09:45The proposed building would measure 40 by 56 feet, adding approximately 900 square feet to the existing accessory structures on the property, which already total nearly 5,000 square feet. Under the new zoning regulations, the property, which is just under two acres, is permitted no more than 3,200 square feet of accessory structures. However, the existing buildings were established before these updates, classifying them as “legal non-conforming structures.” This designation allows for their maintenance but not expansion beyond the current square footage.

38:44During the meeting, city officials and Josh explored various options. Josh suggested removing some current structures to remain compliant, though this would still necessitate a variance, as replacing one building with a larger one would constitute expansion. The council was inclined toward a compromise that would allow Josh to proceed with construction, provided the overall square footage does not increase. A motion was made to approve the variance with the condition that the total square footage remains unchanged, but further action was deferred pending the submission of a site plan and additional documentation.

05:58The council underscored the need for a comprehensive site plan to verify the dimensions of all structures involved. The absence of this plan, coupled with a lack of a formal staff report on the variance application, complicated the decision-making process. The council recommended continuing the public hearing to the next meeting, slated for May 20th, to allow time for preparation of the necessary reports and site plan evaluations.

28:11Amidst this discussion, Josh expressed his willingness to comply with the council’s requirements, asserting his openness to removing certain structures to meet compliance. He requested assurance that such actions would lead to the approval of his proposal, emphasizing a need for clarity on the specific structures he might remove and the total square footage involved.

As deliberations continued, council members reviewed four potential pathways: approving the variance as requested, denying it, deferring the decision to a future meeting, or approving a variance that would keep the total square footage unchanged. The council seemed to favor the last option, reflecting a reasonable approach to the situation, though final decisions are contingent on further documentation and analysis.

45:09In other business, the meeting addressed officer elections, specifically the selection of a vice chair. Concerns about potential conflicts of interest and leadership continuity were discussed, with plans to elect a vice chair at the subsequent meeting to ensure a stable leadership structure.

49:40The council also received updates on zoning applications, expressing a preference for formal reports over informal updates. Additional reports included progress on the WSB project, with code revisions nearing completion. Two issues, involving a sign ordinance and the percentage of parks in subdivisions, remained outstanding and required input from the city attorney.

Plans for a high-level meeting to review code changes were announced. This meeting aims to prepare stakeholders for the formal public hearing scheduled for July.

56:23Further updates involved an open position with no current candidates, ongoing deliberations on a driveway request, and the zoning change at Outlaw Cedar Woodland. Enforcement issues concerning an occupied, uninhabitable structure on the Mary Nash property were highlighted, with potential involvement from the sheriff’s department suggested for further action.