Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1637 April 12, 1991 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />The aspect of the temporary nature of the request may shed <br />another light on the application and may simply be resolved by <br />an agreement for a specified period of time between both <br />applicants and the City. This again will be another issue the <br />City Attorney will be asked to address. <br />Please note the applicants propose no physical changes. <br />Except for the signage there will be no change in physical <br />appearance of the facility. Note none of the meetings or <br />conferences proposed by the Freshwater Foundation will exceed tf.e <br />300 persons occupancy limit but even if this were to occur, such <br />a Sleeting would be allowed under a large assembly permit. This <br />would be the responsibility of the owners to monitor. Review <br />Exhibit E, detailed information on the Freshwater Foundation ’s <br />proposed use of the facility. <br />Except for the issue of non-profit versus profit-making, the <br />application appears straightforward and consistent with all other <br />standards of zoning under the RR-lB-1 zoning district. If this <br />issue cannot be resolved by our meeting of April 15th, applicant <br />■my be given the opportunity to separate the church use from the <br />conference center use as the addendum for the Woodridge Church <br />notes the Immediate need to occupy the facility. <br />Pending resolve of the ownership matter, do Planning <br />Commission members have any other concerns that should be <br />addressed? <br />Options of Action <br />Conditional use permit for church use - If members concur <br />that church conditional use permit can be separated from the <br />cosiprehenaive application submitted by Spring Hill Land Company, <br />BMmbers nay grant a conditional use permit. <br />As for the issue of the type of ownership of the conference <br />center, the following issues must be resolved by the Planning <br />Commission before they can formally act: <br />1.If non-profit is determined to be a performance <br />standard for the permitted use conference center, then <br />we need only address the need for a variance. <br />2.If non-profit organization is considered part of the <br />permitted use, then to consider a variance would be in <br />violation of State and local codes. Would you approve <br />a zoning amendment that would allow a profit-making <br />conference center use? If it is within the City’s <br />authority would members recommend a temporary agreement <br />for a limited period of time for the applicants/owners <br />based on the uniqueness of the facility and the <br />financial investment (physical improvements) that exist <br />on this property.