PCAgenda_89Dec4 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ I MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 6, 1989 PAGE 2 Further discussion on the wording changes requested by the Solid Waste Commission and the fact that they are planning to write their own composting brochure followed. After more discussion an yard waste collection, the Commission moved to another agenda item. PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FROM GARY AFFOLTER, 1892 BOLTON Mr. Affolter, 1$92 Holton, requested a Permitted Accessory Use Permit to construct a~8hed attached to his garage for storage of his boat Suring the winter months. He distributed his application for Consideration of Planning Request Form with attachments describing location and type of construction. Discussion ensued whether or not the structure constitutes~a shed or a garage addition and, .therefore, whether the Permitted Accessory Use Permit was necessary. Planner Hoyt Taff agreed that the structure initially appears to be an addition to an existing garage. However, she interpreted it as a storage shed because it did not fit the definition of a garage,_ it has a separate entrance and it is built specifically for storing a boat. Therefore, a Permitted Accessory Use Permit as well as a building permit, due to its size, is required. Barry moved, seconded by Daykin, to approve the Permitted Accessory Use Permit as requested based upon the description contained in his October 31, 1989 Application for Consideration of Planning Reguest • and attachments; that a building permit would be required and should be taken out forthwith; and work on such structure be completed within a year. A vote was taken. The following voted in favor thereof: Barry, Daykin, Duncan, Finegan, Grittner and Nestingen and the following voted against: Boche. (Boche was of .the opinion that a precedent would be set by approving a structure which is attached to the garage as a Permitted Accessory Use.) The motion carried. DEFINITIONS OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE ZONING CODE, 9-3.02(1) an - SUBDIVISION 2 b Staff Planner Susan Hoyt Taff reviewed changes which would clarify portions of the Zoning Code which are il~.ogical, confusing and/or contradictory relating to accessory structures. She recommended exempting attached garages in an R-1 Zone from the Code requirement that the accessory use not extend beyond the front of the principal structure {9-2.04, Subdivision 1{f ). She described several examples of this construction currently within the City. She suggested a size limitation such as a four car garage be considered. Discussion on these points followed. Boche moved the lay the item over but the motion died for the lack of a~second. Black arrived at 8:33 P.M. After further discussion on whether the Commission wanted to address • this issue at this time or request further staff clarification, Finegan moved (he relinquished the Chair to Black) seconded by