My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-14-2015 Councill Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
12-14-2015 Councill Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/23/2015 10:02:41 AM
Creation date
12/23/2015 9:37:50 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1094
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, November 23, 2015 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 10 of 41 <br /> <br />The eighth item related to sanitary sewer, which is normally done at the final plat stage. Gronberg <br />indicated he has talked to Staff about that and that they are probably going to use the same type of injector <br />pumps for the three houses. Gronberg stated they are prepared to bore a lot of the lines in order to save <br />trees, which is the main goal with the sewer line and will be done with the final plat approval. <br /> <br />The ninth item related to the drain fields. The proposal is to have three new lots with a low pressure <br />sewer system as well as Irwin Jacobs’ house. Once those are hooked up, the Jacobs’ drain field would be <br />removed. <br /> <br />Gronberg stated as it relates to Hennepin County’s response to using the existing Irwin Jacobs’ driveway, <br />he has spoken with Steve Grone at Hennepin County and he strongly recommended using Heritage Lane <br />with the turn lane. Gronberg indicated he has done a hundred subdivisions during the 50 years he has <br />been in business and that he has worked closely with Staff and the various agencies on those subdivisions. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he would like to clarify the issue with Hennepin County. Walsh indicated he spoke with <br />Mr. Grone about 15 minutes after he spoke with Mr. Gronberg and that Mr. Grone indicated he was going <br />to tell Mr. Gronberg the same thing, which is that there was no guarantee that they would approve or not <br />approve using that road. <br /> <br />Gronberg stated their strong recommendation is to use Heritage Lane. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he was told Hennepin County takes into consideration the applicant and the neighborhood <br />and have three people look at it. Mr. Grone indicated nothing is guaranteed and that they take everybody <br />into consideration. Walsh stated Mr. Grone also said at that point they do not police it, which is basically <br />the same conversation that he had with Mr. Gronberg. Walsh stated it all depends on the perspective of <br />who is talking to him and that they may say what the person wants to hear, which could be a little <br />misleading. <br /> <br />Gronberg asked why he would send him an e-mail saying that. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he does not know how Mr. Gronberg broached the question. <br /> <br />Gronberg indicated he spoke with him numerous times. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he wants to make sure because the process is more complicated than calling him and getting <br />an e-mail and that additional information would be taken into consideration when Hennepin County <br />actually reviewed the request. <br /> <br />Bruce Malkerson, Attorney-at-Law, stated he is appearing tonight on behalf of the applicant. Malkerson <br />noted he submitted a lengthy letter late this afternoon, which he apologizes for, but that he was not able to <br />submit it any earlier since Staff’s report came out late Friday afternoon and he had to meet with his client <br />prior to submitting it. <br /> <br />Malkerson stated on Page 2 of the letter there is an overview of the legal principles that relate to two <br />questions. The first question is whether the applicants comply with applicable law related to the proposed <br />construction activity, whether that is on the extended road, on the road leading to it, or with any of the <br />activities within the three lots themselves. Malkerson stated what has been agreed to is contained in the <br />draft resolution. On the bottom of Page 2 is another added another condition which refers back to some
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.