SR 05:069 - Laserfiche WebLink

by staff and was discussed by the Planning Commission and City Council at their public bear- ings. Copies of the neighbors' petitions in favor of the sidewalk connection and in opposition to the sidewalk connection are attached. The Bozorgzads believe that Condition No. 8 provides the ability to revisit the sidewalk's location even though there is an existing easement for the side- walk's location. Present Proposal and Issues Hoss and Mojgan Bozorgzad have stated their opposition to the sidewalk connection because of potential impacts to the privacy of their home and requested that it be deleted from the proposed project. In an effort to resolve the issues on the sidewalk, there have been substantial discus- sions involving Mr. Bozorgzad, the applicants, and staff, including an on-site meeting. The ap- plicants agreed to several continuances of the public hearing in order to work out the sidewalk issues and other neighbor issues. To address the Bozorgzads privacy concerns, staff committed its support to Mr. Bozorgzad re- placing the existing open fence with a six-foot tall solid wall/fence. In staff's opinion, the solid wall/fence would effectively screen his property from the view of pedestrians on the sidewalk. However, prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing, there remained unresolved issues including: · The location of the public sidewalk with respect to the Bozorgzads' property - the Bo- zorgzads wanted the sidewalk moved farther into the subject property. · The location of the previously mentioned solid wall/fence in relation to the Bo- zorgzads' existing driveway - the Bozorgzads wanted a minimum three-foot separa- tion between the relocated wall/fence and their driveway to accommodate landscaping that would screen the wall from the view of their home. · Relocating the existing eight-inch water line - the water line must be relocated to ac- commodate the relocated wall/fence. Otherwise, the relocated wall/fence would be sit- uated directly over the water line. · Payment of the costs for the construction of wall and the relocated water line. · Reimbursement of the applicants' portion of the costs borne by the Bozorgzads to con- struct Sycamore Terrace. Staff notes that there is a current reimbursement agreement providing civil means to resolve this issue. From a design/construction standpoint, the above-mentioned items can be done. The stumbling point has been who would pay the costs of their implementation, e.g., the applicants totally or shared between the applicants and the Bozorgzads. Staff understands that the applicants would not be receptive towards paying the total costs but would be receptive to sharing the costs with the Bozorgzads. Staff would not support the Bozorgzards' request that the City require the appli- cants pay the costs to relocate the sidewalk, pay for the construction of the wall, and relocate the waterline because the required nexus for such a requirement would be absent. The issue regard- SR 05.'069 Page 6 of ! 5