05-21-1984 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1!I ? ^; :i' . ? i% ^ . 4" ; fc'ivXTi-y ? '■r: •S;N/^;/;! '■■'■r---'^j^-. the lot line o£ County Road 84 per the non encroachment section o£ the ordinance (10.03 Sub 15 (c)) and as it jogs away from the County road assumes the required setbacks for accessory structures 10 feet from side lot line and a minimum of 75 feet from lakeshore - it appears to be 100' ■¥ from lakeshore Review of Appeals Petition Mrs. Hehl has filed a petition claiming that the subject fence blocks her view of Lake Ninnetonka (No. 12onplatmapr Exhibit D) resulting in a diminution of property values. She has included with her application several pictures of the area as it existed before the Stielow and LAD plats. I have reviewed the ordinances with Mrs. Hehl and she concurs that the fence conforms in its placement but not at the present height along the section that runs along County Road 84 where the grade was raised 3* to 4*. She notes specifically Section 10.03 Sub 15 (D) "fences not to exceed a height of six feet above grade." The applicant claims she would have no problem with the fence i£ it were placed at the existing grade. What was the existing grade at the time the fence was constructed? the grade left by the glaciers grade resulting from county road construction grade prior to development grade established in grading plan with building permit review Staff approved a grading plan in '81 but the final site grading was not completed until the summer of 1983. There was never any discussion of a privacy fence nor was one ever shown on any plans. The fence was constructed at the new owner's request. The final grading would appear to have exceeded what was shown in the grading plan. Pilling and grading was continued further west along the north side in line with the second lot on Eastlake Street (lot 22 on enclosed plat map). The final grading was approved by the inspection staff at the final site inspection. In regard to the question of existing grade, staff would always refer to the final site grade plans for grade elevations. Staff does not take a shovel to determine grade changes - the files are always reviewed if there is a question of a grade change - that is a change from the approved elevations at the time a building permlt^was issued. Staff does not permit the filling or the raising of grades when approving the construction of privacy fences. The timing of the fence construction and the final grading has created the hard feelings and misunderstandings. r : J Ir - I iM « • The Boa