Laserfiche WebLink
8. Is the Planning Commission satisfied with the number and locations of viewpoints <br />for the analyses? <br />Chairperson Arkin noted that had been discussed. <br />Commissioner Fox believed it would be good to retain the open space so the animals <br />could remain. <br />Chairperson Arkin agreed with that opinion. <br />Ms. Decker advised that staff would return to the Commission with this information as <br />well as some azchitectural visuals. She noted that staff would continue to address the <br />potential to move the EVA, if it is still required by Life Safety Services. The City's <br />intent to develop or manage the triangulaz piece would also be brought back before the <br />Commission. <br />No action was taken. <br />The Planning Commission recessed for a break at 8:47 p.m. <br />Chairperson Arkin reconvened the meeting at 8:57 p.m. <br />c. PREV-539, Dave Johnson/Home Depot <br />~--- Work Session to review and receive comments on an application for a preliminary <br />review to construct a Home Depot store, three multi-tenant retail buildings, one <br />drive-through restaurant, and one self-service gasoline station and convenience <br />market, totaling approximately 181,904 square feet in floor azea, on a vacant 14.7- <br />acre site in located at the southeast corner of Stanley Boulevazd and Bernal <br />Avenue in the Stanley Business Pazk. Zoning for the property is PUD-C (Planned <br />Unit Development -Commercial). <br />Ms. Decker summazized the staff report and detailed the layout and background of this <br />application. She noted that the noticing radius for this project faz exceeded the <br />requirements. She emphasized that the displayed site plan did not reflect any agreements <br />or decisions regazding the road or traffic modeling or analysis; staff was still working on <br />the preliminary traffic impacts. Staff would like to heaz from the Commission to <br />determine if the uses aze supported by the Commission to have the Home Depot and this <br />retail use at this corner, to examine the circulation of the site, and to examine the <br />architecture. Staff found that the azchitecture on the corner was quite pleasing. Staff <br />would like to heaz the Commission's opinion on the tower elements and whether the <br />buildings should be separated more. Staff noted that pazking was more than adequate <br />according to Code; however, the applicant has requested more parking onsite. The <br />drive-through restaurant was not anticipated to be a fast food restaurant. She noted that <br />traffic circulation and ingress/egress issues were critical to the plan. <br />T <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 11, 2006 Page 10 of 19 <br />