HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #06 Consideration of Rose Hill Phase 2&3 - Existinf Fence Issues �'ve Center of Good L i
COER .
( 9�
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
Meeting Date: February 01, 2011
Item #
Reviewed By: fi
Contact Name: Michael Rumer City Planner: _
Contact Number: Ext. 1018 City Manager: r,.
Subject: Rose Hill Phase II & III Existing Fence Issue
Commission District 2 — Rosemary Wilsen
Background Summary:
Rose Hill Phases 11 and III is a single - family residential subdivision annexed into the City in September of 2009.
Recently, a resident of Rose Hill Phase II applied for a fence permit for a replacement fence on a corner lot.
Upon review and inspection, City staff found the applicant's fence and similar fences on corner lots in Phase II
and III do not meet the City's or County's fence setback requirements.
Further research found that Orange County's permit process for fences did not provide for a follow -up
inspection of the fence to identify the final location. As a result, many fences on corner lots were placed out of
compliance with Orange County setbacks and the approved Orange County fence permit. Many of the permits
that City staff reviewed were approved and constructed in the 1990's. Staff did further research and found that
no variances for fences were granted by Orange County and at the time of annexation; there were no active
code enforcement cases related to fences.
n can apply for a variance to the re
Current) a resident ca
Y, pp Y required fence setbacks. Given the current economic q
conditions and relative infancy of the City's relationship with Rose Hill and their 244 homes, the Planning
Department is proposing a policy to provide relief for residents from going through the variance process that
could have an adverse affect by setting a trend that could carry to new fences on corner lots.
Attached are signatures from the Presidents of Rose Hill Phases II and III supporting the proposed policy.
Issue:
Should the Honorable Mayor and City Commission approve a request by staff that will provide recognition of
existing fences in Rose Hill Phases II and III as of November 2010, allowing said fences to be replaced in their
current location with the required permit?
Recommendations
Staff recommends that the Honorable Mayor and City Commission consider adoption of a policy that will
provide recognition of existing fences in Rose Hill Phases II and III as of November 2010, allowing said fences
to be replaced in their current location.
Attachments:
Signature Letter
Financial Impact:
Not Applicable
Type of Item: (please mark with an °x')
Public Hearing For Clerk's Dept Use:
Ordinance First Reading Consent Agenda
Ordinance Second Reading Public Hearing
Resolution Regular Agenda
Commission Approval
Discussion & Direction
Original Document/Contract Attached for Execution by City Clerk
Original Document/Contract Held by Department for Execution
Reviewed by City Attorney N/A
Reviewed by Finance Dept. N/A
Reviewed by N/A
2
ce nter of Good j Nte
‘44*
`` i'loiida
Mayor. November 12. 201(
S. Scott \'andergrift
Commissioners
Gary Hood 'Tony Adams
District 1 President
Rose Hill Phase III HOA
Rosemary \ \'ilsen
District 2 91 1 1 Pristine Circle
Orlando. 11. 32818
Rusty Johnson
District 3
Joel F. Keller Dear Mr. Adams:
District 4
Thank you for taking my phone call and your attention to the issues. 1 am happy
to say that we have spent the past year with relatively few conflicts. working to ,
City Manager correct all but the zip code issue. However, one issue that has recently come to
Robert D. Frank
the City's attention is existing fences on residential properties. A resident has
recently applied for a building permit to construct a replacement fence upon their
fe n c es ins II. review Phase a 11 (I and l City i11 not t meet the City's applicants
ity's oOrage
fence and
County's code requirements.
Staff's research further concluded that Orange County did not provide follow -up
inspections on the final location of fences during the permitting process. What
appears upon inspection of a few properties by City staff is the physical fence
location does not match the location on the survey submitted with the permit.
Many of these permits go hack to the 1990's.
As the relationship between Rose Hill and the City is still in its infancy and we
have an uphill battle with respect to providing Rose Hill the Ocoee zip code, I
would like to offer a solution to the fence issue. Staff woukl like to take this issue
before the City Commission, asking them to grandfather in all existing fences in
Rose Hill Phases Ii & 111, so long as they do not have an existing compliance
issue with their respective 1 IOA's.
The Commission's decision would permit a resident to replace a fence in its
current location under a City of Ocoee Building permit. All permits for a new
fence after the effective date of the decision would have to comply with the codes
and ordinances of the City of Ocoee.
My desire in offering this solution is to keep Ocoee from appearing to harass the
Rose Hill residents by seeking to collect permit and violation fees. Below, 1 have
ow of Ocoee • tins. Lakeshore Drive • Ocoee, Florida 3-1'61
Phone: (14)') 9115 - 31110 • ON: (1 1') 9113 316' • www.ocoee.org
asked for a signature from Phase 11 and 111, lending then' support in grandfatheril)g
in existing fences. "Together with staffs recommendation and Rose 1lill•s support.
1 will approach the City Manager asking to take this issue before the City
Commission.
Please have someone authorized from Phase 11 and Phase 111 sign below and
return to my office.
Phase III: Phase 1 .
dea_64.113. A:_-.97
1
Title: Title:
a S /e 5' d(:-NT 4, C'
Sincerely,
M i'V
Michael inter
City Planner
� r { i ^ it li j 11t
,; I
• 5O N 1.akcshore Drive • Ocoee, Florida 34-'61 r ' �
Citv of Ocoee O) • I y{ 2YMO i T ,
Phone: (t(1')')(I;t -31i1U • Yols: (tll') 656- 1,i11} • �t�ttt.ci.�uocc.il.us il� DEC Cl� QAY f
CITY CM L'1G01.:I j