Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 <br />The City Planner continued his review. There was some discussion of <br />outdoor storage standards, with the Planner noting that the most specific <br />standards are outlined in individual zoning districts. <br />The Planner and the Council discussed the Code Enforcement Officer's <br />memo relative to limiting recreational vehicle storage on properties. It <br />was the consensus of the Council that this type of storage should be <br />limited to recreational vehicles and equipment owned by the occupant of <br />the property only. The Council agreed that this restriction should extend <br />to all zoning districts. <br />The Council discussed the Code Enforcement Officer's comments relative <br />to numbers of recreational vehicles on a property. Given that this has not <br />been an issue for the City, the Council's consensus was to address in the <br />future should there be the need. <br />McGraw commented that in the R-3 District the minimum housing sizes <br />for senior citizen housing is very small. The City Planner indicated that <br />these are common numbers and are likely tied to standards developed by <br />HUD many years ago. The Planner indicated that he would check these <br />numbers to determine if they are still appropriate. <br />The Council discussed the Code Enforcement Officer's comments relative <br />to hobbyists purchasing industrial property. A hobbyist use of a <br />commercial property is not provided for in the Code. The City Planner <br />indicated that the approach that has been taken is if the hobbyist obtains <br />City licenses and complies with Code requirements relative to outdoor <br />storage, etc., the City will not be making a determination whether this is a <br />true business or just a hobby use of a property. An example is a person <br />purchasing an industrial property for storage/restoration of his/her own <br />antique vehicles. The Planner noted that commercial and industrial zoning <br />is in place to regulate business uses. These businesses bring jobs to the <br />community and other economic benefits to the community which a <br />hobbyist use does not. It was the consensus of the Council to not include <br />the hobbyist use as a permitted use in the industrial and commercial <br />sections of the Code. <br />The City Engineer noted the definition of impervious surface was very <br />simplistic. It was agreed that he would work with the City Planner on <br />revising that definition. <br />The City Planner then reviewed the proposed changes to the Subdivision <br />Ordinance. <br />4 <br />