09-16-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 • August 19, 1998 Peterson asked the applicant how they intended to meet staffs recommendation that the east side drive have a minimum ten-foot setback. John Trumble, Setter Leech and Lindstrom, project architects, stated t• 0-f. rive aisle and zero setback, as requested in the development review, was fel to be th-' • G•c situation for the facilities operation and requested the Commission to co$ 9 this -,47014,56,144f �g ' ..+ this request only. SYSCO has calculated dimensions needed for the s i '' of its vi = $� 4� ees, and truck drivers and the dimensions requested on the plan i k$ ' ated the � ies achieve these safety dimensions. Obert suggested a container wall on the east side drivew• Y - that no pollutants entered into the wetland from the SYSCO facility. ` s z<; Mr. Trumble stated there were aesthetic issues as � operate. hat would not allow this type of structure. Miller asked how many new employees w $ be adg s planned expansion. ;,:; • Mr. Trumble stated an additional -ople, •0 450 0, would be added as a result of the expansion. Stevenson st ted he would •. or of e i g, G ,Ostipulation requiring a ten-foot setback as recouune • • � staff to �• .•date th $• �' . s dimensional requests (50-foot-access- drivewa • i..t are • 0 safety needs of SYSCO's visitor, employees, and truck drivers. ; Brasaemle ask • . i opose• "• storage would be and if the original PUD had requireme or snoii,q., e`n_:: Mr. ` mble stated p. a` r ces are sacrificed so that snow storage can be accommodated.•Eric-•n stated there is .cis specific requirement in the PUD for snow storage other than the issue $: •ressed and a . be stated by the developer. �.$ r.40 the recourse would be for a property owner pushing snow into a protected wet •1�, a r Jopke stated it would be an issue for the City's Code enforcement and the violation would subject the perpetrator to fines. MOTION/SECOND: Obert/Brasaemle to approve Resolution No. 555-98, a Resolution •