2021.11.09 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

October 26,2021 Page 8 of 12 property and for this reason,he would lean towards approval of the request He discussed how strong the conditions were and noted the applicant would have to follow each condition or the garage may have to be removed. He encouraged the applicants to minimize the amount of staff resources that would be required to keep this property in compliance with City Code. Councilmember Allen stated he did not have a clear idea of how violations would be addressed by staff and what type of non-compliance it would take to bring the garage down.He was troubled by the fact this was not clearly defined.He suggested action on this matter be tabled to allow the Council and staff to more clearly address this concern. Mayor Niedfeldt-Thomas discussed the City's home occupation requirements and noted a violation of this portion of code was still a violation,whether or not an SUP was requested. City Manager Massopust reported if the applicant chooses to go forward with a garage that does not require an SUP there would be no clause that would require the garage to be tom down if there was a misdemeanor for a home occupation business, where if the SUP were approved,this would be a requirement. Councilmember Axberg indicated she was conflicted and she did not know where she stood.She empathized because when she had three children in high school,she had numerous cars in her driveway.She indicated she had a neighbor that nuns a VRBO which drives her crazy. She encouraged the neighbors and the applicant to keep in mind that in the end,everyone will remain neighbors and to try to work to find a path that leads to success for everyone.She indicated the SUP would force Mr.Blomquist to be a better neighbor because the 11 conditions would have to be strictly followed. Mayor Niedfeldt-Thomas questioned if the Council would like to hold off on making a decision this evening. She stated she understood the applicant would like action taken this evening,but asked what coming back to this would look like.City Manager Massopust reported staff would need further direction from Council. Councilmember Allen stated he would like to better understand how the property would be deemed in or out of compliance if a complaint were received. Councilmember Abdulle read Condition 7 in full for the record noting if there was any violation on the property the garage would be in violation. He suggested guidelines be put in place with the number of calls that would be allowed within a certain timeframe. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola stated trigger language could be provided to staff for clarity purposes.He further commented on the language within Condition 11. Councilmember Allen stated if the oversized garage were approved and a complaint were received because a Twin Cities Construction truck was parked three blocks away what would happen. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola commented this would not be a home occupation concern,but rather would be deemed a parking violation.He explained staff would be reviewing the eight criteria within City Code when considering a home occupation violation. City Manager Massopust discussed how staff currently responds to home occupation complaints and noted they are nebulous.He reported staff could monitor this property more closely given the knowledge staff has now. He indicated if the item were tabled staff would not have a great deal more information to offer the Council. Mayor Niedfeldt-Thomas questioned if the Zoning Code Steering Committee should be investigating the SUP portion of code further. Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola reported the Council could direct the committee to look into the SUP language further. Mayor Niedfeldt-Thomas stated she understood the applicants were feeling harassed,but commented people were watching this property for good reason.She feared there was a risk with pursuing the SUP garage. She suggested that if the SUP oversized garage were to move forward and if a violation were to occur,that the timeline to remove the garage be less than a year. City Attorney Sonsalla advised if the SUP were revoked and the garage has to be removed,the City could go in and remove the garage and the costs could be assessed against the property. Motion by Councilmember Allen to adopt a Resolution denying a Special Use Permit to Authorize an oversized garage at 720 McCallum Road based on the four rationale listed within the staff report. The motion failed for lack of a second.