Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/05/2002

Home

26 Page 6 -- October 25, 2002 7,.8. repairs before the current zoning regulations Were enacted and could not have discontinued such uses for more than one year. Keeping those requirements in mind, COB pefformedonly occasional car repair and maintenance services to retain its grandfather rights. In 1996,. COB remodeled the property to include a three-bay garage and leased the property in 1997 to-a full-service auto repair facility known as Homer Tire and Auto. COB also asked the city's Advisory Planning Commission to approve its non- conforming uses. Griswold owned another nearby garage, called Glacierview Garage. Glacierview Garage was a direct competitor of.COB, Griswold was the only person to object to COB's petition for approval of nonconforming uses. The commission found COB had produced sufficient evidence the prop- erty had been used as a public garage and car repair services had not been discontinued. The comm/ssion also found COB had not abandoned its intent to use the property for those purposes. The commission agreed to COB's contin- ued use of the property as a public garage. Griswold appealed to the board of adjustment, which reversed the commission's decision. COB appealed the reversal to the lower court, which reversed the board's decision with instructions to remand the matter to the commission to allow COB to present evidence that car repair services had' con- tinued on the property. On remand, the commission found COB failed to.show the uses had act-u_ ally continued but still found COB had intended to continue the nonconform- ing uses during the years in question. The commission concluded the' zoning ordinances in effect required the intent to discontinue the nonconforming use as well as actual discontinuance before the protected nonconforming use would be lost. The board adopted the commission's findings, and Griswold appealed. · The court reversed and remanded the matter again, finding COB's intent 'was not relevant and ordering the commission to f'md whether COB had stopped providing car repair services for a period of more than one year. The. court later added a statement that the commission had consistently used the wrong stan- dard to find whether COB's n. onconforming uses had been disconti"nued. The court directed the commission to consider COB.'s actual, use. The comm/ssion considered the matter for a third time, hearing testimoriy from Stewart and reviewing additional sworn statements and business records and invoices. Specifically, COB documented 46 separate vehicle repairs or maintenance services performed on the property since 199'1, even while the property was leased to a taxicab company. COB had perfo.rmed repair work on the premises solely in order to preserve its grandfather rights. Gr/swold argued the documents and testimony showed the business was "fabricated" and was not "commercial." The commission ultimately found COB had failed to show the property was used as a public garage within the.past year and determined COB lost the right to use the property as a "public garage." The commission did find COB was. entitled to use the property for car repair i I I I i I I I I i I