HomeMy WebLinkAbout9B3 - Ord Amend Fences
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
FEBRUARY 17, 2004
9B3
CYNTHIA KIRCHOFF, AICP, PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
CLARIFY THE FENCE ORDINANCE (Case File #04-06)
INTRODUCTION:
Historv: The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance Amendment is to clarify
that the fence ordinance applies only to residential properties.
On January 26, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this item, and unanimously recommended approval of the amendment.
Meeting minutes are attached to this report.
Backaround: Section 1101.504 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates the
location and height of fences, but does not distinguish between residential
and commercial and industrial fences.
The fence ordinance was adopted in May 1999. On February 3, 2003, the
City Council approved an amendment to the fence ordinance regulating
the height and location of fences in front yards on corner lots along
collector streets.
DISCUSSION:
Issue: The only purpose of this amendment is to clarify that the existing
ordinance pertains only to residential use districts. Currently, Section
1101.504 allows fences six to eight feet in height. While not specifically
stated, it is inferred that this provision is meant for residential use districts,
because required fences in commercial and industrial use districts may be
greater than the height limitation. This amendment adds "Residential Use
Districts" to the existing language in order to clarify this intent.
Commercial and industrial fences will not be regulated by the existing
fence ordinance.
The City Council may want to consider whether the Zoning Ordinance
should set forth criteria regulating fences in commercial and industrial use
districts at some later date.
L:\04 FILES\04 GRDIN AMEND\04 ZONlMWerl~Pok~oom
Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245
CONCLUSION:
ALTERNATIVES:
ZoninQ Ordinance Amendment Findings
Section 1108.600 of the Zoning Ordinance states that recommendations
of the Planning Commission and final determinations of the City Council
shall be supported by findings addressing the relationship of the proposed
amendment to the following policies:
1. There is a public need for the amendment.
There is a public need for the amendment. It will clarify that the existing
fence regulations in Section 1104.504 apply only to properties in
residential use districts.
2. The amendment will accomplish one or more of the purposes of
this Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted plans or
policies of the City.
The Zoning Ordinance purports to:
. Protect the residential, business, industrial and public areas of the
community and maintain their stability.
. Prevent over crowding of land and undue concentration of
structures and population by regulating the use of land and buildings and
the bulk of buildings in relation to the land surrounding them.
Objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan include:
. Enact and maintain policies and ordinances to ensure the public
safety, health, and welfare.
. Enact and maintain policies and ordinances to ensure the safety
and preservation of property.
The proposed amendment strives to accomplish the purpose of the
Zoning Ordinance and the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive
Plan by clarifying the existing fence regulations apply only to properties in
residential use districts.
3. The adoption of the amendment is consistent with State and/or
Federal requirements.
This amendment is consistent with federal and state laws.
The proposed amendment specifies that the fence ordinance pertains only
to properties in the residential use districts. Based upon the findings set
forth in this report, staff recommends approval.
The City Council has three alternatives:
1. Adopt the ordinance amendment.
2. Deny the ordinance amendment.
L:\04 FILES\04 ORDIN AMEND\04 ZONING\fences\cc report.doc
2
RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
3. Defer this item and provide staff with specific direction.
Staff recommends Alternative #1. This action requires the following
motions:
1. A motion and second amending the Zoning Ordinance to clarify the
fence ordinance.
1.
2.
L:\04 FILES\04 ORDIN AMEND\04 ZONING\fences\cc report.doc 3
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 04- XX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1101.504 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY
CODE
The City Council of the City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain that:
1. Section 1101.504 of the Prior Lake City Code is hereby amended as follows:
Fences. Fences in Residential Use Districts may be permitted in required yards, subject to
the following provisions:
(1) The height of fences and walls permitted in required yards shall be limited.
The height shall be measured from the ground level to the top of the fence
or wall section. Fence posts may extend no more than 8 inches above the
required height limit of a fence. In the case where the fence section has
variable heights, the height of the fence shall be the average height. Fence
heights shall be limited as follows:
~ A fence or wall shall not exceed 6 feet in height if it is located in any
side or rear yard.
~ A fence or wall may be located in a front yard if the fence or wall
does not exceed 4 feet in height and 50 percent opacity. Fences in
the front yard shall be limited to decorative fences, such as picket
fences, split rail fences and decorative iron fences. Chain link fences
are not permitted in the front yard. (amd.Ord. 00-07 - pub. 6/10/00)
~ A fence or wall shall not exceed 8 feet in height if the yard in which it
is placed abuts State Highway 13 or County Roads 21, 42, 82 or 83.
~ A fence or wall exceeding 8 feet in height may be allowed if placed
in any side or rear yard separating a commercial or industrial use
from a residential use, a school, church or other pUblic building.
~ A fence or wall may exceed 6 feet in height in any side or rear yard
when it is installed as part of a bufferyard, but may not exceed 8 feet
in height.
~ A fence or wall in one front yard of any through lot may be at the
height permitted in a rear yard if it complies with all of the provisions
of subsection 1101.506, is used as a rear yard, and the fenced yard
used as the rear yard does not adjoin a yard used as a front yard.
(2) Where a fence or wall 6 feet in height or less is used as part of an animal
kennel or run, it may not be located in any required side or front yard, and it
shall be located at least 10 feet from any rear lot line.
L:\04 FILES\04 OROIN AMEND\04 ZONNll(Weci:ijJ~*dmm
Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245
(3) Temporary snow fences shall be permitted in any yard from November 1st
to April 1 st.
(4) No fence, hedge or wall or visual obstruction of any kind shall be permitted
which is not in compliance with subsection 1101.506.
(5) Any fence or wall over 6 feet in height constructed as a result of this
subsection shall be constructed of a nonmetallic material and shall be 90%
opaque. It shall be considered a structure, shall require a building permit,
and shall meet all Minnesota State Building Code requirements for a
structure.
(6) No fence may be located in any public right of way.
(7) A fence on a corner lot abutting a collector street shall be subject to the
following conditions:
~ The fence shall not exceed 6 feet in height along the side street lot
line.
~ The front yard shall be determined by the location of the garage.
The direction the garage is facing shall be considered the front yard.
~ For lots with driveway access on a collector street, the fence shall
not be constructed within a sight triangle described as beginning
from a point at the intersection of the extension of the existing curb
lines of the street or pavement edge and driveway, and extending 50
feet along the edge of the street and along the length of the
driveway to the garage front. This defines two sides of the triangle.
The third line is a line connecting the end points of the two sides
described above.
~ The side street shall be designated as a collector street in the
Comprehensive Plan.
~ A 6 foot fence shall be located behind the rear corner of the principal
building or detached accessory structure along the front lot line
abutting the collector street.
~ A 6 foot fence shall maintain a 10 foot setback along the collector
street in front of the rear corner of the principal structure or detached
accessory structure.
~ The fence shall maintain a 1 foot setback from a trail or sidewalk.
(8) A zoning permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of a fence not
exceeding 6 feet in height. A site plan showing the location of the fence in
relation to the property lines shall be submitted with the permit application. A
building permit shall be required for a fence exceeding 6 feet in height.
This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication.
L:\04 FILES\04 ORDIN AMEND\04 ZONING\fences\ord04-XX.doc
Passed by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake this _ day of _' 2004.
ATTEST:
City Manager
Mayor
L:\04 FILES\04 ORDIN AMEND\04 ZONING\fences\ord04-XX.doc
Planning Commission Meetings
January 26, 2004
additional hearings, added expense for property owners and more confusion. This
is the most consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
· Agreed - this will make sense and the annexed property needs to be zoned.
Stamson:
. Had a few reservations at the workshop however, after reading this, it makes more
sense. Likes the approach Jordan took with the special district. This annexation
area is really Rl. This is easier for people who own property and will now clearly
know the designation.
. This is the fairest.
. Support.
MOTION BY PEREZ, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
This matter will go before the City Council on February 17,2004.
-+ C. Case #04-06 An amendment to Section 11 01.504 clarifying the listed fence
regulations pertain to fences within Residential Use Districts.
Planner Cynthia Kirchoff presented the Planning Report dated January 26,2004, on file
in the office of the City Planning Department.
The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance Amendment is to clarify the fence ordinance
applies only to residential properties. Section 1101.504 of the Zoning Ordinance
regulates the location and height of fences, but does not distinguish between residential
and commercial/industrial fences.
The fence ordinance was adopted in May 1999. On February 3,2003, the City Council
approved an amendment to the fence ordinance regulating the height and location of
fences in front yards on comer lots along collector streets.
The only purpose of this amendment is to clarify the existing ordinance pertains only to
residential use districts. Currently, Section 1101.504 allows fences six to eight feet in
height. While not specifically stated, it is inferred this provision is meant for Residential
Use Districts, because required fences in Commercial and Industrial Use Districts may be
greater than the height limitation. This amendment adds "Residential Use Districts" to the
existing language in order to clarify this intent. Commercial and industrial fences will
not be regulated by the existing fence ordinance.
Staff recommended approval based on the Findings.
L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04 pc Minutes\MNOI2604.doc 5
Planning Commission Meetings
January 26. 2004
Perez asked if there were recent issues to bring this amendment up. Kansier said not
specifically, staff made the interpretation regarding outdoor storage about whether a
fence could be higher than 6 feet. The portion of the ordinance was specific to residential
zones based on where it was in the ordinance. Staff is trying to clear up the
interpretation.
There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was closed at 6:58 p.m.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Stamson:
. Questioned the last two buildings constructed off Commerce Avenue. It seems
the developer had to berm and fence the area. Kansier responded that was under
the pre-1999 ordinance. The intention was to have a combination and not just a
tall blockade fence.
. The concern is a fence between a commercial and residential property. Although
it is legal it will be unsightly on the residential side. That is my sole concern.
. Kansier responded reading the new ordinance and explained potential situations.
. Will support.
Lemke:
. Agreed - the Commission looked at other ordinances and this will clarify the
matter.
. There is a public need. Support
Perez:
. Agreed.
Ringstad:
. This as more of a housekeeping issue. Support.
Atwood:
. Support for the reasons already stated.
MOTION BY LEMKE, SECOND BY ATWOOD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
This matter will go before the City Council on February 17,2004.
D. Case #04-07 An amendment to Section 1108.200 changing the procedure for
approval of conditional use permits to allow the Planning Commission to make the
final decision.
L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04 pc Minutes\MNOI2604.doc 6