Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2017 09 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 10, 2017 Page 6 of 19 Moline says it looks like Parks and Open Space Board reviewed this proposal. I note they made a comment on one particular item. Did their referral comments include other things that would be of interest to the PC? Ritchie says not to great degree. I attended both of those meetings. The applicant as well as myself presented the application by the Parks Project Manager, who made most of the presentation. We presented to Public Landscaping Advisory Board and Open Space Advisory Board (OSAB). OSAB talked about the tree species and the desire to keep native landscaping along SH42. The applicant did modify the landscaping plan after that meeting to acknowledge their comments. The City has future plans for a trail connection at SH42 and S 104th Street which will connect with regional trails and the Aquarius Trailhead. OSAB and Parks requested the grading plan be revised to accommodate a future City -installed trail. The applicant has accommodated that trail connection. Brauneis asks about the entrance drive on the east. Is it set back far enough from the road so that this location complies? Ritchie says yes. This is a very large site. Public Works has reviewed it and CDOT has reviewed it for their referral. The City Traffic Engineer reviewed it. They have no concerns. Brauneis says regarding size which is a big issue involving architectural detailing and signage size, if this was half the size/lot, would you generally find the same concerns? Ritchie says I would probably argue that we would still have equal concerns because you are looking at it in proportion. We don't have measurable standards in the IDDSG, so it doesn't say you need a minimum of 50 linear feet of accent material. I would argue that it doesn't comply. Rice says the way the ordinance was written with regard to these architectural enhancements, the language that is operative is "above the standards of the IDDSG" and focusing on the materials issues. What would that be? What they propose does not satisfy that condition. Ritchie says we talked about this internally. We hesitate to redesign a building for an applicant. We talked about options and included them in the Staff report. You could include some metal canopies or more windows. The applicant is constrained by the end user and their operational standards, but we think there are a lot of options for additional materials that could be used. It doesn't need to replace the structural element. It could be a cladding material or faced -on after. Rice says I presume your disagreement satisfying the above standard was communicated to the applicant. Ritchie says we had numerous discussions and meetings to try and see if there was a middle ground or different options. We requested enhanced photo representations demonstrating that the form liners or metal accent panels do meet it. We have not been able to review the materials. Rice says the reason we put this in the ordinance was because of the high visibility of the site. Zuccaro says for the CTC, the whole north boundary is either commercially zoned or industrially zoned, but the GDP for the industrial properties to the north was required to meet the CDDSG which has a higher architectural standard. When the applicant came in last year to rezone this parcel, which was zoned Commercial, there was the question of maintaining the continuity of a higher architectural design along the entire north boundary. Rather than rezoning it to Industrial to allow this use but still requiring the full CTC CDDSG, it was a middle ground. You don't have to meet CDDSG but you must meet something higher than IDDSG. Hsu asks if the Planning Department has an opinion on whether this design meets the minimum requirements of the IDDSG. Ritchie says we were not reviewing this proposal against the IDDSG, but we would argue it probably does. There is no measurable standard. It has the allowed building materials and some level of articulation. Hsu says with respect to traffic, how does this impact SH42. Usually we have some analysis. Ritchie says we included the applicant's traffic study in the packet so the PC can understand some of their operational traffic -related issues. Staff discussed traffic extensively and referred the application to CDOT. In addition to this particular development, the Metro district in the City is working on traffic studies to consider installing traffic signals at SH42 and S 104th Street as