Laserfiche WebLink
r ® � <br />place to go is 81st Street because there is an existing cut in <br />the median. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt there was no question about <br />eliminating the curb cut, but asked if there was any way to give <br />Mr. Penalba credit for losing the parking space. <br />Director Keating explained that there would have to be a <br />variance granted by the Board of Adjustments, but they would have <br />to prove that their case is unique. <br />Architect Tom Culler showed a diagram of the parking plan <br />and confirmed that Mr. Penalba would lose two parking spaces. <br />Chairman Lyons felt that either we follow the ordinance or <br />we change the ordinance; and the ordinance says they must give 10 <br />feet. <br />Commissioner Bird agreed, but pointed out that sometimes the <br />Board tends to redesign the site plan when confronted with <br />similar problems and requests. If he were the owner, he would <br />prefer to have his customers enter off of 81st Street for <br />safety's sake. <br />Director Keating confirmed that it was still staff's <br />recommendation to require the 10 ft. dedication and not to allow <br />the existing curb cut. <br />Attorney Vitunac emphasized that under the ordinance, we <br />cannot do any differently. <br />Attorney Albrecht again emphasized that this is an existing <br />curb cut and the ordinance does refer to creating traffic <br />hazards. <br />Chairman Lyons felt that we should get the 10 feet now and <br />not have to buy it or a building at some time in the future. <br />Marvin Penalba emphasized that he purchased the property in <br />the first place because of the existing curb cut off of U.S. #1 <br />and he felt that opening up his property from end to end would <br />create a hazard for customers coming in and out of the buildings <br />because of hot rodders, etc. Mr. Penalba felt that <br />constitutionally his property is his investment and did not feel <br />33 <br />BOOK Gn2 FAuE <br />EC 19,85 <br />