Laserfiche WebLink
City Attorney Knaak shared that it is his understanding that there are many pending applications <br /> before Staff on this matter. He noted that fence disputes are ordinarily private matters and is not <br /> typically something that the City would get involved with. <br /> Mr. Tetens asked if the Council would be able to put forth an amendment to Code 106.485 so that <br /> it would be a requirement to get a zoning permit for fencing. He noted that as a taxpayer, he pays <br /> taxes on this land and there is a Code specifically for locating the boundary lines. He said it should <br /> be in Code that would require the landowner to accurately locate their boundary lines prior to <br /> putting up the fence. <br /> City Attorney Knaak asked if the City currently has a permitting process for fencing. <br /> Planning Manager Larson explained that they used to have fencing permits; however, they found <br /> that people would submit their plans for the permit then they would end up doing the fencing <br /> wrong or the fence would be put up without a permit. He noted they cut the permitting out <br /> altogether. <br /> City Attorney Knaak said they could modify City Code and make new requirements; however, it <br /> is still the responsibility of the individual to do things in accordance with the law. He explained <br /> that if the neighbor's fence is on Mr. Tetens' property, then it is up to him to enforce his rights <br /> under the law. <br /> Mr. Tetens asked if the Council would just abolish Code 106.485 if it is unnecessary and people <br /> are not having to follow it. He noted there seems to be no point of the Code. <br /> City Attorney Knaak explained that in a situation like this, they have a legal standard, similar to a <br /> speed limit. He added that he would not want to urge the Council to eliminate this legal standard. <br /> Mr. Tetens said he would not want to eliminate it,but rather amend the Code to put forth a zoning <br /> permit, which would be enforced by inspections. <br /> Councilmember Howell shared that she understands the Code in the same way as Mr. Tetens. She <br /> stated that she understands that this is not the City's fight; however, she does not understand why <br /> they would not be asking the neighboring property owner to be subjected to the Code. She <br /> suggested that Mr. Tetens put up a temporary fence to block off his property. <br /> Mr. Tetens said putting up a temporary fence is his next step; he is just trying to be civil throughout <br /> this process. <br /> Councilmember Musgrove shared that she was very bothered when she received Mr. Tetens' email <br /> and seeing the plight that he is having to go through as the property owner who is being violated. <br /> She noted that she asked Staff a number of questions about this situation, and she was told that <br /> there is a Code violation; however, it is suspended as the neighboring property owner is applying <br /> for some kind of permit. <br /> City Council/August 27, 2024 <br /> Page 3 of 13 <br />