Laserfiche WebLink
� MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> February 9,2015 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. �:.� <br /> O <br /> Gaffron stated it is his anticipation that Staff will have something ready in a couple of weeks for the � <br /> Council to look at. Gaffron stated unless the Council needs to see the draft three or four times, it should <br /> be done before spring. `���t <br /> Levang asked if Staff would like some guidance on the retaining wall definitions and which ones the <br /> Council would prefer. <br /> Gaffron stated the definitions are different but yet basically the same. Gaffron stated most of the <br /> definitions talk about supporting earth and not supporting another material. <br /> Mattick stated the situation gets complicated in part if a retaining wall is there for simply decorative <br /> purposes. Mattick stated from a definition standpoint,a planter box would seem to be the same as a <br /> retaining wall or other landscape feature. Mattick stated regardless of what it is, if it is 12 inches or <br /> higher from an existing grade,the City should set a threshold for regulating it. <br /> Walsh stated in his view that approach makes sense if the City chooses to define it. <br /> Mattick stated a planter box that is four feet tall might be just as offensive as a 4-foot tall retaining wall <br /> and that he would approach it from a performance standard and not a definition standpoint. <br /> McMillan stated she would be in favor of a 2-foot high retaining wall and 20 cubic yards of fill not <br /> requiring a permit. McMillan stated anything within the right-of-way would need to be approved by Staff <br /> regardless of height due to the fact that snow needs to be plowed and the impact it could have on <br /> sightlines. <br /> Gaffron stated from a side lot line or a rear lot line,the Code has been at five feet. Gaffron stated it <br /> should be set at the point where the person can still walk around and maintain it. <br /> Walsh stated in his view two to three feet would allow some room. Walsh stated as it relates to the 10- <br /> foot issue,that could take up a lot of room on a narrow lot,and that people should know that if something <br /> has to be removed within the right-of-way, it has to be removed. Walsh stated he is not sure the City has <br /> to regulate the footage within the right-of-way any more than they currently do with the 5-foot. <br /> Gaffron stated the original language does not talk about front yards. Currently the City allows very few <br /> encroachments in someone's front yard and that people are allowed to do more in their side or rear yards. <br /> The current Code does not allow anything in the front yard that encroaches. Gaffron stated it is likely <br /> there will be a situation where someone would like to construct a retaining wall in their front yard and <br /> that the City Council should discuss that. Gaffron stated if it is in the right-of-way, an encroachment <br /> agreement will be required. <br /> Walsh stated if the City starts regulating all kinds of planter boxes and stepping stones,that does not seem <br /> that reasonable. <br /> McMillan noted oftentimes the road is not exactly in the middle and that it can vary,which is another <br /> factor. McMillan stated the City needs room for snow plowing and storage and that she would like the <br /> Council to look at the right-of-way issue a little further. McMillan stated she is not sure at this point <br /> whether ten feet is too much. <br /> Page 7 of 25 <br />