05-20-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OK THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, April 15, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (N02-277I Orono Ambar, C'ontiniied) inquired whether there w ere any public comments relating to this application. Scott Mabusth. 740 Drown Road North, expressed a concern about the amount of dirt that has been dropped into their gutter and onto their boule\*ard. noting that this proposal calls for the hauling of cs-cn more dirt. Mabusth requested that other alternatives be ctmsidcrcd for the removal of the fill. Mike Shrack, 2004 Sugarwood Drive, staled he has a concern with the height of the building, noting he had the impression from the first phase that this would be a low-rise structure, which is not the ease. Shrack commented the additional senior housing building is even higher than the first building, which was not what he had env’isioncd when he purchased the property’. Shrack stated in his opinion this is not a good use of this property. Jacqueline Ritz. 2108 Sugarwood Drive, indicated she was aware this property was commercial at the time they purchased the property, but that she does object to the height of both buildings. Rit/ stated she IS opposed to a third story building since there arc no other three-story buildings in Orono. Randy Hogan. 2103 Sugarwood ITnvc. expressed a concern regarding the height of the building, noting they were told in the first phase that this would be a low-rise office building Hogan slated the developer at that time told the City and residents that this project would only work with an oflice building, with no talk of an additional senior housing building. Hogan slated he has had an opportunity to review the plans for this proposal, noting that the building would be approximately 70 feel aKne the n»ad. 100 feel above the intascction. and would ltH)k like a citadel Hogan commented in his view the current buiMing is not being built according to the spirit of the plan, noting that the residents were informed the trees would be protected along Sugarw»H>d. which is not the case. Hogan stated a large number have been removcL' Hogan stated this development has changed the w hole feel of the area and character of the Sugarw ood neighborhood. Roger Olson. 2114 Sugarwood Drive, stated he had the understanding the onginal building would be one story near the residential area and then increase. Olson stated he thought the building would be cut further dovvTi into the hill, which is not the ease. Olson stated the proposal to construct a second building on lop of the hill will only make the situation worse. Rick Apple. 2101 Sugarwotnl Drive, expressed a concern regarding the height of the two buildings. Apple slated this development is different tlun what they were informed of originally. Dunbar stated to his knowledge the building has been built exactly to the engineer specifications that were presented to the City. Dunbar staled he regrets that there is a sense that they have done something different than what was approved by the City. Dunbar acknowledged that some trees were removed on the north side in order to construct some berms in that location, which was done with the knowledge and approval of the City. Dunbar noted he did have the engineers measure the building and it has been built to within one-half inch of the plans. PAGE 18