Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />March 26, 1996 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sullivan asked for clarification on Terry Maurer's comment <br />regarding the parking stalls near the yard entrance. Terry Maurer explained that <br />he felt customers may have a problem backing out of these stalls if there were a <br />line of cars waiting to access the yard. Mr. Prochaska stated these stalls will be <br />used primarily by the yard attendants and should not be a problem. <br /> <br />Commissioner Anderson asked if Menards planned to use speed bumps in the <br />parking lot. Mr. Prochaska explained since the traffic will be entering off the <br />street and making parallel routes throughout the lot, he did not feel there would <br />be a problem. <br /> <br />Commissioner Minton asked if the Police Department concerns had been <br />addressed. Mr. Prochaska felt given the geometrics of the plan, there would not <br />be a problem with lighting. Also, Mr. Prochaska stated the lighted product signs <br />on the wall of the building would be set on a time clock to go off approximately <br />1 hour after store closing. <br /> <br />Chair Dillon opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the <br />public, Chair Dillon closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Minton stated that two letters have been received which stated <br />concerns regarding the proposed Menards facility; one from Cheryl Becker and <br />one from Jeff Meyer. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Chair Dillon expressed his concern for hoses lying on the ground with the type of <br />sprinkling system proposed by Menards. Chair Dillon felt the City should require <br />the same type of sprinkling system for all developments to remain consistent. <br />Chair Dillon also expressed concern for the yard entrance canopy and felt some <br />type of building material which would be compatible to the Menards structure <br />should be used. <br /> <br />Discussion followed regarding the yard canopy, The Commissioners were in <br />general agreement they did not have a problem with the yard canopy as <br />proposed, with the exception of Chair Dillon. <br /> <br />Chair Dillon stated he felt the outdoor display should be located within the <br />outside storage yard. He noted Sax and Target requested outdoor displays and <br />were denied. Discussion followed regarding the location of the yard barn and <br />fencing display. Commissioner Sullivan stated she did not have a problem with <br />the yard barn display. She felt the type of storage was unique. Commissioner <br />Anderson stated when visiting other Menards stores, outdoor displays include <br />patio and lawn furniture, patio brick and other items. Mr. Prochaska stated <br />those stores had chain link fencing around the outdoor storage display area for <br />security and this area would not: therefore, those items would not be displayed <br />in the yard barn display area. Chair Dillon questioned if the display area could <br />become a security issue in the future. <br /> <br />Commissioner Anderson concurred with staff's recommendation for additional <br />landscaping along the fence. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND <br />APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY MENARDS, INC. FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT <br />