Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br /> Commissioners Hale and Chair Sosin agreed with the language. Mr. Giffen asked if <br /> Commissioners preferred 8 or 10 feet. Commissioner Chase felt that 8 feet would be enough. <br /> Other commissioners agreed. <br /> 7:01:52 PM <br /> Chair Sosin referred to the cross-hatched section on the graphic from the corner of the dwelling <br /> to the street and asked if it was already possible to have a six foot fence that is 70% transparent <br /> and is 10 feet behind the setback line. Mr. Giffen responded yes. She referred to the graphic <br /> and asked if that was the point where a fence can be more solid and go to eight feet. Mr. Giffen <br /> responded yes. <br /> • <br /> 7:02:48 PM <br /> Commissioner Murphy asked if the current regulation allowed for an eight foot maximum fence <br /> height in the back yard. Mr. Giffen responded no, the current regulation allows for a maximum <br /> height of six feet. He stated that the current regulation allows a dwelling to be a maximum <br /> height of 28 feet and allows a garage to be a maximum of 15 feet. The proposed regulation <br /> allows for a reasonable fence height given the height of the rest of the structures on the property <br /> but the fence must meet the building setbacks. Commissioner Murphy asked how far the <br /> setback was from the property line. Mr. Giffen referred to the corner lot graphic and explained <br /> that the setback would be 10 feet from the street side lot line and 5 feet from the interior lot line. <br /> Commissioner Chase asked if the proposal allowed a six foot high fence on the property line <br /> and an eight foot fence that met the building setbacks. Mr. Giffen responded yes. <br /> Commissioner Murphy asked what the setback would be if there were no sidewalks. Mr. Giffen <br /> responded that the fence would be setback a minimum of 10 feet from where the sidewalk <br /> would be placed in the future as determined by the City Engineer. <br /> 7:10:01 PM <br /> Mr. Ingalsbe circulated a handout regarding a revision made to Figure 52 and additional <br /> language in Zoning Code section 39.070 which cross referenced the new Core Residential Area <br /> fence regulations. Commissioner Olivers asked if that should be included as an exhibit to the <br /> resolution. Mr. Ingalsbe responded yes. <br /> Commissioner Adams stated that the graphics assist in understanding the proposed regulations <br /> and he would like to have the fence graphics included in the code revision. Mr. Giffen <br /> responded that the graphics would be included. <br /> Chair Sosin recommended that the word "fence" be added to standard#1 for interior and corner <br /> lots. She asked Mr. Ingalsbe how the transparency percentage was determined. Mr. Ingalsbe <br /> responded that the calculation was taken from a fence section - post to post. <br /> 7:13:15 PM <br /> Commissioner Olivers recommended that the transparency language in standard #3 be <br /> changed to read "There shall be space between fence boards, rails, or slats to achieve this <br /> purpose." <br /> 7:14:35 PM <br /> Commissioner Adams asked if it would be beneficial to add an exception to the regulations if the <br /> fence created a traffic hazard. Mr. Giffen responded that there was an exception addressed in <br /> section 39.070 for corner lots. <br /> Citizen Comments <br /> 21 <br />