Laserfiche WebLink
Acting Mayo~,. P~rson stated he is not in favor of the fence for added storage space because other <br />businesses m~y ~Xpect to be able to do the same thing but have less building space and a larger <br />fenced storage ar~. <br /> [ <br />Mr. Nissen ~ ~nted that the same tax base is present whether he has fenced storage or not. He <br />added that a~ !iflg to the ordinance, a fence constitutes storage. He also stated that he would like <br />Council to asSes.~ !Why a liquor store even needs 4,000 square feet to operate. He felt the ordinance <br />is antiquated, i~n¢fdeserves review. He stated he did try to fred other places to relocate his pawn <br />shop to but eo~l¢ ~fi°t find any reasonable enough in price. <br />Council agre~:t~}~ tO review the ordinance. <br />Zoning Admi~is~ator Frolik stated she reviewed Mr. Nissen's site and felt that it didn't make <br />sense to conSla-udt the fence in the location Mr. Nissen indicated he would because this area was <br />landscaped, ~e~added the proposed storage area cannot be relocated to any other part of the s~te <br />because it w°ttld ~hen interfere with off-street parking and loading areas. <br /> <br />Councilmem[~er ~eyer stated that June 25, 1991, Council granted permission to Mr. Nissen to <br />erect a fentle l~Or ~e remainder of his 4,000 square foot requirement and over a year later, that has <br />not been compleX. She felt Council had been quite lenient and patient with Mr. Nissen. <br />Councilmemb~r ~.Hardin stated he was not opposed to giving Mr. Nissen a one-year extension to <br />comply w~th ¢it~ Code to whmh Councflmember Beyer stated she felt s~x months was plenty of <br />time to give '1~, ~qissen. <br />Councilmerab~_ r Hardin stated that Mr. Nissen already had the liquor business when he came to <br />City Council'~ ~to ~quest approval of his pawn shop, which Council approved. He suggested <br />Council take pju't~lame for Mr. Nissen ending up with too little space for his liquor establishment <br />because the Cbu~l ordinance was not reviewed closely enough at that time. He added that Mr. <br />Nissen's businesi!is kept neat. <br /> <br />Councilmemb~r Zimmerman felt that six months did not allow Mr. Nissen much time to look for <br />another buiidi~lg,r' <br /> <br />Mr. Nissen sat?d~ ii~, year would allow him plenty of time to find another location for his pawn shop. <br />Councilmemb~ r Bcyer giving <br /> · ~ ~ felt Mr. Nissen such an extension would be a detriment to other <br />hquor store ov0ners. <br /> <br />Motion by Coi~nojlmember Hardin to renew Mr. Ralph Nissen's liquor license for one year with <br />the stipulati°n!,th~fbetween now and then Mr. Nissen will determine if his present location will <br />become totai l~u~r store or total pawn shop. In the interim, City Council will be reviewing the <br />ordinance, if ~ ~endment is made to the ordinance, it is possible that Mr. Nissen may be in <br />compliance as <br /> <br />Motion failed ~or lack of a second. <br /> <br />Motion by Coan~il~ember Zimmerman and seconded by Councilmember Beyer to allow Mr. <br />Ralph Nissen, R~ph s Highway #10 Liquor, ten months from July 1, 1992 to comply with City <br />Code by maldt~ g ~!$ building all pawn shop or all liquor store. In the interim, City Council will be <br />reviewing the~ ~d~ance. If an amendment is made to the ordinance, it is possible that Mr. Nissen <br />may be in corn fli~nCe as is. <br /> <br />City Council/June 29, 1992 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />