My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Packets
>
2001
>
06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2014 3:49:13 PM
Creation date
7/31/2014 9:35:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Packet
Meeting Date
06/27/2001
Env Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
155
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
Planning & Zoning Board <br />June 13, 2001 <br />Page 30 <br />block on the office portion of the building shall be either smooth burnished <br />concrete block or rock -face block. <br />Staff stated this originated in a request by the Planning & Zoning Board to revisit the building <br />elevation along the freeway. Because this was a very visible location, the P & Z asked for some <br />additional attention to aesthetics. In response, the applicant then submitted a revised south <br />elevation that included a custom "cattail" pattern in the concrete panels. Though the P & Z did <br />not see the new pattern, the revision was included in the project review by the City Council and <br />was specified in the condition of approval listed above. <br />Staff indicated North American Compsites had asked that this condition be deleted because of <br />the cost of the custom design. Instead, they had submitted a design that included a four -foot blue <br />stripe across the top of the precast concrete panels. The panels had a raked finish, just like the <br />original submittal. In addition, the design of the building had been reviewed somewhat. The <br />office portion exterior would still be decorative concrete block. However, the standing seam <br />metal roof on both portions of the building had changed in the new design. Instead, the new <br />proposed design had a flat roof for the warehouse portion. The office portion also had a flat roof, <br />but the east elevation incorporated a peaked facade. <br />Staff stated the footprint of the new design increased the footp t by about 500 sf, about a 2% <br />change. Staff considered this a relatively minor change. <br />Staff indicated because the cattail design was a con • 'on oapprovaf it would require action by <br />the City Council to change it Staff discussed the req ith the City Council at the June 6 <br />worksession. Council directed staff to bring the request e P & Z for a recommendation. It <br />would then to go the City Council at its June 2 <br />Staff recommended approving the ne <br />delete the sentence regarding the c <br />4. The warehou e <br />the buildm shall be <br />exterior eleons by <br />lading ;±- sign and revising the condition of approval to <br />"dition number four would thus read: <br />b„,e precast concrete panels and the office portion of <br />we concrete rock -face block as indicated on the <br />tiglich Construction, Inc., dated 5/1/01. <br />Chair Schaps invited applicant t hake comment. <br />Ivan Levy, presented a history of the project and thanked the Board and staff for all of their <br />efforts. <br />Mr. Zych made a Motion to approve the new building design and the revision of the condition of <br />approval, and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 5 -0. <br />Mr. Rafferty applauded applicant's efforts. <br />VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS <br />Mr. Smyser stated the draft Comprehensive Plan was available for review and copying. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.