Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971 07-28 CC MIN177 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED MEETING OF JULY 27, 1971 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA July 28, 1971 The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of National City was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Mayor Morgan. ROLL CALL Council members present: Camacho, Reid, Waters, Morgan. Absent: Hogue. Administrative officials present: Gerschler, McLean, Minogue, Osburn, Stenberg. UNFINISHED BUSINESS The City Attorney read in full his written report dated 7/28/71 in regard to building permit for South Bay Foundry. City Attorney McLean said, if he understood correctly, the Council wanted to issue a permit to construct the proposed facilities with the only restrictions on the development being those restrictions that are already in the M-4 one regulations without adding any further conditions; that can be accom- plished by the Council granting the pending application for a Conditional Use Permit under the terms and conditions of the zone regulations already in the Zoning Ordinance for the M-4 Zone; that would constitute a form of Special Use Permit which the Council is authorized by City ordinance to grant; before the Council makes a final determination in this matter the Council ought to have some statement about City law from him because he wasn't at the City Council meeting when this matter was presented. The City Attorney summarized City law saying if Council wished to allow this construction without any condi- tions other than those already in the M-4 Zone regulations that Council do so by granting a Conditional Use Permit with those restrictions and no more; if Council wished to do something else, of course, he would be happy to advise them as to how that could be accomplished. There was discussion. Donald H. Freeman, Attorney representing Mr. Lee Morgan, was present and said in part no one wants to be building something not in compli- ance with the zone; everytime you want to improve your business, improve your house or your apartment, you have to make application for a Conditional Use Permit because you simply don't comply with that zone; they had a basic argument as to whether or not a foundry would be a permissible use in the M-4 Zone as it stands; as he understood it, the Planning Commission's recommendations was that there was no use that was permitted in the M-4 Zone without a Conditional Use Permit other than those specific items which are set out in the C-4 and the M-2 Zones; this really did not make any sense to him at all; that means the Council and the Planning Commission would have to grant a Condi- tional Use Permit for every application in the M-4 Zone that didn't already comply with the C-4 or the M-2 Zone; he believed the Council had a right to review that information and make recommendations contrary to its finding; the general law is that the Planning Commis- sion must have some sort of appeal; you could have an appeal board from which you could apply for a change in that ruling or in the absence of that the law provides the legislative body, which would be the City Council in this case, would have an opportunity for review and change. Mr. Freeman said he had a basic difference of opinion with Mr. McLean; the real problem here is if the South Bay Foundry was granted a permit under Conditional Use Permit whether the 21 conditions were in there or just simply the conditions of the M-4 Zone, it amounts to a finding that he was in the wrong zone; as he reads the ordinance, the non -conforming use, they want to eventually phase them out; they don't want them to be there at all; they don't want any expansion in a non -conforming use nor any modifications or improvements as eventually they want to get rid of them; Mr. Morgan hates to spend a great deal of 7/28/71 178 money, like he would have to do in this case, if he was in the wrong zone. There was discussion. Lee J. Morgan, owner, South Bay Foundry, was present and said when he made application for Conditional Use Permit he was told that was the only kind of permit he could apply for; he didn't understand the con- ditions op this thing until he got legal advice. Mr. Freeman said he would like to indicate what the future problems could be under their ordinance; it says "Such non -conforming use shall not be enlarged or extended to any other portion of the lot not actually so occupied at the time such use became non -conforming as a result of the adoption of this ordinance;" it also provides that buildings cannot be extended and cannot be enlarged; it provides that in the event these buildings would burn down or there would be a calamity where one would collapse and were destroyed to the extent of 75%, he could no longer rebuild there; it was a non -conforming use; these are some of the great restrictions and hardships if it was non -conforming; he would really like to know if he does have a conforming use to the M-4 Zone or not; it would make a difference as to what he would do on the property. City Attorney McLean said this issue of non -conforming rights was in his judgment completely separate from where they stand today; what he was trying to do was to prevent, if he could, from the Council doing what it wants to do only doing it th.e wrong way so that their action winds up being ineffectual and embarrassing to them at a later date; this idea that somebody who was in the M-4 Zone and applies for a Conditional Use Permit because his kind of uses was specifically listed thereby somehow acknowledges there was a nonconforming use, he did not agree with; however, there was a way to handle that; separate and apart from what they do with Mr. Morgan's application for a Conditional Use Permit today, because he knew they were anxious to get going on his construction, they could grant him his Conditional Use Permit under the conditions of the existing M-4 Zone which apparently he was willing to comply with; then they could deal with the concern of the landowner about some problem of non -conforming rights; they could make a change in the zoning ordinance. There was discussion. Moved by Camacho, seconded by Waters, a Conditional Use Permit be issued to allow Mr. Mor an to o ahead with his construction under the restrictions that are in M-4 Zoning and the ordinance be amended to allow foundries in the M-4 Zone (amended motion.) Motion carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camac ho, Reid, Waters. Nays: None. Abstaining: Morgan. Absent: Hogue. MOVED BY WATERS, seconded by Cai ac ho, staff be directed to draft an amendment to the ordinance to where foundries is a ermitted use within the M-4 zoning and direct this to the Plannin Commission to hold a public hearing within the next month. Mayor Morgan said he wanted the record to show he hadn't discussed, voted in any way on this motion. City Attorney McLean said the Mayor brought up a good point and he had better say something about that, too; he was very sensitive to this particular issue, especially when it involves a relative of a member of the Council; he wanted the public to know he had never discussed the matter of Lee Morgan's zoning problem with Mayor Morgan; he specifically did not discuss the Conditional Use Permit requirements with Mayor Morgan and specifically he had never discussed the contents of the report that was here before the Council; he had not said a word to the Mayor about it and he never said a word to him (City Attorney) ; as a matter of fact, no one on the Council has; he thought that was something that should be emphasized again. Carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Cama, ho, Reid, waters. Nays: None. Abstaining: Morgan. Absent: Hogue. 7/28/71. 119 MQVED BY CAMAC} }, seconded by Watere, nee i h c °sed. Carried by unanimous vote. Absent Hogue,' The meeting closed at 400 p.m. C ty F leak City Of National City, Cal orni a The foregoing minutes were approved by the City Council of National City at the regular meeting of August 3, 1971. No correotione r7771Correction as noted below vows, ona . City, California 7/28/71