Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Edgewood staff proposes 1996 cutoff and longer abandonment window for nonconforming uses
Summary
City staff presented a draft ordinance setting Feb. 28, 1996, as the lawful-establishment look-back date for nonconforming uses and recommended extending the abandonment period from six to 12 months; the Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption and staff will bring the ordinance to the next regular meeting for consideration.
Get email alerts on the Planning And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City planning staff proposed an amendment to Edgewood’s development code to set Feb. 28, 1996, the city’s incorporation date, as the lawful-establishment date used to evaluate nonconforming land uses, and to lengthen the abandonment period for certain uses from six months to 12 months.
The change was presented at the Feb. 4 study session by Jeremy, a planning staff member. Jeremy said the draft code in the meeting packet establishes Feb. 28, 1996 as “the date that was discussed to set that legally established, look back date” and noted the Planning Commission had recommended adoption unanimously. “Happy to take any questions the council may have and looking forward to bring us forward for consideration next week's regular meeting,” he said.
The proposal would require applicants or staff to rely on evidence such as aerial imagery where a construction date is unknown; Jeremy told the council the city generally would use aerial imagery to show that a structure existed before the 1996 cutoff. He also explained staff’s recommendation to extend the statutory abandonment period from six months to 12 months, saying recent experience showed six months can be too short in some circumstances and that 12 months aligns with other jurisdictions.
Council members asked clarifying questions about proof of dates and the abandonment provision. Council member Jeff asked whether an applicant must prove the exact construction date or only that the use predates 1996; Jeremy answered that applicants need only show the use existed before Feb. 28, 1996 and that staff would rely on aerial imagery if no other documentation is available.
No formal vote was taken at the study session. Planning staff indicated the ordinance draft will be brought to the council’s next regular meeting for consideration and possible first reading.
