06-21-1993 Planning PacketC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Fik #1823 June 15. Page: The applicani faikd to Jcsifiu^ a wkk cai'*alk Jeck providing atcrvv the upper level hedroon! with the origual pfopinal. Fhe additk>nal JeeW will he located 26 Hvjen the rear l»>t line. The cxbtinf deck to the north side » II‘ 4 ’. Rcrici* of Landscaping The applicant asks that extsting plantii^ *lo*^ the v<iuth and east side of 'he propert)' be cooMdered as part of the ftial landscaping plan In additKin she (»oposcs the installation of a 6' high solid wwd privacy fence along the stxith tide of the cxistii« garat^t and the instan.itit>n of gravel akmg the pcrimc»n of the garage ak>ng the iKinh. cast and south sKtes Nt>te privacv fencing has not been shown enclosing the emirc gravel area. Applicant suggests that ladders and scaffolding will he stored within the gravel area. It would seem this would be completely against the inleT' »f the Planning CommtssKm ’s recommendation to have all of the son ’s work related equipment stiwed w ithin the iiuenor of sinicturcs If Plarming Commission approves the gravel yard expansion for cvtcnor storage, oatl wsiuW recommend that either mamre evergreen plantings or fencing be continued aior^ the gravel area. It is still not dear ht>w parking and drive areas are to be physically dcsignatal. Applicant sh«xild provide additional information. The applicant may be asked to consider boulders for tkfining the drive and parking areas. In earlier discussions during the review, the applicant had considered tlK installation of a berm from the materials excavated from the foundation lor the addition. Applicant has b^n advised that Use majority of the existing berm is located withm the road right-of-way and that i^rm could not he expanded within the right-of-way. Issues for Consideration A. Will the deck to the northeast side of the new ;Kidilion present new concerns? B.Has applicant’s landscape plan addressed concerns expressed by the Planning Commi.ssion at your May 17ih meeting? C.As applicant has not noted that the gravel area would be underlain with plastic or geotechnic fabric, hardcover facts have not been amended, although hardcover is not an issue for this propeny ih3W proposed .^t 13+ %. Privacy fence will be iCKated 60 ’ from the street lot line meeting the minimum required setback for fences in excess of 3 ‘A’. Applicant may install privacy fence without City ’s approval. Please refer to staff memo and minutes of the Planning • ’ommission meeting of May I7th ip making your final recommendation. Isv