Laserfiche WebLink
5-foot maximum height. The proposed amendment has a word missing; the first sentence <br />`.- in red should read: "Fences not exceeding 60 inches in height may be constructed in the <br />side yard or the front yard of a property. " <br />Council Member Akerson asked if an 8-foot fence would be appropriate in the back yard. <br />A back yard is not public realm. If there are pools, higher fences might keep children <br />out. <br />Mr. Marohn explained that with small, urban lots high fences block out light and <br />circulation of air. Homeowners can make the choice of height. <br />A motion was made by J. J. Levenske, seconded by Scott Snyder, to amend the proposed <br />amendment to state "Fences not exceeding 96 inches may be const�°ucted in rear yard of <br />a properry. " All members voted "aye". Motion carried. <br />A motion was made by J. J. Levenske, seconded by Scott Snyder, to recommend the City <br />Council amend Section 17-5.9 Urban Residential, as follows: <br />Amendment: Chapter 17, Article 5 shall be amended as follows: <br />Section 17-5.9 URBAN RESIDENTIAL (UR) <br />� 4. Performa��e Standards. <br />C. Fences. �o�,.o� �„+ o ooa;.,,. �n :.,,.�,o� ;., �,o;,��,* ,,, ., �,o <br />.,�*,-,,,.�oa o „+ . ,;.�,;,, *�,o nu�x� �o+�,�,.i� ., . Fences not <br />exceedin� 34 inches � � mav be constructed within the OHW <br />��.��: setback area so lon� as the fencin� is transparent. I� cuc�� i�ot <br />''� .;:at� _ ��,_ _ � .__ _ - _�. 1��� i��l�t �nati� hc construct��l in the side vard <br />fi•ori� '�� f a propertv. Fences not etic��din�� 9� inches <br />i� ��il�t:'ii tccj in rcar �•ard oi�a t����t�cl�t� . Under no <br />circumstances shall a fence be constructed closer than 10 feet from <br />�; <br />the surface of a public road and in all cases not within the public <br />�°�� ��� right-of-way. Materials shall consist of usual fencing materials <br />with posts and fence of inetal, wood, concrete, brick or smooth <br />wire. Barbed or electrified wire is prohibited, except where <br />specific approval has been given by the Planning Commission. <br />All members voted "aye". Motion carried. <br />ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA: None. <br />,� OPEN FORUM: None. <br />MINUTES <br />Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br />May 17, 2012 <br />