Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />-Would there be a possibility for making the landscaping taller, such as use of trees in <br />addition to what was in place? It was stated that there would be a mix of trees and, <br />once the trees reached full height, there would be adequate screening. <br /> <br />Staff Comments <br /> <br />Mr. Greatens stated that the proposed use, including the additional 17 memory care units, <br />and layout was functional and the parking requirements would be exceeded. Regarding <br />building height, Mr. Greatens stated that although the proposed height was ten feet taller <br />than the building addition previously approved in 2009, the proposed building footprint <br />was smaller than what was previously approved. He stated there was sufficient buffering <br />between the proposed building addition and the adjacent residential properties to the west <br />and southwest. He added that the single-family residential district, the maximum <br />building height is 35 feet, which could result in a building that was significantly taller <br />than and closer to the residential buildings to the west. Mr. Greatens stated the proposed <br />building addition would be at a minimum 80 feet from the closest residential dwelling <br />and additional landscaping would be provided in the buffer area between the properties. <br />addition would not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties and staff <br />recommended approval of the amended Conditional Use Permit with the conditions set <br />forth in Attachment B of the Staff Report. <br /> <br />Questions/Comments from Plan Commission members and responses from the applicant <br />included: <br /> <br /> <br />-With the proposed expansion, would the number of employees increase and were <br />there previous instances of overflow parking needs in the neighborhood or parking <br />issues overall? Mr. Walker stated there had not been parking issues. <br /> <br />Ms. Locke asked for public comments. <br /> <br />Mr. Tom Malon, property owner of 8677 Barby Lane, addressed the Plan Commission <br />and stated his property was the closest to the subject site. He stated that in reference to <br />setbacks of 80 feet, according to Mr. Walker, a parking lot could potentially be as close <br />as 15 feet from the property line and a dumpster as close as six feet from the property <br />line. He stated that Plan Commission members should consider this space and proposed <br />construction of a solid stockade fence to block the construction. <br /> <br />Mr. Michael Lane, property owner of 8677 W. Kingsbury Avenue, expressed concern <br />with inconveniences that could be caused by the proposed construction such as noise <br />pollution and was concerned about potential light pollution after the addition would be <br />built. He also had concerns about landscaping and lack of maintenance and replacement <br />of dead landscaping in the existing landscape buffers. <br /> <br />tğŭĻ Ќ ƚŅ Џ <br /> <br />