HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4967 Staff AnalysisJanuary `26, 1988
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 11
NAME:
LOCATION:
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Proposal:
Delta Express Conditional Use
Permit (Z-4967)
The south side of West 65th
Street just west of I-30
(2715 West 65th Street).
Hastings Realty Company/Murphy
and Sons, Incorporated, Bryan
Addison
To add one 24 feet by 60 feet canopy (two new pump islands
requires a 40 feet front yard variance), to construct a 493
sq. ft. addition and enclose 332 sq. ft. of additional floor
space to an existing 1,653 sq. ft. convenience store on 0.83
acres of land that is zoned "I-2."
Ordinance Design Standards:
1. Site Location:
Adjacent to an arterial street (West 65th Street).
2. Com atibilit with Neighborhood:
The property is abutted by industrial/commercial uses to
the north, vacant and industrial use located to the
south, office and commercial use located to the east and
vacant land located to the west. The proposed use is
compatible with the surrounding area and with the 65th
Street East District Plan (shown as commercial).
3. On-site Drives and Parking:
The Plan contains 12 existing paved parking spaces
(eight spaces required) and two 44 -feet wide access
drives to West 65th Street.
4. Screening and Buffers:
The site plan contains no landscaping.
I V
I'f
` January 26, 1988
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 11 - Continued
5. Analysis:
The applicant is requesting a 40 feet front yard setback
variance. The existing canopy sits ten feet off the
property line (50 feet required in "I-2"). The staff
sees no problem in allowing an additional canopy in the
setback area. The site plan is, however, somewhat
deficient. The applicant needs to revise the site plan
to include all dimensions of structures (existing and
proposed) and their setbacks from each other as well as
the property line. The applicant also needs to show
landscaping.
6. City Engineer Comments:
Provide landscaping.
12
7. Staff Recommendation:
Approval provided the applicant agrees to submit a
revised site plan as described above.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present and agreed to comply with staff
recommendations. There were no unresolved issues.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Commission voted 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent to approve the
application as recommended by the staff, reviewed by the
Subdivision Committee and agreed to by the applicant.