Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Buffer Yards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews buffer‑yard options: trees, fences and resident input
Summary
Commissioners reviewed draft buffer‑yard concepts for commercial properties adjacent to residences, discussed tree‑height and fence‑material standards, resident requests to reduce heights, discontinuous wall breaks for access, and maintenance/vegetation replacement requirements; staff will update language per feedback.
At the Nov. 5 meeting the commission discussed draft buffer‑yard standards intended to screen commercial uses that border residential properties. Staff presented three concept options and draft ordinance language and asked the commission whether the revisions reflect prior feedback.
Commissioners flagged inconsistent language about tree sizes and asked staff either to standardize numeric minimums or remove the adjective 'large' to avoid confusion. The draft currently includes options with 15‑foot and 25‑foot minimums for canopy/evergreen trees in different buffer options.
The commission also discussed fence placement (near, not straddling, property lines) and materials. Staff explained that the narrowest buffer option relies on a more substantial, longer‑lived barrier—concrete block or rusted metal—because the wall plays a greater screening role in a narrow yard, but staff offered to add wood as an allowable material if the commission preferred. The draft allows adjacent residential owners to request a lower wall or tree height; staff said Option 1 sets an 8‑foot maximum wall height unless an adjacent property owner requests a lower height (down to 6 feet).
Commissioners raised maintenance and access issues: draft language requires discontinuous walls to allow maintenance access but does not specify the number of breaks; staff offered to require a minimum number of breaks per run (for example, two breaks per 100 feet) if the commission wishes. Staff also confirmed that property owners will be responsible for ongoing care and must replace required vegetation within four months if plants die.
Staff said they would incorporate the commission’s edits (clarify adjacency language, tree‑height wording, fence options and break/access standards) and return with revised ordinance language.
