04/14/1992 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

v agreed previously to put up a fence and to cut down the neighbor's rose bushes, but he now says lie did not complete the fence because of the rose bushes. Mr. Gorris reminded her -that Mr: Conway ha.s stated he will not issue a permit until the fence is completed. Mr. Skoulis questioned if this would be acceptable to the neighbors if some kind of fast growing.trees were installed behind the fence. She again stated that there was a building on the property that could be used for storage, and a snaller build:ing or residential garage could be built to store the maintenance equipment. Mr. Gorris stated that since the building meets code the developer,ha.s a right to develop his property. Mr. Tallon stated tha.t none of the members like this kind of `development, there is a loop hole in the zoning codes which will have to be addressed, but this must be approved tmder the ordinances that are in place today. Ms. Wiersma also asked if any of the members had visited the site as she had asked. Mr. Orlowski asked if the side walls could be reduced from 10 foot to 8 foot and then a mansard type roof could be installed on the front of the building with the roof sloping back. He stated that ceramic tile and vinyl flooring cannot be stacked over 3 feet high, iuiless they were going to have a racking system. Mr. Hayden responded that there would be a racking system which could store the materials up to the top. Mr. Orlowski stated that he is trying to reach a compromise and believed that some of the developers needs are self imposed because of the way the.retail strip was developed. Mr. Hayden stated the height is anly 15.5 feet and his neighbor has an 18 foot high residential garage. Mr. Draeger stated tha.t the fence will be continued, and suggested that a landscape buffer can be installed about 10 feet off the back of the building so tha.t the neighbors would see trees instead of the wall. Ms. Ficker, who lives to the east, stated she would still be able to see behind the buildings. Mr. Draeger pointed out that the drawing shows that the fence is to be turned along the east property line. Ms.; Fieker stated that there is a portion of the fence on the ea.st but it steps doxm, and she can still see the entire rear yard. After some discussion, Mr. Draeger proposed to..plant a screen of pine trees 10 foot on center, staggered, which will be continued-along the east line. It was clarified tha.t this buffer would _be on : higher ground and the trees cannot be transplanted if they axe more than 4 or 5 feet high. The neighbors claim that the trees shown on the plan on the east side were cut down. Mr. Hayden stated that the forester gave theln permission to relnove those trees which were half dead. Mr. Conway will check with the forester: R. Tallon moved to forward this to the A.R.B. to look at the screening which has been talked about tonight to screen the new building, the completion of the fence to adequately screen all the surrounding property in order to ha.ve a pleasant view, to check with the forester.to make sure that he had approved all the trees that were removed and to approve the type of plantings. That the developer provide the A.R.B. with a topo and ask that the Architectural Board look at the height of the builcling and roof design. They should also determine what type of trees would.screen the best. Mr. Gorris added that the Commission looked.at this two years ago and apparently something was not done right because the buildings are not screened properly, so the Commission wants the Architectural Board to make svre that all the adjacent residents are reaily screened from this development, for both the protection of the residents and the development with a full. dense type of growth.. Mr. Hayden stated.that origi.nally he wanted trees, not a fence, but the residents wanted a fence. The members agreed it should be both, the fence for security and trees and natural vegetation for screening. The motion was seconded by Mr. Orlowski, and unani.mously approved. The residents were advised that the Architectural Board would be a.week froan this Wednesday at 5:30 p.m. 5