Frontenac is losing some of its openness with the approval of a new fence ordinance, allowing fences to be up to 6 feet tall. There are many provisions to slow the growth of closing some of the openess in the community. For example, all fences must be black metallic in a wrought iron style in steel or aluminum finishes. Stockade fences for new homes and replacements are now banned by voice vote of the board of aldermen, passing by a vote of 5-1.
“We are approving this with an abundance of caution,” Ward 3 Alderman John Levis said.
After a lengthy discussion by homeowners, the unofficial tally was 6-5 favoring the new ordinance. About 40 concerned residents attended the meeting.
Several of the speakers said losing stockade fences would be a hardship for those who live on busy through streets and seek additional privacy. Mayor Keith Krieg tried to call for a 12th hour compromise, only to be soundly defeated by a vote of the aldermen.
Showing posts with label fence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fence. Show all posts
Friday, October 21, 2011
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
County Ignores Resident's Complaints for Compliance . . . for Over A Year
Residents in the Florissant/North County area have been complaining for over a year asking the county to take action to enforce their own regulations. The basic complaint is the replacement of a fence which could have been done in less than a week. Here's the latest letter to county officials.
Mr. Penney:
It has now been exactly one year to the day (November 24, 2008) that this committee first reported the issue of the required missing fencing at the above referenced commercial property, which is owned by Mr. Stallings. Please scroll all the way to the bottom of this message to view the original complaint of Monday, November 24, 2008 at 11:08 a.m.
We have now been through all of the four seasons: fall, winter, spring and summer, and the cycle has begun once again. Yet, to date, the infamous Mr. Stallings has made no attempt to re-install the required fence, nor does it appear likely to this committee, his business tenants, or to anyone else, that he intends to re-install the fence and comply with the respective St. Louis County ordinance.
St. Louis County has been far too lenient in granting Mr. Stallings a six month extension back in April (which expired on September 23, per your message below of August 6) to re-install a fence that should and could have been re-installed in less than a week. Considering the past track record of Mr. Stallings disregard for compliance with St. Louis County ordinances, no extensions should have been granted to him at all.
Upon receipt of this message, I would appreciate your response with regard to the status of the pending litigation against Mr. Stallings so that this committee will have a timeline as to when we can expect this issue to be resolved by the courts, since it’s apparent by now that this is the only viable solution.
And, as I have stated in the past, is it any wonder to you as to why people are dissatisfied with St. Louis County government?
Mr. Penney:
It has now been exactly one year to the day (November 24, 2008) that this committee first reported the issue of the required missing fencing at the above referenced commercial property, which is owned by Mr. Stallings. Please scroll all the way to the bottom of this message to view the original complaint of Monday, November 24, 2008 at 11:08 a.m.
We have now been through all of the four seasons: fall, winter, spring and summer, and the cycle has begun once again. Yet, to date, the infamous Mr. Stallings has made no attempt to re-install the required fence, nor does it appear likely to this committee, his business tenants, or to anyone else, that he intends to re-install the fence and comply with the respective St. Louis County ordinance.
St. Louis County has been far too lenient in granting Mr. Stallings a six month extension back in April (which expired on September 23, per your message below of August 6) to re-install a fence that should and could have been re-installed in less than a week. Considering the past track record of Mr. Stallings disregard for compliance with St. Louis County ordinances, no extensions should have been granted to him at all.
Upon receipt of this message, I would appreciate your response with regard to the status of the pending litigation against Mr. Stallings so that this committee will have a timeline as to when we can expect this issue to be resolved by the courts, since it’s apparent by now that this is the only viable solution.
And, as I have stated in the past, is it any wonder to you as to why people are dissatisfied with St. Louis County government?
Labels:
fence,
St. Louis County
Thursday, January 17, 2008
So. County Subdivision Residents Get Citations from County for Fence Painting
At least three residents of Golden Gables Subdivision in South County (63129) recently received citations for maintenance of their chain link fences surrounding their back yards. The County gave the residents until May to have the fences painted.
One homeowner commented that probably half the chain link fences in the county need paint. Another said he purposely let the fence go into a rust condition since the color blends in with the surrounding terrain making the fence almost invisible.
A check of a local fence company showed that chain link fences come in different colors - silver, white, green, brown and black. Now this raises a question. Which color does the County prefer?
Stay tuned for further developments.
One homeowner commented that probably half the chain link fences in the county need paint. Another said he purposely let the fence go into a rust condition since the color blends in with the surrounding terrain making the fence almost invisible.
A check of a local fence company showed that chain link fences come in different colors - silver, white, green, brown and black. Now this raises a question. Which color does the County prefer?
Stay tuned for further developments.
Labels:
fence,
Golden Gables,
maintenance,
south county
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
