12/18/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, N, that was correct. He further explained that the Gate Company tried to talk to the neighbor and explain that the fence would be an improvement for them as well. Mr. M. Conway felt that if they allowed one resident to go against code it forces the board to allow it for everyone. Mr. Mortach felt that due to the circumstances he should be allowed to have the fence for esthetic reasons as well as safety reasons. The chainlink fence is very old and rusted and he is concerned for his 8-year-old daughter. Mr. Engoglia suggested that the applicant could abut his vinyl fence up to the chainlink and then paint the chainlink. Mr. Mortach voiced that he was against the suggestion as the chainlink fence is in such disrepair and needed to be replaced. Bui9ding Department Comanents: Mr. D. Conway reviewed that the main concern of the City regarding two fences is that neither fence can be maintained. The City would also like to see the neighbors work together and cooperate with one another. In this instance, the neighbor is reluctant to remove or allow the removal of a section of fence, which is obviously in dubious condition. A representative from the Gate Company is present and has stated that there are two clips, which will allow 8- foot sections to be removed. The applicant has agreed to submit a letter to the Building Department stating that if the rear neighbor wants to paint and maintain their fence he will remove the required sections of fence to allow that to take place. Furthermore, he would remove sections of the fence if the City needs to have access to the sewer system at the rear of his yard. 1VIr. D. Conway further explained to the board that any judgement rendered on this case has no bearings on any future case heard. There are special circumstances to this request. The fence in question addresses each of the Cities concerns. The fence can easily be maintained and the City will have access if needed. If this request was for a board on board or chainlink fence, the coinmission would have, grounds to refuse the request as it could not be properly maintained. Boards Comrr?ents and Questions: Mr. TVI. Conway felt that if the lady were spoken to again one on one in a gentleman like manor she would allow the rusted old fence to be removed. Mr. Mortach voiced that he was polite and that the owner in question was adamantly against the vinyl fence. He suggested that the concerns of the City are the fence being maintained and access to the drainage system is available. This vinyl fence comes apart in 4-foot sections, which allows the ability to maintain the fence as well as gives the City access to the drainage system. Mr. Althen questioned if the applicant's fence would cover the neighbors entire rear property. Mr. Mortach stated that the vinyl fence would span the entire length of Mrs. Comodeca's backyard and then some. Neighbors questeons and comments: leTote: Mrs. Comodeca the neighbor in question arrived at the meeting. Mrs. Comodeca read aloud a letter she submitted stating that she and her husband are against the fence. They feel that the vinyl fence does not go with the neighborhood, will block the sun from their garden and believe that their property value will decrease if the fence is allowed. They are concerned about the drainage system, which runs the length of the rear property, and do not want to see the trees damaged by the fence. Mr. Engoglia voiced that the fence would not interfere with the drainage system. Trees on Mrs. Comodeca's property are not the responsibility of the applicant. Mrs. Comodeca indicated that the trees are on Mr. Mortach property. Mr. Puzznttiello questioned what Mrs. Comodeca was going to do to address the poor condition of her chain link fence. The fence is in need of serious maintenance it should be painted at the least. Mrs. Comodeca suggested that there is no problem with the state of her fence and she 2