CC MIN 1970 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

75 as written, and that for the purposes of the present use of the building 14 parking spaces are required. Reversing action of the Planning Commission, he said, was not in the best interests. Further discussion was held relative to the parking layout as submitted. Mr. Dell'Ergo made the observation that the Variance pertains only to the daytime period when the lot is vacant, Council expressed additional concern that while the number of spaces was adequate, there was a question regarding their usability, and discussed whether this problem could be corrected. It was learned that sacrificing trees and lawn area would provide a larger area, but that it would be more desirable to main- tain appearance. It was the Appellants' belief that there is more than adequate parking at present. Councilman Arnett requested specifics regarding section of the Ordinance pertaining to parking for medical and dental buildings, as it relates to this property, and Planning Director responded that in this situation, the building being ir/a combination of uses, a combination of standards would have to be applied to it, including one and 1/3 space per dwelling unit, under provisions covering apartments and a requirement for five spaces per doctor under the medical or dental clinic provisions. These standards applied to only one of the two existing medical offices. He was not recommending a change in these standards, and acknowledged that in this case where there were only three offices there would be no apparent problem if conditions remained the same, He noted his concern about the spaces designated as 14 and 15, and felt if Variance had been granted by Planning Commission, these should have been exempted from the application, but the matter did not progress to the point where it was considered by the Planning Commission, Councilman Henderson moved to amend the original motion to incorporate two recommendations made by Staff to the Planning Commission regarding elimination of Spaces 14 and 15, and regarding assumption that Use Permit requirements satisfied, Also to include Planning Director's suggestion relating to eliminating parking and lawn, and requirement that parking spaces conform, even though fewer in number. Council discussed amended motion briefly. There was additional discussion as to the merits of accepting deficiences in numbers of spaces, or standards of the spaces. Planning Director noted that Planning Commission had not considered redesigning the layout, and felt if they were instructed to this effect, a better proposal might result. Councilman Keckley suggested terminating proceedings and referring matter back to Planning Commission for redesign and recommendations. Mayor Bury reminded Council there was a motion on the floor, and Councilman Weymouth suggested it might be possible to act on the motion, with the understanding the matter be referred to the Planning Commission for redesign. Councilman Henderson questioned whether, if