Laserfiche WebLink
Wh : . <br />^ir-"- <br />•’^ ■ . Vf 5- <br />V *r'i>-' <br />% <br />V.N;» <br />■■'V; :' ■• <br />■y <br />■>. <br />■5«'S' i <br />'I ;mV . <br />?|«?-:. ^ <br />MPr. <br />~ -Ir^- <br />Xf:'^ A ' :.' <br />Ifet^.:.m$rkim'-P*A <br />K»i.ilfc. <br />M-r <br />...... <br />:j:=va C; <br />.<f = ir . <br />^^v:- <br />■h:' <br />p" <br />*r-: i - ■ <br />V.* <br />,.^>- <br />;P> <br />P 0 <br />0:^ <br />Sf;-“ <br />H>' <br />1^: <br />J,j ‘ <br />IS'. <br />Sl^i? <br />Tos Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council <br />Proa: <br />Hate: <br />% <br />/o <br />Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administafet <br />C-. « <br />April 8, 1992 <br />Subject: Shoreland Ordinance - Response from DNR <br />or <br /><a. V ^ <br />^ , <?>A <br />Attached is a letter from the DNR requesting additional <br />information regarding our definition of "steep slope" and the <br />issue of lock boxes. Regarding Item 1, staff will research the <br />background of our current ordinance and attempt to find sotae <br />technical justification for our definition. Regarding Item 2, <br />Council should consider whether the 10' setback for lock boxes is <br />acceptable. If so, we could easily revise the ordinance to omit <br />the need for flexibility in this section. Arguably, the only <br />time when a 10' setback would not be possible is xn a steep slope <br />situation where there is not a 10’ strip of flat area at the <br />shoreline in which to construct a lock box. <br />Staff Re <br />1. <br />dation <br />Direct staff to review the background behind the City's 18% <br />"steep slope" definition and report b^ck to Council in two <br />weeks . <br />2.Agree conceptually to DNR's proposal that Section 10.56, <br />Subdivision 16 (E), Water-Oriented Accessory Structures be <br />revised to require a 10' setback fromthe OHWL. <br />Isv <br />■*>