Laserfiche WebLink
<br />that the density of the units would conform to R-2 District requirements, but the applicant is <br />requesting rezoning and a Comprehensive Plan amendment, as well as a PUD. This involves a <br />deviation from the lot widths and a change in land use. The proper sequence would be to <br />consider the Comprehensive Plan amendment first. If tllis is approved Council should then <br />consider the rezoning, and if that is approved the site plan should be considered. If Council <br />determines to proceed with denial, a resolution has been prepared with the appropriate fmdings <br />for Council to consider. The resolutions included in the Council's packet are for approval. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec commented the Council has gone through this site plan several times and had <br />indicated a preference for the buildings to be staggered. There was also discussion of storage to <br />be screened, and it was requested that extra landscaping be included between the buildings or in <br />the back. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon explained the plan shows some landscaping <br />wrapping around tlle buildings. This has not been compared against the requirements and there <br />is no indication of what the plantings are planned to be. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen stated she was looking for bigger trees out towards the front to break <br />up the mass of the buildings, and that is not included in this plan. With respect to the front of the <br />houses with the difference in the dormers and the porch, she believes Councilmembers Look and <br />Elvig had commented that they preferred the earlier concept where the dornlers matched better. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated he appreciates the different colors included in the elevation on the <br />5th submittal; however, the drawing that is being presented does not show the staggering and the <br />buildings appear to be coming across as a flat front. His commented that the dOffilers over the <br />doors should be more consistent; he would like some articulation, but too much of a good thing <br />tums into a gingerbread house appearance if they are not careful. He appreciates the different <br />windows on top. He stated he has always looked forward to these buildings being staggered and <br />would like to see the center building pushed back, which is not depicted in this drawing. <br /> <br />Mr. Dan Murphy, applicant, stated he believes the buildings were staggered about five feet and <br />did not show up on this representation. The actual appearance of the buildings will be different <br />than in the drawing, as the program has limitations. He suggested Council approval could be <br />based on conditions they would like to stipulate. If needed, he can add landscaping and <br />boulevard trees to break up the buildings. Through the building process, once the actual <br />architectural plans are drawn, the site plan can be revised with these things addressed. Colors <br />will not be an issue; they vvill be presented in tlle final drawings and will be witllin the nicely <br />matched earth tones with brick, shakes and stone on the front. They will be architecturally <br />pleasing. Council could stipulate these l1lings and it will be addressed in the final drawings. <br />These things can be required before the project is approved by the Building Department. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated there needs to be certainty that there is an understanding with the <br />preliminary plat. Items to be addressed include staggering of the buildings, color, more <br />consistency with the dormers over the door, boulevard trees and plantings in between the <br />buildings. <br /> <br />City Council / April 10, 2007 <br />Page 7 of 20 <br /> <br />P71 <br />