08-12-1981 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 2. Drainage and Utilities. In reviewing a survey of Parcel A and B of Lot 1, Block 1, Rauenhorst 1st Addition (see Exhibit 0), a drainage and utility easement was noted at the southern end of Parcel B. This was referred to the City Engineer for review, and he has indicated in a letter to the City Council, dated 31 July 1981, that since the easement was unnecessary, it has since been vacated. The Engineer may also wish to address the adequacy of existing drainage and utility service for the site relative to the proposed use. 3. Zoning Ordinance Requirements. The existing structure and proposed expansion are considered a permitted use within the I -1 District. The following items require particular attention: a. Setback Variance. The proposed structure conforms to the setback requirements of the I -1 District with one exception. The applicant has-requested a variance to the side yard setback along the eastern edge of Parcel B (abutting the Maaco property). While the Zoning Ordinance requires 15 feet, the applicant has proposed a setback of 7.33 feet to allow extension of the existing crane bay in the existing building. When we originally discussed this issue with Mr. Dougherty, we suggested that he explore the possbility of acquiring additional land from the adjoining property to the east. Mr. Dougherty has informed us that the owner is not interested in giving up any land but is not opposed to the 7.33 foot setback. In reviewing Section 922, which deals with variances, three items appear to apply to this request: (1) The variance is necessary due to the shape of the property .involved.. If the eastern property line were straight, the problem would not exist. (2) The property configuration is not a result of action by the applicant. Rauenhorst was responsible for the division of Lot 1 and the sale of Parcel A to Maaco. (3) The variance allows reasonable use of the existing building and the variance is the minimum variance necessary.' In considering this variance it should be kept in mind that the building represents a considerable expanse ofrwall area.- If the City views the request favorably, it may wish to require landscaping to break up the visual mass of the building.