Laserfiche WebLink
oppose the amount of grading, and the replacement of the landscape screen that was originally <br />required as a part of the approved tract map (Exhibit D; Condition No. 5). <br />"the improvements are nearing completion. As described in the Zoning Administrator staff <br />report and minutes (Exhibit E and Exhibit F), the City originally approved the installation of the <br />pool and retaining wall without requiring design review. The Johnstons did not oppose to <br />construction of the pool but do oppose the installation of the retaining wall. Please see <br />Exhibit G for the Johnston's letter of appeal. <br />Rear Neighbor Concerns <br />The Johnstons, 3110 Catawba Court, expressed concerned about their loss of privacy with the <br />grading and removal of the landscaping. The Johnstons had attended the Planning Commission <br />and City Council meetings during the development review of Vintage Heights II in 1988 and <br />were involved in the discussion which resulted in the placement of a condition of approval <br />requiring City approval of all grading in the rear portion of the Vintage Heights II homes and the <br />planting of a landscape buffer (Exhibit D, Condition No. 5). The Johnstons' property is at a <br />lower grade than the subject site and the landscaping that was removed provided a buffer <br />between the homes. The Johnstons would like to see dense mature hedges and/or landscaping <br />placed back in the rear and side yard area so that their privacy can be returned to them <br />immediately. <br />View from second-story bedroom window of the <br />In addition, the Johnstons do not want the Jeffery lot to be "leveled out" and are asking the <br />grade be the same as it was prior to grading and that the rear yard be planted with dense <br />landscaping. "The Johnstons have also indicated that if the retaining wall is allowed to remain, <br />they believe a fence on top of the retaining wall with landscaping would also help reduce noise <br />impacts that would be generated from the use of the pool. <br />PAP-123. Appeal of PDR-715 Planning Commission <br />2of7 <br />View from backyard area of <br />Johnstons' home towards subject property <br />