Laserfiche WebLink
Excerpts from Plan Commission Minutes of February 5,2009 continued: <br /> Mr. Livingston asked if it was an option of the Commission to delay this until a court decision is <br /> made. He asked how long it would take the court to make a decision. Mr. Robinson stated he <br /> had no idea. <br /> Ms. Sadorus stated the decision of whether or not the property can be used as a duplex is up to <br /> the court. She believes the Commission will be setting a new precedent if they decided to <br /> change the zoning. <br /> Mr. Livingston asked if the petition is denied would the petitioners be able to come back at a <br /> later time. Ms. Stickle stated they would not be able to come back for a year. <br /> Mr. Steve John asked if the City Council were to grant the zoning change would the court case <br /> be moot. Mr. Robinson stated not necessarily as the court case deals with past dates. If the <br /> rezoning was granted by the court system it would be able to be used as a duplex now and in the <br /> future. <br /> Mr. Bill Clevenger stated he drives Main Street all the time and sees all the other duplexes. He <br /> would like to know how staff is going to deal with the other duplexes in the area. Mr. Greg <br /> Crowe stated they will be dealt with on a case by case basis. He said the area is zoned R-3 which <br /> makes all the duplexes non-conforming. A complaint was brought to staff about #5 Edgewood <br /> Court and staff had to follow up on the complaint. �' <br /> Mr. Clevenger asked if staff received complaints on the other properties would this process have '� <br /> to start over again. Mr. Crowe stated if staff is presented with evidence, as in this case, that a <br /> property has lost its non-conforming status staff will investigate. They cannot turn a blind eye <br /> on the complaints they receive. <br /> Mr. Flynn stated he agrees with Mr. Crowe that you have to take these incidents on a case by <br /> case basis. He said the petitioners walked into a property that was clearly built as a duplex, <br /> marketed as a duplex, and bought as a duplex. They fixed it up and rented it out to three (3) <br /> people. The petitioners will be honorable and respectable landlords. <br /> Mr. Dave Anderson said in the past when the Commission has had zoning issues similar to this <br /> the Commission has granted a special use permit which basically grandfathers the property until <br /> it is structurally changed. Ms. Stickle said granting a special use permit, which is now called a <br /> conditional use permit, is not an option. The zoning ordinance does not allow conditional use <br /> permits for a two-family residence in a single family district. <br /> Ms. Buxton stated since the property has been single family for thE past thirty (30) years she <br /> does not feel the neighborhood should be penalized for poor business decisions of the property <br /> owners not looking into what the area is zoned. <br /> Ms. Watson said the reason this is totally upsetting to the residents is that they were aware of the <br /> duplexes close to them but this property has been a single residence since 1978. The other <br /> duplexes do not affect the streets of Edgewood Court and Victoria. <br /> It was moved and seconded (Mickler/Sadorus) to forward Cal. No. 09-OS to the City Council <br /> with recommendation for denial as presented by staff. Motion carried five (5) to four (4) with <br /> Dave Anderson, Bill Clevenger, Glenn Livingston, and Susie Peck voting no. <br />