Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 15,2016 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> function of retaining earth to allow for a functional driveway while not being located at the very edge of <br /> the driveway. This would appear to be a safer situation than the approved plan. <br /> Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the existing retaining wall as <br /> currently located, subject to the property owner entering into an encroachment agreement establishing <br /> parameters for the continued existence of the wall within the drainage and utility easement. <br /> Thiesse asked whether the wall could be replaced in kind in the future in its current location. <br /> Gaffron indicated they would require a permit if the wall is relocated and that the City would likely also <br /> require a review of the conditional use permit if the wall is rebuilt in the same location. <br /> Thiesse asked if the property owners could build a similar wall in a different location if the City decided <br /> that it needed that area for a drainage way. <br /> Gaffron stated to his belief they would be allowed to but that it would be a question for the City Attorney <br /> to answer. Gaffron stated if the City decided it needed the easement area,the wall would not be allowed <br /> to be rebuilt if it interfered with anything within the area. <br /> Thiesse stated he would like that spelled out in the agreement. <br /> Peter Johnson stated he is here on behalf of the applicants and can answer any questions the Planning <br /> Commission may have. <br /> Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. <br /> Schoenzeit stated perhaps allowing encroachment agreements to be approved administratively could be <br /> discussed at the next Planning Commission work session. <br /> Thiesse noted it requires a conditional use permit. <br /> Leskinen noted the issue with this application relates to the retaining wall being located in a drainage and <br /> utility easement. <br /> Curtis stated if the wall were located out of the easement area,then it would require a conditional use <br /> permit and not an encroachment agreement. <br /> Thiesse stated the public should also be able to comment on the matter. <br /> Leskinen commented it appears to be a reasonable request as long as an encroachment agreement is <br /> entered into. <br /> Page 2 of 21 <br />