2012_0521_Packet as amended - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Lloyd assured Commissioners that this Conditional Use allowed much better controls for the City, 50 since the property would lose its current grandfathered characteristics. 51 Member Cunningham asked if staff had provided legal notice to Saint Anthony Village, as an adjacent 52 property holder, allowing for their comment. 53 Mr. Lloyd advised that the State required notification; and their property was within the 500’ property 54 notice proscribed by the City Council via code; and advised that Hennepin County’s Park Board, manager 55 of the adjacent golf course, had also been notified. Mr. Lloyd advised that no comment from either body 56 had been received. 57 Applicant Representative, Jeff Dufresne – Minnehaha Transportation 58 Mr. Dufresne advised that their firm had been in operation now for six (6) years, and as a former School 59 Principal, the business had been established to serve area charter schools. Mr. Dufresne advised that, 60 now that he has retired, the business continues to grow and they found they were outgrowing their 61 previous location. 62 Mr. Dufresne advised that his firm did not want to preclude the possibility of limited outside truck storage. 63 Even though the firm was a school bus company with forty-five (45) buses and ten (10) vans, However, 64 Mr. Dufresne advised that he wanted to be clear upfront that they served a diverse and particular 65 community, with many of their drivers and the community they served of East African descent, and using 66 their facility in off hours for repair and maintenance of their personal vehicles, some of which were semi- 67 trucks. Mr. Dufresne noted that the trucks would come and go from the site and facility; and not be stored 68 long-term on-site. However, Mr. Dufresne advised that he did not want to preclude that use, since this 69 had been part of their rationale in considering this parcel. 70 Member Boguszewski clarified that the intent was that the truck drivers, once trucks were repairs, would 71 not be stored on the parcel; but may be there for some short period of time (e.g. several days), but not a 72 permanent storage area per se, but only while under maintenance and/or repair. Member Boguszewski 73 asked Mr. Dufresne to define “truck.” 74 Mr. Dufresne advised that some of the drivers’ personal vehicles could include 19-wheelers. Mr. Dufresne 75 advised that his firm was not currently using the property; but was hoping to purchase in the future. 76 Chair Boerigter questioned, if Mr. Dufresne purchased the property, would he have any opposition to the 77 City regulating under this Conditional Use, that there would be no right to continue any operations as a 78 non-conforming use once this Conditional Use was granted. Chair Boerigter clarified that the current 79 outdoor truck/trailer storage was allowed to operate as a legally, non-conforming use; however, if this 80 Conditional Use application is approved and moves forward, with the City Council’s final approval, for this 81 specific requested use, if this use was found out of compliance in the future the City would have the ability 82 to revoke it. 83 Mr. Dufresne sought clarification as to what manner the property was currently out of compliance. 84 Chair Boerigter advised that outdoor storage was not permitted without a Conditional Use; however, since 85 the current property owner/tenant had been using it for that purpose for a significant amount of time, it 86 had been allowed as a legally, non-conforming use. 87 Mr. Lloyd further clarified that use of the property did not include or allow for outdoor storage of trailers; 88 and approval of this Conditional Use would remove that previous legally, non-conforming use. From his 89 perspective, Mr. Lloyd opined hat buses and trucks could be kept on the site in compliance with this 90 Conditional Use; however, no piles of material, construction equipment or truck bodies not considered 91 fleet vehicles would be allowed under this use. 92 Mr. Dufresne interpreted the City’s preference and intent to avoid the property becoming a scrap yard. 93 Member Boguszewski further noted that, if in the future, the applicant was found to have broken down, 94 inoperable vehicles on site, the City could then revoke this Conditional Use as it would be out of 95 compliance; and the use of the property could not revert back to storing of trailers as had been done 96 before the applicant’s use and/or purchase of this p property. 97