2005.02.10 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Minutes — February 10, 2005 duplicate what was on the south side of C.S.A.H 8. The Commission asked about the variety of architecture of the townhomes. Bruce Pankenon, with David Bernard & Rottlund Homes Company, explained that they had been working with the City to change the elevation of the townhomes facing Elmcrest Avenue and the ends of the buildings. Three different concepts were presented for consideration and he explained that they intended to wrap the entire bottoms of the buildings and the end of the buildings with a cultured stone product and finish the buildings with different sidings. He showed the locations of the mechanical components of the units. All three elevations would be included in the development and would be mixed with four to six different exterior colors for plenty of variety. Staff would work with developers to identify where each type of building would be. There were no comments from the public so Schumann closed the public hearing. Commission McRoberts recalled a condition was to be included regarding the adjacent agricultural uses. Parties considering the purchase of homes in the development that were adjacent to the properties to the north were to be made aware that the north properties are agricultural and what the permitted use of agricultural property is. The Planner explained that she recalled in the previous discussion that if that condition was included, it may cause buyers to assume that property to the north would always be agricultural. The Commission agreed it should be included in the conditions of approval but be worded to not imply that the use would never change. Commission members agreed they liked the revisions to the outside design of the townhomes. Rosenquist said he has seen snowplowing equipment do more damage to wing walls than semi trucks and he has seen wing walls and berms work well together. He felt that walls on top of the berm would reduce the noise level of trucks. The CDD discouraged the use of the wall on top of the berm for aesthetics reason and felt the berm and screening the wall next to the truck dock would provide adequate screening. Rosenquist asked if it could be a condition of approval that some screening is done on the adjacent property when it develops. Pratt committed work to provide screening on the adjacent development. Hoffbeck asked Anderson her opinion of the wall. Anderson explained that it didn't make sense, for aesthetic and financial reasons, to construct the wall when there was the ability to construct a berm. Commissioner McRoberts asked about the site line for the townhomes off the back of the building and felt the berm was preferable to the wall. McRoberts discussed the hours of operation saying 11 p.m. was very late for deliveries. Rosenquist pointed out that plow trucks could be an issue too. Kleissler asked how much additional space would be needed to add more berm if the building could be moved forward.