pf07-069 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

--. .-. Bryan Lloyd From: Patrick Schmidt [schmidtp@macalester.edu] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 2:03 PM To: Bryan Lloyd Subject: footnotes to our conversation Dear Bryan, What I want to write here is not the whole of the systematic arguments that FAST (Foes of Autumn Street Traffic) will be raising in our various documents for the city's deliberation, but let me offer two foonotes to our conversation that are probably among the most important to bring to your attention as city planner. � First, while you have indicated in the planning document that both B-1 and B-lb are consistent with the LB designation, in the review of the Bookhouse application (PF07-050), your own analysis in Section 6.3 of that planning document emphasizes the Comprehensive Plan's commitment to "fairly low traffic generating users" at this intersection. In particular you draw the distinction with a"conveninence business that relies on drive-by traffic," and you state the staff's belief that "all of the proposed allowed uses" in that property "would be similar low-traffic, destination businesses...." The city code's failure to define "pick up window" vis-a-vis "drive through" (if there is any real distinction in practice) aside, a pick up window is closely tied in most understandings to a"convenience" (and at any rate Class II Restaurant uses are titled "Fast Food Convenience" in the city code. Given the language you have used on the record, and other actions (such as the permission for Dino's Gyros on Snelling and Larpenteur bordering a residential district which excepted a drive-through window), approval of a B1-B zone and a permit for a catering business that includes a pick-up window via a residential street would strongly cast doubt on whether the City was proceeding according to a rational scheme of zoning. It might even raises a colorable argument that this action would constitute spot zoning out of line with the overall plan articulated for the Roselawn- Lexington multi-use intersection. � Second, in our phone conversation I was fishing for the code's language on one matter. What I wanted was Section 1011.02.A: "A pre-existing nonconforming use or structure may be continued but may not be extended, expanded, intensified or changed, unless to a conforming use." This proposal for a take-out window clearly changes and intensifies the property and its use of the small patch of parking on the small side. The proposed development to the south face of the building, intensifying its use, thus must confront a range of restrictions. Note, e.g., sight-line barriers, see 1005.O1.E.1: "All business, storage, SERVICE...shall be conducted wholly within a building or behind a solid fence not less than 6.5 feet nor more than 8 feet high adjacent to residential district to completely screen the activity....". This is clearly the case with all other properties in this area. This property is open to R-1 properties across the street. If they want a take out window offering service, it must be completely fenced off, not visible from the R-1 properties surrounding it including directly across the street, from the western edge of its property to within 15 feet of Lexington Ave. (See also Section 1005.O1.A.2: "Where such a corner lot side yard faces a residential district across the street, screening shall be provided as specified in subsection G of this Section." Located as it is, across Autumn street from 1881 Lexington (zoned LR/R-1), the intensification of use brings into play this non-conforming nature, such that any take-out window and parking will need to be completely screened, and thus, fortunately in effect prohibiting use of Autumn Street for vehicular traffic. In essence, if rezoned as B-lb, they can have a take-out window anywhere they want, but it could be on the south side only if they fence the property off from Autumn Street. If there are a lot of very solid arguments available to me, it must be because this property is an awkward, old building that doesn't fit well into the Comprehensive Plan, sitting as it does at the very edge of the Lex-Roselawn corner. It sits on (but currently does not "face") a wonderful street--one with 25 children who virtually hold a bike rally every summer night. Families, elderly, and others alike, we love the fact that it is an incredibly quiet street. That these applicants want to make use of Autumn Street as a thoroughfare to any aspect of the building--the only business in the Lex-Roselawn district to have any access to something other than Lexington or Roselawn--makes us very concerned. 1