Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 12/14/1989

Home

diameter is prepared for sale as firewood. The firewood stored on the property falls into the category of supply yard because it is an item he storing tbr retail sales and supply yard is a permitted use in the I-1 zone according to the City's ordinance. The complaint filed by the City indicates that the defendant owns property on which there has accumulated debris, refuse and garbage. That is not a definition of what is there; what is there is wood being sold for firewood. The principle concern of City Staff is to be able to see that there is not a spreading of wood diseases by Mr. Gorecki's operation. The City's Ordinance #88-3 (Diseased Tree Ordinance) is perfectly clear and provides the City with the right to inspect Mr. Gorccki's property and order the removal of diseased trees. The City's conditional use permit ordinance indicates that the City can impose the conditional use permit principle if it is a health, safety and welfare issue. In this case the City doesn't need the conditional use permit process because it has the Tree Ordinance to protect it's concerns with health. With respect to fire safety, the likelihood of a firewood pile catching on fire is little or none. There should not be a welfare issue raised in this case because Mr. Gorecki's neighbors have indicated that they have no problem with his business. There should be a better way to solve this issue than prosecution. Mr. Goodrich stated that the root of the problem is how the City is interpreting supply yards; supply yard is not defined in the City Code. City Staff is of the opinion that supply yards does not include stockpiling of wood materials; if Council is of the opinion that it does, the ordinance can be amended. Currently, the City is not pursuing the issue of diseased trees and at the request of Mr. Gorecki, the court hearing has been delayed until after this meeting to determine if there is any staff direction to amend the ordinance such that prosecution against Mr. Gorecld is not appropriate. Mr. Banwart explained that City Staff is of the opinion that wood does not fall under the category of supply yard and furthermore that wood could be considered a debris or a waste but with a conditional use permit it could be considered a feedstock like waste aluminum or tires. Mr. Banwart stated that the City is trying to develop a consistency of approach to deal with businesses that deal with waste as a feedstock. Bob Johnson - Requested that City Staff try to resolve the definition of supply yards in some way other than the conditional use permit process because that process would submit Mr. Gorecki to a whole spectrum of issues like parking, screening, setbacks, etc. Mr. Banwart replied that it has been the City policy that any business that deals with 'waste' as a feedstock must have a conditional use permit. Mayor Reimann stated that in his opinion scrap aluminum and used tires are no longer usable and therefore considered a waste that can be used as a feedstock; after trees are cut down, their wood should not be considered a waste because it is still usable for lumber and firewood. Councilmember Peterson noted that the City's concerns in Mr. Gorec 'ki's case have to do with diseased trees and fire safety; the City does have a Diseased Tree Ordinance and a Fire Department to which Mr. Gorecki's business is obligated to comply with the requirements of. Councilmember Pearson was also of the opinion that split wood should not be considered a waste. City Council/November 14, 1989 Page 9 of 14