Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1795 <br />February 5. 1993 <br />Page 2 <br />of 55 to 60. The required student-teacher ratio is 1 teacher per 10 students. It is her goal to <br />have an administrator with 6 teachers, 2 aides and a cook. Applicant has asked to amend tlie <br />application to a maximum student-teacher use at 70. Please note the maximum use at the <br />Planning Conjmission review was approved at 60. <br />It has been suggested that variances for parking be addressed as we are now dealing with <br />a conforming use of the property. Earlier applications dealing with the non-conforming <br />commercial uses involved setback variances for parking. Parking was once again reviewed at <br />the time the State Highway Department acquired the additional area with the upgrading of the <br />intersection and the installation of the semaphore. The following setback variances are required <br />for parking based on most recently amended site plan, review Exhibits L and N: <br />1. Section 10.61, Subd. 5 (A). <br />Required setback = 50’ <br />Existing = 0’ <br />Proposed = 0’ (27’ from travehd road State Highway No. 12, <br />30’ County Road 6) <br />If Council deems it necessary' to address substandard setbacks of existing structure, <br />setback variances would be as follows: <br />A. Setback from State Highway 12 <br />Required = 50’ <br />16 ’ from lot line <br />43’ (43’ from traveled road) <br />B. County Road 6 <br />Required = 50’ <br />40’ from lot line (NW corner of structure) <br />70’ from traveled road <br />Review of Amended Site Plan <br />Applicant has provided an amended site plan reflecting directives of Planning <br />Conunission approval at their Januaty* meeting. <br />Parking <br />Seventeen parking stalls are shown. There are only 13 valid parking places. Both City <br />staff and Countv concur that they would noi approve parking stalls located within defmed right- <br />of-wav of adjacent roadways. Refer to staff sketch. Exhibit N. The original design submitted <br />by the City Engineer. H-l and H-2 were not acceptable to applicant because of the actual pattern