04-11-2016 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORP., 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH — PRELIMINARY PLAT APPOVAL — RESOLUTION NO. 6603 (continued) Walsh stated obviously no structures should be allowed but that it is more a matter of having the easement in the event it is ever needed. McMillan stated if there is berming and plantings, it makes it harder to put something there down the road. Gaffron noted there would also be a 10 -foot drainage and utility easement in the same spot and there is the potential that utility companies will put whatever they need in that area. City Attorney Mattick stated if it is going to be a 10 -foot overlapping easement, the City could simply expand what is allowed in that easement to accommodate any berming or other items the Council would like to allow. Gaffron noted the bottom of the ditch is probably ten feet into the actual existing right-of-way and that there will likely be some utilities in the easement at some point. Gaffron stated in the past the City has not required a trail easement to be separate from a utility easement. Mattick stated if the Council is interested in the future growth and interconnectivity of the area, now is the time to obtain the easement. Mattick stated as it relates to some of the discussion about the berming, initially some plantings would be nice to buffer the homes from the road. Mattick stated a sidewalk or trail is put in 10 to 20 years down the road, the residents abutting the trail may not like it and that they need to be told up front about the possibility of a trail being constructed in that area at some point in the future. Mattick stated the Council and developer should think about the design and where things get planted but that there is nothing in the resolution that would disallow plantings in there. Gaffron stated he is not sure if the developer is thinking about fences at all and that City Code would allow a rear yard fence since it is abutting a fairly substantial road. Gaffon noted other cities will quite often allow a 6 -foot high fence along an arterial road and there could be six or seven different fence types unless some type of stipulations are required. Tom Gonyea, Applicant, stated he agrees with the concept of getting the easement now, and that if it is a long-term plan, he would like to put some trees or other plantings in there as a buffer. Gonyea stated there is also the possibility, in addition to the speed limit being reduced, that the County may change their opinion on whether they would allow a trail in that right-of-way, which may mean that the buffering could stay and the trail could be relocated. Gonyea indicated he is not proposing any fencing at this point since in his view the buffering will suffice. If a fence is ever built, it likely would be a black chain link fence and would be the same all the way down. Gonyea stated the type of fence and where it is located could be included as a condition in the resolution. Walsh stated it would be more of a matter of disclosing it to the homeowner so they are aware of all the stipulations. Page 1S of 32