My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-26-1998 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
01-26-1998 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2012 4:09:54 PM
Creation date
9/26/2012 4:09:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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 JANUARY 26,1998 <br />• (#4 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) <br />Flint asked how the cost of the units would differ if there were only two to a group. He <br />noted the land cost was less than other land in the area. Gleason said the buildings to the <br />east are generally split entrys and not one level living. The units in the proposed <br />development are similar to walkouts. Gleason said the land is not economical and 75% <br />of the project cost is for the infrastructure. He noted other cities would allow more <br />density. Flint responded that the plan is incompatible with the philosophy of Orono and <br />land use efficiency is not a consideration but best use of land is a consideration. He <br />suggested single level units be considered. Gleason said single level units require more <br />land and would not be feasible for this project. <br />Goetten said she was not against the project but is concerned with CoRd 15. She <br />suggested a graduation in the type of units from twinhomes to townhomes. Jabbour <br />added that the plan should not require sprinkling and include only one cul -de -sac. <br />John Gleason, the builder for the development company, questioned what alternatives <br />would be favored. He asked if the product as proposed would be totally unacceptable <br />with the projected height. Kelley said he did not believe so. John Gleason felt the mixed <br />use of single level with units as proposed would make sense. Goetten noted the need to <br />create a good transition in the housing but admitted not being aware of the cost effects. <br />• Jabbour asked that the applicant present sketches for submission to Council without <br />requiring a full design and laying out several options for Council to give direction on. <br />Other Council members agreed with this proposition. <br />Bill Gleason said he would explore this possibility. Density was still creating a problem <br />for him. Jabbour said there is no formula for density in the City. Jabbour noted that the <br />code allows for leeway in its interpretation. <br />Tom Barrett said the landowner has the right to build on 1/2 acre lots on the property <br />without a density credit. The density credit is more of a legislative judgment. The <br />appearance of the development can be considered, as well as height, design, and <br />recreational needs. Jabbour felt these comments were relevant. <br />Kelley said the plan would be that of sketch plan given the discussion at this meeting. He <br />preferred a preliminary sketch plan be presented to Council and options given for <br />consideration before further development. <br />Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to table Application #2308. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />( * #5) #2310 DICK BURY, CLASSIC CAR SALES, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE <br />Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to accept withdrawal of the application. Vote: Ayes <br />5, Nays 0. <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.