Laserfiche WebLink
151 <br /> <br />counted when calculating lot sizes. This would deal with the <br />concerns regarding density and setbacks from slope banks. (2) The <br />applicant must get approval from adjacent residents for matters <br />relating to site design and development, including but not limited <br />to landscaping, site subdivision, subdivision improvement, housing <br />placement and design. The consensus of the adjacent residents <br />should be demonstrated by the developer before plans are <br />considered by the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission or <br />the City Council. This would minimize the discussion before City <br />agencies. (3) Landscaping on the slope banks are to be installed <br />by a licensed landscape contractor. (4) Instead of having <br />individual lot owners responsible for landscaping maintenance, a <br />Neighborhood Association should be created, which association will <br />be responsible for hiring a qualified contractor to maintain the <br />landscaping on all slope banks. <br /> <br /> Mr. Jim Lavey, 4571 Gatetree Circle, stated that the parcel <br />sizes are in line with the parcels on either side of Vintage <br />Heights II and Foxborough. He commented that Mr. Beratlis lives <br />in the area and would in effect be developing his own backyard. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the <br />public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that it would be logical to rezone the <br />property to PUD - Low Density and ask the developer to meet with <br />the neighbors, with a Councilmember as liaison, to work out the <br />concerns regarding the development. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes concurred with Mr. Mercer. <br /> <br /> Mr. Beratlis mentioned that with regard to cooperating with <br />the neighbors, he has spent about $15,000 for Lots 2, 3 and 4 of <br />the Gray Fox Circle Subdivision, including Ms. Dennis~ property, <br />to realign the ditch and reinstall the chain-link fence. He has <br />likewise agreed to the landscape plans. He added that meeting <br />with the neighbors, with a Councilmember acting as liaison, could <br />bring about better results. He then inquired how this process <br />would affect growth management. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer replied that he would qualify if he gets the <br />project back to Council before the deadline. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush stated that it would be appropriate at this time <br />for Council to adopt a resolution of intention to rezone the <br />property to PUD - Low Density. This would give the opportunity <br />for the developer to meet with the neighbors and the Council <br />liaison and then come back to Council with a PUD plan with <br />conditions for action. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes commented that not all requests for PUD rezoning <br />come with a plan. <br /> <br /> - 11 - <br /> 3 -6-90 <br /> <br /> <br />