01-12-06 Planning Comm. Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2006 felC Chat without regulation of matters such as these, the City would be left with a "dog's breakfast". Duray asked what the Code says on this issue. The City Planner indicated that the ordinance is not clear. While the ordinance seems clear that accessory structures cannot be located in the required setbacks, there is question about whether the hockey boards are considered to be a fence or a structure. The Planner also indicated that while the ordinance talks about recreational structures in the rear yard, it does not address recreational structures in the front yard. The Planner indicated that this property has a unique front yard situation. He also commented that the purpose of the Text AmendmenC is to set some regulations that deal with recreational structures in the fronC yard. While the currently ordinance doesn't say that you cannot have a recreational use in the front yard, it does not say that you can. The Planner pointed out that Che way the City's ordinance is structured, there needs to be specific language in the ordinance allowing a use, otherwise it is not permitted. Knudsen felt that the issues with a sports court in the front yard would relate to lighting and noise. Knudsen suggested that these are likely the issues that the neighbors will be concerned about. Galba indicated that he has temporary lights at the sports court, and was willing to meet whatever requirements the City would impose for lighting. Galba stated that all lighting would project towards the rink. Duray asked about screening. Galba indicated that the Code says that screening should be 4 to 6 feet in height. Galba indicated that he planned to plant screening at a height equivalent to the top of the boards. That screening would be at the western end of the sports court. Galba indicated that the kids using the rink will be playing no rise hockey; therefore, there would not be a problem with pucks flying into Edgerton Street. Galba indicated that he would be willing to work with the City on screening and would meet all the City's requirements. Knudsen asked about the impervious surface limit. Galba stated that in the spring he will work to get the amount of impervious surface on the property into compliance. Duray asked what is under the ice in the sports court. Galba replied that iC is grass right now. Rheaume asked if the sports court is an issue because of the appearance in the front yard, as well as lighting, noise, etc. The Planner replied that it is a combination of location in the front yard and exposure to the street are the issues. The Planner noted that a sports court is not typically a front yard use. 5-