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 15 of 41 <br /> <br /> <br />Libby stated his point and premise is, in orchestration with Steve Brynes’ remark, the Council does not <br />have enough information to make a prudent decision of governance based on the good of the many <br />outweighing the good of the few. Libby stated the City really needs more time to look at this and that in <br />particular they should ask whether Hennepin County has any authority for requiring the use of the Jacobs’ <br />driveway. <br /> <br />In addition, the developer has never really educated the Council or brought forward the scope and <br />magnitude of these homes. Libby stated Mr. Steadman has mentioned to him that maybe they will not <br />build big houses. Libby stated someone does not invest a million dollars in a 3-acre lot to build a small <br />home and that these houses more likely will be 12,000 to 16,000 square foot homes. Libby noted that <br />type of home is not built in six months and that the Foxhill residents are looking at a potential of three to <br />six years of open-ended construction activity consisting of roofing, concrete, flooring, and framing. In <br />addition, the construction will likely will require some type of crane construction. <br /> <br />Libby noted Heritage Lane already cannot accommodate the school bus passing a maintenance truck and <br />that it will be very difficult to traverse Heritage Lane if there are cars parked along the side of the road, <br />especially during the summer when the residents are parked there so they can access the dock. <br /> <br />McMillan noted the white house on Heritage Lane got torn down and rebuilt approximately eight years <br />ago and that their driveway was off of Shoreline. Hennepin County did not want the new driveway to go <br />onto County Road 15 and they told the City so. The City ended up keeping the driveway where it is. <br />McMillan stated Hennepin County makes strong recommendations on what they feel is right and that they <br />want the traffic properly managed. McMillan stated she does not want to get into what Hennepin County <br />says as being set in stone and that they make strong recommendations, which does not mean they cannot <br />be overridden by the City. McMillan stated when Hennepin County looks at this situation, they look at <br />the fact that Heritage Lane has a turn lane, which they deem as being safer. <br /> <br />McMillan stated the City respects what Hennepin County says about their roads and that the City respects <br />what other agencies have to say. McMillan stated she would like to leave it at that and not get into what <br />was said to whom. <br /> <br />Libby stated the statement that was made this afternoon by the Hennepin County authority was that the <br />statement contained in the e-mail is a standard response and it has no intrinsic specific application to 1700 <br />Shoreline Drive. <br /> <br />McMillan stated that is their response and that she will leave it at that. <br /> <br />Greg Coward, 1950 Heritage Lane, stated there have been two representations that he has wondered about <br />since he has gotten involved with this application. One was what the Mayor was just addressing. <br />Coward stated it seems to be that there is a difference between a Council saying it can be allowed versus <br />having it appear to everyone here in the audience that the County will not permit it and it is a done deal. <br />Coward stated if Hennepin County had refused access through the Jacobs’ property, this would have all <br />been over months ago. <br /> <br />Coward stated the other issue is about the bluffs. Coward stated he never saw the platting of the ground, <br />and that when he heard about the bluffs, he assumed that the alternative road would have to go over the <br />bluff and then down into the area. Coward stated it was only afterwards that he found out that there were
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.