10-17-1988 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 e City Council Minutes October 17, 1988 Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, reviewed the original site plan and the updated site plan which included the changes requested by the Planning Commission with the Council. Mr. Rohlf indicated that the maximum density allowed on the site is 172 units and CHW Properties are requesting 112 units. Mr. Rohlf explained that the Planning Commission included 25 recommendations in their motion for approval to the Council and that CHW Properties have addressed 24 of the 25 recommendations. The one recommendation not addressed was the elimination of building #6, however, CHW is recommending moving the apartment buildings further to the northeast in order to put more distance between the apartment buildings and the existing residents. Duane Kropuenske, Planning Commission Representative, stated that the Planning Commission held two meetings on this request; the first meeting being a regular Planning Commission meeting on September 27, 1988, and the second meeting being a special Planning Commission meeting on October 5, 1988. He indicated there were a large number of concerns by surrounding residents at the first meeting and the major concern of the second meeting centered around the elimination of apartment #6 and how to provide privacy to existing residents as this apartment building was very close to existing property lines. Mr. Kropuenske reviewed the Planning Commission's concerns at this time. e Mr. Mike Potowitz and Don Welter were Partnership. present representing CHW Mayor Gunkel opened the public hearing. Jim Hudson - 366 Gates Avenue - Mr. Hudson questioned what the distance would be between Apartment #6 and surrounding property owners. Mr. Potowitz explained there would be 49 feet between apartment #6 and the property line with a 7 foot privacy fence included. Pat McCabe 378 Gates Avenue - Mr. McCabe questioned where the fence would be located. Mr. Stephen Rohlf explained that CHW Partnership will have to grant the City a sewer easement and the fence could be placed on the easement if a variance was granted to allow this. If the fence is not placed on the easement it would have to be placed on the adjoining property. Butch Rohlf representing Mrs. Murray Mr. Rohlf questioned how the apartment complex would affect the property valuation. A1 Hopper Indicated his concern regarding his property value being affected and the fact that he would still like to see apartment building number 6 eliminated. e Mayor Gunkel indicated that the proposal is well within the requirements of the City ordinance and, therefore, was in favor of the request. Mayor Gunkel closed the public hearing at this time.