Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Shoreline council adopts 2025 development‑code updates after debate over chain‑link fencing
Summary
After a debate over whether vinyl‑coated chain‑link fences should be allowed at the property line, the Shoreline City Council approved Ordinance 1047 adopting 2025 development‑code batch amendments; an amendatory setback proposal failed after a reconsideration vote.
The Shoreline City Council on Dec. 1 approved Ordinance 1047, adopting a package of 2025 development‑code amendments including changes to how commercial fencing is regulated. The measure passed after an extended discussion about whether vinyl‑coated chain‑link fencing should be allowed at or behind building facades and a procedural reconsideration of an amendment.
Staff told the council the planning commission recommended the main package and presented examples showing how vinyl‑coated chain‑link fencing could be used in commercial zones if it is set back from the street to align with the front building facade. A staff member said the proposed language would “give us more leverage when those things pop up” by clarifying rules and enforcement approaches.
The council split over an amendment proposed to explicitly prohibit untreated chain‑link fencing, razor wire and barbed wire in public view and to require vinyl‑coated chain‑link in commercial zones to be located no closer than the front building facade. Mayor Roberts argued in favor of the setback, saying the amendment would support walkability and street safety: “If we’re trying to create a walkable…environment that’s friendly for pedestrians…rows of chain link fence is not something that I envision many people wanting to do.”
Other members raised practical concerns. Chancellor Radomati warned the amendment could impose costs on small businesses and noted many existing buildings are set back from sidewalks, making the proposed setback impractical for some property owners: “Chain link fencing is inexpensive compared to other fencing, thus why it’s chosen by small businesses…so I’m just concerned there’s a lot of examples for small business owners spending a lot of money.” Staff clarified that existing fences would be grandfathered as preexisting nonconforming features, and that owners would need to show proof of prior installation if enforcement issues arise.
The council first voted in favor of the amendatory language in a 5–2 roll call. Several members then said they had been confused about what specific language they had just approved and requested reconsideration. Following a successful motion to reconsider, the council re‑voted and the amendment failed 4–3. The council then voted to adopt Ordinance 1047 as recommended by the planning commission; the clerk recorded unanimous 'Aye' votes on the final passage.
Votes at a glance: the consent calendar was approved by unanimous voice/roll call earlier in the meeting; Ordinance 1047 passed as recommended by the planning commission after the amendatory language failed on reconsideration.
What happens next: staff will incorporate the adopted code language into the municipal code and implement the changes per normal ordinance effective procedures. The council recessed into an executive session after the meeting to discuss potential litigation as noted on the record.
(Reporting from the council meeting record: staff presentations, council member remarks and roll‑call votes.)
