My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-14-2005 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
03-14-2005 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2012 3:49:44 PM
Creation date
7/24/2012 4:47:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
4 <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />ORONO CITY CO <br />Monday, M <br />7:00 old <br />( #05- 3080Interspace West, Continued) <br />Moorse noted this step of the process is similar to pri <br />Moorse stated the Council should be clear in their dii <br />would like to see to the project. <br />OF THE <br />rNCIL MEETING <br />'ch 14, 2005 <br />ck p.m. <br />ry approval and is not a sketch plan review. <br />to the applicants on what revisions they <br />Evelyn Schommer, 2106 Sugarwood Drive, indicated she would like more information concerning the <br />landscaping being proposed for this development. Schommer inquired how tall the roof being proposed <br />tonight is as compared to the previous proposal. <br />Mrs. Carlson indicated the roofline is 19 feet above the existing elevation, which is 11 feet below the <br />maximum height allowed. I <br />McMillan inquired what steps would be followed for approval. <br />Gundlach stated Staff would prepare a concept plan <br />their next meeting, which will document all the conc <br />applicants would need to address those concerns anc <br />the City Council. <br />White noted the landscaping plan would be <br />public hearing would take place. <br />Murphy pointed out this roofline would be <br />Mrs. Carlson stated the roofline would be 10 to 20 f <br />upon where it is measured on each building. <br />. pproval resolution for adoption by the council at <br />;rns and issues raised. Gundlach indicated the <br />then reappear before the Planning Commission and <br />at the next Planning Commission meeting where a <br />lower than the adjacent senior housing center. <br />lower than the senior housing center depending <br />Marilyn Mileusnic, 2110 Sugarwood Drive, expressed a concern regarding the number of buildings being <br />proposed for this small lot. Mileusnic indicated sheIwould prefer that parking only be provided in the <br />front. Mileusnic also commented that they have not heard any information regarding the landscaping for <br />this lot. I <br />Murphy encouraged the applicants to meet again <br />raised tonight. <br />Carrie Case, 2100 Sugarwood Drive, inquired <br />are. <br />the neighbors to discuss some of the issues being <br />roof would be made of and how definite the plans <br />White noted the applicants would be providing more detailed plans in the future. <br />Mr. Carlson indicated the proposed roofs would be metal and would be earthtone in color. <br />Schommer stated the residents of the Sugarwood neighborhood have concerns regarding the height of the <br />buildings, the lighting from the buildings and cars, and parking. Schommer stated they would like to see <br />a development that is appropriate for the size of this lot. <br />PAGE 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.