Laserfiche WebLink
<br />twinhome buildings. Ms. Daines stated the submitted elevations meet the R-2 Residential <br />architectural requirements, subject to verification of the brick and color information at the <br />building permit review. However, because the applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan <br />Amendment and Rezoning, the City has an opportunity to request additional improvements to the <br />design. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Daines reviewed that on January 9th, the City Council tabled the plat and <br />directed the applicant to prepare additional revised elevations to be brought before Council at a <br />worksession, and to have an architect available at that meeting. It was staff's interpretation of <br />Council direction that the applicant was to make substantial revisions prior to the worksession. <br />The applicant has submitted another elevation which is similar to earlier versions, though a 2nd <br />style of dormer has been added and some color changes between the two sides have been <br />included. Council is requested to provide direction to the developer on what additional revisions <br />to the elevations are required. <br /> <br />Council reviewed the submitted elevations for Ebony Woods Twinhomes with the applicant, Mr. <br />Dan Murphy. <br /> <br />The following comments were made regarding the staggering of the buildings that was <br />previously requested by Council: <br />· Councilmember Elvig indicated his preference for the angling of the buildings included <br />in submittal #3. <br />· Mr. Murphy explained the location of the building pads will affect the ability to save <br />trees on the site. Councilmember Strommen requested Council be provided with <br />information on the impact of staggering the buildings on the tree preservation plan. Mr. <br />Murphy indicated the City has a copy of the tree inventory of the site. Associate Planner <br />DaInes indicated there could be work done to minimize the loss of trees while achieving <br />the goal of staggering the buildings. <br />· Councilmember Jeffrey pointed out that staggering the buildings by pushing one back <br />would likely cause the allowable impervious surface amount to be exceeded. Associate <br />Planner Daines suggested bringing the two end units forward to achieve the staggering <br />and solve the impervious surface issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson expressed her preference for the current building elevations as opposed to <br />what was previously submitted. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated this site is in his ward. The number one issue he heard during his <br />campaign was that there should not be more townhomes. He will not vote in favor of this <br />Comprehensive Plan Amendment, as there are too many townhoines in this area and this <br />development would add more. <br /> <br />Mr. Murphy replied there is a difference between a twinhome and townhome; a twinhome has a <br />different appeal than a typical multi-unit townhome. He attended the Planning Commission <br />meetings where those concerns were raised by the neighbors. A lot of the concerns had to do <br />with income, race, and things he does not believe are appropriate concerns for what they are <br /> <br />City Council Work Session I March 20, 2007 <br />Page 6 or 13 <br />