Laserfiche WebLink
m <br />File W)4-2977 <br />April 16.2004 <br />Page 8 of8 <br />l6»/o7 <br />5. <br />6. <br />7. <br />8. <br />Should the non-conforming sign at the Kelly Avenue entrance receive a <br />variance to stay in that location? Do the retaining wails and large right-of- <br />way create hardships to allow it to remain? <br />Is a restaurant with liquor appropriate? Or, does it have the potential for too <br />many negative impacts to the su' ounding neighborhood? <br />Would the Planning Commission approve a CUP for a restaurant without <br />liquor? <br />Are there any other issues with this application‘s <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Planning Department staff recommends denial of the request for a CUP and associated <br />commercial site plan review with variances for a restaurant with liquor (Class II). Staff <br />would recommend that the applicant entertain a restaurant use without liquor (Class I) <br />and that the Planning Commission discuss what would be appropriate under that use.