Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Chair Wietecki clarified issues of circulation, signage, trash enclosures and <br />parking. <br /> <br />Doug Kennedy, Franchise Assoc" the operator of Arby's, described the access <br />along back property lines, noting it is most heavily used at noon time. A public <br />access would be difficult because of other drive-through lanes in the area. <br /> <br />Doug Kennedy stated that the Arby's sign is corporate heritage/tradition. When <br />Arby's rebuilds, they keep the original signs, The new building will be set back <br />and less visible. The existing sign is more visible. <br /> <br />Kennedy stated employees and contractors parking will be handled off-site. The <br />31 spaces will be adequate in the off-season, <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked for the reason and the placement of the new store. <br />(Arby's hopes to keep its employees and customers during construction). <br /> <br />Member Harms asked, if the sign was such a contention and issue, would the <br />project go ahead? (Doug Kennedy: no). Chair Wietecki noted that this <br />Conditional Use Permit would require a new sign, meeting the current code. <br /> <br />Council member Mastel asked for an example of a similar designed building and <br />location (Hwy 35E and Hwy 96). <br /> <br />There were no comments from the public and therefore Chair Wietecki closed <br />the hearing. <br /> <br />Member Mulder asked what are the existing building setbacks along the street. <br />He also asked if the electrical and telephone poles/lines could be buried or <br />moved. <br /> <br />Motion: Member Wietecki moved, Member Harms seconded, to recommend <br />approval, based on staff findings and recommendations (as follows), of the <br />Conditional Use Permit with the exception of #6 stating that free standing signs <br />must meet the current code requirements. <br /> <br />1 . The redevelopment of the site as proposed will have a minimal impact on <br />traffic in the area, as the use of the property will not be changing. <br /> <br />2. The proposed redevelopment of the property as proposed will not have an <br />impact on parks, streets and other public facilities. <br /> <br />3. The redevelopment of the property as proposed will be compatible with <br />contiguous properties. Access and egress will be improved, sight lines <br /> <br />7 <br />