PCP 07-06-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . Conditions for approval of 0 5-12 (emphasis added): I): The applicant shall sublllit revised plans complying with the comments from the Plan Review Comments section of this report (14A), for review and approval. . , 2) and 3): No comment 4): Only one business shall be permitted to occupy anyone lot within the developmenl.1f a business owns and/or occupies more than one lot, the appearance of the building an those lots, including signage, shall not be altered to consolidate the appearance and use of the building as one business. [Explanation: We object to signage (other than the freeststanding entrance monument sign) on building 26-30 that can be read from Highway 96 just across the pond, and which, in our view, would detract from the "townhome" appearance of the development. ) 5): No retail use shall replace the office uses proposed for the development. 6): Restaurant which are listed as special uses for the Neighborhood Business District shall not be permitted 7): No comment. 8): Add the following sentence: Include three or more of the southernmost parking spaces adjacent to Lot 20 among the 15 parking spaces or other impervious surfaces to be eliminated to . bring the Landscape Lot Area to not less than 35%, as recommended in items 4A (page 6) and 9A (page 10) of the Plan Review by skiff. and under 14A, Plan Review Comments, as item "j" on page 13. 9): Add the following sentence: Among other stimdards, wall signage for individual units shall be limited to six square feet. 10) and II): No comment. 12): Add the following sentence: Specifically, the lighting pole west of Lot 20 shall be eliminated or moved to at least 60 feet from the south property line to limit its visibility from the residences at J 389 and 1390 Arden View Drive. /3) to 21): No comment. 22): With the provisions added to Condition 4 and Condition 9 as recommended under those numbers above, Condition 22 becomes irrelevant and should shnply be deleted. 23): Revise the plat to show the larger than standard radii (50-foot recommended) on the northwest and southwest comers of the Hamline Avenue/Karth Lake Circle/Site Access, intersection as recommended by the traffic study (Attachment 4b-3) on page 14 of that attachment, and stated to be concurred in by the County under 14A, Plan Review Comments, as item "p"' on page /3, and require those radii to be constructeq. .