Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br /> <br />maximum is limiting. Mann replied that it may be difficult to say how many employees are too <br />many. Schiferl added that by having a specific number of employees on the ordinance it will <br />allow the City to enforce the ordinance if it should become an issue. <br /> <br />MacKenzie approached the commission and stated that there will not be any vehicles left over <br />night at the church, there will not be any signs, and he will not be in the church on a full time <br />basis, his hours are a bit different than the nine to five. Schiferl stated that it could lead to a forty <br />hour work week. MacKenzie replied that while it could be a full time job, he does not want to <br />work that many hours and so plans to not be there full time. Baker reiterated that this ordinance <br />is for the City in general and another caterer could decide to work that many hours. <br /> <br />Motion by O'Brien, Second by Mann to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. <br /> <br />7 Ayes, 0 Nays, MOTION CARRIED. <br /> <br />Schiferl inquired from staff what "uses deemed similar by the City Council" might be and <br />questioned if that statement should be in the ordinance. Gundlach replied that she was tying into <br />the public uses language that is above that statement and a large number of ordinances have that <br />statement. Zisla moved that the statement "uses deemed similar by the City Council" be struck <br />from the ordinance. Schiferl asked how broad is the term "catering," would it include different <br />styles of preparation offood. Fernelius replied that catering is not defined with in the code, he <br />added that the language is such to allow some flexibility for the Council. Schiferl suggested that <br />the term "preparation of food" be substituted for "uses deemed similar by the City Council." <br />Doffing stated that there are other uses that would fit into this ordinance that do not fit the term of <br />catering. O'Brien added that all of these uses would have to pull a special use permit and the <br />Council would have the final say. Zisla recommended to staff and the City Attorney to come up <br />with precise language for this ordinance, he feels the current language is too broad. Fernelius <br />replied that the staff would need directions on any additional uses the Commission would like to <br />have placed in the ordinance. Mann and Baker replied that they are comfortable with how the <br />ordinance currently reads, since all applicants would have to pull a special use permit and <br />recommends no change to the ordinance. O'Keefe stated that he is concerned about allowing <br />commercial uses on noncommercial properties. <br /> <br />Motion by Schiferl, Second by Baker to WAIVE THE READING AND FORWARD THE PROPOSED <br />CHANGES TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL WITH OF THE ZONING CODE AMENDMENT <br />TO SECTION 4-030 (8) (1) WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS TO At, A2 AND A4. <br /> <br />. Al Preparation of food by a third party using the facility for distribution or use <br />offsite, to exist within the principal structure of the uses noted <br />. A2 Overnight parking of vehicles or any outside storage of materials associated <br />with the business is prohibited <br />. A4 Number of employees associated with the use shall be limited to two (2), <br /> <br />5 Ayes, 2 Nays. MOTION APPROVED. <br /> <br />