CCP 06-08-1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the 1\rden Hills Regular Planning Ocmnission Meeting, 6-03-92 . Page 9 ~E #92-11 (CONT'D): It was suggested that Ranallo provide the information prior to Council action on this matter or a request that action on the matter be delayed until receipt of the information relating to the fence. Acting Clerk Administrator Catherine Iago suggested Mr-. Ranallo contact Mary Bierenger at MnDOr obtain sound wall and decibel informatiol) as a guideline. Member Barbara piotrowski left the meeting at 9:05 p.m. ~E #92-08: V1IRI1'IN::E. 1717 PARKSIICRE DRIVE #1112. DLUGOSCH: Planner Bergly review his report dated 6-03-92, relating to the variance request to allow a 6 foot fenced wall in a residential side yard (2 1/2 foot variance for solid wall or a variance from the 30 percent open requirement), 1717 parksh=e Drive #1112, James Dlugosch. Bergly explained the applicant proposes a variance to allow a 6 foot solid wall along a side property line. '!he fence would be setback 40 feet from the street and will extend south 64 feet; the top of the wall will be 107 feet and the ground at the base will be 101 feet. '!he very south end of the wall will be . approximately 11 feet high. '!he Planner reviewed the findings listed in his report and stated a City trail is located immediately east of the applicants property. '!he proposed pool in the rear yard of the proposed house would be exposed to trail users without a solid fence. Bergly stated the applicant feels that privacy from the trail is linportant and neither a 42" wall or a 30 percent open fence allowed up to 6 feet high would provide the desired privacy. '!he applicant also feels the trail is an amenity but would like privacy, tea. ]3ergly indicated the land use east of the trail is higher density residential and a buffer between single family and higher densities is considered appropriate. '!he usable site area on the lot is limited due to the sloping rear yard and full utilization of the upper portion is proposed. '!he Planner also indicated the nearest townhomes are approximately 150 feet east of the trail easement and will not be irrpacted by the solid fence. Neither air circulation or light as specified in the Ordinance provision requiring 30 percent openness in a fence are issues due to proximity. Planner Bergly explained the trail easement is 35 feet wide and will provide ample space for air circulation and the 64 foot long wall does not irrpact a portion of the trail. '!he wetland on the south end of the lot will not be affected by the wall. '!he Planner concluded to reconune.nd approval of the variance and stated 3 reasons why it is appropriate: . -