07-08-1996 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JULY 8, 1996 • ( #10 - Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition - Continued) Jabbour added that the understanding would be that the 11 acre park land would be passive in its use but the 9.5 acre parcel could be of a different use. Council all agreed with the understanding as stated. The Minnesota Land Trust was asked for their position. Renay Leone, Director of the Minnesota Land Trust, said it was their position that the interest be in perpetuity with some form of restriction for undeveloped or passive uses. Leone said the Minnesota Land Trust hoped to include the 9.5 acre parcel but would accept the separation of the two parcels. She also said the organization would prefer the conservation easement but would accept those restrictions placed on the property by the DNR. Leone said the concern of the Minnesota Land Trust was their desire to have a continuing role in bird- dogging the restrictions. She suggested the Minnesota Land Trust be given the legal authority for right of enforcement. Without the legal right, the Minnesota Land Trust would take the responsibility informally as citizens of Orono. Callahan responded that the DNR does provide for monitoring of the land use. If the • Minnesota Land Trust would monitor it as an informal participant, it would be done as a practical matter. He noted that the informal watch could effectuate what is done as opposed to two agencies having veto power. • It was noted that the earnest money placed on the purchase agreement would be lost if the grant was not accepted. Callahan said the City was in the position to move forward with the grant if that was the wish of the Minnesota Land Trust. Leone said she was in favor of that position. Jabbour said there was a misunderstanding that the City of Orono was seen as pro development, which was not the case. Jabbour said the problem arose with the deadline for the application and the lack of being privileged to reviewing the conditions of the grant. He wanted to clarify the issue, noting it would have been easier if all of the information had been laid out earlier. Leone responded that the process was complicated and drawn out. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to draft a letter to the DNR requesting clarification that the grant restrictions apply only to the 11 acre parcel. This correction is to be clarified in writing by the DNR. 15