Laserfiche WebLink
<br />understood the need for the fenee on the side because of the apartment driveway,. <br />but was concerned about the fence in .front. Mre Conway clarified that fences in <br />the front setback should be 50% open for visibility of people coming down the <br />sidewalk, and he is concerned for'safEty. Mr. Sharp, a neighbor, was sworn in at <br />this time. Mr. Reis er.plained that there was an extra 10 feet of right of way on <br />his property so the fence would be 10 feet from the sidewalk. Mr. Conway advised <br />that this right of way could always be v.sed for a right hand turn lane later on. <br />He would like a fence set back about 10 foot from the property line so tha,t a <br />driver could see a child on the sidewalk. Mr. Reis stated that he would be <br />willing to tear the fence down if a turning lane were constructed. Mr. Sharp <br />stated that Mr.. Reis has improved his property and he came to the meeting to <br />support his request, he stated that many people in the area have let their <br />property go because of recent changes. Again, Mr. Reis offered to agree to remove <br />the fence if the other lane is constructeda The members discussed the plans and <br />agreed that if the fence were placed about 11 foot from the northern edge of the <br />sidewalk for the present and if he would agreed to remove if the right of way is <br />used the variance could be granted. T. Koberna moved to grant the request of <br />Gilbert Reis, 25346 Butternut Ridge Road, for a variance to place 6 to 8 foot <br />fence in 75 foot corner lot setback and a solid fence no taller than 30 inches in <br />the front sghich nust be a minimun of. 11. foot from the north edge of the present <br />sidewalk extending to the center line of the fence. Mr. Reis is aware that he <br />will have to move the fence back if indeed the right of way is used for thE <br />widening of the road, seconded by R. Gomersall, and unanimously approved. <br />Variances granted. <br />Several mambers cannot attend the meeting an June 2nd, and it was decided to hold <br />the meeting on June 3rd. <br />Mr. Conway advised that the variance for the Frankie's sign was for 3 foot back <br />fran the right of way, but it is actually 2 foot 6 inches because of a retention <br />pipe tmder the ground and it could not be placed back further. The members ha.d no <br />problem with it. <br />Mr. Conway stated that monument signs on the entry into subdivisions used to be <br />double faced and on an island in the center of the drive, now developers are <br />putting in single sided signs on either side so they can be seen coming from <br />either directiono He is going to treat these as one sign since the visibility is <br />the same. <br />14r. Gomersall stated that the Nlayor would like some participation at the city <br />tent at the Homecoming. Mr. Maloney suggested that it would be a good idea to <br />have representation at various times during the day and put this information on <br />the program. Law Director Gareau did not believe that a quasi-judicial board <br />should be expected to. give advice at such a i-unction. <br />The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. <br />7