Laserfiche WebLink
1 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING <br /> 2 OCTOBER 8 , 1991 <br /> 3 PAGE 10 <br /> 4 <br /> 5 <br /> 6 <br /> 7 request . The height of this fence was of some concern to <br /> 8 members of the City Council and of the Planning <br /> 9 Commission . They felt this could become a trend if it <br /> 10 were not specifically addressed in a fence ordinance. <br /> 11 <br /> 12 To avoid any further concern with this matter, the City <br /> 13 Attorney added to the amendment of Section 340 . 10 an <br /> 14 exception for height for only that which is affixed to a <br /> 15 deck and is measured from the elevation of the raised <br /> 16 deck . He felt this exception would control heights of <br /> 17 fences which run the length of the property. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 The City Attorney also addressed hardships on variances <br /> 20 and .the criteria which must be met . The conditions for <br /> 21 finding hardships are addressed by State statute. He <br /> 22 noted that some City Councils interpret hardships as <br /> 23 inconveniences . During the last Legislative Session a <br /> 24 bill was introduced to relax the definition. The bill <br /> -25 failed . <br /> 26 <br /> 27 It was the opinion of the City Attorney that the <br /> 28 interpretation should be kept rather narrow for fence <br /> 29 heights and a provision should be added to the fence <br /> 30 ordinance which allowed for "special permits . " <br /> 31 <br /> 32 Mayor Ranallo referred to the Preussner situation which <br /> 33 granted a variance due to the problems experienced in the <br /> 34 back portion of the lot . The City Attorney felt it i-s <br /> 35 important to recognize something unusual or unique before <br /> 36 granting a variance. <br /> 37 <br /> 38 Motion by Marks , second by Wagner to approve the first <br /> 39 reading of Ordinance No. 1991-007 being an ordinance <br /> 40 pertaining to fences which are constructed as part of a <br /> 41 raised deck; amending Section 340 ..10 , Subd. 10 of the <br /> 42 1973 Code of Ordinances . <br /> 43 <br /> 44 <br /> 45 Motion carried unanimously <br /> 46 <br /> 47 <br /> 48 The City Manager advised the Council that some thought is <br /> 49 being given to a request of the J.C. Penney Company at Apache <br /> 50 Shopping Center to include their name on the sign at the <br /> 51 Center which now exclusively used by Herberger ' s . <br /> 52 <br /> 53 Councilmember Wagner recalled that Apache agreed to the sign <br /> 54 on a one-time only use basis . It was felt that to include another <br />