Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 19,2007 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#07-3325 Gary DeSantis,Continued) <br /> Rice inquired whether the conservation easement would fit under No. 2 of Staff's recommendations. <br /> Curtis indicated it would not. <br /> Rice asked if it would be helpful to have the conservation easement be part of the motion. <br /> Curtis concurred that it should be made part of the motion. <br /> Kempf noted he was not at the meeting at the time this application appeared before the Planning <br /> Commission as a sketch plan and that it was noted in the minutes that Mr. Gaffron had stated that in <br /> granting width variances, there should be a separation between the two house sites that matches the <br /> goals of the two-acre zone. Kempf asked whether Staff has an overhead that depicts the neighboring <br /> house. <br /> Curtis stated she does not but that there is an aerial wetland photo that depicts the property lines <br /> somewhat. <br /> Kempf commented this area appears to be more of a rural area and that the three houses are in close <br /> proximity to each other,which would change the rural area to more of an urban area. Kempf stated in <br /> his opinion this subdivision would negatively impact the two neighboring properties and that the <br /> subdivision is inappropriate for this area. <br /> Winer stated she also was not in attendance at the September Planning Commission meeting,but that <br /> the minutes do reflect there should be a separation between the two houses. <br /> Zullo commented she does not see where the issues concerning the road have been addressed by the <br /> applicant. <br /> Curtis stated Staff would recommend that those issues be addressed prior to the application moving <br /> forward. <br /> Curtis stated to her recollection there was a significant amount of discussion concerning the separation <br /> of the two lots but that there was not a clear direction by the Planning Commission on what the <br /> applicant should do. Curtis stated the issue is whether the Planning Commission is comfortable with <br /> what is being proposed for the area. Curtis pointed out that the building sites identified on the lots is <br /> not necessarily the exact location of the houses and the Planning Commission could give some <br /> specific direction on where they would like the house situated. <br /> Gronberg stated in his opinion the houses are not too crowded and are at least 60 feet apart. <br /> Turner asked how large the triangle is that is depicted on the plans. <br /> Gronberg indicated it is 80' by 50' and that it is bigger than the existing house. <br /> Turner commented that sometimes a surveyor will depict the triangle as actually bigger than what the <br /> house would be, which can cause some confusion. <br /> PAGE 6 <br />