03-11-2021 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 11, 2021 6 developed this would only apply in the few undeveloped residential areas within the community. He reviewed photographs of homes and garages with different relationships and distances from the road. Chair Schwalbach asked how the Commission is being asked to consider these concepts. He noted that in a mixed-use situation he would rather have the back of the building towards the residential rather than parking between the uses. Mr. Weber stated that within general development landscaping there will be specific requirements for transitioning between commercial and residential uses. Chair Schwalbach noted that property within Little Canada is almost fully developed and therefore there would not be a lot of space to create that buffering. He stated that he would want to prevent a situation in which a building burns down and cannot be rebuilt because of the new standards. Mr. Weber noted that the reduced front setback would simply allow additional flexibility and a commercial property would not need to be set that close to the road. He noted that it would be a minimum setback and staff would not propose architectural guidelines. He noted that the parking regulations will also be loosened, which will be discussed at a later time. He noted that the possible building height will also be raised to allow for mixed use buildings within the corridor. Chair Schwalbach asked for input as to whether the garage suggestions were merely suggestions or whether those are suggested changes. Mr. Weber stated that if the new regulations were in place a developer would be required to visually mitigate the impact of a garage with a porch or increased setback. Chair Schwalbach commented that he has paid attention to garages since the last discussion. He stated that it seems to be based upon personal preference. He stated that because Little Canada has such little residential development left, he would struggle with implementing that type of change. He stated that he would be interested in feedback from developers because it is a personal preference and there is little opportunity for new residential development. Mr. Weber agreed that this would be the most radical change. He stated that they can continue the discussion and clarified that his proposal would mandate a softening of the garage to more fit in with the architectural design of the building. Commissioner Buesing commented that if the front setbacks are reduced that would eliminate the ability to put a garage in front. He noted that perhaps there be a house setback and separate garage setback.