PC 03/25/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

~ Ron. CALL VOTE AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners McGuirk, Michelotti, and Chairman Mahern Commissioner Hovingh Commissioners Horan and Wright None Resolution No. PC-92-30 was entered and adopted recommending denial of Case GP-91-D3/PUD-91-D3 as motioned. UP-92-9. ShennAn PronertieslThe Saw Mill Application for a conditional use permit to allow a bulk furni located at 7116 Johnson Drive. Zoning for the property is Development) - Business Park District. Mr. Swift presented the staff report recommending approval of C conditions of the staff report. re retall establishment (Planned Unit UP-92-9 subject to the Commissioner Hovingh expressed concern about the signage for project and wished to ensure that banners and signs would not be visible from the freew y. Mr. Swift commented that some signage might be visible from the freeway; however, no pylon signs would be allowed on the site. ~ THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Mark Hirsch, 5000 Hopyard Road, represented the application. e felt that staff had given a thorough report; he noted that the Design Review Board will furth r address landscape and signage issues. He said Gem Langtry has prepared a traffic repo and is available for questioning, as is the architect. Mr. Hirsch noted that overall the traffic should not be impacted by the project as their business is done in mostly off- hours; staff is comfortable with the amount of parking that is provided. The onl problem he had with the conditions was with Condition 9 in regard to loading and unload' . He felt it would be impractical to limit deliveries to only the morning hours. He wen to the rendering that was displayed and suggested that as the building has four roll-up doo that they shift the warehouse entrance to the north rather than the south so that deliv ries might be made during the day without blocking the main entrance. He noted they only ve one or two deliveries per day for 15/20 minutes, and hence, would not be in violation any time restrictions. Mr. Swift said the issue really is that by using all the space in the rear of the building for parking there is no loading zone in the site plan. That means this would block one of the doors that would be normally used for the operation or for custo ers. He felt it would be better to block the northern driveway as suggested by Mr. Hirsch rather than the southern driveway. Staff would prefer that no driveways be blocked; how ver, with the projected Minutes Planning Commission March 25, 1992 Page 20