Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1497 <br />April 4, 1990 <br />Page 5 <br />Additional Coments and Planning CoHnissioc ^conmendation - <br />Please review the Planning Conunission minutes of March 19, <br />1990 for background discussion on issues raised for this current <br />review. The majority of the Planning Commission members were <br />sympathetic to the applicants' request to renew the non- <br />conforming conditional use permit that would allow a boat <br />sale/nautical shop use on the property. The neighbors in <br />attendance were equally opposed to the reinstallation of the <br />commercial use. <br />Rezoning to commercial use was soon ruled out of the <br />question because the City would loose control of the commercial <br />use of this severely limited property. If there is to be a <br />commercial use, it must be controlled with a conditional use <br />permit. <br />The applicant claimed that the property has not been <br />utilized for commercial use because of the impact of the severe <br />drought on boat sales in general. Lack of interest had nothing <br />to do with the physical character of the property. <br />Planning Conlssion Recommendation - <br />Planning Commission voted to recommend approval (3-1) of the <br />renewal conditional use permit for Gerald Toberman that would <br />permit a boat sale/nautical shop to be installed on the <br />residential zoned property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive. The <br />Planning Commission further referenced the City Attorney • *.'emo <br />that strongly recommended that if the recommendation was to <br />approve the commercial use of the property - approving a change <br />from one non-conforming use to another - continuation or a <br />commercial use once it had been discontinued for over 12 months - <br />that further case study be conducted to assure that such action <br />would not be in violation of State Statutes that prohibit use <br />variances. <br />Options of Action Available to Council - <br />A) Adoption of Planning Commission approval recommendation, but <br />prior to formally directing staff to draft the appropriate <br />resolution, the City Attorney must be directed to further <br />study the issue of a potential violation of the State <br />Statute that prohibits use variances. Can the City legally <br />grant variances to the standards of the non-conforming use <br />sections of the code?