11-28-2001 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2001 George Rossez appeared before the Commission and indicated that he had no problem with the rezoning as requested. Barraclough asked for an explanation of B -3 zoning versus R -B zoning. The City Planner replied that B -3 allows full commercial development. Under R -B zoning, small office -type uses are allowed as well as a limited amount of retail by Conditional Use Permit. Keis asked if Youngs would be running a business out of the home. Youngs replied that he would not. Roycraft pointed out that once this request is sent on to the City Council there is no going back. Keis noted that rezoning from B -3 to R -B does not limit what the City wants to see for this area. The Planner noted that R -B accommodates some limited commercial activity. Roycraft recommended approval of the rezoning from General Business (B -3) to Residential Business (R -B) of 355 Little Canada Road as requested by Ery Youngs and Linda Fuller to allow for replacement of the existing single- family house with a new house subject to compliance with the recommendations of the City Planner and subject to the new house meeting all building codes. Motion seconded by Duray. Motion carried 5 — 0. AMENDMENT The City Planner reported that while the Zoning Code requires a CUP TO ZONING for detached accessory garages when an attached garage already exists on CODE — a property, the Code allows accessory buildings as a permitted use. The ACCESSORY Planner pointed out that the impact of a detached accessory garage or a BUILDINGS detached accessory building would be the same; therefore, it would be logical to require the same permitting process. The only difference in an accessory garage versus an accessory building is that the accessory garage has a garage door. Keis recommended adoption of the Amendment to the Zoning Code relative to accessory buildings as discussed this evening. Motion seconded by Duray. Motion carried 5 — 0. Page 13