Laserfiche WebLink
CASE <br /> <br />REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO SITE PLAN; <br />~CASE OF STEPItEN J. FRANTA, CANVAS CRAFT <br />By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik <br /> <br />Background: ~ <br /> <br />Stephet~ Franta of Canvas Craft received a conditional use permit and site plan approval in 1992 for <br />the construction bf a 3,472 square foot manufacturing facility on Lot 2, Block 3, Alpaca Estates. <br />The facility has tJeen constructed and is used to manufacture boat covers and portable fishhouses. <br />Mr. Franta's site~lan wa,s approved and provided for a storage yard that would be surfaced with <br />concrete. At M~Franta s request, the requirement for curbing in the storage yard was waived <br />because of the po!ential for damage to lower units of boats when being maneuvered in this area. <br /> <br />Observations: <br /> <br />As a part of bringing final closure to Mr. Franta's case, there was a final inspection of the site. It <br />is noted by City ~,taff that a portion of the storage yard at Canvas Craft was surfaced with concrete <br />and the remaindar of the area was surfaced with recycled, crushed asphalt. The portion of the <br />storage yard surf~ed with the crushed asphalt is not in compliance with Mr. Franta's approved site <br />plan or City Cod& <br /> <br />Mr. Franta is reqa. esting that City Council approve amending the specifications established in the <br />Site Plan Development Permit, accept the crushed asphalt as an approved surface in the storage <br />yard, and declare ~[he site development complete to the City's's satisfaction. <br /> <br />The following itefins are enclosed for your information: <br /> <br /> a) Site location map <br /> b) Sitk plan <br /> c) Site plan development permit <br /> <br />In only one other ~ase was the bituminous or concrete surfacing requirement waived on Highway <br />#10. Because the¢rea was fenced and not accessible to the general public, Skelgas was permitted <br />to construct their ~ropane filling facility in their back yard with a Class 5 surface applied to the <br />area. The site acc~esses and the customer/employee parking areas were required to be paved up to <br />the fence line. <br /> <br />Acceptance of theicrushed asphalt will strengthen the precedent established in the Skelgas case and <br />make future impo~;ition of the standards and denial of requests for waivers more difficult. <br /> <br />RecommendatiOn: <br />City Staff recommends denial of the request for an amendment to Site Plan Development Permit. <br /> <br />7_11 <br /> <br /> <br />