Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />March 25, 2008 <br />Page 2 <br />2 <br />11 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 IV <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 V. <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />B. Consider licenses and permits. <br />C. Consider payment of claims. <br />Motion by Councilmember Gray, seconded by Councilmember Thuesen, to approve the Consent <br />Agenda items. <br />Motion carried unanimously. <br />PUBLIC HEARING. <br />None. <br />REPORTS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF. <br />A. Resolution 08-023; Variance to Fence Height for 2916 Silver Lake Court. <br />Planning Commissioner Kim Goodwin stated last week at the Planning Commission meeting the <br />Commission reviewed the request for a variance to fence height for 2916 Silver Lake Court. The <br />Council and Mayor have been provided with the staff report on the property. She explained due <br />to the proximity to Silver Lake Road, this property is affected by lighting from the businesses <br />and the noise from Silver Lake Road. The owners of the property were present at the Planning <br />Commission meeting and discussed the need they feel to construct an 8 -foot high fence; the <br />current fence is at 7 feet. All but one member of the Planning Commission were present and the <br />resolution was unanimously approved. <br />Councilmember Stille asked if there was any opposition to the variance request. <br />Ms. Goodwin replied there were no members present in the audience that voiced any opposition. <br />There was discussion by the Commission about the rationale and the concern from the applicant <br />about the light from nearby businesses. There were no principal concerns expressed. The <br />Commission recognized there may be similar requests brought forward from neighboring <br />properties, and it was noted that there is a neighboring property that already has an 8 -foot fence. <br />Councilmember Stille asked if there was any discussion about addressing the request for the <br />fence in a different way than a variance, such as crafting an ordinance for certain lots in <br />proximity to streets like Silver Lake Road. <br />Ms. Goodwin replied she had considered this, but does not recall any specific discussion to that <br />point. <br />Mr. David Johnson, applicant, addressed the Council and thanked Ms. Goodwin for her overview <br />of the situation. He stated essentially they wanted to replace the aging fence in the back of their <br />lot, which is 7 feet, and they found there is an ordinance in place that restricts fences to 6 feet. <br />They felt reducing the size of the fence would be unacceptable. They are on a very busy road to <br />the back of their house and the lighting from the businesses has a lot of effect at night. They feel <br />a higher fence would continue to shield that. He explained a 7 foot fence would almost double <br />