Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />6. PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> <br />a. UP-96-46. Holoz Laser Tal! <br />Application for a conditional use permit to operate an indoor recreational facility/amusement <br /> <br />center cons{si{ng of "laser tag," v{deo games, and rood and beverage sales located at 5572 <br />Springdale Avenue, Suites A-D in the Best Plaza Shopping Center. Zoning for the property is <br />C-R(p) (Regional Commercial, Peripheral Area) District. <br /> <br />Continued to September 25, 1996. <br /> <br />b. PUD-90-18-2M. JoseDh Zuffa <br />Application for a major modification to the approved PUD Development Plan for the Bonde <br />Ranch subdivision to reduce the required 20'0" building-to-building separation and to allow <br />building construction beyond the graded building envelope for an existing attached carport <br />structure located at 839 East Angela Street. Zoning for the property is PUD (Planned Unit <br />Development) - MDR/LDR/RDR (Medium Density Residential/Low Density Residential/Rural <br />Density Residential) District. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson presented the staff report on the request for a major modification to the approved PUD <br />Development Plan for the Bonde Ranch subdivision to reduce the required 20 ft. building to building <br />separation to less than 3 ft. and to allow building construction beyond the grading envelope. The <br />modification is in response to an existing carport located at 839 East Angela Street that was <br />constructed without staff review or building permits. Staff understands the applicant spoke to the <br />Building Department and was advised to speak to the Planning Department regarding development <br />standards and regulations for his lot. The carport was installed without speaking to the Planning <br />Department nor securing building permits. <br /> <br />There is a special requirement on the Bonde Ranch Development that goes beyond normal zoning <br />ordinance. This requirement involves a 20 ft. separation between buildings in the side yards. <br />Further, the grading envelope was extended by the applicant which necessitated a retaining wall, <br />which also does not have a building permit. <br /> <br />The applicant stated the carport is to be used to park his business construction truck and store related <br />items. Its size is 14 x 26 ft., the posts being 2'9" from the property line, the roof projects a couple <br />inches into this space as well. The roof is flat, is about 8.5 feet high, and is gated to the front street. <br />This lot is somewhat lower than the adjacent property. <br /> <br />When staff received the PUD modification request, staff notified the surrounding residents. <br />Opposition was received from Mr. Allen Ting. He is opposed to the carport because it is just below <br />the three bedroom windows of his house; the carport roof is flat and does not match the roof design <br />of the house; the 20 ft. separation is not being adhered to; this is the fourth covered parking space <br />at this residence; and the son of a vice-president of Shapell should know better than to build a carport <br /> <br />without the proper building permits. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson advised the 20 ft. building separation was written into the PUD for the following <br />reasons: to maintain the open hillside character; preserve privacy; to prevent the appearance of a wall <br />of buildings; to provide adequate areas for sloped banks between lots; and minimize the use of <br /> <br />Plaoning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />September 11, 1996 <br />