Laserfiche WebLink
‘r^ <br />) - <br />ft. <br />it' <br />f' <br />£I <br />(#8)ZONING PILE «1643>DAVID J. NELSON <br />740 WILLON DRIVE SOUTH <br />RENEWAL VARIANCE-PUBLIC HEARING <br />David Nalson was present, aid a <br />the Public: Hearing. <br />7:40 pm., Kelley opened <br />Mabusth advised that this 1=5 an application for a renewal <br />Variance and that there are no changes from what had been applied <br />for an approved in the original 1588 application. M,.busth noted <br />that subsequent to the 1988 application, Mr. Nelsvon has installed <br />a new septic system. <br />There were no public comments, and a 7 <br />closed the Public Hearing. <br />7:41 p.m., Kelley <br />It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommend <br />that Council approve t.he request for a renewal of nine foot side <br />setback Variance to construct an attached garage. All voted aye. <br />Motion carried. <br />(#9)A.J. GRAF-2008 SUGARNOODS DRIVE <br />REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL CURB CUT <br />A. Jay Graf was present for this matter. <br />Mabusth reported that she had met with the City Engineer on <br />the site today, and that she could now confirm that the second <br />curb cut would be located where it Is presently staked on the <br />property. She said, "Staff has also confirmed that the eastern <br />access meets a sighting distance -if 2SO feet, however the mailbox <br />and certain trees on the neighboring property may pose a sighting <br />problem for vehicles palling out of that driveway. The City <br />Enqineer has confirmed that the proposed access would work well.” <br />Rowlette asked what impact on traffic circulation there <br />would be if Sugarwoods Drive were to become a one-way street. <br />Mabusth stated that such a proposal was not discussed during <br />the Sugarwoods subdivision process, nor w-?is the aspect of an <br />island separating the ro<id discussed. Mabusth advised that there <br />will be other properties within the Sugarwoods Development that <br />will have the sa.me problem. <br />Kelley stated that, in his opinion, there will not be a <br />significant amount of traffic going through this neighborhood, <br />other than the Sugarwoods residents. <br />Bellows agreed with Mabusth that the islands wex*e not <br />uded in the review process, and seemed to just appear. She <br />^d that Planning Commission has reviewed this particular <br />property before, and did not unanimously agree to grant a <br />turn-around. Bellows indicated that she would have a proble.m <br />recommending approval of a second curb cut. She said, "We <br />pointed out very early on in the review process of the curb cuts <br />- 10 - <br />p. <br />J