|
Mr,, Giga thanked United Properties, and staff, for keeping the neighborhood well-
<br />..nflormled and being forthcoming in recognizing neighborhood concerns,
<br />Mary IF 2000 Brenner
<br />Ms. Reed noted that the neighbors were always aware that someday the
<br />adjoining property would be developed, but it was always their understanding
<br />that it would be single- or multi-farnfly development more in keeping with the
<br />existing neighborhood. Ms. Reed opined that the proposed development was out
<br />of place and not acceptable, and needed to be transitional, rather than such a
<br />major project creating such negative, impacts to the neighbors. Ms. Reed further
<br />opined that the entire neighborhood would be. more supportive of town homes,
<br />with this project moved further down on the other side,, but were not supportive of
<br />this housing development as presented.
<br />Ms. Reed also recognized the honesty of United Proper-ties regarding their
<br />intended plans.
<br />Chair Bakeman closed the Public IHear,ing-,
<br />Discussion among Commissioners and staff included complimenting the
<br />speakers on the quality of their presentations and comments.
<br />Commissioner Wozniak noted that the math computations and diagrams, and
<br />sufficient understanding of them at this late hour was challenging, however, he
<br />opined that while he had originally been �S on the fence" about this application, the
<br />neighbor, comments had convinced h�im that', this project was not appropriately
<br />transitional considering its proximity to single - family homes, Commissioner
<br />Wozniak expressed appreciation to Ml r. Suh�'s for his presentation of solar access
<br />rights, an issue that will be receiving more consideration in the future as the
<br />Corgi miss,ion reviewed, applications, Commissioner Wozniak concluded by
<br />opining that this project was too la�r,ge, and he would not support the proposal.
<br />Commissioner Doherty advised that, the Commission had a contract wit
<br />residents, and if something was zonled R-1 I that was part of the contract and th
<br />Commisis,ion didn't drastically change zoning to R-6. Commissioner Dohertoi
<br />expressed profound concern with the total height of the structure,. and reluctant[,,
<br />,opined that he could support it as presented.
<br />Commissioner Bakeman opined that the Comprehensive Plan takes priority.
<br />Commissioner Bakeman expressed disappointment that the twin homes were no
<br />longer a part of the proposal; and opined that they would have provided a
<br />transition for the neighbors. Commissioner Bakeman expressed strong support
<br />for the access road to the existing parking lot and Langton Lake Park; however,
<br />noted that the. property had been represented in the Comprehensive Plan for
<br />more than twenty (20) years, a.ndl this was not a new plan. Commissioner
<br />Bakeman opined that the height is a, hard transition from 1-1/2 story single-family
<br />homes, and that the twin homes would have helped that transition a great deal;
<br />however, further opined that. the proposal met the Comprehensive Plan
<br />guidelines and caused her difficulty denying it.,
<br />Commissioner Boerigter expressed h�is difficulty with this project as presented,
<br />fi
<br />the packet and original
<br />and had anticipated voting for the, project after reviewing
<br />sketches, Commissioner Boerigitier opined that this was a fine project, that it
<br />made sense to have the road in place and access secured for Langton Lake
<br />(Park however, given the mass and height of the proposed structure, not just due
<br />to the shadow study, but looking at the scaled perspectives representing the final
<br />
|