Agenda - Council - 02/10/2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

December 20, 2003 City of Ramsey 15153 NOwthen Blvd N.W. Ramsey, Minnesota 55303 Re: Electric fence on neighboring property To the Ramsey City Council: The purpose of this letter is to submit a formal appeal to the City of Ramsey regarding the installation of an electrically charged fence on the property owned by Bruce and Karen KonZak and abutting 1'3' other residential properties including my own. As stated in the letter November 24, from Chris Anderson, Ramsey's City Code states that wood or chain link are acceptable fencing materials and any other type of fencing requires specific approval of the Zoning Administrator. Chis Anderson states in his letter that the clause permitting consideration and approval of other types of fencing was included in.~the code to allow other types of fencing to be used in conjunction with agriculturali activities and horses and livestock. While this may be true, there is no reason to believe that the ordinance was intended to allow approval of electrically charged fencing in a relatively dense, non-rural residential area. As it is written, the ordinance clearly designates wooden and chain link fencing as acceptable. Because it requires specific approval of all other types of fencing, the ordinance implies that other types of fencing would be acceptable only for compelling reasons. For this ordinance to be properly enforced for the benefit Of the city's communitylof citizens, as any ordinance should be, approval of fencing other than wood or chain link must be made only where such fencing reasonably accommodates the interests of!the parties immediately involved and the larger community's interests. The electrically charged fencing as currently proposed by Chris Anderson fails to balance the interests involved. Electrically charged, open-wire fencing, 6 inches from the property line, is neither safe nor desirable for all thefamily life surrounding the Kpnzak prope2y.. In fhct, there is no compelling reason to approve such fencing as a deviation from the wood or chain link fencing approved by the City. If it is determined that a wooden fence wo'uld not adequately serve the purpose of containing the Konzak's horses, then one live wire could be placed inside a wooden fence. This has been the practice for other horse owners in Ramsey and there is no acceptable or compelling reason to make an exception [o this past Practice l:br the Konzak's in this instance. This type of wood and single-wire t:'encing would be acceptable to me and, I believe, the other families that adjoin the Konzak property. It involves a minimal electrical charge and offers maximum protection against injUry or harm to other people or animals.