1981_0112_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

3 December 1980 PLANNING REPORT CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: 1264-80 City of Roseville ACTION REQUESTED: Review of Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Relating to Use of School Properties PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. As you will all recall, the Planning Commission and 'Council have been considering an amendment to the R-1 District of the Zoning Ordinance clarifying the use of public schools for other quasi-public purposes. The existing Ordinance covers this subDect by 'including "churches,, convents, libraries, city buildings and similar public uses" as permitted uses in the R-1 District. our purpose was to indicate more precisely the nature of "similar public uses" so as to give the School Board a clearer definition of uses which would be permitted and those which may be included as special uses. 2. On 2 July 1980, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing for the review of the Ordinance as prepared and published in the Roseville Sun on 18 June 1980. A copy of that proposed Ordinance is attached. Representatives of the School District questioned our ability to control the use or the re-use of school structures based on a law adapted by the Legislature allowing the School District to lease and/or sell school properties for purposes of paying off bonded indebtedness. The City then requested a ruling from the State's Attorney General. In an opinion dated 24 October 1980, the Attorney General ruled that "we believe that school districts are subject to reasonable ordinances affecting the leasing of school property to other public and not for profit organizations. on 14 October 1980 we received a letter from the School Board addressed to the City Manager (a copy of which is attached) noting their plans for various school sites in the City of Roseville, including the currently unused site for the "Western-Dale Site" originally purchased for another high school. An opinion from our City Attorney indicates that the ordinance as proposed is reasonable for adoption. 3. Representatives of the School Board have been notified that the Planning COMMiss ion will be considering the Ordinance amendment at the 3 December meeting. Hopefully, they will be in attendance and may offer such suggestions as they may wish to contribute. Inasmuch as they are now aware of the Attorney General os rulinq, they may wish to offer additional constructive comments in light of that fact. We suggest that the Planning Commission consider such comments and other suggestions as they may wish in reviewing the Ordinance as proposed.