Agenda - Council - 01/09/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Case #5: Discussion Regarding Enforcement of City Code Pertaining to Storage of Commercial Vehicles in Residential Districts Zoning Administrator Frolik reported that earlier this year City Council directed City Staff to review City Code pertaining to storage of commercial vehicles in residential districts. After two workshops were held to take comment from the public, review ordinances from other cities, and consider draft code amendments prepared by City Staff, Council turned this over to the Planning Commission in order for them to review the most recent draft amendments and work out a final version. Commissioner Hendriksen stated that the reason the City has very tight restrictions on outbuildings has been to constrain commercial uses, and then on the other hand we see all these commercial uses for storage outside and find them unsightly. He commented that people take work home all the time and it's allowed because it is unseen, so "we need to extend that courtesy to tradesmen. Then if someone wants to operate a business, we need to look at how we do it in the industrial area and consider each on an individual basis." He stressed the need to work with the citizens until they can find a suitable site. Commissioner Deemer stated that since City Council directed the Planning Commission to work on reviewing all of Chapter 9, instead of arguing, he suggested listening to citizen comment again so that the Commission can figure out how to work with this issue. Recognizing that many of the citizens in the audience have been to the workshops and public hearings on this subject, Commissioner Hendriksen questioned whether they find it agreeable to go through a site plan process in order to retain commercial use, thus opening themselves up to a certain amount of scrutiny from neighbors. An unidentified citizen inquired of the result if there were no objections from neighbors. Ms. Frolik questioned what type of process and fees would be involved. Commissioner Hendriksen stated he was only looking for input here, not setting up such a process yet. He commented that the only way he can see handling the blatantly offensive and allowing the rest to exist, is to review these instances on a case-by-case basis. Maybe some of the citizens will have to do certain things to appease their neighbors, but this may be more acceptable to a more punitive action. Ms. Frolik explained the site plan process. An unidentified citizen expressed skepticism referencing those citizens who in good faith came in recently and applied for a conditional use permit (CUP), went through the whole process, only to be turned down. Now another process is being suggested, probably to get turned down. Commissioner Hendriksen stated that the Planning Commission is trying to find "middle ground" where the citizens can conduct their business and where their neighbors won't find it offensive. Another unidentified citizen suggested only handling this if a complaint is involved. He felt this was just creating a lot of extra problems for the City. Commissioner Deemer explained that earlier this year City Council hired someone to document violations of the law. Now, there are documented complaints and the City is trying to find a way to deal with them. He also noted that it is very misleading to say all were turned down when only two cases were presented to the Planning Commission. Planning Commission/November 9, 1995 Page 8 of 12 I I I I ! I I I I I I I I ! I I I I