CUP 86-04 � CITY OF HOPKINS
APPLICATION FOR: AMENOMENT OF ZONING OROINANCE �TE: �-��O -��
CONCEPT REVIEW /�
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT � CASE N0: C;�j��� - �
SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
VARIANCE FEE: ��j+CYJ
WAIYER OF PLATTING REQUIREMENTS
DATE PAID: ,..�j-3O- 8,�
1. Stree t Location of Property: ` ��=Y/'�2p
2. Legal Description of Property:�07`S/��/� /�`CtC� i/D/'5 .���Od,'Ur`S�`D��,��/ 'L
� O � /c � d a � � ' ��r ci � ���G� �
/ �
3. Owner: Name P ���Address��//yJQ�7zS7�"�'�t Phone S' /
4. Appl icant's Name� ih��Y��`z2�; by,-� Address�;a/-S"�'�c��� Phone �
5. Descri pti on of Request: �c'�-v d � ` �� � � ���/
p c��P %S 7'� J �` Cb��
oning District Use
^6. Present �`� Proposed 7. Present � Proposed
/-�l�� ��a�m�
8. Reason for Request: lv �`r' U �' �� � ���� ' �
NOTE: If request is for variance, p ease also comp ete attached page.
9. What error, if any, in the existing Ordinance would be corrected by the proposed amendment?
(for Zoning Ordinance amendment only)
10. Exhibits submitted: �('�S � �
Map or plat showing the lands proposed to be changed
Other
11. Acknowledgement and Signature: The undersigned hereby represents upon all of the penalties
of law, for the purpose of i�ducing the City of Hopkins to take the action herei� requested,
that all statements herein are true and that all work herein mentioned will be done in ac-
cordance with the Ordinance f the ' y of Nopkirts and the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Signature of Applicant: � . l�
�
Signature of Owner: �'
^ RECORO OF ACTION TAKEN BY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Da te: 6/24/86
Application for Conditional Use Permit •
CASE N0: 86-4
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENOATIONS
On the 24 day of June 19 86 , the action requested in the foregoing petition
was approved ( � disapproved subject to the following conditions: Recommend approval
of Conditional Use Permit to construct an addition to the existing Car Care Center
at 404 Mainstreet with the Findings of Fact that (1)a parking variance was granted
(2) that the proposed development meets the requirements for a Conditional Use Permit
and with the Conditions (1)the applicant provide sufficient off-site parking if it is�,
determined to be necessary (2) a guardrail be provided along the west property line at
the drop-off area (3)that drainage on the leased parking be provided to ensure that
excess water dces not drain onto adjacent apartment property (4)Waiver of landscape
requirements be granted as set forth on revised plan as subnitted (5)review and approval
by the Director of Engineering and Fire Marshal.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Approved X Denied by the Council this lst day of Julv 19 86
Approved with following amendment: Approved as recommended by Zoning and Planning
with Findings of Fact and Conditions as set
forth.
Resolution No.86-36
^ Clerk: —�• ��ci'� 1
Following to be filled in by City Action of City Officials
Chronolo Date B
Rec'd by Bldg Dept.
Published by Bldg Dept.
On P1 . Conm. Agenda
Pl . Comm_ Postponement
P1 . Comm. Action 6/24/86 JK
On Council Agenda 7 1 86 JK
�Council Postponement
� ( i
�ouncil Action 7/1/86 JK Approved as recommended (see above)
� r . . ... . _ 1
CITY OF HOPKINS
� Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION N0. 86-31
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP86-4
WHEREAS, an application for a Conditional Use Permit entitled CUP86-4
has been made by Jim Lindstrom, Hopkins Car Care, 404 Mainstreet, for con-
struction of an addition over $75,000.
WNEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows :
1. That an application for Conditional Use Permit CUP86-4 was filed with
the City of Hopkins on May 30, 1986.
2. That the Hopkins Planning Corrmission reviewed such application on
June 24, 1986.
3. That the Hopkins Planning Corrunission, pursuant to mailed notices ,
held a public hearing on June 24, 1986; all persons present at the
hearing were given an opportunity to be heard.
4. That the written comments and analysis of the City Staff and the
Planning Comnission were considered.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Hopkins City Council makes the
^ following Findings of Fact in respect to CUP86-4:
1. That a parkin g variance was granted.
2. The proposed development meets the requirements fior a Conditional
Use Permit.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that application for Conditional Use Permit
CUP86-4 is hereby approved subject to the following Conditions :
1. The applicant provide sufficient off-site parking if it is determine
necessary.
2. That a guardrail be provided along the west property line at the drop-
off area.
3. That drainage on the leased parking be provided to ensure that excess
water does not drain onto adjacent apartment property.
4. Waiver of the landscaping be granted as set forth on revised plan as
submitted.
5. Review and approval by the Director of Engineering and Fire Marshal .
Adopted this lst day of July, 1986.
�— Ellen Lavin, Mayor
�° ,'�"d'yC���pr'�+�' �yy.J,.
' .,
� CITY OF HOPKINS
June 12, 1986
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - HOPKINS CAR CARE
404 �lainstreet
PLAfJNING REPORT
CUP86-4
PURPOSE: To review and recommend action on a Conditional Use Permit application
for construction over $75,000.
BACKGROUND: Name of Applicant: Jim Lindstrom
Address of Property: 404 Mainstreet
Present Zoning : B-3
Nature of Request: Ordinance requires a Conditional Use Permit
for construction over $75,000
Reason for Request: Construction of an 8,672 square foot addition
The applicant is proposing to construct a 8,672 square foot addition
�
to the existing building at 404 Mainstreet. This addition will con-
tain an 8 stall area for cleaning cars and a retail sales area.
Ordinance Requirements Subject Lot
Lot Area 3,000 Approx. 37,004.00
Lot Width 25 146
Setback-front 20 20
-west side 0 47
-east side 0 0
-rea r 10 100
Floor Area Ratro 1.5 Approx. .37
Height 45' 28'8"
Parking 57 31 on site
25 leased
The applicant has applied for a parking variance. This subject will
be addressed in the variance request.
At the northwest end of the site there will be an entrance/exit and at
the northeast end of the site is the exit for the car wash. The leased
parking area will also have an entrance/exit onto 5th Avenue. Access
to the stalls will be from the west side of the proposed addition.
The landscape plan shows a variety of plantings. However, it appears
that the applicant has not met the landscape requirements which would
� require 19 plantings of required size. The Commission does have the
discretion to grant a waiver if the requirements restricts compliance
with off-street parking requirements. The applicant has submitted a
second landscape plan which provided more landscaping, however, it also
utilized 3 parking spaces.
� .
PLAf4NING REPORT
r' CUP86-4
Page 2
The Assistant City Engineer has reviewed the drainage plan. He noted
that there is a problem with drainage in the entire area. The site
will use surface drainage.
The Building Inspector has reviewed the plan and sees no problems at
this time.
The Fire Marshal has received the plans , however, u; of this date no
report has been received.
The existing building will be refinished to match the proposed addition.
The building will be finished with rock face concrete block, a metal
canopy, aluminum windows, and ' fluted' concrete block.
The entire site and the leased parking area will be surfaced with bitu-
minous paving.
The building to the rear of the car wash and proposed addition will re-
main, it is currently used for offices and installing trailer hitches
and running boards. It will continue for installations.
^ The site plan does not address lighting or the trash container. The
applicant was out of town at the time of this report. He will be noti-
fied to provide this information before the meeting.
ANALYSIS: The Conditional Use Permit is dependant on the granting of the parking
variance. Since there are no parking requirements for one use on this
site, the amount that we have determined is only an estimate. The Com-
mission may feel that 31 on-site spaces will be adequate for the site,
however, the staff feels this might not be enough. The applicant will
be upgrading the entire site and offering a new service in Hopkins. The
only thing holding back this project is the parking, which if there are
conditions place on it the project should work.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Grant the Conditional Use Permit with the Conditions on parking.
2. Grant the Conditional Use Permit with no conditions on parking.
3. Deny the Conditional Use Permit because of the parking situation.
RECOMt�1ENDATIOPJ: I recommend alternative one. The following are suggested Findings
of Fact should the Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit:
1. That a parking variance was granted.
2. The proposed development meets the requirements for a Conditional Use
Permit.
The following Conditions could be placed on the permit:
� 1. The applicant return to the Commission one year after completion of the
addition for a review of the parking situation.
2. The applicant provide sufficient off-site parking if it is determined
necessary.
3. The applicant continues to seek permanent off-site parking.
� �(l
����,n�� '�l lll'(���(�.���1)1
al� ncy;�. Anderson, Analyst
Comm�in'itv flPvalnnrmnt