Laserfiche WebLink
r i <br />■ • r- k <br />1 <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1997 <br />they would accept a lesser wetland separation, or if the garage should be located on this <br />parcel at all. <br />Another issue is the replacement of the fence, which is located on the lake side of the road <br />along the portion acquired by Brooks. The 60' right-of-way width from the center line is <br />actuaUy 30' away from the boundary but is the perceived edge. Gaffron indicated that the <br />poor condition of the fence is likely due to its proximity to the road. He reported that <br />Chapter 6 of the Municipal Code requires a permit to allow this encroachment. The point <br />is located within the 0-75' setback. <br />Gaffiron said Staff recommends the fence not be allowed within the right-of-way and <br />should be located at the property boundary. If it is located less than at the property <br />boundary, it at least should be 15’ from the paved roadway with screening inbetween. <br />Gaffron said the applicant would be asked to sign a hold-harmless agreement for damage <br />to and maintenance of the fence. He asked the Planning Commission to review the <br />hardship statement. <br />Mr. Brooks said the garage is part of the old Skarp property, and its replacement is a step <br />in the clean-up process of the property. He intends to replace it with a storage garage <br />with no driveway. He indicated there is no other location on the property on which to <br />place the garage. It will service the house and lakeshore. <br />Brooks said the fenc".; is necessary for privacy to eliminate trespassing. He noted the <br />property is narrow in hs width. It is currently located on the road side of the tree line and <br />could be located 6-8* back as opposed to 4-6*. If it was located behind the tree line at <br />about 10-12', it would leave room for vegetation to grow and for plowing. He reported