My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-06-10-PC
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2010-2019
>
PC Packets 2010
>
01-06-10-PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2015 9:18:25 AM
Creation date
1/5/2010 1:26:28 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
134
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
visible on the Maloneys' side. See our photos #3 [Exh. A] and #4 [Exh. D] showing color <br />variation, knots, and screw heads all visible on the Maloneys' side. <br />The 1x6 and 1x8 fence boards were upgraded to "clear" cedar (i.e., no knots), and are all <br />"rough -sawn" on both sides. The "good" side of all boards was installed facing the <br />Schneiders' property. Where there were any blemishes, the blemished side was installed <br />facing the Maloneys' property, except for three installed in error with the better side <br />facing the Maloneys. The builder was asked by city staff to reverse them, and he did so <br />right away. We don't know what the complaint re "no structural supports showing" on <br />our side of the fence means. There are three horizontal cross -members on all fence <br />panels on both sides of the fence. See enclosed photos. It looks identical on both sides. <br />4) All fence footings were inspected by city staff to examine their placement in relation <br />to the property line. They determined that concrete from four of the footings had <br />extended closer to the property line than it did everywhere else. They asked the builder <br />to remove the extra material at those four posts. It was removed by the builder the very <br />next day and verified by city staff. No part of the fence or footings encroaches on the <br />Schneiders' property. The fence itself is set back six inches inside the Maloneys' <br />property. See our photo #5 [Exh. E] showing the east end of the fence set back six inches <br />from the red survey stake. The same setback of six inches was applied along the entire <br />property boundary, following a string -line the builder established at the outset. Our <br />photo #6 [Exh. E] is a less successful attempt to show the west end of the fence clear of <br />the survey marker; a tree unfortunately impeded my access when attempting this shot. In <br />any case, the Schneiders' claim of continued encroachment is a canard left over from <br />their earlier claim to a 300 foot strip of our land. Even after we paid for a survey (see <br />enclosed surveyor's invoice [Exh. F]) to establish the true property line, they refused to <br />accept the results and vandalized the markers placed by the surveyor. That's when we <br />retained legal counsel. See enclosed copies of correspondence between Mr. Schneider <br />and our attorney [Exh. H, 5 pages] . <br />5) The footings were purposely installed with a little concrete above ground, sloping <br />away from the posts on all sides to enhance drainage and prevent rotting where they meet <br />the ground. Rotting of fence posts is a common occurrence when the top of concrete <br />footings is level with the ground or below grade, thus allowing soil to make contact with <br />them or rainwater to pool around them. See quote from cedar experts in # 12 below about <br />needing to avoid contact with the ground. <br />6) The zoning regulations governing the building of fences in Arden Hills were sent to us <br />by James Lehnhoff on July 18, 2007. They stipulate that fences in side or rear yards may <br />not exceed six feet. In good faith, we ordered pre-cut six-foot board lengths and had our <br />builder proceed to install them. Note that the lumber invoice [Exh. B] lists 269 pieces of <br />1 x6x6' clear cedar. These were used as the vertical members of all the fence sections. <br />Only the posts exceeded six feet, to enable them to be sunk in the ground; but once <br />installed, all of them were cut off at the six-foot mark, too, at the request of city staff <br />because of the Schneiders' complaints about the fence extending higher than six feet. <br />The fence itself does not exceed 6 feet in height anywhere. <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.