Agenda Packets - 2003/03/03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Broos reported that the east side of the street a certain distance back from the corner could be posted No Parking to maintain adequate visibility. If, however, parking were to be restricted along a certain distance of the east side of Greenfield Avenue, the vehicles currently parking in front of the business would in all likelihood shift further to the south on Greenfield Avenue. The property owner, Steve Farrell, has appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the proposed parking restriction, indicating that when he bought the property he did so with the intent of utilizing Greenfield Avenue for overflow parking if needed. There are currently no restrictions that would prohibit Mr. Farrell, his employees or clients from parking on the east side of Greenfield. The Planning Commission asked Mr. Farrell to examine and resolve the situation on his own so as to avoid a potential parking restriction. Mr. Farrell contacted the property owner of the adjacent land to the west (the former Tom Thumb site) to ascertain whether he would consider leasing some of his spaces to Mr. Farrell. The property owner was not willing to consider such an arrangement. Mr. Farrell was asked about car-pooling and ride share alternatives, to which he responded that his employees work staggered shifts and often are required to attend closings off-site, making ride-share and car-pooling impractical. Mr. Farrell indicated that he would be willing to add as many as four additional stalls to the parking lot, however doing so would require a variance in the permitted setback along Greenfield Avenue and would result in the parking lot extending beyond the property onto the City’s right of way. While possible, the Commission determined that such a parking lot expansion would do more aesthetic harm to the neighborhood than good. Even so, no application was made to expand the parking lot so no action was taken in that regard. At the Planning Commission on January 22, 2003, the Commission directed staff to inspect the area and take measurements from the corner of County Road I and Greenfield certain distances back from the corner: 150 feet, 300 feet, 350 feet and 500. Staff created a map of the area plotting the four distances on the map as Locations A, B, C and D. At the February 5th Planning Commission meeting, the Commission had indicated that Location A was unacceptable. Location B, at 300 feet from the corner, is situated across the street from the 7656 Greenfield Avenue, north of its driveway by perhaps 30 feet. There are no obstructions on the east side of Greenfield at this spot. Location C, 350 feet from the corner, is located almost directly across from the property line between 7656 and 7644 Greenfield. While there are no obstructions on the east side of Greenfield at this point, the driveway for 7656 Greenfield is at the south end of the lot and vehicles parked on the street could be an obstruction for residents backing out of the driveway onto Greenfield. Location D, intended to represent a 500-foot setback from the corner, is actually about 515 feet due to a driveway serving Greenfield Estates. After significant discussion at multiple meetings involving residents and the property owner of 2402 County Road I, the Planning Commission voted to approve resolution 718- 03, a resolution recommending approval of a no parking restriction on the east side of Greenfield Avenue, 350 feet back from the corner of County Road I and Greenfield Avenue.