CC PACKET 01262021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Stille and St. Anthony Village City Council From: Stephen Grittman, City Planner Date: City Council Regular Meeting for January 26, 2020 NAC File No: 323.01 – 20.21 Request: Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Car Wash facility for Boulevard Autoworks at 2701 Kenzie Terrace. STAFF and PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS The applicant is proposing to construct a new car wash facility at 2701 Kenzie Terrace. The facility requires a conditional use permit, and would replace the existing parking lot on the site. Based on a review of the application, Planning Staff recommends approval of the CUP request, with conditions related to compliance with code requirements applicable to the impacts of the proposed use. The Planning Commission reviewed the application at a public hearing on December 15, 2020. Several members of the public provided written and oral comments, expressing concerns related to noise, lights, odors, and general compatibility with the neighborhood, with the potential to disrupt quality of life and diminish property values. The applicant expressed an interest in mitigating those concerns, and agreed to the required conditions recommended by staff. After the hearing, Commission discussed the item extensively, ultimately passing a motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit, based on the findings in the proposed resolution and with the conditions recommended in the staff report, as well as one additional condition limiting hours of operation to 7:00a.m. to 10:00p.m. The applicant had indicated that his proposed hours of operation would be 8:00a.m. to 5:00p.m. With those conditions, the Planning Commission vote was 7 in favor, 0 against. As you are aware, the Council referred action on this item back to the Planning Commission to finalize and clarify its recommendation. The Commission met on January 19 and took up the item, with the 11 conditions that were incorporated into the motion at their prior meeting. Staff had included the many written submitted comments from neighbors of the property in the Commission’s packet, but the hearing had been closed on December 15, and no public verbal comment was taken. The Commission members brought the item to the table, and discussed it briefly. Comments from Commissioners predominantly related to their satisfaction that they had reviewed the subject thoroughly at their previous meeting, and did not believe it needed significant further review. With that, Commissioners asked for a vote on the full staff recommendation together with the 11 conditions, including the hours of operation condition that they had previously approved. That motion passed 4 in favor, 0 against, and 1 abstention due to that Commissioner not being a member at the time of the prior discussion. This action brings the item back to the City Council with a Planning Commission recommendation of approval of the CUP, with the attendant 11 conditions. 29