Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1027 <br />June 5, 1986 <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation <br />A motion to approve the height variance failed by a vote of 4 to <br />2. Members failed to formally vote to deny the Pillsbury application <br />but the intent of the majority wa. clear. <br />The applicant's representatives were well warned that privacy <br />fences and walls are highly sensitive issues - especially for the past <br />year. The majority recommended natural pl,ntings in place of 6 feet <br />high walls. The "bricking in" effect of Lakeshore lots does not meet <br />the intent of the Code or Comprehensive Plan. <br />The miLority confirmed the need to screen the property from noise <br />and lights in consideration of the curve �n County Road 15 as it <br />approaches Bracketts Point Road going eastward. The Pillsbury lot has <br />been defined as a "tight lot" requiring special landscaping and <br />properly placed screening to offset the only location for the house in <br />the lakeshore yard and the unique -ngles of intersecting roadways. <br />The applicant has indeed demonstrated physical hardships. <br />Council Action: <br />To give staff conceptual direction in order to prepare the <br />appropriate resolution for Council action at your next meeting. <br />