My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-23-1995 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1995
>
10-23-1995 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2023 2:07:26 PM
Creation date
10/6/2023 2:04:20 PM
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
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21, 1995 <br />(#14 - #2056 Michael 8L Barbara Wigiey - Continued) <br />Peterson told the applicant that the Planning Commission does not want residents to wait <br />until a hill is eroding, but he also did not sec any problem except b>' the house. The w s <br />and the structure on the hill should hold back the hill while re\Tgetating according to <br />Peterson. It was also noted that the stairway was in good solid condition <br />Gaf&on inquired about a drainage pipe found on the property^ The applicant said she had <br />no idea what was the reason for the pipe. The contractor said he would check on the pipe. <br />Laue said defoliating would be difficult and would kill the undergrowth <br />Hawn asked what would be used to kill the poison ivy and oak voicing her concern with <br />chemicals washing into the lake. Laue said i spray would be aUowed to dry resulting in no <br />run off <br />Laue said the top wall would hold back erosion from the house area It is his plan aeate a <br />swale with the boulder wall being located higher and the soil lower to catch the drainage <br />and allow it time to percolate thru the soil <br />Lane said an original permit was denied by the MCWD. not because of the plaa but <br />because the nei^bor ’s contraaor was under investigation. The neighbor was asking for a <br />similar boulder wall. Schroeder said it would be hard to believe that the permit was <br />denied for any other reason than merit. <br />Schroeder said the Ciw’s Comprehensivt Plan sets guidelines for lakeshore The Plan <br />requires that natural vegetation be preser\cd as much as is praaical. If erosion is present, <br />np rap can be used. The City ’ recommends a natural look. <br />The applicant asked what was the definition of erosion It was noted that no erosion was <br />noted bv either the Engineer. Staff’, or the Planning Ccmmissioners Schroeder said the <br />onlv erosion noted was near the home, which can be assisted - oth walls at that location <br />Wigiey said she was looking at taking the grass out and putting in vegetation Lane said <br />the'mulch will also be removed <br />Gaffron asked if the walls were to be approved, what construction process would be used <br />for this project Laue said two options were avaiiaole If permission were received from <br />th’ neiahbor he would come across their property, drop the materials over the hill to be <br />placed oy a machine at the bottom. Tne other alternative would be to bnng m me wall <br />material over the lake during the winter and install it in the spring <br />Gaffi-on read into the minutes a letter received from the DNR noting their concern with <br />retaining walls removing the narurai vegetation, with screening, erosion control of the <br />steep slopes, and concern over water level and ensuing construaion. <br />:o
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.