Laserfiche WebLink
^-r <br />'■'k <br />Application Date: 3/21/00 <br />Completion Date: 3/21/00 <br />60 Day Deadline: 5/19/00 <br />60 day Extension: 7/18/00 <br />COIIMCIL MEETING <br />JUL 1 0 2000 <br />cu Y or UnUHO <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Department Approval: <br />Name Wendy Bottenberg <br />Title Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner <br />Item Description: <br />Administrator Reviewed: <br />DATE: 7/6/00 <br />ITEM NO.: if <br />Agenda Section: <br />Zoning <br />#2574 Tom Micheletti <br />519 Femdale Road North <br />Variance <br />Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) <br />Lot Area: 106,105 s.f. (2.43 acre) <br />List of Exhibits: <br />A Resolution <br />B Letter to Applicant <br />C Notice of Planning Commission Action <br />D Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting (4/17/2000) <br />E Staff Report and Exhibits of 4/17/2000 <br />Application: The applicant seeks approval of a height variance for a 9' privacy fence to be <br />constructed on the property to within 6-7' of the side lot line. As the fence exceeds the allowed 6' <br />height, the code requires that it meet the 30' side yard setback. The proposed fence will be <br />constructed of cedar slats and a metal gate on the street side of the house and wire with turn-buckles <br />on the west side of the house. The fence is proposed to be 9' high to match with the eave height of <br />the house. The property is fairly isolated with neighboring properties being a golf course and DNR <br />protected land. The applicant has designated on the survey the area where the fence will be located. <br />The requested variance is to allow a 9 foot fence where 6 feet is allowed. <br />• Section 10.03, Subd. IS (C): Non-Encroachments: Fences. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION: <br />The Planning Commission recommended by a 3 to 2 vote to: <br />Deny the application based on the following; <br />1. No hardship inherit in the land to build a higher than allowed fence. <br />2. The concern about preventing deer from approaching the home and affecting the gardens, as well <br />as the location adjacent to a natural area is not a unique or unusual circumstance that Justifies the <br />variance. <br />3. Planning Commission expressed concern about the possible precedent setting aspect of the <br />request, although it was noted that no neighboring properties would be impacted.