03-27-2002 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 23, 2002 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDER- ATION OF CUP APPROVAL — 3058 GREENBRIER - MENTES RIGHT-OF- W4 1' REQUESTED B 1' SAM RO73ERTO PENDING ,4 RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Scalze. Ayes (5) LaValle, Scalze, Montour, Fahey, Anderson. Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. Mr. Rick Ducharme, representing Al and Cindy Mentes, appeared before the Council requesting a reconsideration of a Conditional Use Permit approval for accessory garage that was granted on August 22, 2001. Ducharme reported that the requirements of the CUP were not workable. Ducharme also outlined the history of the Mentes' purchase of the property, and information they received that led them to believe a 1,000 square foot accessory garage would be allowed to be constructed on their property. He noted that the lot is large, and that a 1,000 square foot garage would be in keeping with the scale of lots in the area and the character of the neighborhood. Fahey noted the careful consideration that both the Planning Commission and the City Council gave of the Mentes application. He also noted the neighborhood input that was heard as part of the public hearing process. Fahey indicated that unless there is a new proposal or some new information to consider, the CUP should stand as approved. Ducharme indicated that the Mentes' have a revised plan that they would like considered which they believe is a compromise from what was originally proposed and what was ultimately approved. Anderson felt that if the Nlentes' have a different option to present, that the matter should be reconsidered. Anderson pointed out that this should not be taken as an indication that the Council will approve the new proposal, however. LaValle asked if the revised concept was for an attached or detached garage. Ducharme replied that it was for detached. He indicated that an addition to the existing garage would be difficult to construct. He also indicated that a detached accessory garage does fit in aesthetically with the character of the neighborhood. Scalze indicated that a reconsideration of the CUP would have to apply to the original proposal. A new proposal would require the CUP process to be repeated. The City Attorney agreed. Fahey also pointed out that typically a reconsideration must occur at the meeting immediately following the one where action was taken. Fahey