02/12/1996 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 22, 1996 developer had to provide a physical barrier around the periphery of the development to deter trespassing onto the adjacent rural properties. She said that it was always a known fact that the adjacent parcels were of large acreage and the PDO never categorized these rural adjacent properties with size restrictions. Ms. Walseth said, in recent conversations as late as yesterday with neighbors on the north side of Holly Drive, they have not received such a letter. When Ms. Walseth and Ms. Dahl looked through the Trapper's Crossing file near the end of November, 1995, there was no evidence of any fencing letters sent to these property owners. Ms. Walseth asked why none of her neighbors received the revised information regarding the fence buffer which Ms. Wyland was directed to address almost five (5) months ago? Mr. Schumacher suggested that since Ms. Wyland name has been mentioned a number of times this evening, these issues should be raised with her so that she can state her side of this issue. The original intent of the fence issue is in the minutes and Mr. Schumacher suggested that it be researched and reviewed at a time when Ms. Wyland is present. Council Member Lyden said it was quite clear what was outlined by Ms. Walseth. A physical barrier for all the adjoining property owners was explicitly outlined in the minutes. He said if the Council wants to research this matter again, it should be since it is time to get this matter taken care of. Caroline Dahl, 1101 Holly Court - Ms. Dahl said that she was going to read excerpts from the Lino Lakes City hall Trapper's Crossing file, the City Council minutes and other facts. She quoted from the February 13, 1995 Council minutes, pages 35 and 36 as follows: Holly Drive Feasibility Report and Cost Sharing Proposal - Mr. Powell explained that the developer of the proposed Trapper's Crossing was required as a condition of the preliminary plat approval to participate in a satisfactory plan for the reconstruction of 12th Avenue and Holly Drive between Ash Street and Birch Street. He said based on a recent traffic study completed in the area, ignoring any effect of a park complex, the subdivision would ultimately account for about 70% of the traffic. At the August 8, 1994 Council meeting, Darrell Schneider, Mayor Reinert and City Attorney Bill Hawkins repeatedly stated that a satisfactory provision requiring Mr. Hokanson's development road participation cost be written into the agreement or there would be no development. The developer, Mr. Hokanson insisted on a decision for the PDO and the preliminary plat that night, August 8, 1994 in spite of Mayor Reinert's suggestion of a two (2) week postponement on this decision. Ms. Dahl said that the developer's agreement was signed on July 18, 1995 yet the road feasibility report was not finished until October 17, 1995. She asked how can this be? She said the staff is overstepping Council's action. This is putting the cart before the horse. Ms. Dahl said that this is not following the PDO and preliminary plat agreement that was made between the developer, Mr. Hokanson and the Council on August 8, 1994. She said that the staff has to follow what the City Council dictates. This was not done. She asked who is responsible for overstepping their (staff) bounds? Ms. Dahl addressed these questions to Mr. Schumacher. Mr. Schumacher asked which question did Ms. Dahl want answered first. He said that Ms. Dahl had raised a PAGE 9