11-26-2001 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13,2001 10. #01-2718 Amendment lo Zoning Code Scctioa 10.03, Sufadhision IS Relating to Fence Standards Weinberger stated that the proposed changes to the fence ordinance would take some of the language out of the non-Encroachments section. The primar>' changes would be that the finished side of the fence would face neighboring property owners, and change the permitted height of split rail fences. They also added some construction and maintenance standards. The owner of the fence shall maintain the fence in a reasonable state of repair and appearance and shall work with the City to remove or repair a fence that is unsafe. Staff recommended Council adopt the changes. White asked that "adjacent fences" be clarified for lokeshore lots. Weinberger stated that fences are not allow ed w ithin 75 ’ of the lakcshore and fences are not allow ed to block views ol the lake enjoyed by adjacent lots. Weinberger showed the method for determining the fence setback for lakcshore lots. Sunseverc stated he was in favor of allowing non-opaque (chain link) fences of up to 6’ for security purposes in nearly any location. Weinberger stated that fence placement in front yards varies depending on the specific zone's front setbacks. Sonsevere stated he does not think fences look good sitting at a 50* setback. Rick Meyers asked if there was a provision for requiring a 1 ’ setback from any property line. Nygard stated that Orono requucs a 2 ’ setback from property lines, and he favored requiring a permit to erect a fence so that people would have to sur\ey their property. Wliitc stated he favored sending a notice to residents and letting them self-police. Mabusth stated the Planning Commission had discussed the issue in depth and raised many issues, but felt they were directed not to go into such depth so as to quickly move something through. While moved, and Sansevcrc seconded, lo approve the proposed amendments as proposed and directed staff lo research issues of security and the possibility of requiring a permit lo erect fences. Council also directed Staff to schedule a second hearing with the Planning Commission to consider additional fence standards. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 11. #01-2726 Erotas Building Corporation, 450 Orono Orchard Road—After-lhe- Fact Variances—Resolution No. 4722 Weinberger stated that the application was to permit a 6* fence within the 50 ’ .street yard setback where fences arc permitted to be 3 V{ in height. Tiie fences would be located