Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/02/1996

Home

CASE # ~ REVIEVg PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTERS 5 AND 9 OF RAMSEY CITY CODE REGARDING PARKING AND STORING VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik Background:I The Planning Qommission has been working for several months to draft an ordinance to _amend the City Code to mlake allowances for parking and storing commercial vehicles in Residential districts. Those draft or ~dinances were forwarded to Council for adoption. Notification:; Persons that hgve been in attendance at prior City meetings regarding this subject have been notified of this !ssue being placed back on the Planning Commission agenda. However, the case wasn't written [mtil Friday, March 29 and therefore, the mailing to the residents did not go out until that same ~lay in order that they also could be provided wi~ a copy of the case cover sheet. If there are additi{>nal changes to the ordinance based on Council s comments, an additional public hearing will bejrequired and the residents will have another opportunity to respond to Coucil's concerns submgted to the Planning Commission on April 2. Observationsi As proposed t9 the City Council, the ordinance amendments basically establish the following regulations: : a. Any number of licensed, operable, private use motor vehicles and 1 unlicensed, operable, private use moor vehicle may be stored outside on a paved, gravel, con-bit or some other pre- approved type df surface. b. Any nuflaber of private use equipment used for private purposes may be stored outside. c. Any nu~nber of commercial vehicles and equipment may be stored indoors. d. Any nu~aber of commercial vehicles and equipment may be stored outdoors if they are stored on a pa4?ed, gravel, con-bit or some other pre-approved type of surface and are 75% screened from ~e public road or adjacent neighbors. e. No junk:~automobiles, licensed or not, may be stored outdoors. The Council haS requested that the Planning Commission review their draft again, taking into consideration th~ following comments and concerns: a. The typ~,~s of surfaces considered acceptable for outside gtorage of vehicles and equipment should be specit~cally identified and there should not be any language allowing for another type of surface that has been pre-approved by the City Administrator. b. Perhaps there should be stricter regulations in the urban service area like restricting outside parking to the d~iveway or a pad immediately adjacent to the garage, and requiring equipment as well as vehicles ~o be parked on a hardsurface pad adjacent to the garage. City Attorney Goodrich has indicated that it would not be considered discriminatory to set different standards for the urban and rural areas (~ee Memo from Mr. Goodrich dated February 15, 1996). c. Perhaps ~ere should be a cap on the number of vehicles and pieces of equipment that can be stored or parged outside.