09-27-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 13,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (James Render, Appeal of Administrative Decision, Continued) Gaffron stated the 940.5’ is probably accurate, noting that there is a survey from the City that reflects that elevation. Gaffron commented that any time grade is proposed to be changed on a property, technically the City requires a filling or grading permit for any changes in elevation or changes in grade on the property. Gaffron stated any filling of over 500 cubic yards requires a conditional use permit and any filling between 0 to 500 cubic yards is a staff-issued permit. Gaffron indicated he is not aware of any permits being granted for filling of this lot or of any interim grading plan being submitted to the City. Sansevere inquired what answer the architect gave to the applicant for why City Staff was not contacted to verify that their interpretation was correct. Render stated he engaged the architectural firm of TEA and was told someone from their staff obtained the City ’s code book and had also researched the City ’s web site situation for any modifications to the code. Render indicated he has spent approximately 15 months in the design process, but did not become aware of a problem with the height until the City informed his architect that they would not issue a building permit. Render noted the architect has prepared an exhibit that is before the Council tonight that looks at it from the City ’s perspective as much as possible. Sansevere inquired whether the architectural firm ever discussed this matter with City StafT. Render indicated he is not aware of whether they talked with City Staff over this issue. Sansevere stated in his opinion there should be accountability on both sides and that the City of Orono should consider putting language on their web site saying that you must contact City Staff for any relevant policies. Sansevere commented that it is difficult to believe that Orono is the only city where interpretation of city codes is an issue and where the architect docs not bother to get a clarification. Sansevere inquired w hether architects routinely contact City Staff to get clarifications of city codes. Gaffron stated Staff is contacted almost on a daily basis concerning these types of issues. Render stated the architect has explained that they have never encountered a situation like this in another city where a policy is not part of a city ’s established printed code and is different than the Uniform Building Code. Render stated City Staff informed him that this policy is not made available to applicants unless specifically requested. Sansevere stated the lack of contact by the architect with City Staff is the gap in this situation. Barnard staled in his opinion if there was .some ambiguity in the ordinance, that the architect would then have a duty to talk to the City, but w hen the ordinance tells you how- to define the height of a building, then there is not reason to ask for clarification. Sansevere inquired if the historical grade of 940.5’ was used, along with StafTs interpretation of the code w'lthout the policy, what the defined height would be. PAGE 9