Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, April 21,2003 <br />6:00 o*clock p.m. <br />(Ml M13-2889 RAVI A REAL ESTATE, LLC, Continued) <br />Mr. Schommcr felt that the development had a greater density than could be supported by <br />the small parcel. <br />Based on staff reconunendations, Chair Smith asked the Commissioners to consider the <br />scale and character of the buildings, in terms of: <br />• appropriate intensity of use and resultant impacts to surrounding properties, <br />traffic, etc. <br />- building setbacks <br />• building height, number of stories <br />- basement/walkout exposure and elevation views <br />• parking location and orientation <br />- driveway layout, site access, interior circulation <br />- Building design, facade materials, etc. <br />- Methods to reduce visual impact to neighbors or to public <br />- Landscaping, screening needs <br />- Engineering concerns per Kellogg letter <br />Hawn stated that she felt the use was too intense and did not provide enough parking. She <br />found the design and height acceptable. While she believed it to be an improvement from <br />the Ambar proposal, Hawn took issue with the parking supply and would rather see too <br />much than too little parking provided. <br />Chair Smith indicated that she would be hesitant to support an access loop that ran outside <br />the development through Outlot D to access the strip m^l. <br />Mabusth agreed that the need to use the Outlot for an access route did not present itself <br />here and she would be interested in seeing a traffic light to help with access to the <br />development. <br />While she would prefer to see an access driveway. Chair Smith inquired how dead ending <br />the parking lot would impact the development. <br />Gaffron indicated that the fire marshal might have an issue with dead ending the parking. <br />Revering stated that the original intent of this rear access to the parking lot was merely to <br />provide an untraveled access for emergency use. Only throu^ conversations with the <br />neighboring business had access to the mall been considered. <br />Bremer stated that she felt the use was far too intense and the only way to gain more <br />parking would be to reduce the number of units. <br />Chair Smith agreed and called for the applicant to deintensify the use. <br />PAGE 25 of 40