Laserfiche WebLink
<br />prohibited in this neighborhood by the restrictive covenants, and City Code does not prohibit <br />rental property. Mr. Goodrich advised there are two reasons in this case not to deny the rental <br />application: 1) the restrictive covenants do not prohibit rental of parcels and homes; 2) even if <br />there were a prohibition, historically the City has not enforced private, restrictive covenants, <br />although this has been requested on several occasions. Mr. Goodrich advised at this point staff is <br />recommending that the rental license be approved for the property at 7362 l49th Avenue NW. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look noted that Section 4.3E states there will be no business allowed on the <br />residual portion of the lot. In addition, Section 4.3A states that the occupant of the house shall <br />be either the owner or manager of the business. He indicated this does not all seem to be flowing <br />together. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich explained this is a residential/commercial neighborhood. It is the only <br />plat like this in the City. If the property is going to be rented the commercial enterprise would <br />have to be conducted on that lot, or it would need to be run by the owner/manager. It cannot be <br />split. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look requested clarification that the manager as referred to in Section 4.3A <br />would be the leasee in this case. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied Section 4.3A states the occupant shall be either the owner or <br />manager of the business. If it is a renter the renter has to be running the industrial/commercial <br />business, but it does not prohibit the occupant from being a renter or the owner from renting the <br />property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson requested clarification that currently there is no business being conducted <br />on the back half of the property; <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that is correct; however, if the property is rented out and <br />someone wants to run a business there it has to be the renter. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson indicated she does not see any reason to deny the request for the rental <br />license. It would be a bad precedent to delve into association rules, and in the second place there <br />does not seem to be anything about this within the association rules. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Olson, seconded by Councilmember Elvig, to afprove the request for <br />a rental housing license from Mr. Jamie Sharp for the property at 7362 l49t Avenue NW. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Mayor Gamec noted this area was designed for people starting at home <br />businesses and progressing into commercial sites. Some of them looked at subdividing now and <br />some have actually retired and no longer have their business there, but still have their single <br />family home. Councilmember Jeffrey requested clarification that if there is any violation of the <br />covenants the City will not be enforcing that. City Attorney Goodrich replied. yes, as it exists <br />now, but the Council could undertake to do that. Councilmember Dehen stated he tends to <br />disagree. There was a time period where there was an appeal to a lot of these communities and <br />developments to entice people with various restrictive covenants. He thinks it would be a good <br /> <br />City Council/August 28, 2007 <br />Page 12 of 33 <br />