Laserfiche WebLink
installed by the developers at Great Northern Boulevard and Moen Drive as <br />recoirnnended by the traffic study. Mr. Tallon questioned if there would be a need <br />for a separate building for expansion. Mr. Cocco stated that the potential is <br />there for expansion. Mr. Tallon requested that the thirty five foot high light <br />poles in the parking lot be lowered to about 20 foot maximun because of the <br />adjacent residential areas. Mr. Cocco also clarified that the building will be <br />washed an all sides with ground munted.flood lights. The 9 by 36 foot sign with <br />the Moen logo faci.ng the freeway exit ramp will be backlit. Building Commissioner <br />Conway advised that the maximum wall sign allowed is 75 square feet and a <br />variance would be required. Mr. Coeco questioned the size of the signage on the <br />other developments in the area. He also clarified that the granite was more of a <br />terra-cotta color than the color shown on the rendering and samples would be <br />presented to the Architectural Board. There is a card key aacess system, but it <br />has not been decided if there will be security guards on the site. Parking lot <br />lighting is on a timed system. Mr. Thomas pointed out that once the road is <br />dedicated as they are requesting, the'City must accept the maintenance of it. Mr. <br />Berryhill believed that after the road is dedicated, the City would have more <br />control over the access points. Mr. Tallon pointed out that maintenance would be <br />a very expensive proposition, and although this would be up to the Mayor and the <br />Council, he questioned why they would agree to it. Several other points were <br />made: the traffic light would be trip activated; only a microwave.dish is planned <br />and will be screened; there will be no vehicle storage on the property; and no <br />buffering adjacent to the apartments is planned since tha.t complex is planning a <br />40 foot landscaped buffer. Mr. Tallon suggested they should at least add a row of <br />pines. It was clarified that there was approximately 500 feet from the western <br />end of the building to the multi-family residential property line. Mr. Neff <br />pointed out that the interstate is about 16 to 20 feet below the elevation of the <br />loading dock and would not be seen from the off-ramp, and this area will be <br />adequately screened,. but in lieu of a solid wall, the owners would prefer a heavy <br />natural barrier, such as scotch pine, heavier than is shown on the plan, Mr. <br />Orlo«ski would prefer the shrubbery. It was suggested that more landscaping be <br />installed adjacent to the State's chain li.nk fence. The Conunission recomnended <br />that they work with the City forester on this and that they would also prefer <br />some mounding along with the pineso Mr. Bradley, a resident of Butternut Ridge <br />Road, questioned if the building was constructed to allow for vertical expansion. <br />Mr. Cocco stated that the plans do not provide for constructing additional <br />floors, they intend that the structure will remain 3 stories above grade. E. <br />Bouman, a resident, questioned if the parking spaces shown are only for this <br />building and the proposed expansion, or would this parking accommodate the other <br />office building. This parking is only for this building. Mr. Conway advised that <br />the Architectural Board has agreed to a special meeting on April 29th and this <br />proposal would come back to the Commission in Ma.y. City Engineer Deichmann <br />advised that sidewalks would be required if the street is to be dedicated. B. <br />Gorris moved to refer the Moen Corporate World Headquarters facility to the <br />Architectural Review Board for their input especially that relative to the color <br />schemes and landscaping, paying particular attention to the landscaping along the <br />highway, and the landscaping immediately abutting the multi-family residences <br />that is now under construction, as well as their comments on the overall <br />aesthetics of washing the buildi.ng in light and the possible rntisance of that <br />light upon the neighbors to the south; also it is requested that the A.R.B. <br />review all the proposed signs; additionally this proposal should be referred to <br />the City forester for his input. At the next meeting it is requested tha.t Mr. <br />Berryhill update the plans showing the continual development of parcel "A" and <br />how that will dovetail into this development. This should also be referred to the <br />3