HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 08-11 PCP Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 83042
Applicant: Robert D. Welty
Location: 66th and Xerxes Avenue North
Request: Preliminary Plat
The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide into three lots the
parcel of land at the southwest quadrant of I-94 and Xerxes Avenue North. The
property in question is zoned R1 and-is bounded on the north by I-94,on the east
by Xerxes Avenue North, on the south by public right-of-way between Xerxes Avenue.
North and the old Xerxes Avenue North right-of-way, and on the west by "old"
Xerxes and a single-family residence. The property was recently acquired at an
auction of.tax-forfeited property.
The existing parcel is described as Outlot G, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addi-
tion. An outlot is unbuildable by definition under the City's Subdivision Ordi-
nance. The proposed legal description is Lots 1 , 2, and 3, Block 1 , Dee Welty
Addition. The existing parcel is 33,390 sq. ft. The new parcels have the
following characteristics:
Legal Description Area Frontage Width Average Depth
Lot l 12,152 s.f. 20r 98' 125'
Lot 2 9,500 s.f. 61 ' 75' 114'
Lot 3 11 ,738 s.f. 148' 148' 80'
The proposed lots meet ordinance requirements except for lot depth on Lot 3 and
frontage on Lot 1 . A separate application (No. 83043) has been filed requesting
a variance from these provisions. All three lots have sufficient buildable area
to locate a normal residence and two-car garage within required setbacks. The
setback off Xerxes Avenue North is 25.', from I-94, 10' (because of presence of
noise wall). The setback from "old" Xerxes Avenue North from which the lots will
gain access is superceded by an NSP power line easement which is 55.5' wide over
Lot 1 and 35.5' wide over Lots 2 and 3.
The street serving these lots is only a half-street (20' wide paved area) al-
though there is 50' of right-of-way. Both 66th Avenue North and Quarles Road,
which are the two nearest cross streets, also have 50' rights-of-way with full
size(30' wide) streets. Water and sewer are available in "old" Xerxes Avenue
North, but no service leads have been extended to the property line. City staff
recommend that the existing half-street be widened to a full 30' width, allowing
for 10'wide boulevards. A subdivision agreement establishing responsibility for
public improvements and assessing costs will be required.
Subject to approval of Application No. 83043, the plat generally appears to be in
order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions:
I . The final plat is Subject to review and approval by the City .
Engineer.
2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the
City ordinances.
3. The applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the .
City stipulating the widening of "old" Xerxes to a full street
width and extension of public utilities to the respective lots.
8-11-83
1
1
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 83043
Applicant: Robert D. Welty
Location: 66th and Xerxes Avenue North
Request: Variance
The applicant regests a variance from Section '15-106 of the Subdivision Ordinance
(attached) to allow a lot with an average depth of 80' rather than the required 110'
and to allow a lot with only 20' of street frontage rather than the required 60' .
The lots in question are Lots l (frontage) and 3 (depth) of the proposed Dee Welty
Addition ( see Application No. 83042) . The land in question is zoned R1 and is
bounded on the north by I-94, on the east by Xerxes Avenue North, on the south by
right-of-way extending between Xerxes and the "old" Xerxes Avenue North right-of-
way, and on the west by "old" Xerxes and a single-family residence.
The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which he addresses the Standards
for a Subdivision variance (also attached) . He points out that the existing parcel
has ample area and street frontage for the three proposed lots, but that the
variances are needed to obtain an aesthetic configuration of the lot lines. He
states that development of the parcel with less than three lots would "seriously
deprive the petitioner of his right to fully realize the best investment standards
of which he is entitled. " He states that the improvement costs would be sub-
stantially the same whether 1 ,. 2 or 3 lots are developed, he states
that there would be no detrimental effect -to the public welfare; rather the public
would benefit from an increased tax base. He notes there would be no greater cost
maintaining the street if the variance is granted.
The Subdivision Ordinance provides that the City Council may grant a variance
when, in its opinion, an undue hardship may result from strict compliance. To grant
such a variance, the Council must find:
1 . That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting said
property such that the strict application of the provisions of
this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use
of his land.
2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of a substantial property right of the petitioner.
3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in
which said property is situated.
The parcel in question, Outlot G, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition, was
created in 1967 when the alignment of the Xerxes Avenue bridge and Xerxes Avenue
North right-of-way were dedicated. It is apparently a remnant parcel from the
original Earle Brown Farm which could not be incoporated into the Industrial Park
because of the alignment of the freeway. The power line easement running along
the west side of the property was included in the original 1967 plat. It should
be noted that there were a number of parcels created as •outlots in the Twin Cities
Interchange Park Addition plat, most of which were quite large. . The fact that the
parcels were designated as outlots did not necessarily Mean that they were too
small to be developed.
8-11-83 .1_
Application No. 83043 continued
The area of the parcel is 33,390 sq.ft. more than large enough for three buildable
lots. The buildable area outside the NSP easement and other setbacks is large
enough to accommodate normal sized dwellings on each of the three lots. It should
be noted that a variance from the zoning requirement for 300 of lot area to be in
rear yard would be required on Lot 1 and possibly on Lot 3. Approval of this
variance would certainly imply .that the configuration of Lots 1 and 3 and the
presence of the power line easement create a hardship in terms of trying to meet
zoning requirements for the placement of structures. . Staff believe such a hard-
ship would certainly exist for Lot 1 and possibly for Lot 3. In general , we
believe that the proposed lots are reasonable in that they provide adequate width
and lot area and buildable area. It would appear unreasonable to deny the
three lots in light of the circumstances surrounding the existing parcel .
As to enjoyment of property rights, we do not believe (as the applicant apparently
does) that the Subdivision Ordinance guarantees anyone the best possible return o
on investment. How much money someone makes or loses on real estate investments
is not a concern of the Subdivision Ordinance. What is a concern is that a given
area of property should be subdividable into a reasonable number of parcels
without being unduly restricted by the regulations in the Subdivision Ordinance.
We believe three lots is a reasonable subdivision of this parcel and may be ap-
proved by variance Cwhether or not the owner makes money on the deal ).
We also agree that there should be no adverse impact on surrounding property.
Although some people in the neighborhood may have become accustomed to using this
land in a recreational manner, the surrounding owners really have no basis to
prohibit development of the property for three single-family homes.
Regarding precedent, we should note that lot variances have generally been ap-
proved if:
1 . The variance(s) have been minimized to the maximum extent
possible.
2. There is no excess land available on adjacent lots to meet
the strict letter of the ordinance.
3. The proposed lot or lots meet at least two of the requirements
for lot width, depth, and area, especially lot area.
In this case, Lot 3 has been made as large as possible and Lot 2 kept to the mini-
mum size as a means of maximizing buildable area and lot depth on Lot 3. The
frontage .variance has not been minimized, however. A different configuration of
property lines was originally submitted which provided 60' of frontage for both
Lot 1 and Lot 2, but the side property lines would have slanted in front of
prospective building sites making for a very confusing arrangement. Staff felt
that a frontage variance was preferable to such an arrangement.
As to excess land on neighboring lots, there is extra land on the lot to the west;
but the variances in question do not pertain to a lack of area. Finally, two of
the lots in question meet the width, depth, and area requirement of the Sub-
division Ordinance. One lot meets width and area, but not depth. We feel this-
arrangement is in keeping with previous variances.
In conclusion, staff recommend that the variance application be granted on the
grounds that the standards for a variance are met in this case. A public hearing
on this application has been scheduled and notices have been sent.
8-11-83 -2-
Planning Commission. Information Sheet
Application No. 83045
Applicant: Ramada Inn/Al Beisner
Location: Freeway Boulevard, east of Shingle Creek
Request: Site and Building Plan/Special Use Permit
The applicant requests site and building plan 'and special use permit approval to
construct a 13 storey, 174 room hotel on the north side of Freeway Boulevard,
immediately east of Shingle Creek. The property in question is zoned I-1 and is
bounded on the north and east by vacant I-1 zoned property, on the south by
Freeway Boulevard, and on the west by Shingle Creek. Hotels are a special use in
the I-1 zone and are subject to the Standards for a Special Use Permit and to the
standards listed in Section 35-330 Subsettion 3(f) (both attached) .
The proposed site for the hotel is a 6.3 acre parcel of land, proposed as Tract
B of the R.L.S. proposed under Application No. 83046. Access to the hotel will
be via a 24' wide opening onto Freeway Boulevard at the southeast corner of Tract
B. Access will also be available indirectly off Shingle Creek Parkway at a
median opening approximately 400' north of the intersection with Freeway Boule-
vard. The cost of constructing this median opening will be assessed to the hotel
site and to .the other parcels west of Shingle Creek Parkway which will benefit
from this access. A private service drive extending east from Shingle Creek
Parkway 9
alon the north side of Tracts D and F will carry traffic to the hotel
n
site and other sites within this general area, including the large central
parking lot.
The parking requirement -for the hotel use takes into account a number of activi-
ties within the building. Although there are 174 rooms, there will be only 172
separate keys (there will be two suites composed of two rooms. each) which require
one parking stall each. There will be a 90 seat restaurant, a 20 seat breakfast
room, and a 200 seat nightclub all calcualted at -one space per two seats. A
ballroom with seating capacity of 280 and meeting rooms with seating capacity of
180 are calculated at a rate one space per three seats. Finally, the entire
establishment will be served by 44 employees on the maximum shift, calculated at
one space per two employees. The sum of these parking requirements comes to a
grand total of 502 parking spaces, 404 of which will be provided on site. Ninety
eight (98) spaces will be deferred until eventual construction of the large
central parking lot serving the commercial and industrial area at the northwest
quadrant of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard. Eleven (11 ) handicapped
parking stalls are required for this use, all of which will be provided on the
hotel site, close to the building.
The site is laid out with a large parking area southeast of the building and
smaller parking areas to the northeast and northwest of the building. A main
central drive leads from the Freeway Boulevard access to a circular drop-off
area in front of the building. This main drive is bounded on each side by a 10'
wide delineator planted with crab trees. The building is oriented perpendicular
to the Shingle Creek right-of-way from which it is set back 50' (the building is
318' from Freeway Boulevard) . Parking is set back 42' from the Shingle Creek
right-of-way. The greenstrips along interior property lines will 7' wide, 15'
wide along Freeway Boulevard. The hotel plans to construct a set of bituminous
paths to line up with the City's bike and walkway trail system within the Shingle
Creek right-of-way.
8-11-83 -1-
Application No. 83045 continued
Plantings include 39 shade trees' (22" to 3" dia. ) around the building and the
perimeter of the site, including Hackberry, Littleleaf Linden, Sugar Maple, Sum-
mit Ash .and Skyline Honeylocust. Twenty-four (24) Crab trees, including Red
Splendor Crab, Spring Snow Crab; and Vanguard Crab, are scheduled in large con-
crete delineators and adjacent to the major entrance points. Rock mulch will be
used in the two large concrete islands alongside the main entrance drive. In
addition, the plan calls for almost 200 shrubs and almost 600 flowers to be con-
centrated in areas around- the building and the drop-off at the main south
entrance. These shrubs include Broadmoor junipers, Techny Arborvitae, American
Cranberry, Amur Maple, A.W. Spirea, Gold Drop Potenti'lla, and Green and Red
Barberries. The flowers will mostly be Snow on the Mountain. The landscape
plan indicates underground irrigation in all sodded areas and planting beds next
to the building. Rock mulch is proposed adjacent to interior property lines
rather than sod. Staff recommend that the Planning Commission examine this
choice and consider whether sod would not be more appropriate, in keeping with
other commercial sites.
The grading and utility plans call for surface runoff to drain toward a series
of catch basins located about mid-way between the hotel and outer property lines.
The plan proposes that openings be left in some concrete delineators to allow
runoff to flow toward catch basins. The catch basins in the northeast and south-
east parking lots are connected by a singel storm sewer line which widens from
18" diameter to 30" diameter as it drains into Shingle Creek. A baffle weir is
proposed to be constructed just inside the Shingle Creek right-of-way to skim off
oil before the water enters the Creek. A similar, but smaller, system is pro-
posed to handle drainage from the northwest parking lot.
Water service to the building will be gained from an existing 12" water main in
Freeway Boulevard. Sewage will flow west under Freeway Boulevard and south under
the freeway to main lines serving the Central Neighborhood rather than east along
Freeway Boulevard and 65th Avenue North to an interceptor under the freeway.
This is because of a bottleneck in the sewer line between Humboldt Avenue North
and Dupont Avenue North which restricts the total flowage which can be carried by
this line for the Industrial Park. A lift station will have to be installed at
the southwest corner of the hotel site to move sewage through a 4" force main to
existing sanitary sewer further west in Freeway Boulevard. The cost of this lift
station will be assessed against the hotel and other parcels using the force
main.
The building itself will have a brick exterior (samples of brick will be avail-
able at Thursday night's meeting). The first two floors of the building will be
rather large, encompassing restaurants, nightclub, ballroom, meeting rooms,
swimming area, kitchen facilities, lobby, laundry, offices and a terrace. The
rooms themselves will be located in a, tower extending 11 stories above.the first
two floors. The typical floor in the tower will have 16 rooms around the outer
walls with elevator, stairwell , linen room and canteen in the central area. At
the eleventh floor, an overhang protrudes approximately 4' from the north and
south (facing Freeway Boulevard) elevations of the building, expanding four of
the rooms (two along either wall ) on floors 11 , 12 and 13. The four corner rooms
on the eleventh floor will be equipped with a small bar. The building is to be
equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system in accordance with NFPA
standards and the City's fire code.
Regarding the standards for a special use permit, the applicant has submitted no
written materials apart from the site and building plans. Staff see no conflict
with standards (a) and (b) from Section 35-220. Standard (c) would not have been
met if sewage were to. flow east under Freeway Boulevard rather than west. Such a
proposal would have impeded development of other I-1 zoned land further east.
8-11-83 -2-
Appli.cation 83045 continued
However, with the sewer route proposed we feel there is no concern regarding
standard (c) . Regarding ingress, egress and parking to minimize traffic conges-
tion in the public streets, staff oelieve the combination of accesses off Free-
way Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway provide good access to the site with a
good deal of stacking space provided on prvate property. The greatest concern is
probably over an increasing number of left turns onto Freeway Boulevard posed by
this use and anticipated restaurant uses at the northwest corner of Freeway
Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway. We believe traffic congestion can be
manageable if: 1 ) only two accesses* to Freeway Boulevard are allowed between
Shingle Creek and Shingle Creek Parkway; 2) the median opening in Shingle Creek
Parkway is at least 400' north of the intersection with Freeway Boulevard; and
3 the accesses onto Freeway Boulevard are offset at
least 125 from each other.
Regarding the standards set forth in Section 35-330, Subsection 3(f) regarding
commercial uses in the I-1 district, staff feel that the proposed hotel use is
compatible and complimentary to the uses permitted in the I-1 district generally.
We would admit that, from the standpoint of traffic, the proposed use is probably
more intense than permitted uses in the I-1 zone, but with the changes proposed
traffic should not be a major problem. With regard to truck traffic, noise,
odor, vibration, glare, or heat, the proposed use is probably of comparable
intensity. Overall , we feel the hotel use does not threaten the other uses in
the Industrial Park. Finally,. as mentioned above, we feel the facility is so
designed that the traffic generated will not have an adverse impact.
Altogether, the use proposed and the plans for it generally appear to be in
order. Approval is recommended, subject to the following conditions:
1 . The special use permit is subject to all applicable .codes,
ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall
be grounds for revocation.
2. Plan approval acknowledges deferral of 98 parking spaces to be
located on the large, central parking lot serving the commercial
and insustrial uses in this area. A separate Peformance Agree-
ment and supporting financial guarantee shall be secured by the
City for improvements to the central parking lot prior to the
issuance of permits for the hotel .
3. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to
the issuance of permits.
4. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the
issuance of permits.to assure completion of approved site
improvements.
5. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion
of approved site improvements.
6. Any outside trash -disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
8-11-83 -3-
Application No. 83045 continued
7. . The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire ex-
tinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and- shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
8. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
9. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
10. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
11. A flood plain use permit shall be obtained for earthwork within `
the flood fringe.
12. The landscape plan shall be revised to indicate sod in the 7°
wide greenstrip areas adjacent to interior property lines.
8-11-83 -4-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 83046
Applicant: Ramada Inn' Al Beisner
Location: Freeway Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway
Request: Preliminary R.L.S.
The applicant requests preliminary R.L.S. approval to -subdivide into seven tracts the
southerly parcel of laid created by R.L.S. approved under Application No. 82004 (this
R.L.S. has still not b en filed at the County and, therefore, has no number) . The
land in question is zo ed I-1 and is bounded on the north by MTC, the site for
speculative industrial buildings 10 and 11 , and the site of the central parking lot
serving this area, on the east by Shingle Creek Parkway, on the south by Freeway
Boulevard, 'and on the west by Shingle Creek. . The prospective uses include office-
warehouse on Tracts A and G, hotel on Tract B, parking lot on Tract C, and rest-
aurants on Tracts, D, , and F.
The area of the entire subdivision is 24.1 acres. This is divided in the following
manner:
Tracts Acres
A 6.3
B 6.3
C 1 .3
D 2.0
E 2.1
F 1 .7
G 4.4
Total 24.1
Two parcels, Tracts and C, have no frontage on public streets. Access to these
parcels is assured b cross-access agreements which overlay all the land from
Spec. 9 on the north to the hotel and restaurant sites adjacent to Freeway Blvd.
on the south.
A drainage and utility easement is indicated over a portion of the northwest area
of Tract A. This easement is primarily for drainage. A master utility plan for
this entire development area shows prospective locations for water and sanitary
sewer lines as well . The Commission is referred to a memo from the Assistant
City Engineer regarding the proposed R. L. S. and a subdivision agreement for
certain improvements in public right-of-way.
Approval of the preliminary R.L.S. is recommended subject to at least the follow-
ing conditions:
1. The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of
the City Or inances.
3. The preliminary R..L.S. shall be revised to include items noted
in the. Assistant City Engineer's memo of August 8, 1983, prior
to consideration by the City Council .
8-11-83 -1-
Application No. 83046 continued
4. Preliminary R.L.S. approval acknowledges a master plan for
grading and utilities- for the area encompassed by this R.L.S.
and the areas occupied by Spec. 10 and 11 and the central parking
lot. Said master grading and utility plan shall be subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer. However, review and
approval of individual site development pla Rs is not thereby
implied.
5. The applicant shall enter a Subdivision Agreement with the City
stipulating responsibility for and assessment of costs for certain
improvements to public facilities within the public right-of-way,
including, but not limited to:
a) the median opening-in Shingle Creek Parkway
b) potential installation of a traffic signal at the
above median opening
c) sanitary sewer improvements
8-11-83 -2-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 83047
Applicant: Ramada Inn/A1 Beisner
Location: Northwest corner of Freeway Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway
Request: Special Use Permit
The applicant requests special use permit approval for off-site parking to serve
the Ramada Inn Hotel proposed along the north side of Freeway Boulevard, immedi-
ately east of Shingle Creek. The accessory off-site -parking .lot is to be located
on Tract C of the proposed Registered Land Survey for this area (see Application
No. 83046). Both the site of the principal use and the site of the off-site
accessory parking is a special accessory use in that zoning district.
The total required parking for Ramada Inn is 502 spaces, 404 of which are located
on the principal site. Ninety-eight (98) spaces are, therefore, proposed for the
off-site accessory parking lot. The spaces proposed in Tract C meet the require-
ments of Section 35-701 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached) for off-site accessory
parking (ie. they are not located in a more restrictive zone; they are on a single
site; they are within 800' of the site of the principal use; there are more than
20 spaces; they are not Tocated across a major street, although they are located
across a private access drive serving this and other prospective developments in
the proposed R.L.S. ) . A legal encumbrance for the 98 stalls has not been sub-
mitted. Such a document should be submitted with the final R.L.S. and filed at
the County prior to issuance o.-1 building permits.
The ordinance also provides that accessory off-site parking site improvements
shall be provided as required by the City Council . In this case, the accessory
off-site parking lot will not be constructed immediately and the stalls to be
located on that site will serve as proof-of-parking during the period while con-
struction of the off-site lot is deferred. The applicant has pointed out to
staff that the ordinance formulas result in double-counting some hotel patrons
who will also use the restaurant, nightclub, and/or meeting rooms. Therefore,
these 98 off-site stalls need not be installed immediately. Staff concur that a
deferral of the off-site improvements is warranted. However, as the conditions
of the site plan approval suggest, we recommend that a bond be held by the City
to insure the installation of central common parking lot at some time in the
future. A formal site plan for this large central lot, including landscaped
areas, should be submitted for separate approval before the last parcel of the
proposed R.L.S. is developed in order to firmly establish how many parking spaces
will actually be installed and what spaces will be allocated to which use.
A master plan for the proposed R.L.S. and including speculative industrial
buildings 9, 10, and 11 , has been submitted with certain stalls from the central
parking lot designated for the Ramada Inn. Based on this master plan, approval
of the special use permit for off-site accessory parking is recommended subject
to at least the following conditions:
1 . At least 98 parking spaces to be constructed on Tract C of the
R.L.S. proposed under Application No.83046 shall be legally
encumbered to the sole use of the Ramada Inn on Tract B of the
same R.L.S. The legal encumbrance shall .be subject to review
and approval by the City Attorney and shall be filed at the
County prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. A separate performance guarantee provided by Shingle Creek
Land Company shall be held to insure completion of. site improve-.
ments to the large central , common parking lot on the master
plan for the- area bounded by Freeway Boulevard on the south,
Shingle Creek Parkway on the east and north, and MTC and Shingle
Creek on the west.
8-11-83 0
i
1
1
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 83029
Applicant: Wes' Standard
Location: 6044 Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Special Use Permit
The applicant requests special use permit approval to sell items other than fuels,
lubricants or automotive parts and accessories at the service station at 6044
Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded on the
north, east, and south by R5 zoned property (Brookdale Manor Apartments) and on
the west by Brooklyn Boulevard. This application was reviewed by the Planning
Commission at its June 30, 1983 meeting. At that time, the application was tabled
and the applicant was directed to submit a professionally drawn parking plan to
show that adequate parking can be provided on the site in accordance with Section
35-704, 2(b) and (c) of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission is referred to the
minutes and information sheet from that meeting (attached) for background on this
application.
The applicant has recently submitted a plan which provides proof-of-parking for
up to 23 parking stalls. - Twenty-three (23) stalls is the number required by the
service station (12) and the retail sales operation (11 ) . The applicant does not
intend to put in all of the stalls shown on the plan, but will continue with the
18 existing stalls. He feels that additional parking is unnecessary since most
customers will be parked at th-e gas pumps while they purchase food or other items.
Staff would acknowledge that this is probably acceptable, but would recommend that
the applicant be required to agree in writing to put in the proof-of-parking stalls
upon a determination by the City that additional stalls are necessary to avoid
traffic congestion in the public streets.
The Assistant City Engineer has reviewed the plan to see that certain turning
movements are possible, given the location of the. proposed parking stalls. He is
satisfied that movements into and out of the service bays and car wash should be
unimpeded. There is a driving lane, south of the building, which is indicated to
be 21 ' wide rather than the normal 24' . This deficiency is offset by the fact
that the stalls adjacent to this driving lane are 19' 6" in depth when only 18'
is required with curb overlap. Taking 1 ' 6" from each stall adds 3' to the driving
lane to meet the required minimum. Also, a stall in the southeast corner of the
site is labeled as an angle parking stall . However, we feel this stall should more
appropriately be a 90° stall .
It should be noted that Mr. Reavely has proceeded to sell food and other items at
the service station without a special use permit and without a food establishment
. license. He has been cited for an ordinance violation and the matter is in court
and has been continued for arraignment until September 6. In the meantime, Mr.
Reavely continues to operate the retail business without the proper license and
special use permit. We believe such a flagrant action cannot be ignored.
It raises serious question regarding whether or not the applicant can meet Stan-
dard (a) for granting special use permits (It should be noted that with the sub-
mitted plan and certain assurances by the applicant, the staff feel the other
standards can be met).
Standard (a) states that "The establishment, maintenance or operation of the
special use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be
detrimental to or endanger•the public health, safety, morals or comfort "(emphasis
added) . Selling food products without the required license certainly has the
potential of endangering the public health and safety and may be indicative of the
applicant's attitude regarding compliance with all applicable codes, ordinances
and regulations.
8-11-83 -1-
Application No. 83029 continued
Further consideration by the Planning Commission and assurances by the applicant is
in order.
We have been contacted by Boyer Palmer, owner of the apartment complex east of the
site, who states that he does not object to the grocery operation at the site, but
has indicated that the screen fence on the Standard site is in need of painting and -
some minor maintenance. We would recommend such a conditionif this application
receives a favorable review by the Commission.
Based on the parking plan submitted and resolution of the Standards for a Special
Use Permit approval can be recommended subject to the following conditions:
1 . The permit is subject. to all applicable codes, ordinances and
regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for
revocation.
2. Permit approval acknowledges proof-of-parking for 5 additional
stalls on the site. The applicant shall agree in writing prior
to the issuance of the permit to install parking spaces in
accordance with the proof-of-parking plan upon a determination
by the City that additional spaces are needed to prevent traffic
congestion in the public streets.
3. The screen fence along the east side of the property shall be
repaired and painted prior to the issuance of permits.
8-11-83 -2-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 83044
Applicant: The Salvation Army
Location: 2300 Freeway Boulevard
Request: Special Use Permit
The applicant requests special use permit approval to use the property at 2300 ,
Freeway Boulevard (formerly Swenson's Ethan Allen Carriage House) for the divisional
headquarters of the Salvation Army. The property in question is zoned I-1 and is
bounded on the northeast by Shingle Creek, on the south by Freeway Boulevard and on
the northwest by the Schmitt Music warehouse/store. Office uses are allowed in the
I-1 zone by special use permit. The previous use of the building was also a special
use, but that permit was for a retail/commercial use and is not transferable to the
proposed use.
The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which he explains the reasons for
the transfer to the Brooklyn Center location (the Salvation Army offices are presently
located at 1516 !lest Lake Street, Minneapolis) . He explains that a number of Salva-
tion Army personnel live close to the Brooklyn Center location and that the proximity
of the site to the freeway system will improve access to Salvation Army facilities .
Mr. Speck explains that the use of the property would be for administrative offices
only and will not include any distributional services. He states that there are to
be approximately 35 pers ns employed at the site. There are presently 54 parking
spaces available on the 3ite which should accommodate normal demand and occasional
committee meetings which bring extra people to the site.
The applicant has also submitted an as-built survey of the site and a copy of the
proof-of-parking plan submitted with the original site and building plans. The
building in question is approximately 15,000 sq. ft. The office parking requirement
for a building of this size is 75 spaces. Although there are only 54 presently in-
stalled, the proof-of-parking plan shows a capacity on the site of over 100 spaces.
We do not feel there is any need to install more parking at this time. A condition
of approval should acknowledge the proof-of-parking and require the applicant to
commit i_n writing to the installation of more parking in the event the City determines
additional parking is needed.
Staff see no conflict with the standards for a special use permit (attached) , nor
with the limitations pla ed on commercial special uses in the I-1 zone (also attached).
Approval is, therefore, �ecommended subject to the following conditions :
1. The permit is s bject to all applicable codes , ordinances , and
• regulations, an any violation thereof shall be grounds for
revocation.
2. The special use permit is issued to the Salvation Army as the
user of the fac�lity and is nontransferable.
3. Special use permit approval acknowledges a proof-of-parking for
stalls sufficient to meet the requirement for office use of the
entire building In the event that the City determines that
existing parking spaces are inadequate, the applicant shall be
required to install additional parking stalls up to the office
requirement of 75 spaces. The applicant shall state in writing
that they under tand and agree to this condition prior to the
issuance of the Special Use Permit.
4. Building plans for the remodeling to office space are subject
to the review arid approval of the Building.Official with respect
to applicable codes prior to the issuance of building permits.
8-11-83