Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JULY 12, 2012 <br />the north for both delivery and visitor traffic. Mercil pointed out that he <br />does not have a door on the south side of his house that would lend itself' <br />to use for visitors. <br />Duray reported that he looked at the property and agreed that it was <br />unique. Duray asked if there was a service door proposed on the new <br />garage. Mercil pointed out that there are two service doors proposed, one <br />on the north side of the garage and one on the east side. <br />Fischer asked when the old garage would be demolished. Mercil stated <br />that he estimates the old garage would be demolished by June 1, 2013 and <br />the area reseeded or resodded by July 1, 2013. Murphy asked if the new <br />garage could be moved in order to meet the setback requirement. Merril <br />indicated that a 6 foot separation is required, and the only way to move the <br />garage back would be to attach it to the house. Merril stated that he <br />couldn't attach it because his utilities come into the house in the southwest <br />corner. The Planner pointed out that the Building and Zoning Codes <br />require a 6 foot separation between buildings. Duray asked if the side <br />yard setback was being met. The Planner replied that the 10 foot side yard <br />setback requirement was being complied with. <br />The City Planner reported that in preparing his report he assumed that in <br />addition to the old garage being removed, the northern driveway would <br />also be removed. He indicated that the Ordinance suggests only one <br />driveway access per single- family residence. In some cases as second <br />driveway can be added by Conditional Use Permit. There are criteria in <br />the ordinance for a CUP for a second driveway, and the City Planner <br />indicated that this property would have difficulty in meeting that criteria. <br />Duray asked if the new garage would match the house and if the driveway <br />would be blacktopped. Mercil responded in the affirmative to both. <br />Murphy asked about seeding the area after the old garage is removed, and <br />if access to this area would be over grass. She also asked whether Mercil <br />would request a CUP for a second driveway access based on the Planner's <br />comments. Mercil replied that he would seed the area of the old garage, <br />but that the blacktop driveway and a blacktopped parking area would he <br />retained on the north. This area would be utilized for deliveries and <br />guests. Mercil reviewed pictures of his property showing that his front <br />door faces north and is the logical entrance area for guests. Again, the <br />City Planner reviewed the conditions listed in the Code that would need to <br />be met to obtain a CUP for a second driveway access pointing out that it <br />would be difficult to meet these conditions. <br />Duray asked if Mercil would change his plans for the new garage if he <br />could not continue to utilize the driveway on the north. Mercil stated that <br />-3- <br />