Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MONDAY,OCTOBER 15,2001 <br /> (#01-2724 MICHELLE AND DAVID TIMP,CONTINUED) <br /> Stoddard inquired what the visibility of the wall would be from the lake from the highest point of the <br /> wall. <br /> Oberg stated at maturity the spruce trees would be taller than the wall,which will eventually totally <br /> screen the wall. <br /> Stoddard pointed out the view from the adjoining residences need to be kept in mind when screening <br /> the wall. <br /> Oberg stated it is not a matter of the view from the neighbors but rather the view from the lake. <br /> Oberg stated it is his belief the wall would not encroach into anyone's sight lines. <br /> Stoddard reiterated that the view from the adjoining property owners needs to be considered when <br /> screening the wall. <br /> Oberg stated there is a possibility the neighbor to the west may experience some screening of a <br /> portion of the lake due to the trees that will be planted. <br /> Mabusth inquired whether the City has heard from the other adjoining property owner. <br /> Oberg stated he has not. <br /> Stoddard inquires what will screen the boulder wall. <br /> Oberg stated there is nothing that will screen the wall,with the height of the boulder wall ranging <br /> from 30 inches high to 18 inches high. <br /> Stoddard commented the Planning Commission does routinely request shrubbery along boulder walls <br /> to help screen the wall. <br /> Lindquist inquired why this boulder wall was not approved at the same time the original permits were <br /> issued. <br /> Gaffron stated that is a question to ask the property owner rather than Staff since Staff had approved a <br /> drainage plan that shows a yard that tapered down to the lakeshore and did not require a boulder wall. <br /> Oberg stated he did request a drainage plan and was told there was not one by Staff. <br /> Gaffron stated the information Staff was originally provided did not show they intended to create a <br /> flat yard to the west of the house. Staff had the impression they were just going to let the land in that <br /> area taper off. Gaffron stated he would have preferred to deal with this issue as part of the house plan <br /> and perhaps the Applicnat would have redesigned the house differently. <br /> Lindquist inquired whether this should be considered a bluff impact zone. <br /> Gaffron stated to his knowledge it does not rise high enough to be considered a bluff,but it certainly <br /> is a steep slope. <br /> PAGE 20 <br />