My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-23-1989 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
08-23-1989 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2014 2:24:39 PM
Creation date
6/26/2013 1:25:55 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
127
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
Setbacks. The development proposal lies in conformance with B -3, <br />General Business District setback standards as listed below. <br />Front Yard <br />Side Yard <br />Abutting residential <br />property or public <br />right -of -way <br />Abutting non - residential <br />property <br />Rear Yard <br />Required Setback Proposed <br />40 feet 40 feet <br />40 feet <br />None <br />20 feet <br />40 feet <br />N.A. <br />87 feet <br />Landscaping. The landscape plan has been overlaid upon the <br />submitted site plan (Exhibit C). The plan reveals a major <br />concern along the site's norther boundary where no landscaping <br />has been provided. With residentially zoned property lying <br />directly north of the subject site, screening must be provided <br />along this boundary (Section 903.050.D.8.9). The plantings <br />should be of a variety which will insure an effective visual <br />screen. It should be noted that the landscape plan must be <br />accompanied by an estimate from a landscape contractor and a bond <br />for 125 percent of that amount to assure implementation. <br />Adjacent Residential Parcel. As mentioned previously the <br />development proposal under review does not include the <br />development of the 4.23 acre residentially zoned parcel which <br />lies to the north and east. It should be noted that if the <br />current project submittal is approved and constructed, <br />development of the said parcel will most assuredly become <br />financially unfeasible. Whereas, public improvement costs would <br />greatly exceed the return gained on the sale of the subdivided <br />single family lots, it would appear that if the residential <br />tract is to be subdivided, the applicant's previous development <br />proposal in April of 1987 (Exhibit F) stands to provide the <br />greatest opportunity for development. <br />Grading and Drainage. Prior to final site plan approval, the <br />applicant must submit a grading and drainage plan. The plan will <br />be subject to the review and comments of the City Engineer. <br />Signs. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a detailed <br />signage plan must be submitted indicating the size and locations <br />of all signs which are to occur upon the site. <br />Page 49 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.