Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 2006-167 RESOLUTION NO. 2006-167 RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FROM CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ZONING CODE FOR SAVERS, INC. WHEREAS, a proposal (Case # 2006-0901) has been submitted by Savers, Inc. to the City Council requesting a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage from the City of Columbia Heights Zoning Code at the following site: ADDRESS: 4849 Central Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On File at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING PERMIT: A Conditional Use Permit per Code Section 9.112 (D)(2), to allow outdoor storage in the MXD, Mixed-Use District. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on September 6, 2006; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community and its Comprehensive Plan, as well as any concern related to traffic, property values, light, air, danger of fire, and risk to public safety, in the surrounding area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights that the City Council does accept and shall adopt the following findings of the Planning Commission: (a) The use is one of the conditional uses listed for the zoning district in which the property is located, or is a substantially similar use as determined by the Zoning Administrator. Outdoor storage is specifically listed as a Conditional Use in GB, General Business District in the City of Columbia Heights. The MXD District allows all Conditional Uses that are listed within each commercially zoned district. (b) The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. The intent ofthe Comprehensive Plan is met in this case. The land is designated for Transit-Oriented Development. This type of commercial use is consistent with the types of commercial uses in a transit-oriented development. (c) The use will not impose hazards or disturbing influences on neighboring properties. The outdoor storage will not be satisfactorily screened from adjacent properties, thus would impose negative influences on neighboring properties. (d) The use will not substantially diminish the use of property in the immediate vicinity. The required setbacks for outdoor storage for the proposed CUP would help ensure that the uses of properties in the immediate vicinity would not be diminished in any capacity. (e) The use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner that is compatible with the appearance of the existing or intended character of the surrounding area. The outdoor storage will not be satisfactorily screened from adjacent properties, and is not designed in a manner that is compatible with the appearance of the existing or intended character off the surrounding area. (f) The use and property upon which the use is located are adequately served by essential public facilities and services. The property located at 4849 Central Avenue meets this criterion. (g) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimize traffic congestion on the public streets and to provide for appropriate on-site circulation of traffic. The nature of outdoor storage does not and will not generate an excess of traffic, and will not create traffic congestion. Measures will be taken to ensure that on-site circulation is provided. (h) The use will not cause a negative cumulative effect, when considered in conjunction with the cumulative effect of other uses is the immediate vicinity. The outdoor storage will not be satisfactorily screened from adjacent properties, and will cause a negative effect with other uses in the immediate vicinity. (i) The use complies with all other applicable regulations for the district in which it is located. The proposed use will comply with all other applicable regulations for the district. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that said variance requests are denied based on the following: 1. The use is not designed in a manner that is compatible with the appearance of the existing or intended character of the surrounding area. 2. The use is not adequately screened from adjacent properties. Passed this 25th day of September, 2006 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Diehm Nawrocki Ayes: Peterson, Williams, Nawrocki, Diehm, Kelzenberg Attest: Deputy City Clerk/Council Secretary