09/04/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. .,_. . . want to change the requirements if any ofthe neighbors were opposed to the proposal. It was clarified they have not revised any landscaping on the eastern border, which abuts Adon Equipment. Mr. Maloney would like it stated in the motion that if these plantings should need to be removed or die off, new plantings will be required to replace them or the board on board fence installed for as long as the use for which the variance ? was granted continues. Mr. Gomersall did not have a problem with this proposal. The members are willing + to grant this revision to the April 17, 1996 mivutes, as long as the plantings are replaced as needed or a' screeuing effect is created. Mr. Gomersall asked if this would take care of the request. Mr. Rymarczyk did uot believe this took care of the elimiuation of the mound in the rear. Mr.. Gareau reiterated there is an existing mound wluch extends approximately half way across the property. Mr. Rymarczyk clarified that any existing trees, mounds, etc. would remain. Mr. Gareau pointed out the mound does not extend all the way across the property. In response to Mr. Gomersall's question, Mr. Rymarczyk stated that they are looking to amend the fence along the western property: Mr. Gomersall read through the minutes of April 17, 1996 and stated that he believed they only needed to revise the minutes eluniuating the fence on the western side of the property. Mr. Gareau suggested that they indicate the rear of the property remaiu in its current natural state. There was some discussion on the part of the motion which read "that a 4 foot mound with a 6 foot fence with evergreens ou either side of it be installed on the north boundary of the property." Mr. Gomersall would like the 4 foot mound to remain as it already exists. Mr. Gareau stated that the inouud is actually about 8 feet high, only exteuds half way across the northern border, and there is no fence. Mr. Rymarczyk stated that there is an existing fence but it is not board on board fence. Mr. Gomersall explained that they did not require a board on board fence, but only that the fence be 6 feet in height with evergreens on either side. He felt that this part of the motiou should remain as agreed upon at the previous ineeting. Mr. Gomersall believed the only change that needs to be made is the amendment allowing the fence to be removed along the western border. Mr. Rymarczyk e}cplained the fence will remain on two portions on the western border, as indicated on the plau. He stated that we must address the fact they will not add the 4 foot mound on the rear of the property. Mr. Gomersall clarified the motion did not read that they had to add the mound, and since it akeady exists, it should remain. Mr. Gareau explained the mound ovly extends half way up the property and the reason for the evergreens is to slueld it from the residents to the rear. He did not believe the existing trees were evergreens, thus this portion of the motion should remain. Mr. Gomersall clarified that this board is requesting a six foot fence with evergreens on either side. He felt the only amendment needed would be to eliminate the fence on the western border. The board is not will'uig to change the requirements for the northern border. Mr. Gomersall clarified this board is requiring that a 4 foot mouud with a 6 foot fence with evergreens on either side of it be installed on the uorthern border, if it does not already exist. He reiterated the board will amend the motion of the April 17, 1996 minutes to withdraw the requirement that a 6 foot board on board fence be installed along the western property line. Due to the amount of confusion, Mr. Gomersall agreed to meet with Mr. Rymarczyk and Mr. Wendell at the site for clarification. It was decided that fencing and landscaping be installed as ou drawing LP-1 dated 8/28/96. The mouudiug on the uorth of the property will be reinoved and evergreens added to shield the U- Store-It property from the residential area as approved by the City Forester, Dave Wendell. No additioual fence will be required at the extreme north property line, only the fence that is shown on the above mentioned plan with laudscaping. R. Gomersall inade a inotiou to amend the motion from the April 17, 1996 minutes for U-Store It, 24000 Loraiu Road as follows: To eliiniuate the requirement for a 6 foot board on board fence to be installed on tlie west line starting fi-om the permanent structure back to the back liue. The fence shall be replaced with arbor vitae, evergreens, and like plantiugs. The motion was seconded by J. Maloney and unanunously approved. In the framing of the