Laserfiche WebLink
Item # <br />.t~ver <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO: Mayor and City Council <br />FROM: Scott Hariicker, Senior Planner <br />DATE: October l8, 2004 <br />SUBJECT: Case No. OA 04-03 <br />Request by City of Elk River for Ordinance Amendment <br />Request <br />Consider an ordinance amendment regarding fencing around pools <br />Attachment <br />• Current ordinance <br />• Proposed Ordinance <br />Overview <br />The current ordinance is not clear about fencing requirement around pools. Fencing is only <br />referenced as a note in the dimensional regulations chart. It only states that pools shall be <br />completely enclosed with an opaque chainlink or equivalent fence at least four feet high with <br />a lockable gate. <br />Issues <br />What is opaque? <br />It is not clear why this term is included. Is it to screen the pool or is it an attempt to make <br />the fence non-climbable. If a resident wants privacy they can install a stockade fence or <br />utilize landscaping. Afour-foot high fence, even with slates, would still be climbable for a <br />deterrnined child. At the Planning Commission meeting, it was suggested that one possible <br />reason for including the term opaque was to address the issue of "attractable nuisance". <br />