11-20-1989 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1472 November 15, 1989 Page 4 of 5 2. Privacy fence to be repaired where necessary. 3. Clean-up existing fill in median in south yard - more gravel needed. Issues for the City's consideration in the current review: 1. We are once again being asked to approve a slight change in a non-conforming retail use of the property, seemingly less intense but also nay be equal tc a sailboat sales operation. 2. The non-conforming use has been discontinued for over a twelve month period of tine. In reviewing the staff nemo (Exhibit J) and the resolution approving the original conditional use permit in 1987 (Exhibit D), there was no .^ference or forewarning to the applicant of the special non-conforming sections of the code that were applicable to this property. If you review the last section of the resolution, specifically Item 5 of the conditions of approval, it notes as follows: "Authorities granted by this conditional use permit run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this conditional use permit will expire on that date (June 8, 1988)." It should be noted for the record that a building permit was issued to Mr. Toberman to make the necessary and required repairs to the structure anJ to the yard area on September 1, 1987. Based on the directives of that specific resolution approving the conditional use permit, it would appear that all the applicant would have to do is obtain a permit within a year from the approval date. In a letter from Mr. Toberman to the City dated August 30, 1988, he requested an extension of the original approvals granted to the property (Exhibit K). Review Exhibit E, in Mabusth's response although the expiration of June 8, 1988 had been reached for the original conditional use permit, note the letter does not reflect concern that the use had been discontinued for over a year, but merely addresses the fact that a new conditional use permit would be required for either another sailboat use or a new use. Ill the issuing of building permits for the major repair and upgrading of the former transmission site, the City ray have placed itself in a compromising position, but the building permit was issued in good faith that a sailboat operation would be installed as soon as a Certificate of Occupancy was issued. It should be once again noted that Mr. Toberman has fulfilled all v''e conditions set forth in the original resolution.