Laserfiche WebLink
REQUEST FOR ACTION <br />ver <br />To Item Number <br />Ci Council 5.1. <br />Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by <br />Communi Develo ment Au st 18, 2008 Jerem Barnhart, Plannin Mana er <br />Item Description Reviewed by <br />Request by Earl Hohlen for Conditional Use Permit Approval <br />(Zane Street Commons), Case# CU 08-17 -Public Hearing Reviewed by <br />Action Requested <br />Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit, as illustrated on <br />drawings dated June 30, 2008, with the following conditions: <br />1. All comments of the Public Works Director memo dated July 30, 2008 shall be <br />addressed. <br />2. All comments and conditions of City Environmental Technician memo dated May <br />19, 2008 shall be addressed. <br />3. The development shall meet all applicable fire codes. The Fire Chief shall verify the <br />location of all fire hydrants, and may require additional hydrants necessary to <br />preserve the health and safety. <br />4. Vacation of easements by Great River Energy to allow the site plan as proposed. <br />5. Provision of an easement to permit the encroachment of parking on City property. <br />6. Final platting of the property, including the payment of park dedication and other <br />fees. <br />7. Provision of a landscape plan per the requirements of Section 30-934. <br />8. One overhead door may be permitted, provided it is on the west elevation of building <br />#1. <br />Summary <br />The applicant is proposing two retail buildings, totaling 21,000 square feet, on the east side of 169, west <br />of Zane Street. No tenants have been identified to date. Full analysis is provided in the attached staff <br />report. <br />Planning Commission Discussion <br />The Planning Commission did not have any issues with the project as a whole. The majority of the <br />discussion focused on the applicants desire to have garage doors on the west side of the building. The <br />architect, for illustrative purposes, showed four garage doors. The applicant stated they only needed one <br />garage for a potential client. The commission recommended allowing only one garage door on what was <br />shown as Building #1. The stated they would like to see the garage door to be designed as an integral <br />part of the building and be screened as much as possible with landscaping. They did not specify which <br />elevation the door should be allowed on and staff would recommend that it only be allowed on the west <br />elevation. <br />S:\PLANNING MAIN\Case Files\CUP\CU 08-17 Zane Street Commons\CC staff report 8-18-08.doc <br />