06/10/2020 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board June 10, 2020 Page 5 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Larsen replied yes, a gateway sign would be included, however, there is not a final design for the gateway at this time. Mr. Vojtech inquired, since the amenities were moved from the clubhouse to the main building, is there any plan to relocate the gardens. Ms. Larsen stated there was not any plan to relocate the gardens as part of the final plan. She clarified even if it is not on the site plan, we are not opposed to Lyngblomsten relocating the gardens if they are able to find a location to do so. Mr. Vojtech questioned if the townhomes will be for sale or leased. Ms. Larsen explained the townhomes will be owned and maintained by Lyngblomsten, therefore, they will be leased homes. Mr. Vojtech agreed with earlier comments regarding the use of more color pallets on the exterior. He preferred three, four, or five color pallets be proposed to help differentiate buildings. Mr. Fenlon reiterated he would inform the design team of the board’s comments regarding the height of the parapet and color scheme changes. Regarding the exterior signage, he stated it is important the building be branded and identifiable from the major street frontage, but he would work closely with Lyngblomsten concerning the board’s comments on the exterior signage. Mr. Root asked if the exterior signage was additional to the monument sign. Mr. Fenlon replied it is common practice of a campus type project to have a monument sign as well as building signage. Nonetheless, he would bring the comments back to the design team and look for alternative ways to accomplish the branding component. Mr. Root stated the original design of the project was great, however, the current changes to the exterior of the building are inconsistent with previous board approvals. Mr. Tralle commented on the height of the parapet. He specified with air units being placed on the rooftop and with workers occasionally being on the roof, the 2ft. parapet is not a safe height. He stated he would be in favor of raising the parapet. He also explained he would be okay with the signage on the corner of the building if it was just on the east side. He also preferred Lot 2 be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board. Ms. Peacock explained she was disappointed to hear the garden was removed. Furthermore, she stated many of the changes to the site plan were not good changes. She expressed concern with the artic white signage and clarified that a product be used that does not rust or look dirty. Ms. Peacock asked if the lining up of the road with Hodgson Road and Ash Street will be addressed.