Commission denies Helmers’ business zoning request

Published 12:00 am Wednesday, June 14, 2000

On Tuesday night, Robert and Sheila Helmers tried one more time to have their two Kar Korner lots and the adjacent lot rezoned before the deadline set in court by Judge Rysavy to bring that property into compliance, but their appeal met with a firm negative from the Austin Planning Commission.

Wednesday, June 14, 2000

On Tuesday night, Robert and Sheila Helmers tried one more time to have their two Kar Korner lots and the adjacent lot rezoned before the deadline set in court by Judge Rysavy to bring that property into compliance, but their appeal met with a firm negative from the Austin Planning Commission.

Email newsletter signup

It was a near replay of the hearing a year and a half ago for Planning Commission members and Kar Korner neighbors, only the Helmers were missing. The couple was represented at the Planning Commission meeting by Rochester attorney William French, because they were in Oklahoma.

Since the original hearing in December of 1998, the used car lot owners paved the lot adjacent to the original Kar Korner lots in violation of the city’s zoning laws and the Planning Commission/Austin City Council’s decision. The case subsequently went to a Mower County Courtroom, where Judge Rysavy ruled against the Kar Korner owners and in support of the city and the neighbor’s who objected to the illegal expansion.

French asked that the city look at the case again, because it was his and his clients’ belief that the city’s zoning laws have not been fairly applied. French cited several examples of other businesses that have been granted a rezoning

Planning Commission chairman Brian Johnson rebutted French’s complaint.

"The commission and the Austin City Council have done what the law charges," Johnson said. "We look at each piece of property and evaluate that property under the standards that apply. Each piece of property is unique. No other piece of property sits where Kar Korner is. I don’t see where the rezoning of a property across town is relevant."

The story of the three lots is confusing, because none of the lots are actually zoned as commercial property. They’re residential, but commercial use on the two front lots was basically grandfathered in when the city adopted a zoning map in 1975. At that time the entire neighborhood was designated multi-family residential – meaning that the properties could be used for single family or multiple-family homes – but the two lots where Kar Korner now sits were allowed to remain in commercial use through a "non-conforming land use" permit. However, the adjacent lot purchased by Helmers was not grandfathered in and was zoned residential.

After French pointed out that "the lot was expanded (to include the adjacent residential lot) and the sky didn’t fall in," several neighbors addressed the commission.

"The sky did fall, both for ourselves and other neighbors," Glen Thaisen told the commission. Since the expansion, the Thaisen home of 29 years is now bordered on both the south and the west side by the Kar Korner lot. "We are continuously put out by traffic. It is not uncommon to find strange cars parked in front of the house for two or three days until someone enforces the 12 hour parking laws. There is traffic in and out of our driveway at all hours. It has been a constant source of aggravation and concern since the business’s inception."

Thaisen’s wife, Darlene, added to his comments.

"I used to look out the kitchen window and see grass and a tree that was probably 100 years old," she said. "Now (since the expansion) I see asphalt. I would not call that an improvement," she added, responding to French’s assertion that the paving of the lot was an improvement because there was previously a dilapidated home on the lot.

Another neighbor, Ed Arons, who lives several hundred feet away, told the Planning Commission that his family needed no night lights in the downstairs of their home, because the lights of Kar Korner illuminated their home all night.

Commission member Gordie Kuehne, who was chairman when the first case was heard, moved for the denial.

"The conditions previously used to deny the rezoning still apply," Kuehne said, referring to the three reasons cited for the original denial: that city law discourages expansion or change of a non-conforming use; the Comprehensive Plan discourages businesses along the major arteries of Fourth and 14th Avenues, and the expansion of the business is not in the best interests of public health, safety and welfare. "Also the fact that since the last time the petitioner was before us they created a further disturbance and further blighted the neighborhood by creating more blacktopped area."

The decision by the Planning Commission to not recommend the rezoning to the council was unanimous. The council will now hear the rezoning request at its meeting Monday.

Should the council also deny the request, the couple have until June 26 to bring the lot into compliance or Ms. Helmers could serve the jail sentence given her by the judge, and the court could order that city crews bring the lot into compliance.