Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Questions, Comments, and Discussion: <br /> <br /> <br />-Commission members asked about the age, materials, and condition of the existing garage. The <br />applicant stated it was newer than the house, estimating construction in the 1940s, with lap <br />siding as opposed to shingles, and it was in bad shape. He confirmed that the proposed siding <br />would be cedar shingles. <br /> <br />-Commission members asked about setbacks of the existing garage. Mr. Greatens stated that the <br />existing garage was not in compliance with the 5-foot setback from the eastern property line or <br />the 15-foot setback from the northern property line. It was stated that the proposed garage, as <br />shown in the site plan, would comply with all setback requirements. <br /> <br />A motion was made by Mr. Wesenberg to recommend to Community Development staff to <br />accept the proposal to demolish the existing detached garage and to approve the proposed <br />detached garage as described in the information submitted. The motion was seconded by Mr. <br />Guest and carried unanimously. <br /> <br />5. Other Business <br /> <br />5.a. Public Comments <br /> <br /> <br /> There were no further public comments. <br /> <br />6. Reports <br /> <br />6.a. Council Liaison Report <br /> <br />Mr. Jennings had no update. <br /> <br />6.b. Department Report: Update from staff <br /> <br />No update from staff at this time. <br /> <br />7. Adjournment <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 7:20 pm. <br />tğŭĻ Ћ ƚŅ Ћ <br />