Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON APRIL 15, 1996 <br />( #9 - #2128 Orono Hockey Boosters - Continued) <br />Grabek said the areas of contention need to be discussed. Peterson said the Commission <br />takes the engineering standards and review it. Grabek said engineering and staff are <br />inconsistent. Mabusth noted exhibit F, which stated the engineering comments on the soil <br />borings, paragraph 4, page 2, last sentence, which was read. Grabek said he was told the <br />borings were not conclusive. <br />Grabek asked if a shadow print has been done on the building. Mabusth asked the <br />Commission if they would recommend one. Peterson said it has not been done in the past. <br />Peterson noted that the Commission looks at the information that they are provided in <br />determining the viability of an application and finalized by the City Staff, Engineer, and <br />applicant's engineer. Grabek noted that the wall would be 20' high, 160' long, and located <br />50' from CoRd 6. Roseboom said he would be more concerned if the building was moved <br />to the south as it would affect the southern exposure for the residents. Grabek said the <br />arena infringes on the Timms and others and blocks the sun from the Timms. <br />Hawn commented if the building affects the east sun and the view, what else would be <br />learned from a shadow print. Hawn said that all concerned have agreed that the arena will <br />affect the Timm property. <br />Grabek questioned the amount of funding necessary before construction. Engebretson <br />reiterated that the City adopted a zoning code calling for 80% of funds raised prior to <br />construction but the lease will not be signed without 100% of the funds raised. <br />Grabek commented that the "push down, push in" of the building would have the same <br />effect if the building would be moved 150' south. <br />Grabek asked if there would be absolutely no noise from the louvers. Engebretson said <br />there would be some noise from the louvers. <br />Grabek commented that whether the Timms moved to this particular location should not <br />make any difference, and the City should not have free rein to place it where they want. <br />Engebretson said he objected to this statement. He said it is not neighborly to say the <br />residents should not have moved there or if they knew what would be going into the area. <br />He said the Boosters owe the residents a top job on how it is constructed. He reiterated <br />that the code was always 50' setback from the residential lot line and was proposed at the <br />100'. Grabek said the 50' setback was passed to accommodate the building. Engebretson <br />said it was maintained to keep the setback the same as for a school. Hawn said Grabek <br />was incorrect. She noted there was no vehicle by which to deal with the building. With <br />the school setback at 50', the ordinance clarified the school uses and its use by a non -profit <br />organization. <br />16 <br />