Laserfiche WebLink
Schreier stated his project will not impact traffic loads. Only the production <br />space will increase. <br />On August 12, an open house was held for 37 neighbors; five showed up. The <br />neighbors were supportive. The Schreiers did meet with 83 neighbors door-to- <br />door and received approval from all. <br />He stated he met with the building inspector and fire marshal. The property has <br />been surveyed and a new site plan was drawn showing 16 parking spaces (with <br />parking in front of overhead doors). He stated he has never exceeded three <br />customer cars at one time, by appointment. There are nine current employees, <br />two additional employees are possible. There would be 13 to 14 spaces, 17 <br />spaces would not be needed. He stated storm water improvements would not be <br />necessary with his 13 to 14 spaces. <br />MemberMulder asked how delivery vehicles will be shown on the site and noted <br />that the delivery vans spaces should not be in front of the overhead doors. <br />MemberMulder asked if the property line jog on the north side of the building will <br />be removed. How will the legal description be written – will there be access <br />between parcel A and B? (No). <br />The garage and drive for the house is on the north side of the house, away from <br />the shop. <br />MemberMulder asked what direction surface water flows today? (No answer <br />available). Mr. Schreier stated that the drainage plan will be in the next phase. <br />MemberMulder asked why parcels A and B are not in the proposal.Schreier <br />stated that the Schreier house will not be part of the PUD for his business; he <br />cannot afford to replace the house and also add to the business (assuming the <br />house must be torn down immediately). <br />. <br />ChairRhody stated that the original discussion was to include both lots and <br />provide two years to consider what to do with the house. <br />Mr.Schreier stated that the long-term view of use along Cleveland Avenue will <br />be much like his shop. <br />Member Cunningham recalled that the homes could remain as long as they are <br />part of the PUD. The houses could later be sold as a commercial development. <br />Member Olson asked why the homes would not be sold and redeveloped within <br />2 <br />