My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-08-2009 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2009
>
06-08-2009 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/1/2012 9:47:18 AM
Creation date
6/1/2012 9:47:18 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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, June 8, 2009 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. • <br />(5. #09 -3404 PAUL AND MEGAN BENNETT, 500 HANLONAVENUE, Continued) <br />coverage variance to allow 42 square feet over the permitted 15 percent, resulting in 15.3 percent <br />structural coverage is requested. <br />The Planning Commission voted 5 -0 to recommend approval of the after -the -fact variances on the <br />Consent Agenda. <br />Planning Staff recommends approval of the variances as outlined in the draft resolution. The applicants <br />have also made a request of the Council to waive the required double after - the -fact zoning application fee. <br />Murphy noted the work was completed in 2007; and asked where this application has been during that <br />time. <br />Curtis stated letters have gone back and forth between Staff and the applicants during that time. <br />Murphy noted the Planning Commission approved this on Consent even though this process has taken a <br />couple of years. <br />Curtis stated the Planning Commission reviewed what was before them and determined whether they <br />would have approved it in the first place and not the amount of time that has elapsed. <br />Murphy requested the applicant address the issue of time. • <br />Bennett stated they did receive a letter from the City, which was followed by some further <br />correspondence back and forth between them and Staff. Bennett indicated they asked Staff for the <br />reasons why a variance was required so they could address it adequately in their hardship application. <br />Bremer asked whether the applicants knew a variance was required. <br />Bennett stated they were not aware of the need for a variance since the deck already existed and they <br />merely put a small tin roof over it. <br />White and Bremer indicated they do not have a problem with the after - the -fact variance. <br />Murphy asked what costs are involved with this application. <br />Curtis stated the after -the -fact variance fee is $750, which is double the normal fee. The building permit <br />fee is based on the cost of the construction, which is an additional fee. Curtis indicated she does not know <br />what the cost of the construction was. <br />Bennett stated it cost approximately $100 to add the roof. The roof is constructed out of tin and cedar <br />4 x 4 posts. <br />Bremer noted there is also a cost for the building inspector to inspect the project. Bremer asked what the <br />rationale is to request a waiver of the fee. <br />Bennett indicated it is the low cost of the project. • <br />PAGE 8 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.