Laserfiche WebLink
File U2326 <br />February 12, 1998 <br />Page 4 <br />3. Is the slight reorientation of the trash enclosure acceptable? <br />4.Is the overall landscaping plan sufficient to enhance the neighborhood orientation in this B-5 <br />zone, as well as hide those aspects of the site which are necessary but visually negative (i.e. <br />the high retaining wall, the trash enclosure, etc.) ? <br />5.Given the Hennepin County approval of two entrances, and Planning Commission's previous <br />comment that two entrances appear necessary, does Planning Commission have any further <br />comments regarding access to the site? <br />6.Noting that one monument sign is deleted and the other monument sign and pylon sign <br />would meet the 10’ front setback, does Planning Commission have any concerns about <br />signage? <br />7.Staff has not identified any additional lighting plans in the recent submittals. Does Planning <br />Commission feel additional site lighting depictions are necessary? <br />8.Applicant notes that due to the extensive grading of the site, no existing trees will be <br />preserved. Does the revised landscape plan provide sufficient replacement trees to meet <br />Planning Commission's goals for this site? <br />9. Is the applicant's rationale for the hardcover variance acceptable? <br />10. Is the location of the pedestrian trail adjacent to the parking lot (rather than through it) <br />acceptable? <br />11. Does Planning Commission have any further general comments regarding the proposal? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Applicant has done a good job of addressing the concerns reviewed by Planning Commission m <br />January, in staffs opinion. This is a difficult site. <br />Planning Commission should review the applicant's new submittals in comparison with the January <br />16th staff comments, the January 23rd Wally Case comments, and the January 12th comments by <br />City Engineer Tom Kellogg. Planning Commission should then make recommendations regarding <br />the following general issues: <br />1 . Site plan and layout <br />2. Building design and facade materials variance