08-14-2023 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING July 24, 2023 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 11 Price said at the March meeting, the Council said they believed the new wall system has to go back to the original grade and line up with the tip of the bluff and the properties on either side. The Mayor had said at the time the contractor had created an entire new bluff landscape that was not part of the like in-kind, and they have to figure out how to re-engineer to get that grade back, she said. Price said the concerns she expressed at the February and March City Council meetings do not seem to be addressed in the revised plan. She said the proposed plans to add 3.4 feet in height to the center of the sixth wall near the stairs and then add timbers besides toward the adjacent property don’t mitigate the gradient difference. She contended the new patio would be larger than the original and further into the average lakeshore setback. The survey denotes that the timber border of garden from the adjacent lot to be removed, she pointed out, explaining the garden border is actually a retaining wall that steps down the elevation gradient of the Price property to the applicant’s property. This elevation ranges from approximately six inches to 12 inches. She asked, where is the note to explain what will be done once the timbers are removed so that her yard and gardens don't fall into the neighbor's yard. Johnson said Ms. Prices’s notes were included in the packet and are very technical and no one on the Council is a licensed engineer, as she is. He asked how the Council can take her comments and apply them directly to the engineers involved and find a way to address these in a way that is meaningful to her. Johnson said what's important to him in this process is that the Prices as neighbors have done nothing wrong. There has been a problem and as a result, the neighbors are suffering through this process. Within the responses of both Prices, he said, there's some really good information that quite honestly, he doesn't understand. However, the City has staff to be able to do that. He asked what is the best process to make sure that the Price’s concerns get addressed to give them satisfaction that their investment is protected. Walsh suggested a meeting between the neighbors, the City staff, and the applicant’s engineer to address the questions. He said the City’s goal would be to make sure it is done correctly and solves all those issues. The consensus of the City Council was that the Prices would meet with the applicant’s engineer and the City Staff to get questions answered. City Council Members discussed the need to be sure of plans to taper the top of the wall at the east and west ends and make sure the landscape plan screens enough of the wall. The Council debated requiring a certain percentage of the wall being covered. Crosby suggested 25 percent be required. Benson said without getting into percentages or trying to micromanage this process, she thinks the intention is to create a view from the lakeshore up and for the neighboring houses that is covering as much of this as possible. That's really the goal, she said, and it sounds like that's achievable. Veach said it seems that communication has been an issue. She heard that the applicant is willing to plant vegetation and it would be in their best interest to make the retaining wall as attractive as possible. She believed they would figure that out and the Council does not need to get into the weeds on that as long as everybody has agreed to a mode of communication.