10-13-99 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 13,1999 Ed McCumber described the tenants he has leasing from them and pointed out the fact that some of them are doing fabrication work. Fahey noted that the Comprehensive Plan has earmarked this property for residential. Fahey felt that the Council needed to move forward with some closure on this issue. Scalze indicated that she was confused about the recommendation relative to PUD zoning. Scalze asked how the City could rezoned to PUD allowing the existing uses for the short-term while still indicating residential as the long-term use. Morelan indicated that he would assume that if the Council rezoned the property to PUD and then allowed contractor's shops in the PUD District, that contractor's shops would be allowed in all PUD Districts. The Zoning Administrator pointed out that State Statutes required that a city's zoning code and comp plan must be consistent. She noted that if the McCumber and Buetow properties were rezoned to PUD and the underlying use is industrial, the Comp Plan designation would have to be consistent. With regard to PUD zoning, the Zoning Administrator pointed out that all uses would apply except for six auto-related exceptions listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Pedersen asked if the uses allowed in a PUD District are site specific. The Zoning Administrator replied that they were. Fahey asked if the property could be rezoned to PUD, the existing uses allowed to continue, and the long-term plan for the property remain as residential. Fahey pointed out that there were previously concerns with screening of the McCumber property. Mr. McCumber satisfactorily addressed those concerns. However, if the property were sold, the next owner may not be as conscientious. Fahey felt that the Buetow property was different than the McCumber given that the Buetow property has not been developed. He felt that a BW zoning was more appropriate for the Buetow property. Fahey stated that the did not feel it was appropriate to retain the I-1 zoning on either property. Fahey felt that some move was necessary to improve the situation without impacting the existing use of the properties. The City Attorney reported that per Chapter 915 of the City Code, the only exceptions to the uses allowed in a PUD District are a list of auto-related uses listed in the ardinance. Fahey asked if the PUD District would allow I-1 uses. The City Attorney reported that all uses, R-1 through I-1, would be allowed although the CUP process would give the City some control.