5/17/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

construct a 5600 sq. ft. warehouse and shop addition (to an existing 1500 sq. ft. building) with associated improvements at 12855 79th Avenue in Roseland. The proposal was considered to be an expansion of an existing home occupation use within the ROSE -4 zoning district. Although the special ROSE -4 home occupation regulations were recently repealed, the subject application was accepted for review prior to the ordinance change. Therefore, this application was reviewed under the "old" ROSE -4 home occupa- tion criteria. This plan was originally heard by the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion at its regular meeting of February 11, 1988. At this meet- ing, with the applicant in attendance, action was taken to table the item until a later date in order to allow the applicant and staff to work out several outstanding technical issues. The following is a sequence of events since that meeting. CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS: - February 17, 1988. The applicant personally picked up a copy of staff's action letter which advised him of the Commis- sion's action (see attached letter dated 2/15/88). This letter set out the timeframes which staff established based upon Commission action, so 'that the application could be considered in a timely manner. - February 19, 1988. Staff received a letter from the appli- cant's attorney advising staff that the applicant objected to the timeframes set forth, and requested additional time for revisions (see attached letter dated 2/17/88). - February 23, 1988. Staff contacted applicant's attorney and advised him that the timeframe issue would be brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission in order to verify its true intent of tabling the item. - February 25, 1988. The Planning and Zoning Commission took action to have this matter heard at its regular meeting of March 24, 1988 (see attached minutes from 2/25/88). February 26, 1988. Staff sent action letter to applicant notifying him of the action taken by the Planning and Zoning commission at the February 25, 1988 meeting (see attached letter dated 2/26/88). - March 3, 1988. Staff received a letter from the applicant's attorney concerning several informational aspects of the plan (see attached letter dated 3/3/88). No revised plans submit- ted as of this date. - March 8, 1988. Staff received a letter from the applicant's attorney advising staff that the deadlines imposed upon the applicant were unreasonable (see attached letter dated 3/7/88) . March 10, 1988. Staff responded that this should not have been a problem (see attached letter dated 3/10/88). - March 16, 1988. The only additional information submitted by the applicant or the applicant's attorney was the letter dated 3/3/88 that served to clarify the applicant's in- tentions. Actual plan revisions have never been submitted, and at its regular meeting of March 16, 1988,.the County's Technical Review Committee re -discussed the original plan and the attorney's letter dated March 3, 1988. 24 AY 17 1988 Boor 72 r.P.,[ 367