11-26-1996 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 1996 Page 7 . ability to remodel or expand his business, and that it unfairly singles out specific businesses. There being no further comments from the public, Chair Thompson closed the public hearing. Steve Ach explained that no conditional use permit review would be required for internal remodeling of a restaurant, but it would be required for an addition. Mr. Bell argued that restaurant owners are already required to comply with state building and health codes and the conditional use permit is unnecessary. Commissioner Mesich expressed his concern that the city would be putting a barrier up for sit-down restaurants that would like to locate here. Steve Ach explained that there may be issues associated with a restaurant having live entertainment and a liquor license that could have a significant impact on a neighborhood which could be addressed through the conditional use permit process. Mr. Bell questioned why only the C3 district was chosen and not the other commercial districts. Scott Harlicker noted that currently hotels/motels and class I restaurants are allowed as a conditional use in the C4, a permitted use in the Cl and C3, and not allowed at all in the C-2 (office district) zoning district. . Commissioner Minton suggested the ordinance amendment apply to the Cl district as well. Commissioner Sullivan questioned why hotels and motels are included in the proposed amendment. Steve Ach explained there may be issues such as density, hours of operation and again traffic. Since in most of the C3 areas, there is no buffer zone, there may be a need for special conditions to lessen or at least review the impact to neighboring residential zoned property, which could be accomplished through a conditional use permit. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF ELK RIVER'S REQUEST FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING HOTELS/MOTELS AND CLASS I RESTAURANTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE C3 AND C1 ZONING DISTRICTS, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. OA 96-16. COMMISSIONER TACHENY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION FAILED 3-4. COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON, MESICH, SULLIVAN AND KUESTER OPPOSED. 6~3. ..........AAAert3dH...p8rtdB@.telecoAAReguest.f8rRez8hlh~..t8AT(ArltehHdO"erldvl. .. ...[)istrt8f,puBli8RedtlHdCdseNo.ZG96..2a_DiscussioH28Htihlled. ..... ............................ . Scott reviewed concerns of the city regarding the coverage maps, why co- location on the AT&T tower is not possible, the impact on neighboring residential property, and why a mono pole is not being considered. Scott noted to the applicant that their letters were not received in time to include in the Planning Commission I s packets and were distributed tonight.