Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE • <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 21,2016 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Olson stated if the applicants were misguided at all in building this structure,they now have to tear it <br /> down and incur costs. Olson stated he is not sure if that is the case,but if it is the case,he has an issue <br /> with the applicants incurring costs to do that, especially if it was not their fault. <br /> Thiesse stated what he is hearing is that Staff did not tell them any one thing but that the applicants <br /> understood one thing but it was not on the plans. Thiesse stated if the applicants can come up with any <br /> documents that show it was included in the plans that were reviewed,they could bring it back. Right now <br /> the Planning Commission is talking about whether the existing code was applied correctly <br /> Schoenzeit stated if the applicants want to attempt to keep it,they can apply for an after-the-fact variance. <br /> Landgraver asked how much time the applicants would have to appeal the Planning Commission <br /> decision. <br /> Curtis indicated they would need to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within ten days. <br /> Thiesse asked if an after-the-fact variance would be necessary if they can show it was included in the <br /> plans. <br /> Barnhart stated if it is denied at the City Council level,the applicants will have exhausted their appeals, <br /> and another avenue might be an after-the-fact variance request. <br /> Thiesse asked if they would have to apply for an after-the-fact variance if the plans show the structure on <br /> it. <br /> Barnhart stated if Staff told them they could keep it during the review process,the remedy is not that Staff <br /> erred in applying the ordinance but rather the fact that they were misguided could be considered a <br /> hardship. Barnhart noted as-built surveys are required because things are sometimes fluid and typically it <br /> is not an issue. <br /> Curtis stated that is one of the reasons why a landscape plan is required. Curtis stated Staff requires the <br /> landscape plan to be shown on the survey. When the applicants came in for a building permit,they had a <br /> survey and a landscape plan that should have been incorporated into the survey. Curtis stated Staff is not <br /> interested in plantings but rather interested in hardscape. Curtis stated what Staff is approving is the <br /> survey. <br /> Schoenzeit stated if the applicants had provided elevations for the structure,this would be a different <br /> discussion. <br /> Landgraver asked if he would able to find documentation within ten days. <br /> Schutt indicated his parents should be back within the next ten days and that it is his belief they have all <br /> the appropriate documentation. Schutt stated he appeared tonight to show that they are willing to work <br /> with the City. <br /> Curtis stated Staff will also take another look at all the materials that were submitted. <br /> Page 16 of 26 <br />