Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Commissioner Nelsen, to recommend the City Council <br />approve requested special use based on the findings of fact and conditions listed in the staff <br />report. <br />A roll call vote was taken. Approved 5-0. <br />2) Site Plan and Nonconforming Use Variance Permit Review: Request Jamatar II LLC and Everest <br />Properties LLC to rearrange past shared parking arrangements and easements to optimize use <br />of all landholdings – 441 Old Highway 8, 750 4th Street NW, and 755 4th Street NW – PID’s: <br />29-30-23-42-0022, 29-30-23-42-0023, 29-30-23-42-0025, and 29-30-23-42-0024. <br />Assistant Director of Community Assets and Development Gozola reported this area of the City has <br />significant history dating back before our present zoning code resulting in multiple legal <br />nonconformities and an arrangement of uses that would not occur under present development <br />standards. The present property owners have determined that “fixes” put in place to address parking <br />issues over 20 years ago are not operating as intended, and are preventing efficient use of the land in <br />this area. The proposed site plan amendment and variance are needed to address these long- <br />standing problems. Staff provided further comment on the request and noted there were two <br />hurdles. It was noted the applicant was asked to provide staff with a plan that showed emergency <br />vehicles could the movement to the north and that it wouldn’t be worse than current conditions. He <br />reported staff had not received this plan. The options available to the Planning Commission would <br />be to table action on this item until a plan has been received, or make approval contingent upon staff <br />receiving the information. The second hurdle for this case was that any changes in parking would <br />create nonconformities with the setbacks from the internal property lines. To address this concern, <br />staff was recommending a variance process to authorize zero lot line setbacks. This would give the <br />City and the applicant the flexibility needed to make this area work for all parties. The variance <br />criteria were reviewed in further detail with the Commission and noted the fence surrounding the <br />outdoor storage would have to be opaque or be slatted. Staff reviewed the options available to the <br />Commission noting the item could be tabled until a turning radius study was completed, or the <br />Commission could recommend approval of the Site Plan and Nonconforming Use Variance Permit <br />contingent upon the completion of a turning radius study, based on the findings of fact and subject <br />to the following conditions: <br />1. Approval of the site plan authorizing a change to parking easements and configuration shall <br />only become effective upon the applicant providing an engineered turning movement <br />analysis that shows adequate area exists to facilitate on-site emergency vehicle turning <br />movements. <br />2. Staff is authorized to work with the applicants on a final configuration of parking spaces <br />that protects both the overall number of spaces on the site AND emergency vehicle access <br />should changes be needed as a result of the turning movement analysis. <br />3. The variance allowing for zero-lot line parking setbacks from internal side lot lines between <br />the subject properties shall become void at such time as one or more of the buildings is <br />removed or when lot lines are shifted as such changes would likely alter the facts <br />supporting the variance.