Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Elvig stated that he likes what he has seen as far as the product is concerned and <br />thought it was a development that would fit into the community. His major concern is if they <br />look at T.H. #47 there is a townhome development that is very close to the road and with this <br />development they are establishing a line of dwellings along a major arterial road. He understood <br />that there will be a 30-foot setback, but he did not feel that that was adequate to provide for the <br />proper plantings, buffer, etc. He thought that the town homes should be moved back from C.R. <br />#5 to provide for a more aesthetic look along C.R. #5. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec inquired if the 30-foot setback was from the road right of way. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald explained that the 30-foot set back is measured from the boundary line <br />of the property to the unit. It is a 90-foot setback from the center of the road. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that it seems as though the units are being pressed in very tightly <br />and he was concerned that some of the there own City ordinances may be driving some of that. <br />The Council may need to provide for some lenience of their own ordinances to provide for a <br />better layout. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman inquired if the seven units per acre for medium density exclude the <br />wetlands. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald explained that medium density allows for up to seven units per acre <br />excluding wetlands and roadway. The development as proposed is 6.3 units per acre. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman stated that he was not in favor of changing the zoning to medium <br />density on this piece of property so he would not be voting in favor of the development. He <br />thought the property was better fit for single family residential. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pearson expressed concern with how close the units are to the road. He inquired <br />how they measure the 30-foot setback when there is a slope. <br /> <br />Brian Johnson, Hakanson Anderson, explained that the setback is measured horizontal. He <br />explained that along C.R. #5 if they were to take the length of right of way and divide it by the <br />number of single-family lots they could fit on the site there would be 16 homes along C.R. #5, <br />which is what they are proposing for townhomes. Along with the townhome development they <br />have extensive landscape buffering along the roadway. Mr. Johnson felt that the 30-foot setback <br />would allow for them to plant the landscaping to show a good project. The net density does <br />exclude the wetlands. They have 42.4 acres with the combined Alpine Acres and 2nd Addition <br />and they are proposing 208 units, which would be 4.9 units per acre with the wetlands included. <br />When they take out the wetlands they are at 6.3 units per acre and the ordinance allows for up to <br />7 units per acre. Within the development they are proposing 8-foot trails surrounding the <br />development and there will be five foot sidewalks along the public streets. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that she was concerned about the density, how the buildings are <br />positioned and how close they are to the road. There is one situation along Alpine Drive where <br /> <br />P62 <br /> <br />City Council/June 10, 2003 <br />Page 12 of 24 <br /> <br /> <br />