Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC80029 - 8/14/80 - 55th & Dupont AvePLANNING COMMISSION FILE CHECKLIST File Purge Date - Planning Commission Application No. 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 Location Agenda Cover Sheet: Planning Commission Agenda Book Minutes: Planning Commission Minutes: City Council Resolutions: Planning Commission Resolutions: City Council Ordinances: City Council 6111h1164) City Vault £'1Z5�ev City Vault City Vault City Vault City Vault Historical Photographs: Planning Commission City Archieve CITY OF bll () W:l_; i1 Cl w H. k PLANNING C0II'1ISSION ZOINIIIG, AHILIC/1'10i' Application No. 80029 Please 'Print Cle7.rr Street Location of Property 55th and -'-Dupont Avenue North Legal Description of Property Lot 6, Block 2, Littel Addition, Hennepin Co., Mn. O,,;ner Harron United Methodist Church Address 55th & Dupont Avenue North Phone 566-2780 Applicant Glenna Larson, Board Chairman P,ddres� 5420 Queen Avenue North 560-8826 Phone No . Type of Request: Rezon -1 ng Subd i vi si. n Approval Var ian,ce Sitc & bld Pail Special Use Pet . i t Other Description of Reques-t: Variance of Dreen Strip to allow parking of 40 cars versus 25. We are asking for a variance of ten (l0�feet.___ We are also asking to use existing lilac bushes as screening on two sides with additional oga ue fencing where needed. If for any reason, the lilac hedge_ should fail, we would replace with -appropriate_ screenin�._�_ Lee $ 15.00 _.-,. 53912 AP-C'e;NL_ tau. Datel---% of P.C. Cons ,deration: X— ing co''PC.' eons: w hppI tce.nC'S'S-�ii3 July 28, 1980 -' Date PLANIN-114G COi^.VT;Z1ZTO r4 RECONf,,ENDijTria Itis _ day of 19,t]Lsubject- :o Li- �`01 1ot hn _fit Chai rti.an CITY COUNCIL ACTION Dates 4f CcunCI1 CO, Isic ratio?: Appi-, e-3 Denied this c� day c>f Qom. 19&, with the fof10-Jll,j -^- e,nc•n:in�; 6- 11/1 I llt'Ilt 'No 1s (G\%or pl('xJ' ) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 80029 Applicant: Harron United Methodist Church Location: 5501 Dupont Avenue North Request: Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 35-700 of the City's Zoning Ordinance in order to allow for a 12' greenstrip along Dupont Avenue North to the east of the parking lot proposed in Application No. 80028. The ordinance requirement for all districts other than Cl and C1A is a 15' greenstrip between off-street parking and street right-of-way. The zoning facts which surround this case are rather complex. While the Standards for a Variance would not seem to be met for the proposed variance if considered in isolation, we feel there is definite merit to this request when considered along with the particular facts surrounding the application. There are at least four deficiencies existing, potential or proposed in the plan for this site: 1. The seating capacity of the church is over 300 persons which translates into a parking requirement of over 100 stalls. Average attendance on Sunday morning is roughly 120 implying that 40 stalls would just about meet the present parking needs. Technically a deficiency of 60+ parking stalls remains even if the variance is granted. Without a variance, the parking deficiency would be approximately 75 stalls. This is an existing condition which cannot be ameliorated by withholding a permit. 2. The proposed greenstrip is 12' wide (10' wide if no ordinance amendment is adopted regarding compact car stalls), but still provides adequate room to plant or dense shrubrow for effect- ive screening. The absence of sidewalk within the Dupont right-of-way means there should be approximately 27' of unbroken green space as opposed to the normal 30'. 3. While there is no ordinance requirement for a buffer area between churches and other R1 uses, staff recommend that church parking areas be kept a minimum of 5' from neighboring property as in commercial zones. The proposed plan calls for a separation of 5' on the north and 2.5' on the west. Mitigating the narrow green area to the west of the parking lot is an approximate 15' green area between the west property line and a dense row of Lilacs on the neighboring property. The 2.5' greenstrip at the property line is a departure from past policy and is not literally a variance from an ordinance requirement. It is felt that this is a wide enough area for a fence to be erected if it becomes necessary to provide required screening. 4. The alternative to reducing the green areas or the number of parking stalls is to reduce either the length of the parking stalls on the width of the driving lanes. (This is accomplished to some extent with a row of compact car stalls on the east side of the lot). It is staff's judgment that granting a variance from these requirements would create more problems on the site than the reduction of the greenstrip and would set a dangerous precedent that could possibly be used by commercial developers 8-14-80 -1- Application No. 80029 continued (Condition 4) seeking to maximize the use of available land to the point of overutilization. The granting of a variance would attempt to minimize the existing and potential deficiencies of the present use in a manner that optimizes the overall benefits to the church and to the general public. Implicit in this attempt are a set of priorities reflecting those benefits: 1. Minimize the existing parking space deficiency and provide, as far as possible, adequate parking for the church. 2. Maintain ordinance standards for parking and driving lanes to ensure that the lot functions properly in accommodating church traffic. 3. Provide screening of off-street parking areas as required by City Ordinance. 4. Provide adequate green space on the site. We concur with former Commissioner Engdahl that the primary ordinance objective is to reduce the existing parking deficiency for the church and that this can reasonably be accomplished by granting a variance from the greenstrip require- ment of Section 35-700. Approval of the application is therefore recommended on the following grounds: 1. Not only the applicant, but the public as well would be adversely effected from the denial of the variance. (This is based on the finding that the priorities outlined above accurately reflect the public interest in this particular case). 2. The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique in that the parcel in question is to be put to use to alleviate an existing deficiency in the parking required for the church and wi 1 not be recognized as grounds for further expansion. 3. The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance which cannot all be met simultaneously in this case. The hardship was not created by persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land in that it was platted in a size and shape to serve residential as opposed to institutional needs. 4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood so long as the conditions attaching to the approval of the site plan are met. 8-14-80 -2-