2014-10-08_PC_Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment A ES15,2014RCCM Њ XTRACT FROM THE EPTEMBER OSEVILLEITYOUNCIL EETING Ћ b. Discussion Regarding the Treatment of Non-Conforming Uses (Particularly in the Twin Lakes Area) Ќ Mr. Bilotta reviewed options for the City Council’s consideration of this discussion regarding the treatment Ѝ of non-conforming uses, particularly in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area, as detailed in the Request for Ў Council Action (RCA) dated September 15, 2014. Mr. Bilotta noted part of that discussion was more Џ general in nature, while some of the discussion was related specifically to the Vogel Sheetmetal parcel; and А asked the City Council for their preference in how to move forward. As outlined in the RCA, Mr. Bilotta Б noted the differences in State Statute regarding nonconforming use controls, and those based on City В Council policy. Under the City's policy, Mr. Bilotta noted that the Interim Use could be used for ЊЉ nonconforming uses, but had a local limitation of five years, and if the City wanted more flexibility it could ЊЊ look at code amendments accordingly. ЊЋ Councilmember McGehee opined that she heard many more complaints in the City?s use of Conditional Use ЊЌ Permits versus Interim Uses in terms of enforcement and longevity of a CUP and lack of ability to change it ЊЍ as the surroundings or environment change, since the CUP runs with the land. Councilmember McGehee ЊЎ stated that her personal preference would be to favor a change for an Interim Use that provided more ЊЏ flexibility beyond the five years; but otherwise she was perfectly happy with how it was handled, and stated ЊА she was not concerned with nonconforming uses and how handled, if a 10-20 year Interim Use was ЊБ available providing different requirements for screening and exterior situations. ЊВ Councilmember Willmus expressed his agreement and disagreement in part with Councilmember ЋЉ McGehee’s preference. Since the Conditional Use becomes a part of the property title and ran with the land, ЋЊ Councilmember Willmus agreed it can become an issue in some instances. However, Councilmember ЋЋ Willmus opined that leaving the five year timeframe for Interim Uses offered some value and protection ЋЌ particularly if those uses were abutting less-intensive uses (e.g. commercial abutting residential). ЋЍ Councilmember Willmus opined that the five year check-back was a valuable tool and provided some ЋЎ leverage if there were ongoing issues to make sure they were remedied. Councilmember Willmus ЋЏ questioned if he would be comfortable with a 20 year Interim Use, while he could consider a ten year term, ЋА unless abutting residential properties, since that was where the real conflict occurred from his perspective. ЋБ Councilmember Willmus referenced a past Interim Use for the former Woof Room location, abutting a ЋВ residential neighborhood, and how contentious that had become. Councilmember Willmus opined that it ЌЉ depended on where Interim Uses were used, which would determine his consideration of a five or ten year, ЌЊ or longer, term. ЌЋ Mr. Bilotta suggested if a longer term was considered by the City Council, granting an Interim Use for a ЌЌ certain period of time should be based on the particular situation, not a generic timeframe, and determined ЌЍ on a case by case basis. Mr. Bilotta suggested having some flexibility depending on the situation, making it ЌЎ less about policy versus removing the handcuffs to allow greater flexibility. ЌЏ Mayor Roe opined that the term allowed flexibility as far as zoning and nonconforming uses, noting that if ЌА commercial use and zoning had moved toward future residential uses, he would be less eager to grant a ЌБ long-term Interim Use, depending on the viability of the particular business and its impact to the ЌВ surrounding area, each which would make a difference. Mayor Roe noted this relates to the discussion held ЍЉ on the Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) zoning as well, with the desire for more flexibility and allowing ЍЊ different possibilities and fewer restrictions. Mayor Roe opined that the advantage of that is that uses could ЍЋ be set up as conditional in some instances, while permitted uses in other instances, since what may or may ЍЌ not be good adjacent to one use may be more amenable to others. Specific to the Terrace Drive issue, ЍЍ Mayor Roe noted that it had been recently rezoned to High Density Residential (HDR) which really limited ЍЎ uses, and the rationale in granting the Interim Use for Vogel Sheetmetal for five years in that instance. If ЍЏ that wasn’t the zoning for that particular area, Mayor Roe noted that there would be a different issue. Mayor ЍА Roe concurred with Councilmember McGehee’s comment that things were improving and getting closer to ЍБ the desired outcome, provided the turnover in multi-use buildings could still be addressed, and the use didn’t