Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Site Plan topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission reviews tentative rebuild of 9,660‑sq ft contractor building at 8535 Industrial Drive

Village of Big Bend Planning Commission · August 23, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Village of Big Bend planning staff described a proposed 9,660‑square‑foot, five‑unit building for contractor use at 8535 Industrial Drive and recommended approval contingent on a scaled site plan, a survey to confirm setbacks, drainage and parking clarifications, and other standard conditions.

The Village of Big Bend Planning Commission reviewed an application from Damon Peterson for a site plan and plan of operations to reconstruct a contractor construction and landscaping building at 8535 Industrial Drive. Planning staff described the project as a roughly 9,660‑square‑foot, five‑unit building with a 145‑foot length and 27‑foot height and said the submission lacks a scaled, dimensioned site plan and survey.

"We've received this from Mr. Peterson — an application to construct, it looks like to be a 9,660 square foot building," the planning staff member said, noting the plans did not include a dimensioned site plan or full drainage information and recommending conditions of approval.

Staff told commissioners the property is in the I‑1 industrial district and that the code requires a 50‑foot front setback and a 15‑foot side setback for new structures. The staff member recommended, as a condition of approval, that a dimensioned and scaled site plan completed by a surveyor be provided to the zoning administrator prior to building occupancy so the commission can confirm compliance with setback and open‑space requirements.

Commissioners discussed tenant mix, parking and waste handling. Staff said proposed tenant spaces would range from about 1,500 to 2,400 square feet and that converting former parking into garage stalls would reduce current parking capacity. "Industrial/warehouse uses generally require one space per employee and one space per 300 square feet of office," the planning staff member said, adding that the commission may grant relief under section 16.16(b) if the existing lot conditions warrant a waiver.

A commissioner noted potential changes in use if an auto‑repair tenant leased a unit, which could trigger additional ventilation or code requirements before occupancy. The fire inspector also raised concerns about how an auto‑repair use could affect parking and mechanical needs.

The applicant asked the commission for a tentative approval so work can proceed on state‑approved construction plans and a survey without returning to the commission for a month. "I'm looking for basically a tentative approval from the planning commission tonight with contingencies that all the state approved plans and the survey are provided," the applicant said.

Staff flagged several other conditions the commission could require, including architectural façade standards (the code calls for a percentage of finished façade material facing the street), screening for HVAC and mechanical equipment, and a fenced or screened dumpster enclosure. Staff estimated the site currently has about 8,000 square feet of landscape area — roughly 18% open space — which would satisfy the I‑1 requirement to retain 15% open space if confirmed by a site survey.

Next steps: the commission discussed and indicated support for moving forward subject to conditions and for staff to verify a scaled site plan, survey, drainage details and any required erosion‑control permits before issuing zoning/building approvals. No final building permit will be issued until those items are submitted and verified.