Laserfiche WebLink
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Cleveland, Trites Rolle, Brauer, <br />Hunt, Levine, and Van Scoy. Voting No: None. Absent: None. <br />Case #6: Request for Site Plan Review of Cullinan Rigging, Inc.; Case of Cullinan <br />Rigging, Inc. <br />Management Intern Gladhill stated Cullinan Rigging has applied for site plan review for the <br />development of a 40,920 square foot office /warehouse facility in the Ebony Addition. Mr. <br />Gladhill stated the site plan complies with the front yard, rear yard, and side yard setbacks <br />established in the E -2 Employment District. Lot coverage has been calculated at 19 %, which is <br />under the 40% maximum lot coverage restriction established in City Code. The site will derive <br />access from Ebony and McKinley Streets. The off - street parking and maneuvering areas will be <br />surfaced with bituminous paving and finished with concrete curbing. The site plan is proposing <br />sufficient parking stalls. <br />Management Intern Gladhill indicated the proposed precast panel material on the exterior walls is <br />permitted in the E -2 Employment District. The grading and drainage plan is generally acceptable <br />with the revisions outlined in the City Staff Review Letter. The landscaping plan is generally <br />acceptable in accordance with the revisions outlined in the City Staff Review Letter. Mr. <br />Gladhill indicated the applicant has requested that leniency be given in the landscaping plan. <br />This will be a tax increment financing project. <br />Mr. Dennis Sharp, Sharp and Associates, stated he is the general contractor for this project. <br />Everything that has been indicated in the Staff Review Letter is acceptable. Mr. Cullinan asked <br />him to bring up that this is a sizable lot and the landscaping is pretty extensive; he would like to <br />know if they could do something to cut the landscaping down to a certain extent. With the <br />extensive landscaping and the irrigation that is required they are looking at $50,000 worth of <br />landscaping. <br />Management Intern Gladhill stated one option would be to reduce some of the landscaping <br />requirements with a revised landscaping plan. The second option would be to save money by <br />waiting to do the landscaping and getting a cheaper price on the plants; that would be acceptable <br />with this landscaping plan. <br />Mr. Sharp stated Mr. Cullinan had suggested that they wait until spring to do the landscaping, <br />and then maybe plant dry root, and that rather than 2 1 /2 or 3 inch trees to plan 1 ' / 2 inch trees to <br />save on costs. <br />Management Intern Gladhill indicated this would need to be discussed with the Environmental <br />Coordinator. <br />Chairperson Nixt indicated he would ,recommend approval with the caveat that the applicant <br />work with staff regarding an acceptable landscaping plan that is modified or phased. He noted if <br />the landscaping plan is ,modified a variance will be needed. <br />Planning Commission/ June 7, 2007 <br />Page 17 of 31 <br />