My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-18-2024 Council Packet
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2024
>
12-18-2024 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/19/2024 4:43:22 PM
Creation date
12/19/2024 4:41:57 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
183
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> STAFF REPORT <br /> <br /> <br />TO: Mayor Fischer and Members of City Council <br /> <br />FROM: Ben Harrington, AICP, Community Development Director <br /> <br />DATE: December 18, 2024 <br /> <br />RE: Planning Case 1436 – Interim Use Permit Ordinance – Ordinance #906 <br /> <br /> <br />ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED <br />Recommend to Approve/Approve with Amendments/Deny Ordinance 906 to amend Chapter 917 of <br />the City of Little Canada Zoning Code (Attachment 2). <br /> <br />A redline version of the ordinance is also attached (Attachment 1) where the yellow highlights indicate <br />new additions to the Code. <br /> <br />BACKGROUND <br />Staff are proposing to add Interim Use Permits back into the City’s Zoning Code. Interim Use Permits <br />(IUPs) are essentially identical to Conditional Use Permits (CUPs), but unlike CUPs, they have <br />definitive dates of expiration tied to them whereas CUPs exist in perpetuity. <br /> <br />The need for the City to create the IUP process in our Code stems from the forthcoming legalization of <br />cannabis. The City Attorney has advised Staff that we should seek to allow these uses on an interim <br />basis, providing the City maximum flexibility and protection should State law change in the future or <br />should a business become an unforeseen nuisance. <br /> <br />The proposed ordinance would have IUP applications follow an identical application and review <br />process to the City’s current CUP process. The only difference is the length of time that a CUP and an <br />IUP are valid for. <br /> <br />Per our ordinance (and State law) CUPs must be recorded with the County and run with the property. <br />They do not sunset based on ownership. For IUPs, we are proposing three different options for their <br />lifespan, which the Staff/Planning Commission/Council would determine on a case-by-case basis: <br />1. 5 years from the date of approval; <br />2. Upon an expiration date established as a condition of approval; or <br />3. Upon reaching some other expiration threshold established as a condition of approval. <br /> <br />Additionally, while reviewing the Chapter, the City Attorney noticed that the Code currently states that <br />planning applications must be submitted five (5) weeks prior to a Planning Committee meeting. Not <br />only does Staff not need this much time, if the standard were enforced it would present practical <br />challenges in abiding by the State’s 60-day rule for reviewing applications. Staff have proposed to <br />amend the ordinance to allow submissions up to two (2) weeks prior to Planning Commission <br />meetings. State Law requires a 10-day notice for public hearings and although official public hearings <br />will take place at the City Council level, Staff will ensure notices are mailed and published a minimum <br />of 10 days prior to Planning Commission meetings, including both Planning and Council meeting <br />dates. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.