Agenda - Council - 04/08/2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-152- commercial use of the building rather than focusing on the fact' that the property is zoned residential. The consensus of the previous City Council is that the best case scenario would be conversion of the property from non-conforming to conforming. This would require constructing a home on the property and utilizing the accessory building for storage of personal velti'cles and equipment, or commercial vehicles and equipment owned and operated by the homeowner only. In the event that tkis is not possible, the Council indicated that they would consider reviewing a conditional use permit request to operate a Iow intensity business on the property that would not have intentions for expansions. The property owners and realtors have expressed concern that there is not a reasonable building pad for a home on the property because of a major power easement that crosses the property. And, at a minimum, the power easement renders the property an undesirable location for a home. City staff has suggested that a survey could answer the question of whether or not there is a reasonable building pad on the site. Because the power easement consumes so much of the front yard, staff has also indicated a willingness to support a variance to the requirement that the home be located closer to the' front property lien than the accessory building. Last. summer, the. City"s regulations for the residential' districts were amended. Now, the City Code specifically names and restricts the types of conditional uses the City can allow in the residential districts. In the R-1 District, conditional uses are restricted to commercial and private dog kennels, commercial horse boarding, religious institutions, cemeteries, and essential services. TherefOre, the only tool available to Mr. Menard to legalize a commercial use of the subject building is an Interim Use Permit, which is restricted to a five-year period. He contends that buyers with commercial uses will not invest in the pi'operty with a five-year use' limit. In summary, Mr. Menard has a sort of "white elephant" on his hands that he is n-ying to sell: An eleven acre residential piece of property without a home that contains a 5,000 square foot non-conforming accessory building that was designed and constructed to standards exceeding a typical residential accessory structure. Councilmember Zimmerman stated that he could agree with a situation where someone has a residence on the property and operating a business, but not a stand alone commerCial'business. Councilmember Kurak stated that she has made the suggestion to Mr. Menard that he talk to his neighbors about the possibility of changing the zoning in the area to mixed use or combining his two properties to resolve the issue. Lonny Menard, 8900 181~t Avenue NW, inquired as to how many neighbors would have to be included for the zoning to be changed to mixed use. COuncilmember Kurak replied that she 'was only making a suggestion; she could not give him any direction as to what might happen. Mayor Gamec stated that he woUld be opposed to' the rezoning. Community Development Director Frolik explained that if the lot was combined with the homestead property the building could be used to park and store the homeowner's corm2ercial equipment, but they could have no employees. City Council/March 18,.2003 Page 4 of 8 I I. I I I I I I I i I 1 I I I I