My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-22-2013 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
04-22-2013 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/19/2015 4:04:58 PM
Creation date
2/19/2015 4:04:56 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
� MINUTES OF THE <br /> � ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,April 22,2013 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE—APPEAL, <br /> Continued) <br /> Gaffron stated the code directs Staff to not allow or approve of any future nonconformity,which could be <br /> something that exists without any approvals but is placed in a location where at some future date the <br /> buffer is triggered and that item suddenly becomes nonconformity. Staff does not have a choice under the <br /> current code to accept the fire pit when they see a delineation and a potential encroachment into the <br /> wetland even though Staff believes the Watershed District would accept ultimately the new delineation. <br /> Gaffron indicated they did not know that for certain because no one had surveyed the fire pit. <br /> Gaffron stated it becomes a Conservation Act issue if there is an encroachment of a wetland. Staff <br /> disagrees with the Wetland District's policy of using a 12 or 13-year old delineation that was done before <br /> the development occurred based on a proposed drawing rather than actual plans. Gaffron noted the <br /> survey is not an as-built survey. The Watershed District does not have an easement or a covenant for the <br /> buffer based on the drawing that is before the Council, and from Staffls perspective,they did not have a <br /> choice but to request a new delineation to determine if there was an encroachment of a buffer. Gaffron <br /> noted Staff was reyuired under the current code to request the wetland delineation. <br /> Gaffron noted at the April Planning Commission meeting,the consensus was to get rid of the City's <br /> attempt to regulate future nonconformities. Gaffron stated if it was not in the City Code,they would not <br /> be here tonight but that it will probably be a month or two before the code changes. <br /> Levang asked if he is referring to the fire pit or the sport court as the nonconformity. <br /> Gaffron indicated he is referring to the fire pit. <br /> Levang noted Kanive was told by the City that he did not require a permit for the fire pit. <br /> Kanive indicated his contractor was also told the same thing. <br /> Levang questioned how the City can hold him responsible for something that he was told was a nonissue. <br /> Curtis indicated she did not speak with him or his contractor. <br /> Kanive stated it was Christine Mattson. <br /> Curtis stated she discussed with Mr. Kanive the fact that a grading permit was required for any earth <br /> disturbance of 0 to 500 cubic yards. A grading permit was not obtained for this work and they would <br /> have been told a grading permit would have been required. <br /> Kanive noted he did have a city inspector inspect his properiy when he applied for the deck steps and the <br /> patio was being built at the same time. <br /> Curtis stated they spoke about the patio and that the incorrect information was given to him by the city <br /> inspector. <br /> Kanive stated he understands he needs to deal with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on the fire <br /> pit. <br /> Page 11 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.