CCMIN112784 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Victor Weber, owner of the northernmost lower lot in the Twelve Oaks subdivi- sion (lot 17), stated he felt the City is getting into over-regulation on private property, specifically as it relates to individual concept of fencing. He stated that his need for the solid fencing is for privacy and protection from trespassers. He stated the wooden fence is barely visible from the intersection or to the other residences in the area. He presented pictures in support of this claim. He con- cluded by stating the ultimate objectives of the PUD requirements relative to fencing would be met when landscaping around his fence reaches maturity. Mr. Harris reviewed the modifications that have been made to the Twelve Oaks PUD and his conversations with Mr. Weber regarding his fence. After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Brandes, and seconded by Council- member Wood, that Mr. Weber be allowed to retain the existing solid wood fence along his northern property line but that wrought iron fencing meeting the requirements of the PUD be installed along his rear property line and between the northern property line and the side of his home, and additionally that shrubs be planted along the exterior of the northern property line fence in accordance with City requirements and that an acceptable means of irrigating these plants be provided. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Butler, Mohr, and Wood NOES: Mayor Mercer ABSENT: None Resolutions Making Application to LAFCO and Agreeing to the Exchange...~f Property Tax Revenue and Initiating Prezoning for Annexation No. 111 (Vineyard Avenue) Mr. Warnick presented his report (SR 84:622) dated November 27, 1984, regarding this matter. He advised that he had received a letter this week from Mr. Joel Robert- son requesting that his property on Linden Way be included in this annexation Process. Mr. Warnick stated that annexation of this property is not logical and he would not recommended including it in Annexation No. 111. Ms. Karen Duran, 3568 Vine Street, spoke in opposition to this annexation, stating that neighbors in the area want to retain the rural atmosphere and are not in favor of any further improvements in the Remen Tract. She stated that annexation encourages development and that she is strongly opposed to mope mult-family development, more traffic, and more people in the area. She requested Council to place a moratorium on any additional annexations in the Remen Tract area, and also not to allow further high density development in this area. She further requested Council to formally reconfir~n that the Remen Tract will be kept rural and that lots will be 1/3 acre or larger in size. Mr. Chuck Muth, 3644 Vine Street, speaking on behalf of himself and his neighbors, stated they are in opposition to annexations and they want to keep the area rural as it has been in the past. He stated that Council seems to be annexing property in this area piece by piece; he felt this was against their policy established several years ago. Mr. John Caroline, 4487 Pleasanton Avenue, stated that he understood the feelings of the residents of the Rement Tract to remain rural, but that some of the residents are in favor of annexation in order to get sewer and drainage problems resolved. Mr. Will Heinrich, 3683 Vineyard Avenue, stated he requested annexation to the City in order to get city improvements and that he did not plan to further develop his pro- perty. He added that he is not going against everyone in the neighborhood by request- ing annexation to the City. 7. 11/27/84