Laserfiche WebLink
• Planning Commission Meeting <br /> May 18, 1993 <br /> Page 7 <br /> 1 leaning more closely towards opposition to the permit <br /> 2 because she did not perceive the Garage Setback Permit -had <br /> 3 been intended for detached buildings but rather had been <br /> 4 tailored for converting existing single garages to double <br /> 5 to meet the types of vehicles most of today's families <br /> 6 possess . <br />_ 7 <br /> 8 Commissioner Thompson reacted to the other Commissioners ' <br /> 9 comments by modifying his first reaction to the proposal <br /> 10 by saying he could now see where it would be better to <br /> 11 have the proposed garage sited closer to the house, <br /> 12 especially as long as Mr. Henry followed through with the <br /> 13 landscape buffering he was proposing. <br /> 14 <br /> 15 Commissioner Werenicz stated that he had to oppose the <br /> 16 garage which had been proposed because it appeared one <br /> 17 side would be built right up against a utility easement. <br /> 18 He perceive moving the guide wires would only transfer a <br /> �9 maintenance nuisance to someone - else's property. It was <br /> 0 also his contention that the Garage Setback Permit had <br /> 21 only been intended to allow the expansion of one car <br /> 22 garages on older homes in the community. The Commissioner <br /> 23 said he seriously doubted that anyone wanted to see a <br /> 24 precedent set for double garages in backyards which in his <br /> 25 opinion, would be totally out of character for St. <br /> 26 Anthony. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 Chair Faust agreed that the proposal certainly didn't <br /> 29 appear to meet the intent of the permit when it was <br /> 30 established. He also questioned whether a structure <br /> 31 further back on that property with a 12 foot driveway <br /> 32 could satisfy the 30% criteria set for backyards . <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Motion by Madden, seconded by Murphy to recommend the <br /> 35 Garage Setback Permit requested by Douglas and Julie <br /> 36 Henry, 353-1 Skycroft Drive, be denied by the City Council . <br /> 37 In the interest of not having recreational vehicles parked <br /> 38 on driveways, etc. , the Commissioner wouldn't want the <br /> 39 idea of additional storage space completely abandoned for <br /> 40 this property. Rather they recommend the applicants be <br /> 41 encouraged to work with staff to find some way of <br /> 42 modifying their plans so as to erect the structure they <br /> 43 proposed closer to the house in the hopes of its <br /> 44 eventually be.coming an attached garage. <br /> 05 <br /> 6 Motion Carried Unanimously. <br /> 47 <br />