Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Commissioner VanScoy stated that a blanket statement was made that there are other businesses <br />that have structures within the 35-foot setback in that area and asked to what extent. <br /> <br />Planning Technician McCann stated that he does not have the exact number but displayed an aerial <br />view that shows multiple businesses with encroachments. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy stated that in the previous case there was a specific percentage of outdoor <br />storage that would be allowed and asked if the current amount of outdoor storage could be <br />validated as well as the percentage. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that in this case the outdoor storage would be based on the <br />proposed site plan and provided details. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy stated that it is his understanding that the ordinance allows a specific <br />percentage of outdoor storage, 30 percent. He stated that this case is a legal non-conforming case <br />and asked why the amount allowed would not be specified. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl commented that this request is for a Conditional Use Permit to <br />expand the legal non-conforming use, so it would be based on the site plan rather than a percentage. <br />She stated that staff could complete the calculation and identified the area proposed for outdoor <br />storage. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy commented that it would appear that over half of the site would be <br />allowed for outdoor storage. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill noted that this site predated the establishment of the City and <br />therefore the CUP tool would be an adequate tool to use in this case. He stated that it would be <br />difficult to compare this site to the last case, as there needs to be acknowledgement of the lawful <br />nonconforming protection. <br /> <br />Chairperson Bauer stated that the applicant indicated that they would like this to be permanent <br />while the interim use would be for five years. He asked why the City is using the interim use tool <br />if the desire would be for this to be permanent. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl explained that there are allowed conditional uses within each zoning <br />district and hoop buildings are not a listed conditional use. She stated that the only tool to allow <br />this structure would be an interim use permit. She noted that two additional structures of this <br />nature have been allowed within the City for salt storage through a similar Interim Use Permit <br />process. She confirmed that when the five-year period expires, it would be reviewed and could be <br />extended. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked whether the Commission or staff looks at this type of structure <br />differently for businesses and residential use. She noted that the Council does not desire these <br />structures in residential areas, but the Public Works site uses this type of structure for salt. She <br />asked if a condition could be added that the structure be placed on an appropriate surface. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/ November 5, 2020 <br />Page 4 of 19 <br /> <br />