04-12-07 Planning Comm. Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 12, 2007 violations to be resolved before building occupancy would be allowed. The City Administrator also reviewed the court action relative to Mr. Sedaghat's request for a temporary restraining order against the City's red tag, and noted that the court upheld the red tag. The City then allowed Mr. Sedaghat access to the building in order to clean up the imminent danger violations. The City Administrator reported that over the years the City has demonstrated its desire to work with property owners. In this case, however, it has been a one way street, with Mr. Sedaghat failing to work with the City. Duray felt that the City has gone further in trying to work with Mr. Sedaghat than with any other property owner in an attempt to get this property into Code compliance. Barraclough asked again about the fact that Code limits retail vehicle sales licenses (indoor) to four, while there were five in existence until the Valor license was not renewed. The City Planner explained the confusion that occurred with whether one license was retail or wholesale. It was the Council's position that when the level returned to four, it would remain at that level. Barraclough asked about the auto repair license and outdoor storage. The City Planner indicated that auto repair is a permitted use in the I-1 Dish•ict, however, outdoor storage is a conditional use. The Planner noted that one is not necessarily tied to the other and pointed out that there are auto repair businesses that do not store outside. These businesses conduct auto repair inside as well as store inside. The City Planner indicated that Little Canada Code treats auto repair and outdoor storage as two distinct uses and each are treated differently. Auto repair is a permitted use and outdoor storage is a conditional use. Socha noted that Valor's CUP for outdoor storage was limited to a total of 50 vehicles, 30 for-sale vehicles and 20 for-repair vehicles. She noted that Valor has never complied with that limitation, and she did not see Valor moving toward CUP compliance. Hall asked about a probationary period for CUP's. The City Planner indicated that there is not generally a probationary period tied to CUP's. Conditions can be set on a CUP, and the Conditional Use Permit will run with the land as along as conditions are adhered to. If conditions are not met, then the City would take action to revoke the CUP or issue citations. Each of these methods has been done in the Valor situation. The Planner indicated that the concern with issuing Valor Enterprises the CUP's requested is that the City will end up with the same situation that it has been in with the property for the past several years. -20-