Laserfiche WebLink
CC Regular Session <br />Meeting Date: 07/10/2012 <br />By: Chris Anderson, Community <br />Development <br />7. 2. <br />Information <br />Title: <br />Consider Options Related to an Approved Conditional Use Permit For Motor Vehicle Sales at 8175 Riverdale Dr <br />NW <br />Background: <br />On December 13, 2011, the City Council approved a conditional use permit (the "Permit") for motor vehicle sales <br />in the B-2 Business District for Quality RV (the "Permittee"). The Permit addressed several issues including the <br />temporary use of an unimproved surface for display of inventory and allowing class V gravel rather than pavement <br />and curb and gutter. The Permit stated that both the temporary use of the unimproved surface and the installation of <br />class V gravel shall be completed no later than June 30, 2012 and that grading and drainage plans must be <br />submitted and approved by June 30, 2012 to initiate the Permit. <br />Observations: <br />The temporary use of an unimproved surface was requested and approved to allow the Permittee to start moving <br />their inventory over from their Elk River site over the winter. Due to the season, it wasn't feasible to install a proper <br />surface. Class V gravel, rather than pavement and curb and gutter, was requested and approved due to the preferred <br />alignment of the future Armstrong Blvd/Highway 10 interchange, which will directly impact the property in <br />question. <br />The owner of the property did submit a drainage plan on June 26, 2012, which was considered incomplete <br />because it lacked details needed to verify adequate on -site stormwater management. Staff has relayed to the <br />property owner the deficiencies with the plans, stated what information is still necessary and identified why that <br />information is needed. <br />The June 30, 2012 deadline passed without approved plans, without the installation of the class V surface, and with <br />inventory still being displayed on an unimproved surface. At this point, there are several options that the City could <br />consider: (1) a one-time brief (30-60 days) extension to allow the Permittee and the property owner to complete the <br />necessary tasks to comply with the terms of the Permit; (2) reduce the inventory such that it is only on the existing, <br />paved areas; (3) consider scheduling a public hearing to discuss revoking the Permit for failing to comply with <br />the Permit terms. <br />Recommendation: <br />Staff continues to work with both the Permittee and the property owner to resolve the outstanding issues. The <br />preferred alignment of the Armstrong Blvd/Highway 10 interchange has created some difficulty for both the <br />Permittee and the property owner because of the uncertainty of if and when that project may commence. They <br />have expressed concern about an inability to recoup their expenses for both plan preparation and the actual on -site <br />improvements if the interchange project moves forward within a few years. However, Staff still believes that a <br />one-time extension of no more than sixty (60) days should be considered to provide the Permittee and the property <br />owner a chance to submit the necessary information for plan review, approval by the City, and ultimately, <br />the installation of the class V material. <br />Funding Source: <br />