Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR JANUARY 19. 2000 <br />(#2547 KimlMrli and William Abbott, Continued) <br />Applicant. <br />Weinberger stated City Staff is not in possession of a statement by a certified engineer. <br />Abbott commented the storm experienced in this area back in 1987, necessitated the need for <br />the retaining wall. <br />Hawn commented that this property has been discussed for a number of years, with the present <br />owner failing to bring this property into compliance or providing any evidence which would <br />demonstrate a need for this retaining wall structure. Hawn stated the present property owner <br />was told exactly what he needed to do to bring this property into compliance, which he has failed <br />to do, and the same type of showing needs to be demonstrated with this application. <br />Abbott stated the recommendations by City Staff appear to be the same as in the previous <br />application. <br />Hawn inquired whether there has ever been a finding that this retaining wall structure is <br />necessary to prevent further erosion along the shoreline. <br />Abbott commented he is attempting to resolve this issue. Abbott indicated if some type of <br />agreement is not reached, he will not be purchasing the property. <br />Hawn stated the cooperation of McCloud is needed to help resolve this issue. Hawn stated the <br />Planning Commission must act within City Code as well as existing law and precedent. <br />Abbott stated he is in agreement that cooperation on McCloud's part is needed as well. <br />Stoddard stated the City of Orono does not allow structures to exist within the 0-75* lakeshore <br />setback. Stoddard stated the Planning Commission needs to have an opinion from an expert <br />on the need for the retaining wall. <br />Abbott stated he is willing to remove all decking within the 0*75' setback and is only asking for <br />some leeway on the width of the terrace. Abbott stated in his view the railing should not be <br />included in the calculation for the height of the retaining wall and some type of agreement will <br />need to be reached on that issue as well. <br />Hawn commented a one foot retaining wall will probably not be very effective, but that the <br />Applicant will first need to provide some evidence that a retaining wall is necessary in this area <br />before the design of the structure can be discussed. <br />Abbott inquired if he produced pictures showing the erosion along the shoreline, whether that <br />would be sufficient to demonstate the need for the structure. <br />Hawn stated pictures and/or a statement by an engineer would help to demonstrate a need for <br />retaining walls in this area. <br />Weinberger stated had the property owner requested the proper permits prior to any construction <br />being done on the property. City Staff would have requested evidence showing the condition of <br />the property as well as a statement by an engineer to help demonstrate the need for the retaining <br />wall. Weinberger indicated that information would then have been reviewed and approved by the <br />City Engineer and Staff would have made a determination whether erosion along the shoreline was <br />Page 4