09-05-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Tires N’ More Parking Lot Variances Report September 5, 2012 Page 3 e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The access driveways from the adjoining parcels have been as is for many years, and there is currently asphalt in the front parking lot up to the property line, so there will be no change to the existing character of the neighborhood. Instead it will be a big improvement to this property and the neighborhood. f. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The requested variances are the minimum that would be necessary in order for the applicant to be able to access his property and the rear parking lot. g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood, and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. 1. Tires N’ More owners must make all possible efforts to prevent customers and employees from using the CVS access to Silver Lake Road. The property owner of 2800 County Road 10 does not give permission for the applicant to use of any more of their property than what is specified in the easement documents. Public Hearing: As with any requested variance, this request necessitated a public hearing. Staff mailed notices to all property owners within 350 feet of the applicant’s property and staff had a notice published in the Sun Focus newspaper. Staff has been in contact with the attorney representing the property owner of 2800 County Road 10 (CVS does not own the land). They do not want the applicant using any of their property that is not included in the easement agreements. Mr. Soussi will need to modify the original plan and have agreement from CVS’s property owner before the City will approve any variances for the east property line. There is a letter from the attorney included in this staff report. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commissioners take testimony from staff and the applicant and open the public hearing. At the time of this report, the applicant is still working on the modified plan and will need to have the adjoining property owner agree to the layout along the shared property line/driveway. This variance application will likely not be ready for action on September 5, 2012, and staff recommends that the Planning Commission move to table this case until the next meeting on September 15, 2012.