08/02/07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

parcels directly to the south, and now wishes to revise their development proposal. To do this, the previously-approved variances need to be reviewed again. With regard to the Bufferyard Variance Request, Mr. Gladhill advised the subject property is located in the E-1 Employment district, which requires a 60-foot bufferyard between parcels zoned E-1 and those zoned R -1. The applicant previously received a variance to allow a 30- foot buffer on the northern property line. The revised site plan shows a northern bufferyard of approximately 30- 35 feet, which complies with the previously approved plan. The site plan shows a 55-foot bufferyard on the eastern property line, which was previously approved for 60 feet; Staff is recommending that this bufferyard be maintained at 60- feet. Staff is also recommending that the number of plantings required for the northern bufferyard be maintained. Management Intern Gladhill advised the previously approved plan also included an 8-foot cedar privacy fence on the northern and eastern property lines, and a wrought-iron decorative fence on Ran1sey Blvd. Staff is recommending that this be carried forward to the current plan. With regard to the Pavement Setback Variance request, Mr. Gladhill advised the E-1 District also requires a 20-foot setback for all pavement and maneuvering area from public street right-of-way. As a part of the Regency Pond 4th Addition plat, the applicant is required to construct a cul-de-sac at the end of 148th Ave NW. As proposed, the pavement shown on the site plan has a 3- to 5-foot setback from the right-of-way ofthe cul-de-sac. Management Intern Gladhill advised that because of the unusual shape of the subject property, it is difficult to locate buildings on the site and accommodate the full setback to the cul-de-sac as required in the E-1 District. Staff would also note that the cul-de-sac will be used primarily for turnaround purposes. Citizen Input Mr. Robert Umland, 14830 Limonite Street, stated his property is on the northeast comer of this lot. He stated everyone knows the setbacks are there to minimize impact on different zoning in the area. In this particular application it appears there is absolutely no landscaping within the reduced setback area and the turn around. He understood the City and applicant have done everything they could to prevent the street from going through, but from 148th and Limonite Street, they will be able to see right through to mini-storage area and he wondered why they would grant this request without appropriate landscaping. Management Intern Gladhill indicated staff is recommending additional buffer and landscaping. Board Member Nixt reviewed the additional landscaping items being recommended. . The applicant indicated he did not plan to deviate on the variance from what was previously approved with one exception. From County Road 56, they may use the back of the building as the security buffer running decorative fence from the edge of the building to the property line. They intend to comply with all of the requirements from the previous approval. Board of Adjustment/August 2, 2007 Page 10 of 12