09/26/2000 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

soften the appeaxance with landscaping. Mr. Hreha questioned if the trucks are able to get behind the building. Mr. Ports replied yes, there is.a service drive behind there. Trucks can not go in there and turn around they have to back out. Mr. Hreha questioned if the only entrance to that is west to east. Mr. Ports replied yes. Mr. Spalding questioned if there was lighting in the rear of the building. 1VIr. Ports replied there would be some wall packed lighting on the proposed building and maybe a security light, no pole lights will be in the rear of the building. Mr. Conway described the variances that would be needed. They will need a variance for the trash compactor, basically extending a business use in a front 75 foot setback. There is a 2% lot coverage issue and it should be stated that there was a variance granted two or three years ago when this project .was first submitted and they did not build the original square footage, so they are not as big as they originally proposed. Thirdly is the parking issue, in reality they have more parking thari what they had, but the way the zoning code reads and the way Mr. Conway has to enforce it, they are going to be about 400 spaces short of what they are going to need to support the entire square footage on the site. Mr. Ta11on questioned if the reason Mr. Conway can not use the cross parking is"because the mall akeady used it. Mr. Conway replied correct, when a development came through for an expansion on the mall that was identified as their parking and they do in fact own that land and that was used to calculate the mall itsel£ Mr. Hough commented that they have over 600 spaces that are in a cross parking easement arrangement with the mall. Mr. Conway suggested that the building department did not count the gravel area in their final numbers because it is not developed yet. . Mr. Ken Fisher came forward and explained that this parking arrangement has been in existence for a number of years and this proposal does not change it in anyway. Mr. Tallon commented that at the rriall they use the 4.5 ratio and here they axe using the 6.5 ratio. Mr. Conway commented that he was correct. Mr. Tallon inquired if they did the 4.5 here would it fall in line. Mr. Conway replied that it may, 4.5 is related to gross leaseable area, the 6.5 is related to 80 percent of the gross building area. The developer would have to make application to the Board of Zoning Appeals to get them to grant a blanket variance like they did for the mall. Mr. Spalding commented that he is a little concerned about the cross parking, if in fact the mall is going to put a building in that area adjacent to the proposed building then would they be in a position to also put a building in the other area where there is cross parking, they own it but we don't know how firm the easements are. Mr. Conway replied because when variances granted to the mall to exceed our lot coverage and they've pretty much maxed-out their parking as a relation to their proposed structure. Mr. Dubelko questioned the way Mr. Conway is viewing this in light of the situation at the mall, is that the parking presently at the riorth and south plaza development area is non-conforming, that they're 400 or so short based on the uses the people:at the mall have put the parking lot to. Mr. Conway replied yes, with a future expansion of the mall. Mr. Dubelko commented that he thinks that is something that the city has to acknowledge and deal with and get some type of vaxiance for. If you have a situation where the owners of the north and south plaza have insufficient parking and it is lawfully not conforming and for some reason they've lost their ability to use the cross parking at the mall, the city has to resolve it. Mr. Tallon questioned Mr. Hough if there has been any thought given to asking for a 4.5 instead of the 400 cars. Mr. Hough commented that this is the first time he's heard of this and he ran some rough numbers and came up with the"square footage they propose tonight they would need 2,930 spaces for a 4.5 ratio and they are proposing 2,907 so they are 23 spaces short under a 4.5 ratio. He thinks they would be able to come up with an extra 23 spaces. Mr. Conway commented what they would do is submit data to the traffic engineer, he would then review it ancl make a recommendation to the Planning Commission, who