Loading...
10-14-02 PC Minutes 'e e Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 14, 2002 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday October 14, 2002. Vice Chair Shaffer called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Those present were Commissioners Eck, Groger, Keysser, McAleese and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, City Planner, Dan Olson. Chair Pentel and Commissioner Rasmussen were absent. I. Approval of Minutes - September 23, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Groger, seconded by Eck and motion carried unanimously to approve the September 23, 2002 minutes. II. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit (CU-98) Applicants: Excel One, Inc. (d.b.a. Auction Network) Address: 2510 A Hillsboro Avenue North, Golden Valley, MN Purpose: The Conditional Use Permit would allow for a broker for wholesale and retail automobile sales on property in the Commercial zoning district. Grimes discussed the applicant's request to display and sell up to five cars in the parking lot of the Sunny Hollow Shopping Center. He stated that the Zoning Code allows car lots only with a Conditional Use Permit in the Commercial zoning district. He explained that the applicant would be leasing approximately 150 square feet of office space and that the type of use being proposed is considered commercial in nature and is consistent with the General Land Use Plan map and other car dealerships in the Commercial zoning district, but that no other dealerships are in shopping centers. He showed the Commissioners a site plan and pointed out the area where the cars would be parked. He stated that the applicant does have additional car storage space in Brooklyn Park so he would not have a need to store more than five cars at this location. He added that the applicant's current business is in Ham Lake and that he has spoken with staff in Ham Lake and they have stated that they haven't had any problems or complaints regarding the applicant's business. Grimes stated that there are currently 95 parking spaces at the shopping center and that according to the type and mix of uses in the shopping center there would be adequate parking for the shopping center after Excel One moved in. He added that the proposed use would unlikely create any traffic problems. He discussed the proposed test drive route and stated that staff suggests that one of the conditions of approval be Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 14, 2002 Page 2 that there be no test drives on local, residential streets. He added that this requirement would be hard to enforce. He referred to his staff report and discussed the ten factors he considered as part of a CUP approval. Ed Johnson, applicant stated that he is looking to move his business from Ham Lake to Golden Valley. He said he is a resident of Golden Valley. He stated that there is always plenty of parking available on the site and that for him to have five cars at one time would be a lot for him. He discussed the landowner's proposal to repave the whole parking lot. Keysser asked how the cars would arrive on the lot. Johnson stated they are driven individually and that there would be no trucks or trailers. Eck asked the applicant how he would draw customers to the site. Johnson stated that e he advertises in the paper and only sees customers strictly by appointment. Groger referred to the applicant's existing Conditional Use Permit from Ham Lake and stated that it requires the 5 cars to be inside a building or in a fenced in area. Johnson stated that that is a condition of his CUP in Ham Lake, but that the landlord has never put a fence up. Groger asked the applicant if he anticipates that drive by traffic would be a factor in finding customers. Johnson stated no. Shaffer asked the applicant if there has been any vandalism at his location in Ham Lake. Johnson stated no and added that at his Ham Lake location he has residential areas on both sides of his business and that there have been no problems or complaints. Shaffer asked the applicant if he clears snow off of the cars in the winter. Johnson stated yes and reiterated that he would rarely have five cars in the parking lot. e Keysser asked ifthere was a way for the City to monitor the site and the conditions of approval. Grimes stated that generally the staff in the Inspections Department would check a site if there are complaints. He stated that Ham Lake reviews their CUP's every year, but Golden Valley does not. Groger asked how many test-drives per week the applicant has at his current location. Johnson stated he has two or three test-drives per week and that he usually goes with them. Shaffer opened the public hearing. Glen Busitzski, 2436 Mendelssohn Lane, stated that he didn't think car sales would be a good mix in this shopping center. He stated that he is not extremely against the proposal but is concerned as to how the City would monitor the site. He showed the Commission some pictures he took at Plymouth Avenue and TH 169 and stated that the cars in the pictures all had for sale signs in the windows and that some of them had been at that location for over a year. He stated he could assure that residents in the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 14, 2002 Page 3 area would be monitoring the site and that the proposal is not appropriate at this location. Andrew Garon, 2416 Mendelssohn Lane stated that this proposal would bring in an element the City doesn't need and that it would be an inappropriate use. He is concerned about the values of the homes in the area and that not everyone at Pheasant Glen received a hearing notice. Bonnie Ostlund, 2456 Mendelssohn Lane stated that she takes issue with the test drive pattern being enforced. She stated that Ham Lake is not Golden Valley and she is concerned that a car dealership would have a negative impact and would open the City up for the possibility of other uses like the one being proposed. e Phyllis Bailey, 9201 Medicine Lake Road stated that when the condominium parking lot next door was repaved some of the residents asked the shopping center owner if they could park their cars in there parking lot. They were told no and that any car parked in their parking lot past midnight would be towed. Hearing and seeing no one, Shaffer closed the public hearing. Eck asked Grimes if he had any comments about the pictures that were taken at Plymouth Avenue and TH169. Grimes stated he was not aware of the situation and that he would be checking into it. He stated that car sales are not permitted atthat location and that they do not have a conditional use permit. Groger stated that he has reservations about setting a precedent. He stated that the proposal is minimal and not terribly invasive, but it is not appropriate in a mostly residential area and he would be voting against the proposal. e Shaffer stated he was also concerned about allowing car sales at a strip mall and setting a precedent because then other shopping centers could ask for the same type of use. He stated he doesn't think this proposal is compatible in this shopping center. McAleese referred to condition number two in Mark Grimes' memo and stated that the word "modes" should be "models" and he asked for a definition of "good condition". He stated that if he were going to approve a business of this type that this would be an ideal use, but this particular proposal is inappropriate for a shopping center that is in a mostly residential area. Grimes suggested adding as a condition of approval that vehicles cannot be delivered by a car transport. Eck stated that this particular application is minimally intrusive and probably won't be noticeable at all by the neighbors, but in this particular case it is not a compatible use. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 14. 2002 Page 4 Keysser stated that he is less concerned about the impact to the shopping mall but he is concerned about this type of use in a residential neighborhood. Eck stated that he thinks another condition of approval should be added so that vans would not be allowed to park on the site. McAleese suggested adding language regarding passenger vehicles up to a certain weight. MOVED by McAleese and seconded by Eck to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a broker of wholesale and retail automobile sales on property in the Commercial zoning district with the following conditions: · Change condition number two in Mark Grimes' memo to define "good condition". · Delivery of automobiles by trailer would not be allowed. · Only passenger vehicles up to a certain weight would be allowed to park on the lot. e Upon a vote the motion was unanimously denied. The Commission thought the use was incompatible with the area and they didn't want to set a precedent. III. Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Code Text Amendment Applicant: City of Golden Valley Purpose: The City would like to revise three Sections of the Zoning Code to allow for time extensions for P.U.D.'s, CUP's and Variances. e Olson stated that staff would like to revise the Zoning Code to allow for time extensions on PUD approvals for six months for final plat submittal, and one-year extensions for CUP's and variances. He referred to the draft ordinance written by the city attorney. Shaffer asked how the City has been handling extensions. Grimes stated that the City Council nas issued extensions in the past but that there is nothing in the City Code regulating this. Eck asked for clarification on what exactly staff is asking. Olson explained that for Conditional Use Permits and variance approvals applicants have one year to do the requested work or the approval expires. Eck stated that some clarification is needed in the draft ordinance. Grimes stated that the draft ordinance is more clear when the section of the code involving these items is read. Shaffer asked how many times an applicant could apply for an extension. Olson stated that the language allows an extension for up to 12 months. McAleese stated that when the whole section of the Code is read it sounds like applicants could only apply for an extension one time. e e Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 14, 2002 Page 5 Shaffer opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one, Shaffer closed the public hearing. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Keysser and motion carried unanimously to approve staff's request to revise three Sections of the Zoning Code to allow for time extensions for P.U.D.'s, CUP's and Variances. -- Short Recess -- IV. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Shaffer discussed a variance request for a third stall garage that the Board of Zoning Appeals denied. He stated that the applicant is appealing the Board's decision to the City Council. V. Other Business The Commissioners discussed hardships for variance requests and for third stall garages. VI. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 PM.