12/04/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

variance picks up the need to extend the rooflines and the tower elements. He said code currently provides for 36 feet for multi-family. He said the upper areas they are proposing for multi-family will have the tower elements and rooflines as part of the development. To be able to create them, instead of a solid block wall, linear roofline, they have broken up the rooflines by adding those elements, therefore a need for a variance to the height. It is to embellish and incorporate the architectural design elements into the plan. He then reviewed items 9, 10, 11, and 12. He said they are asking the board to grant a setback variance to accommodate an underground parking garage for the residential units. The garage goes into the front yard setback requirement under the code itself. Additionally, the garage takes up, as far as size, the additional massing variance that will be required to accommodate that building. The garage will be completely underground and will not be seen above ground. He read items 13, and 14 and indicated those issues are being discussed with the Planning Commission. He said before they file with the Planning Commission they will have an agreed upon formation for the main entry drive. It will provide for a safe flow of traffic. Board Member Questions and Comments Mr. Konold asked if the underground garage is solely for the residents in the development. Mr. Berryhill said it is dedicated to those residents. They want the residents to be segregated from the retail uses that are on the first floor and the way to do that was to create a dedicated parking garage. It is another amenity to the project. Mr. Kelly asked for clarification on the number of residential units. Mr. Berryhill said they are looking at 100 units at this time. He said they are playing with the number right now and may increase the size of the units and the number of units may go down to 95, 98, something like that. Instead of doing a 1,100 square foot unit, they may do a 1,500 or 1,600 square foot unit and marketing is being done right now to see the impact of multi-family. Mr. Maloney said under fair housing laws, people with children should be permitted to live in the units. He asked for confirmation on that. Mr. Berryhill indicated they would have to comply with all federal, state and local requirements. Mr. Maloney asked if there will be a recreation area for children and asked about their safety. Mr. Berryhill said the way they designed the project, there is a plaza or courtyard area in the center and they view it as community space, interactive space. They see the first floor units as restaurants, retailers, with outdoor seating and dining. It is really gathering space. They intend to have a walking area that goes through the development. Mr. Konold asked if they can limit the number of children in a unit. Mr. Berryhill said because of the nature of the development they will probably not have a lot of young families there. They see it as being more professionals, a little up-scale. There may be a child or two but they see it as more of a single, professional living space where perhaps a manager operating a restaurant downstairs will live there. Mr. Kelly asked for the approximate cost of a rental, a single unit. Mr. Berryhill said it would be anywhere from $850 to $1100 or $1200 a month, which is very consistent with the Madison facility on Butternut Ridge. The community is already supporting those rentals. Mrs. Sergi said the drawing she has is different than the one Mr. Berryhill is using. He reviewed the plans with Mrs. Sergi. He showed them the plan that is before the Planning Commission at this time. They then discussed the surface parking and the underground parking. Mr. Berryhill confirmed there are 2 parking spaces per residential unit. He said he believes the overall parking ratio is 1 space for every 5.6 square feet. Mrs. Sergi asked if the 9 foot maximum height request is only for the peaks. Mr. Berryhill said it is for the peaks and portions of the roofline. Mr. O'Malley said the rendering being used shows 3 smaller buildings as previously proposed but now when talking about 3 stories for those buildings, that rendering may not be accurate. Mr. Berryhill said the rendering does show a 2-story building and they have added a third story of residential. They will elongate some of the elements. He said they will have an interconnecting bridge between 2 of the buildings, which will be open air and overlook the courtyard area. There was further discussion about the units and the parking. 1VIr. Maloney said the applicant just presented a new plan with the underground garage. He asked if all the boards and commissions will be presented with the same plans so they have the same understanding of the proposal. He understands from the Planning Commission they have seen different things and it has not been consistent. Mr. Berryhill said he agrees 100% with the Chairman and he said they will see the same plans. He said they have to remember this is an evolution process. He said as this moves 8