Laserfiche WebLink
<br />John Olson responded that realtors have written him explaining that the property values will not decline. <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked if the building fac;ade could be extended to have a matched look with the lab. Mr. <br />Olson has a proposal to match the west wall with that of the lab. <br /> <br />Member Rhody asked for clarification on edition nine and ten of the plans. Mr. Olson illustrated how the building <br />moved five feet. <br /> <br />Member Egli recommended a larger space between buildings and asked for details of the maintenance. John <br />Olson explained the area will be maintained by a contractor; the distance between businesses is necessary for fire <br />doors. Lighting will be included with subdued lighting. Fire exits do require safety lighting. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing closed the hearing. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing observed that this is a tough balancing act between proposals and adjacent existing properties. He <br />asked if changes to the east wall improved the design. <br /> <br />Member Rhody noted that the Olson Lab is requesting significant changes. The benefits to the neighborhood may <br />be masked by fears such as improved drainage; improved design and aesthetics; traffic circulation and noise <br />buffers from traffic along Lexington in rush hours. He had concerns about landscaping. <br /> <br />Member Olson noted the Cornerstone Program is just a guideline and the proposed setbacks are not enough; we <br />need to retain green space. <br /> <br />Motion: Member Mulder moved, seconded by Member Rhody to recommend approval of the CONCEPT Planned <br />Unit Development for a 8,417 s.t. (6,817 s.f. on rear and 1,600 s.t. on front) office, retail, and warehouse addition <br />based on the findings and conditions listed in Section 3 of the Request for Commission Action dated 4/14/99. <br /> <br />Ayes: Mulder, Rhody, Egli, Klausing <br /> <br />Nays: Olson, Cunningham <br /> <br />Motion carried: 4-2 <br /> <br />6b. Planning File 3049. Prince of Peace Lutheran Church and Senior Housing Partners, LLC, 2561 North Victoria, <br />Concept Development Plan review/approval of new designs for the mixed use Planned Unit Development. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing opened the hearing and requested Community Development Director Dennis Welsch to provide a <br />summary of the proposal. <br /> <br />Jean Knaack, representing Prince of Peace, described the refined proposal. Prince of Peace with child care and <br />senior care wishes to add senior housing. The Church wishes to control the adjacent property to the south. The <br />project will be a cooperative. She explained the market for a cooperative, a tax paying entity as homesteads. The <br />advantages of this proposal are: <br /> <br />1. The need for affordable senior housing <br />2. The plan will have the least impact on Central Park and the residences nearby. <br />3. An opportunity for seniors to use the park <br />4. Provides additional parking for the park <br />5. Resolves the issue of the Huberty Property <br />6. Is consistent with rationale of senior housing like Villa Park <br />7. Resolves park pathway <br />8. Traffic is not a major problem. <br /> <br />Jean Knaack described the site plan including less impact on the park and lake; more trees and more ponding. The <br />plan provides a second driveway from the parking area. <br /> <br />Mike Pollock, AlA, described details of the refined plan with computer images shown from the lake and from <br />County Road C. The open space is 56%, not including the expansion of the church. The building (43feet), will be 3- <br />4 feet lower than the church. The brick from the church will be matched. There will be stucco wall areas, bay <br />windows and dormers. The view from across Bennett Lake showed some building above the tree line, bust most <br />was tucked behind greenery, (The pictures were taken with no leaves on trees). <br />