HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 07192011 Meeting Sheet
IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII
104996
Box: 33
Folder: PL PACKETS 2005-2011
Document: PL PACKET 07192011
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY,F JULY 19,F2011
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. CALL TO ORDER.
II. ROLL CALL.
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA.
V. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 21., 2011
VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
NONE
VIII. CONCEPT REVIEWS.
1. GARAGE SETBACK PERMIT— 2609 PAHL AVENUE
2. GARAGE SETBACK PERMIT— 2610—30TH AVENUE
3. U-HAUL N 3829 Foss ROAD
IX. REPORTS FROM STAFF.
1. Code Enforcement Update—John Malenick, Fire Chief
X. OTHER BUSINESS.
XI. COMMUNITY FORUM. Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any item not includedon
the regular agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium,sign their name and address on the form at
the podium,state their name and address for the Clerk's record, and limit their remarks to five minutes The
Planning Commission may refer the matter to staff for a future report or direct the matter to be scheduled on an
upcoming agenda.
XII. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT.
F:\P1anning\PC Agendas\201 1\0719201 1 pc agenda doc
! J
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
4
5 JUNE 21, 2011
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 I. CALL TO ORDER.
9
10 Chair Jensen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
11
12 H. ROLL CALL.
13
14 Commissioners Present: Chairperson Jensen; Commissioners Chaput, Cincoski, Crone, Heinis,
15 and Niccum.
16 Absent: Commissioner Poucher.
17 Also Present: Assistant City Manager Kim Moore-Sykes.
18
19 III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
20
21 Chair Jensen invited the Commission and the audience to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance.
22
23 IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA.
24
25 Consensus of the Board was to approve the meeting agenda of June 21, 2011 as submitted.
26
27 V. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES.
28
29 Motion by Commissioner Chaput, second by Commissioner Cincoski,to approve the May 17,
30 2011 Meeting Minutes as submitted.
31
32 Motion carried 4-0; Abstain Cincoski and Crone
33
34
35
36 VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
37
38 Chair Jensen stated that the next City Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 28th, and
39 advised that he would plan to attend the City Council meeting. Commissioner Chaput agreed to
40 attend should the Chair find he is unable to attend.
41
42
43 VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
44
45 VII.I. ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 152.142, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT
46 PERMITTED CONDITIONAL USES
47
48 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes explained that staff earlier learned that language in the
49 City's Zoning Ordinance Section 152.142 relative to permitted conditional uses had been
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2011
Page 2
1 mistakenly omitted by the publisher. She stated that the language had been approved by the City
2 Council prior to the City's Code being recodified in 2009 and allowed,with a conditional use
3 permit,assembly places, meeting lodges,or convention halls in the Industrial Zoning District,as
4 well as catering operations delicatessens,and cafeterias. She indicated that the City Council also
5 questioned the necessity of subsection(g)relative to caretaker units for mini-warehouse
6 facilities. She advised that the cities of Columbia Heights,Fridley,and Roseville still allow
7 caretaker units and the caretaker unit for the storage facility in St. Anthony is used primarily for
8 storage with no one living there. She stated that the City Council is proposing to strike the
9 caretaker language currently at §152.142(g)and to re-sequence the remainder of this section.
10 She then recited the proposed changes to §152.142 as outlined in the staff report.
11
12 Chair Jensen opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. No speakers were present. Chair Jensen
13 closed the public hearing at 7:07 p.m.
14
15 Commissioners Cincoski, Crone,and Heinis agreed with the proposed amendments.
16
17 Commissioner Niccum stated that this issue was discussed by the Planning Commission at its
18 last meeting and agreed with the proposed amendments.
19
20 Commissioner Chaput noted that the amendments appear to be procedural in nature and agreed
21 with the proposed amendments.
22
23 Chair Jensen asked if the owner of the existing mini-warehouse storage facility had been
24 contacted regarding the proposed amendments.
25
26 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes replied that notices were provided according to the statute
27 and requirements for public hearings.
28
29 Chair Jensen pointed out that there are facilities with caretaker units in New Brighton and
30 Minneapolis, in addition to those communities noted in the staff report.
31
32 Motion by Commissioner Cincoski, seconded by Commissioner Niccum,to approve Ordinance
33 2011-004,Amendment to Zoning Ordinance 152.142 Light Industrial District Permitted
34 Conditional Uses.
35
36 Motion carried unanimously.
37
38 VII.2. ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 152.226, LIMITED CONTINUANCE
39
40 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes advised that this is a housekeeping item as a result of
41 recent legislative action and the City Attorney has advised that it is necessary to update the
42 City's Zoning Code to reflect the statutes dealing with limited continuation or non-conformities.
43 She recited the language contained in Minnesota Statutes Section 462.337 subd. le, and noted
44 that the City's limited continuation ordinance does not comply with this statute because it does
45 not allow for a nonconformity to be reconstructed or replaced, which is counter to the statute.
46
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2011
Page 3
1 Chair Jensen opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. No speakers were present. Chair Jensen
2 closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
3
4 Commissioner Heinis requested confirmation that as long as a building permit to rebuild is
5 applied for within 180 days,the City cannot stop a property owner from putting the same
6 structure on their property.
7
8 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes replied that this is correct.
9
10 Chair Jensen asked if the"greater than 50%of the estimated market value" standard will use the
11 County Assessor's estimated market value of the property as a whole or the estimated market
12 value of the structure only.
13
14 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes indicated that the amendment provides "greater than 50%
15 of the estimated market value,as indicated by the records of the county assessor,"which would
16 include the structure and the land.
17
18 Motion by Commissioner Chaput, seconded by Commissioner Crone, to approve Ordinance
19 2011-05, An Ordinance Amending Section 152.226 of the St. Anthony City Code.
20
21 Motion carried unanimously.
22
23 VII.3. ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 152.245,VARIANCES
24
25 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes explained that on May 5, 2011, Gov. Dayton signed into
26 law Chapter 19 which amended Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, subd. 6,to restore
27 municipal variance authority as a result of the Minnesota Supreme Court's ruling in
28 Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka. She stated that this amendment, effective May 6,2011,
29 changes the standard for granting variances from"undue hardship"to requiring an applicant to
30 establish"practical difficulties." She noted that the new law still retains the three-factor test of
31 reasonableness,uniqueness, and essential character, and the new law requires that variances shall
32 only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the
33 ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan.
34
35 Chair Jensen opened the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. No speakers were present. Chair Jensen
36 closed the public hearing at 7:21 p.m.
37
38 Commissioner Niccum stated that the Planning Commission discussed this issue at its May
39 meeting and agreed with the proposed amendment. He added that the language will be
40 consistently used by all cities.
41
42 Commissioner Heinis stated that the requirement of the applicant to establish that there are
43 "practical difficulties"will make it easier for the City to make a decision on a variance request
44 versus the "undue hardship"test.
45
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2011
Page 4
1 Commissioner Chaput agreed and stated the practical difficulties language will be much easier to
2 manage. He reminded anyone applying for a variance to list the practical difficulties on their
3 variance application.
4
5 Motion by Commissioner Niccum, seconded by Commissioner Heinis,to approve Ordinance
6 2011-06,An Ordinance Amending Section 152.245(C)of the St. Anthony City Code.
7
8 Motion carried unanimously.
9
10 VIII. CONCEPT REVIEWS.
11
12 None.
13
14 IX. REPORTS FROM STAFF.
15
16 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes reported that there may be two concept reviews for
17 Planning Commission consideration at its next meeting.
18
19 X. OTHER BUSINESS.
20
21 None.
22
23 XI. COMMUNITY FORUM.
24
25 None.
26
27 XII. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
28
29 Chair Jensen requested that staff provide an update to the Planning Commission regarding
30 building permits in the City, given the increased amount of activity in the community.
31
32 Commissioner Cincoski reported that he participated in a very educational river boat cruise that
33 was sponsored by MWMO. He indicated that Mayor Faust attended as well and discussion
34 included the importance of using natural grasses along the river bed to retain the river's integrity.
35
36 XIII. ADJOURNMENT.
37
38 Motion by Commissioner Niccum, second by Commissioner Crone,to adjourn the meeting at
39 7:31 p.m.
40
41 Motion carried unanimously.
42
43 Respectfully submitted,
44 Barbara Hughes
45 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
STAFF REPORT
To: Chair and Planning Commissioners
From: Kim Moore-Sykes, Assistant City Manager
Date: July 19,2011
Subject: Garage Setback Permit and Variance Request— 2609 Pahl Avenue NE
Background. The property owners,Lindsay and Tom Wernimont,have submitted an application for a
Garage Setback Permit to build a double car garage to replace the existing detached single car garage. They
are also requesting that they be allowed a variance to construct 24 X 24 new garage,which will be 576 SF or
48SF larger than the City Ordinance allows.
The property owners in their written statement report that they would like to keep the new garage in the
same location as the existing garage because is it situated next to the alley. This placement is consistent
with the placement of garages of their adjacent neighbors and this garage location next to the alley is
generally the characteristic of the neighborhood. Being granted a setback permit for their garage allows
them to keep the existing location.
They also desire a slightly larger garage because,as they suggest in their written statement, their house is
one of the smaller houses in the neighborhood and they would like to have the additional storage that the
extra 48 SF would provide, in addition to housing their vehicles and other equipment.
The property owners are responsible for demonstrating why the strict enforcement of the Ordinance would
cause practical difficulties for them by preventing the subject property to be used in a reasonable manner;
that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
that the variance if granted, will not alter the essential the character of the locality; and that economic
considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. (City Code §152.245(C))
Attachments.
• Project Description and Statement of Request
• Plans,Exterior Elevations
• Photos of the Subject Structure and Subject Property
• Site Plan
FAPlanning\Staff Reports\2011\07192011 2609 pahl garage permit concept review stf rpt.doc07192011 2609 pahl garage permit concept review
stf rpt.doc
.
ViltHa
tehon
3301 Silver Lake Road •St.Anthony,MN 55418 • (p)612.782.3301 • (f)612.782.3302
www.ci.saint-anthony.rnn.us
VARIANCE APPLICATION FEE: $60 Residential
$100 Other"Zoning Districts
A.GENERAL DATA +_ n OfNiqp
APPLICANT'S NAME; v� 11
, `� 1
The above-named individual,firm,or corporation hereby respectfully submits the following supplemental data in support
of the preliminary information provided on the accompanying zoning application summary form dated for
the purpose of securing a variance from existing land use zoning controls.
W�i M nN� �I I—O� Y/I� w �� • �� I I'
Contact Person Last Name First Day Phone
PROJECT INFORMATION
I AV 12 f*MW
q M y 4�
Subject Property Address: K�(/� r 1�/�
2. Specify the nature of the project for which a variance is sought: d�a� CoKmnmol e -
3., Frx Itlin howo�ish to vary frog' th ap licable provisions of the Ordinance: QA tD op I.6'Amp
-W INWRIAD
rasa 43K
P►�-c,f�.ca-F ��*�4t4s
4. Explain on a separate sheet why the strict enforcement of the Ordinance would cause an un or
deny the applicant reasonable use of the property. State Statute defines hardship as the following: p as used
in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by the official controls,the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not
created by the landowner,and the variance if granted, will not alter the essential the character of the locality. Please
address each of these items in your written statement.
5. Check all additional supporting documents and date which are being submitted to help explain
ntthis
�/prroject proposal:
I
Site Plan" O Topographic Map *X Other(specify) r . ND011 Vl P QS
"Required Can munch additional pages to Jnlly c. )lana proposal and need joi vai mire.
I HEREBY CL'R'1'IIY W1TI-I MY SIGNATU THAT ALL DATA ON MY APPLICATION FORMS,PLANS AND Snar-ICATIONS ARE TRU1.ANI)
CORRi;CI'TO T BEST OF�Y KNO L GE.
Signature plicant Dale
EXPIRATION
Within one(1)year after the approval of a variance or appeal if the property owner or applicant has not substantially
started the construction of any building,structure,addition of alteration requested as part of the approval,said variance
shall become null and void unless an application for extension of the approval has been submitted. A letter to extend
the approval of a variance shall be submitted to the Assistant City Manager not les than thirty(30)days before the
expiration of said approval. Such letter shall state the fact for the request,showing a good faith attempt to utilize the
valiance,and it shall state the additional time being requested to begin the pioposed consU•ucUon The City Council
may grant extensions not to exceed one(t)year.
F:\Planning\horns\Variance Application 2005 doc
July 13, 2011
Project:
New Detached Garage for
Tom and Lindsay Wernimont
2609 Pahl Ave.
St. Anthony, MN 55418
Legal Description:
Lot 33, Block 5, Murray Heights Addition to Minneapolis
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Attached materials:
• Site Plan showing the existing garage and the outline of the new proposed 24' x 24'
double car garage.
• Design and construction documents showing the style, look, and construction details for
the proposed new garage.
• Photos of the existing garage to be demolished, the existing house, and the existing
surrounding garages and neighborhood.
• Colored renderings indicating the proposed style and look of the new garage.
Statement of Request:
According to the current City of St. Anthony zoning ordinance, new detached garages are
required to be set back at least 3'-0"from all property lines. The ordinance also states that if a
setback permit is issued allowing for the construction of the garage within the required setback,
that the garage shall be no larger than 528 sf with no dimension greater than 24 feet.
Tom and Lindsay Wernimont are asking for two requests, one is to allow them to build a new
detached garage at the same location as the existing garage which is 1.6'from the north
property line and 1.8'from the west property line as shown in the site plan survey. The second
request is to build a 24' x 24' (576 sf) garage which is 48 sf larger than the 528 sf currently
allowed under the ordinance if a setback permit was granted.
Statement of Circumstances:
Tom and Lindsay Wernimont moved into their new house located at 2609 Pahl Ave. in late
2008. They bought the house knowing that the existing garage was in a state of disrepair. The
garage is structurally unsound and moves with the time of season. Much of the time during
winter and early spring the garage door and service door will not open due to movement of the
building and concrete slab through the freeze/thaw process. The current concrete slab is
broken into a thousand pieces because of the lack of structural reinforcement within the slab
and the movement of the slab through the seasons of Minnesota. Water also flows into the
building making the garage a pool of water during rain storms and the winter water run-off. Thus
the garage is unusable for their cars for much of the year.
As shown in one of the photographs of their yard, Tom and Lindsay would like to save, if
possible, their only tree in the backyard. In order for that to happen, the new garage would have
to be constructed at the same setbacks as the existing garage. As you can tell from the
attached photos, the majority of the garages along their alley are at similar setbacks.
Constructing the new garage at the existing setback would not in any manner detract from the
existing look or characteristic of the neighborhood. They would still maintain the approximately
6' of green space between the garage and the 20 foot alley. Fire safety and traffic through the
alley would not be changed or compromised.
Because their house is the smallest residence on the block and surrounding neighborhood, they
severely lack storage. Because of this need for more storage, the new 24' x 24' garage has
been designed to be larger than the 24' x 22' allowed under the garage setback permit
ordinance. They are also maximizing storage possibilities by adding potential storage within the
truss space in the attic. The new 5° reinforced concrete slab is designed to float with the change
in seasons without major cracking of the slab. Asking for an additional 48 sf would not detract
from the existing character or size of the existing garages along the alley.
In addition, the two adjoining houses have recently been greatly enlarged with new additions.
The look of the new garage has been designed to enhance the existing neighborhood look and
the character of the two new adjacent homes. The exterior will have narrow lap siding,-insulated
windows, exterior flower boxes, new lighting, a new insulated overhead door, and decorative
moldings and paneling in the gable area to enhance the character. Base and accent colors
would be earth toned. The Wernimont's goal is to have the look of this garage carry over into a
future remodeling and addition to their house within the next 3 to 5 years. This is another reason
for them to keep the garage as close as possible to the existing setbacks:
In conclusion, a new 24' x 24' garage as designed constructed within the existing setbacks
would not be detrimental to the site. In fact, it would greatly enhance the existing neighborhood
and not have any impact on fire safety or traffic. It would align with all of the existing garages in
the neighborhood and thus would maintain consistency along the alley.
60.03 SITE
PLAN
GARAGE ` I 2609 Pahl Avenue
1•S'
33 G� Saint Anthony, MN
I � I
I �
I
W E
I °°
Vto \
L- 0\'\
to3234
*— [xg T— 0 10 20
I 4.9' I-- — a O\'\9
I
1-STORY STUCCO
I #2609 4)
11.3 I Legal Description
G�
Lot 33, Block 5,MURRAY HEIGHTS
\�O I ADDITION TO MINNEAPOLIS,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
I
32.8' °
28.4'
° Site Plan
59.97 Tom Wernimont
P
2609 Pahl Ave.
Saint Anthony, MN
Project Number:
PAH L AVENUE Data: 06/09/2011
Sheets: 1 of 1
C.'dJsereWomas.wemlmomlDmpbox%Publk\Hm=Smey\2609 PAHL AVEAW-11 x17-1142011 11 S4 AN
•naawon�a arK•.y yr •rni..
if 1 c if ` ° ' ifN till
7� 9a • tt¢ �� 7Ei ` ��; I to �3 93 "' ��;�� i $d �Si
4n 4� 4y
r d n If
o ~
Z
ooa
if it if
4 � i
i�
gita4i: III sJ7 3
a7 � a�q�q$}.lj RtI it
�a
fi °d4 6 8 °� a
3� a69 ` o LEE
f� z
fig idg v
lit if
F
1d A p � D 1111-i
a1R6�idi
F
0
u F
� 0 0
ejli �411�
fad apt poi 6�� d$ ldt -
a u� cfl fi
L�
i
o ae�i �� j it tE►
g a J it lit
t6S, 111� �
y
if
I I I 11 .
alp
PLAN, EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS, E ° 1t` ►3 ;
�o SECTIONS & DETAILS �t>d {g'� ° �,o
WERNIMONT GARAGE ANO MAN CAVEd kdE jai �s! '•e u ��W
s 2609 PAHL AVENUE
z
fl
ST ANTHONY,MN 55418 6 44(@[ej$$ �e€gptaSa 3 «w
t(�§p Fe�I1dYC v YOi ot l
_ 'r •— ^..,mss
t
,.n t
o
-
fi .I
f
i
� j • .� x
y
j
l
I ,
F '
Ac.
40 IL
SF �. ��cK ,•} SS4�,
•rte ��.� �' � �� :.'�
i
STAFF REPORT
To: Chair and Planning Commissioners
From: Kim Moore-Sykes, Assistant City Manager
Date: July 19,2011
Subject: Garage Setback Permit and Variance Request—2610 30th Avenue NE
Background. The property owners have submitted an application for a Garage Setback Permit to build a
double car garage to replace the existing detached single car garage.
The property owners in their written statement report that they would like to keep the new garage in the
same location as the existing garage because of the shape of the lot and the existing driveway. The property
owners had considered moving the garage into the rear yard but it would have put the house too close to
their home. The proposed placement in the rear yard setback is consistent with the placement of garages of
their neighbors and this garage location is generally the characteristic of the neighborhood. Being granted a
setback permit for their garage allows them to keep the existing location.
The property owners are responsible for demonstrating why the strict enforcement of the Ordinance would
cause practical difficulties for them by preventing the subject property to be used in a reasonable manner;
that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
that the variance if granted, will not alter the essential the character of the locality; and that economic
considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. (City Code §152.245(C))
Attachments.
• Photos of the Subject Structure and Subject Property
• Site Plan
FAPlanning\Staff Reports\2011\07192011 2610 30th garage permit concept review stf rpt.doc07192011 2610 30th garage permit concept review
stf rpt.doc
No►�z"F�
1
1 �
' I
X G
321
-� E x i vii Ivc
`A fi
T
NoI�T!-F
.fi.,�
(34
;� I
_.�
� � '� d �
x � i
� � � � r
� �
k' J� `
� � •-�
1 1i 1� l 4
;i x
� �
-� � �
�F 7 ?�
� �.
—`�
�� ��;
� �� � �'^
� z
-.
> »
! .
.��
: w
V
�4 Q _ _ k -
K.`t'� R S
{� �i S Y y * Y .1 3 ;,9
.
. '' -„.'.5 C - F a , 11 �' K
S ”
.. ' .
- :.:- -
. '
1.
. : ?.. .,
,
a
:
F +:: ...
k.`z.; 1. - -
�,
a
—.
.
� ..
.'.m ...
.
..
.•::. -
: `* ;
r�
.. . .. .. . , ..
.4
til q':%.
4 e. - .
Y
.- p
v
: ..is _ .
a
:,� 3 �.q
;! ' £
f i�, C C 5
Z .,
1�1
` �, �4 �
....., ,., - -
%
t.
"5r Y _ ^ F
C
u r
-i �. - _ �.
}
`. r l .` - f �,.,� -vu errs
`f
r'• ',�',ry r. 3�k'gt!4� 'wet, ". 11 4 �3 ',{',a Y y
. \ S,4wj F, f �i ^4 5 4 , ..cu 4 1� t t �.�{ :r , K.. s �� y-,'} ..
". of 3 r $ 't
. _ .. _ ,5 d ,.. -
p
- .. - Y _
_ - _ ��
' £
y{ ...u.
ii • .- 4 E} {
r
_ , 11 ,:v
r ; �c y�
1.
,. 4f l� e
_. ., - _
. .. -- ."Y
..
1.
N J '
_ _ I i t Kf
N .+ ..Ea'
��
,
.
�41111
- .» ,: '
a-� — _ ...
i.
v If :. 7 "b -5a i! -: �i x' fs3 Jnr` ihf�KKf yt .
_ r _ _ i '.a' v v2 Ayr 1 :rz u t -i,fir t s77 rg..ry, 4 �t •'nr.�z+- ✓...
1 'z
C'
s a r-`: a z
. _: r n <
k
a
k F I4
b 7 . wa
i
Lj t
C. _ - .
..
Y R
1 3^
Y r
Y
T
d
�I
AV i
tip
i
w.
w
Or
a ;k
r x
�1
g i t 4
i
STAFF REPORT
To: Chair and Planning Commissioners
From: Kim Moore-Sykes,Assistant City Manager V*Ib
Date: July 19,2011
Subject: U-Haul Request—3829 Foss Road
Background. Joel Cornell, Area Field Manager for U-Haul Company of Minnesota,met with staff to find
out if it is feasible for U-Haul to partner with the owner of the St. Anthony Mini-Storage in expanding the
moving services that the mini storage is currently offering. Mr. Cornell is requesting that he be allowed to
operate a small U-Haul business in conjunction with the mini-storage,offering rental trucks to the clients
using the mini-storage. He indicated that he would only keep 3-4 trucks on site,tucked behind the
buildings of the mini-storage so as to be out of sight of the public.
The site is zoned LI and the mini-warehouse storage is an allowed use (§152.141(1)). Mr.CorneWs proposal
may also be an allowed use also under §152.141(C). Subsection 152.183 requires all exterior storage to be
screened.
FAPlanning\Staff Reports\2011\07192011 3829 Foss Road U Haul concept review stf rpt.doc07192011 3829 Foss Road U Haul concept review
stf rpt.doc