My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-28-1982 PC MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
1980 - 1989
>
1982
>
09-28-1982 PC MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:35:58 AM
Creation date
4/25/2006 2:34:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCM
date
9/28/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />September 28, 1982 <br />Page Four <br /> <br />Mrs. Balfanz asked if this ordinance \Vas dra1;VIl up so they (Axelson's) can do \vhat <br />they would like to do; add to their home. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee indicated that this was not drffiVll up just for them; the City is trying <br />to deal with all nonconforming uses. <br /> <br />Discussion was carried on regarding the length of time it is taking to consider <br />this particular problem. Chairman Tracy indicated that it is taking longer be- <br />cause of the strict interpretation and the complexity of the problem. <br /> <br />Discussion was also carried on regarding the procedure for this type of variance <br />in regard to nonconforming uses. The City Administrator indicated that the ord- <br />inance is intended to be tough. The City Administrator indicated the intent of <br />the ordinance was for very "unique" situations; not one-in-a-dozen. The City <br />Administrator further indicated that possibly a zoning ordinance could be made for <br />this type of problem. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gunkel indicated she felt the \vord "variance" should be taken out <br />of the ordinance. <br /> <br />The City Administrator indicated it was set up using variance procedures. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee indicated that the reason the nonconforming question is so difficult <br />is that first of all, there are no statutes for expanding nonconforming uses and <br />secondly, most Cities have nonconforming uses with no change being made possible. <br /> <br />Discussion was carried on regarding the procedure for notifying people when they <br />become nonconforming through a zone change. Discussion was also carried on regard- <br />ing the flexibility of the City in problems such as this. <br /> <br />Discussion was carried on regarding the complexity of this item with regard to <br />possible zone changes. Also discussed was the fact that the Planning Commission <br />was back where they were in their thinking when this item was first presented to <br />them. It was :the general consensus of the Planning Commission and the Mayor that <br />a workshop be held regarding this item of expansion of nonconforming uses. <br /> <br />MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PEARCE, SECONDED BY COMMISISSIONER GUNKEL TO RECOMMEND A <br />WORKSHOP BE HELD WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY PLANNER <br />AMD THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM. MOTION PASSED 4-0. <br /> <br />It was the general consensus of the Planning Commission to hold the workshop after <br />October 14th, 1982. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee indicated to the Planning Commission that they should be aware that <br />they should consider what is best for the City as a whole. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gunkel indicated that when we have come up with nonconforming uses, <br />we should notify the people they are as such. Rick Breezee indicated that staff <br />will notify the ones that have been denied a variance because they \Vere nonconform- <br />ing. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.