Laserfiche WebLink
226 <br /> <br />one or two neighborhood representatives, Planning Commission representative, City staff <br />and the development team. The purpose is to provide a mechanism for the neighborhood <br />and City to have continued involvement. Mr. Wardell said it may be advantageous to <br />develop the single family housing before they go through the PUD process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Frank Stoner, partner in the proposal, said the site was originally looked at for <br />single family housing, but they did not feel it could be made to work. In addition to Mr. <br />Wardell, Mr. Stoner said that Mr. Bob Hauser and Frank Cox are also involved as <br />partners. Mr. Stoner said all of the partners are local people whose mission is to build <br />high quality housing that is socially and environmentally responsible. Mr. Stoner said <br />there is a need to assess the contamination on the site and the remedial cost, adding that <br />he hopes that the City will assume responsibility for debris dumped there by the City. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gouldman said the contract price includes: price of $215,803; closing date of <br />December 31, 2001; 60 day feasibility period; the City's agreement to share in the cost of <br />the environment study; and City review of the project. <br /> <br />The public hearing was opened. <br /> <br /> Ms. Joan Schatzman, 204 Douglas Avenue, expressed concern about the traffic <br />generated if the proposal is accepted and asked that a moratorium be placed on any <br />project going forward until a study is done. Ms. Schatzman also asked that another <br />traffic access point be opened up for the project. <br /> <br /> Ms. Phyllis Sylvester, 222 Douglas Avenue, said she attended a lot of <br />neighborhood meetings concerning the property, and her main concern is with the <br />number of units the project entails. She said she thinks this number would devastate the <br />neighborhood. Ms. Sylvester said she loves the proposal, but not in this neighborhood. <br /> <br /> Mr. Patrick Rannigan, a resident of Locust Avenue and owner of a business in <br />Belmont, supported the proposal, and said he is most impressed that this will keep a <br />balance between the culture of the community and the reality of development; does not <br />depend on outside funding; and will add families that will help the neighborhood. Mr. <br />Rarmigan noted that the recent influx of homeowners into Belmont has helped to improve <br />the neighborhood which was previously in decline. <br /> <br />Mr. Leo Arico, 222 Douglas Avenue, said that a traffic study needs to be done. <br /> <br /> Mr. Eric Norcross, 1003 Carlton Avenue, supported the Belmont Commons <br />proposal and said he feels the architecture is perfect for the site. Mr. Norcross said he <br />loves that the park is left and feels the park will be much safer with the development. He <br />said it will be quality affordable housing. Mr. Norcross said he is not sure who will pay <br />to maintain the park, and asked what if they decide to gate it if problems occur. <br /> <br /> Mr. Todd Shallenberger, 713 Graves Street, a landscape architect, said he thinks <br />the design will contribute to Belmont, especially with the park and outdoor spaces. Mr. <br />Shallenberger said he thinks the buildings are an appropriate response to the urban nature <br />of the property. <br /> <br /> Ms. Kelly Godfrey, 1003 Carlton Avenue, thanked the City for involving the <br />neighborhood to such a great extent. She said she is impressed with the quality of the <br />proposals and thinks the Belmont Commons proposal is appropriate for the site. Ms. <br />Godfrey said her one concern is that the construction process could drag out for two years <br />and feels it would be better if it happens in a more timely manner. <br /> <br /> Mr. Nathan Van Hooser, 1215 Little High Street, read a letter from the Simplicity <br />Group expressing disappointment with the process, and saying they felt their proposal <br />offered a new vision for the community. He said the Simplicity proposal was the only <br />one to tailor development to the needs of the neighborhood. He said attempts were made <br />to merge Simplicity's proposal with the Belmont Common's proposal, but they were <br />unable to come to agreement. Mr. Van Hooser said Simplicity was the only proposal that <br />offered affordable housing, and said it would not have added traffic. <br /> <br /> <br />