My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
06/08/2005 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2005
>
06/08/2005 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2014 2:37:23 PM
Creation date
6/19/2014 11:02:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
06/08/2005
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br />• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />May 11, 2005 <br />Page 9 <br />Mr. Kampmeyer noted there had to be a back of the building somewhere, but they could <br />look at options. He noted no matter which way they faced the building someone would <br />have to look at the back of it. <br />Mr. Tralle asked what types of businesses the tenants would be. Mr. Kampmeyer replied <br />hair care, services uses (dental, medical), food services, etc. <br />Chair Rafferty asked them to be creative in their design. He noted Lake Drive was <br />important and the back of the building should not face Lake Drive. Mr. Kampmeyer <br />stated The Blaine Village had a number of big box retailers, so smaller retailers were <br />more willing to fill in the gaps. He noted The Marketplace was quite a bit smaller in <br />scope and its drawing power, so it was difficult to design the same type of buildings as <br />The Blaine Village had because the smaller tenants did not want to pay for the expense of <br />having two storefronts. He indicated they wanted to work with the Board. <br />Mr. Hyden suggested they "fold the building in half' so there were businesses on both <br />sides. He stated they did not want to look at a long back of a building. He noted <br />businesses on both sides would be different, so they would not have two store fronts. He <br />indicated as the mass started accumulating, they would have additional space to add <br />another building. <br />Mr. Laden stated they needed to look at a different model of a strip mall than what was <br />being proposed. He indicated the building was attractive, but a different model was more <br />appropriate to this site. <br />Mr. Hyden understood a business having two storefronts was expensive for a tenant. Mr. <br />Kampmeyer stated all of these ideas were good and he would have his architect <br />investigate these comments and see if they can come up with a better proposal. <br />Mr. Pogalz stated the only function the back of the building served as egress and he <br />believed they could "fold the building" with a center corridor. He stated The Blaine <br />Village worked well because the stores were anchored either on one end or both ends <br />with a restaurant, or other major retail area. He noted by having a restaurant the key <br />tenant at one end, he believed this proposal could work. <br />Chair Rafferty believed Mr. Hyden's suggestion was a good one and there was a lot of <br />merit to that suggestion. He noted the City needed to understand that if they were patient, <br />they would have a much stronger market place. He stated it was important to get the <br />trash facility inside the building and not have it a freestanding structure also. <br />Mr. Laden stated one of the things that made The Blaine Village successful was that it <br />was pedestrian friendly and that element had to be added back to this site plan. Mr. <br />Kampmeyer stated they would look at their plan again and see what options they had. <br />• Mr. Tralle stated he personally liked the building, but not in this location. <br />Chair Rafferty invited anyone for or against the PUD to make comment. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.