04/03/2000 Park Board Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1999 The City Attorney advised that the criteria to grant a variance are well laid out. Findings of Fact have to be made to justify granting the variance. If the criteria can't be met the Council has an obligation to deny the variance request. Ms. Sue Walseth, 6408 Casssiopeia Court, came forward and pointed out where the fence would be located. She gave the following reasons why a 6' fence variance should be granted: 1. The fence will be 70' from the stop sign, which will not obscure vehicle view. 2. A rear lot abutting a side lot is rare in Lino Lakes. 3. The elevation of the lot is such that the fence will be constructed in a hole. Therefore, the fence will not be 6' high. 4. The second floor windows of her home are in line with the headlights of oncoming traffic, the fence would block the light. 5. A 6' fence would provide a better buffer from noise an •RQ • ian ffic. 6. A 6' fence would allow for better privacy, safety, . rid r pedestrians. 7. The adjoining neighbor is agreeable to 8. The front of her home faces Ca 9. There are many other h• the � ity that have a 6' fence. 10. A 6' fence will a•• safety relating to the swimming pool and her large dog. 11. Snow durin inter months will reduce the height of the fence. 12. A 6' fence should be allowed because of the trail along side the home. 13. There is no natural buffering in place. The Council expressed concern regarding the safety of a 6' fence. Staff advised a 6' fence will be less safe than a 4' fence. The Police Department was unable to comment on the safety issue without visiting the site. Council also expressed concern regarding the adjoining property owner. If the adjoining property is sold, the new owner may not be agreeable to a 6' fence. Council Member Lyden moved to approve variance as requested. Council Member Dahl seconded the motion.