My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.5. SR 04-19-2010
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2010
>
04-19-2010
>
6.5. SR 04-19-2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/16/2010 10:40:29 AM
Creation date
4/16/2010 10:39:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
4/19/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Time limit. A time limit was suggested by staff, as a means of encouraging the completion of the <br />original Conditional Use Permit. This was originally modeled after the Lakeland Properties (CU <br />10-01) Conditional Use Permit (attached) that was suggested by staff, although there is no time <br />limit imposed by the Council. <br />Planning Commission Discussion <br />The Planning Commission agreed with the engineer that the erosion issue needed to be addressed as it <br />would only get worse with increased run-off. <br />The Planning Commission also agreed with staffs recommendation to amend the landscaping plan, <br />although some commissioners had concerns with the term "screening". In response, staff modified the <br />recommended condition. <br />The Planning Commission felt that a time limit is appropriate. The recommended condition #7 has not <br />been reviewed by the Planning Commission, but was drafted based on their input. <br />Public Comment <br />There was no public comment except for those offered by the applicants. The applicants had concerns <br />with the landscaping, as they indicated that it has been planted twice and did not survive. They also <br />noted that a well would be helpful, but having been told by previous staff that it is not permitted, they no <br />longer have the funds to put a well in. They also felt that screening of their property was unnecessary due <br />to the image of the area, and that is can barely be seen from the rail lines. Staff and the applicant are <br />working together on the development of a landscape plan. <br />The applicants also voiced concern regarding the time frame, feeling that it is unfair regulation of their <br />business. Upon further review, staff notes that the Council did not impose a time limit on the most recent <br />outdoor storage request. <br />Staff s recommendations include a time limit for outdoor storage, believing this is important to the image <br />issue. <br />The applicants also noted the conditions of the neighboring property, and highlighted the fact that the <br />neighbor to the north has several RV's parked. The Conditional Use Permit allows outdoor storage, but <br />does not state limitations to what is stored. It is helpful to note that a requested variance for reduction in <br />landscaping requirements was denied. Further, it was a requirement to install an irrigation system. <br />Attachments <br />• Staff report to Planning Commission dated April 13, 2010. <br />• Conditional use permit CU 10-01 <br />• Approval/ denial letter for Majestic Masonry dated June 4, 2004 <br />• Conditional use permit for CU 04-08 <br />Action Motion by Second by Vote <br />Follow Up <br />S:\Community Development\Planning Main\Case Files\CUP\CU 10-07 Kostreba\CU 10-07 Staff report to CC 419-10.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.