File #: 19-460    Version: 1 Name: Resolution 19-29 Revocable Long-Term Obstruction at 302 3rd Avenue
Type: Resolution Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 7/30/2019 In control: City Commission
On agenda: 8/7/2019 Final action: 8/7/2019
Title: Resolution No. 19-29, Revocable Long-Term Obstruction in the Right-of-Way at 302 3rd Avenue
Sponsors: John Lewis
Attachments: 1. Staff Report, 2. Resolution No. 19-29, 3. Photo Exhibits, 4. Motion Made by TAC 9-19-18, 5. John Replinger Recommendation MUTCD, 6. McLoughlin to Canemah Trail Drawing Excerpt, 7. Planning Memo, 8. Citizen Comments Received From 7/17/2019 City Commission Meeting
Title
Resolution No. 19-29, Revocable Long-Term Obstruction in the Right-of-Way at 302 3rd Avenue

Body
RECOMMENDED ACTION (Motion):
Approve Resolution No. 19-29 for a Revocable Permanent Obstruction in the Right-of-Way Permit for the property at Tax Lot 2-2E-31CA-04800 (302 3rd Avenue).

BACKGROUND:
The property owners at 302 3rd Avenue, John and Ann Addleman, have applied for a Revocable Permanent Obstruction in the Right-of-Way Permit for an existing fence that is located within the right-of-way of Ganong Street in the Canemah neighborhood. This existing fence was constructed approximately 32 years ago and has been maintained over its lifetime. The applicant is not proposing to replace the fence. The applicant only intends to keep maintaining the fence by replacing boards as they become in poor condition and/or painting the fence as needed. Due to complaints about the fence being located in the right of way by two area residents, the applicant has chosen to apply for a Revocable Permanent Obstruction in the Right-of-Way Permit in an effort to bring the longstanding fence into compliance with City Code as related to encroachments.

The complaints concerning the existing fence are as follows:
1. The fence is blocking the sight lines of drivers users of the right-of-way resulting in unsafe conditions for drivers, bikers and pedestrians.
2. The fence is not historically appropriate and does not meet Fence code requirements nor the Historic Review Board fence guidelines.
3. The fence is illegally located in the right-of-way.

Public Works has reviewed the complaints and found the following:

1. Over the two years since this sight line question has been brought up, several staff have reviewed the fence and the specific location, considering sight distance concerns.
a. Based on field evaluations and engineering judgment, a 2018 discussion and motion by the Transportation Advisory Committee, a third party opinion of a licensed transportation engineer (Replinger and...

Click here for full text