request for council action re lot combination

Home Browse Search

contains about 10,400 square foot of ground or about .23 of an acre. This piece of ground can certainly accomodate automobile and related access and parking without being obtrusive in any way. No one's view of the lake would be violated by parking adjacent to County Road 15 and the Orono Lane Access point. This area is more the 250 foot from the lakeshore - obviously well beyond the significant 75 foot lake front set back area. Mike, we believe that automobile, boat and boat accessory (trailer) parking should be allowed when such parking is in conjunction with reasonable and ordinary private use of and access to the lake. In this regard specifically we are in agreement with several of your 11/19/98 staff recommendations; namely Nos. 1 and 3, page 4: 1.) A parking area meeting all required setbacks (75' from shoreline, 10' side lot line, 1�' street lot line) and meeting hardcover limitations. . . . 3.) Grading work to create such a parking area within Parcel B shall be subject to appropriate land alteration permit. beyond the above we feel you are sort of doubling up on your basic land allowances and restrictions. Let us suggest something along the lines of the following in place of your other suggested recommendations: 5a.) Vehicle, boat and boat accessory (trailer) parking shall be allowed when such parking is directly incident to or associated with a specific private use or visit to the lakeshore, whether for boat, swimming, picnic or other similar lake use; and such parking may continue for the duration of the specific use. However for the purposes of this paragraph it is agreed that a boat or ice boat will be placed �r sited for full seasonal use at the shoreline or attached to dock or lift or mooring at or near the shoreline. 5b. ) It is further agreed that trailers accessory to boats placed or sited for full seasonal use at or near the shore- line, may not be parked in seasonal storage within Parcel B. 5c. ) It is further agreed within th�sparagraph that the vehicle parking shall be limited to no more than 6 vehicles at any one time. We feel the above, in conjunction with the hardcover restrictions (which we understand to be 25% of the lot area beyond the 0-75 foot lake set back area) will effectively limit and outline reasonable park- ing for reasonable and ordinary private lake use. Proposals of screen- ing, fencing and chaining the property seem questionable as to usefulness or attractiveness as we think of the matte�� just now. The final matter of our concern relates to assuring a workable access to the lake piece from Orono Lane. As indicated above, our access -2-