Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC83006 - 2/17/83 - 6810 Brooklyn BlvdP%P(NNING COMMISSION FILE CHECKLIST File Purge Date: 3'} FILE INFORMATION Project Number: 8306y— Sze, a.l3v S10 3, 770,2s, -79oVs— PROPERTY INFORMATION Zoning: PLAN REFERENCE Note: If a plan was found in the file during the purge process, it was pulled for consolidation of all plans. Identified below are the types of plans, if any, that were consolidated. • Site Plans • Building Plans • Other: FILE REFERENCE Note: The following documents were purged when this project file became inactive. We have recorded the information necessary to retrieve the documents. Document Type Date Range cation Agendas: Planning Commission Office Minutes: Planning Commission Minutes: City Council Document IM Resolutions: Planning Commission Resolutions: City Council Ordinances: City Council 'V/0-3 City Vault 3y3/83 c1, le/ t soPul�v� City Vault Number Location City Vault City Vault City Vault COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY FILES CHECKLIST s.! ! ( 01 �<,�; 1i..'.. i s ,4 11 PLAI-ININ('. APPLI.Ch.1 ON Application No. 83006 Please Print Clearly or ape Street Location of Property__. 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard Legal Description of Property. Owner Address Applicant Thomas G. Cook Tract A, R.L.S. 1456 4401 Bay Shore Drive, Sturgeon Bay, WI Phone No. (414) 743-5350 Brian Cook Address 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard Phone No. 560-0330 Type of Request: Rezoning _ Subdivision Approval Variance X Site & Bldg. Plan Approval X Special Use Permit ! Other: !_ Description of Request: Site and building plan and special use permit approval to build a car wash. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn. Center, within fifteen (15 ) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdra:!al of the applicatiorI shall not relieve the applicant uF the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal. Fee $ Sn_OD _ Applicant's Signature Date: February 3, 1983 Receipt No. 54768 ._ PLAiJiIING COMMISSION Ri:C0M;YiEJdDATION� Dates of P.C. Consideration: _ Approved _ Denied this day of following conditions: CITY COUNCIL ACTION 19 , subject to the Chairman Dates of Council Consideration: Approved _ Denied amendment: this day of 19 , with the following `CTork PJI Form No. 18 (over please) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83006 Applicant: Car-X Muffler Shop Location: 6810 Brooklyn Blvd. Request: Site and Building Plan and Special Use Permit This application was tabled by the Commission at its February 17, 1983 meeting with a request to bring back a resolution recommending denial of the application. We have prepared such a draft resolution and it is attached for the Commission's consideration. The public hearing for this application has been closed. There- fore, action need only be taken on the resolution recommending denial. 3-3-83 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83006 Applicant: Car X Muffler Shop Location: 6810 Brooklyn Blvd. Request: Site and Building Plan, Special Use Permit The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a linear (one -bay) car wash adjacent to the Car X Muffler Shop at 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard. The car wash would be on the same property as the muffler shop and would be owned and operated by the current proprietor. The property is zoned C2 and is bounded by North Star Dodge on the southeast and northeast, by Big Wheel Auto Parts on the northwest, and by Brooklyn Boulevard on the southwest. A car wash is a.special use in the C-2 zoning district. The proposed car wash is a structure 25' 4" wide by 72' long. It is to be situated on an area of land approximately 50' wide by 200' long (deep) on the south side of the Car X property. There is one 30' wide access to the property at present and no additional accesses are allowed pursuant to an agreement entered into by Car X when the property was platted into a single parcel in 1977. A second access is also made infeasible by the requirement that driveways in commercial and industrial areas be 50 feet apart (the North Star Dodge driveway is less than 100 feet from the Car X driveway). The primary difficulty of the site plan is with the provision of parking and of stacking space for waiting customers. The site plan provides only one additional parking stall on the grounds that there will allegedly be only one employee connected with the operation. We feel the ordinance requires at least four (4) parking spaces for this operation and possibly nine (9). If the car wash is con- sidered similar to a one -bay auto service garage, the parking requirement would be three spaces for each bay (and in this case, one bay holds three cars) plus one space for every two employees (this results in four spaces in this case). If no formula in the ordinance (Section 35-704) is deemed to be comparable to the car wash use, then the use falls into the category of "other commercial uses" which requires one space per 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area (in this case, the result is nine spaces). The Planning Commission may also make a finding that the parking requirement is more or less than we have suggested here. Also of concern is the area provided for stacking. The site plan shows stacking for 27 cars. This is an optimistic total, assuming as it does, a double line of stacking within a 17' wide driving lane along the south side of the building. (In the winter time, snow may narrow this lane to one car width and reduce stacking space to 18 cars). The City Ordinance lists no explicit stacking requirement. In the case of the Brookdale Car Wash, the Planning Commission and City Council ap- proved stacking space for 52 cars (in addition to 10 spaces for employee parking) where the maximum number of cars washed in an hour was 60 cars. One major difference between the Brookdale Car Wash and the proposed operation is that Brookdale Car Wash sells gasoline whereas this operation will simply be a car wash. We have checked with a number of other communities in Hennepin County to relate stacking requirements. Many of them require between 20 and 30 parking or stacking spaces or stacking for the number of cars that can be washed in one half-hour. The capacity of the proposed car wash is difficult to precisely define. The minimum speed would wash 40 cars in one hour. However, the equipment has the ability to be speeded up to wash up to 200 cars per hour. To some extent this would reduce the 2-17-83 -1- Application No. 83006 continued The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which he argues that the proposed use meets the Standards for a Special Use Permit. The letter notes that the operation will be operated in accordance with state and local codes and con- ditions of special use permit approval. He points out that the proposed car wash will be constructed of materials similar to the existing muffler shop and is compatible with other uses in the area. He explains that the proposed car wash is of a fully automated design requiring only one employee to operate, thus reducing the need for parking. He also explains that there will be no additional services (ie. vacuuming, hand detailing)or gasoline offered to keep traffic moving as expediently as possible. Finally, he points out that the peak hours of the car wash are on weekends when other businesses in the area are closed for service. It is clear that in terms of land use compatibility, a car wash is a logical use at this location. The location is virtually surrounded by other automotive uses. The primary standard which is not met is standard (d). The applicant has done his best to provide parking and stacking space, given the constraints of the site. Staff -conclude, however, that the amount of stacking space provided leaves an unacceptable risk of traffic congestion in the public streets. This traffic con- gestion may, in turn, have a detrimental effect on property values within the neighborhood. The root of the problem is not with the use or with the design, but with the parcel of land. It is simply too small and there are simply too many deficiencies to overlook and hope that the use will work on the site. After considerable design work, we are forced to conclude that everything that can be done has been done and the proposal simply just doesn't make it: Other conveyor -type car washes in the metro area have considerably more land and more stacking space. We have received a.partial list of these car washes (attached) from the legal representative of Brookdale Car Wash supplied by the Minnesota Automatic Car Wash Association. Although from an interested source, the survey includes no location with less than 15,000 sq. ft. of area or stacking for 35 cars. Most are 25,000 to 45,000 sq. ft. and have stacking for 45 to 60 cars. We feel this is at least an indication that the present site with only 10,000 sq. ft. and 27 stacking spaces does not come up to the general industry standard. (We wish to emphasize that our negative recommend- ation of the present application is not intended as a protection of the existing industry. Other sites exist in Brooklyn Center which would be suitable.) Staff are also concerned that the proposed use does not provide parking or stacking in a manner consistent with the only other conveyor -type car wash in town, the Brookdale Car Wash. That car wash provided 52 stacking spaces relative to a maximum capacity of 60 cars. per hour. Cars have, however; stacked up out onto the nonpublic roadway adjacent to this car -wash. The proposed car wash has a maximum capacity of over 120 cars per hour (we have been told up to 200 cars per hour) and stacking for no more than 27 cars. If a standard of stacking for one half-hour maximum capacity were used, the proposed car wash would need stacking for at least 60 cars. Another comparison that can be made with the Brookdale Car Wash is regarding access. Brookdale Car Wash has no direct access onto a public street, but three accesses onto a private road. This allows for management of any off -site stacking without affecting traffic in public streets. The proposed car wash has only one access onto an undivided and heavily traveled major thoroughfare. Left turns into and out of the proposed car wash would be made extremely difficult if cars are stacked out to the entrance or onto the street. Nevertheless, they would undoubtedly be tried. 2-17-83 -3- *� . .;K.._ ..: ...~«.» �., -��y �`' "'i.'`T'�-tom• + . ,. 3. .• .. ��� •way NO , �,{f � i� •V 1 .... - '� f—a—j—s�•- � � `.� is `{ ��# vi- ct 44 In -z st list v�Z.-���!�.� - _ -�• \�1 -- 1� ifr�i•\S fir F C ' .�_. sue_. _ `� ►,� — _ _ { � ji ._ Application No. 83006 continued time customers would have to wait, but it also expands the capacity of the car wash to handle more cars and could lead to stacking of vehicles off the premises. This possibility is a definite concern of the staff since Brooklyn Boulevard is a major thoroughfare and traffic on this stretch of the Boulevard has increased noticeably since the opening of I-94 to Minneapolis. On the other hand, the peak hours for the car wash would likely be on weekends when traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard is more moderate. Nevertheless, we feel the likelihood of cars stacking in Brooklyn Boulevard is fairly high which increases the possibility of accidents and has definite implications on whether the application meets the standards for a special use permit (ie. standard d). Apart from the questions of parking and stacking, the site plan has both pluses and minuses. Curb and gutter is provided around all parking and driving areas as re- quired by ordinance, but driving lanes are too narrow along the south side of the building (17') and west of the building where entrance and exit lanes are 10' wide separated by a one -foot wide concrete median. The Assistant City Engineer has recommended that the main driving lane be at least 18' wide and the entrance and exit lanes be separated by a 3' wide rather than a 1' wide median. This may require the building to be moved back a few feet, reducing stacking space by perhaps one car. Green areas on the site are to be sodded and underground irrigation is to be in- stalled in all landscaped areas. Seven (7) Norway Maples are scheduled within the peripheral green areas on the site. The front greenstrip has already been landscaped with seven (7) Pfitzer Junipers and one Russian Olive. The building . exterior proposed is a dark brown brick to match the existing Car X Muffler Shop. Lighting is provided by three mercury-vapor pole lights at the southwest, southeast and northeast corners of the car wash portion of the site. As to whether the proposed use meets the Standards for a Special Use Permit, our judgment is that not all the standards are met. Section 35-220 provides that: "A special use permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: (a) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. (b) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. (c) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. (d) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. (e) The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located." 2-17-83 -2- . -. Application. No. 83006 continued The limited, on -site stacking and high capacity of the car wash, combined with the high volume of traffic on undivided Brooklyn Boulevard, make for what staff feel is an unacceptable risk of congestion and accident and the applicant has not conclusively shown that this proposal will overcome that objection. Based on the foregoing, we must recommend denial of this application. If the Planning Commission agrees with this analysis, it may wish to adopt a resolution recommending denial. We will be prepared to offer such a resolution or conditions of approval at Thursday night's meeting. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent. 2-17-83 -4- V-' - NILLOW LAN SCHOOL /ILLOW LANE PARK �i a Iq9 CE Application ivo. 83006