CC PACKET 12131988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 concerns had been about adding another driveway on- Kenzie terrace and 2 the provision of less brick on two of the buildings than had been promised in the Redevelopment Agreement, he indicated. 4 Commissioner Werenicz told the Council the Commissioners had been 5 unanimous in their opposition to another curb cut off Kenzie Terrace, 6 perceiving it, would defeat the purpose of the traffic signal the City 7 had just installed to serve the project's main entrance as well as the 8 Kenzington across the street. He said the developers had indicated 9 they would have a traffic study done to see if the Commission concerns 10 were warranted and had even suggested they might be able to turn 11 Building A around to maintain the necessary flow of traffic within the 12 -project. 13 The other "bone of contention" had been the Commissioner's perception 14 that the developers were not providing as much brick as promised 15 originally, and which Commissioner Werenicz conceded might have been a 16 tradeoff for a better building design, but still didn't seem to meet 17 the terms of the Redevelopment Agreement. 18 Developers Defense of Changes 19 Paul Brewer, Gene Nelson, and Greg Bronk of Lang/Nelson Associates and 20 a representative of Leonard Lampert Architects were present to answer 21 questions from the Council. 22 Mr. Brewer confirmed the changes in the site plans which would: 06 *move the 50 unit, 3 story senior Building A away from the street and 24 farther from the "huge mass of the Kenzington" across Kenzie Terrace; 25 *at the same time, time that building and the other 75 unit senior 26 Building B and the 76 unit general occupancy Building C closer 27 together; 28 *provide drainage for the site into a pond adjacent to the pool in the 29 center which would provide a focal point for the buildings; 30 *relocate the parking lot exits farther away from the main entrance 31 where there would be less incline and more room for stacking. 32 Mr. Brewer indicated the developers had perceived a real marketing 33 advantage to providing the villa, clustered entrance type design for 34 Buildings B and C because those are the types of amenities prospective 35 renters seem to be looking for in multi-family housing. He pointed 36 out, however, that whenever more angles and roofing are added to a 37 building, it has to cost more money than it would to just construct a 38 three story building which looks more like a dormitory. That cost 39 factor, and the architectural design which was decided on, called for 40 brick exteriors on the first two floor exteriors of Buildings B and C, 41 wood siding on the highest center portion. ® 7