CCP 08-10-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting, August 10, 1987 Page '- C) CASE 1/87-24; (Cont'd) Counci1member Winiecki questioned if there would be planters around the solarium that faces the parking . area; also if a landscape plan had been submitted. Cossack advised that each solarium would have a planter across the width and greens would be planted. The Planner stated that no landscape plan was provided by the applicant; only verbal acknowledgement that original plantings would be replaced. Moved by Hansen, seconded by Peck, that Council approve Case #87-24, Amended Special Use Permit for expansion of Blue Fox Inn. 3833 North Lexington Avenue, contingent upon applicant installing no parking signage at the east end of the building and replacing plant materials in the reconstructed planters. Moved by Winiecki, seconded by Hansen, that the motion be amended to include as a condition that a landscape plan be submitted for Planner's review and approval. Amendment to motion carried. (4-0) Original motion as amended carried unanimously. (4-0) CASE #87-26; PUD & Council was referred to Planner's report of 7-23-87 and GENR'L PLAN APPRVL Planning Commission minutes of 8-5-87, relative to the EDGEWATER EST./HWY PUD and General Plan approval for the townhouse portion 10 & PARKSHORE DR. of the Edgewater Estates project. Planner gave a brief background of the 1985 PUD concept plan approval for this . project; he noted that original approval was for 31 townhouse units. The applicant is now requesting approval of the PUD General Plan for 29 townhouse l _eunits and Rezonfting of the site to the R-3 Distrtict. ~e Miller noted that since his report was submitted the applicant has submitted the lighting plan, landscape plan and grading plan. The grading plan was sent to the Engineer for review and approval; however, no response has been received to date. Hiller advised that the landscape and lighting plan were adequate and he displayed for Council review a copy of the proposed lighting on the site. Mayor Woodburn questioned if the proposed lighting would be placed on the right-of-way and who would be responsible for maintenance. .' The Planner stated that the lights would\placed on)' _ l.n., behind the ,)' right-of-way; placement on the plan was 'for visual notation onlYj <1 "i ,t:~ .' ~!" '" Kim and Keith Tramm, Mar-Don Homes, Inc., were present to answer Council f2c(,L.I questions. ..../. .. ~ Planner noted the changes that have been made to respond to the recommendations in his report; length of buildings, parking nodes provided for visitor parking, submission of preliminary plat (ownership of parcel under unit and common space), and berming has been addressed in the new grading plan. Mayor Woodburn suggested a condition of approval be that closings on townhomes . be validated only after buyer has seen their townhouse association agreement prior to closing. Miller advised that State law now addresses that matter and allows for buyer to recind a contract within 10 days after purchase. He also noted that the townhouse agreement would be reviewed by the City Attorney as a condition of approval. Councilmember Winiecki questioned the grading elevations; how do the current grades relate to the original plan proposal; berms were to be provided to screen the townhouses from the apartment building. Planner was unsure if the existing grades had been compared with the original grading plan; Engineer could verify the grade levels. . Winiecki further questioned the density for the parcel and if the light standard heights would be viSible from apartments adjacent. Miller pointed out that the overall denSity for the proposed site is 4.5; the actual density on the townhouse portion is less. He advised that the light standards would be cut off from view by the height of the buildings, as well as the grade change. -