Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,May 21,2001 <br /> (#01-2679 SHARRATT AND MACDONALD DESIGN COMPANY,CONTINUED) <br /> and raised on the property. Osborn commented these dogs have gotten out from time to time due to <br /> the lack of fencing. Osborn inquired when and if fencing would be erected on this property. <br /> Moore stated there is fencing on Dickenson Street on the back side of the barn. Moore stated they <br /> have discussed the issue with the dogs before with the City Council and that is not on the agenda <br /> tonight. <br /> Osborn inquired how long the property would be unfenced. Osborn stated she has safety concerns <br /> regarding the dogs. <br /> Smith stated the resident would like to know whether any additional fencing would be erected in the <br /> future. <br /> Moore stated they are anticipating the main residence will be completed in August,with the site plan <br /> showing proposed fencing and berms with trees along the whole front of the property. Moore stated <br /> following completion of the project,the residence and guest house will not be visible from the street. <br /> Moore stated that fencing and trees would continue along Dickenson Street. <br /> Smith suggested they discuss this further with the neighbor following tonight's meeting. Smith <br /> inquired whether the Applicant had considered moving the guest house further back to be in line with <br /> the principal residence. <br /> Sweitzer stated they have not considered that possibility. <br /> Stoddard stated if the guest house were relocated, a variance may not be needed. <br /> Sweitzer stated they could look at that option. Sweitzer stated the current driveway works well as far <br /> as drainage. <br /> Gaffron pointed out the guest house would need to be moved approximately 40 feet back in order to be <br /> in line with the principal residence. <br /> Smith and Stoddard commented they were not aware the guest house would need to be moved that far <br /> back. <br /> Weinberger indicated Exhibit F shows the view of the guest house from the street. Weinberger stated <br /> the guest house would not be visible from the street. Weinberger stated the guest house has been <br /> designed to meet a 50 foot setback each way so it meets all principal building setbacks in the event <br /> this lot is every split. <br /> Smith stated if this property were ever subdivided or sold,the City has required in the past that the <br /> oversized accessory structure be removed. Smith inquired whether that was the case in this situation. <br /> Gaffron stated the City requires a standard covenant for every oversized accessory structure,which <br /> includes that language. Gaffron stated if the property is ever divided in the future,the divided <br /> property would need to have the required acreage to support those accessory structures or they would <br /> need to bexemoved. <br /> PAGE 17 <br />