11-25-2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 21,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. 7 a- (#14) #02-2840 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC, 2550 KELLEY PARKWAY, Continufd Gaflron reminded the Commission that this would be the last time the Planning Commission would see Phase 1, unless a major change were to occur. Chair Smith moved, to accept Application #02-2789/#02-2840, Dahlstrom Development, LLC, **2550** Kelley Parkway, rrcommending the granting of Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan Approval which includes rezoning of this property. With regard to site layout, building styles, proposed materiab, and color palettes, pedestrian circulation, accessibility, and connectivity, recreation amenities both public and private, and overall landscape plan the Planning Commission would recommend approval. In addition, the Planning Commission recommends the City Council pursue site lighting, Kelley Parkway lighting and streetscape, housing aHordability, and development covenants, and grants approval of the phasing concept, and approval for preliminaiy plat and final platting for Phase 1, subject to the final traffic report and affordable issues being resolved, and the applicants work with staff to resolve outstanding engineering and other related issues either noted in this memo or which may come to light in the future. Rahn stated that the Planning Commission has awaited the traffic study since day 1. Chair Smith stated that the Commission would prefer resolution of the affordable housing issue, traffic study, and consultants plan all take place before City Council makes its final decision. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#15) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS OF SEPTEMBER 23,2002 AND OCTOBER 14,2002 September 23, Mabusth stated that the Welsh application was discussed and approved for a 44’ setback. She reported that the Tidwell Tree on Concordia, the preservation of which was tied to the approval of a variance there, had died. Which confirmed Attorney Barrett’s assertion, in her mind, that you should not put contingencies in resolutions based on unique situations, such as tying the variance to the preservation of a tree, or view it as a valid hardship. Berg disagreed, stating that one never knows when a large tree will die and it is worth the effort to conserve these natural beauties. October 14, Berg noted that there was discussion about driveway access. She reported that the proposed office/condo for Navarre was reviewed and then tabled after the Council decided they would need to examine the overall Navarre area before going forward with this proposal. Gaffron added that beyond the Fox Street driveway discussion, the CPUD was also discussed. Page 29 .. w.. . __________