Laserfiche WebLink
restriction. Due to some replatting in 1997, staff's interpretation of the side and rear yards has <br />changed. The result of this is that the applicant should obtain a variance to the rear yard setback. <br />The exterior of the finish on the building is proposed to consist of a combination of brick, <br />painted concrete block, rockface concrete block, and cedar siding with asphalt shingles. The use <br />of the cedar siding in the proposed addition would be consistent with the existing building, but it <br />does deviate from City code and requires Council approval. Staff was originally recommending <br />use of integrally color treated concrete block versus painted block but that would not match the <br />block on the existing building. Thirty parking spaces are provided, which is slightly deficient of <br />the thirty-four spaces required by City Code, but adequate for the use of the building. All <br />proposed parking and drive areas will be paved. No curb and gutter are proposed. City code <br />requires B-612 concrete curb to be installed around the perimeter of the newly paved area. Staff <br />recommended that the remainder of the current paved area also have B-612 curbing installed to <br />be in compliance with City code. It was also recommended that a curb be placed along the <br />northeasterly edge of the driveway to prevent erosion and drainage onto the adjacent parcel <br />which is located only five feet from the edge of the driveway. The Parks/Utilities Supervisor <br />reviewed the landscaping plan and has requested that some additional foundation landscaping <br />and variation in tree species from the salvaged trees. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Dempsey, to recommend <br />approval of the Boilermakers site plan contingent upon compliance with City Staff Review Letter <br />dated June 28, 2000 as amended, and obtaining setback variances. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Paul Pendergast, Boilermakers //647, stated that he can understand the <br />requirement of curbing the new portion of the property, but curbing the existing parking area <br />would be very expensive. He also noted that there is a portion of the new parking area that they <br />plan on expanding in the future and they would prefer not to curb that area. Community <br />Development Director Frolik replied that the City has granted waivers on curbing future <br />expansion areas, but all other areas should be installed with curbing. The reasoning for the <br />recommendation of curbing along the existing parking area is to improve the aesthetics along the <br />Highway #10 corridor. She questioned if the existing area was in need of an overlay. Mr. <br />Pendergast replied that an overlay was completed two years ago. Commissioner Johnson <br />questioned the applicant as to what would make the most sense to them as far as curbing. John <br />Keinz, Architect, suggested curbing the north edge all the way around the new addition. <br />Community Development Director Frolik suggested curbing both sides of the entrance and the <br />entire north side. Mr. Pendergast replied that he would have no problem with curbing the entire <br />north side, but on the south side of the entrance the landscaping would be impacted. <br />Commissioner Johnson stated that it would make sense to do some portion of the south side. <br />Commissioner Nixt inquired if there are any water nm-off problems. Community Development <br />Director Frolik replied no. Commissioner Nixt inquired if any staff member viewed the site to <br />check the condition of the overlay. Community Development Director Frolik replied no. <br />Motion was amended to require curbing on the north side of the parking area and waiving the <br />curbing along the existing parking area, as long as there is reasonable screening, until the next <br />overlay. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/July 10, 2000 <br /> Page 17 of 20 <br /> <br /> <br />