Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 24, 1996 <br />into single-family lots. <br />Morelan pointed out that the size of the structure <br />proposed by Battista is very large. Morelan indicated <br />that he would not have much of a problem with the <br />proposal if the land around the Battista property was <br />not developable. There are residential homes in the <br />area and the potential for additional homes. These <br />property owners would have to live with the building. <br />Morelan felt that protecting future property owners in <br />the area was grounds enough to deny the CUP request. <br />Morelan also added that he will take Mr. Battista at <br />his word about his intended use of the building. <br />However, the property will eventually be sold and the <br />next person buying the property will have to pay for <br />the building and will have to have a use in mind for <br />it. The natural answer appears to be using the <br />building for repair work. <br />Morelan encouraged Mr. Battista to come in with a <br />scaled-down version of the building. <br />Fahey pointed out that Mr. Battista already has 1,456 <br />square feet of garage space, therefore, he would be <br />reluctant to approve additional accessory building <br />space. Fahey stated that he was skeptical about the <br />proposal given the amount of existing garage space. <br />Morelan asked if the current ordinance considered the <br />footprint of accessory space or the total square <br />footage amount. The Planner replied that the total <br />square footage amount is considered. <br />Scalze pointed out the numerous requests the City is <br />getting for additional accessory space, and that the <br />maximum amount approved in the past has been a total of <br />1,500 ~quare feet. <br />LaValle asked if new homes being constructed with three <br />or four garages should have a CUP. <br />Pedersen pointed out that the standard size for a two- <br />car garage is 22 feet by 22 feet or 484 square feet. <br />Mr. Morelan introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 96-4-94 - DENYING THE CONDITIONAL USE <br />PERMIT FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AS PROPOSED BY MR. <br />GERALD BATTISTA BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE <br />8 <br />