Agenda Packets - 2000/05/22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council May 8, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 22 forward. He inquired if it would be possible to allow the fence as a temporary structure, and to incorporate some rapidly growing shrubs as a more permanent means to resolve this situation. Mayor Co ughlin advised that due to the relative permanence of a fence, it should probably be viewed as a permanent entity. Planning Associate Ericson stated this was correct. He advised that the request before the Council was not the consideration of an interim use permit or and conditional use permit, but rather, the granting of the variance to allow for the fence. He explained that at some point in the future, staff would likely come back before the Council with an ordinance that would allow for a different forms of redress for property owners through the conditional or interim use permit, however, that is not the case at this point, due to the timing of this matter. Council Member Marty inquired what would occur if one or both of these property owners were to move in the future, and the 8-foot fence was still present. Planning Associate Ericson stated the property owner might desire to remove the fence. Council Member Quick advised that the fence would be the property of the owner of the property upon which it is located, and it would be up to that individual to determine what to do with the fence. Mayor Coughlin inquired if the Code requires that fences be constructed no closer than one-foot from the property line. Planning Associate Ericson stated the Code simply indicates that a fence may not be constructed upon the property line. Council Member Stigney stated this property owner has certainly demonstrated her need for privacy, and it is evident that she has experienced some problems. He stated he would be pleased to grant her request for a fence, at least on an interim basis. He explained that if the fence were permitted because of the specific conditions that exists, and those conditions should cease, he would not see a need for maintaining that type of deviation from the Code. He suggested the Council stipulate that the matter be reevaluated at such time as the situation changes. Council Member Stigney indicated the necessity for proceeding with this matter has been documented to be the result of problems with a neighboring property. He advised that there are currently no administrative penalties for all of the Police calls that have been made to this property. He indicated that in attempts to resolve the issue through the courts, it might not be viewed as a significant problem, in light of all of the other very serious crimes that occur. He advised that Mounds View should establish some form of administrative policy as a penalty action for repeated calls to the same location for the purpose of dealing with the same types of problems. He explained that this would assist to address such problems in the future, in terms of generating administrative penalties for repeated calls.. Mayor Coughlin stated this was a good point, and although not necessarily germane to the motion, it would be in order to request the consent of the Council to direct staff to research this, after the Council deals with the motion on the Floor. Council Member Quick requested City Attorney Long advise regarding this matter.