Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-01-1997 Council Minutes Special MeetingMINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING • HELD APRIL 1, 1997 ROLL The Orono City Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Councilmembers J. Diann Goetten, Barbara Peterson and Charles Kelley. Councilmember Richard Flint was absent. The following represented City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Director of Public Services Greg Gappa and Recorder Lin Vee. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Jabbour at 8:00 a.m. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ( #1) #2202 HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - COUNTY ROAD 15 RECONSTRUCTION - VARIANCE /CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3878 Jabbour reported that the application is for variances and a conditional use permit for the alteration of existing wetlands and the filling of City protected wetlands as part of the reconstruction of County Road 15. Council had delayed action on this application until after the EAW process was complete. Moorse noted the City has now received the results of the EAW and Record of Decision, which • indicated no need for an EIS. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3878 granting variances for filling of wetlands and floodplain areas, and granting a conditional use permit for land alteration, for Hennepin County Department of Public Works for the County Road 15 Improvement Project. Vote: 3 Ayes, 1 Nay. Goetten opposed. Hennepin County noted a bid letting date has been set for May 13, 1997 with construction to begin in August and continuing into 1998. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ( #2) COUNTY ROAD 6 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT - REVIEW OF APPROVED LAYOUT Moorse reported that the current layout for County Road 6 reconstruction minimizes the overall impact of the project. He noted a letter from the Hannings of 4220 County Road 6 had been received expressing concern about the proposed alignment. 40 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 1, 1997 • Steve Theis from Hennepin County explained that County staff had been requested by Council to make minor alignment adjustments to reduce the impacts to adjacent property owners. Theis distributed maps depicting Layout 02 and Layout 03 and the impact on property owners of each plan. Theis indicated the maximum distance the alignment was moved was 8.5 feet. Jabbour questioned the impact on the Larson property. Theis explained that not much movement had been done, just some "tweaking" to get the best layout with the least impact. A substantial amount of trees are still being taken. Hanning expressed two of her concerns: 1) the berm; and 2) if more of their land is taken, they wouldn't have a 5 acre buildable lot remaining for subdivision. She asked if the City would grandfather this property in as a buildable lot. Currently they have 14 acres and have had a survey done showing a possible subdivision into two lots. Gaffron could not confirm if a subdivision would be possible without knowing more about the property and the existing wetland. He questioned if the proposed lot line could be shifted to create a 5 acre lot. She was unsure if any more changes could be made as they have already moved the proposed lot line behind the barn. She commented that their property would cost the County a lot more if they could not subdivide in the future to have an additional buildable lot. Jabbour cautioned Hanning about the need for variances if they were granted a subdivision with a • substandard lot. Councilmembers agreed the intent of the City was not to prevent a legal subdivision but could not bind future Councils to the actions of the current Council. Hanning stated they were not planning to subdivide at this time and were not prepared to incur the costs of a subdivision application in addition to a park dedication fee and additional real estate taxes. Harming noted they had discussions with the County regarding an additional curb cut to serve a second lot. The County would not approve a second curb cut so the existing driveway would be shared. Jabbour suggested the Hannings proceed with the subdivision process with the current Council as this Council would act favorably to a subdivision in the current situation. Hanning commented that they would then have two tax statements with increased value. Moorse suggested the first step is to further research the property and confirm the possibility of subdivision. Moorse also indicated staff will work with the City Attorney to determine if there is a way that the City could enter into an agreement with the Hannings regarding a future subdivision that would be binding on future councils. Goetten did not feel it was fair to force the Hannings to pursue a subdivision if they were not ready to do so. Jabbour suggested a preliminary subdivision where approval would be given and the Hannings could renew their application until they were ready to formally subdivide. Kelley suggested the Hannings work with staff regarding ways to proceed. is MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING • HELD APRIL 1, 1997 Hanning questioned the County filling in the wetland on the other side of their house. Polaczyk responded that the County needs to obtain all the required permits and will have to follow regulations of various jurisdictions. For example, mitigation is required, and could occur on the same parcel if the property owner is agreeable and sufficient land is available. Hanning asked if the two pine trees in front of their house would be affected with the road reconstruction. Theis responded the trees would not be impacted. Hanning asked what the County does about replacing vegetation. Nolan responded that the County must always re- establish vegetation as part of erosion and sediment control. Hanning asked about the berm on Hunt Farm Road. Theis responded that the County had met with the Hunt Farm residents. The residents were concerned about the grade of their driveways and the County was working with them on that. Hanning questioned the elevation of the completed road. Theis responded that it would be very similar to the existing road. is Jabbour asked if the road was designed to accept the Highway 12 improvements. Theis explained that the portion nearest the Highway 12 intersection may have to be reconstructed as the Highway 12 design is not available at this time and they could not predict what the specifications would be. Hanning asked what is happening to the two houses across the street from their property. She noted it looks as if they are not affected at all. Theis responded that because of the fixed radius of the curve, the minor realignment to somewhat reduce the substantial impact on the Larson property resulted in the elimination of impacts on the two properties across the roadway from the Hannings. Theis confirmed that construction would most likely begin in the spring of 1998. During the summer of 1997, permits will be obtained and other details finalized. Kelley referred to the memo from Ron Moorse dated March 14, 1997 regarding the relocation of County Road 19. He strongly objects to the use of Townline Road. Hennepin County explained that County Road 19 in Independence is 1/2 mile east of County Road 110/83 and the goal is to have County roads one mile apart instead of 1/2 mile apart. County Road 19 extends through a significant part of the western suburbs with a jog in Maple Plain and Independence. Independence, Orono, Medina and Maple Plain are being asked to consider relocation of County Road 19 from the Highway 12 intersection to Townline Road (1/2 mile east), south to County Road 6 and possibly using the McCulley Road connection to County Road 6. One of the main reasons the relocation is being considered is that the intersection at Highway 12 and County Road 19 is very dangerous. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 1, 1997 • Jabbour asked if the proposed County Road 6 design works, assuming the cities would approve the concept. The County responded that two lanes would be available for eastbound traffic on County Road 6 at the Townline intersection. Many designs could be engineered if the relocation concept was approved. Kelley noted that traffic is being pushed to the west, thus Independence is becoming more developed. Eventually a stoplight will be necessary if County Road 19 is extended to Townline Road and McCulley, and traffic is encouraged to use County Road 6 and 19. He felt traffic counts would increase drastically from what was shown in the discussions for the County Road 6 improvement. This will also take additional land from residents. The County disagreed with Kelley's thoughts, noting capacity to handle future traffic growth has been included in Layout 03 for County Road 6 improvements. A traffic signal or stop sign would be generated by the communities requesting it. Typically, 700 -800 traffic movements through an intersection in 4 -8 hours or a severe interruption of traffic moving through an intersection may require a traffic signal. Kelley asked what the current traffic count is on County Road 19. That information was not available at the meeting. Projected traffic counts may double over the next 20 years. Jabbour noted the cost of moving County Road 19 would be in the millions considering bridge replacement. He asked why it has to be a straight road. He also questioned why so many accesses to Highway 12 are needed. Mn/DOT has been working with Maple Plain to try to make the traffic from County Road 83 on the west to Townline Road on the east safer. Kelley feels stoplights will eventually be put at Townline Road and County Road 83 leaving Maple Plain with two stoplights and the same problems that exist in Long Lake. Nolan explained that the designation of Townline Road as a County highway would necessitate the passage of a resolution of concurrence from the four cities involved (Independence, Orono, Medina and Maple Plain) to relocate County Road 19. Kelley wants to be sure that Hennepin County understands that Orono will not approve a plan to use Townline Road as part of County Road 19. Goetten asked when discussions about the relocation of County Road 19 would begin. Hennepin County stated informal discussions between the mayors of Maple Plain and Independence have already taken place with County Engineer Vern Genslinger. No design has been done at this time. If the communities involved indicate that they are favorable to the proposal, designs would proceed. When the new mayor was elected in Maple Plain, discussions about adding a stoplight at County Road 83 were held. This generated further discussions about where County Road 19 should be and how traffic can flow through Maple Plain. 4 • MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 1, 1997 Jabbour agreed that traffic problems exist in Maple Plain at County Road 19 but suggested Hennepin County look at alternatives to using Townline Road as a solution. Kelley reiterated that he would not vote in favor of the County Road 6 project unless there was assurance that County Road 19 would not come down Townline Road. He felt Orono would be taking the brunt of the north/south traffic by using Townline Road and both Maple Plain and Independence benefit by moving traffic to their eastern borders. The County Road 6 project was designed to handle east/west traffic. The approved County Road 6 design would not be appropriate if County Road 19 is relocated to Townline Road. Hanning expressed concern over increased traffic using County Road 6 if McCulley Road is used as part of a County Road 19 relocation. Nolan asked if it was the City's position that there is "no way" that Orono would approve relocation of County Road 19 to Townline Road. Kelley agreed and suggested using County Road 110/83 as the north/south corridor. Goetten agreed there is a major problem with traffic at Highway 12 and County Road 19. However, • the City has already spent a great deal of time working on the County Road 6 project to get the best possible design. She also felt there should be another way to move traffic through Maple Plain. Peterson concurred with Goetten and Kelley and would not favor the use of Townline Road as part of County Road 19. Jabbour stated he saw the relocation of County Road 19 as a quick and easy solution to the existing traffic problem, but this would be against Orono's policy and suggested the traffic burden be spread around. He reiterated that moving County Road 19 to Townline Road would not be well received by Orono. Kelley noted that McCulley Road would not be built today because of the wetlands. It was originally constructed by the City of Orono to relieve the traffic from County Road 15. He felt if the County used McCulley Road that they should reimburse the City for the cost of its original construction, plus the future value that the money could have earned, as compensation. Kelley also commended Theis and Polaczyk for the work they have done on the County Road 6 project to move traffic east and west. No motion is required regarding the County Road 6 project as the design has already been approved by Council. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 1, 1997 Hanning voiced her displeasure with the City regarding a call she made to the City. She was told by the Public Works Director that no changes would be made in front of their property only to find out later that their property was affected. Harming also requested that the speed limit remain at 40 m.p.h. as it is a residential street. It was noted that the street design and curve by Larson's will keep the speed limit at its present level. Theis commented that there is a historic study of barns being conducted at the Sweezo and Serena properties to determine if they are eligible for the National Historic Register. Jabbour urged the County to contact the owners as soon as possible to discuss their plans. ( #3) HIGHWAY 12 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE Jabbour explained that the City is being asked to participate in the Highway 12 Design Review Committee and provide three or four members to serve on the committee. He recommended Ed Callahan, Ron Moorse, J. Diann Goetten and Jim Murphy. Representatives from Long Lake are the City Administrator, Tod Olson, Planning Commission Chair and a community representative. Goetten noted that Orono's representatives somewhat align with the Long Lake representatives. Jabbour emphasized that the City Council has the final approval for Orono of the design specifications and anyone is welcome to attend the design review committee meetings. Jabbour commented that as the design progresses, the City will have to decide if they want to be the agent to interact with the residents or if they want to leave that to Mn/DOT. He added that the City would have a greater interest in working with the residents to make the transition less painful. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Peterson, to appoint Edward J. Callahan, Jr., J. Diann Goetten, Jim Murphy and Ronald Moorse to the Highway 12 Design Review Committee. Vote: 4 ayes, 0 nays. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:48 a.m. Z Gabrie Jabbour, Mayor • r1 r