- No upcoming events available
Dear Commission Members:
We strongly object (again) to the Van der Werth proposal for 500 Miller Avenue, as it does in no meaningful way meet the original objections of the Commission.
1) The non-conforming height limits are unacceptable
2 ) 44 parking spaces leaves 14 for the public (assuming each of his proposed two-bedroom units requires two spaces each); 14 spaces for the retailing public would seem to be inadequate for accommadating meaningful retail attraction
3) The 2-foot change in the wall is meaningless.
In addition, of course, is the added traffic that the project will bring to the Gomez-High School area...traffic which at certain times of the day makes getting on to Miller from Gomez a sometimes harrowing experience.
Thank you for your consideration of our comments.
Robert & Lee Skutch
The plan revisions you have received do not address your initial concerns and the concerns of many in Mill Valley. Make them reduce the size of the structure to 2 stories, put back the 1 bedroom units and lower the retaining wall. Retaining walls are jsy a disaster waiting to happen.. I can just see the massive mudslide that will eventually result from the cutback in my head. We really don't need that and the city woulod undoubtedly get stucjk with the costs from something like that. Reject the current plan. Please.
Yours in Cheerful Service,
I am writing to implore you, do not back down or compromise on the specifications you set earlier to reduce the impact of the development at 500 Miller.
It is discouraging that the developer is attempting to get you to do so. Please uphold your previously set requirements and do not allow the developer to talk you into compromising your standards.
Dear Members of Mill Valley Planning Commission,
Please stand by your last revised decision to require Al Van Der Worth to comply to the size reduction of his project planned for 500 Miller Ave.
In my opinion the project should be terminated all together.
Reasonable and lower cost housing is what Mill Valley needs, but not at the cost of hill erosion, and mammoth structures that have huge negative impact.
I understand he has the right to do something on the property, and this must be respected.
However the concerns for our city, and the impact of this type of over size building development, must also require that our rights as tax payers, and home as well as business owners be respected and not trampled on just because he has the funds and the will to bend the present system.
Do not let this and other developers ruin our city, impact our road ways, and overload our infrastructure. Vote NO on this project.
Have you tried to negotiate Miller ave in the Southbound direction in the morning between 8-9am? Hopeless enough as it is.
PLEASE NO ON THIS PLAN.
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing to urge you to maintain your position on this development as you indicated at the December 10, 2007 meeting, ie a 2 story project, 12 units with low retaining wall and less cut into the hillside.
15 units with 44 parking - which I assume the developer is not providing! - and a 3 story building which exceeds height limits clearly should be a non-starter.
I strongly encourage you to maintain the requirements on height and to reject the new proposal which is too large for this neighborhood.
On inspecting the site, it appears that there is only one story pole that shows the actual height of the three story structures to be built. This is extremely misleading since that height will run for hundreds of feet along the street.
This needs to be brought to the attention of the Planning Commissioners tonight. Please attend the meeting at 7 pm and make your voices heard.
Dear Planning Commissioners:
In reviewing the newly submitted plans for 500 Miller Avenue, I’m gratified to see that after years of public input and PC feedback, some of it has finally begun to be evidenced in the plans. This includes the project being scaled back to 15 units, even though that was at the high side of the PC’s recommendation (e.g. 10 to 15 units) and that parking is finally in compliance with City Codes (an extremely important issue for the adjacent residential community).
It also appears the developer has made efforts to create a project that is stepped back into the hillside and better integrated into the topography. However, some concerns remain.
Building mass, unit mix and affordability:
In the last meeting the PC commented that a smaller, sensitively sited project would help reduce visual impact. Again, the PC recommended 10 to 15 units. The new design clearly is headed in that direction but I think it is still quite massive and monolithic.
Location: City Hall Council Chambers
Location: City Hall Council Chambers
To include discussion of potential traffic light at the intersection of La Goma/Montford and Miller.