Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning, Board <br />September 13, 2006 <br />Page 3 <br />Mr. Rafferty made a motion to close the Public Hearing at 7:09 p.m. and was supported <br />by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 5 -0. <br />Mr. Laden stated that he is in favor of a neighborhood business zone to the property. Mr. <br />Laden questioned why a catering business would fit in to a neighborhood zone, as most <br />catering business is taken off site, and opposed a change to catering but agreed with the <br />other proposed changes. <br />Mr. Pogalz asked what the property was zoned when this project was originally proposed. <br />Mr. Smyser replied that the site was originally divided into R -1 and R -3 districts, but the <br />site was guided for commercial. The Council later approved a rezone to LB for the <br />corner. Mr. Smyser stated that when property was rezoned to LB, there was a great <br />amount of discussion between the LB and NB zones at that time. The most recent <br />application included the drive -thru, and City Council stated they would deny the <br />proposal. <br />Mr. Pogalz questioned Council's intent for denial. Mr. Smyser stated that the City <br />Council re- examined zoning of the site, and no longer agreed with the original decision. <br />Mr. Smyser explained that staff generated the additional revisions to the ordinance <br />accordingly. Mr. Pogalz questioned the fairness of the decision. <br />Mr. Smyser pointed out that the applicant withdrew the application, therefore an intent <br />was a moot point. <br />Mr. Laden asked if a building was proposed with the original approval. Mr. Laden <br />believes the proposed use seemed appropriate for the site. Mr. Laden addressed that the <br />original proposal did not include a drive - through. Mr. Smyser replied that a proposed <br />building was reviewed and considered with the original approval. <br />Mr. Laden asked staff if a Conditional Use Permit is granted for a coffee shop, at a later <br />time could that use turn into a fast food restaurant or would the applicant have to reapply. <br />Mr. Smyser responded that conditions were proposed for this site to restrict that the use <br />would be limited to a coffee shop as part of City Council discussion. <br />Mr. Smyser explained that a permitted use is a use by right, however a city can legally <br />add stipulations to a Conditional Use Permit. He stated that a Conditional Use Permit <br />gives the city excess regulatory ability, adding that this is an important difference <br />between the two. <br />Upon further discussion, board members and staff agreed that the fact is the applicant <br />withdrew the application, therefore they needed to address the proposals presented before <br />them tonight. <br />• Mr. Smyser reiterated that the city has the right to rezone property. He added that often <br />decisions are made and later determined that a different decision may have been better. <br />Mr. Hyden commented that he understands that the city has the ability to make changes <br />and can, but stated that the developer thought they knew what the rules were, and now the <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />