Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/02/2018

Home

Commissioner VanScoy questioned if Alternate #1 would create a steep grade change. Planning Intern Imihy explained this was a concern for the applicant. Even with this concern in mind, she commented staff believed it was important to support the EPB and DNR recommendation, which was Alternate #1. City Planner McGuire Brigl reported staff and the DNR would be supportive of Alternates #1 and #2. Rick Farrell, 15795 Juniper Ridge Drive, thanked staff for all of their assistance with his request. He indicated he was requesting the variance to allow him to store a truck in the detached accessory garage. He explained the original location was proposed as it was the least impactful, visually from the road and the river. He reviewed a number of pictures of his property and noted the location of the garage on his property. He questioned what would be gained by placing the garage closer to the street and requested the Commission allow him to place the garage per his request as this was the least visible and impactful option. Chairperson Bauer asked what the garage size would be if the applicant were forced to place the accessory building on the Alternate #1 or #2 site. Mr. Farrell commented his property was so pristine and heavily wooded. He indicated if the variance was not approved per his request, he would not be pursuing a garage at all. He discussed how his property would be adversely impacted if the garage had to be located in the open space. Commissioner VanScoy stated when the Commission reviewed this type of request, the City worked to ensure the nonconformance was not made worse. Gary Steinke, 15825 Juniper Ridge Drive, explained he lived next to the applicant. He stated he received a variance three years ago for his garage. He reported he followed all of the City's rules and requested Mr. Farrell be required to follow the same rules. In addition, he feared that the applicant's proposed location would obstruct his view of the river. Susan Anderson, 15854 Juniper Ridge Drive, explained she lived on the opposite side of the street. She expressed concern with the letter she received from the City and stated the information provided was very confusing. Mr. Farrell reported his proposed garage location would not block his neighbor's view of the river. Commissioner Surma questioned what alternative location would work for both parties. Mr. Farrell stated neither of the alternatives would work for him. He explained he was not interested in taking down trees or jeopardizing his property. He indicated he was not interested in placing the garage where a large driveway would be required and greenspace would be lost. Planning Commission/July 12, 2018 Page 3 of 11