Laserfiche WebLink
<br />in Cornerstone areas have been developed: however, they have not been adopted <br />by the City Council. A portion of the guidelines encourage placing the building closer <br />to the street and allowing more open space, buffers, or parking along side or behind <br />the building. Such guidelines are being considered by adjoining property owners. <br /> <br />2.13 Mr. Johnson is also requesting a variance from Section 1009 of the City Code to <br />reduce the front yard setback of a pylon sign to 5 feet for the purpose of upgrading <br />an existing sign. The pole for the existing pylon sign is located five feet from the <br />property line; however, the sign itself extends up to the property line along <br />Lexington Avenue. Mr. Johnson is proposing to use the existing single pole as the <br />western pole of the new two-pole sign. The proposed new sign will be 8 feet wide <br />and approximately 8 feet in height. The overall height of the sign will be <br />approximately 16 feet. The proposed sign will set within a parking stall. <br /> <br />2.14. Section 1005.01 (A) of the City Code requires a front yard setback of 30 feet. a rear <br />yard setback of 20 feet, and a side yard setback of 10 feet for a parcel in a B-2 <br />zoning district. <br /> <br />Section 1005.01 (0) requires five parking spaces per 1000 square feet of floor area. <br />Portions of the building devoted primarily to storage and aisles are not included in <br />these calculations. The 23 parking spaces available on the site will adequately <br />accommodate the building with the proposed expansion. <br /> <br />Chapter 1009 outlines the requirements for signs within the community. Pylon signs <br />are classified as structures and must meet the setback requirements for the district <br />in which they are located. The area of a free-standing sign is limited to 100 square <br />feet and the overall height is limited to 20 feet. <br /> <br />Section 1013.02 outlines the criteria and procedure for considering a variance. <br /> <br />3.0 STAFF COMMENT <br /> <br />3.1 In reviewing the request for building variances, staff made the following findings: <br /> <br />1. The proposed setback variances for the building addition are in harmony with <br />the general purpose and intent of the City's existing Comprehensive Plan <br />and Title 10 of the City Code (Zoning). The existing principal structure is <br />setback 3 feet from the rear property line and 4.5 feet from the side property <br />line. The proposed addition will not encroach further into these established <br />building lines. The Planning Commission and staff received a letter opposed <br />to setback variances from James and Genevieve McCarthy, dated 8/5/98, <br />claiming that approval of the variance would damage their townhome <br />property by $16,000 to $17,000 (10% of market value) <br /> <br />2. The proposed building variances, if granted, will not adversely affect the <br /> <br />PF#3029 - RCA (08/24/98) - Page 4 of 7 <br />