CC 11-27-1978 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

� Minut�s of Regute�r Council Meeting Page three Novembel- 27, 197$ appropriate for Counc9i to consider the proposed butiding renova- tion; shou�d noten on �the site plan, the portion of the site included in Phaso I of the developmeot. Crtchton noted that he has received negative publfc comments relative to the massive gertatric building; won't 9et that occur again. Winge�t satd he wlll probab9y vote agalnst the Phase 1 proposal because of the proposed ovsr-tiutlt, oNer-dense development of the ba0ance of the sPte; does not want to ses thts. . Fe�stad explafned that it was not their iptent to show Phasa 2 deve9opm�nt, wh(ch was done in a two-week period; we naed to renovate the school now; Phase 2 is conceptual; we aill sariously fiake Counc0l's concerns tnto consideratlon. � Ha�son asked for informai remctio� to double bungalows, wh[ch he suggested mfght be mo re favorable than the proposed massive town- house concept. Mr. FrEtzEe expiained that the plan for Phase 2 Ts the result of provfding something to the archttect; tried Yo provide green area and to provide for the anticipated needs at the restdents on this stte. Ackermann sa6d he is trying to fleld the buildfng desl�res and ac- commodate Iarge graen areas whtch wfll present a pieasing density for the nelghborhood. Crtchton referred to the elevatfons of the proposed schoal build- Ing renovatlon; suggested that the proposed use of fihe bullding makes sense; sees no value in not a9lowing the renovation to take paace. ' Woodburn concurred w(th Phase t, as detalled; �oted that he concurs vrtth the negative comments expressed re the Phase 2 cept. Woodburn explained that, If any motlon Is pas5ed ior ap.proval, the deveBaper is "1ocked into" what ts dete(led on plans presented; any change w101 need approv.aB. slso con- t-he Crlchton moved that Cou�cit approve a Speclal Use Permit for �Phase Y contructtan based on the documents submitted� and as they are modlfled by blueprint page V fdated II-27-789 and the stgn as detailed on page 4 f91-27�78). Approval is contingent upon compfetion of pandscapdng on west arod south sides of buildfng prtor to occupancy and postfng of the approprtate landscape bond. Motion was seconded by Nanson. Harson moved that the motlon be amended to Include the contin_qency that appropria�Pe road easemen4 documents be executed,, providtng tor conttnued use of i-h� existing driveways. and s4reef relative to the right-of�wsy of Shorewood Drive. Fenstad explaf�ed iha�P i•he rosd easemant in question is on the Presbytertan Homes property to the ��, not a part of the Sut'Fon Place stte. - . Woodburn rul9d that the suggestto� for amendment is fn order because it r�quirAs some4htng that rela�es to the Speclai Use P�rmit, and fs in the cc�ntrol of the epplicant. Crichton sugges4ad, betEuse ot the tim� efement which may be In- volved, the road easement mtght Detter be resolved witfi Phase 2, and �he Ainended Spec6a9 Use Permit; suggested thaf the Amended Speciai Use Permit include some tfine pariod for resolutlon of ihe road easement. Crlchton also expr�ssed concern re fhe �eed tor a plme period in whtch approva6 of parking plans on the Sutton Place slte be reGuEred; suggested that if Phase 2 ts ten years off, Clfy and App�Ican4 may have to contend with unsuitabYe parking arran�ements and tr�complete landscapdng (east af buflding) for those years; suggested that 14 PAese 2 fs not resoived wtthin � certatn time period, parktng and landseaping, east and south of bufldtng, be reso9ved for the Sutton Place buliding. -3-