My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-23-08 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
04-23-08 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2011 11:16:37 AM
Creation date
10/19/2011 11:09:16 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
96
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />APRIL 10, 2008 <br />Stanke noted that a portion of the Quality Restoration property is zoned I -P <br />and asked the impact on limiting the off -site outdoor storage to only I -I <br />businesses. It was suggested that I -P could be included in the provision. <br />(Note: Quality Restoration's property has split zoning. The north half is <br />zoned I -1, and the south is zoned I -P.) <br />The City Planner summarized the issues of concern at this point. Those <br />relate to the use of semi - trailers for storage and the requirement that semi- <br />trailers need to be moved 25% of the time, the prohibition on outdoor <br />storage in the front yard of a property, and the off -site outdoor storage issue. <br />Knudsen stated that he did not support a modification to the prohibition on <br />outdoor storage beyond the front building line, noting the efforts to regulate <br />the aesthetics of outdoor storage to the extent possible. The Planner pointed <br />out that if a property owner had a unique situation, they could apply for a <br />Variance from this provision. <br />Holm pointed out his situation. Knudsen stated that he did not feel the City <br />should modify this limitation because of one business. He agreed that the <br />Variance route is an option a property owner pursue. <br />Duray asked the next step. The City Planner indicated that the Commission <br />could table action pending modifications to the draft code amendment, <br />could deny or approve the amendment as presented, or could recommend <br />approval subject to modifications. <br />Knudsen and Duray pointed out the amount of time spent on this ordinance <br />and felt that it should be passed on to the Council with modifications. <br />Socha disagreed, feeling the draft should be tabled and the Commission <br />review the amendments that the Planner will draft prior to passing it on to <br />the council. Pechmann felt that the ordinance amendments were fairly close <br />and are an attempt to balance the interests of the City with those of the <br />property owners. Pechmann felt the modifications could be made and <br />passed on to the City Council for action. Knudsen pointed out that there <br />will never be 100% agreement on the ordinance language. <br />Deeb requested that the matter be tabled and another workshop meeting <br />held. Duray pointed out that two or three workshops have already been <br />held. Knudsen indicated that there could be perpetual debate on this <br />ordinance and felt it was time to move the matter to the Council for final <br />action. <br />Hall felt that the City Planner would be able to tweek the language based on <br />the discussion this evening and present a revised draft to the Council for <br />26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.