My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf10-014
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
2010
>
pf10-014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2014 2:04:52 PM
Creation date
7/2/2013 8:17:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
10-014
Planning Files - Type
Conditional Use Permit
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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
f» <br />t;a <br />�F <br />66 <br />c;� <br />��� <br />�.;, <br />�c <br />� ;�, <br />� <br />� • <br />removal or cessation of the nonconforming use would effectively put the business owner <br />out of business. <br />6.2 At this point, the City is faced with the ongoing challenge of regulating a nonconforming <br />use which, by definition, is already outside of the City's regulations. Until this spring, <br />equipment and vehicles that were unrelated to MIDC's business were also being stored <br />on the property, and the applicant has cooperated with Roseville's Code Enforcement <br />staff to remove those materials from the property in preparation for this application; <br />current photographs of the property are included with this staff report as Attachment D. <br />Through the rtvTExIM usE approval process, the City and the property owner can <br />formalize the requirements and expectations on the property in a way that provides more <br />certainty for the property owners, more clarity for the neighbors, and a greater ability for <br />the City to enforce the approved provisions. <br />6.3 Interim uses typically represent departures from what is allowed by the normal zoning <br />requirements; in this case, the outdoor storage is inconsistent with the existing I-1 zoning <br />and the Comprehensive Plan land use designation. Temporary approval of the t1vTER�1vt <br />usE can ensure that the approval expires on a pre-determined date or when the use is <br />discontinued, whichever comes first. Since MIDC has occupied the property for a long <br />time and intends to remain for the foreseeable future, Planning Division staff <br />recommends approving the �NTERt1v1 uSE with the maximum duration of 5 years. If the <br />respective owners of the business and of the property agree that the use should continue <br />beyond the 5-year limit, they may apply for renewed approval of the ttvTERIM USE. <br />6.4 The site plan illustrating the proposed arrangement of irrigation supplies and delivery <br />vehicles, included with this staff report as Attachment E, shows a 20-foot separation <br />between the existing fence and the proposed stacks of pipe material. Outdoor storage uses <br />in General Industrial (I-2) Districts are required to be screened to a height of at least 8 <br />feet by opaque fences or walls. The existing fence meets that height standard and has the <br />20-foot setback from the rear property line required by the village Council in the 1963 <br />SUP. The record doesn't provide clear information about why the 20-foot setback was <br />required for the fence, but it seems to complicate the maintenance of additional, taller <br />vegetative screening south of the fence. Under the circumstances, however, perhaps the <br />most reasonable alternative is to require the applicant to work with City staff, including <br />the staff arborist, to determine the type, number, and location of plantings to create <br />adequate vegetative screening between the fence and the materials stored on the property. <br />" �, %.O PUBLIC HEARING <br />���� The duly-noticed public hearing for this application was held by the Planning <br />s� � Commission on May 5, 2010; draft minutes of the public hearing are included with this <br />��t� staff report as Attachment G. The bulk of the conversation focused on the ongoing <br />s;:; struggles of screening and regulating the nonconforming outdoor storage use and <br />� o;; determining how best to provide adequate screening into the future. In addition to the <br />i o' public comment provided at the public hearing, written communications received prior to <br />� c:� the public hearing are included with this staff report as Attachment F. <br />� o:� 8.0 <br />1(',' <br />i:, <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Based on the comments and findings outlined in Sections 4-7 of this report, the Planning <br />Division concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the <br />PF10-014_RCA_052410 (2).doc <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.