My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
1996-04-22 Regular Meeting
LaPorte
>
.Minutes
>
City Council
>
1990's
>
1996
>
1996-04-22 Regular Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2016 12:07:06 PM
Creation date
7/31/2025 10:49:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Meetings
Meeting Body
City Council
Meeting Doc Type
Minutes
Date
4/22/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
80
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Planning and Zoning COmmiSSione <br />SCU96-OO1 <br />Page 8 of 9 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />process. As presently drawn, the facility site plan indicates a twenty foot wide <br />driveway that is to be located along the eastern face of the building. It appears <br />that this drive is intended to provide access to the rear of the facility as well as <br />the undeveloped portion of the site. Under the circumstances, staff would <br />recommend the following: <br /> <br />. The driveway be treated as a private access road; and <br /> <br />. As such, it be widened to 24 feet in order to provide access for <br />emergency vehicles. <br /> <br />Performance or "density intensity" standards in effect within R-2 zones are <br />established by Ordinance Section 5-700. <br /> <br />Based on the 61 units proposed for the facility and the 5.637 acres available, <br />overall density will be 10.8 units per acre. This is very close to the 10 unit per <br />acre limit established for quadreplex townhomes, one of the highest density <br />permitted R-2 uses. Future units constructed on the undeveloped portion of the <br />site would of course significantly impact overall density and would, therefore, <br />require careful review and consideration. Future development should also hold <br />to R-2 Density parameters. <br /> <br />Staff would recommend as a condition of the SCU approval, that any site <br />development beyond that which is presently proposed, require a new SCU permit. <br /> <br />Conclusion: <br /> <br />The application for SCU96-OO1 substantially complies with ordinance requirements. <br />However, due to outstanding items, it would be premature to recommend City Council <br />approval. Staff will be willing to recommend approval (with certain conditions) once the <br />following items have been addressed. <br /> <br />. A Minor Development Site Plan has been reviewed and approved by the <br />City. <br /> <br />. Side building setbacks have been adjusted as necessary. <br /> <br />. Internal access to the northern portion of the tract is adequately provided <br />for by provision of a private street (minimum width, 24 feet). <br /> <br />. Adequate provisions are made for fire protection and potable water service <br />to the interior portions of the tract. <br /> <br />. P. U . D. covenants are submitted for City review and approval. <br /> <br />. Adequate landscape/screening plans are developed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.