03/10/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 10, 2003 DRAFT •90 any other kind of service, since they are not actually working on trees at the location, simply storing 491 equipment. 492 493 Mayor Bergeson stated that to incorporate a change in the ordinance tonight that would address the 494 Tree Service would require three votes in favor. He indicated they already have two votes against it, 495 so that possibility is not possible for tonight. He indicated that the City has a request related to this, 496 and they need to be prepared to address not only this situation but others also. 497 498 Community Development Director Grochala indicated the last issue is the external storage piece. He 499 explained the changes made to page 3-73, indicating that as written, with the wording `indoor or 500 outdoor', it would not allow for any storage, even in a pole barn. He stated K.1.a. is also a problem 501 for people with multiple vehicles, as they would not be able to park because of the 72 hour rule. He 502 explained that this starts on page 3-37, and reviewed item P.1.a.1-8. He added that page 3-59 item 6 503 is related, and says you can only use a residential driveway for cars or one truck. He indicated the 504 intent of 3-73 is to not allow parking of anything over 11,075 pounds in a residential or rural zone 505 with less than 2 /2 acres, without a permit. He stated they now need to clarify the wording and 506 determine what the City is really trying to do. He added his recommendation is that since they have 507 added language to address rural lots 2 1/2 acres or less, and the wording is more restrictive than it was 508 previously, he suggests adopting the ordinance with the 2 1/2 acre wording and coming back in a few 509 months with an amendment, if needed, after examining the intent. He does not believe they should 510 hold up the zoning ordinance, but feels Staff and the Council need to review all three sections •11 together and see how they fit. 512 513 Councilmember Carlson stated that the conversation late last week related to the addition of item 514 1.a.8. on page 3-37. She asked if the wording 'per Sec. 3 Subd. S.K.' was a mistake. Community 515 Development Director Grochala indicated it was not, noting that what that says is provided you can 516 meet these requirements, it would not be considered exterior storage. He explained that page 3-37 is 517 saying all personal property must be in a building or screened so as not to be visible. However the 518 City realizes that is not practical, so there are exceptions, for things such as swing sets, laundry poles, 519 etc., or, if you meet the rquirements of item 3.5.K., you could park a semi outside provided it is not 520 there for more than 72 hours in a seven day period. 521 522 Councilmember Carlson indicated that they had discussed the number of trucks this could encompass, 523 and that concerns her. Community Development Director Grochala indicated they had a big 524 discussion on residential and rural less than 2 1/2 acre lots, and he agreed it does not clearly say not 525 more than two trucks. He indicated they have added some language intended to clear up the issues 526 but have not yet accomplished it, and he is concerned about the unintended consequences they may be 527 creating, which is why he suggests stopping where this is now and re-evaluating these sections. 528 529 Councilmember Carlson indicated she sees it as stronger wording after 3-37, but does not see 3-37 as 530 being strong. She stated her point had been they could put five, six, or 50 trucks there, to which 531 Community Development Director Grochala had responded they could put six, or fifty, however 532 many they could fit. She added she does not think they should add item P.1.a.8. until they have 33 evaluated all the sections together. 534 12