Laserfiche WebLink
<br />None. <br /> <br />Commission Questions <br /> <br />Chairman Boulet is concerned with the fact that the Commission is being asked to figure out <br />which standards to apply to these buildings at this time. Boulet asked if they are willing to specify <br />the maximum percentage of the building that they can use for office or office-type uses that have <br />to be parked like an office in order to get in under the Industrial Guidelines. Mr. West is looking <br />for R&D uses, industrial uses, and warehouses. <br /> <br />Chairman Boulet is also concerned with the architectural treatment regardless of whether the <br />industrial standards are being applied or not. Boulet does not feel that the landscaping will be <br />adequate to shield a 30-foot high building that is table-topped. <br /> <br />Commissioner Klahn informed the applicant that the Commission is not going to take on faith that <br />certain things are going to happen, and does not see that this project would meet the sort of <br />standards that are typically asked for. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lipton is concerned with the architecture because they are still seeing the same <br />type of CTC projects instead of something upscale as talked about previously by the applicant and <br />the developer. He would like to see something a lot more interesting and less massive. <br /> <br />Staff Summary: <br /> <br />Paul Wood stated that with regard to how the zoning ordinance, in Staff’s opinion, how it <br />identifies office relating to parking demand, there is no differentiation between research and <br />development office than professional office. With regard to the process that they are in, the note <br />on the Business Center at CTC Final PUD does not preclude the process from starting at <br />preliminary if in fact the proposal does not meet the criteria addressed in both the Subdivision <br />Ordinance and the PUD Ordinance which specifies when you can and cannot follow the expedited <br />process. <br /> <br />Mr. Wood stated this project is in the preliminary process and that there is a 30-day timeline and <br />the Planning Commission is required to either approve, disapprove, or approve with <br />modifications. In the event that the Commission disapproves or approve with modification, the <br />applicant within 15 days may submit in writing to the Staff their desire to either come back to the <br />Commission or go directly to City Council. When there is a plat and a PUD they should be <br />processed together according to the ordinance and the City would not object at all to processing <br />an appeal for the applicant that included not just the Replat, but both the Plat and the PUD to City <br />Council. Therefore, Staff forwards a Resolution (No. 13) of disapproval of a Preliminary PUD <br />Development Plan and a Preliminary Replat to Planning Commission with findings number 2, 3, 4 <br />and 5, with the understanding that any reference to a SRU action in Condition No. 1 has been <br />stricken from the request. <br /> <br /> 3 <br /> <br />