Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, August 19, 2002 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />(#02-2819 TIM DEVRIES, Continued) <br />Mabusth asked if the wetlands were merely types 1/2 or more. <br />Gaffron noted that, in general, the newly defined wetlands were extensions of the original <br />wetlands and not viewed as wetlands themselves in 1983. <br />Smith asked if there was a list of notified neighbors. <br />Gaffron stated that the nearest neighbor is Susan Wilson, who lived across the creek to the east <br />and up the hill. <br />Mr. Robin stated that he wished to address each of the concerns or conditions noted in the staff <br />recommendation. He began by stating that the applicant has no intention of compromising any <br />existing wetland sites and intends to steer clear of any risk to the septic sites. He added that <br />more heavy duty silt fencing was not an issue and the applicant had already committed to doing <br />that and more. As far as the delineation and new recording, Mr. Robin stated that the applicant <br />would prefer to not have to go to the added expense of additional surveys at this time and asked <br />ifthere were other options. Mr. Robin indicated that the setbacks to wetlands do vary depending <br />on the type and size, and he believed the court to be shoehorned in to fit the appropriate <br />proportions currently. He continued that discussion had taken place with regard to moving the <br />court to the other site, however, since no residence exists on that site, the accessory structure <br />could not be supported there. This would also limit future potential sale of that parcel. <br />Mabusth asked why trees were removed from the shaded area. <br />Mr. Robin stated that the applicant was trying to eliminate the infestation of buckthorn and was <br />also forced to remove the box elders that were beginning to fall upon themselves. <br />Mabusth asked where and if a home were to be placed on the upper lot. <br />Mr. Robin stated that there were no plans for a home to be built on the upper lot, but they have <br />merely opened up the play area. <br />With regard to staff recommendation #5, the encroachment into the 26' setback, Robin explained <br />that the applicant would be building a concrete curve around the entire court approximately 6" to <br />12" to avoid spilling of additional fill. He pointed out that approximately 120 cubic yards of soft <br />soil would need to be removed from that end of the court providing a diagonal support system. <br />PAGE 21 of28