DRRC 03-25-21 Meeting SummaryDevelopment Review and Regulations Committee
Meeting Summary – March 25, 2021
Page 1 of 1
1
Members Present: Mr. Oates (Chairperson), Mr. Jewell (Vice Chairperson), Ms. Kozel, Mr. Morrison,
Ms. Dawson, Mr. Cline, Mr. Kenney, Mr. Banks, Mr. Shank & Mr. Wagner
Members Absent: Mr. Thomas & Mr. Stowe
Staff Present: M. Tyler Klein, AICP (Senior Planner – Department of Planning & Development)
Others Present: None
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 PM by DRRC Chairman Gary Oates.
Item # 1 – Opaque Fence Requirements.
The Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) discussed a request modify the definition
for “opaque fence” to allow chain link fence with slats to satisfy the requirement. Staff stated that
following the meeting on February 25th, the proposed text amendment was revised to further specify a
minimum fence opacity (90%), type (double-walled wing slats), and preferred colors for slats. Staff noted
that the intent of the opaque fence requirement, to “visually obscure structures, outdoor storage areas, and
other uses,” is still being met with the text amendment. Staff concluded that following the previous
meeting discussion about visual appeal, staff proposes slats be prohibited for road efficiency buffers
(§165-203.02(E)) which are intended to provide protection for residential structures from any street
classified as a collector road or higher while still providing an attractive view of the residential
neighborhoods from major roadways.
The Committee was generally supportive of the proposed amendment going forward to the Planning
Commission, noting it satisfied the request from the Board of Supervisors member to allow an alternative
standard to a board-on-board fence. The DRRC did expressed concern about chain link in residential
developments as part of the buffers/screening requirements but agreed with prohibiting chain link fence
with slats in road efficiency buffers. Two (2) members (Mr. Oates & Mr. Kenney) of the DRRC objected
to sending the item forward to the Planning Commission for further discussion.
Item # 2 – Other.
No “other” topics were discussed.
The meeting concluded at 7:19 PM.