Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />AUGUST 8, 2024 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br /> The foregoing motion was duly seconded by Haluptzok. <br /> Ayes (6). Nays (0). Motion passed. <br /> <br />Chair Johnson invited a resident present to provide input. <br /> <br />David Carlson, 3101 Edgerton Street, asked what will happen with the two lots, particularly <br />whether a second home would be built. Chair Johnson acknowledged that often when there is a <br />lot split, the intention would be to build a new home on the new lot. <br /> <br />The City Clerk stated that the applicants intend to stay in the existing home and will sell the <br />newly created lot. She stated that the current zoning of the property would only allow a single- <br />family home to be built. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson asked if there would be kids living in the new home and whether there would be any <br />damage to his lot. Chair Johnson stated that it is not the purview of the Planning Commission to <br />determine who would live in a new single-family lot. She explained that the request is to split <br />the lot into two, and the newly proposed lots meet all City standards and requirements. She <br />stated that there should not be any impact to Mr. Carlson’s lot. It was also noted that Mr. <br />Carlson’s lot is on the north, adjacent to the existing single-family home. <br /> <br />ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS FOR GARAGES AND DRIVEWAY CURB CUT <br />WIDTH <br />The City Clerk stated that earlier this year the Commission made amendments to the zoning code <br />related to garages in order to eliminate the need for some residents to come through the <br />Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. She stated that the total allowance for garages and <br />accessory structures was changed to 1,500 square feet. She reviewed some language that <br />remains in the Code that is more restrictive, as it restricts the size of any one accessory building <br />to no more than the first-floor living space of the home. She provided an example of a resident <br />who would like to construct a garage smaller than 1,500 square feet and because of the first-floor <br />square footage of her home would not be allowed to do so, but could construct two smaller <br />garages and still meet the City Code. She provided examples of garages that exceed that current <br />restrictive Code limitation but do not overpower the home, as the additional square footage often <br />comes from depth. She recommended changing the Code language to allow 1.5 times or 150 <br />percent of the first-floor square footage of the home and to place a limit on the width of the <br />garage. She stated that some residents will still be limited in the size of the garage because of the <br />size of their lot as well. She stated that currently there is not a cap on the total square footage for <br />a garage that could be requested through a CUP. She also discussed the allowed curb cut size, <br />noting that with the Code update the allowance was changed from 24 feet to 18 feet. She <br />explained that there are a lot of driveway replacement requests that come in and residents are <br />then hesitant to move forward with the project because they would need to decrease the size from <br />their existing 24 feet to 28 feet. She noted that 24 feet would be the standard two-car garage size <br />and there are many two and three-car garages in Little Canada. She stated that staff would <br />recommend changing that back to 24 feet. <br />