Loading...
01-10-1995CITY OF RICHFIELD Special Knnrnm commission nGEnDR January 10, 1995 7:00 p.m. ROIlIl C MU I "u li• Hezirin ITEM #1 95 -Z -1 7301 Penn Avenue South Dunrite Automotive Amendment to the Zoning Code to permit auto repair in the C -1 zoning district I@ :uwiile 1.1C111 V1 iii UItI School Board Community Services Advisory Commission HRA City Council AdHoc 135/1494 Traffic Committee A • jc urY nient Item: #1 Agenda Section: Public Hearing Case: #95 -Z -1 Date: January 10, 1995 GENERAL INFORMATION Petitioner: Dunrite Automotive Location: 7301 Penn Ave. S. Type of Request: Amendment to Zoning Ordinance to allow automotive repair as a permitted use in a C -1 district.. Zoning: C -1 Land Use: Neighborhood Commercial Comp. Plan: Medium Density Buffer References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts) Zoning Code: 520.03 City Code: ACTION Proposed Change: Recom endation: Deny the request for amendment to the zoning code. 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. Public Hearing: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on. Hearing Examiner: City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing date of February 6, 1995. ANALYSIS Background: Dunrite Automotive is requesting an amendment to the Zoning Code that would allow them to operate an auto repair center at 7301 Penn Ave. S. This site is zoned C -1 Neighborhood Commercial) a classification which prohibits auto repair. The previous use of the property was as an auto detailing shop Steve's Auto Detailing) which was permitted with special business licensing Proposal: Dunrite is now proposing an amendment to the Zoning Code which would make auto repair businesses a "Permitted Use" within that zoning designation. Issues: Auto repair is allowed in the C -2 (General Commercial) and I (Industrial) districts as a conditional use. Rezoning to either designation would require a conditional use permit to allow the proposed use, however, since the site 7301 Penn) is located adjacent to residential property and within 300 feet of a church it would not be permitted in any event. Amendment of the zoning ordinance to permit auto repair within a C -1 zone would allow similar uses through out the city on C -1 zoned property. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended Action: Preferred: Recommend that the Planning Commission deny the request for an amendment to the Zoning Code. Basis: 1. While the proposed amendment is designed specifically to fit this situation, similarly zoned property ( approximately 14) throughout the city would then be available for auto repair use. 2. The C -1 district was established for uses providing limited neighborhood oriented services. The proposed businesses will necessarily provide service well beyond its immediate neighborhood and the city. 3. Auto repair adjacent to residential property has repeatedly been considered to be incompatible in previous cases. Current plans for the Comprehensive Plan revision stress the importance of landuse compatability particularly landuses adjacent to residential. The buffering requirements that would be availible through a C-2 (general commercial )zone is not present in this instance. Therefore residential property would be protected by similar requirements in availible in other zoning districts. 4. There are potential uses other than automotive for the site. Several have been investigated all would have resulted in little or no adverse impact to the adjacent residential neighborhood. Alternative: Recommend that the Planning Commission approve the request with a finding of fact that the proposed use would not have an adverse impact on surrounding properties or the City as a whole. ZONING CODE: CITATIONS Section 520 - Zoning: commercial districts C -1, C -2 and C -3) 520.01. Neighborhood business (C -1) district. Subdivision 1. Permitted uses. Unless otherwise specified in this code, the uses listed in this subsection are permitted uses in the neighborhood business (C -1) zoning district. Subd. 2. General. A use permitted in an R, MR, R -1, MR -1, MR -2, or an MR -3 district, upon compliance with the procedural requirements for each such district is a permitted use in the C -1 district. No one family or two family dwelling shall be constructed in the C -1 district without a conditional use permit. Subd. 3. Other: services. Uses intended for the supplying of a limited variety of commodities or services primarily for the benefit of residents of the immediate neighborhood are permitted in the C -1 district. These uses include any local retail business or service establishment such as a grocery store, fruit or vegetable market, meat market, drug store, barber shop, beauty parlor, clothes cleaning and dry good pickup station, business or professional office and similar uses. Subd. 4. Other: food. Restaurant, cafe and soda fountain, which uses do not permit dancing, the sale of intoxicating liquor or non - intoxicating liquor are permitted in the C -1 district. A restaurant, cafe and soda fountain, however, shall not be established in the C -1 district without first securing a conditional use permit therefor. A conditional use permit shall not be granted for any such use in a C -1 district unless the council finds that the proposed use will provide commodities and services primarily for the residents of the immediate neighborhood and will be part of a neighborhood shopping center providing a variety of commodities and services. Subd. 5. Other: automobile detailing establishments. Automobile detailing establishments which are licensed under section 1195 of this code are permitted in the C -1 district. Subd. 6. Other: general. Other accessory uses and structures not otherwise prohibited and customarily accessory and incidental to permitted uses are permitted in the C -1 district. 520.03. Prohibited uses. Subdivision 1. The uses specified in this subsection are not permitted in the C -1 district. 520.05. Other uses. Any other use may be permitted which is determined by the council pursuant to the provisions of subsection 5 05. 11 of this code to be of the same general character as the uses listed as permitted in this section, provided that such use is not specially prohibited in this section. 520.07. (Repealed, Bill No. 1988 -20) 520.09. Conduct. Permitted uses and businesses shall be conducted wholly within a completely enclosed building, except for permissible off - street parking and loading; goods shall consist of primarily new merchandise; goods shall not be stored, processed or sold which are objectionable by reason of odor, dust, fumes, noise, vibration, refuse matter or water- carrier waste. 520.11. Height requirements. In a CA district, no building shall be erected or structurally altered to exceed three stories or 40 feet in height subject to modifications and exceptions provided in section 540. 520.13. Area and yard requirements. Subdivision 1. The following minimum requirements apply to all buildings hereafter erected or structurally altered in a C -1 district, subject to modifications and exceptions provided in section 540. Subd. 2. Conformance. Single family dwellings shall conform to the requirements for an R district. Multiple family dwellings shall conform to the requirements for an MR district. Subd. 3. Front yard. Each building shall have a front yard of not less than 40 feet, and shall have a greater front yard where required under the provisions of section 540. If the building lot abuts upon more than one street the area between the building and each of such streets shall be regarded as front yard. Subd. 4. Side yard. Side yards are not required except as follows: a) on a corner lot adjacent to a key lot in a residential zoning district there shall be a sideyard adjacent to the street of a width equal to not less than one -half the depth required for front yards on the lots to the rear of such corner lots; b) there shall be a sideyard of not less than 15 feet along that side of every lot in a commercial zoning district bordering upon property in the R or R- I district. Subd. 5. Rear yard. There shall be a rear yard in every lot in a C -1 district equal to 20% of the depth of the lot to a maximum required depth of 25 feet for such lot, provided that such rear yard may be reduced one foot for each one foot of front yard provided in exceed of the minimum requirements for front yard set forth in this code for a C -1 district and provided that said rear yard must be at least ten feet. No rear yard bordering upon an R or R -1 district shall be used for storage, loading, unloading or similar activities. Richfield City'Code 1195.01 4— Section 1195 - Automobile detailing establishments 1195.01. Definitions. Subdivision 1. For purposes of this section the terms defined in this subsection have the meanings given them. Subd. 2. "Automobile detailing establishment" means a business activity where, for a fee, automobiles, including components and parts are cleaned and refurbished. The term does not include the repair or replacement of parts or components, oil changing or lubrication, painting other than minor touch -up, sale of fuel or automobile parts, accessories or products. Subd. 3. "Automobile" means a motor vehicle exclusively designed and equipped to transport its driver and passengers. The term includes a van which is so equipped, but does not include trucks, buses or motor homes. 1195.03. License required. No person shall operate an automobile detailing establishment without having first obtained a current and valid license to do SO. Except as provided in this section, operation of an automobile detailing establishment without a license is a misdemeanor. 1195.05. Application. A person desiring to engage in the business of operating an automobile detailing establishment shall submit an application for license to the city clerk. The application shall be on a form prepared by the city clerk and shall contain the following: a) The applicant's name, age, address of residence and whether applicant is a. registered voter of the city. If the applicant is a partnership, the names of all partners must be verified by one such partner. If the applicant is a corporation, the names of all the officers must be verified by one such officer. b) The applicant's (i) business and residence addresses for a period of five years prior to the application date, (ii) statement as to whether the applicant is sole owner of the business and (iii) statement to the effect that no persons other than those named in the application have any interest in the management and control of the business. c) The application .shall be accompanied by (i) the favorable recommenda- tions of two citizens of the city, attesting to the integrity and business ability of the applicant, or, (ii) if applicant is a partner- ship, the same. attestation as to each partner, or, (iii) if applicant is a corporation, the same attestation as to the corporate officers and managers. d) The applicant shall provide a plot plan or drawing showing: i) the total area of the business premises; ii) the location of streets and alleys adjacent to such premises; Richfield City Code 1195.07 iii) the location or proposed location of any building to be used in connection with the business; iv) the proposed location, size and type of advertising signs; and v) the proposed location of vehicle entrances and exists. e) A complete description of the auto detailing activities proposed to be conducted on the premises. f) Such other information as the city clerk shall require. 1195.07. License fee and license year. The license fee is provided in Appendix D and must be paid in full at the time of application. The license, once issued, is valid for 12 months from the date of issuance unless earlier suspended or revoked. 1195.09. Conditions governing issuance. The following conditions are imposed upon the granting of licenses under this section: a) The site of the licensed activity shall abut and have access to an arterial roadway. b) No mechanical car washing equipment shall be used in connection with the licensed activity. c) No overnight outside storage of vehicles shall be permitted. d) The site shall be adequately screened from adjacent residential properties. e) The licensed activity shall not result in undue congestion on sur- rounding streets. f) There shall be adequate parking spaces provided on the site for customers and employees as follows: three offstreet parking spaces for each bay where auto detailing takes place; one offstreet parking space for every employee. The licensee shall instruct customers and employees not to park on surrounding streets. g) The licensed activity must be conducted totally within the confines of the building. h) There shall be no exterior storage or sales of equipment, materials or products. i) The licensed activity shall not generate noise, dust,. or .odors which disturb or annoy occupants of adjacent residential properties. j) There shall be no more than one curb cut per street which must be located at least 50 feet from any intersection. k) Exterior lighting shall be designed and directed so as not to cast light on adjacent residential property. Richfield City Code 1195.11 1) The establishment may be open only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. m) The premises shall be maintained in a state of good repair at all times and shall be kept free of litter, trash, debris and weeds. n) Underground storage tanks shall be removed as required by the city. o) Licenses shall be granted. only to establishments located in the commercial districts of the city. p) If the establishment is located in a C -1 district, it must be proposed as a replacement to an existing gasoline service station, service station store or public garage. 1195.11. Suspension or revocation. If the city manager determines that the licensee has violated any of the conditions for licensure contained in subsec- tion 1195.09, the manager shall notify the council of the nature of the violation and request that it consider taking action to suspend or revoke the license. A copy of the notice shall be mailed, or otherwise delivered, to the licensee at the licensed premises. The council shall consider the matter at its next regularly scheduled meeting, at least ten days following the date of mailing or delivery of the notice. At the hearing, the licensee or its repre- sentative shall have an opportunity to rebut any of the information contained in the manager's notice and to offer evidence in mitigation thereof. Following the hearing, the council shall determine whether the evidence of violation is established and whether the license should be suspended or revoked. In consid- ering suspension of the license, the council may place additional and further conditions upon the licensee, if the council concludes that such additional conditions will assist in the orderly operation of the business. 1195.13. Relationship to other licenses or permits. Businesses located in C -2 districts of the city which lawfully operate as gasoline service stations, service station stores, public garages or car sale lots may continue to engage in those aspects of an automobile detailing establishment which are permitted as paft of their lawful operation without the license required by this section. 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 311 Agenda November 14, 1994 Issue Statement: Request for an amendment to the Zoning Code which would make auto repair a "permitted" use in the C -1 (neighborhood business) district. Background: Dunrite Automotive, 3322 West 44th Street in Minneapolis, is requesting an-am ' endment that would allow them to operate an auto repair center at 7301 Penn Avenue.. This site is zoned C -1, where auto repair is prohibited by the code. The previous use was Steve's Detailing, which was permitted with special business licensing. Dunrite is now requesting a code amendment to make auto repair "permitted" in C -1 with similar licensing requirements (see attachment). Auto repair is allowed in the C -2 (general commercial) and I industrial) districts, if a conditional use permit is granted by the Council. If this parcel were rezoned to C -2 or I, it still would not be eligible for auto repair use because, among other reasons, it abuts single family homes and is within 300 feet of the grounds of a church. Recommended Motion: Review the proposed amendment and decide not to take further action as to its adoption. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The proposed amendment is designed specifically to fit this particular situation, however, would have impact City -wide, because other C -1 parcels would become eligible for auto repair. There are some 14 separated areas zoned C -1 throughout the City such as the Erik's Bike Shop area of 71st and Chicago Avenue. 2. The C -1 neighborhood business district was established for uses intended for the supplying of a limited variety of services primarily for the benefit of residents of the immediate neighborhood. A successful business of the size proposed would, of necessity, draw from a much larger area. 3. The issue of auto repair adjacent to residential property has been considered several times in recent years and rejected because of non - compatibility. Auto repair as a home occupation was rejected as was an auto repair facility at 7200 Cedar Avenue. 4. There are potential uses which may be made of the site which would.be less impacting on the neighbors and which could be accomplished within normal parameters. i (D-i Alternative Recommendation: Forward the proposed amendment to the Planning Commission for review, and direct the Planning Commission to provide its recommendation by December 12, 1994. Discussion /Decision Mode: This matter will be presented for action at the City Council meeting of November 14, 1994. Respectfully submitted, James.D. Prosser City,Manager JDP:ds FA E G R E & B E N S O N 2200 NORWEST CENTER gO SOUTH SEVENTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 -3901 612/336 -3000 FACSIMILE 612/336 -3026 October 20, 1994 Byron Wallace Community Development Director City of Richfield 0700 Portland Ave. S. Richfield, Minn. 55423 re: 7301 Penn Avenue Dear Mr. Wallace: G -L Garr L. Gandrud Direct Dial 16121 336 -3332 Facsimile 16121 336.3885 On behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Kit Arom, I have been discussing the use of their property at 7301 Penn Avenue with your City Attorney, John Dean. At John's suggestion I have prepared the attached text amendment that would allow the use of that property for certain specified uses. Like the "detailing" ordinance, a stringent licensing ordinance accompanies the zoning text amendment. After reviewing the proposed amendment, John suggested that I forward it to you with the request that it be brought before the City Council for their consideration. The property at 7301 Penn has been improved by the Arom's construction. The proposed amendments would allow a use in keeping with that property and not result in the kind of City wide change that would be more difficult to assess. The way that the building is proposed to be used, in accordance with the licensing ordinance, accomplishes the same goals that were sought in the "detailing" use that was previously approved. In fact, this use creates more off street parking because the inside capacity is greater. I understand that this represents a change from the past actions on the property but great care was taken to make changes that were appropriate to the neighborhood and the property's history. Certainly, I could foresee uses that would not be so closely regulated and so compatible with the neighborhood. DENVER DES MOINES WASH INGTON,.D.C. LONDON FRANKFURT 10 -3 Please contact me with your analysis of the proposal. We request that it be put before the City Council as expeditiously as is proper. Thank you. Very truly yours,., t. AI , Gary L andrud GLG/ MRROMDMPS cc: Su Arom John Dean, City Attorney DRAFT 10/17/94 BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 520 SUBDIVISION NO. 5 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE (ZONING) CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES'ORDAIN: Section 520, Subdivision 5 of the Zoning Code is hereby amended in the following respects: 1. By revising said subdivision 5 of Section 520 to read as follows: Other: 1. Automobile detailing establishments which are _ licensed under section 1195 of this code are permitted in the C -1 district. 2. Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Centers which are licensed under Section 1195A of this Code are permitted in the C -1 district._ 2. By adding to said subdivision 5 of Section 520 the following new language: 1. Public garage, unless licensed as a Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Center under Section 1195A of this Code. BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO' SECTION 1195 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1195 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled "Business and Trade Regulation and Licensing" is amended by adding thereto the following new Section 1195A. 1195A.. Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Center: Subd. 1. Definitions. The following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section: . 1. "Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Center" means a business where, for a fee, automobiles, including component parts, are mechanically repaired, cleaned and refurbished. This term requires that at least 80 °s of the business performed is by appointment _ and that the business does not include: welding, body. work, painting, fuel sales, storage of automobiles or t engine replacement. 2. "Automobile" means a motor vehicle exclusively designed and equipped to transport its driver and passengers. The term includes a van or light truck which is so equipped, but does not include buses, motor homes, or heavy or commercial trucks. Subd. 2. License Required. No person shall operate a Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Center without having first obtained a current and valid license to do so. Except as hereinafter provided, operation without a license i.s a misdemeanor. Subd. 3. Application. Any person desiring to engage in the business of operating a Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Center shall submit an application for a license to the City Clerk. The application shall be on a form prepared by the City Clerk and shall contain the following: 1. The applicant's name, age, residence and whether applicant is a registered voter of the city. If the applicant is a partnership, the names of all partners verified by one such partner. If the applicant is a corporation, the names of all the officers verified by one such officer. 2. The business and residence addresses of the applicant for a period of five years prior to the application date, whether the applicant is sole owner of the business and that no persons other than those 2- ic) - named in the application have any interest in the management and control of the business. 3. The application shall be accompanied by the favorable recommendations of two citizens of the city, attesting to the integrity and business ability of the applicant,.or, if applicant is a partnership, the same attestation as to each partner, or, if applicant is a corporation, the same attestation as to the corporate officers and managers. 4. The applicant shall provide a plot plan or drawing showing: a. The total area of the business premises; b. The location of streets and alloys adjacent to such premises; C. The location or proposed location of any building to be used in connection with the business; d. The proposed location, size and kind of advertising signs; _ e. The proposed location of vehicle entrances and exits. ,td. 5. A complete description of the Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Center activities proposed to be conducted on the premises. 6. Such other and further information as the City Clerk shall require. Subd. 4. License Fee and License Year. The license fee is as provided in Appendix D of this Code. The fee shall be paid in full at the time of application. The license, once issued, shall be valid for 12 months from the date of issuance unless earlier suspended or revoked. Subd. 5. Conditions Governing Issuance. The following conditions are imposed upon the granting of all licenses under this section: 1. The site shall abut and have access to an arterial roadway. 2. No mechanical car washing equipment shall be used in connection with the licensed activity. 3. No overnight outside storage of vehicles shall be permitted. 4. The site shall be adequately screened from adjacent residential properties. 3- b ` 5. ' The licensed activity shall not result in undue congestion on surrounding streets. 6. There shall be adequate parking spaces provided on the site for customers and employees; three offstreet parking spaces for each bay where specialized minor mechanical auto repair takes place and one offstreet parking space for every employee shall be provided; and the licensee shall instruct customers and employees not.to parking on- surrounding streets. 7.- The use must be conducted completely within the confines of the-building. 8. There shall be no exterior storage or sales of equipment, materials or products. 9. The use shall not generate, noise, dust, or odors which disturb or annoy occupants of adjacent residential properties. 10. There shall be no more than one curb cut per _ street. Curb cuts must be located at least 50 feet from any intersection. 11. Exterior lighting shall be designed and directed so as not to cast light on adjacent residential property. 12. The establishment shall be open only between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. 13. The premises shall be maintained in a state of good repair at all times, and shall be kept free of litter, trash, debris and weeds. 14. Underground storage tanks shall be removed as required by the City. 15.. Licenses shall be granted only to establishments located in the commercial districts of the City. 16. In addition to other conditions provided for in this subdivision, if the establishment is located in a C -1 district of the City, it must be proposed as a replacement to an Automobile Detailing Establishment. Subd. 6. Suspension or Revocation. If the City Manager determines that the licensee has violated any of the conditions for licensure contained in subdivision 5 of this section, the Manager shall notify the Council of the nature of the violation and request that it consider taking action to suspend or revoke the license. A copy of the notice shall be mailed, or otherwise delivered, to the licensee at WIC f E) -F the licensed premises. The Council shall consider the matter at its next regularly scheduled meeting, at least ten days following the date of mailing or delivery of the notice. At the hearing, the licensee or its representative shall have an opportunity to rebut any of the information contained in the Manager's notice and to offer evidence in mitigation thereof. Following the hearing, the Council shall determine whether the evidence.of violation is established and whether the license should be suspended or revoked_. In considering suspension. of the license, the Council may place additional and further conditions -'upon-'the licensee, if the Council concludes that such additional conditions.will assist in the orderly operation of the business. Subd. 7. Relat.ionshig to Other Licenses or Permits. Businesses located in C -2 districts of the city which lawfully operate as gasoline service stations, service station stores, public garages or car sale lots may continue to engage in those aspects of an Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto-Repair Center which are permitted as part of their lawful operation without the need to first obtain the _ license required in this section. Effective Date. This amendment will be effective from and after the later of: (1).30 days following the date of publication, or (2) the date on which the amendment to Section 520, subdivision 5 making Specialized Minor Mechanical Auto Repair Centers a permitted use in C -1 districts is effective. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1994. ATTEST: City Clerk MRROC83 F. W P5 Mayor 5- CITY OF RICHFIELD Memorandum DATE: January 6, 1995 TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Bill Weaver, City Planner SUBJECT: Background Information Attached material is supplied as background at the request of the Planning Commission Chair. BW:js Attachment FLANNMG COMMISSION MINUTE Regular Meeting January 26, 1993 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson William Snyder; Commissioners: Nancy Edwardson, Robert Elliott, Timothy Erlander, Michael Gallagher, Daniel Linnihan, Morris Nilsen II, Thomas Scaglia, and David Sumnicht MEMBERS ABSENT: None COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor STAFF PRESENT: Byron Wallace, Community Development Director; Bill Weaver, City Planner; Diane Anastos, Associate Planner The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Snyder at 7:03 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Elliott, S /Scaglia to approve the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of November 241992. Motion carried: 8 -0 Commissioner Nilsen arrived. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 93-CUP-1, 7200 Cedar Avenue ITEM #1 Steve Jensen Conditional Use Permit to construct an auto repair station City Planner Weaver reviewed the staff report, stating that the petitioner is proposing to build an auto repair station in the C -2 zoning district. Mr. Weaver said that although this type of use is permitted with a conditional use permit, it is in conflict with a 1989 amendment to the comprehensive plan. Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 1993 Page 2 The 1989 comprehensive plan amendment has designated this site as Mixed Use District - A, which encourages less intensive commercial officelretail uses. The. comp plan amendment supports a mix of uses to denote variety and activity, but also are reflective of area density which should provide a buffer for T.H. 77 and airport related activity. Mr. Weaver stated that the proposed use may or may not have a negative environmental impact on the area. The factors which will impact future development and consequently need to be taken into consideration when reviewing the proposal are: image, land use, and vision. He stated that because this site lies on the city's eastern edge, the image presented to passers -by needs to be identified. Development patterns which fit within the context of the surrounding area as well as degree of variation in land uses and scale of development need to be considered. Mr. Weaver then proceeded to describe the potential advantages and disadvantages of the proposal. Mr. Weaver suggested that the eastern edge could be defined by a favorable image -well balanced building and site design and scale consistent with the context of the area. He stated that the proposed project does appear to be compatible within the existing context by neatly designed building and proportionate scale. Mr. Weaver said the land uses along the eastern edge should be a sensitive mix of uses such as wholesale, light industrial, offices and some retail, as designated by the comprehensive plan. He felt a sensitive mix of uses could be achieved by increasing the number of structures contained on a lot. This would reinforce variety as well as unified image. He suggested, however, that the proposed project does not necessarily contribute towards these goals. The potential for future lot combination is limited because the project occupies one lot. It is also not part of a larger development which impacts the ability to reinforce mixed use or present a unified image. Mr. Weaver also stated that the use will be more apparent by producing noise and potential clutter. Mr. Weaver noted that this edge presents an, opportunity to have an impact on T.H. 77 which faces the corridor. He suggested that buildings facing the corridor need to be perceptible , not blend into the neighborhood to the west and reinforce a collective sense of a well defined edge. He stated that the project blends into the surrounding neighborhood scale, reinforcing a sense of an ill- defined edge. Nor does it set a tone for redevelopment that could reinforce the edge image. He suggested that reinforcing lively activities, preserving the residential character of the area could facilitate a more urban development pattern, adding richness to the neighborhood. Mr. Weaver stated that the proposal does provide new activity, reinforcing existing activity within the neighborhood vicinity. He also said that the lot is sensitively developed which increases the potential for reinforcing an evolving urban diversity. Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 1993 Page 3 Mr. Weaver concluded his remarks by stating that the proposal is in conflict with the comprehensive plan. However, the issues presented need to be reviewed in consideration of future development of the area. Bruce Schmitt, representative of petitioner, Steve Jensen, stated that the project is compatible with the surrounding residential area. He noted that Mr. Jensen has not received complaints from neighbors regarding' noise or parking, and he feels the use is appropriate. The intent of the new site is to handle the increase in activity at his transmission shop at 6958 Cedar. Responding to Community Development Director Wallace question, Mr. Jensen responded that the practice has been to take the automobiles off the parking lot in the morning and park them in the street for operational purposes, and at night the cars are then moved back to the lot. He didn't know whether there would be sufficient parking available because the number of clients is uncertain. Mr. Steve Jensen, owner of TSI, 6958 Cedar, stated that he felt the nature of the business is compatible with the neighborhood. He gets along well with the neighbors and has helped them out in the winter time plowing driveways. He wants to provide a service that the adjacent residential area would support. M/Scaglia, S/Nilsen to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 9 -0 General discussion followed regarding the potential impacts of this proposal. Commissioners questioned the possibility of a parking problem and what kind of use would be appropriate for the site under the direction of the comprehensive plan. Commissioner Edwardson expressed concern that this project did not seem suitable for the area and that it might hamper future development of Cedar Avenue. She stated that- the Mega Mall was presumed to have a positive impact on the area and hasn't. Commissioner Sumnicht stated he was not entirely convinced that the proposal is in conflict with the comprehensive plan, and could foresee little negative impact in the area with this type of use. M/Sumnicht, S /Snyder to recommend approval of the conditional use permit with the following stipulations: 1. That a cash escrow be provided for landscaping. 2. That the petitioner be responsible for maintenance of the entire site including the contiguous boulevard. Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 1993 Page 4 3. That petitioner provide additional off - street parking if warned or cited for on- street parking issues. 4. That on- street parking be allowed. 5. That operation be limited to the hours between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Motion carried: 7 -2 (Edwardson and Gallagher opposed) QIIMA t_:M. fri I 1 *X1 Information Letter # 1 1993 Capital Improvement Budget and 1994 -1998 Capital Improvement Program Community Services Director Fondrick reviewed the recommended priorities for the Capital Improvement Program, noting the projects assumed a Special Revenue Funding of =/ 500,000.00 annually.. General discussion of the priorities followed. Commissioner Linnihan stated that he lives in the vicinity of Madison Park.. His neighborhood has a number of children living in it and he is concerned that by the time improvements are made, his children will be too old to use it. Mr. Fondrick stated that he has been approached by several other residents who feel the same way .about their neighborhoods. , M/Erlander, S /Scaglia to recommend approval of the motion to accept Staff recommend priorities for the 1993 Capital Improvement Budget and 1994 -98 Coital Improvement Program. Motion carried: 9 -0 Information Letter # 2 1992 Fourth Quarter Report of Administrative Review Committee Activities cm, W ° D PLANNING COMMISSION Action Request Item: # 1 Agenda Section: Public Hearing Case: #93 -CUP -1 Date: January 26, 1993 GENERAL INFORMATION Petitioner: Steve Jensen LOCation: 7200 Cedar Avenue Type of Request: Conditional Use Permit for an automobile service station Zoning: C -2, General Commercial Land Use: vacant Comp. Plan: Mixed Land Use- District A References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts) Zoning Code: Section 520.17 outlines conditional uses in the C -2 zoning district. Section 545.09 outlines administration of the conditional use permit process. ACTION Proposed Change: A conditional use permit is required to allow an auto service station in a general commercial district Staff • Deny the request with a finding of fact that the proposal is in conflict Recommendation: with the Comprehensive Plan, and may be detrimental to the welfare of neighboring residents. 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 February 22, 1993 ANALYSIS Issues: Petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to construct a 5,112 sf. automotive service station with a 2,528 sf. mezzanine at 7200 Cedar Avenue South. He currently owns and operates a transmission shop at 6958 Cedar Avenue, which will remain open for business. The proposal would consist of light maintenance auto repairs, .such as brake jobs. The hours of operation will be from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. The business will employ 6 -8 persons and will provide 24 parking spaces. He anticipates 10 -20 customers per day. The zoning for this site is designated as general commercial and does allow for this type of use with a conditional use permit. For a conditional use permit to be issued, Section 545.09, Subdivision 5 stipulates the following conditions must be met: 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). Section 545.09, Subdivision 6 imposes additional 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 ) and officially adopted redevelopment plan and urban design guidelines, and ( iii ) applicable parking regulations and landscape guidelines. (Amended Bill No. 1988 -7). Automobile repair businesses are required to obtain a conditional use permit because of their potential impact on neighboring properties. Mechanical operations are often noisy, traffic is generated during the day and often during evening hours, and the combination of parking needs and automobile storage awaiting repair may overflow onto adjoining streets. The latter issue has been a concern at the existing transmission shop at 6958 Cedar Avenue. A Comprehensive plan amendment was adopted in 1989 which identified and designated this area as a Mixed -Use- District A. This includes wholesale, light industrial, offices and some retail component which is tied into the office use'. The Comprehensive Plan amendment was intended to encourage more intensive development of a character that could be accommodated immediately adjacent to residential property. This is important in that transition to full redevelopment will take a number of years. As a result, retail service type establishments were relegated to the north and south ends of the corridor focused off of 66th and 77th streets and the area between included only retail which was tied into an office use. The landscaping plan has been reviewed and screening will be provided through the use of shrubbery and deciduous trees along the westerly edge of the property. The lighting has been designed in a fashion to avoid glare on the neighboring property. Similarly, the open area of the building is away from the residential property. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended Action: Preferred: Recommend that the City Council deny the conditional use permit application for Steve Jensen's auto service station with a finding that the proposal is in conflict with the comprehensive plan and may be detrimental to the welfare of persons residing in the neighborhood. Basis: The proposed use is in conflict with the Comprehensive plan in that it is not the category type business that will accommodate the policies envisioned in the plan. The proposed retail service business may negatively impact neighboring residents through noise, traffic and parking issues. Alternative: Recommend that the City Council approve the conditional use permit with a finding that the proposal is in compliance with the comprehensive plan and that it meets the requirements for the proposed use, with the following stipulations: 1. That a cash escrow be provided for landscaping. 2. That the petitioner be responsible for maintenance of the entire site including the contiguous boulevard. 3. That petitioner provide additional off - street parking if warned or cited for on- street parking issues. 4. That no on- street parking be allowed. 5. That operation be limited to the hours between 7:30 a.m. -and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. CITATIONS ZONING CODE: 520.15 _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. a) undertaking establishments; b) drive -in business where people are served in automobiles; c) automobile camps and courts; d) hotels, motels, restaurants, cafes, gasoline service stations, service station stores, public garages, car sales lot 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; e) other business uses which are determined by the council to be of the same general character as the uses enumerated in this section and which will not be obnoxious or detrimental to the area in which they would be located. 545.09 Conditional use ermits. Subdivision 1. Usuan 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 of 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 heating shall be held by the board or a by a committee of commission to be designated by the board in any application of a conditional use permit for the establishment of any use listed in subdivision 1, paragraphs a and f. (Amended Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 5. 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 plan and urban design guidelines, and ( iii ) applicable parking regulations and landscape guidelines. (Amended Bill No. 1988 -7) Subd. 7 Compliance. 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 condition imposed. If any person violates a 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 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 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 reasonable 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 it s 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 of there 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. Other remedies. In addition to the procedures 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) RESOLUTION N0. 7587 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the TH77 /New Ford Town'(Area) represents a special study area of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, study of this Area was prompted by the need to evaluatechanginglanduseneeds; and WHEREAS, this study has resulted in the formulation of an amendmenttotheLand Use Element of the city's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has considered this amendment and made recommendations to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Area study and related amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on he proposed amendment on Tuesday, December 5, 1989 and approved oncept B; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on December 1, 1989. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota that: Land Use Concept B of the TH77 /New Ford Town Study is hereby adopted and thereby amends the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. PASSED by the City Council of the y of lchf ' d, this 11th day of December, 1989. J ATTEST: Thomas Ferber. City Clerk tevery D .v Quarry'. / Mayor Z z zwl J 1 eofifII I• 1Atii ! i 1 Ns E i • ; ro+ r i to 3 I 1 1 X w uw,s as Uk%& efo 1 e tl ; 1 •' _ I i f r1 1 it ; I i." s ja I Tyo we- ypOli91.1 i •.... f N ... I I 1 I !"Art I fYwr ra 3 1 zi ljofNLNJ fit. - Aw ft1 R U t t d 4 M o Y V a. Al i/ rid CIO L V 0 CO) O C9 1 f t 7i.:. U a•w fir ^` iI u f u 1 1 x w .3 w 2 LJ z 0 cq a c b U 0 0 r 4) U1 Item #6 CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AUTO REPAIR BUSINESS AT 7200 CEDAR AVENUE. C.L. NO. 55 City Manager Prosser reviewed Council Letter No. 55 regarding a request from Steve Jensen for a conditional use permit-to allow an auto repair business at 7200 Cedar Avenue. He stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit by a 7 -2 vote. City Manager Prosser further stated it was his recommendation that the Council deny the request on the basis that it is in conflict with the comprehensive plan. Steve Jensen, 7620 Auto Club Circle, spoke in support of granting the conditional use permit. He stated that the transmission shop he operates at 6758 Cedar Avenue is an asset to the community and has operated without detriment to the neighborhood. Mr. Jensen said that the proposed business would be a full service automotive shop and take some of the pressure off of the transmission shop. He stated opposition to complying with stipulation numbers-4 and 5 of the alternative . recommendation. Mr. Jensen added that if on- street parking or the hours of operation became a problem they could be addressed at that time. Council Meeting Minutes -4- February 22, 1993 Bruce Schmitt,-architect for the applicant, spoke in support of Mr. Jensen's request for the conditional use permit. M /Sandahl, S /Susag to close the public hearing. Council Member Susag asked for clarification regarding the 1989 Comprehensive Plan amendment with which this proposal may conflict. City Attorney Dean summarized the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the types of development allowed in the Mixed -Use- District A. Council Member Sandahl stated he remembered the intent of the amendment was to address concerns about the separation of commercial and residential uses and the potential changes to Highway 77. Council Member Susag asked about the boundaries of the district. Community Development Director Wallace stated the Mixed -Use- District A encompassed the area between 68th Street and 75th Street, and Cedar Avenue and 18th Avenue. Council Member Priebe stated opposition to the conditional use permit request because it conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan. .He stated that allowing this type of development would hinder future larger and more desirable development. Council Member Rosenberg stated opposition to the request and concurred with Council Member Priebe's reasons. Council Member Sandahl stated this proposal does not meet goals for development and that auto repair shops sometimes are not compatible next to residential neighborhoods. Council Member Susag asked where such a use is allowable. Community Development Director Wallace stated that it is allowable on Cedar Avenue north of 66th Street and other properly zoned commercial areas in the City. M /Sandahl, S /Rosenberg to deny the request of Steve Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow an auto repair business at 7200 Cedar Avenue South and to direct staff to prepare the findings of fact for denial for adoption-by-the City Council at the next City Council meeting. Motion carried 5 -0.