07-18-2006 _2_ - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Approved While the draft ordinance amendment will establish different fence standards for lakeshore properties, there are a couple of additional issues worth noting. First, the City does not require a building or zoning permit for a fence that is less than six feet in height. As a practical matter, there would be no administrative process to ensure compliance, unless the zoning code is changed to require a permit for any fence constructed on a lakeshore lot (regardless of height). At a minimum, this would provide a zoning review to ensure that the placement is consistent with the new code requirements. Second, any existing fence on a lakeshore property that does not meet the new requirement would be non-conforming. One option to address this issue would be to establish an effective date, which essentially "grandfathers" pre-existing fences under the code. The difficulty with this option is that it would be very difficult to determine the date of construction, since the City has not required fence permits in the past. A more realistic option would be to simply prohibit all fences within the setback area on lakeshore lots and the non-conformities created by the proposed ordinance could be addressed at the time an owner decides to either re-build the fence or a land use/building permit action is triggered. In such circumstances, the owner could eliminate the non- conformity or apply for a non-conforming use permit. Lastly, under the existing fence regulations property owners would still have the ability to apply for a Special Use Permit to erect a fence not meeting the requirements of the Section. This may be important in that property owners may want to construct a pool where a 6' fence is required under the City Code. Under this scenario the Planning Commission and Council would have the opportunity to review the proposed fence location and fence height/materials in an effort to lessen any negative impacts that may result. The Special Use Standards of Section 8-130 and Section 4-540 (3) (F) would apply. Schiferl inquired why this ordinance is directed only at fences and if this ordinance includes accessory buildings. Gundlach replied that the specific concern was if a neighbor were to put up a six foot tall fence then the view across the neighbor's yard would disappear and that the value of their property decreases. Gundlach continued that staff was directed to approach the amendment only in terms of fence regulations, nothing more. Therefore, accessory buildings are not addressed, however that was an issue addressed in at least one letter that the City received. Gundlach stated that several years ago a zoning code amendment was passed that allows lake shore property owners the ability to put an accessory structure in their front yards, which is not allowed any other residential zoning district. Schiferl asked why this zoning change is addressing only DNR classified lakes. Gundlach replied that those were chosen because they are easy to define, but it could be opened up to any and all types of bodies of water. The issue becomes what types of bodies of water should be regulated. Schiferl inquired if staff had considered starting C:ADocuments and Settings jgop local Settings Temporary Internet Files\OLK28\07-I S-2006(2).doc Page 4 of 13