My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 02/10/2004
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2004
>
Agenda - Council - 02/10/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 2:21:26 PM
Creation date
2/6/2004 3:13:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
02/10/2004
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
245
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
At the January. 13, 2004 meeting, several of the surrounding property owners said that they do <br />not necessarily°bject to the use of an electric fence on the subject property. However, they do <br />object to its cli~se proximity to their properties (currently, the fence is about 6 inches from the <br />property line). '.They felt that at a minimum, a two (2) foot setback from the property line should <br />be maintained.: This would not only allow them full use of their property without the concern of <br />contacting an electric strand of the fence, but would also ensure that the horses would not be able <br />to reach over the fence and onto their property. <br /> <br />Also at the January 13, 2004 meeting, Bruce Konzak stated that there has been such abuse of <br />their property by means of encroachment, that it was more important to him to clearly demark <br />their property bi)undaries rather than to have an electric fence. Therefore, he offered to eliminate <br />the electric feature of the fence if that would prevent the necessity of its relocation. <br /> <br /> MaYor proposed that the electric fence be setback two (2) feet from the <br />Finally, <br /> the <br /> property <br /> line, <br />that only two (~2) strands be electrified, and that the fence is relocated to the minimum two (2) <br />foot setback by July 1, 2004. <br /> <br />The following items are enclosed for your information: <br /> <br /> a) Site Location map <br /> b) Letter, from City Staff to the Konzaks, dated May 29, 2003 <br /> c) Letter received from Bev Kleckner-Thiele & Dean Thiele dated June 2, 2003 <br /> d) Letter, from City Staff to the Konzaks, dated June 25, 2003 <br /> e) Letter, from City Staff to the Konzaks, dated August 6, 2003 <br /> f) Letter, from City Staffto the Konzaks, dated October 9, 2003 <br /> g) Letter, ~om City Staff to the Konzaks, dated November 20, 2003 <br /> h) Notice of Staff's decision sent to each of the adjoining property owners <br />i) Appeal, !received December 23, 2003, submitted by seven (7) of the adjacent property <br /> owners <br />j) Appeal, ireceived December 23, 2003, submitted by Beverly Kleckner-Thiele & Dean <br /> Thiele <br />k) Copy °fthe current fencing regulations for the R-1 Residential District <br /> [ <br /> 1) Pictures 'of the fence construction (along western edge of property) as of January 13, 2004 <br /> m) Draft City Council meeting minutes dated January 13, 2004 <br /> n) Proposed Resolution adopting Findings of Fact and Conclusion <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />In the appeal process, the City Council has the authority to affirm, reverse or modify City Staff's <br />decisions in administering the City Code. Per Council's direction, Staff has drafted Findings of <br />Fact relating to :.this appeal. Based on the Findings of Fact and any further discussion, Council <br />may conclude tO: a) uphold the ruling of the Zoning Administrator in the letter dated November <br />20, 2003; b) reverse the ruling of the Zoning Administrator, which has the effect of not <br />permitting the u~titization of an electric wire strand fence as an acceptable fence material; or <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.