My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-08-07 Planning Comm. Minutes
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
02-08-07 Planning Comm. Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/1/2008 1:23:53 PM
Creation date
5/1/2008 1:22:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />FEBRUARY 8, 2007 <br />The City Planner reviewed his report dated February 2, 2007 and noted that <br />should the Commission wish to allow the auto repair hobby use to continue <br />on an interim basis, a development contract could be drafted to govern how <br />the use would continue. The Planner recommended that the interim use be <br />for a period of one year. If the property is not sold in that timeframe, the <br />applicant could apply for an extension of the interim use permit. <br />Montreux stated that she had an issue with the one year limitation, and <br />noted that the property has been for sale for the past three years. Montreux <br />indicated that there have been prospective buyers for the City, but each time <br />the buyer has run into road blocks with the City. <br />Duray indicated that he favored a time limit on the interim use. He also <br />noted that there is a lot of junk on the property. Montreux pointed out that <br />there is a mess on the opposite side of the railroad tracks as well. That area <br />is not part of Ann Trobec's property. <br />Helmeke asked about the problems that potential buyers have faced from <br />the City. Montreux indicated that an insurance business had wanted to <br />purchase the property, occupy the house for their business, as well as <br />continue renting the back buildings. The City indicated that the back <br />buildings could not be rented given there was no water or bathroom <br />facilities. The loss of the rental income was a deal breaker. There was also <br />a buyer interested inputting together several parcels for a redevelopment <br />project. That buyer backed out, and Montreux was not sure why. Montreux <br />stated that she was not clear on what Little Canada wants for the area, and <br />indicated that any prospective buyer is sent to the City for information on <br />what is allowed for the property. Montreux stated that she currently has <br />someone who is interested in utilizing the warehouse for a reception hall. <br />Duray asked the condition of the house. Montreux stated that the house was <br />in good condition, but she did not think the property could be used as <br />residential. <br />Montreux stated that she would like to continue renting to Mr. Anderson. <br />He has been a good tenant, and it has been beneficial to have him on the <br />property given that the house is vacant. Mr. Anderson works on cars as a <br />hobby and has a couple of his buddies there with him. He has rented this <br />space for the past seven years. Montreux indicated that she would as Mr. <br />Anderson if he would make some improvements to the front of the property. <br />Montreux stated that there is a little bit of outdoor storage behind the <br />warehouse abutting the railroad property. <br />Duray stated that it is more than a little bit of outdoor storage. Duray <br />pointed out that the City Planner outlined five recommendations in his <br />February 2"~ report that should be complied with if the Commission feels <br />-7- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.