07/19/2010 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

♦ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING • Monday,July 19,2010 - 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#10-3477 JOHN ROEDEL,4725 NORTA SHORE DRIVE, CONTINUED) Curtis stated it was not. The builder only proposed a patio under the second story deck. What changed at the time of the building permit is that the patio doors were installed, so Staff made an accommodation for some little landings at each patio�door. , Roedel stated it was his understanding the patio was approved with the original plan. Curtis stated the builder proposed a main floor patio under the second story deck. . Curtis displayed the original plan on the overhead. The original application showed a jog in the home with a deck off of the kitchen. The building permit application depicted the deck as house and Staff did not catch that change because the deck structure was akeady there on the original plans and the structural and hardcover numbers did not change. Feuss asked what the City's position is on the pervious pavers. Curtis stated the City Council has decided not to allow a reduction in hardcover for pervious pavers. Kang stated while the applicant did have his variance application in to the City prior to the Supreme Court , ruling,that fact unfortunately does not change the ruling. Curtis pointed out the actual law did not change but that they were told they were interpreting the statute incorrectly. Curtis noted there is no grandfathering under the statute. Leskinen stated even though the applicant applied for their variance on June 22°a,their application was not reviewed and approved prior to the Supreme Court ruling. . � Feuss stated the state legislature has basically tied the City's hands with regard to variances given the language in the statute,and until that language is changed, if there is a reasonable use of the property,the. City is unable to grant a variance. If there is no reasonable use of the property without a variance,that would be considered a hardship and the City can grant a variance. Kang indicated that is also her interpretation. ;Roedel stated they are talking about the perviousness of the ground and that sand will allow for more runoff and be an environmentally better solution. Kang stated the City of Orono still counts pervious pavers as hardcover but that she understands what the applicant is saying. . � Schoenzeit recommended the City Council do further research on pervious pavers and their benefits to encourage more people to use them. Kang stated she does not see any place in the ordinance to grant the variance. Schoenzeit stated the applicant is free to take their case to the City Council or wait for the language to be changed by the legislature. . PAGE 12