My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-24-2016 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2016
>
10-24-2016 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2019 2:15:41 PM
Creation date
11/28/2017 3:26:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
141
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
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />DATE: October 24, 2016 <br />ITEM NO: 7 <br />Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: <br />Name Adam Edwards P.E. Y"_4 Public Works Director/ <br />Title Public Works Director/City Engineer City Engineer's Report <br />Item Description: Old Beach Road Right of Way (ROW) Encroachment <br />List of Exhibits <br />A- Image Map. D- Neighborhood Comments. <br />B- Photos. E- Example Encroachment agreement. <br />C- Resident Request <br />1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to get the Council's decision on granting an encroachment <br />agreement and direction on placement of a private retaining wall within the ROW of Old Beach Road. <br />2. Background. The homeowners at 2560 Old Beach Road, had a retaining wall constructed adjacent to <br />their home but within the City Right of Way. (Exhibit A&B) No permits were issued for the work. Upon <br />discovery of the work City Staff issued a stop work order. Construction of a structure within the ROW <br />requires an encroachment agreement with the City and for a minor land alteration/retaining wall permit . <br />An encroachment of this magnitude requires Council approval. The permit can be approved at the staff <br />level if an encroachment agreement is approved. As constructed the retaining wall is — 18 inches from <br />the edge of pavement. The residents have requested an encroachment agreement and applied for a minor <br />land alteration/retaining wall permit. (Exhibit C). Many of the neighbors have expressed support of the <br />wall. (Exhibit D) <br />3. Considerations. Staff recommends the Council should consider the following items when providing <br />direction on this item: <br />• Related code. The city code does allow for retaining walls in front yards as long as they are at <br />least 10 feet from the travelled road way'.Section 78-1405 (5.1). While this code is written for walls <br />that are on private property the l Oft limitation could be applied to this circumstance. <br />• Encroachments into the public right of way are normally allowed in order to overcome a practical <br />difficulty such as a driveway approach. <br />Best practice is to keep ROWS clear of immovable objects for safety and maintenance efforts <br />When objects are necessary with in the ROW we try and keep them 10 ft from the travel way. For <br />local roads and streets, a minimum clear zone of 7 to 10 feet is considered desirable on sections <br />without curb. On collectors without curbs, a 10 foot minimum clear zone is recommended. <br />The road is a residential cul-de-sac with low volume and low speed traffic. <br />4. Staff Recommendation. After consideration of the proposed project, it is my recommendation that if <br />the Council does grant an encroachment the wall should be required to be set back a minimum of 10 <br />feet from the edge of pavement/travel way. <br />COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: <br />Decision on Encroachment Agreement for retaining wall and if approved guidance on setback of wall <br />from the edge of pavement. <br />Section 78-1405 (5.1) <br />z. AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.