Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JUNE 27, 2001 <br />VARIANCE & <br />REQUEST FOI2 <br />NO .PAR.KING - <br />90 ROSEWOOD <br />DRIVE - <br />MONTGOME:ftY <br />Fahey opened the public hearing to consider the request for a Variance from <br />the fence height limitation of 4 feet in a side yard abutting a public street and <br />the requirement that the fence be 25% open for 90 'Rosewood Drive as well as <br />as well as a request for no parking on Rosewood Drive as made by Bryan <br />Montgomery. The Council reviewed the recommendations of both the <br />City Planner and the Planning Commission noting that the Plamier <br />recommends the fence be placed in line with the west side of the house and the <br />Planning Commission recommends the fence be lined up with the fence for the <br />coffee shop. <br />Scalze asked about the location of the existing fence. The City Administrator <br />noted that it appeals the existing fence is in the right-of--way and indicated that <br />the fence will have to be moved. <br />The City Planner reported that his office Felt it most reasonable to move that <br />fence to lineup with the west side of the Montgomery home. He felt this was <br />more in keeping with the intent of the ordinance. Fahey agreed, and it was <br />noted that a variance was granted for the house when it was constructed <br />allowing fora 16-foot setback from the property line ratlrer than the standard <br />30-foot setback. Fahey felt there was no hardship present to justify bringing <br />the fence to the property line. <br />Scalze noted that the coffee house property was zoned commercial prior to the <br />development of the Montgomery house. <br />There was no one present from the general public wishing to comment on this <br />matter. <br />Upon motion by Montour, seconded by Fahey, the public hearing was closed. <br />Montour pointed out that the Plamiiug Commission's recommendation would <br />line up the Montgomery fence with the coffee shop fence. Montour agreed, <br />however, that there was no hardship present to justify allowing the fence at the <br />property line. <br />Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RE>SOLU770N N0. 2001-6-125-APPROVINGTKE vAItIANCEFOR <br />FENCE IIEIGFIT ALLOWING A S'la F00T HIGH IBNCE IN THE SIDE <br />YARD ABUTTING A I'U131_IC STKEET AS WELT AS AI LOWING THE <br />PENCE TO 13E OPAQUE, AND I'URTI-IER REQUIRING THAT TIIE <br />FENCE 13E P].ACED IN LINE WITH THE WEST EDGE OF THE <br />MONTCOMBRPHOUSE AT 90 ROSEWOOD DRIVE ]3ASED ON THE <br />