My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-24-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
01-24-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2023 10:39:08 AM
Creation date
1/11/2023 10:24:08 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.
/
248
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, January 10,2005 <br />7:00 o’clock p.io. <br />(#04-3016 Wayzata Design and Development, Continued) <br />Coleman indicated further houses. <br />Gaffron pointed out both of those areas arc located within the conservation easement and would require <br />rezoning of the site and action by the council, which would necessitate notice to the neighbors. Gaffron <br />stated he is unsure whether there would be a way for this council to prohibit future councils from allowing <br />development to occur within those areas but that in his view it is unlikely to happen given the City’s <br />current ordinances. <br />Barrett indicated tlie easement provides for a very foreseeable and assured reliance to the new owners and <br />neighbors that additional development would not happen. Danett stated future development of those <br />areas would be difficult, noting that the City’s easement would have to be yielded, which would probably <br />not happen. Barrett stated one option is to dedicate that easement to a third party, which in his opinion is <br />not necessary in this case. <br />Dave McCuskey, 130 Brown Road, noted a lot of his concerns have already been addressed, but that he <br />still has a concern regarding possible lighting. McCuskey indicated he would like the rural character of <br />this area pre.served. <br />Gaffron stated the City’s lighting code stales that the light shall not be visible from outside property <br />boundaries. Gaffron stated he would not be opposed to including language in the development agreement <br />restricting lighting. Gaffron stated it is likely that some lighting would be installed for safety reasons but <br />that lighting in the cul-de-sac has not been discussed. <br />White pointed out that whatever covenants are approved on this development would likely be requested <br />on the rest of the area. White stated in his view the developer is attempting to construct a subdivision that <br />is in keeping with the rural character of Orono. <br />Gaffron stated any monuments in the future would need to be located within the outlot or easement, with <br />the developer needing to meet certain requirements of the City. Gaffron noted no monuments arc being <br />proposed at the present time. <br />McMillan inquired whether this road would actually have a road sign. <br />Gaffron staled there would be a road sign and that the applicants are proposing a name of Creekside Trail <br />for the private road. Gaffron noted there more than likely would be a bank of mailboxes located out by <br />Brown Road since the Post Office generally does not accept individual mailboxes on private roads. <br />McMillan inquired whether the homeowners in this subdivision would be required to do their own snow <br />plowing. <br />Gaffron stated the homeowners would be responsible for maintenance of that road and that a sign could <br />be erected designating this as a private road. <br />McCuskey inquired whether the bank of mailboxes would be required because it is a private road. <br />PAGE 6
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.