CC MINUTES 01262021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 26, 2021 Page 7 1 NE, as wells as many residents of the Kensington at 2601 Kenzie Terrace. She noted in the 2 packet are multiple letters from concerned residents and a petition signed by more than 70 3 residents of the Kensington, identifying concerns not addressed by the Planning Commission. 4 She really values the work of the staff and of the Planning Commission and the Council that 5 contribute their time to ensure that St. Anthony is a place where people want to live. As 6 concerned citizen, as committed residents here they do feel like it is their responsibility to point 7 out the concerns that have arisen with this. She noted the residents do not have any animosity 8 towards Tom, personally, and really do appreciate that he has been a good neighbor with his car 9 business. However, a car wash is not consistent with St. Anthony Code. It is not an appropriate 10 use of the land he owns. The residents would be willing to engage with him around planning for 11 an alternate business and would have engaged earlier if he had reached out prior to submitting 12 the application. The residents feel that the Planning Commission has not fulfilled their statutory 13 responsibility relative to the Conditional Use Permit for this commercially zoned property that is 14 adjacent to single family and multiple family homes. She explained during the December 15`h 15 Planning Commission meeting when asked who burden it was to provide hard evidence of 16 detrimental effect Mr. Grittman incorrectly stated the burden would be on the people making the 17 claim of detrimental value. In fact, as noted in the letter from Tim Keane, Attorney at Law, 18 Minnesota case law shows that the burden is actually on the applicant to prove, based on facts 19 and the record that the use will conform. There has been no such request from the Planning 20 Commission to that applicant. Even though the Planning Commission recommended approval of 21 the CUP, during the December 15`h Commission discussion, Commissioner Socha stated she had 22 a hard seeing how it would not be detrimental to some point on neighboring property values and 23 the neighbors agree. In the absence of Planning Commission or applicant action St. Anthony 24 residents did solicit expert opinion so this is not fear of the unknown, this is actually the residents 25 solicited expert opinions, and while these were provided to the Planning Commission before the 26 January 19`h meeting, they were not considered. Real Estate agents are considered as experts 27 relative to property value and in the Council packet there are two letters from independent real 28 estate agents, Kathy Daniels, and Ella Ritzman, noting significant negative impact on property 29 values on adjacent single family and multi -family homes. There is also a letter from Steve 30 Platisha, who is professional engineer and noise expert. Based on the decibel levels provided to 31 Tom and in response to a neighbor's question during the December Commission meeting, the 32 noise expert states that a vacuum at a car wash dryer noise at this level occurred for more than 33 six minutes an hour, the levels would exceed State Noise Pollution Standards. She stated 34 nowhere in the application nor at the planner's analysis were specific decibel levels requested, 35 described nor analyzed. 36 37 Ms. Zarhbock stated the City Planner and Planning Commission also neglected to consider or 38 assess the impact of air pollution from idling cars and offered no mitigation from this detrimental 39 impact. The car wash plan as seen allows for two lanes of cars idling resulting in sixteen cars 40 waiting their turn in the car wash. These are directly adjacent to the alley which is directly 41 adjacent to backyards as well as the patios and balconies of the Kenzington. This Conditional 42 Use Permit approval is not consistent with St. Anthony's sustainability plan and it is committed 43 to a reduction of cars idling through the young lungs at work initiative developed due to 44 documented pollution and ill effects of idling cars. The Planning Commission also neglected to 45 consider the impact of noise pollution from car radios while cars wait their turn in the car wash 46 and offered no mitigation to this detrimental impact. She stated in summary, they respectfully