Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />11/9/83 <br />Page 12 <br />Richard Rebholz, 1951 Foxswallow Circle, stated that unfortunately he moved into <br />his home after the entire development was started. He was confused as to where <br />the condo units would be located. Mr. Falk reviewed the plan with Mr. Rebholz. Mr. <br />Rebholz didn't want the project to be stark white. He didn't want to look from his <br />home to a stark white development. He was very concerned with tree removal right <br />behinid his home and asked what the replacement would be. He stated the width <br />of his backyard is about 155-165 feet and the trees give him privacy. He stated he <br />has 35-40 feet on Valley Avenue. He urged that something be done to protect his privacy. <br />Chairman Jamieson asked Mr. Rebholz if the trees were on his property. Mr. Rebholz <br />responded that they are on the property of the developer. He stated that he has friends <br />who have homes which abut the units on the south side of Valley Avenue who are <br />very upset with that development because they were not constructed like they were <br />supposed to have been. Chairman Jamieson didn't understand that statement as the <br />units are inspected and must meet the approvals. <br />Mr. Rebholz addressed an apartment complex off of Mohr Avenue and Santa Rita <br />Road as having a great barrier of trees on the property. He stated he is very much <br />opposed to apartments on the subject property. Commissioner Wilson then asked <br />Mr. Rebholz if his escrow had closed at about the same time this development was <br />being considered. Mr. Rebholz confirmed this fact. Commissioner Getty then told <br />Mr. Rebholz that there would be 144 apartments and 10 condominiums in the subject <br />project. <br />Mr. Falk indicated that the landscape plans were brought in and approved at the time <br />of PUD approval. He stated that at the time the PUD was considered a condition <br />was added requiring a masonry wall be added to the property. <br />Commissioner Lindsey asked if there would be a problem if the treeswere left intact. <br />Mr. Falk said there would be and that the trees are not on Mr. Rebholz' property. <br />Commissioner Getty stated that the landscaping and soundwall were put in Mr. Rebholz <br />area because of his previous concerns with regard to exposure to Valley Avenue. Mr. <br />Falk added that the trees are not in very good shape. Commissioner Lindsey confirmed <br />this fact. Mr. Rebholz stated that at the time the matter was considered by City <br />Council, he did not realize it was a time at which they wouldbe making a decision. <br />Commissioner Doherty stated that his neighbors removed some large pine trees which <br />removed privacy from his backyard because of a swimming pool installation. He <br />felt it was their right to do so . <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Getty, seconded by Commissioner Wilson that <br />Tract 5164 be approved per the conditions of the staff report inasmuch as this proposal <br />conforms to the Planned Unit Development approved for the site. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: Commissioners Doherty, Getty, Lindsey, <br />Wilson and Chairman Jamieson <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br />Resolution No. 2385 was entered and adopted approving Tr. 5164 as motioned. <br />-12- <br />_..._.._.__.T..._..._ .._..._ ._ ...,___... _, ._ <br />