Laserfiche WebLink
Item No: 6 <br />Meeting Date: June 15, 2005 <br />Type of Business: Public Hearing <br />City of Mounds View Staff Report <br /> <br />To: Mounds View Planning Commission <br />From: Jim Ericson, Community Development Director <br />Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance to Allow <br />a Six-Foot Tall Fence in the Front Yard of 5290 <br />Pinewood Court; Planning Case VR2005-006 <br />Introduction: <br /> <br />The applicants, Shawn and Stephanie Young, are requesting a variance to replace an <br />existing non-conforming fence in the front yard of their property located at 5290 Pinewood <br />Court. The property is located at the northeast corner of County Road H2 and Pinewood <br />Court. By virtue of bordering on two streets, the corner lot has two frontages. The Zoning <br />Code indicates that no fence in front of the front line of a building in a residential district may <br />exceed four feet in height. The existing privacy fence has deteriorated to the point where it is <br />beyond repair. The applicants would like to replace the existing six-foot tall privacy fence, <br />which acts as a buffer and screen from County Road H2, and thus have applied for the <br />variance. <br /> <br />Discussion: <br /> <br />According to the Municipal Code, Section 1103.08, Subdivision 3, fences of a height greater <br />than 48 inches (4 feet) are not allowed in the front yard of a property. The site plan attached <br />to this report depicts the existing fence location and the location of where the fence would be <br />if consistent with City Code. The Zoning Code also establishes a sight triangle that limits all <br />obstructions within the area at the corner of intersections, measured thirty (30) feet from the <br />point where the property lines meet at the intersection of two streets. The proposed fence <br />would not be located within the sight triangle. <br /> <br />Variance Considerations: <br /> <br />For this variance to be approved, as with any variance request, there needs to be <br />demonstrated substantial hardship or practical difficulties associated with the property that <br />makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property <br />owner. State statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission) review a <br />set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these <br />criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The <br />Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The individual <br />criteria are as follows: <br /> <br />a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply <br />generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, <br />topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective <br />date hereof have had no control. <br /> <br />The property at 5290 Pinewood Court is a corner lot, which is not in itself unique, <br />however the applicants seek permission to replace an existing fence for the purpose of <br />continued privacy and screening. <br />