8/3/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

On the basis of a site inspection, the Planning Depa):trdent staff determined that of the approximately 17 single-family homes fronting on Pelican Lane, five have existing fences or walls. There are two 3 foot open rail fences extending along rront property lines, two 4 foot walls with gates at driveway entrances, and one 4 foot chain link fence surrounding the rear yard of a residence. Since no fences similar to that requested by the applicant were found to exist within the vicinity of his residence and because of the characteristics of the existing six foot, front yard fence, the Planning Department staff determined that the fence was not visually compatible with the rest of the community and recommended that the Planning -and Zoning Commission deny Mr. Beatty's request. The Planning and Zoning Commission addressed the Beatty minor site plan application at its June 23, 1983 meeting. At that time, Mr. Beatty presented additional information to supplement his minor site plan request. He stated that the primary reason for the fence is safety, to protect his children from dogs running loose in the neighborhood. He'noted that there are several front yard fences exceeding five feet in height located on Wynn Cove, the street just north of Pelican Lane. He also noted that his fence is visually compatible with the area and acceptable to his -neighbors. By a 4-0 vote, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied -Mr. Beatty's request for approval of a six foot cedar fence surrounding his property. The reason for denial was visual incompatibility of the fence with the surrounding area. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS Based upon its finding that the fence is visually incompatible with the area, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied Mr. Beatty's request. Besides denial, the only Other alternative available to the Commission was to approve Mr. Beatty's request. Since the Commission determined that that portion of the fence which already exists is visually incompatible with the neighborhood, the Commission could not approve the regnest for exceeding the height restrictions specified by the ?oning Code. The applicant, however, does have an alternative. He can obtain a permit for, and then constrdct, a fence meeting the height limitations specified by the Zoning Code. -'According to Section 25(i) of the Zoning Code, front yard fences may.,not exceed three feet in height, side yard fences may not exceed five feet in height, and rear yard fences may not exceed six feet in height. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department staff recommends that the appeal..be denied and the action of the Planning and Zoning Commission be upheld. 41 BOOK 54 PAct AUG 3 1993