My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-14-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
02-14-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2023 10:43:33 AM
Creation date
1/11/2023 10:24:46 AM
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.
/
309
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
1 <br />MINUTKS OF HIE <br />ORONO 1‘LANNING COMMISSION MEEIING <br />Tuesday, January 18,2005 <br />6:00 o*clock p.ro. <br />Bremer commented she prefers the nine-fool ceilings and thai she does not have an issue with the increase <br />in hciglit ns a result of the raised ceilings. Bremer indicated in her view the building would be more <br />visually attructive with the taller roofs, but that she has a concern with the size of the one building. <br />Bremer encouraged the developcf to reduce the size of the building. <br />Rahn staled he wmdd like the size of the building reduced to the rimonni of square fooinge that was <br />originally approved. Rahn inquired whether any outdoor amenities are being proposed. <br />Johnston stated they have looked at some outdoor amenities bin have decided not to include them due to <br />the maintenance issues ussociated with a pool and the close pi o.xiinity of tennis courts to this site. <br />John.ston indicated in his opinion this proposal i.s a bettci looking plan and noted that one unit was <br />removed from the previous proposal. <br />Willkcy coiTuncnlcd the units are more likely to be leased with the amenities but that in his opinion the <br />costs a.ssociatcd with the amenities with this projrosal versus (he pieviou.s proposal have not eliangcd <br />dramatically and tliat a higher rent could be charged for the larger units. <br />Joluiston noted some square footage was added to make the building deeper. <br />Zacbman indicated they did increa.se the size of the parking stalls to allow easier acce.s.s for full-size cars. <br />Winkey stated it is his understanding (be number of larger units has been increased and that in his opinion <br />this project would be economically teasible even with a reduction in the number ot units. <br />Jurgens commented it is difTicult to imagine the visual inipact tlii.s building will have. Jurgens inquired <br />whelliei the first lltHM elevation is .seven to eight feel above the curb line of the c.xi.sting road. <br />(Jatfron staled llie road is at 1022 ’, with the fust Hour level being .seven to eight feel above the road. <br />Jurgens inquired how it would be transitioned from the loadway to leducc the appearance that this <br />building towers over you. <br />Jiilmsioii staled the slope as it exists now would remain for the mo.st part, with the parking lot located :n <br />heiween the road and the building. <br />Jurgens inquired bow far back llie building is situated from the cuib. <br />page: 46
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.