04-17-2006 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

.� a; . � • � : � ;i � � � � �. �#06-3185 WJM Properties LLC ~"� ;April 14,2006 � Pnge 3 . � � � 2. The second facet of the proposal is to create a walkway connection between the two detached , truck garages. The attachnient will be of exterior materials siinilar to the pre-finished steel jconstruction of the existing easterly garage. In reviewing this with the building inspector, ' tlus is a.ii appropriate coiinection since it would be difficult to inake the comiectioiz with tip- ,� up paiiels. The coimection will be viifi.ially invisible fiom most a�igles,as it is merely filling ; a 10' space between two buildings, and will be of the same coloration as those buildings. �The total square footage of the combined accessory buildings will be 7,250 s.f. The building . inspector has advised the applicant to provide pla.iis showing how the connection will be ; made. � k . �3. The 200' x 200' parking lot extension approved in 2005 has been graded aiid graveled,but ; � has not been paved. The current plan would abandon(?)the south 100'x 200'of that parking ; area,and create a ilew 160' x 220' (35,000 s.f.)parking area directly south of the new main � ' buildiiig addition,plus a new 26' x 210' (5,500 s.f.) connecting driveway south of the i�ruck ; garage.The net result is about 20,500 s.f.of bihuninous hardcover over and above the level ` � of previous approvals. _ � { None of the proposed new parking area is close to lot lines. It is all more than 250' from the : � rear lot line. There is,however,only a limited vegetated buffer along the south property line, i � and staff believes this will disappear when the MnDOT drainageway along the north side of ' � the new Hwy 12 corridor is fuushed. The visual impact of losing this btiffer is not major; : there is one house south of the 12 corridor that would have second-story views of the parking ; � area, from a distance of about 850'. Glare from night lighting aiid stm reflection have a potential to be annoying... s It is anticipated that lighting for the new parking will be similar in style, height, etc to the = lightiiig on the remainder of the site. Planning Coinmission should consider whether any � � specific screening requirements should be placed on this new area of outside storage. � i � �4. The fourth element of the cui�rent request is for a CUP per Section 78-1366 to allow two(2) �� 60-foot high fla�poles,where the code would normally limit such poles to 40'. One will be . �� located directly behind tlle new momiment sign adjacent to Higliway 12, the second to be � located in the midpoint of the large easterly paxking area, about 450' south of Higliway 12 �, ' and 180' west of the east lot line. A 60' flagpole will be approaimately 4 times the height of :, ? the east fa�ade of the main building. As a comparison,the power poles along the north side ' of Highway 121iave beeii estimated by triangulation to be approximately 40' in height. � �. i Staff questions the need for flagpoles of such extreme height, as well as the need for two � such poles for a single site. Both are proposed to be for display of the .American Flag. � Applicant has iiot inentioned whetlier a corporate flag or other flags are intended for these � , poles. It would be iiiappropriate ui staff's opinion to use the Ainerican Flag as an advei�tising � tool or to bring attention to the site. Staff would note that the National Flag Foundatioii ' - suggests that for a 50-60' pole the appropriate flag size would be no more than 8' x 12'. �: ; , � ; .