Zoning Laws

[onthebay]

Before I start paying out lawyers fees I would like to find out if anyone from the forum has run into this issue.
We were planning on building a stone/retaining wall along our property line, about 3 feet high and 100 feet long.
The town told us that we had to be setback 10 feet from the property line because it was considered a structure. Whats the point of a having a boundary wall if you lose 10' of your yard. Any one else ever hear of this happening.

[Onshore]

Are you planing to build a free standing stone wall or a retaining wall which will hold back material, like fill or cut materials?

[onthebay]

There would be fill on one side so it would classify as a retaining wall.

[Onshore]

Then it would be considered a structure under the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act as well. Stonewalls that are "free standing" are considered fences and would be exempt.

[codeman671]

Then it would be considered a structure under the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act as well. Stonewalls that are "free standing" are considered fences and would be exempt.

Is in fact the wall in question on a lot near the water? I did not see anything in the original post that the lot was abutting the lake in which case the CSPA would not be applicable.

I do not know the poster so I am not sure where the lot is located, unless I should take a clue by the name "onthebay"

[Onshore]

Sorry, I had thought his question was whether anyone was familiar with other examples of ordinances or laws under which a retaining wall would be a structure that would need to meet a setback. I did not intend to speak specifically to his lot.

[onthebay]

The lot does fall under shoreland protection but that isn't the issue. It is within guidlines and DES has given us a written opinion that it is okay. It is the setback to the abutter that the town has a problem with.
It either sounds like we need to do a freestanding wall or apply for a variance and get the abutter to agree (which they already have)