My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-18-2003 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2003
>
08-18-2003 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 1:41:31 PM
Creation date
2/9/2023 1:38:56 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.
/
331
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. July 21.2003 <br />6:00 o'clock p.ni. <br />(«I6 m-2922 IMAGINAIUTY ON BEHALF OF MIKE CASHMAN, Co«lhi«ed> <br />Waataja stated that a wetland is defined by plants and soil l>‘pcs and water alone docs not <br />constitute a wetland. <br />Chair Smith inquired whether the property owners would be interested in performing a <br />delineation to find out where the wetlands arc. <br />Omstein indicated that she had been given the impression that the owners would be willing to <br />take the next step by identifying the wetland and refining the monument design accordingly. <br />Chair Smith suggested the Commission table the application to allow Omstein the opportunity to <br />conduct the delineation. <br />Waataja asked the Commission if they felt a hardship existed, whether it be the wetland, <br />vegetation or location of the drive. If they felt there was a hardship and would consider a <br />wetland setback variance, then a delineation should be conducted. If they didn't feel there w as a <br />hardship, there would be no sense in requiring a wetland delineation. <br />Chair Smith believed that, while the markers could be revised, they arc necessary’. She indicated <br />that not all members of the Commission would support overturning staffs recommendation to <br />put up the monument in the wetland. <br />Omstein asked for direction. <br />GafTron encouraged the applicant to design a street sign, on a 4X4 post with hanging address <br />plates. He notol that the c^c allows 2 s.f. per address. <br />Berg questioned whether the monument could be moved up to replace the currem split rail fence <br />GafTron stated that the sight triangle would be negatively impacted by mo\ ing the monument in <br />place of the fence. He indicated that many possibilities exist and should be discussed in further <br />detail, especially, since the vegetation and trees themselves also obstruct the sightline. <br />Berg moved. Mabusib seconded, to table Application «03-2922. Imaginality on behalf of <br />Mike Cashman. for the purpose of redesign and wetland delineation. VOTE: Aves 7. Navs <br />0. <br />(#17) WI3.2924 TODD SMITH ON BEHALF OF JIM AND JULIE IIARSTAD, 4550 <br />WOLVERTON. VARIANCE. 10:35-10:30 P.M. <br />Todd Smith, on behalf of Jim and Julie Harstad, was present <br />Chair Smith stepped out of the Chambers briefly, horn 10J510 J7 P.M. <br />PAGE 30 of 37
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.