Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Wednesday,July 17,2002 <br /> 5:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#2) #02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC, Continued <br /> Gaffron asked where the property line fell with regard to the berm. <br /> Johnston stated that the property line falls along the ditch. <br /> Gaffron suggested letting the applicant extend the berm, to avoid an up and down hill <br /> appearance. <br /> While she would support allowing them to extend the berm, Berg stated that everything that <br /> happens on the berm would need to happen on their side of the concrete fence. <br /> Krall felt this could be accomplished. <br /> Rahn stated that the applicant was already borrowing square feet from the street, and now would <br /> be encroaching on City property in order to meet density, which was already at six units per acre. <br /> He questioned whether there were too many units being proposed for this site. <br /> Johnston stated they understood the City's perspective. <br /> Gaffron asked Berg to clarify her request to remove units. Would she accept them moving the <br /> building further from the property line. <br /> Berg stated that she thought removing 4 units would give the City more space from the lot line. <br /> Gaffron clarified that the setback from the lot line would be 80' versus 60'. <br /> With respect to greenspace and separation between buildings, Berg stated that she would not find <br /> it acceptable to simply move the building down, in lieu of losing 4 additional units. <br /> Smith appreciated the clarification, stating that the Commissioners would not like to see the <br /> building moved. <br /> Mabusth stated that the removal of units would be more appropriate and asked which would go. <br /> Berg stated that she had suggested they remove a whole block of units, 6 to be exact. They <br /> already removed two by tapering the end units to 2-story's, and she suggested they remove those <br /> units as well. Thereby the end units go back to 3-stories,just moved in one set. <br /> Gaffron stated that the City would obtain an 85' setback by requiring those units to be removed. <br /> Krall asked if they could address the City's need to expand the 60'setback to 80', and separately <br /> address, how many units the city believes the property needs to lose overall. She stated that she <br /> PAGE 9 OF 22 <br />