08-22-2000 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes August 22. 2000 Page 10 . She noted that architecturally designed metal siding has not been included in the Class I and Class II list of materials. The Commissioners discussed the terms "facing" and "visible" , as well as an appropriate percentage of Class I and Class II materials for the front, back and sides of buildings in business park zoning districts. Ms. McPherson expressed support for the need to provide continuity in the choice of materials used, on all sides of a building. Commissioner Baker stated that he felt there needs to be consistency of materials used within a development. He felt that the buildings can look for different structurally, but have continuity in the type of materials, such as glass or brick. Chair Mesich stated that he felt it would be too restrictive to require that the same materials be used on all buildings within a development and would not want to see them all look the same. He supported having higher standards for the backs of the buildings. Commissioner Chambers stated that he felt the back of the buildings should have at least 50 percent of Class I materials. . Further discussion following regarding minimum requirements for use of Class I and Class II materials. The Commissioners were in agreement that it is difficult to establish these types of standards. Ms. McPherson suggested that the Commission could formally review each site plan, if they chose: staff would first review an application and make a recommendation for the Planning Commission to consider. Commissioner Pederson felt this process would add another level of "red tape" and would cause delays for developers. The Commissioners supported the proposed language changes for loading spaces/overhead doors and multi-tenant buildings. Chair Mesich suggested including an option to allow overhead doors on the front of a building with a conditional use permit. He also suggested including stainless steel as a Class I building material. Ms. McPherson asked what other information the Commission would like to have regarding building materials. She noted that there will be a number of requests coming in for site plan review, therefore, she felt it was important to adopt standards for the business park district as soon as possible. Chair Mesich supported the 50 percent Class II building materials for the backside of buildings. Commissioner Pederson expressed his concern for eliminating concrete tip-up panels in the Business Park zoning district. He felt that rake-face panels should be accepted in some circumstances. The Commissioners discussed architecturally treated concrete panels which are allowed in the Class II material list. . Commissioner Chambers expressed his concern for allowing an "all rock-face block" or "all stucco" building. He felt there should be some break-up in the use of materials. The Commissioners discussed requiring use of at least three different