My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-08-1990 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
10-08-1990 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2019 12:30:55 PM
Creation date
4/23/2019 12:30:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
.ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 8, 1990 <br />ZONING FILE #1587 - RUBY SIFORD CONTINUED <br />. Council direct the building staff to look at the substandard <br />nature of the shed for possible firewall construction. The <br />applicant had agreed to this at the Planning Commission meeting. <br />Mrs. Siford noted this shed is between the bottom garage and <br />the house and is really the foundation of the upper garage which <br />is attached to the house. <br />Acting Mayor Callahan asked, "What did the Planning <br />Commission actually permit ?" <br />Mabusth replied, "They approved the 5' setback and asked <br />that when the building staff was reviewing the need for a <br />firewal l in the detached garage to also look at the shed to <br />determine if this has impacted safety or fire needs of the shed, <br />house, and garage." <br />Mabusth also explained that the contractor built the deck <br />while waiting for a permit for the siding, forgetting that he <br />also needed a building permit for the deck. Rather than getting <br />the building permit, the contractor quickly finished everything <br />based on what he thought he heard from the building staff and got <br />his payment. This is the problem for Mrs. Siford. <br />Callahan stated that considering the size of the lot and the <br />• location of the buildings, if the garage is fire - proofed and the <br />shed is either fire - proofed or removed, there is no practical <br />damage done. Mabusth agreed. <br />Goetten states there is an issue here of what kind of <br />recourse the City has to a contractor who knowingly disregards <br />notices. <br />Mrs. Siford stated that the contractor had told her on two <br />different occasions that he was going for the permit. He said <br />maybe she should get it but Mrs. Siford told him it was up to the <br />contractor because he would know measurements and answers to any <br />questions the City would have. She assumed he had the permit. <br />Goetten asked what could be done about these situations. <br />Mabusth replied, "We can issue citations immediately to the <br />contractor." <br />Bernhardson stated we could still issue citations if we can <br />locate him. <br />It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by <br />Councilmember Peterson, to adopt resolution #2884, granting an <br />after-the-fact variance to the required separation between the <br />• principal structure and accessory structure. Motion, Ayes -4, <br />Nays -0. Motion passed. <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.