09-25-2019 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2 In addition, some cities will add a financial security requirement to both encourage the removal of the temporary building, as well as to cover the costs of City enforcement if that becomes necessary. For this aspect, a development agreement identifying the security and the City’s enforcement process and rights would be common. The City Council and City Attorney should determine the need and form of the security and agreement. Whether a financial security is considered or not, a brief written agreement should be utilized, as the statutory requirements for interim use require that the applicant agrees to the limited time period in writing. A standardized, recordable agreement is the best way to memorialize this requirement. Parking Supply. The applicant has provided two alternative locations for the proposed building. • Proposal Option 1 locates the building within the south parking lot, along the main access driveway. This location would be approximately 500 feet from Country Drive. It would have the easiest access to the main driveway, and would occupy approximately 15 parking spaces, based on the sketch provided by the applicant. This loss of spaces includes additional room for drive aisle circulation necessitated by the building location. • Proposal Option 2 locates the temporary building along the east building wall, near the southeast corner of the building. This option would occupy a similar number of parking spaces, and would potentially interfere with vehicle circulation around this corner of the site. With regard to loss of parking, the applicant indicates that the parking lot – currently with a supply in the range of 200 spaces – is much more than the facility is ever in need of. This aspect of the request should be verified, however based on available aerial photography, the site appears to be rarely even half full. Presuming this to be the case, the loss of the spaces in either scenario should not raise any issues. Planning staff would suggest that Option1 would be preferable for emergency vehicle access, both to the building itself and for access to the principal building. As noted, circulation could be affected by the Option 2 location, which would be problematic in the case of firefighting or other emergency response needs. Summary and Recommendation As discussed above, there are two primary aspects of the PUD that are being impacted by the proposed Interim Use Permit – the use of a temporary, rather than permanent, building, and the loss of parking space during the duration of the permit.