|
<br />;' - M;mo to Planning COmmissO 0
<br />Planning Case #Q2-25: Preliminary Plat and MasterPI.a,t}PUD
<br />. Page80fl2 '
<br />
<br />ex~~, the l'l:q~ments for l.a,t}dscape ar\l3' by hayiIlg 53.3%~ftlw pi'OlM'rt)' as
<br />l'l~~<q.le area, M!l<:h I}f ~t landscllPe,are~ gO!lS to,llerv:e,as'!ll,b~fflll:,-betw.el'n the
<br />Guidant Campus' and the surrounding residential ProP~;,JPr04ijCiqgUll: ildditional
<br />benefit of a development with decreased visual impact on the residential neighbors.
<br />
<br />Another amenity provided by the extensive landscape area is fuelp~~ion'~f trilitt,~
<br />wgll14beo}l!:n furtb.epl,ib.\ic t9,.lrtilize.Io, conj~fi' witb/tht "ti~ dedl~0n
<br />requirement in the plllt, sWI is CIllTeotly reviewing the pollsibility creat.ing bettet'tie$
<br />between the Gmdl!nt tnMls ~o the City's <:urrent ,trail systenl.
<br />.. --'_ .,", -', ""',.'::~i~.,:'" - ':' "-,,'-:'~ _ ,:-';'_::,"::, .:.. > ;...~': '-", >. . ,- "''-
<br />
<br />5.
<br />
<br />.,
<br />6.
<br />
<br />
<br />SetblU:ks
<br />
<br />All new col\$truction wouldl(;"l"j!1.~~,!\1<::,~titl~ ll1"~" ~;~.v9.,.Jq,,~<!'!f!Jll4~, '
<br />reduction of lI(:tbacks. The BuiRtirttOffieiaIhlls"stilted'thatthcf appficlIDt s1iQl.Ild~e'
<br />to DllIintain a 60 fQQt clear arol\lld bllildingll J, D, E,JU\4.1. SW'(~j.n.<;;lwJ!!S\!lli$as'a;
<br />con<lition for llllProv!l1 of the Master Plan. ' ' , ,', '
<br />
<br />Pb.~ing';"Y r' i
<br />
<br />Phll$ing()f~.2-~~~p~,~ov~~tllwith~;~~e~UW'~
<br />will be a ctl,~~:~~vie\\litit the~~:Plaff~~~ <If
<br />imp{Ovc;m~~~ Jne,t witli.GP,i~ll1it' re(>res(:l1tativeJ!~, hll$ ()~* ..e~ed ~heduJe
<br />which sh.o1,lll:l'~ex: manage. the'imPact of Wcr~ tWfi& <:~~f'bythegwwing
<br />Guidant Campus. A r\Wised Pltaslllg plan is attached for YOI)l" r<::vi~.
<br />
<br />. ,",',-,.-, "'.
<br />
<br />7. p.,-ltiqg
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />"
<br />'I'h<::~~~e!itl$tll!l1Qffioo builliings 'Provi.dea tllU"kirig t'llt.iool'lstall per
<br />2S9~ feet;$ld41ll1l3nufacturiUgactivi.tie$providea ratio, of'lst;dfp<::r ,.I;()QQ'S4lllU'e
<br />feet ,...Tl!etQblebeiovvsbovvsaicomparison ofpllrlting req~ited bytheZ1)niilgCC& and
<br />the parkihgprovi'dM in the propolled Ml\Stet "an, In- otd<::r for th<::iapplicaattn meet the
<br />parking reql.lir@men.t $* w9Qld lleed to be either a red\lctiOI,J. in 1~<:llP<:: lIfea or
<br />:, ' ,- ,-'- i .-'';1'.-,:' - _::' ,_,',' ' - ~,:' ~', : :' _", ':__ ," }" :",,:,,- -",":' ",' ',_ _,' " , , ' .- _ _ _ -, _ - ',," .- ' ',:, .. , ,,' "__, ,_ ", ':,', _ ,', _ ..," ,', '.' :: "
<br />increasew.~Gf'~p~g~, Neitheroptiwwouldbe vewd~ihl.bleto the
<br />n<::ighboring ~~ owners$JII,Uti$staff's detell\l.ination that an alterJiativ<:: oolqtiol!
<br />would be in tbe'\'!~interest oftbeCity,
<br />
<br />Although the mastlll: plan shows a deficit of 653 parking spaces from lhe,Zonil1gCode
<br />requirement, the benefit to the City is 653 less vehicles that will be driving on lIrea
<br />streets; whi..nintum m;lyhelp ease'any traffic issutlll'in the area. The:: applicanthaj; a.lso
<br />beenco~tingMetro COlnlnut<::tServices in efforts torednce single Ol;<:llpant vehicltlll
<br />
|