|
Review
Z-97-05: An amendment to Parcels 1, 2, &3 of the Preliminary PUD of Cloud City Subdivision.
From
Les Mangus Memo: The proposed amendments make subtle changes to the
parcel boundaries and add a small adjacent parcel to the PUD. The most
sustentative request is to decrease the building setback between the
commercial and residential uses in exchange for more intense screening and
landscaping. Staff has no particularly important concerns with the
amendments, but feels that if the decrease in setback distance is allowed, a
detailed screening/landscaping plan should be provided.
Greg
Allison of MKEC Engineering presented the plans for the owner/applicants.
Greg explained Parcel 3A is being created on a new parcel adjacent to Parcel
3 recently purchased by the developer.
Jeff
Bridges asked if they would replat the First Addition to include that parcel
and change the street alignment. Greg said that is correct.
Les
said this will be the 4th revision for this piece of property.
Greg Allison supplied the original PUD to help the members see the proposed
changes. He explained this revised plan makes the lots deeper along US Hwy.
54.
Greg
showed the proposed site plan for the commercial tenant and said the drainage
ditch would be relocated. He said the Corp of Engineers has given them a
conceptual approval for the relocation of the ditch. He said they will comply
with all permits required for stream disturbance.
Jeff
Bridges asked if there will be
sidewalks built through the reserve in the commercial areas. Les said no they
are not built yet in the commercial areas. Jan Cox read General Provision
number 7, “An 8’ sidewalk shall be provided on the west side of Yorktown, on one side of Cloud Avenue and through Reserves D and E connecting Minneha Avenue to Cloud Avenue”.
There
was general discussion about the revised plan removing more existing trees
than in the original PUD plan. They will replace them along the revised
drainage way. Jan Cox asked for the advantage to changing the drainage flow.
Greg said it is to give more building space to the future tenant on the lot
adjacent to Andover Road.
Jeff
Bridges asked if the tenant will have a signed contract before they go
through the effort to change the drainage way. Greg said he did not know.
There
was discussion about the option of the water being carried underground. Greg
said they are designing a combination of underground and realignment of the swale.
Jeff Bridges asked how this would effect erosion. Greg said he would work
with Les on minimum grades, and there will be some type of rip-rap as the
water enters the existing pond in the Reflection Lakes Addition.
Jason
Gish from MKEC Engineering arrived at 5:50 p.m.
Greg
said the only adjustment to the General Provisions is the setback from the
south line to the building which was 130 feet and they are asking for it to
be 75 feet. Greg said the encroachment into the setback line would be for the
truck service area. They would like to build a 4 foot berm with trees and a
wall on it along the south line for screening the adjacent residents.
Lynn
Heath was very concerned about the noise
and light disturbance of the truck service area to the neighborhood to the
south. Greg Allison thought the berm, trees, and wall would mitigate most of
the disturbance. General discussion continued.
Greg
asked if the required wall height is 6 feet. Les said 6 feet is the minimum.
Les
said he is not impressed with the hybrid hedge tree. Jason Gish said he would
rather use a cedar tree.
Greg
asked if the reduced building setback would be a problem. Lynn Heath said it might be. There was discussion about whether the truck dock is an enclosed
structure and about building materials that could be used to decrease the
noise. Les asked how the trucks would be faced. Jason said the truck doors
are on the east and west ends of the dock.
There
was discussion about the 35 foot wide drive which Les said would circulate
around the building. Greg said there would be 40 feet from the property line
to the service drive which would contain the wall, berm, and trees.
Les
said the closer the wall is to the line of sight of the truck headlights, the
better the wall will knock the lights down, but the affects of the noise are
greater with closer proximity.
There
was much discussion about the noise created from the truck service area. Greg
thinks the screening will be enough to contain the noise. Les asked if it
could be required in the General Provisions for all loading docks to be
enclosed with a screening wall between. Jason Gish thinks the loading area is
already designed to be enclosed, but he will check. Les was concerned about
setting a pattern for the commercial lots to the east of this development.
Lynn
Heath wants proof at the next Planning
Commission meeting on Tuesday that the loading dock will be completely
enclosed and noise insulated.
Jan
Cox asked Les if all his comments had been addressed. Les said he has not seen
a revised plan yet. Greg Allison said there is nothing on the staff comments
list they can’t deal with.
Lynn
Heath asked about the zoning for Parcel 3-A. Les said it is B-3. Greg Allison
said Parcel 3 is B-4, Parcel 2 is B-3, and Parcel 1 is B-3.
Jason
Gish said he will deliver 15 copies of the revised plan for packets.
Lynn
Heath made a motion to recommend this plan be approved by the Planning
Commission with the following conditions:
- Subject to approval of all staff comments.
- 4’ berm and 6’ wall with trees on top along the
commercial/residential boundary.
- Sound attenuation for the loading dock.
Jan Cox seconded the motion. Motion carried 2/0.
|