07-27-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 13, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 19 Council Members agreed that it comes down to the dry buildable land no matter how many acres a parcel is. Walsh stated Mattick could look into the rule, there can be an understanding of what it means or doesn’t mean in relationship to what the Applicant is trying to do, and the Council could hear the feedback. Mr. Puzak said he wanted to point out that not all floodplain is wetland and the wetland has been delineated and should be considered as part of the dry buildable. People build in wetlands all around the country; they just elevate. Walsh stated the Council will not start changing the rules of what they believe the wetlands are. They have a specific rule of how it is delineated is how it will factor into the dry buildable. The Council will follow the same rule for everyone. Mr. Puzak said he thought the Council need ed to look at the fact that not all floodplain is wet and they are really taking private property when they do that if they are not giving people credit for it. Walsh noted the City Council is not defining floodplain, the Corps of Engineers does that. Mr. Puzak stated that Orono is one of the few communities that does not recognize it as contributing to the total lot area. Walsh noted that is what is so great about the community. He asked Mr. Puzak to discuss it with Mattick. Mattick said the rule has been if there is a single lot and it meets the 66% requirement, then you get to build on it. If you have contiguous lots and it does not meet the 66%, you are expected to combine the lots until you get to conforming. In this instance, conforming would be ½ acre, not something short of that. Walsh asked Mattick to review the rule and let everyone know what it says. If Mattick confirms his previous statement, the Applicant will need ½ acre of dry buildable unless there is a different conversation of the public benefit of having a cul-de-sac. He suggested that if the Applicant wanted to come back, he could do so in the next two or four weeks. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT 19. CONSULTING ENGINEER RFP Rief stated that last year the Council went through the RFP for the attorney and the auditors. As part of the adopted schedule, it is time for the engineering firm RFP. He attached in the packet a revised copy of what Edwards and he developed to solicit RFPs for engineering firms. He is asking for the City Counci l’s approval of the RFP so they can start advertising. Walsh said many years ago he wanted to make sure all of the different expertises that the City has goes out for bid every five years. He was asked if that should even apply for legal services, and he responded that no matter how much the City likes someone, they have to go through the process like they said they would for transparency, et cetera. He noted they went through this process 8 -10 years ago because they were using the same engineering company for a long time without ever looking at prices, and the City ended up cutting engineering consulting prices in half.