07-13-06 Planning Comm. Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTIJS PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 13, 2006 Knudsen pointed out that the City's direction may be to move away from outdoor storage in the I-P District. The Planner agreed that this may be the direction that comes from the City's review of its Zoning Ordinance. Barraclough pointed out that currently outdoor storage is allowed as a Conditional Use in the I-P District, and noted that if the outdoor storage were in the rear yard, there would not be an issue. Knudsen agreed. The Planner noted that if the outdoor storage were in the rear yard, the discussion would focus on the screening of the storage area. The Planner pointed out that the outdoor storage as proposed meets all the CUP requirements, other than location. McGraw reported that he looked at the property and his natural inclination was that the front yard was the Yorkton Blvd. frontage. This determination of front yard puts the outdoor storage in the rear yard. Kromroy presented photographs of the building showing the building appearance from Yorkton Blvd. as well as Yorkton Court. Kromroy again noted that the front of the building faces Yorkton Blvd., while the side faces Yorkton Court. That interpretation puts the outdoor storage in the rear yard. Duray asked how many instances such as this occur in the City. The Planner stated that this is not uncommon, and pointed out that the Code defines front yards and side yards for the purposes of establishing building setbacks for vacant property for development purposes. Kromroy asked about setbacks for his property. The Planner indicated Yhat a 40 fooC setback is required in the I-P District for front yard as well as side yard abutting a street. Barraclough pointed out that based on the Code definition of rear yard, Che rear yard of this property would be the north. He pointed out that the adjacent property to the north is being used as residential although it, Coo, is zoned I-P. Therefore, moving Che outdoor sCOrage area Co the north would impact the pool area of the adjacent residential home. Kromroy noted that he allows United Scientific to use a portion of his property for access via an agreement. Kromroy did not believe this was a recorded document, and indicated that he does not have a like agreement to utilize United Scientifics' property. The Planner pointed out that the placement of the proposed outdoor storage area would not provide enough room for AMR to access around the storage area. Kromroy indicated that he could adjust the dimensions to allow access around the storage area without trespassing on the United Scientific property. 4