My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-09-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
05-09-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/12/2023 9:06:22 AM
Creation date
1/12/2023 8:39:46 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
326
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
I • <br />I I <br />■ .1 <br />'t <br />% <br />FILE«04-3060 <br />9 November 2004 <br />Paoe4or4 <br />The prevention of soil erosion or the possible pollution of public waters, both <br />during and after construction; The property owners have taken steps to address <br />possible soil erosion during and after construction. Silt fence will be provided <br />until all disturbed areas have been completely re-vegetated. <br />The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is <br />limited; The submitted plan does not propose any screening of the lower boulder <br />wall from the lake. As designed, the lower wall system is too close to the rip-rap <br />to allow for shrubbery screening. <br />The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment; Not <br />applicable. <br />• The types, uses and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate are <br />compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate <br />these watercraft; Not applicable. <br />City Engineer, Tom Kellogg, has reviewed the site and has provided staff with a <br />recommeiulation based on the most recently submitted plan (the letter is attached as <br />Exhibit H). <br />Planning Director, Mike Gaflron, has provided a memo suggesting that the upper <br />retaining wall be omitted in favor of a graded slope that will appear more natural (see <br />Exhibit L). <br />Issues for ConsMeratlou <br />1. Does the Planning Conunission feel that the boulder walls as proposed will have a <br />minimal impact on views of the property from the lake, or should additional <br />vegetative screening be utilized to shield the boulder wall from the lake? Should the <br />upper wall be eliminated? <br />2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this triplication? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Planmng Department staff recommends conditional approval of the proposal subject to <br />the following: <br />1. Submittal of a plan which shows the elimination of the upper tier of wails to the <br />greatest extent possible; and <br />2. Compliance with the City Engineer’s recommendations; and <br />3. Any additional conditions or revisions Planning Commission may wish to add.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.