Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTE3 <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />VOVEMBER 27~ 1996 <br />Pedersen expressed concern with sheds placed adjacent <br />to a house and in line with the front of the house. <br />Pedersen felt that the City's definition of front yard <br />should be amended so that the front yard extends half <br />way back from the front of the house. Pedersen felt <br />the discussion focused on sheds tucked in the back <br />yard, and pointed out that situations do exist where <br />sheds are placed even with the front of a house. <br />Fahey agreed that under current ordinance a shed could <br />be placed immediately adjacent to the front of a house <br />as long as the shed was within the required setbaok. <br />Pedersen stated that in his opinion sheds should be in <br />the rear yard and felt there should be better <br />definitions of front, rear and side yards. <br />The City Planner indicated that the ordinance defines <br />required front yard as 30 feet adjacent to the street. <br />Required rear yard would be everything within 30 feet <br />of the rear lot line. <br />Fahey felt this matter should be tabled while staff <br />determines how other cities define front yard and <br />whether or not sheds are limited to rear yards. <br />The Planner indicated that it would be rare that a <br />property owner would have the ability to place a shed <br />adjacent to his/her house and still meet required <br />setbacks given the 6 foot building separation <br />requirement in the City Code and Building Code. <br />Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved <br />its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 96-11-292 - TABLING ACTION ON THE SHED <br />SETBACK ISSUE PENDING A REPORT FROM STAFF ON HOW <br />SURROUNDING CITIES DEFINE FRONT AND SIDE YARDS AND <br />WHETHER OR NOT SAEDS ARE LIMITED TO REAR YARDS <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by LaValle. <br />Ayes (5) Fahey, LaValle, Scalze, Morelan, Pedersen. <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />CITY CENTER/ Council reviewed proposed revisions to the City Center <br />OLD FIRE use policy as presented by City staff. Cou ncil also <br />STATION USE reviewed a proposed use policy for the old fire <br />POLICY station. Fahey suggested that this policy be presented <br /> to the Fire Department for comment since there may have <br /> been an understanding between the City and Department <br />7 <br />