Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Minutes Page 6 <br /> April 3,2017 <br /> ----------------------------- <br /> be governed the same as an RV,per state laws, or as a business/personal home in a <br /> zoning district. <br /> Mr. Carlton noted the city would require restrooms for the business so they would <br /> need a septic system or be tied into city sewer and water. <br /> It was noted the applicant is proposing a rain water collection process and alternative <br /> systems as means of providing potable water to the site. This system will need to <br /> receive state approval <br /> Councilmember Westgaard stated he is not opposed to the concept but would like <br /> more information regarding the residential requirement. He further stated it doesn't <br /> make sense for every business. He noted examples where it would make sense for <br /> residential such as a bait shop or above a pub in the downtown district. <br /> Mr. Carlton agreed and questioned why a residential use would be allowed in an <br /> industrial district in the first place. <br /> Councilmember Wagner expressed concerns with allowing residential use in this <br /> zoning district due to unintended consequences that could occur. She expressed <br /> concerns with living on the site and effects to surrounding neighbors. She also <br /> expressed concerns with the water system. She stated she would be willing to review <br /> further. <br /> Councilmember Olsen stated fencing should remain in place but questioned why the <br /> septic and well couldn't be shared with the models. <br /> Mr. Hagelberg stated maintaining a green footprint is important to him. <br /> Councilmember Ovall stated he struggles with having the living component in the I3 <br /> district due to the different dynamic it would bring to the area. He questioned if the <br /> use could be forced to go away if this business sold at a future date. He stated he is <br /> undecided but would be willing to review further. <br /> Mr. Carlton explained the conditional use process and how it is tied to the property <br /> and not the owner so the use would remain with the land if the property sold. He <br /> stated if the conditional use were inactive for 6 months, then the use goes away. <br /> Councilmember Westgaard noted the Council can set a limit for having one person <br /> residing at the site,which may alleviate a concern for suddenly having 15 people <br /> living in various tiny homes. <br /> Council consensus was to move forward with a review of the ordinance for a <br /> possible amendment noting it would be non-binding. <br /> 10.2 Blight and Code/Permit Enforcement <br /> UREJ <br />