09/07/2021 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

since 42"d is often used to cut across to Lamar. RuthAnn asks if he believes that a passenger car would have that same visibility to which he responds that no matter the size of the vehicle if you are to pull up past the fence which is set back far enough to keep you out of the line of traffic and take the time the look both ways, you can safely exit the alley. He continues to say that with the road being curved you have to be cautious of the traffic either way and come to a complete stop when exiting the alley. Mr. Jones also says that people have been cutting across the corner of the lot for a long time despite the owner's efforts of putting rocks and reflectors up to deter people from damaging their car and to be more cautious. James Jaggers of 4015 Jasmine St, spoke in opposition of the variance. Mr. Jagger states that he uses the alley very often and it has worked well until the fence was put in place. He states that he cannot see around the fence in his vehicle and that the fence has made it dangerous to exit the alley. He continues to tell the board that he believes the fence was built in violation of the ordinance and should have been built shorter, with 50% visibility and located further back to meet the front yard fence criteria so that there would not be visibility issues like there is now. Mr. Jagger also explains that since all of the homes on that block have rear entry driveways and garages the alley is the only way in and out, so with this being their main exit from the alley it needs to have more visibility to also prevent the alley from getting congested when people try to exit. Lastly, Mr. Jagger states that this issue could potentially decrease the value of his home when he tries to sell it in the future since this issue affects the accessibility of the home. RuthAnn Alsobrook made note of citizen input forms submitted by mail as follows: Larry Cope of 4130 Oleander Ave, in favor. Paul and Marsha Stuart of 355 SE 42"d St, in favor. Stated that Chance followed the correct procedure in obtaining the permit and should be able to leave the fence where it is since that is where he was initially told he could place it even if it was wrong on the city's part. Also, they do not believe the Floyd's should have to move their fence since there are similar constructed fences along 42"d street. Wayne & Betty Clement of 4120 Jasmine St, in opposition. Stated they believe the fence obstructs the view of the oncoming southbound traffic on SE 42"d from motorists entering SE 42"d from Jasmine Street. Murray Jackson of 4110 Jasmine St, in opposition. Stated when pulling out of Jasmine visibility to the north is more blocked than before; southbound traffic on 42"d street cannot be seen until right upon the intersection. Lynn Wells of 365 SE 42"d St, in favor but is concerned the fence was poorly built and a strong wind could blow it over. No one else spoke in favor or opposition.