Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nuisance Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants privacy‑fence variance for Michigan Road homeowner after testimony about safety and past enforcement change
Summary
The Area Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance Aug. 13 to allow a 5‑foot front‑yard fence at 50859 Michigan Road after the homeowner described safety concerns, a history of similar fences in the neighborhood, and confusion about a permit requirement that took effect earlier in 2023.
The Area Board of Zoning Appeals on Aug. 13 granted a variance permitting a 5‑foot tall privacy fence in the front yard at 50859 Michigan Road, reducing the relief sought from an earlier denied application and following testimony from the homeowner and supporters.
Fariel Sharif of the Area Planning Commission presented the petition and said staff recommended denial because the petitioner had not demonstrated the “practical difficulty” required for a front‑yard fence greater than the ordinance‑allowed 36 inches (3 feet). Sharif noted the property owner had previously applied for a six‑foot fence and been denied earlier in the year; the current request would allow five feet. Staff also explained enforcement is largely complaint‑driven and that other non‑conforming fences in the neighborhood may have been in place before permitting requirements changed.
Homeowner Katie Lewis (also identified in the record as Mrs. Pawlowski) told the board the recent fence was installed after a contractor advised a permit was not required; she said the law change in April 2023 requiring permits was not widely understood at the time of installation. Lewis described repeated, unwanted approaches by a nearby neighbor and said the fence provided privacy and safety for her and her daughter. She also said the neighbor directly north submitted a letter in support.
County Councilwoman Amy Drake spoke in support of Lewis, saying Lewis meets variance criteria and describing the fence as consistent with neighborhood character and installed for reasons of safety and privacy.
After discussion the board voted to grant the variance; board minutes will include written findings. The transcript shows a split vote: four board members voted yes and two voted no.
Why it matters: the decision balances code uniformity against a resident’s testimony about personal safety and the neighborhood’s pattern of non‑conforming fences; it underscores that fence enforcement can be complaint driven and that changes in permit rules may not be broadly understood.
What’s next: staff will prepare written findings and the homeowner may proceed with repairs and finishing work consistent with the approved five‑foot height.
