02-28-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION Wednesday, February 2,2005 5:30 p.m. Zachman noted that the exterior materials would inelude a variety ofstone (not brick) per the samples provided at the last meeting. The upper areas not in stone would be a concrete-board ‘Hardi-panel’ in a stucco finish, rather than lap siding. Me noted an cxamplcot use ofthis was two new buildings constnicted on the wc.»5t side of Hwy 169 just south of394. Ralin indicated this was a much more stable product than the old masonite paneling. Ralin indicated this was a public hearing and asked for public comments on the application. There were no comments from the public. Gaffron noted tlie City Engineer and Fire Marshal were reviewing the plans. The Fire Marshal had indicated prcliminari ly that there was no code requiring a second vehicle entrance to the garage. Gaffron reviewed the City Engineer’s comments with the Commislion, and noted that there arc no apparent unsolvabk issues. Kempf asked how the parking shortage was resolved. Gaffron indicated that the combination of 82 basement stalls, 23 dedicated outside stalls on site, and 7 adjacent street parking stalls added up to 112 s‘..ils or 2.0 per unit for 56 units (excluding the guest unit). Fritzler asked what the deck materials would be. Zachman indicated they decking would be the maintenance-tree plastic material tliat doesn ’t stain. Discussion ensueu as to whether the City has or should have ordinances regardinggrillingon decks for multi-family buildings. 2:ackman noted tliis varies fixim city to city. Gaffron stated there is no zoning restriction in place, but he would have to review this witli the building inspector with regards to the fire code. Rahn suggested we discuss this further in a work session, as we will have future multi-family projects. Zacliman noted that barbecue grill on natural gas will be placed on the lower patio level. Jurgens suggested that the 3’ wide path around the back of the building should be wider if possible to provide better emergency access. Rahn noted this would likely be looked at as part of the building p>an review. GafTron dc.scribed ho". the steeply sloped grading around the noi th sides ofthe building would make widening the sidewalk more complex, perhaps needing retaining walls. Rahn indicated that all the alwvc issues should be addressed by the time tliis goes to the Coiuici!, especially if the I’lanning Commission will not have opportunity for further review. GatTron reviewed the next steps, which could exclude further Planning Commission review if the Commi.ssion felt that tlicre wasnoneed for their additional review. Rahn moved, Fritzler seconded, to recommend approval of application ff05-3081 for the S tonebay Loft.s, Outlot E, Stonebay, 2670 Kelley Parkway, for the proposed RPlJI) amendment, and site Page 2 of 3