Laserfiche WebLink
August 10, 1977 <br />Page 4 <br />E ' <br />S nEVIEW OF EXISTiNG OFF-STREET PARKING CODE FOR A~4ENDMEi~TS - COMMERC[AL VENICIE pARK1NG <br />~ /-~. <br />i Chairperson Haake stated that the Planning Commission would be reviewing the existinq <br />code far amendments to off-street parking for commercial vehicles. She esked the <br />Commission Members for their comnents since they had been given a list of vehictes and <br />tocatlons in Che communlty and hed had a chance to view them. <br />Commission Member Burmeister stated that she felt the situation was very discouraging <br />and foit it was very irritating and that she had driven by one location where a semi <br />was parked close to a corner and blocked the view. She stated that sho did not feel <br />that big crucks belong is a residentiai area. A1so, she stated that while some trucks <br />did look ok appearance wise, some did lnok very ratCy end did nat belong in a residen- <br />tiai area. <br />Comnission Member ~4ackeben pointed out a semi parked at a bouse on Long Lake Road off <br />the lake and state<1 that it certainly was not ett~•active, and that two houses down <br />from iti was a motor home that he alsn did not feel was attractive. However, he ques- <br />tioned how one cou7d tell one person that they could not park their vehicle in their <br />yard ff their neighbor, recreationa7 vehicle could be parked there. <br />Commission Durmeister stated that if 7t was felt both commercial and recreattonel <br />vehicles looked bad, why not try to ellminate.at leas~ one of them. <br />Corrmission Member Pedor stated that generally motor homes are much quieter than large <br />trucks, which Commission Member Mackeben stated was a noise ordinance problem, not a <br />parking problem. • <br />Chairperson Haake Gointed out that mar~y af the vehicles could also fall into the ,~unk <br />category. <br />Co~mnlssion Member Blanchard suggrsted that a motion could be made, stating that nothing <br />over l~s tons be allowed antess tt is a recreational vehicle. The 1~ ton was ~ust a <br />starting figure and could be changed to encompass other cRtegorles. <br />Chairperson Haake poirted out that dum~p trucks could weigh under 1~ ton ard thus wouid <br />be aI]owed, <br />Corunission Member Fedor asked what the Commissior felt its u7tlmate goal was, to pet; <br />down to Allowing 3ust small pickup trucks and vans in the City? <br />Gnairpcrson Haake staCed that she hud di~iven by one house that -iad a tractor trafler <br />parked Sn the drivew~y and annther one in the garage that was being worked on and ~id <br />not feel it was attractive at a17. She aiso drove by anuther house that had at teast <br />four different types of vehictes in the yard, some of which were rusted, one pickup <br />with a wheei missing, etc. <br />Commissictn Member Mackeben pointed out that there was a semi thet parks an ta9rchild <br />that takes up most af the w7dth of the street and makes tt very difficult to see other <br />traffic or children. He also stated that it was not attractive at all. <br />Comnission Member Gtnzer stated that he did not see anything attractive about motor <br />homes either. <br />`-~~ Commission MemEer Mackeben stated that he felt they should appTy the same ru7es Lo <br />both commercial and recreatlonal vehicles and that it was not fair to legislate against <br />one and not the other. <br />