Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />May 25, 2004 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Bobby Peterson, applicant and owner of the site, stated that the landscape plan has been <br />redone as suggested by staff and will be resubmitted for the City Council review on June 21. <br />He stated that he does not see a need for signage. Mr. Peterson stated that the landscaped <br />areas will be irrigated and that will be noted on the landscape plan if requested. He <br />is working with the City Engineer, T eny Maurer regarding his recommendations and that <br />those changes will be inc01porated for City Council review, as well. Mr. Peterson discussed <br />the exterior building materials, stating that they will have no problem meeting the City's <br />requirements. He noted that a standard curb should have been listed and that it is cost <br />effective to include the additional fifteen parking spaces now. He then discussed the <br />function of the second access and why it is being requested. Mr. Peterson noted that the <br />second access will only be used about once a week. <br /> <br />There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Stevens stated that he liked the design of the project. He stated that he had <br />some concern regarding the second access but that this a truck terminal and he understood <br />the need for it. He noted that the landscape plan may work better with two accesses rather <br />than one widened access. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pederson asked if the building materials proposed by the applicant meet the <br />City's requirements. Ms. McPherson stated that the requirements would be met if applicant <br />uses the materials on the front of the building and under the canopy as he has described. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pederson stated he concurred with Commissioner Steven's comments and <br />that he supported the second driveway based on the following: the project is located in an <br />industrial area, the second driveway would have limited use, it would be difficult to <br />maneuver a truck without it. <br /> <br />Commissioner Offerman stated he also supported the second access. He asked if staff felt <br />there was a need to sign the primary access for entrance only. Ms. McPherson stated that <br />the issue is having two driveways in a short distance. Staff will review the plan to make sure <br />the driveways are not excessively wide. She stated that it would make sense to sign the <br />driveway coming out of the building for exit only. <br /> <br />MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY <br />COMMISSIONER PEDERSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE <br />REQUEST BY BMS INVESTMENTS FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, <br />CASE NO. CU 04-14, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: <br /> <br />1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER SHALL BE ADDRESSED, <br />WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTION: <br />· TWO ACCESSES ONTO JARVIS STREET SHALL BE ALLOWED <br />WHICH CONFORM TO THE CITY'S WIDTH STANDARDS. <br />. THE ACCESS FROM THE BUILDING SHALL BE SIGNED AS AN <br />EXIT ONLY. <br />2. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL BE REVISED TO INCLUDE THE <br />REQUIRED AMOUNT OF SPECIFIC TYPES OF TREES. <br />3. ALL SIGNAGE SHALL COMPLY WITH THE SIGN ORDINANCE. <br />4. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED. <br />5. THE EDGES OF THE TRUCK TERMINAL AREA SHALL BE <br />PERMANENTLY DEFINED WITH SOME FORM OF LANDSCAPE <br />