pf_01885 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

- PLANNING REPORT ()A IE: CASe NUME3~R: APPUCANT: 7 September 1900 18SS Lexington Avenu.: Partnership l.imited LOCA nON: Ncrthwost Q...adrant of LexiOl'tcn Avenue and Woodhlll Drive (see sketch) AI.:TION RfQUEc:rCD: Amendmcnt to Comprehensive Plan, Rezoning from R.2 and ShoPpIng Center District to ~.l and R.)A Gnd 8.4, Approval of Planned Ur.lt De\lolopment, and Preliminary Plat PLAN.'\IING CQNSIDERA nONS: 1. As you are all aware, a pre\llous proposal fOf dcvelopment of this property by the appllcnntlS was considered by the Planning Commission and Council. That proposal nvol\lcd 321 dwelling uni~s of which 225 units were in three 75 umt apar~ment structures, with the remainder in the B uOlt, two-story manor hous'1$. That proposal was turned down by the C!ty_ Neighbors expressed their concern rogardlng the transition to slngle-famll,. <'e\lcloprnent on the north edge of the site, the extension of County Road C-2 In~o the neig';;,orhood to the west, the overall denSIty of the $itc, tht: handling of addltlo 31 traffic 1m Le:dngton AVC;1'Je, and the irnpsct on the r~sldencc$ to the cast. 2. With these concerns III mmd, the 3ppHcants have substantially revised the:r proposal by dropping one of the 75 unit structures. Thoy now propose only two bulldiflg' With a total cf 150 'JOlts rather than the prevIously propoMd 225 umts. They have also addo)d a 'trip of SIngle-family hOU*lOg contlguous to the County Road C-2 :lhgnment and p'opose a cul-de.snc for Countv Road C-Z. ThIS reduces the Impact of any multl-tamlly develolJment housing on the neighborhood to the north and west and reserves the north end of this site arId the land to tho north 01 Cc..rlty R.oad C for Single- ~amaly hOUSing. 3. The sl,oPplO9 center IS :~talOed at Its reduced 20,000 square foot scale, cnd the mmn entrance to the site IS contiguous to the north end of the center. n-.is access pOlOt prov.des a means of 9Jin9 from the ~"'I/elopment directly to the center WIthout traffiC yO 109 CJut anto the public st'eet. We feci that thiS IS ::I slgmflcant advantage O\lef some of the prevIous access plans. Though reVIsed plnns were conJldered that eliminated the plIbhc pnrk, the park propvsal is retaliled an the C'urrent development plan. It would appear that the retention of the park Is -~ Important for the welfare of the neighborhood and the future reSidences 10 thiS area.