03-09-2015 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 23,2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 3. #15-3707—AMEND SECTION 78-1405(a)(5) CLARIFY RETAINING WALL AND LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE SETBACKS—ORDINANCE NO. 139 (continued) Levang stated that five feet allows for proper drainage and that the issue is to ensure someone has enough land so water can be diverted properly. Public Works Director/City Engineer Edwards noted the proposed ordinance does not prohibit people from putting things in that area but that it requires an administrative permit,which allows Staff to review it. Edwards stated the number one call relates to the roads and that the number two call typically deals with drainage being diverted onto a neighbor's properiy. Walsh stated the Code already addresses that. Gaffron stated the Code does not administer itself and that sometimes it is not possible to approve something without having a plan in front of you to review. Levang stated it sounds like Staff would like to review a plan to make sure something can be placed within five feet. Edwards stated a lot of the properties have drainage ways along the property lines and the ordinance would allow Staff to review the drainage. Edwards stated people sometimes innocently will do something in that area resulting in water going into the neighbor's property. Walsh stated the ordinance would force people to come in for a permit for something that is very minor. Edwards stated a raised planter box does not typically create the issues that a retaining wall or a planting bed would. Edwards noted a properly installed fence has some clearance underneath it to allow water to go under it. Walsh stated a planter box would fall under the same definition as a retaining wall since it is holding the earth back. McMillan asked whether the language should say right-of-way easement in Item No.2 rather than the structure is not located within a drainage,utility,or other easement. Mattick stated in his view that would be covered by the other easement. McMillan stated she was attempting to figure out the right-of-way piece. McMillan stated on her street the south side has maybe a 15-foot right-of-way and the north side has five feet. McMillan asked if the ordinance would mean that no structure can be on the south side in that 15 feet if the right-of-way varies. Mattick indicated it would be from the edge of where the right-of-way shows up on paper and necessarily where the road is. Mattick stated everyone usually assumes the road is located in the middle of the right- of-way,which is not always the case. McMillan stated ten feet from a traveled roadway can be different from where the right-of-way is. Page 7 of 18