Laserfiche WebLink
-194— <br />existing one lot. The southern lot is proposed to be redeveloped with a multi- tenant retail <br />facility and the northern lot is proposed as an outlot, with the possibility of developing an <br />office building on the property at some point in the future. All drainage, utility, trail and <br />access easements have been shown on the plat or written in an easement agreement to be <br />recorded with the plat. Mr. Trudgeon stated the Planning Commission met on August 2, <br />2007 to discuss the request for sketch plan of the Sunfish Development plat, and <br />recommended approval of the minor subdivision of Sunfish Development. Staff <br />recommends approval of the minor subdivision, contingent upon compliance with the <br />City Staff Review Letter, revised September 7, 2007. - <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon stated the proposed site plan for Sunfish <br />Lake Development indicates the development of a 12,800 square foot, multi-tenant retail <br />building to be developed on a 1.5 acre -lot. The site meets all setback and parking <br />requirements for the B -1 Business District. The plans have been revised to reflect an <br />additional 15 feet of maneuvering space between the western row of parking near the <br />drainage pond. The drainage pond will serve both lots. A grading and drainage plan has <br />been submitted and requires a couple of minor changes. A landscaping plan has been <br />submitted; and staff has requested a revised landscaping plan that includes the addition of <br />more landscaping to the parking areas. The applicant has not objected to this request. Mr. <br />Trudgeon stated staff recommends site plan approval, contingent upon the Staff Review <br />Letter and all of the other approvals. <br />Councilmember Jeffrey stated he applauds the right - in/right -out, but that does not mean <br />that any future tenants might not be angry. He suggested sending a letter to the applicant <br />acknowledging that the right- in/right -out is coming, and that the tenants should be <br />notified about the hard channelization. <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon indicated staff tried to reference this in the <br />Staff Review Letter, but it would be a good approach to write a letter requesting the <br />applicant to share this information with the future tenants of the facility. <br />Councilmember Dehen stated he does not oppose these changes. The concern he has had <br />is looking at the struggle that the businesses have had on Highway 47 and Bunker Lake <br />Boulevard, and the same type of situation will occur with this particular building. There <br />are vacancies and access issues where people have to make u -turns to get into some of the <br />buildings on the corner of Highway 47 and Bunker Lake Boulevard, and they are creating <br />a similar situation here. Although he does not oppose it, he is a little bit concerned about <br />limited access places such as this one. It may be for Mr. Wayman to make that <br />determination on what he wants to put in there, but his concern is that they have vacant <br />buildings when people have . access issues to get into them, particularly in retail spaces. <br />Councilmember Elvig stated he echoes the concerns, but the philosophy of breaking this <br />into two lots does a disservice to the whole concept. To have a break in the two <br />properties in the center with the access in the center makes sense for the initial building, <br />but if the access were to be moved to the north end of the property they may be able to <br />convince the County to allow a left hand past that channelization. Knowing that is <br />