request for council action re lot combination

Home Browse Search

Andrew Goetten April 8, 1998 Page 2 The zoning code provides some direction regarding standards for parking areas that may be pertinent to this discussion. Section 10.61 Subd. SA indicates that "vehicles normally owned or kept by the occupants on the premises must have a garage stall or open parking space on the same lot as the principal use served"; since Outlot A and Lot 1 have been legally combined into a single tax parcel, an argument could be made that parking on Outlot A would not be in conflict with this section. Subd. SA also states that "open parking spaces on lots must have a location other than a required yard except that such parking may be located in a rear yard to within ten feet of an interior side lot line and to within ten feet of a rear lot line". Since a lakeshore lot has by definition a lakeshore yard and a rear yard, one can infer that open parking on a lakeshore lot would normally have to occur at least 10' back from the street lot line. Notwithstanding the above discussion, because there is a lack of any specific direction to the contrary in either the record of your subdivision review or in the Zoning Code, it is my conclusion that the'no parking' condition is intended to mean exactly what it states: "The Outlot shall not serve as an accessory parking area". Without qualification,this means no temporary or permanent parking of vehicles is allowed on the parcel. The Agreement does not specifically address whether storage of boats and/or trailers is allowed, but I would consider a boat on a trailer or on blocks to be the equivalent of a vehicle for purposes of the Agreement. It may be reasonable for the City to allow'temporary' parking of a vehicle on Outlot A under certain circumstances; for instance,while the property owner is actively using or maintaining the parcel, i.e. out on the boat, mowing, using the dock, etc. If you wish to pursue a revision of the Agreement to allow this, I would recommend conditioning the revision on establishing a minimal parking area for no more than one or two vehicles, that meets the setback requirements, hardcover limitations, and is adequately screened from the roadway and the neighboring property so as not to be obtrusive. Given the topography,some grading work might be required in order to establish a parking area that would meet required setbacks, if parking were allowed. Placement of a chain barrier across the parking area would probably be appropriate to deter unwanted visitors. Please feel free to contact me at 473-7357 if you have questions or want to have the Council reconsider the provisions of the Agreement. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator cc: Ron Moorse, City Administrator