01-13-11-Planning Comm. Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 2011 will allow for the expansion of the light manufacturing and office space use within the building. The addition is planned at the northeast corner of the existing building and will occur over three levels. Access to the addition will be via the service drive coming in from County Road B -2. While the addition is not part of the original campus plan, it is consistent with the concept and expected uses on the property. The Planner indicated that at the time St. Jude proceeds with their Phase II plans, it is envisioned that a parking deck would be constructed. At this time, St. Jude is proposing to expand the surface parking directly southwest of the building to serve the immediate additional parking needs. As a result, a portion of the slope and ponding will have to be modified. St. Jude is working with the City Engineer on these issues. The City Planner reported that the building addition fits on the site without any setback or use concerns. The Planner indicated that a landscape and screening plan should be submitted to ensure that the expanded parking lot is adequately screened from abutting residences to the south. The Planner also indicated that if new signage is proposed, it would have to meeting all applicable provisions of the City's Sign Ordinance. The Planner further noted that issues related to grading, drainage, and utilities should be subject to comment and recommendation of the City Engineer. Nina Eberhausen, Architectural Alliance, described in detail the existing parking area and the proposed expansion, including ponding and screening. Eberhausen noted that the existing screening would be moved further south and would be supplemented with additional screening, as needed. Eberhausen also described the retaining walls as they exist and as would be added to relative to the parking lot expansion. She noted that they are exploring another option that would minimize the vertical surface needed, thus reducing the amount of retaining walls. Duray asked about the height of the retaining walls. Eberhausen indicated that the initial option would have 4 to 5 foot high retaining walls on the southeast end of the parking lot and up to 12 foot high walls reducing down to zero on the southwest end. However, under the second option being considered, retaining walls would be 4 to 5 feet on either end and the ponding and rainwater garden would have to be moved further to the east. These details would be worked out with the City Engineer to his satisfaction. Knudsen asked about the roof line of the addition. Eberhausen reported that the addition would be visible predominantly from County Road B -2. She also noted that the facade of the new addition will match the existing building. Duray asked if there would be any retaining walls needed because of the building addition. Eberhausen replied that the new addition causes the building to be pushed further to the east; therefore some -2-