Minutes - Council - 01/13/2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Case #4: Request for an Appeal of City Staff's Interpretation of Fencing Regulations in the R-1 Residential District City Attorney Goodrich explained that the actual procedure before the City Council was an administrative appeal, where the City Council acts as the Boards of Appeals. The Community Development Department has made an interpretation of City Code pertaining to fences and the City has received an appeal of that interpretation. The Council would not be making a decision tonight but would direct staff to draft findings of fact after all parties are able to present their case. Community Development Director Frolik stated that in May 2003, an issue regarding the installation of an electric fence was brought to the attention of the City. The subject property is located at 16620 Zirconium St NW and is ten (10) acres in size. A letter was drafted by City Staff and sent out to Bruce & Karen Konzak on May 29, 2003. This letter outlined Ramsey's regulations regarding fencing and requested that they contact the City to discuss their intentions. As of July 15, 2002, City Code states that fence material shall consist only of wood or chain link or other material as approved by the Zoning Administrator. Prior to July 15, 2002, there were no specific restrictions on fence materials. On June 5, 2003, Staff met with Karen Konzak at the subject property for a site inspection. Karen presented four reasons why they needed to relocate the existing electric fence on the property from inside the border of pine trees that encompasses the property to the property boundary: 1) Increase the acreage of the pasture area for their horses; 2) Ensure sufficient strength of the contaimnent system to maintain large animals; 3) Implement a forest management plan that includes thinning the dense stand of pine trees. The trees would need to be felled inward, toward the Konzak's house, to avoid any damage to the neighboring properties and thus, the fence needed to be relocated to the outside of the trees; and 4) There has been some encroachment, by the neighbors, onto the Konzak's property and they wanted to more clearly demark their property boundaries. During the site inspection, it was apparent that the stand of pines was overly dense and certainly some thinning would benefit the stand. Furthermore, encroachment onto their property was evident. This included concrete (possibly from an old patio), tires, yard waste, spoils, small forts, and a drain field (the inspection tube is roughly 5 feet into the Konzak's property). On June 25, another letter was drafted and sent to the Konzaks summarizing the information that had been gathered and outlined what would be considered an acceptable fence. Shortly after this letter was sent out, Staff contacted one of the members of the Horse Care Board, Dorothy Breu, for her opinion on the situation. Mrs. Breu reviewed the letter that had been sent to the Konzaks and informed Staff that one (1) foot "arms", which were called out in the letter, did not exist. She did inform Staff that there were five (5) inch "arms" that were available and this might be an option (arms provide an opportunity to offset the live wire(s) inside the fence). Mrs. Breu did not find the request for an electric fence to be unusual. In fact, it is a common practice for electric fences to be used in conjunction with horses. When these five (5) inch "arms" were suggested to the Konzaks, they stated that the "arms" could not withstand the tension that would be required to maintain a taught fence over some of the uneven terrain. They were certain that the "arms" would snap off from the pressure. On August 6, '2003, another letter was drafted with a revised proposal for the electric fence. This letter included input from Councilmember Elvig, who had been contacted by both the property owners and some of the surrounding neighbors. The proposal stated that the live wires of the fence were to be affixed to insulators on the inside of the posts while the non-live wires would be affixed to the outside of the posts, which would provide some separation between adjoining properties and the live wires. Furthermore, the Konzaks had agreed to only turn the City Council/January 13, 2004 Page 8 of 24