05-13-2013 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 22, 2013 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 18 (5. Permit #2012-00424 - JAY AND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE – APPEAL, Continued) Kanive stated Staff also informed him of the satellite images they used to determine that a fire pit and patio have been built. The expanded buffer would result in the fire pit being ripped out. When the patio was installed, the city inspector came to the house while it was being built and approved the stairs that were constructed because it was an engineered structure. That city inspector said nothing about the patio being built or requested a permit. The sport court was in plain view since it already existed. The appeal process is the first time they were hearing any issues about a fire pit or patio. Kanive stated he has also been informed by other members who do this sort of survey work in the community that it is highly irregular to ask for a full survey of a property that is not located in a hardcover zone. That is why the fire pit and the patio and some of the other structures, landscaping in general, was not included on the survey. Kanive indicated Staff did incrementally ask for these things to be placed on the survey but he would question what the point is. Kanive indicated they have spent over $1,500 in surveys as the requests came to update them. The other factor was the time spent. Kanive commented he could never have imagined that a simple sport court permit would come to this and that he is frustrated that a year later they are still dealing with this. Kanive stated in his view a lot of these facts that are being put forth are not really facts but merely interpretations that are loosely based on one following the other. Bremer stated when you look at the overhead, the line that is on the approved survey appears to be right within the wetland. Bremer asked if that would cause concern to him if he was sitting on the Council and saw that. Bremer stated it appears to be an incorrect survey of what exists now. Bremer indicated she attempted to visit the project but it was difficult to look at it given the weather. Kanive stated it is a valid point when you see it in the satellite image. This wetland is bigger than what it originally was but that he is not trying to build close to it. The sport court is being tucked behind the garage. Kanive stated if they were building right up on it, it would change the optics but it does not change the law. The law for the Watershed District is that their delineation is perpetually kept for a residential neighborhood. Staff took a connection between a non-wetland delineation expiring after five years versus a wetland delineation that does not expire. Given the optics of the overhead, Kanive stated he can see where there could be issues, especially if they were pushing the envelope and building right up into it. McMillan noted this is one of those lots that the City is having some issues with relating to its wetland buffer ordinance. Staff and the Planning Commission have started to look at those issues. McMillan stated that discussion is not far enough along for this application. McMillan noted the City Council has started to have some beginning discussion on the delineation issues and how the City’s regulations differ from the Wetland District’s regulations. McMillan indicated she would like Mr. Kanive to know that the City has taken his site under consideration. Kanive stated he has spoken with Catherine Bach quite frequently about giving homeowners certainty as to the boundaries within their own properties. Printup asked where the location of the sport court is. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/13/2013 Approval of Council Minutes 04/22/2013 [Page 9 of 18]