CC 06-13-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I, I. I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I- I ARDEN H1T.J .s CITY COUNCIL - JUNE 13, 1994 5 property. There is an existing easement with the property owner of the clinic which will continue. If that access easement would ever be withdrawn, staff recommends that the SUP be reviewed by the City. Fritsinger stated that there are no changes to the parking lot or drainage. The existing drainage would flow from the southwest comer into the ditch along the highway. The design of the building does meet Code requirements, and the colors will be the existing AMOCO colors. The Planning Commission did request the applicant to add smaller shrubs along the freeway on the west side of the property to provide additional screening from the freeway. The Planning Commission did not review the signage plan and has requested that once completed, the Commission have the opportunity to review and approve it. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposal, subject to the screening conditions. Fritsinger stated that the applicant maintains allloca1, state and federal permits. There will be no parking of damaged, inoperable or unlicensed vehicles outside of the service bays. As detailed in the staff report, no exterior storage will be permitted. Hicks asked what the existing setback conditions are that cause the building to be non- confonning. Fritsinger stated that there is a City requirement that the parking lot abut the PIOpert}' line and the building be set back 10 feet. In this instance, the building is on the property line. When this building was approved there were some issues of frontage and setback requirements. The Council at that time ultimately granted a variance to allow the building to sit in its present location. Hicks noted that the green space is the required 25 percent only with the portion of berm on the adjacent property. Mr. Ted Brausen stated that he would be willing to enlarge the benn three feet onto the AMOCO property to meet the 25 percent landscape requirement and also maintain the portion of berm on the adjacent property. That would increase the landscaping to slightly greater than 25 percent. Hicks noted that the Planning Commission minutes state conditions for the amended special use permit contingent upon maintaining the existing parking agreement with the former restaurant. He asked if Mr. Brausen will own both properties. Mr. Brausen stated that he is in the process of negotiating to purchase the AMOCO station. There is no problem with maintaining the parking easement with the restaurant. It goes with the property and will need to be transferred. Hicks noted, as a point of information, the concern of the property owner to the east