My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-15-2017 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2017
>
05-15-2017 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2018 8:11:38 AM
Creation date
1/19/2018 8:11:34 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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).
View images
View plain text
CITY OF ORONO <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 15,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Schoenzeit commented he is the last one to say that the City should make someone spend money, but this <br /> particular activity is at an intensity level that requires engineering. Schoenzeit stated he cannot make a <br /> recommendation for them to go forward with it since it is against Staff's recommendations. <br /> Leskinen stated if they can find an engineer that will sign off on the plans as proposed, then that is one <br /> thing, but that she is not comfortable with it. <br /> Olson stated he is struggling with it since the property owner did not cause this problem. Olson stated he <br /> does not doubt the capability of the team but questioned whether the City is setting up a level of <br /> expectation that other applicants will also not require engineering. <br /> Schwingler noted it would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. <br /> Thiesse questioned whether the future owner also has an expectation that it will hold. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the liability probably comes with a future property owner. <br /> Curtis noted conditional use permits are recorded against the title of the property so they would be <br /> accessible to a future owner. <br /> Thiesse stated in his mind it is more than a landscaping project and is remediation. <br /> Schwingler stated he is okay with it without the engineer signoff. Schwingler commented it is a tough <br /> case and that the property owners are trying to do the right thing. Schwingler stated he understands the <br /> importance of an engineer signoff, but instead of allowing the property owners to improve what exists,the <br /> City is now penalizing them and requiring them to get an engineer approval. Schwingler commented <br /> sometimes it comes down to a practicality. <br /> Schoenzeit commented he knows enough about engineering that he cannot say yes to this. <br /> Anderson stated they do have a slope stability analysis done. Anderson stated clay is amazingly structural <br /> and that the issue is that the filtration that has happened has to be removed. <br /> Schoenzeit asked if there is any hydraulic pressure coming from behind the house. <br /> Anderson indicated there is not and that they are not changing the existing drainage patterns. Anderson <br /> stated they could have an engineer look at the piping,the sizing, and the water volume and include that in <br /> their information. Anderson stated that way they will know it will handle the water volume. Anderson <br /> indicated they are just trying to stabilize the slope and not impede on the neighbors. <br /> Schoenzeit stated that might be an opportunity to get another opinion and another set of eyes to look at it, <br /> which would up the confidence. <br /> Leskinen stated regardless of what the Planning Commission recommends, they can still argue their case <br /> before the City Council. <br /> Thiesse indicated he would be okay with sending this forward to the City Council. <br /> Page 18 of 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.