Agenda - Council - 06/11/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I ! CASE REQIJ~ST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ACCESS~OR¥ STRUCTURE LARGER THAN ALLOWED BY CITY CODE; ~ ~ CASE OF BRIAN AND LAURAL SOHNS By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik I I I I I I I I I I I I I Baekgroun& Brian and LarVal ~ohns are requesting a conditional use permit to construct an accessory structure larger than. C~ty ~ode allows on their property at 17958 Fluorine Street N.W. Mr. Sohns has indicated in hi~; apl~lication that the structure would be used to store'classic cars, and personal lawn and recreattoniequipment. The followtng[aerns are enclosed for your information: a) II Application b) f Site!location map c) i Site~certificate of survey d) ~BUjlding plan e) }Pr0posed findings of fact f) IProl~osed conditional use permit Observationa: According to t2ity iCode as it pertains to the subject property, the accessory structure would be limited to 716 squlare feet and the total allowable garage and accessory structure space on the property is r[e,,!trie~d to 1,488 square feet. Mr. Sohns is proposing to construct an accessory structure that ~aeast~res 1,064 square feet. The result of this is that the accessory structure would exceed City G)de !imits for any single structure on the property by 348 square feet and the total allowable gala,ge and accessory structure space on the property by 248 square feet. The accessqry };tinCture is proposed to be constructed of materials similar in appearance to that of the principal S ~t~ctqre on the property. The applicant ~s al~o proposing to construct a second driveway to the accessory structure. City Code does not ,prohfbit second driveways when they access onto City streets. On numerous ~Scca~ions, the City has granted approval for oversized garages. However, all of these cases wefie pi'~or to the City action to increase garage space allowances in 1986. In reviewing past caseS, I h~veit~ound that on two occasions the City denied requests to construct accessory structures larger th~an allowed by City Code. In one case, the request was to construct a 1900 square foot sg'tlctmZe on a one acre lot; Council felt the proposed structure size was too excessive for the size oft~e itt. In the other case, the applicant already had an 1800 square foot accessory structure on throne!acre lot. On June 2, thc, Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing regarding the request. One ~trea~resident was present and expressed concern with the structure design and intended Use. The Applicants assured the resident that the structure is a typical garage design and the use is solely for '.the storage of personal vehicles and equipment. I I I Recommenda The Planning the request. tlon: id 7_oning Commission reviewed the findings of fact and recommended approval of