Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking And Vacant Property topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ferndale planning commission debates parking‑lot standards, vacant/abandoned business rules and outdoor storage
Summary
Commissioners scrutinized proposed language on parking‑lot maintenance, outdoor storage at vacant businesses and the city's vacant/abandoned building policy; staff agreed to simplify technical tests and keep enforcement focused on observable surface conditions.
Commissioners reviewed several sections of the redlined ordinance dealing with parking‑lot condition, storage at closed businesses, and the city’s new vacant/abandoned property approach during the May 14 hearing.
Roger explained staff's intent to prohibit outdoor storage and vehicle parking at businesses that have been vacant or abandoned, noting a 90‑day threshold before the requirement to remove nonconforming signage: "we actually just created a vacant structure program... but that's just a general catchall that if you're a vacant and abandoned building that you haven't been there more than 90 days, you can't have outdoor storage." Commissioners supported 90 days as a reasonable threshold and directed staff to keep removal timelines clear.
The draft also included a proposed performance measure for parking‑lot condition (an initial staff draft referenced that "no more than 20% of the parking lot area shall have potholes or surface integrity issues" and language about subbase condition). Several commissioners pushed to simplify enforcement language to observable surface condition rather than technical base and subbase testing. One member summarized the change request: "If the surface is intact, it's what you care about"; staff agreed to remove the subbase requirement and keep standards focused on visible surface integrity.
Outdoor storage language prompted edits to clarify prohibited items (materials, equipment, recreational vehicles, boats) and to allow limited exceptions for active construction or site maintenance. Commissioners asked staff to combine related sections for clarity and to ensure the vacant/abandoned business provisions align with the city's new vacant structure program.
The commission also discussed whether parking lots should be allowed in front yards and noted existing nonconforming sites that predate the ordinance. Commissioners suggested adding an explicit crossreference in the parking‑lot section if staff determines front‑yard parking lots should be prohibited for new development; staff said they would add language and check related screening and setback rules elsewhere in the code.
No formal vote was taken on these specific technical edits; staff will return a simplified text that focuses on observable surface standards for parking lots and clarified outdoor storage/vacant property rules.
