My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PCAgenda_93Mar22
FalconHeights
>
Committees and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
199x
>
1993
>
PCAgenda_93Mar22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2009 4:05:44 PM
Creation date
7/7/2009 11:34:25 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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).
View images
View plain text
3. A variance request for a nine foot high fence in the <br />front yard (maximum allowed is three feet) was denied <br />for a property on Hamline Avenue. The commission <br />• recommended that the property owner continue to buffer <br />his property from commercial property across the street <br />with a landscape screen. <br />Comments from neighbors <br />The property owner at 1433 West Idaho, Mr. Brace, said that he <br />had no objections to the proposal as long as the fence is <br />constructed on or adjacent to the King's property line. He said <br />that when he was constructing his garage, he found the survey <br />stake on the west side of his property, then measured 50 feet to <br />the east to determine the location of his east side property <br />line. This measurement revealed that the existing King fence is <br />about 2 to 4 inches over the property line between the Kings and <br />Braces. Mr. Brace said that he doesn't mind this now, but if a <br />new fence is installed the property line should be determined. <br />(The city requests that property owners determine the location of <br />their property line by finding stakes or hiring a certified land <br />survey. Any variance should include this as a condition.) <br />staff report <br />The city's code allowing for a six foot high fence is adequate in <br />• most situations. The intent of restricting fences to this height <br />is to avoid a tunnel effect .between properties and to keep some <br />consistent open space. <br />Staff cannot determine if the eight foot high fence will more <br />adequately screen the rear 15 feet of the Brace garage from the <br />King property or not. The rear 15 feet is the additional length <br />that makes this garage different from the previous one on the <br />King property. It doesn't appear that the additional three feet <br />in fence height will screen the height of the garage, which meets <br />the zoning code. There is no expressed need to screen the east <br />side of the King property with an eight foot fence. <br />Possible alternatives: <br />1. Approve the variance for an eight foot fence as requested. <br />2. Approve the variance for an eight foot fence on the west <br />side and rear west side of the King property to screen the <br />neighbor's garage. as described by the Kings. <br />3. To deny the variance because there is no benefit from the <br />eight foot fence in screening the adjacent property or there <br />are alternatives to an eight foot fence. <br />L <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.