HomeMy WebLinkAbout192-91RESOLUTION NO. 192-91
Zo~ _c47
~? /... l'?
DENYING DANVILLE MOTORS REQUEST TO ESTABLISH AN
OUTDOOR STORAGE/DISPLAY OF AUTOMOBILES AT 151 EAST
PROSPECT AVENUE (LUP 91-19)
WHEREAS, in November 1990, Mr. Peterson applied for a Zoning Compliance Certificate
for an auto sales office at 137 #D East Prospect and was approved as a "point-of-sale"
office with no on-site storage of "for sale" vehicles; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Peterson established an automobile storage/display/sales operation on
the subject site without Town approval; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is located at 151 East Prospect with the Danville Motors sales
office located at 137 #D East Prospect (APN: 208-022-042 & 017); and
WHEREAS, the subject site is located in Area I of the DBD; Downtown Business District
which requires approval of a Land Use Permit for outdoor storage/display/sale of
merchandise in Area 1; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Danville DBD; Downtown Business District does not allow auto
sales/display/storage in Area 1 with or without issuance of a Land Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Town received complaints from the public regarding the operation of an
automobile sales/display/storage lot on 151 East Prospect; and
WHEREAS, on April 29, 1991 the Town of Danville notified Mr. Peterson in writing that
he was in violation of the Zoning Compliance Certificate by storing "for sale" vehicles on-
site; and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 1991 Jim Peterson of Danville Motors requested approval of a
Land Use Permit for outdoor storage/display of automobiles on 151 East Prospect Avenue;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the project at a noticed public hearing
on August 13, 1991 and denied the request; and
WHEREAS, on August 22, 1991 Mr. Peterson filed an appeal of the Planning
Commission's decision to deny LUP 91-19; and
PAGE 1 OF RESOLUTION NO. 192-91
WItEREAS, the Town Cov'~il did review the project at a no~'~.d public hearing on
October 15, 1991; and
WHERFAS, the public notice of this action was given in all respects as required by law;
and
WHERFAS, a staff report was submitted recommending that Town Council deny the
appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's action denying LUP 91-19; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council did hear and consider all reports, recommendations, and
testimony submitted in writing and presented at the hearing; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Council of the Town of Danville that the Town Council
denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Commission's action denying LUP 91-19 and
makes the following findings in support of the denial:
o
The proposed land use is inconsistent with the Danville 2005 General Plan, Goal
3 and Policy 3.01, by not functionally integrating into the downtown character and
desired image of the community and Goal #4 by discouraging pedestrian retail in
the central retail area (Area I of the DBD; Downtown Business District).
0
The proposed land use is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Downtown
Master Plan. General Goals I and 2 stress maintaining an economically viable retail
center by encouraging a distinctive retail core that serves local needs. Parking
Goals 1, 2 and 3 and Policies B, C and D support a vital retail base by enhancing
the historic character and charm of downtown by minimizing on-site parking,
specifically parking that faces on East Prospect. Land Use Goals I and 4 and
Policy A promote maintaining an economically viable retail area by controlling the
mix of uses within the downtown area. Civic Focus Goal 2 encourages preserving
the historic character of Old Town. Urban Design Goals I and 2 promote the
village-like character of the downtown.
.
The land use project is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the DBD;
Downtown Business District which do not allow automobile sales in Area i as a
permitted or conditionally permitted use. The guiding intent of Area I is to
promote the establishment of businesses in the central retail core that store
merchandise on-site and have all transactions occurring within an enclosed
building. Retail is defined as any business which devotes the major portion of the
interior space to exhibit products for sale which provide pedestrian interest.
0
Establishment of this land use at this location would potentially be precedent
setting as it may lead to a redefinition of retail uses downtown.
,
The proposed land use may be detrimental to the health, safety, and general
welfare of the Town by disrupting the planned retail mix of uses downtown area.
PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 192-91
.
The proposed land use may adversely affect the orderly development of property
within the Town by permitting a non-pedestrian retail use in the central core of the
Area I DBD district.
.
The land use may adversely affect the preservation of property values and the
protection of the tax base within the Town in the long run by not conforming to
the planned pedestrian retail mix of uses.
o
The land use may create a nuisance and\or enforcement problem within the
neighborhood or community by conducting outside business activities that are not
conducive to a pedestrian retail environment.
,
The land use may encourage marginal development within the neighborhood by
not providing a pedestrian retail attraction to support other retail business nearby.
NOW, THERFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Town Council of the Town of
Danville that Danville Motors will have 180 days to cease the sale/storage/display of
automobiles at 151 East Prospect.
APPROVED by the Danville Town Council at a Regular Meeting on October 15,
1991 by the following vote:
AYES:
Greenberg, Lane, Ritchey, Schlendorf, Shimansky
NOES:
None
ABSTAINED: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~City Attorney
acmcm20
ATTEST:
City Clerk
PAGE 3 OF RESOLUTION NO. 192-91