Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-1 PCR t11'ember Mike Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. 86-1 RESOLUTION RECOf LENDING DENIAL OF THE APPEAL OF DR. JOHN B. LESCAULT AND AFFIRMING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO CLASSIFY DR. LESCAULT'S CHIROPRACTIC OFFICE, 6142 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD, BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, AS A SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance distinguishes between permitted home occupations and special home occupations in Sections 35-310, 35-405, 35-406, and 35-900 which are attached hereto by reference; and WHEREAS, Dr. Lescault operates a chiropractic office at his home located at 6142 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Dr. Lescault's property located at 6142 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, is zoned Rl under the City of Brooklyn Center's Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on or about May, 1984, Dr. Lescault submitted an application for a building permit to the City of Brooklyn Center for an expansion of his private residence and chiropractic office; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 1984, the Brooklyn Center Zoning Administrator informally reviewed Dr. Lescault Is proposed expansion and the current status of the chirporaetic office with the Brooklyn Center Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on June 26, 1984, the Brooklyn Center Zoning Administrator by and through Gary Shallcross, Brooklyn Center City Planner, classified Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office as a special home occupation under Brooklyn Center Ordinance 35 and informed him of the classification; and WHEREAS, on or about July 10, 1984, Dr. Lescault wrote a letter to the City of Brooklyn Center stating the conditions acceptable to operation of his chiropractic office; and WHEREAS, on July 26, 1984, the Brooklyn Center Planning Commission formally convened to discuss the Dr. Lescault's Special Use Permit. The Planning Commission found that Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office was a special home occupation for the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on August 6, 1984, the City Council of Brooklyn Center reviewed Dr. Lescault's special home occupation and granted him a special use permit for his chiropractic office; and WHEREAS, on or about October 1, 1984, Dr. Lescault filed a complaint against the City of Brooklyn Center and on October 18, 1984, the City answered the complaint; and WHEREAS, in January, 1986, a trial was held and during the trial, the court determined that Dr. Lescault should exhaust his administrative remedies before the Brooklyn Center Planning Commission before completing the trial; and RESOLUTION NO. 86-1 WHEREAS, on or about February 12, 1986, Dr. Lescault appealed the above described decision to the Brooklyn Center Planning Commission sitting as a Board of Appeals; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator submitted a report on the appeal to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a hearing on the appeal on February 27, 1986 at which Dr. Lescault and his attorney were present; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator read verbatim his report to the Planning Commission and into the record; and WHEREAS, Dr. Lescault's attorney, David Cody, addressed the Planning Commission on the appeal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Brooklyn Center adopts the following as its reasons and findings of fact for declaring Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office at 6142 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, a special home occupation: 1. The report of the Zoning Administrator attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office is a special home occupation because of the traffic it generates. Traffic generation is an important factor in differentiating special home from home occupations. Home occupations listed as permitted in Section 35-900 -- dressmaking, secretarial services, individual music or art instruction, individual hobby crafts, professional offices, etc. -- are businesses which have only occasional customer traffic. The person performing the activity is likely to travel to the customer, rather than the customer travelling to the. person's business premises. On the other hand, special home occupations -- barber and beauty shops, photography studios, group instructions, saw sharpening, small engine repairs, etc. --have regular customer traffic on the premises. Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office is a special home occupation because it generates regular customer traffic of twenty to twenty-five patients per day, which is at least as much, if not more than, most special home occupations. Dr. Lescault may have up to three patients in his office at any one time. To .accommodate this traffic Dr. Lescault has constructed a parking lot on his property. Patients who drive to Dr. Lescault Is office enter the parking lot from 62nd Avenue North, a residential street. The traffic generated by Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office is a factor addressed in Section 35- 405 and 35- 406 by virtue of the regulation of on-street parking and the admonishment in 35-406 (1) prohibiting special home occupations from causing traffic congestion. RESOLUTION NO. 86-1 Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office, like other special home occupations generating customer traffic, must be regulated under the provisions in Section 35-406 (particularly those provisions dealing with traffic congestion and parking) for special home occupations in order to preserve the health, safety and welfare of the R1 zoning district. 3. Dr. Lescault's chiropractic office is a special home occupation because of the use of equipment not customarily found in a residential dwelling unit. Dr. Lescault has two pieces of equipment not normally found in the home. First, Dr. Lescault uses an x-ray machine for patient diagnosis in his office. Former Building Official Will Dahn reported this fact to the City in spring 1984. In addition, Dr. Lescault admits using an x-ray machine. Second, Dr. Lescault uses a thermography device in his office. This device measures temperature variance on the surface of skin. The x-ray equipment and the thermography device are equipment not customarily found in a residence. Use of such equipment is prohibited in home occupations, under Section 35-1405• Use of the equipment is permissible, however, pursuant to Section 35-1406 in a special home occupation. 4. Dr. Lescault's use of a nonresident employee makes his chiropractic office a special home occupation under the provisions of Sections 35- 405 and 35-406. For purposes of the Zoning Ordinance, the City defines a nonresident employee as any person not living on the premises who is engaged in the activity of a home occupation. Use of a nonresident employee in a home occupation requires a special use permit. On July 10, 1984, Dr. Lescault wrote a letter to the City of Brooklyn Center informing them that he intended to hire an intern from a local college as a nonresident employee at his office. Further, although Dr. Lescault would not directly pay the intern for his research assistance, he would pay money to the intern's school for the intern's services. In addition, the City learned that Dr. Lescault has another chiropractor come to his office to treat patients while tie is out of town. Like the intern, this person is also a nonresident. Finally, Mrs. Lescault's daughter, another nonresident, answers Dr. Lescault's business phone and takes messages for him while he is out of the office. The intern, the visiting chiropractor and the daughter of Nis. Lescault all qualify as nonresident employees because they do not live on the premises and because they are engaged in the operation of the chiropractic office. Their employment means that the chiropractic office is not a permitted home occupation because permitted home occupations do not permit nonresident employees: See Section 35-405 (5) • The chiropractic office is, therefore, a special home occupation pursuant to Section 35-406 (4) . RESOLUTION NO. 86-1 ffi �r March 27, 1986 Date 7 hairman L� Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Carl Sandstrom, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: George Lucht, Wallace Bernards, Mike Nelson, Carl Sandstrom and Ann Wallerstedt; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was duly passed and adopted. C