01/11/2006 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board October 12, 2005 Page 12 The overall area of the building will be 7,935 square feet. The majority of the building itself is single story, with the exception of an office area which is located over the center section of the building. The Planning and Zoning Board continued this item at the September 14th regular meeting, and offered up comments to both staff and the developer about the proposal. Numerous revisions have been made to the plans and are addressed throughout this report. Staff presented their analysis and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A site performance agreement between the City and the developer must be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. Issues discussed in the S.E.H. engineering review memo must be addressed to the satisfaction of City staff. 3. Operation and maintenance agreements for the site, including provisions for stormwater facilities, must be submitted for review by City staff prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. The `gull wing' fixture type shall be changed to a shoebox fixture. This fixture type will need to be approved by staff and used throughout the rest of the parking area on this block, if not the rest of the project site. 5. The final plat for the project (Village No. 4) must be approved prior to City Council approval of this building. 6. The developer must work with staff to identify the most appropriate location for bicycle parking within this block of the development. Mr. Pogalz asked if the applicant owned the building and the land, or just the building. Mr. Bengtson responded they would be dividing a lot that would encompass the building as well as some of the parking area. The rest of the parking lot and drives would be within an outlot that would be maintained in part by each lot owner. The area of outdoor seating would be owned by Betty's Pies. Mr. Pogalz noted in this climate, pavers could be a maintenance headache and while he liked pavers, he would recommend a colored concrete or stamped concrete in lieu of the pavers. Mr. Root stated this was a terrific looking plan. He inquired about the west entry access. He noted it appeared to be close to the street radius and he asked if it was possible to move it farther to the west to the end of the lot. Mr. Grochala responded the driveway access was already set and the curb and radius had been poured already. He noted there was probably more room there than was indicating on the plan. He stated it met the line of sight standards. Chair Rafferty inquired about the circular structure on the plans. Mr. Pogalz responded that was the decorative pavement band. Chair Rafferty inquired about the fencing on the trash enclosure area on the west side of the building. He asked the developer to come forward. • •