Laserfiche WebLink
a <br />a good job, and yes they want to do it within as close to the context of the code they can. Tf they <br />did what the code strictly allows, in the terms of the setback, that the end result is not going to be <br />nearly as nice for the City, the Developers, or the neighbors. He is not disagreeing that they are <br />asking for variances, because they are asking for variances which would allow them to do a <br />much better product than what the code as written today would allow for. They think this is a <br />legitimate request. Mr. Tallon commented that if they want to meet the code they should go with <br />something like they did on example "C', which is pretty close. The second "C", with the several <br />smaller units meets almost all the setbacks. Mr. Gilespie indicated that they were attempting to <br />inake as much as a buffer between the residential houses and these Townhomes in trying to <br />maximize the green space separation between them. Mr. Tallon suggested that for a planned <br />development it makes much more sense to have open units, so you have some spacing between it <br />and you won't be jamming anything together. Mr. Gilespie indicated that if the commission <br />decides to move that back and •reduce that, then they are open to do that. Mr. Tallon indicated <br />that this could have 41 units on it, that is, if it meets the code. Mrs. O'Rourke questioned if these <br />would appeal to double-income, young couples. Mr. Gilespie replied yes. Mrs. O'Rourke <br />questioned if there would be a lot of children. Mr. Gilespie replied that he didn't believe there <br />would be a lot of children. If they had three hundred of these, they probably wouldn't do this <br />product; it is too high scale. You can't do that many of them, but a small-scale product of this <br />type in a quite neighborhood would work. These are all rental units, not for purchase. Mr. <br />Tallon questioned if the units in example "C" were the same type of units they proposed tonight. <br />Mr. Kephart replied yes, they are exactly the same. The only reason the setback requirement is <br />greater is simply because the building is a little longer. Mr. Tallon indicated that he would <br />definitely like to see them incorporate "C" site plan layout into their big picture for this <br />development. He thought the design and architecture of the buildings was fine, it is just not laid <br />out properly. Mr. Gilespie commented that getting 40 units in there is critical because of the <br />whole cost of the project. If they can do it with smaller groups, and maintain that 50 ft. <br />rninimum setback that they need to anyway. He is more than willing to go back and explore that. <br />Mrs. O'Rourke complimented the style and design of the homes and thought they would be a <br />great addition as long as it can fit in and not disrupt the neighborhood. Mr. Spalding agreed with <br />NIr. Tallon on breaking the units up into smaller blocks would be much more attractive and <br />certainly from a green space perspective it would open it up much more rather than just having <br />blocks of structures, which is what he sees in the first drawing. Mr. Gilespie indicated that they <br />would absolutely look at that then and refer to plan "C" for guidance. Mr. Tallon questioned if <br />anyone in the audience had any comments or questions about this proposal. Len Miller, a <br />resident of 24754 Kennedy Ridge Rd., came forward. Mr. Miller was concerned that when these <br />buildings go up the trees that are back there know would be the buffer zone, that 50 ft. is not <br />much of a buffer to start with and the trees are tall and skinny, which wouldn't help at all. He <br />thinks they should consider some type of hill with evergreens or something on it between the <br />properties. Mr. Tallon indicated that they really haven't even gotten into that yet. The board is <br />trying to get the concept first, and once that is done they can get into the development of the site <br />itself. Mr. Miller commented that was his only concern. Mr. Tallon questioned if anyone else <br />wished to speak. Nick Weber, a resident from 24715 Kennedy Ridge Rd., came forward. He <br />questioned how many units should they be allowed to put in there based on the code. Mr. <br />Rymarczyk replied 40 units. W. Weber thanked the board. Joe Wilson, a resident from 24908 <br />Kennedy Ridge Rd., came forward. Mr. Wilson questioned if there were 7 variances requested. <br />Mr. Tallon replied yes. Mr. Wilson questioned what those were. Mr. Tallon read the variances <br />requested aloud. Mr. Wilson commented that this looks like a fairly nice plan and there are not <br />too many units going in. His concern was that the board only passes specific variances that are <br />specifically related to a specific plan. Mr. Tallon thanked him for his time. Mike Yunich, a <br />3