03-27-2002 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

therefore recommend that the amount of accessory storage space be reduced to 520 square feet (to eliminate the need for a CUP) and that either the existing garage be expanded or a detached structure lying 6 feet from the principal building be constructed. The Mentes's application was heard by the Planning Commission on February 14, 2002. After considering the Application and the other maters submitted, the Planning Commission recommended 4 -1 to approve the application for a CUP for a 1,008 square foot accessory storage garage, subject to the applicant's agreement to alter some of the setbacks. Discussion A. Consultant Report Must be Rejected Where Recommendation is Based Upon Subjective Aesthetic Criteria for "Oversized Garage" That Is Without Foundation In Zonino Code or Existing Conditions The Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. Report bases its conclusions and recommendations upon an evaluation of "oversized garages" in Little Canada. The Report implies that the standard of "oversized" is the relationship or ratio of the total floor space of the combined accessory buildings to the size of the total lot area. The ratio of the floor area of the accessory structure to the total lot size area is not the standard established by the Little Canada Zoning Code or even a factor under the Code. The Code only limits the relative floor area of the accessory structure to a ratio of 25% of the area of the rear yard. Section 903.020.D.4. The Report does not even mention this fact or the fact that the structure proposed by the Applicants falls well within this limitation. The rear yard area of 3058 Greenbrier is 149.4 feet x 111.91 feet (according to the survey on file) with a total rear yard area of 16,719.3. The total floor area of 1,448 square feet is well within the 25% ratio limit of the Code which for 3058 Greenbrier would be 4,179.8 square feet. Significantly, the Report's comparison chart of the accessory garages whose CUPs have been approved also omits this ratio. The consultant implies that the Mentes accessory garage would be "oversized" because the ratio of combined floor area to the total yard area would be largest of any of the CUP's approved by the City. Thus, the ratio of combined floor area to total yard area for the mentes accessory building is 0.0585 (1,448 _ 24,752). This compares to the ratios for 2935 Edgerton, which is 0.0542 (1,493 ± 27, 525), 3075 Edgerton, which is 0.0480 (1500 ± 31,193) or even 2808 Noel, which is 0,0543 (1500 ± 27,600). The fallacy of this comparison and the consultant's Report is that the ratio is not a standard in approving a CUP. Total yard area is not even a relevant factor. Only the ratio of combined floor area to rear yard area which exceeds 25% is relevant. "Oversized garage" is not specifically defined in the City Code. The Report's author basically devised his own definition and standard for `oversized garages" and then recommended denial of the Mentes application based upon the application meeting that subjective standard or definition. The Zoning Code clearly permits accessory garage structures up to 1,500 square feet, offset only by the square footage of any other accessory structure, which are not "oversized" unless they exceed that 3