Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-05-05; City Council; 21957; Denying Gunther’s Guns Shooting Range Appeal Part 5 of 5Gunther’s Guns Shooting Range Appeal MCUP 14-17 City Staff: Don Neu, City Planner Location Map FA R A D A Y A V E L F UERT EST PALOMAR AIRPORT RD L O K E R AVWEST MCUP 14-17 Gunther's Guns Shooting Range SITE MAP JPALOMARAIRPORTRDELCAMREALLACOSTAAVCA R LSB A DBLELCA MINO REAL MELR OSEDRAVIARAPY RAN CHO S ANTAFERDCOLLEGEBL INNOVATIONWYSLATER PL F A R A D A Y A V PALOMAR AIRPORT RD EL FU E R T E S T L O KERAVWEST0 400 800200 Feet IMCUP 14-17 Gunther's Guns Shooting Range - Appeal of a City Planner Determination Title 21 -Zoning Ordinance •The Zoning Ordinance is a permissive ordinance •If a use is not listed in the Permitted Uses Table (Table A) for the zone, it is not permitted •The exception is the following provision contained in each zone: –“A use similar to those listed in Table A may be permitted if the city planner determines such use falls within the intent and purposes of the zone, and is substantially similar to the specified permitted uses.” Planned Industrial (P-M) Zone Intent and Purpose, CMC Section 21.34.010(1) “Allow the location of business and light industries engaged primarily in research and/or testing, compatible light manufacturing, and business and professional offices; ….and allow flexibility for other select uses (i.e., athletic clubs/gyms, churches, daycare centers, recreation facilities, etc.)when found to be compatible with the P-M zone through the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.” Planned Industrial Zone –Chapter 21.34 •Section 21.34.020 Permitted Uses (Table A) does not list a shooting range as a permitted or conditionally permitted use •The zone includes a listing for “Recreation Facilities” subject to the approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit. •“Recreation Facilities” is not defined in the Zoning Ordinance •Interpreting the Zoning Ordinance to classify the use as a recreation facility for zoning purposes would establish a precedent that effects numerous land use zones Recreation Facilities ZONE PERMITTED CONDITIONALLY-PERMITTED MCUP (1); CUP (2) Exclusive Agriculture (E-A)2 Rural Residential Estate (R-E)2 Residential Tourist (R-T)2 Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) 1 Office (O)1 General Commercial (C-2)1 Heavy Commercial/Limited Industrial (C-M) 1 Local Shopping Center (C-L)1 Industrial (M)1 Open Space (O-S)1 Planned Industrial (P-M)1 Public Utility (P-U)X Background November 26, 2014 Minor Conditional Use Permit application filed for an indoor shooting range in the P-M zone; applicant requested that it be considered a recreation facility, similar to ice skating rink, go-carts, and swim facility December 23, 2014 City Planner determined that shooting range is not a permitted or conditionally-permitted use in the P-M zone nor is it similar to other permitted or conditionally-permitted uses Due to inherent safety concerns, shooting range does not meet the Intent and Purpose of the P-M zone December 31, 2014 Appeal of the City Planner’s determination filed by Lisa Gunther Background-cont’d Planning Commission Hearing February 18, 2015 Significant number of people spoke in support of the indoor shooting range; one person spoke in opposition Planning Commission voted 3-3 Scully, Anderson, Segall voted Yes to uphold the City Planner’s determination and deny the appeal Black, L’Heureux, Montgomery voted No and felt the City Planner erred in his decision Tie vote resulted in an unbreakable tie Appeal denied; City Planner’s determination upheld Background-cont’d Appeal of Planning Commission Decision (filed February 27, 2015) Grounds for Appeal (CMC Section 21.54.150) Burden of proof is on the appellant to establish, by substantial evidence, that the grounds for appeal exist City Council is limited to considering whether there was an error or abuse in discretion by the Planning Commission (i.e., decision was not supported by facts) City Council hearing is de novo; however, City Council shall only consider the evidence presented to the Planning Commission for consideration of the appeal Appellant’s Justification for Appeal An indoor shooting range should be evaluated as a recreation facility through a Minor Conditional Use Permit An indoor shooting range is not a unique recreational facility and is similar to an indoor go-cart track, ice skating rink, and swim facility Correspondence Received Letter from Ms. Leslie Devaney, Esq., April 10, 2015 (Attachment 7) Letters and petition in support of indoor shooting range (Attachment 8) Letters and petition in opposition (Attachment 9) City Planner Response A shooting range is unique and is not substantially similar to existing recreation facilities, including an ice skating rink, indoor go-karts, swim facility, due to documented safety concerns (use of lead, noise) Shooting range is not purely for recreation Does not meet Intent and Purpose of the P-M zone; if it were a desired use in the P-M zone, it would be listed separately in the list of permitted or conditionally- permitted uses City Planner Response-Cont’d Substantial evidence not submitted by Appellant demonstrating that a shooting range is similar to other recreation facilities like an ice skating rink, children’s swim facility or a go-kart track Appellant has not met burden of proof Appellant has not demonstrated that there was an error or abuse in discretion by the Planning Commission Recommendation ADOPT Resolution No.2015-114 DENYING the appeal and upholding the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the appeal and uphold the City Planner’s determination that an indoor shooting range is not a permitted or conditionally-permitted use in the Planned Industrial (P-M)zone nor is it substantially similar to a permitted or conditionally- permitted use in the P-M zone. Gunther Guns Shooting Range Signs of the times… “The neighbors agree since the Range went in parking has become a significant problem that signs, fences, cameras and tow trucks have failed to solve” Owner of South Coast Glass (Located right next door) Opposition for a gun range in an industrial park in North Olmsted, Ohio Those opposed stated: “We’re not anti-range, we’re anti-location on this…It’s the wrong location for that type of business.” (Gallatan) “…there are other businesses around, saying people going to and from a firing range with weapons is a potential safety hazard to other nearby businesses and homes.” (Gallatan) Lack of Safety Regulations “…a lack of age restrictions isn’t the only way gun ranges are safety-free zones, and potentially the sites of preventable deaths. Inside gun ranges, individuals can also “rent” a gun without any of the precautions that happen before an individual buys a gun. They don’t have to pass a criminal background check. There’s no check of their mental health records, although some require individuals to attest to their mental competence. Many gun ranges don’t even collect names or identification” (Flatow). “Even those gun ranges that want to check the backgrounds for rental customers are not permitted to. Stephen Fischer of the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services told Politico Magazine earlier this month that individuals who rent guns don’t actually “possess” them because they don’t take them off the premises. So federal background check law doesn’t apply, and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is not permitted to conduct a check” (Flatow). “State laws vary, but this is the way most firing ranges operate throughout the country—they require customers to show identification, fill out a waiver of liability and sign a form indicating that they’re mentally competent (which isn’t verified by anybody). It’s certainly not a foolproof system—and in addition to a few accidents, there have been more than a few suicides” (Valentine) The real aim of this Shooting Range is not about Second Amendment Rights, Boy Scouts, Gun Safety, or Community Service. Gunther wants to sell more hand guns, assault rifles and ammunition. Greg and Lisa also want to sell a couple thousand Memberships at $400 a year.