10/04/1999 Park Board Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board September 8, 1999 Page 3 the Zoning Ordinance and explained the Ordinance prohibits the construction of a six foot fence from the setback line of the adjoining home on Holly Drive and also along Holly Drive to the front of the house. The Ordinance would allow a fence of no more than four feet in height. Ms. Wyland explained that in reviewing this variance request, staff reviewed the Anoka County site /distance guidelines which, if used in considering this request, would support the intent of the Ordinance requirement limiting the fence height to four feet. She stated staff also considered the variance requirements and have concluded that a variance to allow a six -foot privacy fence in this location would not meet the required Findings of Fact. Ms. Wyland noted the adjoining hobby farm and possible compromise to allow the construction of a six foot high fence on the rear property line to match the existing six foot fence on the east side of 1101 Holly Drive which was constructed to screen the Trappers Crossing Development from 1101 Holly Drive. However, staff would not support a six -foot fence within the County site /distance triangle. Ms. Wyland presented pictures submitted by the a that in all cases, the fences depicted meet Code Schaps was unable to attend tonight but did s for staff's recommendation of denial base . ., • n five criteria necessary for a variance. Ch that granting a variance would confer � Ms to other landowners similarly situa t of other fences and clarified . She advised that Chair memorandum indicating his support onale the request does not meet the so indicated in his memorandum a privilege which has been denied Upon inquiry, Ms. Wyland st is above ground and does not require fencing. Mr. Schilling asked if the reco fence. Ms. Wyland stated that wo ld be an option since it would not restrict visibility within that location. ation within the site triangle was a four -foot high Ms. Carlson asked about the location of the trail. Ms. Wyland stated it was within the right -of -way of Holly Drive and remains debatable as to which side it would be constructed. Acting Chair Lane stated she sees some privacy issues depending on the location of the trail. Sue Walseth, applicant, presented a site plan of her property and proposed fence location. She noted the distance of that location to the traffic is 70 feet and the fence location is not abutting the corner of the property. She stated that the intersection contains a stop sign and a clear view would be present with a six -foot high fence. Ms. Walseth stated the adjoining property is at an elevation of 914 feet with a large ditch. She stated her fence would be one foot lower than the hill and she would prefer the side fence, if she had to