04-19-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Fik •04^^9^^ January 20.2004 Paft 4 of 1 1 tnd emertainmcnt oriented businesses (Navarre Lanes/TKc Crib Proposed Rcstauram) at Ihc rear of the building. The grade changes ben^ ccn the rear and front of the building arc quite drastic and cause the need for retaining walls. Parking also needs to be accommodated at the front and rear further lessening potential areas for green space, all of which are hardships which have caused the existing 90®/o hardcover percentage The existing gravel parking area in the noithcast comer of the site is the site of an old gas station and has been the subject of past actions by the Pollution Control Agency in order to clean the site. Those actions have since been closed and there arc no current environmental issu'*s associated with the gravel area. This bnngs the potential for added green space. Tl.;: applicant has proposed a parking plan for the lot, however, no islands have been incorporated into the layout and it doesn’t meet the required setbacks The Planning Commission should discuss with the applicant his willingness to pave, stripe, increase the green space, and/or curb and guner this proposed parking lot. The grassed area along the southern border should remain grassed and the area between the two retaining walls could be better maintained and further vegetated with shrubs. Staff doesn’t see any other opportunities for further hardcover removals without having severe parking impacts. Stniclural Coverage Section 78-1403 of the Zoning Ordina tce requires that all p.cpenies in all zoning districts be subject to I S% ma.ximum simciural coverage The only changes the applicant is proposing which affect the sites structural coverage is two entrvAvays and an awning as shown in Exhibit G. The applicant has stated that these entryways are proposed to help control heating and cooling costs and to provide safer and more inviting entrances to the building. The intention of the aw ning is to provide for a covered walk. The eastern entryxv’ay is proposed at 600 square feet (50’ x 12 ’) and the western cnirv way is proposed at 36 square feet (6* x 6 ). The proposed awning will extend along the south elevation of the building to cover the current sidewalk The structural coverage ordinance allows for overhangs to be mcluded in tlte buildmg square footage when they are 2’ or less in width. The awnings proposed arc 4’ in width and extend 97.5 feel, adding 292.5 square feel of structural coverage (2’ of awning x 97.5’). This is a total of 928.S square feet (1% of toui) of additional structural coverage, or 16% where the existing percentage is 1 5%. HARDSHIP It isn’t out of the ordinary for structural covc.-age variances to be granted for commcrcit-I properties. In fact, variances in the past have been granted to allow for up to 20°/b or 30% for commercial properties. For example, the Service 800 building on Highway 12 had a structural coverage variance to allow 26.1% The Zoning Ordinance doesn’t allow for any exceptions for commercial properties however, commercial properties are not seen as critical as residential properties with relation to the 15% maximum. The reasonableness of commercial properjes having to meet this requirement, the impacts of the proposed entrances, and the benefits and/or disadvantages of the entrances should be discussed in