05-20-97 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Johnson said there is an overhead garage door on both sides of this building. All the wholesale business before the construction of Campus Drive occurred along the border. Campus Drive allows some of that activity to be moved to this side of the building. The door was the only access to the storage area. Now we can move some of the traffic. We are looking at a site plan that had elements that do not require a variance but on which we are also asking for concurrence. Our suggestion is that the Planning Commission would say, based on what we know tonight, this is what we think should be done. This may become an issue that is resolved by the City Council. Changing the excess of the driveway for truck traffic solves the problem of trucks turning around on the site. It improves the traffic access and shrinks the entrance. The driveway becomes part of the solution. Baker stated he is concerned about the parking issue. Baker said he could not approve any plan without seeing the parking plan. The nonconformity in the parking must be addressed before anything else can be addressed. If 34 stalls are needed for the existing business, then 34 stalls should be on the site. Johnson pointed out the area the parking area would have to be moved. That cannot happen because the business needs parking in front of the building to survive. We would like to preserve as many parking spaces as possible. The plan we are suggesting provides 28 of those 34 stall in front of the building. We have not considered the area along the north side because it takes up great space and is part of the parcel adjacent to it. The applicant does not want to expand the asphalt to that area because it moves the customers a long distance from the front door to the business. There is not public access along the side of the building. The side of the building is for product delivery. It would be like bringing your customers to the back door. We are trying to preserve as many parking stalls on the existing parking lot. We do need more than 17 parking spaces in the front of the building. Baker stated Johnson’s comments are irrelevant as to Campus Drive. The parking lot has to be addressed along with any addition to the building. Campus Drive would have no bearing on the parking lot. If the applicant built addition A, the parking lot should be conforming. Johnson asked if Campus drive would require the relocation of the driveway. Baker responded affirmatively. Johnson stated that, once we relocate the driveway, the whole parking lot is altered. Baker stated that Pletscher’s is proposing three new buildings on the site without correcting the nonconforming parking lot. Johnson said there is a total of 52 feet from the edge of the existing asphalt to the curb sidewalk that exists there today. The 18-foot setback from the existing driveway line to the parking would then become smaller. Johnson said Mattila told them it would be an expansion of the nonconforming use. The stalls work as they are even though they do not meet the parking standards. The 64-foot size is ideal, but other sizes do work. Baker stated that, if the applicant removed eight stalls on the west side, only four parking stalls would be lost. It would not be much of a hardship to correct the parking nonconformity. Schiferl asked if Baker meant that, if any of the additions are made, parking would increase. Baker answered no he did not. Baker said that the City could require the applicant to correct nonconforming parking when any building addition takes place. Schiferl asked if the Planning Commission can require the nonconforming parking be brought into compliance, but must we require it? Mattila said the Planning Commission must require the nonconformity be corrected to the greatest extent practical. Zisla pointed out that “the greatest extent practical” may not be complete conformity. Mattila said they are proposing a 52-foot parking area. Currently the parking is 18 feet from Old Highway 8 right-of-way. The Planning Commission and the City Council would probably want to maintain that 18 foot landscaped area and not encroach into it any further. It appears that, if the sites were combined, there would I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\1997\05-20-97.WPD 4