Laserfiche WebLink
~. - <br />August 17, 1979 <br />APPLICATION FOR VARIAN GE <br />VN-210, CHARLES BERGMAN <br />PURPOSE <br />To re-.examine a request for a variance for a fence 10 feet in <br />height in a front yard. <br />BACKGROUND <br />APPLICANT: Charles Bergman <br />LOCATION: 299 Oakwood Drive <br />(generafily the northeast corner of 3rd Street. <br />S.W. and Oakwood Drive) <br />ORDINA_N'CE REQUIREMENT: The zoning code restricts the height <br />of a fence in a residential district to 3a feet <br />high in the front yard and in.all other yards the <br />fence cannot exceed 6_feet in height pursuant to. <br />Section 13-050 d. 1 and 2. The fence in question <br />is 10 feet high on the west side which. would be <br />considered-the front yard and it is also l0 fee <br />high on the east side which is considered the <br />side yard.. <br />PREVIOUS COUNCIL-ACTION: At its regular meeting of July 9, <br />1974, City Council granted a conditional use <br />permit for a 10 foot high fence around the <br />existing concrete pad subject to the following <br />conditions: <br />1. That the fence be a°chain link fence with no <br />screening material that could obstruct sight <br />distances. <br />2. That the owner keep the boulevard a-nd land " <br />neatly trimmed and landscaped. <br />3. Permit be granted for a 5-year period of time. <br />The applicant was notified. that-the time period established by the <br />Council in approving VN-T21 h_as expired.. Since.the applicant desires <br />that the. fence remain in place., another variance will have to be <br />considered by the Council. <br />To the best knowledge of City Staff the applicant's fence has not <br />caused or affected any traffic problems on the corner of Oakwood <br />Drive and 3rd Street S.W. In addition, the .applicant has not.used <br />any screening material to obstruct vision and has maintained the <br />boulevard area. <br />The applicant's reasons for the fence is to provide a safe play <br />area for his children and-their friends. The hardship that would <br />result from not having the fence is that the applicant and'his <br />family could not fully use the concrete pad for tennis and other <br />play activities in a safe manner. Another hardship mentioned by <br />the applicant is that the installation of the `fence was a sub- <br />