Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />February 29. 2000 <br />Page 7 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />determined that it is appropriate, the applicant will then be required to bring the <br />property into conforming status. Findings for denying the request are provided in <br />the staff report, if the Planning Commission denies the request. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kuester asked if this situation were unique. City Attorney Peter Beck <br />stated that there are other conditional use permits which are not in compliance, <br />but not this type. He felt that the situation is unusual in that the entire back yard <br />of a single family dwelling is a the parking lot of a commercial business. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker asked what the zoning of the property. Ms. McPherson <br />stated that it is C2 (Office District). <br /> <br />Commissioner Kuester asked if the structure is being used as a residence. The <br />applicant stated that a family is renting the house on a month-to-month basis, <br />because of the uncertainty of allowing the house to remain on the property. <br /> <br />Commissioner Schuster questioned if there was a statute of limitations for <br />conditions of a CUP. Peter Beck stated that there is none. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker asked the applicant what they plan to do with the building. <br />Tim Smith stated that they would sell the property if they could find a buyer. He <br />stated he did not have the resources to move the building. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Discussion followed regarding why the condition was not enforced earlier, and <br />also, why it has become an issue now. Peter Beck explained that the issue was <br />brought forward by a council member, and also, a complaint was made to <br />another council member. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Jerry Smith, 24860 147th Street, part owner of the property, stated that he was not <br />sure why the condition was placed on their permit and that in the excitement of <br />building the new structure, the condition was overlooked by them. He stated <br />that their intent has always been to sell the building and it is being marketed. He <br />felt the expense to bulldoze the building down and clean up the site would be <br />enormous, and they would also lose the income they are not receiving in rent. <br />Mr. Smith suspected that the complaint which was made was likely caused by <br />the previous tenant who stored playground equipment on the site. Currently, a <br />mother and 2 children are living in the home. <br /> <br />There being no further comments from the public, Chair Thompson closed the <br />public hearing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kuester asked the applicants what they would like to see happen. <br />Mr. Tim Smith stated he would like to see the condition to remove the house <br />completely removed from the CUP. He felt the property may not sell for some <br />time, based on the time it has taken to move other properties in the downtown <br />area. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker asked if the Smiths are actively marketing the property and <br />whether or not they have had any showings. Mr. Jerry Smith stated that they are <br />trying to market the property and did have someone interested in the site as an <br />