07-02-2013 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES July 02, 2013 Page 7 of 12 MOTION: Council Member Smith moved TO APPROVE 085A AS AMENDED ADDING PRIVACY FENCE EXCEPTIONS FOR STREET FRONT/STREET BACK PROPERTIES AND HOT TUB SCREENING IN PREVIOUS CODE. The motion did not receive a second. MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND. Mr. Pearson noted that other cities do not have problems. Ms. Park asked if current code has any language addressing lot size. Mr. Klatt stated that it does not. Mr. Pearson asked that those who oppose the expansion go view problem properties. Ms. Smith said it is inappropriate that one example of a problem property would be used. She stated that that one person could obtain variance. Ms. Smith noted that she is appalled that this item was brought up again after the past work. Mr. Nelson reiterated that he is in favor of property rights and it is evident that there are people who want to have 6ft fences, it is not appropriate to tell them what to do with their property. Jay Johnson rebutted that claim by noting that it seems contradictory to tell people what they can and cannot do with their properties when it comes to problem properties, but not with fences. Mr. Nelson stated that health and safety reasons allow the city to make the distinction. MOTION: Council Member Pearson moved TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 08-085 AS PRESENTED. Council Member Nelson seconded the motion. MOTION FAILS 3-2 (SMITH AND PARK - NAY). LACK OF REQUIRED 4/5 SUPERMAJORITY. Mr. Nelson explained that the fence needs to be fixed. Ms. Smith asked that the old code be cleaned up and not gutted. She has problem with the process it has come up. City Attorney Snyder reminded the council that they are entitled to individual views, however agreement may never take place so Council may want to focus on other areas. Mr. Pearson disagrees with the backhanded accusation. Ms. Smith denied using that language and restated her desire to have had the Planning Commission review the proposal and find another option. Ms. Park offered to amend Mr. Nelson’s motion by adopting the proposed ordinance but leaving the current height language. Mayor Pearson said that the amendment was not closely related enough to be an amendment. Mr. Bloyer asked for a compromise. MOTION: Council Member Nelson moved TO ELIMINATE CURRENT FENCE ORDINANCE IN ITS ENTIRETY. Council Member Bloyer seconded the motion. MOTION FAILS 3-2. (SMITH AND PARK – NAY). LACK OF REQUIRED 4/5 SUPERMAJORITY. Mr. Klatt noted that the options were to send back to Planning Commission; give direction to Planning Commission; or pass something tonight. It is only a part of a much larger zoning rewrite. Mr. Snyder noted the option of variances and certificate of compliance. Ms. Park wants to again make her motion.