10-26-88 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES City Council October 26, 198II Multiple Frattalone reported that in addition to the parcel on which his business Rezonings is located, he has another piece of pr•oper•ty being consider•ed for r~ezoning. (Cont.) Frattalone did not believe he could develop his pr~operty under• the proposed I-P zoning and asked that his proper~ty remain I-l. Fr~attalone r•eported that he needs more outdoor~ stor~age than allowed under• the I-P Distr~ict. Fr•attalone asked for an explanation of gr•andfather•ing of existing businesses which would become non-conforming under a zoning change. Fahey repor•ted that a non-confor~ming business could remain, however~, the non-conformity could not be increased. Frattalone pointed out that he may want to add on to his building and asked if he would be allowed to do so if his business was non-confor•ming. A r•epresentative of Buck Blacktop appear~ed before the Council and reported that when the rezoning was fir•st pr•oposed, he did not understand the ramifications of it. Buck ~lacktop reported that he has the only undeveloped piece of pr•oper~ty in his immediate area and could not understand the need to rezone his ar•ea. Fahey commented that the Council is trying to push development in the r•ight di r•ecti on and i s tr~yi ng to set standards for~ how i t wants the i ndustr•i al park to develop. Fahey r~eported that the Council does not want to encourage pole buildings and felt that through the iase of Tax Increment Financing it can encour~age high-quality development in the area. Duck Blacktop pointed out that his area is alr•eady developed and nothing much will change in that ar~ea. The only difference is that the Buck Blacktop property will have to live with a new zoning. Quck Rlacktop pointed out that his business involves outdoor• storage and felt the I-P District limitations would be too r•estr•ictive. Blesener asked if the non-confor•ming businesses would be allowed to put an addition onto their building. The City Planner pointed out that the Or•dinance allows a non-confor•ming building to expand to 25% of its existing size. The Planner also stated that as long as the non-conformit,y is rYOt being increased, the property owner would not be for•ced to br•ing his pr~operty into confor•mance. The Planner r~epor•ted that any building addition lar•ger• than 25% of the existing floor• area, would have to comply with the zoning standar~ds. Scalze pointed out that there are large par•cels in the area whose pr~oper•ty owners have indicated that they ar•e not opposed to the r•ezoning. Jerry Mogr•en repor~ted that he did not like pole buildings and would not develop one on his pr•operty. However, Mogr•en repor•ted that he owns a large par•cel and felt the r•estr•ictions of the I-P zoning wer~e too str•ingent. Mogr•en disagreed with the landscaping r•equirements of the I-P Distr~ict as well as the limitation on outdoor stor•age. Mogr•en stated that he would be in favor of upgr•ading the building, but requested that the landscaping and outdoor storage r~equir•ements be changed for• the I-P Distr'ict. Page -3-