8.2 SR 11-06-2023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Background/Discussion Case No. CU 23-19 The applicant, Jeremiah Shank, has requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit authorizing the operation of a home occupation at his home. The applicant operates a utilityT equipment painting companyT and proposes storing three work trucks and t�vo trailers with traffic control devices in his driveway. He notes that neither the home nor the gaYage will be used foY material oY pYoduct stoYage. The subject propeYtyr is located in the R-1b zoning district and is 3.48 acYes in size, howeveY, much of the pYopeYtyr is unusable due to the location along the Elk River and topography. The proposed storage area will take place in the drivewayT along Yankton Street. The applicant was a previous emplo�Tee of the compan�T Bullfrog Industries but recentl�T purchased the business from the previous owner. Public Hearing Two residents and the applicant spoke during the public hearing with the Planning Commission. The first neighbor expressed a number of concerns with the propertyT dating back manyT yTears. Here is a summaryT of the concerns: ■ There are materials left around the propertyT and the garage, including old paint cans, pallets, and temporaryT shed structures. ■ Maintenance of vehicles has occurred on the propertyT, be�Tond the basic maintenance of headlights. ■ He believes home occupations should serve as a transition during a gro`vth phase and states that the subject business may have grown beyond the capacities of a home occupation at a single-family home. ■ RefeYenced alleged environmental conceYns from 10+ yeaYs ago. ■ He has concerns with the pYolifeYation of vehicles and traileYs that have at times been located on the site. Notes that up to nine vehicles have been theYe befoYe. ■ Notes the current drive`vayT work mayT have impacted required setbacks and ordinance standards related to the pro�mityT to the river and environmental standards. ■ Believes the applicant should have received a grading permit for the driveway. ■ Notes that the applicant may live out of state and believes a Yental peYmit may be Yequired. The applicant spoke and responded to the previous comments. The applicant's responses are summarized as follo`vs: ■ Vehicle maintenance, like oil changes, were done on his personal vehicles and not work vehicles. He stated that all maintenance is done at dealerships. ■ Acknowledged that trailers have been parked on his propert�T in the past and asked to update his request to allow t�vo trailers and associated traffic control devices (cones and barricades). ■ Stated that his driveway woYk tivas not deeper than 1-foot as stated b�r the Yesident. ■ Ackno�vledged that cinT staff visited the site `vith him 8-10 yTears ago to address grading and environmental concerns around the home. He said the work requested byT cityT staff was addressed. ■ He does have plans to gro`v the business, possiblyT relocating the operation, but `vould prefer to discuss that outside of a public meeting. A second resident spoke and noted that she lives directlyT across the street from the subject parcel. She noted that her propernT is the closest to the applicant's and said she does not have anyT concerns ��ith the operation. She