1978-12-13 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dacembar 13, 1978 P86e 2 Although Offioial Rose a~reed that lt would ba imposeible to legally en- Eorae owner oooupancy of townhousee, by nature that ia moet always the faot. OfYicial Roee rupurCad that 5tafr had conduceed a eurvey of seven ~communitiea and found Chat all allowed two curb cute for R-2 and R••3 usae, He added that Staff had diecuesed it with t~a Police Chief, who telt that Cwo curb cute would not preeent a traffir prublem on a typical residentbai etreac. Ofticial Rose etated that a maximnm width of 12' for each curb cut or a~oint meximum width of 30' wae falt to be pr~cticaL, keeping all cuta a minimum of 50' from interscct•ione, A minimum oeparatian oE 40' could aleo be raquired for eaparate aure. Officixl Rose added that tha requaet for two curb cuta would raquire a variance and/or an ordinance change, Official Roee reported that the applicant haa requeeted turnarounde ~o pravent backing out txaEfic. He stated it could detxact from the overall looke uf the properCy but if properly done with connectin~ eidewalke and ecreening and so forth, could be basically unseen and very use£ul, Officia!. Roee reported that eight parkiug epaces would be provid~~, four ' garage nnd four outdoor, ae rzquired. lie added thaL- a de~rel.opmene sgzee- ' ment would incl.udQ concrete curbing, three plantinga at a minimum 2" at i breaet ha.ight, concrete sidewulk and bo~;d or eacrow of $3,000. ~ Official Roee xecommended the request be approved with ordi.nance changes , to k0,02, Sub. B~~34 to eCate that the tndividual dwe111ng units may have ~ eeparate or joink entrancee, and 40,07 Sub. D 8 f to state that in R-2 and R-3 uses, two cvrb cute would ~e permissuble witl-, maximum widthe of ~ 12' and a 40' aeparation, with a eingle maximum 30' cuC for. ~oint ueage. i Mr. Beneon atated ho would like to go wit.hout the two turnarounds in front ~ ae he felt they would be uaed for parking epaces rather than turnaroundo, ~ Commieeion Member Fedor asked what zoning the development would be, OfEi- ~ cial Roee r.eplied tha.t it would ba R-3, mulr,ipl.e dwelling. Mr. Senson stated he would like to go wi*_hout any curbing at all due to ~ the cost, or if neceesarp, bituminous. He pointed out that the triplex ~ would be juse one etep ovar a duplex. ~ Co~nies3an Member Burmeister etated ehe would not be in favor of bituminoua ! curbing ae it deteriorates very quiclcl.y with heavy use. 4 Commieeion Member Glazer pointed out that if the develapment is to be j claesiEied multiple family, i~ would require z500 equare feet, which is , leea than what would be required for a duplex. Officiul Rose repl3r~d ~ that Cha present code could allow a thzee or four plex on the ;~ eame property. Official Rose added that the qusAeion whiah muet be ; clerified in if it is re~rtal propertq or r~wner occuplied. Qhairpereon Haake etated that either o,n ordbnance change sh~uld be made or a variance grantad. Commiesion Member Burmaister etated ahe ati11 ob,jectad to Che parking ~'~eituation aa it wae tha esme ae wae preeeated at the ].ase meeting, and Chat `rj~he did nnt f~el it was enou$h, Officiel koee repliw.d that it economically imposeible to plan for every poesibility and that he did not feel the parking would poea a problem.