Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MAY 10, 2012 <br />driveways on the site plan, and if a new driveway is proposed to show that <br />as well. Knudsen asked if there were any issues relative to impervious <br />surface. The Planner replied that there was not as the property is very <br />large. <br />Knudsen asked if any proposed use of the new garage would be <br />commercial in nature. O'Brien replied no. <br />Hall asked if O'Brien intended to keep the driveway at the western edge of <br />the property. O'Brien reported that it is usable, but he would not be using <br />it on a daily basis. <br />Duray noted the proposed setback for the garage is 30 -feet from the north <br />property line. O'Brien indicated that he would likely have a 40 -foot <br />setback. There was discussion about whether or not the new garage would <br />be visible to the homes in The Preserve. It was noted that there are a lot of <br />trees on the property, and the Commission pointed out that increasing the <br />setback to 40 feet would be preferable. O'Brien indicated that moving the <br />garage closer to his house provided him with easier access and again <br />stated that the setback would likely be 40 feet. <br />Knudsen asked the impact of this new garage on any future division of this <br />property. The City Planner indicated that if a property division is <br />proposed, there would have to be an agreement that a house would be <br />constructed on the new lot. A new lot could not exist under the code with <br />just an accessory building. The Planner felt that in practicality, this issue <br />would be easily addressed. <br />I3arraclough indicated that moving the proposed accessory building fin-ther <br />south would be a good thing. Duray stated that the proposal meets the <br />Code and noted that the issue of garage height can be worked out with the <br />Building Official. He also indicated that the neutral color proposed for the <br />garage was good. Knudsen asked about requiring the house be resided <br />within 24 months. The Planner felt it typical to give an applicant adequate <br />time to meet that condition, and suggested a time period through the end <br />of 2014. <br />I3arraclough asked whether or not the lean -to on the house would be <br />counted as garage space. The Planner indicated that any accessory <br />structure with a roof would be counted, and noted that this would likely <br />bring total garage space over the 1,500 foot maximum in the Code. The <br />Commission informed Mr. O'Brien that the lean -to would either have to <br />be removed, downsized, or the proposed accessory building downsized so <br />that total garage /accessory building space does not exceed 1,500 square <br />feet. O'Brien indicated that he would either remove or reduce the size of <br />the lean -to. Maleitzke asked if a Variance would be an option. The City <br />- 3 - <br />14 <br />