Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 20,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Fretham stated they likely will not get larger. <br /> Lemke asked if there is a consideration for the height. <br /> Fretham noted there is a view easement on Lot 2, which is why the building footprint on that lot is more <br /> stretched out. Fretham indicated they have been in discussions about purchasing the easement so the <br /> height of the building can be increased but that he is not sure where that is at this point. <br /> Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. <br /> Jay White, 3560 Ivy Place, stated the yellow line on the map is the wetland border. White pointed out <br /> their property and the easement, which has been surveyed on their property. White commented he is not <br /> sure how they can fit a 12-foot driveway into a 10-foot easement and that he is not sure why the <br /> calculations are not four feet off. White indicated he has spoken with the Watershed District about it and <br /> they have verified that is the correct wetland border. White stated an 8-foot driveway would fit there but <br /> that a 12-foot driveway would be into the setback. <br /> Schoenzeit noted the applicant is requesting a 1.8 foot setback into that area. <br /> White stated he has been out there countless times,measured it a few times,and that he does not see how <br /> a 12-foot driveway will fit in there. In addition,the Watershed District has verified where the boundary <br /> is. White stated he would like to hear from the developer about what proof he has that he is not going <br /> into the wetland rather than coming back at a later time for an after-the-fact variance. <br /> White stated in addition,the practical difficulty statement made about the access easement for the <br /> property predates any knowledge of the presence of wetlands and therefore should be allowed. White <br /> stated the basis of the developer's argument for the driveway is that statement but he does not know what <br /> type of proof the developer has that that is true. White noted the photographic evidence at the sketch plan <br /> review showed that it was a wetland and that something changed in 1968 when the access was granted. In <br /> 1975, Orono had the whole point still as wetland. White stated he is wondering whether there is any <br /> proof that at the time the access easement was given that they had no knowledge of wetland. White stated <br /> it appears the City had knowledge of the wetland and that he is not sure what the basis is for the variance. <br /> White stated with regard to the fill, it was stated to be 1,300 cubic yards but that there has been no <br /> mention of the dirt being moved. At the Planning Commission meeting it was stated that if it is more than <br /> that, it would be a different project. White noted they are pulling 1,200 cubic yards out and bringing <br /> 1,600 cubic yards back in. White stated that was not addressed and it was proposed at a lot less. White <br /> noted the developer is talking about 270 truckloads and that the safety concerns are three times what was <br /> discussed and is radically different than what was discussed. <br /> Thiesse noted the Planning Commission is a recommending body and that amount was changed at the <br /> Council level because they requested the home elevations be raised. Thiesse indicated the number <br /> discussed at the Planning Commission meeting was just to give the Council an idea of where the Planning <br /> Commission's thinking was at. <br /> Schoenzeit noted the City Council can approve a higher number. <br /> Page 15 of 21 <br />