CCP 06-29-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

... Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting, July 1, 1987 Page 5 CASE#87-22 (Cont'd) Miller explained the additions to the east and west . side will encroach upon existing driveways. He stated the east driveway will be narrowed to 23 feet, which is considered adequate; the west addition will cause the elimination of approximately 13 parking spaces to provide adequate circulation space. The 27-foot-wide driveway is considered adequate. He recommended that the driveway be posted as a no parking area to prevent potential congestion and also curving the driveway, to separate and protect the parking spaces near the southwest corner of the site, would be desirable. To replace lost parking spaces and to provide for expanded seating capacity, addition parking spaces are proposed at the rear (north) of the site. Parking requirements are 1 space per 3 seats; this plan provides a parking ratio of 1 space per 2.2 seats. The Planner advised that the expansio~ of the parking area eliminates some existing landscaping and he recommends a landscape plan be submitted which will provide landscaping comparable to that which exists on the site. Where feasible, relocation of existing trees is recommended. Miller commented that the trash storage area will be moved to the southwest corner of the building; he suggested a trash storage enclosure plan should be submitted by the applicant. No signage is shown on the site plan submitted by the applicant; it was the Planner's assumption that the existing pylon sign will be replaced with a Perkins sign. Miller noted that the applicant should be reminded that all signage, including flags, must conform to the City's sign ordinance and will . require administrative review for ordinance compliance. In summary, the Planner advised that the proposed building and parking expansion comply with ordinance requirements regarding setbacks and site coverage; he also noted that based. upon a seating capacity of 165 persons, the parking spaces proposed exceed the ordinance requirement for restaurant parking. He recommended approval of the site and building plans should be condition upon applicant's submission of an acceptable plan for restoring the site landscaping and complete enclosure of the trash storage area. Tom Koury, owner of the Town Crier, was present to explain that the ownership of the restaurant would not be changed; the company has changed to a Perkins franchise. He displayed an artists rendering of the building with the proposed remodeling and submitted the plans for landscaping and trash storage enclosure for review by the Commission. Commission questioned the size and placement of the sign and flag for the restaurant. Koury advised that the sign would probably be left at it's present location and the flag would be near the sign. He stated the sign company he has retained stated they have researched the current requirements and should have no problem complying with those requirements. Commission questioned if a sign height variance was granted to the Town Crier restaurant; Miller advised he was not sure if a variance had been granted to . the Town Crier or the Emerald Inn; he noted he would work with the applicant to establish the height. He reminded the applicant the flag must comply with zoning requirements as well. ---