2013 001 Ordinance - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

P & Z Minutes Dec 3, 2012 Pg~#5 trying to do. Let's be realistic, it's not going to happen. You're going to have some site line to buildings and there's going to be some things you're going to see. I've been in situations before where a fence is not going to be the answer. Envision those terrible god awful fences along the highway. Be careful about locking yourself into something. Chairman Pro-Tem Regan said we're trying to answer the gentlemen's question. I think he's not as concerned about what somebody driving on SOM is seeing as opposed to what he's seeing in his backyard out his window. Sam Cannata said T think you have to also realize when you're talking about a 3' mound, he's going to have to allow us to get onto his property to taper that mound down. He's going to have to give us a construction easement. Just so everybody's above board here. To Mr. Kinnaird, you're going to have to cooperate. I would expect your consent is not going to be unreasonably withheld if things are reasonable amongst the Village and ourselves. David Hartt thinks that language goes into the actual Development Agreement. I'm sharing the concern. I'm not against putting this language in, but the way the plan you're approving now looks is there would be green space from the eastern property line. to 57' in, because there's no parking east of the building because there's no room for the parking behind the building if you put the building at 57'. We have to careful we don't tear down screening, existing vegetation to get a mound and a fence when the existing vegetation is going to do an equally good job when we make this judgment at the appropriate time. If we add the language: "Such buffering will include a 3' mound on the Kinnaird property, a primary fence at a inimum of 8' and evergreens or an alternative for protective screening mutually agreed upon by all parties". • Chairman Pro-Tem Regan asked, when you say "mutually agreed upon by all parties", does .that mean with all due respect, if the gentleman says I don't agree to that, that we're at an impasse? -.- -•- -•- David Hartt replied actually the authority to the Agreement is the Planning and Zoning Commission's vote. We shouldn't say "mutually agreed" because you have the final say if you're going to approve something else reasonably. Chuck Kinnaird said Michael and I had talked about the fence. There are a lot of ideas out there. For security purposes, I don't want people in my backyard. I realize we're not going to hide the building. I made my commitment to these guys by retracting my appeal regarding the variances. I'm hoping they'll do the same forme (because that was a handshake agreement) so you guys can go forward and do what you want to do back there. For me, it's a big concern that I have a fence, if it looked like something out by the freeway, I could care less. Michael Gatto said on our standpoint, if there's a fence there, we can landscape the one side of it. I don't know if 8' is to code, generally in a lot of communities, 6' is the limit. Chuck Kinnaird said I talked to John and 6' is the code. He said a variance is not a problem.