01/14/2015 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

around them so their tenants' buildings already block visibility of the plaza. He doesn't believe Verizon will adversely impact traffic as the proposed use only generates 20 vehicles a day. Mr. O'Malley advised that in the absence of a dumpster enclosure being shown on the plans there is to be no dumpster at this site. Mr. Conrad said the new building will share the existing enclosure assigned to the Remington building. Mr. DiFranco aslced if there were enough accessible spaces provided and if the spaces were added after the easement or as part of the easement. This should be studied as removing the spaces will place the neighboring building in violation of parking requirements. The two entities need to carefully review the easement and work together to ensure both sites meet their parking requirements. Mr. Plautz asked if the handicap parlcing needed to be provided on the neighbor's site. Mr. DiFranco said the two property owners need to work out where the handicap parking will be placed so that neither site will be in violation. Mr. Malone moved, seconded by Mr. Schumann, to table CMS14-2564 - Verizon; PP# 235- 27-008, Broolcparlc Road wfth the following recommendations: 1. All easements pertaining to this parcel are to be submitted for review including parking. 2. Coping cap will be the same color as the coping. 3. Honey Locust trees are to be replaced with Little Leaf Linden at 2'/Z" caliper. 4. "Root ball" on plan is to be changed to "root flare." 5. Provide details of dumpster enclosure on plans or indicate there will be no dumpster enclosure. Motion passed 5-0. CMS14-2601 - Lot Snlit & Consolidation; 28517 Windsor Drive Representative: Ralph Kronz Mr. DiFranco said the proposed plat requires minor edits. Applicants propose to split the rear portion of the lot which fronts Mackenzie and consolidate that portion with two other parcels to form a consolidated parcel which will front onto Windsor Drive. Mr. O'Malley asked if the lot created would be a legally buildable lot or would it create any practical difficulties because of ditches or storm easements, etc. Mr. DiFranco assured him that the lot would be lawful and would have access and could be developed as zoned. Ms. Humphries said they purchased their home in 1985 and tried to purchase the back land and was advised that it was not for sale nor was it buildable as there were underground tanks and cisterns buried on the property. She asked if a home could be built on the land and if the tanks would be removed. There was a water plant on the property and the city didn't remove the tanlcs and left an open cistern in the southeast corner of the property. She asked if the tanks or the cistern is reinoved what impact it would have on their property. She aslced if a bridge could be built over the ditch and had concerns it would devalue their property. Mr. Malone asked the city engineer to address the neighbors' concerns. Mr. DiFranco said the land is vacant and located between the baclcyards of parcels along Maclcenzie and Forest Ridge. The Windsor ditch runs along the front of the proposed parcel and is a significant stream. The ditch is an open ditch except a 30-foot area at the southwest corner where the city has a large culvert which is being replaced. Mr. Kronz will put his driveway over the culvert which is not prohibited, however the owner must be aware that if in the future the city choses to remove the culvert he would be responsible to provide access to his property.