2013_0819_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

in April of 2012; however, he expressed his apprec iation that long-term drainage issues were being 130 discussed. 131 Mr. Eldridge stated that the concern of the neighborh ood is that a temporary stru cture for three (3) years 132 was too long; and that it would create a greater negative impact to neighbors on the south, and was too 133 close to them. Mr. Eldridge asked that the Commissio n deny this application until the stormwater issues 134 had been addressed; and opined that if the rationale fo r placing the structure at this location was based 135 on their desire for its proximity to the permanent stru cture, that the requirement to move it 30’ further 136 down the hill negated that rationale. Mr. Eldridge spoke in support of a location for the temporary 137 structure further west or north of the existing structure; and reiterat ed his request that the Commission 138 deny this proposal to allow the applicant to explore other areas on the church property for its location. 139 Acting Chair Cunningham asked Mr. Eldridge, if locati ng the building 6’ from the main structure were still 140 possible, would he still oppose the current plan. 141 Mr. Eldridge responded that yes, he would still oppose it as it limited the space for kids to play; and that 142 the three (3) years represented a si gnificant amount of time; and that he preferred it located on other flat 143 land on the west behind the church itself. Mr. Eldridge referenced a similar temporary structure by 144 Waldorf while they looked for a new location; and sug gested that this temporary structure could be placed 145 at the same location. 146 Member Daire clarified his interpretation of Mr. Eldrid ge’s preference that this application be denied until 147 all drainage problems currently existing on the site had been solved, not just those created by the 148 additional hard surface proposed. 149 Mr. Eldridge noted that, since the church had yet to address existing drainage issues, and would not be 150 considering them before September of this year, with any resolution not done until 2014, he asked that 151 the other locations on the property be thoroughly explor ed as more suitable for the temporary structure, 152 since it could no longer abut the existi ng structure as originally planned. 153 With Member Daire seeking specific clarification, he asked if Mr. Eldridge was requesting that the 154 application be denied until all drainage problems on the site are settled, with Mr. Eldridge responding, “In 155 a perfect world, yes.” 156 Member Questions to Applicant Representative 157 Acting Chair Cunningham asked Mr. Thompson if he had thought about moving the accessory building to 158 a different place on site given the 30’ requirement ve rsus their original 6’ placement to the existing 159 structure; and if so, if he could provid e rationale why that would not be feasible. 160 Mr. Thompson suggested that, based on the current Site Plan, the structure could probably move to the 161 west and retain the same grade. However, to situatio n it further to the north, Mr. Thompson opined would 162 not be possible due to the grade out and ability to meet measurements and code requirements from the 163 permanent structure; requiring a w hole new element of grading not wise for an interim building. Mr. 164 Thompson advised that the rationale to site the tempor ary structure as close as possible to the church 165 was predicated the use of restroom facilities and other rooms in the church. Mr. Thompson advised that 166 the existing playground equipment could be relocated to the west or north to put the children on the west 167 side of the current leased space. If the building came off the south side, Mr. Thompson advised that it 168 would provide access to the church’s exit door leadi ng off the main hall to the center and access to 169 restroom facilities and two (2) classrooms used by the school in the church. Based on the required 30’ 170 distance between the facilities, Mr. Thompson advised that it would be logical for the oldest school 171 children to walk through that door to sue that restroom facility. 172 Attachment E Page 4 of 5