Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Excerpt of December 7, 2006 Board of Zoning Adjustments Meeting <br /> <br />Page 3 of5 <br /> <br />Planning Manager Pollart told him that his application had opened up a lot of questions that <br />staff had to consider from a city-wide standpoint, not only as it affected the property he wished <br />to purchase. She offered to talk with him after the meeting. <br /> <br />Chair Raposo clarified that these zoning changes came about as a result of the speaker's <br />application. However, his case was isolated and it would take special attention from staff. He <br />asked Planning Manager Pollart to clarify what the speaker's next step could be. <br /> <br />Planning Manager Pollart stated that it would be appropriate to make his request to the Board, <br />which would allow the future site of his church to be included in the overlay areas. <br /> <br />Member Marr stated that she knew the speaker had attended the joint work session and she <br />asked when the speaker's original application was filed. <br /> <br />Pastor Mortara replied that the application was filed May 18th. He had originally contacted <br />staff in March when they were first considering making an offer on the property. <br /> <br />Member Marr agreed that it would be appropriate for the applicant to make his request to the <br />Board tonight. She recalled that he had mentioned that he had a deposit on the site, which he <br />could lose by a certain date. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Goldt reiterated that this hearing tonight did not address the speaker's specific <br />situation, so this was not the venue for his topic. She wondered how he could "still be out on a <br />limb, somewhere." <br /> <br />Planning Manager Pollart stated that an application had been submitted regarding the site on <br />Catalina for modifying the zoning code that would allow religious assembly use. The site was <br />currently zoned IP. Originally, staff considered rezoning the IL site, then changing the zoning to <br />allow the church to occupy the property. However, the application opened up the need to review <br />all IL sites in the city. The Business Development Subcommittee were met with for direction to <br />staff, the options were presented during the joint work session in October; and the amendments <br />were created and brought forward. <br /> <br />Member Marr asked if staff had been communicating with Faith Fellowship all along. <br /> <br />Planning Manager Pollart responded that staff had stayed in communication with the applicant <br />and his other representatives. They had been apprised of all the meetings and they had attended <br />them. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Goldt asked if the applicant's purchase of a new site was entirely on hold until this <br />was settled city-wide. <br /> <br />Member Eliason defended staff by reminding everyone that the applicant wanted to relocate <br />where, currently, it was not allowed. Staff could have brought this application to the Planning <br />Commission for denial, rather than working with this applicant to try to work with the Zoning <br />Code to allow them to relocate in this location. Yes, the applicant was caught up, but he was <br />asking for something that the Code did not allow at this time. The industrial base was very large <br />and profitable and it should be protected. Much consideration should be taken before other uses <br />