08-12-2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, July 15,2002 6:30 o’clock p.ni. Mabusth slated that she would not support a northeast access to the development. Rahn felt it would be derelict to allow the loA units so close to public works when we know there would be complaints. He also questioned traffic volume. Smith asked the Commission if they could suggest an alternate location for the loft units. Rahn suggested that the loft units supply the spot to reduce density. He questioned how many on site parking spots were allowed per unit. Johnston stated that there are 4 s(>ots per unit, with additional on street parking within the bump out areas. Krall pointed out that the development has provided substantially higher parking ratios than required. Rahn staled that he liked the proposed water feature. Berg stated that she understood the use of the space to the north, but believed the lofts were way too dense. She could support the site for the lofts, however, felt there were too many. With regard to traffic, Berg slated that the Commission needs to decide what Kelley Parkway will look Bremer stated that if there are to be lofts that Is where they need to be, from an economical standpoint she could sec the logic. She had less issue with the density than she did with 3 stories in general. Bremer contended that since the code allows 3-6 units per acre, the Commission should have no difftculty with 6. She complimented the applicant for their efforts in reworking the design, emphasizing the need to keep the low’er price point for Orono to encourage diversity in housing. Mabusth added that the watenvays are attractive and do much to enhance the plan. Bremer stated that parking to her was not a big concern and she could not support more parking at the cost of greenspace. She felt less parking might cut down on the amount of extra people Johnston pointed out that without the loft units as part of the equation, the project is at a 4 unit per acre figure. He maintained that if the City was not going tot develop this property at 6 units per acre, they should not have said 3-6 units per acre in the code. With this being said, Johnston stated that the applicant would like to find a solution that is good for everyone. He added that the loft units are 60’ from the ptoperty line, well within what the ordinance requires. In fact, he stated that if the City had concerns alKiut locating housing near public works, they should have turned the building so that the ugly side faced the City Hall. With regard to a 3-story loft unit building versus a 2-story loft building, Johnston pointed out that either requires an elevator. PAGE 20 of 35