01/09/2002 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board January 9, 2002 Page 21 APPROVED MINUTES believed the land would be buildable with one lot per the current zoning. He stated he did not support rezoning the property to allow the construction of seven lots. Mark Groff, 6613 Ruffed Grouse Road, noted Mr. Peake had referred to the proposed development as an extension of Pheasant Hills development. However, he felt the proposed development would in reality be an extension of the Quail Ridge development. He stated Quail Ridge currently has 40 homes with no access to City trails or City parks without crossing the street. Mr. Groff stated that he agreed that a landowner has the right to develop his land, however, he felt the applicant should only be allowed to develop one lot. He felt the proposed development would impact the value of the existing homes in the area. He noted the development will result in the loss of trees, which will alter the view of the current homeowners on the north side of Ruffed Grouse from of a natural area to that of a street and the rear of the proposed homes. Mr. Groff stated there appeared to be no positive impact with the proposed development on the existing neighborhood. He stated the development will generate additional cars, although the additional traffic generated by seven homes was not a primary concern. He felt because the proposed project will devalue the existing homes, the application should be denied. Marc Valerius, 6674 Ruffed Grouse Road, stated the proposed development does not have the support of the Department of Natural Resources, although the applicant’s representatives have intimated that they have such support, which makes him somewhat suspicious of other statements being made. Mr. Valerius stated he did not agree that the proposed development was a logical extension of the Pheasant Hills development si nce, if that were the case, the access would be made from the existing development. Mr. Valerius indicated the majority of the surrounding property owners do not support the proposed development, nor do the Department of Natural Resources or the Environmental Board. He noted the proposal does not meet many of the City ordinance requirements and he questioned what positive aspects there were to the proposal. He stated he was not opposed to the development of one home on the island and he asked that the proposal as submitted be denied and the applicant be allowed to construct one home as originally planned. Mr. Valerius noted when Mr. Peake read the Court order regarding City support of the development, the agreement referred to staff level support. He questioned the interpretation of “staff level support.” He believed City staff has done a great job in assisting the applicant by reviewing the plans and bringing them forward. Mary Kutzman, Lot #13 Quail Ridge, stated her primary concern was with the high level of the water. She noted the issue of the markers had been brought up and she felt many do not realize how high the water has become over the years. She indicated last year her