Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fences And Property topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves parallel fence permit for South Redwood Road property
Summary
The Riverton Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit allowing a second, taller concrete fence to be built wholly on Robert Ford’s property at 13523 South Redwood Road, with conditions requiring maintenance of the space between the two fences and compliance with city code.
The Riverton Planning Commission voted to approve a conditional use permit that allows a second “parallel” fence to be built wholly on the property at 13523 South Redwood Road.
The permit, submitted by property owner Robert Ford, authorizes a concrete engineered fence to be erected along roughly 132 feet of his north property line to increase privacy where his lot sits lower than neighboring parcels. Lisa (city planning staff) told the commission the city code allows a “fence within a fence” when the second fence is wholly on the applicant’s property, does not rely on the existing fence for structural support and when the applicant accepts responsibility to maintain the space between the fences.
The permit report explained that Ford’s lot is about 2.8 acres in the southeast quadrant near Riverwood Estates and that the proposed wall would be engineered concrete with posts and a thin wall section. Ford told the commission the finished structure will be an earth-colored concrete wall and described the posts as roughly 20 inches thick and the wall panels about 4 to 4½ inches thick; he said the design will include a heavy-duty weed barrier in the gap between the two fences and that he had invited the neighbor to participate in placing a new fence on the common property line.
Commissioners asked staff and the applicant for details about how wide the gap between the fences would be and whether the city’s code sets a minimum width. Lisa said the plans in the packet did not call out a single exact gap measurement and that Riverton code requires only that the new fence be constructed wholly on the applicant’s property and that the space between fences be permanently maintained by the applicant.
There was no public comment. After discussion the commission approved PLZ-25-2001 with the conditions recommended by staff, including compliance with Riverton City Code and permanent maintenance of the space between the two fences. The motion passed on a voice vote.
Because the planning director must still review final engineering and certify that the height meets code requirements, the planning commission approval was limited to the conditional-use aspects and compliance with the ordinance; final height and building permit review remain administrative steps.
