CC 08-10-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Regular 4ItnCil Meeting, August 10, 1987 ~ Page 5 CASE #87-23; (Cont'd) Miller stated that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area, as well as the entire church area adjacent, as an R-3 Density, medium density of 4 units per acre which is normally considered townhouse density. The applicant is requesting R-4 density, which is 12 units per net acre. ~ The applicant moved the access to Highway 96 because it may have less impact on the existing single family development on Snelling; after discussion at the Planning Commission meeting it was recommended that the access be placed on Snelling due to overall traffic impact on the community and the desire to limit access onto Highway 96. Miller discussed the previous discussion relative to conditional zoning; he noted that if the Council wished just to rezone this application would be at the maximum density for the property with the pond located on the site. , Planning Commission was comfortable with the Concept Plan and attaching the rezoning to the General Plan review; however, they did not favor just a "blanket" rezoning. Counci1member Hansen questioned if it was feasible to have an acceas on Hishway 96 and Snelling. ~ Miller adVised that in terms of traffic impact on Highway 96 and with the Highway 96 Study which suggests limitins the number of access points on the highway, it was preferable to have the access on Snelling Avenue. In terms of two access points being necessary, it was Miller's opinion that it would not be essential to have two accesa points for this property. He further explained that the State requires turn lanes from Highway 96, this access is close to an intersection and there could be problems with construction of the turn lane; also, it would encourage U-Turns on the Highway. Councilmember Winiecki questioned if the apartment complex would be three stories, if there was any common space in the building, if the parking would be totally underground, and how many units were located on each floor. Planner advised that it is a three story building, there is a portion of the building that is a single story area with common facilities, however, each floor of the building contained 16 units; the parking provided underground is one space per unit and there is a visitors parking area located to the west of the site. Mrs. Reeves, owner of the property, explained that due to the Church development adjacent to her property the land was no longer developable as Single-family residential. She noted that the access point was changed because of concern for the residential development along Snelling Avenue; when the property was purchased the State advised Reeves that an access point would be provided every 100 ft., however, that may have changed since they purchased the ~ property 25 years ago. Bernard Herman, architect, spoke on behalf of the Reeves and offered the following comments, -The applicants are agreeable to changing the access point from Highway 96 to Snelling Avenue. -The building is set back so it is less visible; all perimeter foliage will remain as a buffer from adjacent properties. -The building design is V-shaped has interest and is energy efficient. -The drainage pond will have sod to the bank, manicured look, and a fountain is proposed for the center. -A substantial amount of additional landscaping is proposed for the site. -The visitor parking has been located to the west of the site to reduce visibility. -The building consists of two wings; 24 units in each wing and 16 units per floor. It is an all bric~ exterior; elaborated on design. ~