11-25-1985 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Admi.istrato `;JJ DATE: Hovember 21, 1985 3UBJE"T: Application #986/George Rovegno I_N"TRODUCTION - As you will recall George Rovegno constructed a 5 foot fence in its present location during one of the first weekends in May of 1985. He maintains today that it is an appropriate and legal structure under our code. After a review of our ordinances and our practice we presented a memo to Council in June regarding interpretation and intent and the direction at that time was that ,.ip to a 3 1/2 foot, fence woul i oe al lowed in the 0-'15 without a variance. Subsequent to that the propperty owner felt he still wanted to have a five foot fence on the property and we indicated to him that in order to do that a variance application would be required. Pe felt that he had oroperly constructed the fence, that he Jid not need to come in or, an application. We indicated to him at trat point that if he did not come in that we would issue a ticket. He finally agreed to submit an application, althc—h the application is not cl(:ar as to whether he wanted to hay- IL treated -!s an appeal or a variance. Staff initially treated it and brouiht it to the Planning Comr,ission as an appeal since he felt h:s fence was legal and it was their considered opinion that. in fact he would need a variance to allow a fence of lip t,) rive feet within the 0- 7 5. The applicant then requested ;hat it be converted to a variance application. Because of the need to republish for variance anti the fact we were riot able to meet appropriate deadlines thi " had to oe delayed from September to the October Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission then considered the variance and on a 4 to 1 votc voted to deny it. It was then taken to the Council at its October 28th meeting at which time the Council on a 3 to 1 vote gave conceptual approval to allow a 44 inch fence in its present location, with the first 30 feet from the access be only to a height of 30 inches. At the 4ovember 12t, meeting staff presented to the Council the draft resolution to permit such a fence to exist with a 2 inch variance for height together with a vari,iace to al low accessory structure on a parcel of land that does not support a primary structure. During considLrati-n of this several objections from the neighborhoou w^re raised regarding allowance of this fence and in the abserjoe of Mr. hovegno the Gounc i 1 decided to table the issue until the November 25th meeting. After giving i-aff direction to inform Mr. Rovegno teat he need pay the appropriate after the fact variance fee .or his application, together with inclusion of a hold harmless agreement as a ,ondition for granting the variance, I.3SUE:>