Laserfiche WebLink
cuii^icn. fviErjiNGTo;Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members <br />Planning Commission Chairman Kelley <br />Orono Planning Commission Members <br />City Administrator Bernhardson <br />!A!I{>2 i990 <br />pjTv Hi- <br />Prom: <br />Date: <br />Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administrator <br />January 8, 1990 <br />Subject:#1469 City of Orono, North Arm Drive & County Road 151 <br />Intersection - Conditional Use Permit - Continuation of <br />Public Hearing <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A - <br />Exhibit B - <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />C <br />D <br />E <br />F <br />G <br />H <br />Application <br />Kilbo's Memo <br />Siren Plan for City of Orono <br />Elevations/Detail for Siren <br />Updated Property Owners List <br />Survey <br />Lynch Report <br />Plat Map Locating Siren <br />Pertinent Code Section - <br />Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D) - As amended February 23, <br />1987 [specific LR-IB section - Section 10.24, Subdivision 3 <br />(A) ] <br />Review of Revised Application - <br />Per Planning Commission's directive the Police Chief has <br />presented a plan relocating the siren tower to the intersection <br />of North Arm Drive and County Road 151. As of this writing, <br />staff has received no comments from the neighbors notified within <br />the 350* radius. The Public Works Director has asked that the <br />siren be set back 100' from the center line of the intersections <br />of the roadways and placed to the back slope of the right-of-way <br />of North Arm Drive. In addition, the Director has asked that an <br />access drive of a minimum 12' width be installed for easy access <br />to the siren. <br />In reviewing the comments of the Planning Commission at the <br />earlier review, members questioned the type of pole to be <br />installed. The anodized aluminlmum pole is similar to the type <br />installed at the water treatment plant in Navarre, this type was <br />approved by the City because of longevity and minimal maintenance <br />characteristics. Planning Commission members noted that the <br />galvanized steel is aesthetically i. acceptable. Pertinent <br />staff members will continue to recomn. the anodized aluminlmum <br />pole, not only because of its longevity and ease of maintenance <br />but that as the pole weathers, the color blends with the natural <br />surrounding environment. The galvanized steel pole will be more <br />noticable. The zoning staff will advise Council of both <br />preferences. The Planning Commission may wish to expand upon the <br />their reasons for recommending the galvanized steel pole. <br />La <br />i ! <br />f