06-10-97 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL JUN~ 10, 1997 from their home, and Willis indicated that the sale of the I~ouse and their subsequent relocation will resuit in loss of Little Canada business. Fahey asked if the business is 1 licensed home occupation. The City Administrator replied tl~at the CiCy has not granted a Special Use Permit for a home occu~aCiou for Che Willis'. F1hey pointed oiit that if the home occupation is not licensed or not permitted, the Council cannot lddress th1C issue. Fai~ey suggested tl~at stlff look into whether or not the business could Iegitimately continue in its present location. Willis ii~dicated that the business is a flower delivery business and that they only occ2sionally had people stopping at the house to purchase flowers. Fahey indieaCed that the City cannot overlool< the use, and that I~ome occupltions must comply with City Code requirements. ~ahey pointed out tl~1t if the business w2s only (lower deliveries, ti~ere was no reason it could not be carried out in ~ location other than Little Canada. Willis replied that at his house he has a 6lsement that l~e can work out of. Willis felt it wouid be dif('iculC Yo replace this worl<space in another house. Willis indiclted that he did not consider this aspect of relocation when he firsC began discussion with t~he Cit~y for the sale of his property. Fahey pointed out that the City's purchase of other homes in the area was btised o~~ the apprlised v11ue of the property. Fahey also responded to a request in Willis' letter to ti~e Cow~cii and indicated that the City could not assure Willis that the property would never be tal<en by eminent domain. There m1y be some public purpose Co t~al<e the property in the future. Fal~ey indicated to Willis that if ti~ere is no s11e, there is no sale and whatever happens in the lrea would be at the discretion o('future City Counci(s. Scalze agreed tl~at the City cannoC deviate ii~om its policy for one pro}~erty owner. The CiCy has dealt with a number of pro~~erty owners in ~ood faith, and there is no basis for deviation from Che policy that has been established. Morelan stated th~t he ~ssume t~he $98,000 pw~chase price was btised on the current co~~ing oPfhe pro~~erry. The Administr~ttor replied that that was correct. Morelln pointed out the necessity to close on the property by the end of June; otherwise property taxes would have to be paid in 1998. Mr. Fahey introduced the tollowin~ resolution and moved its adoption: 13