14 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

reasonable requests, considering the vast improvements he would be gaining from the redesign of his yard. She noted that Mr. Jeffrey has greatly increased the value of his home while decreasing theirs. Ms. Johnston concluded that this long and exhausting process was mismanaged from the start and that they never want to address it again. She noted that 20 years ago, they fought long and hard for their privacy and view shed from these homes, and she requested the Commission to make a decision tonight that will prevent this will from ever happening again. Commissioner Fox asked Ms. Johnston what additional mistakes were in the staff report besides the two she had mentioned. Ms. Johnston replied that the report reads: "The appellants oppose the amount of grading and replacement of the landscape screen." She stated that they do not oppose replacement of the landscape screen. She added that on page 4, there is reference to the new wall replacing the old wall and noted that the original wooden fence was installed at that place by the original owners to hide the V-ditch and that they then put the heavy broad-leaf plants in front of it. She noted that the purpose of Mr. Jeffrey's wall was to specifically level. Ms. Johnston also pointed out that on page 4, it also states that the Johnstons felt they could possibly agree to the grade change if the applicant planted the majority of the yard with mature dense landscaping. She noted that they would never agree to that change without conditions, and no mention is made of their suggestion of the three-foot high berm. She added that every time the wall is mentioned, it is referred to as four feet tall, but staff has not come out and seen it, noting that it was actually on top of two feet of grade, making it a six-foot tall wall. In response to Commission Fox's inquiry regarding whether or not the existing plants serve as a noise barrier, Ms. Johnston replied that through the years, Mr. Jeffrey's yard was probably the least used of any yards in the City because it was not very pretty and that she does not blame Mr. Jeffrey for wanting to re-design it. She stated that it had a sloped lawn going all the way down to the fence line with large pretty bushes and that she knew whenever the previous owners were in their hot tub. She noted that the home had been sold at least three or four times since the Johnstons had lived in the area. Steve Jeffrey, Applicant, stated that his contractor had applied for a pool permit for its present location in his backyard and was issued one a couple of weeks later by the Planning Division, together with a permit to install afour-foot tall retaining wall. He noted that, with respect to the retaining wall, there were a couple of issues in his yard: (1) the vegetation was so high with such a slope coming off that there was a major safety issue for him and his family; and (2) the bushes were so tall, and he was unable to use any type of ladder to maintain them. He explained that his intent was to install the four-foot tall wall closer to the property line as shown in Exhibit A, but there is a 15-foot easement from the property line towards his house for the drainage ditch at the back. He then referred to Exhibit A-2 showing the existing V-ditch that drains the run-off from his property. He indicated that he has had to maintain the slope along the ditch to prevent the water from going onto the neighbors' properties. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 10, 2008 Page 11 of 25