CR 92-099 Ordinance - Industrial Fences
- ~ ,
March 31, 1992
council Report CR92-99
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - INDUSTRIAL FENCES
Proposed Aetion.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to approve
Ordinance 92-706 for second reading to require a setback for
fences in the industrial districts abutting a right-of-way
and order the Ordinance published.
Mr. Winship moved and Ms. Reuter seconded the motion to
approve Resolution RZ92-4 recommending approval of Ordinance
92-706 to require a setback for fences in the industrial
districts. The motion carried unanimously
Overview.
At the December 3rd city Council meeting, the Council asked
if the fence requirements for industrial districts could be
reviewed. The Council's concern was that buildings are
required to have a setback, but fences do not have a
setback. It appeared the front yard was the spec if ic area
of concern.
The attached ordinance will require fences in the industrial
district that abut a right-of-way of 50 feet or more to have
the minimum setback as required by a building.
Staff reviewed the proposed ordinance. There was little
discussion on this item. Mr. Pavelka opened the public
hearing at 9:30. Being there was no one to speak on this
issue the public hearing was closed at 9:31.
primary
o
o
o
Issues to Consider.
What setback will a fence be required to have in
the industrial districts?
Will the existing fences be affected?
Do other cities allow fences in the front yard
setback?
What is the impact of the new Ordinance?
o
Supporting Doeuments.
o Analysis of Issues
o Ordinance 92-706
CR92-99
Page 2
Primary Issues to Consider.
o What setback willa fenee be required to have in the
industrial distriets?
All fences in the front yards in the industrial district
will be required to have the same setback as the building if
the property abuts a right-of-way 50 feet or more in width.
The usual setback is 20 feet. If an industrial building
abuts a residential district, this setback is increased to
50 - 75 feet. Also, fences will be required to have a
setback in the side yard if the property is used for open
storage.
The proposed Ordinance will also require the setback area to
be landscaped.
o Will the existing fenees be affeeted?
The existing fences will be grandfathered and will be
allowed to remain as long as they are not replaced or
destroyed 50% or more. Any fence that is replaced will have
to meet the new ordinance requirements.
o Do other cities allow fenees in the front yard setbaek?
In checking a few other cities ordinances, most do not
detail fences in their zoning ordinance. However, Maple
Grove allows fences in the front setback not over six feet
in height and the fence must be chain link. Plymouth's
ordinance did not state that a fence could not be in the
front yard, however it did state there was no open storage
allowed in the front yard. It is very common in other
cities not to allow storage in the front yard.
o What is the impaet of the new Ordinanee?
Any new fence in the front yard along a right-of-way of 50
feet or more in width will be required to have the same
setback as abuilding. A setback will be required for
fences in the side yard if the property is used for open
storage. This ordinance will mostly affect the sites that
are used for storage. An example would be the Cliff Lambert
contractor yard. The fence on this site would have been
moved 20 feet to the south. Another example is the old Red
Owl parking area that abuts 2nd street N.E.
There was a concern by the staff that if a lot abutted a
residential district and a right-of-way, the side yard could
not be used for parking because the fence would be setback a
distance of 50-75 feet. To correct this situation the
section regulating open sales lot now will apply to open
CR92-99
Page 3
storage and will require a fence in the side yard to have a
setback.
Alternatives.
1. Approve the Ordinance to require a setback for fences
in the industrial districts. By approving the
Ordinance, fences will be required to have a setback in
industrial districts.
2. Deny the Ordinance to require a setback for fences in
the industrial districts. By denying the Ordinance,
fences in the industrial district will not be required
to have a setback.
3. Approval'of the Ordinance with changes.
4. continue for further information. If the City Council
indicates that further information is needed, the item
should be continued.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
ORDINANCE NO. 92-706
AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING SETBACKS FOR FENCES IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Hopkins as
follows:
That section 520.13 Subd. 8. and 540.03 m) is revised to the
following:
Subd. 8. Industrial district fences. Property line fences in an I
district shall not exceed eight feet in height except that:
a) fence in industrial districts which are primarily erected as
a security measure. may have arms projecting into the applicant's
property on which barbed wire can be fastened commencing at a point at
least seven feet above the ground, and
b) a fence located in the front yard of premises in an
industrial district abutting a right-of-way containing 50 feet or more
in width shall conform to setback requirements for buildings in said
district. Said area consisting of the setback shall be landscaped in
accordance with a plan approved by the ci ty . Ornamental fences
utilized for landscaping purposes are excluded from the provisions of
this ordinance.
Section 540.03. Conditional uses:. I districts.
are permitted conditional uses in I districts:
The following uses
m) open sales lots and open storage provided:
6. that a side yard setback is required for fences that
abut a right-of-way 50 feet of more in width. The setback shall
be the required setback for a building in said industrial
district.
That the presently existing Hopkins Zoning Ordinance 515-570 is
hereby amended and changed in accordance with the above provisions.
First Reading: March 2, 1992
Second Reading: May 5, 1992
Date of Publication: May 13, 1992
Date Ordinance Takes Effect: June 3, 1992
ATTEST:
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor
James A. Genellie, City Clerk