Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout91-166 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1991/09/03RESOLUTION NO. 91-166 A RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF HONEYWELL, INC. FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT UNDER SECTION 14-124.(2) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF AN 8,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO STORE HAZARDOUS WASTE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE DDD, DIVERSIFIED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AT 1625 ZARTHAN AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota 1. On July 9, 1991, Honeywell, Inc. filed an application seeking a special permit to permit the construction of an 8,000 square foot addition to store hazardous waste for property located in the DDD, Diversified Development District, at 1625 West Lake Street for the following legal description, to wit: That part of Government Lot 8 lying northeasterly of Cedar Lake Road except roads, Section 4, Township 117, Range 21; and that part of Government Lot 1 lying north of the centerline of Old County Road No. 16 except roads, Section 9, Township 117, Range 21 in Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract) 2. On July 24, 1991, the Planning Commission considered the request and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council. 3. On August 19, 1991, the City Council held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, discussed the application, closed the public hearing and authorized preparation of a resolution of denial on a vote of 4-0. 4. Findings: Based on the testimony, evidence presented, and files and records, the City Council makes the following findings: a. At present hazardous waste and material, some of which is flammable, is stored in two separate areas within the building, one in the southeast part of the building and a second in the southwest part. b. Hazardous waste and material stored in the building is loaded onto trucks via the loading docks on the east side of the building c. Relatively high potential for release of hazardous waste and materials into the environment exists during loading, unloading and transport. d. If the addition is constructed as proposed, storage of hazardous waste and materials, some of which are flammable, will be consolidated in the addition. e. The west side of the subject site, as well as Zarthan Avenue, are presently used intensively to the point where their use is incompatible with the single family residential neighborhood to the west. f. If the addition is constructed as proposed, the amount of hazardous waste and material stored in the southwest part of the building in close proximity to the residential neighborhood to the west will increase. If the addition is constructed as proposed, the amount of hazardous waste and material loaded onto and unloaded from trucks via loading docks on the west end of the building in close proximity to the residential neighborhood to the west will increase. g. h. If the addition is constructed as proposed, the amount of hazardous waste being transported to and from the site via Zarthan Avenue which forms the east edge of the residential neighborhood to the west will increase. i. The proposed addition includes a loading dock and, if constructed as proposed, the activity level, noise and hard surfacing from the loading dock will increase the intensity of use on the west side of the site. If the addition is constructed as proposed, the amount of building bulk adjacent to the single family residential neighborhood to the west will increase, thereby increasing the intensity of use on that part of the site. k. If the addition is constructed as proposed, truck traffic on Zarthan Avenue which already has a negative impact on the single family residential neighborhood to the west will increase, thereby increasing the intensity of use caused by the applicant. 1. The applicant has requested approval of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to increase the amount of flammable hazardous waste that can be stored on the site from 10 to 40 barrels and of hazardous waste that can be stored on the site from 60 to 120 barrels. J. 5. Conclusions: Based on the above Findings, the City Council concludes: a. The proposed addition does not comply with General Land Use Goal B as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan as follows: "Develop a community which has a safe and pleasant environment and which enhances social, economic and ecological welfare" (page 11). b. The proposed addition does not comply with General Land Use Goal E of the Comprehensive Plan as follows: "Reduce adverse affects associated with intense land use to a level compatible with adjacent less intensive uses" (page 11). c. The proposed addition does not comply with Housing Goal E of the Comprehensive Plan which is as follows: Preserve and enhance the integrity and character of neighborhoods (page 29). d. The proposed addition does not comply with Housing Policy K of the Comprehensive Plan as follows: "Reduce or eliminate adverse impacts such as pollution, noise, glare, odor and activity of incompatible land use on residential development and neighborhoods" (page 30). e. The proposed addition does not comply with Housing Goal N which is as follows: "Eliminate potential sources of deteriorating residential neighborhoods" (page 30). f. The proposed addition does not comply with Goal 1 -Diversified Compatible Development of the Diversified Development Guide Plan which, in part, is as follows: g. Development of sites for residential, commercial and some industrial uses is allowed, provided adequate provisions are made for public facilities, separation of dissimilar uses, screening utilitarian functions and integrating and coordination of development using good site design techniques (page 7). The proposed addition does not comply with Policy 10 -Diversified Compatible Development of the Diversified Development Guide Plan which, in part, is as follows: The development of new and redevelopment of existing industrial facilities are to be planned and constructed in a manner to be harmonious and compatible with contiguous development in accordance with high standards typical of quality industrial park concepts (page 8). h. The proposed addition does not comply with Policy 16 -Industrial and Commercial Development Adjacent to Residential Use of the Diversified Development Guide Plan which, in part, is as follows: In those locations where industrial or commercial development abuts residential development, the industrial and commercial uses will be required to provide greater or additional setbacks and landscaping to insure an appropriate transition between the uses. Loading areas, access, parking, signing and building equipment shall be prohibited or minimized to the extent appropriate in order to eliminate or minimize noise and visual pollution and to insure compatible development (page 10). i. The proposed addition does not comply with Transportation Goal 2 of the Diversified Development District Guide Plan as follows: "Transportation facilities for the area are to be designed and constructed to provide desired safe access to metropolitan transportation corridors and facilities while providing a combination of a choice in transportation mode to and within the area, while at the same time minimizing adverse environmental or other conditions and improving the safety for persons regardless of their mode of travel" (page 10). The proposed addition is detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the Community. k. The proposed addition is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Diversified Development District Guide Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. 1. The applicant has not demonstrated that there is no suitable alternative location for the proposed addition. 7. The contents of Planning Case File 91 -27 -SP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. CONCLUSION The applicant's request for a special permit to permit the construction of an 8,000 square foot addition to store hazardous waste at 1625 Zarthan Avenue is hereby denied based on the Findings and Conclusions set forth above. Adopted by the City Council September 3, 1991 ATTEST: Reviewed for administration: City Manager 91-27-DEN:RES4 Approved as to form and execution: eLLL C Ci y Attorney