Laserfiche WebLink
<br />had directed staff to draft an ordinance amendment to regulate this based on the number of items <br />rather than operability. She stated that staff recommended that 5 items be allowed on parcels <br />less than 5 acres and 8 items be allowed for parcels over 5 acres. She stated that there was a <br />public hearing held at the March 6, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and it' was tabled <br />because the Planning Commission wanted additional information. She stated that staff <br />conducted some cursory drive by inspections and looked at around 600 lots and they found about <br />25 lots that would be in violation if the new ordinance was adopted. She stated that this <br />information was taken back to the Planning Commission and they do not recommend amending <br />this ordinance and would like to give some time for the abatement process to work. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look asked if this would continue to be a complaint based violation. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Frolik stated that it would remain a complaint based <br />violation. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that he listened to some of the Planning Commission discussion <br />and thinks that there may be some confusion in thinking that the abatement process can take care <br />of every issue. He stated that abatement is only as good as the underlying ordinances that <br />support it. He stated that he feels this is a good ordinance and gives the City another "tool" to <br />work with for these kinds of issues. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that he was concerned about residents who farm. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Frolik read aloud from page 132 of the packet and <br />noted that farms would be exempt from a limit on the number of items allowed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey stated that earlier tonight there was discussion about allowing people to <br />run businesses out of their homes or garages. He questioned what would happen if those same <br />households have 4 licensed drivers and live on less than 5 acres. He stated that he is not in favor <br />of the ordinance as it is presented. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated that this would be a complaint based ordinance and feels that if a <br />complaint was brought forward in that situation where there are 4 licensed drivers, there would <br />be a way to work with the City. He cited the example of someone who has a blue van parked at <br />the rear of their property right along the property line that is an eyesore. He stated that he feels <br />this boils down to consideration for neighbors and property values. He stated that he supports <br />this ordinance and feels that 80-90% of residents already comply with it. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that this idea was raised by the City's prosecutor, that it would be <br />easier for the City to enforce this issue by putting a limit on the number of units allowed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that the City also has recently loosened the outbuilding ordinance <br />with the hope that people would go ahead and put them up to store their equipment. He stated <br />that he agrees that there are some clean up issues that should take place in the City, but noted that <br />it is not as big of an issue in the rural areas of the City. <br /> <br />City Council / April 22, 2008 <br />Page 11 of 18 <br />