10-21-1985 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ PAGE 9 ctobe~ 21,1985 COMMISSONER ACCEPT THE MOVED BACK LEFT TO THE PYLON SIGN COMMISSIONER 7-0. MERRICK MOVED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL BURGER KING SITE PLAN WITH THE 6' X 6' 20' SIGN FROM THE HIGHWAY AND WITH THE LANDSCAPING TO BE CITY STAFF, AND WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE 50' BE A MINIMUM OF 125' OFF OF THE INTERSECTION. WARNER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED COMMISSIONER MERRICK MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF EXTRA PARKING STALLS ALONG THE NORTH AND TO INCLUDE THE EXTRA ENTRANCE ON THE CORNER AS NOTED IN EXHIBIT 3 AS PREPARED BY THE BUILDING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. COMMISSIONER WILSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 7-0. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE BURGER KING SITE PLAN. COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAMS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 12. Cans~deca~~an_af_S~~e_elan_amendmen~_Eac_Bac~bel_eUD The Building and Zoning Administ~ato~ noted that the change would allow a 40,000 square foot Pamida Sto~e and a 10,000 squa~e foot Coast to Coast Store to be located to the South of the existing Ben Franklin Sto~e. He fu~the~ stated that the la~ge ~etail store would not have a negtive impact with the Downtown a~ea. He stated that the ma.io~ change is the L shape effect on the Cente~, which would change the mall f~om an enclosed a~e~ to an unenclosed area. Chairman T~alle noted that there had been no effort shown in the housing p~oJect on Barthel's part. M~. Ken Ba~thel stated that the o~iginal concept was fo~ 36 units and that the concept had been changed to 40 units and that it took time to process this because it was fede~ally funded. M~. Ba~thel stated he is expecting funding in approximately two weeks and that the single family housing is ready and does have funding available. Chai~man Tralle noted he was opposed to any changes until the housing is developed because of the stipulations stated in the develope~s a9~eement. Rick Breezee, the Building and Zoning Administrator noted that because Pamida is on part of Pa~cel G, the develope~s ag~eement would not apply. Councilmembe~ Schuldt noted that most of the building would be on Parcel N, not G. The Building and Zoning Administ~ator noted that this was not the point whethe~ the building was mostly on Pa~cel G or N, but whethe~ o~ not they should approve the concept.