2003 Planning Commission Packets

Home Browse Search

1VIo�ncis `Viedv Pla�a�fng Co�mission Regular Il�ieeting Febr�aary 5, 2003 �age 5 Commissioner 3ohnson indicated that the previous property owner had checked into the number of u�azts he could have and that is why the building was reinodeled as it was. He then said he does not think a variance would be appropriate in this case. Commissioner Zwim i�idicated he understood why the applicant wished to expand the building but indicated from an aesthetic standpoint he would side with the resideilts that it wouid be unsightly to look out your window and see vehicles parking in front of the building. He also indicated he was concerned that approval of this parking variance would meaai the,City would be obligated to grant parlcing variances to the other four-plexes and the area.carinot accommadate. that type of density and traffic, He further commented that allowing this would detract from the `' property value of the neighboring properties due to congestion, aesthetics, and increased traffic and he cannot see how ihis would blend in well with the existing co�nnuz�ity. Mr. Viger asked if his project could proceed if he were able `to provide tlie gaa;age stalis. Commissiox�er Jok�nsan indicated he would need to provzde 6 garage stalls and 9 surface stalls. Mr. Viger i�idicated his intent was io provide haizdicapped accessible �.nits as ihe building lends itself to that due to the walkout. Director Ericson indicat�d the options would be to denial, appraval, or hold off an action to, allow tim Commissioner 7ohnson re� there is no hardship and if The Comxnission directed' Director Ericson x�clica would consider a resolL move forward if the ap� requirements of the Cii� Ms Bedbury indicated tki.e,parking. She also s, Director Ericson indica� aiit� asl�ed thai intereste a resolution for draft a resolution of parking options. il'with the main reason being ihat will want ihe same accommodation, a resolution to deny the vari at�ce. ;ed the next meeting, would be February 19, 2003 and the Cornmission tion danying the. yariance request. He then clarified that the proj ect could �licant is able to provide enough parlcing to satisfy the parlcing �'s.Cade.,_ �here are Iittle kids on that street and she cannot see where they can meet �id she"does not want the increased traffic in the area. Staff could infoim residents as to whether the project is proceeding residents provide their name and address. if residents could bring a petition fo stiop the proj ect. Director Ericson indicated that the residents would be within #heir rights to protest the projeet by petition but explained that, if the projeci meets the requirements of the City's Code, it would be difiicult to prohibit the expansion.