Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fence Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architecture board approves 6-foot street-side fence, tables north-side privacy section at 1286 M Florence
Summary
Montgomery City’s Architecture Review Board approved a 6-foot privacy fence on the street-facing (southern) portion of 1286 M Florence Street but tabled the northern privacy section pending a professional evaluation of a leaning brick retaining wall. The board also granted the height and setback variances needed for the approved portion.
The Montgomery City Architecture Review Board on Jan. 30 approved a 6-foot privacy fence along the southern (street) side of 1286 M Florence Street and tabled the requested northern privacy fencing until a structural evaluation of a deteriorating brick retaining wall is completed.
Petitioner Greg Parker, who identified himself as the husband of property owner Natalie McKenzie, asked the board for a privacy fence; he said he would “love for it to be 8 feet tall” but acknowledged that was unlikely. Neighbors raised safety concerns about a leaning brick wall that runs near the proposed northern fence alignment.
Board staff told members they had visited the site and recommended a professional evaluation, including a structural engineer and possibly an arborist, before any work that could affect the wall. A neighbor, identified in the meeting as Mr. Benet, said the wall is “about 3, 4 feet high” and “pooched out,” estimated repairs at roughly $50,000, and offered to do the work for free if the owner would grant a small quitclaim deed.
During debate board members noted that the zoning ordinance limits street-side fences in that location to 3 feet, that some zoning contexts allow up to 7 feet, and that historic-district precedent and the expedited review process typically limit privacy fences to 6 feet. Staff recommended limiting the privacy fence to 6 feet in the historic district.
A motion to approve a 6-foot fence on the Clanton/Clinton (street) side of the lot and to table the northern privacy-fence request until the board receives an evaluation of the brick retaining wall carried on a voice vote. After that motion passed, the board separately moved to grant the variances needed to permit a 6-foot fence (a height variance from the 3-foot street-side limit and a street-side setback variance); that motion passed as well.
The board asked staff to obtain the structural evaluation that would clarify whether fence posts or other work could make the wall worse, and to determine whether the large canopy tree near the wall poses a hazard. The board also noted that if tree removal became necessary staff could evaluate administrative removal or require a separate application.
What happens next: the petitioner may proceed with the approved southern portion under the conditions noted by staff and the board, while the northern privacy section remains tabled until the board receives the requested professional assessment of the retaining wall and any related arborist findings.
