Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JANUARY 10, 2008 <br />maintained. The City Planner noted that this is what would be done under <br />the licensing process. He noted that it is easier to not renew a license than <br />it is to revoke a CUP. <br />Duray stated that there are a good group of owners in Ryan Industrial <br />Park, and he would like to see a way to work with them. Some of these <br />owners have made huge improvements to their property. Duray suggested <br />that the City turn to the property owners to come in with a plan. Keis <br />asked if the Ryan property owners have an owners' association. Starke <br />replied that they are getting ready to start one. Starke stated that he would <br />be glad to be the liaison between the City and the Ryan Industrial Park <br />property owners. <br />The City Administrator reported that just reviewing existing site plans <br />with property owners, explaining the deficits and what needs to be done to <br />bring the property into compliance is a major time issue. He noted the <br />extensive amount of time staff is currently spending with the roofing <br />company on the corner. Blesener suggested that the City start the <br />revocation process for this property. The City Administrator indicated <br />that the City Attorney can comment, but it is his feeling that the citation <br />process should be completed before the revocation process is begun. This <br />gives the City more substance to support the revocation. The <br />Administrator noted the process the City has gone through with Valor <br />Enterprises and the fact that Valor is now suing the City. The <br />Administrator felt that the level of documentation that the City has in this <br />case lessens its risk. <br />Knudsen suggested that the grounds for revocation be changed. The City <br />Planner noted that this is a due process issue and property owners are <br />entitled to their day in court. <br />McGraw pointed out that with some property owners the only way to <br />achieve compliance is to go through a long arduous process which costs <br />the City a lot of money. McGraw stated that a license fee is a way to <br />recover some of these costs. Allan noted that the licensing process would <br />bring the property owner in every year for a compliance review. McGraw <br />pointed out that if a license is revoked, the property owner would not be <br />able to conduct his business. The City Administrator noted that it would <br />likely be non-renewal of a license versus revocation. <br />The City Planner agreed that the City could license outdoor storage as an <br />activity. If an outdoor storage license is not renewed, it gives further basis <br />for revocation of the CUP as the business owner would be operating <br />without a license. <br />10 <br />