My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-08-2006 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
Historical
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
05-08-2006 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2012 4:30:26 PM
Creation date
7/25/2012 4:30:26 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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 <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, May 8, 2006 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. • <br />(4. #05 -3136 TROYBROITZMAN,1860 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued) <br />plans /elevations have not been revised, Gaffron stated that the applicant requests final approval for <br />the lot area, width, and average lakeshore setback variances. <br />Gaffron indicated that the grading plan had been revised to create a swale about 20' in from the NE <br />lot line, draining to the front and minimizing impacts on the existing trees between the Charrier and <br />Broitzman homes. Additionally, the driveway now incorporates curbing rather than an inverted <br />crown, so runoff from all parts of the driveway will be directed to the rear. In addition, the side <br />driveway apron will be bordered by a 1 -2' retaining wall in an attempt to minimize impacts on the <br />two existing spruces, although staff is skeptical they will survive. <br />Gaffron continued, stating that as the driveway leaves the garage area and curves towards Heritage <br />Drive, very little of it will be below existing grade. It will remain curbed on both sides all the way <br />to Heritage, where catch basins will divert runoff to the wetland rather than onto Heritage Drive. <br />Gaffron noted that it has been detennined by the Engineer that the added runoff due to the <br />reconstruction on this site will require installation of a culvert offsite, of which there are two <br />options, 1) under the Coward's driveway which was apparently built through a wetland, without <br />installation of a culvert in the 1960's, or 2) under Heritage Drive to the larger wetland to the north. <br />With regard to the landscaping plan, Gaffron stated that all the proposed plantings are on the <br />Broitzman property. From a staff perspective, Gaffron noted that even though the grading plan now <br />makes an attempt to save the trees, there is the potential that all existing trees in proximity to the • <br />applicant's new home are at risk, and he should be prepared to replace those that are damaged <br />during the demolition and construction process. To that end, Gaffron pointed out that a draft <br />resolution with numerous conditions had been drafted for Council consideration and continent with <br />the requirement that all trees and shrubs shown on an approved landscaping plan be in place prior <br />to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. <br />Kellogg stated that he had made a site visit with the applicant and that many of the points had been <br />incorporated into the proposal. He indicated that the applicant had made great strides in retaining <br />water and drainage on his site. <br />Sansevere asked whether the Cowards favored a culvert running under their driveway. <br />Gaffron stated that, for some reason, in the 1960's no culvert was put in and should have been done <br />so at that time. He indicated that staff had no specific preference, though it would be more costly to <br />put the culvert under the road. <br />Broitzman stated that they could install a 12' culvert under the driveway and restore it to its <br />original condition after being placed. <br />Mr. Coward, 1950 Heritage Drive, stated that he did not have a strong position with regard to the <br />culvert, though he would prefer not to tear up his driveway to place one there. <br />White stated that, in his personal opinion, the applicant should return to his original request to <br />maintain the driveway off the front of the home onto County Road 15 in order to retain the . <br />vegetation in the backyard. He felt that, in an attempt to help the County out by reducing the <br />PAGE 4 of 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.