09-14-2015 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 24, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 13 the development agreement is the best way to proceed. Gaffron stated the Citizens for Lakeview Preservation would like to eventually put in a permanent sign that talks about the park as well as some interpretative signage located in different areas of the park. Gaffron displayed photos of some of the signs that are being considered. Staff is proposing that the four parameters listed in Staff memo be added to the Development Agreement in the section addressing out lots. Those parameters are as follows: 1. Improvements to Outlot I shall be limited to the trails indicated on Plan I, Sheet C-507 as noted in Paragraph 7 of the Agreement and to the specific signage improvements described in the attached Sign Descriptions document. 2. The developer shall obtain a City permit for the temporary sign, such sign to be allowed to remain in place for 90 days from the date of installation, and shall obtain a City permit for the permanent main park sign. 3. The temporary sign and main park sign shall be set back no less than ten feet from the street lot line of Outlot I. 4. All other signage described in the sign description, including interpretive/educational signs, tree and planting signs, and memorial or dedication signs, shall not require City permits. Levang asked what language will be on the temporary sign. Gaffron stated he does not have that information and that the only information Staff has received is their application, which does not get into the content of the sign. McMillan asked where the lots for sale sign will be located. Gaffron stated the developer is allowed one large subdivision sign advertising the development. That sign will likely be located on County Road 19. The developer is also allowed a monument at the end of the road and each individual lot is allowed to have a 2’ x 2’ real estate sign. Council Member Printup asked if this is something the Park Commission should review. Gaffron noted this is a privately owned space and the Park Commission would not have any jurisdiction over it. McMillan stated the only issue is whether this would set any precedence and that tying the sign to the development agreement would restrict other people from installing similar donation signs. Mattick noted this is a private park, which does not happen very often, and is part of a development. Mattick stated there are grounds to differentiate this from other donation signs but that the Council should make sure they are comfortable with the request. McMillan asked what would happen if they ask for an extension.