Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Nixt asked for some history on Mr. Menard's business and property. He questioned <br />if the building is lawfully non-conforming. <br /> <br />Ms. Moreland stated the business has been there since 1985 or before. The building is lawfully <br />non-conforming. Associate Planner Wald stated the business never has been conforming. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated they are not going to solve this issue tonight. He directed Staff to come <br />back with a compromise between the two ordinances. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated they have a PUD district that may work. He indicated with the power <br />lines and soil issues they may be able to come up with a crafty way to present a PUD option that <br />will work. He thinks the two ordinance proposals are so far apart they will not work, and Ms. <br />Moreland is not really looking for an ordinance change but is looking for a way to help her client. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson Nixt, seconded by Commissioner Brauer to continue the consideration of <br />Chapter 9 Section 9.11.04 Home Occupations in accordance with the Chapter 9 re-writes until <br />August 7, 2003 and to direct Staff to find a solution to allow the applicant to market his property. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson indicated they could also look at what Staff thinks would be appropriate <br />in that area so Mr. Menard could market the property appropriately. He would ask that Staff <br />make suggestions in this regard. <br /> <br />Ms. Moreland stated the problem with the PUD is Mr. Menard does-not plan on staying with the <br />property. They would need to propose a plan without a buyer and then market it accordingly. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt reiterated they should work with Staff off the record and come up with a <br />solution. <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy indicated it looks like, based on this request, they are addressing the <br />whole ordinance. He is not sure there is a reason to address the original ordinance, as it may be <br />okay as it is. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated that is why he coached his motion as part of the Chapter 9 re-writes they <br />are reviewing. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald stated Staff needs to discuss the Home Occupation Ordinance witht e <br />Planning Commission and City Council, regardless of this request. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked if there was an issue with timing. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald stated they would need to waive the 60 day requirement, since it will <br />reach 120 days on August 1st. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt indicated the applicant's options are to waive the 60 days and work with staff <br />or have the Planning Commission deny the request. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/July 10, 2003 <br /> Page 6 of 21 <br /> <br /> <br />