Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> MINUTES <br /> <br /> CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br /> NOVEMBER 9, 2009 <br /> With regard to item 3B., The Planner noted that the applicant has identified <br /> two outdoor sales a~•eas on the site plan. The Commission was agreeable <br /> to the two areas provided that only one is operational at a time. The <br /> Planner indicated that the applicant has indicated that these outdoor sales <br /> areas are 8,000 square feet in size, one being just north of the building and <br /> the other in front of the north door. It was noted that these areas are part <br /> of the parking lot and would be used for parking when an outdoor sales <br /> event was not occurring. The Planner also pointed out that there may be <br /> some securing of merchandise in these areas over the weekends that an <br /> outdoor sales event is occurring. <br /> The Planner indicated that the Commission was in agreement with <br /> recommendation #4. With regard to #5, the Commission was agreeable to <br /> four weekend tent sales with tents to be up no longer than a 30 day period <br /> in a calendar year. The 30 days includes the total time that a tent is up, <br /> whether a tent sale is occurring or not. The Planner indicated that this is <br /> outside the 20 weekends allowed for seasonal outdoor sales events. Rod <br /> Johansen, President of Hom, indicated that the four tent sales could be <br /> included in the 20 outdoor sales events. <br /> With regard to #6, the Planner reported that the site has more than enough <br /> parking for the retail furniture operation and the warehouse operation. <br /> However, if space is leased to an intensive retail business, there could be a <br /> parking shortage. Therefore, the recommendation is to show proof of <br /> parking for the site. The Planner indicated that if the City is comfortable <br /> with the current situation, additional discussions about parking could <br /> occur once lease tenants are identified. He noted that the recommendation <br /> intents to ensure there is adequate parking on the site to support the <br /> occupants of the building. This issue could be addressed in the PUD <br /> Agreement. <br /> Recommendation #7 deals with architectural review. He noted that the <br /> applicant has modif ed the concept from the typical Hom store to the Dock <br /> 86 concept. '1 he Planning Commission felt the concept was acceptable in <br /> the context of uses in the area. The Planner noted that the additional dock <br /> doors would benon-functional and would be added to the north and east <br /> sides of the building. <br /> Recommendation #9 requires that freestanding, directional signs remain as <br /> such, and the applicant has indicated that they would comply with Code. <br /> The Planner next reviewed recommendation #10 which lease with various <br /> signage issues. The applicant has requested 120 days of temporary <br /> signage with no limitation on the number of signage permits. The Planner <br /> noted that the Council's 2007 PUD Permit approval required compliance <br /> 3 <br /> <br />