Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, November 18, 2013 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 32 of 35  <br />  <br />There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> <br />Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 9:35 p.m. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated he prefers Option 2B and that in his view the City should not exclude wind technology. <br />Landgraver stated restricting it to a few situations allows it but only in a small area of the City, which is <br />probably the recommendation that should be made to the City Council. <br /> <br />Thiesse asked how many properties would be allowed in the City. <br /> <br />Gaffron noted the property needs to be a minimum of 10 acres and that he would guess that would apply <br />to less than 100 and perhaps only as many as ten. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated what the Planning Commission is doing is setting a framework for alternative energy <br />systems for a few selected properties and that other property owners can come in and request a variance. <br /> <br />Schwingler commented technology will also likely be changing. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated he has not heard anyone say there is a demand for hydronic furnaces and that he is not <br />sure whether the Planning Commission should allow them. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the City cannot grant a variance for something that is prohibited. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked if Staff is aware of anyone who wanted a hydronic furnace. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated he is not and that a number of cities have prohibited hydronic furnaces. <br /> <br />Leskinen commented the Planning Commission has discussed hydronic furnaces a number of months ago <br />and that it is her recollection the Planning Commission had concluded they should be banned. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated part of the issue is that the industry is not sure how to measure those standards or which <br />standards should apply. Gaffron stated if someone comes in and indicates they would like to have one, <br />they can ask for a code change. <br /> <br />Leskinen stated that would be the path of least resistance and that the safest path is to prohibit them. <br />Leskinen stated if something changes down the road, it can be addressed at that time. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated he is okay with prohibiting the hydronic furnaces and setting the framework for <br />allowing the wind energy. <br /> <br />Leskinen stated as it relates to wind energy, she would prefer Option 2B. Leskinen noted the <br />Woodbury/St. Paul language was more geared towards residential use than commercial use. <br /> <br />Thiesse stated he does not like prohibiting something and that he is not aware of anyone with hydronic <br />heating or anyone who is interested in it. <br /> <br />Schwingler commented they can come in and ask for a code change. <br /> <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 01/21/14* <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 11/18/2013 <br />[Page 32 of 35]