2026-10-15 - Board of Zoning Appeals

00:24[music]

00:55[music]

01:37[music]

02:09Heat. Heat.

02:13[music]

02:38>> [music]

02:47[music]

03:24[music]

03:37>> Heat.

03:40[music]

03:51[music]

03:53Heat.

04:05>> [music]

04:29[music]

05:09[music]

05:14[music]

05:23>> Heat. Heat.

05:32[music]

05:57Board of Zoning Appeals will come to

05:58order. Um, I want to just let you know

06:02what our process is so that you

06:04understand what we're doing here today.

06:07We only have one case. Um, so that'll be

06:09the first and only one we hear. Uh what

06:12we're going to do is I'm going to um

06:16have staff and one of the board members

06:19that was out to the site this week give

06:22us some information about why we're

06:24here, what the request is, and then um

06:27we'll ask the applicant to come forward,

06:30fill in any holes, um tell us anything

06:33else they want us to know about the

06:35request, and then we're going to open it

06:38up for public comment. So, anybody else

06:41that's here that wants to talk to us

06:43about it is more than welcome to come

06:45up. Um, if there's letters in the file,

06:48we'll refer to those, too.

06:52[clears throat] Excuse me. And then once

06:54we have everything we think we need, the

06:56person that's in charge of this file

06:59will then close the public hearing,

07:02which means we just talk about

07:04everything amongst ourselves. we're just

07:06not taking any more input

07:09unless [clears throat] we have very

07:10specific questions of the applicant. Um

07:14once we we have a conversation, the

07:17person that's in charge of the file has

07:19the ability to do one of three things.

07:22They have the ability to table the the

07:26request if they feel they need more

07:28information or need more time with it.

07:32That doesn't happen very often.

07:35um they can approve the request or they

07:37can um deny the request and then after

07:41that we just have uh the applicant work

07:44with staff to work through what needs to

07:46be done from there. So with that I am

07:50going to ask that the um minutes of our

07:56last meeting be read.

08:00A motion to wave the reading of the

08:02minutes and approve as written.

08:05>> Second. Okay. Second. Does anybody have

08:07any changes?

08:10>> Nope. Okay. Last meeting was actually

08:14our um it was an education meeting. So,

08:18we're talking about the meeting before

08:20that.

08:21>> We had business.

08:22>> Oh, we did.

08:25>> Okay, great. So, that was for September

08:2717th. All those in favor?

08:29>> I

08:30>> I opposed.

08:31>> Hopefully those that couldn't make it

08:33last time we had a chance to watch our

08:36pretty faces on video, [laughter]

08:39um we videoed it for you. So, all right.

08:43And with that, we're going to start um

08:46our public hearing which is at 761

08:48Spencer Northeast. [snorts]

08:50[clears throat]

08:51If Mr. Brady would give us some

08:53background here, it' be great.

08:59Okay. Our first case on the agenda today

09:01is 761 Spencer Street Northeast.

09:05The applicant is requesting a

09:07dimensional variance to increase the

09:09permitted height of a privacy fence in

09:11the defined front yard from 3 feet to 6

09:15ft.

09:19The property is located in the city's

09:21northeast side in the Crusten

09:22neighborhood indicated there with a

09:24yellow star.

09:28The Bridge to Our Future community

09:30master plan identifies this area as the

09:32compact neighborhood. The intent of the

09:35compact neighborhood is to create,

09:37maintain, and promote a variety of

09:39housing opportunities while enhancing

09:41the desired physical characteristics of

09:44the city's existing neighborhoods. These

09:46areas support small-scale commercial

09:48uses and contribute to the vibrancy of

09:51neighborhood centers. These areas align

09:54with the traditional neighborhood and

09:55the mid 20th century neighborhood

09:57classifications.

09:59The land use of the compact neighborhood

10:01is a mix of housing and small office,

10:04commercial, religious, K through2

10:06schools and other civic uses that are

10:09commonly located at corners or along

10:10major streets. As I mentioned, this

10:13property is within the Cresten uh

10:15neighborhood. Cresten has an area

10:17specific plan or a neighborhood level

10:19plan that identifies this property. Also

10:22within the compact neighborhood, the

10:24Cresten area specific plan um notes that

10:26the compact neighborhood is

10:28predominantly single family housing and

10:30may grow to provide more diverse housing

10:32options in the future.

10:36The property is a part of a larger

10:39independent/ass assisted living

10:40facility. Um let me go back one slide.

10:43You can see it here kind of extending

10:44from Union all the way to the subject

10:47property which is kind of at the end of

10:48the development.

10:51The development is accessed from Union

10:53Avenue Northeast and Marietta Street

10:55Northeast.

11:00There are three structures on the

11:02property. Well, actually a fourth one

11:04that kind of straddles the property

11:05line. Um the structures on the east and

11:08the west ends of the property which are

11:10running vertical on your screen are

11:13residential and the middle structure at

11:15the south of the property closest to the

11:17sidewalk is a carport. The site is

11:20roughly two to three feet higher than

11:22the sidewalk elevations which you'll see

11:24in the street view photos that I'll show

11:25kind of towards the end of my overview

11:27of the case.

11:30As I mentioned at the at the beginning

11:32of the presentation, the applicant is

11:34requesting a dimensional variance of 3

11:36feet to increase the permitted height of

11:39a privacy fence in the defined front

11:41yard from 3 feet to 6 feet. Oh, here's

11:45the street view photos that I mentioned.

11:47As you can see, the the site slopes up

11:50away from the sidewalk along towards the

11:53residential properties in the carport.

11:55And there's an existing chain link fence

11:57that that runs parallel to the sidewalk.

12:02Then just another photo.

12:05And then finally, another photo a little

12:07bit further to the west.

12:11The applicant is proposing a six-foot

12:13vinyl privacy fence along the sidewalk

12:15indicated there in the plan in red. The

12:18space between a building and the street

12:20is the defined front yard and privacy

12:23fences are limited to a maximum of 3

12:25feet in the in the front yard.

12:28The graphic on your screen shows the

12:30front yard there in that yellow box

12:32towards the south side of the property.

12:34Anything to the north or towards the top

12:36of the screen above the yellow box would

12:39be considered a sideyard or a rear yard

12:41as you get further up. Um the areas that

12:44a 6ft privacy fence would be allowed are

12:46indicated on the plan there in those

12:48light blue dashes.

12:50And if we look back at the applicant

12:53screen, they're proposing the fence a

12:55little bit further south closer to the

12:56sidewalk. Again, necessitating that

12:58variance for increased height.

13:05Um, the applicant has stated that

13:06they're not unable to locate the fence

13:08in an approved location because it would

13:11bisect landscaped gardens that residents

13:13have planted and it would leave portions

13:16of buildings exposed. The applicant has

13:18stated that there are security concerns

13:20for the site and that the privacy fence

13:22is needed for site safety and security.

13:24Um the applicant has offered to work

13:26with staff um to find a location

13:28potentially between the sidewalk and the

13:30building to accommodate the privacy

13:33fence with landscaping. Um if the board

13:35is amendable to approving the variance,

13:37I would suggest a condition is added

13:39that the applicant work with staff to

13:41provide landscaping or other screening

13:43elements to soften the the fence and the

13:46sidewalk.

13:47And with that, I will turn it over to

13:49Miss Schaefer.

13:53Thank you. Afternoon everyone. Hi. Um

13:58I uh drove uh over to this neighborhood

14:00at 761 Spencer Street Northeast. Um I

14:04drove by it three times. I don't know if

14:06I should admit that, but [clears throat]

14:07it front Spencer Street. Um and uh and

14:11what you see from the road is a uh

14:14sidewalk, a bit of an elevation and then

14:18a chain link fence which is in a bit of

14:21disrepair. It's listing to the side a

14:23little bit. Um [clears throat] it unlike

14:26the rest of the neighborhood where in

14:28the front yard you are seeing um the

14:31fronts of houses. Um in this particular

14:34case when you drive by Spencer Street,

14:36it is not the front of the house. It's

14:37the, as you can see on the picture here,

14:40it's the back of the carport, um, and

14:42some pine trees and then the sides of

14:44the houses there. It is adjacent to a

14:48school. Um, and then as you can see from

14:50the picture immediately on the other

14:51side of it, there's there's a

14:52residential um, single family home that

14:55fronts Spencer Street. Um and then as

14:58you come if you come into the area and

15:01into the culde-sac of the of the houses

15:03um as you can see here the fronts of the

15:05houses um themselves actually front that

15:07parking lot um [clears throat]

15:11off of that creating a bit of a

15:12culde-sac. So um in this particular case

15:16uh again it's it's a compact residential

15:18neighborhood. um lots of houses, a lot

15:21of houses have fencing um in and around

15:25their homes. Um as for front yard

15:28fencing, um I didn't see any that were 6

15:31feet tall that was white that ran right

15:33directly in front of somebody's front

15:35yard. Um then again, I don't necessarily

15:37think I would see that, but um for

15:40purposes of the visit, I will note that.

15:42Um but happy to have the applicant come

15:44up and talk if Chairwoman, you're okay

15:46with that.

15:46>> Sure.

15:48Okay, if we can yeah the applicant come

15:50forward and give us any information you

15:53would like to share.

15:55>> Yeah, my name is Isaac Taylor. Um, work

15:58with Rest Haven Homes. I've been there

15:59for a number of years. Oh, sorry. There

16:01we go. Sorry. Name is Isaac Taylor. Work

16:04with Rest Haven Homes there. Um, and

16:07yeah, so one of the big um concerns uh

16:10for us as has been mentioned is the

16:12safety and security of the property. Um,

16:14we've had people um jump over that.

16:17you'll be able to easily climb that

16:19fence that is there now. Um that they

16:21have stolen um items from our residents.

16:24Um and it's just an easy access point

16:26that's quite a ways away from our main

16:28building, so not as easily observed.

16:30We've um added some security cameras and

16:33stuff down there, but it is still um

16:35something that can easily be jumped

16:36over. We've had people um scale that

16:39fence, steal stuff. We know they've come

16:41and gone through that area because we've

16:43seen, you know, found one of the things

16:44broken on the other side of the fence.

16:46So, we know that that was their access

16:48point. Um, so just really looking to uh

16:51secure that area um and make our um

16:54residents, you know, they're a little

16:55bit more of a vulnerable population.

16:57Really make them feel uh more secure uh

17:00in their in their homes there. Um I see

17:05I did there are some other see I can

17:07pull this up here. Here we go. other

17:09houses in the area where we see um I I

17:12made note of a few um just right in the

17:15immediate couple blocks where they have

17:16fences that are um in the sideyard which

17:21is kind of what this um boils down to is

17:24it it is like as you mentioned in the

17:27side of um the residences and then the

17:29back of the carport. So, there's a few

17:31examples of fences that I found in the

17:33area that are um in what would be kind

17:37of considered the sideyards that have um

17:39fences going right along the uh property

17:43line or along the uh sidewalk rather.

17:50Um but yeah, I think most everything

17:52else has been covered. Like I said, it's

17:54it's really just something um that we

17:56want to do to promote the safety and

17:58security of our our residents, maintain

18:00their sideyards where they have um a lot

18:02of them have put a lot of work into the

18:04landscaping around there. Um and

18:06ideally, I'd like to keep the fence

18:08where it is to um maintain that safe

18:11space for them and [snorts] be able to

18:13maintain the areas that they've put uh

18:14that work into.

18:16>> Yeah. Thank you so much. And like

18:18excellent investigative skills. Yeah. Uh

18:22just to be clear for the record, this is

18:24just a you're suggesting that you just

18:26lift out the existing fence and replace

18:30it with the white vinyl. So it's going

18:32to go back into the same footprint that

18:34the fence currently exists in.

18:36>> That would be my ideal scenario. Yeah.

18:38Is just to have the exact same

18:40footprint. Um, and we've been in talks

18:41with the uh school Kent Hills that we

18:44border with all along um asking them

18:47about what their thoughts were on

18:48replacing that fence there. And they've

18:50had no problems um with it at all. Um

18:53yeah, that that would be my ideal is to

18:55just um remove that chain link fence and

18:57put the the privacy fence right where it

19:00lies now. And how many feet are between,

19:03and this might be one for Rowan, between

19:05the like back of the carport and the

19:08fence line as it exists now.

19:12>> 10.

19:13>> You got it.

19:14>> Oh, no.

19:16>> Oh, lovely.

19:35>> [music]

19:44[music]

19:54>> Heat. Heat.

19:59[music]

20:04Heat.

20:20[music]

20:25[music]

20:31Heat. Heat. Heat.

21:00>> [music]

21:26[bell]

21:27[music]

21:37[music]

21:49[music]

22:09[music]

22:15[music]

22:23>> Heat. Heat.

22:34[music]

22:44Heat. Heat.

23:02[music]

23:11>> [music]

23:36>> Heat. Heat.

23:40[music]

23:46>> [music]

23:59>> Heat. Heat.

24:12>> [music]

24:20>> Heat.

24:22[music] Heat.

24:41>> [music]

24:50>> Heat up here.

24:54Heat. Heat.

24:59[music]

25:15[music]

25:15Heat.

25:31Heat.

26:06Heat. Heat.

26:24[music]

26:29Heat. Heat.

26:32[music]

26:42[music]

27:00Can I get a motion to come back to

27:01order, please?

27:02>> Well, in regular a motion to resume the

27:06meeting.

27:06>> Second.

27:07>> All those in favor?

27:08>> I

27:09>> opposed. Okay. Okay. So, um I think we

27:13were talking about the fence. Uh and so

27:16when you know we we are seeing in the

27:19packet here that you could put a fence

27:21sort of in between the buildings and and

27:24abide by code. And so there is that

27:27strip of land between the existing fence

27:29and the back of the carport. And it

27:31seems like you want to maintain that.

27:33And so um can you talk a little bit

27:36about the uses of that land and why

27:37that's important to the residents?

27:40>> Yeah. Um, so yeah, that that that space

27:44of land there, it gives them um kind of

27:46a buffer. Uh, there's some that have um

27:49done quite a bit of landscaping there

27:52and it's as kind of their side and

27:53backyards um for their units and they

27:57enjoy um being able to use that space

28:00easily access it um alongside of the

28:03apartments. There are um actually see if

28:06I can bring it back up here.

28:12Does

28:13Yeah. So um you can see here alongside

28:16of the buildings they have um plantings

28:19here that um they you know enjoy

28:22maintaining. Um

28:24>> I see. So if you were to put the fence

28:26in between, let's say that carport and

28:28that

28:29>> exact

28:30>> that house right there, it would

28:31basically go where the bush near the

28:33eaves trough is, right? And then I see.

28:36And then you're saying that they would

28:37not be able to then

28:38>> it wouldn't be accessible to them,

28:40>> difficult to access the

28:43>> um and then the this other end of it,

28:45this area here, the couple that has

28:47recently moved into here um I think

28:50probably since these pictures have been

28:51taken have really done a lot to um

28:54improve their their side um area here as

28:57well as this corner um there. So ideally

29:00I would like to replace the that

29:03existing fence with that one um to give

29:05them that to be able to maintain that

29:08space that they enjoy um being in and

29:10not uh and then it also for security as

29:13well. There are windows you can see

29:16>> um that would still be um exposed with

29:19the fence um going between the two

29:21buildings.

29:22>> Gotcha. Very helpful. Thank you so much.

29:25Um Chairwoman, that's the end of my

29:27questions for now. Thank you.

29:29>> Does anybody else have questions of the

29:30applicant?

29:33>> Yes.

29:34>> Yeah. Just um

29:35>> yeah,

29:36>> just a couple quick questions. Um so

29:40very sensitive to the the safety

29:41concerns that you addressed um because I

29:44I mean it is a little alarming if

29:45there's people who are who are breaking

29:47into the property. Um and of course not

29:49knowing like the full scope of those

29:51security issues like when they're

29:52happening, how they're happening, time

29:54of day. I guess I'm just curious if

29:56there were other options that were

29:58pursued that didn't involve maybe such

30:03I guess kind of an intrusive measure

30:05along kind of an important sight line

30:07near a school. So, um I guess you know I

30:10I heard you you talked about like adding

30:12cameras. I guess I'm curious if there

30:14was any other considerations around like

30:16upgrading window safety, um, lighting,

30:19motion sensor lighting, um, perhaps a

30:23lower fence that could still be near the

30:25road, but that also included like

30:27abrasive plantings like rose bushes that

30:30deter people from getting near them or

30:31trying to climb over them for fear of

30:33getting stuck. Um, or even having um,

30:36like private security that rolled

30:38through on times when there was

30:40concerns. Um, so just wondering if there

30:43was any of those other things that were

30:44given consideration before this

30:46particular adaptation was was pursued.

30:49>> Yeah, definitely. Um, so yeah, we do

30:51have um a a security company that does a

30:55drive-thru property um a couple times a

30:57night. Um typically uh the theft issues

31:01we've had um have happened during the

31:03day or I mean rather uh have happened at

31:06night but we've also had people um the

31:08residents observe uh people coming

31:11through in the daytime. We've had

31:12recently people um going through

31:14knocking on the doors asking for um

31:18money. Somebody went into somebody's

31:19apartment um and then actually stole

31:22something. Um that was during the day

31:24recently. We've added um there are um

31:27dusk to dawn lights on some of the

31:30buildings. We do have a uh a large

31:33parking light

31:35um kind of on top of that the carport

31:38that's in the back there. Um I don't

31:40think you can see it from any of these

31:41pictures. Um that does illuminate that

31:43area. There's dust to dawn lights and

31:45cameras on here on this building here.

31:47Um

31:49um so yeah, there there are have been

31:52things that we've done um and this is

31:53just kind of that next level um to make

31:56it um and and to answer your question

31:59about other types of fencing. Um I don't

32:02know that the a three-foot privacy fence

32:05as as it uh the code allows would really

32:09do much to deter people from, you know,

32:11jumping over the fence and still coming

32:13on like they are.

32:15>> Okay. Thank you.

32:17Okay, Miss Swanson,

32:22>> thank you. My questions are pretty much

32:25along the same lines because I think

32:27security the residents is a concern.

32:31Sounds like you've put in quite a few

32:34measures to try to do that. Have the

32:37problems gotten worse, gotten better?

32:42Frequency of problems? I live in a

32:44residential neighborhood and these

32:47things do happen unfortunately. So, how

32:51prevalent is this and have the measures

32:53you've put in had any impact?

32:56>> Um,

32:58I don't know that what we've done has

32:59had a significant impact. I mean, I know

33:01that um the security folks have I can

33:04think of one instance where they did

33:05catch somebody in the process of getting

33:08ready to cut off somebody's catalytic

33:10converter and they scared them off the

33:12property. Um so they have caught people

33:14in the act at at nighttime. Um but we

33:18have had, you know, cars stolen. We've

33:20had people going around looking for

33:21unlocked doors, rifling through cars. Um

33:24and um

33:27so I wouldn't say that it's decreased

33:29recently. I think we still have um you

33:32know every so often we will have people

33:35going through and we've had planting

33:37stolen um I think uh

33:43three three four months ago maybe back

33:46in the spring we had um one of the

33:48residents had just put plants in that in

33:50this corner right

33:53right here they had just put some um uh

33:56[clears throat] plantings in. Somebody

33:57jumped that fence and took the plants

33:59right out of the ground, which seems

34:02like a silly thing to steal, but um that

34:05is something just a couple months ago we

34:07had um happened where they could see

34:08that they had just planted something.

34:10They jumped the fence and took the

34:11plants that they had just put in there

34:13right out of the ground.

34:15And as far as um because I spent some

34:18time driving around there too and I

34:20won't say how many times I drove past or

34:23the scenic route I took to finally find

34:26Spencer with the help of one of your

34:28facilities people

34:30[gasps]

34:31there there's a lot of opportunity to

34:33enter onto that property from a lot of

34:35places. So, people knocking on doors,

34:38um, entering the property. I I

34:41understand security concerns right along

34:44the fence line.

34:45>> Mhm.

34:47>> But

34:49I guess what I'm saying is

34:52sometimes a fence also provides cover

34:55for people who are doing things they

34:57shouldn't be doing. And I don't know if

35:01personally the fence is the only

35:04solution to keeping people from coming

35:06in and knocking on doors or going

35:09through the parking lot at their

35:11catalytic converter. Do you have any

35:13data or information on that?

35:16Um, so yeah, I I I would agree that it's

35:19not a way there's, you know, ultimately

35:21no way to completely, you know, without

35:23putting a huge fence around the whole

35:25entire property, no way to keep people

35:27completely off. Um, but this eliminates

35:30one one area where they can come in. So

35:32now, if they are entering the property,

35:35um, you're coming by the main building,

35:37which has a lot more people there. It's

35:39a lot more um more lights, uh, more

35:42staff members. Um, so that there's a lot

35:45more activity up there that you've got

35:46to walk past versus just hopping the

35:49fence and being right there where

35:51there's um, you know, more of our our

35:55residents are a little more exposed down

35:56there where whereas uh, if we're if

35:58we're able to secure this far edge of

36:01the property, then they have to if

36:02they're going to come in, they have to

36:04come by the main building which is much

36:06more illuminated, has more people there.

36:08Um, so,

36:10>> and forgive me, I think I read this.

36:12You're proposing a fence all along the

36:14school side as well. The same.

36:17>> Yes. Yep. So, this this fence would um

36:21go Yeah. from just basically everywhere

36:24that where there is a chain link. Let me

36:26see if I can Yeah. So, we would be um

36:31going this front area and then down. It

36:34would continue on. our property

36:36continues um to the north here and it

36:39would go until the next property line

36:41just a little bit further up.

36:44>> And then as I was driving around your

36:46property, I noticed that there was a lot

36:48of um taller chain link fences with

36:51vegetation growth. I mean,

36:55is that any consideration? You talked a

36:58little bit about the alternatives to

36:59fencing, too. And I don't know if this

37:02is part of our consideration, but a

37:06solid white vinyl fence along there.

37:10Even in the examples you showed us, um

37:14they were more wooden. There's ways to

37:16have screening and privacy without such

37:20a um

37:22obtrusive, and that's my word, um type

37:26of fence. Did you look into why this

37:28type of fence are you requesting?

37:31>> Um, so yeah, I mean this in terms of

37:34going with the white vinyl versus

37:35others, that's just um kind of what

37:37we've we settled on as um we like the

37:40look of it there. The maintenance is

37:42easier. Um and you know, long-term it's

37:45a it's a lower maintenance. You have a

37:48longer warranty on them versus wood

37:50fence is more upkeep. Um that kind of

37:52thing. Um, and chain link, I guess,

37:56isn't something we had really

37:58considered. A higher chain link. Um, but

38:00I mean, I' I'd say we'd be open to um,

38:03discussions if if a variance can be

38:05allowed for, you know, a wood fence

38:07versus the the white fence if um, you

38:10think that would change the look. Um,

38:12everybody that we had talked to kind of

38:14likes that that nice clean look of that

38:17white um, vinyl fence. And then I have

38:20one last question if you all will

38:22indulge me. Um

38:25>> you said everybody we talked to,

38:28>> how about the neighbors across the

38:30street in the area? Again, it looked

38:32like as I I drove it, it's a very nice

38:34little neighborhood. Lots of trees, lots

38:36of walkability, lots of visibility from

38:40the

38:40>> the street and the sidewalk into

38:42everybody's property.

38:44um

38:46is what kind of public outreach did you

38:49do?

38:50>> I haven't talked to there the people

38:53directly across the street. There's

38:54somebody kind of kitty corner um who

38:56would have fell within the 300 ft um

38:58that I did talk to and he um was all he

39:01was all for it. Um I don't know that it

39:05matters or not. I'm also within that 300

39:07foot. So I'm all for it. But [laughter]

39:11that's kind of kind of a side note

39:13there. But yeah, I I say I did talk to

39:15the one neighbor um across the street in

39:18down a little bit and he was um he was

39:21totally fine with it and he totally

39:22understood the needs for um security for

39:25our population.

39:27>> Thank you.

39:29>> I do have maybe two questions for um one

39:33for Miss Schaefer. As you were driving

39:35around, how much did you see much

39:36pedestrian traffic on Spencer? And um if

39:39if you went or Miss Wson, if you went um

39:42during school hours at all, did it seem

39:44like there were kids and families

39:46walking that stretch?

39:48>> I went after work um around 6:00 p.m. I

39:53did not notice I noticed one pedestrian

39:56about a block

40:01near the school. Um but I didn't see any

40:05any others. Um, it could have just been

40:08a quiet time, but I didn't see very many

40:09pedestrians walking.

40:13>> Okay, I'll fess up. I drove it at 11:30

40:15today. [laughter]

40:17>> Um, but I will say my son lived a couple

40:20blocks from there a couple of years ago.

40:22Okay,

40:22>> so I'm familiar with the area. There's a

40:25community garden. There's

40:27>> It's a residential neighborhood. I mean,

40:30I'm sure there are people who walk and

40:32people who don't walk, it's not like a

40:34destination, but everybody in any

40:36neighborhood has dogs or whatever, but I

40:38didn't notice an abundance of people out

40:41either way. Just curious.

40:43>> I went by also in the middle, but it

40:45wasn't like a school. The school was in

40:48session went by, so I didn't see a lot,

40:51but there there's quite a bit of

40:53traffic,

40:55>> you know. I had to be careful, pull

40:56myself off the side of the road to to

40:59look on Spencer. Um, and then there's

41:02also I drove into the complex to try to

41:06get a better visual of what I was

41:08looking at. There is an entrance off of

41:10>> Is that a name? Asher.

41:12>> What?

41:13>> Asher. Asher. Yep.

41:15>> Yeah, there's an entrance there. I

41:16couldn't get out because they have it

41:18chained.

41:19>> Okay. um which you know I guess a fire

41:22truck could get through there if they

41:24needed to. But um so there's a there's

41:27an entrance in the neighborhood on a

41:31side street and it doesn't sound like

41:33you're worried about fencing that side.

41:36>> Uh at some point we would probably be

41:38looking into a a different fence there

41:41as well. Um, part of this has also been

41:43u part of this whole project would has

41:45been adding a a more secure gate there.

41:49Um, because we've had people back into

41:51that and knock it over and then cars can

41:53come and go through there. Um, but

41:55putting a more secure gate so then we

41:57know any cars especially entering or

41:59exiting the property are going by um

42:01that through that main entrance by the

42:03main building.

42:04>> Yeah. And that actually was related to

42:06my second question. And so I don't know

42:08if maybe one slide back from this or um

42:13just trying to understand the extent of

42:15the property. There's not really a good

42:18one, but yeah. Um

42:21uh go to Yeah, that one's probably the

42:23best one. So if I consider the entirety

42:27of this parcel,

42:29>> would the expectation at some point be

42:32that the whole parcel is ranked with

42:35some sort of either fencing or gate,

42:39including probably neighbors

42:42uh budding properties with fences on the

42:44back of their property? I'm just trying

42:46to understand if at some point would the

42:48entire property be enclosed or

42:50protected?

42:52So,

42:54um yeah, right now um there is a fencing

42:59basically um starting from up here. You

43:02guys can see my screen right? Okay.

43:04>> So, um from right there, there's a fence

43:06that comes down. There's a fence that

43:09runs all along the back here. And then

43:11up here, um there is a a chain link

43:15fence here. And this is where that um

43:17that chain is. So, we're also looking at

43:19adding in um a little bit more solid

43:22gate there um to make sure that cars

43:24can't enter or exit. Um and then again,

43:27fence runs down along here. A fence all

43:30along your

43:32>> um and then this would be where the um

43:36>> the new fence would

43:37>> the Yeah, the new privacy fence would

43:39end right there. So, it'd be going all

43:41along here where we have a more exposed

43:43area versus, you know, I'm not as

43:46concerned about these um where it goes

43:48into a backyard right now because you if

43:51somebody's has to go, you know, through

43:54somebody else's property and then jump

43:56onto ours.

43:57>> Um and a lot of those do have extra

43:59vegetation growing on it. So, another

44:02deterrent there. Um but yeah, so the

44:05privacy fence would be going from here

44:07down to here. And then again, there's a

44:09fence already existing along here. And

44:11then there's a fence all along here. Um,

44:14all the way out to the edge of the

44:16property. That fence ends about right

44:18here.

44:18>> Okay.

44:18>> Is that a chain link?

44:21>> Um, I'm trying to think. I believe all

44:26Yeah, as far as I know, yeah, I think

44:28everything there is a chain. This is a a

44:30privacy fence here. Um, this one here is

44:33a privacy fence. Um, but most of the um

44:37what's behind our apartments is chain

44:39link.

44:41>> Thank you. That was that was helpful.

44:43Thank you.

44:46>> Just following up quickly because I

44:48think that's what I saw. Again, I was

44:50looking at existing fencing

44:52>> quite a bit and I didn't notice

44:55um along those stretches in the back

44:58that it was the white vinyl privacy

45:01fence. It was more fences with

45:04vegetation.

45:05>> Yeah. A majority of the existing fencing

45:08is um that chain link fence.

45:11>> Okay.

45:11>> Right. But sorry, can I just ask one

45:13real quick question? But they could put

45:15up this white privacy fence in their

45:17backyards if they wanted to. It's just

45:19existing is chain link fence.

45:21>> Yeah. As far as I know, any of those

45:23areas that I we could go the way I

45:26understand it, we could any of those

45:27spots we could put that white privacy

45:29fence in. I mean, even our our line here

45:31along where the school is, that's not in

45:33question. It's this just this section

45:36along the street here.

45:38>> Um, we can put the as I mean, again, as

45:40far as I know, we can put that white

45:42privacy fence between houses um or in

45:45the side or backyards. It's the

45:48>> um the front area here.

45:51>> Yep, that's correct. So, I think the

45:52only spot that would maybe warrant

45:55additional discussion is the closer to

45:56the drive entrance off Marietta is maybe

45:59where some of that would change and we

46:01would apply front yard standards.

46:03Without seeing a plan, I can't specify

46:05how we would apply those, but that would

46:07be the only location where there might

46:09be a question.

46:10>> Yeah. Rowan, can you talk a little bit

46:12about why I mean the the so-called front

46:16yard [clears throat] on this property

46:18for 761 is actually a carport. Um, it

46:22seems more akin to a backyard. So, I'm

46:23curious why um

46:26why the why it's 761 Spencer Street for

46:30the address and not something off

46:33Rehobith. And I totally probably

46:35completely mispronounced that.

46:37>> Um, it's a good question.

46:39uh our staff, including myself, we

46:42pulled all of the historic uh archive

46:44files for this property dating back to

46:46when it was constructed to try to find

46:48what was the motivation for at least

46:51this property being accessed off of

46:53Rehobith. Thank you for confirming that

46:55pronunciation cuz I was including

46:56[laughter] it all day. Um,

46:59and uh, unfortunately I was unable to

47:03find any files that spoke specifically

47:05to 761 Spencer and the construction of

47:08these three units. I found everything

47:10else except this one property. So I I

47:12don't have a clear answer on why it was

47:15developed this way. I I know it was

47:17developed before the 2007 ordinance was

47:20instituted which really put more form

47:23standards based on where buildings are

47:24constructed, how they relate to the

47:26street. Prior to that, our ordinance

47:29dates back to the 1960s and the approach

47:31to planning was very different um dating

47:33back to then. Um so it's and I I can't I

47:38don't know why it wasn't combined into

47:40all of the properties. If a request came

47:43before us today to combine 761 Spencer

47:46into 1424 Union, which is the big parcel

47:50that has most of the homes, we would

47:52likely deny it because it would create

47:54another frontage for that property on

47:57Spencer. Um, typically properties,

48:00unless they're a corner lot, are only

48:02allowed to have one frontage. We're not

48:04allowed under ordinance to create what

48:06we call through lots, which is a lot

48:08that extends one street kind of through

48:10a block to another street. So, it's got

48:13streets kind of on the front and back.

48:15That's not something we're able to do

48:17under ordinance, and it would likely be

48:19considered a through lot to combine 761

48:21Spencer into 1424 Union. So, today we

48:26wouldn't be able to combine it in, and I

48:28don't know the the history on the

48:30construction of this property.

48:32>> Interesting. Thank you. Thanks.

48:34>> Anybody else?

48:37Okay. Um I just have two comments. First

48:40of all, if you're going to do anything

48:42with Asher, make sure and I'm sure staff

48:44would help you um that the fire

48:47department is good with this cuz um I

48:49live in an area that has a culdeac,

48:52>> which if Asher was turned into a

48:55culde-sac, you wouldn't be able to exit.

48:57But our culdeac is designed in a way

48:59that a fire truck can maneuver through

49:01there if need be.

49:03>> But it that's just a safety issue and

49:05given your population. I think it's

49:07really important

49:08>> for sure.

49:09>> Um the second problem I have is um you

49:14you abut a school.

49:16>> You want a fence three feet off of the

49:19sidewalk. Um, according to the public

49:23safety

49:25um, things I have been through and other

49:27zoning things I have been through, one

49:29of the reasons why we set fences back in

49:31the front yard is so that when

49:34somebody's walking down the street,

49:36let's say a child is going down Spencer

49:38towards the school, all of a sudden you

49:42have a barrier that they can't see

49:44around where people may be to jump out

49:48and get them or what you know, whatever

49:50bad things could happen, but there's

49:52always been a line of sight issue,

49:56safety issue. Um,

49:59and to be real honest, I I totally get

50:03where you're coming from. The issue I'm

50:06having is I see every house on that

50:10street

50:11being able to ask for the same relief

50:16because everybody in a residential area

50:19in the city has problems with vandalism

50:22and kids jumping fences and things like

50:24that. And

50:27so I'm I'm struggling with

50:32how

50:34cut off it seems it would make your

50:36property from

50:39the neighborhood and um trying to or

50:44wondering if other

50:47issue other options have really been

50:51discussed

50:53and I'm assuming you guys did that

50:56correct? Yes. I'm sorry. Yes, it was. As

50:59I'm staring at you. [laughter] Sorry.

51:03>> Yeah. Um the applicant came into our

51:05office maybe four or five weeks ago to

51:07kind of talk about this process. So, we

51:10explored a number of um solutions for

51:13fencing and and sight security and the

51:16applicant has proceeded to ask for a

51:18variance here today.

51:19>> Sure. Okay. And other options were

51:22discussed. I mean,

51:23>> Yep. including a fence that would meet

51:25ordinance requirements in either in

51:27location or height or altering placement

51:30of the fence to meet ordinance

51:31requirements as well.

51:33>> All right. So, those that that was my

51:36biggest concern. Um

51:39I can see a white fence going all the

51:41way down Spencer. Um because

51:45I guess I'm not finding what's unusual.

51:48So

51:48>> yeah, I'm happy to offer my thoughts

51:51once we hear from the

51:53>> Okay.

51:53>> Uh if anybody wants to speak for public

51:55comment or

51:56>> I also would like to just provide a

51:58brief comment. Going back to our

52:00standards and to chair's um point when

52:03we look at our standards, we do have to

52:05remember that we're looking for an

52:06exceptional or extraordinary

52:08circumstances applying to this property.

52:10So when we're talking about safety

52:12concerns relative to population, that

52:15would not necessarily be appropriate

52:17finding for purposes of a variance

52:18grant.

52:20>> Thank you.

52:22>> Okay. Is it okay if we go to public

52:24comment and the letters?

52:26>> Yeah.

52:27>> Okay. Um do you want to review the

52:29letters while I ask? You guys all came

52:33down here, so this is your time to talk.

52:35So if you would like to please come to

52:37the microphone. The only thing we ask is

52:40um for your name and uh for our records

52:43and any comments you might want to tell

52:45us about and why you're here.

52:55You can all come up.

52:59Okay.

53:01the designated spokesperson.

53:07My name is Trudy Grobe. Great.

53:10>> And I am a resident right next to where

53:13the fence is,

53:14>> as is Loey and my husband.

53:16>> Um

53:19the safety and concern we have is real.

53:23>> Yeah. We have observed and learned from

53:26other residents right in that little

53:28hollow we call it of the fence um of all

53:32the incidents that have occurred. And

53:35one resident actually opened her door

53:38and spoke to the person trying to steal

53:41a very sentimental item

53:44and put herself at great personal risk.

53:46>> Yeah.

53:47>> Um I I hear what you're saying about a

53:50privacy fence and about the safety of

53:53the school. I hadn't thought of that.

53:55Maybe one of those big mirrors where

53:57they could see around the corner. We do

53:59see a lot of kids go up and down. I'm

54:01sure

54:01>> and there's a lot of people who walk

54:03their dog on Spencer. So, we do have a

54:05lot of pedestrian traffic. Um it's it's

54:09a very a neighborhood where people are

54:11out and about. These incidents, except

54:14for the girls asking for money, um

54:18they mostly are occurring in the middle

54:20of the night. And there was another one

54:23um just last week that isn't in our

54:26letter because we wrote the letter first

54:29um where they did try to steal out of

54:31the same yard where they dug the plants

54:33right at the corner of the two

54:35properties, the school and us. Um they

54:38tried to steal the bird bath, but it was

54:40too heavy,

54:41but it had been moved.

54:44So, um,

54:47we would just like to do everything we

54:49can to protect what I consider

54:53the the people who live there as

54:55vulnerable.

54:58Thank you.

54:58>> Thank you. That's awesome. Thanks.

55:01Either one of you want to come up.

55:13elbows. [laughter] Just do this.

55:15>> It's not required.

55:17>> Okay, fine. Thank you. What do you want

55:19to do?

55:20>> Um I I would like to make a motion to

55:21close the public hearing and go to board

55:25discussion.

55:25>> Okay.

55:26>> And I'll second.

55:26>> And that's seconded. All those in favor?

55:29>> I I opposed. Now we're going to have our

55:31discussion.

55:32>> Yeah.

55:32>> Thanks. Um, why don't I just make the

55:35motion and then we can have a discussion

55:39if that works for you guys all and then

55:41I think it's going to cover the

55:42exceptional extraordinary circumstances

55:45and sort of some of your concerns. I did

55:48want to note for the record though there

55:49are three letters um in our packet. One

55:52is from the Rest Haven Homes

55:54administrator. Uh, one is from a

55:56resident of um that

56:00area, senior living area, and

56:02[clears throat] the other one is a

56:04single letter from eight um homeowners

56:06in that same um senior living area. Um

56:10all supportive of the fence for the

56:12reasons that were stated on uh by um

56:17Isaac as well as um the other I'm so

56:20sorry, I just forgot your name.

56:21>> Trudy.

56:22>> Trudy.

56:22>> Trudy. and um also uh said by Trudy

56:25during public comment. So, just want to

56:26have that for the record.

56:29[clears throat]

56:29Okay. So, I'm gonna make a motion and

56:31then we can chat. So, um this is a

56:35motion to approve

56:38um the dimensional variance request of 3

56:42feet uh for a front yard fence um for

56:46761 Spencer Street Northeast

56:50for the following reasons. Standard one,

56:53exceptional or extraordinary

56:54circumstances or conditions. In this

56:57particular case, this lot is very

56:58unusual for this neighborhood. Uh both

57:01during my visit as well as what we can

57:03see in the packet, it is actually a

57:05rather large lot with um

57:10it all it creates a culde-sac. There's

57:12two houses and then there's a carport.

57:15The carport is what faces the road. Um,

57:18in addition to that, the lot goes up a

57:20hill and so where the existing fence is

57:24is actually several feet above the

57:26sidewalk. Um, if you go around the

57:28neighborhood, the rest of the front

57:30yards are a typical front yard that you

57:32would see where there's a front porch

57:34and a front door. In this particular

57:36case, when you um drive past 761

57:39Spencer, as I mentioned, I passed it

57:41three times. Um, which I'm totally going

57:44to blame on the site and not me. Um you

57:47p you primarily see pine trees uh a

57:50fence that is um a chainlink fence and

57:54um the back of the carport and the sides

57:56of the house. Um the front of the houses

57:59are actually uh facing um that the

58:02internal um I'm going to call it a

58:04culde-sac um of the building that the

58:07buildings create. Um for that reason um

58:10because it is a a rather exceptional

58:12shape for the neighborhood. It also um

58:15has a does not have a typical

58:18front-facing

58:20um front yard. It is more more akin to a

58:24backyard in this neighborhood than it is

58:26for the rest of the houses. For that

58:28reason, I find standard one is found. Um

58:31for number two, substantial property

58:33right. In this case, they're asking to

58:34replace um an existing fence.

58:37Understanding that that does not mean

58:38that they get to automatically place a

58:40fence in the same spot. Um, but I do

58:43want to note that um when we look at the

58:47neighborhood and as the applicant

58:48presented on um during his testimony, um

58:52a number of um houses in this area do

58:55have privacy fences [clears throat] in

58:58their backs or sideyards. And as I

59:00indicated in standard one, um in the

59:03exceptional extraordinary standard, um

59:06this is more akin to a backyard than it

59:08is a front yard. Um, for that reason, I

59:12would I would find that that is found

59:14that um they have a right to um

59:17[clears throat]

59:18the enjoyment of their backyard. I am so

59:20sorry.

59:22[cough]

59:23>> I got you.

59:24>> Excuse me. [snorts]

59:26>> Do you want some water?

59:27>> Oh, thank you, Tracy.

59:31>> Apologies.

59:32um

59:34in order to enjoy the same um

59:36substantial property right of the

59:37privacy and security of their house.

59:41Oh, Tracy, thank you.

59:46Number three, not self-created. Um in

59:49this particular case, um the

59:51neighborhood the testimony on there is

59:55currently an existing fence. It is a

59:57chain link fence. Um it is in need of

1:00:00updating. Um, and when we look at not

1:00:03self-created, the question is is could

1:00:06the applicant have avoided um, needing

1:00:09the zoning? So, I think that the board

1:00:11asked a number of really great questions

1:00:13around other things that were done in

1:00:16order to try to um, improve um, this

1:00:20area and allow the residents to enjoy

1:00:22that um, land next immediately adjacent

1:00:26to their um, houses. If they were to put

1:00:28a fence where it is allowed, it would

1:00:31cut the residents off from um their

1:00:33sideyard um directly outside of their

1:00:35windows where um residents enjoy

1:00:38currently enjoy gardening um and other

1:00:41pastimes. Um in addition to that,

1:00:43they've tried other methods to improve

1:00:45the security of their property and we're

1:00:47not unable to do so. Um and are now

1:00:50representing that defense is necessary

1:00:52um in order to have that no substantial

1:00:55detriment. Um, again, due to the way the

1:00:59property is placed on this lot, um, as

1:01:03you walk by, you're not seeing the

1:01:05typical front of the house. Um, if

1:01:08anything, I think that it would improve

1:01:10the neighborhood and the look of the

1:01:11neighborhood. Um, and um, allow for a

1:01:15uh, pleasant neighborhood to live in.

1:01:17Um, and I don't think that this would

1:01:19find um, would create a substantial

1:01:22detriment to the neighborhood as a

1:01:23whole. Um and finally, master planning

1:01:26and zoning ordinances. As noted by

1:01:28Rowan, um this is a compact neighborhood

1:01:31area that is, you know, and especially

1:01:33in the Cresten plans wants to have

1:01:35diverse housing options. I think that

1:01:37includes um the ability for um our

1:01:40senior population to age in place and to

1:01:43live in our cities. Um and for that

1:01:45reason I think that um ensuring that

1:01:47they are able to live in a safe and

1:01:50comfortable manner and by putting in a

1:01:52fence that replaces an existing fence um

1:01:55on a rather extraordinary lot in a

1:01:58residential neighborhood um is in

1:02:00accordance with those plans and and and

1:02:02zoning ordinances. So uh for those

1:02:04reasons I make a motion to approve.

1:02:07Were there conditions

1:02:09>> with the condition

1:02:11uh that the applicant work with staff um

1:02:15on any necessary landscaping or other

1:02:20necessary

1:02:23actions to uh soften the fence line to

1:02:26ensure that it is harmonious with the

1:02:29neighborhood? Rowan.

1:02:32Yeah. Okay. Great. Okay. Is there

1:02:36is there support for that?

1:02:38[clears throat]

1:02:39>> I second.

1:02:40>> Okay.

1:02:41All right. Discussion.

1:02:44>> What do you guys think?

1:02:48>> Go ahead.

1:02:49>> So, I thought um a very thoughtful

1:02:51motion. I think there's there's two

1:02:53areas where I'm sort of um hitting my

1:02:57head a little bit on the on the table.

1:02:58Yeah. Um I think one is um condition

1:03:02number one exceptional or extraordinary

1:03:04circumstances or conditions. While um I

1:03:07do understand that like this piece of

1:03:09property is unique in that it you know

1:03:11it's frontage to the street and there

1:03:13being a carport um I feel like the

1:03:16majority of the ask in moving this fence

1:03:19all the way to the as close to the

1:03:21sidewalk as it is isn't because there's

1:03:23a uniqueness to the land but because

1:03:25there's a desire to maintain an amenity

1:03:28for for residents which I value too and

1:03:30I think is important.

1:03:31>> Yeah. No, I appreciate that. Can I

1:03:32answer that one first? I I completely

1:03:35appreciate that perspective and I would

1:03:37say that for me the way that I see it is

1:03:39that if we're looking at the zoning

1:03:41ordinance and why we don't want privacy

1:03:43fences in the front yard, right, is to

1:03:45not

1:03:47basically make it look incredibly

1:03:48unwelcoming to come up to houses and and

1:03:51if everybody had a fence in their back

1:03:53right in front of their front door, it

1:03:54wouldn't be a welcoming community. And I

1:03:56think what makes this extraordinary is

1:03:58that it is more akin to a backyard. The

1:04:02way that the the way that the property

1:04:04is laid out and even the city staff

1:04:06couldn't explain why the houses had a

1:04:11761 Spencer address but did not front

1:04:14Spencer. And if you were telling me that

1:04:16they wanted to put a fence around the

1:04:18culdesac there, I would I would be comp

1:04:21I would have made a motion to deny. But

1:04:23in this particular case, if you look in

1:04:26the neighborhood, if you if you think of

1:04:29this as a backyard,

1:04:31then they would have a right to put in

1:04:33this fence. And that doesn't mean

1:04:35they're automatically able to do that in

1:04:37their front yard. But what makes it

1:04:39extraordinary to me is that driving

1:04:41around the neighbor, there is no other

1:04:42house that I saw in the immediate v

1:04:44vicinity

1:04:46where their front

1:04:49their front part of their address was

1:04:51the back of their garage.

1:04:53Yeah.

1:04:54>> Yeah. So that that's what makes it

1:04:57extraordinary and exceptional to me.

1:05:00>> So I so I I c I certainly hear that. Um

1:05:03>> so I think but I but so with that so I'm

1:05:06I I'm still struggling with the the

1:05:08desire to move it to that particular

1:05:10location for the purposes of

1:05:12>> protecting a resident amenity. But I am

1:05:14hearing what you're saying that there is

1:05:16uniqueness there. But I think

1:05:18>> to your point around the intention of

1:05:19not having fences in front yards and

1:05:22>> um for me goes to number four, no

1:05:24substantial substantial detriment. I am

1:05:26really struggling with the idea of a

1:05:29fence that close to the road that close

1:05:31to a school.

1:05:33>> Um

1:05:34>> where I think the point here has been

1:05:36made about you know creating those

1:05:38spaces where there isn't a good line of

1:05:40sight for individuals to see if there is

1:05:42someone hiding or propped up behind a

1:05:45space. I'm looking at this image that we

1:05:47have up here and I know that it looks

1:05:49like the back of the school is kind of

1:05:50what faces Spencer and there's either a

1:05:53paved or a very strong desire walking

1:05:56path that goes from the school down to

1:05:57the street which leads me to believe

1:05:59that there is a time of day when there

1:06:00are many kids that are moving along this

1:06:02sidewalk.

1:06:03>> Yeah.

1:06:04>> Yeah.

1:06:05>> Yeah.

1:06:05>> So to me that's that you know that's a

1:06:07walking path. I know I see a crossing

1:06:09there, but this is an area where like

1:06:10kids are traversing. And I'm just

1:06:12thinking of like this time of year a

1:06:15little, right? They're also not even as

1:06:16tall as we are. We're talking about, you

1:06:18know, this is an elementary school.

1:06:20Yeah. So, we're talking about littles

1:06:22>> um at 8:00 in the morning when it's

1:06:24still dark out walking down a path where

1:06:27there's now a very obstructed line of

1:06:29sight

1:06:30>> to what's on the other side. And I'm I'm

1:06:33fairly uncomfortable with that idea.

1:06:35>> Yeah. though very sensitive to the

1:06:36security concerns that the residents

1:06:38here are trying to address. So I'm

1:06:40trying to balance kind of like

1:06:42>> what on their end could be more of an

1:06:44operational

1:06:45>> approach that they need to take to are

1:06:47we going to authorize the construction

1:06:50of a large and permanent barrier

1:06:53>> that these

1:06:55>> young kids are going to have to traverse

1:06:56by here.

1:06:58>> Yeah. So those are my two concerns.

1:07:00>> Yeah. No, I could no completely hear

1:07:01you. I think one thing that I noted

1:07:03about the property when I was visiting

1:07:04is that currently when you and

1:07:08Zone is probably going to have to get up

1:07:10to the microphone and help me here

1:07:11because uh my spatial awareness is not

1:07:13the greatest, but when you are in front

1:07:17on 761 on the frontage, what's

1:07:19interesting is the way the property

1:07:20slopes upward is that actually the fence

1:07:23as it currently exists, it already sits

1:07:26up two to three feet.

1:07:29That's where I want Rowan to confirm

1:07:31above the sidewalk. So, there's like a

1:07:34little like retaining wallish and then

1:07:37the sidewalks and then the fence the

1:07:39current fence sits above that. So,

1:07:42already I'm not sure if even not even

1:07:44having a fence would because there's

1:07:47already it's already sort of elevated

1:07:49from the parking lot and Oh, thank you.

1:07:51So, yeah. So, you can see

1:07:54here

1:07:56um that see how it kind of goes at the

1:07:58end. So there is already sort of like

1:08:00some elevation off the sidewalk. Now

1:08:02that does not mean though that it

1:08:04completely negates your concern, right?

1:08:06Because if this is white 6oot privacy

1:08:08fence, then you wouldn't be able to see

1:08:10that wood barrier there. Um but I I

1:08:15don't think that,

1:08:17you know, again, I think that if if this

1:08:19were their backyard per zoning, they

1:08:22could put in this fence irregardless.

1:08:24Um, and

1:08:27if we're talking about how it's situated

1:08:29on the property and and the small

1:08:30children walking by, um,

1:08:34I mean, I I I guess people could jump

1:08:38out. I mean, I just

1:08:41I'm not sure if not having a fence or

1:08:43putting the fence where it could go and

1:08:45then cutting off their access to their

1:08:47sideyard

1:08:50would necessarily solve any like that

1:08:54concern.

1:08:56But I I don't know. I'm happy to hear

1:08:57other thoughts if people um a agree with

1:09:01that viewpoint or wants to make a motion

1:09:03to deny.

1:09:05I think what I struggle with is they

1:09:08could comply if they put the fence

1:09:10between the buildings and they could put

1:09:12two gates that could be lockable by

1:09:14their security at nighttime like and

1:09:16they could still leave the existing

1:09:17fence up because it's it's been there

1:09:20forever. So they could still have their

1:09:22yard. They could still have those

1:09:23things.

1:09:25We're here to make sure that if they can

1:09:27comply,

1:09:28we shouldn't make a variance. So that's

1:09:30what I'm struggling with a little bit.

1:09:31No, I I know and I and I appreciate that

1:09:34and um you know, if that's how the rest

1:09:36of the board feels, somebody else is

1:09:38more than welcome to make a motion. I

1:09:40just think that considering the facts

1:09:43here that you know, like I said, I I

1:09:46would I would support approving just

1:09:48because I think that we all know and the

1:09:51reason why we sit on this board is that

1:09:53zoning works the majority of the time

1:09:54and so that's why, you know, we only

1:09:56meet once a month. Um, but there are

1:09:58situations when you have historical

1:09:59properties like this that are in,

1:10:03you know, that are set apart from the

1:10:05neighborhood and want to do something

1:10:06that,

1:10:09you know, had they had they been zoned

1:10:11differently, they maybe wouldn't even

1:10:13have to ask for an ordinance like or

1:10:14variance like you know what I'm saying?

1:10:15Like I just think that like that's why I

1:10:18think that we should approve. I do agree

1:10:20that they could put it where is

1:10:22indicated on the um particular um map.

1:10:26they could do it. Okay. Um,

1:10:30and I do think though that there is if

1:10:31they really do want it for security, if

1:10:33they're leaving those windows still,

1:10:36somebody can walk up to that. I'm not

1:10:38sure if that's

1:10:40answering their security concerns, but

1:10:41maybe that's not something that um we

1:10:44think should be solved by a fence. So,

1:10:48>> else this way.

1:10:52>> I I guess I'll weigh in because I'm

1:10:54struggling a little bit, too. I want to

1:10:56provide security for the residents,

1:11:00but I don't want to do it as

1:11:03at this much of a change

1:11:06to the ordinance or to the neighborhood.

1:11:11Um, again, when you're walking along

1:11:13there, and I spend some time there, when

1:11:15you can see into

1:11:18the the Rust Haven area and it's it's

1:11:22open, it's green, and suddenly you'd be

1:11:24walking along a fence that would be a

1:11:27barrier. It would almost look if I lived

1:11:29across the street from it, I would

1:11:31rather look at a carport with some trees

1:11:33in front of it and know that if I was

1:11:36walking on that street and had a problem

1:11:39or I was a little kid, I had somewhere

1:11:42to run or somewhere who could see me. I

1:11:45think this I think what bothers me and I

1:11:48don't know how much we can um influence

1:11:51on this except perhaps with conditions

1:11:53is a large white vinyl

1:11:58privacy fence that I think substantially

1:12:01changes the look of the neighborhood

1:12:04um substantially changes the walkability

1:12:08um of the neighborhood and so that's

1:12:12where I'm struggling with this is there

1:12:15something we can do that is less that

1:12:18can meet the security and safety needs

1:12:21besides what is being put in front of

1:12:24us?

1:12:24>> No, I think that I think that that's

1:12:25very valid and I think that the the area

1:12:28that's highlighted in yellow here on the

1:12:31picture on the that that Rowan has up,

1:12:33it's pretty narrow. So, if you're going

1:12:35to move it like halfway off the street

1:12:37or something or try to split the

1:12:38difference, I think then it really

1:12:40should just like be where the light blue

1:12:42lines are, which they're entitled to.

1:12:44Um, in my opinion, somebody else can

1:12:47feel completely different. Um, so I

1:12:49would just say like it seems like this

1:12:51side of the group and and maybe others

1:12:53who haven't spoke up are are are leaning

1:12:55towards denying this variance. And so

1:12:57I'm wondering, Chairwoman, if somebody

1:12:58maybe wants to make that motion and and

1:13:00see where we stand with that.

1:13:03As there is a motion on the table, we

1:13:05would need to vote on the motion. That

1:13:07is

1:13:07>> That's fine.

1:13:08>> Yeah.

1:13:09>> Any discussion down here?

1:13:14>> I I I would just echo I think the

1:13:17consideration on no substantial

1:13:19detriment and and the sensitivities

1:13:21towards the school. I also think u Mr.

1:13:23King, your point around um uh I'm what

1:13:30you tied to exceptional or extraordinary

1:13:33circumstances I attribute more to um

1:13:36being self-created in terms of uh I'm at

1:13:42a loss for the words of that but just in

1:13:45terms of there is there is an option put

1:13:47forth which we've already agreed upon

1:13:49that could meet the variance intent. Um,

1:13:53so you know, and just to add to the area

1:13:57in yellow, if you move the fence back in

1:14:00that area, you likely have to cut down a

1:14:01bunch of trees, which is caused for

1:14:03screening there. And so I think that is

1:14:06not optimal either, even seeking a

1:14:09variance and locating it in a different

1:14:10spot within that yellow area still. So

1:14:14that's that's where I'm sitting on

1:14:16things.

1:14:21I guess actually just one other

1:14:23reflection question.

1:14:26If we were to have seen an 8- foot chain

1:14:28link fence instead of an 8ft vinyl

1:14:31fence, does that change our attitudes

1:14:34about these things? Not that the the

1:14:37that's not the ask. We're not um we're

1:14:39looking at the location, not the design,

1:14:42but is is the

1:14:44is the challenge the

1:14:47wall that's being created essentially?

1:14:54So, I think that design, that take on

1:14:56the design might alleviate some of the

1:14:58no substantial detriment because for me

1:15:00that's primarily line of sight concerns

1:15:02which are not, you know, don't aren't

1:15:04caused by a chain link fence. Do I love

1:15:06the idea of an 8ft tall chain link fence

1:15:09in the middle of a residential

1:15:10neighborhood? Not necessarily. But I

1:15:12don't we're not asked to talk about

1:15:13taste. Um, so but I think it it would

1:15:17answer some of the line of sight

1:15:18questions. Um to your point where I kind

1:15:20of addressed it as exceptional or

1:15:22extraordinary circumstances, I hear you

1:15:24talking about not self-created, which I

1:15:25I can see there. Um like there still is

1:15:28an option. Um

1:15:31>> and to Mr. Lewis's point, like still an

1:15:33option to help work within the code to

1:15:35make

1:15:36>> Yeah, I appreciate that. I do I do just

1:15:39and maybe this is cuz I wasn't at the

1:15:41training um so apologies but I don't

1:15:44think that not self-created means that

1:15:46there's some possibility out there that

1:15:49they could do anything and that even by

1:15:52ask because I think that that would make

1:15:53wouldn't that make every ask for a

1:15:55zoning thing to to say that it was like

1:15:58I I don't understand how they could

1:16:01>> yeah I I think about that question on is

1:16:03there an alternative out there more

1:16:06associated with standard Number five

1:16:07about intent of the zoning ordinance.

1:16:10>> Where do we adhere the standard of the

1:16:12zoning ordinance? I think the critical

1:16:15language on standard two substantial

1:16:18property right is um how the variance is

1:16:23necessary for the

1:16:24>> or excuse me were we talking about

1:16:26self-created self? Thank you. I I was

1:16:28reading that I was looking at the

1:16:29section. Um the critical element of not

1:16:32self-created is [snorts]

1:16:33[clears throat] describe how the

1:16:34immediate practical difficulty causing

1:16:37the need for the variance. So we have to

1:16:40identify what the practical difficulty

1:16:42is that is causing the need for the

1:16:44variance and often the practical

1:16:47difficulty and the variance might not be

1:16:48the same thing and the variance might be

1:16:50needed to alleviate a practical

1:16:52difficulty and so I would maybe as

1:16:55you're thinking about not self-created

1:16:57think about what is the practical

1:16:59difficulty that is preventing compliance

1:17:02with the ordinance here

1:17:04>> okay

1:17:04>> and is that practical diff difficulty

1:17:07created by the applicant again.

1:17:10>> Gotcha.

1:17:12>> And so with that, I think then there

1:17:14there could be reason to um satisfy the

1:17:17not self-created. I I appreciate that

1:17:19explanation. I do think then for me it

1:17:23just is hinging on the no substantial

1:17:25detriment and it's really that line of

1:17:27sight piece for the school.

1:17:35>> All right. So, I need to call the motion

1:17:39that's on the table and um we'll we'll

1:17:43try it with voice. [laughter]

1:17:46>> Can I ask one more question?

1:17:48>> Yes,

1:17:49>> Rowan. You know, thinking about Miss

1:17:52Schaefer's motion and the condition of

1:17:57landscaping and softening the fence

1:17:59line,

1:18:01what is

1:18:03permissible or allowable? Maybe this is

1:18:05for our lawyer in the room as well in

1:18:08terms of changing the fence or the

1:18:11material to help with that line of sight

1:18:14and that visibility.

1:18:16>> Yeah, conditions typically have or not

1:18:19typically conditions have to be tied to

1:18:21a standard. You can't just add a

1:18:23condition that's not relative to one of

1:18:24the standards of review. I think there's

1:18:27been testimony from the board of zoning

1:18:28appeals members that there's a concern

1:18:30about standard 4, no substantial

1:18:32detriment that relates to the style and

1:18:35type of the fence. I think that would be

1:18:37an appropriate condition to connect to

1:18:40standard number four. And if the

1:18:42assistant, if the attorney disagrees

1:18:43with me, she's more than welcome to add

1:18:45any additional perspective.

1:18:50It's not something I would generally

1:18:52recommend we look to in these types of

1:18:55decisions.

1:18:57>> Okay. Thank you.

1:18:59>> Thanks, Kendall.

1:19:00>> All right. So, we have a motion on the

1:19:02table to approve. All those in favor?

1:19:05>> I

1:19:06>> I.

1:19:08>> All those opposed?

1:19:10>> I I

1:19:11>> Okay. Want to start all over again? Then

1:19:14I need somebody to make a motion to

1:19:17deny.

1:19:25You guys can do it down here to Well,

1:19:27you can't, but anybody else in the who

1:19:30voted against the motion to approve?

1:19:38>> Yes, I can do that. [laughter]

1:19:41I feel eyes. Um, can you give me just

1:19:43one? Can I ask for just one minute? Just

1:19:45one. Okay,

1:19:47>> I can make one other statement. Um, I

1:19:49was looking at the larger map with the

1:19:52houses across Spencer. Um, and those

1:19:56that face the side streets and have

1:19:58their sideyards to Spencer. I know that

1:20:02would still be considered um another

1:20:05frontage. So those fences would be have

1:20:08to be back also the 15 ft, right?

1:20:12>> We would apply the the front yard

1:20:14standards to those fences. So in terms

1:20:16of height and style would apply uh

1:20:19corner lots have two front yards. So let

1:20:22me see if I can find a strong example.

1:20:24Here we go.

1:20:24>> Right there.

1:20:25>> Yeah. So this property at 1411 Emerald

1:20:29Avenue Northeast has two front yards.

1:20:32So, the front yard would run any space

1:20:34between the the primary building, which

1:20:37is the home here, and both Spencer and

1:20:39Emerald. It looks like the uh the

1:20:43property here has a fence, and I can see

1:20:46if it's a six foot.

1:20:48>> Yeah. No, I just it was just an

1:20:50observation when you had that picture up

1:20:52with more homes across the street.

1:20:57>> I sent you.

1:20:58>> So,

1:21:06So, this property has a six-foot privacy

1:21:09fence running looks like roughly in

1:21:12parallel with the house. If it were to

1:21:14move closer to the sidewalk, it would

1:21:16have to come down to 3 ft,

1:21:18>> right?

1:21:18>> Yeah.

1:21:19>> Okay.

1:21:24>> All right.

1:21:27>> It's a tough one.

1:21:43Okay.

1:21:46>> Okay. I'm going to take a stab at this.

1:21:49Um, so bear with me. Um,

1:22:01okay. I am going to make a motion um to

1:22:04deny the request at 761 Spencer Street

1:22:07Northeast for a dimensional variance um

1:22:10to permit a 6-ft privacy fence in the

1:22:13defined front yard and a dimensional

1:22:15variance of 3 ft to increase the maximum

1:22:17permitted height of 3 ft for a solid

1:22:20fence in the defined front yard to 6 ft

1:22:23for the following reasons. Number one,

1:22:25exceptional or extraordinary

1:22:27circumstances or conditions. Um, I do

1:22:29not believe that this condition has been

1:22:31met. Um, while the property itself sits

1:22:34off a um a a culde-sac adjoined to an

1:22:39adjacent street um in its backyard

1:22:42fronts Spencer Avenue. Um the physical

1:22:45topography of the land I don't believe

1:22:48creates um justification for needing to

1:22:52place the fence directly along the

1:22:54property line. um per the variance

1:22:56request.

1:22:57Um number two, substantial property

1:23:00right. Um

1:23:04I do not believe that this has been met

1:23:06while for this particular property um it

1:23:09may sit along the street along Spencer

1:23:12where Spencer acts as its backyard. Um,

1:23:15but it is in fact it's it's it's

1:23:17front-facing along other houses and none

1:23:20of the other houses in that neighborhood

1:23:21enjoy um a having a privacy fence

1:23:24directly in their front yard. Um, number

1:23:27three, not self-created. Um, I believe

1:23:30that this condition has been met as the

1:23:32immediate practical difficulty causing

1:23:33the need for the variance was not

1:23:35created by an action or inaction of the

1:23:36applicant. Number four, no substantial

1:23:39detriment. Um, I do not believe that

1:23:42this has been met. Um, as has been

1:23:45discussed, um, and in testimony, there

1:23:47are concerns um, from regarding line of

1:23:52sight access for residents and

1:23:55pedestrians along the street, including

1:23:56students who are utilizing the school.

1:23:58While there were letters of support from

1:24:00residents who would benefit from the

1:24:02fence, um, I do believe that this would

1:24:04create a detriment to the surrounding

1:24:07neighborhood. Um, number five, master

1:24:10plan zoning ordinance. Um

1:24:15I do not believe that this has been met.

1:24:17Um as the master plan and zoning

1:24:20ordinance specifically calls out a need

1:24:22for these types of compact neighborhoods

1:24:24to be walkable and I believe that the

1:24:26impact on the line of sight for

1:24:27residents for this type of construction

1:24:30um and this level of variance um would

1:24:32impact the enjoyment. So for that reason

1:24:35I deny the variance request.

1:24:38>> Okay. Is there support?

1:24:40>> Support. Okay. any further discussion.

1:24:44>> I would just like to add I I do think

1:24:47that the exceptional extraordinary

1:24:49circumstance of the site is met. I know

1:24:51that does not change the result of the

1:24:54motion um or the the denial. Um, but I

1:24:58do think the configuration of the lot,

1:25:00the fact that this acts as more of a

1:25:02backyard than a front yard does um is a

1:25:07exceptional or extraordinary

1:25:08circumstance for the um for the motion,

1:25:11but it doesn't change the motion itself.

1:25:16>> Okay. All right. All those in favor of

1:25:19the motion to deny I

1:25:22>> opposed.

1:25:23Oppos. Okay.

1:25:25>> Two opposed.

1:25:28Mosure passes.

1:25:29>> All right. So, you'll work with them

1:25:31going forward on what they can do to

1:25:34secure up their property.

1:25:35>> Yep.

1:25:36>> Thank you. Sorry.

1:25:39>> Can I ask any other questions?

1:25:41>> Um, we can have a conversation after the

1:25:43meeting, Isaac. Yeah.

1:25:44>> Okay. All right. Any other business?

1:25:49>> We will have a meeting next month.

1:25:51>> Yes, we have variance cases scheduled

1:25:53for next month. So, if you could get me

1:25:56I know it's approaching a holiday, so if

1:25:58you could get me your availability

1:25:59sooner than later, that would be

1:26:00appreciated.

1:26:02I I don't anticipate cancelling any

1:26:04upcoming meetings. I know December is

1:26:06one we typically cancel, but that has

1:26:08been for a lack of cases, not generally

1:26:10related to the holiday, so I will keep

1:26:12you all updated on those meetings as

1:26:15they they get scheduled or cases get

1:26:17scheduled.

1:26:19I'm trying to remember that our Thursday

1:26:21doesn't conflict with uh Thanksgiving

1:26:23this year, right?

1:26:24>> Okay.

1:26:26>> All right. All right. We good?

1:26:28>> Make a motion to adjurnn.

1:26:30>> All right. So,

1:26:31>> second.

1:26:31>> Okay. Seconded. All those in favor?

1:26:34>> I opposed.

1:26:37>> Stick around for

1:26:44>> Thank you.

1:26:45>> I do. I do want to see the wedding

1:26:47picture.

1:26:50>> [cough]

1:26:51>> Or you can or you don't rush. I'll I can

1:26:54see him another time. You do your job.

```*