04-05-2010 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 5, 2010 APPROVED 90 When the council asked how often the regulations come up, staff said probably a couple 91 times a year, many times having to do with individuals wanting to construct facilities 92 such as a pole barn. The council was also informed that the city's regulations (accessory 93 structure allowances) are pretty average compared with like cities. 94 95 The staff report included seven questions posed to the council; the questions (and 96 answers) are as follows: 97 98 1. Are the current regulations too restrictive? The regulations should be reviewed(5 99 acres and under shouldn't be changed). 100 101 2. Can another option based on percentage of lot size allow a more evenly applied 102 ordinance? Percentage options should be considered; in some cases, the jumps based 103 strictly on percentage are either too much or too little of a change. 104 105 3. When defining the Accessory Structure area calculation, should"lot size"be defined 106 differently than current policy? 107 108 4. Should the number of accessory structures be increased from the current 109 requirements? The regulations should be reviewed. 110 111 5. Should construction requirements be altered, specifically in regard to fabric structures? 112 No changes sought in construction requirements. `- 113 114 6. Is the city interested in expanding temporary uses, and as a result accounting for that 115 expansion by regulating temporary structures? Staff explained that there isn't an 116 allowance for temporary structures such as tents (except as associated with special 117 events); the council did not request a change. However a council member suggested that 118 the city should be somewhat open minded about temporary uses considering the current 119 economic difficulties and the possibility of things developing into a more permanent 120 business. 121 122 7. Should this (as presented in staff report) interpretation of the ordinance be made 123 official with language added to the ordinance confirming"Agriculture, Gardening and 124 Sod Farming"includes stand-alone agricultural buildings? And if so, should there be size 125 limitation or other regulations added for those structures? Staff explained the 126 implications of the current code and the state building code that dictates that the building 127 proposed at 1288 Main Street will require a building permit. If the applicants were to 128 open the facility to the public (riding lessons), that would also require a conditional use 129 permit. It was confirmed that the applicants will proceed on a dual track to obtain a 130 building permit and at the same time await the city's consideration of their situation on 131 allowable accessory buildings. 132 133 Staff will prepare some draft amendments reflecting the council's directions and present 3