My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-11-2006 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
09-11-2006 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/14/2019 2:14:55 PM
Creation date
7/15/2015 1:58:34 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
192
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, August 28, 2006 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />(#06-3219 Edson Spencer, Continued) <br />10. Submission and approval of the final plat. <br />11. Confirmation that the existing right-of-way for Sixth Avenue North is adequate for the needs of <br /> the County Transportation Department. <br />Planning Staff recommends approval of the plat per the draft resolution. Turner noted the resolution, as <br />drafted, requires the widening of the private road to 20 feet before December 31, 2007. <br />Sansevere stated he would recommend tabling this application if the applicant wishes to sit down with the <br />fire marshal to discuss the width of the road. Sansevere noted he is in support of the 20 feet <br />recommended by the fire marshal. <br />Turner stated the applicant would like to have action by the council on the application as soon as possible. <br />Murphy inquired what the status is on the conservation easement. <br />Hust stated the Minnesota Land Trust would be the owner of the easement and that they are very <br />interested in taking the easement. Hust stated she would like to explain the rationale for leaving the road <br />at 17 feet. <br />Murphy inquired whether it is consistent with past Council action to have buildable lots within the city <br />that are under conservation easement. <br />Gaffron stated he is aware of buildable properties that consist of 30 to 40 acres that are in conservation <br />easements that could have been subdivided. <br />Murphy stated the concept of the conservation easement is a good idea on the surface and inquired what <br />would happen if the conservation easement were not obtained. <br />Gaffron stated approval of the application, without a conservation easement, would result in a buildable <br />lot. Gaffron noted there has also been septic testing on the lot. <br />Murphy inquired if the applicants understand what the ramifications are with a 17-foot roadway <br />Hust noted a different driveway services the Spencer house. Hust stated the two outlots and Lot 1 will be <br />sold to the neighbors to the south. Hust commented they felt from the beginning that the conservation <br />easement would be a win/win situation for everyone involved. The neighbors to the south do not want to <br />see the driveway widened. Hust stated two Planning Commission members viewed the driveway and <br />were fine with leaving the driveway at 17 feet. This driveway has served three homes for over 30 years <br />and has not been an issue. Hust noted some of the houses were rebuilt and the width of the roadway was <br />not an issue at that time. The Spencers, Fullertons and the neighbors have put a considerable amount of <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br />PAGE 11 <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda 09/11/06 <br />Approval Of Minutes 08/28/06[Page 11 of 19]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.