Agenda - 01-07-1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

U48 • 7 The presentation was made by Planning Director Marvin Collins. The applicant desires that the Zoning Atlas for Cheeks Township show this parcel as Light Industrial as opposed to Residential-1 zoning district. A building permit was issued for the use of the tract after the November, 1983 Public hearing on the extension of zoning to Cheeks Township and prior to the decision to zone Cheeks Township made by the Board of Commissioners in October 1984. The property was not listed among the parcels in Cheeks Township to be zoned non-residential as it was not used for a commercial use at the time of the public hearing. The Planning Staff recommends that the property be zoned non-conforming as it is inappropriate for this type of use to be conducted in this location under the policy of the County. Whiffed asked staff to locate the use on the map. reviewed the location of the operation on the map. P Collins Lloyd inquired how long the use had been in operation. Collins responded that a permit was issued in September, 1984. Dean Gast owner/operator clarified that a building permit was issued in February, 1984 for the operation building and a second permit was issued in October, 1984 for the storage structure/warehouse. He indicated he had begun operations in June, 1984. Steve Yuhasz, Planning Board member, inquired when the deed of the property was dated. Gast responded February, 1984. Lloyd asked why staff disapproved of an on-going use. Collins responded that it was an inappropriate use in that area. He noted it was located a substantial distance from the area designated for Comanercial/1nd-- dustrial activity node under the West Orange Area Study and that it was located north of the Transition Area under the same study. He continued that agricultural uses were clearly designated as appropriate in this area and he was concerned that the existence of this use would stimulate yet further requests for commercial and industrial uses in the area. Collins continued that staff would rather classify the use as non-conforming than open the door to similar requests. Lloyd asked what would happen to the use if the structure were destroyed by fire. Collins cited the Ordinance that specifies if 60% or more of the structure housing a non-conforming use was destroyed, that reconstruction could only occur in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. If this use were destroyed to that et:tent, it could not be rebuilt in that location under that provision. •