Laserfiche WebLink
165 <br />Special Council Meeting <br />10/5/92 <br />Page Three <br />Mr. Flynn asked if Mr. Basile or Mr. Diemert could analyze the position of the Planning and <br />Zoning Commission and why they voted in that manner. <br />Mr. Diemert said he thought adamandy opposed to any such use granted by variance other than <br />what is permitted by code, especially in light of the rezoning being proposed by Council. <br />Mr. Rinker asked if there was any specific discussion by Planning. and Zoning of an office- <br />laboratory use there in lieu of warehousing. . <br />Mr. Basile said no. <br />Mr. Rinker asked if they understand that if there is no warehousing then there would be office- <br />laboratory use very likely requested and how would they reconcile then. <br />Mr. Basile said that was not discussed. T'hey felt since there is an ordinance proposing the <br />rezoning of that property that nothing should be done with that building. . <br />Mr. Fixler said what Mr. Panzica just stated before is he does not need our permission if he wanted <br />to bring in a manufacturing or machine shop. He asked if everyone would rather have that. Mr. <br />Fixler said he understands changing the code is one issue, but on the other hand there is another <br />issue people must ask themselves--what is the lesser of two evils? Are you better off having one <br />furniture warehouse with some repair in there and "x" amount of trucks, or are you better off <br />having a machine shop or whatever would be in there and having no limitation on trucks <br />whatsoever? He asked if the Law Director said that production would be acceptable. <br />Mr. Diemert said on the rear portion of the property; the building itself is mostly office laboratory which is what the zoning is and what would be pernutted in there. There aze a number of pernutted <br />uses under office laboratory. 1VIr. Diemert said that even if that property is rezoned to single-family <br />residential, that does not mean that he could not use it as office laboratory. He may be <br />grandfathererl in and be permitted to use it. Keeping it vacant does not protect its not being used <br />for the building it was made for. <br />Mr. Rinker said he was surprised that Planning and Zoning was not discussing alternative uses. <br />Mayor Pietrafese said that Chairman Schulte commented that when Planning and Zoning held their <br />workshop they asked Mr. Panzica to be there and Mr. Panzica was out of town and no one showed <br />up for that workshop. What proceeded after that was that Council came in and addressed Tony <br />Panzica, Jr. and we kind of made a decision on their own and they felt that we stepped over them. <br />He thinks that is why they are adamant about their feelings and saying no to this. They felt it did <br />not go through the proper channels. - <br />Mr. Rinker said that is unfortunate because they left the last meeting with specific instructions that <br />people on Planning and Zoning be made aware that we were hoping to have this meering following <br />the meeting they had tonight to avoid just that interpretation. Unfortunately, we had <br />miscommunication. , <br />Mr. Fixler said he would like Council not to vote on this tonight. He would like more discussion <br />between Nacy Panzica and Planning and Zoning because he does not know if they have had an <br />opportunity to hear everything.