Loading...
06-23-1992ICHTY OF RHCIHFHTRZZ Planning Commission AGENDA June 23, 1992 7:00 p.m. 11101) 1 CM-1 I' ,unit #utc' Regular Planning Commission meeting of April 28, 1992. ITEM #1 92 -SD-3 7626 -44 Knox Avenue South Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership, Subdivision waiver to divide parcel into two separate lots. ITEM #2 92 -CUP -3 6745 12th Avenue South Norma Jean Sims Accessory apartment in R zone ITEM #3 92- ACUP -2 7627 Lyndale Avenue South Hope's Chow Mein Restaurant expansion T V' : Uti lll titi CI i L1tilI1E'titi I .i.l c tl I epc i•t School Board Community Services Advisory Commission HRA City Council AdHoc 135/1494 Traffic Committee Add ounnm imt CITY OF RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 28, 1992 - Regular Meeting MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson William Snyder; Commissioners: Nancy Edwardson, Robert Elliott, Timothy Erlander, Michael Gallagher, Daniel Linnihan, Morris Nilsen II, and David Sumnicht MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Thomas Scaglia COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor STAFF PRESENT: Byron Wallace, Community Development Director; Bill Weaver, City Planner; Shawn Drill, Zoning Administrator and Diane Anastos, Associate Planner The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Snyder at 7:04 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M /Erlander, S /Elliott to approve the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of February 25, 1992. Motion carried: 7 -0. PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM #1 92 -CUP -2 7440 PENN AVENUE SOUTH, PARENT INFANT EDUCATION PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Zoning Administrator Drill stated that the Lincoln Hills Parent - Infant Education Center, which provides daycare for high school age parents is proposing an increase to allow up to 40 children, through use of an additional classroom. Mr. Drill Planning Commission Meeting April 28, 1992 Page 2 reviewed the site plan, noting the nearest available classroom to the daycare will be used to accommodate the additional children. The drop area is on -site, with transportation provided for those using the program. There are no physical changes to the site. Staff recommended approval to the request as it is compatible with other uses, and there is adequate on -site parking and play area. Nancy Bengston, representing the Parent- Infant Education Program stated that Independent school District 287 has been providing programs for teens and pregnant teens for 20 years. The daycare which has been part of the program since 1985 serves 25 children. The proposal would increase enrollment to allow preschool age children to attend. Currently only infants and toddlers attend the daycare. Ms. Bengston also stated that the program serves younger parents who remain in the program for 2 -3 years and need daycare provided for their preschool age children. She also noted that they have been in touch with the person who licenses the program to ask for assistance in providing daycare. Chuck Copshlees, supervisor for the program, stated that the program allows high school age girls to complete their high school education. He noted that many of the students who attend the Parent- Infant Education program also attend Richfield High School and are working towards obtaining their high school diploma. Responding to Community Development Director Wallace's question, Mr. Copshlees stated that the program has been implemented, but they hope to increase the enrollment as soon as possible. M /Snyder, S /Nilsen to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 7 -0. M /Elliott, S /Erlander to recommend approval of the amendment to the conditional use permit: Motion carried: 7 -0. Community Development Director Wallace stated that this item was pre - published so that it may go to the first City Council meeting in May. Planning Commission Meeting April 28, 1992 Page 3 Commissioner Sumnicht arrived. ITEM #2 92 -SD -2 7629 -35 AND 7639 -45 LOGAN AVENUE SOUTH LEASEBACK PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, SUBDIVISION WAIVER Zoning Administrator Drill stated that this subdivision request is similar to the Morgan Avenue property considered a few months ago. There are no physical changes to the property other than those required: 1. Landscaping on the perimeter of the parking area. 2. Widen the curb cuts which cross over both properties. 3. Either extend sidewalk to the corner or remove from both properties. Mr. Drill stated that Olson Tool Company was the occupant in both buildings up until six months ago. Leaseback Properties has a buyer for the north building, also a tool company, and has the south building for sale. He also noted that there are ten parking spaces on Parcel A and 19 on Parcel B. Staff recommended approval with the following stipulations. 1. That the Hearing Examiner grant variances and rear yard setbacks on each building. Hearing Examiner is currently considering the variance. 2. Parking area be screened as per the plan. 3. Logan Avenue curb cut be widened to 26 feet. 4. Logan Avenue, sidewalk be extended or removed. 5. That a cash escrow be provided for all required improvements. 6. Subdivision waiver would be subjected to easements on the street. The staff recommendation is that the approval would not interfere with purposes of platting per Section 500. A subdivision waiver would allow separate ownership of the two buildings. Mr. Drill noted that the required improvements would comply with engineering and landscaping requirements. He noted that the sidewalk stipulation was made because the sidewalk does not meet the end of the street, making it difficult to plow. Planning Commission Meeting April 28, 1992 Page 4 Responding to Chairperson Snyder's question, Mr. Drill stated that maintenance would be difficult and removal of the sidewalk would facilitate maintenance. Mr. Drill stated that there is no sidewalk across the street. Mr. Drill.also stated that there is a school two blocks away, suggesting the sidewalk may have been put in as a path, but has a lower user rate. Mr. Drill also noted that there is a sidewalk that runs along 77th Street and continues up to the Masonic Lodge. Michael Thornton, representing Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership, stated that Mr. Drill covered all of the issues. He stated his only concern was the requirement of sidewalk extension or removal. He noted that extending the sidewalk is not necessary, as the building has been there for 20 years without one. He stated that the expense of installation of the sidewalk is considerably less than removing what is already there, and this option would be preferred if the stipulation was not removed but it isn't warranted). He noted that it would be easy to install bumpers with posts or markers for plowing considerations. Responding to Chairperson Snyder and Commissioner Elliott questions, Mr. Drill stated that the concern about the sidewalk was that it did not continue to the end of the street. M /Edwardson, S /Erlander to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 8 -0. M /Snyder, S /Elliott to adopt recommendation with omission of Stipulation No. 4: 1. That the Hearing Examiner grant the necessary variances. 2. That the parking area be screened pursuant to the Landscape requirements. 3. That the Logan Avenue curb cut leading to the parking lot be widened to 26 -32 feet pursuant to City Code. 4.' That a cash escrow be provided for all required improvements. 5. That the subdivision waiver be subject to the easement for street purposes running in favor of the City of Richfield and recorded as Document No. 3186043 in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County. Motion carried: 8 -0. Planning Commission Meeting April 28, 1992 Page 5 NEW BUSINESS ITEM #3 INFORMATION LETTER # 7 QUARTERLY REPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT COMMITTEE Mr. Drill discussed the quarterly report noting Acadian Candles, 6328 Penn had to meet PASSS guidelines for approval, and 6832 14th Avenue request for a variance for a four season porch is being considered by the Hearing Examiner. OLD BUSINESS None. LIAISON REPORTS School Board: Commissioner Linnihan stated that the Junior and Senior High were well represented at the art exhibit. The theme was Operation Desert Storm. He also stated that the district is working on implementing an outcome education model for next year. It teaches kids how to learn, establishes high expectations for kids and the means to provide them. He also stated there is an ongoing redefinition of the performance clause for superintendent Larson's compensation package. Community Services Advisory Commission: Mr. Wallace stated that there will be a Community Services bus tour coming up on Tuesday, May 12, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. HRA: Mr. Wallace stated the HRA closed on April 15, 1992 without any income tax and bought the Cloverleaf site. City Council: Mr. Wallace stated that the City Council approved Phase II of the Richfield Rediscovered Program for increasing housing stock. There is one lot left under Phase I. Phase II is for $4.5 million dollars, and is being paid for with funds from LHN and the Sewer /Water District. The amount borrowed will be paid back by income gained from tax increment districts. Mr. Wallace also stated that the opening of Rainbow Foods Plannning Commission Meeting April 28, 1992 Page 6 presented the City with some traffic problems that are in the process of being resolved. Mr. Wallace also stated that BEST Companies has hired Welsh Company to sublease its space; lease negotiations are ongoing with Cub Foods. Ad Hoc Traffic Committee:. Chairperson Snyder stated a public meeting was held on Thursday, April 23, 1992. Mr. Wallace noted a public hearing will be held at the high school on May 14, 1992 on Saturday, May 2, 1992 a water plant tour will be held from 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:57 P.M. Timo rlander Planni g Commission Secretary 07 RICTOU21D PLANNING COMMISSION Action Request Item: #1 Agenda Section: Public Hearing Case: #92 -SD -3 Date: June 23, 1992 GENERAL INFORMATION Petitioner: Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership Location: 7626 -44 Knox Avenue South Type of Request: Subdivision waiver Zoning: C -2, general commercial Land Use: General commercial and light industrial Comp. Plan: Freeway Strip References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts) City Code: Section 500.05 of the City Code outlines the procedures relating to subdivision waiver. ACTION Proposed Change: Division of parcel into two separate lots with one building on each lot. No physical changes will be made except to meet the noted stipulations. Staff Recommendation: Recommend approval of the subdivision waiver with stipulations. HISTORY Public Notice: Notice of the Planning Commission's consideration and public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. 13earing A public hearing for setback variances was held on June 16, 1992. A Examiner: decision has not yet been filed. City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing date of July 13, 1992 for the subdivision waiver. 7626knox ANALYSIS Issues: Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership is requesting a subdivision waiver, in conjuction with variances, in order to divide 7626 -44 Knox into two separate lots with a commercial building on each lot. Currently, two principal buildings are situated on the parcel. To accomodate separate ownership of the buildings, the parcel requires a division allowing each building to be situated on its own lot. No physical changes will be made to the site except to meet the noted stipulations. A streetside sideyard and rear yard setback variance application is currently under consideration with the Hearing Examiner. The variances would not change any existing setbacks, rather, they would allow the current lot configuration. The Hearing Examiner is responsible for consideration of the variances only, and the Planning Commission and City Council are responsible for consideration of the subdivision waiver application. Both applications must be approved independantly in order for the parcel to be sucessfully divided into two lots. Proposed Parcel A (7626 -30) is currently occupied by Barrel Finish Inc. under a 1971 conditional use permit. Leaseback Properties plans to retain this building for the time being, but may offer it for sale in the future. Proposed Parcel B (7634, 40, & 44) is currently offered for sale and consists of three lease spaces as follows: o 7634 is currently occupied by Allied Overhead Door Co. o 7640 is currently occupied by Graphic Prep Printing Co. o 7644 is currently vacant, however, it was occupied by Olson Tool Co. for several years prior to a recent move. Proposed Parcel A provides nine on -site parking spaces, and proposed Parcel B provides 31 on -site parking spaces. Parking availability appears to be adequate for the building sizes and potential traffic generation. Both structures were designed for use as commercial /light manufacturing operations. It is expected that a similar low impact use will occupy the 7644 lease space. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended Action: Preferred: Recommend that the City Council approve the subdivision waiver at 7626- 44 Knox Avenue in accord with the proposed site plan and with the following stipulations: 1. That the Hearing Examiner grant the necessary variances. 2. That the parking lot be screened pursuant to the landscape requirements, be striped in accord with the proposed site plan, and the curbing be repaired where broken. 3. That a cash escrow be provided for all required improvements. 7626knox Basis: 1. Approval of the subdivision will not interfere with the purposes of platting regulations of Section 500.05. 2. The subdivision waiver would allow separate ownership of the two buildings. 3. The required improvements would comply with landscape requirements. Alternative: Recommend denial of the subdivision waiver if a finding of fact determines that this proposal would have an adverse impact on adjacent properties. CITY CODE: CITATIONS Section 500 - Plats: subdivision regulations 500.05. Conveyances by metes and bound. Subdivision 1. Conveyances prohibited. No conveyance of land in which the land conveyed is described by metes and bounds or by reference to a plat made after March 11, 1940, which is not approved by council resolution, shall be made or recorded if the parcel described in the conveyance is less than five acres in area and 300 feet in width unless such parcel was a separate parcel of record as of March 11, 1940, or unless an agreement to convey such smaller parcel was entered into prior to that time and the instrument showing the agreement to convey is recorded in the office of the register of deeds within one year thereafter or was a separate parcel of not less than two and one -half acres in area and 150 feet in width on January 1, 1966, or is a single parcel of land not less than five acres and having a width of not less than 300 feet. Subd. 2. Subdivision waiver. In any case in which compliance with subdivision 1 will result in an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply does not interfere with the purpose of the platting regulations of this section, the council may waive such compliance by adoption of a resolution to that effect, and the conveyance may then be recorded. The council may at its option refer such questions to the planning commission for recommendation before council action. Subd. 3. Noncompliance: penalty. Any owner or agent of any owner of land who conveys a lot or parcel in violation of this subsection shall forfeit and pay to the city a penalty of $100 for each lot or parcel so conveyed as provided by law. Any penalty so levied may be collected by the city by action in a court of competent jurisdiction. Subd. 4. Noncompliance: injunction. The city, in addition to imposing the penalty provisions of subdivision 3, may bring appropriate proceedings to enjoin any conveyance not complying with this subsection. Subd. 5. Scope of subsection. This subsection does not apply to plats recorded prior to March 11, 1940, or to the sale or exchange of small parcels of land to or between adjoining property owners where such sale or exchange does not create an additional lot or space sufficient to construct an additional residence thereon. Subd. 6. Application fee. Applications for plat or subdivision approval or for waiver of preliminary platting procedures shall be accompanied by the fee provided in appendix D of this code. 7626knox I L 4 6.78 - c= 89.06 14.0 1 g •. X - 76.05 PARCEL A PARCEL B -+— 18.24 n, b d HC DOck HC 1 19 LB' T Landscape screening 0 9 # to be added a, 11 i 4, S o 733 6.79 _ West 77th Street x location of security lights proposed subdI1Wsn1 ®n 7626 -44 Knox Avenue Division of parcel into two lots. PLANNING ZONING PLANNING COMMISSION Action Request Item: #2 Agenda Section: Public Hearing Case: #92 -CUP -3 Date: June 23, 1992 GENERAL INFORMATION Petitioner: Norma Jean Sims Location: 6745 12th Avenue South Type of Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow an upstairs accessory apartment in a single family residence ZOII* : R- residence Land Use: Single Family Residential Comp. Plan: Single Family Residential References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts) Zoning Code: Section 515.07, Subd. 6 outlines requirements for 2 family dwellings in the R district. Section 545.09 outlines conditional use permit requirements. ACTION Proposed Change: A Conditional Use Permit is required to allow a two family dwelling in a single family residence district Staff Recommendation: Approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit with stipulations HISTORY Public Notice: Notice of Planning Commission consideration and Public Hearing was mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council hearing date of July 13, 1992. 6745- TW.DOC ANALYSIS ISSt esl • Applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for an upstairs accessory apartment in her single - family dwelling. Two family dwellings are permitted in the R toning district. A Conditional Use Permit was issued in 1984; however, it has expired. Physical changes to the subject property will include the addition of a 12 foot dormer which will extend the dormer across the back side of the house. The apartment will also have a separate entrance, with steps, a kitchen, and a bath. RECOMAONDATIONS Recommended tion• Preferred: Recommend approval of the request for the conditional use permit with the following stipulations: 1. That the dwelling meet building and fire code requirements, specifically that an egress window be provided in the sleeping room. 2. That a hard -wired smoke detector be installed in the unit. 3. That the ceiling height must be at least seven feet -six inches. Basis: Two family dwellings are conditional uses in the R tone if a) lot(s) shall abut on arterial, or collector streets; b) two off - street parking spaces, one of which must be enclosed, shall be provided for each dwelling unit; c) only one access shall be allowed; and d) the structure must meet all setback requirements for two-family dwellings except that a single family dwelling which does not meet the required two family interior sideyard setback may be converted into a two-family dwelling if the dwelling is not expanded or if the expansion meets all applicable city code requirements. Alternative: Deny the request for the conditional use permit with a finding of fact that the requirements for allowing a conditional use permit are not met. CITATIONS ZONING CODE: 515.07. Conditional uses. Subdivision 1. The uses listed in this subsection are conditional uses permitted in the R district. Subd. 6. Two family dwellings, subject to the following additional requirements: a) lot(s) shall abut on arterial or collector streets; b) two off - street parking spaces, one of which must be enclosed, shall be provided for each dwelling unit; 6745- TW.DOC c) only one access shall be allowed; and d) the structure must meet all setback requirements for two- family dwellings except that a single family dwelling which does not meet the required two family interior sideyard setback may be converted into a two- family dwelling if the dwelling is not expanded or if the expansion meets all applicable city code requirements. 545.09. Conditional use ,permits. Subdivision 1. Issuan ce. Conditional use permits may be issued for any of the following: a) any of the uses of purposes of which a conditional permit is required or permitted by this code; b) public utility or public service uses or public building when found to be necessary for the public health, safety, convenience or welfare; c) commercial excavating or natural materials used for building or construction purposes; d) to classify as a conforming use any institutional use existing in any district at the time of the establishment of such district; e) to permit the location of any of the following uses in a district from which they are excluded by the provisions of this code: airport, library, community center, church, hospital and institutional of an educational, philanthropic or charitable nature, cemetery, crematory, mausoleum or any other place for the disposal of human dead; and f) for use determined pursuant to subsection 505.11. Subd. 2. Limitation. A conditional use permit may not be issued for (i) the purpose of granting an adjustment or appeal, (ii) for any use not authorized for the zoning district for which the permit is sought, (iii) nor for prohibited use. Subd. 3. Application. Application for the issuance of a conditional use permit is made to the director. Proceedings to classify certain uses as conforming uses may be initiated either by an applicant or by the council. (Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 4. Public hearing. The council may hold such hearings on the proposal to issue a conditional use permit as it may consider necessary; but at least one public hearing shall be held by the board or by a committee of commission to be designated by the board in any application for a conditional use permit for the establishments of any use listed in subdivision 1, paragraphs a and f. Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 5. CQnditions. The council may not grant a conditional use permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use for which the conditional use permit is sought will not under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental, (i) to the health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the use, or ii) to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. (Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 6. Other conditions. The council may not grant a conditional use permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use for which the conditional use permit is sought is in compliance with the (i) comprehensive municipal plan, (ii) an officially adopted redevelopment plans 6745- TW.DOC and urban design guidelines, and (iii) applicable parking regulations and landscape guidelines. Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 7. Com liance. The council may impose conditions and require guarantees in the granting of conditional use permits. Any use permitted under the terms of any conditional use permit shall be established and conducted in conformity to the terms of the permit and of any conditions imposed. If any person violates a term of the permit or any condition imposed by the council in connection with the grant or issuance of a conditional use permit, the council may revoke such permit and all rights attributable to such permit. In considering the revocation of a conditional use permit, the city shall proceed as follows: a) Complaint. The director shall review any complaints received by the city involving property which is subject to a conditional use permit, and shall determine whether, in the director's judgment a violation of the terms or conditions of any conditional use permit appears to have occurred. b) Notice of apparent violation. If the director determines that an apparent violation of such terms and conditions exists, the director shall cause a notice of violation to be mailed to the owner of the property or owner's agent and to any other person known to the city to be conducting the use for which the conditional use permit was granted. The notice shall: 1) be in writing; 2) particularize the violation or violations found to apparently exist and particularize the remedial actions which must be taken to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of the conditional use permit; 3) provide a reasonable time, but not less than ten days, for the recipient to remedy the violation or violations particularized in the notice; and 4) inform the recipient that if the particularized violations are not remedied within the stated time period, the director will request the council to consider revocation of the conditional use permit. c) Failure to comely. When notice has been given in accordance with clause (b) above and the recipient has failed to correct the violations particularized in the notice within the time allowed, the director shall refer the matter to the city manager with a recommendation that a hearing be held by the council to consider the revocation of the conditional use permit. A copy of the director's recommendation shall be mailed to the same persons who previously were mailed the notice of violation. 2) describe with particularity the violations or violation which will form the basis of the director's recommendation to the council; 3) describe the recommendation which the director intends to make to the council with respect to revocation; and 4) inform the recipient of its opportunity to be present at the hearing, to be represented by legal counsel during the hearing, to present testimony and evidence and to cross - examine witnesses. The director shall also provide a notice containing the information described in subparagraphs (1), (2) and (3) of this paragraph to all other persons who would have been entitled to notice had the hearing been to consider the granting of the conditional use permit. 6745- TW.DOC f) Determination. At the conclusion of the hearing, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible, the council shall render its written decision. The decision shall state the terms and conditions of the conditional use permit found to have been violated; and shall state the determination of the council with regard to revocation of the conditional use permit. The council may, in lieu of revocation, permit the conditional use permit to continue subject to such further or additional terms and conditions as in its judgment are necessary to insure compliance with the conditional use permit. The council's written findings and determination shall be mailed to the persons who were mailed the director's notice of violation. If a conditional use permit is'revoked, all uses and activities which are permitted only by such conditional use permit shall immediately cease. And all other licenses and permits issued by the city which require, as a condition of their issuance, the existence of the conditional use, shall be subject to termination in the manner set forth in this code or other applicable law. (Added (a) -(f), Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 8. Time limitations. A conditional use permit expires one year after it has been issued unless (i) the use for which the permit has been granted has commenced within one year or (ii) upon written application of the owner of the affected land the board extends the expiration date of such permit for an additional period not to exceed one year. Subd. 9. F=. The fee for a conditional use permit is set by appendix D. Subd. 10. Other remedies. In addition to the procedure set forth in subdivision 7, the city may exercise, with or separately from such procedure, all and any other remedies and actions available to the city including, but not limited to those contained in sections 320 and 115 of this code. (Added, Bill No. 1988 -7) 6745- 12.DOC 4 0 Zr Z z i O N I as I Icc d CD to I r I C Z 3 i d QD Q enuand 4lzL W MILILFL-Mim PLANNING COMMISSION Action Request Item: #3 Agenda Section: Public Hearing Case: #92- ACUP -2 Date: June 23, 1992 GENERAL INFORMATION Petitioner: Hope's Chow Mein Location: 7627 Lyndale Avenue South Type of Request: Amended conditional use permit to allow restaurant expansion. Zoning: C -2, general commercial Land Use: Commercial Comp. Plan: Mixed land use References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts) Zoning Code: Section 520.17 outlines conditional uses in the C -2 zoning district. Section 520.21 outlines the requirements for restaurants. Section 545.09 outlines administration of the conditional use permit process. ACTION Proposed Change: Hope's Chow Mein is proposing to expand into the neighboring lease space to the south, and increase seating capacity. Staff Recommendation: Deny the request with a finding of fact that the proposal would have an adverse impact on traffic circulation and parking in the area. HISTORY Public Notice: Notice of the Planning Commission's consideration and public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council hearing date of July 13, 1992. ANALYSIS Issues: In 1990, Hope's Chow Mein was issued a conditional use permit to allow a 26 seat restaurant with carry- out service. The restaurant owners are now proposing to amend their conditional use permit and expand into the neighboring lease space to the south owned by Fred Ryan. This' application initially requested seating for 36 additional customers which would require 15 additional parking spaces for restaurant use. Subsequently, on June 18, 1992, the petitioner lowered the number of additional seats requested to 24, requiring ten additional parking spaces for restaurant use. Review of the petitioner's parking plan indicates that only six parking spaces will be available for the expanded seating: As part of the previous compromise on parking to allow the continued operation of the business, some nine parking spaces were allocated for their use. Although this is less than we would have required for the opening of a restaurant, it was already in existence and a restructuring of the lot added several parking places. The petitioner has unilaterally suggested that it should be allocated additional spaces from the same area. For the following reasons, staff will not recognize the additional allocation: 1. No new or added parking spaces are available. 2. The commercial property owner has not agreed to such allocation and specifically made his tentative approval contingent on adequate parking being supplied by Ryan. 3. The other tenants have not agree4 to the proposed allocation of parking to the petitioner. Several tenants have complained to the City and erected "defensive" signs, and other businesses are threatening such. 4. The spaces designated as 14, 15, and 16 are not usable because they are needed for snow storage, preclude the wide turns necessary to access the alley, and prevent use of the delivery door to Mattress Liquidators. 5. Spaces 17 and 18 are needed by Mattress Liquidators to ensure access to the delivery door when snow storage precludes direct access from the south. 6. Space 19 is too remote from the restaurant. This space is in front of a building that is not connected and, as a result, is not reasonably accessible. There are additional spaces on the Ryan property readily accessible to the expanded restaurant. The number of spaces is inadequate to sustain the expansion for the following reasons: 1. There is 2800 square feet of commercial space remaining in the Ryan building which requires 12 parking spaces to serve a general retail use. 2. Parking spaces 4, 5, and 6 are not properly allocated as parking spaces because such area is only 14.6 feet wide, which is clearly inadequate for parallel parking. In fact, this area is actually the extension of the alley and necessary for alley circulation and to prevent an encroachment on the Total property. 3. Parking spaces 1, 2, and 3 are boulevard parking and not technically on site but are included herein by staff. 4. The Ryan property does not have a designated handicap parking space. This is required by federal law. There is no other parking which can be included as long term available spaces: 1. The total gasoline station is currently being used for parking but such closure must be assumed to be temporary. Bollards have been placed on the northerly parking lot of the Total property to discourage encroachment. A previous application by Total, which was rejected by the City, would have utilized their entire property to the north line. Similarly, no extension of the alley along the east line is practical. Without a long term commitment "running with the land ", no access from nor parking on this site may be considered. 2. Before the temporary closure of Total; 77th Street was utilized for overflow and employee parking. There is still substantial parking on 77th Street but this will end next spring as construction starts on the 77th Street project. RECOMN ENDATION Recommended Action: Preferred: Recommend that the City Council deny the amended conditional use permit application for Hope's Chow Mein with a finding that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on neighboring properties. Basis: There will be a need for more parking as a result of the expansion. There is currently inadequate parking and no additional parking spaces are being created beyond what is in existence and currently used. This will directly and adversely affect neighboring businesses. Alternative: Recommend that the City Council approve the amended conditional use permit application for Hope's Chow Mein with the following stipulations: 1. Handicapped parking be provided on Fred Ryan's property. 2. The petitioner provide a grease trap for the restaurant. 3. The petitioner provide a dumpster area with concrete slab, screening, and hose bib per City Code. 4. An interior layout including table location and aisle width be approved by the Building and Health Departments. 5. The parking lot for the Ryan building be repaired and striped. CITATIONS ZONING CODE: 520.17. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted in the C -2 district only upon the procurement of a conditional use permit pursuant to section 545. d) hotels, motels, restaurants, cafes, gasoline service stations, service station stores, public garages, car sales lots and theaters. No service station may be converted into a service station store without a conditional use permit for such use issued in accordance with section 545; 520.21. Hotels, motels, restaurants and cares. Subdivision 1. General rule. A conditional use permit shall not be granted for a hotel, motel, restaurant or cafe in the C -2 district unless the council finds that the proposed use will be in substantial compliance with the standards set forth in this subdivision. Subd. 2. Traffic. The use will not create undue traffic hazards or traffic congestion either on the public streets adjacent to the site or on the parking areas on or adjacent to the site or on streets adjacent to the site unto which traffic to or from the site is channeled. Subd. 3. buffers. Adequate provision will be made, through the use of building setbacks, buffer areas, screening and exterior treatment or placement of the building on the site to avoid noise, glare, fumes, dust and any other sources of nuisance or annoyance to adjacent properties. Subd. 4. Nuisance. Adequate provision will be made through the use of building setbacks, screening, landscaping, exterior design and placement of the building on the site to avoid noise, glare, fumes, dust and any other sources of nuisance or annoyance to users, or patrons of the facility. Subd. 5. Parking. Adequate off - street parking space must be available for patrons and employees. Subd. 6. Liguor sales. If intoxicating or non - intoxicating liquor is to be sold on the premises (i) the property must abut upon a main thoroughfare of the city, (ii) access to all off - street parking space must be from internal driveway systems and is not directly from a public street, and (iii) provision must be made for well - designed vehicular stacking space allowing for an efficient and orderly flow of traffic from the site onto adjacent main thoroughfares of the city. "Main thoroughfares of the city," as used in this subdivision, means a street designated as a state trunk highway or a service drive adjacent to the state trunk highway, a state aid highway, a county aid highway, a county highway, or a street which is so located as to serve primarily commercial development. Subd. 7. Architecture. The proposed facility will provide an aesthetic appearance which will not detract from or conflict with the existing or proposed architectural form of buildings in the same area. Subd. 8. Public services. The use will not create an excessive burden on public parks, public open - space, streets, or utilities requiring public services which are proposed to serve the facility. Subd. 9. Plan conformance. The proposed development will not conflict with the comprehensive development plan of the city. Subd. 10. Conditional use permits: special case. The city council shall not approve a conditional use permit for a restaurant with a drive -up service window if the drive -up service window, or the order station, or an exterior loudspeaker is located within 150 feet of any residentially zoned property. The terms "residentially zoned property" shall include any planned unit development which contains residences within it. (Amended, Bill No. 1989 -3) 545.09. Conditional use permits. Subdivision 1. Issuance. Conditional use permits may be issued for any of the following: a) any of the uses of purposes of which a conditional permit is required or permitted by this code; b) public utility or public service uses or public building when found to be necessary for the public health, safety, convenience or welfare; c) commercial excavating or natural materials used for building or construction purposes; d) to classify as a conforming use any institutional use existing in any district at the time of the establishment of such district; e) to permit the location of any of the following uses in a district from which they are excluded by the provisions of this code: airport, library, community center, church, hospital and institutional of an educational, philanthropic or charitable nature, cemetery, crematory, mausoleum or any other place for the disposal of human dead; and f) for use determined pursuant to subsection 505.11. Subd. 2. Limitation. A conditional use permit may not be issued for (i) the purpose of granting an adjustment or appeal, (ii) for any use not authorized for the zoning district for which the permit is sought, (iii) nor for prohibited use. Subd. 3. Application. Application for the issuance of a conditional use permit is made to the director. Proceedings to classify certain uses as conforming uses may be initiated either by an applicant or by the council. (Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 4. Public hearing. The council may hold such hearings on the proposal to issue a conditional-use permit as it may consider necessary; but at least one public hearing shall be held by the board or by a committee of commission to be designated by. the board in any application for a conditional use permit for the establishments of any use listed in subdivision 1, paragraphs a and f. (Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. S. Conditions. The council may not grant a conditional use permit unless it finds. that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use for which the conditional use permit is sought will not under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental, (i) to the health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the use, or (ii) to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. (Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 6. Other conditions. The council may not grant a conditional use permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use for which the conditional use permit is sought is in compliance with the (i) comprehensive municipal plan, (ii) an officially adopted redevelopment plans and urban design guidelines, and (iii) applicable parking regulations and landscape guidelines. (Amended, Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 7. Com 1piance. The council may impose conditions and require guarantees in the granting of conditional use permits. Any use permitted under the terms of any conditional use permit shall be established and conducted in conformity to the terms of the permit and of any conditions imposed. If any person violates a term of the permit or any condition imposed by the council in connection with the grant or issuance of a conditional use permit, the council may revoke such permit and all rights attributable to such permit. In considering the revocation of a conditional use permit, the city shall proceed as follows: a) Complaint. The director shall review any complaints received by the city involving property which is subject to a conditional use permit, and shall determine whether, in the director's judgment a violation of the terms or conditions of any conditional use permit appears to have occurred. b) Notice of apparent violation. If the director determines that an apparent violation of such terms and conditions exists, the director shall cause a notice of violation to be mailed to the owner of the property or owner's agent and to any other person known to the city to be conducting the use for which the conditional use permit was granted. The notice shall: 1) be in writing; 2) particularize the violation or violations found to apparently exist and particularize the remedial actions which must be taken to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of the conditional use permit; 3) provide a reasonable time, but not less than ten days, for the recipient to remedy the violation or violations particularized in the notice; and 4) inform the recipient that if the particularized violations are_not remedied within the stated time period, the director will request the council to consider revocation of the conditional use permit. c) Fgilure to comply. When notice has been given in accordance with clause (b) above and the recipient has failed to correct the violations particularized in the notice within the time allowed, the director shall refer the matter to the city manager with a recommendation that a hearing be held by the council to consider the revocation of the conditional use permit. A copy of the director's recommendation shall be mailed to the same persons who previously were mailed the notice of violation. d) Scheduling of hearing. If the city manager concurs in the recommendation of the director, the manager shall schedule a hearing before the council to consider revocation of the conditional use permit. The date of the hearing shall be as soon as is reasonably convenient. e) Upon the scheduling of the hearing, the director shall furnish mailed notice of such to the same persons who were mailed notice of the violation. The notice shall: 1) state the time, date and location of the hearing; 2) describe with particularity the violations or violation which will form the basis of the director's recommendation to the council; 3) describe the recommendation which the director intends to make to the council with respect to revocation; and 4) inform the recipient of its opportunity to be present at the hearing, to be represented by legal counsel during the hearing, to present testimony and evidence and to cross - examine witnesses. The director shall also provide a notice containing the information described in subparagraphs 1), (2) and (3) of this paragraph to all other persons who would have been entitled to notice had the hearing been to consider the granting of the conditional use permit. f) Determination. At the conclusion of the hearing, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible, the council shall render its written decision. The decision shall state the terms and conditions of the conditional use permit found to have been violated; and shall state the determination of the council with regard to revocation of the conditional use permit. The council may, in lieu of revocation, permit the conditional use permit to continue subject to such further or additional terms and conditions as in its judgment are necessary to insure compliance with the conditional use permit. The council's written findings and determination shall be mailed to the persons who were mailed the director's notice of violation. If a conditional use permit is revoked, all uses and activities which are permitted only by such conditional use permit shall immediately cease. And all other licenses and permits issued by the city which require, as a condition of their issuance, the existence of the conditional use, shall be subject to termination in the manner set forth in this code or other applicable law. Added (a) -(f), Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 8. Time limitations. A conditional use permit expires one year after it has been issued unless (i) the use for which the permit has been granted has commenced within one year or (ii) upon written application of the owner of the affected land the board extends the expiration date of such permit for an additional period not to exceed one year. Subd. 9. Fee. The fee for a conditional use permit is set by appendix D. Subd. 10. Qjher remedies. In addition to the procedure set forth in subdivision 7, the city may exercise, with or separately from such procedure, all and any other remedies and actions available to the city including, but not limited to those contained in sections 320 and 115 of this code. (Added, Bill No. 1988 -7) L i rto EleMonic dovloeo, Inc. 1 1 1 Sewing Machine Mattress Uquidators 1 I 1 ' H JOI17 L t\ 14 1 1 Lw G & J Tailors ACR a I W 1 a Radio Shads z J Funk- Hancey Distributors I 1 1 Hutch & Mantle t 12 Hope's Chow Mein 2 in Propo6ed Hope's ; 1 3 1 St. Paul Book Stationary 4 1 1 uglll l h HOPE'S CHOW MEIN N ply 1111 7627 LYNDALE AVENUE AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PLANNINGNZONING j REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT FOR PURPOSE OF Rp cv t" P•vk z " , 5 Legal Description: We, the undersigned, being owners of immediate adjoining land as above described, do hereby concur with the conditional use permit as requested. Signature of Owners* Address Signatures may not be removed once the petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. o Ac A!i Signatures may not be removed once the petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. June 8, 1992 City of Richfield Shawn B. Drill, Zoning Administration 6700 Portland Ave. S. Richfield, MN 55423 -2599 Project Address: 7627 Lyndale Ave. S. Case No.: 92- ACUP -2 Regarding: Parking availability The parking spaces available for the restaurant follow: 1. Eight spaces in front of the store property. 2. Three spaces of parallel parking next to the south wall of the store. 3. Three spaces in front of the store adjacent to the curb. Therefore, a total of fourteen spaces are available for customer parking. Another tenant in this building will be informed of the restaurant's parking needs. If there are any questions, please call me at (612) 831 -3300. Si rely, k red S. Ryan, Prope Fyi' ner 7629 Lyndale Ave. S. Richfield, Minnesota ions 10,L992 V.W. propar'.ies PC Bcx 40+ Hopkins, hn. 55143 Ehewn Drill Cit`' of Richfield 6000 Portland Pve. Rzchlield` Mr. 55423 Re:Proposed axpsrsion of Hope's Chow Meir - 76E7 Lyndale Ave We a-e not opposed to the proposed expansion of Hope's Chou Mein into the adjoining ouilding owned by Fred Ryan, to the sow;h of ou' building, zs long as Mr. Ryan can provide the additional narking suacen needed for the adcitional rsstauravt seating. This is our opinion and does not reflect the opinlon uf our te:&rts or oLher busineses in the area. Alsc before hope's Chow Mein proceeds wivh their expaision we will need to approve the planE and they will need to sign an amendment to their lease pertaining to she modificationF to our building, such as the openings connecting the two buildings, etc Sincerely, Russell walzer w 6 FUNK - HANECY DISTRIBUTORS, INC. TELEPHONE 866 -3053 June 17, 1992 City Council Richfield City Hall 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Att'n: Shawn Drill, Zoning Administrator 7623 LYNOALE AVENUE SO. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55423 Re: Hope's Chow Mein, 7627 Lyndale Avenue South, Request for amended conditional use permit. We have been at our location for approximately 25 years. Hopes have been good neighbors and our firm has tried to go along with their present state of occupancy. Many of the local firms have had to put up "no restaurant parking" signs due to congestion in front of their stores as under the current Hopes permit. Hopes have only parking space in front of their building for two vehicles and to seat the current allowed 25 seats they have to spill their parking into all of the other tenants' spaces. As I understand, Hopes are applying to lease additional space in the store next door to them. This total new space would provide a maximum of 8 parking spots under their new lease. I also believe that they are planning on subleasing all but 1200 sq feet to another retail operation and this would then provide parking for an additional three or four vehicles in net new space. With an estimate of two people per vehicle this would provide parking space for an estimated six to eight people, not the additional 37 seats that they are requesting. Although my. son had signed a petition for approval without adequate information, I want to state that Funk - Hanecy Distributors, Inc. and Funk - Hanecy, Inc. (occupants at 7623 Lyndale Avenue South) want to oppose the granting of any amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. Sincerely, Ron Funk Owner & Director June 18, 1992 Subject: Hope's Chow Mein Dear City of Richfield: Please change my application to allow 50 seats. Thank you. r