My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-11-2013 Planning Comm. Minutes
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
07-11-2013 Planning Comm. Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/16/2013 2:14:34 PM
Creation date
7/16/2013 2:14:21 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 />JULY 11, 2013 <br />it could be moved to another part of the property. It was also noted that <br />the structure extends beyond the height of the screening fence. <br />The City Planner reported that outdoor storage cannot exceed the height of <br />the screening fence. He also noted that any structure would have to meet <br />building code requirements, setbacks, etc. and was not sure that a <br />temporary structure of this type would be allowed on the property in any <br />case. The Planner indicated that an option may be to construct an <br />accessory building for this truck storage, but again noted that building and <br />zoning code requirements would have to be met. <br />Schwalbach noted that storage containers can be as high as 8 feet. The <br />City Planner replied that there are special conditions for storage containers <br />and they are allowed to exceed the height of a screening fence. Duray <br />suggested that the tenant use a storage container for salt storage. <br />Lillemoen noted that the tenant backs his truck into the temporary tent <br />structure to protect the salt in the bed of the truck from the elements. <br />Barraclough pointed out that the temporary structure is not allowed by <br />Code and suggested that either a permanent structure be constructed or a <br />storage container used. Lillemoen asked if a structure consisting of poles <br />and metal would be acceptable. Duray suggested that Lillemoen contact <br />the Building Official to determine the type of building materials that <br />would meet Code. Lillemoen asked if a building could be constructed in <br />the same location as the temporary structure. The Planner replied that that <br />location would require a setback variance. <br />Fischer stated that he agreed the use of the space for outdoor storage <br />appears fine and is consistent with the other corner properties in Ryan <br />Industrial Park are being used. However, he did not support the temporary <br />structure. <br />The City Planner indicated that if the Commission is inclined to approve <br />outdoor storage in the location proposed, that approval can be contingent <br />upon elimination of the temporary storage structure. The Planner also <br />noted that if the applicant would like to pursue a permanent structure, City <br />staff can work with him to ensure Code compliance. <br />Murphy asked how long the temporary structure has been in place. <br />Lillemoen estimated that it was put up early in 2013. Murphy asked if <br />Lillemoen has been contacted by the City informing him that the structure <br />was non - compliant or if he contacted the City to ask if the structure could <br />be put up. Lillemoen stated that his father's tenant may have asked to put <br />the structure up, and his father likely told him to go ahead. <br />- 5 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.