The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About9B - Outdoor Sales in C-3 District .' MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AUGUST 2, 1999 98 JENNITOV~PLANNER JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR DON RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 99-XX APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO OUTDOOR SALES AS A PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE IN THE C-3 ZONING DISTRICT (DOWNTOWN AREA) Historv: On May 18, 1999 the Planning Department received an application from Paul and Mary Viereck requesting an ordinance amendment to allow outdoor sales on a permanent basis. The Planning Commission considered the request on June 14, 1999 and directed staff to research other communities relating to outdoor sales and to prepare an ordinance allowing outdoor sales as a permitted accessory use with conditions in the C-3 zoning district. Current Circumstances: Section 1102.1104 allows for specific accessory uses within the C-3 Zoning District. Such accessory uses included parking lots, outdoor seating by a restaurant, and motor vehicle repair. Section 1101.510 Temporary Uses (attached) allows for Temporary Outdoor Sales within any "C" or "I" district. The area cannot exceed 1 00 square feet and no merchandise can be displayed overnight. If the area exceeds 1 00 square feet, then the temporary use is limited to no more than 4 consecutive days and 12 calendar days per year. The applicant is requesting this amendment in order to allow year- round outdoor storage and display area at his business. The attached site plan, submitted by Paul Viereck, shows this area located between the existing fireplace showroom and the adjacent structure (previously JB Furniture and Remax office). The area exceeds 100 square feet, and would be permanent, thus the need for the amendment. f:\dept\planning\99fi1es\99ordamd\zoning\99-029\99029cc.doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER It is important to note that the proposed amendment would not only apply to the applicant's property, but to all properties located within the C-3 district. For information purposes the staff researched how other communities deal with outdoor sales in the downtown area. The communities surveyed either do not allow outdoor sales or require a conditional use permit. The following are downtown ordinances reviewed in preparing the recommendation. Farmington Outdoor Sales as principal or accessory use requires CUP Wayzata Outdoor Sales as accessory use requires CUP Hopkins Outdoor Sales not allowed, temporary use of public sidewalks for display is permitted with conditions Rochester No outdoor sales/display is permitted. Shakopee No outdoor sales/display is permitted. Zoning Administrator has authority to approve related accessory uses Lakeville Outdoor Sales as accessory use requires CUP On July 12, 1999, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the ordinance amendment which would allow outdoor storage as an accessory use in the C-3 district with the following conditions: 1. The items displayed must be related to the principal use. 2. The area allowed for outdoor sales is limited to 30% ofthe gross floor area of the principal use. 3. The area must be landscaped and fenced or screened with a Bufferyard Type D from view of neighboring residential uses or abutting any "R" district. 4. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from the public right-of-way or from neighboring residential properties and compliant with Section 11 07.1800. 5. Areas shall be hardsurfaced with asphalt, concrete, decorative concrete interlocking pavers, or other equivalent material approved by the City. These conditions, similar to those found in the Lakeville and Wayzata ordinances, are intended to assure that the outdoor storage does not become the principal use of the property, and that the use be screened from adjacent residential properties. f:\dept\planning\99files\99ordamd\zoning\99-029\99029cc.doc Page 2 The Issues: Section 1108.600 of the Zoning Ordinance states specific findings which, must be met to change the ordinance: 1. There is a public need for the amendment. The C-3 district permits limited outdoor storage as an accessory use to other permitted uses in the district. The Planning Commission has determined there is a public need for permanent outdoor display within the district. 2. The amendment will accomplish one or more of the purposes of this Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted plans or policies of the City. The proposed amendment will accomplish one or more ofthe purposes of the Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan or other plans such as the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The proposed Ordinance will allow outdoor display on a permanent basis with conditions rather than on a limited temporary basis. This may have been a use which was overlooked during the preliminary stages of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan review of allowable uses. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan identifies economic vitality as one ofthe City's goals. Specifically, this amendment will help to achieve that goal by encouraging a diversified economic base, promoting sound land use by requiring that such development contribute to the function and success of adjacent neighborhoods, and by maintaining proper screening and landscaping standards. 3. The adoption of the amendment is consistent with State and/or Federal requirements. This provision is non-applicable in this case. Upon review by the City Attorney, an issue regarding proposed Condition #1 should be addressed. Condition #1 states the items displayed must be related to the principal use. The concern is regarding Mr. Viereck's request to allow the display of hammocks outdoors. The principal use of the property is retail sales (gas fireplaces). It is the opinion ofthe City Attorney and staff that hammocks are not related to gas fireplaces. There is case law regarding "related uses" permitted on properties and what is related and permissible. However, considering retail is permitted within the district, Mr. Viereck could sell hammocks and patio furniture as a principal use f:\dept\planning\99files\99ordamd\zoning\99-029\99029cc.doc Page 3 ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDED MOTION: REVIEWED BY: within the structure, and then the outdoor display could be permitted within the confines of the proposed ordinance amendment. This interpretation would therefore apply to all uses within the C-3 Zoning District. The City Council may choose to modify Condition #1 to be more specific or leave the proposed ordinance amendment as written to be interpreted on a case by case basis by the Zoning Administrator. Conclusion: Both the Planning Commission and the staff recommend approval of this amendment. The City Council has three alternatives: 1. Adopt Ordinance 99- XX approving the proposed amendment as requested. 2. Deny Ordinance 99-XX. 3. Defer this item and provide staff with specific direction. If the City Council concurs with the Planning Commission and staff recommendation, Alternative #1 is appropriate. This requires a motion and second to adopt Ordinance 99- XX approving the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. Approval of this ordinance requires a 4/5 vote of the Council. f:\dept\planning\99files\99ordamd\zoning\99-029\99029cc.doc Page 4 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ORDINANCE NO. 99- XX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1102.1104 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE The City Council ofthe City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain that: Section 1102.1104 of the Prior Lake City Code is hereby amended to add the following language: (5) Outdoor Sales is permitted as an accessory use with the following conditions: a) The items displayed must be related to the principal use. b) The area allowed for outdoor sales is limited to 30% of the gross floor area of the principal use. c) The area must be landscaped and fenced or screened with a Bufferyard Type D from view of neighboring residential uses or abutting any "R" district. d) All lighting must be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from the public right-ol-way or from neighboring residential properties and compliant with Section 1107.1800. e) Areas must be hardsurfaced with asphalt, concrete, decorative concrete interlocking pavers, or other equivalent material approved by the City. I) This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake this 2nd day of August, 1999. ATTEST: City Manager Mayor Published in the Prior Lake American on the 7th day of August, 1999. Drafted By: City of Prior Lake Planning Department 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Prior Lake, MN 55372 f: \dept\p lann ing\99fi les\99ordamd\zoning\99-029\draftord.doc PAGEl 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 \ Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER \ Stamson: . Concurs with Commissioners. . The variance hardships have been met on both sides of the home. . The ordinance is not to create a tunnel length affect and allow reasonable air flow. The 10 foot walkway takes care of that issue. Criego: .;-..... . Agreed with Commissioner's comments. .... /' ." . Questioned the .8 foot variance. Horsman explained the existing~ttH9,~e and setback~. :'r:<}7 '~~f~Y~ . Feels strongly the 10 and 5 foot setback is reasonable..~":>l .. ,."" ...... )01,,--\ . Hardship has been met with building length..-...~~~l'., . Reduce setbacks. The garage entrance would have to,:he--:8 feet' less. .;):/ /1ti? ';'.!... . Mrs. Lein explained the proposed deck plan. . Recommend approve all variance except the sum 0' ,.;~;~~~:\ '~Jt/ ,/ Open discussion: ..',;;,?::~~:,:'-o'~ \:,;\~f~':'....~ .,.~. Discussed the garage setbacks.,;\ . .. ~~",:~Jj,;/ Applicant Brad Lein, 3852 Pershing, explaine~,.lteis using~iitubstandard 12 foot garage door. . .._...,~:'6;,,>"\.}\ / ~;:~}'j \ ".,,/~" Cramer is willing toretak the imperlrious surfaceJr~de off to keep the garage. Vonhof agreed. The variarice'l1~dswps.~i@:et;..~.:"";."" ,j/ ".:\(-.....'.... ,'..,.:/ MOTION BY GRAMER, SECOND BY VONHOF, DIRECTING STAFF TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION'AFl>1{0YINGA..S';o8<POOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A .~.t/ '.. .".,.,..('.". '/ G.ARA:GE/ROOM ADDITION S~JiBACK OF 5.82 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQGlRED 11.5 FEET;,~ A\~ FOOT VARIANCE FOR A 14.2 FOOT C'OMQIN:ED SIDE Y AR:t>.}SETBACK AND A 6.5 FOOT VARIANCE TO A 10 FOOT -"..).>',' ,....../ SIDE Y~:~~~TBA~~JNSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 16.5 FEET. Vote taken si~~ed~~?;s by Vonhof, Cramer and Stamson. Nay by Criego. MOTION ,-','...-" ./ CARRIED. <Y ,,// Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. ~ D. Case File #99-029 (Continued) Paul and Mary Viereck are requesting an amendment to Section 1102.1104 of Zoning Ordinance relating ~o Outdoor Display and Sales within the C-3 Specialty Business Use District. f:\dept\planning\99fi1es\99p1comrn\pcmin\nm071 299.doc 9 ._..., ,..'~_.~;~_<., 1,1''1 ~.;.&~'""-lo.,,,,,,,...,....,.,,.._.......,_,,..~,,,","- "'.': -....'" -..,.iA~~ ~,. ..... ~ ii_ Planner Jenni Tovar presented the Planning Report dated July 12, 1999, on file in the office of the City Planner. Staff recommended approval of the Ordinance amending Section 1102.1104 of the Prior Lake City Code. Rye and Tovar explained the existing accessory use ordinance. Comments from the public: ./~':' . f Paul and Mary Viereck, 3465 140th Street NW, Shakopee, pointed;out theh',gdals to see the redevelopment for Prior Lake's downtown. Vierecks felt~Y~11Jet all the '. .r, requirements and explained their proposal and expectationsrPaul Viereck stated h~,.. . attended the recent downtown meeting and was impress;ed with:f!1~ attendance. Mr~.;J/ Viereck invited the Commissioners to talk to downtown'businesses~and enforce the ordinances to improve the area. Mr. Viereck felt itis ~~'t9)p.~~~ittiie~'ommunity to improve the downtown area. :,1,,:,. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: · Still slightly uncomfortable changing theotdiIiance given the downtown committee's . "-,';,__ "'. -'~"'" 0/ -... plan not being complete(j.,~h6wev~r what staff has as conditions is appropriate. · Would like to add twQ;'dditiona1:~onditions;''1) Display area be limited to the ./ ,I . . -: /" sideyard and be setbhck from the/leading edge 9fthe building and/or the adjoining . / . . building whicheverisless. Only-a11owinj~s(ances where there is buildings on both lots, so you cannot have a display ona 'com:er lot. 2) Minimize storage and display in the downtown area. · Concern for abuttmg residentiahdi~tricts. · If this ordinance is in place it is}nore likely a new business will put the building back with the display in theftont. It'is counter productive. Criego:. .. , · Staff Pun()g~ther what I was looking for. · Stamson'~c()ncelli'for display in the front could not occur with staffs condition. . Happy with starf's report. · Rye explained the reasons staff came up with the conditions. · Criego said his concern for the restrictions. Items C and D should be for any adjoining property, not just residential. Cramer: · For the most part support the new ordinance. It will make downtown more aesthetically pleasing. f:\dept\planning\99files\99pJcomm\pcmin\mn071299.doc 10 . It will set the tone Prior Lake wants to keep businesses downtown and encourage other business to come to our community. . In some ways share Stamson's concern, how to limit setbacks. ,But in Viereck's case, they have a porch and is acceptable and conducive to the area. Does not want to see racks in front of other buildings. . Support ordinance. Would like to see Stamson's concerns addressed. ;';>.-'>" ._'"....",..:..'.:.:.,;,."-....... V onhof:.> y/?;;''c1.;,~<) . The criteria for the amendment had been met. There is a public neea~or this and everyone agrees.-,~:~.V-"t2{!~~ . Look at how ordinances fit into the City's Comprehensive Phm.:1. We ~anlt9.'!llake it attractive to come to downtown to walk around and sh~p.ii6.;:i;.::'t:/~ 'if;;;"' . Displays cannot block sidewalks.,,;<~'-;/ . Less concerned with having some type of transitioJ:i'~es. ,,;~ . Agreed going with a more general ordinance. TJ1i~1l,~gnsi~t~nt~~th the entire downtown area....c.~'.' fr "'1 .'.........../ Starnson: '1~! "~,1>7'..,.<~~ . Agreed with Vonhofs compelling argti~nttdf;~~~tQwn~isPlays. . Still feels strongly on his comments regar<!in~r~(tficti6p.s~/) \-~ ;/ -",/ :'-_:'.,:'-' - -' -. > -"~ '/ ,y' There was a brief discussio~:on:~the existing orID'nance with limited display and porch / ' area. .~ ,. MOTION BY VONHOF SECOND BY.GlRAMER, RECOMMENDING CITY "~'\. .,'".," .....;.._ +..; __, ,,";': ,~"';1;';._ "/ COUNCIL APPROVAL Of'l,QRDINANCE"99-XX AMENDING SECTION 1102.1104 "'''''';~ OF THE PRIOR",bAKE CITY?:CODE. ";;'~~';~~;-\..": '.",'/ V ote t~~ signified aY~s'~,y V onh9f;Cramer and Criego. Nay by Stamson. MOTION C~D. >''\. 5. ./ --",:,'. ~~:,tf),. dia'1Business: i .j /' ';;,~:,r:~ ;'. _; ~" -;' - :'._.'_\.~/ ..':'/',,/i A. Case FiI.~m9/8i670 consider request by Robert Jader for time extension for a variance previously granted for the property located at 14962 Pixie Point Circle. ./ Planner Jenni Tovar presented the Planning Report dated July 12, 1999 on file in the office ofthe City Planner. Staff recommended approval ofthe 90 day extension to November 10, 1999. Comments from the Commissioners: f:\dept\planning\99fi1es\99plcomm\pcmin\mn071299.doc II T..~ 'TI~ --..or: r:- '\JJ ~P' !f'II::'t"!' 't''''; .~ .'iil!~;-.r.ti'..~ 'j '~ifh:E1ti!;'\f',.......1II'!' .' . '.:.~ '""". .... . 'G -i:{cSlA U \'-1 LS i\ II W\~ \ 8 1999 ~ To: the City of Prior Lake the Planning Commission of Prior lake R e: 1 6 1 6 1 M a i n Au e. SE Prior lake, MN On May 14, 1999, my wife andl-purchased the building at 16161 Main Aue. We also own and operate Uiereck Fireplace which is 22 feet due north from our newly acquired building. The building we purchased at 16161 Main Aue.-has been completely and eHtensiuely brought up to date. We are presently in the process of repainting and detailing both buildings, one to coordinate or compliment the other. All the oJd black top and debris between the huildings haue been replaced with new concre~es !nc!uding 2 new rear parking area. At 16161 Main Hue. we plan to display and .tJemonstrateour unique brands of barbecue grills as well as outdoor swings and hammocks. "ine front iJOrCh area anj ihe-nellJ ara~b,?~~:;c;e~ ~~e !.'._.;jdings woulti be part of our disiJ~~yarea. ~ 'picket fence ~~ the back~::: well as a locking gate in the front, anneHed to a handicap ramp, would deter theft and secure the area. We feel that this is a positiuemoue towards upgrading downtown Main Aue. and would help increase retail traffic to the area. I twas brought to our attention one hour prior to closing on this property that a new ordinance went into effect on May 1, 1999. We hope the city will approue and embrace our new uenture and not discourage businesses that are trying to improue the atmosphere surrounding the downtown area. &JaJ1/~ ~~ Paul and Mary Uiereck cc IDes Mader City Council 1.-. t. i .J.. ~... ~ ~ ~ - . ~ --6 0. "_ "- ..- ~...... ~ ~ & ~ u o ~ 61~ , .. .... ~J'l , '7 ....iJ '~n I " '- I ~ ... ~ - T i ') JI./ ~ d- ).11.Jn")~S. ~?,()"!JJ ~1-.J" ^~/dS.IO ;0(' " 'S -f f) 0 ~O?l k "~Jb J~/I'S/G~",. -rf,I>-I-J?O c;r?f 11'- . ....:e,. '[. .. ... ...\.,.,,_........ '-'. ". ~J~ .......06ilii. .......... .- . I ,/ <' 1 .. y7..1IJd r-- iol..~' ~l :.'d