20 ATTACHMENT 05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Specific Plan, which includes fencing requirements. She added that she did not look extensively into that matter. Chair Blank noted that the fence is not the question of this application. Ms. Amos concurred. Chair Blank noted that in the June 20, 2007 violation letter, an option given the applicant was to apply for a conditional use permit for the water tank which would cost $150, would be reviewed by the Planning Commission, and would typically be afour-to-six-week process. He inquired why it took nine months to come before the Commission. Ms. Amos replied that the process would typically take four to six weeks if the information necessary to move the application forward was complete. She added that there were also site visits to be conducted by staff. She noted that this particular application was filed during the holiday season and there were vacation schedules that had to be taken into consideration. Chair Blank noted that on page 9 of the staff report, it states that the water tank was a complementary earthtone color. He inquired if green was considered a complementary earthtone color. Ms. Amos acknowledged the error. Commissioner Fox stated that this application reminded her of the fifth wheel hearing with a cylindrical object in place of a trailer. She noted that she grew up in a farm and was under the impression that if a water tank were to be replaced, it would have be much better to put it in the same location as the old one. She stated that she had a problem visually with the location as she was unsure the tank could be screened with redwood trees. She stated that she lived by Nielsen Park where there are redwood trees and noted that as redwoods grow taller, the trunks get very long and the evergreens stay at the top portion of the trees. Commissioner Pearce commented that it always make her really sad when she sees neighbors engaging in hostilities like this. She stated that she understood where both sides are coming from. She noted, however, that this is a farm property and a lot of things come with it such as being near horses, getting flies and the odor from manure, and a water tank. She noted that there is no well expert present, but that given what the well expert said, the present location appears to be the most efficient. She pointed out that while the tank could be place five feet in either direction, the applicant took care to move it toward the garage. With respect to the neighbor's situation, she indicated that she would consider mitigation but the neighbors appear not to want mitigation since they cut down the trees that would have screened the tank. Commissioner Olson stated that he initially thought that one of the possible mitigations would be to move the tank farther to the east so it is completely behind the garage. He noted, however, after driving down Diamond Court, that the tank would still be visible from Diamond Court. He added that it was unfortunate that the solid fence was removed. He stated that he was in a tough spot because moving the tank to mitigate the view for the neighbors to the rear would not solve the problem for the Diamond Court residents. He stated that after taking several trips to the Happy Valley area, he noted that the place is a farm country and that the decision to locate the tank as close to the wellhead as possible was one that was motivated by efficiency. He stated that in that respect, he did not think the tank should be moved. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, April 9, 2008 Page 10 of 15