My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-09-2023 Planning Commission Minutes
>
Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2023
>
03-09-2023 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2023 3:49:44 PM
Creation date
8/25/2023 3:49:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MARCH 9, 2023 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />3 <br />The Community Development Director confirmed that public works has that service built into <br />the budget, should it be needed. <br /> <br />Chair Johnson noted that these homes would also contribute to the City’s tax base. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director stated that the issue of lighting was also discussed at the <br />Council meeting and as they move forward, the Public Works Director will be involved in the <br />type of lighting and spacing between the lights. <br /> <br />Commissioner Masrud acknowledged the lack of sidewalk and asked if that could be added in <br />the future or whether that is a consequence of the lack of space available for the road. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director commented that there is not a sidewalk planned at this <br />time but there should be room within the right-of-way if that is desired in the future. <br /> <br />Commissioner Thorson stated that one of the larger outstanding issues was the Watershed <br />District and that has now been resolved, which is assuring. <br /> <br />Chair Johnson invited members of the public to speak. <br /> <br />Jessica Turcotte, 2674 Schletty, stated that she believes the builder has made strides to be <br />accommodating as the process has evolved. She stated that she has two concerns that remain. <br />She commented that there is a large drop is elevation between the subject property and her <br />property. She recognized the intent to use landscaping and a swale to direct the water, which she <br />believes will initially work. She asked where the liability would lie if the new homeowner were <br />to alter their backyard in the future that caused water to then run onto her property instead of the <br />desired path. She referenced lot four which runs along her backyard and the backyard of her <br />neighbor. She stated that her neighbor is actually a group home for developmentally disabled <br />adults and believes that location was chosen because of the privacy. She wanted to ensure that <br />privacy is maintained and asked if the Commission would recommend a privacy fence along the <br />back of lot four. She said that 13-year old boys could be looking down at their property if a fence <br />isn’t installed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Masrud asked if privacy fences would be shown on the plat at this stage or <br />whether that would be left to the preference of the future property owner. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director stated that the City does not require fencing between two <br />residential developments, outside of tree preservation/replacement requirements. She stated that <br />given the increased depth of the lots, there would be about 75 feet between the back of the new <br />home to the back of the existing lot. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.