My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-07-2005
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
09-07-2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/4/2018 6:02:10 AM
Creation date
9/4/2018 6:01:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
9/7/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Miller Wright Report <br />August 17, 2005 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Other Issues: <br /> <br />In addition to the northeast and east sides of the property, Mr. Perrozzi requested setback <br />variances at the south and west sides of the property. Without a parking plan or anything to <br />demonstrate that reduced setback is necessary at the south property line, staff would <br />recommend no variance be granted in that location. As to the west side of the parking lot, <br />the Planning Commission may rule that the pre-existing zero-foot setback may remain even if <br />the parking lot is reconstructed, as the reconstruction is necessary to correct damage that <br />occurred associated with the CVS development. In addition, the Planning Commission may <br />further rule that the parking lot may be reconstructed in the same manner as before, which is <br />to say, without the required barrier curb. In return for those concessions, staff would <br />recommend that any work alongside the west side of the building be fully code compliant, <br />which is to say, if the area is repaved, a five foot setback shall be observed and the required <br />barrier curb installed. Ultimately, staff would prefer that this section be converted to pervious <br />surface (greenspace) area as it would no longer be needed for access—the east side alone, <br />with a variance to allow for the 24-foot wide drive aisle, would be adequate. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />Review and consider the testimony of staff and the applicants. If the Commission believes all <br />of the criteria have been satisfied and an approval is in order, Resolution 810-05 is available <br />for your action. If the Commission feels the request does NOT satisfy the hardship criteria, <br />staff would bring to your next meeting (September 21, 2005) a resolution of denial. If the <br />Commission should need additional information before action can be considered one way or <br />the other, staff will arrange to have such additional information prepared and submitted at <br />your next meeting for your review. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />_____________________________________ <br />James Ericson <br />Community Development Director <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.