My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2024_0408
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2024
>
CC_Minutes_2024_0408
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2024 1:22:02 PM
Creation date
5/7/2024 1:22:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
4/8/2024
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,April 8,2024 <br /> Page 2 <br /> particular item, such as a shorter fence, how much time would the applicant have <br /> to wait before coming back with a different variance request. <br /> Ms. Gundlach indicated she did not believe the applicant would have to wait any <br /> particular time. The applicant would just have to make the application and it <br /> would be considered a different request. <br /> Chair Roe welcomed the representative from the appealing party to speak to the <br /> Board of Appeals and Adjustments. <br /> Mr. Michael Pate, representing Amarok Ultimate Perimeter Security, reviewed <br /> the type of device that is being requested for the variance. <br /> Member Etten indicated he was struggling with why Mr. Pate is saying that this is <br /> not a fence. If it is something that is ten feet tall and has wires running across it, <br /> he wondered why it is not considered a fence. <br /> Mr. Pate explained it does not meet the definition of a fence. The property line is <br /> not delineated, it is non-scalable and is not a fence. It is basically suspended wires <br /> that run the alarm with a deterrent, which is a pulse, and a shock. <br /> Member Etten explained without looking up the City's definition of a fence in the <br /> Code,he did know that it asks that a fence not be on a property line. Instead, it is <br /> on a setback or a parking lot or something like that. He did not think that the City <br /> would look at the definition in the same way and in this sense, it appears to be an <br /> intentional barrier that is built in some form. He wondered what would happen if <br /> this was six feet tall and angled back into the property so it would be harder to <br /> jump over. <br /> Mr. Pate explained this needs extra height in order to work. Most industrial or <br /> commercial areas where these are operated actually allow somewhere around <br /> eight feet throughout the country and that is the reason this is being requested for <br /> ten feet. Ten feet is also the standard and what every business builds for. <br /> Member Etten indicated the application refers to this as a fence in many areas and <br /> he was not sure how Mr. Pate is saying this is not a fence. <br /> Mr. Pate explained his company was asked to do this and told it is not going to be <br /> considered an alarm. It would be considered a fence so when the application was <br /> filled out,his company was told it had to use the term"fence". <br /> Member Schroeder asked for clarification on how many wires there are. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.