12/02/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, J. Konold motioned to grant Kurt Dunlap of 29275 Hastings Dr. his request for variance (1123.12). . ? Which consists of a shed and that the following variance be granted: A variance to build a shed in the side-yard, (code prohibits sheds in side-yard). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1135.03 dl). The motion was seconded by T. Koberna and Unanimously approved. Variance Granted. 2. Clark Merrill: 3580 Hunter Dr. Request for variance (1123.12). Proposal consists of a fence. The following variance is requested: A variance to erect a 6-foot high board on board fence, in the required front setback. Fence extends 13 feet 4 uiches into the required front setback of his home and the first house on the abutting side street. Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1135.02 F1). Which prohibits any fence higher than 30 inches and less than 50% open in a required front setback between the front building line and the street line. Note: Fence has already been constructed without a pernut. Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties forward and reviewed the variance being requested. Mr. Merrill, the owner and Ms. Wood, a neighbor came forward to review the request. Mr. Gomersall commented that the current request had been before the Board on September 10, 1998 and questioned if there had been any changes made to the request since the last meetina. Mr. IVlerrill commented that the difference was that he was unable to attend the last meeting and that the two friends that did attend the meeting on his behalf were unable to clearly explain his needs. He presented a list of signatures from his neighbors indicating the fence did not offend them. He reviewed that the fence that he replaced was dilapidating, to the point of needing replaced. He and his neighbor split the cost of the existulg fence and worked together putting it in place. Mr. Merrill remarked that he had a very small backyard and the house is located on a corner. He is concerned for his children's safety. Mr. Gomersall commented that he as well as the other Board Members had been to the site and saw the fence. He questioned why the existing fence was not lowered to the 4-foot height that was granted on September 10, 1998, and July of 1994. He further commented that there was no reason the fence should extend past the edge of the home. Mr. Merrill reiterated that he needed the fence to be 6 foot high so that his children could not climb over the fence. If the fence is cut down too 4-foot the children will just climb over it and get out of the yard. All he did was replace an old fence that was there when he purchased the home, he is just trying to improve his property as well as the properties surrounding his home. 1VIr. Gomersall indicated that just because a fence had been there previously, does not make it O.K. to just put up a new fence without a permit, especially since the fence is encroaching upon his neighbors 50 foot setback. Mr. Merrill commented that the owner in which his fence encroaches upon signed the petition. Mr. Merrill indicated that he was willing to work with the City as far as paying penalties or things of that nature. Mr. Gomersall remarked that if Mr. Merrill was willing to work with the City, then he should cut the fence to a 4-foot height and end it at the edge of the house so that it is not infringing on anybody's property. Mr. Merrill indicated that the fence was already in place and if the fence was moved and the height lowered there would not be any play area for his children. Mr. Gomersall indicated that if the fence ended at the edge of the home there would still be room for a play area. Mr. Merrill remarked that there was an addition on the back of the home so the play area is smaller then what it looks on the site plan. If the fence was cut to a lower height the cars pulling into the development would be able to .see into his home and yard. Mr. Gomersall commented that Mr. Merrill was avoiding his suggestion to have the 6 foot fence end at the edge of the home. Mr. Merrill commented that he understood what the chairman was suggesting but he did not want to lose the play area. Ms. Wood, a neighbor, indicated that she did not see how the fence intruded. Mr. Gomersall indicated that the fence was intruding the neighbors home not the 2