Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />DRAFT <br /> 4 <br />4. 23 Century Trail Second Driveway Variance Request – City Planner Larsen 130 <br />reviewed a PowerPoint presentation that included information on the following: 131 <br />- Background (property owner request for second driveway after constructing second 132 <br />garage); 133 <br />- Site location and aerial Map; 134 <br />- Variance required for driveway; application has been made; 135 <br />- Review of permits, issues and communication on second driveway request; 136 <br />- Historically, there is a tree preservation area included (trees were removed 2005-2008); 137 <br />- Zoning ordinance language was reviewed; need for variance relates to the residential 138 <br />nature; 139 <br />- Applicant’s narrative (full request, communications and implications, situations 140 <br />currently existing in the City); 141 <br />- Building permit approval process review (information from Planning & Zoning; staff 142 <br />assumptions; permit application); 143 <br />- Off-Street Parking Regulations (review/reasoning); 144 <br />- Findings of Fact (all criteria must be met; review of criteria; variance request does not 145 <br />meet the criteria); 146 <br />- Staff recommendation for denial; 147 <br />- Planning & Zoning Board action reviewed which was basically no recommendation; 148 <br />(Planning & Zoning Board did recommend review of zoning ordinance regarding need to 149 <br />change language on second driveways and staff suggests taking that matter up as part of 150 <br />ordinance review in comp plan implementation process); 151 <br />- Action to be presented to council would deny variance request. 152 <br /> 153 <br />Councilmember Ruhland acknowledged that the permit application contained no request 154 <br />for a driveway but most garages have driveways; perhaps the assumption was that it 155 <br />would happen in the future? Planner Larsen said staff will attempt to make the 156 <br />process/regulations clearer for the permit process. Councilmember Ruhland noted the 157 <br />findings on the criteria and some areas where this property would be different. He does 158 <br />have concern though about setting a precedent because it could be far reaching. He thinks 159 <br />looking at a change to regulations is a good way to go. Councilmember Ruhland asked 160 <br />about the timing of the ordinance updates and Ms. Larsen remarked that this could be 161 <br />included in the larger process of updating zoning regulations based on the comp plan 162 <br />update and that process tends to come through in pieces and could take perhaps up to a 163 <br />year. Councilmember Ruhland asked about the term “tree preservation area” and 164 <br />suggested that’s mainly for the development process and staff concurred that while the 165 <br />intent would be to have the preservation be more permanent there are not a lot of 166 <br />regulatory teeth to provide for that. 167 <br /> 168 <br />Councilmember Cavegn asked the applicant how he intended to access his garage. 169 <br /> 170 <br />Applicant Derek Sadowski said he intended to put in a driveway eventually so as a part of 171 <br />work in progress, he talked to the cement contractor about a driveway and found an 172 <br />efficiency and by the time he talked to the City he already had made a significant 173 <br />investment in a driveway project. He is unfamiliar with the building permit process 174