Laserfiche WebLink
<br />allow more open land to be used for the development. The developer e <br />proposes to have a separate tax account for maintenance and upkeep, <br />and he submitted that unless City Councilor the developer guarantee <br />that that maintenance system will be reserved in perpetuity, the <br />responsibility will eventually go to the total membership of Valley <br />West. He said even if the private roadway system were privately <br />maintained, he did not believe it would be reasonably compatible with <br />the existing development. <br />Gerald Kelly, 3775 Kevington, was concerned with the high-density <br />s ituati on. He said the neighbors were not opposed to the develop- <br />ment, but are opposed only to the high density being allowed. <br />Peter Thompson, 2440 Oak Grove, architect for the project, said the <br />developer was in total concurrence with the Hearings Official recom- <br />mendations and would comply with them. He felt there were a number of <br />issues that should be addressed regarding the processes established by <br />the Code for PUDs. He said there have been other projects proposed <br />for this phase, noting one was for 115 units. He said the proposed <br />120 units may be modified as the process and design phase develops. <br />He noted the proposed development would be encouraging a variety of <br />living spaces for the community. He said the density was well within <br />the allowable established by City Code. <br />Elaine Roccio, 2483 Blackburn, president of Churchill Neighborhood <br />Association, said their main concern was with the public versus <br />private streets. She said this issue would come before the group -- <br />in February, and she wanted to be informed in order to inform the <br />neighborhood association. <br />Mr. Saul replied he would like to deal with several issues in the <br />appea 1. He said the statement was made that due process was denied. <br />The Hearings Official followed the specific procedures for quasi- <br />judicial hearings as set forth in the Code. It was announced at the <br />beginning and the Hearings Official took care to emphasize the proce- <br />dures were followed correctly. In regard to whether further density <br />is reasonable compared to the adjacent development, he read for City <br />Council Section 9.512(7)(b), saying these standards were met. He sai d <br />the buildings, as far as height was concerned, would be two stories <br />and broken up in a series of small units to avoid a bulky appearance. <br />The distribution and location of recreation spaces would be in two <br />areas, with additional private open space areas for each individual <br />unit. Parking would be governed by City Code and access would be off <br />Westleigh Street directly to Bailey Hill Road. On the basis of these <br />factors specified in City Code, the Hearings Official decided the PUD <br />satisfied the criteria. He said there was some agreement in the <br />concept for PUDs whereby PUD evaluation was based on the density <br />points correlated with bedrooms correlated with the number of residen- <br />tial dwelling units. He said this particular phase would bring the <br />overall density level to a total of 158.8 per acre. He noted for <br /> e <br /> 12/12/77 - 12 <br /> "" <br />