My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016.01.14 PC Packet
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Agendas/Packets
>
2016 PC Packets
>
2016.01.14 PC Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/13/2016 9:39:13 AM
Creation date
1/13/2016 9:19:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
1/14/2016
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
LaValle Fields - Apartment Concept Plan <br />Page 4 <br />The PUD conditions require a trail connection to the existing trail on the senior housing property <br />to Upper 1460' Street to access Lions Park. This has not been shown on the concept plan. There <br />are sidewalks shown within the plan connecting the buildings to the openspace in the center of <br />the site. There seems to be a lot of space within the concept plan that is not used efficiently. It is <br />good that there is a common open space between the buildings, but the buildings could better be <br />oriented to relate to each other and create a large common area with several amenities. <br />Building Architecture <br />The applicant has provided building elevations and renderings of the proposed apartment <br />building A, but has not shown a concept for building B. The applicant has stated that the building <br />materials for building A will be a combination of various types of stone with cement board <br />siding or other comparable siding material. The plans show a pitched roof with dormers along <br />the sides. There are gables periodically along the walls over entrances and in-between. The <br />colors are generally good, but the number of different colors should be reduced and be comprised <br />of compatible earth tones. The building could provide deeper overhangs and include a <br />combination of horizontal and vertical siding design. There was not a calculation submitted for <br />the amount of stone versus other building materials, but it appears more stone needs to be added <br />meet the required ratio of 50% per the performance standards for multi -family residential <br />developments. <br />The plans show the fagade being broken up with horizontal projections and a combination of <br />building materials. There are windows along the sides of the building projections. There is a <br />significant main entrance to the building, including secondary entrances that are visible and <br />clearly defined. The horizontal projections at the secondary accesses into the building could be <br />extended vertically to the third floor, instead of only being on the first floor. Multiple breaks in <br />the roofline, as encouraged in the Multi -Family Design Guidelines, may help further break up the <br />facade. To accomplish four-sided architecture, the back of the building will need some work. It <br />is lacking vertical projections that are created on the front of the building. The back of the <br />building will be very visible from the west along 147th Street. <br />Although there are some good elements in the architecture of the building, it does not eliminate <br />the look of a very long building. The walls of the building, even with the decks and projections at <br />the entrances, are still generally flat and long. Building B, if designed well, could help break up <br />the massing of Building A, but that is unknown at this time and it remains unclear whether the <br />building would be built. <br />Apartment Management and Amenities <br />The applicant has stated that building A would be owned and managed by ARMC Properties. <br />They have stated that there would be on-site management and underground parking. The <br />amenities for the apartments that the applicant has listed in the narrative are, a spa/exercise room, <br />community room, attached deck, and dog park. <br />The applicant is showing a gazebo in the center common space, as well as a play area/basketball <br />court on the north end of the site. The center common space would need more than a gazebo to <br />be a valued amenity to the project. If the applicant wants to provide additional common space for <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.