Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />LP-99, NC-44 <br />Page #3 <br /> <br />In this particular application, staff contends that the size <br />of the front yard landscape strip could not be expanded without <br />reducing the manuvering and parking area necessary to the use <br />of the gasoline pumps on the east side. <br /> <br />In regard to the non-conformity of the lack of the 351 buffer <br />strip, staff notes that R-l property across Rice Creek Road is <br />church property allowed in a R-l district by special use permit <br />and not singl~ family homes. The applicant in 1976, provided <br />the 15 foot landscape strip that is required in a side street <br />yard. It appears that because the land uses south of Rice <br />Creek Road are a church and apartment complex that in 1976 the <br />applicant was not required to provide the 25 foot buffer strip. <br />In the opinion of staff widening the landscape area to 25 feet <br />would greatly hamper the internal circulation on the site. <br /> <br />- .--- <br />in 1976, provided the 15 foot landscape strip that is required <br />in a side street yard. It appears that because the land uses <br />south of Rice Creek Road are a church and apartment complex that <br />in 1976 the applicant was not required to provide the 25 foot <br />buffer strip. In the opiniDn of staff widening the landscape <br />area to 25 feet would greatly hamper the internal circulation <br />on the site. <br /> <br />The eastern most driveway on Rice Creek Road is approximately 30 <br />feet from the right-of-way of the intersection. The code <br />requires the driveway to be at least 50 feet from the right~of- <br />way of the intersection. The applicant contends that the driveway <br />location is necessary in relationship to the service island and <br />that if one measured curb to curb rather than by the right-of- <br />way the distance is about 46 feet. The applicant feels that <br />since the concrete curbing was required in 1976 it is not practical <br />to remove the curbing and close or alter the driveway. ' <br /> <br />In respect to the three driveways, the company states that western <br />most drive fatilitates vebicles servicing the underground tanks and <br />customers using the store portion of the site. Having this <br />driveway separates these persons from those along Silver Lake <br />Road using the service island. <br /> <br />Staff contends that to meet the intention of the non-conforming <br />use permit, that the applicant should be required to provide <br />additional landscaping to better buffer and screen the site. <br />It might not be practical however to require that the landscaped <br />areas are enlarged or that one of the driveways be closed. <br /> <br />BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION <br /> <br />The plans presented are complete and contain all necessary informa- <br />tion. It should be noted that the parking space calculation is <br />based on the addition being used only for storage and this should <br />be a condition of approval. Also, the station presently has a <br />storage unit for salt in the northern portion of the site and this <br />unit is located on one of the designated parking spaces. The <br />unit has to be removed and all product display outside the building <br />should be removed. <br />