Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, March 17, 2003 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#03-2878 EDWARD HAMM, Continued) <br /> entrance gate would be for the principal drive into the property and would align with the <br /> existing fence which is about 6' inside the property line north of the driveway. The metal <br /> gate at its highest point was proposed to be 8.5' high and supported by brick and some <br /> monument of almost 11' in height. The pedestrian gate would serve a sidewalk from the <br /> main house to the road and would align with the existing fence which is about 3' into the <br /> right of way at this location. Bottenberg pointed out that the metal gate at its highest point <br /> would be 6.5' high and supported by a brick and stone monument of almost 13' in height. <br /> Bottenberg stated that research had shown numerous properties with monuments and gates <br /> in Orono, however, most of these are lakeshore lots along county roads which are allowed <br /> to be 6' in height and meet certain setback requirements. She did cite three examples <br /> similar to this proposal, first 450 Orono Orchard Road South, 480 Deborah Drive, and <br /> 2710 Pence Lane. <br /> With regard to the Fire Marshal's comments, Bottenberg stated that the City was advised <br /> that the required opening excluding the gate portion of the structure must be at a minimum <br /> 20' based on width of fire emergency vehicles. Also, since gates would be electronically <br /> controlled, the emergency agencies have requested that a lock box "knox box"be provided <br /> for ease of access by emergency vehicles. <br /> Based on the numerous monuments/gates throughout the city, Bottenberg reported that <br /> staff recommends denial of the monuments/gates as proposed. If the applicant chooses to <br /> redesign the proposed monuments and gates keeping the height to 7', moving the <br /> pedestrian gate back out of the right-of-way and meeting the recommended 20' width by <br /> the fire marshal, then a recommendation of approval would be justified based upon past <br /> approvals. <br /> Chair Smith asked why the taller monuments have been allowed throughout the City when <br /> code mandates a lower height. <br /> Bottenberg explained that monuments on lakeshore County Road properties are allowed by <br /> code to be higher than others in the community. <br /> Chair Smith was concerned that the examples, which are not County Road sites, had been <br /> approved. <br /> Mr. Roddy stated that the applicant has been undergoing major renovations and is highly <br /> security conscious. <br /> Chair Smith asked the representative if the applicant could accept the staff <br /> recommendations. <br /> PAGE 21 of 24 <br />