Re: permit 2012-00610 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Melanie, left you a voicemail on rriday asking for a meeting with you, Pat and myself on Monday. I think it would 6e good if we could actually meet at the Middleton's Property so that you can visually see what it is we are trying to accomplish rather thanjust looking at a survey as the majority of the properties in Orono are unique and the City codes often do not fit universally for every property. I am very concerned that you do not have an understanding of this particular property and are only following standard procedures based on a limited knowledge of the property. Regarding item#1 the current/previous retaining wall was installed along both the north and south property lines. These retaining walls were constructed of treated tim6ers which are/were in major disrepair including rotting and erosion issues.We could replace the retaining walls with like/kind materials in order to 6e a6le to install the walls along the property line as you have stated which will end up being in the same state of disrepair in 10-15 years,or we could install)=fieldstone boulders which will take a few hundred years to fall apart if not longer. I would 6elieve that the City of Orono would rather have property owners using superior material that will last rather than materials that will cause decay and erosion issues over a relatively short period of time 6ut your email would suggest otherwise. The retaining wall along the north side of the property that is proposed to 6c installed along the property line has a length of 26 ft running along the property line and then moving toward the south.The north side of the house is 7 ft from the property line so if I understand you correctly you would have the retaining wall installed less than 2 ft away from the house if not using like/kind materials. Please tell me how this makes any sense at all since this would increase potential water pro6lems along this side of the house not to mention that it would limit access along this side of the House. In addition the elevation from the neighboring property is 4 ft higher in this area and 69 moving the retaining wall to within 2 ft of the house will encourage/increase the chance for more water to flow toward the foundation.We are proposing to use)=fieldstone boulders to increase the longevity of the retaining walls, but there is a need for the retaining wall to 6e built along the property line at the north side. The retaining wall along the south side of the property line has an existing retaining wall that runs along the property line and is part of a retaining wall that is installed on the property to the south within 5 ft of the property line.The proposed retaining wall would 6e constructed along the property line for 1 O ft.This wall is needed to 6e installed along the property line to tie into the existing retaining wall,to keep erosion from occurring into the neighboring property and to keep the neighboring retaining wall from collapsing.59 not having any part of the retaining wall installed along the south side property line to tie into the neighboring retaining wall erosion may become an issue. To not allow either retaining wall to 6c constructed along the property line in this particular situation would 6e using poor judgment.Also,to require a property owner to install inferior materials in order to satisfy the definition of like/kind materials would 6e poorjudgment. Regarding item#2 1 6elieve the property owner satisfied the hardcover requirements during his previous project when the City required that the landscape poly and rock 6e removed from the area along the north side of the house. don't 6elieve that there was any mention to Mr. Middleton that there was additional"illegal" hardcover present in the 75 ft to 250 ft zone.The proposed project has the hardcover being decreased 69 10%from the current hardcover which I would think that the City of Orono would find to 6e positive.F)ut instead it appears that you have the attitude that this is not good enough and that you would ratherthat the property remain at a higher percentage of 2