Laserfiche WebLink
citizens, which he did in Mr. Hickman's case; he then brought the issue to <br />Council's attention; Council suggested that he and Ms. Norris meet with Mr. <br />Hickman to work out a plan. Councilmember Cox stated that there is another <br />issue to be discussed -- the commercial building constructed in a rural area on <br />Hwy. #47. <br /> <br />Ms. Norris stated that the property to which Councilmember Cox refers is <br />applying for a conditional use permit. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schlueter suggested that the City Attorney's letter regarding <br />infractions of Plants and Things be reviewed for possible action. <br /> <br />Chairman Peterson stated that it was P&Z's understanding that the issue is not <br />up for discussion; that Councilmember Cox and Ms. Norris were to resolve the <br />problem. P&Z's comment back is that if Mr. Hickman is to be given variances <br />from the ordinance requirements, justification for doing so should be <br />documented. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox stated that it was his understanding that after he and Ms. <br />Norris met with Mr. Hickman, Mr. Hickman's proposal was to be reviewed at this <br />joint meeting. The agreement should then be laid out in final form. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that there are infraction of State Building Code; <br />City Building Official and Council can grant variances to State codes. The <br />City did grant the building permit; the longer the case goes unresolved, the <br />city's chances of getting court backing to require compliance decreases. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox stated that the building is up and what the point would be <br />in pursuing the matter after the fact. <br /> <br />Chairman Peterson stated that Mr. Hickman needs a variance to setback <br />requirements; he needs to provide a site plan showing adequate parking <br />facilities and a certificate of lot survey. Chairman Peterson noted that the <br />site plan would address concerns with delivery trucks obstructing traffic on <br />Cry. Rd. #57; retail sales items being displayed in the right-of-way; access <br />being located in State highway turn lane. Chairman Peterson stated that all <br />P&Z is asking for is that Plants and Things not be allowed to continue to <br />operate in a haphazard manner with total disregard for ordinances and <br />justification for any variances granted should be documented. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox stated that the building permit was issued and it is <br />difficult to negotiate compliance after the fact but he and Ms. Norris will <br />try. <br /> <br />Commissioner Deemer stated that he did some research regarding Mr. Hickman's <br />concern for his green acres tax base; in the process he found that County <br />records do not reflect that Mr. Hickman is the owner of the property; if Mr. <br />Hickman is leasing the property, that would explain his reluctance to construct <br />permanent type structures. Also, that portion of the property being used for <br />retail sales should not be eligible for green acres tax base. <br /> <br />Commissioner Fults stated that County records would not show Mr. Hickman as <br />property owner if he is in the process of purchasing it on a contract for deed. <br /> ED¢-PZ-Council/November 20, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 4 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />