Laserfiche WebLink
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY <br />OPINION NO. 74-2 <br />December 13, 1973 <br />SUBJECT: Mobile Home Sales Conditional Use Permit <br />' Application; C.U.P. X73-17 <br />REQUESTED BY; Planning Commission <br />OPINION BY: James ,~. Withers, City Attorney <br />BY: Richard F. Lay, Deputy City Attorney <br />QUESTION 1: In determining cahether to grant a <br />Conditional Use Permit for the sale <br />of mobile homes to a mobile home park <br />operator, should the Planning Commis- <br />sion under-take to determine if the <br />applicant's business operation would <br />constitute an illegal or unfair compe- <br />titive practice? <br />ANSWER: PIo. The Planning Commission should not <br />.inquire into or make findings upon the <br />issue of unfair competition. <br />QUESTION 2: .Play the grant of a Conditional Use <br />Permit for the sale of mobile ,homes to <br />a mobile home park operator be condi- <br />tioned upon the continued maintenance <br />of post-sale services? <br />ANS[~~ER: Yes. But such a condition is not recommended <br />. because it would not be effective to accom- <br />plish its purpose of maintaining such servic- <br />. ing operations beyond the time when the appli- <br />cant ceases to sell mobile homes on the pre- <br />mises. <br />ANALYSIS: <br />I <br />The applicant,. EPM Hunt Company, holds a conditional <br />use: permit (7~-10) to operate a mobile home park on a parcel lo- <br />cated at 4?.11 [lest First Street. The parcel is zoned C2 on a <br />strip borderiizg First Street, with the remainder zoned Al. The <br />applicant is now applying fora new conditional use permit (73-17) <br />to allow the sale and display of mobile home units on the parcel, <br />in addition to its present condi~tionall;r permitted use as a rio- <br />bile home park. Certain mobile home dealers have argued that the <br />Planning Commission s'~ould deny the application, primarily upon <br />-4- <br />