10/06/87 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Add Item #22 to read as follows: 'That two neighbors appeared before the Planning and Zoning Commission at the public hearing to voice their opposition to the request.' Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners LaDue, Hendriksen, Howell, Shumway and Terry. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioner Holm. Motion by Commissioner Hendriksen and seconded by Commissioner Howell to table further action on this request until Mr. Wendt can be present to answer any questions tha Commission might have. Further Discussion: Commissioner Shumway disagreed and stated that a decision on Mr. Wendt's request should be based on criteria and city code, not Mr. Wendt's presence. Commissioner Hendriksen inquired as to how the Commission can know if Mr. Wendt's request meets the criteria without him being present to answer to each of the criteria. Commissioner Shumway replied that the criteria can be made conditions of the permit and if Mr. Wendt doesn't comply, the permit is revoked. Commissioner Howell inquired as to the legallity of taking past condition of premises problems at Mr. Wendt's address into consideration at this time. Mr. Goodrich stated that the past problem could be made a part of the findings of fact. Ms. Norris stated that past problems involved unlicensed vehicles and accumulation of debris in the yard, Mr. Goodrich inquired as to how that past problem relates to the request for a home occupation permit. Ms. Norris replied that it may not; Mr. Wendt was notified of the condition of premises violation and cleaned up his yard. Commissioner LaDue agreed that Mr. Wendt's presence was not necessary; the specifics of the ordinance can be made conditions of the conditional use permit; if Mr. Wendt signs the permit agreement, he must be in compliance with ordinance criteria. Commissioner Hendriksen stated that approving the request infers that the Commission believes the request meets the criteria and the Commission doesn't know that for sure without talking to Mr. Wendt. Commissioner LaDue stated that if the criteria are made conditions of the permit and if Mr. Wendt's business isn't in compliance now it better be when he signs the permit agreement otherwise he is in violation and the permit is revoked. Commissioner Hendriksen stated that voting to approve indicates the Commission is satisfied that Mr. Wendt should receive the permit and he cannot honestly vote that way at this time. Mr. Friese stated that only two neighbors were present at the hearing and they were both in objection to the request; the applicant is not present; this request merits further investigation. Motion failed. Voting Yes: Commissioners Hendriksen and Howell. No: Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners LaDue, Shumway and Terry. Commissioner Holm. Voting Absent: Motion by Commissioner Shumway and seconded by Commissioner LaDue to amend findings of fact, previously recommended for Council adoption, relating to Mr. Brian Jerome Wendt's request for a conditional use permit as follows: Add Item #23 to read as follows: 'That there have been complaints Planning & Zoning Commission/October 6, 1987 Page6 of 8