CC MINUTES 05132025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Regular Meeting Minutes May 13, 2025 Page 6 1 8. The City Engineer approves required final designs of the bioretention and other 2 aspects of the stormwater (and other) plans as noted in the Engineer's memo of April 3 3, 2025, and any subsequent Engineer's review. 4 9. The weed -barrier material under the deck is pervious fabric to ensure compliance 5 with impervious surface regulations. 6 10. Additional landscaping plant materials are provided in the rock mulch edge along the 7 south side of the building to help mitigate impacts of the lessened setback in this area. 8 The updated plans reflect compliance with this condition. 9 11. The applicant supplements landscape plans with the recommendations of the City 10 Engineer and as suggested in this report. 11 12. Additional sustainability elements recommended by the Planning Commission and 12 approved by the City Council may be included in any final approval. 13 13. The proposed sign will be reviewed separately and permitted under standard sign 14 permitting procedures. 15 14. The applicant constructs the project consistent with the finally approved plans. 16 15. The applicant enters into a Conditional Use Permit Development Agreement 17 guaranteeing the terms of the permit and operational elements. 18 16. The approval recommendation incorporates the findings of fact and as included in the 19 draft City Council Resolution. 20 17. Any additional recommendations of the City Council. 21 22 Mr. Grittman reviewed the Findings. Also provided for City Council review are the presentation, 23 application materials, and resolution. Alternative Council action include motion to deny the CUP 24 and/or variances. In the event of a recommendation for denial, the City Council must state its 25 findings related to denial on the record. Council may request additional information and table 26 action. A motion to table should be accompanied by the specific information requested of staff or 27 the developer necessary to make a final decision. 28 29 Councilmember Randle asked who currently owns the land, and Mr. Grittman stated Sheldon 30 Mortenson. 31 32 Councilmember Jenson asked if these were all efficiency apartments. Mr. Grittman stated that 33 each of the rooms does not have a full kitchen. Councilmember Jenson asked what if the demand 34 for assisted living goes away and the building is empty with no parking. Mr. Grittman stated that 35 one of the conditions involves changing the use of the site would require a re -application to the 36 City. Councilmember Jenson referred to the setback and the fact that we are trying to squeeze 37 something into a very tight spot. He asked if it could be done without the setback variance. Mr. 38 Grittman stated that the width of the building is standard, and it could not be done without the 39 setback variance. 40 41 Councilmember Elnagdy stated that she is worried that if the assisted living facility is no longer 42 needed, the rents on a 17-unit building would be too high. She referred to the parking and asked 43 where the personal vehicles would be parked. She asked about the access for emergency 44 vehicles. Mr. Grittman stated the space on the street would be sufficient for one vehicle. If there 45 were more responding vehicles, they might block the street temporarily. This allows for good 46 access to the front of the building. 47