Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-6- <br /> <br />Planning File l2l4 - Proposed Ordinance relating to the sale and leasing of <br />new and used lIDtor vehicles <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren reviewed the history of the zoning ordinances relating to the sale <br />of used lIDtor vehicles. He indicated that when the zoning ordinance was adopted <br />in 1959, it was decided by the City that we did not desire to have used car or <br />truck lots as principal uses in the city. He stated that there existed, at that <br />time, a concentration of used car lots on Lake Street in Minneapolis and also in <br />Hopkins. '!hey were recognized as an aesthetic problem. <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren also reviewed the proposed ordinance and indicated tha intent of the <br />ordinance was to clarify certain anbiguities which exist in the present ordinance <br />and to ensure that the ordinances reflect a long standing policy of the City. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Mr. V. Johnson asked why the proposed ordinance permits the sale of cars by <br />leasing firms. He stated it would seem that they could operate their leasing <br />business from a very small lot and end up with a very junky appearance. <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren indicated that the leasing of lIDtor vehicles would require a special <br />use FErmi t and that the Planning Corrmission and Council could control the use by <br />placing conditions on the special per:mit. <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren indicated that use No. l5 "Open Sales lots" under uses by special <br />permit in general business districts, in the proposed ordinance, should probably. <br />be clarified to read: "Open Sales IDts Exclusive of futor Vehicles". <br /> <br />Mr. Jim Trapp indicated he felt this ordinance had a lot to do with him. That it <br />was personally airred at him. He stated that he was in the process of selling <br />Cleanco and Dick's Transmission and really didn't have anything to gain or lose <br />by the ordinance. He stated that he did not feel the proposed ordinance was <br />doing what it should and he didn't knav who the law was going to protect. He <br />corrrrented that he was opposed to the concept of the ordinance and didn't know <br />why the ordinance was needed. <br /> <br />Mr. Mastel indicated that 56% of all used cars are sold by private individuals to <br />other private individuals and are never handled through a used car lot. <br /> <br />Mr. V. Johnson canrrented that he didn't see any clarroring need for this ordinance. <br /> <br />Mrs. Dressler indicated that any tine an arrbiguous ordinance can be clarified <br />that it should be done. <br /> <br />~1r. Mastel indicated that he felt Mr. Trapp was right and he felt the ordinance <br />was discriminatory. <br /> <br />Mr. V. Johnson could see no compelling need for the proposed ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. G. Johnson opposed the ordinance because he felt that anyone who desires to <br />gP into business should have the right to be heard. <br /> <br />Mr. Rukavina indicated that these are restrictions and controls that are needed. <br />