Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Wcdacsday Jaaaary 22,2003 <br />6:30 o'clock p.Bi. <br />(M2-2060 SUNSTATE CONCEPTS. Coatiaacd) <br />Ckair SaUlli aiovcd, Raka Mcoadcd, to approve Applicalioa #02-2860, Saavlatc Cooerptv, Ibc„ <br />based OB stair recoaiaseBdailoBs to §raat a lot area variaBce, deay a side setback v irlaace, approve <br />the froBt setback variaace relative to the *alteraate* plaa bat aot for the ori|{iaal proposal that <br />reqaires the side setback vaiiaace, a farther recoauaeadatioB. that the aea hone be coaoected to <br />maakipal seaer rather thaa recoaaected to the exlstiag septic system at completioB of <br />coastractioa. aad completiag a aetlaad deliaeatioB prior to coastruction of the 2nd-story deck fur <br />the property located at 1955 Heritafe Drive. \‘OTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. <br />GofT asked if be a cre being required to hook up to municipal sew er, even after being told by the City he <br />was not required to do so, if the current system was conforming, lie felt this w as contrarv to ex eryihing <br />he had been told. <br />Chair Smith stated that the Commission recommendation to City Council would be that he connect to <br />City Sewer pnor to the issuance of the certifica».* of occupancy. As there was not an adequate second site <br />found for sewer, the Commission agreed with stafTs recommendation to connect the new construction to <br />municipal sewer. <br />Gafl'ron suted. to be fair, the applicant likely has a second issue with the City, .since he had also been told <br />incoiK. tly by staff in the past that he would not have to go through this process for a lot area variance to <br />rebuild on the e.visting foundation, which was not the case. <br />Gorr stated he was told tw ice he would not need to ask for the lot area variance by staff, first early last fall <br />by Weinberger and then Bottenberg late fall. It was not until more recent meetings with GalTron ih. l he <br />was informed otherwise, after purchasing the property. <br />Rahn stated tliat since Gorr had asked to be moved along to Council, this is only the Commission's <br />recommendation and he could plead his case and the inconsistencies lo Council when he nwets with them <br />Gaffron reminded the Commission that this issue, of when a remodel becomes a rebuild or new <br />construction, is still a fluid issu.- fo*- discussion that the Commission has not come to any conclusion on. <br />There is no code recognizing 50 “/o. or any other standard, by w hich to judge w hen a rennidel becomes <br />new construction. Ibis issue docs need to be resolved so that the City can show people, in its Code, that <br />sshen a remodel reaches a certain level it becomes new construction or rebuild. <br />Chair Smith agreed w ith Gaffron. and stated without a standard in place for documentation, it would be <br />the Commission's recommendation that the Council consider this as new construction, whereas the <br />Council may still decide cthenvise. <br />Gaffron si;.ted that this would come before Council next week and asked if the applicant felt he had <br />enough tine to make the alterations since the process came as somewhat of a surpnsc lo him. <br />Gorr indicated that he could w ork w ith staff to have something ready for Council. <br />PAGE 18 of 29