2003 Planning Commission Packets

Home Browse Search

It�rr� No: 5 iVieeii:�g Dat�: Julv 2, 2003 3°ype of ��asiness: Public Hearinq and Comrr�ission Busin�ss ,' C�°it� of .Maur�d� �Pi�vv St�ff ��o�t �ao iVlounds View Planning Commission �ra�; James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Itern i°itlel��bject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance Request for a Reduced Frant Yard Parking Lot Sefback at 2402 County Road I Planning Case VR03-004 [ratrod�c��on. r The subject properiy is a small, commercial lot improved with a two-story office building at the southwesi corner of County Road I and Greenfield Avenue. The propErty is zoned B-3, Highway Business Corr�mercial and is designated as Ne�ghborhood Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan. The variance request would aElaw the property owner to expand ihe parking lot by an additional two parking stalls toward Greenfield Avenue, reducing the permitted setback from 10 feef to 2 feet. � . Saor� after the building afi 2402 County Road 1 was completed and occupied, staff began ;f recaiving complaints from residenfs regarding tenants and clients fro��n the ofFice building parking on Greenfiield Avenue, averflowing #rom the parking lof, After a series of rrteefiings on the subject, ihe Planning Commission recommended and the City Council approved a parking restric#ion on fhe east side of Greenfield Avenue, 35O feet back from the corner, except the area directly across from the office bui[ding. The fVo Parking signs have been instalfed and have been effeciive in eliminafiing parking in frant of the single-family dwellings. Mr. Steve Farreil, the owner of the office building, was not in favor of the parking restriction. Variance Considerations: For a variance to be approved, there needs #o be demonstrated hardship or practicai difficu(ties associafed with the property fhat makes a litera! interpreiafiion of #he Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. State statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission} review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.d2, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardsi�ip exists when alI of the crifieria are met. The individual criteria are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstanc�s apply to the property which do not appiy generalfy #o other praperties in ihe same zone or vicir�ity and result from !at size or shape, topography or other circumstances over whici� the owners of the property since the efifective dafe hereof have had no controi, b. The litera[ in4erpretation of fihe provisio�s of fhis iitle would �eprive the applicant of rights _ commonly enjoyed by ofihsr properties in the same distric� under �E1e terms of this Tifile.