Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, August 04, 2010 <br />Page 2 <br />new garage in line with the new driveway; areas requiring hard surface and those <br />45 <br />not requiring it, in accordance with City Code. <br />46 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that he had received one phone call from a concerned <br />47 <br />neighbor regarding the size of the proposed garage and its potential use for <br />48 <br />commercial purposes; however, Mr. Lloyd advised that he had noted that any <br />49 <br />commercial use was prohibited. Mr. Lloyd summarized review criteria analyzed <br />50 <br />by the Design Review Committee (DRC) composed of City staff from various <br />51 <br />departments, resulting in the conditions as proposed in the report. <br />52 <br />Mr. Lloyd reviewed the context of another phone call from a resident who used to <br />53 <br />own the subject property, alerting staff of the existence of an old private well, <br />54 <br />dating from approximately 1947, in the immediate proximity of the new garage <br />55 <br />location. <br />56 <br />Mr. Lloyd reviewed the Site plan in the packet materials, identified as <br />57 <br />“Attachment C” <br />58 <br />Discussion included confirmation that the existing garage would be demolished <br />59 <br />upon completion of the new garage; preference of the applicant for a reduced <br />60 <br />time frame for demolition of the old garage, but staff’s suggestion for an extended <br />61 <br />time to facilitate unanticipated construction delays; location and wide of garage <br />62 <br />doors; window installations on the garage to soften the aesthetics of the new <br />63 <br />garage and its proximity and size comparison to the adjacent neighbor’s garage <br />64 <br />on the south; and absence of any additional accessory structures on the <br />65 <br />property, especially given the size of this proposed structure. <br />66 <br />Staff recommended approval of the requested 1,008 square foot garage as a <br />67 <br />CONDITIONAL USE at 1863 Chatsworth Street, based on the comments and <br />68 <br />findings of Sections 4 and 5, and the conditions of Section 6 of the staff report <br />69 <br />dated August 4, 2010. <br />70 <br />Applicant, Mr. Majors <br />71 <br />At the request of Commissioners, Mr. Majors advised that the mature tree would <br />72 <br />remain on the site; and reviewed the next intended phase of improvements to <br />73 <br />relocate and/or replace blacktop on the site. Mr. Majors assured that he had no <br />74 <br />intention of using the garage for commercial purposes, and that his hobby was in <br />75 <br />semi-classic cars. <br />76 <br />Chair Doherty closed the Public Hearing at 6:00 p.m., with no one appearing for <br />77 <br />or against. <br />78 <br />MOTION <br />79 <br />Member Wozniak moved, seconded by Member Gottfried to RECOMMEND <br />80 <br />TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of the requested 1,008 square foot <br />81 <br />garage as a CONDITIONAL USE at 1863 Chatsworth Street, based on the <br />82 <br />comments and findings of Sections 4 and 5, and the conditions of Section <br />83 <br />6 of the staff report dated August 4, 2010. <br />84 <br />Chair Doherty and Member Wozniak opined that the recommended conditions <br />85 <br />appeared to be fair to all parties. <br />86 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />87 <br />Nays: 0 <br />88 <br />Motion carried. <br />89 <br />Chair Doherty noted that the case was scheduled to be heard by the City Council <br />90 <br />at their August 16, 2010 meeting, rather than the August 23 as indicated in the <br />91 <br />staff report. <br />92 <br />b. PROJECT FILE 0004 <br />93 <br />Request by the Roseville Planning Division to consider corrections or <br />94 <br /> <br />