Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVIII-14 Approve Variance – Fence Height – Michael Fuchs (2570 Cannon St)City Council Memorandum To:Mayor Fasbender and City Council From:Justin Fortney, City Planner Date:July 7, 2025 Item:Resolution for Variance #2025-18 –Fence Height –2570 Cannon St -Michael Fuchs Council Action Requested: 1.Approve the attached resolution with the findings and action directed by the City Council at their June16, 2025 meeting. Approval of a variance requires the support of at least six of seven members. Background Information: The City Council was generally in favor of the variance at their June 16, 2025 meeting. Staff said they would base the attached resolution on the Planning Commissions findings for approval. The applicants built a fence along their back property line in 1998 that is just under eight feet tall. The maximum allowed fence height since that time has continued to be six feet in residential areas. The applicant’s desire for a taller fence is because of a retaining wall behind their fence that is two feet high. They believe this reduces the effective height of a six foot tall fence. Citizens regularly want taller fencing due to one aspect or another of an adjacent property but comply with the requirements. To grant a variance, the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals must make a series of findings of fact to support a variance and the unique circumstances. Please see the attached June 9, 2025 Planning Commission staff report for full details and analysis. Financial Impact: N\A Advisory Commission Discussion: The Planning Commission voted 3-1 (Swedin Nay) to recommend approval of the variance at the June 9, 2025 meeting. Their findings were based on the difference of grade between properties, staff approved a permit for a pool and fence in 1998, and the fence proposed for replacement has been there since 1998. These findings are the basis for the attached resolution to approve the variance. Commissioner Swedin voted in opposition. Swedin stated that a variance should not granted just because it was already installed out of compliance or because the adjacent VIII-14 retaining walls make the fence less safe, when the effective height still meets the city safety standards of four feet tall around a pool. Michael and Barbara Fuchs,applicants, said they want a fence up to eight feet tall so it will effectively block someone for six feet high standing on the retaining wall behind their fence. Michael Fuchs said in 1998 he did not include the proposed height of the fence on the application, but he had previously told someone at the city that was his intention. John Rutledge, 1301 Eagle Bluff Dr.commented that justification for a variance should be related to the grade difference rather than because it is already there not meeting city code. He added there are so many things in Hastings that don’t meet code and really shouldn’t be there, which creates challenges. Council Committee Discussion: N\A Attachments: •Resolution for approval •Planning Commission Staff Report –June 9, 2025 VIII-14 HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO._________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT FOR MICHAEL FUCHS AT 2570 CANNON ST Council member _______________________ introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: WHEREAS, Michael Fuchs, requests up to a two foot fence height variance on property generally located at 2570 Cannon St and legally described as Lot 5,Block 1, BOHLKEN ESTATES 2ND ADDITION, Dakota County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, The Subject Property is Zoned R-2, Medium Density Residence per Hastings City Code Chapter 155.01 (R2, Medium Density Residence) -Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, Hastings City Code Chapter 155.05, Subd. (F)(4)–The maximum height of any fence installed within a residential zoning district of the City of Hastings is 6 feet; and WHEREAS, The Property Owner seeks up to a 2-foot variance to Hastings City Code Chapter 155.05(F)(4) to allow replacement of the existing fence that varies from just over six feet tall to just under eight feet tall along the rear property line; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 2025, the request was reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of Hastings, as required by state law, city charter and city ordinance; and WHEREAS the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request to the City Council subject to the findings of fact contained herein; and WHEREAS the City Council acting as the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals has reviewed the request and concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: That the City Council hereby approves the variance based on the following findings of fact: VIII-14 1)The difference of grade between properties present a practical difficulty.staff approved a permit for a pool and fence in 1998, and the fence proposed for replacement has been there since 1998. 2)Site conditions are unique to the subject tract of land. 3)The owner doesn’t seek to obtain the variance exclusively to increase the value or income potential of the lot. 4)Granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land improvements in the vicinity. 5)The property will not impair light, air, congestion, fire danger, public safety, or property values within the vicinity for the reasons listed above. 6)The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of ordinance. 7)The property is guided for low density residential development. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 8)The proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner, as a fence is an allowable accessory structure. 9)The practical difficulty is caused by the provisions of this chapter, site, and area conditions. 10)The variance does not alter the essential character of the locality. The parcel will continue to operate consistent with the way it has been. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: Approval of the variance is subject to the following conditions: 1.Conformance with the City Council Memo and attachments dated July 7, 2025. 2.The variance only applies to the fence along the rear lot line. 3.The proposed fence replacement shall not be taller than the existing fence that is just over six feet tall on the SW corner to just under eight feet tall at the NW corner. All other rear fencing is limited to six feet in height. 4.A building permit is required for privacy fences exceeding seven feet tall. This includes plan review and must either be designed and stamp by a licensed engineer or the applicable manufacture product ratings sufficient for the region must be submitted. Council member __________________ moved a second to this resolution and upon being put to a vote adopted by _____ present. Adopted by the Hastings City Council on July 7, 2025 by the following vote: Ayes: Nays: Absent: ATTEST:__________________________ Mary Fasbender, Mayor ________________________________ Kelly Murtaugh City Clerk VIII-14 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) City of Hastings )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of Hastings, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY, that I have carefully compared the attached copy of Resolution with the original on file in my office and the same is a full, true and complete copy thereof. WITNESS, my hand as such City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City of Hastings this ____ day of________________, 20___. ______________________________ Kelly Murtaugh, City Clerk SEAL STICKER VIII-14 To: Planning Commissioners From:Justin Fortney, City Planner Date:June 9, 2025 Item:Variance #2025-18 –Fence Height –2570 Cannon St -Michael Fuchs Planning Commission Action Requested Review and make recommendation to the City Council on the following action requested by Michael Fuchs on property located at 2570 Cannon St: 1)Grant a two foot variance for a privacy fence in a rear yard. Hastings City Code Chapter 155.05.F.4. -Fences and walls or hedges,limits fencing behind the front of the house to six feet tall. Background Information The existing wood privacy fence was constricted in 1998. It is six feet tall except in the rear, it starts at the south corner at six feet tall for aways then slowly gets taller until it is nearly eight feet tall at the north corner. In 1998 the applicant said he recalls discussing the need for a variance with city staff, but the permit was approved without a variance and constructed. Staff located the original building permit for a pool and fence in 1998 (attached). The permit application with site plan did not state the proposed fence height. The applicant noted on the site plan that an existing retaining wall results in a two foot grade indifference. The Planning Department stamped their approval. There are retaining walls behind the fence.The fence increases in height from just over six feet at the south to just under eight feet at the north corner. The applicant also has a retaining wall along part of his back property line. Where that retaining wall stops, the height of the fence quickly reaches near eight feet tall. Update (7/16/2025) Building Safety Department The Building Official recently commented that privacy fences exceeding seven feet tall require a building permit, plan review, and must either be designed and stamp by a licensed engineer or a design must be accompanied by product rating specifications for region wind load requirements from the manufacture. Zoning The property is zoned R-2 Single Family medium-density Residence along with the surrounding homes. Fences are allowed up to six feet tall behind the front of the house. Planning Commission Memorandum VIII-14 Public Notification Notification of the meeting was sent to all property owners within 350 feet of the proposed property. Staff has not received any questions or comments as of this writing. Variance Definition Variances are a permitted departure from strict enforcement of the ordinance as applied to a particular piece of property. To issue a variance, determination of findings of fact and conclusions supporting the variance must be determined. Variance Review City Code Chapter 30.02(F) establishes the requirements for granting variances. The City Council acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals with recommendation from the Planning Commission considers land use variances including to Chapter 155 Zoning Code that are not contrary to the public interest where owing to special conditions, and where a literal enforcement of the provision of the City Code would result in practical difficulties. Variances may be granted providing the following has been satisfied. ATTACHMENTS •Location Map •Pictures •1998 Building Permit Application •Land Use Application VIII-14 AE R I A L MA P VIII-14 Left side of house hi VIII-14