Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />I'EBRUARY 22, 2006 <br />a. The applicant shall demonstrate by clear and convincing <br />evidence that the proposed action has been considered in relation <br />to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be <br />consistent with the official City Comprehensive I and Use Plan. <br />b. The applicant shall demonstrate by clear and convincing <br />evidence that the proposed site is or will be compatible with <br />present and future land uses of the area. <br />c. The applicant shall demonstrate by clear and convincing <br />evidence that the proposed use conforms with all performance <br />standards contained herein. <br />d. The applicant shall demonstrate by clear azzd convincing <br />evidence that the proposed use will not tend to or actually <br />depreciate the aggregate property values in the area in which the <br />amendment or conditional use is proposed. <br />e. The applicant shall demonstrate by clear and convincing <br />evidence that the proposed use can be accommodated with <br />existing public services and will not overburden the City's service <br />capacity. <br />f. The applicant shall demonstrate by clear and convincing <br />evidence that the development of the conditional use shall reflect <br />the architectural character of the buildings in the surrounding <br />area in regard to the following: <br />i. Proportion, scale and roof line; <br />ii. Architectural style; and <br />iii. Exterior finish. materials. <br />T. The City's Comprehensive Plan directs that existing residential <br />neighborhoods be protected from unnecessary encroachments or <br />incompatible land uses. <br />2. The proposed hockey rink boards and sport court will create <br />noise, lights, and activity that are inconsistent with the City's <br />goals and policies, and will be incompatible with neighbors' quiet <br />enjoyment of their properties. <br />3. There was no evidence provided that the applicant would meet <br />the Shoreland Ordinance impervious surface requirements, or <br />the City's regulation offence height. <br />4. The facility has heen partially constructed in violation of the <br />City's zoning regulations, without proper building permits, and <br />in contravention of specific orders to discontinue work from City <br />authorities. <br />5. The location of the proposed facility, including noise, lights, and <br />activity generated by the use of the facility, created a concern that <br />6 <br />