03/28/05 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regular Meeting March 28, 2005 not been delineated. This appears to be a mistake in Mr. Hill’s work-up. So in other words, when this property is sliced down the middle so you have a Lot A and a Lot B, really a east lot and an west lot, and then you measure the distance from those respective lots to other lots in order to arrive at a setback criteria… what he refers to as the ‘prevailing setback’ . . . he doesn’t delineate between Lots A and Lot B, so there’s no way to know what measure he’s using to come up with what I say is seven rather th than ten. It is not even delineated in his June 18 memo to the Commission.” Mr. Harig: “In B-3 one of the lots, and this is really important, I think it got lost in the shuffle before. One of the lots cited in Mr. Hill’s work-up was 7835 Greensfelder, and it is really important to make this point, this goes to the, this not only is absolutely accurate but goes to the point of prevailing. That lot is not any way near the subdivision. It turns out, not only is it not near but it happens to have the smallest setback of all the houses on the street. It’s a coincidence that it’s not near, but used as a reference, mentioned 7835, yet it’s the smallest setback and I’ve attached to the reference document, a survey. I just picked one. I could have done this for every house on the street, but I do not have the time and money. It shows 7814 – I have it highlighted in yellow – the distance from Greensfelder Lane to the house at 7814 is seventy-four feet. That’s the biggest setback, I will admit, but the point is that house is one that he could have used in determining the ten closest houses, but he picked 7835 that is at the other end of the street; it is not even close to this particular subdivision. So I’m saying that is not an accurate measure and I would say it is a misleading measure, in my opinion, maybe not an intentional, but a misleading measure.” Mr. Harig; “Then at C there is a question regarding the size of the 533 Warder lot after the eighteen feet is sold to Mr. Anselmo. Mr. Hill states that it would have a resulting area of 10,667 square feet and that’s cited in that paragraph next to the letter C. I’ve had one architect take a look at the Plat that was developed for the subdivision and there’s a question as to what … in his opinion it did not come to ten thousand and he couldn’t measure it with absolute preciseness, but there is a question … whether it could be a little over six thousand square feet or it may not hit six thousand square feet, so I just raise that question.” “It’s really the opinion of the Greensfelder Land Association, that certain zoning provisions as set forth in University City zoning regulations have not been properly adhered to and we had all other kinds of conversation with you all so I do not have to go into that, but basically, I do not think this adds up and I really don’t think that even at this late date, bottom of the ninth, maybe two out, three and two on the hitter, that I ask that you vote ‘no’ on this request for subdivision. Thank you.” Mr. Ollendorff: “With all respect to the neighbors, the applicant submitted an appropriate application last June and virtually every couple of weeks since then, objections have been raised, measurements have been challenged, and laws have been questioned. This entire project has been looked over very carefully by our Page 18