Loading...
03-28-1995CITY Of RIOHFIELD PLnnninG oommission nanni1 March 28, 1995 7.00 p.m . f ppi cn-ril apt• ivlinut'S Special Planning Commission meeting of March 14, 1995. Ironton i t• I I I.>l ITEM #1 95 -CUP -1 6600 Penn Avenue South Bruegger's Bagel Bakery Conditional Use Permit/Off- Street Parking Permit NE'V•' Ii Utilll titi Planning Commission Study Session and workshop schedule School Board Community Services Advisory Commission HRA City Council AdHoc 135/1494 Traffic Committee k dd(Murn msnt Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative Service's Director at 861 - 9702 ". PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Special Meeting March 14, 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Pamela Dmytrenko, Timothy Erlander, David Gepner, Mitchell Hadley, Kevin Hansen, Dawn Postudensek, Kristal Stokes, and Paul Wasko MEMBERS ABSENT: None COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor STAFF PRESENT: Byron Wallace, Community Development Director; Bill Weaver, City Planner The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linnihan at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M /Stokes, S /Erlander to approve the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of February 21, 1995 as amended. Motion carried: 9 -0 PUBLIC HEARINGS Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 1995 Page 2 CASE 95 -TAP -1, 510 -512 West 78th ITEM #1 Street Richfield Plumbing Transitional Activity Permit City Planner Weaver reviewed the staff report, stating that Richfield Plumbing together with Hagen Micro Age were being relocated from their current locations due to the pending commencement of the CSM Phase II development. Mr. Weaver also stated that the deadline for relocation was June 1, 1995. He stated that Richfield Plumbing and Hagen intended to refurbish the existing two buildings and construct an addition to the rear to accommodate Richfield Plumbing's trucks and materials. He stated that the staff recommended in favor of the project with the following stipulations 1. That a payment in -lieu of be made for storm water management; 2. That the area immediately to the east of the building be maintained as a landscape buffer until such time as access to 78th Street is denied. At that time the area may be converted into a drive. Brian Hagen of Hagen Micro Age described the nature of his business and the estimated parking demand on the site. He stated that his business is largely off -site with occasional classes held on -site. Commissioner Wasko asked about parking. Mr. Hagen responded stating that seldom were all employees on site. Commissioner Linnihan asked about the classes and Mr. Hagen stated they usually consisted of six to eight people but occasionally they would have a seminar with approximately 25 people. M /Stokes, S /Erlander to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 9 -0 M /Erlander, S /Stokes to recommend approval of the Transitional Activi Permit. Motion carried: 9 -0 Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 1995 Page 3 NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Linnihan reviewed the need to set goals and an agenda for study sessions. He asked City Planner Weaver to record the suggestions of the commissioners relative to study session topics. Weaver recorded the following requests by each commissioner: Signs and billboards Water quality Tax increment financing Storm water management Housing opportunities Parliamentary procedures zoning categories Glossary of terms Review of the current comprehensive plan Gun shops, pawnshops and-blight Parking Review of the role of the Planning Commission CIP /CIB process Finances of Richfield Traffic Management Industrial zoning Alternative transportation, bike, walk, public transit Airport issues Infrastructure The Commission agreed that the objectives of the study sessions should be focused on those issues relevant to improving the ability of the commission's decision making ability. The Commission also agreed that the first study session would take place on April 11, 1995 and would focused on the planning review process and the role of the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 1995 Page 4 OLD BUSINESS LIAISON REPORTS School Board: Community Services Advisory Commission: H RA: City Council: Ad Hoc Traffic Committee: ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:21 p.m. T mothy Erlander Planning Commission Secretary CITY CAF R10HRELD. PLnnninG commission Motion Request Item: #1 Agenda Section: Public Hearing Case: #95 -CUP -1 Date: March 28, 1995 GENERAL INFORMATION Petitioner: Bruegger's Bagel Bakery Location: 6600 Penn Avenue South Type of Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow a restaurant/cafe in a C -2 zone. Zoning: C -2, General Commercial Land Use: Commercial Comp. Plan: Mixed landuse References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts) Zoning Code: 520.17 (d); 545.09 City Code: ACTION Proposed Change: Expand existing non - conforming building to house a new business. Staff Recommendation: Approve the conditional use permit request 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. Public Hearing: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on March 28, 1995. Hearing Examiner: City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing date of April 24, 1994. ANALYSIS Proposal: Bruegger's Bagel Bakery wishes to purchase the existing Mr. Donut. Their proposal involves expanding the building to the west to accommodate their bakery equipment. Background: In 1964 the property was developed for use as a donut.shop under the Mr. Donut franchise. At that time the required action by the City was an off - street parking permit. Since that time the area within Penn/66th was classified commercial and under the current zoning ordinance that classification was C -2 general commercial. Since the property did not change use it was apparently grandfathered through each subsequent revision of the Richfield Zoning Code. The current proposal changes the use and ownership status of the property therefore triggering a review. Section 520.17 of the Zoning Code identifies this type of use as conditional in the C -2 zoning district. Issues• Parking is the primary issue relative to this case. The site plan as presented provides for 18 parking stalls. According to Bruegger's marketing surveys, no more than 50% of their business is sit down; the remaining 50% are takeout indicating high parking turnover. This type of use is not categorized by Richfield's parking standards nor is it covered under the Institute for Traffic Engineers (ITE). However, the ITE Parking Generation Manual does have a category for "fast food restaurant without drive -in windows ". Using this category as a model the parking provided by Bruegger's proposal is adequate. The ITE Manual (Figure 1) indicates an average weekday use of less than 20 parking spaces occupied for businesses of gross floor area of 2,200 and average weekday occupancy rate of 11.68 for all uses studied under this classification. Bruegger's will have 55 seats in this facility. Applying the ITE standard for seating indicates adequate seating as well ( Figure 2). The standards indicate an average parking occupancy of .50 spaces per seat for weekday use. Landscaping represents a secondary issue. The location of this site and small lot size limit the possibilities for meeting the city's landscape requirements fully. Bruegger's has agreed to provide a low iron fence, softened by annuals, as a means of screening along Penn Avenue and 66th Street. Also because of the salt accumulation in the soil, they have agreed to replace the planting soil every two to three years. They will also provide intense planting on the corner of Penn and 66th and that will soften the sign base. Staff has waived the requirement for evergreen planting due to the large amount of salt spray from both streets. The salt spray will severely limit the survival of evergreen plant material in that location. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended Action: Preferred: Recommend that the City Council approve the request for Conditional Use Permit with the following stipulations: 1. All signs must meet the requirements of Section 416 of the Richfield City Code. 2. Landscape escrow must be provided prior to construction and issuance of building permit. Basis: 1. The proposed use will significantly improve the corner of Penn Avenue and 66th Street. 2. Parking will be adequate. 3. The proposed use also complies with the intentions of the Comprehensive Plan revisions. Alternative: Recommend that the City Council deny the request with a finding of fact that the proposed use would have an adverse impact on surrounding properties or the City as a whole. FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVEN WINDOW (ate Peak Parking Spaces Occupied vs: II AW GROSS SQUARE FEET LEASABLE AREA On a: WEEKDAY PARKING GENERATION RATES Awape Amps of Snnderd Numbaol Avpe 1,090 oSF tyro ROY ow,194n Srudift LMaaeM Arse 11.66 211 -19.11 166 17 5 DATA PLOT AND EQUATION o K so- 40 0 o . 30 0 0 a o V 0 0 o t0 n 0 t.e 22 216 J s.s 3A A2 X + 1000 GROSS SQUARE FEET LEASABLE AREA O ACTUAL DRA POINTS Fl7TED cum Fitted Curve Equation; P I- I3D.$WX) + 62.0 FP 0.679 FIGURE 1- Parking by 1,000 GFA FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE-IN WINDOW (837) Peak Parking Spaces Occupied vs: SEATS On a: WEEKDAY PARKING GENERATION RATES An »m Rut" Of 53andwd Numberor Average Number of RItO Rata Downum Studies Saafs 0.50 0.15-0.97 M27 S e9 DATA PLOT AND EQUATION a0 w 70- 0 a 60 SO 40 0 90 0 d0 o. I d 10 0 30 60 TO 90 X • NUMBER OF SEATS 0 ACTUAL DATA POerte PRIED CURVE Fitted Curve Equation: P [(9.61/X) - 0.0901 '' Rs - 0.967 FIGURE 2 - Parking by seating u gym J WIWI I I is ME t t. _..• i His lift 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. a) undertaking establishments; b) drive -in business where people are served in automobiles; c) automobile camps and courts; 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 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) 0,: r 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. 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. 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 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 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.