My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-13-2001 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2001
>
11-13-2001 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/8/2012 3:38:15 PM
Creation date
3/8/2012 3:38:15 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
0 <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2001 <br />10. #01 -2718 Amendment to Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 Relating to <br />Fence Standards <br />Weinberger stated that the proposed changes to the fence ordinance would take some of <br />the language out of the non - Encroachments section. The primary changes would be that <br />the finished side of the fence would face neighboring property owners, and change the <br />permitted height of split rail fences. They also added some construction and maintenance <br />standards. The owner of the fence shall maintain the fence in a reasonable state of repair <br />and appearance and shall work with the City to remove or repair a fence that is unsafe. <br />Staff recommended Council adopt the changes. <br />White asked that "adjacent fences" be clarified for lakeshore lots. Weinberger stated that <br />fences are not allowed within 75' of the lakeshore and fences are not allowed to block <br />views of the lake enjoyed by adjacent lots. Weinberger showed the method for <br />determining the fence setback for lakeshore lots. <br />Sansevere stated he was in favor of allowing-non- opaque (chain link) fences of up to 6' <br />for security purposes in nearly any location. <br />Weinberger stated that fence placement in front yards varies depending on the specific <br />• zone's front setbacks. Sansevere stated he does not think fences look good sitting at a 50' <br />setback. <br />Rick Meyers asked if there was a provision for requiring a 1' setback from any property <br />line. Nygard stated that Orono requires a 2' setback from property lines, and he favored <br />requiring a permit to erect a fence so that people would have to survey their property. <br />White stated he favored sending a notice to residents and letting them self - police. <br />0 <br />Mabusth stated the Planning Commission had discussed the issue in depth and raised <br />many issues, but felt they were directed not to go into such depth so as to quickly move <br />something through. <br />White moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the proposed amendments as <br />proposed and directed staff to research issues of security and the possibility of <br />requiring a permit to erect fences. Council also directed Staff to schedule a second <br />hearing with the Planning Commission to consider additional fence standards. <br />Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. <br />11. #01 -2726 Erotas Building Corporation, 450 Orono Orchard Road- After -the- <br />Fact Variances — Resolution No. 4722 <br />Weinberger stated that the application was to permit a 6' fence within the 50' street yard <br />setback where fences are permitted to be 3 %Z' in height. The fences would be located <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.