Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />January 8, 2003 <br />Page 11 <br /> APPROVED MINUTES <br />Mr. Pfingsten stated he runs a clean business and takes care of his business. He stated <br />that in a high profile business such as his, perception is everything. He stated he has <br />been in this industry for 21 years and since he started this business five years ago it has <br />grown 15% overall per year. He stated that is because he maintains his equipment with <br />high curbside appeal and uses a professional mechanic. He stated his desire is to get his <br />equipment inside and out of the weather. <br />With regard to traffic on the street and children in the area, Mr. Pfingsten stated that he <br />has no reason to go down the street beyond the location of this shop. He stated there is a <br />lot of traffic in this area but not nearly the amount as on the other side of the bridge <br />where the new development is taking place. He stated he has the greatest respect for the <br />residents. <br />Chair Schaps asked if he will be parking cars on the street. Mr. Pfingsten stated he will <br />not. <br />Mr. Lyden stated the residents have been “burned” in the past and that is being heard <br />loud and clear. He stated he would not consider a rezoning but may consider a <br />conditional use permit if the right conditions are placed. He stated he would like to <br />consider that option so the issues of screening, parking, and lighting can be addressed. <br />He stated if the City is not willing to purchase the property, remove the buildings, and get <br />it ready for a house, then someone else will buy the property and want to use the building <br />for a business. He raised the question whether anyone who purchased the property would <br />be able to park their RV and a trailer on the property. <br />Chair Schaps stated Mr. Pfingsten impresses him as a decent guy and very honest and he <br />also thinks the neighborhood has provided a thorough, thoughtful, and well laid out <br />response to this proposal. He stated it is unfortunate that these two groups have not <br />gotten together and do not know each other at all. He stated he would hate to see a much <br />less intensive use, such as Mr. Pfingsten’s, not considered when another auto business <br />could occur. He suggested that they take 30 days so they can meet together and see if <br />there are ways within reason for Mr. Pfingsten to buy this property and use it in a way <br />that is acceptable to the residents. He noted that they may not agree to everything but <br />there should be a reasonable manner that it can be considered and eliminate the potential <br />of another auto shop. Chair Schaps stated Mr . Pfingsten is talking about a few trucks, not <br />a lot of activity, and only activity in the morning and evening. He asked if a 30 day delay <br />is of interest to Mr. Pfingsten. <br />Mr. Pfingsten stated it is and he is interested in scheduling such a meeting with the <br />residents. <br />Mr. Hedger asked if there is no way to enforce a conditional use permit or to provide <br />input. He stated if there is not, they are not interested in anything like that. <br />Chair Schaps explained that conditions can be placed on a conditional use permit and it <br />can be enforced. He stated if the conditional use permit is violated it can be taken away.