03-12-2007 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r Y 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 12, 2007 7:00 o'clock p.m. • ( #06 -3238 Vogue ICF Homes, Continued) Gaffron stated the original footings underneath that wall still remain and that there is a full foundation wall for the majority of the house. Gaffron indicated some of the joists in the main level and the ceiling of the basement have been replaced. Gaffron stated there is one section of foundation of the house that is still intact. Gaffron stated the roof and the ceiling of the main level are gone, with the pictures depicting exactly what has been removed and replaced. Gaffron stated this application was presented to Staff as a remodel and a repair of a roof system and that it has gone past the point of a remodel and is almost a total rebuild. Murphy inquired whether the removal of the concrete floor in the basement of the house was in the plans approved in November. Turner stated the removal of the concrete floor wag not in the plans that were approved and that it was explained the existing walls would be utilized. Turner indicated the permit was issued prior to the structural plans being submitted and that the structural plans clearly show what walls have to be replaced. Turner stated it is doubtful that Staff would have issued the permit if they had had the structural plans. McMillan commented that the Council had the impression that the first floor walls were going to remain and that a second story was going to be added. • Turner stated it was specifically noted that the first floor was going to be gutted to eliminate the mold and improve the wiring. Turner stated the description of the project basically stated that there would be a second story added to the existing first floor walls and foundation. Bremer noted the language in the resolution states that the existing foundation and exterior walls shall be retained. Bremer inquired whether it was always the intention to remove the eight -foot walls. Vogstrom stated he did speak with Staff immediately after he was red tagged and that there was a misunderstanding between himself and the building inspector on the plans. Vogstrom stated in order to raise the roof, the old roof would need to be removed and replaced. Vogstrom stated when he was before the City Council, he thought he was complying with what the City Council wanted and that it was his intention to construct the building as presented. Vogstrom suggested applicants also be required to submit a demolition plan at the same time, which would help to clarify their project. Vogstrom stated the problem was that there was no way of foreseeing that problem at that end of the building and that he is unsure how it could have been avoided. Bremer stated one way to avoid it is to have a structural engineer look at the structure prior to the project being undertaken. Bremer noted the applicant did state they were unable to get equipment back there but that the pictures clearly show that equipment was able to traverse in that area. Vogstrom stated after the walls were removed, they were able to get equipment in that area. PAGE 4 of 19