Laserfiche WebLink
Attachment B <br /> <br />Mr. Paschke concurred, using the recent FedEx buil ding of County Road B-2 and Transit Avenue as a <br />classic example of that last sentence to support their metal panels with stucco finished, of a higher quality <br />than their original proposal for corrugated metal. While this raised the construction cost for them, Mr. <br />Paschke spoke in support of the material and design achieved to enhance overall aesthetics in the <br />community. <br />At the request of Member Cunningham, Mr. Paschke clarified that this would apply to all Commercial, <br />Mixed Use, Employment (Industrial and Office Park), Institutional, and Park Districts city-wide. For those <br />businesses in Neighborhood or Community Business designated districts, similar to the funeral home <br />application heard earlier tonight, Mr. Paschke clarified for Member Cunningham that they would not be <br />allowed to use aluminum siding either. <br />To address Member Cunningham’s concerns in why aluminum siding was not allowed, Mr. Paschke <br />reviewed the difference in typical residential applic ations versus that in commercial or industrial <br />applications and their differences in design. Mr. Pasch ke noted that most comm unities looked at those <br />commercial areas as requiring a higher level of design and materials that would exclude residentially <br />designed exterior materials. <br />Regarding a commercial business desiring to blend in with a neighborhood through use of residential type <br />materials, Mr. Paschke staff would still be able to review each case, and depending on the actual <br />location, a co-mingling of materials may be appropriate and could be approved; and opined that this <br />recommended revision would not necessarily preclude that from happening. <br />Member Boguszewski provided an example if an existing funeral home was demolished by an Act of God, <br />and their preference was to rebuilt looking like a large home to provide comfort to families; and that they <br />wanted to use aluminum siding, shingles, etc.; and suggested that this was Member Cunningham’s <br />concern that this clause may preclude that happening. However, Member Boguszewski noted that the <br />owners could bring their design to the Community Development Department explaining their rationale in <br />preferring a residential look, and whether there was a process for them to accomplish that desired look. <br />Mr. Paschke opined that this clause didn’t necessarily preclude that happening and actually could allow <br />for a broader or more flexible interpretation. Mr. Paschke questioned whether the previous definition <br />would have allowed aluminum siding for a new funeral home; however, opined that hairs were being split <br />again. Mr. Paschke further opined that in his opinion, it was better to provide for better direction and <br />greater clarification for the intent of the previous ordinance language by eliminating those things not found <br />desirable, while allowing flexibility for staff to work with them for similar products and new materials. <br />If the Commission remained uncomfortable with the pr oposed language, Mr. Paschke noted that there <br />was no rush to move this forward, and suggested more review and tweaking by staff. Mr. Paschke <br />opined that he was quite confident that residential type lap siding was not desired in a Regional Business <br />District, where the potential would them be for it to be wrapped all the way around a strip mall, as an <br />example. Mr. Paschke expressed his preference for other design components closer to a street, but <br />noted that there were many nuances in code, and he was not sure how best to cross that bridge. Mr. <br />Paschke advised that he understoo d the concerns expressed by Me mber Cunningham. However, unless <br />restricting it to a specific District, such as the Neighborhood Business section where materials could be <br />slightly different and may allow for a commercial grade metal siding, Mr. Paschke advised that staff could <br />reconsider that; however, he could not advocate for it in other Districts. <br />Member Daire opined that, from his perspective, staff’s choice of words was close to genius, by including <br />“may be” as that indicated that some things may be permitted or encouraged, while allowing for flexibility. <br />Mr. Paschke concur red with staff’s intent with that wording, noting that they had attempted a potentially <br />broad selection of materials.