My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10/10/2007 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2007
>
10/10/2007 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/2/2014 2:34:47 PM
Creation date
7/2/2014 12:11:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
10/10/2007
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.
/
15
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 />August 8, 2007 <br />Page 3 <br />Mr. Smyser explained that phasing is planned for the development due to a slow market. <br />He assured the board that circulation will connect throughout the site, adding that <br />circulation elements will be completed as the site continues to develop. <br />Staff advised the applicant to submit a peak parking analysis for proposed users, and will <br />continue to tweak parking areas shown on the plat to improve the plan. Colored <br />elevations will be required with the submittal application. Staff will suggest enhancing <br />architectural features, however Mr. Smyser noted that he has been impressed with the <br />design and materials that have been submitted. Staff stated that all buildings are within <br />maximum building heights and the applicant has submitted signage specifications. <br />Mr. Smyser asked for input from board members in order to achieve the best possible <br />development. <br />Mr. Pogalz asked if there is a timeline for the reconstruction of the bridge. Staff replied it <br />is projected for 2010, as funding has not been completely addressed. <br />Mr. Pogalz asked if the developer would still like to begin the project this year, and staff <br />responded they believe so. <br />Board member concerns included the city's trail system plan, opportunities for pedestrian <br />areas and traffic flow within the development. <br />Mr. Tom Schutte, Azure Properties, applicant, stated that Azure properties plans to <br />develop three of the corners at this freeway interchange. He stated that they will work <br />with the city on staff and board concerns. His concerns include the interior traffic flow <br />study, a parking plan, and site entrances and intersections. He stated they intend to <br />include a coffee shop on the corner with a potential patio in the back. He noted that <br />infiltration is a really big and difficult issue, adding that they became aware at the <br />Environmental Board meeting that they are not in complete conformance with the <br />necessary requirements, but are working with staff on this issue. <br />Mr. Schutte introduced Kathy Anderson, architect, and SunTide Realty staff, who were <br />present for questions. <br />Mr. Pogalz stated concern about the traffic plan accommodating large trucks. Kathy <br />Anderson remarked that their plans have been fine tuned for location and size, noting that <br />it is helpful to have specific users in order to plan details for the site. <br />Ms. Anderson commented that they should be able to add glass to the corner treatments <br />of the Main Street facade, but noted that some users may not buy in to it. They would <br />like to show the board how pedestrians will be able to access the site internally. <br />Mr. Laden stated concern about the image of the city if the backs of buildings are <br />continually built against the major roads. He commented that outdoor seating should be <br />in the front of the building, not the back of the building. Ms. Anderson stated that there <br />is room for a small island area that could be used for the seating area in front. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.