Laserfiche WebLink
: <br />MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Tuesday, January 18,2005 <br />6:00 o’clock p.ni. <br />Gaffron stated the building would be located approximately 60 to 80 feet from the curb. <br />Jurgens indicated he still has a concern regarding the length of the building and inquired whether the focal <br />point of the structure could change somehow to try to lessen the visual impact. <br />Heller indicated the vertical uprights come out four feet, with the fa9ade being broken up with different <br />shades. Heller stated a .3-D picture would help to better illustrate how the building will appear, <br />l^hn stated he prefers the step-down appearance of the building. Rahn recommended the applicant <br />review their plans to see how the building can be reduced in length. <br />Zachman inquired whether the Planning Commission would like to see the end units clipped off <br />Leslie .stated he would like to see the top unit also clipped near the end cap so there would still be a step <br />down. Leslie encouraged the applicant to review his options for reducing the size of the building. <br />Jurgens inquired whether a patio is being constructed off the back of tlie building. <br />Johnston stated the patio could be accomplished with an easement. <br />Gaffron stated the patio ends up being located in one of the conunon areas. <br />Johnston stated the outlots could possibly be rcplattcd to avoid the need for an easement. Johnston noted <br />commercial development will be going up in the area in front of this building and would also help reduce <br />the appearance of the building. <br />Rahn inquired whether there were any public conunents regarding this application. <br />There were no public comments. <br />WInkey moved, Itrcincr seconded, to recommend approval of Application ttOS-3081, Stonebay <br />l^ofls, with the understanding that the proposed revisions arc acceptable and that a revised plan <br />would be submitted prior to the Council meeting. VOTE: Ayes 2, Nays 4, Rahn, Jurgens, Leslie <br />and Fritzler Opposed. MOTION FAILED. <br />Rahn indicated he was opposed to the motion because he would like to sec some reduction made in the <br />size of the stmeture. <br />Bremer suggested Uiis application be discussed at the next Planning Commission work session. <br />PAGE 47