HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19881115
'\
/
/
~w
~
) .. /__-;,_ r
J: 0 / }i}U!I!/ -,
V / ,(J
! D
)ltJe/ I ~ J I f'{g'
(i- /4
TO: �VELTOTJ ANDERSON & MEMBERS, PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
- CINDY HOUBAN, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM: BOB MURRAY, 1275 RIVERSIDE DRIVE
DATE: 14 NOVEMBER 1988
RE: GORDON/CALLAHAN SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL
My first concern, shared by some of my neighbors in the
Riverside Drive subdivision, has been the proposed road along
my property line connecting the Aspen Club's Centennial Circle
with the Enlow Residence on South Riverside Avenue.
The new owners of the Gordon property, Enlow & Yow, advise that
they have no responsibility for the agreement made between
Gordon and Enlow, nor do they have any intention of developing
a roadway along that access.
This is little reassurance to me or to the Riverside subdivision.
However, we have done our research and are adamant that this
agreement/proposal is illegal and we are prepared to take what-
ever measures may be necessary to protect ourselves against
this possibility.
That point aside, I wish to express my concern about the
potential development and density for the Gordon subdivision.
Originally that land was zoned for two residences. Mr. Gordon
built one of those homes, now known as the Enlow residence.
I understand that the original limitation was expanded to
accomodate six houses. Apparently this was done legally,
if not very credibly.
If the P' & Z Commission has the obligation to examine the total
impact upon a parcel, then the suggestion from Jasmin Tyqre that
the present developer divulge his plans for the land remaining
after development along the river's edge is appropriate at this
time.
When Mr. Elmore introduced himself to me last April he gave me
a copy of his plans for six houses:. four along the river bank,
two more on the meadow, above.
When I questioned him why he would want to crowd six houses on
this land, he replied that he and his partner had paid such a
sum for the property that the only way they could make it pay
was by developing it with six houses.
I urge P & Z to examine the whole development package anticipated
for the Gordon/Callahan subdivisions. The result of granting
a portional request does not seem to fulfill the goal of the
PUD and might very well lead to a development similar to Ten/Ten
Ute.