05-12-2009 Council Work Session Packet

Home Browse Search

. We were told that some of the requests were issues to be addressed at time of buildi.ng application, not variance of lot size needed to build a home. l.when we applied for variance we were told we had to have another survey. When we contacted a surveyor, he said, "That lot has been surveyed twice. You have not built any structures on the property since then so you don't ' need a survey. You can use the existing survey." The second surveyor we met with said the same tivng. However, city planner requested another survey, so we found one who presented a plan. Yes, the grading is steep and water run off and grading was a concem. However, we understood that issue would be addressed at time of application for buildi.ng permit. As you may recall we waited over a year before the variance was passed. Even though Frank Traytro has been grading hills and foundations for homes for over 28 years, lus plan was rejected. ( it did differ somewhat from the original grading plan surveyor submitted, however, Frank has exceptional e�ertise. We have known about his work for years.) We were grateful the council passed OK for variance We did not receive the bill for extra charges until after the variance was granted. ( We are unhappy we were not told ahead before costs were incurred.) It is just a good business policy. When we questioned why Boonestro or City of Orono or planner waited so long to tell us (instead of discussing the charge with us ahead of time). Mrs. Turner stated, "Boonestrro was havi.ng accounting problems due to changes in their books. Their books were in disarrav." (no one knew about it) A couple weeks later we asked Ms. Tumer reason for not telling us about City Orono charges ahead of time. She stated, "City of Orono was going through an accounting change and we were not able to get access to that information. The accounti.n�svstem was in disarrav." We also spoke to several other engineers and city planners who specialized in