Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File ^1874 <br />December 3, 1993 <br />Page 2 <br />6. Variances to be granted include: <br />Street setback variance (30’ required. 28 propc)sed). <br />Hardcover variance (no change in percentage, but changing from <br />pavement to "structural" hardcover). <br />Reduction in number of usable parking stalls from 42 to 41 where 48 are <br />required. <br />Planning Commission recommended that the applicant provide a landscape plan for staff <br />review and approval, for screening of the proposed storage module. In staff’s opinion, such plan <br />should include evergreen plantings along the street side and south end to provide at least a 50 /r <br />screening of the module in the first year, with potential in three years to be 100/i screened on <br />ihose two sides No screening will likely be feasible on the north or east sides facing the <br />parking lot. Screening must also not interfere w ith vehicle site distance for exiting the site. <br />Staff would issue a permit for this module (in this case a zoning permit rather than a <br />building permit since the building inspectors feel this cannot be defined as a strucnire) only when <br />a suitable landscape plan has been submitted and approved by stall. <br />Additional Discussion <br />• Planning Commi.ssion reviewed this in the context of a "semi-permanent" installation, i.e. <br />requiring vegetative screening hut not allowing a foundation, so that the unit is not <br />attached to the ground anu therefore can be mobile. Does Council wish to reserve the <br />right to make this a temporary or conditional variance? For instance, would Council <br />prefer to reserve the ability to have the unit moved to a diffeient location or removed <br />altogether if it becomes a visual nuisance? <br />• Regarding the visual aspects of this module. Planning Commission did not specily that <br />the exterior finish of the module match that of the clubhouse. Does Council wish to <br />specify the e»‘»*rior finish? <br />• Altliough not addressed in the Planning Commission’s recommendation, there was <br />discussion rcga’’ding sti'rage ol ooats. equipment, materials, etc. in the landscape areas <br />j)f the siie. It was clearly the intent of the Council in its 1990 approval that no storage <br /><Kcur in the land.scape areas. This has been clarified in the proposed resolution. <br />• It should be noted that due to the 20’ length of the niinJule and the fact that stalls #33 and <br />#34 arc only lb’ deep, the module will panially bltKk stall #35. This can In: solved by <br />shifting stalls #35 thru #38 four feet northeastward, without atfectu'g har<icover <br />percentages. This half of the parking h>t has not been paved yet.