97-352�L
Presented By
� �': 4 � � ", £ !"`.. �
�. ' �. f �
, F � . . . .. ...�
Green Sheet # \���
L, MINNESOTA
2
Referred To ��
�C7
Council File # I� —3 S �'
Ordinance #
Committee: Date
An ordinance amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaiiung to zoning for the City
of Saint Paul and the zoning maps thereo£
�
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
WI�REAS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462357 and §64.400 of the Legislative Code, DAIVIEL AND
LINDA Bi7RNS duly petitioned to rezone 986 GRAND AVENUE, being legally described as Lot 2, Block
35; Summit Park Addition, from RM-2 to B-3, the petition being subsequently amended to rezone the
properry from RM-2 to P-1, to allow development of a pazking lot to accommodate expansion and remodeling
of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue, the petition having been certified by the Planning
Division on March 12, 1997 as having been consented to by at least 67 percent of the owners of the azea of
the property to be rezoned, and fiirther having been consented to by at least two-thirds of the owners of the
property situated within 100 feet of the total contiguous property within one year proceeding the date of the
petition; and
WHEREAS, The Zoning Committee of the Plaiming Commission held a public hearing on January 16, 1997,
for the purpose of considering the rezoning petition, and pursuant to § 107.03 of the Administrafive Code,
submitted its recommendation to the Planning Commission that the petition be granted; and
19 WHEREAS, The Planning Commission considered the rezoning petition at its meeting held on January 24,
20 1997 and zecommended that the City Council approve the petition; and
21
22 WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council on the said rezoning petition was duly
23 published in the official newspaper of the City on January 31, 1997 and notices were duly mailed to each
24 owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property sought to be
25 rezoned;and
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
WIIEREAS, public hearings before the City Council having been conducted on February 26, 1997 and Mazch
12, 1997, where all ittterested parties were heard, the Council having considered all the facts and
recoxnmendations concerning the petition; now, therefore
II�'I�K�lfl�[�I_11i]�1:1_�Zi]�.Y:\1��1771�JA�Z�]�.I.Y� '�� : 1�
Section l.
That the zoning map of the City of Saint Paul, Sheet Number 27, as incorporated by reference in §60301
of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows:
That property with the address of 986 GRt1ND AVENUE, being more particularly described as:
Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Pazk Addition
�/
?a�a1
40 be �nd is hereby rezoned from RM-2 to P-1. 3 5�—
41 q �"
42
43 Section 2.
44
45 This ordinance shall take effect and be in foYce fliiriy (30} days from and after its passage, approval and
46 publication.
Bimrrecrc
�. ; ! !' •. .
Requested by Department of:
�V-C
Adoption Certified by Council Secretazy
B �� a. � �
Approved by Mayor: nate �f" I��� �
By:
By:
Form Approve City Attorney
BY� .2t%G°"lN�� r1�raCO—�2
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By: � G��� �---��•
TOTAI # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
FOR
3����
GREEN SH � � � �� a "
INRI INRIAUDATE
DEPAqTMENTDIRECTOfl �CfTYCOUNGL
GINATTORNEY O CffYCLERK
BUDGET DIRECipP � FIN. B MGT. SERVICES DIP.
MAYOR(ORASSISTANT) �
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
Adopt an ord'mance to fmalize council approval of a petition of DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS to rezone
property located at 98b GRAND AVENLJE from RM-2 to P-1 (public hearings held February 26, 1997 and
Mazch 12, 199� .
RE Approva (A) w Aejact (R) PEHSONAL SEHVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWfNG QUESTION3:
L PLANNING COMMISSION _ CIYIL 5ERVICE CAMMISSION �� Nas lFiis person/iirm ever worked untler a comract for this departrnerr[?
GB COMMISTEE YES NO
��� _ 2. Has ffiis person/tirm ever been a ciry employee?
YES NO
__ DISTflIGTGOURT __ _
SUPGORTS WHICH COUNCIL OB.IECT7VE?
3. Does tBis perso�rm possess a skill mt norrnally possessed by any wrrent c(ty employee?
YES NO
I Erzplalrt a11 yea anawers en aeparate ahaet a�tl attach tc green sheet
�� �� t �
IIiIATINO PROBLEM, ISSUF. OPPOR7UNIlY (VJho, What. When, Where, Why):
Finalize council approval of a perition of DANIEL t�ND LINDA BURNS to rezone property at 986 GRAND
AVENTJE from RM-2 to P-1 to allow development of a parking lot to accommodate expansion and remodeling
of the existing auto repair business at 982 Graud Avenue.
��������
1�AR 20 j�9�
,���v�'d �
�a-tC�
� �^ ��-� �`���gf
s ��..._�. , �_ ,�:.�,. � a
.,<<��.� � �� i�97
___---_��_�.>.����
�'
., • �.
��
' � < ;.
OTAL AMOUNT OF THANSACTION $
COST7REVENUE BUDGETED (dRCLE ONE)
Q�-�iF.
)NOf47G SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
�ANCIAL INFOiifrfA710N: (EXGIAIN)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RANfSEY
l
) ss
)
����
Daniel and Linda Burns, being first duly sworn, depose and state that they
are the persons who circulated the within petition and consent, consisting of t�es-�c:.tr
`t(,$) pages; that affiants are informed and believe that the parties described are the
owners respectivefy of the fots placed immediately before each name; that affiiants
are informed and believe that each of the parties described above is the owner of
the property which is within 100 feet from any property owned or purchased by
petitioners or sold by petitioners within one (1) year preceding the date of this
petition which is contiguous to the property described in the petition; that none of
the parties described above has purchased or is purchasing property from the
petitioner contiguous to the above-described property within one (1) year of the
date of the petition; that this consent was signed by each of said owners in the
presences of affiant; and, that the signatures are the true and correct signatures of
each of all of the parties so described.
�� ������
NAME
�{lV(U�
NAME
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
5th day of March, 1997.
3 � . � a.1�
Notar�
CAROLYN J KELL ((
� , � NOTaav aiJBLiC—MINN£SOTA �
uar.?SEY COUNTI'
:�•,� b!:
,� �_... .__.,m,,,�.�.v.�
982 Grand Avenue. St. Paul, MN 55105
ADDRESS
(61 21 228-1 31 6
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this 6th day of March, 1997.
�,�� � ,� �
Notary Pub�ic
CAROLYN S. KELt
4
� j�� NOTA RAMSEY COUNTY SOTA i
n ('pinmiss�FxP�JAN37.2000 �
� �qr��: t�N
DEPAR'SMENT OF PLANNING
& ECONOMIC DEVEIAPMENT
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norrrz Co[emwz, Mayor
January 28, 1997
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
Division of Plmverng
25 West Faurth Street
Sa'vu Pau1, MN55102
c{,'�1 ' � S �-
Telephone: 612-266-6565
Facsimile: 612-228d314
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday
February 26, 1997 far the following zoning case:
Applicant: DADIIEL & LINDA BURNS
File Number: #96-289
Purpose: Rezone property from 12M-2 (multiple family residential) to B-3 (general
business) to allow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business
at 982 Grand Avenue, Lloyd's Automotive.
Address: 986 GRAND AVENLJE (south side of the street between Chatsworth & O�'ord)
Legal Description
of Properiy: Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Park Addition
Previous Action:
Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, vote: 11-6, January 24, 1997
Zoning Committee Recommendation: Approval, vote: 6-0, January 16, 1997
My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the February 5, 1997
City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger.
Please call me at 266-6582 if you have any questions.
Sincerely, �
�� ��
Kady Dadlez
City Planner
Zoning Secrion
cc: File #96-289
Mike Kraemer
Donna Sanders
, I: �� F
�
t�F�r' h �
' i� n�
t '., �`i'
--_ ---
. �. - ° - - ` HOT2CE OF YUBLIC HEARITTG -. � � - - � ..-� `
-=.. � -.,.'_,�: ..: _ `_ .
� T�e Saint .Paul k;ity� Council� wilt conduch a gublic rieartng on � Wec2nes�ay:�'
Februazy 26. 1997, in the CouneiP�Chambers, Third Rloor Ciry HaIl to:consiQer�th� �,
appllcatlbn ofDaaieYand Linda Burns to rezone propertyfrom RI13-2 (m"ultipleifamily- '
residenti2i) to�B3�(gexxeml business), to allow expansion and remodeling:of the ' .
� O� au�; repair bnsiness at 9S2 Grand Avenue (sbnth��ide betwee,n Chatsivoi[h ;,
Dated Januarg.28;;1997 '- _ . _ � , ' � . ,;�
NAI!ICY ANDERSON , ,. � -� ,. ,,, .. _
�Assistant Qity Council Secretary � � - __ :. _ - " � _ � . � . . _. .
.. - . . _ - fJa�7iary 31, 1997) . - - �` -`- �
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNA*G
& ECONOMIC DEVECAPMENT
SaINT I I
PAUL �
�
AApA'�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Caleman, Mayor
February 14, 1997
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Zoning File #96-289
City Council Hearing:
Division afPlannirzg
25 West Fourth SYreet
Sav+t Paut, MN 55702
DAI�tIEL AND LINDA BURNS
Februaty 26, 1997 430 p.m. City Council Chambers
q� - 3sa.
Telephone: 612466-6565
Facsimile: 6I2-228-3314
PURPOSE: To consider rezoning property at 986 GRAND AVENUE (south side between Chatsworth &
Oxford) from RM-2 (residential multiple family) to B-3 (general business) to allow expansion and
remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
PLANNING COMIvIISSION RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL vote: 11-6
• ZONING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL vote: 6-0
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL
SUPPORT: No one spoke.
OPPOSITTON: No one spoke. District 16 supports the applicant's plans for expansion but voted to
oppose the rezoning to B-3. District 16 supports rezoning the property to P-1 (pazking).
Dear Ms, Anderson:
�
DANIEL AND LINDA BUKNS submitted a petition to rezone properry at 986 GRAND AVENiJE. The
Zoning Committee of the PJanning Commission held a pubiic hearing on the proposed rezoning on
January 16, 1997. The applicant's representative addressed the committee. At the close of the public
hearing, the committee voted 6-0 to recommend apptoval to rezone to B-3. The Planning Commission
upheld the Zoning Committee's recommendation for approval on a vote of i l-6 on 3anuary 24, 1997.
This proposed rezoning is scheduled to be heard by the Ciry Council on February 26, 1997. Please notify
me if any member of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site presented at the public hearing.
5incerely,
Ken F��
Planning Administrator
Attachments
cc: City Council members
q�-35�-
city of saint paui
planning commission resolution
file number 97-03
�tE? January 24, 1997
WHEREAS, DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS, fi!e #96-289 have petitioned to rezone 986 GRAND
AVENUE, situated on the south side of the street between Chatsworth & Oxford, from RM-2 to B-3 to
allow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business a[ 982 Grand Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 16,
1997 at which all persons present �i�are given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said application in
accordance �vith the req�irements of Sec[ion 64.400 of the Saint Paut Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Plannin� Commission, based on the evidence presented to its Zoning
Committee at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of
fact:
•
The applicant oivns the duplex property To be rezoned. The applicant atso owns Lioyd's AutomoYive
at 982 Grand Ae•enue, a neighborhood auto re�air sliop that has been operating for 50 years. In order
to provide better service and relieve traffic con�estion the applicant plans to remodet the existing auto •
repair building and combine thlt property with t6e iot to t6e west to provide off-sVeet parking for the
espanded business. 7he applicant is working on plans to have the house moved to a new location in
the Ramsey Hill neighborhood.
The applicant intends to espand tlie number of service bays in the existin� repair garage from six to
nine or ten and provide off-street parl:ing on the lot to the west. Plans include replacing the existing
parking area at the northern portiott of the property at 982 Grand Avenue with die expanded bui(ding
built up to tiie nonhern property line. The proposed parkin�, lot to the west, 14 spaces, would iiave
ingress from Grand Avenue onfy, and egress to the a0ey. The lot, with 40 feet of fronta�e on Grand
Avenue, is �toY �vide enough to provide ingress and egress at Grand Aveaue, A feiue and landscaped
buffer is proposed along the western property line abutting an RM-2 zoning district.
The e�isting auto repair shop emptoys nine people, one or two may be added as a result of the
ex�ansion. T(ie hours of operation will remain the same afrer the expansion: 7:00 a.m, to 8:00 p.m
Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Saturday.
The applicant states that the use of the property as a duplex is not economically feasible because the
cost of taxes (non-homesteaded), mortgage, insurattce, and maintenance make a profitable return on
the investment untikely.
moved by �nCl
seconded by
in favor 11
a���t 6{Maddox, Mardell, Gordon, Lee, Nowlin, Geisser)
•
0
��-�s�
• Zonina I=ile #96-289
Pa�e T�vo of Resolution
2. The proposed rezonin� is in conformance with comprehensive plan. Objectives and policies ofthe
Economic Development Strategy include: "ensure sufficient land for future business growth" and "the
city's land use plan should provide adequate land for industrial and commercial development and
expansion in order to increase the proportion of commerciaUindustrial tax base." #6 & k25, pp. 16 &
17.
In addition, the proposed building expansion is in conformance with the Grand Avenue Design
Guidelines estabiished in ti�e East Grand Avenue Sma1S Area Pfan. One of the guideiines states,
"Limit curb cuts on Grand Avenue. Parking lots should be located to the side or rear of commercial
structures and have a minimum of curb cuts. For parking lots on corners, access from the side street
is preferred." #22, p.4. Tlie applicant plans to locate the parking lot to the side ofthe existing
commercial structure and create one curb cut; an existing curb cut to the east will be eliminated.
Another guideline states, "Protect and promote block-front-setback patterns. Many blocks on Grand
Avenue have both commercial and residential type structures. In terms of design, the most successful
ofthese have corner commerciai structures up to the sidewalks, with smailer residential-type
structures set back from the sidewalk in mid-block. This design pattern shoutd be preserved and
expanded. On all-commercial blocks, buildii�gs should have no setback from the sidewalk." #2S, p.4
The applicant's plans include a building addition that will be built right up to the side�valk.
3. The rezoning of this one parcel for commercial use would not have an adverse impact on the
surrounding community, particularly because it is immediately adjacent to an existing commercial
• area. ]f the property were rezoned to allow a parkine lot, the applican[ would no lonaer need to park
vehicles that he hasFwill service in tlie street, thus reducing parking and conoestion in the streets,
particularly on Chatsworth Street.
4. The applicant submitted a sufficient petition signed by hvo-thirds of the property owners within one
hundred (100) feet of thc propeRy to be rezoned (14 parcels eligible, 10 parcels needed, and l(
parcels signed).
5. The off-street parkina requirement for the proposed expansion is 10 spaces. Four spaces wi1V be iost
due to the building expansion. Fourteen spaces will be provided in the new lot to the west. Thus,
adequate off=street parking is provided for the use. The applicant's request to have alley access for
the parking lot can be evaluated during review ofthe site plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by tl7e Saint Paul Planning Commission that the petition of
DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS to rezone property at 986 GRAND AVENLIE, more particutarly
described as Lot 2, Slock 35; Summit Park Addition, from an RM-2 zoning classification to a B-3 zoning
classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the City; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
Council of the City of Saint Pau1 that properiy located at 986 GRAND AVENUE be rezoned from RM-2
to B-3 in accordance nith the petition for rezoning on file with the Saint Paul Planning Division.
C�
3
��1-3s�
M�nu�es: Sa►h�- i'aut Plo�►h,v►o� Co�nw��Ssian
Planning Commission of Saint Paul
City Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
A mee[ing of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, January 24, 1997 at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of Ciry Hall.
Commissioners Mmes, Birk, Faricy, Geisser, Maddox, Mor[on, Treichel and Wencl and
PresenL• and Messrs. Chavez, Gordon, Gurney, Kramer, Lee, Mardell, McDonell,
Nowlin, Sharpe and Vaught.
Commissiouers Mmes. *Duarte and *Lund-Johnson and Messrs. *Field, Jr. and
Schwichtenberg
Absent:
*Excused
Also Present: ICen Ford, Planning Administrator, Jean Birkholz, Kady Dadlez, and Roger
Ryan of tlie Planning Staff.
I. ApE�rova] of Minutes of January ]0, 1997
MOT[ON: Commissioncr Maddox snoved approval oF thc minutes of January 10,
1997; tl�e motion was seconded by� Commissioner Treichel and passed unanimously on
a voicc votc.
II. Chair's Announcements
Steering Committee Meeting Report:
Fifth Friday is scheduled for next Friday, January 31, 1997, from 8:30 a.m. - 10 a.m.
Discussion on the revision of Saint Paul's Comprehensive Plan is on the agenda. The
Fifth Friday in May will a(so be devoted to discussion of the Comprehensive Plan.
- STAR Board: Frank Gurney will not be able to continue to represent the Planning
Commission on the STAR Board. Chair McDonell asked members to call Roger Curtis
in the Mayor's Office, 266-8531, if interested. Commissioner Gordon expressed
interest in applying for the position.
III. Planning Administrator's Announcements
Mr. Ford announced:
•
•
- Alter Trading Corporation filed a complain[ against the City of Saint Paul lasf week •
challenging the moratorium which the City established on permitting recycling centers
��-�s �
• with metal shredders and a number of other environmental related decisions.
- Tn the meantime, the Planning Commission will proceed with the rezoning scudy the
Ciry Council requested on metal shredders.
- The Mayor has sent his recommendations on Planning Commission appointments to the
Cit}' Council. The process wilt be finatized in approximately 2-3 weeks.
- The Neighborhaods Conference is tomorrow.
Commissioner Vaught requested a copy of Alter Corporation's complaint. Chair McDoneil
requested one for each Commission member. Mr. Ford will look into the request.
Chair McDonel{ stated that copies of a Ne�v York Times article, "What's Doing in Saint
Paul" will be made available and sent out thanks to Commissioner Geisser.
IV, 2oning Comn�ittee
1196-289 D�niel and 1 ind� i3urns - Rezone dte property from RM-2 to B-3 [o allow
expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue (986
Grand Avenue).
]1fOTfON: Cominissioncr 1i'encl moved approval of thc requested rezoning from Rhi-
• 2 to I3-3 to allow expansioti and remodeling oF tlie existing auto repair business on
Grand Avenue.
Commissioner Wencl reported diat the District Councii voted to support a P-1 tezoning
instead of a B-3, however, the 2oning Committee voted 6-Q to approve the rezoning to B-3.
Commissioncr Geisser believes this request to rezone should be denied. She explained the
relationship of this case to the East Grand Avenue Smal{ Area Plan, which is now part of
thc Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Geisser described Grand Avenue as a
"unique" section ot Saint PauL She handed out a portion of the East Grand Avenue Sma11
Area Plan that was written to recognize and protea that "unique" quality. Although she
finds the pian flexible, Commissioner Geisser proceeded to read parts of the plan that
conflict with this case:
(p. 1. col. 2) Description of a conservation area; the block where this auto repair
business is located: .....it protects these areas from significant change......the current
zoning is appropriate.......rezonings and variances should not be supported.......the
design guidelines should be adhered to.
(p. 2 under Zoning and Land Use): 1....we need to protect these Areas from less
restrictive zoning.......should be protected from the expansion of B-2 and B-3 zoning.
2.....reinforces the intent to remove B-3 from anywhere on the Avenue. 3......cannol
have premamre demolition of buildings.
• (p. 3): 12......establishes that P-1 is used for parking locs. 13.....establishes the fact
that there should be no parking lots in conservation areas. 14......recommends that
houses no[ be removed to allow for parking lots.
�
l
9�-�5�
(p.4): Grid diat shows conservarion areas
Commissioner Geisser's intent was ro show [hat this rezoning is inconsistent with the East
Grand Avenue Small Area Plan. She noted that having served as the Chair of [he East
Grand Avenue Task Force, it was quite apparent that the group's choice was for a11 B-3
zonings to be removed from the Avenue, And the evolution of Grand Avenue was not ro
increase auto repair statioas. Since diis request asks for an expansion of an auto repair
station as wel! as permission to demo�ish a house in order to provide additional parking, it is
inconsistent with the plan. The plan ctearly states [hat houses are not to be removed to
provide parking. A study at that time proved the gain of only 7-9 spots when a house is
demoiished, which is hardty sufficient reason for destroying a house.
Comntissioner Geisser found Summit Fiill's decision of P-1 over B-3 to be compromising
but just as problematic and inconsistent as the request by Mr. Burns, because it also calls for
die removal of a house to provide parkina.
J
Commissioner Geisser wamed Commissioners that shoufd this property be rezoned to B-3,
it will ahvays be B-3, which means that any use allowed in a B-3 zone would be permitted
on this property, including a fast-food restaurant. Past food restaurants are also not allowed
by the Gast Grand Avenue Small Area Plan. She pointed out that a conservation area on
Grand Avenue maans that the block is residentia] except for the corners, and encroachment
into d1e block from thc ends is not d�e intent of d�is plan. She noted that once this precedent
had been set, it could have far-reaching effccts. .
Commissioner Geisser's concerns ref7ect Irer passion and conviction to cherish the jewe( oF
Saint i'aul by adherino ro the guidetines deveioped by devo[ed pcople on the task force wlto
spen[ many long and iatensc hours developing and dclibcrating over thcse specific
guidelines in I989.
Commissioner Vaugh[ commented that he believes Commissioner Geisser has overstated thc
case for her position in at least three cases: 1) her statement that the Last Grand Avenue
Small Arca Plan is flexihlc. He stated that in his opinion the plan is very inflexible, and that
it is it's inflexibilit} that leads ro discussions such as today's. Ie invites itself to read as
though it were a piece of conerete and noc a piece of paper. 2) Several times
Commissioner Geisser referred to"demolishing° the house in question. He noted that it is
his understanding that the plans are to move the house, not demolish it. 3) 7'he fast food
restaurant business. He added that fast food restaurants may be located in B-3 zones, but
they may be located in B-3 zones, only subject to special conditions, which means [hey must
acquire a special condition use pertnit through the process of application, a pablic hearing
before the Zoning Commiitee, and probably also a pablic hearing before the City Council
because such a requesf would cercainty be appealed by Grand Avenue residents and basiness
peopie.
Commissioner Vaught continued to take the Commission through the rezoning process: any
rezoning can either be initiated by the Cin• Council, by the Planning Commission itself,
and, the most common way, through a peticion of abutcing or adjacenc property owners. In
this case, there are 14 property owners within the circumference of property owners who •
needed to be consulted regarding the rezoning procedure. Unless the requisite number of
those property owners approve a rezoning, it doesn't get any farther in the process. In this
case, 11 property owners signed their approval of the B-3 zoning, which meant the rezoning
�
��-�sa—
• could move forward. It was put onto a Zoning Committee agenda. Ten days before the
case is to be heard, the matter is sent out in a notice to the relevant district council for their
consideration and recommendation. In this case, the Land Use Committee of che Summit
Hill Association considered Ihe matter first. At a meeting where there was a full
presentation by the applicant, tlie Land Use Commitree voted [o support the change to a B-3
zoning. Next, [he full board of the Summit Hill Association heard the case without benefit
of a full presentation. The recommendation of the Land Use Committee to support the
ctiange to B-3 zoning was defeared by a very close vote. Then, at that same meeting, the
district council voted to approve [he P-I zoning. This is very significant. No one
immediately aPfected and/or interested in this change is encouraging us to follow the
inflexible guidelines of the East Grand Avenue Plan. Anyone in question is supporting
something efse and these are people much closer to the issue than is die Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Vaught encouraged the Commissioners to support the B-3 rezoning.
Commissioner Chavez commended Commissioner Geisser on her presentation. He felt that
since there apparently were such strong feelings and concerns regarding ti�is issue, she or
someone else should have been at the Zoning Committee to provide testimony.
Conm�issioner Gumey stated Ihat he went to tlte Zonino Commitcee meeting convinced tha[
the pruperty, at tha very best, should be zoned P-L At [he meeting he was told Ihat if
ci[her one of dic lots in question were to be modified in the fumre, they would need to go
• d�rougl� a��other planning process, including site plan review. Tfiis fact convinced him there
was a safeguard for the neighborhood. He supports dle R-3 rezoning.
Convnissioncr Gordon noted that he is very troubled by this and he will speak and vote in
opposition to thc motion to rezone to B-3. He rciterated the Mayor's word [hat Grand
Avenue is the "gem" of Saint PauL The unique mix which has taken years to develop on
Grand Avenue needs special attention and should not be changed unless there is good
reason. He noted Ihat the East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan of 1989 takes diose special
considerations into account and has set up guidelmes to reFlect the unique characteristics of
this very special A� enue. The plan takes into account die greater good of the City of Saint
Paul and that particular neighborhood. He also commenred diat if the Planning Commission
expects others to pay attenuon to the small area plan guide(ines, then the Commissioners, in
their decisions ought also to pay attention ro these smal( area plan guidelines. If, on the
other hand, the Commission i�nores the plan's guideiines for no good reason, then it should
not be surprised when everyone else ignores them for no good reason. He s[ated that if the
Commission is going to depart from the guidelines, there ought ro be a good, legitimate
justification for doing it. He questioned the good, legitimate justification for departing from
the guidelines in this case. Is a parking lot good, legitimate justification? Upon examining
the site plan, he said he found that the on(y thing the duplex propetty wili be used for is
parking, 14 parking places.
Commissioner Gordon feels that the East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan was called to the
attention of the Zoning Commitree, contrary to what Commissioner Chavez said, by staff on
• page 2, finding �`2 of the staff report which states that the proposed rezoning is not in
conformance with the comprehensive plan. He does not find jus[ification in removing a
very nice older home, eliminating 2 residential units from the City, for 14 parking places.
He thinks that does not make sense; is a bad decision, and is the kind of a bad decision that
1
��-���
•
Nie City Council looks at and wonders, `What are they doing in that Planning Commission?'
Contmissioner Gordon aiso thinks [hat there is enough space between the end of the
business building and the a[fey to park cars, and presumably there is also space for parking
cars at other nearby busiaesses the Burns' own. He does not think the justification for
additional parking is legitimate.
Commissioner Gordon noted that he is atso very concerned about the B-3 zoning because
rezoning is the single biggesc step that enables a fast food type operacion or any other such
use to take place. A special condition use permi[ is much easier to obtain, and the
Commission is much more wlnerable in denying a SCUP in the future, afrer the property is
already rezoned, than we are right now in simply refusing to permit the rezoning. He said
that when a B-3 zone is created, it invites B-3 uses.
He stated that he is also troubled because staff very clearly recommended denial and gave
very specific reasons for that denial. However, the Zoning Committee report does not list
the reasons for the Committee rejecting staffs recommendation; there's no discussion. He
is concerned that the Zoning Commit[ee hss noc adequately justified the failure to abide by
die staff decision.
He also noted diat there is no supporting data for the statement that the duplex is not
economical. He finds [tiat unacceptabie.
Commissioner Gordon noted, too that a(though there is a reference to die Burns' "working •
on platts to [novc dic house", therc is no written commitmenc to do so.
Of the 11 of 14 who sapported the peti[ion, Comrr�issioner Gordon understands that severat
of those 11 are other businesses who would welcome the opportunity to have cars visiting
their businesses taking [he places vacated by the cars that are parked there for Mr. Burns'
business. Hc also understands that the motivation of a number of the neighbors who signed
die pctition �vas to get cars off the street. He sees this as narrow self inrerest and not in the
interest of ihe Ci[} or ihat community.
Commissioner Gordon encouraaed members of the Zoning Committee to revisit their
decision. He quoted Justice Frankfurter, "Wisdom too often never comes, therefore it
shouid not be rejected merely because it comes late."
Commissioner Kramer noted that if there had been a similar provision in the East Grand
Avenue Small Area Plan as the Commission provided for in the recently adopted Thomas
Dale Small Area Plan, that said if the District Council and a developer come up with a
proposal they matually agree to that the Commission would accept that, then we wouldn't
be having this discussion.
Commissioner Kramer aiso no[ed some things were not mentioned:
- the proposed expansion inclu@es a$400,Q00 addition to the block, which inclades a
remodeling of the existing building and facade and requires a]0-foot setback from the •
nex[ residential property line.
- he doesn't think it is tegal to park 10 cars behind a duplex unless it is rezoned.
0 +
�I `Z ^ ^,�� �-.
• Commissioner Lee thanked Commissioner Gordon for doing his homework and
Commissioner Geisser for bringing the small area plan to the Commission's attention. He
questioned why a B3 zone was petitioned for instead of a P-1, since parking is what he says
he needs. He said he will vote against the motion.
Commissioner Vaught reminded Commissioners that the small area plan is merely a piece of
paper, tl�e expressed ���ill and opinion of the people who worked on it from tt�eir perspective
in 1989. He continued to say diat today we have in (he application to zezone, the judgments
and opinions of 11 of the 14 abu[ting property owners from 8ieir perspective in 1996. He
stated that he ofren sees wid�in the Commission's deliberations the attimde tfiat any
residential use is to be favored over any commercial use, no matter what, and that any
philosopl�ica( adherence [o any residential use is more righteous than any commercial use,
no matter what. He disagrees with that attitude and urged Commissioners to listen ta the
opinions ot'the property owners of tlie abutting property, no matter what Ihe use of that
�roperty.
Commissioner Geisser commented d}at she feels she is representing a siient majoriry. She
knows thcre are a number of people who did not pnrticipate in the process who feet very
strongly about tliis issue. She chatlznged Commissioner Vaught's statement that Ihe
Conm�ission always secros to favor residences over athec uses. She thinks qiat the mood is
centered around whatever businesslcommercial development says. Regarding itexibility,
slie referred to anothcr part of tf�c East Grand Avenue Small Area Pi�n, wl�ere it is c{ear
that thc rationale u•as to maintain thc residents. The task force felt very strongly diat this
• avenue cannot succecd unless is a criticat mass of residents. There are some potentiai
redcvclopmcnt areas.
Comntissioncr [Jowlin stated tfiat hc is intrigued by the debate, howevcr, it seems to pi[
planning versus zoning. He thinks that the debate is covering the wrong thing. It's a
zoning question, but flie overarching issue is whether or not d�e small area plan shouid be
amended and/or whether or not the zoning ordinance shoulJ bc amendcd. [=rom a City-
widc perspective, dre issue seems tu reall}' be whethcr �ve shouid sacriFicc this duplex for
morc {�arking, but that's not dic question here. He also doesn't agree that this request is
abtiulutel}� inconsistent with the small area plan. He thinks the issue should be tabled until
more infonnauon can be obtained.
Comnussioner Mardell added, considering the uniqueness of Grand Avenue and taking the
lon� term view, t�e doubts if the existing use or [he expanded use, is the highest and bes[ use
of tl�e site. As co-chair of the Selby Avenue Task Force, he has become much more
sensitized to smafl area plan guidelines, so he will vote in opposition to the mo[ion.
Commissioner Wencl tead a paragraph from a letter to the Zoning Committee sent by the
Summit Hill Association, for the Commissioner's consideration:
While rezonina from residentia( to commercial is in fact against the district plan,
it was aereed tha[ this proposal would not be detrimental, but would rather enhance
the livabi(ity of the neighborhood by improving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by
• minimizing auto access from Chatswonh, and by getting cars off the street. It was
determined that this proposal would not intensify commercialization, but rather would
help to mitigate the traffic and parking problem that currentty exists.
c,
i
���3��-
Commissioner Treichel commented that in order to balance the scenerio that has been
piayed out ltere in discassion that Mr. Burns a•ii( do this rezoaing, sell the properry, and
then God knows what's going to happen, she will counter that with the scenerio that maybe
Mr. Burns has three sons and he wiil pass the business onto them, and maybe that business
will be there for another fifry years. She intended to get across that this is not a slippery
slope, and she is bodiered by the Commission allegging that people witl not continue to do
tivhat they say [hey tvill do.
C6air DlcDonell ca!!ed for a roll call vote. The motion to approve the requested
rezoning of property from R�t-2 to B-3 at 986 Grand Avenue carried on a roll call vote
of 11 - 6(11laddos, l�tardell, Gordon, Lee, Noa�lin, Geisser).
Chair McDonel( noted that the Planning Commission's passion and discussion of the tast
issue w�as superb, but it also pointed out that where the zoning ordinance now is the
preeminent decision maker, under the new guidelines from the Metropoiitan Counci[, the
planning documents will be preeminenc.
Commissioner Nowtin rei[erated the imporcance of Commissioner Kramer's point thac
flexibiliry be contained in tliese small area plans. He suggested tl�at there be a vehicle in
piace ro assess or to change the plans.
�
��
Commissioner Wene( reminded Commissioners that a rezoning goes to the Ciry Counci[ for
their approvai, as well. •
N96-290 Macales[er Colteec - Modification of Speciai Condition Use Permit to allow a t0
foot setback from tl�e southerly property Iine to accommodate building changes relating to
thc south interior staircase of a new residence hatl (Cambridge Street between Summit &
Grand; zoned R-3).
Coatmissioner Wencl reported that this issue was iaid over urttil dre February 20 Zoning
Committee meeting.
1196 ?91 Reinhard Kreuser - Nonconforming Use Pemtit to establish a contracror's exterior
remodefing business as a legal non-confotming use on the property (843 Lexittg[on Parkway
Soudt; zoned R-4j.
NfOTtOti: Cocncriissioner LVenct mo��ed approval, with three conditions, of the
requested nonconforming use permit to establish a conYractor's exterior remodeling
business as a legal nonconforming use on the property at 843 Lexington Parkwa}',
svhich carried unanintously on a voice rote.
Commissioner Morton announced there is no agenda at this time; the next Zoning
Committee meeting will not take place until February� 20.
`'. Comprehensive Planning and Economic Development Committee
No report. .
f�
`��'
�
�
�
MINUTES OF THE 20NING COMMITTEE
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ON JANIIARY 16, 1997
PRESENT: Mmes. Farcy and Wencl; Messrs. Chavez, Gurney, Kramer and Vaught o£
the Zoning Committee; Mr. Warner, Assistant City Attorney; Mmes.
Dadlez and Sanders and Mr. Ryan o£ the Planning Division.
ABSENT: Field, excused
Morton, excused
Time: 3:38 - 4:40 p.m.
The meeting was chaired by Barbara Wencl, Vice Chairperson.
D,�
BiRN9 D N7 uD NDA• 86 rand Av nue• so� hcidP be w n('ha cwo h and
Ox£ord: #96-7.89� Rezonina. Rezone the property from RM-2 (residential) to B-3
(general business), to allow expansion and remodelling of the existing auto
repair business at 9&2 Grand Avenue.
Kady Dadlez, Planning Division staff, reviewed the staff report and presented
slides. Staff recommended denial of the petition to rezone to B-3 based on
findings 2, 3, and 4 of the staff report.
The Summit Hill Association voted to approve the applicant's plans for
expansion and parking, but did not support the petition to rezone to B-3. The
Summit Hill Association supports the project provided the property is zoned to
P-1.
Commissioner Vaught asked if the property were rezoned to B-3, whether the
combined square footage of the two lots in question as B-3 would be
sufficient, and whether requirements would be met so as to allow a fast-food
restaurant to locate on that corner.
Ms. Dadlez responded that there is not a minimum 1ot size for a fast-food
restaurant, however was uncertain how a drive-thru and the required amount o£
parking would be configured, but that it would be properly zoned for such a
purpose.
Commissioner Vaught further asked that if the duplex property was rezoned to
P-1, whether it could be reasonably configured along with [he B-3 zoned lot,
using the P-1 for parking for a£ast-food restaurant and using the B-3
property for the building.
Ms. Dadlez responded that one criteria would require 100 feet of frontage
along the principal access street, and that this condition would be met.
Commissioner Faricy asked where other conservation areas were located on Grand
Avenue,
�i�t-�5� �--
�����' •
Ms. Dadlez wasn't certain about the locations of all conservation areas but
noted that the entire block between Chatsworth and Oxford on Grand Avenue is a
conservation area, on 6oth the north and south sides, Mr. Ryan concurred,
however with the exception of the corners which are developed commercially.
Commissioner Vaught surmised that the intention of the district plan is that
conservation areas remain as they are wi[hout any additional commercial
encroachment upon the existing area, and that a conservation area is a more
rigorously intended protection of property than the normal zoning controls
that exist along Grand Avenue.
Staff agreed with this determination. Ms. Dadlez explained that what is meant
by a conservation area is that the mix of uses and of architecture on Grand
Avenue is the epitome of what Grand Avenue is, and that it is to be preserved.
There should not be any change between residential and commercial, and it
references not providing parking in that block.
Commissioner Vaught asked that if the request for rezoning to B-3 were to be
granted, and the building were remodeled as proposed, whether the building
would be flush with the property line on Grand Avenue, and whether it would be
consistent with the other three corners of the intersection.
Ms. Dadlez responded that it would be flush and consistent with the design
guidelines in the sma12 area plan.
Brian Alton, attorney for Linda and Daniel Burns, who were also present, .
spoke. Mr. Alton reviewed that the business has been located a� this
intersection for 50 years and that Mr. and Mrs. Burns intend to renovate the
property at a cost of approximately $400,000. One curb cut will be removed
from Chatsworth Street and one curb cut wi11 be moved down Grand Avenue
further away from the intersection which they believe will improve traffic
flow and allow for some additional parking on Chatsworth. He reviewed that
th= rezoning and renovation will permit moving customers' cars for Lloyd's
Automo*_io off of the side street as there is currently a lack of off-street
parking and wi1l relieve some congestion from the street, The applicant
believes the proposal will improve the neighborhood significantly and will
also improvz th� character of the intersection.
John Coleman, Ankeny Kelly Architects, displayed and reviewed design
rend2rin9s of the proposal, Mr. Coleman pointed out that discussions are
underway regarding moving the duplex to the cathedral area to be reused as
housing.
Mr. Alton addressed the issue of whether a fast food restaurant could be put
on this property. It was determined that a minimum of I00 feet of frontage on
its principal access street would be met. However, he noted that there would
be special conditions that would need to be met as well as that it would
require a special condition use permit, and felt the likelihood of a£ast foot
restauran*_ being approved at that location to be remote.
Mr. Alton reviewed that the applicant prefers B-3 zoning over P-1, because
conditions associated with P-1 would limit their ability to use their property
most efficiently. He noted that P-1 would not allow a sign on the site as .
2
'` -
� � -'3 S �--
�� � • they intend to do. In addition F-1 would allow no structures on a P-1 lot� �
He reviewed triat currently there is no intention o£ putting a structure on
this site, however in the future something such as a vestibule may be desired
and would not be allowed. The agplicant grefers that both lots be consistent
with one zoning classification.
Mr. Alton referenced finding no. 3 of the sta£f report, "...Rezoning of this
property, however, and of other similar properties, proposals for which are
1ike2y to follow, could cumulative2y have an adverse impact by disrupting the
baZance of commercial and residential uses on the avenue." noting that this
finding was used to support denial of the rezoning. He argued that the
committee should not consider potential rezonings for the future as a basis
for considering this rezoning request.
Commissioner Vaught observed that a P-1 zoning would carry with it less
opporCUnities for intensive use than B-3, however he asked Mr. Alton to
substantiate whether a P-1 zoning would in any way precl�de or affect the
proposal for the subject property.
Mr. Alton agreed.
Commissioner Faricy asked how the cars would be transported from the parking
area on the western side of the building around and into the bays on the
eastern side.
Mr. Alton reviewed that customers would park their cars in the lot and leave
• them there until a service person would drive them into the service bay. The
plan is to use the alley to come around the back of the building, much the
same way as it is done currently. He said that in the event the site plan is
not approved, that there is enough space to allow the maneuvering to take
place on the site without using the alley.
Commissioner Gurney asked for clarification regarding petition signatures for
990 Grand Avenue, as well as the asterisked signature £or 993 Lincoln, and
whether the asterisk referenced a condition.
Mr. Alton reviewed that James Rubin is purchasing the apartment building on a
contract for deed, which is next door to the site proposed to be rezoned.
City sta£f determined that the signature of a contract-for-deed purchaser was
not sufficient but needed the fee owner. The fee owner is Francis Difveney,
and was signed by his attorney. Mr. Alton said he was not aware of any
significance meant by the asterisk.
Commissioner Kramer asked whether a variance could be issued with respect to
the sign restrictions in P-1.
Mr. Ryan responded that if apglication was made for a variance that the
Planning Commission would have the ability to grant it.
Chris Trost, Executive Director of the Summit Hill Association, District 16
Planning Council, spoke. Ms. Trost referenced the letter submitted by John
Siekmeier, President of the Summit Hi11 Association, that was distributed to
. the committee. Ms. Trost reviewed that the Summit Hill Association was
3
f3
�f'!- ���
��
���� opposed to the request to rezone 986 Grand Avenue to B-3 because of the lack
of restrictions on a B-3 zone. The letter states that all of the zoning
studies on the avenue and the resulting changes that have occurred, have
attempted to limit or reduce the number of B-3 parcels on the avenue, with
some of them having been reduced, and that rezoning must be considered in the
long-term.
Ms. Trost emphasized that the Summit xill Association supports the proposed
remodeling and expansion, and they believe the business is an asset to the
neighborhood and the success o£ that business is in the best interest of the
neighborhood. The Su�r�mit Hill Association recommended that 986 Grand Avenue
be rezoned to P-1 in order to accommodate the proposal. Ms. Trost reviewed
the paragraph that: "Whi1e rezoning from residentia2 to commerciaZ is, in
fact, against the District Plan, it was agreed that this proposal wouId not be
detrimental, but rather would enhance the livability of the neighborhood by
improving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by minimizinq auto access from
Chatsworth and by getting cars off the s[reet. I[ was determined that this
proposal wou2d not intensify commercia2ization, but rather would he2p to
mitigate the traffic and parking probleln that currently exists."
Commissioner Vaught reviewed with Ms. Trost the process that the Summit Hill
Association followed to arriv< at its recommendation.
Commissioner Vaught revisited a previous rezoning request that was not
approved by the committee for property on the north side of Grand Avenue
between Milton and victoria. He recalled the opposition for that rezoning •
from the district council, reviewing that a strong foundation to the district
council's lack of support was that the rezoning was vio2ative of the district
plan. Whereas, in reviewing the Summit Hill Association's position of support
for a P-1 zoning in this case, he observed it to be a departure from the
district plan. Rs these two positions were znconszstent he said it would
affecc the cre3ibility that he'd place on the Summit Fiill Association's
recommendation.
Ms. Trost responded that the board made the motion fully realizing that it was
in opposition te the district plan an3 the small area plan, What the board
attempted to do was deterraine whether the proposal would be detrimental to the
immediate communi�y and to the community as a whole. They determined that not
only would it not be detrimental, that it would be an advantage and the
community would benefit from it_ Traffic and parking are onz of the greatest
problems that are present on Grand Avenue and in the Summit Hill neighborhood
and it has been with their goals and objectives for years that they wi11 do
wha[ever they can, or that they will make it a priority [o solve or mitigate
the traffic and parking problems. The board felt that this proposal helped to
mitigate a traf£ic and parking problem.
Ms. Trost compared the two proposals for rezoning. She said that the petition
to rezone 885 Grand Avenue was seen as an extreme intensification of
commercialization by the Summit Hi11 Association, as that proposal was to
bring new businesses into the neighborhood. They felt that realistically they
would not be providing the parking that was needed for that proposal (although
they had on paper) and that it would also intensify the traffic ar.d parking
problem that currently exists. The two proposals were seen as very different �
4
��
q� ,�
for those reasons. ����r
�
Commissioner Vaught asked why he shouldn'[ put more credence in the ii of 14
signatures of the immediate abutting property owners who support a rezoning to
B-3, notwithstanding the fact that it also is not in consort with the district
plan,
Ms. Trost responded that the recommendation of the Summit Hill Association is
based on the knowledge of the potential in trie future, and she was uncertain
whether the neighbors have also considered this.
The applicant chose no rebuttle.
There was a brief discussion of the present zoning for nearby properties:
Cherokee Bank, across the street from the proposed property, with a parking
lot behind the bank and a drive-in facility to the west of the bank.
The property is zoned B-1 from the frontage on Grand to the alley, which
includes the drive-in banking facility.
Nearby property owned by Sherman Rutzick, that also has a parking lot behind
it.
This is zoned B-2C.
• Mr. Ryan reviewed'that there is a B-2C on Chatsworth next to the alley and
there is_also a B-2C next to Rutzick's building where the parking lot is. The
southeast corner is B-2.
Commissioner Vaught moved approval of the petition to rezone ta H-3.
Commissioner Gurney seconded the motion.
Commissioner Chavez referred to the staff report and asked why finding no. 4
supported staff's recommendation for denial.
Ms. Dadlez responded that the current use of the property is a duplex, and
that the current zoning allows for the reasonable use, and that what is
located there now is a reasonable use of the property and isn't necessarily a
reason to rezone it.
Commissioner Vaught said he did not £ind that to be critical to a findinq oP a
B-3 zone.
Commissioner Vaught said he didn't think the issue of what the district plan
says ought to control in this case, and that is also the position of the
Summit Hi11 Association, although they don't agree with B-3 zoning.
C�
5
e
�� J ✓ V
Commissioner Gurney asked if the applicant were to want to put a car p��� �
the parking side where the duplex currently is, and if zoned B-3, whether a Z ` �
site plan review wouZd be required, which would include comp2iance with the
sign ordinance.
Ms. Dadlez responded that a site plan review would be required.
Commissioner Vaught noted that although a fast-food restaurant would be an
allowable use under a B-3 zoning that certain other requirements would require
revisiting of any such proposal.
Ms. Dadlez noted triat the motion excluded any reference to the comprehensive
plan, and that she was uncomfortable rezoning property without it being
consistent with the comprehensive plan_ She noted that there are citations in
the staff report that discuss the design gui8elines, and also citations from
the economic development strategy that she wouZd like to see referenced in the
resolution.
Commissioner Vaught said that his intent was to excise from the findings those
things that were inconsistent with a rezoning to B-3 and that any findings
that are not would remain and would be amenable to including anything that she
felt pertinent.
Commissioner Kramer said he would support the motion. However, he said it
concerned him when the committee votes against a district plan, but noted that
sometimes rigidity is written into plans, and it becomes necessary. He .
pointed out that the Thomas Dale plan was adopted recently where this was not
done, but a provision was added which helps prevent situations such as this
from occurring.
The motion recammending approval of the petition to rezone to B-3 carried on a
voice vote of 6 to 0.
Drafted by:
l S�-
➢onna Sanders
Submitted by:
�����
xady Dadlez
Approved by:
Barbara Wencl
Vice Chairperson
•
0
� '�S�
• ZOL3ING CO�SITTES STAFF REPORT
___________°__-__�___________
FILE # 96-284
1. APPLICANT: DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS DATE OF HEARING: O1/16/97
2. CLASSIFICATION; Rezoning
3. LOCATION: 986 GRAND AVENUE (south side between Chatsworth & Oxford)
4. PLAN2SING DISTRICT: 16
5. L$GAL DBSCRSPTION: Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Park Addition
6. PR858NT ZONING: RM-2 ZONING CODB R8F8RSNC8: 64.400
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND RBPORT: DATE: 1/9f97 BY: Kady Dadlez
8. DATE RECEIVSD: 12/09/96 DBADLINB FOR ACTION: 2/6/97
==5________________________0======__
_____�__°_____________________�__�__�_________________
A. PURPOSE: Rezone property from RM-2 to B-3 to allow expansion and
remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
B. PARCSL SIZB: The property has 40 feet of frontage on Grand Avenue and is
150 feet in depth for'a total lot area of 6,000 square feet.
C. SXISTING LaxD IISS: The property is occupied by a two-story wood structure
which is used as a duplex residence.
D. Si7l2ROUNDING LAND IISS:
North: Cherokee Bank in a B-1 zoning district and apartment buildings in
� an RM-2 zoning district.
East: Auto repair shop in a B-3 zoning district and a variety of
commercial uses in an B-2 zoning district.
South; Predominantly single family homes in an RT-1 zoning district.
West: Small apartment buildings in an i7M-2 zoning district.
E. ZONING COD& CITATION: Section 64.400(a) states in part, "the council may,
from time to time, amend, supplement or change the district boundaries or
the regulations herein, or subsequently established herein pursuant to the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357 and amendments thereto as
may be made from time to time. The planning commission may, from time to
time, review district boundary lines to determine if, pursuant to state
laws, such district boundary lines should be changed."
Section 64.400(b) states in part that "an amendment to the zoning code may
be initiated by the council, the planning commission or by petition of the
owners of sixty-seven (67) percent of the area of the property to be
rezoned."
• F. HISTORY/DISCIISSION: There is one pYevious zoning case concerning this
�
��-'���
Zoning FiTe #96-269
Page Two
property. The case involves a petition in 1992 to rezone the duplex
property to B-I (later revised to B-2C) to allow a bridal shop and shop
which designs and creates bridal veils and pageant gowns. The planning
commission recommended approval but the city council denied the rezoning
petition.
G. DISTRICT COIINCIL RHCO2�NDATION: The Summit Hill AssOCiatiori vOted t0
approve the applicant's plans for expansion and parking but does not
support the petition to rezone to B-3. The association supports the
project provided the property is rezoned to P-1.
H. FINDINGS•
2. The applicant owns the @uplex property to be rezoned. The applicant
also owns Lloyd's Automotive at 982 Grand Avenue, a neighborhood auto
repair shop that has been operating for 50 years. In order to provide
better service and relieve traffic congestion the applicant plans to
remodel the existing auto repair building and combine that property with
the lot to the west to provide off-street parking for the expanded
business. The applicant is working on plans to have the house moved to
a new location in the 12amsey Hi71 neighborhood,
�
U
The applicant intends to e�cpand the number o£ service bays in the •
existing repair garage from six to nine or ten and provide off-street
parking on the lot to the west. Plans include replacing the existing
parking area at the northern portion o£ the property at 982 Grand Avenue
with the expanded building built up to the northem property line. The
proposed parking lot to the west, 14 spaces, would have ingress from
Grand Avenue only, and egress to the alley. The lot, wi.th 40 feet of
frontage on Grand Avenue, is not wide enough to provide ingress and
egress at Grand Avenue. A fence and landscaped buffer is proposed along
the western property line abutting an RM-2 zoning district.
The existing auto repair shop employs nine people, one or two may be
added as a result o£ the expansion. The hours of operation will remain
the same after the expansion: 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m Monday through
Friday and 9:00 a.m. to I:00 p.m. Saturday.
The applicant states that the use of the property as a duplex is not
economically feasible because the cost of taxes (non-homesteaded),
mortgage, insurance, and maintenance make a profitable return on the
investment unlikely.
2. On balance, the proposed rezoning is not in conformance with
comprehensive plan. The East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan, 1989,
identifies the subject property as being located in the "conservation
area." The plan states, "Conservation areas are where existing land use
is established and site and building design is consistent with the Grand
Avenue design guidelines. This plan seeks to protect those areas from •
significant change. The current zoning is appropriate in these areas.
t ��
a � ��sy
. Zoning File #96-289
Page Three
Rezonings and variances should not be supported, and the design
guidelines should be adhered to." #1, p.1.
Zoning and Land Use recommendations o£ the East Grand Avenue Plan
include: "Protect conservation areas from less restrictive zoning" and
`�Curtail B-3 zoning." #1 , p.2. Plan recommendations relating to
parking state, "restrict parking lots from conservation areas. If
zoning parcels are developed solely for new parking lots, they should be
limited to 'non-conservation' areas and should be appropriately screened
from the street and alley" and "Restrict building removal for parking.
The removal o£ historic or residential buildings solely to provide
additional parking is discouraged." #13 , p.3.
The proposed building expansion is in conformance with the Grand Avenue
Design Guidelines established in the small area plan. One of the
guidelines states, "Limit curb cuts on Grand Avenue. Parking lots
should be located to the side or rear of commercial structures and have
a minimum of curb cuts. For parking lots on comers, access from the
side street is preferred." #22, p.4. The agplicant plans to locate the
parking to the side of the existing commercial structure and create one
curb cut. Another guideline states, "Protect and promate block-front-
setback patterns. Many blocks on Grand Avenue have both commercial and
residential type structures. In terms of design, the most successful of
these-have`corner commercial structures up to the sidewalks, with
�- smaller residential-type structures set back from the sidewalk in mid-
block. This design pattern should be preserved and expanded. On a11-
commercial blocks, buildings should have no setback form the sidewalk."
#25, p.4 The applicant's plans include a building addition that will be
built right up to the sidewalk.
Objectives and policies of the Economic Development Strategy include:
"ensure sufficient land for future business growth" and "the city's land
use plan should provide adequate land for industrial and commercial
development and expansion in order to increase the proportion of
commercial/industrial tax base.'� #6 , pp. 16 & 17.
3. The rezoning of this one parcel for commercial use would not,
necessarily by itself, have an adverse impact on the surrounding
community, particularly because it is immediately adjacent to an
existing commercial area. Rezoning of this property, however, and of
other similar properties, proposals for which are likely to follow,
could cumulatively have an adverse impact by disrupting the balance of
commercial and residential uses on the avenue. The East Grand Avenue
Small Area Plan makes clear the importance of maintaining the existing
architecture and mix of commercial and residential uses in the
designated "conservation area." Such a change to existing conditions is
discouraged and would disrupt the mix of use and design that is the
hallmark of Grand Avenue.
• On the other hand, if the property were rezoned to allow a parking lot,
the applicant would no longer need to park veriicles that he has/will
� ".
`������-
Zoning File #96-289
Page Four
service, thus reducing parking and congestion in the streets,
particularly Chatsworth Street.
4. The existing residential zoning allows for reasonable use of the
property.
5. The applicant submitted a sufficient petition signed by two-thirds of
the property owners within one hundred (100) feet of the property to be
rezoned (14 parcels eligible, 10 parcels needed, and 11 parcels signed}.
6. The off-street parking requirement for the proposed expansion is 10
spaces. Four spaces will be lost due to the building expansion.
Fourteen spaces will be provided in the new lot to the west. Thus,
adequate off-street parking is provided for the use.
The applicant's request to have alley access for the parking lot would
be evaluated during review of the site plan.
'I. STAFF RSCOb4�NDATION: Based on findings 2, 3, and 4 staff recommends denial
of the petition to rezone to B-3.
�
Addit3onaZ Informatioa �
If the rezoning is approved, a special condition use permit will be reguired
since the floor area of the building is expanding by more than 50 percent.
The Planning Administrator would process the permit administratively rather
than require a second public hearing since the planning commission is holding
a public hearing on the rezoning petition currently. The planning commission
amended its rules of procedure in 1984 to delegate authority for the approval
of special condition use permits to the planning administrator in all cases
where public hearings have been held in which the commission has recommended,
and the city council has approved, a rezoning specifically for a special
condition use.
Section 60.54a{18) of the zoning code provides that auto repair businesses are
permitted in a B-3 zone subject to certain conditions. These conditions and
the developer's ability to meet them are as follows:
a. The mittimvm lot area shall be fifteea thousand (15,000) square £eet.
This condition is met. Combining the existing auto repair shop property
(9,000 square £eet) with the lot to the west wi11 increase the lot size by
6,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet.
�b. A ten-foot lattdscaped bu£fer with screen plantiag and an obscuring fence
sha21 be required along any property line adjoiaiag to an existiag
residence or adjoining to land zoaed rasideatial.
This condition can be met. The site plan submitted indicates a new fence .
and landscape border along the western property line. Depending upon the
l�
�� ,� S �-
• Zoning File #96-289
Page Five
degree to which the parking spaces are angled, there may or may not be
adequate space to provide the full 10 foot setback with landscaped buffer.
The required width for the maneuvering lane varies from 12 to 15 feet
depending upon the angle of the parking spaces. If the maneuvering lane
is required to be 15 feet then the setback from the western property line
can only be 7 feet and the applicant would need a modification of this
condition. If a modification is necessary, staff would not be able to
pzocess the permit application administratively and a second public
hearing would be necessary.
c. All repair work shall be done within an enclosed building.
This condition is met. The applicant understands that all work must take
place within the enclosed building and that no repair may occur on the
exterior of the lot or in the public right-of-way.
d. There shall be no outside storage.
This condition is met. The applicant does not propose any outdoor storage
and understands that vehicle parts, tires, oil, or similar items may not
be stored outdoors.
:-The following conditions must also be met before the special condition use
,- • permit may be approved.
a. The extent, Zocation and iateasity of the uae wiZl be in substantial
compliance with the Saint Pau2 Compreheasive Plan and any applicab2e
subarea plans which were approved by the city counci3.
b. The use wi12 provide adequate ingress and egress to miaimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
c. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of the
development in the immediate neighborhood or eadanger the pubSic health,
safety and geaeral melfare.
d. The use will not impede the norma2 and orderly development and improvement
of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the diatrict.
e. The use shaS2, in alI other respects, confozm to tbe applicab2e
regulations of tbe district in which it is located.
Staff would likely impose, at a minimum, the following conditions on the
permit:
i. A wood privacy fence, at least 6 feet in height, shall be installed along
the western property line and shall be properly maintained at all times.
2. Parking for customers and employees shall be arranged on the lot as shown
on the attached site plan. No more than 20 vehicles shall be parked
outdoors on the lot. Only customer vehicles and employee vehicles of the
permittee may be parked on the lot. This condition is intended to
prohibit long term storage of vehicles on the lot.
• 3. All vehicles parked outdoors on the lot shall be completely assembled with
no parts missing. Vehicle salvage is not permitted.
4. Parking of vehicles that are awaiting repair or that have been repaired
shall be prohibited in the public streets.
�1��35 2-
) A INT
VL
���
PETtTION TO AMEND ': HE ZONING CODE
Department ojFlanning and Eco:znmic Develapment
Zoning Sedion
1100 Cify Half Anner
25 West Fourth Street
Saint Paul, MN SSIO2
266-6589
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Property Owner �a.p_iel and Linda Ri�rnc
Address 482 Grand Avenue
City_ St. Paul St.�Zip 551Q5 Daytime phone 228-1316
Contact person (if different)
•
Address/Location 986 Grand Avenne
Legaldescription Lot 2_ Block 35_ Summit Park Additinn
(attach additional s heet if necessary)
TC THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
Pursuant to Section 64.400 of the Saint Paul Zoning Ordinance and to Section 462.357(5) of
Minnesota Statues, Dani el and Li nda Burns , the owner of ali the land proposed
for rezoning, hereby petitions you to rezone the above described property ftom a
RM-2 zoning district to a B-3 zoning district, for the purpose of:
Permitting the use of the land preposed for rezoning for the same purpose as the
lan� located at °82 Grand F,venue in order to permit the remodelling of the
existing business knawn as L'oyd's Automotive.
(attacB additional sheet(s) if nec�
Attachments: Required site pian
Subscribed and swom to
before me this �, g� day
of 1��='L�'�$ , 19
Fee owner of property
Tdle:
Page 1 of ,�,
�
� �,� �m
< _ G�;�"!!; �
�;�:— - .^ram �,..��c— _ =
�t��� _:-.._VrY��!�, . . .
eYr"
Consent petition � Affidavit
•
u
2=
�� . �
S�
�
REZONING
FIRST SUBMITTED
SCUP
NCUP
DATE PETITION SUBMITTED: `�� v' � f� DATE PETITION RESUBMITTED: � � 2 ' 7 `!�
DATE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED: DATE OFFIC[ALLY RECEIVED: �`� `� Rv
__ • .,.
PARCELS ELIGIBLE:
PARCELS REQUIRED:
PARCELS SIGNED:
�
�
�
PARCELS ELIGIBLE:
PARCELSREQUIRED:
PARCELS SIGNED:
l �
��
��
CHECKED BY: ��,�C��L��I� DATE: ' Z' I` 1 F�'
ZONtNG F1L� q� ��
C�
�=
��-352-
��
J
T
r? �
v�
C
i ;,�
� �
r-�
'✓�
��,,
o„
.;
`� �
f 1 �f ,
�
CONSENT OF AATOZNZNG YROPERTY OWNERS TO REZONING
We, the undersigned, owners of the property within I00 feet of the total
contiguous descripCion of rea2 estate owned, purchased, or so2d by petitioner
within one year preceding the date of this petition, acknowZedge that we have
been furnished with the following: .
1. A copy of the Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns
60.51i to . , (name of petitioner)
2. A copy of Sections 60.720, and 6Q.406�t� tA 60.454 , inclusive of the
Saint Panl Zoning Code; and
acknowledge that we are aware of a1Z of the uses permitted under a B-3
District zoning c2assi£ication and we are aware that any of these uses can be
established upon City Council approval of the rezoning; and we hereby consent to
the rezoning of the property described in the
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a B-3 District
(name of petitionerj
•
•
� .
\ J
z4
Petition shall not be considered as oEficially fi2ed until the 2apse of seven (7)
working days after a petition is received by the P2anning Division. Any signator
of any peti[ion may withdraw his/her name therefrom by written request within
that time. page Z of �
•
�
(name
�
�'
,�_�
11-21-1996 02:45PM FROM MCCLRY--ALTOIJ TO
� �
i �
� I
�
CON3ENT OP AII1.10ININC PROPE[�i OWNERS TO &EZOt+ING
f
3177575 P.02
S�
�� ��
tve, the nndersigned, owness of the propert7r within 104 £eet o£ tha total
contiguous descrfpaion of eal estace owned, purchased, or sold by petitfo::er
withZn one year precediag �he date of t�is petition, acknovledge,thac we have
been furnished vith tha £ol owing: -
1. A copy�of the Pet�ti j of Daniel and Linda B�rnc
! 50.�11 tA 6D.552, C�e of petitiioner)
2. A copy �of Sectfons(� 7,9(l. ard fi0.4_Q6�fiR �`� -__, ��iusive o£ the
Saint Paul Zoning Cod�e; and
acknawledge CFiBC we are av�e oE a21 0£ the uses permitted under a B-3 _
pS.strict zoning classifica�ion and we are aware that any of these uses can be
astablished �ipon Gity Council approval af the rezoning; and ve hereby consenc to
the rezoning:of the propexty described in the
Petit3.nn of ;_ Daniel_and Linda Burns to a 6-3 Discrict
r)
ft a► 9�
E
� ,
Petision shali aot be a�
wosking days' aftez a pe+
� of any petition may vi
that time.
ed as o£ficially £iled until the lapse oE seven (7)
is received by the Planning Dxvision. Any signator
hisJhez aame ihexefrom by wricten zeguest wi.thin
page � of �,,,
?OTAL P.62
2�
11-25-1996 @5�27PM FRQM MCCLAY-ALT�N Tp R�i ���
2238163 P.04
i i
(
{
cASSEN': OF aiL10TNZVG YROPER�Y OvtiFgS Yo 8E?ANIac
✓ t
ue, the uadarsig:ead, o*is+ess of the proQe=ty wi�hin 100 feet of :he cosal
eoz:tigueeu desczipLien oP �a1 estate e�on�d, purei:ase8, or so2d by yetit£o�er
wLthin one yrar psece8lag e daee oF rkis peti[ion, acknov_edge,that s�e have
besn £urtniehed with the fo ensing: .
1. A eopy�of t31e Pet3.ei J of Oarie' and Lind 8�rn�
� 60.�11 tp 60.552, C�e of peci�ioaer)
2, A cOppjo£ SectionafjQ�e�,�,§t]�'�1 A`WC06tgh�60_454____ _, inelusive of the
Sainc $aai zor:ing Co , and
aeknowladge dhac c:e aze aw e of x21 of r3:e +�aes pezmiete2 under a 6-3
DiscrieL zon3r,$ elassifiaa�io� aad ve aze avare tha! any of tbasa usea can bs
sstabFished tigon City Counci3 agprwa2 of the rezoaing; :nd vc hereby cor.senc to
chs zszoaing;oF the propexey dnaesibed in che
Petition ef : Daniel 2
t�
AD�Rr55 Oit � ._ Z,P�N _ at
r�°= 9qo G�, A. ., s�
,
-�
�
i�'' � �f 4'�l , �P
�� J �
r-.
,�
E`:
�,�
Fecicion shall not'�e oon
trorking days` a�Ler a pet3
�- of any pecieion may ++ftt
Chat time.
Burns co a �- Disarict
t.
� •
�
�
;
ed as officially fE1ed until the iapse of aeven (7j
3s teceiveB by the Plac:zning IIivisioa. Any signator
his/her z�ame therefrom �y wricten req�est within
page � of ,�
' . ..
�Q���� ���� ��O'2�ar'1 I
�DTAL P.62 � �
�
�i'� ^ �
sy
�
STATE OF MJNNESOTA)
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
: SS
� Aa 1 t t t�t} '�LN� S , being first duly sworn, deposes and states that fieJshe is the person
who circulated the within petition and consent, consisting of � pages; that affiant is informed and
believes that the parties described are the owners respectively of the lots placed immediately before each
name, that affiant is informed and believes that each of the parties described above is the owner of tlie
property which is within 100 feet from any property owned or purchased by petitioner or sold by
petitioner within one (1) year precedittg the date of this petition which is contiguous to the property
described in the petition; that except for
none of the parties described above has purchased or is purchasing property from the petitioner contiguous
to the above described property within one (i ) year of the date of the petition; that this consent was signed
by each of said owners in the presences of this affiant, and that the signatures are the true and correct
signatures of each and all of the parties so described.
�
� / � �'�L�/i
�
• �
•
Subscribed and swom to bef re me
this�!dayof (�JG`�afYi� 19�(L)
TAR PUBLI
.
� BRIAN D. ALTO"�s �
� N �
RAMSEVCOUhr�. >
r��^� A 1 yConriss , oaEzW.r?�._ ,
'wwv� ,
�� Z �e�C-�,+J {�i1�uJ�l't—.
ADDRESS SZ O�� � j�j l��
z 2. K { 'a( �l
TELEPHONE NUMBER
;� � •-
� ' `
PAGE � OF \
11-1-96
a�-���-
Attachment to 5oecial Condition Use Permit ARnlication• •
982-986 Grand Avenue, St. Paul MN 55105
Lloyd's Automotive has operated at the cor�er of Grand and Chatsworth as a
neighborhood service station, celebrating 50 years of service this year.
In order to provide better service to customers and relieve traffic congestion , the
owner's of Lloyd's Automotive have applied to rezone the property of 986 Grand
Avenue to the same zoning classification as the business at 982 Grand Avenue. The
existing building will be remodeied and the lots combined in order to provide
sufficient off-street parking for the business.
The conditions of codes section 60.544(18) a-d will all be met. By adding the
additional Iot to the business, the minimum lot size for an auto service use will be
met. The landscaping and fence required will be instaited. All repair work will be
done in the enclosed building and there will be no outside storage.
The conditions of code section 60.300(d? will be met.
Lloyd's Automotive is a permitted use in a B-3 Zone area subject to special
conditions. An auto service station, in compliance with all requirements of the code,
is a compatible mixed use along the existing Grand Avenue commercia! strip. This �
compties with the policies of the comprehensive plan.
Remodeling and use of the adjacent land are designed to improve ingress and egress.
Traffic congestion will be relieved by the improved site plan and the addition of off-
street parking.
The continued use of a well established neighborhood business will not be
detrimental to the character of the neighborhood. Over three fourths (3/4) of the
customer's of Lloyd's Automotive live in the 55105 zip code. The comprehensive
ptan reftects the need for the zoning code to be flexible to reflect current commerciai
trends. There is a need to renovate the existing business to better serve its
customers. The current multiple family residential use of the property at 986 Grand
Avenue is not economically feasible,
The approval of the special condition use permit and rezoning of 986 Grand Avenue
will not impede development and improvement of the surrounding property. The
areas fully developed and the uses are well established.
The use will in atl other respects conform to the applicabfe regulations of the district
of which it is located.
Z � 6 � i � i,7 � � 6� � -�==�— � �
��
�l'i -
! ,
�
EXISnrvG gRqND AVE.
STR£ET UpiT
EwSnrvG
5lDEWnl1c
• !
� I
' r � � ��
I � �
� �
� �
� ' '
� EXIS7ING �
S 1 DUPLEX �
� � (�o ee a�+o�o) I
I I
f I
i
� i I
� f I
� �
I �-----�
EXISnNG�
FENC:
RETqINiNG WAt1
NN� GLANIER
` EXISTiNG
B�NwNWS
PAfiKiNG�
6U5 STC%
EXiS�1::
STREE' UGI:T
' �' EXISTI:G
4GN
�
EXISi1NG
TREE
( � EXISi1NG �
EXISTING P RKINOU� I
BUfLDING
E%159NG-
SDEWALH
� E%ISiING
PARKING
CGRA4EL) �
��
EXISIING
ALLEY �OVERHEAp
UTl1TY LMES
� � �
���� �
�
��
Kel4
Architects
• ' ���
����� ����
SITE P
Z�
- EXISTtNG
� T- 30' n
�
ti
H
�
�
a
S
U
LLOY�'S AUTOMOTIVE
A��1710N ANQ RE.NOVA -
\
_ _ _ _ M1 ` _
\\
\
EXISt1NG
i (TO BE I
NEW BINMINZ
PARKING
16 SiALLS TOTA
INCL (1) VqN ACf
GRAND AVE.
ALLEY �o� Eno
unum �u+es
!
��� ��� �� ���� ���
���� �
E�snuc
8U5 STO?
EXISTiNG
SRr EET �p1T
��-��a-
•
N
�
K
O
3
�
r-
¢
U
•
��Y .
K�e SITE PLA — NEW CONSTRUCTION
nra,rte�cs
�,�,�� SCALE T= 30' •
LLOYL7'S AU O I
A�E�ITION ANL7 RENOVATION
\ �! EC EX6nNG �qRKMG STALL � /
� �
z
0
>
�
W
2
�
�
z
0
>
W
I
�
0
z
0
Q
>
W
k-
W
�
�,� �3s �--
�o`
��
�
�
�
0
�
w
a
�
0
Q
>
W
F-
Q
w
��
�-� �
� Y � <_
W
�
�-
0
�
d
�-
�
Q
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
Z
0
�-
Q
�
�
z
W
�
�
Z
4
Z
Q
�
�
�
Q
�
�i
�� -35�.-
SPECIAL CONDITIUN USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Departmenr of Planning and Economic Development
Zoning Section
II00 City HaII Annex
25 Wes[ Four[h Streer
Saint Paul, M1V 55102
266-6589
APPLlCANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Name Burcorn Inc.
AddfeSS 982 Grand Avenue
City St. Paul St. MN Zip 55105 Daytime phone 228-1316
Name ot owner (if difFerent)
Address/Location 982 - 986 Grand Avenue_ St. Paul MN 55105
Legal description: Lots 1& 2. Block 35 Summit Park Addition
Current Zoning �'"3 '� Z
(attach addifionai sheet if necessary)
TYPE OF PERMIT: Apptication is hereby made under the provisions of Chapter s4
Section �nn , Paragraph � of the Zoning Code for a:
[?� Speciai Condition Use Permit
❑ River Corridor CondiEional Use Permit
� Mod�cafion of River Corridor Standards
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: in the space be�ow supply information fhaf is applicable to your type of
permit (attach additionai sheets if rtecessary)
• SPECIAL CONDITION USE: Explain how the use wiii meet each of the special conditions.
• RNER CORRIDOR CONDi710NAL USE: Describe how the use will meet the applicable conditions.
• MODIFICATION OF RIVER CORRIDOR STAIVDARDS: Expiain why modifications are needed.
SEE ATTACHED SNEET
site plan is attached �
i ��t���� ���� `.�- �
I�1
LI
�
�,
�J
ApplicanYs signature G�l'd�..��f" �i':�� Qate i Z ° i � City agent
� �� �� ?�
q�_ 3s�
Summit �-Ii11 Association
Distrsct 16 Pianning Council
Kady Dadlez aso saint c�air avenue
� Planning and Ecanomic Deve{opment �{�CEIVED Saint Paui Minnesota 55105
25 West Fourth Street �elephone 612-222-7222
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 JAN 1 5 1997 fex 612-222-1558
January 1q �ss� ZONfNG
RE: Zoning File Number 96-289
Dear Ms. Dadfez and Members of the Zoning Committee af the Planning Commission,
The Board of Directors of the Summit Hili Association/District 16 Planning Council recommends
deniaf of the request by Daniel and Linda Burns to rezone 986 Grand Avenue fr�m RM-2 to B-3 in
order to aifow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue. A
B-3 zone is the least restrictive zone ailowed on Grand Avenue. B-3 is general husin?ss, not
community business. All of the zoning s#udies of the Avenue, and the resulting zoning changes, have
attempted to )imit or reduce the number of B-3 parcels on the Avenue. Rezoning must be considered
in the long-term. One cannot assume that Mr. Burns will maintain ownership of Lloyd's Automotive
indefiinitely.
Having said that, I would like to emphasize that ihe Summit Hill Association supports Mr. Burns
proposed remodeling and expansion of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
His business is an asset to the neighborhood and the success of this business is in the best
interest of the neighborhood.
_� ' The Summit Hill Association recommends that 986 Grand Avenue be rezoned to P-1 in order
to accommodate this proposal.
Mr. Burns was asked by the Zoning and Land Use Committee if he fi�as plans, or wants the
option to expand his repair shop again in the future. He stated that he has no pfans to expand
after this expansion and that he Is not opposed #o a less restric#ive zoning of P-1 if � allows him
to compiete the currently proposed expansion.
While rezoning from residentiai to commercial is, in fact, against the District Plan, it was agreed
that this proposal would not be detrimentai, but rather wou{d enhance fhe iivability of the
neighborhood by +mproving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by minimizing auto access from
�n�t��. �.;� � �e�;;,5 �q�� �� t�� ���eEt. it was deterrnined that this proposai wouid not
intensify commercialization, but rather would hefp to mitigate the traffic and parking probiem
fhat currently exists.
Therefore, the Summit HiH AssociationlDistrict 16 Pianning Councif recommends that the
Zoning Committes ot the Planning Commission use its authori#y and discretion to rezone 986
Grand Avenue from RM-2 #o P-1 in order to ailow expansion and remodeling of the existing
auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
Sincere{ , '_ --
`=_'� `�,%� g �
.�..=.�— ������ .
John Siekmeier, President � � g � �,. � � � �� ��
Summit Hi11 AssociationlDistrict 16 Planning Council
� g A i�.
cc: Council President Thune
Daniel and Linda Burns
33
R�-�52-
RECEIVED
JAN 13 1997
Gladys Morton, Chair
Zoning Committee of the
Planning Commission
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
1100 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paui, MN 55102
Attn; Kady Dadlez
January 9, 9997
Re: 986 Grartd Avenue
Lot 2, Block 35, Summit Park Addition
Dear Ms. Dadlez:
The Board of Directors of the Grand Avenue Business Association, at its regular December
meeting, passed a resolution in support of the request by Dan and Linda Burns to rezone the
property located at 986 Grand Avenue from RM-2 to B-3.
Lloyd's Automotive has been an important business in the community for many years. It is
appropriate to rezone the adjoining parcel of property to the same zoning classification as the
current business in order to allow Lloyd's Automotive to provide better service to Grand
Avenue and the neighborhood.
�in eiy,
` Bonnie Johns
Vice President
BJ/ck
�_��i���€'°:`` � :-?" �,� �
••'�. �"��d_
ZONING
•
.
1043 Grand Avenue, Suite 315•
0
St. Paul, Minnesota 55105
0
612-224-3324
nv�uv��� x��v�;u�llviV
� ----- j� T�'
�E1VE� ---- --
__ RE _ .------
---SAN-�'t_199T - --- .
---�
-- -Z�N���--
- ---- - =.��.�
C��
a�L���
-.�y"� ��
G
��.,�� _
-=�
�=r 'G-
_ , -�
------ -�-----��
- -- -- - -----��Ze %ir-d�c j _�.__ J
---_� -- - -'-�� -�-� � ��2�
-�- - =`- ---- - - - - -
---- - - ----- -- ----------
------ --- -----,�-.e�--- �
-----�---� �"-�
- j��y -�r� ---
- - i?���e-- -- - " .
- - - ---�
- - - ���`�� --���
• _.�.�- i �
q� _ 3� a
Z����� �� � _ � ;
r��
�ti:ti
�_�.._. ;
��
�' � ` �--��-
., ,
,
�
�-- ----
��!
�J�
��
/ �
,! �
1
� �/ , i � � � ��� �
, � i
/ �� / � % / � `' / j.
� ��
��� ,//
; � / , �/
� � �� i
" .� �� , - ,
-.1:1�• .� � �'
.
, �
�
�
-��-`��2-
. � �� i'`� ��
-�- �
_
�
---- ---- ----- ----�- - ---- -- - - - - - - - - '-_ -
-- � -
� . .
-- -�.�_�_ -6� -- - - -
.. ..
� .
,..� � r
,, y
_'� '
� _ "_ _' . '" _ _� _""_ "�' " '
- ---- �'-- - - - - - - - j ,�
--� ------ =--- - -- ---�---- - - --�-7,-_/_:�'4 � �- -- -- - - "
� G i�� i!� -- �,� i .. �
_ _ _--� - ---�-=i��u" - -�- ---: — — - — --- 4z�r
` , ---- -- � -
e;'J�,_�_�_ ----�C�- - - - -- -- -!�t`-e .
_ -� _--- :��z`-`'--�-� - -- �- �- - - - - - -- ._` —_.
- - - - � - - - _ _:_�.�. �.�-�*�-�-�- _ -
`= - -- - - � - --` --- — --�- =-__ .�_ _�.--� - --- -- - --
_:���—=-- — _ -- -- —= _- - --- ----C�. �,.�GCr��.- - 5�y� - —
- ------- -�----- =--�-=---- - ��3 _ ��.�%roCy'�_ -
_. -� --- s��� �
--- --- --- - --- - -- -- - - - - -�sT _O��- ---- ----
. , a�� ��• a . ; � :.= -_ ,
� _
------ ----__— . _ - -
r =� - ��>Y_< ._ .
• �;�
'::•...=.. . . _.:. - -
--� .. _ :_ • -- , � ,
-4
�-
•a • ��• �' �� � � i • ��'���
q'1 -35�
`
1. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HAUEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE
4. DAYTON'S BLUFF
5. PAYNE-PHALEN
6. NORTH END
7. THOMAS-DALE
8. SUMMTT-UNIVERSITY
9. WEST SEVENTH
10. COMO
11. HAMLINE-MTDyVAY
12. ST. ANTHONY PARK
13. MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLIN&S1�IELLING HAMLINE
14. MACALES'I'ER GROVELAND
16. SUMMTT HIL
1 . DOWNTOWN
�. .
ZONING FILE ��°��`''
CTITZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNING DISTRICTS
�� �3��
�ebruary 25, 1997
Council President Dave Thune
Members of the City Council
310 City Hail
Saint Paul, NIN 55102
Dear Councii President Thune and Councilmembers:
We, the undersigned, all live on the norkh side o£ Lincoln Avenue
within one biock of Chatsworth Avenue and Lloyd's Automotive. We
access our alley opposite the automotive repair shop. We are also
customers of Dan Burns.
We oppose the rezoning of Lloyd's to B-3. The rezoning is a radical
departure from the Grand Avenue Plan and its intent to preserve a
mixture of residential and commercial uses along the street. An expansion
of B-3 sets a precedent that reduces confidence in the long term use of the
property and all the property along the Avenue.
Dan Burns says he need parking to expand his business. �urrently,
Chatsworth Avenue is filled with his customers'cars, so we know he
already needs parking. But we will take Dan at his word that his intent for
the new lot is only parking and offer support for a parking rezoning (P-1).
�� � ���
`�6 / �,� �, r„
�f ( C��tcc�•-�
� '.
,
�
� ���
��, s�_
�'/' 7.3 ��i��aC�F/ �t/�.
� �� �� �
�� �,
�� � c.,��t� �-„-� _
9 Ys' �'� �t � 5�v�c- .
�i�� G�y�/� �'-� �
f S 7 �-��..�`����- �--
�s7 ��.�,.. �.,��_
� Q . �,��..�..
(� e �:.�.-,�.,�..
� CONSENT OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND ��� ��
REZONING PETITION c�r� _ 3S�--
We, the owners of the property within 100 fieet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
I acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
ADDRESS = ` FEE:011st1�ER[S} __ 5tGt3tkTC1RE "DATE -
� �Q-�r�x�Z� 2'�2�
978 Grand D&B Properties �^� L ,� � j, (R 7
975 Lincoln
Billie Gilliland
and WiNiam Gilliland
��' 1��
969 Grand
999 Grand
995 Grand
985 Grand
JSS Associates
William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
�(�/��-
Tab Properties
Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. pieveney, by 8ert
McKasy under Power of
Attorney dated April 1 S,
1993
994 Grand
John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Grand
997 Grand
993 Lincoln
Patrick F. Sullivan
Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
Linda Zick
983 Lincoin I Melvin Spielman and li��� °� �-�
� Anna Spielman
i
2�����
3 '����
��/��
<�j�1�7
> �/�71y�
COMSENT OF ADJO{NING PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND �����
REZONING PETITION �I
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Danief and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
I acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
. /ktI�RESS FgE; (3VYRtER(Si - ` SCGNATURE ° Dt.tT6 " .
978 Grand D&B Properties
975 Lincoln Billie Gilliland
and William Gilliland
969 Grand JSS Associates ,� �a--��^�
. '� /
999 Grand William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
985 Grand Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert
McKasy under Power of
Attorney dated April 18,
1993
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
�� � V ��� n
998 Grand Patrick F. Sullivan r�� `- ���f��•-- � �'���j (
� �,,.�,_
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincofn Melvin Spielman and
Anna Spielman
CONSENT OF ADJOINIIVG PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND �
REZONING PETITION q � -' �J 5
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Surns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniei and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
1 acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
'.-_;-RDI7RES�- FEE t3]NNER(SI . - StGlY1lTC1£iE: , _I3ATE- _-
978 Grand D&B Properties
975 Lincoln Biilie Gilliland
and William Gilliland
969 Grand JSS Associates
999 Grand William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
9$5 Grand Cherokee State Ba�k
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert
McKasy under Power of n ��� /
Attorney dated April 18, ����" l' �� �� � �l ,�� � !
1993
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Grand Patrick F. Sullivan
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincoln Melvin Spielman and
Anna Spielman
CONSENT OF ADJOINiNG PROPERl'Y OWNERS TO AMEND
REZONING PETITION � 7 3 S�"
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the reaf estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
f acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 80.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
ADTSEtESS- - FE�OWRiERtBT-. `- SlGttWTt7SE"- DA7E---
978 Grand D&B Proparties
975 Lincoln Billie Giliiland
and William Giililand
969 Grand .1SS Associates
999 Grand Wiiliam Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
985 Grand Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert ,�
McKasy under Power of �%�,��� ��^ �
Attorney dated Aprit 18, ��� "l� �` �j p 1
1993
� �m� tL . 2�; 6 �,J
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Gra�d Patrick F. Sullivan
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grent
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincoln Melvin Spielman and
An�a Spielman
�L
Presented By
� �': 4 � � ", £ !"`.. �
�. ' �. f �
, F � . . . .. ...�
Green Sheet # \���
L, MINNESOTA
2
Referred To ��
�C7
Council File # I� —3 S �'
Ordinance #
Committee: Date
An ordinance amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaiiung to zoning for the City
of Saint Paul and the zoning maps thereo£
�
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
WI�REAS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462357 and §64.400 of the Legislative Code, DAIVIEL AND
LINDA Bi7RNS duly petitioned to rezone 986 GRAND AVENUE, being legally described as Lot 2, Block
35; Summit Park Addition, from RM-2 to B-3, the petition being subsequently amended to rezone the
properry from RM-2 to P-1, to allow development of a pazking lot to accommodate expansion and remodeling
of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue, the petition having been certified by the Planning
Division on March 12, 1997 as having been consented to by at least 67 percent of the owners of the azea of
the property to be rezoned, and fiirther having been consented to by at least two-thirds of the owners of the
property situated within 100 feet of the total contiguous property within one year proceeding the date of the
petition; and
WHEREAS, The Zoning Committee of the Plaiming Commission held a public hearing on January 16, 1997,
for the purpose of considering the rezoning petition, and pursuant to § 107.03 of the Administrafive Code,
submitted its recommendation to the Planning Commission that the petition be granted; and
19 WHEREAS, The Planning Commission considered the rezoning petition at its meeting held on January 24,
20 1997 and zecommended that the City Council approve the petition; and
21
22 WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council on the said rezoning petition was duly
23 published in the official newspaper of the City on January 31, 1997 and notices were duly mailed to each
24 owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property sought to be
25 rezoned;and
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
WIIEREAS, public hearings before the City Council having been conducted on February 26, 1997 and Mazch
12, 1997, where all ittterested parties were heard, the Council having considered all the facts and
recoxnmendations concerning the petition; now, therefore
II�'I�K�lfl�[�I_11i]�1:1_�Zi]�.Y:\1��1771�JA�Z�]�.I.Y� '�� : 1�
Section l.
That the zoning map of the City of Saint Paul, Sheet Number 27, as incorporated by reference in §60301
of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows:
That property with the address of 986 GRt1ND AVENUE, being more particularly described as:
Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Pazk Addition
�/
?a�a1
40 be �nd is hereby rezoned from RM-2 to P-1. 3 5�—
41 q �"
42
43 Section 2.
44
45 This ordinance shall take effect and be in foYce fliiriy (30} days from and after its passage, approval and
46 publication.
Bimrrecrc
�. ; ! !' •. .
Requested by Department of:
�V-C
Adoption Certified by Council Secretazy
B �� a. � �
Approved by Mayor: nate �f" I��� �
By:
By:
Form Approve City Attorney
BY� .2t%G°"lN�� r1�raCO—�2
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By: � G��� �---��•
TOTAI # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
FOR
3����
GREEN SH � � � �� a "
INRI INRIAUDATE
DEPAqTMENTDIRECTOfl �CfTYCOUNGL
GINATTORNEY O CffYCLERK
BUDGET DIRECipP � FIN. B MGT. SERVICES DIP.
MAYOR(ORASSISTANT) �
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
Adopt an ord'mance to fmalize council approval of a petition of DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS to rezone
property located at 98b GRAND AVENLJE from RM-2 to P-1 (public hearings held February 26, 1997 and
Mazch 12, 199� .
RE Approva (A) w Aejact (R) PEHSONAL SEHVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWfNG QUESTION3:
L PLANNING COMMISSION _ CIYIL 5ERVICE CAMMISSION �� Nas lFiis person/iirm ever worked untler a comract for this departrnerr[?
GB COMMISTEE YES NO
��� _ 2. Has ffiis person/tirm ever been a ciry employee?
YES NO
__ DISTflIGTGOURT __ _
SUPGORTS WHICH COUNCIL OB.IECT7VE?
3. Does tBis perso�rm possess a skill mt norrnally possessed by any wrrent c(ty employee?
YES NO
I Erzplalrt a11 yea anawers en aeparate ahaet a�tl attach tc green sheet
�� �� t �
IIiIATINO PROBLEM, ISSUF. OPPOR7UNIlY (VJho, What. When, Where, Why):
Finalize council approval of a perition of DANIEL t�ND LINDA BURNS to rezone property at 986 GRAND
AVENTJE from RM-2 to P-1 to allow development of a parking lot to accommodate expansion and remodeling
of the existing auto repair business at 982 Graud Avenue.
��������
1�AR 20 j�9�
,���v�'d �
�a-tC�
� �^ ��-� �`���gf
s ��..._�. , �_ ,�:.�,. � a
.,<<��.� � �� i�97
___---_��_�.>.����
�'
., • �.
��
' � < ;.
OTAL AMOUNT OF THANSACTION $
COST7REVENUE BUDGETED (dRCLE ONE)
Q�-�iF.
)NOf47G SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
�ANCIAL INFOiifrfA710N: (EXGIAIN)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RANfSEY
l
) ss
)
����
Daniel and Linda Burns, being first duly sworn, depose and state that they
are the persons who circulated the within petition and consent, consisting of t�es-�c:.tr
`t(,$) pages; that affiants are informed and believe that the parties described are the
owners respectivefy of the fots placed immediately before each name; that affiiants
are informed and believe that each of the parties described above is the owner of
the property which is within 100 feet from any property owned or purchased by
petitioners or sold by petitioners within one (1) year preceding the date of this
petition which is contiguous to the property described in the petition; that none of
the parties described above has purchased or is purchasing property from the
petitioner contiguous to the above-described property within one (1) year of the
date of the petition; that this consent was signed by each of said owners in the
presences of affiant; and, that the signatures are the true and correct signatures of
each of all of the parties so described.
�� ������
NAME
�{lV(U�
NAME
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
5th day of March, 1997.
3 � . � a.1�
Notar�
CAROLYN J KELL ((
� , � NOTaav aiJBLiC—MINN£SOTA �
uar.?SEY COUNTI'
:�•,� b!:
,� �_... .__.,m,,,�.�.v.�
982 Grand Avenue. St. Paul, MN 55105
ADDRESS
(61 21 228-1 31 6
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this 6th day of March, 1997.
�,�� � ,� �
Notary Pub�ic
CAROLYN S. KELt
4
� j�� NOTA RAMSEY COUNTY SOTA i
n ('pinmiss�FxP�JAN37.2000 �
� �qr��: t�N
DEPAR'SMENT OF PLANNING
& ECONOMIC DEVEIAPMENT
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norrrz Co[emwz, Mayor
January 28, 1997
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
Division of Plmverng
25 West Faurth Street
Sa'vu Pau1, MN55102
c{,'�1 ' � S �-
Telephone: 612-266-6565
Facsimile: 612-228d314
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday
February 26, 1997 far the following zoning case:
Applicant: DADIIEL & LINDA BURNS
File Number: #96-289
Purpose: Rezone property from 12M-2 (multiple family residential) to B-3 (general
business) to allow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business
at 982 Grand Avenue, Lloyd's Automotive.
Address: 986 GRAND AVENLJE (south side of the street between Chatsworth & O�'ord)
Legal Description
of Properiy: Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Park Addition
Previous Action:
Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, vote: 11-6, January 24, 1997
Zoning Committee Recommendation: Approval, vote: 6-0, January 16, 1997
My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the February 5, 1997
City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger.
Please call me at 266-6582 if you have any questions.
Sincerely, �
�� ��
Kady Dadlez
City Planner
Zoning Secrion
cc: File #96-289
Mike Kraemer
Donna Sanders
, I: �� F
�
t�F�r' h �
' i� n�
t '., �`i'
--_ ---
. �. - ° - - ` HOT2CE OF YUBLIC HEARITTG -. � � - - � ..-� `
-=.. � -.,.'_,�: ..: _ `_ .
� T�e Saint .Paul k;ity� Council� wilt conduch a gublic rieartng on � Wec2nes�ay:�'
Februazy 26. 1997, in the CouneiP�Chambers, Third Rloor Ciry HaIl to:consiQer�th� �,
appllcatlbn ofDaaieYand Linda Burns to rezone propertyfrom RI13-2 (m"ultipleifamily- '
residenti2i) to�B3�(gexxeml business), to allow expansion and remodeling:of the ' .
� O� au�; repair bnsiness at 9S2 Grand Avenue (sbnth��ide betwee,n Chatsivoi[h ;,
Dated Januarg.28;;1997 '- _ . _ � , ' � . ,;�
NAI!ICY ANDERSON , ,. � -� ,. ,,, .. _
�Assistant Qity Council Secretary � � - __ :. _ - " � _ � . � . . _. .
.. - . . _ - fJa�7iary 31, 1997) . - - �` -`- �
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNA*G
& ECONOMIC DEVECAPMENT
SaINT I I
PAUL �
�
AApA'�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Caleman, Mayor
February 14, 1997
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Zoning File #96-289
City Council Hearing:
Division afPlannirzg
25 West Fourth SYreet
Sav+t Paut, MN 55702
DAI�tIEL AND LINDA BURNS
Februaty 26, 1997 430 p.m. City Council Chambers
q� - 3sa.
Telephone: 612466-6565
Facsimile: 6I2-228-3314
PURPOSE: To consider rezoning property at 986 GRAND AVENUE (south side between Chatsworth &
Oxford) from RM-2 (residential multiple family) to B-3 (general business) to allow expansion and
remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
PLANNING COMIvIISSION RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL vote: 11-6
• ZONING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL vote: 6-0
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL
SUPPORT: No one spoke.
OPPOSITTON: No one spoke. District 16 supports the applicant's plans for expansion but voted to
oppose the rezoning to B-3. District 16 supports rezoning the property to P-1 (pazking).
Dear Ms, Anderson:
�
DANIEL AND LINDA BUKNS submitted a petition to rezone properry at 986 GRAND AVENiJE. The
Zoning Committee of the PJanning Commission held a pubiic hearing on the proposed rezoning on
January 16, 1997. The applicant's representative addressed the committee. At the close of the public
hearing, the committee voted 6-0 to recommend apptoval to rezone to B-3. The Planning Commission
upheld the Zoning Committee's recommendation for approval on a vote of i l-6 on 3anuary 24, 1997.
This proposed rezoning is scheduled to be heard by the Ciry Council on February 26, 1997. Please notify
me if any member of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site presented at the public hearing.
5incerely,
Ken F��
Planning Administrator
Attachments
cc: City Council members
q�-35�-
city of saint paui
planning commission resolution
file number 97-03
�tE? January 24, 1997
WHEREAS, DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS, fi!e #96-289 have petitioned to rezone 986 GRAND
AVENUE, situated on the south side of the street between Chatsworth & Oxford, from RM-2 to B-3 to
allow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business a[ 982 Grand Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 16,
1997 at which all persons present �i�are given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said application in
accordance �vith the req�irements of Sec[ion 64.400 of the Saint Paut Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Plannin� Commission, based on the evidence presented to its Zoning
Committee at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of
fact:
•
The applicant oivns the duplex property To be rezoned. The applicant atso owns Lioyd's AutomoYive
at 982 Grand Ae•enue, a neighborhood auto re�air sliop that has been operating for 50 years. In order
to provide better service and relieve traffic con�estion the applicant plans to remodet the existing auto •
repair building and combine thlt property with t6e iot to t6e west to provide off-sVeet parking for the
espanded business. 7he applicant is working on plans to have the house moved to a new location in
the Ramsey Hill neighborhood.
The applicant intends to espand tlie number of service bays in the existin� repair garage from six to
nine or ten and provide off-street parl:ing on the lot to the west. Plans include replacing the existing
parking area at the northern portiott of the property at 982 Grand Avenue with die expanded bui(ding
built up to tiie nonhern property line. The proposed parkin�, lot to the west, 14 spaces, would iiave
ingress from Grand Avenue onfy, and egress to the a0ey. The lot, with 40 feet of fronta�e on Grand
Avenue, is �toY �vide enough to provide ingress and egress at Grand Aveaue, A feiue and landscaped
buffer is proposed along the western property line abutting an RM-2 zoning district.
The e�isting auto repair shop emptoys nine people, one or two may be added as a result of the
ex�ansion. T(ie hours of operation will remain the same afrer the expansion: 7:00 a.m, to 8:00 p.m
Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Saturday.
The applicant states that the use of the property as a duplex is not economically feasible because the
cost of taxes (non-homesteaded), mortgage, insurattce, and maintenance make a profitable return on
the investment untikely.
moved by �nCl
seconded by
in favor 11
a���t 6{Maddox, Mardell, Gordon, Lee, Nowlin, Geisser)
•
0
��-�s�
• Zonina I=ile #96-289
Pa�e T�vo of Resolution
2. The proposed rezonin� is in conformance with comprehensive plan. Objectives and policies ofthe
Economic Development Strategy include: "ensure sufficient land for future business growth" and "the
city's land use plan should provide adequate land for industrial and commercial development and
expansion in order to increase the proportion of commerciaUindustrial tax base." #6 & k25, pp. 16 &
17.
In addition, the proposed building expansion is in conformance with the Grand Avenue Design
Guidelines estabiished in ti�e East Grand Avenue Sma1S Area Pfan. One of the guideiines states,
"Limit curb cuts on Grand Avenue. Parking lots should be located to the side or rear of commercial
structures and have a minimum of curb cuts. For parking lots on corners, access from the side street
is preferred." #22, p.4. Tlie applicant plans to locate the parking lot to the side ofthe existing
commercial structure and create one curb cut; an existing curb cut to the east will be eliminated.
Another guideline states, "Protect and promote block-front-setback patterns. Many blocks on Grand
Avenue have both commercial and residential type structures. In terms of design, the most successful
ofthese have corner commerciai structures up to the sidewalks, with smailer residential-type
structures set back from the sidewalk in mid-block. This design pattern shoutd be preserved and
expanded. On all-commercial blocks, buildii�gs should have no setback from the sidewalk." #2S, p.4
The applicant's plans include a building addition that will be built right up to the side�valk.
3. The rezoning of this one parcel for commercial use would not have an adverse impact on the
surrounding community, particularly because it is immediately adjacent to an existing commercial
• area. ]f the property were rezoned to allow a parkine lot, the applican[ would no lonaer need to park
vehicles that he hasFwill service in tlie street, thus reducing parking and conoestion in the streets,
particularly on Chatsworth Street.
4. The applicant submitted a sufficient petition signed by hvo-thirds of the property owners within one
hundred (100) feet of thc propeRy to be rezoned (14 parcels eligible, 10 parcels needed, and l(
parcels signed).
5. The off-street parkina requirement for the proposed expansion is 10 spaces. Four spaces wi1V be iost
due to the building expansion. Fourteen spaces will be provided in the new lot to the west. Thus,
adequate off=street parking is provided for the use. The applicant's request to have alley access for
the parking lot can be evaluated during review ofthe site plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by tl7e Saint Paul Planning Commission that the petition of
DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS to rezone property at 986 GRAND AVENLIE, more particutarly
described as Lot 2, Slock 35; Summit Park Addition, from an RM-2 zoning classification to a B-3 zoning
classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the City; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
Council of the City of Saint Pau1 that properiy located at 986 GRAND AVENUE be rezoned from RM-2
to B-3 in accordance nith the petition for rezoning on file with the Saint Paul Planning Division.
C�
3
��1-3s�
M�nu�es: Sa►h�- i'aut Plo�►h,v►o� Co�nw��Ssian
Planning Commission of Saint Paul
City Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
A mee[ing of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, January 24, 1997 at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of Ciry Hall.
Commissioners Mmes, Birk, Faricy, Geisser, Maddox, Mor[on, Treichel and Wencl and
PresenL• and Messrs. Chavez, Gordon, Gurney, Kramer, Lee, Mardell, McDonell,
Nowlin, Sharpe and Vaught.
Commissiouers Mmes. *Duarte and *Lund-Johnson and Messrs. *Field, Jr. and
Schwichtenberg
Absent:
*Excused
Also Present: ICen Ford, Planning Administrator, Jean Birkholz, Kady Dadlez, and Roger
Ryan of tlie Planning Staff.
I. ApE�rova] of Minutes of January ]0, 1997
MOT[ON: Commissioncr Maddox snoved approval oF thc minutes of January 10,
1997; tl�e motion was seconded by� Commissioner Treichel and passed unanimously on
a voicc votc.
II. Chair's Announcements
Steering Committee Meeting Report:
Fifth Friday is scheduled for next Friday, January 31, 1997, from 8:30 a.m. - 10 a.m.
Discussion on the revision of Saint Paul's Comprehensive Plan is on the agenda. The
Fifth Friday in May will a(so be devoted to discussion of the Comprehensive Plan.
- STAR Board: Frank Gurney will not be able to continue to represent the Planning
Commission on the STAR Board. Chair McDonell asked members to call Roger Curtis
in the Mayor's Office, 266-8531, if interested. Commissioner Gordon expressed
interest in applying for the position.
III. Planning Administrator's Announcements
Mr. Ford announced:
•
•
- Alter Trading Corporation filed a complain[ against the City of Saint Paul lasf week •
challenging the moratorium which the City established on permitting recycling centers
��-�s �
• with metal shredders and a number of other environmental related decisions.
- Tn the meantime, the Planning Commission will proceed with the rezoning scudy the
Ciry Council requested on metal shredders.
- The Mayor has sent his recommendations on Planning Commission appointments to the
Cit}' Council. The process wilt be finatized in approximately 2-3 weeks.
- The Neighborhaods Conference is tomorrow.
Commissioner Vaught requested a copy of Alter Corporation's complaint. Chair McDoneil
requested one for each Commission member. Mr. Ford will look into the request.
Chair McDonel{ stated that copies of a Ne�v York Times article, "What's Doing in Saint
Paul" will be made available and sent out thanks to Commissioner Geisser.
IV, 2oning Comn�ittee
1196-289 D�niel and 1 ind� i3urns - Rezone dte property from RM-2 to B-3 [o allow
expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue (986
Grand Avenue).
]1fOTfON: Cominissioncr 1i'encl moved approval of thc requested rezoning from Rhi-
• 2 to I3-3 to allow expansioti and remodeling oF tlie existing auto repair business on
Grand Avenue.
Commissioner Wencl reported diat the District Councii voted to support a P-1 tezoning
instead of a B-3, however, the 2oning Committee voted 6-Q to approve the rezoning to B-3.
Commissioncr Geisser believes this request to rezone should be denied. She explained the
relationship of this case to the East Grand Avenue Smal{ Area Plan, which is now part of
thc Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Geisser described Grand Avenue as a
"unique" section ot Saint PauL She handed out a portion of the East Grand Avenue Sma11
Area Plan that was written to recognize and protea that "unique" quality. Although she
finds the pian flexible, Commissioner Geisser proceeded to read parts of the plan that
conflict with this case:
(p. 1. col. 2) Description of a conservation area; the block where this auto repair
business is located: .....it protects these areas from significant change......the current
zoning is appropriate.......rezonings and variances should not be supported.......the
design guidelines should be adhered to.
(p. 2 under Zoning and Land Use): 1....we need to protect these Areas from less
restrictive zoning.......should be protected from the expansion of B-2 and B-3 zoning.
2.....reinforces the intent to remove B-3 from anywhere on the Avenue. 3......cannol
have premamre demolition of buildings.
• (p. 3): 12......establishes that P-1 is used for parking locs. 13.....establishes the fact
that there should be no parking lots in conservation areas. 14......recommends that
houses no[ be removed to allow for parking lots.
�
l
9�-�5�
(p.4): Grid diat shows conservarion areas
Commissioner Geisser's intent was ro show [hat this rezoning is inconsistent with the East
Grand Avenue Small Area Plan. She noted that having served as the Chair of [he East
Grand Avenue Task Force, it was quite apparent that the group's choice was for a11 B-3
zonings to be removed from the Avenue, And the evolution of Grand Avenue was not ro
increase auto repair statioas. Since diis request asks for an expansion of an auto repair
station as wel! as permission to demo�ish a house in order to provide additional parking, it is
inconsistent with the plan. The plan ctearly states [hat houses are not to be removed to
provide parking. A study at that time proved the gain of only 7-9 spots when a house is
demoiished, which is hardty sufficient reason for destroying a house.
Comntissioner Geisser found Summit Fiill's decision of P-1 over B-3 to be compromising
but just as problematic and inconsistent as the request by Mr. Burns, because it also calls for
die removal of a house to provide parkina.
J
Commissioner Geisser wamed Commissioners that shoufd this property be rezoned to B-3,
it will ahvays be B-3, which means that any use allowed in a B-3 zone would be permitted
on this property, including a fast-food restaurant. Past food restaurants are also not allowed
by the Gast Grand Avenue Small Area Plan. She pointed out that a conservation area on
Grand Avenue maans that the block is residentia] except for the corners, and encroachment
into d1e block from thc ends is not d�e intent of d�is plan. She noted that once this precedent
had been set, it could have far-reaching effccts. .
Commissioner Geisser's concerns ref7ect Irer passion and conviction to cherish the jewe( oF
Saint i'aul by adherino ro the guidetines deveioped by devo[ed pcople on the task force wlto
spen[ many long and iatensc hours developing and dclibcrating over thcse specific
guidelines in I989.
Commissioner Vaugh[ commented that he believes Commissioner Geisser has overstated thc
case for her position in at least three cases: 1) her statement that the Last Grand Avenue
Small Arca Plan is flexihlc. He stated that in his opinion the plan is very inflexible, and that
it is it's inflexibilit} that leads ro discussions such as today's. Ie invites itself to read as
though it were a piece of conerete and noc a piece of paper. 2) Several times
Commissioner Geisser referred to"demolishing° the house in question. He noted that it is
his understanding that the plans are to move the house, not demolish it. 3) 7'he fast food
restaurant business. He added that fast food restaurants may be located in B-3 zones, but
they may be located in B-3 zones, only subject to special conditions, which means [hey must
acquire a special condition use pertnit through the process of application, a pablic hearing
before the Zoning Commiitee, and probably also a pablic hearing before the City Council
because such a requesf would cercainty be appealed by Grand Avenue residents and basiness
peopie.
Commissioner Vaught continued to take the Commission through the rezoning process: any
rezoning can either be initiated by the Cin• Council, by the Planning Commission itself,
and, the most common way, through a peticion of abutcing or adjacenc property owners. In
this case, there are 14 property owners within the circumference of property owners who •
needed to be consulted regarding the rezoning procedure. Unless the requisite number of
those property owners approve a rezoning, it doesn't get any farther in the process. In this
case, 11 property owners signed their approval of the B-3 zoning, which meant the rezoning
�
��-�sa—
• could move forward. It was put onto a Zoning Committee agenda. Ten days before the
case is to be heard, the matter is sent out in a notice to the relevant district council for their
consideration and recommendation. In this case, the Land Use Committee of che Summit
Hill Association considered Ihe matter first. At a meeting where there was a full
presentation by the applicant, tlie Land Use Commitree voted [o support the change to a B-3
zoning. Next, [he full board of the Summit Hill Association heard the case without benefit
of a full presentation. The recommendation of the Land Use Committee to support the
ctiange to B-3 zoning was defeared by a very close vote. Then, at that same meeting, the
district council voted to approve [he P-I zoning. This is very significant. No one
immediately aPfected and/or interested in this change is encouraging us to follow the
inflexible guidelines of the East Grand Avenue Plan. Anyone in question is supporting
something efse and these are people much closer to the issue than is die Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Vaught encouraged the Commissioners to support the B-3 rezoning.
Commissioner Chavez commended Commissioner Geisser on her presentation. He felt that
since there apparently were such strong feelings and concerns regarding ti�is issue, she or
someone else should have been at the Zoning Committee to provide testimony.
Conm�issioner Gumey stated Ihat he went to tlte Zonino Commitcee meeting convinced tha[
the pruperty, at tha very best, should be zoned P-L At [he meeting he was told Ihat if
ci[her one of dic lots in question were to be modified in the fumre, they would need to go
• d�rougl� a��other planning process, including site plan review. Tfiis fact convinced him there
was a safeguard for the neighborhood. He supports dle R-3 rezoning.
Convnissioncr Gordon noted that he is very troubled by this and he will speak and vote in
opposition to thc motion to rezone to B-3. He rciterated the Mayor's word [hat Grand
Avenue is the "gem" of Saint PauL The unique mix which has taken years to develop on
Grand Avenue needs special attention and should not be changed unless there is good
reason. He noted Ihat the East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan of 1989 takes diose special
considerations into account and has set up guidelmes to reFlect the unique characteristics of
this very special A� enue. The plan takes into account die greater good of the City of Saint
Paul and that particular neighborhood. He also commenred diat if the Planning Commission
expects others to pay attenuon to the small area plan guide(ines, then the Commissioners, in
their decisions ought also to pay attention ro these smal( area plan guidelines. If, on the
other hand, the Commission i�nores the plan's guideiines for no good reason, then it should
not be surprised when everyone else ignores them for no good reason. He s[ated that if the
Commission is going to depart from the guidelines, there ought ro be a good, legitimate
justification for doing it. He questioned the good, legitimate justification for departing from
the guidelines in this case. Is a parking lot good, legitimate justification? Upon examining
the site plan, he said he found that the on(y thing the duplex propetty wili be used for is
parking, 14 parking places.
Commissioner Gordon feels that the East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan was called to the
attention of the Zoning Commitree, contrary to what Commissioner Chavez said, by staff on
• page 2, finding �`2 of the staff report which states that the proposed rezoning is not in
conformance with the comprehensive plan. He does not find jus[ification in removing a
very nice older home, eliminating 2 residential units from the City, for 14 parking places.
He thinks that does not make sense; is a bad decision, and is the kind of a bad decision that
1
��-���
•
Nie City Council looks at and wonders, `What are they doing in that Planning Commission?'
Contmissioner Gordon aiso thinks [hat there is enough space between the end of the
business building and the a[fey to park cars, and presumably there is also space for parking
cars at other nearby busiaesses the Burns' own. He does not think the justification for
additional parking is legitimate.
Commissioner Gordon noted that he is atso very concerned about the B-3 zoning because
rezoning is the single biggesc step that enables a fast food type operacion or any other such
use to take place. A special condition use permi[ is much easier to obtain, and the
Commission is much more wlnerable in denying a SCUP in the future, afrer the property is
already rezoned, than we are right now in simply refusing to permit the rezoning. He said
that when a B-3 zone is created, it invites B-3 uses.
He stated that he is also troubled because staff very clearly recommended denial and gave
very specific reasons for that denial. However, the Zoning Committee report does not list
the reasons for the Committee rejecting staffs recommendation; there's no discussion. He
is concerned that the Zoning Commit[ee hss noc adequately justified the failure to abide by
die staff decision.
He also noted diat there is no supporting data for the statement that the duplex is not
economical. He finds [tiat unacceptabie.
Commissioner Gordon noted, too that a(though there is a reference to die Burns' "working •
on platts to [novc dic house", therc is no written commitmenc to do so.
Of the 11 of 14 who sapported the peti[ion, Comrr�issioner Gordon understands that severat
of those 11 are other businesses who would welcome the opportunity to have cars visiting
their businesses taking [he places vacated by the cars that are parked there for Mr. Burns'
business. Hc also understands that the motivation of a number of the neighbors who signed
die pctition �vas to get cars off the street. He sees this as narrow self inrerest and not in the
interest of ihe Ci[} or ihat community.
Commissioner Gordon encouraaed members of the Zoning Committee to revisit their
decision. He quoted Justice Frankfurter, "Wisdom too often never comes, therefore it
shouid not be rejected merely because it comes late."
Commissioner Kramer noted that if there had been a similar provision in the East Grand
Avenue Small Area Plan as the Commission provided for in the recently adopted Thomas
Dale Small Area Plan, that said if the District Council and a developer come up with a
proposal they matually agree to that the Commission would accept that, then we wouldn't
be having this discussion.
Commissioner Kramer aiso no[ed some things were not mentioned:
- the proposed expansion inclu@es a$400,Q00 addition to the block, which inclades a
remodeling of the existing building and facade and requires a]0-foot setback from the •
nex[ residential property line.
- he doesn't think it is tegal to park 10 cars behind a duplex unless it is rezoned.
0 +
�I `Z ^ ^,�� �-.
• Commissioner Lee thanked Commissioner Gordon for doing his homework and
Commissioner Geisser for bringing the small area plan to the Commission's attention. He
questioned why a B3 zone was petitioned for instead of a P-1, since parking is what he says
he needs. He said he will vote against the motion.
Commissioner Vaught reminded Commissioners that the small area plan is merely a piece of
paper, tl�e expressed ���ill and opinion of the people who worked on it from tt�eir perspective
in 1989. He continued to say diat today we have in (he application to zezone, the judgments
and opinions of 11 of the 14 abu[ting property owners from 8ieir perspective in 1996. He
stated that he ofren sees wid�in the Commission's deliberations the attimde tfiat any
residential use is to be favored over any commercial use, no matter what, and that any
philosopl�ica( adherence [o any residential use is more righteous than any commercial use,
no matter what. He disagrees with that attitude and urged Commissioners to listen ta the
opinions ot'the property owners of tlie abutting property, no matter what Ihe use of that
�roperty.
Commissioner Geisser commented d}at she feels she is representing a siient majoriry. She
knows thcre are a number of people who did not pnrticipate in the process who feet very
strongly about tliis issue. She chatlznged Commissioner Vaught's statement that Ihe
Conm�ission always secros to favor residences over athec uses. She thinks qiat the mood is
centered around whatever businesslcommercial development says. Regarding itexibility,
slie referred to anothcr part of tf�c East Grand Avenue Small Area Pi�n, wl�ere it is c{ear
that thc rationale u•as to maintain thc residents. The task force felt very strongly diat this
• avenue cannot succecd unless is a criticat mass of residents. There are some potentiai
redcvclopmcnt areas.
Comntissioncr [Jowlin stated tfiat hc is intrigued by the debate, howevcr, it seems to pi[
planning versus zoning. He thinks that the debate is covering the wrong thing. It's a
zoning question, but flie overarching issue is whether or not d�e small area plan shouid be
amended and/or whether or not the zoning ordinance shoulJ bc amendcd. [=rom a City-
widc perspective, dre issue seems tu reall}' be whethcr �ve shouid sacriFicc this duplex for
morc {�arking, but that's not dic question here. He also doesn't agree that this request is
abtiulutel}� inconsistent with the small area plan. He thinks the issue should be tabled until
more infonnauon can be obtained.
Comnussioner Mardell added, considering the uniqueness of Grand Avenue and taking the
lon� term view, t�e doubts if the existing use or [he expanded use, is the highest and bes[ use
of tl�e site. As co-chair of the Selby Avenue Task Force, he has become much more
sensitized to smafl area plan guidelines, so he will vote in opposition to the mo[ion.
Commissioner Wencl tead a paragraph from a letter to the Zoning Committee sent by the
Summit Hill Association, for the Commissioner's consideration:
While rezonina from residentia( to commercial is in fact against the district plan,
it was aereed tha[ this proposal would not be detrimental, but would rather enhance
the livabi(ity of the neighborhood by improving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by
• minimizing auto access from Chatswonh, and by getting cars off the street. It was
determined that this proposal would not intensify commercialization, but rather would
help to mitigate the traffic and parking problem that currentty exists.
c,
i
���3��-
Commissioner Treichel commented that in order to balance the scenerio that has been
piayed out ltere in discassion that Mr. Burns a•ii( do this rezoaing, sell the properry, and
then God knows what's going to happen, she will counter that with the scenerio that maybe
Mr. Burns has three sons and he wiil pass the business onto them, and maybe that business
will be there for another fifry years. She intended to get across that this is not a slippery
slope, and she is bodiered by the Commission allegging that people witl not continue to do
tivhat they say [hey tvill do.
C6air DlcDonell ca!!ed for a roll call vote. The motion to approve the requested
rezoning of property from R�t-2 to B-3 at 986 Grand Avenue carried on a roll call vote
of 11 - 6(11laddos, l�tardell, Gordon, Lee, Noa�lin, Geisser).
Chair McDonel( noted that the Planning Commission's passion and discussion of the tast
issue w�as superb, but it also pointed out that where the zoning ordinance now is the
preeminent decision maker, under the new guidelines from the Metropoiitan Counci[, the
planning documents will be preeminenc.
Commissioner Nowtin rei[erated the imporcance of Commissioner Kramer's point thac
flexibiliry be contained in tliese small area plans. He suggested tl�at there be a vehicle in
piace ro assess or to change the plans.
�
��
Commissioner Wene( reminded Commissioners that a rezoning goes to the Ciry Counci[ for
their approvai, as well. •
N96-290 Macales[er Colteec - Modification of Speciai Condition Use Permit to allow a t0
foot setback from tl�e southerly property Iine to accommodate building changes relating to
thc south interior staircase of a new residence hatl (Cambridge Street between Summit &
Grand; zoned R-3).
Coatmissioner Wencl reported that this issue was iaid over urttil dre February 20 Zoning
Committee meeting.
1196 ?91 Reinhard Kreuser - Nonconforming Use Pemtit to establish a contracror's exterior
remodefing business as a legal non-confotming use on the property (843 Lexittg[on Parkway
Soudt; zoned R-4j.
NfOTtOti: Cocncriissioner LVenct mo��ed approval, with three conditions, of the
requested nonconforming use permit to establish a conYractor's exterior remodeling
business as a legal nonconforming use on the property at 843 Lexington Parkwa}',
svhich carried unanintously on a voice rote.
Commissioner Morton announced there is no agenda at this time; the next Zoning
Committee meeting will not take place until February� 20.
`'. Comprehensive Planning and Economic Development Committee
No report. .
f�
`��'
�
�
�
MINUTES OF THE 20NING COMMITTEE
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ON JANIIARY 16, 1997
PRESENT: Mmes. Farcy and Wencl; Messrs. Chavez, Gurney, Kramer and Vaught o£
the Zoning Committee; Mr. Warner, Assistant City Attorney; Mmes.
Dadlez and Sanders and Mr. Ryan o£ the Planning Division.
ABSENT: Field, excused
Morton, excused
Time: 3:38 - 4:40 p.m.
The meeting was chaired by Barbara Wencl, Vice Chairperson.
D,�
BiRN9 D N7 uD NDA• 86 rand Av nue• so� hcidP be w n('ha cwo h and
Ox£ord: #96-7.89� Rezonina. Rezone the property from RM-2 (residential) to B-3
(general business), to allow expansion and remodelling of the existing auto
repair business at 9&2 Grand Avenue.
Kady Dadlez, Planning Division staff, reviewed the staff report and presented
slides. Staff recommended denial of the petition to rezone to B-3 based on
findings 2, 3, and 4 of the staff report.
The Summit Hill Association voted to approve the applicant's plans for
expansion and parking, but did not support the petition to rezone to B-3. The
Summit Hill Association supports the project provided the property is zoned to
P-1.
Commissioner Vaught asked if the property were rezoned to B-3, whether the
combined square footage of the two lots in question as B-3 would be
sufficient, and whether requirements would be met so as to allow a fast-food
restaurant to locate on that corner.
Ms. Dadlez responded that there is not a minimum 1ot size for a fast-food
restaurant, however was uncertain how a drive-thru and the required amount o£
parking would be configured, but that it would be properly zoned for such a
purpose.
Commissioner Vaught further asked that if the duplex property was rezoned to
P-1, whether it could be reasonably configured along with [he B-3 zoned lot,
using the P-1 for parking for a£ast-food restaurant and using the B-3
property for the building.
Ms. Dadlez responded that one criteria would require 100 feet of frontage
along the principal access street, and that this condition would be met.
Commissioner Faricy asked where other conservation areas were located on Grand
Avenue,
�i�t-�5� �--
�����' •
Ms. Dadlez wasn't certain about the locations of all conservation areas but
noted that the entire block between Chatsworth and Oxford on Grand Avenue is a
conservation area, on 6oth the north and south sides, Mr. Ryan concurred,
however with the exception of the corners which are developed commercially.
Commissioner Vaught surmised that the intention of the district plan is that
conservation areas remain as they are wi[hout any additional commercial
encroachment upon the existing area, and that a conservation area is a more
rigorously intended protection of property than the normal zoning controls
that exist along Grand Avenue.
Staff agreed with this determination. Ms. Dadlez explained that what is meant
by a conservation area is that the mix of uses and of architecture on Grand
Avenue is the epitome of what Grand Avenue is, and that it is to be preserved.
There should not be any change between residential and commercial, and it
references not providing parking in that block.
Commissioner Vaught asked that if the request for rezoning to B-3 were to be
granted, and the building were remodeled as proposed, whether the building
would be flush with the property line on Grand Avenue, and whether it would be
consistent with the other three corners of the intersection.
Ms. Dadlez responded that it would be flush and consistent with the design
guidelines in the sma12 area plan.
Brian Alton, attorney for Linda and Daniel Burns, who were also present, .
spoke. Mr. Alton reviewed that the business has been located a� this
intersection for 50 years and that Mr. and Mrs. Burns intend to renovate the
property at a cost of approximately $400,000. One curb cut will be removed
from Chatsworth Street and one curb cut wi11 be moved down Grand Avenue
further away from the intersection which they believe will improve traffic
flow and allow for some additional parking on Chatsworth. He reviewed that
th= rezoning and renovation will permit moving customers' cars for Lloyd's
Automo*_io off of the side street as there is currently a lack of off-street
parking and wi1l relieve some congestion from the street, The applicant
believes the proposal will improve the neighborhood significantly and will
also improvz th� character of the intersection.
John Coleman, Ankeny Kelly Architects, displayed and reviewed design
rend2rin9s of the proposal, Mr. Coleman pointed out that discussions are
underway regarding moving the duplex to the cathedral area to be reused as
housing.
Mr. Alton addressed the issue of whether a fast food restaurant could be put
on this property. It was determined that a minimum of I00 feet of frontage on
its principal access street would be met. However, he noted that there would
be special conditions that would need to be met as well as that it would
require a special condition use permit, and felt the likelihood of a£ast foot
restauran*_ being approved at that location to be remote.
Mr. Alton reviewed that the applicant prefers B-3 zoning over P-1, because
conditions associated with P-1 would limit their ability to use their property
most efficiently. He noted that P-1 would not allow a sign on the site as .
2
'` -
� � -'3 S �--
�� � • they intend to do. In addition F-1 would allow no structures on a P-1 lot� �
He reviewed triat currently there is no intention o£ putting a structure on
this site, however in the future something such as a vestibule may be desired
and would not be allowed. The agplicant grefers that both lots be consistent
with one zoning classification.
Mr. Alton referenced finding no. 3 of the sta£f report, "...Rezoning of this
property, however, and of other similar properties, proposals for which are
1ike2y to follow, could cumulative2y have an adverse impact by disrupting the
baZance of commercial and residential uses on the avenue." noting that this
finding was used to support denial of the rezoning. He argued that the
committee should not consider potential rezonings for the future as a basis
for considering this rezoning request.
Commissioner Vaught observed that a P-1 zoning would carry with it less
opporCUnities for intensive use than B-3, however he asked Mr. Alton to
substantiate whether a P-1 zoning would in any way precl�de or affect the
proposal for the subject property.
Mr. Alton agreed.
Commissioner Faricy asked how the cars would be transported from the parking
area on the western side of the building around and into the bays on the
eastern side.
Mr. Alton reviewed that customers would park their cars in the lot and leave
• them there until a service person would drive them into the service bay. The
plan is to use the alley to come around the back of the building, much the
same way as it is done currently. He said that in the event the site plan is
not approved, that there is enough space to allow the maneuvering to take
place on the site without using the alley.
Commissioner Gurney asked for clarification regarding petition signatures for
990 Grand Avenue, as well as the asterisked signature £or 993 Lincoln, and
whether the asterisk referenced a condition.
Mr. Alton reviewed that James Rubin is purchasing the apartment building on a
contract for deed, which is next door to the site proposed to be rezoned.
City sta£f determined that the signature of a contract-for-deed purchaser was
not sufficient but needed the fee owner. The fee owner is Francis Difveney,
and was signed by his attorney. Mr. Alton said he was not aware of any
significance meant by the asterisk.
Commissioner Kramer asked whether a variance could be issued with respect to
the sign restrictions in P-1.
Mr. Ryan responded that if apglication was made for a variance that the
Planning Commission would have the ability to grant it.
Chris Trost, Executive Director of the Summit Hill Association, District 16
Planning Council, spoke. Ms. Trost referenced the letter submitted by John
Siekmeier, President of the Summit Hi11 Association, that was distributed to
. the committee. Ms. Trost reviewed that the Summit Hill Association was
3
f3
�f'!- ���
��
���� opposed to the request to rezone 986 Grand Avenue to B-3 because of the lack
of restrictions on a B-3 zone. The letter states that all of the zoning
studies on the avenue and the resulting changes that have occurred, have
attempted to limit or reduce the number of B-3 parcels on the avenue, with
some of them having been reduced, and that rezoning must be considered in the
long-term.
Ms. Trost emphasized that the Summit xill Association supports the proposed
remodeling and expansion, and they believe the business is an asset to the
neighborhood and the success o£ that business is in the best interest of the
neighborhood. The Su�r�mit Hill Association recommended that 986 Grand Avenue
be rezoned to P-1 in order to accommodate the proposal. Ms. Trost reviewed
the paragraph that: "Whi1e rezoning from residentia2 to commerciaZ is, in
fact, against the District Plan, it was agreed that this proposal wouId not be
detrimental, but rather would enhance the livability of the neighborhood by
improving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by minimizinq auto access from
Chatsworth and by getting cars off the s[reet. I[ was determined that this
proposal wou2d not intensify commercia2ization, but rather would he2p to
mitigate the traffic and parking probleln that currently exists."
Commissioner Vaught reviewed with Ms. Trost the process that the Summit Hill
Association followed to arriv< at its recommendation.
Commissioner Vaught revisited a previous rezoning request that was not
approved by the committee for property on the north side of Grand Avenue
between Milton and victoria. He recalled the opposition for that rezoning •
from the district council, reviewing that a strong foundation to the district
council's lack of support was that the rezoning was vio2ative of the district
plan. Whereas, in reviewing the Summit Hill Association's position of support
for a P-1 zoning in this case, he observed it to be a departure from the
district plan. Rs these two positions were znconszstent he said it would
affecc the cre3ibility that he'd place on the Summit Fiill Association's
recommendation.
Ms. Trost responded that the board made the motion fully realizing that it was
in opposition te the district plan an3 the small area plan, What the board
attempted to do was deterraine whether the proposal would be detrimental to the
immediate communi�y and to the community as a whole. They determined that not
only would it not be detrimental, that it would be an advantage and the
community would benefit from it_ Traffic and parking are onz of the greatest
problems that are present on Grand Avenue and in the Summit Hill neighborhood
and it has been with their goals and objectives for years that they wi11 do
wha[ever they can, or that they will make it a priority [o solve or mitigate
the traffic and parking problems. The board felt that this proposal helped to
mitigate a traf£ic and parking problem.
Ms. Trost compared the two proposals for rezoning. She said that the petition
to rezone 885 Grand Avenue was seen as an extreme intensification of
commercialization by the Summit Hi11 Association, as that proposal was to
bring new businesses into the neighborhood. They felt that realistically they
would not be providing the parking that was needed for that proposal (although
they had on paper) and that it would also intensify the traffic ar.d parking
problem that currently exists. The two proposals were seen as very different �
4
��
q� ,�
for those reasons. ����r
�
Commissioner Vaught asked why he shouldn'[ put more credence in the ii of 14
signatures of the immediate abutting property owners who support a rezoning to
B-3, notwithstanding the fact that it also is not in consort with the district
plan,
Ms. Trost responded that the recommendation of the Summit Hill Association is
based on the knowledge of the potential in trie future, and she was uncertain
whether the neighbors have also considered this.
The applicant chose no rebuttle.
There was a brief discussion of the present zoning for nearby properties:
Cherokee Bank, across the street from the proposed property, with a parking
lot behind the bank and a drive-in facility to the west of the bank.
The property is zoned B-1 from the frontage on Grand to the alley, which
includes the drive-in banking facility.
Nearby property owned by Sherman Rutzick, that also has a parking lot behind
it.
This is zoned B-2C.
• Mr. Ryan reviewed'that there is a B-2C on Chatsworth next to the alley and
there is_also a B-2C next to Rutzick's building where the parking lot is. The
southeast corner is B-2.
Commissioner Vaught moved approval of the petition to rezone ta H-3.
Commissioner Gurney seconded the motion.
Commissioner Chavez referred to the staff report and asked why finding no. 4
supported staff's recommendation for denial.
Ms. Dadlez responded that the current use of the property is a duplex, and
that the current zoning allows for the reasonable use, and that what is
located there now is a reasonable use of the property and isn't necessarily a
reason to rezone it.
Commissioner Vaught said he did not £ind that to be critical to a findinq oP a
B-3 zone.
Commissioner Vaught said he didn't think the issue of what the district plan
says ought to control in this case, and that is also the position of the
Summit Hi11 Association, although they don't agree with B-3 zoning.
C�
5
e
�� J ✓ V
Commissioner Gurney asked if the applicant were to want to put a car p��� �
the parking side where the duplex currently is, and if zoned B-3, whether a Z ` �
site plan review wouZd be required, which would include comp2iance with the
sign ordinance.
Ms. Dadlez responded that a site plan review would be required.
Commissioner Vaught noted that although a fast-food restaurant would be an
allowable use under a B-3 zoning that certain other requirements would require
revisiting of any such proposal.
Ms. Dadlez noted triat the motion excluded any reference to the comprehensive
plan, and that she was uncomfortable rezoning property without it being
consistent with the comprehensive plan_ She noted that there are citations in
the staff report that discuss the design gui8elines, and also citations from
the economic development strategy that she wouZd like to see referenced in the
resolution.
Commissioner Vaught said that his intent was to excise from the findings those
things that were inconsistent with a rezoning to B-3 and that any findings
that are not would remain and would be amenable to including anything that she
felt pertinent.
Commissioner Kramer said he would support the motion. However, he said it
concerned him when the committee votes against a district plan, but noted that
sometimes rigidity is written into plans, and it becomes necessary. He .
pointed out that the Thomas Dale plan was adopted recently where this was not
done, but a provision was added which helps prevent situations such as this
from occurring.
The motion recammending approval of the petition to rezone to B-3 carried on a
voice vote of 6 to 0.
Drafted by:
l S�-
➢onna Sanders
Submitted by:
�����
xady Dadlez
Approved by:
Barbara Wencl
Vice Chairperson
•
0
� '�S�
• ZOL3ING CO�SITTES STAFF REPORT
___________°__-__�___________
FILE # 96-284
1. APPLICANT: DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS DATE OF HEARING: O1/16/97
2. CLASSIFICATION; Rezoning
3. LOCATION: 986 GRAND AVENUE (south side between Chatsworth & Oxford)
4. PLAN2SING DISTRICT: 16
5. L$GAL DBSCRSPTION: Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Park Addition
6. PR858NT ZONING: RM-2 ZONING CODB R8F8RSNC8: 64.400
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND RBPORT: DATE: 1/9f97 BY: Kady Dadlez
8. DATE RECEIVSD: 12/09/96 DBADLINB FOR ACTION: 2/6/97
==5________________________0======__
_____�__°_____________________�__�__�_________________
A. PURPOSE: Rezone property from RM-2 to B-3 to allow expansion and
remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
B. PARCSL SIZB: The property has 40 feet of frontage on Grand Avenue and is
150 feet in depth for'a total lot area of 6,000 square feet.
C. SXISTING LaxD IISS: The property is occupied by a two-story wood structure
which is used as a duplex residence.
D. Si7l2ROUNDING LAND IISS:
North: Cherokee Bank in a B-1 zoning district and apartment buildings in
� an RM-2 zoning district.
East: Auto repair shop in a B-3 zoning district and a variety of
commercial uses in an B-2 zoning district.
South; Predominantly single family homes in an RT-1 zoning district.
West: Small apartment buildings in an i7M-2 zoning district.
E. ZONING COD& CITATION: Section 64.400(a) states in part, "the council may,
from time to time, amend, supplement or change the district boundaries or
the regulations herein, or subsequently established herein pursuant to the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357 and amendments thereto as
may be made from time to time. The planning commission may, from time to
time, review district boundary lines to determine if, pursuant to state
laws, such district boundary lines should be changed."
Section 64.400(b) states in part that "an amendment to the zoning code may
be initiated by the council, the planning commission or by petition of the
owners of sixty-seven (67) percent of the area of the property to be
rezoned."
• F. HISTORY/DISCIISSION: There is one pYevious zoning case concerning this
�
��-'���
Zoning FiTe #96-269
Page Two
property. The case involves a petition in 1992 to rezone the duplex
property to B-I (later revised to B-2C) to allow a bridal shop and shop
which designs and creates bridal veils and pageant gowns. The planning
commission recommended approval but the city council denied the rezoning
petition.
G. DISTRICT COIINCIL RHCO2�NDATION: The Summit Hill AssOCiatiori vOted t0
approve the applicant's plans for expansion and parking but does not
support the petition to rezone to B-3. The association supports the
project provided the property is rezoned to P-1.
H. FINDINGS•
2. The applicant owns the @uplex property to be rezoned. The applicant
also owns Lloyd's Automotive at 982 Grand Avenue, a neighborhood auto
repair shop that has been operating for 50 years. In order to provide
better service and relieve traffic congestion the applicant plans to
remodel the existing auto repair building and combine that property with
the lot to the west to provide off-street parking for the expanded
business. The applicant is working on plans to have the house moved to
a new location in the 12amsey Hi71 neighborhood,
�
U
The applicant intends to e�cpand the number o£ service bays in the •
existing repair garage from six to nine or ten and provide off-street
parking on the lot to the west. Plans include replacing the existing
parking area at the northern portion o£ the property at 982 Grand Avenue
with the expanded building built up to the northem property line. The
proposed parking lot to the west, 14 spaces, would have ingress from
Grand Avenue only, and egress to the alley. The lot, wi.th 40 feet of
frontage on Grand Avenue, is not wide enough to provide ingress and
egress at Grand Avenue. A fence and landscaped buffer is proposed along
the western property line abutting an RM-2 zoning district.
The existing auto repair shop employs nine people, one or two may be
added as a result o£ the expansion. The hours of operation will remain
the same after the expansion: 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m Monday through
Friday and 9:00 a.m. to I:00 p.m. Saturday.
The applicant states that the use of the property as a duplex is not
economically feasible because the cost of taxes (non-homesteaded),
mortgage, insurance, and maintenance make a profitable return on the
investment unlikely.
2. On balance, the proposed rezoning is not in conformance with
comprehensive plan. The East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan, 1989,
identifies the subject property as being located in the "conservation
area." The plan states, "Conservation areas are where existing land use
is established and site and building design is consistent with the Grand
Avenue design guidelines. This plan seeks to protect those areas from •
significant change. The current zoning is appropriate in these areas.
t ��
a � ��sy
. Zoning File #96-289
Page Three
Rezonings and variances should not be supported, and the design
guidelines should be adhered to." #1, p.1.
Zoning and Land Use recommendations o£ the East Grand Avenue Plan
include: "Protect conservation areas from less restrictive zoning" and
`�Curtail B-3 zoning." #1 , p.2. Plan recommendations relating to
parking state, "restrict parking lots from conservation areas. If
zoning parcels are developed solely for new parking lots, they should be
limited to 'non-conservation' areas and should be appropriately screened
from the street and alley" and "Restrict building removal for parking.
The removal o£ historic or residential buildings solely to provide
additional parking is discouraged." #13 , p.3.
The proposed building expansion is in conformance with the Grand Avenue
Design Guidelines established in the small area plan. One of the
guidelines states, "Limit curb cuts on Grand Avenue. Parking lots
should be located to the side or rear of commercial structures and have
a minimum of curb cuts. For parking lots on comers, access from the
side street is preferred." #22, p.4. The agplicant plans to locate the
parking to the side of the existing commercial structure and create one
curb cut. Another guideline states, "Protect and promate block-front-
setback patterns. Many blocks on Grand Avenue have both commercial and
residential type structures. In terms of design, the most successful of
these-have`corner commercial structures up to the sidewalks, with
�- smaller residential-type structures set back from the sidewalk in mid-
block. This design pattern should be preserved and expanded. On a11-
commercial blocks, buildings should have no setback form the sidewalk."
#25, p.4 The applicant's plans include a building addition that will be
built right up to the sidewalk.
Objectives and policies of the Economic Development Strategy include:
"ensure sufficient land for future business growth" and "the city's land
use plan should provide adequate land for industrial and commercial
development and expansion in order to increase the proportion of
commercial/industrial tax base.'� #6 , pp. 16 & 17.
3. The rezoning of this one parcel for commercial use would not,
necessarily by itself, have an adverse impact on the surrounding
community, particularly because it is immediately adjacent to an
existing commercial area. Rezoning of this property, however, and of
other similar properties, proposals for which are likely to follow,
could cumulatively have an adverse impact by disrupting the balance of
commercial and residential uses on the avenue. The East Grand Avenue
Small Area Plan makes clear the importance of maintaining the existing
architecture and mix of commercial and residential uses in the
designated "conservation area." Such a change to existing conditions is
discouraged and would disrupt the mix of use and design that is the
hallmark of Grand Avenue.
• On the other hand, if the property were rezoned to allow a parking lot,
the applicant would no longer need to park veriicles that he has/will
� ".
`������-
Zoning File #96-289
Page Four
service, thus reducing parking and congestion in the streets,
particularly Chatsworth Street.
4. The existing residential zoning allows for reasonable use of the
property.
5. The applicant submitted a sufficient petition signed by two-thirds of
the property owners within one hundred (100) feet of the property to be
rezoned (14 parcels eligible, 10 parcels needed, and 11 parcels signed}.
6. The off-street parking requirement for the proposed expansion is 10
spaces. Four spaces will be lost due to the building expansion.
Fourteen spaces will be provided in the new lot to the west. Thus,
adequate off-street parking is provided for the use.
The applicant's request to have alley access for the parking lot would
be evaluated during review of the site plan.
'I. STAFF RSCOb4�NDATION: Based on findings 2, 3, and 4 staff recommends denial
of the petition to rezone to B-3.
�
Addit3onaZ Informatioa �
If the rezoning is approved, a special condition use permit will be reguired
since the floor area of the building is expanding by more than 50 percent.
The Planning Administrator would process the permit administratively rather
than require a second public hearing since the planning commission is holding
a public hearing on the rezoning petition currently. The planning commission
amended its rules of procedure in 1984 to delegate authority for the approval
of special condition use permits to the planning administrator in all cases
where public hearings have been held in which the commission has recommended,
and the city council has approved, a rezoning specifically for a special
condition use.
Section 60.54a{18) of the zoning code provides that auto repair businesses are
permitted in a B-3 zone subject to certain conditions. These conditions and
the developer's ability to meet them are as follows:
a. The mittimvm lot area shall be fifteea thousand (15,000) square £eet.
This condition is met. Combining the existing auto repair shop property
(9,000 square £eet) with the lot to the west wi11 increase the lot size by
6,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet.
�b. A ten-foot lattdscaped bu£fer with screen plantiag and an obscuring fence
sha21 be required along any property line adjoiaiag to an existiag
residence or adjoining to land zoaed rasideatial.
This condition can be met. The site plan submitted indicates a new fence .
and landscape border along the western property line. Depending upon the
l�
�� ,� S �-
• Zoning File #96-289
Page Five
degree to which the parking spaces are angled, there may or may not be
adequate space to provide the full 10 foot setback with landscaped buffer.
The required width for the maneuvering lane varies from 12 to 15 feet
depending upon the angle of the parking spaces. If the maneuvering lane
is required to be 15 feet then the setback from the western property line
can only be 7 feet and the applicant would need a modification of this
condition. If a modification is necessary, staff would not be able to
pzocess the permit application administratively and a second public
hearing would be necessary.
c. All repair work shall be done within an enclosed building.
This condition is met. The applicant understands that all work must take
place within the enclosed building and that no repair may occur on the
exterior of the lot or in the public right-of-way.
d. There shall be no outside storage.
This condition is met. The applicant does not propose any outdoor storage
and understands that vehicle parts, tires, oil, or similar items may not
be stored outdoors.
:-The following conditions must also be met before the special condition use
,- • permit may be approved.
a. The extent, Zocation and iateasity of the uae wiZl be in substantial
compliance with the Saint Pau2 Compreheasive Plan and any applicab2e
subarea plans which were approved by the city counci3.
b. The use wi12 provide adequate ingress and egress to miaimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
c. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of the
development in the immediate neighborhood or eadanger the pubSic health,
safety and geaeral melfare.
d. The use will not impede the norma2 and orderly development and improvement
of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the diatrict.
e. The use shaS2, in alI other respects, confozm to tbe applicab2e
regulations of tbe district in which it is located.
Staff would likely impose, at a minimum, the following conditions on the
permit:
i. A wood privacy fence, at least 6 feet in height, shall be installed along
the western property line and shall be properly maintained at all times.
2. Parking for customers and employees shall be arranged on the lot as shown
on the attached site plan. No more than 20 vehicles shall be parked
outdoors on the lot. Only customer vehicles and employee vehicles of the
permittee may be parked on the lot. This condition is intended to
prohibit long term storage of vehicles on the lot.
• 3. All vehicles parked outdoors on the lot shall be completely assembled with
no parts missing. Vehicle salvage is not permitted.
4. Parking of vehicles that are awaiting repair or that have been repaired
shall be prohibited in the public streets.
�1��35 2-
) A INT
VL
���
PETtTION TO AMEND ': HE ZONING CODE
Department ojFlanning and Eco:znmic Develapment
Zoning Sedion
1100 Cify Half Anner
25 West Fourth Street
Saint Paul, MN SSIO2
266-6589
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Property Owner �a.p_iel and Linda Ri�rnc
Address 482 Grand Avenue
City_ St. Paul St.�Zip 551Q5 Daytime phone 228-1316
Contact person (if different)
•
Address/Location 986 Grand Avenne
Legaldescription Lot 2_ Block 35_ Summit Park Additinn
(attach additional s heet if necessary)
TC THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
Pursuant to Section 64.400 of the Saint Paul Zoning Ordinance and to Section 462.357(5) of
Minnesota Statues, Dani el and Li nda Burns , the owner of ali the land proposed
for rezoning, hereby petitions you to rezone the above described property ftom a
RM-2 zoning district to a B-3 zoning district, for the purpose of:
Permitting the use of the land preposed for rezoning for the same purpose as the
lan� located at °82 Grand F,venue in order to permit the remodelling of the
existing business knawn as L'oyd's Automotive.
(attacB additional sheet(s) if nec�
Attachments: Required site pian
Subscribed and swom to
before me this �, g� day
of 1��='L�'�$ , 19
Fee owner of property
Tdle:
Page 1 of ,�,
�
� �,� �m
< _ G�;�"!!; �
�;�:— - .^ram �,..��c— _ =
�t��� _:-.._VrY��!�, . . .
eYr"
Consent petition � Affidavit
•
u
2=
�� . �
S�
�
REZONING
FIRST SUBMITTED
SCUP
NCUP
DATE PETITION SUBMITTED: `�� v' � f� DATE PETITION RESUBMITTED: � � 2 ' 7 `!�
DATE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED: DATE OFFIC[ALLY RECEIVED: �`� `� Rv
__ • .,.
PARCELS ELIGIBLE:
PARCELS REQUIRED:
PARCELS SIGNED:
�
�
�
PARCELS ELIGIBLE:
PARCELSREQUIRED:
PARCELS SIGNED:
l �
��
��
CHECKED BY: ��,�C��L��I� DATE: ' Z' I` 1 F�'
ZONtNG F1L� q� ��
C�
�=
��-352-
��
J
T
r? �
v�
C
i ;,�
� �
r-�
'✓�
��,,
o„
.;
`� �
f 1 �f ,
�
CONSENT OF AATOZNZNG YROPERTY OWNERS TO REZONING
We, the undersigned, owners of the property within I00 feet of the total
contiguous descripCion of rea2 estate owned, purchased, or so2d by petitioner
within one year preceding the date of this petition, acknowZedge that we have
been furnished with the following: .
1. A copy of the Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns
60.51i to . , (name of petitioner)
2. A copy of Sections 60.720, and 6Q.406�t� tA 60.454 , inclusive of the
Saint Panl Zoning Code; and
acknowledge that we are aware of a1Z of the uses permitted under a B-3
District zoning c2assi£ication and we are aware that any of these uses can be
established upon City Council approval of the rezoning; and we hereby consent to
the rezoning of the property described in the
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a B-3 District
(name of petitionerj
•
•
� .
\ J
z4
Petition shall not be considered as oEficially fi2ed until the 2apse of seven (7)
working days after a petition is received by the P2anning Division. Any signator
of any peti[ion may withdraw his/her name therefrom by written request within
that time. page Z of �
•
�
(name
�
�'
,�_�
11-21-1996 02:45PM FROM MCCLRY--ALTOIJ TO
� �
i �
� I
�
CON3ENT OP AII1.10ININC PROPE[�i OWNERS TO &EZOt+ING
f
3177575 P.02
S�
�� ��
tve, the nndersigned, owness of the propert7r within 104 £eet o£ tha total
contiguous descrfpaion of eal estace owned, purchased, or sold by petitfo::er
withZn one year precediag �he date of t�is petition, acknovledge,thac we have
been furnished vith tha £ol owing: -
1. A copy�of the Pet�ti j of Daniel and Linda B�rnc
! 50.�11 tA 6D.552, C�e of petitiioner)
2. A copy �of Sectfons(� 7,9(l. ard fi0.4_Q6�fiR �`� -__, ��iusive o£ the
Saint Paul Zoning Cod�e; and
acknawledge CFiBC we are av�e oE a21 0£ the uses permitted under a B-3 _
pS.strict zoning classifica�ion and we are aware that any of these uses can be
astablished �ipon Gity Council approval af the rezoning; and ve hereby consenc to
the rezoning:of the propexty described in the
Petit3.nn of ;_ Daniel_and Linda Burns to a 6-3 Discrict
r)
ft a► 9�
E
� ,
Petision shali aot be a�
wosking days' aftez a pe+
� of any petition may vi
that time.
ed as o£ficially £iled until the lapse oE seven (7)
is received by the Planning Dxvision. Any signator
hisJhez aame ihexefrom by wricten zeguest wi.thin
page � of �,,,
?OTAL P.62
2�
11-25-1996 @5�27PM FRQM MCCLAY-ALT�N Tp R�i ���
2238163 P.04
i i
(
{
cASSEN': OF aiL10TNZVG YROPER�Y OvtiFgS Yo 8E?ANIac
✓ t
ue, the uadarsig:ead, o*is+ess of the proQe=ty wi�hin 100 feet of :he cosal
eoz:tigueeu desczipLien oP �a1 estate e�on�d, purei:ase8, or so2d by yetit£o�er
wLthin one yrar psece8lag e daee oF rkis peti[ion, acknov_edge,that s�e have
besn £urtniehed with the fo ensing: .
1. A eopy�of t31e Pet3.ei J of Oarie' and Lind 8�rn�
� 60.�11 tp 60.552, C�e of peci�ioaer)
2, A cOppjo£ SectionafjQ�e�,�,§t]�'�1 A`WC06tgh�60_454____ _, inelusive of the
Sainc $aai zor:ing Co , and
aeknowladge dhac c:e aze aw e of x21 of r3:e +�aes pezmiete2 under a 6-3
DiscrieL zon3r,$ elassifiaa�io� aad ve aze avare tha! any of tbasa usea can bs
sstabFished tigon City Counci3 agprwa2 of the rezoaing; :nd vc hereby cor.senc to
chs zszoaing;oF the propexey dnaesibed in che
Petition ef : Daniel 2
t�
AD�Rr55 Oit � ._ Z,P�N _ at
r�°= 9qo G�, A. ., s�
,
-�
�
i�'' � �f 4'�l , �P
�� J �
r-.
,�
E`:
�,�
Fecicion shall not'�e oon
trorking days` a�Ler a pet3
�- of any pecieion may ++ftt
Chat time.
Burns co a �- Disarict
t.
� •
�
�
;
ed as officially fE1ed until the iapse of aeven (7j
3s teceiveB by the Plac:zning IIivisioa. Any signator
his/her z�ame therefrom �y wricten req�est within
page � of ,�
' . ..
�Q���� ���� ��O'2�ar'1 I
�DTAL P.62 � �
�
�i'� ^ �
sy
�
STATE OF MJNNESOTA)
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
: SS
� Aa 1 t t t�t} '�LN� S , being first duly sworn, deposes and states that fieJshe is the person
who circulated the within petition and consent, consisting of � pages; that affiant is informed and
believes that the parties described are the owners respectively of the lots placed immediately before each
name, that affiant is informed and believes that each of the parties described above is the owner of tlie
property which is within 100 feet from any property owned or purchased by petitioner or sold by
petitioner within one (1) year precedittg the date of this petition which is contiguous to the property
described in the petition; that except for
none of the parties described above has purchased or is purchasing property from the petitioner contiguous
to the above described property within one (i ) year of the date of the petition; that this consent was signed
by each of said owners in the presences of this affiant, and that the signatures are the true and correct
signatures of each and all of the parties so described.
�
� / � �'�L�/i
�
• �
•
Subscribed and swom to bef re me
this�!dayof (�JG`�afYi� 19�(L)
TAR PUBLI
.
� BRIAN D. ALTO"�s �
� N �
RAMSEVCOUhr�. >
r��^� A 1 yConriss , oaEzW.r?�._ ,
'wwv� ,
�� Z �e�C-�,+J {�i1�uJ�l't—.
ADDRESS SZ O�� � j�j l��
z 2. K { 'a( �l
TELEPHONE NUMBER
;� � •-
� ' `
PAGE � OF \
11-1-96
a�-���-
Attachment to 5oecial Condition Use Permit ARnlication• •
982-986 Grand Avenue, St. Paul MN 55105
Lloyd's Automotive has operated at the cor�er of Grand and Chatsworth as a
neighborhood service station, celebrating 50 years of service this year.
In order to provide better service to customers and relieve traffic congestion , the
owner's of Lloyd's Automotive have applied to rezone the property of 986 Grand
Avenue to the same zoning classification as the business at 982 Grand Avenue. The
existing building will be remodeied and the lots combined in order to provide
sufficient off-street parking for the business.
The conditions of codes section 60.544(18) a-d will all be met. By adding the
additional Iot to the business, the minimum lot size for an auto service use will be
met. The landscaping and fence required will be instaited. All repair work will be
done in the enclosed building and there will be no outside storage.
The conditions of code section 60.300(d? will be met.
Lloyd's Automotive is a permitted use in a B-3 Zone area subject to special
conditions. An auto service station, in compliance with all requirements of the code,
is a compatible mixed use along the existing Grand Avenue commercia! strip. This �
compties with the policies of the comprehensive plan.
Remodeling and use of the adjacent land are designed to improve ingress and egress.
Traffic congestion will be relieved by the improved site plan and the addition of off-
street parking.
The continued use of a well established neighborhood business will not be
detrimental to the character of the neighborhood. Over three fourths (3/4) of the
customer's of Lloyd's Automotive live in the 55105 zip code. The comprehensive
ptan reftects the need for the zoning code to be flexible to reflect current commerciai
trends. There is a need to renovate the existing business to better serve its
customers. The current multiple family residential use of the property at 986 Grand
Avenue is not economically feasible,
The approval of the special condition use permit and rezoning of 986 Grand Avenue
will not impede development and improvement of the surrounding property. The
areas fully developed and the uses are well established.
The use will in atl other respects conform to the applicabfe regulations of the district
of which it is located.
Z � 6 � i � i,7 � � 6� � -�==�— � �
��
�l'i -
! ,
�
EXISnrvG gRqND AVE.
STR£ET UpiT
EwSnrvG
5lDEWnl1c
• !
� I
' r � � ��
I � �
� �
� �
� ' '
� EXIS7ING �
S 1 DUPLEX �
� � (�o ee a�+o�o) I
I I
f I
i
� i I
� f I
� �
I �-----�
EXISnNG�
FENC:
RETqINiNG WAt1
NN� GLANIER
` EXISTiNG
B�NwNWS
PAfiKiNG�
6U5 STC%
EXiS�1::
STREE' UGI:T
' �' EXISTI:G
4GN
�
EXISi1NG
TREE
( � EXISi1NG �
EXISTING P RKINOU� I
BUfLDING
E%159NG-
SDEWALH
� E%ISiING
PARKING
CGRA4EL) �
��
EXISIING
ALLEY �OVERHEAp
UTl1TY LMES
� � �
���� �
�
��
Kel4
Architects
• ' ���
����� ����
SITE P
Z�
- EXISTtNG
� T- 30' n
�
ti
H
�
�
a
S
U
LLOY�'S AUTOMOTIVE
A��1710N ANQ RE.NOVA -
\
_ _ _ _ M1 ` _
\\
\
EXISt1NG
i (TO BE I
NEW BINMINZ
PARKING
16 SiALLS TOTA
INCL (1) VqN ACf
GRAND AVE.
ALLEY �o� Eno
unum �u+es
!
��� ��� �� ���� ���
���� �
E�snuc
8U5 STO?
EXISTiNG
SRr EET �p1T
��-��a-
•
N
�
K
O
3
�
r-
¢
U
•
��Y .
K�e SITE PLA — NEW CONSTRUCTION
nra,rte�cs
�,�,�� SCALE T= 30' •
LLOYL7'S AU O I
A�E�ITION ANL7 RENOVATION
\ �! EC EX6nNG �qRKMG STALL � /
� �
z
0
>
�
W
2
�
�
z
0
>
W
I
�
0
z
0
Q
>
W
k-
W
�
�,� �3s �--
�o`
��
�
�
�
0
�
w
a
�
0
Q
>
W
F-
Q
w
��
�-� �
� Y � <_
W
�
�-
0
�
d
�-
�
Q
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
Z
0
�-
Q
�
�
z
W
�
�
Z
4
Z
Q
�
�
�
Q
�
�i
�� -35�.-
SPECIAL CONDITIUN USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Departmenr of Planning and Economic Development
Zoning Section
II00 City HaII Annex
25 Wes[ Four[h Streer
Saint Paul, M1V 55102
266-6589
APPLlCANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Name Burcorn Inc.
AddfeSS 982 Grand Avenue
City St. Paul St. MN Zip 55105 Daytime phone 228-1316
Name ot owner (if difFerent)
Address/Location 982 - 986 Grand Avenue_ St. Paul MN 55105
Legal description: Lots 1& 2. Block 35 Summit Park Addition
Current Zoning �'"3 '� Z
(attach addifionai sheet if necessary)
TYPE OF PERMIT: Apptication is hereby made under the provisions of Chapter s4
Section �nn , Paragraph � of the Zoning Code for a:
[?� Speciai Condition Use Permit
❑ River Corridor CondiEional Use Permit
� Mod�cafion of River Corridor Standards
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: in the space be�ow supply information fhaf is applicable to your type of
permit (attach additionai sheets if rtecessary)
• SPECIAL CONDITION USE: Explain how the use wiii meet each of the special conditions.
• RNER CORRIDOR CONDi710NAL USE: Describe how the use will meet the applicable conditions.
• MODIFICATION OF RIVER CORRIDOR STAIVDARDS: Expiain why modifications are needed.
SEE ATTACHED SNEET
site plan is attached �
i ��t���� ���� `.�- �
I�1
LI
�
�,
�J
ApplicanYs signature G�l'd�..��f" �i':�� Qate i Z ° i � City agent
� �� �� ?�
q�_ 3s�
Summit �-Ii11 Association
Distrsct 16 Pianning Council
Kady Dadlez aso saint c�air avenue
� Planning and Ecanomic Deve{opment �{�CEIVED Saint Paui Minnesota 55105
25 West Fourth Street �elephone 612-222-7222
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 JAN 1 5 1997 fex 612-222-1558
January 1q �ss� ZONfNG
RE: Zoning File Number 96-289
Dear Ms. Dadfez and Members of the Zoning Committee af the Planning Commission,
The Board of Directors of the Summit Hili Association/District 16 Planning Council recommends
deniaf of the request by Daniel and Linda Burns to rezone 986 Grand Avenue fr�m RM-2 to B-3 in
order to aifow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue. A
B-3 zone is the least restrictive zone ailowed on Grand Avenue. B-3 is general husin?ss, not
community business. All of the zoning s#udies of the Avenue, and the resulting zoning changes, have
attempted to )imit or reduce the number of B-3 parcels on the Avenue. Rezoning must be considered
in the long-term. One cannot assume that Mr. Burns will maintain ownership of Lloyd's Automotive
indefiinitely.
Having said that, I would like to emphasize that ihe Summit Hill Association supports Mr. Burns
proposed remodeling and expansion of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
His business is an asset to the neighborhood and the success of this business is in the best
interest of the neighborhood.
_� ' The Summit Hill Association recommends that 986 Grand Avenue be rezoned to P-1 in order
to accommodate this proposal.
Mr. Burns was asked by the Zoning and Land Use Committee if he fi�as plans, or wants the
option to expand his repair shop again in the future. He stated that he has no pfans to expand
after this expansion and that he Is not opposed #o a less restric#ive zoning of P-1 if � allows him
to compiete the currently proposed expansion.
While rezoning from residentiai to commercial is, in fact, against the District Plan, it was agreed
that this proposal would not be detrimentai, but rather wou{d enhance fhe iivability of the
neighborhood by +mproving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by minimizing auto access from
�n�t��. �.;� � �e�;;,5 �q�� �� t�� ���eEt. it was deterrnined that this proposai wouid not
intensify commercialization, but rather would hefp to mitigate the traffic and parking probiem
fhat currently exists.
Therefore, the Summit HiH AssociationlDistrict 16 Pianning Councif recommends that the
Zoning Committes ot the Planning Commission use its authori#y and discretion to rezone 986
Grand Avenue from RM-2 #o P-1 in order to ailow expansion and remodeling of the existing
auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
Sincere{ , '_ --
`=_'� `�,%� g �
.�..=.�— ������ .
John Siekmeier, President � � g � �,. � � � �� ��
Summit Hi11 AssociationlDistrict 16 Planning Council
� g A i�.
cc: Council President Thune
Daniel and Linda Burns
33
R�-�52-
RECEIVED
JAN 13 1997
Gladys Morton, Chair
Zoning Committee of the
Planning Commission
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
1100 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paui, MN 55102
Attn; Kady Dadlez
January 9, 9997
Re: 986 Grartd Avenue
Lot 2, Block 35, Summit Park Addition
Dear Ms. Dadlez:
The Board of Directors of the Grand Avenue Business Association, at its regular December
meeting, passed a resolution in support of the request by Dan and Linda Burns to rezone the
property located at 986 Grand Avenue from RM-2 to B-3.
Lloyd's Automotive has been an important business in the community for many years. It is
appropriate to rezone the adjoining parcel of property to the same zoning classification as the
current business in order to allow Lloyd's Automotive to provide better service to Grand
Avenue and the neighborhood.
�in eiy,
` Bonnie Johns
Vice President
BJ/ck
�_��i���€'°:`` � :-?" �,� �
••'�. �"��d_
ZONING
•
.
1043 Grand Avenue, Suite 315•
0
St. Paul, Minnesota 55105
0
612-224-3324
nv�uv��� x��v�;u�llviV
� ----- j� T�'
�E1VE� ---- --
__ RE _ .------
---SAN-�'t_199T - --- .
---�
-- -Z�N���--
- ---- - =.��.�
C��
a�L���
-.�y"� ��
G
��.,�� _
-=�
�=r 'G-
_ , -�
------ -�-----��
- -- -- - -----��Ze %ir-d�c j _�.__ J
---_� -- - -'-�� -�-� � ��2�
-�- - =`- ---- - - - - -
---- - - ----- -- ----------
------ --- -----,�-.e�--- �
-----�---� �"-�
- j��y -�r� ---
- - i?���e-- -- - " .
- - - ---�
- - - ���`�� --���
• _.�.�- i �
q� _ 3� a
Z����� �� � _ � ;
r��
�ti:ti
�_�.._. ;
��
�' � ` �--��-
., ,
,
�
�-- ----
��!
�J�
��
/ �
,! �
1
� �/ , i � � � ��� �
, � i
/ �� / � % / � `' / j.
� ��
��� ,//
; � / , �/
� � �� i
" .� �� , - ,
-.1:1�• .� � �'
.
, �
�
�
-��-`��2-
. � �� i'`� ��
-�- �
_
�
---- ---- ----- ----�- - ---- -- - - - - - - - - '-_ -
-- � -
� . .
-- -�.�_�_ -6� -- - - -
.. ..
� .
,..� � r
,, y
_'� '
� _ "_ _' . '" _ _� _""_ "�' " '
- ---- �'-- - - - - - - - j ,�
--� ------ =--- - -- ---�---- - - --�-7,-_/_:�'4 � �- -- -- - - "
� G i�� i!� -- �,� i .. �
_ _ _--� - ---�-=i��u" - -�- ---: — — - — --- 4z�r
` , ---- -- � -
e;'J�,_�_�_ ----�C�- - - - -- -- -!�t`-e .
_ -� _--- :��z`-`'--�-� - -- �- �- - - - - - -- ._` —_.
- - - - � - - - _ _:_�.�. �.�-�*�-�-�- _ -
`= - -- - - � - --` --- — --�- =-__ .�_ _�.--� - --- -- - --
_:���—=-- — _ -- -- —= _- - --- ----C�. �,.�GCr��.- - 5�y� - —
- ------- -�----- =--�-=---- - ��3 _ ��.�%roCy'�_ -
_. -� --- s��� �
--- --- --- - --- - -- -- - - - - -�sT _O��- ---- ----
. , a�� ��• a . ; � :.= -_ ,
� _
------ ----__— . _ - -
r =� - ��>Y_< ._ .
• �;�
'::•...=.. . . _.:. - -
--� .. _ :_ • -- , � ,
-4
�-
•a • ��• �' �� � � i • ��'���
q'1 -35�
`
1. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HAUEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE
4. DAYTON'S BLUFF
5. PAYNE-PHALEN
6. NORTH END
7. THOMAS-DALE
8. SUMMTT-UNIVERSITY
9. WEST SEVENTH
10. COMO
11. HAMLINE-MTDyVAY
12. ST. ANTHONY PARK
13. MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLIN&S1�IELLING HAMLINE
14. MACALES'I'ER GROVELAND
16. SUMMTT HIL
1 . DOWNTOWN
�. .
ZONING FILE ��°��`''
CTITZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNING DISTRICTS
�� �3��
�ebruary 25, 1997
Council President Dave Thune
Members of the City Council
310 City Hail
Saint Paul, NIN 55102
Dear Councii President Thune and Councilmembers:
We, the undersigned, all live on the norkh side o£ Lincoln Avenue
within one biock of Chatsworth Avenue and Lloyd's Automotive. We
access our alley opposite the automotive repair shop. We are also
customers of Dan Burns.
We oppose the rezoning of Lloyd's to B-3. The rezoning is a radical
departure from the Grand Avenue Plan and its intent to preserve a
mixture of residential and commercial uses along the street. An expansion
of B-3 sets a precedent that reduces confidence in the long term use of the
property and all the property along the Avenue.
Dan Burns says he need parking to expand his business. �urrently,
Chatsworth Avenue is filled with his customers'cars, so we know he
already needs parking. But we will take Dan at his word that his intent for
the new lot is only parking and offer support for a parking rezoning (P-1).
�� � ���
`�6 / �,� �, r„
�f ( C��tcc�•-�
� '.
,
�
� ���
��, s�_
�'/' 7.3 ��i��aC�F/ �t/�.
� �� �� �
�� �,
�� � c.,��t� �-„-� _
9 Ys' �'� �t � 5�v�c- .
�i�� G�y�/� �'-� �
f S 7 �-��..�`����- �--
�s7 ��.�,.. �.,��_
� Q . �,��..�..
(� e �:.�.-,�.,�..
� CONSENT OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND ��� ��
REZONING PETITION c�r� _ 3S�--
We, the owners of the property within 100 fieet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
I acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
ADDRESS = ` FEE:011st1�ER[S} __ 5tGt3tkTC1RE "DATE -
� �Q-�r�x�Z� 2'�2�
978 Grand D&B Properties �^� L ,� � j, (R 7
975 Lincoln
Billie Gilliland
and WiNiam Gilliland
��' 1��
969 Grand
999 Grand
995 Grand
985 Grand
JSS Associates
William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
�(�/��-
Tab Properties
Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. pieveney, by 8ert
McKasy under Power of
Attorney dated April 1 S,
1993
994 Grand
John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Grand
997 Grand
993 Lincoln
Patrick F. Sullivan
Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
Linda Zick
983 Lincoin I Melvin Spielman and li��� °� �-�
� Anna Spielman
i
2�����
3 '����
��/��
<�j�1�7
> �/�71y�
COMSENT OF ADJO{NING PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND �����
REZONING PETITION �I
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Danief and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
I acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
. /ktI�RESS FgE; (3VYRtER(Si - ` SCGNATURE ° Dt.tT6 " .
978 Grand D&B Properties
975 Lincoln Billie Gilliland
and William Gilliland
969 Grand JSS Associates ,� �a--��^�
. '� /
999 Grand William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
985 Grand Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert
McKasy under Power of
Attorney dated April 18,
1993
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
�� � V ��� n
998 Grand Patrick F. Sullivan r�� `- ���f��•-- � �'���j (
� �,,.�,_
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincofn Melvin Spielman and
Anna Spielman
CONSENT OF ADJOINIIVG PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND �
REZONING PETITION q � -' �J 5
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Surns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniei and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
1 acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
'.-_;-RDI7RES�- FEE t3]NNER(SI . - StGlY1lTC1£iE: , _I3ATE- _-
978 Grand D&B Properties
975 Lincoln Biilie Gilliland
and William Gilliland
969 Grand JSS Associates
999 Grand William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
9$5 Grand Cherokee State Ba�k
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert
McKasy under Power of n ��� /
Attorney dated April 18, ����" l' �� �� � �l ,�� � !
1993
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Grand Patrick F. Sullivan
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincoln Melvin Spielman and
Anna Spielman
CONSENT OF ADJOINiNG PROPERl'Y OWNERS TO AMEND
REZONING PETITION � 7 3 S�"
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the reaf estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
f acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 80.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
ADTSEtESS- - FE�OWRiERtBT-. `- SlGttWTt7SE"- DA7E---
978 Grand D&B Proparties
975 Lincoln Billie Giliiland
and William Giililand
969 Grand .1SS Associates
999 Grand Wiiliam Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
985 Grand Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert ,�
McKasy under Power of �%�,��� ��^ �
Attorney dated Aprit 18, ��� "l� �` �j p 1
1993
� �m� tL . 2�; 6 �,J
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Gra�d Patrick F. Sullivan
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grent
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincoln Melvin Spielman and
An�a Spielman
�L
Presented By
� �': 4 � � ", £ !"`.. �
�. ' �. f �
, F � . . . .. ...�
Green Sheet # \���
L, MINNESOTA
2
Referred To ��
�C7
Council File # I� —3 S �'
Ordinance #
Committee: Date
An ordinance amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaiiung to zoning for the City
of Saint Paul and the zoning maps thereo£
�
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
WI�REAS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462357 and §64.400 of the Legislative Code, DAIVIEL AND
LINDA Bi7RNS duly petitioned to rezone 986 GRAND AVENUE, being legally described as Lot 2, Block
35; Summit Park Addition, from RM-2 to B-3, the petition being subsequently amended to rezone the
properry from RM-2 to P-1, to allow development of a pazking lot to accommodate expansion and remodeling
of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue, the petition having been certified by the Planning
Division on March 12, 1997 as having been consented to by at least 67 percent of the owners of the azea of
the property to be rezoned, and fiirther having been consented to by at least two-thirds of the owners of the
property situated within 100 feet of the total contiguous property within one year proceeding the date of the
petition; and
WHEREAS, The Zoning Committee of the Plaiming Commission held a public hearing on January 16, 1997,
for the purpose of considering the rezoning petition, and pursuant to § 107.03 of the Administrafive Code,
submitted its recommendation to the Planning Commission that the petition be granted; and
19 WHEREAS, The Planning Commission considered the rezoning petition at its meeting held on January 24,
20 1997 and zecommended that the City Council approve the petition; and
21
22 WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council on the said rezoning petition was duly
23 published in the official newspaper of the City on January 31, 1997 and notices were duly mailed to each
24 owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property sought to be
25 rezoned;and
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
WIIEREAS, public hearings before the City Council having been conducted on February 26, 1997 and Mazch
12, 1997, where all ittterested parties were heard, the Council having considered all the facts and
recoxnmendations concerning the petition; now, therefore
II�'I�K�lfl�[�I_11i]�1:1_�Zi]�.Y:\1��1771�JA�Z�]�.I.Y� '�� : 1�
Section l.
That the zoning map of the City of Saint Paul, Sheet Number 27, as incorporated by reference in §60301
of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows:
That property with the address of 986 GRt1ND AVENUE, being more particularly described as:
Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Pazk Addition
�/
?a�a1
40 be �nd is hereby rezoned from RM-2 to P-1. 3 5�—
41 q �"
42
43 Section 2.
44
45 This ordinance shall take effect and be in foYce fliiriy (30} days from and after its passage, approval and
46 publication.
Bimrrecrc
�. ; ! !' •. .
Requested by Department of:
�V-C
Adoption Certified by Council Secretazy
B �� a. � �
Approved by Mayor: nate �f" I��� �
By:
By:
Form Approve City Attorney
BY� .2t%G°"lN�� r1�raCO—�2
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By: � G��� �---��•
TOTAI # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
FOR
3����
GREEN SH � � � �� a "
INRI INRIAUDATE
DEPAqTMENTDIRECTOfl �CfTYCOUNGL
GINATTORNEY O CffYCLERK
BUDGET DIRECipP � FIN. B MGT. SERVICES DIP.
MAYOR(ORASSISTANT) �
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
Adopt an ord'mance to fmalize council approval of a petition of DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS to rezone
property located at 98b GRAND AVENLJE from RM-2 to P-1 (public hearings held February 26, 1997 and
Mazch 12, 199� .
RE Approva (A) w Aejact (R) PEHSONAL SEHVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWfNG QUESTION3:
L PLANNING COMMISSION _ CIYIL 5ERVICE CAMMISSION �� Nas lFiis person/iirm ever worked untler a comract for this departrnerr[?
GB COMMISTEE YES NO
��� _ 2. Has ffiis person/tirm ever been a ciry employee?
YES NO
__ DISTflIGTGOURT __ _
SUPGORTS WHICH COUNCIL OB.IECT7VE?
3. Does tBis perso�rm possess a skill mt norrnally possessed by any wrrent c(ty employee?
YES NO
I Erzplalrt a11 yea anawers en aeparate ahaet a�tl attach tc green sheet
�� �� t �
IIiIATINO PROBLEM, ISSUF. OPPOR7UNIlY (VJho, What. When, Where, Why):
Finalize council approval of a perition of DANIEL t�ND LINDA BURNS to rezone property at 986 GRAND
AVENTJE from RM-2 to P-1 to allow development of a parking lot to accommodate expansion and remodeling
of the existing auto repair business at 982 Graud Avenue.
��������
1�AR 20 j�9�
,���v�'d �
�a-tC�
� �^ ��-� �`���gf
s ��..._�. , �_ ,�:.�,. � a
.,<<��.� � �� i�97
___---_��_�.>.����
�'
., • �.
��
' � < ;.
OTAL AMOUNT OF THANSACTION $
COST7REVENUE BUDGETED (dRCLE ONE)
Q�-�iF.
)NOf47G SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
�ANCIAL INFOiifrfA710N: (EXGIAIN)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RANfSEY
l
) ss
)
����
Daniel and Linda Burns, being first duly sworn, depose and state that they
are the persons who circulated the within petition and consent, consisting of t�es-�c:.tr
`t(,$) pages; that affiants are informed and believe that the parties described are the
owners respectivefy of the fots placed immediately before each name; that affiiants
are informed and believe that each of the parties described above is the owner of
the property which is within 100 feet from any property owned or purchased by
petitioners or sold by petitioners within one (1) year preceding the date of this
petition which is contiguous to the property described in the petition; that none of
the parties described above has purchased or is purchasing property from the
petitioner contiguous to the above-described property within one (1) year of the
date of the petition; that this consent was signed by each of said owners in the
presences of affiant; and, that the signatures are the true and correct signatures of
each of all of the parties so described.
�� ������
NAME
�{lV(U�
NAME
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
5th day of March, 1997.
3 � . � a.1�
Notar�
CAROLYN J KELL ((
� , � NOTaav aiJBLiC—MINN£SOTA �
uar.?SEY COUNTI'
:�•,� b!:
,� �_... .__.,m,,,�.�.v.�
982 Grand Avenue. St. Paul, MN 55105
ADDRESS
(61 21 228-1 31 6
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this 6th day of March, 1997.
�,�� � ,� �
Notary Pub�ic
CAROLYN S. KELt
4
� j�� NOTA RAMSEY COUNTY SOTA i
n ('pinmiss�FxP�JAN37.2000 �
� �qr��: t�N
DEPAR'SMENT OF PLANNING
& ECONOMIC DEVEIAPMENT
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norrrz Co[emwz, Mayor
January 28, 1997
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
Division of Plmverng
25 West Faurth Street
Sa'vu Pau1, MN55102
c{,'�1 ' � S �-
Telephone: 612-266-6565
Facsimile: 612-228d314
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday
February 26, 1997 far the following zoning case:
Applicant: DADIIEL & LINDA BURNS
File Number: #96-289
Purpose: Rezone property from 12M-2 (multiple family residential) to B-3 (general
business) to allow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business
at 982 Grand Avenue, Lloyd's Automotive.
Address: 986 GRAND AVENLJE (south side of the street between Chatsworth & O�'ord)
Legal Description
of Properiy: Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Park Addition
Previous Action:
Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, vote: 11-6, January 24, 1997
Zoning Committee Recommendation: Approval, vote: 6-0, January 16, 1997
My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the February 5, 1997
City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger.
Please call me at 266-6582 if you have any questions.
Sincerely, �
�� ��
Kady Dadlez
City Planner
Zoning Secrion
cc: File #96-289
Mike Kraemer
Donna Sanders
, I: �� F
�
t�F�r' h �
' i� n�
t '., �`i'
--_ ---
. �. - ° - - ` HOT2CE OF YUBLIC HEARITTG -. � � - - � ..-� `
-=.. � -.,.'_,�: ..: _ `_ .
� T�e Saint .Paul k;ity� Council� wilt conduch a gublic rieartng on � Wec2nes�ay:�'
Februazy 26. 1997, in the CouneiP�Chambers, Third Rloor Ciry HaIl to:consiQer�th� �,
appllcatlbn ofDaaieYand Linda Burns to rezone propertyfrom RI13-2 (m"ultipleifamily- '
residenti2i) to�B3�(gexxeml business), to allow expansion and remodeling:of the ' .
� O� au�; repair bnsiness at 9S2 Grand Avenue (sbnth��ide betwee,n Chatsivoi[h ;,
Dated Januarg.28;;1997 '- _ . _ � , ' � . ,;�
NAI!ICY ANDERSON , ,. � -� ,. ,,, .. _
�Assistant Qity Council Secretary � � - __ :. _ - " � _ � . � . . _. .
.. - . . _ - fJa�7iary 31, 1997) . - - �` -`- �
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNA*G
& ECONOMIC DEVECAPMENT
SaINT I I
PAUL �
�
AApA'�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Caleman, Mayor
February 14, 1997
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Zoning File #96-289
City Council Hearing:
Division afPlannirzg
25 West Fourth SYreet
Sav+t Paut, MN 55702
DAI�tIEL AND LINDA BURNS
Februaty 26, 1997 430 p.m. City Council Chambers
q� - 3sa.
Telephone: 612466-6565
Facsimile: 6I2-228-3314
PURPOSE: To consider rezoning property at 986 GRAND AVENUE (south side between Chatsworth &
Oxford) from RM-2 (residential multiple family) to B-3 (general business) to allow expansion and
remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
PLANNING COMIvIISSION RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL vote: 11-6
• ZONING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL vote: 6-0
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL
SUPPORT: No one spoke.
OPPOSITTON: No one spoke. District 16 supports the applicant's plans for expansion but voted to
oppose the rezoning to B-3. District 16 supports rezoning the property to P-1 (pazking).
Dear Ms, Anderson:
�
DANIEL AND LINDA BUKNS submitted a petition to rezone properry at 986 GRAND AVENiJE. The
Zoning Committee of the PJanning Commission held a pubiic hearing on the proposed rezoning on
January 16, 1997. The applicant's representative addressed the committee. At the close of the public
hearing, the committee voted 6-0 to recommend apptoval to rezone to B-3. The Planning Commission
upheld the Zoning Committee's recommendation for approval on a vote of i l-6 on 3anuary 24, 1997.
This proposed rezoning is scheduled to be heard by the Ciry Council on February 26, 1997. Please notify
me if any member of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site presented at the public hearing.
5incerely,
Ken F��
Planning Administrator
Attachments
cc: City Council members
q�-35�-
city of saint paui
planning commission resolution
file number 97-03
�tE? January 24, 1997
WHEREAS, DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS, fi!e #96-289 have petitioned to rezone 986 GRAND
AVENUE, situated on the south side of the street between Chatsworth & Oxford, from RM-2 to B-3 to
allow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business a[ 982 Grand Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 16,
1997 at which all persons present �i�are given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said application in
accordance �vith the req�irements of Sec[ion 64.400 of the Saint Paut Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Plannin� Commission, based on the evidence presented to its Zoning
Committee at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of
fact:
•
The applicant oivns the duplex property To be rezoned. The applicant atso owns Lioyd's AutomoYive
at 982 Grand Ae•enue, a neighborhood auto re�air sliop that has been operating for 50 years. In order
to provide better service and relieve traffic con�estion the applicant plans to remodet the existing auto •
repair building and combine thlt property with t6e iot to t6e west to provide off-sVeet parking for the
espanded business. 7he applicant is working on plans to have the house moved to a new location in
the Ramsey Hill neighborhood.
The applicant intends to espand tlie number of service bays in the existin� repair garage from six to
nine or ten and provide off-street parl:ing on the lot to the west. Plans include replacing the existing
parking area at the northern portiott of the property at 982 Grand Avenue with die expanded bui(ding
built up to tiie nonhern property line. The proposed parkin�, lot to the west, 14 spaces, would iiave
ingress from Grand Avenue onfy, and egress to the a0ey. The lot, with 40 feet of fronta�e on Grand
Avenue, is �toY �vide enough to provide ingress and egress at Grand Aveaue, A feiue and landscaped
buffer is proposed along the western property line abutting an RM-2 zoning district.
The e�isting auto repair shop emptoys nine people, one or two may be added as a result of the
ex�ansion. T(ie hours of operation will remain the same afrer the expansion: 7:00 a.m, to 8:00 p.m
Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Saturday.
The applicant states that the use of the property as a duplex is not economically feasible because the
cost of taxes (non-homesteaded), mortgage, insurattce, and maintenance make a profitable return on
the investment untikely.
moved by �nCl
seconded by
in favor 11
a���t 6{Maddox, Mardell, Gordon, Lee, Nowlin, Geisser)
•
0
��-�s�
• Zonina I=ile #96-289
Pa�e T�vo of Resolution
2. The proposed rezonin� is in conformance with comprehensive plan. Objectives and policies ofthe
Economic Development Strategy include: "ensure sufficient land for future business growth" and "the
city's land use plan should provide adequate land for industrial and commercial development and
expansion in order to increase the proportion of commerciaUindustrial tax base." #6 & k25, pp. 16 &
17.
In addition, the proposed building expansion is in conformance with the Grand Avenue Design
Guidelines estabiished in ti�e East Grand Avenue Sma1S Area Pfan. One of the guideiines states,
"Limit curb cuts on Grand Avenue. Parking lots should be located to the side or rear of commercial
structures and have a minimum of curb cuts. For parking lots on corners, access from the side street
is preferred." #22, p.4. Tlie applicant plans to locate the parking lot to the side ofthe existing
commercial structure and create one curb cut; an existing curb cut to the east will be eliminated.
Another guideline states, "Protect and promote block-front-setback patterns. Many blocks on Grand
Avenue have both commercial and residential type structures. In terms of design, the most successful
ofthese have corner commerciai structures up to the sidewalks, with smailer residential-type
structures set back from the sidewalk in mid-block. This design pattern shoutd be preserved and
expanded. On all-commercial blocks, buildii�gs should have no setback from the sidewalk." #2S, p.4
The applicant's plans include a building addition that will be built right up to the side�valk.
3. The rezoning of this one parcel for commercial use would not have an adverse impact on the
surrounding community, particularly because it is immediately adjacent to an existing commercial
• area. ]f the property were rezoned to allow a parkine lot, the applican[ would no lonaer need to park
vehicles that he hasFwill service in tlie street, thus reducing parking and conoestion in the streets,
particularly on Chatsworth Street.
4. The applicant submitted a sufficient petition signed by hvo-thirds of the property owners within one
hundred (100) feet of thc propeRy to be rezoned (14 parcels eligible, 10 parcels needed, and l(
parcels signed).
5. The off-street parkina requirement for the proposed expansion is 10 spaces. Four spaces wi1V be iost
due to the building expansion. Fourteen spaces will be provided in the new lot to the west. Thus,
adequate off=street parking is provided for the use. The applicant's request to have alley access for
the parking lot can be evaluated during review ofthe site plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by tl7e Saint Paul Planning Commission that the petition of
DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS to rezone property at 986 GRAND AVENLIE, more particutarly
described as Lot 2, Slock 35; Summit Park Addition, from an RM-2 zoning classification to a B-3 zoning
classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the City; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
Council of the City of Saint Pau1 that properiy located at 986 GRAND AVENUE be rezoned from RM-2
to B-3 in accordance nith the petition for rezoning on file with the Saint Paul Planning Division.
C�
3
��1-3s�
M�nu�es: Sa►h�- i'aut Plo�►h,v►o� Co�nw��Ssian
Planning Commission of Saint Paul
City Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
A mee[ing of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, January 24, 1997 at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of Ciry Hall.
Commissioners Mmes, Birk, Faricy, Geisser, Maddox, Mor[on, Treichel and Wencl and
PresenL• and Messrs. Chavez, Gordon, Gurney, Kramer, Lee, Mardell, McDonell,
Nowlin, Sharpe and Vaught.
Commissiouers Mmes. *Duarte and *Lund-Johnson and Messrs. *Field, Jr. and
Schwichtenberg
Absent:
*Excused
Also Present: ICen Ford, Planning Administrator, Jean Birkholz, Kady Dadlez, and Roger
Ryan of tlie Planning Staff.
I. ApE�rova] of Minutes of January ]0, 1997
MOT[ON: Commissioncr Maddox snoved approval oF thc minutes of January 10,
1997; tl�e motion was seconded by� Commissioner Treichel and passed unanimously on
a voicc votc.
II. Chair's Announcements
Steering Committee Meeting Report:
Fifth Friday is scheduled for next Friday, January 31, 1997, from 8:30 a.m. - 10 a.m.
Discussion on the revision of Saint Paul's Comprehensive Plan is on the agenda. The
Fifth Friday in May will a(so be devoted to discussion of the Comprehensive Plan.
- STAR Board: Frank Gurney will not be able to continue to represent the Planning
Commission on the STAR Board. Chair McDonell asked members to call Roger Curtis
in the Mayor's Office, 266-8531, if interested. Commissioner Gordon expressed
interest in applying for the position.
III. Planning Administrator's Announcements
Mr. Ford announced:
•
•
- Alter Trading Corporation filed a complain[ against the City of Saint Paul lasf week •
challenging the moratorium which the City established on permitting recycling centers
��-�s �
• with metal shredders and a number of other environmental related decisions.
- Tn the meantime, the Planning Commission will proceed with the rezoning scudy the
Ciry Council requested on metal shredders.
- The Mayor has sent his recommendations on Planning Commission appointments to the
Cit}' Council. The process wilt be finatized in approximately 2-3 weeks.
- The Neighborhaods Conference is tomorrow.
Commissioner Vaught requested a copy of Alter Corporation's complaint. Chair McDoneil
requested one for each Commission member. Mr. Ford will look into the request.
Chair McDonel{ stated that copies of a Ne�v York Times article, "What's Doing in Saint
Paul" will be made available and sent out thanks to Commissioner Geisser.
IV, 2oning Comn�ittee
1196-289 D�niel and 1 ind� i3urns - Rezone dte property from RM-2 to B-3 [o allow
expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue (986
Grand Avenue).
]1fOTfON: Cominissioncr 1i'encl moved approval of thc requested rezoning from Rhi-
• 2 to I3-3 to allow expansioti and remodeling oF tlie existing auto repair business on
Grand Avenue.
Commissioner Wencl reported diat the District Councii voted to support a P-1 tezoning
instead of a B-3, however, the 2oning Committee voted 6-Q to approve the rezoning to B-3.
Commissioncr Geisser believes this request to rezone should be denied. She explained the
relationship of this case to the East Grand Avenue Smal{ Area Plan, which is now part of
thc Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Geisser described Grand Avenue as a
"unique" section ot Saint PauL She handed out a portion of the East Grand Avenue Sma11
Area Plan that was written to recognize and protea that "unique" quality. Although she
finds the pian flexible, Commissioner Geisser proceeded to read parts of the plan that
conflict with this case:
(p. 1. col. 2) Description of a conservation area; the block where this auto repair
business is located: .....it protects these areas from significant change......the current
zoning is appropriate.......rezonings and variances should not be supported.......the
design guidelines should be adhered to.
(p. 2 under Zoning and Land Use): 1....we need to protect these Areas from less
restrictive zoning.......should be protected from the expansion of B-2 and B-3 zoning.
2.....reinforces the intent to remove B-3 from anywhere on the Avenue. 3......cannol
have premamre demolition of buildings.
• (p. 3): 12......establishes that P-1 is used for parking locs. 13.....establishes the fact
that there should be no parking lots in conservation areas. 14......recommends that
houses no[ be removed to allow for parking lots.
�
l
9�-�5�
(p.4): Grid diat shows conservarion areas
Commissioner Geisser's intent was ro show [hat this rezoning is inconsistent with the East
Grand Avenue Small Area Plan. She noted that having served as the Chair of [he East
Grand Avenue Task Force, it was quite apparent that the group's choice was for a11 B-3
zonings to be removed from the Avenue, And the evolution of Grand Avenue was not ro
increase auto repair statioas. Since diis request asks for an expansion of an auto repair
station as wel! as permission to demo�ish a house in order to provide additional parking, it is
inconsistent with the plan. The plan ctearly states [hat houses are not to be removed to
provide parking. A study at that time proved the gain of only 7-9 spots when a house is
demoiished, which is hardty sufficient reason for destroying a house.
Comntissioner Geisser found Summit Fiill's decision of P-1 over B-3 to be compromising
but just as problematic and inconsistent as the request by Mr. Burns, because it also calls for
die removal of a house to provide parkina.
J
Commissioner Geisser wamed Commissioners that shoufd this property be rezoned to B-3,
it will ahvays be B-3, which means that any use allowed in a B-3 zone would be permitted
on this property, including a fast-food restaurant. Past food restaurants are also not allowed
by the Gast Grand Avenue Small Area Plan. She pointed out that a conservation area on
Grand Avenue maans that the block is residentia] except for the corners, and encroachment
into d1e block from thc ends is not d�e intent of d�is plan. She noted that once this precedent
had been set, it could have far-reaching effccts. .
Commissioner Geisser's concerns ref7ect Irer passion and conviction to cherish the jewe( oF
Saint i'aul by adherino ro the guidetines deveioped by devo[ed pcople on the task force wlto
spen[ many long and iatensc hours developing and dclibcrating over thcse specific
guidelines in I989.
Commissioner Vaugh[ commented that he believes Commissioner Geisser has overstated thc
case for her position in at least three cases: 1) her statement that the Last Grand Avenue
Small Arca Plan is flexihlc. He stated that in his opinion the plan is very inflexible, and that
it is it's inflexibilit} that leads ro discussions such as today's. Ie invites itself to read as
though it were a piece of conerete and noc a piece of paper. 2) Several times
Commissioner Geisser referred to"demolishing° the house in question. He noted that it is
his understanding that the plans are to move the house, not demolish it. 3) 7'he fast food
restaurant business. He added that fast food restaurants may be located in B-3 zones, but
they may be located in B-3 zones, only subject to special conditions, which means [hey must
acquire a special condition use pertnit through the process of application, a pablic hearing
before the Zoning Commiitee, and probably also a pablic hearing before the City Council
because such a requesf would cercainty be appealed by Grand Avenue residents and basiness
peopie.
Commissioner Vaught continued to take the Commission through the rezoning process: any
rezoning can either be initiated by the Cin• Council, by the Planning Commission itself,
and, the most common way, through a peticion of abutcing or adjacenc property owners. In
this case, there are 14 property owners within the circumference of property owners who •
needed to be consulted regarding the rezoning procedure. Unless the requisite number of
those property owners approve a rezoning, it doesn't get any farther in the process. In this
case, 11 property owners signed their approval of the B-3 zoning, which meant the rezoning
�
��-�sa—
• could move forward. It was put onto a Zoning Committee agenda. Ten days before the
case is to be heard, the matter is sent out in a notice to the relevant district council for their
consideration and recommendation. In this case, the Land Use Committee of che Summit
Hill Association considered Ihe matter first. At a meeting where there was a full
presentation by the applicant, tlie Land Use Commitree voted [o support the change to a B-3
zoning. Next, [he full board of the Summit Hill Association heard the case without benefit
of a full presentation. The recommendation of the Land Use Committee to support the
ctiange to B-3 zoning was defeared by a very close vote. Then, at that same meeting, the
district council voted to approve [he P-I zoning. This is very significant. No one
immediately aPfected and/or interested in this change is encouraging us to follow the
inflexible guidelines of the East Grand Avenue Plan. Anyone in question is supporting
something efse and these are people much closer to the issue than is die Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Vaught encouraged the Commissioners to support the B-3 rezoning.
Commissioner Chavez commended Commissioner Geisser on her presentation. He felt that
since there apparently were such strong feelings and concerns regarding ti�is issue, she or
someone else should have been at the Zoning Committee to provide testimony.
Conm�issioner Gumey stated Ihat he went to tlte Zonino Commitcee meeting convinced tha[
the pruperty, at tha very best, should be zoned P-L At [he meeting he was told Ihat if
ci[her one of dic lots in question were to be modified in the fumre, they would need to go
• d�rougl� a��other planning process, including site plan review. Tfiis fact convinced him there
was a safeguard for the neighborhood. He supports dle R-3 rezoning.
Convnissioncr Gordon noted that he is very troubled by this and he will speak and vote in
opposition to thc motion to rezone to B-3. He rciterated the Mayor's word [hat Grand
Avenue is the "gem" of Saint PauL The unique mix which has taken years to develop on
Grand Avenue needs special attention and should not be changed unless there is good
reason. He noted Ihat the East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan of 1989 takes diose special
considerations into account and has set up guidelmes to reFlect the unique characteristics of
this very special A� enue. The plan takes into account die greater good of the City of Saint
Paul and that particular neighborhood. He also commenred diat if the Planning Commission
expects others to pay attenuon to the small area plan guide(ines, then the Commissioners, in
their decisions ought also to pay attention ro these smal( area plan guidelines. If, on the
other hand, the Commission i�nores the plan's guideiines for no good reason, then it should
not be surprised when everyone else ignores them for no good reason. He s[ated that if the
Commission is going to depart from the guidelines, there ought ro be a good, legitimate
justification for doing it. He questioned the good, legitimate justification for departing from
the guidelines in this case. Is a parking lot good, legitimate justification? Upon examining
the site plan, he said he found that the on(y thing the duplex propetty wili be used for is
parking, 14 parking places.
Commissioner Gordon feels that the East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan was called to the
attention of the Zoning Commitree, contrary to what Commissioner Chavez said, by staff on
• page 2, finding �`2 of the staff report which states that the proposed rezoning is not in
conformance with the comprehensive plan. He does not find jus[ification in removing a
very nice older home, eliminating 2 residential units from the City, for 14 parking places.
He thinks that does not make sense; is a bad decision, and is the kind of a bad decision that
1
��-���
•
Nie City Council looks at and wonders, `What are they doing in that Planning Commission?'
Contmissioner Gordon aiso thinks [hat there is enough space between the end of the
business building and the a[fey to park cars, and presumably there is also space for parking
cars at other nearby busiaesses the Burns' own. He does not think the justification for
additional parking is legitimate.
Commissioner Gordon noted that he is atso very concerned about the B-3 zoning because
rezoning is the single biggesc step that enables a fast food type operacion or any other such
use to take place. A special condition use permi[ is much easier to obtain, and the
Commission is much more wlnerable in denying a SCUP in the future, afrer the property is
already rezoned, than we are right now in simply refusing to permit the rezoning. He said
that when a B-3 zone is created, it invites B-3 uses.
He stated that he is also troubled because staff very clearly recommended denial and gave
very specific reasons for that denial. However, the Zoning Committee report does not list
the reasons for the Committee rejecting staffs recommendation; there's no discussion. He
is concerned that the Zoning Commit[ee hss noc adequately justified the failure to abide by
die staff decision.
He also noted diat there is no supporting data for the statement that the duplex is not
economical. He finds [tiat unacceptabie.
Commissioner Gordon noted, too that a(though there is a reference to die Burns' "working •
on platts to [novc dic house", therc is no written commitmenc to do so.
Of the 11 of 14 who sapported the peti[ion, Comrr�issioner Gordon understands that severat
of those 11 are other businesses who would welcome the opportunity to have cars visiting
their businesses taking [he places vacated by the cars that are parked there for Mr. Burns'
business. Hc also understands that the motivation of a number of the neighbors who signed
die pctition �vas to get cars off the street. He sees this as narrow self inrerest and not in the
interest of ihe Ci[} or ihat community.
Commissioner Gordon encouraaed members of the Zoning Committee to revisit their
decision. He quoted Justice Frankfurter, "Wisdom too often never comes, therefore it
shouid not be rejected merely because it comes late."
Commissioner Kramer noted that if there had been a similar provision in the East Grand
Avenue Small Area Plan as the Commission provided for in the recently adopted Thomas
Dale Small Area Plan, that said if the District Council and a developer come up with a
proposal they matually agree to that the Commission would accept that, then we wouldn't
be having this discussion.
Commissioner Kramer aiso no[ed some things were not mentioned:
- the proposed expansion inclu@es a$400,Q00 addition to the block, which inclades a
remodeling of the existing building and facade and requires a]0-foot setback from the •
nex[ residential property line.
- he doesn't think it is tegal to park 10 cars behind a duplex unless it is rezoned.
0 +
�I `Z ^ ^,�� �-.
• Commissioner Lee thanked Commissioner Gordon for doing his homework and
Commissioner Geisser for bringing the small area plan to the Commission's attention. He
questioned why a B3 zone was petitioned for instead of a P-1, since parking is what he says
he needs. He said he will vote against the motion.
Commissioner Vaught reminded Commissioners that the small area plan is merely a piece of
paper, tl�e expressed ���ill and opinion of the people who worked on it from tt�eir perspective
in 1989. He continued to say diat today we have in (he application to zezone, the judgments
and opinions of 11 of the 14 abu[ting property owners from 8ieir perspective in 1996. He
stated that he ofren sees wid�in the Commission's deliberations the attimde tfiat any
residential use is to be favored over any commercial use, no matter what, and that any
philosopl�ica( adherence [o any residential use is more righteous than any commercial use,
no matter what. He disagrees with that attitude and urged Commissioners to listen ta the
opinions ot'the property owners of tlie abutting property, no matter what Ihe use of that
�roperty.
Commissioner Geisser commented d}at she feels she is representing a siient majoriry. She
knows thcre are a number of people who did not pnrticipate in the process who feet very
strongly about tliis issue. She chatlznged Commissioner Vaught's statement that Ihe
Conm�ission always secros to favor residences over athec uses. She thinks qiat the mood is
centered around whatever businesslcommercial development says. Regarding itexibility,
slie referred to anothcr part of tf�c East Grand Avenue Small Area Pi�n, wl�ere it is c{ear
that thc rationale u•as to maintain thc residents. The task force felt very strongly diat this
• avenue cannot succecd unless is a criticat mass of residents. There are some potentiai
redcvclopmcnt areas.
Comntissioncr [Jowlin stated tfiat hc is intrigued by the debate, howevcr, it seems to pi[
planning versus zoning. He thinks that the debate is covering the wrong thing. It's a
zoning question, but flie overarching issue is whether or not d�e small area plan shouid be
amended and/or whether or not the zoning ordinance shoulJ bc amendcd. [=rom a City-
widc perspective, dre issue seems tu reall}' be whethcr �ve shouid sacriFicc this duplex for
morc {�arking, but that's not dic question here. He also doesn't agree that this request is
abtiulutel}� inconsistent with the small area plan. He thinks the issue should be tabled until
more infonnauon can be obtained.
Comnussioner Mardell added, considering the uniqueness of Grand Avenue and taking the
lon� term view, t�e doubts if the existing use or [he expanded use, is the highest and bes[ use
of tl�e site. As co-chair of the Selby Avenue Task Force, he has become much more
sensitized to smafl area plan guidelines, so he will vote in opposition to the mo[ion.
Commissioner Wencl tead a paragraph from a letter to the Zoning Committee sent by the
Summit Hill Association, for the Commissioner's consideration:
While rezonina from residentia( to commercial is in fact against the district plan,
it was aereed tha[ this proposal would not be detrimental, but would rather enhance
the livabi(ity of the neighborhood by improving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by
• minimizing auto access from Chatswonh, and by getting cars off the street. It was
determined that this proposal would not intensify commercialization, but rather would
help to mitigate the traffic and parking problem that currentty exists.
c,
i
���3��-
Commissioner Treichel commented that in order to balance the scenerio that has been
piayed out ltere in discassion that Mr. Burns a•ii( do this rezoaing, sell the properry, and
then God knows what's going to happen, she will counter that with the scenerio that maybe
Mr. Burns has three sons and he wiil pass the business onto them, and maybe that business
will be there for another fifry years. She intended to get across that this is not a slippery
slope, and she is bodiered by the Commission allegging that people witl not continue to do
tivhat they say [hey tvill do.
C6air DlcDonell ca!!ed for a roll call vote. The motion to approve the requested
rezoning of property from R�t-2 to B-3 at 986 Grand Avenue carried on a roll call vote
of 11 - 6(11laddos, l�tardell, Gordon, Lee, Noa�lin, Geisser).
Chair McDonel( noted that the Planning Commission's passion and discussion of the tast
issue w�as superb, but it also pointed out that where the zoning ordinance now is the
preeminent decision maker, under the new guidelines from the Metropoiitan Counci[, the
planning documents will be preeminenc.
Commissioner Nowtin rei[erated the imporcance of Commissioner Kramer's point thac
flexibiliry be contained in tliese small area plans. He suggested tl�at there be a vehicle in
piace ro assess or to change the plans.
�
��
Commissioner Wene( reminded Commissioners that a rezoning goes to the Ciry Counci[ for
their approvai, as well. •
N96-290 Macales[er Colteec - Modification of Speciai Condition Use Permit to allow a t0
foot setback from tl�e southerly property Iine to accommodate building changes relating to
thc south interior staircase of a new residence hatl (Cambridge Street between Summit &
Grand; zoned R-3).
Coatmissioner Wencl reported that this issue was iaid over urttil dre February 20 Zoning
Committee meeting.
1196 ?91 Reinhard Kreuser - Nonconforming Use Pemtit to establish a contracror's exterior
remodefing business as a legal non-confotming use on the property (843 Lexittg[on Parkway
Soudt; zoned R-4j.
NfOTtOti: Cocncriissioner LVenct mo��ed approval, with three conditions, of the
requested nonconforming use permit to establish a conYractor's exterior remodeling
business as a legal nonconforming use on the property at 843 Lexington Parkwa}',
svhich carried unanintously on a voice rote.
Commissioner Morton announced there is no agenda at this time; the next Zoning
Committee meeting will not take place until February� 20.
`'. Comprehensive Planning and Economic Development Committee
No report. .
f�
`��'
�
�
�
MINUTES OF THE 20NING COMMITTEE
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ON JANIIARY 16, 1997
PRESENT: Mmes. Farcy and Wencl; Messrs. Chavez, Gurney, Kramer and Vaught o£
the Zoning Committee; Mr. Warner, Assistant City Attorney; Mmes.
Dadlez and Sanders and Mr. Ryan o£ the Planning Division.
ABSENT: Field, excused
Morton, excused
Time: 3:38 - 4:40 p.m.
The meeting was chaired by Barbara Wencl, Vice Chairperson.
D,�
BiRN9 D N7 uD NDA• 86 rand Av nue• so� hcidP be w n('ha cwo h and
Ox£ord: #96-7.89� Rezonina. Rezone the property from RM-2 (residential) to B-3
(general business), to allow expansion and remodelling of the existing auto
repair business at 9&2 Grand Avenue.
Kady Dadlez, Planning Division staff, reviewed the staff report and presented
slides. Staff recommended denial of the petition to rezone to B-3 based on
findings 2, 3, and 4 of the staff report.
The Summit Hill Association voted to approve the applicant's plans for
expansion and parking, but did not support the petition to rezone to B-3. The
Summit Hill Association supports the project provided the property is zoned to
P-1.
Commissioner Vaught asked if the property were rezoned to B-3, whether the
combined square footage of the two lots in question as B-3 would be
sufficient, and whether requirements would be met so as to allow a fast-food
restaurant to locate on that corner.
Ms. Dadlez responded that there is not a minimum 1ot size for a fast-food
restaurant, however was uncertain how a drive-thru and the required amount o£
parking would be configured, but that it would be properly zoned for such a
purpose.
Commissioner Vaught further asked that if the duplex property was rezoned to
P-1, whether it could be reasonably configured along with [he B-3 zoned lot,
using the P-1 for parking for a£ast-food restaurant and using the B-3
property for the building.
Ms. Dadlez responded that one criteria would require 100 feet of frontage
along the principal access street, and that this condition would be met.
Commissioner Faricy asked where other conservation areas were located on Grand
Avenue,
�i�t-�5� �--
�����' •
Ms. Dadlez wasn't certain about the locations of all conservation areas but
noted that the entire block between Chatsworth and Oxford on Grand Avenue is a
conservation area, on 6oth the north and south sides, Mr. Ryan concurred,
however with the exception of the corners which are developed commercially.
Commissioner Vaught surmised that the intention of the district plan is that
conservation areas remain as they are wi[hout any additional commercial
encroachment upon the existing area, and that a conservation area is a more
rigorously intended protection of property than the normal zoning controls
that exist along Grand Avenue.
Staff agreed with this determination. Ms. Dadlez explained that what is meant
by a conservation area is that the mix of uses and of architecture on Grand
Avenue is the epitome of what Grand Avenue is, and that it is to be preserved.
There should not be any change between residential and commercial, and it
references not providing parking in that block.
Commissioner Vaught asked that if the request for rezoning to B-3 were to be
granted, and the building were remodeled as proposed, whether the building
would be flush with the property line on Grand Avenue, and whether it would be
consistent with the other three corners of the intersection.
Ms. Dadlez responded that it would be flush and consistent with the design
guidelines in the sma12 area plan.
Brian Alton, attorney for Linda and Daniel Burns, who were also present, .
spoke. Mr. Alton reviewed that the business has been located a� this
intersection for 50 years and that Mr. and Mrs. Burns intend to renovate the
property at a cost of approximately $400,000. One curb cut will be removed
from Chatsworth Street and one curb cut wi11 be moved down Grand Avenue
further away from the intersection which they believe will improve traffic
flow and allow for some additional parking on Chatsworth. He reviewed that
th= rezoning and renovation will permit moving customers' cars for Lloyd's
Automo*_io off of the side street as there is currently a lack of off-street
parking and wi1l relieve some congestion from the street, The applicant
believes the proposal will improve the neighborhood significantly and will
also improvz th� character of the intersection.
John Coleman, Ankeny Kelly Architects, displayed and reviewed design
rend2rin9s of the proposal, Mr. Coleman pointed out that discussions are
underway regarding moving the duplex to the cathedral area to be reused as
housing.
Mr. Alton addressed the issue of whether a fast food restaurant could be put
on this property. It was determined that a minimum of I00 feet of frontage on
its principal access street would be met. However, he noted that there would
be special conditions that would need to be met as well as that it would
require a special condition use permit, and felt the likelihood of a£ast foot
restauran*_ being approved at that location to be remote.
Mr. Alton reviewed that the applicant prefers B-3 zoning over P-1, because
conditions associated with P-1 would limit their ability to use their property
most efficiently. He noted that P-1 would not allow a sign on the site as .
2
'` -
� � -'3 S �--
�� � • they intend to do. In addition F-1 would allow no structures on a P-1 lot� �
He reviewed triat currently there is no intention o£ putting a structure on
this site, however in the future something such as a vestibule may be desired
and would not be allowed. The agplicant grefers that both lots be consistent
with one zoning classification.
Mr. Alton referenced finding no. 3 of the sta£f report, "...Rezoning of this
property, however, and of other similar properties, proposals for which are
1ike2y to follow, could cumulative2y have an adverse impact by disrupting the
baZance of commercial and residential uses on the avenue." noting that this
finding was used to support denial of the rezoning. He argued that the
committee should not consider potential rezonings for the future as a basis
for considering this rezoning request.
Commissioner Vaught observed that a P-1 zoning would carry with it less
opporCUnities for intensive use than B-3, however he asked Mr. Alton to
substantiate whether a P-1 zoning would in any way precl�de or affect the
proposal for the subject property.
Mr. Alton agreed.
Commissioner Faricy asked how the cars would be transported from the parking
area on the western side of the building around and into the bays on the
eastern side.
Mr. Alton reviewed that customers would park their cars in the lot and leave
• them there until a service person would drive them into the service bay. The
plan is to use the alley to come around the back of the building, much the
same way as it is done currently. He said that in the event the site plan is
not approved, that there is enough space to allow the maneuvering to take
place on the site without using the alley.
Commissioner Gurney asked for clarification regarding petition signatures for
990 Grand Avenue, as well as the asterisked signature £or 993 Lincoln, and
whether the asterisk referenced a condition.
Mr. Alton reviewed that James Rubin is purchasing the apartment building on a
contract for deed, which is next door to the site proposed to be rezoned.
City sta£f determined that the signature of a contract-for-deed purchaser was
not sufficient but needed the fee owner. The fee owner is Francis Difveney,
and was signed by his attorney. Mr. Alton said he was not aware of any
significance meant by the asterisk.
Commissioner Kramer asked whether a variance could be issued with respect to
the sign restrictions in P-1.
Mr. Ryan responded that if apglication was made for a variance that the
Planning Commission would have the ability to grant it.
Chris Trost, Executive Director of the Summit Hill Association, District 16
Planning Council, spoke. Ms. Trost referenced the letter submitted by John
Siekmeier, President of the Summit Hi11 Association, that was distributed to
. the committee. Ms. Trost reviewed that the Summit Hill Association was
3
f3
�f'!- ���
��
���� opposed to the request to rezone 986 Grand Avenue to B-3 because of the lack
of restrictions on a B-3 zone. The letter states that all of the zoning
studies on the avenue and the resulting changes that have occurred, have
attempted to limit or reduce the number of B-3 parcels on the avenue, with
some of them having been reduced, and that rezoning must be considered in the
long-term.
Ms. Trost emphasized that the Summit xill Association supports the proposed
remodeling and expansion, and they believe the business is an asset to the
neighborhood and the success o£ that business is in the best interest of the
neighborhood. The Su�r�mit Hill Association recommended that 986 Grand Avenue
be rezoned to P-1 in order to accommodate the proposal. Ms. Trost reviewed
the paragraph that: "Whi1e rezoning from residentia2 to commerciaZ is, in
fact, against the District Plan, it was agreed that this proposal wouId not be
detrimental, but rather would enhance the livability of the neighborhood by
improving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by minimizinq auto access from
Chatsworth and by getting cars off the s[reet. I[ was determined that this
proposal wou2d not intensify commercia2ization, but rather would he2p to
mitigate the traffic and parking probleln that currently exists."
Commissioner Vaught reviewed with Ms. Trost the process that the Summit Hill
Association followed to arriv< at its recommendation.
Commissioner Vaught revisited a previous rezoning request that was not
approved by the committee for property on the north side of Grand Avenue
between Milton and victoria. He recalled the opposition for that rezoning •
from the district council, reviewing that a strong foundation to the district
council's lack of support was that the rezoning was vio2ative of the district
plan. Whereas, in reviewing the Summit Hill Association's position of support
for a P-1 zoning in this case, he observed it to be a departure from the
district plan. Rs these two positions were znconszstent he said it would
affecc the cre3ibility that he'd place on the Summit Fiill Association's
recommendation.
Ms. Trost responded that the board made the motion fully realizing that it was
in opposition te the district plan an3 the small area plan, What the board
attempted to do was deterraine whether the proposal would be detrimental to the
immediate communi�y and to the community as a whole. They determined that not
only would it not be detrimental, that it would be an advantage and the
community would benefit from it_ Traffic and parking are onz of the greatest
problems that are present on Grand Avenue and in the Summit Hill neighborhood
and it has been with their goals and objectives for years that they wi11 do
wha[ever they can, or that they will make it a priority [o solve or mitigate
the traffic and parking problems. The board felt that this proposal helped to
mitigate a traf£ic and parking problem.
Ms. Trost compared the two proposals for rezoning. She said that the petition
to rezone 885 Grand Avenue was seen as an extreme intensification of
commercialization by the Summit Hi11 Association, as that proposal was to
bring new businesses into the neighborhood. They felt that realistically they
would not be providing the parking that was needed for that proposal (although
they had on paper) and that it would also intensify the traffic ar.d parking
problem that currently exists. The two proposals were seen as very different �
4
��
q� ,�
for those reasons. ����r
�
Commissioner Vaught asked why he shouldn'[ put more credence in the ii of 14
signatures of the immediate abutting property owners who support a rezoning to
B-3, notwithstanding the fact that it also is not in consort with the district
plan,
Ms. Trost responded that the recommendation of the Summit Hill Association is
based on the knowledge of the potential in trie future, and she was uncertain
whether the neighbors have also considered this.
The applicant chose no rebuttle.
There was a brief discussion of the present zoning for nearby properties:
Cherokee Bank, across the street from the proposed property, with a parking
lot behind the bank and a drive-in facility to the west of the bank.
The property is zoned B-1 from the frontage on Grand to the alley, which
includes the drive-in banking facility.
Nearby property owned by Sherman Rutzick, that also has a parking lot behind
it.
This is zoned B-2C.
• Mr. Ryan reviewed'that there is a B-2C on Chatsworth next to the alley and
there is_also a B-2C next to Rutzick's building where the parking lot is. The
southeast corner is B-2.
Commissioner Vaught moved approval of the petition to rezone ta H-3.
Commissioner Gurney seconded the motion.
Commissioner Chavez referred to the staff report and asked why finding no. 4
supported staff's recommendation for denial.
Ms. Dadlez responded that the current use of the property is a duplex, and
that the current zoning allows for the reasonable use, and that what is
located there now is a reasonable use of the property and isn't necessarily a
reason to rezone it.
Commissioner Vaught said he did not £ind that to be critical to a findinq oP a
B-3 zone.
Commissioner Vaught said he didn't think the issue of what the district plan
says ought to control in this case, and that is also the position of the
Summit Hi11 Association, although they don't agree with B-3 zoning.
C�
5
e
�� J ✓ V
Commissioner Gurney asked if the applicant were to want to put a car p��� �
the parking side where the duplex currently is, and if zoned B-3, whether a Z ` �
site plan review wouZd be required, which would include comp2iance with the
sign ordinance.
Ms. Dadlez responded that a site plan review would be required.
Commissioner Vaught noted that although a fast-food restaurant would be an
allowable use under a B-3 zoning that certain other requirements would require
revisiting of any such proposal.
Ms. Dadlez noted triat the motion excluded any reference to the comprehensive
plan, and that she was uncomfortable rezoning property without it being
consistent with the comprehensive plan_ She noted that there are citations in
the staff report that discuss the design gui8elines, and also citations from
the economic development strategy that she wouZd like to see referenced in the
resolution.
Commissioner Vaught said that his intent was to excise from the findings those
things that were inconsistent with a rezoning to B-3 and that any findings
that are not would remain and would be amenable to including anything that she
felt pertinent.
Commissioner Kramer said he would support the motion. However, he said it
concerned him when the committee votes against a district plan, but noted that
sometimes rigidity is written into plans, and it becomes necessary. He .
pointed out that the Thomas Dale plan was adopted recently where this was not
done, but a provision was added which helps prevent situations such as this
from occurring.
The motion recammending approval of the petition to rezone to B-3 carried on a
voice vote of 6 to 0.
Drafted by:
l S�-
➢onna Sanders
Submitted by:
�����
xady Dadlez
Approved by:
Barbara Wencl
Vice Chairperson
•
0
� '�S�
• ZOL3ING CO�SITTES STAFF REPORT
___________°__-__�___________
FILE # 96-284
1. APPLICANT: DANIEL AND LINDA BURNS DATE OF HEARING: O1/16/97
2. CLASSIFICATION; Rezoning
3. LOCATION: 986 GRAND AVENUE (south side between Chatsworth & Oxford)
4. PLAN2SING DISTRICT: 16
5. L$GAL DBSCRSPTION: Lot 2, Block 35; Summit Park Addition
6. PR858NT ZONING: RM-2 ZONING CODB R8F8RSNC8: 64.400
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND RBPORT: DATE: 1/9f97 BY: Kady Dadlez
8. DATE RECEIVSD: 12/09/96 DBADLINB FOR ACTION: 2/6/97
==5________________________0======__
_____�__°_____________________�__�__�_________________
A. PURPOSE: Rezone property from RM-2 to B-3 to allow expansion and
remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
B. PARCSL SIZB: The property has 40 feet of frontage on Grand Avenue and is
150 feet in depth for'a total lot area of 6,000 square feet.
C. SXISTING LaxD IISS: The property is occupied by a two-story wood structure
which is used as a duplex residence.
D. Si7l2ROUNDING LAND IISS:
North: Cherokee Bank in a B-1 zoning district and apartment buildings in
� an RM-2 zoning district.
East: Auto repair shop in a B-3 zoning district and a variety of
commercial uses in an B-2 zoning district.
South; Predominantly single family homes in an RT-1 zoning district.
West: Small apartment buildings in an i7M-2 zoning district.
E. ZONING COD& CITATION: Section 64.400(a) states in part, "the council may,
from time to time, amend, supplement or change the district boundaries or
the regulations herein, or subsequently established herein pursuant to the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357 and amendments thereto as
may be made from time to time. The planning commission may, from time to
time, review district boundary lines to determine if, pursuant to state
laws, such district boundary lines should be changed."
Section 64.400(b) states in part that "an amendment to the zoning code may
be initiated by the council, the planning commission or by petition of the
owners of sixty-seven (67) percent of the area of the property to be
rezoned."
• F. HISTORY/DISCIISSION: There is one pYevious zoning case concerning this
�
��-'���
Zoning FiTe #96-269
Page Two
property. The case involves a petition in 1992 to rezone the duplex
property to B-I (later revised to B-2C) to allow a bridal shop and shop
which designs and creates bridal veils and pageant gowns. The planning
commission recommended approval but the city council denied the rezoning
petition.
G. DISTRICT COIINCIL RHCO2�NDATION: The Summit Hill AssOCiatiori vOted t0
approve the applicant's plans for expansion and parking but does not
support the petition to rezone to B-3. The association supports the
project provided the property is rezoned to P-1.
H. FINDINGS•
2. The applicant owns the @uplex property to be rezoned. The applicant
also owns Lloyd's Automotive at 982 Grand Avenue, a neighborhood auto
repair shop that has been operating for 50 years. In order to provide
better service and relieve traffic congestion the applicant plans to
remodel the existing auto repair building and combine that property with
the lot to the west to provide off-street parking for the expanded
business. The applicant is working on plans to have the house moved to
a new location in the 12amsey Hi71 neighborhood,
�
U
The applicant intends to e�cpand the number o£ service bays in the •
existing repair garage from six to nine or ten and provide off-street
parking on the lot to the west. Plans include replacing the existing
parking area at the northern portion o£ the property at 982 Grand Avenue
with the expanded building built up to the northem property line. The
proposed parking lot to the west, 14 spaces, would have ingress from
Grand Avenue only, and egress to the alley. The lot, wi.th 40 feet of
frontage on Grand Avenue, is not wide enough to provide ingress and
egress at Grand Avenue. A fence and landscaped buffer is proposed along
the western property line abutting an RM-2 zoning district.
The existing auto repair shop employs nine people, one or two may be
added as a result o£ the expansion. The hours of operation will remain
the same after the expansion: 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m Monday through
Friday and 9:00 a.m. to I:00 p.m. Saturday.
The applicant states that the use of the property as a duplex is not
economically feasible because the cost of taxes (non-homesteaded),
mortgage, insurance, and maintenance make a profitable return on the
investment unlikely.
2. On balance, the proposed rezoning is not in conformance with
comprehensive plan. The East Grand Avenue Small Area Plan, 1989,
identifies the subject property as being located in the "conservation
area." The plan states, "Conservation areas are where existing land use
is established and site and building design is consistent with the Grand
Avenue design guidelines. This plan seeks to protect those areas from •
significant change. The current zoning is appropriate in these areas.
t ��
a � ��sy
. Zoning File #96-289
Page Three
Rezonings and variances should not be supported, and the design
guidelines should be adhered to." #1, p.1.
Zoning and Land Use recommendations o£ the East Grand Avenue Plan
include: "Protect conservation areas from less restrictive zoning" and
`�Curtail B-3 zoning." #1 , p.2. Plan recommendations relating to
parking state, "restrict parking lots from conservation areas. If
zoning parcels are developed solely for new parking lots, they should be
limited to 'non-conservation' areas and should be appropriately screened
from the street and alley" and "Restrict building removal for parking.
The removal o£ historic or residential buildings solely to provide
additional parking is discouraged." #13 , p.3.
The proposed building expansion is in conformance with the Grand Avenue
Design Guidelines established in the small area plan. One of the
guidelines states, "Limit curb cuts on Grand Avenue. Parking lots
should be located to the side or rear of commercial structures and have
a minimum of curb cuts. For parking lots on comers, access from the
side street is preferred." #22, p.4. The agplicant plans to locate the
parking to the side of the existing commercial structure and create one
curb cut. Another guideline states, "Protect and promate block-front-
setback patterns. Many blocks on Grand Avenue have both commercial and
residential type structures. In terms of design, the most successful of
these-have`corner commercial structures up to the sidewalks, with
�- smaller residential-type structures set back from the sidewalk in mid-
block. This design pattern should be preserved and expanded. On a11-
commercial blocks, buildings should have no setback form the sidewalk."
#25, p.4 The applicant's plans include a building addition that will be
built right up to the sidewalk.
Objectives and policies of the Economic Development Strategy include:
"ensure sufficient land for future business growth" and "the city's land
use plan should provide adequate land for industrial and commercial
development and expansion in order to increase the proportion of
commercial/industrial tax base.'� #6 , pp. 16 & 17.
3. The rezoning of this one parcel for commercial use would not,
necessarily by itself, have an adverse impact on the surrounding
community, particularly because it is immediately adjacent to an
existing commercial area. Rezoning of this property, however, and of
other similar properties, proposals for which are likely to follow,
could cumulatively have an adverse impact by disrupting the balance of
commercial and residential uses on the avenue. The East Grand Avenue
Small Area Plan makes clear the importance of maintaining the existing
architecture and mix of commercial and residential uses in the
designated "conservation area." Such a change to existing conditions is
discouraged and would disrupt the mix of use and design that is the
hallmark of Grand Avenue.
• On the other hand, if the property were rezoned to allow a parking lot,
the applicant would no longer need to park veriicles that he has/will
� ".
`������-
Zoning File #96-289
Page Four
service, thus reducing parking and congestion in the streets,
particularly Chatsworth Street.
4. The existing residential zoning allows for reasonable use of the
property.
5. The applicant submitted a sufficient petition signed by two-thirds of
the property owners within one hundred (100) feet of the property to be
rezoned (14 parcels eligible, 10 parcels needed, and 11 parcels signed}.
6. The off-street parking requirement for the proposed expansion is 10
spaces. Four spaces will be lost due to the building expansion.
Fourteen spaces will be provided in the new lot to the west. Thus,
adequate off-street parking is provided for the use.
The applicant's request to have alley access for the parking lot would
be evaluated during review of the site plan.
'I. STAFF RSCOb4�NDATION: Based on findings 2, 3, and 4 staff recommends denial
of the petition to rezone to B-3.
�
Addit3onaZ Informatioa �
If the rezoning is approved, a special condition use permit will be reguired
since the floor area of the building is expanding by more than 50 percent.
The Planning Administrator would process the permit administratively rather
than require a second public hearing since the planning commission is holding
a public hearing on the rezoning petition currently. The planning commission
amended its rules of procedure in 1984 to delegate authority for the approval
of special condition use permits to the planning administrator in all cases
where public hearings have been held in which the commission has recommended,
and the city council has approved, a rezoning specifically for a special
condition use.
Section 60.54a{18) of the zoning code provides that auto repair businesses are
permitted in a B-3 zone subject to certain conditions. These conditions and
the developer's ability to meet them are as follows:
a. The mittimvm lot area shall be fifteea thousand (15,000) square £eet.
This condition is met. Combining the existing auto repair shop property
(9,000 square £eet) with the lot to the west wi11 increase the lot size by
6,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet.
�b. A ten-foot lattdscaped bu£fer with screen plantiag and an obscuring fence
sha21 be required along any property line adjoiaiag to an existiag
residence or adjoining to land zoaed rasideatial.
This condition can be met. The site plan submitted indicates a new fence .
and landscape border along the western property line. Depending upon the
l�
�� ,� S �-
• Zoning File #96-289
Page Five
degree to which the parking spaces are angled, there may or may not be
adequate space to provide the full 10 foot setback with landscaped buffer.
The required width for the maneuvering lane varies from 12 to 15 feet
depending upon the angle of the parking spaces. If the maneuvering lane
is required to be 15 feet then the setback from the western property line
can only be 7 feet and the applicant would need a modification of this
condition. If a modification is necessary, staff would not be able to
pzocess the permit application administratively and a second public
hearing would be necessary.
c. All repair work shall be done within an enclosed building.
This condition is met. The applicant understands that all work must take
place within the enclosed building and that no repair may occur on the
exterior of the lot or in the public right-of-way.
d. There shall be no outside storage.
This condition is met. The applicant does not propose any outdoor storage
and understands that vehicle parts, tires, oil, or similar items may not
be stored outdoors.
:-The following conditions must also be met before the special condition use
,- • permit may be approved.
a. The extent, Zocation and iateasity of the uae wiZl be in substantial
compliance with the Saint Pau2 Compreheasive Plan and any applicab2e
subarea plans which were approved by the city counci3.
b. The use wi12 provide adequate ingress and egress to miaimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
c. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of the
development in the immediate neighborhood or eadanger the pubSic health,
safety and geaeral melfare.
d. The use will not impede the norma2 and orderly development and improvement
of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the diatrict.
e. The use shaS2, in alI other respects, confozm to tbe applicab2e
regulations of tbe district in which it is located.
Staff would likely impose, at a minimum, the following conditions on the
permit:
i. A wood privacy fence, at least 6 feet in height, shall be installed along
the western property line and shall be properly maintained at all times.
2. Parking for customers and employees shall be arranged on the lot as shown
on the attached site plan. No more than 20 vehicles shall be parked
outdoors on the lot. Only customer vehicles and employee vehicles of the
permittee may be parked on the lot. This condition is intended to
prohibit long term storage of vehicles on the lot.
• 3. All vehicles parked outdoors on the lot shall be completely assembled with
no parts missing. Vehicle salvage is not permitted.
4. Parking of vehicles that are awaiting repair or that have been repaired
shall be prohibited in the public streets.
�1��35 2-
) A INT
VL
���
PETtTION TO AMEND ': HE ZONING CODE
Department ojFlanning and Eco:znmic Develapment
Zoning Sedion
1100 Cify Half Anner
25 West Fourth Street
Saint Paul, MN SSIO2
266-6589
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Property Owner �a.p_iel and Linda Ri�rnc
Address 482 Grand Avenue
City_ St. Paul St.�Zip 551Q5 Daytime phone 228-1316
Contact person (if different)
•
Address/Location 986 Grand Avenne
Legaldescription Lot 2_ Block 35_ Summit Park Additinn
(attach additional s heet if necessary)
TC THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
Pursuant to Section 64.400 of the Saint Paul Zoning Ordinance and to Section 462.357(5) of
Minnesota Statues, Dani el and Li nda Burns , the owner of ali the land proposed
for rezoning, hereby petitions you to rezone the above described property ftom a
RM-2 zoning district to a B-3 zoning district, for the purpose of:
Permitting the use of the land preposed for rezoning for the same purpose as the
lan� located at °82 Grand F,venue in order to permit the remodelling of the
existing business knawn as L'oyd's Automotive.
(attacB additional sheet(s) if nec�
Attachments: Required site pian
Subscribed and swom to
before me this �, g� day
of 1��='L�'�$ , 19
Fee owner of property
Tdle:
Page 1 of ,�,
�
� �,� �m
< _ G�;�"!!; �
�;�:— - .^ram �,..��c— _ =
�t��� _:-.._VrY��!�, . . .
eYr"
Consent petition � Affidavit
•
u
2=
�� . �
S�
�
REZONING
FIRST SUBMITTED
SCUP
NCUP
DATE PETITION SUBMITTED: `�� v' � f� DATE PETITION RESUBMITTED: � � 2 ' 7 `!�
DATE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED: DATE OFFIC[ALLY RECEIVED: �`� `� Rv
__ • .,.
PARCELS ELIGIBLE:
PARCELS REQUIRED:
PARCELS SIGNED:
�
�
�
PARCELS ELIGIBLE:
PARCELSREQUIRED:
PARCELS SIGNED:
l �
��
��
CHECKED BY: ��,�C��L��I� DATE: ' Z' I` 1 F�'
ZONtNG F1L� q� ��
C�
�=
��-352-
��
J
T
r? �
v�
C
i ;,�
� �
r-�
'✓�
��,,
o„
.;
`� �
f 1 �f ,
�
CONSENT OF AATOZNZNG YROPERTY OWNERS TO REZONING
We, the undersigned, owners of the property within I00 feet of the total
contiguous descripCion of rea2 estate owned, purchased, or so2d by petitioner
within one year preceding the date of this petition, acknowZedge that we have
been furnished with the following: .
1. A copy of the Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns
60.51i to . , (name of petitioner)
2. A copy of Sections 60.720, and 6Q.406�t� tA 60.454 , inclusive of the
Saint Panl Zoning Code; and
acknowledge that we are aware of a1Z of the uses permitted under a B-3
District zoning c2assi£ication and we are aware that any of these uses can be
established upon City Council approval of the rezoning; and we hereby consent to
the rezoning of the property described in the
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a B-3 District
(name of petitionerj
•
•
� .
\ J
z4
Petition shall not be considered as oEficially fi2ed until the 2apse of seven (7)
working days after a petition is received by the P2anning Division. Any signator
of any peti[ion may withdraw his/her name therefrom by written request within
that time. page Z of �
•
�
(name
�
�'
,�_�
11-21-1996 02:45PM FROM MCCLRY--ALTOIJ TO
� �
i �
� I
�
CON3ENT OP AII1.10ININC PROPE[�i OWNERS TO &EZOt+ING
f
3177575 P.02
S�
�� ��
tve, the nndersigned, owness of the propert7r within 104 £eet o£ tha total
contiguous descrfpaion of eal estace owned, purchased, or sold by petitfo::er
withZn one year precediag �he date of t�is petition, acknovledge,thac we have
been furnished vith tha £ol owing: -
1. A copy�of the Pet�ti j of Daniel and Linda B�rnc
! 50.�11 tA 6D.552, C�e of petitiioner)
2. A copy �of Sectfons(� 7,9(l. ard fi0.4_Q6�fiR �`� -__, ��iusive o£ the
Saint Paul Zoning Cod�e; and
acknawledge CFiBC we are av�e oE a21 0£ the uses permitted under a B-3 _
pS.strict zoning classifica�ion and we are aware that any of these uses can be
astablished �ipon Gity Council approval af the rezoning; and ve hereby consenc to
the rezoning:of the propexty described in the
Petit3.nn of ;_ Daniel_and Linda Burns to a 6-3 Discrict
r)
ft a► 9�
E
� ,
Petision shali aot be a�
wosking days' aftez a pe+
� of any petition may vi
that time.
ed as o£ficially £iled until the lapse oE seven (7)
is received by the Planning Dxvision. Any signator
hisJhez aame ihexefrom by wricten zeguest wi.thin
page � of �,,,
?OTAL P.62
2�
11-25-1996 @5�27PM FRQM MCCLAY-ALT�N Tp R�i ���
2238163 P.04
i i
(
{
cASSEN': OF aiL10TNZVG YROPER�Y OvtiFgS Yo 8E?ANIac
✓ t
ue, the uadarsig:ead, o*is+ess of the proQe=ty wi�hin 100 feet of :he cosal
eoz:tigueeu desczipLien oP �a1 estate e�on�d, purei:ase8, or so2d by yetit£o�er
wLthin one yrar psece8lag e daee oF rkis peti[ion, acknov_edge,that s�e have
besn £urtniehed with the fo ensing: .
1. A eopy�of t31e Pet3.ei J of Oarie' and Lind 8�rn�
� 60.�11 tp 60.552, C�e of peci�ioaer)
2, A cOppjo£ SectionafjQ�e�,�,§t]�'�1 A`WC06tgh�60_454____ _, inelusive of the
Sainc $aai zor:ing Co , and
aeknowladge dhac c:e aze aw e of x21 of r3:e +�aes pezmiete2 under a 6-3
DiscrieL zon3r,$ elassifiaa�io� aad ve aze avare tha! any of tbasa usea can bs
sstabFished tigon City Counci3 agprwa2 of the rezoaing; :nd vc hereby cor.senc to
chs zszoaing;oF the propexey dnaesibed in che
Petition ef : Daniel 2
t�
AD�Rr55 Oit � ._ Z,P�N _ at
r�°= 9qo G�, A. ., s�
,
-�
�
i�'' � �f 4'�l , �P
�� J �
r-.
,�
E`:
�,�
Fecicion shall not'�e oon
trorking days` a�Ler a pet3
�- of any pecieion may ++ftt
Chat time.
Burns co a �- Disarict
t.
� •
�
�
;
ed as officially fE1ed until the iapse of aeven (7j
3s teceiveB by the Plac:zning IIivisioa. Any signator
his/her z�ame therefrom �y wricten req�est within
page � of ,�
' . ..
�Q���� ���� ��O'2�ar'1 I
�DTAL P.62 � �
�
�i'� ^ �
sy
�
STATE OF MJNNESOTA)
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
: SS
� Aa 1 t t t�t} '�LN� S , being first duly sworn, deposes and states that fieJshe is the person
who circulated the within petition and consent, consisting of � pages; that affiant is informed and
believes that the parties described are the owners respectively of the lots placed immediately before each
name, that affiant is informed and believes that each of the parties described above is the owner of tlie
property which is within 100 feet from any property owned or purchased by petitioner or sold by
petitioner within one (1) year precedittg the date of this petition which is contiguous to the property
described in the petition; that except for
none of the parties described above has purchased or is purchasing property from the petitioner contiguous
to the above described property within one (i ) year of the date of the petition; that this consent was signed
by each of said owners in the presences of this affiant, and that the signatures are the true and correct
signatures of each and all of the parties so described.
�
� / � �'�L�/i
�
• �
•
Subscribed and swom to bef re me
this�!dayof (�JG`�afYi� 19�(L)
TAR PUBLI
.
� BRIAN D. ALTO"�s �
� N �
RAMSEVCOUhr�. >
r��^� A 1 yConriss , oaEzW.r?�._ ,
'wwv� ,
�� Z �e�C-�,+J {�i1�uJ�l't—.
ADDRESS SZ O�� � j�j l��
z 2. K { 'a( �l
TELEPHONE NUMBER
;� � •-
� ' `
PAGE � OF \
11-1-96
a�-���-
Attachment to 5oecial Condition Use Permit ARnlication• •
982-986 Grand Avenue, St. Paul MN 55105
Lloyd's Automotive has operated at the cor�er of Grand and Chatsworth as a
neighborhood service station, celebrating 50 years of service this year.
In order to provide better service to customers and relieve traffic congestion , the
owner's of Lloyd's Automotive have applied to rezone the property of 986 Grand
Avenue to the same zoning classification as the business at 982 Grand Avenue. The
existing building will be remodeied and the lots combined in order to provide
sufficient off-street parking for the business.
The conditions of codes section 60.544(18) a-d will all be met. By adding the
additional Iot to the business, the minimum lot size for an auto service use will be
met. The landscaping and fence required will be instaited. All repair work will be
done in the enclosed building and there will be no outside storage.
The conditions of code section 60.300(d? will be met.
Lloyd's Automotive is a permitted use in a B-3 Zone area subject to special
conditions. An auto service station, in compliance with all requirements of the code,
is a compatible mixed use along the existing Grand Avenue commercia! strip. This �
compties with the policies of the comprehensive plan.
Remodeling and use of the adjacent land are designed to improve ingress and egress.
Traffic congestion will be relieved by the improved site plan and the addition of off-
street parking.
The continued use of a well established neighborhood business will not be
detrimental to the character of the neighborhood. Over three fourths (3/4) of the
customer's of Lloyd's Automotive live in the 55105 zip code. The comprehensive
ptan reftects the need for the zoning code to be flexible to reflect current commerciai
trends. There is a need to renovate the existing business to better serve its
customers. The current multiple family residential use of the property at 986 Grand
Avenue is not economically feasible,
The approval of the special condition use permit and rezoning of 986 Grand Avenue
will not impede development and improvement of the surrounding property. The
areas fully developed and the uses are well established.
The use will in atl other respects conform to the applicabfe regulations of the district
of which it is located.
Z � 6 � i � i,7 � � 6� � -�==�— � �
��
�l'i -
! ,
�
EXISnrvG gRqND AVE.
STR£ET UpiT
EwSnrvG
5lDEWnl1c
• !
� I
' r � � ��
I � �
� �
� �
� ' '
� EXIS7ING �
S 1 DUPLEX �
� � (�o ee a�+o�o) I
I I
f I
i
� i I
� f I
� �
I �-----�
EXISnNG�
FENC:
RETqINiNG WAt1
NN� GLANIER
` EXISTiNG
B�NwNWS
PAfiKiNG�
6U5 STC%
EXiS�1::
STREE' UGI:T
' �' EXISTI:G
4GN
�
EXISi1NG
TREE
( � EXISi1NG �
EXISTING P RKINOU� I
BUfLDING
E%159NG-
SDEWALH
� E%ISiING
PARKING
CGRA4EL) �
��
EXISIING
ALLEY �OVERHEAp
UTl1TY LMES
� � �
���� �
�
��
Kel4
Architects
• ' ���
����� ����
SITE P
Z�
- EXISTtNG
� T- 30' n
�
ti
H
�
�
a
S
U
LLOY�'S AUTOMOTIVE
A��1710N ANQ RE.NOVA -
\
_ _ _ _ M1 ` _
\\
\
EXISt1NG
i (TO BE I
NEW BINMINZ
PARKING
16 SiALLS TOTA
INCL (1) VqN ACf
GRAND AVE.
ALLEY �o� Eno
unum �u+es
!
��� ��� �� ���� ���
���� �
E�snuc
8U5 STO?
EXISTiNG
SRr EET �p1T
��-��a-
•
N
�
K
O
3
�
r-
¢
U
•
��Y .
K�e SITE PLA — NEW CONSTRUCTION
nra,rte�cs
�,�,�� SCALE T= 30' •
LLOYL7'S AU O I
A�E�ITION ANL7 RENOVATION
\ �! EC EX6nNG �qRKMG STALL � /
� �
z
0
>
�
W
2
�
�
z
0
>
W
I
�
0
z
0
Q
>
W
k-
W
�
�,� �3s �--
�o`
��
�
�
�
0
�
w
a
�
0
Q
>
W
F-
Q
w
��
�-� �
� Y � <_
W
�
�-
0
�
d
�-
�
Q
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
Z
0
�-
Q
�
�
z
W
�
�
Z
4
Z
Q
�
�
�
Q
�
�i
�� -35�.-
SPECIAL CONDITIUN USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Departmenr of Planning and Economic Development
Zoning Section
II00 City HaII Annex
25 Wes[ Four[h Streer
Saint Paul, M1V 55102
266-6589
APPLlCANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Name Burcorn Inc.
AddfeSS 982 Grand Avenue
City St. Paul St. MN Zip 55105 Daytime phone 228-1316
Name ot owner (if difFerent)
Address/Location 982 - 986 Grand Avenue_ St. Paul MN 55105
Legal description: Lots 1& 2. Block 35 Summit Park Addition
Current Zoning �'"3 '� Z
(attach addifionai sheet if necessary)
TYPE OF PERMIT: Apptication is hereby made under the provisions of Chapter s4
Section �nn , Paragraph � of the Zoning Code for a:
[?� Speciai Condition Use Permit
❑ River Corridor CondiEional Use Permit
� Mod�cafion of River Corridor Standards
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: in the space be�ow supply information fhaf is applicable to your type of
permit (attach additionai sheets if rtecessary)
• SPECIAL CONDITION USE: Explain how the use wiii meet each of the special conditions.
• RNER CORRIDOR CONDi710NAL USE: Describe how the use will meet the applicable conditions.
• MODIFICATION OF RIVER CORRIDOR STAIVDARDS: Expiain why modifications are needed.
SEE ATTACHED SNEET
site plan is attached �
i ��t���� ���� `.�- �
I�1
LI
�
�,
�J
ApplicanYs signature G�l'd�..��f" �i':�� Qate i Z ° i � City agent
� �� �� ?�
q�_ 3s�
Summit �-Ii11 Association
Distrsct 16 Pianning Council
Kady Dadlez aso saint c�air avenue
� Planning and Ecanomic Deve{opment �{�CEIVED Saint Paui Minnesota 55105
25 West Fourth Street �elephone 612-222-7222
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 JAN 1 5 1997 fex 612-222-1558
January 1q �ss� ZONfNG
RE: Zoning File Number 96-289
Dear Ms. Dadfez and Members of the Zoning Committee af the Planning Commission,
The Board of Directors of the Summit Hili Association/District 16 Planning Council recommends
deniaf of the request by Daniel and Linda Burns to rezone 986 Grand Avenue fr�m RM-2 to B-3 in
order to aifow expansion and remodeling of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue. A
B-3 zone is the least restrictive zone ailowed on Grand Avenue. B-3 is general husin?ss, not
community business. All of the zoning s#udies of the Avenue, and the resulting zoning changes, have
attempted to )imit or reduce the number of B-3 parcels on the Avenue. Rezoning must be considered
in the long-term. One cannot assume that Mr. Burns will maintain ownership of Lloyd's Automotive
indefiinitely.
Having said that, I would like to emphasize that ihe Summit Hill Association supports Mr. Burns
proposed remodeling and expansion of the existing auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
His business is an asset to the neighborhood and the success of this business is in the best
interest of the neighborhood.
_� ' The Summit Hill Association recommends that 986 Grand Avenue be rezoned to P-1 in order
to accommodate this proposal.
Mr. Burns was asked by the Zoning and Land Use Committee if he fi�as plans, or wants the
option to expand his repair shop again in the future. He stated that he has no pfans to expand
after this expansion and that he Is not opposed #o a less restric#ive zoning of P-1 if � allows him
to compiete the currently proposed expansion.
While rezoning from residentiai to commercial is, in fact, against the District Plan, it was agreed
that this proposal would not be detrimentai, but rather wou{d enhance fhe iivability of the
neighborhood by +mproving the aesthetics of the repair shop, by minimizing auto access from
�n�t��. �.;� � �e�;;,5 �q�� �� t�� ���eEt. it was deterrnined that this proposai wouid not
intensify commercialization, but rather would hefp to mitigate the traffic and parking probiem
fhat currently exists.
Therefore, the Summit HiH AssociationlDistrict 16 Pianning Councif recommends that the
Zoning Committes ot the Planning Commission use its authori#y and discretion to rezone 986
Grand Avenue from RM-2 #o P-1 in order to ailow expansion and remodeling of the existing
auto repair business at 982 Grand Avenue.
Sincere{ , '_ --
`=_'� `�,%� g �
.�..=.�— ������ .
John Siekmeier, President � � g � �,. � � � �� ��
Summit Hi11 AssociationlDistrict 16 Planning Council
� g A i�.
cc: Council President Thune
Daniel and Linda Burns
33
R�-�52-
RECEIVED
JAN 13 1997
Gladys Morton, Chair
Zoning Committee of the
Planning Commission
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
1100 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paui, MN 55102
Attn; Kady Dadlez
January 9, 9997
Re: 986 Grartd Avenue
Lot 2, Block 35, Summit Park Addition
Dear Ms. Dadlez:
The Board of Directors of the Grand Avenue Business Association, at its regular December
meeting, passed a resolution in support of the request by Dan and Linda Burns to rezone the
property located at 986 Grand Avenue from RM-2 to B-3.
Lloyd's Automotive has been an important business in the community for many years. It is
appropriate to rezone the adjoining parcel of property to the same zoning classification as the
current business in order to allow Lloyd's Automotive to provide better service to Grand
Avenue and the neighborhood.
�in eiy,
` Bonnie Johns
Vice President
BJ/ck
�_��i���€'°:`` � :-?" �,� �
••'�. �"��d_
ZONING
•
.
1043 Grand Avenue, Suite 315•
0
St. Paul, Minnesota 55105
0
612-224-3324
nv�uv��� x��v�;u�llviV
� ----- j� T�'
�E1VE� ---- --
__ RE _ .------
---SAN-�'t_199T - --- .
---�
-- -Z�N���--
- ---- - =.��.�
C��
a�L���
-.�y"� ��
G
��.,�� _
-=�
�=r 'G-
_ , -�
------ -�-----��
- -- -- - -----��Ze %ir-d�c j _�.__ J
---_� -- - -'-�� -�-� � ��2�
-�- - =`- ---- - - - - -
---- - - ----- -- ----------
------ --- -----,�-.e�--- �
-----�---� �"-�
- j��y -�r� ---
- - i?���e-- -- - " .
- - - ---�
- - - ���`�� --���
• _.�.�- i �
q� _ 3� a
Z����� �� � _ � ;
r��
�ti:ti
�_�.._. ;
��
�' � ` �--��-
., ,
,
�
�-- ----
��!
�J�
��
/ �
,! �
1
� �/ , i � � � ��� �
, � i
/ �� / � % / � `' / j.
� ��
��� ,//
; � / , �/
� � �� i
" .� �� , - ,
-.1:1�• .� � �'
.
, �
�
�
-��-`��2-
. � �� i'`� ��
-�- �
_
�
---- ---- ----- ----�- - ---- -- - - - - - - - - '-_ -
-- � -
� . .
-- -�.�_�_ -6� -- - - -
.. ..
� .
,..� � r
,, y
_'� '
� _ "_ _' . '" _ _� _""_ "�' " '
- ---- �'-- - - - - - - - j ,�
--� ------ =--- - -- ---�---- - - --�-7,-_/_:�'4 � �- -- -- - - "
� G i�� i!� -- �,� i .. �
_ _ _--� - ---�-=i��u" - -�- ---: — — - — --- 4z�r
` , ---- -- � -
e;'J�,_�_�_ ----�C�- - - - -- -- -!�t`-e .
_ -� _--- :��z`-`'--�-� - -- �- �- - - - - - -- ._` —_.
- - - - � - - - _ _:_�.�. �.�-�*�-�-�- _ -
`= - -- - - � - --` --- — --�- =-__ .�_ _�.--� - --- -- - --
_:���—=-- — _ -- -- —= _- - --- ----C�. �,.�GCr��.- - 5�y� - —
- ------- -�----- =--�-=---- - ��3 _ ��.�%roCy'�_ -
_. -� --- s��� �
--- --- --- - --- - -- -- - - - - -�sT _O��- ---- ----
. , a�� ��• a . ; � :.= -_ ,
� _
------ ----__— . _ - -
r =� - ��>Y_< ._ .
• �;�
'::•...=.. . . _.:. - -
--� .. _ :_ • -- , � ,
-4
�-
•a • ��• �' �� � � i • ��'���
q'1 -35�
`
1. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HAUEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE
4. DAYTON'S BLUFF
5. PAYNE-PHALEN
6. NORTH END
7. THOMAS-DALE
8. SUMMTT-UNIVERSITY
9. WEST SEVENTH
10. COMO
11. HAMLINE-MTDyVAY
12. ST. ANTHONY PARK
13. MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLIN&S1�IELLING HAMLINE
14. MACALES'I'ER GROVELAND
16. SUMMTT HIL
1 . DOWNTOWN
�. .
ZONING FILE ��°��`''
CTITZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNING DISTRICTS
�� �3��
�ebruary 25, 1997
Council President Dave Thune
Members of the City Council
310 City Hail
Saint Paul, NIN 55102
Dear Councii President Thune and Councilmembers:
We, the undersigned, all live on the norkh side o£ Lincoln Avenue
within one biock of Chatsworth Avenue and Lloyd's Automotive. We
access our alley opposite the automotive repair shop. We are also
customers of Dan Burns.
We oppose the rezoning of Lloyd's to B-3. The rezoning is a radical
departure from the Grand Avenue Plan and its intent to preserve a
mixture of residential and commercial uses along the street. An expansion
of B-3 sets a precedent that reduces confidence in the long term use of the
property and all the property along the Avenue.
Dan Burns says he need parking to expand his business. �urrently,
Chatsworth Avenue is filled with his customers'cars, so we know he
already needs parking. But we will take Dan at his word that his intent for
the new lot is only parking and offer support for a parking rezoning (P-1).
�� � ���
`�6 / �,� �, r„
�f ( C��tcc�•-�
� '.
,
�
� ���
��, s�_
�'/' 7.3 ��i��aC�F/ �t/�.
� �� �� �
�� �,
�� � c.,��t� �-„-� _
9 Ys' �'� �t � 5�v�c- .
�i�� G�y�/� �'-� �
f S 7 �-��..�`����- �--
�s7 ��.�,.. �.,��_
� Q . �,��..�..
(� e �:.�.-,�.,�..
� CONSENT OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND ��� ��
REZONING PETITION c�r� _ 3S�--
We, the owners of the property within 100 fieet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
I acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
ADDRESS = ` FEE:011st1�ER[S} __ 5tGt3tkTC1RE "DATE -
� �Q-�r�x�Z� 2'�2�
978 Grand D&B Properties �^� L ,� � j, (R 7
975 Lincoln
Billie Gilliland
and WiNiam Gilliland
��' 1��
969 Grand
999 Grand
995 Grand
985 Grand
JSS Associates
William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
�(�/��-
Tab Properties
Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. pieveney, by 8ert
McKasy under Power of
Attorney dated April 1 S,
1993
994 Grand
John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Grand
997 Grand
993 Lincoln
Patrick F. Sullivan
Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
Linda Zick
983 Lincoin I Melvin Spielman and li��� °� �-�
� Anna Spielman
i
2�����
3 '����
��/��
<�j�1�7
> �/�71y�
COMSENT OF ADJO{NING PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND �����
REZONING PETITION �I
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Danief and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
I acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
. /ktI�RESS FgE; (3VYRtER(Si - ` SCGNATURE ° Dt.tT6 " .
978 Grand D&B Properties
975 Lincoln Billie Gilliland
and William Gilliland
969 Grand JSS Associates ,� �a--��^�
. '� /
999 Grand William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
985 Grand Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert
McKasy under Power of
Attorney dated April 18,
1993
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
�� � V ��� n
998 Grand Patrick F. Sullivan r�� `- ���f��•-- � �'���j (
� �,,.�,_
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincofn Melvin Spielman and
Anna Spielman
CONSENT OF ADJOINIIVG PROPERTY OWNERS TO AMEND �
REZONING PETITION q � -' �J 5
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the real estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Surns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniei and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
1 acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 60.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
'.-_;-RDI7RES�- FEE t3]NNER(SI . - StGlY1lTC1£iE: , _I3ATE- _-
978 Grand D&B Properties
975 Lincoln Biilie Gilliland
and William Gilliland
969 Grand JSS Associates
999 Grand William Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
9$5 Grand Cherokee State Ba�k
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert
McKasy under Power of n ��� /
Attorney dated April 18, ����" l' �� �� � �l ,�� � !
1993
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Grand Patrick F. Sullivan
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grant
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincoln Melvin Spielman and
Anna Spielman
CONSENT OF ADJOINiNG PROPERl'Y OWNERS TO AMEND
REZONING PETITION � 7 3 S�"
We, the owners of the property within 100 feet of the reaf estate owned by Daniel and
Linda Burns, hereby consent to amend the Petition and to the rezoning of the property
described in the:
Petition of Daniel and Linda Burns to a P-1 District
f acknowledge receipt of a copy of Section 60.721 to 80.723 of the St. Paul Zoning Code.
ADTSEtESS- - FE�OWRiERtBT-. `- SlGttWTt7SE"- DA7E---
978 Grand D&B Proparties
975 Lincoln Billie Giliiland
and William Giililand
969 Grand .1SS Associates
999 Grand Wiiliam Dunningun and
Maureen Dunninghun
995 Grand Tab Properties
985 Grand Cherokee State Bank
990 Grand Francis J. Dieveney, by Bert ,�
McKasy under Power of �%�,��� ��^ �
Attorney dated Aprit 18, ��� "l� �` �j p 1
1993
� �m� tL . 2�; 6 �,J
994 Grand John Siekmeier and
Rebecca Siekmeier
998 Gra�d Patrick F. Sullivan
997 Grand Mary Kerr Grant and
Andrew Kerr Grent
993 Lincoln Linda Zick
983 Lincoln Melvin Spielman and
An�a Spielman