pf_03113 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

j < i f I .. ~~ ! 4It January 16, 1991 . e CITY Of Ine.PLVMOUTH- Hr. Hike Brennan Ryan Construction. of Minnesota, 900 2nd Avenue South, '700 Minneapolis, HN 554QZ SUBJECT: INFORMAL REVIEW OF PLANS TO REVISE FOOTPRINT AND CERTAIN OTHER FEATURES OF THE -ROCKFORD RCAD PLAZA- (9005~(MPUD 89-2M) Dear Hr. Brennan: This will ackncwledge your meeting with the Development Review Committee on Tuesday, Janua~ 8th, 1991 to discuss your informal proposal to increase the total footprint of the subject shopping center 4400 square feet; reduce the outdoor display area 7000 square feet; and modify the development plan in several other areas. Based on the review of your informal plans the Development Review Committee offers the following comments: 1. The basic conceyt of increasing the footprint by 4400 square feet resulting in a oss of 7000 square feet of outside display area and 15 off-street parking spaces could be consid~red a -minor PUD amendmpntN and therefore subject to administrative approval. 2. The proposal to eliminate one of the screen walls covering truck delivery areas on the east side of the building would require a formal PUD plan amend~nt. A specific concern of the Planning Commis5ion and City Council in their review of this, plan wa~' the potenthl appelirtlnCe of the east elevation of the building to the residential neighborhoods located east of the site. Any modffication to ~hat elevation would t'te significant and requ ire a f onna 1 plan at~ndmen t . 3. The trash enclosure which has been added to the t:ast side of the building must have ~ door structwre with a specification CO~I!,;stent with the zoning ordinance. (2 inch thfc~ material minimum). 4. Your plans show the elimination of the shopping cart storage area which was In a landscaped area I)n the soutt! side of the Rainbow foods st.ructure. The elimination of this C;jrt storagf'i lirea has not been approved. You indicated thaf the cart s~orage area inside oflU1e Rai~bow foods has been increased in size to correspond with the elimination of the outdoor cart storage area. Please provide speciftc evidence of this s~bstftution. At such time as we have been .)bJe to review this proposal He wiJ 1 advise you as to whether a fonaa 1 PUD p J an amendment wi 11 be requ i ,oed or whether an administration approval wiil be possible. 5. Sheet A-8 of the Informal pJilns you submitted depicts \>'at1 ~ignage that appears to be 15-17\ of the wall area to which it is attached. Your approved PUD plan calls for a ~~xim~. of 10\ wall signagp. and no plans m~y be approved for siCJn instal1atlonthat would exceed this 10% maximum without an onendment to the PUO plan. 'I.~(':.t~! ,".' .~;'t""(-I;t'l \/^:;:", 1~'Vt.'<lrftlf "!"!".,r',~r'<"'!". r, t~. ... f f.,;,....;