2020.11.17 Planning Commission - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 5 of 8 property at 1244 Long Lake road was a rental property. He stated he was sympathetic to the neighbors concerns but commented the code was the code. For this reason, he was going to support the request and noted the City Council would have the final say in this matter. Commissioner Enanaa asked if there was any opposition to the garage at 1244 Long Lake Road. Commissioner Biedenfeld explained the properties at 1248 Long Lake Road and 1250 Long Lake Road expressed concern about their views being blocked. He reiterated that the City cannot dictate how to follow City Code based on viewshed. Commissioner Enanaa questioned if the garage at 1244 Long Lake Road was two stories. Commissioner Biedenfeld reported the garage at 1244 Long Lake Road was a story and a half. He indicated the Aplikowski garage would have more curb appeal and would match the home. Commissioner Frischman thanked Commission Biedenfeld for the information regarding the previous garage request on a lakeshore property. Commissioner McQuillan stated he empathized with the neighbors noting he had a two story structure built next to him without his knowledge. He commented the code is what the code is and he did not see how the City could get around allowing this request. He indicated the Commission’s recommendation had to follow City Code and the final decision would rest with the City Council. Commissioner Nelsen thanked Commissioner Biedenfeld for the information on the previous decision. He requested further information on how the square footage calculations were determined. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola explained the square footage of accessory structures was calculated by the foot print. Ms. Danger asked why the City would want to lower property values for homes on the lake who will now have obstructed lake views. Chair Nichols-Matkaiti stated this was a question that should be posed to the City Council. She explained that the Planning Commission was charged with reviewing Planning Cases in terms of City Code requirements. Mr. Danger explained he served on the Commission for years. He suggested that the applicant be required to screen the garage with plantings in order to soften the look from neighboring properties. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola explained one of the criteria for consideration was if it was deemed necessary to require the applicant to provide landscaped screening to lessen impacts from adjacent properties. He reported the Commission could make the landscaped screening a condition for approval. Commissioner McQuillan asked how the applicant felt about providing screening. Mr. Aplikowski stated he would have no problem planting trees or bushes. He anticipated these plantings would impact viewsheds from surrounding properties.