Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />Apr•il 27, 1988 <br />Peter•sen The City Planner• repor•ted that his Apr~il 27th r•eport contains the <br />CUP (Cont.) r~ecommendation for• a 10 foot sideyar•d setback for• the accessor•y <br />building which is a change in his recommendation that was made to <br />the Planning Commission for a 5 foot sideyard setback. The Planner <br />noted that the accessor•y building is detached, ther•efor•e, the 10 foot <br />sideyard setback r•equir•ement would apply. <br />B1 esener~ poi nted out the thor•oughfar~e pl an for• the ar•ea and asked i ts <br />effect on this pr•oposal. <br />The Planner• r~eplied that the pr•oposed accessor•y building would not be <br />in conflict with the thor~oughfar•e plan, although the existing house <br />would be. It may be that should the thoroughfar•e plan be developed, <br />the Peter~sen pr~oper•ty may not be splitable due to the location of the <br />house. <br />Blesener asked if there was the necessity for more than one conditional <br />use per•mit. <br />The Pl anner• noted that the pr•oper•ty wi 11 have mor~e than one accessor•y <br />str•ucture, mor~e than one gar~age, and the accessor•y squar•e footage will <br />exceed 1,000 squar•e feet in total, however•, the Planner~ felt that one <br />conditional use per~mit would cover• all these conditions. <br />Fahey asked Mr•. Peter•sen i f he was agr~eeabl e to the P1 anner~' s r~ecommendati on <br />that the accessor•y building not be used for• commer•cial pur•poses. <br />Petersen r•eplied that he was. <br />alesener~ asked if ther~e would be a dr•iveway back to the building. <br />Peter~sen r~eplied that ther~e would be eventually, as he would stor~e one <br />of his vehicles in the building. <br />Fahey asked if ther•e was anyone fr~om the gener•al public pr•esent wishing <br />to comment on this pr~oposal. Ther•e was not. <br />Mr•. Blesener~ intr•oduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 88-4-153 - CLOSING THE <br />PUBLIC HEARING ON THE VERNON PETERSEN <br />REOUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR <br />ACCESSORY BUILDING <br />The for•egoing r•esolution was duly seconded by P1r~s. Scalze. <br />Ayes (5) Blesener•, Scalze, Fahey, LaValle, Collova. <br />Nays (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appear•s in Resolution Book No. 19, Page 157. <br />Mr•. Blesener~ introduced the following r~esolution and moved its adoption: <br />Page -3- <br />