03-24-1994 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA

Browse Search

Page 3 of 5 Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 4/213/94 V94-003 parking lot traffic flow. This would at best, cause inconvenience and nuisance. At worst it could cause a safety hazard. Requiring either of these conditions to persist would appear to result in a hardship for the applicant. In developing this property, the applicant working within the constraints of property size, successfully designed this facility to comply with Zoning Ordinance requirements. He had originally hoped for a second "A" Street driveway. The size, or more specifically the 125' depth of his property, precluded this. The applicant's hardship is a result of strict conformance to ordinance requirements on a relatively shallow piece of property. Given the circumstances of the case, this hardship does appear to be unnecessary. It is not financial or a matter of convenience. The next two conditions to be considered are protection of the "best public interest" and the "spirit of the Zoning Ordinance". Although these are two separate conditions, they are, in terms of this case, closely enough related to be addressed in a single discussion. Figure 10-3 of Section 10-605 establishes the design parameters for "commercial" driveways. In addition to regulating the number of accesses, this section sets the requirements for: · drive width (20'-25') curb return radius (10'-15') clearance from intersection (40' minimum) · spacing between driveways (40' minimum) · percentage of property frontage that can be covered by driveway (40%) · clearance from obstructions (5' minimum) The asphalt drive installed by the applicant, at 17 feet is narrower than allowed by ordinance. If widened to 20 feet, as illustrated on Exhibit A, this drive would comply with all applicable ordinance requirements except for those regarding number of accesses. The second drive, configured in accordance with ordinance requirements would result in a safer and more orderly traffic flow pattern. This result would certainly be in the best public interest. It would additionally, by improving public safety, observe the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance.