2011_0718_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

204 design because not all uses allowed in Twin Lakes are conducive to a public entry on 205 more than one side of the building. The proposed modification is as follows.- 206 Entrance Orientation: Where awDropriate and applicable P-primary building 207 entrances shall be oriented to the primary abutting public street. - eoffif4affee ffittst 208 hLaL1FV Te %oo La & fiJLL4ljiLljLe%" tLIi.JLXJJnJLaL&l X deer- Additional entrances may be oriented to a secondary street or 209 parking area. Entrances shall be clearly visible and identifiable from the street and 210 delineated with elements such as roof overhangs, recessed entries, landscaping, or 211 similar design features. 212 3.5 The next Standard that should be slightly modified would be Garage Door and Loading 213 Docks. Here,, there would be a requirement of screen walls along the public street 214 frontages so as to frame the public realm much like a building might. It is a more 215 aesthetic way to screen the rear of these uses and buildings so that trucks, docks and 216 other devices such as compactors and refuse areas do not compromise the public's 217 interest and investment. The proposed modification is as follows.- Garages Doors and Loading Docks: Loading docks, refuse, recyclables, and/or compactors shall be located on rear or side facades and, to the extent feasible, garage doors should be similarly located. Garage doors of attached garages on a building front shall not exceed 50% of the total length of the building font. Where loading docks, refuse, recyclables, and/or compactors abut a public street frontage, a masonry screen wall comprised of materials similar to the building or as approved by the Community Development Department, shall be installed to a minimum height to screen all activities. 226 4.0 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 227 4.1 At the continuation of the public hearing on July 6, 2011, the Planning Commission 228 sought additional comments from citizen regarding the revised Twin Lakes Regulating 229 Plan proposal presented by Staff and the Consultant. Two citizens spoke regarding the 230 Plan; Ms. Amy Ihlan and Ms. Annett Phillips. Ms. Ihlan addressed the Commission 231 indicating a concern about the lack of public input into the process, environmental 232 impacts, buffering Langton Lake Park and surrounding neighborhoods, parking, green 233 space/open space, and Twin Lakes Parkway connection to Fairview Avenue (see 234 Attachment E and PC Draft Minutes). Ms. Phillips addressed the Commission 235 questioning why a urban plan was being proposed for this particular tract of land and 236 concerns about the Twin Lakes Parkway connection to Fairview Avenue (see PC Draft 237 Minutes) . 238 4.2 Commissioners did have questions of the City Planner and Consultant (Michael Lamb), 239 regarding the citizens concerns and other items regarding the proposed plan. 24O 4.3 The Planning Commission voted 4 -1 to recommend approval of the Twin Lakes 241 Regulating Plan and subsequent zoning ordinance changes as presented by staff and the 242 consultant on July 6, 2011. 243 5.0 SUGGESTED CITY COUNCIL ACTION 244 5.1 ADOPT a RESOLUTION APPROVING the TWIN LAKES SUB AREA-1 REGULATING PLAN PROM I 7—RCA—RegPlan-071811 (2).doc Page 6 of 7