Laserfiche WebLink
recommendation fro:': ti~at of the Piannin~ and Zoning Commission. From a land use <br />aspect, the proposed expansion is no~ a signficam change to a use that was approved by <br />City Council ip, 1988: anc~ the si~c p)an proposes devclopmem that vdll be an improvement <br />to thc site and address some of the existin7 problems. <br /> <br />Mr. Robert Wojcik referred to the Staff recommendation that the lots be consolidated into <br />one parcel and stated that he would prefer to keep the lots separate to provide him the <br />flexibility to market them as such in the future; also in the best interest of marketing the <br />subjec~ properties in thc future, he requesting being able to retain two accesses onto Hwy. <br />#10. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartlev recalled that when the conditional use permit was discussed in 1988 that <br />applies to the existing operation, Council instructed the applicants to block their accesses <br />during off-business hours to avoid drive through, short-cuI maneuvers that drivers make. <br />Obviously, Council did no~ anticipate the other traffic hazard that results when potential <br />customers park in the road right-of-way during off-business hours. <br /> <br />Mr. Robert Wojcik referred to the concern expressed regarding accumulation of inoperable <br />vehicles and stated that he has upgaded his facility and he is willing to have his operation <br />inspected periodically. <br /> <br />Mr. Hanlev stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission has some valid concerns; the <br />Planning ~ommission and the City Council are both interested in providing for quality <br />development; the applicant is interested in improving the site; the City should t23.' to work <br />with the applicant while maintaining certain standards. <br /> <br />Councilmember DeLuca stated that he can understand the applicants to desire to keep the <br />parcels as separate lots of records with accesses onto Hwy. #10; arrangements should be <br />made to only utilize the western most driveway during operation of the site as a used <br />vehicle sales lot. Councilmember DeLuca questioned the validity of proposed findings of <br />fact #17,822 and #23 and noted that facts #25 and #26 are conflicting. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich stated that from a legal aspect, he is concerned with ganting a conditional <br />use permit and denying an expansion that represents a minor change in the operation. <br /> <br />Motion by Councflmember Pearson and seconded by Councilmember Cich to indicate ~hat <br />C/ty Council is considering approving Robert and Louis Wojcik's request for a conditional <br />use permit to expand Ramsey Auto Sales and to refer the case back to the Planning and <br />Zoning Commission for input regarding appropriate terms to be included in the conditional <br />use permit. Further, that like the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council has <br />particular concern with off-street parking being provided for during off-business hours. <br /> <br />Further Discussion: Councilmember Peterson stated that he doesn't feel the site plan has <br />really addressed the issue of safety. Councilmember DeLuca stated that the presence of <br />Ramsey Auto Sales is not creating a unique traffic situation at Cry. 56 and Hwy. #10; the <br />same traffic situation exists at Cry. Rd. #57 and Hwy. #10. Councilmember Peterson <br />questioned whether the City could trust the Wojciks not to begin accumulating inoperable <br />vehicles again. Ms. Frolik noted that City Staff has initiated a request that the State post <br />'no parking' signs along Hwy. #10. Mr. Goodrich stated that the concern for <br /> <br />City Council/August 8, 1989 <br /> Page 6 of 10 <br /> <br /> <br />