2020.11.17 Planning Commission - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 4 of 8 Commissioner Frischman asked if the applicant could expand the size of the existing attached garage. She inquired if the proposed garage site were moved to the east if this would benefit the views of the neighbors. Mr. Aplikowski commented he had room to add onto the back of his garage, but stated this would require him to demolish a portion of his home. He stated he had considered this as an option, but believed the proposed garage and location was the best fit while providing the most utility. He indicated the garage could move to the east, but this would move th e structure closer to the floodplain. He anticipated the building would only drop several feet if the building were moved to the east. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola explained there would be floodplain and lakeshore setback concerns if the garage were moved to the east. Mr. Aplikowski explained the water in front of his home was considered a canal and not part of the lake. For this reason, he did not have lakeshore concerns. He believed that if the shed were moved from the proposed location it would be more prominent. Ms. Danger discussed how much money they have spent turning their home into their dream home. She indicated this property meant the world to her. She suggested the Aplikowski’s build an addition directly behind the existing garage versus adding a storage shed to the rear of the lot. Mr. Danger stated he was surprised to learn the garage would be two stories. He explained Mr. Aplikowski did not make him aware of this prior to this meeting. Ms. Danger discussed the elevation change between her property and the Aplikowski property noting the garage would be extremely visible. She recommended the garage be screened with landscaping. Commissioner Frischman explained she had a conversation with staff regarding the property at 1244 Long Lake Road. She reported the Commission voted to support a two story garage on this lakeshore property which impeded views of neighbors to the north. She asked if staff recalled what the size of that garage was. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola reported he did not have the particulars on this garage. He noted the garage was a special use for this lot and the Commission was being asked to see if the requested garage met the eight criteria within the special use permitting process. Motion by Commissioner McQuillan, seconded by Commissioner Nelsen, to close the Public Hearing. A roll call vote was taken. Approved 7-0. Chair Nichols-Matkaiti explained many of the Commissioners were on the Planning Commission two years ago when the 1244 Long Lake Road planning case was approved. She stated it was her understanding the existing shed on the property would have the walls removed but the roof would remain. She asked if the Commission supported this action. The Commission supported this action. Commissioner Biedenfeld explained he reviewed the meeting minutes from April 2018 and stated the garage on Pike Lake was not to exceed 624 square feet, or a total of 936 total square feet with the second story. He indicated this garage was smaller than the proposed garage. He recalled the size of the garage at 1244 Long Lake Road was a concern, along with the sight lines. In addition, the