5900 36TH AVE W 2025-01-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

And then we had a Landscape Modification Decision— EN I've attached the Landscape Plan that was included in the 2017 Public Works permit submittal (which was approved) that depicts the split rail fence locations. So just in the Planned Action Determination, there is a bit of confusion because the Codes are conflicting for the instance of our project because we are not allowed to have any fences in the wildlife corridor, but the view analysis from 2017 (attached) shows the "wildlife corridor protection fence', which appears to be outside the bubbled & hatched wildlife corridor area, but is still within a environmentally sensitive area and buffers. Similarly, it is impossible to install any type of fencing in those areas depicted in the approved Landscape Plan without additional clearing, which we are not approved to do so based on the Planned Action Determination - ME This conflict in Code/Planned Action Determination/approved plans has further reared its head as we are working on -site and faced with not only the native vegetation but the topography. It has become apparent that the split rail fence is problematic in several areas. Here are a few keys areas of concern. • On the East side, it interfered with cedar trees and a home owner's chainlink fence • On the north (NE) area, the alignment is very deep into the greenbelt and goes right through the ravine -like valley below Outfall C. This would require significant clearing effort. • ON the north (NW) the alignment takes the fence through neighboring rockeries which may be possible, but very intrusive clearing process. I can provide you photos of these areas, but I do think it would be advantageous for you or the appropriate decision maker to physically see the constraints and help us find a solution that would be continue to meet the Codes, requirements, and design intent. If someone would like to make site visit, I would be happy to walk and talk through this with you. I also realize that this area is very sensitive to the residential neighbors. From my understanding, the sight line study was created to help satisfy the concern of the neighbors. Because of this, I do not want to deviate from such plans that were agreed upon with the neighbors, but I do not believe the logistics behind the approved plans were fully considered and the impacts may be counter intuitive to the desired results. I believe avoiding these areas will provide the best end product for both our project, the environment and the neighboring homes. I've attached a preliminary recommendation for the new split rail fence location that will leave the wildlife corridor and buffers intact without further disruption. Please let me know your thoughts and would like to chat further with you on how we can make this better. Angie Kim I Sr. Director, Development Bridge Industrial 0 425 749 5557 1 C 206 832 6982