06/13/2001 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board June 13, 2001 Page 24 There was a screen wall shown on the rear of the building, to be constructed of split face modular block. The wall did not appear to be of adequate height to screen either the loading dock doors or the trucks that were often parked in the dock area. The screen wall should be of sufficient height to substantially screen the dock area. Staff stated trash enclosures had not been identified on the site plan. The narrative states that all trash dumpsters should be within the building footprints and that a trash compactor for Target was within the loading dock area and was screened. Staff indicated Target often used sidewalk space in front of the stores for cart storage. A full screen wall should be provided if the intent was to store carts in the front of the store. No outside storage was permitted without proper screening. Staff stated Kohl's was proposed to be constructed of masonr _ rials that include predominantly brick on the front with a stucco accent pattern at the i acces: he sides and rear of the building transitions to block. As stated with the proposed g � -leva r • n, the rear of the building was very visible to the area to the north and more att do ho e paid to the design and materials used. Staff indicated the applicant had indicated that decor the development. No details have been provided. Cons same fixtures throughout the Town Center ar restriction which is 1.0 foot candle reading a adjacent residential property. ting as intended to be utilized in on should be given to utilize the lighting shall meet the lighting level street and 0.4 foot candle reading on Staff stated park dedication would be ca a eu of land and should be provided at the rate in effect at the time of the final pl Staff stated a total sign p . een proposed that includes wall signage as well as freestanding signs. The � e a• the example submitted for the pylon signs are not consistent. The signs were su. t to a separate review and sign permit through the City. Under the PDO staff would ibility in the allowable signage as long as it is submitted as a total package. No sig s "' . ld be allowed on the rear of any businesses facing the adjacent residential area. Staff indicated the application included a preliminary plat for the site. The plat as submitted proposes nine lots plus four outlots. The lots are created to provide individual lots for each proposed user. Several of the lots do not have frontage on a public road so appropriate easements regarding access, parking and circulation will have to be provided. The minimum lot size in the SC zoning district was 3 acres. Under the PDO this provision would be waived. Staff stated based on the size of the proposed project, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was mandatory. This process was designed to identify significant environmental effects that may require a more detailed environmental impact statement. Staff stated based upon Chapter 4410.3100 of the administrative rules governing environmental review, a project may not be started and a final governmental decision may not be made to grant a permit, approve a project or begin a project until a negative declaration on the need for an EIS was made. While a draft EAW document has been submitted, the document had not been