My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-25-2002 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2002
>
11-25-2002 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 10:19:30 AM
Creation date
2/9/2023 9:51:50 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.
/
424
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
. - MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, October 21,2002 <br />6:30 o*cIock p.m. <br />•• f <br />(#14) #02-2840 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC, 2550 KELLEY PARKWAY, <br />Continuctl <br />Mabusth asked if the retention ponds were part of development Phase 1. <br />Johnston agreed that the retention pond and other things would accompany Phase 1. <br />With regard to the punch list of 8 items in the staff memo, Chair Smith asked for Commission <br />reaction to the first item, site layout. <br />Rahn asked if the applicant was receptive to changing the size of the roundabout. <br />Johnston stated that they would look at the size of the roundabout with Bonestroo, as well as, the <br />third driveway by the lofts that was added due to the 10’ drop in the grade differences. <br />Gaffron suggested the applicant consider a consolidated side entrance access for both loft <br />buildings versus the proposed 2-3 accesses shown currently. <br />With regard to the color palettes, Gaffron stated that the Commission’s goal should be to tie <br />them down to ensure the City knows what they are getting. <br />Johnston indicated that what they were displaying that evening was a style and a sample of <br />colors they propose, and he ensured the Commission that what they don’t want is a single color <br />only repeated throughout the entire development. <br />Gaffron pointed out that the publics view would be more than just the front, and suggested the <br />applicants consider continuing the front facade around the building since the two story views <br />would be seen throughout the neighborhood. <br />Hassler stated that their intent was to install brick on the front and back of the buildings and <br />provide variations. <br />Similar to the Renaissance development, Dahlstrom noted that these units would be all brick <br />with some similarities and variations, and he realized that they need to enhance the rear as well <br />as the front. <br />• ^ <br />Hassler stated that they would be using materials such as, cultured stone, brick, hardy plank <br />(which could be painted). He indicated that it was their desire to blend all of the materials so that <br />they compliment each other but not necessarily duplicate or look like a hodge podge of styles. <br />Gaffron pointed out that the hardy plank was also used on the new senior housing building. <br />Fritzler asked if vinyl siding would be used. <br />Page 23
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.