11-16-2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The proposed improvements should only improve the area rather than be detrimental. B. That the special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed improvements should have little if any impacts on property in the immediate vicinity/neighborhood. C. That the establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. Not applicable as the general area is already fully developed. D. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The applicant will be using existing roads, utilities, and drainage systems already established for the site. E. That the special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it located. With the exception on the nonconformities listed below, the site conforms to all other applicable regulations. Staff finds the special use standards of Section 11-020(10) and 8-130 are met, subject to implementation of several conditions. NONCONFORMING USE PERMIT ANALYSIS Staff discovered several nonconformities upon review of the survey. Those nonconformities include: • Rear yard (to the west) parking lot setback less than the required 5'. The applicant has indicated this nonconformity will be eliminated. • Front yard parking lot setback less than the required 30'. This most likely resulting from the additional highway easement needed when Silver Lake Road was improved approximately 10 years ago. • Parking drive -aisle less than the required 24' for 2 -way traffic. It appears the site was developed this way originally. While difficult, a 19' drive -aisle may still work. However, it is more likely that cars will stagger their parking so they are not directly across from another vehicle. Because the site has a possible 61 stalls where only 44 are required, staff isn't overly concerned with this situation. • Side yard (to the north) setback less than the required 25'. The actual setback is 18' - -18'. Staff is unsure how this layout was approved, but aerial photos show these setbacks dating back to the early 1970's. Also, there is a significant topographic difference to the north, which may also explain this situation.