2016-04-06_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, March 2, 2016 Page 29 and no guaranties and without knowing the zoning, Ms. McCormick opined it wasn’t fair 1426 for the city or neighbors to be held accountable for their decisions. 1427 Applicant Response/Comments 1428 Ms. Vogel noted that originally they had proposed the option to place a fence around the 1429 8’ area, allowing the existing fence to remain in place.However, she noted that their firm 1430 had been forced to do as they did according to conditions applied to the IU. 1431 Ms. Vogel reviewed the interior of their building via display of a floor plan, showing the 1432 office area and staging areas for their business.Ms. Vogel clarified that this staging area 1433 was no different than that used by a retail store with merchandise stored in the back 1434 room, in this case their materials, and not as a warehouse.At this point, Ms. Vogel 1435 advised that the vacant bays could remain as space for their business or could just as 1436 easily go into training space for their a workforce, all an unknown at this point. 1437 Mr. Crain volunteered to stand for any questions of the Commission. 1438 Recognizing that the neighbors appear to have documentation from utility companies 1439 indicating what can be done while the Vogel’s appear to have similar documentation 1440 supporting what can’t be done, Member Cunningham asked if they could provide that 1441 documentation. 1442 Mr. Crain responded thatit could be provided, however, he noted the significant amount 1443 of paperwork already presented to the City Council including a copy of the standard 1444 easement agreement used by CenturyLink.As a property owner, Mr. Crain noted that 1445 you decided your own risk,and advised that Vogel had chosen to respect that easement. 1446 When talking about screening or noise, Mr. Crain questioned the difference it would make 1447 if the fence was installed on the property line or 4’ to 6’ back, nor could he understand if 1448 that was placed as a condition of approval for the CU.If required to install it on the 1449 property line, Mr. Crain advised that he and his client would respectfully disagree; 1450 however, he recognized that the Planning Commission was not expected to be a fact- 1451 finding body. 1452 Member Bull referenced the displayed drainage on Ms. Erickson’s photo and sought 1453 clarification as to how close that was to the dividing property line. 1454 Ms. Vogel estimated that is was about 8’ to 10’ into the Vogel side of the property. 1455 C hair Boguszewski closed the public hearing at approximately 11:02 p.m. 1456 Ms. McCormick provided her packet of materials to staff asking that they be 1457 incorporated into the final minutes for the record.Mr. Bilotta advised that would be 1458 at the discretion of his successor, Ms. Collins. 1459 Recess 1460 Chair Boguszewski recessed the meeting at 11:03 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 11:07p.m. 1461 Chair Boguszewski noted, as Ms. Erickson had confirmed, that the preference was that 1462 the neighborhood wanted a wall along their southern border while forcing the southern 1463 property owner to pay for it.As an analogy, Chair Boguszewski stated his only 1464 comparison seemed to be a barrier to protect a residential area from a highway. 1465 Regarding the intent to provide a separation between residential and commercial 1466 properties, ChairBoguszewski opined that is seemed to him it could be addressed 1467 through opacity, height and berm locations.If a true barrier separated those universes, 1468 which Chair Boguszewski opined was his interpretation of where the situation currently is 1469 at, many of the other things listed by Ms, McCormick become relevant. 1470 Regarding risks if the fence is located on the line or not, Chair Boguszewski opined that it 1471 was true that at some point down the road, the fence may be ripped out, thus Vogel 1472 preferring it be located closer to their building.However, Chair Boguszewski noted that 1473 frankly for him the whole concept of a no-man’s land between the fences is irrelevant and 1474 a different issue, and should be no part of this conversation. 1475