04-10-2006 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday f April 10, 2006 7:00 o'clock p.m. (7. APPEAL, MICHAEL EBERTZ, 1220 TONKAWA — DECKREPLACEMENT, Continued) Ebertz stated he made a mistake and did not think about the need for a permit. ..- Sansevere stated in his view the.applicants wouid�bave_ come.-to -the city to obtain a permit•and.that they were ignorant of the regulations. Sansevere stated in his opinion the residents of the city are simply not well informed about everything that requires a permit. r • Ebertz stated he should have known better and Murphy inquired whether the person who built Ebertz indicated he constructed the deck with a White stated the city would probably require the Murphy stated if the applicant had come to the have approved the replacement. he would comply with whatever the City decides. deck was a licensed contractor. who is not a contractor. to be removed. at the time the damage had occurred, he likely.would Brokl stated the Council has the right and option of requiring removal of the structure and that the Council also has the option of requiring the property owners to obtain a permit after - the -fact and paying a double permit fee. Sansevere inquired whether the applicants are agreeable with a double permit fee. Ebertz stated they would comply with whatever the Council decides. Ebertz stated he is not a builder and that they just did this on a Saturday without giving much thought to the need for a permit. Curtis noted the applicant would have an fee. Ebertz indicated he does not have a problem with variance fee and an after- the -fact building permit the fees. Murphy stated he would not support a resolution requiring the deck to be removed because in his opinion the deck is less obtrusive and visually appealing and that requiring the deck to be removed would be punitive. I Murphy moved, White seconded, to approve an'after -the -fact variance for Michael and Donna Ebertz, 1220 Tonkawa Road, to allow the preseirt deck with the applicant being charged the appropriate fees. McMillan inquired whether the matter would require a public hearing. Curtis stated it would require a public hearing. Murphy amended his motion, White seconded, to require the applicants to submit an after- the -fact variance application for the deck and to pay thel appropriate fees. PAGE 11 of 15.