Laserfiche WebLink
:s <br />Zoning File #986 <br />October 15, 1985 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />The privacy aspect of the request is more difficult because of the <br />need for a 100% opaque fence and for a specific height because of the <br />elevation of the'road. Staff might suggest cutting back on fence length <br />and placing it closer to dock area. <br />Issues to be discussed with applicant: <br />1. Are the posts a satisfactory attempt at marking the edge of <br />applicant's private property? <br />2. Fence must be relocated away from roadway: <br />a) 30 feet sight distance required at access - intersection with <br />Shoreline Drive <br />b) Reduction in length <br />1) Size of area that requires sunbathing privacy? <br />2) Maximum height of fence at new location if privacy to be <br />achieved? <br />Planning Commission Action <br />If you approve applicants variance request, the fence must be re­ <br />located; what guidelines will you suggest for Council's consideration. <br />Approval can be based on the following findings: <br />1. City has worked with other adjacent land owners to public access <br />and allowed specific improvements such as cylon fencing. <br />2. Location of only riparian access for property in relation to <br />public road and public access. <br />3. Long record of public abuse of applicant's private property. <br />Approval is subject to the following conditions: <br />1. Fence to be relocated away from public road <br />a) 30 feet sight distance must be maintained <br />b) reduction in length of fence _ _ _ feet <br />c) reduction in height of fence _ _ _ feet <br />If denied use Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 for necessary findings and <br />recommended complete removal of fence by appropriate date - winter access <br />use begins December 1, 1985.