09-21-99 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

submitted with the Building Permit application plans. The dissenting commissioners were generally of an opinion that the original plan better responded to ordinance standards and should be complied. Planner Dillerud pointed out the proposed plan shows wall signage that was not a part of the original site plan. The staff has a sign permit application for that signage which they are withholding review of pending the outcome of this site plan amendment. The 10-1-98 drawing that was submitted for the building pert -nit shows more detail on south elevation, east elevation, and the stone wraps around east side. The approved site plan shows less detail. If the footing is as shown in the building permit submittal of 10-1-98, Planner Dillerud felt the stone could be added. Steve Erban presented model and referred to letter from Vettter Stone Company indicating the design is very creative and aesthetically pleasing. In his letter of August 27`h, he stated he fully intended to proceed with the completion on the southwest elevation of the building with stone as indicated on the plans. Erban stated the revision to the site plan was because the stone veneer was not as architecturally attractive as the shingles. If he went with stone veneer, he would be getting 4 ft. of stone flashing and the irregularity of flashing with caulk between. Council member DeLapp commented that right after the Council voted for requiring stone, the applicant continued to place wood shingles and violated the City's direction. The applicant should build the building in compliance with front stone fapade, except in the middle, and wrap it around the building. Administrator Kueffner reported Mr. Erban took the stone off because he changed the window design. In the original plan, the stone was not planned for the whole building. M/S/F Siedow/Dunn — to approve the site plan amendment of Creative Office Gardens for an alternative stone treatment of the south elevation from previously approved plan, as recommended by the Planning Commission. (MOTION FAILED 1-4: Armstrong appreciated the artistic intent of the applicant, however the building to the west came in with a post design to attach the buildings, and regrets how it looks now. The City should follow its code. Dunn — the problem comes in with a particular submittal to change tremendous amounts, after the fact. Now you come in for forgiveness, rather than for permission, is a concern. We have a code we have to follow and you come in and challenge the code. Hunt — we should not have come this far, we stuck to the code previously for a building and didn't like what we saw. D. Preliminary Plat and OP Development Stage Plan -Tana Ridge PP: Wm Zintl At its September 13'h meeting, the Planning Commission, unanimously, recommended approval for an 18 lot single family detached OP project on 40 acres immediately west of the Fields of St. Croix and fronting the south side of 50'1' Street N. Planner Dillerud reported this site was rezoned to OP in 1998. Therefore, the recent amendments to the City Code requiring a Conditional Use Permit for OP projects in AG and RR zoned do not apply. Of the several conditions to approval, the most critical requires the applicant to produce a legal strategy to maintain coordination of this OP with Fields Phase 2 to the south. This is critical due to the common features of Public Park, preserved open space and wastewater treatment between the two OP's. The interdependence assmned by the concept and preliminary plat/development stage plans must be in some manner maintained by the final plat documentation and infrastructure design/construction. Tim Freeman, Folz, Freeman and Dupray, concurred with the staff s recommendation. More trees will be added for buffer where the road is moved over. The primary treatment system is a recycling treatment system and is being used because of land space and upgrade of technology. This is not considered experimental. The applicant was made aware of the City's lighting ordinance. Council member Dunn commented that the proposal is way too dense even though it does meet the criteria of the OP ordinance. The City should get rid of the bonuses offered in the OP zoning. Council member DeLapp was not comfortable with trees being taken away from the Gilbertsons. Planner Dillerud pointed out that Outlot A has a lot of wetland and what is not DNR protected is used in the calculation. In the developer's agreement, the City could put a clause that if the Home Owners Association does not clean the pond, the City will go in and clean it and assess back to the HOA. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 3