pf_02392 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Theodore Brausen, Case No. 2392 Page 2 drawings as "pre-colored stucco to match block over existing block". As explained in his letter, Mr. Brausen believes this may become a maintenance problem due to children in the neighboring apartments bouncing balls and other things off this wall. He proposes instead to paint the existing concrete block to match. Brick and stucco are acceptable materials in the City design standards; painted plain concrete block is not. We do not see a problem in using stucco instead of brick for the south building and had this been proposed in the original application we would not have opposed it. Painted concrete block for the north building is another matter. It is a material that is specifically mentioned in the design standards as not allowed. Throughout the PUD process we worked with the applicant to propose materials and other design features that met the City's design standards. If there was a potential maintenance problem with stucco, Mr. Brausen, his architect, or his contractor could have raised the issue in the many meetings we had on the project. This is the "back" of the project and will not be highly visible from the street, but one of the goals of the PUD process was to improve the project's image from all sides. On this and other issues (e.g., noise from the car wash and vacuum cleaner, screening of service bays) the image from the neighboring apartments was a concern. We do not want to force a maintenance problem onto B-Dale Amoco, but if the applicant cannot build what was proposed, discussed, and approved, then we feel it is up to him to propose another material that will meet both his needs and the city's design standards. One possibility is rock-face block to match the new addition to this north building. Signage As part of the service operation Mr. Brausen will sell tires and wants additional signage on the north building to advertise various brands of tires. The new sign would be on the west side of the north building, facing Dale street, below the AMOCO sign in the sign band. The sign would be 72 square feet in area. The approved building plans have a clearly-defined sign band on both buildings. The proposed sign would be outside this band and would increase total signage for the project by 23%. A comparison to the new sign ordinance standards and an underlying B-3 standard follows. Both buildings are included in the facade totals, i.e., the west facade of the south building and the west facade of the north building are totalled in the table to arrive at the "Total Facade" number for the west facades. The B-3 standard is noted, but the underlying zoning on the parcel was B-3 on the south and B-1 on the north. Allowable signage in the B-1