CCP 06172024 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

84 It should be noted that, although the fence permit could be issued with a ROW permit and 85 encroachment agreement, Staff is unlikely to recommend a ROW permit for the proposed 86 fence. Right-of-way permits are typically not issued for permanent private improvements 87 that obstruct the ROW, such as fences. If a fence were to be considered, an encroachment 88 agreement would need to be applied for and ultimately be approved by Council. Staff has 89 no record of any private fences allowed in public ROW. In fact, Staff has in the past ordered 90 fences found in the ROW to be removed. Two such examples are 2767 Iona Street and 91 2925 Rice St. 92 93 The six-foot privacy fence that was installed at 257 South McCarrons will cause numerous 94 issues if it is allowed to remain. The fence replaced an existing City-owned split-rail fence 95 only two feet off the pathway. The new fence will limit snow storage from plowing the street 96 and pathway. The privacy fence is also at risk of damage from plowing or other 97 maintenance in the ROW such as when Staff will need to repave the pathway in the future. 98 99 Policy Objectives 100 Appeals are governed by Zoning Code Sections 1009.08 and 1011.08. 101 102 Appeals of Staff decisions are considered by the City’s Board of Adjustment and Appeals, 103 as provided in Zoning Code Section 1009.08. Section 1009.08.A.1 states that “the appeal 104 shall be submitted to the City Manager within 10 calendar days after the making of the 105 order or decision being appealed”. The appeal was submitted to the City Manager on May 106 6, 2024, Lastly, in accordance with Section 1009.08.B.3, the homeowner’s attorney was 107 provided notice on May 10, 2024, of a June 3, 2024 public meeting date. The homeowner 108 hired a new attorney and they requested a delay in the appeal date so the public meeting 109 was moved to June 17, 2024. 110 111 Racial Equity Impact Summary 112 There should be no equity impacts with this appeal. 113 114 Budget Implications 115 None. 116 117 Staff Recommendations 118 Deny Mr. Carrara’s appeal of the revocation of the fence permit and require the fence be 119 removed by July 8, 2024, based on the following findings: 120 1. The fence permit was issued in error. 121 2. The fence permit application did not include the location of all property lines as 122 required by Roseville City Code Section 1011.08, A, 1. 123 3. The fence permit application sought to build a fence in the right-of-way without the 124 required encroachment permit or agreement in violation of Roseville City Code 125 Section 707.08. 126 4. The fence permit application was submitted for a six-foot fence in a front yard; 127 however, the applicant had not received a variance of the four-foot height limitation 128 under Roseville City Code Section 1011.08, A, 8. 129 5. The fence constructed did not reflect the fence depicted on the plans provided with 130 the permit application. Page 3 of 4 Qbhf!:!pg!331