Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> March 13,2023 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Walsh said he agreed. <br /> Johnson moved,Seals seconded,to direct staff to draft a resolution approving an after-the-fact <br /> variance for LA22-000070,4085 WATERTOWN ROAD.VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. <br /> 17. LA22-000068,VALDES LAWN CARE& SNOW REMOVAL OB/O MARK&LISA <br /> THOSTENSON,2815 CASCO POINT ROAD,AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES <br /> Staff presented a summary packet of information. City Planner Curtis said in July the lake slope timber <br /> walls and other improvements on this property were destroyed by a fire and a building permit was issued <br /> to reconstruct the walls in-kind.During the installation of the walls staff observed that the construction <br /> expanded beyond the previous footprint and as a result a stop work order was issued.Because the work <br /> was halted prior to completion in November,the owner requested and received permission from the <br /> Council to install a final wall as their engineer provided documentation showing that slope failure was <br /> imminent and needed this emergency correction. The final wall has not been installed,rather the <br /> applicant is now requesting approval to increase the height of the existing top wall to reach the correct <br /> grade rather than installing an additional wall. The applicant is requesting after-the-fact setback variances <br /> to address the wall footprint expansions in the bluff and lake yard. The changes to the configuration of the <br /> retaining walls if approved will likely impact the applicant's ability to fully recapture the structural <br /> footprints and dimensions of the previous existing deck and shed,which were also destroyed. In <br /> February,the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 4 to 1 to recommend approval of the <br /> variances including the following conditions:prior to Council review,the applicant shall provide an <br /> engineer's opinion regarding the necessity of the additional width of the installed walls and a vegetative <br /> planting plan which will screen the walls from the lake. These have been provided in your packet.And <br /> following completion of the project an as-built survey would be required. Comments from the public were <br /> received.Replacement of the destroyed walls is essential to protect the bluff and steep nature of the slope <br /> on the subject property as well as the immediately adjacent neighboring properties who also have steep <br /> slope conditions. Staff finds that the variances to permit the expanded retaining wall structure within the <br /> bluff and 75-foot setback are necessary to protect the slope stability of the surrounding properties and <br /> once screened,will preserve the existing character of the area. Staff recommends approval of the setback <br /> variances for the improvements and the conditions set by the Planning Commission. The contractor is <br /> present this evening. <br /> Seals asked for a refresher on what was approved at a previous meeting.Are we agreeing to other things <br /> that were not intended?And are there any of those things in here? <br /> Curtis said at the time of the emergency slope repair that was the only action the Council took. It was not <br /> in any way an approval of the expanded walls,which is why we're here tonight. <br /> Benson said she was trying to get her head around this because she wasn't on the Council in the beginning <br /> when this when this started last year. When the slope repair emergency was granted did that enable the <br /> contractor to continue working in that area in November to secure it? <br /> Page 6 of 21 <br />