Laserfiche WebLink
Memo to the Mayor and City Council/V 97-2 <br />May 19, 1997 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />by L&W Limited Liability includes materials predominantly steel sided <br />building on three sides with the front elevation a combination of steel, cedar <br />and some brick enhancements at the corner and four feet along the bottom of <br />the building. <br /> <br />The city's performance standards require buildings within commercial <br />districts to consist of 75% of approved materials such as brick, masonry, <br />glass, wood and/or approved architectural metal siding. The proposed metal <br />siding on the building would not be considered architectural metal, as this is <br />a typical metal siding found on many industrial buildings. Conversely, the <br />industrial zoning districts only require buildings to have a minimum of 25% <br />of the approved materials. Typically, this is accomplished by enhancing the <br />front elevation of the building which is adjacent to the road and leaving the <br />balance of the building as a metal skinned building and be consistent with <br />the long range plans for this area. <br /> <br />The applicant has proposed a building not meeting the commercial standards <br />in an attempt to compliment the existing building on site with similar <br />materials. Typically, the city has approved expansions of existing buildings <br />with similar materials; however, this is a new free standing building which <br />should probably meet the current performance standards and be consistent <br />with the long range plans for this area. <br /> <br />Board of Adjustments Recommendation <br /> <br />The Board of Adjustments discussed both variance requests and <br />recommended denying both requests. The Board discussed the <br />Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies of enhancing the east Highway 10 <br />corridor by meeting the current performance standards and by constructing a <br />free standing building, the architectural standards should be met. In <br />addition, since the parking setback of 10 feet was originally approved on a <br />previous conditional use permit, the Board felt this setback should be <br />maintained and that there is no hardship incurred to justify the variance. <br /> <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />It is recommended the City Council consider the following recommendations: <br /> <br />Deny the request for a 7' variance to the 10' parking setback <br />requirement based on the following findings: <br /> <br />The previous approved plans indicated the 10' parking setback <br />must be met as part of the upgrading of the parking lot. <br /> <br />s:XcouncilXv97-3.doc <br /> <br /> <br />