Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JULY 13, 2006 <br />Kromroy asked if he were to construct a masonry wall around the outdoor <br />storage area, if that would be an acceptable compromise to the <br />Commission. <br />The City Planner noted that the first issue is whether the use is acceptable <br />in that location. If so, Chen design issues would be considered. <br />Knudsen pointed out that there are a lot of issues related to this request as <br />well as questions about whether there was a hardship present to support <br />granting a variance. Knudsen pointed out that the north side of the <br />property is an acceptable location for outdoor storage. However, the north <br />side of the property abuts aresidentially-used property that has a pool <br />adjacent to this shared property line. There is also the issue of side yard <br />versus rear yard. Knudsen pointed out that AMR has a significant <br />investment in the property, and he did not believe that AMR would do <br />anything to jeopardize that investment. <br />The City Planner recommended that Che Commission act on the Variance <br />first and then the CUP as it would be possible Co approve a CUP for the <br />outdoor storage without a Variance if Che storage area is relocated to the <br />north side of the property. <br />Knudsen recommended denial of the Variance allowing outdoor storage in <br />the side yard of 2950/2960 Yorkton Blvd. as requested by Advanced <br />Masonry Restoration based on the discussion this evening which reflects <br />that there is no hardship present to warrant granting a Variance. <br />Motion seconded by Duray. <br />Motion carried 3 - 2. Hall and McGraw voted against. <br />Knudsen recommended approval of a Conditional Use Permit allowing <br />open and outdoor storage as an accessory use at 2958/2960 Yorkton Blvd. <br />for Advanced Masonry Restoration subject to submittal of a new site plan <br />showing a redesigned outdoor storage area in the rear yard of the property <br />and subject to compliance with all City Code requirements. <br />Motion seconded by Barraclough. <br />Motion carried 5 - 0. <br />ZONING The City Planner reported that there are two issues for Commission <br />CODE consideration relative to the Zoning Code. The first is the need to <br />AMENDMENT- eliminate the word "building" firom reference to the type of permit <br />6 <br />