Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />MINUTI8 OP THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING - DECEMBER 9, 1991 <br />#1691 & #1702 - CONT. <br />Jabbour felt that they should make known to future Councils their <br />policy on development of this property by setting a maximum <br />allowed to access from the Wolf property to the north. <br />Butler reitated that at the last meeting, it was clear that the <br />Council was opposed to allowing through traffic from Highway 12 <br />to Orono Orchard Road. <br />Goetten felt they had a responsibility to the citizens of Orono <br />who live in the area to ensure there is not a major traffic <br />Impact. <br />Butler stated that they do have control over development of this <br />property, but have no control over development of property to the <br />north. She felt that Wolf should obtain access on his own. <br />Roos felt that restricting future development from the north to <br />access through the property was putting them at a disadvantage <br />and stated that the road will be capable of handling much more <br />than the current proposed development. <br />Mayor Peterson agreed with Jabbour and felt they should set a <br />maximum number. <br />Callahan noted that a maximum number would not bind future <br />Councils any more than than the number 0 would as the covenants <br />can be changed. He stated that he did not recall any <br />conversation regarding granting access to the Wolf property, <br />other than denying such. <br />Moorse explained that it may be beneficial to set a maximum <br />number that both Councils agree upon, so in the future if <br />additional access is proposed, the Councils would have a number, <br />that both had agreed upon, to commence from, rather than start <br />all over again. <br />Goetten commented that the Wolf property is not a part of the <br />property being subdivided, and noted that discussions regarding <br />access were at informal meetings. <br />Mabusth noted that Rowlette, Planning Commission member, asked <br />that the height of monuments be restricted within the covenants. <br />Jabbour noted he had received calls on restrictions of outside <br />storage on the properties. <br />Butler stated that she would like to see language incorporated <br />within the covenants limiting removal of mature trees. <br />Mabusth explained that the roadway has been moved closer to the <br />pond In order to save a mature stand of trees, and also because <br />of the higher elevation at the east side of the road bed.