Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner McQuillan questioned if Mr. Blomquist supported the listed conditions. Mr. <br /> Blomquist indicated he supported the listed conditions. <br /> Commissioner Nelsen inquired if action on this item should be tabled to the next Planning <br /> Commission due to the illegal activity that was occurring surrounding the home occupation. <br /> Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola reported the Commission <br /> could take this action to allow staff to address these concerns, along with the proposed <br /> oversized garage building plans. <br /> Commissioner Biedenfeld stated he was struggling with how to support this request. At this <br /> time, he indicated his vote would be to deny or table the request. He indicated the applicant <br /> has stated he would bring the property into compliance, but this was being done in a <br /> backwards order. He commented it was very clear a business was being operated out of this <br /> property. He explained he would not be able to support this request. He recommended action <br /> on the item be tabled. <br /> Chair Nichols-Matkaiti explained the Commission was bound by City Ordinance. She stated if <br /> the structure in the application meets code, there was not a lot of room to deny. However, in <br /> this case, the proposed detached garage design does not meet or compliment the primary <br /> structure. She commented she was also concerned with the height of the proposed structure. <br /> She feared that if the request were approved, the conditions would not have enough teeth. <br /> Commissioner Biedenfeld stated this was his concern as well. He indicated the proposed plans <br /> were not complimentary and he understood there was a misunderstanding between the <br /> applicant and the City. He suggested action on this item be tabled to allow the applicant to <br /> work with staff to create a plan that was complimentary to the existing house. <br /> Commissioner Nelsen explained it was tricky to separate the issues. He reported there were <br /> concerns regarding the proposed structure along with concerns with the violations occurring on <br /> the property surrounding a home occupation. He noted he was not in place where he could <br /> support approval. He recommended the applicant work with staff in order to allow the <br /> applicant to work with staff to address all of these concerns. <br /> Chair Nichols-Matkaiti concurred stating these were her concerns as well. <br /> Commissioner McQuillan commented if the property owner meets City requirements, he has <br /> the right to do what he wants on his property. However, he understood there was a lot of <br /> backstory on this property. He indicated the property owner was aware of the conditions for <br /> approval and for this reason, he supported the item moving forward with the conditions as <br /> listed by staff. <br /> Chair Nichols-Matkaiti asked what would happen if action on the item were tabled. Assistant <br /> Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola stated he would sit down with the <br /> applicant to see how the plans can be brought down to meet the City's requirements. He <br /> indicated the garage could not be a dominant feature but rather should be secondary or <br /> complement the existing home. He noted the review time on this application would have to be <br /> 6 <br />