Commission reviews 12×48 exterior freezer proposal at 301 S. Century Ave.; asks for stronger screening and design details

Plan commissioners discussed a site plan to install a 12‑by‑48‑by‑9‑foot exterior cooler/freezer immediately adjacent to the former Rocky Rococo restaurant at 301 South Century Avenue, and asked the applicant for more specific design and screening details before taking final action.

Planning staff described the proposed freezer as occupying the former drive‑through lane; the structure would attach to the existing building and have a single exterior door facing east. The developer told commissioners the freezer will be accessible from the building interior and that the corner protection will include bollards at each corner and additional bollards spaced along the 48‑foot length to protect the unit from plows and vehicle traffic.

Commissioners and the applicant discussed aesthetics: many asked if the freezer’s white aluminum exterior could be painted or trimmed to match the building’s stucco and stone facade and whether the red trim used elsewhere on the building could be integrated around the new unit. The applicant said the unit cannot structurally support a brick veneer, but can be painted and could include a red trim ring near the top to better blend with the existing building. Staff and commissioners also asked about hiding the unit behind fencing or taller landscaping; the applicant said taller trees were not proposed because several utilities (natural gas, electric, telephone and storm sewer) run under the planting area, so planting would be limited to shrubs and lower plantings.

Commissioners raised operational questions: deliveries are expected about four times per week and typically occur early in the morning at other locations, the applicant said. Commissioners also asked whether the outdoor door was for deliveries only (the applicant confirmed deliveries) and whether rooftop mechanicals would be added; the applicant said two additional mechanical units will be added to the roof.

Staff advised the commission it could either require the applicant to return with a detailed landscape and screening plan or authorize staff to finalize screening through administrative review. Multiple commissioners said they preferred to see more specific landscaping and aesthetic treatments before final approval. The applicant indicated flexibility on door placement if necessary to address circulation concerns.

Because the record shows commissioners asked for additional design detail and did not complete a final vote, the item remains unresolved pending the applicant’s submittal of refined landscaping/finish plans or staff authorization to approve enhanced screening.

No statutory or ordinance citation was introduced during the discussion; staff noted only minor engineering corrections (an incorrectly listed measurement and a drainage low point) that would be fixed in the plan set.