City Council Minutes 1997 04 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

approved, them were certain representations made during that process having to do with the elevation of the parking lot in relation to the elevation of McCaslin Boulevard, screening of cars and headlights between McCaslin Boulevard and the parking lot and a 35' setback from McCaslin Boulevard. He asked the applicants to compare and contrast their proposal to those representations and the approval of the overall development plan. He wanted Planning Commission to take a particular look at that. Dan Blankenship, Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation, 1743 Wazee Street, Ste. 200, Denver, Colorado, stated that the parking lot is higher than McCaslin. He pointed out that there is a significant amount of landscaping being proposed between the parking lots and McCaslin. He reviewed the site plan. Howard moved that Council send Lot 1 to the Planning Commission with Council comments, seconded by Mayer. All in favor with Sisk and Lathrop being excused. LOT 2 Wood stated that Lot 2, RiteAid Corporation is proposing a 14,286 s.f. building for a pharmacy and foodmart with lot coverage at 22%. Open space at 28% incorporated the hard surface areas, which concerned Staff. Accessory to the building is a two lane drive-thru along the rear or west elevation of the building. The finished elevation of the building is proposed at 5,472.3 which is about 2' higher than Lot 1 and about 7' higher than McCaslin Blvd. No detail had been provided to show how rooRop HVAC units would be screened. Five sign areas were outlined on three building elevations, but no detail as to type and area of sign letters (no monument signs requested). The front parking lot encroached into what had been maintained as a 35' minimum landscaped setback between the adjacent parking lots and McCaslin Boulevard, which would be the location of the detention ponds for L 1. As a result the detention area in front of Lot 2 would be compressed in width requiring a retaining wall system to be dropped down into the detention facility. It was staff's position that the parking lot would not be fully screened from McCaslin Boulevard. Maintaining the parking lot to a point that provided additional landscaping area at the same elevation as the parking lot to McCaslin was an important issue for stafl~. Staffwanted the box-like appearance of the building broken up with additional building articulation, roof overhangs, and additional landscaping adjacent to the north and east building elevations. The PUD should provide additional information on site/building lighting, signage and trash dumpster locations, including enclosure. Davidson called for the Lot 2 applicant's presentation. Donald Slack, SEM Architects, Inc., 7935 E. Prentiss, Suite 102, Englewood, Colorado 80111, reviewed the site. Davidson called for Council questions. 5