Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Burnham suggested the possibility of taking out the chain link fence, pouring a standup curb, <br />and putting up a new chain link fence with landscaping that could include arborvitaes every five <br />to six feet. He noted there is already a buffer at Sharp & Associates with 20 to 30 foot high <br />spruces. He suggested the improved surface could include concrete and class 5. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated Mr. Burnham's concern of over paving what is necessary is noted, but <br />with the conditional use permit there needs to be comfort that as the operations expand the areas <br />of storage will be paved. It would be difficult from a tenant's perspective if there were not some <br />understanding of the expectations. He asked if it is known what the minimum square footage is <br />that would be used. He indicated a basis is needed to tie the conditional use permit in with the <br />tenants operation so there is a means of enforcement. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer asked if the applicant would be opposed to tabling the conditional use <br />permit request to the next meeting in order to prepare a more definitive plan. <br /> <br />Mr. Burnham replied he could do that, but does not want to lose this tenant. <br /> <br />Their representative stated Rain for Rent is interested in getting in as quickly as possible. Before <br />they can proceed with their plans they would require Phase 1 and possibly Phase 2 environmental <br />study. Tabling this pushes everything back along those lines. He stated it should be clear to <br />everyone the type of operation Rain for Rent is. Some of the terminology used sounds almost <br />like a used car lot with everyone coming and going, which is not the case. <br /> <br />Commissioner Trites Rolle commented it does not sound as though the site will have frequent in <br />and out visitors. One thing to follow up on is that currently the findings of fact as presented <br />include a size for the storage area with the requirement that it will be surfaced. To be sure this <br />meets the needs of the applicant a better idea of the plan is needed. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Dalnes indicated the applicant wanted to seek direction on how the <br />Commission feels about the paving requirements, and if the Commission would require paving <br />now before any equipment comes on, or if the applicant would be allowed to do a phasing plan. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt noted the possibility of an interim use permit, rather than a conditional use <br />permit for the site. He pointed out if a conditional use permit is to be granted there needs to be a <br />means of identifying if there is compliance. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Dalnes suggested the fmdings state that any area that is storing equipment <br />must be paved. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt replied it is not so much just the storage, but the access to it. There needs to be <br />comfort that a portion of the area that provides ingress and egress is paved and provides a <br />reasonable buffer to allow sedimentation to fall off; possibly 50 feet. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer asked why this application is for a conditional use permit rather than an <br />interim use permit.p <br />Planning Commission/April 5, 2007 <br />Page 5 of22 <br /> <br />P5 <br />