CC MIN 1974 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� +o o _ s Letter f'rom Carol L. P�rter, 17E7 Kansas Street. ! ! Letter from Randall F. and Sylvia M. Collier, � 1759 Kansas Street . � Letter from Mr, and Mrs. 0. J. Boyle, 1779 Kansas � � Street � Letter from Mary L. and Conrad F. Praetzel, no � � address but Kansas Street. � iLetter signed by 2� homeowners on Hampton Street. � � Letter from B. F. and Evelyn F. Willis, 1787 � Kansas Street. � Letter from John W. and Marjory L. Hurney, 1831 � Anamor Street. � Letter from John W, and Audrey M. Sulliva.n, 1853 i � Anamor Street k ! Planning Director Schroeter showed slides depicting the I site and landscape plan for the proposed development, � provided background information concerning the subject ; application for Planned Development Permit and its con- sideration by the Planning Commission, and a,dvised the � plan presently before the Council had been approved 4-0 � by the Planning Commission. � Discussion followed and Mr. Schroeter replied to ques- � k tions regarding the site, the proposed street plan, the � price of the proposed single-family units and value of �"""' homes in the area, the lot-line placement of the units, � and the need for Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps, � if the land is to be subdivided as shown in the plan. � In response to question, Mr. Schroeter advised that the � property consists of two parts, one being R-2 and the other R-l. He said that a total of 15 units could be ' developed on the total property whether it is developed � as presented in one overall development or with a tri- plex and a duplex on the R-2 portion and ten deta.ched t units on the R-1 portion. , Ed Berger, architect for the development, presented � sl—i�es o� the proposed plan, observing that there will � be no shared wall where the homes join, but separate kwalls with an airspace between for additional_ insula- � tion; that the lot-line placement of the house provides � maximum use of yard space and permits retention of many � more of the trees presently on the site than does the � conventional six-foot sideyard setback; and sta.ted the ; preference of the developer for what is believed to be � a superior overall design yielding the same 15 units � which are permissible on the total property. "'""'" � Discussion continued and Mr. Berger replied to questions � � concerning details of the proposed development. E I � Richard Gardella, attorney for the developer, stated E t a i is un erstood that it will be necessary to F � -2- ! ;` ;�igiM�g� � / 7 4f 6 �.._..�.:�._.,..... ,,.._s,. ._'_ _. . .. . . .. .. . � . .. . .... •�- .. . ... _ ..