Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Deike suggested we give it a try and, if she agrees, he would build the fence and pay for it all. He did <br /> note that the fence might step a little because the fence sticks out. <br /> Mr. Pretzel noted that he was okay with the step. <br /> Mr. Deike then offered $500 to Mr. Pretzel to make this all go away and we will all get out of here. <br /> Mr. Pretzel declined the money and stated that he wants the fence to match and Ms. Fink to agree. <br /> Mr. Deike asked Mr. Pretzel why the other fence does not match. <br /> Mr. Pretzel stated that Bob put that up and he agreed to the higher fence. He noted that he will probably <br /> add redwood fencing, but it is on the side, and the fence steps down. <br /> Mr. Deike stated that the fence is too high and is not six foot. <br /> Mr. Pretzel told him again that the high fence is on the side. <br /> Mr. Deike mentioned they no longer have a pellet gun, but has seen a neighbor shoot a BB gun into Mr. <br /> Pretzel's backyard. <br /> Mr. Deike stated that all he wants is privacy. He explained that he wants to please Mr. Pretzel and asked <br /> what he could do to leave both fences alone. <br /> Mr. Pretzel mentioned that he did not kick the fence down. <br /> Mr. Deike stated he would like this fence issued resolved and he does not have a problem if he has to build <br /> it and pay for it. He noted that if Ms. Fink does not agree then we all would be back here again. <br /> Mr. Otto closed the public hearing and clarified that a variance is not needed when a proposed fence is over <br /> 6 feet, but less than 8 feet. He explained that an administrative design review process is needed and this <br /> process is very common throughout town. He noted that the height of this existing fence is a common <br /> height and is consistent in this neighborhood and other neighborhoods. <br /> Mr. Otto stated that he appreciated Mr. Deike's proposal to resolve the issue by replacing the one section of <br /> fence if Ms. Fink agrees, however, he stated that whether Ms. Fink agrees or not, he does find the design of <br /> this fence to be acceptable. <br /> Mr. Otto explained that he would structure the condition of approval to reflect a signed agreement from Ms. <br /> Fink is acceptable, however, if it is not agreeable with Ms. Fink, he will approve the fence. It is not <br /> uncommon in neighborhoods for fences to vary in height along the property due topography or due to <br /> property line situations where it is owned by multiple owners. Mr. Otto stated that he finds the design of <br /> this fence to be acceptable and he requested that the condition of approval be structured to require M. Deike <br /> to discuss the additional section of fence with Ms. Fink and if she is acceptable of the new fencing, for her <br /> to provide us with a letter that she is ok with it. If she is not ok with it, Mr. Otto reiterated that this <br /> approval would still stand. <br /> Mr. Otto stated that this fence application is not an unusual request and the design of the fence is attractive <br /> on both sides, so it is called a good-neighbor fence. He stated that he would like the fencing offered to Ms. <br /> Fink to be the same design. <br /> Minutes, Zoning Administrator, P11-0664 October 4, 2011 <br /> Page 4 <br />