#3946-variances-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

� MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL - ' � MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 8, 1997 . • (#5 -#2264 Janet Kieman- Continued) ' � Jabbour said the Council is familiar with the site and that the applicant has diligently . ' _ worked with the City. He noted,when Council had previously discussed the application, .� . that Council Member Kelley had felt the footings should be inspected and certified prior .. �. � to.consideration of the variance application to determine their condition. Jabbour had - � � � � � � thouaht it would be a burden to the applicant to have to determine the soundness of the foundation. Based on that information,the resolution approving the variances was � adopted. Jabbour said that technically,the construction is now starting from scratch as a vacant parcel and could not be allowed lower standazds than required of new ' construction. � ' Christy said he understood that what is remaining is as it is but it is due primarily _ because of directives from the building inspector. He said it seems that this furthers the . hardship for the applicant as all of the plans to save portions of the existing building . proved futile. � 7abbour said the building inspector is responsible to adhere to universal building codes and the two are not mutually exclusive. Christy asked what alternatives could be explored. • . Kelley said he agreed with Jabbour that with the finding of bad soils or bad foundatiori; the applicant should be required to adhere to zoning code ordinance: Kiernan said the occurrences happened over 5-6 steps where the building inspector came out to the site and contractor was told of the situation and had asked what should be . done. She questioned why it was allowed to get to this point where the framing and footings are in and not determined in earlier steps. . Gaffron recharacterized what he thought took place. He said he understood the building contractor asked the inspector to come out and look at questionable areas and was told they should be removed. This occuned without zoning staff involvement. Gaffron said . he visited the site last month where he felt the structural removals were at the point . - where he was barely comfortable that it conformed with the conditions of the resolution, � but the project got to the point of needing additional removals putting it out of zoning conformity. • � Jabbour asked if the building inspector was awaze of the 40%structure remaining criteria. Gaffron said he was. He said it was a question of wearing a zoning hat versus a � building inspector hat. He said he told the building official last Thursday, 12/4/97,that the work had to be stopped as it was past the point of ineeting the findings and . conditions of the resolution. • � � . 4