Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Mr. Greatens provided an overview of maps and pictures of the site and surrounding area. He <br />stated that he would only go through the maps and pictures once, since the Conditional Use <br />Permit application and Subdivision application involved the same property. <br /> <br />Eric Kirchner with Cochran Engineering, representing MERS/Goodwill, addressed the Plan <br />Commission members and explained the proposal. He stated there were two parcels, one with a <br />former gas station and the other with a commercial building. He stated there was a cell tower on <br />the site which was to remain and the lease to be continued with an ingress/egress easement <br />provided. Mr. Kirchner stated they would be reducing the number of access points to Olive <br />Boulevard from three to two. He stated the proposed building was 14,429 square feet with a <br />truck dock in the rear with screening provided and a drop-off canopy along the east side. He <br />added that they would combine the two parcels. The parking required is 73 spaces and 76 spaces <br />would be provided. Mr. Kirchner stated that a ten foot landscape buffer would be provided to <br />the north with a vinyl privacy fence. He stated that water quality measures included pervious <br />pavement and bio-retention areas. A trash compactor would be located in the rear and <br />mechanical and HVAC equipment would be roof-mounted and screened. He added that a <br />landscape plan was provided and they would work with staff to finalize the plan. <br /> <br />Questions/Comments from Plan Commission members and responses included: <br /> <br />-What is driving Goodwill to move and expand? Mark Kahrs with MERS/Goodwill stated <br />that they had done a lot in the last ten years to improve their image, which was difficult at <br />the current facility, yet they wanted to stay in University City; the new building is the <br />direction they were going with their branding. <br /> <br />-Would the expansion allow a change to what is offered at the current location or would it <br />remain the same? Mr. Kahrs stated that the donation area was critical in the <br />consideration of a new location as they wanted to keep the donation area clean; the <br />current facility layout was not efficient and the new facility would help to improve <br />appearance. <br /> <br />-To what degree were surrounding business owners and residents to the north <br />communicated with? Mr. Kahrs stated they had not communicated with residents and <br />most communication was with the bar to the west of the new site. <br /> <br />-Regarding the former service station, were there any plans for addressing potential <br />contamination? Mr. Kirchner stated that a Phase 1 investigation was carried out, <br />resulting in some items which needed further investigation so a Phase 2 investigation was <br />done. He stated the tanks had been removed and minor levels of contamination were <br />found but it was nothing above DNR thresholds and none of it was traveling off-site. He <br />stated they would not disturb this area and it was fine to remain where it is. <br /> <br />-Would there be potential for additional contamination? Mr. Kirchner stated there were <br />no concerns for future contamination. <br /> <br />-Question for Staff: Is there a sense of what might happen to the existing Goodwill <br />location? Mr. Lai stated that Goodwill was currently leasing that property and if the <br />Conditional Use Permit was approved it would be up to the property owner of the current <br />Goodwill location as to who the new tenant would be. <br /> <br />The Chairperson asked if any members of the public had any comments. <br />tm; šE  <br /> <br />