My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-28-2005 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
02-28-2005 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2012 3:49:35 PM
Creation date
7/24/2012 4:46:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, February 28, 2005 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />•(8.#05-3080 INTERSPACE WEST, 2060 tl AYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, Continued) <br />Philip Carlson asked whether the Council would be willing to support a two story design that <br />stayed under the 30' height limit. I <br />White indicated that he would be willing to <br />traditional look of the neighborhood better. <br />a two story building, if it fit within the <br />Gina Carlson questioned how they had gone thu the planning process with an application that fit <br />within the ordinance, were given a 610 approval, and are now being told by the Council that it is <br />their personal opinion this design does not fit. 1 <br />Mayor Peterson stated that at the previous Cou <br />Council with a redesign that would flow with a <br />approvals in the packet as examples; noting the <br />I <br />.il meeting the applicant was asked to provide <br />ter Orono development projects, using previous <br />had not done that. <br />Gina Carlson stated that she could come back with a new design in March but asked for assurance <br />that her new design concept would have support among the Council. In addition, she asked if there <br />were other items within the application to which the Council objected. She shared a few photos of <br />previous designs by her firm, including prairie style and flat roof type buildings. <br />Murphy reiterated that it was not simply the roofline but how the proposed building fit into the <br />landscape. He was reluctant to redesign the concept for the applicant, stating that he would like to <br />• see something different than what had been provided, and would know what fits in when he sees it. <br />Planning Commissioner Leslie interjected that the Planning Commission had discussed the roofline <br />and, while they did find it did not interfere with the proposal, suggested that perhaps a flat roof line <br />would be more acceptable if the rest of the building components fit. He asked the Council if they <br />concurred. <br />White agreed that a flat roof would be acceptable but would like to see what the applicant came <br />back with. <br />Mayor Peterson and Sansevere indicated that they both liked the overall project and layout, but <br />fa <br />were not convinced the building design itself it the corridor. <br />Attorney Barrett stated that the ordinance does state that Council has the ability to authorize <br />architectural designs and decide what the look of the corridor should be. <br />Gina Carlson maintained that, in her opinion, the corridor did not have a set standard for the area. <br />Moorse stated that, although roofline and style are at issue and because the design has more units <br />and windows facing the residential area, it is important that the Council to advise the applicant on <br />what they are willing to accept, both in terms of height and design. Moorse explained that if <br />Council is directing the applicant to go back and redesign the buildings, the applicant needs to <br />know whether the windows cannot exceed the height as proposed currently. <br />PAGE 5 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.