HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7076 Staff AnalysisAugust 27, 2001
Item No.: 4
File No.: Z-7076
Owner• Patsy Jordan Steverson
Address• 1806 S. Battery Street
Description: South 1t of Lot 20, all of Lot 21,
North 1i of Lot 22, Block 42,
Centennial Addition
Zoned: R-3 and R-4
Variance Re ested: A variance is requested from the
fence height provisions of Section
36-516 to permit construction of a
6 foot tall fence.
Justification: The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family
Proposed Use of Proper Single Family
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
No issues.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-3 and R-4 zoned property located at 1806 Battery
Street is occupied by a one-story, brick and frame, single-
family residence. The applicant's property consists of two
lots; the house is located on the northern lot and the
southern lot is yard. The southern lot was previously
occupied by a condemned house. The applicant bought the
property and had that dilapidated structure removed. She
now proposes to enclose portions of her yard with a 6 foot
tall privacy fence. The fence would enclose the entirety of
the vacant lot and the rear and side yard of the lot
occupied by the house. The 6 foot fence is proposed to
extend to the front property line of the vacant lot. The
Code limits the height of fences erected within the setback
August 27, 2001
Item No.: 4 (Cont.)
adjacent to the street to 4 feet. The front 25 feet of the
proposed fence fall within this setback area.
Staff is sensitive to the applicant's desire to provide
security and privacy and to reduce unauthorized access to
the lot. However, we do have concerns about the visual
appearance of a 6 foot privacy fence within the front yard
area. Staff recommends that the fence be modified so that
it is a solid fence up to a height of 4 feet, with the
remaining 2 feet to be constructed of trellis to allow
passage of light and air. This style fence would be less
visually intrusive and more aesthetically compatible with
the neighborhood. The portions of the fence outside of the
front 25 foot setback may be constructed of solid materials
up to a height of 6 feet.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff does not recommend approval of the application as
filed. Staff recommends that the portion of the fence
within the front yard 25 foot setback be constructed of
solid materials only up to a height of 4 feet with the
remaining 2 feet to be constructed of trellis. Staff
further recommends that the fence be constructed in "good
neighbor" fashion, with the finished side facing outward.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(AUGUST 27, 2001)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial.
Mrs. Steverson addressed the Board. She presented photos and
described the problems she had with people trespassing on the lot
and throwing trash on her property. Mrs. Steverson stated it was
her desire to make the lot part of her yard and she needed a 6
foot tall fence for privacy and security.
Andrew Francis asked Mrs. Steverson if she felt that building the
fence as suggested by staff would compromise her desire for
security. She responded that it would.
Fred Gray asked if part of the idea of bringing the fence to the
front property line was to prevent people from parking in that
area. Mrs. Steverson responded that it was.
KA
August 27, 2001
Item No.: 4 (Cont.)
William Ruck expressed concern about extending a 6 foot tall
fence out to the property line. He stated he would hate to see
the street lined with 6 foot tall fences.
Mr. and Mrs. Steverson described their neighborhood as being
different than that portion of Battery Street south of Wright
Avenue. Each stated that a 4 foot tall fence would not provide
security or privacy.
Fred Gray commented that the fence would not need to extend all
the way to the front property line to prevent people from parking
on the lot. Mrs. Steverson agreed.
Scott Richburg noted that pulling the fence too far back from,the
front property line would still leave room for people to park.
Gary Langlais suggested that the curb of the street be repaired
to eliminate the old driveway onto the vacant lot.
Scott Richburg stated she would prefer to see the fence pulled
back 5-6 feet from the front property line. Fred Gray also
suggested a 5 foot setback.
Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, noted that the front property
line was located 2 feet behind the sidewalk.
A motion was made to approve the fence height variance subject to
the following conditions:
1. The fence is to be constructed in "good -neighbor" fashion,
with the finished side facing out.
2. The fence is to be located 7 feet behind the back edge of the
sidewalk.
The motion was approved by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
3