Laserfiche WebLink
Mous�cls View Plannis�� Co�remiss�o�a <br />- I�ega�laa° I�Ie�tir�� <br />; <br />IVIr, Maki responded by saying that he agreed with Mr. Ericson's report. <br />Chairperson Peterson commended Ivlr. I�/Iaki on the progress he has made with <br />looks of lus property in the past couple of years. �> <br />Mr. Maki added that he didn't think the garage would <br />be using the same type of roafing for the garage. <br />The Planning Commission continued with minor discusst <br />this discussion was the shed that currently e�cists on th� � <br />included in the tatal area that wa� proposed. Mr. Ericso <br />square %otage of ali accessory buildings would be 1,Q60 <br />square feei. It was also clarified that Mr. Maki would �c <br />Another issue that was addressed was that the proper�� # <br />� <br />physical screening. Mr. Maki �ndicated that he s�x.�k� d�� <br />explained that there is eight feei from the gar ���o t��,,�+ <br />bushes which is acrepiable to h'ss neighbor���'� � <br />Commission Laube expressed his <br />'•' square faotage of the garage wot <br />would be allowing 980 square fe <br />that the resolution would be �;m� <br />?/? to , <br />i� <br />l�Ta <br />' that i; <br />Mr. E� <br />�th an a .�i <br />� : ,,. <br />l to be: ���a <br />9 recamrrit <br />!��rd IvIaki. <br />�ebr�rary 17,1999 <br />�age S <br />the <br />that he would <br />��,. <br />r r�gar �� f is propa� ���' 'm <br />�pe���� d whether ar rit�� i� �a� , <br />.r��'t�r��t� tile Commission tfiat the total <br />�t� [�af tli�„city code allows %r 1,400 <br />d on� IC £�t��'�nd one 9-faot door-. <br />the `��est �vuuas �,�� �eparated by any <br />f,ly� to thc �zt�p�riy owner and <br />c:� atld the f�ce is covered by lglac <br />not cl�n���d in the resoiutian what ti�e actual <br />,, . <br />lar��r1 that the conditional use permit <br />8Q;�auare feet for the shed. He indicated <br />apprvval to the City Council of the <br />son informed th� �p�I"icant that this item would be discussed at the February 22 City <br />meeting at whi��time a public hearing will be held. <br />n� Corrta�ass�o� ���avvso <br />Mr. Ericson reviewed the Plarining Commission Bylaws as they had 6een amended at the last <br />meeting. Mr. Ericson reminded the Commission that the Planning Commission in the past had <br />two kir►ds of ineetings: ihe ag�nda session, where items were discussed, and ihe regular meeting, <br />where items were acted upor►. �ut because of state-mandated time constrain�s, th� number of <br />cases the City Council was actually dealing with, and io accommodate the applica.nts, the <br />Pianning Cammission has b�en cal(ir�g to order at every meeting. The Bylaws �ave been revised <br />