10-13-1997 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r Zoning File #2295 September 12, 1997 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1. Should the garage be located nearer the wetland in order to maintain a greater setback from the street? 2. Should a garage be allowed to oe relocated on this portion of the property, or should applicant be advised to find a confom4ing location for a new stoiage garage? If so, would Planning Commission consider granting any other types of variances for that structure? Note that although Parcel F has been conceptually approved by Council for combination with Parcel H, E and A, no location on Parcel F is outside the 0-75' zone, and it would not be appropriate to construct a garage on Parcel F. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission should review the applicant's request, his hardship statement and any other options or revisions that might be appropriate, and make a recommendation as to whether the applicant should be allowed to construct the garage per his proposal. B. Fence Replacement Applicant proposes to replace the existing wood fence between the traveled portion of Femdale Road and Parcel F. That fence is located in the right-of-way, an average of about 6' from the paved roadway and probably ranging from 15-20' from the actual lot line. The easterly half of the fence is located within 75' of the shoreline. The fence today consists of loose, 'propped up' segments of wooden fence, in extremely deteriorated state. Note that this fence does not show up on any of the survey work which has been submitted to-date. • Applicant proposes to construct a new 6' high cedar screening fence to be located within the right-of- way at a distance of 6-9' from the edge of the pavement. A gate would be installed approximately 12' from the west boundary of Parcel F Please review the applicant's lettu of request and hardship statement. The primary reason for the fence is for privacy, to discourace trespassing, and "permit more of the parcel to be enjoyed by the property owner". It is likely that part of the reason the fence is deteriorated is that in the past it has been so close to the right-of-way that winter plowing probably piles snow against it. The zoning code addresses fencing as a non-encroachment and prohibits it from being located less than 75' from the lake, but does not address the issue of fences in the right-of-way. However, Orono Municipal Code Chapter 6 requires a permit from the City for any obstruction including fences, within a City right-of-way.