05-11-06 Planning Comm. Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

given that the existing building will not be altered other than a coat of paint, the building is likely consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Grading, Drainage and Utilities. Because this is a concept review, the applicant has not submitted a grading, drainage and utility plan. Prior to approval of a PUD amendment, the applicant shall submit grading, drainage and utility plans, which are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Lighting. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan. Any lighting used to illuminate an off-street parking area shall be so arranged as to reflect the light away from adjoining property, abutting residential uses and public rights-of-way and be in compliance with Section 903.020.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Landscaping. The applicant has indicated the addition of perimeter plantings around the existing building. The applicant shall also be required to install landscaping around the perimeter of the parking and loading areas for screening purposes. signage. The applicant has proposed to place signage on the front and rear building facades. Pursuant to Section 903.110 of the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant is required to submit a Comprehensive Sign Plan which outlines the proposed number, type, size and design of all signs requested to be located on the premises. Requirements for signage within the PUD District are the same as those for B-2 through B-I, I-1 and I-P Districts. As such, the applicant is permitted to have two signs having a total area of no more than 15 percent of the building's front fagade. The applicant is proposing to have nine signs on the front of the building and nine on the rear of the building. These nine signs on each side may be combined to qualify as two separate signs provided that the total sign area of all signage does not exceed 15 percent of the building's front fagade area. The submitted drawings were not scaled drawings, however, the' proposed signage appears to total mare than 15 percent of the building's frontfapade. Conclusion /Recommendation The applicant has submitted preliminary materials for the purpose of a concept review of a PUD Amendment. Based on our review, there do not appear to be any significant issues with the proposal. One area of concern, however, is the proposed signage on the front and rear of the building. Prior to approval of a PUD Amendment, the applicant shall submit a detailed site plan, lighting plan, landscape plan and grading, drainage and utility plans. The applicant is not proposing a change in use or significant building or site alterations and our office recommends approval of the submitted PUD Amendment Concept Plan. pc. Kathy Glanzer Steve Westerhaus Lee Elfering KCM Holdings /Active Sports, Inc. 300 S. Owasso Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55117 3 9~