Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOOTHILLS MALL REDEVELOPMENT, MULTI-FAMILY - FDP - FDP150048 - CORRESPONDENCE - MEETING COMMUNICATIONModification — front yard setback — note that there is a significant amount (the width varies) right-of-way between the existing attached walk and the east property line. Compare and contrast with previous approval? Is there an equal to or better than...? Lots 4 and 5 — may need a building -by -building analysis that investigates providing the minimum required aerial apparatus access from the west so that the building can be shifted to the west to allow for change of grade, saving trees, and having sloping connecting walkways versus stairs to building entrances on the east. Spirit of Compromise — Staff is willing to explore creative solutions that are practical and result in a well -designed project that allows the applicant to meet its deadlines with Alberta but only as long as public attributes are protected to the maximum extent feasible. Timing and Process — McWhinney informs us that they are contractually obligated to close in December. December 17th P & Z would be preferable versus December 101h. If Staff and the applicant can agree on how best to resolve these issues, then we can hold to a December hearing. The staff recommendation at this hearing may have to be Approval with Conditions since much of the design work may have to be put off until Final. C I p l L�,- s W �� l pc Foothills Mall Apartments Notes for Meeting with Applicant and Design Team Gradinq Along Stanford — need to see the relationship between the horizontal site plan and the grading plan. How does the grading work? What is the grade behind the existing attached walk to the building entrance? Will this grading require stairs? How does this grade impact the existing trees? Trees — existing trees are worth preserving per Ralph Z. inventory two weeks ago. Where are the trees located in relation to the property line? Are these trees in the public right-of-way or on private property? Where do the trees sit in relation to the buildings? How are the trees impacted by the proposed grading? Where are the trees in relationship to the existing sidewalk or the proposed sidewalk? Public Sidewalk — an attached walk is not our current standard. Show the vertical and horizontal relationship between the sidewalk (existing or proposed) and the proposed grading. Is there a possibility that segments of the sidewalk can be detached? If so, what would be the parkway width? Need at least six feet (not 5.5 feet due to curb). Could the sidewalk meander and be more interesting? The placement of the sidewalk needs to be coordinated with the trees and the proposed grading. Why can't this walk be detached? Keep in mind that there is about 15 feet of public right-of-way behind the existing attached walk. Connecting walkways — how do these work given the proposed grading? Where are these walkways given the existing trees? Does the grading require stairs versus a sloping walkway to the building entrances? Cross -Sections may be needed to illustrate these various vertical and horizontal alignments among the trees, sidewalks, connecting walkways. How do these relationships impact one another? Are these elements in the public right-of-way or on private property? Parking — may have to adjust parking on west side of Blocks 4 or 5 in order to get 25- foot inside and 5-foot outside turning radii. Can the loss of parking on the west side be made up by having about 60 (+/-) parallel parking on Stanford? Although on -street parking cannot be counted towards the required minimum, there will be no other competition for these spaces other than the residents. PFA Aerial Apparatus Access — what about complying with the no more than 30-feet from a three story building? Can this access be provided on the west side, if not for all buildings then perhaps some? Why can't the solution that was found for Lot 3 (northerly most lot) be applied to Lots 4 and 5 (along Stanford)? PFA can go 150' without turn- around.