05/04/1998 Park Board Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning&Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 18 "conditionally permitted"uses within the City's various comercial districts. The following were the two questions to be considered in this amendment: l. Whether operational or physical differenced exist between land uses which warrant CUP processing of only certain uses with accessory drive-through facilities (i.e., drive-in restaurants). 2. The need to address drive-through facilities associated with uses other than banks and drive-through restaurants (i.e., drug stores). The recommendation by staff is to allow bank drive-throughs as"permitted" and approve the Text Amendment. Mr. Dunn stated that their function was to maintain the integrity of traffic flow. Mr. Brixius explained that in regard to the drive-through windows, the traffic flow was the main concern. Other concerns are outdoor audio equipment and stacking space. Mr. Dunn asked his opinion of the change, in relationship to the ability of the City to still maintain the intergity of the situation. Mr. Brixius said that banks differ from fast food facilities because they are enclosed with canopies, they are multi-lanes so the stacking is not so intrusive, and the turnover is much quicker. In that respect, he believed they should consider this. They still have review authority and that is taken very seriously. Mr. Robinson asked how many banks they could possibly have, which could not be answered, so he wondered why they should change it. Mr. Johnson stated that the similarities are more important than the differences, noting that multi-lanes indicated more traffic. He is concerned about drive-throughs being put in residential areas and stated they intend to pay very close attention to where they are located. Therefore, he felt the conditional use permit allowed them the best opportunity to control this. He did not feel that there was any advantage to approving this. Ms. Wyland stated that they did approve a site plan review for a bank contingent on this review, and wondered what would happen to that approval. Chair Schaps said that they intended to make it retroactive. Mr. Robinson noted that it needed to be handled on an individual basis. Mr. Brixius said that they did not have approval for the drive-through based on this discussion. Ms. Wyland stated that they could come back for approval. Mr. Robinson then agreed with Mr. Johnson and asked if the existing bank had a CUP. Ms. Wyland said they did not since they were in a district that did not require one.