pm_070606 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, June 6, 2007 Page 12 Jim Caulcus, of Shole Madsen, presented the shadow study and provided detailed conditions taken into consideration through the software program application. Public Comment Sangwon Suh, 1960 Bremer Avenue (north side of subject property) Mr. Suh advised that he held a PhD in Engineering; and presented a sophisticated shadow study, with solar access and sun path diagrams related to impacts of the proposed structure to neighboring properties. Mr. Suh advised that he represented concerns of neighbors along Brenner Avenue as well, and proceeded to demonstrate through a computer software program a more detailed study of the impacts to various properties with a scaled version of the four (4) story building, that would in effect be fifty-nine feet (59’) and more like a five to six (5-6) story building allowing for the underground garage and roof height. Mr. Suh noted that his study provided points of shadow for existing conditions in winter versus summer months and at more extensive times, other than those studies provided by United Properties only for hours with high sun altitudes. Mr. Suh concluded that solar access along Brenner would be substantially impaired and that a reasonable transitional development should be considered rather than the current proposal, recognizing privacy, traffic, parking, noise and light pollution implications to the neighborhood and widespread concerns of neighbors. Mr. Suh respectfully asked that the Planning Commission consider rejecting the proposal. Michael Giga, 1970 Brenner Avenue Mr. Giga expressed concerns of other neighbors as well, regarding the neighborhoods current zoning for single-family residential, allowing for single-family or duplexes. Mr. Giga noted that, while a buffer may be put in place, it left adjoining properties exposed to another road that substantially impacted their properties and provided increased noise and disturbance from the proposed four (4) story development. Mr. Giga suggested a comparison with the Applewood Pointe project, and implications to that area, with distances appearing drastically reduced to neighboring properties. Mr. Giga respectfully requested that the property remain zoned R-1 or R-2, with an extension of the current neighborhood and a continuation of housing similar to that already in place – single family or duplexes. Mr. Giga thanked United Properties, and staff, for keeping the neighborhood well- informed and being forthcoming in recognizing neighborhood concerns. Mary Reed, 2000 Brenner Ms. Reed noted that the neighbors were always aware that someday the adjoining property would be developed, but it was always their understanding that it would be single- or multi-family development more in keeping with the existing neighborhood. Ms. Reed opined that the proposed development was out of place and not acceptable, and needed to be transitional, rather than such a major project creating such negative impacts to the neighbors. Ms. Reed further opined that the entire neighborhood would be more supportive of town homes, with this project moved further down on the other side, but were not supportive of this housing development as presented. Ms. Reed also recognized the honesty of United Properties regarding their intended plans. Chair Bakeman closed the Public Hearing. Discussion among Commissioners and staff included complimenting the speakers on the quality of their presentations and comments.