My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-23-1998 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
03-23-1998 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2025 12:32:39 PM
Creation date
1/14/2025 12:30:37 PM
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.
/
516
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
March 15, 1998 <br />Mr. Gabriel Jabbour <br />Mayor <br />Orono City Hall <br />2950 Kelley Parkway <br />Orono, Minnesota 55356 <br />9 p i;:93 <br />C'.T\ c.- C, <br />Re: Development of the Carpenter Property <br />COUNCIL Meeting <br />MAR 2 3 1998 <br />CITVOrOHONO <br />Dear Mr. Mayor, <br />I do not believe that the discussion at the March 9 City Council Meeting concerning the <br />development of the Carpenter Property was complete. Specifically, the issue of granting <br />an easement for a bike path was not resolved. <br />Several points need to be considered. First, the developer is willing to grant the easement. <br />Several neighbors welcome and appreciate his offer. I am sure you can understand that a <br />development as large as the Carpenter property is causing some anxiety, but Mr. Anderson <br />seems to be responding to the city's and the neighbors' concerns. His offer to incorporate <br />an easement for any possible bike path is welco <br />Further, there is simply no reason to turn down this offer. The Planning Commission also <br />recommended that a bike easement be incorporated into the development. While the <br />"park contribution" will be r :duced, there would be no contribution if the property was <br />not developed. A smaller contribution is not a loss — it is still a contribution and it will <br />still be quite large. The easement will also allow the city to keep options open. <br />However, the issue, unfortunately, has become which side of the Old Crystal Bay Road is <br />better for a bike trail, rather than whether any bike trail south of the Luce Line makes any <br />sense. The assumed destination of the this bike trail would be Noerenberg Park. While <br />the covenants associated with Noerenberg would most likely allow construction of a bike <br />path adjacent to the property, it makes little sense to construct a bike path to this park. <br />The bikers would not be allowed to bike in the park, as the property north of 51 is a <br />Wildlife Sanctuary and the property south of 51 is a small, 15.98 acre garden area. On <br />many, if not most, summer weekends, there are weddings held at the park. Any number of <br />bikers would be disruptive of the ceremonies. In addition, I doubt that Noerenberg would <br />become a destination for bikers, no food or beverages are allowed in the park There are <br />not many days when the park is open and the park receives f?w visitors. <br />A bike path along the southern part of Old Crystal Bay Road would also raise serious <br />safety concerns. Creating a bike crossing anywhere on Old Crystal Bay Road from Fox
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.