2015-10-07_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 2, 2015 Page 2 Preliminary Plat 46 Mr. Paschke briefly summarized the project specifics with the proposal and pending 47 development to the Rosedale Center site as detailed in the staff report dated September 48 2, 2015 and shown on Preliminary Plat documents, essentially combining several lots 49 and creating one additional lot as noted. 50 PUD Agreement #3608 Amendment 51 Mr. Paschke noted that since the lots and their respective legal descriptions would be 52 changed, the PUD Agreement would need to be amended accordingly.Mr. Paschke 53 noted that this would include development of a 141,000 square foot building addition, a 54 450 space parking deck, and up to five out parcels that would be similar to the land lease 55 of Chianti Grill east of the Har Mar Mall retail strip center.Mr. Paschke noted the project 56 also included associated site improvements, including parking modification, stormwater 57 management, additional islands in the parking lot, and other amenities as detailed in 58 documents included in the redevelopment proposal. 59 Throughout his presentation, Mr. Paschke displayed various plan forms and maps 60 indicating the location of this proposed retail additional near the existing Green Mill 61 Restaurant location, and location of the stormwater management area and second floor 62 with parking deck and additional parking spaces. 63 Mr. Paschke reviewed several components of the current PUD Agreement needing 64 revision as part of the Amended Agreement, including zoning from the former “Shopping 65 Center” designation to the current “Regional Business (RB)” zoning designation providing 66 direction to staff in their interpretation of permit review including that of the new outlots to 67 meet generalized conditions within the PUD for consistency and with current design 68 standards including building setbacks related to property lines, building height and 69 design, and parking deck placement in relation to the property lines.Under RB zoning, 70 Mr. Paschke noted that building height would be limited to 65’ and he expected the 71 addition to be similar to existing building components for the anchor tenant as well as 72 related retail uses.Mr. Paschke advised that, as more detailed plans become available 73 for review, current design standards for exterior elevations would be incorporated into the 74 amended PUD Agreement and current design standards addressing building materials, 75 solidifying smaller retail sites or restaurants, or office uses versus the main building. 76 Mr. Paschke reviewed staff’s analysis to-date and how staff would address subsequent 77 plans during the process as plans were further refined, including square footage for 78 restaurant uses and parking stalls that appeared to exceed City Code requirements for a 79 typical retail mall.Mr. Paschke noted that given current zoning ordinance and design 80 standard requirements, future building plans for this proposal would need to meet those 81 revised standards to the greatest extent possible as staff worked with the applicant during 82 the review and permit process. 83 In conclusion, and as detailed in the staff report, Mr. Paschke advised that staff 84 recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat as conditioned, and amendment of PUD 85 Agreement 3608. 86 Commissioner Questions of Staff 87 Member Stellmach asked staff to explain traffic mitigation and whether this project would 88 incorporate improvements to bicycle and pedestrian access in this area. 89 Mr. Paschke advised that as part of staff’s review of the site, they would look to connect 90 pedestrians from County Road B-2 for better access to the Rosedale Center site and 91 surrounding area as applicable and as easily for them as possible with the fewest traffic 92 conflicts.As far as broader traffic issues on County Road B-2, Mr. Paschke advised that 93 staff would address existing concerns and issues, and suggest potential ways to remedy 94 them as part of this proposal. 95 At the request of Member Murphy, Mr. Paschke advised that the parking ramp was 96 proposed at one level by modifying of the elevation, estimating it to be 12’ to 15’ off the 97 ground, and connecting J. C. Penney’s and the new additional.With Member Murphy 98