12 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Stern stated that generally the City looks at objective criteria related to the fence and that there seems to be a lot of issues going on here that do not related to the fence. She mentioned that Mr. Pretzel was at one time in support of the fence and submitted a joint application. Mr. Pretzel stated that the 2X 1 O were used to heighten the fence, not used to block the dirt from his property. He noted that he knows that is a civil matter, but that it is a dishonest issue as to how the fence was built. Mr. Deike stated that the one reason Mr. Pretzel withdrew his application was because the Planning Division approved Mr. Deike's his fence. Mr. Pretzel stated that that was not the reason he withdrew his name from the application. Mr. Deike stated he did not want to be singled-out and if he had to get a permit for an over-height fence, then he wanted others in the neighborhood to also get permits for their over-height fence. He explained that the reason for the hearing today is because he complained that Mr. Baker's over-height fence was built without a permit. He mentioned that he does not have a problem with the fence, but wants him to get a permit like he had to get a permit. Ms. Fink stated that she did not agree with Mr. Deike. She noted that Mr. Pretzel has lived in the neighborhood since day one and has been a very good neighbor. She explained that Mr. Deike moved in and immediately wanted an over-height fence and change everything. Ms. Fink presented pictures from her yard of the fence and stated that the fence does not look very nice. Ms. Stern asked Ms. Fink if she jointly built the common property fence with Mr. Baker. Ms. Fink replied that she did agree to that fence before the eight-foot fence was up. Ms. Stern asked Ms. Fink which part of the fence she objected to. Ms. Fink showed pictures of what she sees when looking out her kitchen window. She stated the fence is an eyesore sticking up. Ms. Stern questioned if she had an issue with another part of the fence where there is ajunction. Mr. Pretzel explained the fencing that Ms. Fink does not like. Ms. Stern acknowledged the area mentioned. Ms. Fink stated that the fence looks awful. Mr. Baker explain that during the course of this fence project and the tearing down of the old fence, from pre-construction, during construction, and after construction of the fence there were no complains, demands or requirements regarding the height of the fence from Mr. Pretzel. He stated there were no issues or requests that the fence was too high or that he asked to lower the fence. He noted that after the application was put together and submitted, with both their signatures, he felt they had a fence they both agreed on and were in good shape. He mentioned that between August 31, 2011 and October 4, 2011. Mr. Pretzel never came to him about the fence. He stated he found out that Mr. Pretzel was dissatisfied with the fence on October 5. 2011, when the City advised him that Mr. Pretzel removed his signature from the application. ilinutes. Zoning.lclrnini.rtrator. PI 1-0731 October 25, 2011 Page 4