PC 082416 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Ritter: I kind of agree with staff's recommendation too just because of the tandem issue. Deutscher: Can I interject and.... Chair Ritter: Let's wait. We'll direct it to staff as a question. Hold on. Do you have any other comments? Commissioner Brown: No, I mean I can see both sides of things. On the one hand you now have a garage detracting from the visual appeal of the historic house much closer to the street, so I do see that dimension of things. On the other hand, the garage in the staff's proposed location is more in line with the front of Building 10 so it visually isn't too far out of whack. So I can see both sides. Chair Ritter: What is your opinion in what the applicant's concern is of that? Beaudin: They proposed it the way that they have shown it, and I don't disagree that the garage structure is farther away from the home and that's desirable in most instances. Here we've looked at a landscape solution and front yard treatment that we think is going to appropriately screen the garage and it moves closer to the street. There's going to be the two -foot setback. We've cleared it with building. We can meet building code with construction of the new structure that close to the existing home. Two feet is not a walking path but it will be comfortable enough to do maintenance and to walk through the yard. It's not really a cut through area and so I would imagine that a one - story garage next to a taller home, you know, it's raised up a little bit; the floor is up a little higher on the historic home and having the parking spaces function with a little bit more ease seemed like the better outcome for us. So that's staff's position and our recommendation. Ultimately, it's still tandem parking and you're still looking at a situation where you're going to have a garage close to a historic home in either scenario. Commissioner Balch: If it pleases the Chair, it might be something we would like the applicant to comment on. I don't know if we want to re -open public comment? Chair Ritter: I just wanted to know if staff had any feedback, so I'll ask, after our discussions, do you want to stand up and say what your feelings are on that? Thanks. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Deutscher: The applicant has no objection to flipping it if you prefer. The only thing I might add is to give staff the ability to work with us perhaps on sizing, if there's any possibility to make it sized a little narrower just to still accommodate. If not, that's fine, flipping it is just fine. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chair Ritter: All right, any more comments on any of the other items? PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 24, 2016 Page 9 of 39