Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTH' COUNCILMEETING HELD ON AUGUST 2S, 1995 <br />(#14 - County Road 15 Project. Orono Orchard and East - Continued) <br />Hurr noted that the project does not serve the residems of Orono only. <br />Jabbour queaioned why Wayzata will not incur any costs with the project in their area <br />Polyczyk said the staff has a participation cost polic>’, and W'ayzata would incur costs ot <br />their own The construction cost would be paid by the County, the same as Orono, but <br />Wayzata would still be responsible tor the right-ot-way costs. <br />Callahan suggested that the recovery’ area all be changed to suburban Hurr and Callahan <br />noted that the area is not developed only because it is wetlands and undevelopable. <br />Poivczyk said the character ot the road does change in the area mentioned. <br />The utility lines were considered. It was suggested to move the wires outside ot the clear <br />zone. Kdley questioned if there was enough room to do this. Hurr said only 8 is <br />required. Callahan suggested putting the lines on the south side which the Countv said <br />could be done. The idea of burying wires underground was mentioned but said to be <br />expensive. The County does not have any mechanism for this in their cost policy <br />The County representative was asked if the road w ould remain partially opened during <br />construction or closed This will be decided with the City but work can best be <br />accomplished if the road is closed Kelley asked it the work would need to be done in the <br />winter months due to the wetlands involved It was said that the area would be wet and <br />soggy even during the winter months Kelley suggested keeping one lane open and be <br />reversible depending on the time of day. <br />Jabbour asked if a floating road could be done. The County representative said this was <br />an option. <br />Gerhardson asked that the County check with Mn/DOT regarding the recovery areas. <br />Goetten said she would insist that a legal access be provided for her lakeshore property <br />which is currently shown without one <br />The County was asked to see if costs could be reduced and/or ofTsei by the City <br />providing wetland mitigation. <br />The County representative said the funding was 1995 for this project has been rolled over <br />to 1996 and will conttnue to be carried forward as conversation continues with the City. <br />The Countv would like the schedule for this project to satisfy both the County and City.