Minutes - Planning Commission - 04/06/1993

Home

Case #3: Request to Discuss Mississippi River Toll Bridge Theory; case of , Wayne Johnson Zoning AClm~,'nistrator Frolik stated that Wayne Johnson could not be present and will present his case at a sub,Sequent meeting. Case #4: Discuss Proposed Ordinances to Amend Regulations for Accessory Buildings, Accessory Uses and Definitions Zoning Administrator Frolik stated that in March the Commission discussed two issues that have been before t2ouncil that cannot achieve the required 4/5 vote for adoption. The first is eliminating developers to that languag? in the Definitions that allows include road right-of-way to meet minimum lotisize requirements when platting. The second issue is that Council is also divided on the number Of unlicensed vehicles which should be allowed for outside Ms. Frolik storage. explained that the compromise proposed by Staff in March was to amend City Code in the following ways: a) Eliminate the ability to include road right-of-way in meeting minimum lot size requirements ~when platting; b) Reduce the threshold for metal buildings to 2.0 acres to alleviate the concern for those residents that thought they purchased a 2.5 acre lot; c) Establish additional performance Standards for metal buildings constructed within a specified distance of property lines, perhaps 100[ft., to alleviate Council's concern with the visual impact of pole buildings on neighboring property owners; and d) Prohibit any outside storage of unlicensed vehicles now that more people [will be able to afford to construct the lesser expensive metal buildings to provide additional indoor storage space. At the meeting in March, the Planning and Zoning Commission directed City!Staff to draft some proposed amendments to City Code based on Staffs proposal for a compromisg of the issues and written recommendations submitted by Commissioner Deemer, and Ms. Frol!k presented these proposed amendments for the Commission's review. Commissioner Deemer inquired about the recommended amendments to accessory building performance ~tandards, and Ms. Frolik explained that due to City Council's concern for persons who assumed_ they had 2.5 acre lots, the threshold for metal buildings was reduced to 2 acres but with increase~ performance standards for soffits, facia, etc. Commissioner Deemer stated he was uncomfortable lowering the threshold down to 2 acres (87,120 square feet) and suggested 2.29 acres (100,000 square feet). Commissionex Hendriksen stated he felt that the 2-acre threshold was reasonable but that the 100- foot performance zone was not. He explained that someone choosing to put a pole barn within 100 feet of their ~pmperty line on a 40-acre parcel should not be required to shingle the roof of that pole barn. It was noted, there was a typographical error in the table under Subd. 12 of the proposed amendments,i and the fourth row under Total Lot Area of that table should read "108,900 to 152,459 sq. ft. Commissioner Terry stated the typical road right-of-way area is .2 acre; therefore if you take a 2.5 acre lot minus .2 acre right-of-way, you get 2.3 acres or 100,t300 sq. ft. Commissioner Hendriksen stated there would always be someone who just missed the cut-off, and he felt there niust have been some logic going with 2.5 acres. Motion by Cgmmissioner Deemer and seconded by Commissioner Terry to amend the square footage figure in Sub& 13, item (a) to read "100,000 sq. ft." and in item (b) to read "100,001 sq. ft." Discussion: Commissioner Terry stated that the 100,000 sq. ft. threshold is based on taking a typical 2.5 acute lot and subtracting typical road right-of-way (6600 sq. ft.). Planning & Zoning Commission/4/6/93 Page 5 of 8