Laserfiche WebLink
, � r <br /> NIINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING � � <br /> Monday,June 18,2012 �',,;/ <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. ��� <br /> landsca er but found out the landsca er went out of business. The second landsca er that was hired was � <br /> P P P <br /> working with the City on another application so he was asked to help out in this situation and work with <br /> the City. Schumer indicated the second landscaper has designed a plan that he really does not like; and <br /> that if there is a way to delay this and become compliant in the future,that would be great. Schumer <br /> stated he would like an end to this situation and not have it dragged out much further. <br /> Acting Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. • <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Acting Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. <br /> Landgraver commented it seems logical to table this application for a couple of months. <br /> Thiesse stated the City's main goal is protection of the lake and that if there is a way this work can � <br /> become compliant,the Planning Commission should take that approach. Thiesse commented there are <br /> extenuating circumstances sometimes but that five years is a long time for very little action to be taken by <br /> the property owner. <br /> Schumer stated he did not know the work was not compliant until he went to take out the permit for the <br /> pergola. <br /> Landgraver asked what the mechanism would be if the City Council does not act on the hardcover <br /> ordinance in the next month. <br /> Gaffron noted the City has 120 days from June 6�',which gives them until October 6�'. If,by the end of <br /> that time,the Council has not taken action to adopt the new ordinance or if the ordinance they adopt does <br /> not accomplish what is expected,this application will need to come back before the Planning <br /> Commission. <br /> Thiesse stated in his view action on this application should be taken before October. <br /> Curtis noted it is a violation application and that it is a unique situation with a new hardcover ordinance <br /> pending. Curtis indicated this is a unique situation given the fact that there is a new hardcover ordinance <br /> being discussed. <br /> Levang asked if the Planning Commission has to give them 120 days. <br /> Gaf&on stated in his view the Planning Commission does not have to give the applicant the full 120 days <br /> and that typically what happens with extensions is that Staff needs to do additional work or additional <br /> documentation needs to be. The Planning Commission could take action tonight and let the City Council <br /> . �" decide how they want to deal with it. '�"� - <br /> Walsh stated if there aze issues within the 0-75 foot zone,those should be dealt with right away. <br /> Carlson sta.ted he appreciates the comments of the Planning Commission. When we looked at the � <br /> environmental issue,Mr. Schumer did retain an engineer to review the situation and prepare a report. <br /> Carlson stated he would like more time to provide some detailed information if that becomes necessary. <br /> Page <br /> 22 <br />