My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/21/03 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2003
>
04/21/03 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2012 3:46:20 PM
Creation date
2/27/2012 3:46:20 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
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,April 21, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#11 #03-2889 RAVIA REAL ESTATE, LLC, Continued) <br /> Paetzel stated that each individual entryway would be illuminated and signified with their <br /> prospective signage. <br /> Fritzler questioned whether adequate separation existed between buildings for emergency <br /> access. <br /> While the buildings would be set up for sprinklers, Gaffron indicated that he would wait <br /> for comment from the fire marshal on other matters. <br /> Chair Smith asked if the Commission felt there were any other topics of importance for <br /> discussion. She summarized the Commission's position that their biggest concern <br /> continues to be density and suggested that the applicant detensify the use to allow for <br /> additional parking. Furthermore, she encouraged the applicant to add to the landscaping <br /> plan to protect the Sugarwood development. <br /> Mabusth asked if they could provide the applicant with further direction with regard to the <br /> parking balance. <br /> From earlier discussion, Chair Smith felt that staff would be comfortable with 10 stalls per <br /> unit. She believed other options for access would need to be examined. <br /> Gaffron learned and shared that Outlot D was City owned and would not be contemplating <br /> use in the near future. <br /> Chair Smith stated that they would prefer the applicant stay out of the Outlots and that they <br /> would be comfortable with the applicant working with staff with regard to access. <br /> Since the development would be surrounded on two sides by residential use, Mabusth <br /> recommended the applicant take parking, the intensity, and landscaping under serious <br /> consideration. <br /> Gaffron asked if the Commission and applicant believed they had been provided with <br /> enough direction to revise the PUD proposal. <br /> Rahn indicated that the applicants have been advised that the greenspace and parking needs <br /> to increase, and the density decreased. He pointed out that the Commission would not look <br /> favorably upon underground parking as an option at this site. <br /> Alcon understood that intensity,parking, and landscaping need to be addressed. He stated <br /> that they would concentrate on these issues and return with options. He appreciated the <br /> valuable feedback the Commission and public had provided them in their process. <br /> PAGE 28 of 40 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.