Laserfiche WebLink
96 <br /> <br /> reside in the facility at one time. <br /> <br /> Silva Fazio, 3117 Mohr Avenue, spoke inopposition to allowing <br /> 90 occupants. He was concerned with the parking and water <br /> shortage. <br /> <br /> Gwen Vindelli, 4117 Cresfield Lane, explained that she did not <br /> have any objection to the facility or the parking. She was <br /> concerned with adding an additional 20 occupants and with the <br /> traffic. She believed that a compromise could be made to allow 80 <br /> occupants. <br /> <br /> David Sharp, 4145 Cresfield Lane, felt the project was too <br /> dense. He was opposed to changing the occupancy to 90. He <br /> indicated that Council was previously given a petition with 142 <br /> signatures which opposed the high density. <br /> <br /> Jim Lowe, 1536 Meadowview Drive, spoke in opposition to this <br /> application. He shared his concern with the traffic and parking <br /> issues. He felt that the number of deliveries, employees, and <br /> visitors needed to be considered. <br /> <br /> In rebuttal, Mr. Shutts pointed out that there would not be <br /> any additional deliveries made if there were 90 occupants <br /> Unfortunately, all of the studies show visits to the seniors are <br /> very low. Mr. Shutts urged Council to approve this request. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked what the employees' work hours would be. <br /> <br /> Mr. Shutts answered approximately 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the <br /> public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler felt that it would not make much of a difference <br /> whether the occupancy was 70 or 90. He believed that when the <br /> project was first approved, Council met the concerns of the <br /> neighbors. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr stated that at the time this project was first <br /> approved, she felt that '70 occupants was sufficient. She was <br /> convinced that this type of facility was needed in the community <br /> and felt that the City could use three to four more of these type <br /> of facilities. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver agreed that the City needed these types of <br /> facilities. He argued that this project was too dense and felt <br /> that the decision of Council should not be changed. If the <br /> applicant was unable to finance the facility, then the facility <br /> should be reduced to accommodate the financing. <br /> <br /> 2/18/92 14 <br /> <br /> <br />