2003_0818_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

2 Janice Porter, 2621 Cohansey, spoke in opposition to the change because of the 3 protection and enhancement of the Harriet Alexander Nature Center. Run -off will 4 damage the wetland eco system. Also, concern was expressed regarding `;clear - 5 cut "' of vegetation along the borders. Erosion and runoff, construction debris will 6 damage the wetland. A petition was submitted in opposition to the proposal. The 7 housing development is unwanted. The City should take responsibility for this 8 land. 9 10 David Livingston, 2621 Cohansey, spoke to the Vista 2000 program, and environmental vision (page o) preventing damage to wetlands, requires a 12 comprehensive environmental inventory. He explained he was appealing to civic 13 pn" de to retain the undeveloped parcel and protect the adjoining park. 14 15 Peter Pangborn, 2615 Cohansey, illustrated an aerial of the site. The project is not 16 consistent with adjacent neighborhood because of the tree removal and mass 17 grading. Trees will be destroyed for ponding. New townhomes will be larger than 18 illustrated on the proposed drawings. The staff report has no maximum house 19 size; the final townhomes could be much larger than — as large as the development 20 4 `box ". The townhomes at 40x40 (1 600 s t) exceeds the size in the single family 21 neighborhood (twice as large). Roof pitch in the neighborhood is 4 to 12. 22 twenty -six foot height would not be consistent with his two -story house adjoining 3 the site. The townhome has a full lower level (a two -story building as seen from 4 the south and west and 16 feet of rood. The Moser drawings are misleading in 5 that are roof line outlines while the proposed are wall outlines. In section 4. 1, staff 6 report states that the site could be developed but control is still available. why 7 have a common arca? where is the screening between Cohansey houses and new 8 development? The view should be blocked, no bushes or fences proposed. This 29 should be part of the recommendation. 30 31 Peter Pangborn stated that there was confusion in the setbacks. The project is not 32 consistent and should be denied or use the alternatives suggested by the 33 neighbors. He suggested an extension to September for Council decisions. 34 35 Mr. Moser responded to setbacks. There will be a 30 foot setback along the east 36 property lines. The `green box" concept allows for design flexibility, but still has 37 70 feet between units. This is a consistent use, but difficult to compare two -story 38 to one -story with lower walk -out. There probably will be empty nesters housing. 39 He explained the neighborhood meetings. He explained the requirements for run 40 off from state agencies. There will be no abuse of adjacent wetland. It may be dedicated as park land. A tree preservation plan will be prepared. 4 43 Chair Mulder closed the hearing. 44 45 Member f psen asked how high the retaining wall would be (4'to 145 to 101 to 46 zero). The gall will not be exposed to neighbors to the east.