Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br />«'t% <br />• # <br />Zoning Pile 11119 <br />March 11* 1987 <br />Pago 3 of S <br />Staff foola that there will be no significant visual Inpact on the <br />noighbora* and with the proposed retaining walls and shrubbery <br />acrooning of the parking lot* It Is unlikely they will ever see the <br />atroetnro. <br />Zt is staff's opinion that the strucutre will have little or no <br />▼iaaal i«paet on the neighboring property as long as the existing <br />acrooning la sMintained. <br />Jtoa C* Beight of Recroational Peoility. The proposed <br />rocroetional structure is 40* high at the peak* However* the peak(at <br />nboot olow. 998') is only a few feet above ground level at the <br />neighbor's garage* hence it likely will not appear as an unusually <br />high atrueturo fron the neighbor's viet^point. <br />Viewing fron Pox Street* the visual height inpact of the <br />atmctoro will likely be minimal ^ the existing screening both to the <br />front and rear is naintained* and additional screening night be <br />neeeaanry* The nost extreme view of the height of the structure will <br />likely be fron the southeast at Pox Street looking to the northwest. <br />The structure height limitation in the soning code again ia <br />■ainly for aesthetic purposes. A second reason* although not a factor <br />hare* ia to *,ect whatever sunlight and open space ia enjoyed by <br />neighboring properties. If Planning Comniaaion feels that the <br />etrueture is (or can be) adequately screened given the topography and <br />vegetation on the site* then a recomnendation to approve the height <br />variance is in order* perhaps with specific conditions attached <br />regarding the type and density of screening* and/or conditions as to <br />the exterior color or material of the structure * so that perhapa <br />acreening ia less critical. <br />Steal O. Degree of <br />tieeal facility. <br />private control of and aeeeaa to the <br />The MicNillsna are proposing this as a private facility only for <br />nee of family members and guests. Zt la net (and tb city would not <br />allow it to hr) open to the public* and it is not for commerical <br />perpoaes. You #ill note that the caretaker's residence is located on <br />the roadway which provides access to the recreational facility. This <br />ia a conscious effort to maintain a degree of control over access to <br />the facility so that the general public will be leas likely to visit <br />the site uninvited. <br />Also note that the driveway serving the caretaker house and <br />recreational facility is from the private driveway, not from Pox <br />Street* again a deterrent to public traffic. <br />Ztem floor area of the structure “ concern regarding <br />potMtial future uses of the structure. <br />i <br />Ir <br />*• <br />U <br />• • • W <br />' w -V -''%m <br />A