04/23/2009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

with a goal of reducing the height of the walla and protecting Tree #4. Lee sited the fact that the applicant had not solicited neighbors' input prior to their submittal of the plans as the primary reason so many issues had not come forward earlier. Third, she expressed her concerns regarding the proposed foundation design for the home. She offered that their arborist had deemed a peer and beam foundation for the residence as a necessary component to preserving the trees and avoiding the severing of critical tree roots (Tree #30/#35). Fourth, Lee requested that the City hire an independent arborist to monitor the construction of the project. Felix Lee, Ursula Lane, noted that his comments would focus on the massive scope of the project that had been proposed for the site. He provided an overview of the lots natural physical constraints. Lee offered that the project would require five variances. Lee supported a smaller home with a smaller footprint for the site and believed this would eliminate a majority of the project's problems. He suggested that the lot did not warrant an approval of the "allowable" 5,000 square foot residence. Lee noted that the adjacent properties (8 homes) had average lot sizes of 1.8 acres and the average home size was 3,440 square feet. Applicant Comments: Tim McKeegan, applicant, addressed Council. Council had in their packet a letter from McKeegan that was responsive to the concerns the appellants had outlined in their letter. He identified the numerous changes the project had undergone to accommodate the requirements and the efforts that had been taken to preserve his trees. McKeegan had worked with three different Town Planners do to staff changes and had been required to revise his plans three times in less than 90 days. Each change had required revisions by • his architect and engineer. After receiving staff approval, his project was continued by the Planning Commission with direction to make additional modifications. McKeegan noted that the redesigned home that had been approved by the Planning Commission had been relocated an additional 14 feet from the road, lowered in height, the footprint reduced by 20% and the need for a grading exception eliminated. The approved project met all of the required setbacks by an additional 20% more than the Town standard. He noted that his new design had cost him the view from his master bedroom as originally designed. McKeegan noted that his property was heavily forested especially in comparison to his neighbors' properties where trees had been removed for construction. He had hired an arborist to review/survey the trees on his site and the arborist had trenched to review the root system of the trees that had been identified for preservation. The arborist had determined that the root systems would be minimally affected by construction. McKeegan spoke to the required hammerhead turnaround for the fire engine. He offered that he was willing to work with the Fire Department to design the turnaround to save Tree 44. His engineer and arborist were in attendance and available to answer Council questions. Councilmember Kerr questioned if the applicant was amenable to being flexible on the location of the pathway. Kerr suggested that the deer path near Edgerton Road located in • the Open Space Easement might be a better route than the one sited on the plans. 8 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes April 23,2009