My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-27-2020 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2020-2024
>
2020
>
04-27-2020 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2020 3:43:22 PM
Creation date
5/12/2020 3:42:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,April 27,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> builds that are on an old homesite where they might try to reuse the service line.He said there is already <br /> an inspection requirement for new-home builds such as a pressure test,visual inspection,etc. <br /> Johnson asked what makes the point-of-sale the right vehicle to get the process done. <br /> Walsh answered that it is opportunity,because they cannot close without the certificate. He said he does <br /> not feel a homeowner needs the certificate when they list their house but it has to be done before closing. <br /> Edwards commented, on the advertised piece,that may be something that is struck from the ordinance. <br /> He said there are allowances that the alternative would be the establishment of an escrow for the new <br /> homeowner so they could complete any required repairs. <br /> Crosby asked if the inspections can be done in all climates. <br /> Edwards stated they could be done all year. <br /> Crosby suggested adding language of"within 90 days of sale,"or something similar,to give people more <br /> flexibility so they do not wait until the last minute. <br /> Edwards said currently the language is 60 days. <br /> Johnson stated there is enough consequence built in, because you cannot close on your house. <br /> Crosby said the 90 days gives more buffer time to make sure it is accomplished, enough time to do any <br /> necessary repairs, and a heads-up. <br /> Walsh indicated the bigger issue is that if there is a problem, it can get taken care of.He did not think <br /> whether it was 60 days or 90 days would break the bank. If there is a problem, it means water is being <br /> poured into the City's system, which causes the City more and more fees from the Met Council. <br /> Printup asked if he was reading the draft ordinance right: if someone is putting their house on the market <br /> in the near future,they can have it looked at and then it is good for 10 years. <br /> Edwards stated he was correct,the idea being that once the City has a complying system,they would <br /> issue a compliant certificate that would be good for 10 years.He said they do not need to burden people <br /> with inspection after inspection; if the system is good,there would be at least a 10-year life before it <br /> would begin to fail. <br /> Printup referenced Walsh's comment about getting in touch with somebody that does the inspections and <br /> said he thinks it is important to get that hammered out so when somebody goes up to City Hall and they <br /> ask questions,there is an information sheet for the residents. He noted they talked several months ago <br /> about getting the information piece out to residents because they are not paying any fees for inspections; <br /> but when they sell a house,there is going to be this point-of-sale to deal with. <br /> Seals agreed that the information would need to be communicated over and over on every channel the <br /> City has,the newsletter,the website, etc.,because communication did not go well last time. It makes her <br /> not want to make changes if it is not communicated well,because it is unfair to residents. <br /> Page 6 of 16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.