My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-28-1985 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1985
>
10-28-1985 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2025 9:46:21 AM
Creation date
12/11/2025 9:32:46 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
429
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Zoning File #986 <br />October 24, 1985 <br />Page 2 <br />It is the applicant's position that newly amended Section 10.03, Sub- <br />division 15 (C) applies to hi.s lakeshore property. Specifically, a lake - <br />shore lot that is divided by a major thoroughfare would be allowed a 6 foot <br />high fence along the street lot lines (lakeshore or homestead portion of <br />property). <br />Staff contends this non -encroachment section only applies to a yard <br />requirement. The fence is located within 75 feet of the lakeshore. A <br />fence over 3 1/2 feet in height must be located 75+ feet from the lake - <br />shore. The applicant's lot, as with many lots in our City that are divided <br />by public roads or easements, are subject to the standards that protect the <br />viewing rights of lakeshore lot owners (Section 10.22, Subdivision 1). In <br />this case the applicant's lakeshore yard is intersected by a road, the rear <br />yard does not abutt a major thoroughfare but a residential lot line. The <br />neighboring lots are also lakeshore lots divided by a public road and <br />subject to the same standards that protect each owner's viewing rights of <br />the lake. In the case of the Fehl application, her lake view rights were <br />not protected under the existing and now amended ordinances because her <br />property lines did not abutt or run to the lakeshore and she was on the <br />non -riparian side of the major thoroughfare. Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 <br />(C) was intended for lakeshore lots that were adjacent to County Roads <br />along the rear yard or street lot line. Adjacent lot owners' viewF of the <br />lake would not be affected by the placement of a fence 6 feet in height <br />along the rear/street lot line. <br />On August 19, 1985 the Planning Commission denied the applicant's <br />appeals application (Review Exhibit. J). The applicant was given an <br />opportunity to amend his original appeals application to a variance <br />application. On October 21, 1985 the Planning Commission reviewed the <br />applicant's variance application (variance to height of fence - Section <br />10.22, Subdivision 1) : <br />Allowed = 42 inches or 3 1/2 feet <br />Proposed 60+ inches or 5+ feet <br />Variance 18 inches or 1 1/2 feet <br />Per Council's interpretation of Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (Review <br />Exhibit K), the applicant may place a 3-1/2 foot fence at existing grade <br />within the lakeshore portion of his yard. Per Section 10.03, Subdivision. <br />16, at the intersection of the access and the public road, a 3 foot high <br />fence or shrub would only be permitted 30 feet along the lot line adjacent <br />to Shoreline Drive and 30 feet along the north lot line or south side of <br />access if that improvement does not create a sight problem in they use of <br />the public access. <br />Section 1.0.03 (B) Subdivision 6 Combination of Separated Parcels <br />Prohibited. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.