2016-03-02_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, March 2, 2016 Page 13 b. PLANNING FILE 16-007 604 Request by the Vogel Mechanical for a CONDITIONAL USE to allow limited 605 production and processing at 2830 Fairview Avenue 606 C hair Boguszewski opened the public hearing for Planning File 16-007 at 8:47 p.m. 607 City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed the request as detailed in the staff report and 608 attachments dated March 2, 2016, including the city code definition of limited 609 production/processing as a principal and/or accessory use. As part of the Conditional Use 610 process and analysis, Mr. Paschke advised that in all cases, requests are reviewed 611 against general criteria, with some specificity for drive-through applications. In this 612 particular case, Mr. Paschke advised that general criteria as listed in detail in the staff 613 report was used in reviewing the request in conjunction with the City’s zoning code. 614 As noted in the narrative dated February 5, 2016 from Vogel Sheetmetal, Inc., d/b/a 615 Vogel Mechanical, Inc. (Attachment D) to the staff report dated March 2, 2016, Mr. 616 Paschke noted the proposal for one employee to fabricate sheet metal or accessories on- 617 site that were unique to specific projects of the business. Mr. Paschke noted that these 618 projects were frequently done by hand, but that was not necessarily a requirement. Mr. 619 Paschke noted that Vogel Mechanical currently has seven employees in their office at 620 2830 Fairview Avenue, and operated from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 621 with deliveries received from a variety trucks and vendors during those hours of 622 operation. 623 Mr. Paschke reviewed staff’s analysis of the Conditional Use request as detailed in the 624 staff report. 625 Mr. Paschke noted that as part of the Conditional Use, construction of an opaque fence 626 north of the building and property line would be a requirement in accordance with city 627 code standards. Regarding buffer/screening requirements of City Code (lines 192-221), 628 Mr. Paschke addressed the applicable section of code and its requirements that he 629 believed appropriate for this Conditional Use to follow, which were typically only for new 630 construction. However, Mr. Paschke advised that staff feels it appropriate for this 631 particular allowance to comply accordingly. 632 Mr. Paschke advised the Commission that this is a separate and distinct proposal from 633 that of the previous Interim Use and should be judged on its own merits accordingly. 634 However, under that previous Interim Use approval, Mr. Paschke referenced the three 635 alternatives to be determined and recommended by the Commission related to fencing 636 (lines 226 – 248) and applicable conditions for each. Mr. Paschke noted that any of the 637 three options would be subject to completion of that screening installation by June 30, 638 2016; with Condition 3 based on verification of any excessive noise. 639 Chair Boguszewski asked Mr. Paschke to display the map (Attachment B) to define the 640 location of each option and its appropriate interpretation as it related to the fence location 641 between the north edge of the Vogel property and building. Mr. Paschke clarified that the 642 red line shown on the map generally speaking is the property line. Mr. Paschke briefly 643 reviewed the factors related to the utility easement and existing lines and underground 644 cable locations that reportedly meander. Therefore, Mr. Paschke noted the ratification by 645 the City Council of their original determination that the fence be installed at the northern 646 edge of the property. Mr. Paschke noted that the intent was that the fence and/or berms 647 installed serve to screen that side of the property from surrounding adjacent properties or 648 activities on site (e.g. truck deliveries, trash haulers, etc.). Mr. Paschke further referenced 649 Condition 1.C.b requiring additional landscaping at the front providing 650 employee/customer parking to more fully screen headlights from the view of those 651 adjacent residentially-zoned properties as well. 652 Since the Conditional Use attaches to the property, Chair Boguszewski questioned if at 653 some point in the future under option 1.C, the current owner or a new owner may move to 654 a different use for the property and change the configuration; and how difficult it would be 655 to continue protecting those adjacent residential properties long-term. 656