|
being that the proposed coverage of the roar yard would be approximately 60~,
<br />whereas the Zoning Ordinance designates the maximum coverage allowable as 30%. The
<br />staff recommends a Variance for aide yard requirements be granted subject to the
<br />requirements of the Building Code. However, with regard to the separation of
<br />buildings and lot coverage, the variances would be rather substantial. In addition
<br />to the social and esthetic impact both on the applicant's lot and on the aurroundiag
<br />area, the staff ie concerned with the implications in terms of fire fighting pro-
<br />cedures if such extensive lot coverage with generally combustible accessory build-
<br />ings ie allowed. The staff recommends, therefore, that the proposed covered
<br />portions of the patio be eubatantially reduced in area. Following discussion by
<br />the Commission, upon inquiry City Attorney Struthers informed the Commi.seion that
<br />a public hearing moat be held within 25 days of publication and a decision moat be
<br />given by the Commission within 40 days. It was moved by Commissioner Lozano,
<br />seconded by Commissioner Rega, and carried, that the public hearing on the above
<br />matter be continued to the meeting of October 14. The Commission requested that the
<br />applicant be present at the October 14 meeting 1n order that the problem areas in
<br />question may be discussed in more detail.
<br />The next item on the agenda was the application of William Marsh, Castlewood Country
<br />Club, fora Zoning Permit with Site Plan, Architectural and Landscape Approval, in
<br />order to construct an eight-unit multiple dwelling on a one-acre parcel 420+ feet
<br />east of First St. and north of Vineyard Avenue, in an RG-15 District. Mr. Fales,
<br />in giving the staff report, stated that the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance
<br />are not met with respect to the rear yard: 25 ft. are required, whereas 10 ft. are
<br />proposed; also a 20-ft, access drive ie required, whereas an 18-ft. access drive ie
<br />proposed. In addition, there ie a problem regarding parking spaces, and the pro-
<br />posed sign does not meet the restrictions of Section 17.705 (1), Ord. No. 309, con-
<br />cerning size. There was a question on the part of the staff regarding subdivision
<br />of the subject property. If the lot hea not been subdivided and if the applicant
<br />can revise hie proposal to meet the Ordinance requirements,approval would be recom-
<br />mended by the staff with the following conditions: (1) A survey moat be submitted;
<br />(2) A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted for approval of the City Engineer
<br />prior to issuance of a Building Permit; (3) Evidence shall be submitted indicating
<br />that this development can be sewered by gravity, or details of any mechanical syatec
<br />shall be submitted; (4) Site plan shall be revised to show the location of proposed
<br />sewer and water service lines; (5) Perking area and access shall be paved to City
<br />standards; (6) The entrance drive shall be widened to 20 ft. and moved easterly
<br />3 ft., or existing utility pole shall be relocated. In addition, the staff recom-
<br />mends that Chia Zoning Permit should be specifically for the eight units to to
<br />conatzucted at this time, and the applicant should be made aware of the pending
<br />Del Valle interceptor sewer and the possibility of an access street across the rear
<br />of the subject property. Mr. Dennis, representing the applicant, was present in
<br />the audience and stated that the property ie not to be subdivided, and explained
<br />some of the aspects of the proposed plat plan and also submitted an alternate plea.
<br />Chairman Landon was of the opinion that an excessive amount of pavement was proposed
<br />and it was the consensus of the Commission that the crowding of unlta in one area
<br />wee a matter of major concern because of the possibility of a continuation of this
<br />same pattern without increasing open apace in future development of the subject
<br />property. The Commission recommended more usable open apace, better landscaping
<br />and a better parking arrangement. It was moved by Commissioner Rega, seconded by
<br />Commisaionet Johnston, and carried, that the above matter be continued to the
<br />meeting of October 14, 1964.
<br />The next item on the agenda was the application of J.J. Brea, 4377 First St., for a
<br />Zoning Permit with Site Plan, Architectural and Landscape Approval in order to con-
<br />struct canopy and body shop additions to an existing automobile sales and service
<br />facility at 235 Main St., in a C-G District. Mr. Pales, in giving the staff report,
<br />stated that this ie an expansion of an existing use. However, the site plan sub-
<br />mitted does not allow detailed checking, and no landscaping is shown. Prior to
<br />issuance of a Building Permit a complete Bite plan and survey should be submitted,
<br />per Ord. No. 387, for staff approval. Tha proximity of this property to one of the
<br />possible civic center sites should be considered. Mr. Bras spoke in behalf of the
<br />application, and stated that Edgren Motors could be relocated if the Civic Center
<br />is located to the rear of the subject property--the expansion ie not major and coulc
<br />be sacrificed. Mr. John Edgren was present in the audience and said the type of
<br />construction proposed allows for removal and relocation. He also proposes to pave
<br />the area which is now unimproved, and stated that the proposed improvements are
<br />necessary to the continuance of his business. However, Mr. Edgren added that the
<br />location of the new Civic Center has conelderable bearing on hie plena. He might
<br />eliminate the body shop plans, and add only the asphalt concrete and canopies.
<br />Members of the Commission suggested trees be planted on the southerly and westerly
<br />periphery of the property. Mr. Edgren agreed with Mr. Bras to amend the subject
<br />
|