12.10.25 BOA Agenda Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

50 Draft 1 2 Beth Bronson: Oh, good. 3 4 Kevin Hornik: I'm trying to provide you all the information that you're asking for. 5 6 Beth Bronson: Thank you. You want to explain this one? 7 8 Kevin Hornik: This is a similar agreement. It was established in 2016, and it applies to Hi Mar Road. So, 9 there are kind of two separate private driveways. There's Dodson Knoll that runs more or less 10 north, south. Hi Mar that runs more or less east, west. 11 12 Leon Meyers: So, is Hi Mar not entirely on the subject parcel? 13 14 Kevin Hornik: Hi Mar is a portion of it is on the subject property. 15 16 Beth Bronson: It goes up this way. 17 18 Kevin Hornik: There's a separate parcel, and incidentally, the other parcel that is encumbered by Hi Mar 19 Lane is owned by Dr. Mimi Kim. You'll see in the affidavit that's in your packet as Tab 4. 20 21 Leon Meyers: Okay. 22 23 Kevin Hornik: So again, these are the two road access agreements that create the legal right of access that 24 provides access from the subject property and all of the other properties in the general vicinity 25 to Dairyland Road. 26 27 Leon Meyers: Before we go back to James on the frontage matter, you mentioned buffer, the nature of the 28 buffer that's called out on the site plan, just on the eastern frontage of the subject parcel. 29 There's, maybe I should be asking the staff here. The buffer's called out on the site plan, but 30 1 don't see any specific notes about the nature of the buffer. Maybe I'm just not reading 31 carefully enough. 32 33 Taylor Perschau: No, I think you are reading accurately. It's defined as a 30-foot landscape buffer. The 34 standards would define it as a Type B, 30-foot buffer. I will offer that—so this is the special- 35 use permit,which does require a site plan submittal. Subsequent to any approval of a special 36 needs permit, the project is required to move through a non-residential zoning compliance 37 permit, which requires site plan review as well, which is a condition that could be added to 38 correct this note. And it is something that would be reviewed again in that portion. So, it 39 would be a helpful note for staff to ensure that what you approve is what we review, a non- 40 residential zoning compliance permit application against. 41 42 Leon Meyers: Are, are you saying that the UDO in this situation would require a Type B buffer or that's your 43 recommendation for this situation? 44 45 Taylor Perschau: So, section 5.8.2 does ask for a Type B, 30-foot buffer. 46 47 Leon Meyers: Got it. Okay. That that's a condition that we might want to consider adding to the special-use 48 permit. 49 50 Kevin Hornik: And, and just to clarify, Taylor, I'm sorry. 50