Hearing on fence variance at Virgilia Drive postponed after board and applicant discuss sight-line options

The Troy City Building Code Board of Appeals postponed consideration of a variance for a 6-foot vinyl privacy fence at 4368 Virgilia Drive, giving the applicant time to consult neighbors and return with an updated plan that accommodates city vision-triangle requirements and easement conditions.

Applicant Vin Pandey asked the board for a variance for a 6-foot vinyl privacy fence on a corner lot in the R-1-B zoning district. Dominic, building department staff, described the lot as a corner property with a 40-foot front setback requirement and noted that in this subdivision the sidewalk sits inside a 5-foot property easement, so portions of the proposed fence would be placed over city easements and require departmental approvals.

Pandey said his main concerns were privacy and the unkempt appearance of adjacent properties, including one with a parked boat. He told the board the requested vinyl fence would address a privacy and maintenance issue and that he preferred the contractor-recommended product. Board members pointed out the city’s requirement for a 25-foot clear vision triangle at corners to protect sight lines for driveways and sidewalks; that requirement affects how the fence must be shaped or set back at the corner.

After extended discussion about lot width, sidewalk location, existing easements and how a corner cut (vision triangle) would reduce the length of the proposed obscuring fence, board members advised the applicant to consult neighbors and consider options such as moving the fence farther back, installing plantings, or adjusting fence alignment to accommodate the 25-foot sight-triangle. The applicant agreed he would prefer an angled (isosceles) corner cut that gives the maximum usable yard space while meeting city vision requirements.

The board accepted a motion to postpone the hearing to a later meeting so the applicant could gather neighbor correspondence and speak with his contractor and adjacent property owners. The motion to postpone carried unanimously among the four members present. The building department indicated that any fence over an easement requires DPW approval and that a permit would be subject to drainage-easement and infrastructure protections.

Pandey was told he may return with a revised plan or letters of support; if he withdraws and reapplies the application process and fees would apply. The board also suggested an on-site visit before a final decision if the applicant returns with a new submittal.