PC 091008 - Laserfiche WebLink

engineer to ascertain that it complies with the first grading plan that was approved. She indicated that she believes the backyard towards the property boundary should be restricted so that there are no accessory structures, no sports courts, no gazebos, no fire pits, and no play structures. She added that the landscaping should be increased and that a condition be added that that this be reviewed by the City Council as well. She compared this application to that of the nursing facility at 300 Neal Street where there was an issue of planning integrity. She noted that the intent of the resolution should be looked into and that it is not right to say the Council does not need to see this because 15 or 20 years have since passed. Mr. Dolan indicated that there are certain practical limitations to some of the things that have been discussed that he would like to comment on. He stated that in terms of a restriction, the Commission should be very specific geographically with respect to what this restriction should be in terms of the distance from the fence or retaining wall because this can be controversial. Mr. Dolan noted that he was not certain that it will be practical to be able to determine precisely what the grade originally was because as has been mentioned, he was not sure whether or not the retaining wall was over four feet tall. He noted that where the wall is located is definitely farther up the slope than where the fence was located because of the setback requirement from the fence. He added that it would be difficult to determine the grade on which the wall is located, and the applicant's claim that the wall is located on the former existing grade would be difficult to disprove. Commissioner Fox inquired if the City has an original map of the subdivision. She stated that she felt the Commission would not get down to the quarter-inch. Chair Blank indicated that the Commission does not have any professionally prepared diagrams, but ahand-drawn diagram by someone who is not an architect or a soils engineer. He added that a professional engineer could look at the site and say that it would be impossible to determine or it would not make a difference due to erosion or other things; or the engineer could also spend 10 seconds on it and identify how to determine the grade and get within three to four inches. Mr. Dolan stated that he believes the language of the motion needs to acknowledge that kind of difficulty. He questioned that if there is consideration for the Jeffreys to maintain the wall but not backfill it, it would be a retaining wall with nothing to retain. Chair Blank noted that this would be a choice to be made. Commissioner O'Connor pointed out there was also afour-foot tall fence that did not hold any dirt either. Commissioner Pearce stated that given that the Commission does not have any real documents, the Commission could take a stab at how far back it thinks the restriction should be on a structure, or the Commission could have the Director of Planning and Community Development to go to the site and determine the appropriate distance, say 25-foot setback from the property line which would be 10 feet back from the wall. Mr. Dolan stated that if the Commission picked a number, it should be appropriate to replicate where the grade originally tapered off, which is unknown. Commissioner Olson stated that if a three-foot high berm is required, this will equate to a certain PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 10, 2008 Page 27 of 33