05/14/1997 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board May 14, 1997 Page 5 restrictive ordinance. He stated that he would like to re- enforce the fact that position has not changed. He would be happy to mobilize residents to appear again and reiterate the seriousness of the issue. It is important to recognize that if a restrictive ordinance is passed, it would have two effects: 1) it would regulate RV parking; 2) it would be used as a tool by individuals to harass their neighbors. He does not want to be picked on by his neighbors about the way he lives. He believes the residents made their point clear, and it was well received by the City. The proposed ordinance appears to follow what residents expressed at the hearing. Chair Schaps stated that staff will make the proposed ordinance available after this meeting until the June Planning & Zoning Board meeting, so that residents will have the opportunity to respond in writing or by telephone to either staff or Board members, or attend the June meeting where he anticipates that a decision will be made. Mr. Mike Toffley, 6865 Blackduck Drive, stated that the proposed ordinance is reasonable and flexible, especially with the amended wording proposed by Chair Schaps. Mr. Robert Benning, 6788 Shadow Lake Drive, stated that the only thing he has against the proposed ordinance is that it allows an unlimited number of parked vehicles in front driveways. Ten vehicles could be parked as long as they are in compliance with the setback. He would like to see restricted parking in front of homes in residential areas, unless the home has an unusually long setback. Mr. Jim Spenceman, 7539 Jeanne Drive, stated that residents cannot always park in side or back lots because of septic systems. That issue needs to be considered also. Mr. Carl Elmquist, 6310 Otter Lake Road, stated that he would not be affected too much by the proposed ordinance. He believes that the best government is the one that governs least. He does not understand why the City looks at what can be on private property and what cannot, what can be parked in the driveway and what cannot, the color of houses, types of shrubs, etc. Many people who came to the public hearing think along the same lines. Government is too big. Ms. Dahl stated that she is also concerned about a maximum or minimum amount. Although she does not own an RV, she believes those who have them should be allowed to use them. Most of the cities she contacted do not have a problem with their RV ordinance. Eight or ten RV's would not fit on City lot driveways. Her preference would be to keep the back yard open for entertaining.