Laserfiche WebLink
APPROVED <br /> <br />September 14, 2004 <br />Reduced square footage <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Members of the Public: None <br /> <br />Commission Questions of Applicant: <br />Lipton: <br />Is the parking issue the driving force for the staff recommendation of denial? <br />Martell: The major concern is the SRU requirement and the HWY 42 plan. The next concern is <br />the parking situation. <br /> <br />Kalish: <br />Peter, could you address the HWY 42 issues addressed by staff? How does brake/muffler <br />shop fit into the office/commercial use? <br />Stewart: Always recognized that corner of S. Boulder Rd. and HWY 42 would have a different <br />character then the rest of the sub-area to have an auto use area. Landscaping and screen will meet <br />the design criteria. It is compliant to the proposed mixed-use development. <br /> <br />Kalish: <br />How do we classify auto body use or repair in the municipal code <br />Martell: Not classified. Service station is commercial. <br /> <br />Lipton: <br />When was other body shop approved – before or after the HWY 42 Comp Plan? <br />Martell: Just prior to the approval. <br /> <br />Kalish: <br />Is there a shared parking agreement? <br />Fordyce: Shared access agreement and believe it has a shared parking agreement. <br /> <br />Kalish: <br />Would you oppose a shared parking agreement if there isn’t one already? <br />Fordyce: No. <br /> <br />Deborski: <br />Do you run and manage the business yourself? <br />Fordyce: Yes, I manage the site from the time the car enters the site until it leaves. <br /> <br />Deborski: <br />If we could agree on a middle number for parking would you be agreeable to that <br />proposal? <br />Fordyce: I would need to see the number before I could agree to that. <br /> <br />Staff and Applicant Summary and Recommendation: <br />Martell: Recommendation of denial for SRU and PUD amendment. Reviewed the reasons for <br />denial. <br /> <br />Stewart: None of the overhead doors face the street. Landscaping has been added. Site functions <br />quite well for the use. Exceed the parking requirements. <br /> <br />Public Hearing Closed Commission Comments: <br />Kalish: <br />Thanked the applicant for trying to find solutions to the problems identified by the City. <br />Agree with Stewart that we need this kind of service in our community. Still have questions <br />about the parking. Recommend continuance to address the parking ratios and details. <br /> <br />McDermott: <br />Would like to have a middle ground. <br />8 <br /> <br /> <br />