Agenda - Environmental Policy Board - 01/23/2023

Home

Senior Planner Anderson was unsure why fencing was not included in the density transitioning options, as it can be used for commercial properties. Board Member Fetterley stated that she would agree with fencing as an option but noted that if an existing homeowner does not like the view being created, they would most likely install their own fence. Board Member Hiatt stated that he would be concerned with the upkeep of a fence over time. He noted that there are some composite fences that he has noticed more recently that would provide immediate screening. Chairperson Moore recognized that while no one on the Board would choose fencing as the first option, perhaps that could be used in combination with another element or could be the best choice in some scenarios. Senior Planner Anderson agreed that a fence alone should not be allowed for density transitioning but could be part of an overall plan with trees and vegetation. He noted that as this moves forward, he would work with this Board on the vegetation portions while also working with other groups, such as the Planning Commission, on other potential ideas. Board Member Hiatt stated that perhaps it would be helpful to have input from developers as they would have experience on what worked well in other developments and communities they have worked in. 6. BOARD / STAFF INPUT No comments. 7. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Board Member Little and seconded by Board Member Bernard to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 7:41 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Chris Anderson Senior Planner ATTEST: ________________________________ Dana Verbeek Planning Administrative Assistant Environmental Policy Board / October 17, 2022 Page 5 of 6