02/03/87 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

BARE LAKE CITY Docks & Storage, Inc. (D & S) applied for a special use permit in 1975 for a 10' x 18' trailer'office on the shores of Bare Lake; the city approved it and waived 30' front and rear setback requirements. Four years later, D & S replaced the trailer with a 10' x 50' unit. The city objected, and D & S formal].y applied for an amended permit. The city's zon- ing ordinance provides that a special use permit may be Granted after consideration of th~ Planning Commission's recommenda- tions, the affect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, mor~ls, convenience, and general welfare of occupants and sur- rounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions including parking facilities, effect on surrounding land values, and effect on the comprehensive plan. Opponents of the amended permit argued as follows: 1. ASetback waiver for a 50' trailer was too much, compared to an 18' trailer. 2. This would establish a precedent for the lakeshore, and more trailer office and mobile home applications might arise. 3. A trailer office of that size would adversely affect property values. 4. The enlarged trailer would impede the city's efforts to upgrade the lakeshore and to alleviate significant traffic- pedestrian-bicycle problems. 5. The parcel of land was undersized in depth, and would not permit a permanent structure of the same size. D & S argued as follows: 1. The special use sought is compatible with the under- lying zoning. 2. A special use permit has already been granted. 3. The Planning Commission recommended approval. 4. The setback requirements apply to permanent structures, not to mobile trailers. 5. The enlarged trailer will not create any additional traffic, parking, population density, or noise problems, nor otherwise endanger the health or safety of residents. The domino theory is purely speculative. What do you recommend? How.should your findings be written in case the other side goes to court?