05/28/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? .}. •. ?.F lines of lots on the north side. of Mastic Road, west of Clague Road, a proposal to construct 53 duplex buildings (106 units) in the Multi-Family District, to the board of zoning appeals with the recommendation not to have the complex built as presented since there are several serious concerns regarding: the setbacks to the adjoining properties; too many variances; the density of the property itself; safety at the entrance ways; the internal safety; the widths of the streets; the setbacks from the internal streets; and the radius of the drives. Because of a tremendous amou.nt of individual safety concerns, this board, at this time, will not recommend that the board of zoning appeals grant these variances. The motion was seconded by T. Brennan, and unaniinously approved. The residents were advised that this would go to the board of zoning appeals on 7une 6, 1996, and they would receive notification. N. NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDNISIONS: 1) Beaumont Place Subdivision - Preliminary plan The proposal is to subdivide Permauent Parcel Numbers: 231-26-12, 231-26-15, and part of 231-26-89 into nineteen (19) single family residential sublots. Location is north of Gessner Road and west of Beaumont Drive. Zoning is C-Residence, single entirely. Note that Permanent Parcel Number 231-26- 89 is currently landlocked and the proposal, which includes part of this parcel, leaves the balance of the parcel still landlocked and non-conforming. All other proposed sublots conform to zoiung code requirements for frontage and area. _ Mr. Hammerschmidt, builder, and Mr. Bowden, engineer, explained plans. The existing Beaumont -, Drive will be extended about 425 feet from the end of the existing Beaumont Drive to the center of the cu1 de-sac. There will be 181ots and the 19th lot will be cut out of this subdivision for an individual lot. : There is an existing storm and sanitary sewer now and will be extending the sanitary sewer, but will provide their own storm sewer system with retention to drain these lots and the street. Mr. Bowden explained the system, and City Engineer Deichmann advised that the retention would have to meet all the Engineering Department's requirements. The house that previously was to be moved to Gessner Road will be torn down. It was clarified for the neighbors that this would be a single family development. The landlocked parcel mentioned in the write up, is landlocked now and Mr. Hammerschmidt is only buying part of it leaving the remaining segment landlocked, but this subdivision will not be creating a landlocked parceL There is a house on the front parcel and a garage is on the separate parcel and both owned by the same person. Assistant Law Director Dubelko doubted that this would be a problem because it would be too small for anyone to buy separately, but he suggested that this plat could include assembling them. The members preferred this and the developers agreed. W. Hammerschmidt advised that he would be the builder; the houses will be about 1,500 to 2,200 square feet, but could go to 2,600 square feet depending on the market; every house would be a different front and would be custom designed. Mr. Frounfelker, a neighbor, advised that he supported the development, but questioned who would repair the cul-de-sac that was damaged when there was a plumbing contractor in the area. This would be up to the city. It was clarified that the old cul-de-sac would remain, and the new street would abut it. Mr. Frounfelker believed that this should be addressed with this approval. He also would like the sidewalk to the school that went through the old park to remain since it would have to be accessed through someone's backyard.. He pointed out where it was located. He was concerned about the type of streetlights and signage and who would maintain it. Mr. Hammerschmidt stated that there would be a development sign and it could be turned over to the homeowners. Mr. Frounfelker believed that this should be put in the deed and suggested a combined sign with Deerfield and Beaumont Place. Mr. Tallon stated that this would have to be determined later along with where it would be located. He questioned if there were to be sidewalks and if some 7