My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-09-1998 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
03-09-1998 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2024 1:59:00 PM
Creation date
6/5/2024 1:53:10 PM
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.
/
407
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 REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 23, 1998 <br />(#8 - #2326 Orono Development - Continued) <br />Jabbour asked Staffs opinion on the 5 ’ parking setback. He questioned if there was any <br />other commercial district where a 20' setback e.xists. He asked if the 20' setback was <br />reasonable. Gaffron said there are likely no commercial properties w ith a full 20' setback <br />Gaffron said he has concluded, however, that to gain the setback it must be obtained <br />now. Gatlron said the Planning Commission has recommended a 15' setback. Jabbour <br />noted the many standards being required today that reduce useable site area, citing the <br />e.xample of ponding. He indicated priorities have to be review ed. <br />Gaffron noted the code suggests the importance of reviewing the visual aspect ( f the site. <br />He is also concerned if the county road is widened in the future, w ith the City sidewalk <br />abutting the property and only 5' of green space, road e.xpansion could be up to the <br />parking space. Gaffron agreed with Jabbour that it may be an issue of policy. <br />Moorse was of the opinion that it would be difficult to grow any grass or shrubbery <br />within the 5' of green space. <br />Goetten asked what effect the Planning Commission recommendation would have on <br />parking. Gaffron indicated the plan would not be teasible if a row of parking was <br />eliminated. <br />Gaffron said the initial reaction was to make the building less deep. Dillon said the <br />options were reviewed. The building had originally been proposed at a much larger size. <br />He indicated the bumpouts for trees on the front of the building did not satisfy the <br />Planning Commission Dillon said the building depth w as standard as well as the parking <br />space. The 20' drive clearance to the rear is necessary to handle the traffic flow. <br />John O'Sullivan said his adjacent property has a 5' green space. He has been able to <br />maintain a hedge with flower gardens each year. He also referenced the additional <br />landscaping planned around the building. Dillon said green space is provided at the <br />corner of CoRds 15 and 19 as well as surrounding the pond area. Dillon indicated the <br />vacated portion of Navarre Lane could be an area for additional green space. <br />Kelley asked if there would be a raili;.g on the retaining wall. Mike Sepena, the building <br />contractor, informed Kelley that thw highest point of the wall is 14'. A condition of the <br />Planning Commission review was the placement of a fence along the wall. The type of <br />fencing has not yet been studied. Kelley indicated the need to create a pleasan* view and <br />a safe environment. <br />Kelley w as informed that a substantial amount of fill would be brought onto the property. <br />The amount was not known.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.