My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-07-2011 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
2010's
>
2011
>
06-07-2011 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/17/2025 8:25:49 PM
Creation date
8/1/2017 12:00:45 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 7, 2011 2 <br /> <br />Draft Amendment to Fence Ordinance – Ordinance No. 08-044 & Resolution 2011-021 <br /> <br />The City Council was requested to review the ordinance that was drafted to allow solid <br />fences up to 72 inches in height through lots where the rear yard is adjacent to high traffic <br />roadways under certain circumstances. <br /> <br />Planner Klatt reported that on May 3, 2011 the City Council directed staff to draft an <br />ordinance amending the fence code to allow solid fences to be constructed up to 72 <br />inches in height for those lot lines abutting major roadways on through (double frontage) <br />lots. Option A allows solid fences in the rear yards of through lots that abut roads <br />classified as a principal arterial (such as Highway 36) and A minor arterial (such as <br />Manning Avenue South of Highway 5) or a B minor arterial (Lake Elmo Avenue between <br />Highway 5 and 10th Street). <br /> <br />The Planning Commission reviewed the draft ordinance, held a public hearing and <br />provided a recommendation that included amendments to the draft ordinance (Option B) <br />allowing a solid fence to be constructed up to 72 inches in height along those same <br />roadways previously identified, but also when it is a side or corner yard. The <br />Commission found that if screening fences were allowed on through lots that abut major <br />roadways, then it should also be acceptable to allow such fences along corner lots that are <br />located adjacent to the fence ordinance. <br /> <br />Planner Klatt also pointed out that a fence cannot be erected in the OHWM in the <br />shoreland overlay district. <br /> <br />A resident spoke in support of the ordinance, but stated that he would like to be able to <br />extend a solid fence to all sides of his lot. He suggested reducing the variance fee for <br />fence variances. <br /> <br />Council Member Smith pointed out the fence would look very odd if the third leg of the <br />fence is not the same size as the overall fence. <br /> <br />MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to approve Ordinance No. 08-044A as <br />recommended by the Planning Department except for (c) on page 5 until a diagram is <br />received describing (c). Council Member Park seconded the motion. <br /> <br />MOTION: Mayor Johnston moved to amend the motion by reinserting (c) as proposed <br />by staff. Council Member Pearson seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-1(Council <br />Member Smith voting against.) <br /> <br />MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to approve Ordinance No. 08-044A as <br />recommended by the Planning Department and Resolution No. 2011-021 for publication. <br />Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-1. (Council Member <br />Smith voted against). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.