09-12-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.L REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING Sf P 11 ?UUD CITYOFORONO Date: September 8,2005 Item No.: ^ Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Oundlach^ Tide: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Sever Landscaping on behalf of Adam & Kathy LaFavre, 1535 Bohn’s Point Road - Appeal of a Staff Interpretation Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre minimum) 5.52 acres (240,380 s.f.) --495 feet List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant’s Narrative C - Elevation View of Proposed Gates D - City Code Section 78*1405: Nonencroachments E - City Code Section 78-1 & 78-1467 Pertaining to Residential Signage GATE HEIGHT The applicant submitted for a building permit for a number of landscaping improvements and also construction of entrance monuments with gates. Staffs review of the gates concluded that the gate height is limited to 42” per the fence ordinance for a rear/street yard of a lakeshore lot not on a major thoroughfare. The 42” limitation is a result of staff defaulting to the fence height limitations as there is not anything in the ordinance regarding gate height. The gates proposed as shown on the permit approach 7.25* in height at the highest point with the majority of the gate at a height of 5.3*. Rather than allowing the applicant to apply for a variance staff felt it would be more appropriate for the applicant to appeal the staff interjMetation regarding the 42” limitation, as neither the entrance monument or fence sections of the ordinance address gate height. Staff also felt this was an opportunity for the Council to direct staff if something other than the 42” should be permitted. After reviewing many of the existing entrance gates in the community it became clear to staff that the majority existing under similar parameters meet the 42” limitation, however there are a few anomalies. It should also be noted that the entrance monument section of the code is fairly new (adopted 5/04), where many of the entrance monuments and gates existing in the City were reviewed and approved baaed on interpretations of the fence regulations. Staff finds that because the