AgdaPkt 2005-10-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

I'A - ð year, which posed a significant concern to the neighbors. Prior to the submittal of this year's application the property owner informed staff that the subject property would not be used for seasonal sales after 2004. That has not proven to be the case; therefore, despite staff efforts to mitigate the use of this property with respect to seasonal sales and staff efforts to entitle a permanent use on the subject property the seasonal sales use has persisted and continues to substantially impact the neighbors each holiday season. . There are only about 15 days all together when the neighborhood could be impacted. This really is quite similar to a tent sale or similar activity. Normally, the pumpkin patch would be on the site and operational from October 1 st through October 31 st which represents 30 days. The Christmas tree lot would be on the site and operational from November 15th through January 5th which represents 51 days. The site would therefore be operational for a total of 81 days over a three month period. . Similarly, the size of the site has not changed in the last nine years. It was found large enough in the past. How can it be disqualified now? City staff has made continued attempts to try and accommodate the proposed use on the site; however, on-going concerns from the adjacent residential property owner's and the inability to manage the entire use on the subject property, including the parking and deliveries has demonstrated that this site is simply too small to adequately accommodate all of the operational impacts generated from this use. . "Insufficient conformance resulted in continued substantiated complaints" says one finding, but nothing in the Zoning Administrator's presentation demonstrates any substantiation of complaints from the current, mitigated activity. As previously mentioned City staff has received several letters from impacted neighbors. One letter stated that even after the public hearing violations continued proving that the appellant (applicant) was not responsible in managing customers and has no respect for their neighborhood. A second letter states that, "as a resident on Avondale Avenue, we have endured year after year of this hardship." A third letter states the subject use "needs continual monitoring by the city to assure that they will not abuse the local neighborhood for their personal gain." All three letters reference the need to continually monitor the operational uses. Once again, staff concurs with these statements about continuous monitoring which can be attested to by several members of Building and Inspection Services as well as staff planners. Typically, conditional uses that are compatible with the surrounding land uses do not require an excessive number of conditions and they do not require continual monitoring. The City is not in a position to monitor such uses on a daily basis. . The Zoning Administrator points out that other lots could handle seasonal sales, too. Yes, one such location, a very short distance down EI Camino Real and the main competitor to this lot, uses an even smaller lot. 8