Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council grants variance for corner fence at 5th and Utah after resident testimony
Summary
The Libby City Council, sitting as the Board of Adjustments, voted to grant a variance allowing a replacement fence at the 5th and Utah corner to remain despite encroaching on a visibility triangle after the applicant and neighbors testified it improved privacy and aesthetics. Councilor Zimmerman dissented.
The Libby City Council, acting as the Board of Adjustments, granted a variance for a corner fence at 5th and Utah after a public hearing at which the homeowner described safety and privacy concerns and neighbors voiced support.
Ryan Barnes, who identified himself at the podium as the applicant and resident of 504 Utah Avenue, asked the board to approve the existing fence as a variance rather than force a return to the older, lower barrier. "A fence that not only affords me and my family much needed privacy, especially on a corner, but it also provides us a bit of safety as well," Barnes said, noting that the sidewalk installed nearby changed the fence’s elevation relative to the street.
Board members questioned whether granting a variance for a replacement fence would set a precedent that effectively weakens the visibility-triangle ordinance. One councilor noted that the old fence predated current standards and said the application appeared to be a replacement rather than new construction, which weighed in favor of a variance. Another councilor said the contractor who installed the fence should have known the rules.
The council reviewed the variance criteria in municipal code 17.360.7 (as referenced in the hearing): whether special conditions existed, whether the variance would confer a special privilege, and whether the variance would injure public welfare. A council member who lives nearby said he had not observed safety problems at the intersection and cited neighborhood support in the application packet.
After public comment — including Mr. Orr, who said the improvement “doesn’t present any real problems” and that neighbors are pleased — Councilor [name called during roll] moved to grant the variance and a second followed. The mayor conducted a roll-call vote: Councilor Taylor — Aye; Councilor Kristen Smith — Aye; Councilor Ian Smith — Aye; Councilor Zimmerman — Nay; Councilor Berg — Aye. The motion carried and the variance was granted.
The board closed the public hearing and returned to the regular council agenda. The council did not attach additional conditions beyond standard findings required for a variance.
The decision allows the existing replacement fence to remain in its current form; the board’s finding relied in part on the applicant’s statement that the fence replaced a prior fence and on multiple neighbor comments supporting the improvement.
The record shows one dissenting vote expressing concern about the public-safety precedent such variances might create. The council treated the matter as a quasi-judicial decision and recorded the roll-call outcome. The public hearing was then closed.
