Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Curtis indicated Staff was not able to find any. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked if a landscape plan was submitted. <br /> <br />Curtis stated this is new construction and there was a landscape plan submitted. Curtis noted there was a <br />French drain shown on the landscape plan in the approximate location of the pergola. The builder assured <br />Staff that the French drain is there but that is one of the features Staff has requested be shown on the <br />revised as-built survey. <br /> <br />Landgraver noted the Planning Commission did review a landscape plan and to his recollection the <br />pergola was not included. <br /> <br />Michael Schutt stated he is here tonight to answer questions on behalf of his parents since they are out of <br />the country at the present time. Schutt stated given the fact that there is no structural integrity to the <br />feature, the question is whether it should be defined as a pergola, an arbor, or a fence. <br /> <br />Curtis displayed a picture of the structure. <br /> <br />Schutt noted the retaining wall was needed for the drainage from the neighboring property and that the <br />structure is an enhancement. Schutt indicated the adjacent neighbor is very much in favor of it and <br />believes it adds to the aesthetics of her property as well. Schutt stated they would like to get some clarity <br />on it. <br /> <br />Thiesse asked if any public comments were received. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated Staff did not receive any comments but that this was not noticed for a public hearing <br />since it is an appeal and the neighbors were not specifically notified. <br /> <br />Lemke asked if the retaining wall was included in the original plan. <br /> <br />Curtis stated there was a patio and the French drain included in the plan but to her recollection the <br />retaining wall was not included. It is Staff’s belief that it is not a retaining wall but rather a sitting wall. <br />