Laserfiche WebLink
City of ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> CITY NO. 2342 <br /> OF <br /> ORONO <br /> A) There is no unique hardship to the land that would require a <br /> 6 foot high fence. <br /> B) A 3k foot fence with plantings can provide the necessary <br /> protection for children if both are installed with specific care <br /> in placement of plantings to insure there is no negative impact <br /> on required sight distance. <br /> C) The Planning Commission felt the turnaround should be <br /> installed as required. <br /> 4. On November 9, 1987 and November 23, 1987, the Orono Council <br /> considered the application and noted the following findings: <br /> A) The existing six foot high fence creates a visual/safety <br /> hazard for users of public road and for children who exit the <br /> property. <br /> B) Adequate sight distance is essential if a turnaround is not <br /> installed on the property. A 3 1/2 foot fence with plantings at <br /> limited height in designated areas can accomplish applicants <br /> goals for protection of children and privacy in limited yard <br /> area. <br /> C) To allow a 3 1/2 foot fence along the street lot line of the <br /> property, located within the lakeshore protected area, would be <br /> consistent with past actions of the City Council based on valid, <br /> similar findings noted in this review. <br /> D) Economic considerations are not valid reasons to grant <br /> variances per Section 10.08 Subdivision 3A( 4 ) of the Municipal <br /> Code. <br /> E) Sections of the 6 foot privacy fence have been installed <br /> within the road right-of-way of Fagerness Point Road. <br /> F) The 6 foot privacy fence has been installed within 75 feet of <br /> the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. <br /> G) Approving a 6 foot high privacy fence to provide privacy has <br /> not been a valid reason for the granting of variances in light of <br /> recent denials. The approval of this privacy fence would <br /> establish a negative precedent in the consideration of similar <br /> applications in the future. <br /> 5. The City Council has considered this application including the <br /> findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by <br /> City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed <br /> variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br />