Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Presentation <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl presented the staff report stating that staff recommends approval of <br />Resolution #21-054 for an Interim Use Permit for a storage building on the subject property. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Randy Bauer, Saint Katherine Drexel, commented that the church is experiencing problems with <br />having sufficient storage space. He noted that this building would be used for lawn maintenance <br />and storage of items that are used for seasonal decoration. He stated that the storage space would <br />be larger than the current need but is being built to sustain the future needs. He noted that once <br />the primary building is constructed the accessory building would not require an Interim Use <br />Permit. He noted that the church hopes to begin construction in the next few years but that would <br />be dependent on the capital campaign. He noted that the City has sometimes linked an IUP to an <br />event rather than a timeframe. He stated that he would prefer the IUP be linked to the construction <br />of the primary building rather than placing a five-year period on the permit. He stated that they <br />provided some sketches as to where the primary building could be located but noted that could <br />shift as they are currently working with the City on its desire for land to expand Central Park as <br />well as a residential developer that is interested in purchasing some of the land. <br /> <br />Gary VanScoy, representing the applicant, commented that they do have a concept for the building <br />and are working to gain the funds necessary. He stated that they are running out of room for <br />storage at this time. <br /> <br />Acting Chairperson Anderson referenced the comment that the applicant would prefer to link the <br />IUP to the construction of the building rather than five years. He noted that IUPs are typically <br />provided for five years, noting that if that is not sufficient the applicant could request an extension <br />as mentioned by staff. <br /> <br />Mr. Bauer noted that some IUPs along Highway 10 have been linked to specific events, such as <br />interchange construction. He stated that they would prefer that the IUP be linked to the <br />construction of the primary building as once that building is constructed the IUP would no longer <br />be needed. <br /> <br />Acting Chairperson Anderson noted that if there is not a timeline, the IUP could then run <br />indefinitely. <br /> <br />Mr. Bauer stated that the accessory building will continue to be needed and is the first step in <br />progressing forward. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Gengler, seconded by Commissioner Peters, to close the public hearing. <br /> <br />A roll call vote was performed: <br /> <br />Commissioner Peters aye <br /> <br />Planning Commission/ March 4, 2021 <br />Page 10 of 16 <br /> <br />