Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, June 16, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#3 #03-2904 RICHARD S. BROWN, Continued) <br /> Chair Smith questioned when the applicant was informed that the issues involved more than <br /> retaining walls and hardcover would call for after the fact variance approval. <br /> Gaffron noted that the final inspection issues arose during the November 8, 2002 final <br /> inspection. <br /> Brown indicated that he had attended the final inspection, and at no time during that inspection <br /> did he believe the issues were more serious than the retaining walls. He maintained that nothing <br /> was mentioned about hardcover at that time. <br /> Chair Smith asked Gaffron for the building inspector's comments. <br /> Gaffron stated that he had spoken to `Bruce', the inspector, that day, who indicated that both <br /> hardcover and retaining walls were noted on the inspection for further review. He added that no <br /> inspection had been performed on the home in over a year as construction was ongoing. <br /> Gaffron explained that the City Attorney contacted the applicant as soon as hardcover was found <br /> to be an issue and an agreement was written and is enforceable. <br /> Rahn questioned how the City could make sure things are taken of once a temporary Certificate <br /> of Occupancy is granted in the future. He asked if the temporary certificate constitutes a <br /> handshake, or an understanding, that things will be done, and questioned if an escrow of funds <br /> might be a better way of ensuring things are completed. <br /> Gaffron indicated that the temporary certificate is an agreement alone, without an escrow, and <br /> follow-up needs to be done. <br /> Chair Smith inquired whether there were any communications available that could help to <br /> establish a timeline of communication. <br /> Rahn pointed out that,typically, the building inspector performs an inspection for the current <br /> owner, or former in this case, and unfortunately, the potential buyer might not be aware of the <br /> discrepancies. <br /> Gaffron pointed out that, it was not until, they compared the as-built surveys to the approved <br /> builders' submittals that the true discrepancies became apparent. <br /> Mr. Cooper, the subsequent builder to Bob Howard, questioned how the retaining walls, which <br /> were built in 1999, were allowed to remain for three years before any inspectors questioned their <br /> presence. Cooper too, indicated that he was made aware of the retaining wall issues but not the <br /> hardcover issues until days before closing. <br /> Page 4 of 22 <br />