My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-11-2016 Planning Commission Packet
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
08-11-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2019 9:24:13 AM
Creation date
9/8/2016 6:00:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
5 <br /> <br />2. Variance Request – Breakroom Expansion. <br /> <br />The applicant is also seeking a variance to accommodate the addition of a breakroom area <br />for the expanded facility. The breakroom location appears to be less compelling than that of <br />the industrial expansion. Breakroom areas can typically be designed for many alternative <br />locations. The proposed location may be convenient for the applicant, but does not appear <br />to rise to the level of “practical difficulties in putting the property to a reasonable use” as <br />required by the zoning ordinance. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATION <br /> <br />Based on a review of the plans submitted on behalf of Lapham Hickey Steel dated July 25, <br />2016, planning staff recommends approval of the setback variance for the machinery <br />expansion, resulting in a setback of 7 feet 9 inches as requested, with the following <br />conditions: <br /> <br />1. An updated floor plan showing manufacturing, office, and warehousing be submitted <br />to determine the amount of parking necessary. <br />2. The City Engineer review grading and drainage plans. <br />3. The City Fire Chief reviews the fire connections. <br />4. The applicant seeks alternative locations for the placement of the new breakroom; or <br />provide a narrative on the necessity of the location of the proposed breakroom. <br />5. The applicant submits a “simple subdivision” request combining the two parcels to be <br />processed by City Staff. <br /> <br />Staff does not recommend approval of the break room addition setback variance. As noted <br />in the report, there would appear to be a number of alternative locations for such an <br />expansion that would not require a variance. The ordinance test for variance consideration <br />in this case does not appear to be met. <br /> <br /> <br />pc: Heidi Heller <br /> Jessica Jagoe <br /> Steve Westerhaus <br /> Lee Elfering <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.