CCMIN022283 - Laserfiche WebLink

213 Mr. John Tompkins, 4385 Entrada Drive, stated his residence is behind the exist- ing barn on the subject property. He stated he is concerned about his view being obstructed. He presented pictures he had taken recently showing his fence and re- taining wall, the barn below his property, view along the right side of his property, and decking on his property. He stated he is not opposed to development of the sub- ject property but is opposed to the plan that has been presented. He stated that two- story buildings would block the view of people living on Del Sol, even though Mr. Lund has stated that it would not. He stat~ he felt it would eliminate 80% of his p~-~sent view. He asked that view easements be required. He stated that he is open to communi- cation with the developer but added he is strongly in favor of R-1-6500 zoning, and against the developer making money at the expense of the neighbors, and reiterating his concern relative to density, view obstruction, and emergency access, as well as the drainage issue and preservation of trees. He requested Council to consider what is the ultimate and best use of this piece of property, stating the Planning Commis- sion had denied the application because of inappropriate density. He stated the original staff report stated this project would act as a buffer from the convalescent hospital; he stated he did not think the hospital was a high noise type Operation that required a buffer. Mr. Tompkins stated he felt the best use of the land would be a low profile single story development to fit the lay of the land with particular emphasis placed on density, setback, height of buildings, and drainage. He stated there is no demonstrated need for the type of housing proposed, that it is ill-timed, and the surrounding environment will not support it. Mr. Dale Heikkinen, 346 Del Sol, stated he had opposed construction of the con- valescent hospital because he felt it would lead to the kind of zoning that is being proposed; that what is being asked is that this property be rezoned for purely economic reasons. He stated that Council should not be obligated to guarantee a profit to a developer. He stated that all of the surrounding property owners have stated they can live with R-1-65~0 zoning. He requested Council to leave the zoning as it is now. Mr. Lewis Howard, 4455 Entrada Drive, stated he is concerned that areasalong the property line of the subject property will be in the shade for a longer period of time if the project is constructed as proposed. Mr. Gregg Doherty, Planning Commissioner, 2283 Greenwood Road, stated he felt the best land use for the subject property would be PUD zoning, which would allow more control by the City over development of the parcel. He stated he felt there could be a compromise between the developer, City, and neighbors to work out a project that would be economically viable and aesthetically pleasing to the surrounding community. He suggested the item be continued to allow more communication to discuss the matter further. Mr. Lund rebutted the comments of the opponents by stating that with regard to duplexes, there are already several duplex units in the immediate area. He stated that relative to traffic, he had been advised by the Fire Department that there would not be a problem with emergency access to this project, and that there had been no comment from the Police Department so he assumed there was no problem fore- seen by them. Mr. Lund advised there would be a greater possibility of line of view being blocked by single family two-story homes than from the proposed buildings. He stated that the liability of mud slides is the same whether there is a single family development or no development at all. Mr. Lund reviewed the price of homes, stating that single-family homes in this area would cost approximately $250,000, while most of the existing surrounding properties are valued at $150,000. Mr. Lund stated it would not be feasible to reduce the size of the proposed units and that this would adversely affect the design of the project. 7, 2/22/83