Laserfiche WebLink
<br />nonconforming and, therefore, the use cannot be intensified. The business can maintain <br />the building but not improve or enhance it. <br /> <br />Mr. Don Moe, 7040 Brian Court, stated he had addressed the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission stating he felt the City is obligated to follow the Comprehensive Plan for <br />this piece of property. Mr. Moe strongly objects to industrial rezoning because of the <br />ecological issues the floodway presents and, in the event of a rezone, the loss of control if <br />in the future the current business decides to sell and a more disruptive business comes in. <br />He understands Mrs. Stevens wishes to make money by selling the property but as a <br />neighboring resident he does not want industrial property in his neighborhood. <br /> <br />Ms. Susan Luke, 7026 Brian Court, questioned if the buildings currently located on the <br />property comply with industrial zoning regulations. Council Member Broussard Vickers <br />stated they did not conform to any type of zoning and are classified as nonconforming. If <br />the zoning were to be modified, there are major issues concerning the floodway that <br />would govern what could be built on the property. <br /> <br />Mr. Hoeft clarified the buildings are classified as a pre-existing, non-conforming, use <br />meaning the business cannot expand or intensifY its use. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra questioned whether residents have any issues with the building <br />currently located on the property. Ms. Luke indicated her lot abuts the property but she <br />looks out and sees the house on the property as a nice buffer between her lot and the pole <br />building. Ms. Luke indicated her main concern with rezoning the property is all <br />likelihood the house would be tom down. <br /> <br />Mayor Swedberg asked the other residents in attendance if they had any issues with the <br />business as is. Mr. Moe indicated he had no problem with the current use of the property. <br />There may be an issue with the new development to the south with it overlooking the lot <br />with no natural buffer. <br /> <br />Council Member Nelson stated that she was in favor of a rezone if it was not in the <br />floodway. <br /> <br />Mayor Swedberg expressed concern for allowing an industrial use of the property that <br />may jeopardize the wells located downstream from the property. In his opinion, a rezone <br />was inappropriate. <br /> <br />Motion bv Council Member Broussard Vickers. seconded by Council Member <br />Nelson to deny the rezone request for 7007 - 20tb Avenue from R2t to 11. AIl in <br />favor. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated the primary objection is to Industrial <br />zoning not Commercial and it is possible Mrs. Stevens would request a rezone to <br />commercial. <br /> <br />A member of the audience questioned if Mrs. Stevens requested a rezone to Commercial <br />would residents get notice of the meeting. Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated <br />residents would be notified. <br /> <br />Page 10 of 18 <br />