Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fences And Walls topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff present ordinance to clarify fence, wall and RS‑20 setback standards
Summary
Planning staff outlined an ordinance drafted after Board direction to adjust front setbacks in RS‑20 and clarify measurement and height standards for fences and walls across the Neighborhood Protection and Red Rock overlays; commissioners asked about broader increases to residential wall heights and alternatives such as decorative fencing.
Martin Giesem, planning manager in the Advanced Planning Division, briefed the commission on an ordinance the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to prepare. Giesem said the changes would consider modifications to front setbacks in the RS‑20 zoning district and make clarifications to general standards for the Neighborhood Protection (RNP) and Red Rock overlays, and to fence‑and‑wall measurement and height rules. "Those being, to consider modifications to setbacks in the RS 20 zoning district and general standards for the neighborhood protection RNP overlay," Giesem said.
Giesem recounted that the Board had also approved a related text amendment earlier in the year that allows fences and walls up to 8 feet in height for commercial developments with highway frontages; the current ordinance aims to refine and correct measurement and other technical provisions. "That concludes the summary and happy to answer any questions," he added.
Commissioners asked whether broader increases in residential wall heights (for RS‑10, RS‑5 or RS‑3) had been considered. Staff said during the Title 30 rewrite the proposal to increase wall heights in residential districts lacked broad support, although increased heights were allowed where residential lots abut commercial or industrial zoning. One commissioner suggested exploring decorative fencing elements atop walls as a way to add effective height while keeping measurement rules consistent; staff said that approach could be considered.
Staff said the ordinance was removed from the meeting agenda for a formal public hearing (it was presented for briefing only) and will return with the appropriate notices and materials for the commission and public review.
