Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Fence Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milford panel grants 6-foot fence variance for 597 North Main to match existing security fence
Summary
A Milford town panel approved a variance allowing Beaver County to install a 6-foot chain-link fence (with optional barbed wire) at 597 North Main to align with existing fencing and a new sidewalk.
A Milford town panel voted to grant Beaver County a variance allowing a six-foot chain-link fence (with the option to add three strands of barbed wire) along the frontage of 597 North Main, the panel decided at a meeting called to order at 4 p.m. at the city office.
The variance allows the county to keep the new fence at the property line where the county will install curb, gutter and a sidewalk aligned with The Haven Apartments. Panel members said the county answered the five-question variance checklist and cited safety, improved drainage and walkability, and reduced unauthorized parking as reasons to approve the larger fence rather than the four-foot frontage height normally allowed under local code.
Brandon Yarley, a visitor representing the Beaver County commissioners, told the panel the parcel currently has a six-foot chain-link fence topped with barbed wire and that the county wants the replacement fence to match what’s already in place. "If we have a 4-foot fence, we might as well not have a fence," Yarley said, arguing the taller fence provides needed security for equipment on the site. He also said the gate will use key-code access.
Panel members emphasized site-safety details. Staff and the county said they will trim or grade corners to avoid vision blocking at the driveway and public thoroughfares. A nearby property owner who received a notice asked whether attendance was required; staff replied that owners within 300 feet are notified and attendance is optional unless they have questions.
Jennifer (member) moved to approve the variance to permit a six-foot fence with the option to match the existing three strands of barbed wire; Audrey (member) seconded. The panel carried the motion by voice vote; individual roll-call tallies were not recorded.
The panel did not impose additional conditions beyond matching the existing fence height and ensuring corner sight-lines would not be blocked. No date was given for construction during the meeting.
