Laserfiche WebLink
ti <br />Planning Commission address the light issue. She further recommended that lighting be ? <br />code compliant. Ms. Wenger indicated the architecture of the building has not <br />significantly changed. However, if entrances are located on different sides of the <br />buildings, it could affect the layout. <br />Mr. Khouri showed the elevations indicating the plaza areas between Bldg C and D. <br />No modifications have been made to Bldg B. The developer wants to create a pedestrian <br />friendly loolcing plaza with landscaping and a nice traffic pattern. They want the area <br />small enough between the buildings to be attractive, and to encourage traffic to travel in a <br />one way direction. The applicant indicated that tenants do lilce like one way traffic. This <br />malces vehicle travel around buildings. More areas near Bldg D were created to allow for <br />sitting if the tenant warranted it. <br />Mr. Croolc asked the applicant to describe the proposed tenants. He aslced where the <br />front entrance would be. The applicant indicated that the tenant has not yet responded, <br />however, feels they may want a northwest corner entrance. The applicant said they are <br />trying to encourage sinaller restaurant-type tenants on the east side of Bldg D. He <br />indicated there is a sit down patio area at the southwest corner of Bldg C. <br />Ms. Wenger indicated to Mr. Croolc that because the sanitary sewer extension from <br />Westview Drive will run through the area, ?only pavement will be'installed in that area. <br />Ms. Wenger reviewed the applicant's need for 121 parking spaces, wluch exceeds what is • <br />required. The minimum requirement is 105. Oiie of the concerns voiced at the joint <br />meeting is that parlcing was added and public green space was talcen away. They <br />questioned what could be done to preserve the lifestyle feel. Ms. Wenger suggested the <br />applicant reevaluate the modified parlting spaces and designate more as green space. The <br />applicant stated the modified parldng was due to the tenant's necessity for easier parlcing <br />along Bldg D. Ms. Weiiger said a larger plaza could be created,'while still reducing the <br />number of spaces. Mr. Zergott suggested using an aluminum wrought iron loolc fence to <br />create a patio area. The applicant would lilce to eliminate the parlcing at Bldg C and <br />maintain the parking at Bldg D. Ms. Wenger thought the number of parking spaces <br />could be reduced at Bldg C and Bldg D wlule increasing the buffer. The applicant wants <br />to keep the drive aisle as wide as possible to prevent cars from having to baclc into them. <br />Ms. Wenger said if changes are going to occur, then we should not have more parlcing <br />spaces than are required from an aesthetic perspectiye., The planner suggested more <br />green space with less pressed concrete. Agairi, ?the applicant stated he ?would rather <br />reduce parking against Bldg C. At the joint ARB/Planning meeting, it was suggested that <br />Bldg C be mirrored similar to Bldg B. Removing parlting spaces would help create a <br />more plaza lookiilg area on the west side 'of Bldg C. The applicant stated it should be <br />determined by the type of tenant coming in and that has not been determined yet. <br />Mr. Croolc suggested more green areas with the use of decorative pavement, benches, <br />umbrellas and fountains be incorporated at;the;eastern side of Bldg D. The applicant said <br />he would happy to accommodat'e'wlia't the'Board'desires: Eliminating tlie spaces would <br />malce the area not as functional. The size is approximately 75' x 25'. Ms. Wenger said it ,