CC_Minutes_2015_0824 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,August 24,2015 Page 37 Ms. McCormick noted that the original Planning Commission record indicated coniferous and over-story canopy trees. Mayor Roe clarified, with confirmation by City Attorney Gaughan, that the lan- guage of the Interim Use as conditioned was the official record, not discussion at the Planning Commission meeting and was not under consideration be changed at this point. Councilmember Laliberte expressed concern with plantings on the northern side if the fence was moved to make room, this brought up the grey area again between one location or another. Mayor Roe noted that the safeguards were in place for the neighborhood's ap- proval of tree placement. Based on his reading of the Interim Use, City Attorney Gaughan advised that it struck him that the Vogel's would be in compliance if they installed the fence on the northern most edge of the property — or subject to easement restrictions. While placement of the line of trees could be subject to a discussion between the Vogel's and neighbors, City Attorney Gaughan advised he didn't think it was ap- propriate to have that included in the directive to staff that installation was subject to neighbor approval as it would not be consistent with the original condition. With Mayor Roe expressing confusion as to how to word the motion to provide for that discussion with neighbors regarding location of plantings, City Attorney Gaughan reiterated that discussion with neighbors was not nor should it be part of the Interim Use. Mayor Roe noted that whether the plantings were all north or all south of the fence should not make a difference to the Vogel's. Regarding the existing fence and lack of maintenance, Councilmember Laliberte sought to confirm who was responsible for that maintenance. Mayor Roe clarified that the maintenance of the existing fence continued to be the responsibility of the existing owner; ant they could take it down or leave it at their discretion, since it was their property. Specific to the purpose of the trees, Community Development Director Bilotta noted that while the neighbors may view this as a second barrier, staff's interpre- tation of that purpose would be more aesthetic to break up the fence, and was in- tended as one tree per 50 linear feet to achieve that aesthetic perspective. Mr. Bi- lotta sought confirmation and agreement with that perspective from the City Council allowing staff to work out the details.