Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />AUGUST 2.5, 2004 <br />Fahey agreed that this was a policing matter, and would not be the basis to <br />deny a CUl? for a second garage given that the proposal meets the City's <br />code requirements. Hiland stated that he did not object to the second <br />garage. <br />Debbie Lancette, 791 Lal3ore Road, expressed concern with the second <br />garage noting the developable land in the area. Lancette felt that too many <br />garages would decrease land values. Lancette pointed out that according <br />to the City's concept plan for the area, there is the potential for 19 single- <br />family lots. Lancette felt that potential buyers would not want to be <br />looking at a bunch of extra garages. Lancette also noted that while Mr. <br />Kulousek has indicated that he would not operate a business out of the <br />second garage, futw~e buyers of the property may do so. <br />Fahey noted that the CUP would run with the land and any subsequent <br />buyer would be held to the same standards as Mr. Kulousek The City <br />Attorney indicated that this was correct. <br />Fahey noted that the City Code allows a second garage by CUI', and if the <br />CUP requirements are met, the Council would have no basis for denial. <br />Lancette asked if the I{ulouselc property could be subdivided. Fahey <br />indicated that the property is large enough to be subdivided. However, the <br />placement proposed for the second garage would preclude subdivision <br />without removal of that garage. <br />There was no one else present from the general public wishing to <br />comment on this matter. <br />Upon motion by Blesener, seconded by LaValle, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Blesener asked if it would be appropriate to tw~n the garage to face toward <br />the future Leeward Way extension. I{ulousek noted that the Code limits a <br />single-family lot to one street access. "therefore, the garage must face <br />AIIen Avenue. The City Planner indicated that that is correct. <br />Montour noted that eventually the Kulousek property will be a corner lot. <br />Kulousek indicated that he understands that given the placement of the <br />second garage, he will not be able to subdivide his property. Fahey noted <br />that if the second garage is removed, the property may be subdividable. <br />Montour noted the many requests that the City is getting for second <br />garages. He suggested that the Council consider as a condition of CUP <br />approval for second garages, that these properties be restricted from being <br />able to have an accessory shed. Montour noted that one condition for <br />