My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-13-1978 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
1970-1979
>
1978
>
11-13-1978 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 12:52:03 PM
Creation date
2/9/2023 12:51:15 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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).
View images
View plain text
Mayor Van Nest <br />November 11, 1978 <br />Page 2 <br />"4m <br />\ <br />The effect of the retaining walls, as constructed, is <br />that they constitute a "structure** within the meaning of that term <br />as it is used in the Code. S30.040. Therefore, since the retaining <br />walls constitute "accessory structures", under S31.436, they must be <br />no closer than 10 feet from any side lot line. <br />Also, with respect to the construction of these retaining <br />walls and the illegal alteration of the natural grade, it should <br />be pointed out that no study has been made of the effects upon the <br />drainage onto surrounding properties. The Holzcr property ban been <br />made substantially higher than the adjacent properties and since <br />the fill is apparently intended to reach the top of the main portion <br />of the retaining walls, run-off may spill over destructively onto <br />nearby land. <br />Furthermore, v^en considering the effects of such a wall <br />upon property values (as required by S32.340) and upon'aesthetics, <br />it must be recognized that while the Holzers will not have to view <br />any of this wall, the Smerlings will be faced with a harsh and <br />imposing concrete structure along virtually the entire side lot line. <br />Finally, I would note that the concrete block pillars must <br />be considered as part of the wall for purposes of height restrictions <br />under the Code. To do otherwise would be to engage in an ad hoc <br />revision of the Code and would result in a situation «diere there <br />would effectively be no restrictions on the height of such pillars <br />or their proximity to one another. <br />Thank you once again for your consideration of my comments. <br />I look forward to discussing this situation with both the Planning <br />Commission and the City Council. <br />Very truly yours. <br />« 9 LEONARD, STREET. AND DEINARO <br />f <br />Michael A. Nekich <br />MAN:cb <br />CCS Bruce D. Nalkerson, Esq. <br />Louis G. Oberhauser, Esq. <br />Mary C. Butler <br />Walter B. Massengale <br />Norman W. Paurus <br />C. Paul Pesek <br />Tom Frahm <br />John Hammerel <br />Gregg Hannah <br />Richard Hassel <br />Jo Ellen Hurr <br />Gloria McDonald <br />C. Steven Wilson <br />Alan P. Olson <br />* » * * <br />1 <br />i <br />j <br />t. <**»**» -
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.