CC_Minutes_2011_0725 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,July 25,2011 Page 10 Mayor Roe asked that staff provide their rationale for whether or not it was a good idea to eliminate that 150 square foot requirement. Mr. Lloyd advised that staff's rationale, during their review and assessment, was that the nature of that requirement for usable open space for residents on the prop- erty was not specific to the culture of this proposed operation that didn't allow residents to freely roam the site or go off-site; making the 150 square foot mini- mum requirement irrelevant for this proposal. If the City Council mandated that this Conditional Use requirement be met, based on future operations or different clientele, Mr. Lloyd advised that the requirement could be met through vacating a part of the wide Dale Street right-of-way, and adding more of a side yard; or through access to public parks and open spaces within 300' of the property. Mr. Lloyd noted that there are both located within that area; however, their entrances would be further away;but advised that a determination could be made at the time a future operator or use didn't meet that requirement. If not meeting them at that time, Mr. Lloyd advised that the operator would then be forced to operate with fewer beds to meet Conditional Use requirements. Mayor Roe questioned if that was laid out in recommended conditions. Mr. Lloyd responded that it was not laid out specifically; but that with any Condi- tional use, it must meet all relevant code requirements. Mayor Roe questioned if the 150 square foot requirement needed to be addressed as a condition. Mr. Lloyd responded that it could be a condition, and may not be redundant with other City code; however, he noted that there were other code requirements in a Commercial District that may have the same setback requirements as other resi- dential uses in that district; however, there were no other setbacks for residential uses and thus not addressed in the recommended conditions of approval. Councilmember Pust questioned if vacation by the City of its right-of-way was the only option to bring the property into compliance if the use changed. Mr. Lloyd advised that it would be one option; and noted that this project had been before the city in some fashion for three (3) years; and staff was willing to work on vacating some of that right-of-way as long as sufficient right-of-way was retained for the underground infrastructure needs. Mr. Lloyd advised that this had always been a viable situation considered by staff regardless of who owned the property or who had use of that surface. Councilmember Pust opined that she was uncomfortable in approving this, if the only option for the owner is for the City to vacate its right-of-way to allow com- pliance for the 150 foot requirement or make them close their doors. While not