HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.l. Decorative Fences Text Amendment 05-46-TAAGENDA ITEM: Case 05 -46 -TA Decorative Fences Text
Amendment
AGENDA SECTION:
Consent Agenda
PREPARED BY: Jason Lindahl, A I C.P.
Assistant City Planner
AGEND .11 i• t�
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance, Draft 11 -25 -05 PC
Minutes
APPROVED BY: i
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt an ordinance amending Section 3.2- Definitions creating a new definition
for Decorative Fence
4 ROSEMOUNT
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Meeting: November 15, 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
This item was initiated by the City Council duectmg staff to create a definition for the term Decorative
Fence. During the review and updating of the C -3 and C -4 Districts, the City Council felt it was necessary
to create a new definition for the term Decorative fence. With this direction from the City Council, staff
researched the term in other commutates Based on the direction from the City Council and the
information from surrounding commumues, staff created the following draft definition for the term
Decoranve Fence.
Decorative Fence A fence as defined by this Ordinance made of high quality, long lasting and
ornamental materials including finished aluminum, wrought iron, brick and the like but not
including wood, unfinished metal, vinyl, PVC, chain link, wire, barbed wire or like materials.
The Council informally reviewed the proposed definition dunng a work session on September 14, 2005
and found it to be consistent with their original direction to staff. As a result, they directed staff to take
this definition through the formal approval process which includes a pubhc hearing before the Planning
Commission.
ISSUE ANALYSIS
As part of the evaluauon and modermzation of the C -3 and C -4 Districts, staff created a hierarchy of
screening matenals In most cases, the primary source for screening will be the principal building.
Landscaping and bermmg will be a secondary source for screerung Should landscaping and berming be
found ineffective by the City, the City may approve screening walls and /or decorative fencing as an
alternative Staff went on to create standards for screening walls including that they be constructed of the
same materials as the principal building and not extend more than twenty five (25) feet without a change m
architecture to reduce their mass and appearance. However, no standards were outlined for decorative
fencing. As a result, the Council directed staff to create a defuunon for this term so its meaning would be
clear to future Councils, Planning Commissions, and staff.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Commission held a public hearing to review this item on October 25, 2005. Minutes from that
meeting are attached for your reference After hearing no comments from the pubhc, Chairperson
Messner asked the Commission if they had any questions for staff Commissioner Schwartz questioned
what the reasoning was for prohibiting PVC. Ms. Schwartz stated PVC is very durable and maintenance
free Mr. Lmdahl responded that the City Council asked that PVC not be included The Council was
looking for higher quality and a longer lasting material. Mr Lindahl also pointed out these standards are
applicable only in the commercial districts Mr Powell added that over time PVC will become deformed if
not installed properly. After hearing no other comments, the Coimmssion voted unanimously to
recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Secnon 3.2 (Defuutions) creating a new
defimnon for Decorative Fence.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This item was initiated by the City Council duetting staff to create a defminon for the term decorative
fence. During exaimnation and revision of the C -3 and C -4 Districts, the City Council felt it was necessary
to create a new definition for the term Decorative fence. Based on direction from the City Council and
the information from surrounding communities, staff created the definition cited above Staff
recommends approval of this defimnon based on the findings that it is consistent with the both the
direction of the City Council regarding decorative fencing as well as the screening standards outlined in
Ordinance B, the Zoning Ordinance.
2
ATTEST.
City of Rosemount
Ordinance No. B-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ZONING
ORDINANCE B RELATING TO DECORATIVE FENCES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS
that Ordinance B, adopted September 19, 1989, entitled "City of Rosemount
Zoning Ordinance," is hereby amended as follows
Section 1. Rosemount Zoning Ordinance B, Section 3.2 is hereby
amended by adding the following.
Decorative Fence A fence as defined by this Ordinance made of hiqh
quality, lonq lasting and ornamental materials including finished aluminum,
wrought iron, brick and the like but not including wood, unfinished metal,
vinyl, PVC, chain link, wire, barbed wire or like materials.
Section 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and
effect from and after its passage and publication according to law.
ENACTED AND ORDAINED into an Ordinance this day of 2005.
Linda Jentink, City Clerk
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
William H. Droste, Mayor
Published in the Rosemount Town Pages this day of 2005.
5c. Case 05 -46 -TA Decorative Fences Text Amendment
Mr. Lindahl reviewed the staff report. This item was initiated by the City Council directing
staff to create a definition for the term Decorative Fence. During the review and updating
of the C -3 and C -4 Districts, the City Council felt it was necessary to create a new definition
for the term Decorative fence. With this direction from the City Council, staff researched
the term in other communities. Based on the direction from the City Council and the
information from surrounding communities, staff created the following draft definition for
the term Decorative Fence.
Decorative Fence —A fence as defined by this Ordinance made of high quality, long
lasting and ornamental materials including finished aluminum, wrought iron, brick
and the Like but not including wood, unfinished metal, vinyl, PVC, chain link, wire,
barbed wire or like materials.
Chairperson Messner asked the Commission if they had any questions for Mr Lindahl. Ms.
Schwartz questioned what the reasoning was for PVC to not be considered acceptable. Ms.
Schwartz stated PVC is very durable and maintenance free. Mr. Lindahl responded that the
City Council asked that PVC not be included. The Council was looking for higher quality
and a longer lasting material. Mr. Lindahl also pointed out these standards are apphcable
only m the commercial distracts. Mr. Powell added that over time PVC will become
deformed if not installed properly.
Chairperson Messner opened the Public Hearing. There was no public comment.
MOTION by Zurn to close the Pubhc Hearing. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: All.
Nayes: None. Motion approved.
MOTION by Messner to recommend the City Council adopt an ordinance
amending Section 3.2- Definitions creating a new definition for Decorative Fence.
Second by Schultz. Ayes: All. Nayes: None. Motion approved.
Mr. Lindahl stated this item will go before the City Council on November 15, 2005.