Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council continues Mayberry subdivision hearing for revised plan addressing height, lots and fencing
Summary
Neighbors opposed two-story homes and visual impacts from a proposed 10-lot Mayberry subdivision adjacent to existing properties; council asked the applicant to return in two weeks with a revised plan that removes one eastern lot (option 1), adds an 8-foot composite fence or berm-and-fence along the eastern boundary, and identifies which lots will be restricted to single-story.
The council continued deliberations on the Mayberry subdivision after extensive public testimony and staff recommendations. Applicant David Sterling (Ardura) presented a proposal for annexation and a 10-lot preliminary plat on a 5.13-acre site north of Eagle High School. Planning staff (Rick Butler) recommended removing a condition that sought public access across a private driveway easement and proposed a revised fencing condition (8-foot barrier, composite material, and revised exhibit D) after neighbors raised concerns about privacy and fence materials.
Multiple neighbors described privacy and visual-impact concerns from two-story homes that would back up to existing residences. Mary Ann Langan and Craig Carnes urged either removing Lot 5 or converting lots nearest the eastern boundary to single-story. The applicant said he was willing to restrict one lot to single-story and would prefer a textual restriction that disallows "living space on a secondary level" rather than a strict numeric maximum height; staff noted the development agreement already includes a 35-foot maximum height but recommended clarifying language. Council members asked for a revised plat that removes or reconfigures one eastern lot (option 1), a revised fencing plan (no vinyl; composite preferred), and clarification of which lots along the eastern and southwestern edges should be single-story; the council then voted to continue the hearing for two weeks to give the applicant time to return with those revisions.
Why it matters: the proposal touches local land-use issues of density and compatibility with existing single-family neighborhoods. Council sought a negotiated compromise balancing the comp-plan zoning outcome and neighbors' privacy concerns.
