Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves minutes, claims and three land-use permits amid alley safety concerns
Summary
The city council approved last month’s minutes and claims and granted three land-use permits (two fences and a deck). A neighbor and a council member raised line-of-sight safety concerns about a six-foot privacy fence next to an alley; the fence installer said the fence provides a safe play area for an autistic child and offered to move it if the council requires.
The council opened its meeting, approved last month’s minutes and the claims for payment on a voice vote, and then turned to land-use permits for residential fences and a deck.
Council members voted to approve a permit for an event fence for Chad Christensen after brief discussion about property-line placement. They then approved a permit for an 8-by-16-foot deck replacing 8-by-8 front steps; the applicant said the deck would be set about 16 feet back from the property line.
The most contested item was a permit for a full-height privacy fence installed adjacent to an alley near the Methodist Church. A council member and at least one neighbor raised visibility and alley-access concerns, saying a solid fence could impair drivers’ sight lines. The council member who voiced concern asked whether the city has an ordinance requiring alley setbacks; the meeting record shows there is not a specified alley setback in the city code.
A speaker who identified himself as the fence installer and applicant explained the fence was installed with a grant from Renville County to create a safe play area for an autistic child. He said property pins and utilities were located and that the installed fence sits roughly 7–8 feet from an area of worn grass near the alley. He acknowledged a paperwork error on the permit filing but said the company typically does not install fences without permits. He offered to move the fence if the council directs that, saying, “If you think it’s best that we move it, we’ll do so. It’ll cost our company about $1,500 to send a crew down here to move that fence.”
After discussion the council moved, seconded and approved the fence permit by voice vote. The council’s votes on the three permits and the minutes/claims were conducted by voice; the record notes at least one member said “I oppose” during the minutes/claims vote but each motion carried.
Council members said they will consider whether to craft clearer guidance on setbacks near alleys to reduce safety uncertainty in future applications. The council completed the land-use items and moved on to reports later in the agenda.
