My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Court of Appeals Decision
>
OnTrack
>
WG
>
2018
>
WG 18-3
>
Court of Appeals Decision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2019 4:01:21 PM
Creation date
12/26/2019 2:48:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
WG
File Year
18
File Sequence Number
3
Application Name
Lombard Apartments
Document Type
Appeal Decision
Document_Date
8/14/2019
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
View images
View plain text
I one would not hesitate to say that the tool shed was related to or connected with the <br />2 residence. A maintenance building is the apartment-complex equivalent of a tool shed. <br />3 As for exclusivity, the record is slim, but it is reasonable to infer that the maintenance <br />4 building will be used to store maintenance equipment, to facilitate work by maintenance <br />5 staff, and for resident bicycle storage. Those are nonpublic uses by the residents <br />6 themselves (bicycle storage) or by persons acting for the direct benefit of the residents <br />7 (maintenance of the apartment complex). To return to our prior example of a nonpublic <br />8 fitness center on the complex grounds, the maintenance building is akin to a pump room <br />9 for the swimming pool--it is an incidental use that facilitates the residents' use. LUBA <br />10 did not err with respect to the maintenance building. <br />11 INTERNAL PARKING CIRCULATION AREAS <br />12 The remaining issue is the two internal parking circulation areas. <br />13 Petitioners argue that they are "streets" under the code and therefore must be excluded <br />14 from the net-density calculation, while respondents argue that they are "parking drives" <br />15 under the code and therefore were properly included in the net-density calculation.' <br />16 It would be easier to describe the areas at issue by reference to the site plan, <br />17 but the site plan would be illegible if reproduced here, so we must rely on words. The <br />18 property is shaped similarly to the state of Nebraska. River Road runs north-south along <br />19 the western side of the proposed development. Lombard Street will be extended so that it <br />Petitioners do not dispute that, if the internal parking circulation areas qualify as <br />"parking drives," they were properly included in the net-density calculation. Because that <br />underlying legal issue is undisputed, we do not consider it and express no opinion on it. <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.