Laserfiche WebLink
MINUT);S <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JULY 9, 2009 <br />Knudsen stated his opposition to opening the B-3 District to the mini- <br />storage use, and indicated that it is unfortunate that there is someone living <br />on the property. <br />Mark Schultz, 2610 Park Street, indicated that he lives across the street <br />from the mini-storage, and reported that he has no problem with the <br />apartment use since Mr. Jablonski has lived there. Schultz thought the <br />apartment was added in the 1980's when the old house that was on the <br />property burned down. Schultz stated that his concern with the apartment <br />is when another tenant moves into it. Schultz also pointed out the <br />Frattalone property along Park Street and was concerned that another <br />request would be made for a caretaker apartment. Schultz stated that he <br />was surprised when he got the notice as he thought the apartment was <br />legally established. With reference to the building permits that were <br />issued, however, Schultz noted that the apartment was the office for the <br />mini-storage, and it would not have been unusual for replace a water <br />heater or do plumbing work in an office of this nature. <br />Schultz was concerned that allowing the caretaker apartment would result <br />in additional uses of this nature, and he was concerned with the resulting <br />impact on his property. Schultz noted that the mini-storage property is not <br />well-cared for, pointing out the curled roof shingles, poor driveway <br />condition, and umnowed grass. Schultz stated that he recently had his <br />property appraised, and felt the condition of the mini-storage negatively <br />impacted his property. <br />Schultz again stated that he had no issues with Mr. Jablonski, but felt that <br />the ownership of the mini-storage should be present this evening to <br />discuss this proposal. Schultz felt that Mr. Jablonski was caught in the <br />middle. <br />Thoelke stated that they were not in a position to discuss the condition of <br />the property. Thoelke stated that there was a misunderstanding about the <br />scope of the issue, and he thought that one caretaker apartment would be <br />of limited impact and do no harm. <br />Duray asked about denying the "Text Amendment and allowing Mr. <br />Jablonski to stay for a period of time. The City Planner indicated that the <br />Commission could make a recommendation on what it feels the <br />appropriate amount of time would be to allow Mr. Jablonski to stay. It <br />will then be at the City Council's discretion as to how long the property <br />owner will have to bring the property into compliance. <br />7- <br />