Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />City CQuncil Minutes <br />Fehruary 21, 1984 <br />Page Six <br /> <br />ohjection to the eyesore, citing various other examples in the area of undesirable <br />sites. Mr. LaRock further indicated that the trees that the Lodge has planted for <br />screening are developing, that the parking lot will be improved, and that the <br />traffic in the area does not seem to be a specific issue. Mr. LaRock indicated <br />that Mediscreen currently has a long term lease, but should they leave, or go <br />bankrupt, the Lodge would be in trouble to find a large business to occupy the <br />space; therefore, they are requesting the possible ability to rent to up to four <br />businesses. <br /> <br />Mr. Howard Triggs, a Demolay advisor, indicated that many of the boys drive to their <br />meetings and do create traffic in the area, but this traffic is in the community, <br />and the Lodge is the community. Mr. Triggs indicated that the boys need a place to <br />meet and should the Masonic Lodge lose Mediscreen and not be able to find one <br />occupant, they would be forced to perhaps sell their building. Mr. Triggs indicated <br />that the Masonic Lodge is simply looking to the future in their request. <br /> <br />Mr. Roskaft, a representative of the Masonic Lodge, indicated that at the time the <br />building was built, the plans were made for various professional offices, and the <br />changes were made to accommodate Mediscreen. Mr. Roskaft indicated that the original <br />intent of the building was to allow exactly what the Lodge is now requesting. <br /> <br />Discussion was carried on regarding nonconforming uses and the specific example <br />of the spot zoning of the Masonic Lodge. Discussion was also carried on regarding <br />the amortization period of the Masonic Lodge type of building. <br /> <br />The owner of Lakeland Communications indicated that the building was suitable to his <br />needs, as he was a small business. The owner of Lakeland Communications indicated <br />that he was interested in staying at the location, but should the City Council not <br />grant the variance, he would understand that he would have to leave. <br /> <br />Mr. Ken Warneke, Treasurer of the Lodge, again indicated the reason for the Masonic <br />Lodge request. Mr. Warneke indicated that the process of obtaining a variance to <br />allow for more than one occupant would take approximately three to four months, <br />which would mean a loss of income to the Masonic Lodge, should Mediscreen leave. <br />Mr. Warneke indicated that the Masonic Lodge was just looking toward the future <br />and requesting the variance, should it become necessary. Mr. Warneke indicated <br />that it is not the Masonic Lodge's intent to cause a disruption to the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Further discussion was carried on regarding the length of the Mediscreen lease and <br />the vacant property adjacent to the Masonic Lodge property. <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Bailey, owner of the vacant property, indicated that he did not have an <br />objection to the variance request by the Masonic Lodge. <br /> <br />Councilmember Engstrom indicated that he looked at the issue as a division of space <br />issue, rather than an increase of occupancy issue. Councilmember Engstrom indicated <br />that the Masonic Lodge could hold four different uses, using five hundred square <br />feet, or two uses using one thousand square feet, or one.use using two thousand <br />square feet and that it was basically a division of the space, as there were no <br />plans to add space to the Lodge. Councilmember Engstrom indicated that he felt <br />it would be unjust to deny the Masonic Lodge the variance request as it is a <br />