Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Plan Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board scolds absent applicant at Maidstone Acres II review, lists required fixes
Summary
With the applicant absent, the Board said it could not hold a meaningful discussion of the Maidstone Acres II site plan modification and outlined required sanitary, grading, lighting and setback details that must be supplied before further review.
Planner Christopher Stoecker told the Board that the applicant for Maidstone Acres II did not attend the meeting and that a recently submitted revision failed to address prior comments. Vice Chair Jennifer Casper Fowkes said the Board could not conduct a meaningful discussion without the applicant present. Member Reed Jones said the applicant's continued lack of responsiveness had caused repeated re‑reviews and described the submission as "disrespectful" to the Board.
The Board identified specific items the applicant must provide before substantive review can continue: a sanitary plan indicating all piping on the property; existing and proposed ground elevations for a proposed landscaping retaining wall/planter box; a narrative assessing whether the proposed landscaping is acceptable with the propane tank in place and an indicated setback for the existing propane tank; details for exterior lighting that comply with Town Code; adequate clearance above an external air‑conditioning unit; and installation of "No Parking" signs or bollards to prevent parking in a specific southwest corner north of the retaining wall.
The Board emphasized that further consideration will require the applicant to appear and submit the requested materials.
