Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 1988-005CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the day of Januar , 1988. The following members were present: Mayor Schne eir-ouncilme ers as ou, RlcTe-r, titur and Sisk following members were absent: None Councilmember Vasiliou Introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION 88-05 DENYING REQUEST TO AMEND THE APPROVED SITE PLAN RESOLUTION FOR JERRY JENSEN, LYNDALE TERMINAL FOR HOLIDAY PLUS STORE, 4445 NATHAN LANE (83025) WHEREAS, Jerry Jensen, Lyndale Terminal, has requested approval for an amendment to Resolution No. 83-354 which approves the Site Plan and seeks to extend the business hours for the Holiday Plus store located at 4445 Nathan Lane by eliminating Condition No. 10 in Resolution No. 83-354; and, WHEREAS, the City Council considered this request on October 5, 1987 and directed that the Planning Commission conduct a hearinq to include persons who expressed an interest In the project at the original meetings r._rarding the Site Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request at a Public Hearing on November 10, 1987 and and recommended denial; and, WHEREAS, City Council considered the matter on November 23, 1987 and on December 14, 1987, when the matter was continued at the petitioner's request; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MIN- NESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the request by Jerry Jensen, Lyndale Term- inal, to amend Resolution No. 83-354 which approves the Site Plan for Holiday Plus store located at 4445 Nathan Lane, based on the following: 1. The facility represents a retail operation which includes a range of merchandise much broader than that offered in grocery stores. 2. The limited hours of operation were originally set to reduce the site impact, Including noise and lights, upon the residential neighborhood, and the circum- stances have not changed. 3. Approving this request could set an undesirable precedent regarding other com- mercial uses where it has been determined hours are needed to mitigate site impact. PLEASE SEE PAGE TWO Page two Resolution No. 88-05 4. The original approval under Resolution No. 83-354, approving the Site Plan, and this action is consistent with the November 5, 1987 opinion by the City's Attorney. 5. The applicant did not object to Condition No. 10 in Resolution No. 83-354 at the time the Resolution was adopted and did open for business knowing that the hours of operation would be limited to those set forth in that Resolution. The appli- cant has not demonstrated any changed circumstances that would justify eliminating Condition No. 10. The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Zitur 'and upon vote being taken thereon, the o ow nq vote n favor thereof: a or ei nder, Courclimembers Vasiliou, Ricker and Zitur eo ow ng voted against or a sta ned: Councilmem er Sisk Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.