Wales planning panel denies front‑yard sound‑barrier fence, urges applicant to seek council variance

The Wales Planning and Zoning Committee declined to approve a building permit for an 8‑foot sound‑barrier fence proposed at 85 West 200 North, saying the fence does not comply with town height and setback standards and that only the town council can grant a variance.

Don Perry, who said he was representing resident Natalie Howard, described a fence plan that would run 42 feet at 7 feet tall, include a 12‑foot opening for vehicle access and continue about 40 feet at 8 feet tall. Perry said the fence was being requested for medical reasons, asserting that truck noise has triggered seizures for the resident and that the barrier was intended to reduce vibrations and sound that affect her health. "She's trying to do it the right way," Perry said.

Committee members acknowledged the applicant’s medical concerns but repeatedly told Perry that planning and zoning does not have authority to issue variances. The chair read the town fence standards aloud, saying: "No fence or wall may exceed 6 feet in height, 4 feet in the front yard setback, nor 3 feet in the clear‑view triangle." The committee said the proposed 7‑ to 8‑foot sections in the front yard would violate those limits.

Because the application did not comply with the ordinance, a committee member moved to deny the permit and recommended the applicant seek a variance from the town council. The committee directed staff to prepare findings of fact describing the application and the denial and to include a letter with guidance on how to submit an appeal to the city recorder. The chair said the committee would try to expedite council consideration if an appeal is filed.

The committee asked the applicant to file the appeal in writing with the city recorder and explained that the town council — at a publicly noticed meeting — is the body that can consider and grant a variance under the town’s criteria, which include showing unreasonable hardship, a special circumstance attached to the property, and that the variance would not harm the public interest. The committee indicated the applicant appears to have elements that could meet those tests but that the formal appeal and public meeting process is required.

The committee’s denial was recorded at the meeting and committee members said they would include a recommendation to the council that it consider an expedited variance review. Staff gave the applicant paperwork and instructions for preparing the appeal packet and findings.

The committee also discussed alternate ways to reduce noise — for example, window insulation or other in‑house measures — but emphasized their duty to follow the town code and public‑meeting procedures.

The committee did not approve the front‑yard sound‑barrier permit; it recommended the applicant pursue a variance from the town council and tasked staff with preparing the required appeal materials.