05/07/91 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Glen R¥chner, Aluminum Recycling, Inc., felt the Findings of Fact werelfundamentally flawed to begin with because they did not include the fact that outside storage for industries abutting residential areas is not allowed until December 6. He said he kept changing hls~plans In response to what the City had told him. His business Cannot operate sufficiently without some outside storage, and when ~e found out it was not allowed, he withdrew his request. Mr. Rychner etated If the Issue had been pointed out at the onset in October, he would never have pursued the request beyond the first per~lt, He has paid about $1,300 on this, with total charges of about ~9,000 In legal, site plans, and other paperwork. Most of the expense would not have been necessary if he had known the ramifications of the abutment to R-1 ~esldentlal. Mrs. Helllng~clarifled the City's costs totalled $4,419.64. The $891 prop~se~ credit Is the actual amount of time spent on researching the ordinance and could provide reference for the future. S~e didn't think Staff could recommend any adjustment other than that~ Mr. Rychner stated he paid $1,445.92 to the City already. The abutment Issue made all the difference as to whether they could use the land. or not, again pointing out that that fact was not noted until December 6, almost two months after the application was made, which Is when the application of Ordinance #90-5 was mane to his permit, iHe contended that ordinance was not applied to an identlcal~tyPe operation which had been permitted one month before. He was surprised it was applied to him, and he did not feel it was appropriate because It Is the Solid Waste Landfill Ordinance. Attorney ~oodrich explained his memorandum stating Ordinance #90-5 applied t~ Mr. Rychner's permit was written on December 3, 1990, in response ~o the discussion at the November 20, 1990 public hearing. ~ Ms. Froll~ explained the Findings of Fact were drafted by Merlan~ Otto, Hak~nson Anderson Associates, with Input from Staff; however, the Plannfng and Zoning Commission claims authorship after reviewlng~, altering, and acting on them. She also explained that she, Mr. Otto, and Mr. Jankowski met with Mr. Rychner and went over the ramifi!cations of Ordinance #90-5 if it applied to the proposal. Mr. Rychner repeated his issue Is not with Ordinance #90-5, though he did no~ see how it can be interpreted to apply to h~s business. He could:have met those requirements with some variances. It is the abutment iissue that caused him to withdraw his application because he cannot operate without some outside storage. Further dl!scussion noted the difference between Mr. Rychner's request a~d the City's recommendation ~s about $2,000. Mayor Gilbertson suggested he meet with Mr. Rychner, Mrs. Helling and Mr. Otto to negotiate the item. CITY COUNCIL/APRIL 9, 1991 Page 6 of 11