TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Zoning Commission
FROM: Demetrios Moutos - Planner I
DATE: October 14, 2025
RE:
Title
A25-33. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact. Variance request to reduce the minimum corner-side fence setback and allow a maximum fence height of up to seven (7) feet in the Single-Family Residential 10 (SF-10) zoning district, located at 782 Yorkshire Drive (REID# 0417325421000), containing 0.43 acres ± and being the property of Peaches Michelle Ambert, represented by Peaches Michelle Ambert.
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
9 - Deno Hondros
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Strategic Operating Plan FY 2025
Goal I: Safe & Secure Community
• 1.2 - Ensure traffic & pedestrian safety. Places the fence on private property and maintains intersection visibility consistent with sight-triangle standards.
• 1.3 - Ensure low incidence of property & violent crime. Supports privacy and security needs (7-ft. fence with ~1 ft. buried; prior break-in noted).
• 1.4 - Engage citizens in safety. Uses the variance process to align with neighborhood form while upholding visibility and safety.
Goal III: Invest in Today & Tomorrow
• 3.2 - Manage future growth & strategic land use. Balances UDO standards with site constraints (topography, driveway location).
• 3.4 - Revitalize neighborhoods with effective code enforcement. Brings the fence out of the ROW and into compliance through a lawful remedy.
Goal IV: Desirable Place to Live, Work, & Recreate
• 4.4 - Provide a clean & beautiful community with increased green spaces. Preserves a consistent, orderly frontage and avoids awkward offsets with existing fencing.
• 4.5 - Ensure great neighborhoods. Accommodates an accessibility ramp and enables aging-in-place and personal safety.
Goal VI: Collaborative Citizen & Business Engagement
• 6.2 - Ensure trust & confidence via transparency & service. Applicant sought after-the-fact compliance via variance rather than maintain a nonconformity.
• 6.3 - Inform & educate about local government. Detailed variance narrative and public hearing participation demonstrate constructive engagement.
Executive Summary:
30.2. C.14 Variance:
This case seeks limited relief from UDO §30-5.D.4 to (i) reduce the corner-side fence setback (required for fences over 36 inches) and (ii) allow a privacy fence up to seven (7) feet (with ~1 foot buried) at 782 Yorkshire Drive. The request arises from unique site conditions - a corner lot with a 2-3 ft. grade change, a sloped driveway and a rear accessibility ramp - that make strict application of the five-foot setback and six-foot height limit impractical by creating driveway/gate conflicts and undermining containment and security, while not intruding into the sight triangle. Under §30-2.C.14, variances permit narrowly tailored deviations from numeric standards when special land conditions cause undue and unique hardship and the relief is not contrary to the public interest; they are to be sparingly used and cannot change permitted uses or conditions of approval.
Background:
Owner: Peaches Michelle Ambert
Applicant: Peaches Michelle Ambert
Requested Action: Reduce the minimum corner-side fence setback and allow a maximum fence height up to seven (7) feet.
Zoning District: Single-Family Residential 10 (SF-10).
Property Address: 782 Yorkshire Drive
Size: 0.43 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Single-Family Dwelling
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
• North: SF-10 - Single-Family Residential
• South: SF-10 - Single-Family Residential
• East: SF-10 - Single-Family Residential
• West: SF-10 - Single-Family Residential
Letters Mailed: 38
Issues/Analysis:
Site & Case Context: The Subject Property is a 0.43 ± ac corner lot at Yorkshire Dr. & Montclair Rd. in the Montclair Subdivision, developed with a single-family home and zoned SF-10. The Owner replaced a deteriorated fence; during after-the-fact review, staff found the new privacy segment exceeded 6 ft. ad encroached into the public right-of-way where the prior fence had stood. Only the segment northwest of the driveway along Montclair Rd. was replaced; a legally nonconforming chain-link fence remains along Yorkshire Dr. The Applicant seeks relief to move the fence onto private property with a reduced corner-side setback and to retain an effective ~7-ft. fence (with ~1 ft. buried).
Applicable Standards (UDO §30-5.D.4). For one- to four-family dwellings:
• Max height: 4 ft. in front yards (or 5 ft. if open-style metal); 6 ft. in corner side, interior side, and rear yards.
• Setback: fences > 36 in. must be set back the lesser of 5 ft. or the corner-side façade plane.
• Sight triangle areas must remain ≤ 30 in. in height; where property lines extend into the ROW, setbacks are measured from the sidewalk edge (or 10 ft. from pavement if no sidewalk).
Requested Relief. Reduce the corner-side fence setback from 5 ft. to ~3 ft. from the Montclair Rd. property line (to accommodate a driveway gate and avoid an abrupt offset with the older chain-link), and allow a maximum fence height up to 7 ft. for the replaced privacy segment (with ~1 ft. buried to address the site’s 2-3 ft. grade change and large-breed dog containment). The segment does not intrude into the applicable sight triangle at Yorkshire/Montclair.
Insufficient Justification for Variance
The following do not constitute grounds for approval:
1. Presence of similar conforming or nonconforming fences nearby;
2. Desire to establish a prohibited use; or
3. Economic hardship or the prospect of higher profitability.
Subsequent Development
The application explains that strict adherence to the 5-ft. setback would reduce usable driveway area on a sloped drive and create gate conflicts; burying ~1 ft. of fence on a 2-3 ft. grade yields ~5’10” apparent height from the yard for dog containment and personal security. Relocating from the ROW to the property while using a ~3-ft. setback avoids an impractical jog from the existing chain-link and maintains sight-triangle visibility.
Findings of Fact Statements as reviewed by the Planning Staff:
The following findings are based on the responses submitted in the application by the applicant and best available information of the proposal without the benefit of testimony provided at the evidentiary hearing.
1. Strict application causes practical difficulties / unnecessary hardship. Enforcing the full 5-ft. setback would constrain driveway function on a slope and misalign a planned sliding/swing gate; limiting height to 6 ft. undermines containment/security where ~1 ft. is buried due to grade.
2. Hardship arises from unique land conditions, not the owner’s actions. Corner-lot geometry at Yorkshire & Montclair, 2-3 ft. grade change, sloped driveway, and discovery that the prior fence sat in the ROW are property-specific circumstances; a pre-existing chain-link along Yorkshire predates current code.
3. Minimum action to enable reasonable use. Relocating the fence onto private property with a ~3-ft. setback (instead of 5 ft.) and permitting up to 7 ft. (with ~1 ft. buried) is a narrow deviation that resolves driveway/gate conflicts and containment needs while keeping clear of the sight triangle.
4. Harmony with the Ordinance; spirit preserved. Relief advances §30-5.D.4’s safety and visibility aims by removing an encroachment from the ROW, measuring setbacks correctly from the sidewalk, and respecting height/visibility controls at the intersection.
Public safety and welfare assured; substantial justice done. The fence will be entirely on private property and outside the sight triangle; evidence indicates no impairment to driver or pedestrian visibility at Yorkshire/Montclair.
Budget Impact:
• City expenditures: None. All fence work occurs on private property at the owner’s expense.
• Staff time: Minor administrative/hearing/inspection time absorbed within existing Development Services and Inspection operating budgets.
• Revenues: Standard variance and permit/inspection fees collected per the adopted fee schedule; no new recurring revenue.
• Capital/CIP: No impact on the City’s Capital Improvement Plan; No City-owned assets created.
• Operations & maintenance: None for the City; approval relocates the fence out of the public ROW, avoiding future encroachment removal or maintenance costs.
• Enforcement risk: Routine code compliance only; any follow-up can be handled within existing resources.
Tax/utility rates: No effect on property tax base or utility rate structure.
Options:
1. Approve Findings of Facts as drafted.
2. Approve Findings of Facts with specific changes.
Recommended Action:
Approve Findings of Fact as drafted.
Attachments:
1. Findings of Fact
2. Application
3. Aerial Notification Map
4. Zoning Map
5. Land Use Map
6. Subject Property Photos
7. Surrounding Property Photos
8. Site Plan