Laserfiche WebLink
1 was going to "trap all that property in there?" . Mr. Hoium said all <br /> 2 entrances to this project would empty out on Silver Lane with goo <br /> 3 access to both Silver Lake Road and north to County Road E. He told <br /> 4 Mr. Reid with his lot extending from Fordham to the railroad track, his <br /> 5 back land was landlocked now and that wouldn' t change with this <br /> 6 development, but that he did have access to Fordham. Relative to <br /> 7 parking, Mr. Hoium said each unit would have a two car garage with two <br /> 8 parking places beyond that. He said there would be' a fair amount of <br /> 9 green area left over, but he doubted whether the neighbors wanted to <br /> 10 see that blacktopped. He said the 25 foot wide streets should be wide <br /> 11 enough to accommodate cars parking at least on one side. <br /> 12 Mr. Hoium told the neighbors the developers would be glad to make <br /> 13 adjustments like moving the building on Silver Lane Further east as <br /> 14 requested by the neighbor. He pointed out that 37 units was a <br /> 15 comparatively low density for the property and he perceived the project <br /> 16 was a good and attractive utilization of this land which was too nice <br /> 17 not to be utilized for the benefit of the City. The Evergreen <br /> 18 President added that he perceived these units , with a market from <br /> 19 $90 , 000 to $120, 000 , were commensurate with the housing , in St. <br /> 20 Anthony village, which the average home value in the City. <br /> 21 Mr. Hoium told Commissioner London they would hope to blend the grades <br /> 22 on the west side right in with the adjoining properties and said with — <br /> 23 300 foot lots there- would be at least a 100 foot buffer provided on <br /> 24 those yards only one of which has a garage to the rear. Mr. Hill said <br /> 25 the existing grades would probably be' maintained in Silver Lane wit <br /> 26 walkout (or walkup) entrances where the grade is steep, thereb}* <br /> 27 maintaining the existing drainage flow. <br /> 28 Chair Wagner commented that the Planning Commission was only interested <br /> 29 in a - concept plan for the project at this point, but the developer <br /> 30 would have to provide both detailed landscaping and drainage plans <br /> 31 before the final reading was given to the rezoning ordinance if that <br /> 32 was the way the Council went. He also reiterated that the Rice Creek <br /> 33 watershed District would see to it that the drainage wasn' t <br /> 34 detrimental to any, adjoining properties. <br /> 35 The hearing was closed at 10: 35 P.M. , for consideration of a Commission <br /> 36 recommendation to the Council. Commissioner London agreed that this <br /> 37 would be a much nicer project than the one on Old Highway 8 and he <br /> 38 said he was surprised at the value of the units considering they would <br /> 39 be next to a railroad track. <br /> 40 Mr. Childs commented that as a practical matter, townhomes this <br /> 41 expensive were unlikely to be rented out. Ms. Sheehy said most <br /> 42 townhome association bylaws forbade renting except under very special <br /> 43 conditions. <br /> 44 The Commission reaction to the plan was quite favorable as long as <br /> 45 safeguards were built into it later in the process. There was little <br /> 14 <br />