CC_Minutes_2009_0817 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, August 17, 2009 Page 6 Mr. Lloyd advised that, as long as the units remained consistent with the total number of units and lending themselves to the complete project, as previously ap- proved in 2008, staff recommended approval of phasing the project as requested, and as detailed and conditioned in the amended PUD Agreement. Further discussion included the original and amended PUD Agreement; status of existing and proposed plans as highlighted in the amended PUD Agreement; addi- tional landscaping plan requirements and potential variations for construction of Phase I; parking area revisions along the western edge of the parcel by phasing the project; Fire Marshal conditions for entrance(s) from Langton Lake Drive dur- ing construction for public safety considerations; and language of the amended PUD Agreement recommended to avoid the developer being in default on any provisions due to the proposed phasing of the project rather than the original de- velopment in its entirety being constructed at one time. Councilmember Pust opined that she saw no reason that the developer couldn't wait until the building was constructed to replat the lot. Mayor Klausing asked that the applicant come forward to speak at this time. Developer, Alex Hall, United Properties and Kevin Teppen, MFRA Councilmember Pust, recognizing the phasing and HUD financing changes, asked Mr. Hall why the developer wasn't going forward to construct the smaller build- ing without platting the lot line, since it was unknown at this time, based on the number of commitments for units, whether the building would be located 20' one way or another. Mr. Hall advised that it came down to an ownership issue; with the developer needing to secure financing for 51 units, and the lender requiring a defined line and documented purchase of the property. Mr. Hall noted both phases of the de- velopment would go under separate loans in order to acquire a HUD guarantee and lender commitment to the dollar amount for construction to be initiated; and that neither of those parties would make that commitment until a defined parcel was documented under ownership of the developer, thus the need for platting at this time. Discussion among Councilmembers and Mr. Hall included potential differing terms for both phases and subsequent debt service on individual units in both phases; blending of all operating expanses for both phases to be divided among the units of Phase I, and then once Phase II is constructed, divided by the total units. Councilmember Pust requested comment from Mr. Hall regarding Planning Commission discussions on the height of the building, seeking to reduce the num-