Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> The new buildings will be constructed of concrete panels with a raked <br /> finish. The existing metal-sided buildings will remain with the possibility <br /> . that they may eventually be replaced with concrete panel buildings in <br /> the same locations. <br /> COMMENTS: <br /> l. The reorganization and reconstruction of facilities on the existing <br /> site (south portion) represent significant improvement of the <br /> development. The use of new linear storage buildings to provide <br /> screening at the edge of the site is also considered beneficial. <br /> However, since the proposal ignores all setback requirements, <br /> scrutiny of the individual setback conditions is warranted. <br /> a. West property line: The closest lane of 35W is nearly 100 <br /> feet west and 25't below the west edge of the site. Because <br /> of the grade differential, views of the development are <br /> restricted. Additional setback at the top of the slope would <br /> be of limited value. <br /> b. North property line: This corner of the site is adjacent to a <br /> large triangle of highway right-of-way, providing 100 to 300 <br /> feet of separation from the nearest lane of Highway 10. <br /> Additional setback would be of limited value. <br /> c. East property line: The proposed storage building is approximately <br /> 60 feet from the nearest lane of Highway 10. Parki ng extends <br /> to within 40 feet of the highway. Since this side is the <br /> . front of the development. we believe the parking setback of 20 <br /> feet should be enforced. Some additional setback for the new <br /> storage building would also be desirable. Provision of setbacks <br /> would also decrease the total site coverage. <br /> The applicant received permission to use the highway right-of- <br /> way for landscaping, and has recently transplanted several <br /> mature trees along the property line. Because of this landscaping, <br /> the applicant contends that no additional setback is necessary <br /> in this area. <br /> 2. As mentioned previously, the proposed sign is 10 feet higher than <br /> permitted by ordinance. Although there is little competition from <br /> other signs in this area. the sign will be approximately 150 feet <br /> from the northbound driving lane. This relationship to a major <br /> highway may justify the height variance. <br /> 3. The zoning ordinance requires screening of all outdoor storage. I <br /> support the use of buildings to screen storage areas as proposed. <br /> In my opinion, however, two areas require additional screening. <br /> Because the mobile homes to the south have a direct view into the <br /> yard, a screen fence should be provided along the south property <br /> line west of the existing buildings. The north end of the site <br /> should also be fenced to screen low-level views from southbound <br /> Highway 10. <br /> . <br /> CASE #87-08 <br /> TIQQo PAGE TWO <br />