11/15/1988 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.e Minutes of Public Hearing 11/15/88 -3- of .course, 'at keeps the kids out"; the other one is "it keeps them in". This is particularly true of corner lots but again we can't handle everyth3.ng in a law and your Board of Zoning Appeals has been workiag;. they have done, in my opinion, a reputable Sob in solving some of these problems, with some exceptions. Recently, we've had very few legal cases but to devote too much time to this particular fence problem is amazing to me. And again, I'm amazed that in con- sidering it, it wasn't at least sent by to us for our comments, which could have been helpful to you. Again, I recommend that this be turned over to the committee that meets tomorrow night, where it will get a full bearing and the experience of everybody involved, including those who are not in the city. That's all I have. Saringer: Thank you, Mr. Remsu'1. I really appreciate you taking your valuable time to come up and give us this- information. I was going to bring this very subject up. I recall, many years ago, and I.believe I served an the BZI? Cos~aittee at the time, when we increasesd the hsgfht frcam four,. to five feet and at that time, I know that council was vehemently opposed to anything higher than €ive feet. I wondered why this sudden change so I, too, am not aware of all these uses. Maybe Mr. Tallon has some more background. Tallon: No. I just wanted. to answer Mr. Rewoael a little bit, to calm his fears. We hed no intentions of making this go through fast or anything. That's why it hasn't even been in committee yet. You would have been called - your committee would have been called to go to our BRD Committee Meeting on it. So would the . Planning Commission if they so chose. We also had some citizens that are con- cerned about it and they wanted to come to a meeting on it and.so we weren't rushing this through at all. Once it is introduced, it has to follow it's course and this is it's Public Hearing so it has to be on a Public Hearing but no, by no means were we taking this lightly at all and a full hearing is going to be held at the .next BZD Meeting. Saringer: I would like to point out that this was referred to Planning Commission on Qctcaber 5th and appr~ted pm:Qctober 11th but I wholeheartedly agree with you, Mr. Rempel, gaing~ back to these day~t: you kn~aw, I am opposed. to it and I would hope that council would really - I certainly don't want to ~Qe a city of fences and .that is just exactly what we discussed many years ago -high fences. Remmel: I think the Planning Commission's approval sh©uld be looked into. On what basis did they give their approval. Saringer: That will be done at the RZA,Gommttee; they w~.ll take all.. those things into consideration at the cv~ti,ttee hearing, Mr. Rem+sel.. McKay: Yes. There is no 3.ntent of rushing it through, however, I do feel that I am the fellow that introduced this and it was not because i.just felt like it should be done. I had numerous complaints and also, there have been six foot fences put up, where it was required that they bring it back to five. foot, but the top of the fence has been sawed off and I don't think anything looks any uglier than six foot fence, sawed down to five feet. Also, there is more need for privacy as your city gets more populated and I think a six foot fence can give this privacy. There is privacy from children; there is privacy from animals; we have a six foot fence for a swim~a$ pool = that is a requirment already. in place. Nobody has any problem with that so I think and I feel that if you want to put your backyard in a six foot fence, that there should be no problem with it. Remmel: Mr. McKay, may I address that for a minute? Saringer: Go ahead, Mr. Remmel.