PC PACKET 01262015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 24, 2014 Page 3 1 Commissioner Bartel asked if the inside seating would be open until 1:00 a.m. He also asked 2 if the City would consider closing the driveway in the back. 4 City Planner Johnson replied the restaurant use would be open until 1:00 a.m., which is not 5 uncommon with restaurant uses. She noted the provision that any outdoor music associated 6 with the building must be shut off by 10:00 p.m., which is consistent with City Code. She 7 added there is no outdoor seating associated with the proposed use. She advised that staff 8 could check with the City Engineer and Police and Fire Departments to determine if the 9 driveway in the back could be closed prior to the City Council considering this matter. 10 11 Vice Chairperson Heinis closed the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. 12 13 Commissioner Papatola requested that the City explore the possibility of closing the back 14 entrance and felt this was a reasonable accommodation. 15 16 City Planner Johnson advised that staff would run a model on the site to see if this closure is 17 feasible and confirm the closure with the Police and Fire Departments and City Engineer. 18 19 MOTION by Commissioner Papatola, seconded by Commissioner Poucher, to recommend 20 that the City Council approve the request from Joel Janssen for a Conditional Use Permit to 21 allow a restaurant to be located less than 250 Feet from a Residentially Zoned District and to 22 recommend that the City Council approve the variance from the minimum required parking 23 stalls and recommend access on the back of the property be closed on the property located at 24 2510 Kenzie Terrace. 25 26 Motion carried 5 -0. 27 28 B. REQUEST — Request from David and Jaime Bolnick for a Variance from the Required 29 Front and Side Yard Setbacks in Order to Construct a Ground Floor and Basement 30 Addition on the Property Located at 3635 Chelmsford Road. 31 32 City Planner Johnson explained the applicant is proposing to construct a ground floor and 33 basement addition and noted that the existing home is a legal non - conforming structure and 34 any expansion requires a variance. She advised that the subject of the application is within the 35 scope of the variance process and the applicants propose to use the property in a reasonable 36 manner; in addition, it is not reasonable to remove the existing home and the variance from 37 the front and side yard appear reasonable. She stated that economic considerations are not the 38 sole basis for the practical difficulties and it is reasonable for the applicants to use the 39 property for expansion by constructing a single story expansion. She stated the proposed 40 addition is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, the variance is consistent with 41 the City's Comprehensive Plan, the proposal seeks to improve the property, will not impact 42 the adequate supply of light or air from reaching the property or adjacent properties, and will 43 not result in overcrowding of land. She stated the applicant meets all other provisions, 44 including the rear yard setback, floor area ratio, impervious surface coverage, and building 45 coverage, and the proposed use will not conflict with adjacent land uses. 46