Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council previewed ordinance to lower front‑yard fence height, clarify exceptions and reduce variances
Summary
Planning staff proposed zoning ordinance revisions to set a 4‑foot default front‑yard fence height (with 6‑foot allowed where the top 2 feet are 50% transparent), clarify when 8‑foot rear/side fences are allowed and consolidate fence standards to reduce variance requests and address sight‑line and safety concerns.
City planning staff presented proposed revisions to the fence provisions of the zoning code at the Dec. 17 work session, designed to consolidate rules, address public‑safety sight‑line issues and reduce frequent variance requests.
Clint Peters said the proposal would lower the standard allowable front‑yard fence height from 6 feet to 4 feet, while permitting a front‑yard fence up to 6 feet if the top two feet are at least 50 percent transparent (for example, decorative metal pickets). Rear and side yard fences in residential zones would retain a common 6‑foot standard with clear exceptions allowing up to 8 feet in situations such as grade differentials, adjacency to alleys or adjoining commercial uses. Peters said existing fences would not be affected; the changes would apply to new construction.
Why it matters: Over the past five years the city has seen roughly 40 variance applications on fence height. Staff said consolidating standards and explicitly listing front‑yard transparency requirements and automatic exceptions would reduce the number of variance hearings that otherwise would go to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Planning staff said they solicited input from neighboring cities, the development community, neighborhood associations and the Zoning Board of Adjustment and that the Planning Commission recommended the amendment by a 10–0 vote after work sessions and public hearings. Several council members applauded the proactive approach and noted that safety and visual access for law enforcement and drivers motivated the change.
Evidence: Presentation and Q&A on proposed code amendment (presentation and Planning Commission review at 01:40:13; staff summary and Q&A thereafter).
