CCP 11-14-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

...., . . . /1'"'" ,. iF t; 'J If / t. ~ - 10 December 2001 To Whom It May Concern: Weare the current owners of 203 0 Glen Paul Ave. We have the following concerns about the proposed building plans for the adjacent, vacant lot on County Road D and Cleveland Ave: I. The set -back variance requested for Ihe building and parking lot that will decrease our privacy and could affect property value; 2. The privacy that will be lost due to the building's having an upper level; 3. The water that will now be draining between the two properties due to the large parking lot and building. There will be a lot of water draining into the ditch. If it is clogged from piled snow or debris, it could flood the surrounding houses or property. Privacy is currently provided by a six foot privacy fence on top of the retaining wall. There is also an existing three foot chain link fence on the property line which does not provide privacy from the vacant lot. During the planning commission meeting held on December 5, Mark McGuire talked about the need to maintain the privacy offered by the fence. There was confusion about which fence Mark was referring to. Mark was referring to the six foot privacy fence set back ten feet from the property line on top of the retaining walL Mainlaining this privacy is necessary because Ihere is a two foot (larger on some properties) difference in elevation between our property and the vacant lot. Putting a six foot fence on the property line will not maintain the current privacy provided by the existing, set back privacy fence on top of the retaining wall. If a six foot fence is put on the property line, we will have plain view of the parking lot at all times. We are very concerned that the city is considering waiving the set back requirements for the parking 101. Furthermore I have learned from the commission meeting that Ihe building being considered will have an upper floor. When we purchased our bouse we considered the privacy we would lose when the lot was developed. I decided it would be very difficult to put a two story building on the 101 due to the size of the lot. We have come up with solutions that would be salisfactory to us. They are as follows: 1. Reduce building to one level and meet set back requirements for building and parking lot; 2. Build an eight-foot or higher privacy fence on the property line; 3. Leave the current privacy fence that is set back ten feet from tbe property line that sits on top of the retaining wall; 4. Provide an eight to ten foot hedge on top of the retaining wall that would provide year-round privacy and put a six foot fence on the property line. This option would require planting some type of pine or cedar tree tbat would not lose its leaves in the winter; 5. Require snow to be removed off-site; 6. Assure that the snow will not be piled in a way that interferes with drainage; 7. Drain water to other areas;