My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-14-2003 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2003
>
07-14-2003 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/8/2023 1:57:55 PM
Creation date
2/8/2023 1:55:04 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
195
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 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, June 16,2003 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />support of this application. <br />Boder repeated that the posts and beams are original, and that he went to great lengths to <br />confiim this with the builder and the workers to ensure he would have people to testify to <br />this. <br />Rahn questioned why the patio doors exist at the end of the building with no where to go. <br />McGl3mn stated that they were included in the original plans and often times they fish or <br />swim fiom these doors. <br />Gafihon read the ordinance and acknowledged the need to determine the difference <br />between structural change and cosmetic or maintenance needs. He noted that the <br />ordinance does address the value of the improvement being less than 50% of the entire <br />value of the structure. He indicated that both would be difficult to determine. <br />Bremer stated that it made little sense why the vi ork was halted, since the applicants had <br />the right to do what was approved. If the Commission follows the City Attorney reading of <br />the application and the material is old material, Bremer reiterated that the applicants <br />request should be supported. She recognized the need to revisit the ordinance and consider <br />a code change. <br />Gafiron indicated that, upon his initial visit, his conclusion was that the foundation was <br />new material, thus, the reason for it being on the agenda. Since that time, the foundation <br />has been found to be old material. <br />Boder indicated that, prior to restoration, Oman had said the structure was in fairly good <br />sha; and would be there for awhile even without repair. He agreed that, if the intent of <br />the City is to do away with all of these structure by the water, the code does not say that <br />PAGE 27 of 31 <br />i <br />i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.