PC 092408 - Laserfiche WebLink

without any changes; the Commission can uphold the Zoning Administrator's approval with modified conditions; or the Commission can vacate the Zoning Administrator's decision. He inquired if this is still the case. Ms. Decker replied that if the appeal is upheld, the Commission would be overturning the Zoning Administrator's approval and therefore requiring that the property be returned to its former state, which would mean removing all grading, the retaining wall, the irrigation system, all plants which have been planted, and the screening trees which have been planted for the neighbors. Ms. Seto stated that this could be one case, but there could also be other direction from the Commission or discussion regarding whether or not the Commission would ask that the applicant re-apply. She added that during that interim period, the Commission would not require something be simply torn out as long as the applicant diligently pursues the new application, whether it be for something new or for what is already existing. Commissioner Fox stated that there are a couple of options on the table and inquired if it would be appropriate to conduct a poll among the Commissioners to determine what each one is thinking, given that there was atwo-week break and the Commission believed that a compromise had been reached. Chair Blank indicated that he was fine with that. Commissioner Fox stated that she was leaning toward moving the wall back to where the original hand-drawn sketch states it should be and having it appear as what was approved. She added that she felt there should be a removal of the extra fill material made through the repositioning of the wall and that there should be a 35-foot setback where no above-ground structures should be allowed. She also noted that she believed the landscaping needs to be redone with Ms. Decker or Mr. Fulford reviewing the landscaping plans and that an engineered set of plans be submitted for this. She concluded that she does not believe it is a good policy for the Planning Commission, given the entire situation, to simply grandfather in what work was completed in the last six to nine months. Commissioner Pearce commented that she was disappointed that the Commission was having the same discussion two weeks later, especially in light of the direction the Commission is heading. She noted that this is not necessarily something she would have approved had it came to the Commission before the work had been done. She indicated that she recognizes it is complicated and that mistakes were made, but she was extremely concerned with the appellants' lack of privacy. She noted that in this regard, she would like to do everything possible, short of returning the property to the state it was before, to assure the appellants' privacy. She stated that she believed afour- to five-foot tall berm is appropriate and that she is in favor of Commissioner Fox's and Mr. Dolan's suggestion of a very strictly followed landscape plan. She added that she would like to see incorporated in this new plan PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 24, 2008 Page 15 of 41