PC 091008 - Laserfiche WebLink

compromise that he thinks would work that would keep this from elevating any higher. He indicated that he sees this as a noise and a privacy issue. He noted that a neighbor had mentioned not wanting to wait five to seven years for the landscaping to grow in and fill in. He further noted that foliage does not keep out a lot of noise and that usually it is retaining walls or berms or something more solid. He stated that staff had discussed cone-foot high berm going in as opposed to the three- or three-foot high berm that the appellants had wanted. He indicated that when he visited the site, he did not notice cone-foot high berm but that he thinks some kind of berm is needed. He stated that he believed it would be easy to remove some of the new vegetation, get a berm in there, and replant the vegetation without doing too much work. He noted that part of the problem would be that between the wall and the bender board, there is now a limited amount of room because the bender board has gone in as well as the sprinklers and grass which have been done in the last few days. He indicated that he thinks the berm should be a minimum of three feet which would help get some of the vegetation higher now rather than five years later. He stated that the only way to do this would be to encroach into the lawn area, but he noted that the applicant is aware that he would have to remove whatever he has installed should the decision be otherwise. He added that he did not know whether or not the appellants are looking for a tree that would grow to be 40 or 50 feet but that they did like what was there before, which was not really tall but filled in all the way down to the level of their fencing and provided privacy. He noted that the type of trees should be looked into. Commissioner Narum noted that these type of neighbor disputes are tough. She stated that she was thinking along the same lines as Commissioner O'Connor and that she is hearing noise and privacy issues. She noted that the reality is that this will not happen tomorrow in terms of the vegetation and the screening, and, therefore, the issue is how to make this the most effective the quickest. She indicated that she was inclined toward say some kind of berm with plants on top and around to get the height up and the vegetation more quickly. She added that she was disturbed by the picture in the corner with all of the wide open space that is not really going to fill in. She noted that a Pittosporum would grow fast but would not totally fill in the corner, which is the portion most impacted. She stated that she believes a lot of these issues could be solved If we a screen could be provided more quickly. Commissioner Olson stated that he was inclined to go with Commissioner Fox's earlier question of finding for the appellant and then placing conditions. He indicated that as a matter of principle, he felt strongly that the Commission should find for the appellant based upon everything that has happened. He stated that he agreed with Commissioner O'Connor that a berm is needed and noted that he did not see one at the site. He also agreed with Commissioner Narum that it is critical to fill in the corner. He also agreed with both Commissioners that it is both a noise and a privacy issue and while he is not inclined to put restrictions on the applicant's property, he thinks some conditions should be put in place that would prevent the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 10, 2008 Page 25 of 33