CR 93-56 CUP - Used Car Lot
-- ------~---
~ ~
/ \
. _ ,', : \ "( Y 0 i
~ i
C. ~. i
:m:.
'I op \~ ,
'. Aprl. 15, 1993 K Councl.l Report 93-56
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - USED CAR LOT
ProDosed Aotion.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to approve
Resolution 93-31 which denies a conditional use permit to
operate an auto sales lot at 525 Mainstreet.
Overview.
The applicant is proposing to start an auto sales lot at 525
Mainstreet. The subject site is the former site of the Jet
gas station located at 525 Mainstreet. The site is Zoned B-
3, General Business. An auto sales lot is permitted in the
B-3 district with a conditional use permit.
The site is situated on the northeast corner of Mainstreet
and sixth Avenue. The existing site has one access from
Mainstreet and two access points from sixth Avenue. The
existing building on the site is 1836 square feet.
At the last city council meeting on April 6, the city
Council reviewed the applicant' s conditional use permit.
The City council passed a motion for the staff prepare a
. resolution denying the conditional use permit to operate a
auto sales lot at 525 Mainstreet. Attached is the
resolution denying the conditional use permit.
primary Issues to Consider.
o What are the conditions for a conditional use
permit?
o What are the specifics of the site plan?
o Why is the staff recommending denial?
o What is the City Attorney's opinion regarding the
20 foot setback? .
SU~Dorting Doouments.
o Analysis of Issues
o site Plan
o Memo from Jerre Miller
o Resolution 93-31
'.
CR93-56
Page 2
.
primary Issues to Consider~
o What are the conditions for a conditional use permit?
The following are the conditions for a conditional use
permit:
1. the sales lot shall not be larger in square footage
than the square footage of the building devoted to the
related business;
2. a 20 foot front yard setback for auto parking;
3. lighting of the sales lot shall be totally from
indirect lighting;
4. should the lot abut an R district an acceptable design
of screening fence five feet in height shall be
constructed along the abutting lot line;
5. the auto sales lot shall not include vehicles over a
9,000 lb. rated weight.
4It 0 What are the specifics of the site plan?
Access
The site plan show 3 access points. Two on 6th Avenue and
one on Mainstreet. Staff has a concern about the southerly
access point on 6th Avenue.
Parking
The site plan as submitted by the applicant shows seventeen
parking spaces. The applicant can have nine display cars
and is required to have' five customer parking spaces.
Building
There are no sigriificant improvements planned to the
existing'structure. .
Landscaping
The applicant has provided a landscape plan showing a 7 foot
landscaped area on the southwest corner of the site. This
landscaped area shows 12 globe arborvitae in a row abutting
.the sidewalk on Mainstreet.
Fencing
The site plans shows a five foot fence on the north site of
4It the building as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
---_._--~
.,
CR93-56
Page 3
c. " '"
o Why is the staff recommending denial?
Zoning Ordinance section 535.03 subd. 2A requires a 20 foot
front yard setback for vehicle parking. Ordinance 550.03
subd. 6. requires that required yards must be ' landscaped.
Mr. Garber is changing the use of the property from a gas
station to an auto sales lot. An auto sales lot requires a
20, foot front yard setback. Mr. Garber has not provided a
'si te plan showing a 20 foot landscaped area with a landscape
~~. .
A conditional use permit also allows the ci ty to place
reasonable conditions on the property. staff feels closing
the southerly access point on 6th Avenue is a reasonable
condition due to the traffic/safety concerns this
represents, as well as the fact the applicant has two other
access points to the site.
Staff is recommending denial of the conditional use permit
to operate an auto sales lot based on the following reasons:
o That the applicant does not meet the 20 foot front yard
landscaped setback requirement as required by the
_ conditional use permit. ,
. 0 That the southerly access on 6th Avenue has not been
" eliminated on the proposed site plan. Staff feels this
access point needs. to be eliminated due to the traffic
and safety hazards it represents with respect to
traffic movements with the intersection of 6th Avenue
and Mai.nstreet.
The last auto sales lot that was approved was the addition
to the old Minnetonka Motors site. The plan that was
approved .hada landscaped 20 foot front yard setback. Also
last summer Duffs Auto Sales at 1714 Mainstreet had a 20
foot setback area.
o What is the City Attorney's opinion regarding the 20
foot setback?
The applicant has disagreed with staffs interpretation
regarding the 20 foot setback for auto parking . The
applicant feels the language allows him to park in this
arE~a. Attached is the City Attorney's opinion regarding the
20ifoot landscaped setback area.
.
.
u_ __~ __ ____ ___~_____
CR93-56
Page 4
. Alternatives.
1- Approve the conditional use permit. By approving the
conditional use permit, Mr. Garber is be able to
operate an auto sales lot at 525 Mainstreet. If the
City Council undertakes this action, a.resolution with
findings of fact approving the conditional use permit
will need to be prepared.
2. Deny the conditional use permit, By denying the
conditional use permit, Mr. Garber will not be able to
operate an auto sales lot at 525 Mainstreet.
3. continue for further information. If the city Council
indicates that further information is needed the item
should be continued.
.
.
I I !
I I j
r I
, I I
: I
1 ! ,~
! I i I
j I I '.
: I ! '-- U>N~;~(-:_IL - 4- ..----- '"
, ,!
, I
i I 'I f~~'.t.:.l~;; ~r.-'I.,j c:}..cl i~ltd\.. ~)~:rJD fv.fi'.};.
~ I I i I \", I>WIb ~""'f'~'<\1" ='l\- f'-<l"'" -'.'-"
.:;. /'i'- J~-
..r__ -."'\ ~1. ,..... ~.
- I 'n\nJl'~r":r-< I' ."..) t.- ~Yi1"..'::7 ~ ~ .-
HJ J -"l~';"- i ... ,".... -,/ , ,i
'- I , -~.:.---'-]' ,
>' I ../ ---..-...-- t' j
/' i ,.. ~._---- . V i
'", ) . ._" ,
Q : I .' _.----- Q I If:,---t---..-T----- I +.1 . ..
l - .-.-- ..- I -1 . ............-.......,--.., I
, i! . * --- 'r- . , ~ ; I
,. . . ) ,! }
I I .- i : I .
I ~l';.f.:W.t~,. I :(V (.~$TO!Jie:i.. f>../;..:~I"- I i pxr-1TI ~.t01
. .. ,",., .\'....'.1. f'{ ~Jl :: ,
I "''''''''' 'L'''''' 1"'~ , ,\..... i ~ I
! C' '. '
~ I t> ~ ! J \4 ,IS" i :~~ i 171
I ' -.. ...::i< ... i ~ I I .
.j I _'_'H . .... .....L___-i
i '
. I ~-. I I /' "Wt-lt...;et..ez:JL..: "'.
\ I ( .~.:rJmN u;;.i,...(...
j I - 1- _...L j ""..:1'". I. AI! .,....."..,..
j t . . r l'"lf,,;...rl~t ~~.,
I · I J I I .:.,u I' .......... '5'if'2.:itl
'.. _.._. . I! ~................ 1-1\->0 ..
I ~ ' . "'<'''''''''~'' Ii
_d q !. , . '.. /1 .
. () ~'.t\bn;.fb '
1.0 i?\~' i LPI f.-\(:;" -- I I
...._ '-'''' __j. 11 __ _ ~~'Yo ~. fl' I (
t:."tl :11. . I I ; \ r --r.-----/. ----.-1 '
~V~Vp.lU;7~J j I /' \. 1" W~ IN ~ ~ I -]C7-0~;N~
! --..... . I. u.~~-';\,.... ....\ 0... .'" ~ I r? - ?
,I, ...y !.q, Ii.. ......1" .:.;' " (-' - ? " .--....--
J I....' " "
...-<-'-"-/''''' I . ! :, ...... ' \
(,t I' I 1 I \0 II; ,-. I i I
I I ~". ~ ...~
e."(l"T"' ' I "" I I' !
I ~ 1_,1 I I j ~
I .: I I I . .
'; t ~ \..,. ~ to
i, ! t; t ,,;.: ~..l. ~ ''-.,1 r I
': I. '" f I' ~'lI.." t
I' l' --I ' i
;. t-,,1 ~ {
r .-"" ..I. 7 l'~ I ~ R J.. r . I
. /I D' (, I ' I
; : ," ,:I 'P!'"'Ao,.'''r:' C,l..,;:'::" I I
, ~ 1 . I 1 I
, ,"'---' ; , I ' I
txlt,.1'INb-1 l.:tJ! ~ I 2. ! t ;. ·
Di?-l'Vf.;.,Ujb,.y'i l t. ~ · .!
, : .--....I:..-----J .
~+7 i
: "..--> i
! ' ~;-ft<.f.,...... t..'
i () <"-. -r:', - ,........,~'.... ( I~~
I \ r..c r':T..~ t-:::',4t:..t!~H ~-::',A. . .
I lAH1 <;'('i'cf~D' ~t l!"'-l14'7 ,.-t''' f'1.A'..l. /,
It. ,..1- . ,.' .~.... B).l- I
, -,~ ~.- =l::: ,...." , .. -., \ ' f
I ...' ... . " vL .'
\ -.. . ,., - I \ ' , . l' . ~.
. \ or.- /;;;'. .. .. -:."" ??,J?i - \ ' ....-......' '-,. - - .
.~
"0
-~ #0...... (' .
1._- ..-.-,_..~., ~_. -
. ...,-~.=-.- .-;' '''-- ..t4J,i'fi ~k'7
P~l\lt:.;.\..' P(
-'
Q ~
- - -- -
.- - - - l
---- "'-.../
-_._'.~ - ~
is ---=--~~-
~. ..r - .-. - ~ -,-
~ <.l ,_ '2 I - - -
C> ili -
~ ":) ~1
'E
<S
~ .1 ..\'
-::1
00 (j K
~ e
<:r"1 .~!
I i
! 1
.~ !
j
~c>1
, h\ ! .
~ (ii
c l- ;
"" c y i f1.
C <<l .... -..9
<= III ,~'~ I I, ~
.C ,-:;
.~ ~.2..r: 0 ~1' f<.i
1- ,- ! .
,_ ~ In V - '~:f' j i
~:;l l~t
....'" c CD Vl C1)
Iii ~ :l >- g' :~f j-' .
l.,.. I
~.' ~ e..t: ..a E :. i
;:;~,"&,,~ ~' i .
1\1 t:t:I .!::! ~ ~ ::, \ l
:,.,__~~ '~ 'iI .~.. '~'
! i~l
''0 ~T'~'.'O . .~ f5 lA,'
l:-;t: 1\1 ~i5. ~\ . 'l~i
...~:5Cl- t;
cutO In .~! l~"
"Cl. ~ ,E..2 +l '"~ I'" i
2-" 'u . 1- ~_.''-- ..~:
Q.Q.~"",-..z;' . r ...
- . \ . "1
VI ' - ,~, ~ f" ~ ~ ....;- I ...:\;
.i!.:.E~1ii ~ ~ 'i~l
_..: R) 0 ~ ~, 'U "
':l. ,:
C04)-u...... j:: _oR 11:
';0 Ill..aU c: ;n .2 ~ I .~
e.._coo
~ ::l 0 - '';: - . --~,. . .- j !
J... c...Vt ~ (0 ,
:=o=CI\I [!] ittJ
.~ c 'j ~ g. ~ g[
~ 0 ...c '- to ..::J ~
c:' ~-a 5 ~ ~ ,'" .; 0
~ ::J "jji .xl 0\ 5 I
0. -g .~ III .5 '';:
,~ Ii E :::"] .!!l ~t . : I
.J:: OJ III - - :;l I
~ '- Q.;I;S ~ ::;!l
.4:1
I -.Ji
~ j : n-j
D !
.t :--~
:-:t I
.', , 'I ' rr--..
,~ { ___;_~,
~ .. -4'
I ~. \J.-/
! -3
.........- "-D\
-t-."
I"~, =>-i ~
-' 'w
~ ~ 2
-~._,- .::; r ...
~ :
{;. , ~
,
i J:: ~~~
, --;.._. ;r<.
'( : -- , -.
, c.- -~'- '<-- r
! , t-
\ :~ Il . ;
~ . ! ~
I i
:; ! I i :z
... ::.1
. . I .,-
.- I
I
~~ I /
j ~ I
,
.\ /
, "- -~' ,
.;.,.~....~;'"
-_.._------~-
;
.
CITY OF HOPKINS
MEMQ
Date: February 16, 1993
To: Jim Kerrigan
From: Jerre Miller
Re: Garber Conditional Use Permit
You. have asked that I' interpret the language in Zoning
Ordinance 535.03, Subd. 2 A) 2 relative to the Garber
Application for a Conditional Use Permit on the Jet Oil site
of Mainstreet and Fifth Avenue.
Subdivision 2 entitled "Conditional Uses Within B Districts"
requires a 20 foot front yard setback for auto parking. It
is my understanding Mr. Garber's interpretation is that the
. 20 foot front yard setback is to be used for auto parking.
Although the language pertaining to the 20 foot front yard
setback could be more detailed as to what is permitted within
such a setback, the language is of sufficient clarity and a
preciseness for a reasonably prudent person reading this
paragraph to understan4ing that auto parking must be setback
from the front yard of the property a distance of 20 feet.
There can be no other interpretation.
You have also asked me to comment on the landscaping
requirement made a part of the Conditional Use Permit applied
for by Mr. Garber. I have reviewed Zoning Ordinance 555.19,
Subd. 1 entitled "Landscaping" which contains a general rule
in all zoning districts the area not devoted to off street
loading, sidewalks, driveways, building sites or other
requirements shall be ~planted and maintained with grass,
shrubs or other acceptable vegetation generally utilitized in
landscaping premises. Furthermore, the ordinance sets forth
minimum requirements for Conditional Use Permits for
landscaping purposes. Reasonable landscaping requirements
may thus be imposed upon the Conditional Use Permit requested
by Mr. Garber.
Furthermore, Code 550.01, Subd. 6 mandates landscaping for
. yards required under the Code. ,
I trust this opinion covers yoqr concerns but if any further
information is required, please/ik,t/ me know. .
1010 First street South, HOP;in( ~~,i3 612/935~'
An Equal ~E~P~~
~
7
. CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 93-31
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND
DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
WHEREAS, an application for a conditional use permit for an auto
sales lot, CUP 93-1, has been submitted by Joe Garber to the City on
December 28, 1992; and
WHEREAS, the Hopkins Planning ,Commission, pursuant to pUblished
and mailed notice, held a public hearing on January 26, 1993, February
23, 1993 and March 30, 1993 and considered the application; and
WHEREAS, written and oral reports, comments and analysis have
been submitted to the City Council by the City staff and the Planning
commission; and
,
WHEREAS, based on all the documents and information that have
been submitted to the City council, the City Council makes the
following findings pertaining to the application for CUP 93-1:
1. The site plan for the proposed auto sales lot does
. not meet the requirements for a conditional use permit as
set forth in Section 535.03, subd. 2A, in the City's zoning
ordinance because the applicant has not provided for a 20-
foot front yard setback as required by section 550.03, subd.
6, of ~he city's zoning ordinance.
2. The south edge of the southerly driveway of the
property on sixth Avenue is 17 feet north of the north curb
line of Mairistreet. The location of this driveway creates
conflicts with turning movements at the intersection because
additional turning movements are necessary due to the close
proximity of the driveway to the intersection. Additional
distance is needed to insure that a vehicle can pullout
onto sixth Avenue and be completely facing the direction of
traffic.
3. The 17-foot separation between the driveway and
Mainstreet does not comply with the recommendation of the
Institute of Transportation Engineers in "The Guidelines for
Driveway Design and Location" 1985. Those guidelines
recommend a 37-foot spacing separation.
4. The close proximity of the southerly driveway on
sixth Avenue creates a situation where existing traffic from
the site has a greater difficulty turning into sixth Avenue,
. creating additional conflicts with northbound traffic on
sixth Avenue.
- ----~--
j
-
RESOLUTION NO: 93-31
Page 2
.
5. The close proximity of the southerly driveway on
sixth Avenue to Mainstreet does not provide adequate sight
distance or field of vision when a vehicle is pulling out of
the property onto sixth Avenue and when a vehicle is
entering onto the property from Mainstreet.
6. The applicant has stated that he is not willing to
close the southerly driveway on sixth Avenue and is not
willing to comply with the 20-foot front yard setback
requirement of the city's zoning ordinance. .
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city Council for the City of
Hopkins that based on the above findings, the application for CUP 93-1
is denied because:
1. The applicant has not complied with Section 535.03,
subd. 2A, of the city's zoning ordinance.
2. The applicant has not complied with Seqtion 550.03,
subd. 6, of the City's zoning ordinance.
3. The application is not consistent with the health,
welfare and safety of the city.
.
Adopted this 20th day of April, 1993.
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor
ATTEST:
James A. Genellie, City Clerk
.
- ~- .. --. -. . <.- ----~.- '-"-'