03-13-2006 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE � ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, Febniary 27, 2006 7:00 o'clock p.nl. (7. #06-3173 CITY OF ORONO IND USTRIAL DISTRICT ZONING STANDARDS ORDINANCEAMENDNIENT, Conti�ured) listed as an accessory or permitted use. He reiterated that the allowances are at the discretion of the City Council. White mentioned that, as he drove around the past week he oUserved that most every industrial park he encountered had some sort of limited i-etail associated with it. He questioned what it was the City of Orono was afraid of by not ailowing any retail within the zone and stated that he did not wish to see the City zone this out entirely. McMillan concurred,pointing out that sales related to showroom or something less than regular retail should be allowed. Grithllan stated that, oftentimes, limited sales associated with a showroom business is allowed in many commtmities that migllt not wish to see intense retail sales and the parking issues associated with it. Murphy cautioned the Council to be thoughtful with regard to retail and its unintended consequences. McMillan suggested the Council spend mare time looking into this. Joluison asked for more infonnation with regard to the potential access to the south end of Moirie's property. He suggested consideration Ue given to the partial use of the MnDOT ROW. Murphy stated that he had attended a recent tuinUack meeting at which he urged the engineer's to begin the address or draw up sornething as it relates to this case. Gen McJilton,Ryan Properties, asked for fiirther clarification of the 25%rule on page 3, tiiat additions be made to the building materials section, and tl�at signage language be spelled out as it pertains to buildings with 2 ROW's with consideration given to proposed language from another city. Gritttlian stated that the 25%rule is tied to the building, and it is the City's opinion that the building materials and si�zage issues have been addressed. As vv�-itten,he pointed out that if a building fa�ade faces two or more ROW's, tlley would need to meet tl7e 5% on those sides. White maintained that the City must continue to push the road issues forward as soon as possiUle, so that ihe business o�vYiers understand the impacts on their proposals. Murphy commented that he would not support any lit si�is or security lights within the sightlines of those residents living south of the new Highway 12 at night. Gaffi-on pointed out that, ctu-rently, r.'nsicle lit signs are not prohiUited, and suggested the Council add this as a condition. PAGE 5 of 9