Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File 11701 <br />November 14, 1991 <br />Page 3 <br />bhen current o%mer James Dunn filed a variance application with <br />the City for the commercial use of the subject property and the <br />property designated as Parcel A on staff sketch Exhibit K. The <br />applicant failed to complete the review of the application. The <br />property was sold in 1987 to Gerald Toberman and the property <br />appeared to receive less intense commercial use. Staff could <br />judge this by the limited number of complaint calls received frcmi <br />the residential owners. Any time a commercial use is added or <br />intensified on these seve.ely limited properties, there is a <br />concurrent impact on the residential used properties. B*>2 zoning <br />calls for 2 acres. Mrs. Sprague's property has approximately <br />7100 s.f. or .16 acres and the subject property has approximately <br />11,050 s.f. or .25 acres. The combining of these two properties <br />would bring the Sprague property just under 1/2 acre. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />A.Bow would you respond to applicant's request to rezone <br />property to residential? Consider the following: <br />1. Property has been zoned commercial for approximately 35 <br />years. <br />2. Impact on values of property. <br />3. Long-range impact on properties. <br />B,How extensive must rezoning be so that it would not be <br />considered "spot zoning"? Remember one of the four parcels <br />is owned by the current manager/owner of Lakeside Marine. <br />Mr. Dunn will be vehemently opposed to the rezoning of the <br />property to residential. Is there the legal issue of "a <br />taking"? Owners of the remaining lots would concur with the <br />rezoning. <br />C. <br />2. <br />Are there enough unique findings to be made to support the <br />granting of variances to the non-conforming use section? <br />1. The legal combination of the properties will bring the <br />property closer to area conformance of B-2. <br />The improvements to the existing residential structure <br />do not reflect major financial committment or <br />permancence. <br />The existing structure and property will be accessory <br />to principal use on adjacent property. <br />The property was used residentially thru 1985. <br />There was never a legal commercial use approved nor <br />established on the property. <br />3. <br />4. <br />5. <br />OescrlptloB of Hardships <br />Refer to applicant's addendum. Exhibit B and findings noted <br />in Section 'C above. Prior to making your recommendation, <br />please seek further clarification from applicant concerning <br />proposed modifications and use of structure. <br />r <br />■ •