Laserfiche WebLink
APR 2 1966 <br />Bou 64 PA,E ;gyp <br />they had been led to believe that because of the lack of sewer <br />and water services in the area, a development such as proposed <br />was exceedingly unlikely. She emphasized that she had taken time <br />off from work to speak in opposition and urged that the Board <br />leave their area as it is and deny the appeal. <br />Alison DeGenero, 52nd Ave., spoke in support of the Winter <br />Beach residents and hoped they don't get too much multiple <br />family. <br />Mr. Moler wished to respond to some of the issues brought up <br />by the residents and Attorney Block. He felt the Planning staff <br />is well aware that the Winter Beach area is going to develop at 6 <br />units per acre and that is why Winter Beach Road is designated as <br />a primary collector. He also believed traffic generation from a <br />multi family project is less than that generated by single family <br />developments; he also did not feel that a house on a 1/2 acre <br />within 300-400' of a railroad can be marketed as well as a multi <br />family project. He emphasized that if they have to go with <br />single family, they will have to do something to increase the <br />density of the project up to 6 units per acre, and this would <br />require putting in a package plant. Mr. Moler pointed out that <br />regardless of whether this property is developed single family or <br />multiple family, the density permitted by the Land Use Plan is 6 <br />units per acre, and it conceivably could generate the same number <br />of people. He felt multi family is the highest and best use of <br />this land and urged the Commission to vote in favor of the <br />appeal. <br />Carolyn Eggert, Chairman of the Planning & Zoning Commis- <br />sion, stated that she can understand where there might have been <br />a misunderstanding of the Small Area plans; however, when she <br />talked to the group in Winter Beach, she read "up to 6 units per <br />acre," to mean just that - that it could just as easily be 2 or 3 <br />or 4 and not necessarily 6. Mrs. Eggert stated that although she <br />was not present at the P&Z meeting when the subject property was <br />considered, she would have voted with the Commission. <br />30 <br />