The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 02/16/1972 - 7407� � _ A G E N D A , PLANNING COMMISSI4N MEETING FEBRUARY 16, 1972 8s00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: _ PAGES APPROVE PLANNING CONIMISSION MINUTES: FEBRUARY 9, 1972 1.. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUE5T, z0A ��72-02 BY 1-3 __ ROBERT L. MC GREGOR: To rezone from R-1 to R-2 (limited multiple family dwellings) the North 824.i feet of the W� ^ ' af the NE� of the NF� of Section 13. Public hearing closed. 2. STUDY: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Please bring your copy to the meeting. 1�'1 � � � �. CITY OF FRIDLEY MINNESOTA YLANNING AND ZONING FORM Numb�r Zv/�- r7 Z,.-. c�2> APPLICANT' 3 SIGNATURE c�z.� 6C •�.�_,..,.—. Address ,2�-.��" �:1��:.;-r 32.�:ic `� �- ' - -�-�-� _ 2� � -- S /�� . , s r . M�,; , �� ' S: ^� � Ji��✓ Telephone Nu�i�er %� -�71�.� ,��.s : � ��= 261f Pa::s. 7 , �'�-� °� �i1 � �C� PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE TYPE OF REQUEST V „�Retoning Special Uae Ycttait - Varisnce Lot Splits Apgroval of Pre- Z�m�nary p1$t Approval of Final Plet Streeta ar plley�-_._, Addreas Vacatiotss Telephone Number Other Street Locntion af'Protaertv /�r� - �j� Legal Description of . Property N c3 ��,'J �'�.� � a� t.� {C4 �� T�c�- � �:.. ��¢ � �- ��_ ��. % o ��-- � - , � C_ (t Oi.1 ��J Lc=c'cf,�:=�c+'. p � c. +�4�� '- � . � ��, �;F��,�� to:� �� , I��: o.� ��',�. \a��, 1�4� . Present Z�n�g�. Cl�asefffca�tion �- � , . Existinp Use 'of the Property �/ i�-�_ r�,� T . Proposed 2o�ing �la�sification, Special Use, Variance or other xequest -�.. D�scrtbe brie£Iy the Type of Use and the Improvem�nt Propoaed � e�., u i�c�v 3% `�J ��i F_ �-- o� 1� t i.� � Acr@�tge of Fropercty �v � 2 �-� s iis�.�th� Pr�s�t-.A�plicant-Previoualy Saught to Rezone, Plat, O�tain a Lot Split, Obtain a Varir�nce or Sp�ci�l Use Permit on the Subject Site or Part af it?� When? � What was Requested Fee Enclosed $i D S�'S�C� Date Ffled Dat@ of Henrin�_ 7 rl.EUVivltv�; Atvll GUNtNG FURM , d � Nnmber 7-�,��I�—o v" � The undersigned understands that: (a) (bj (c ) Residents and 4wners of �'roperty withfn �'ERSON5 l�jr._& Mrs. Leslie J. Tikkanen Mr. & rs. �,�x�ald Germundson l�j�- �„�'j7'3��: A�,,�n L . [di lliams PACE 2 . A list of all residents and owners of pro- perty �iithin 300 feet must be attached to this applicatfon. This application must be signed by �ll a4Jners of tha property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. Responsibiliry for any defect in the pro- ceedings �esul.tin� from the-failure.to list the names �`nd addre�ses of all resideats And pxoperty o4�r�ers of property within 300 feet of the prap�ri:y in question, belongs to the undersi�ned. 300 fcet:�. ADDRESS 1400 64th Ave. N.E. 1390 County-Raad H 94i 86th Avenue N.W. - Coon Rapids Irj�,,,�„F,�„y� F,;_„�'o,��,�en,,,,; 3345 University Ave. S.E. - Mpls. 55414 AD��,c�„fe��r��ers Builders. Inc. T„��jeo��d�gt Schoc�l District #14 1052 Osborne Road ' . 6000 West Moore Lake Drive ^ A aketch�of praposed properCy and structure must be dra��n on the back of this form or 8ttached, showing the follo�oi.ng: 1. ;VorCh Directfon � 2. Locatioa of Proposed Structuze on 2ot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed � s[ruCtur�, and frant and side set-back�t. . 4. Street Names S. Location und use of adjacent existing � buildings (within 300 feet). The ttndersfgn�d hereby dec2ares'that a12 the fac- anc� representations state�d in this appl:'t�cation are true and correct, . , DA3Z' _ ,, .�-/ � 8IG1vATURE � ,_ �-�c: �� ---� ', , .�.' �`�' .� �-�.,' �? •. f �: , . _.�_..a..�. �APPLICANT) /''� `� . .•• ... �• �.: . • . . �..,:% /�1 - tt �Y �k st x aIt '�ir �tr �k Approved Deni�d By the ;oa�d n� Sppea�s Subject.to the Fo2lowin� Conditions; date Approved Denied by the Plannin� Commission on Subject to the �ollo��ing Co�ditia�s; '`��e Approued Denied by the Council or� Subject to the Follo��ing Conditions: � date Form PC 100 : � � � . _ � _. . . . . . _ . . .. .�. . ._ _ . . 1'y s�:._, .. ZOA' �72-02: Robt. L. McGregor Rezone from R-I to R-2 for :.- . Townhouses. � � . . Abaut 1500 Block on 69th Ave. . . . ' -- /� . N £ CC,= • �I�� SEC. . �""F� �� i� -�`�I[�� =-;t=•_L� �. a:•—a�f:Y sVV�� T-�i-- —KO�� - N�r � ..._7' — — _.i•,.3 r -T . . . : . , .. . , t . • . � � . . . ... . . . , . . , . . . I . ' . . ' . . .. ... . . . . . .. .. _ ._ . ` J'\ _r_� ;_z�I� �i`:� -- _, ._,. .�� S �: t �:��-: r , r� ��► 'is �E�� 20�; ` ;3t' , ` f�-� �2> � :�. ,,� , � ;�� I , ,;� • `0 �� % v:a ,� � � , I � �; `i � � .. ` • 1 . . . . ' . : C ' � a� ; q`i .' . �T. .j.. �• / --- �� e 4�• I � y : . � � �� i . . � . i L�, o �, ��'i- °- ? a1 . f � Q � �-- % � - :. • �.,� � �- . . • W/a�/l1l.�ilr/e�,n�uE (7oS�� . � � ! � � JKn��if �ti .!r's''�i � � ,. � a..:� . ' . ►.'S�rrrfs,Jr.IG�d�J�r.S%�r�t . `: � t t : ° , f�izvP�'i'`f '�• .�-lT+�' J _ �•:. '; . . � i# %a) o � '!�'n� A° • ��J� � . ir%��/r-� 1 .. � • . . i , . • � o. � � r � . � �E . ��►' � ' � � �` r PF ;` � ' ` �*, � � � 1'lJ � `'� / . ' . �a � � � I � ' �` �o � fzn) • �. �� .f" � � f- i O¢.sa/ !.sli jrrf � � w , ~ " .-�,._v. � � . . •' � � � , .,...- . .. � pv�ar �'.�.. i,. � �` !" Yt'E � � ,,..; z . i �`' ` � 1 J � / � • Q� I .� , �/ � � � � ., � � �p . R fi :? � ..�, ''� �`°� i � -- - �� ' ti _ — :,.» - . . r «.:,, ' t � a . . . . . . rN�.(<�1 .�• �`, t i. Ge ; . , .� � nn.�r � !� JJ<a � lirs�' ��.a. % 'y y ✓k ' , ` . • ~fs�if� ��«,P i �,�<��r1-��OQ�.• zr' z �� 2�; �t r3 . ! �; 2� 3 .._ {{� '� � 2 >' � 'A�� jI '' �.- �f � �� qc:f.wy.'IJ+ J 1 .. I �� ' ' �� i B ^---''= 2B .�;L'..� 1 r�a` a. � � .. I .1J �.� trI � u � X� f' 3 27 �' ¢ � f �} t�i a�� ' � /t-� :66 I/2 AYE. _ N.E. = tt L6r �ao�a► I � oao) �e I,_y.�l✓Q:� , Zt 6 6 r�z•�. c� .�s� ,�,. _�„- ' � � `�-�" f� i -�:,� ' � I � �� C ( �,;, -'°' � kt�� (/3�� j. i i, T'lti 24 �' �1 � � �'--S',�_J :. � ;u�� }•��_ 7`�`�.. �.."�'�+=,�� ,� �' 2' .,' � aQ � i3 ��t . 13 �=i�„►J � '�` �/�' e2� � `I 1 �j, %} p �..,., .f �_�it�Lj,..ii �� L� 3 j2 g 22 i,l} 9 r� � � � � ; � W `i� J �`l 1�� I , ' l.��y I ' • 3y O . �fl1i . •,(_ �ill�_.i Ili _ • --A_+_— ` z� .�o ri io �o tLl9 '�(J `�J =1 t�; G i� � I t 1 20 _// ZO / :/ �;..�. ,,a � j,';-� !. } �� /9 _� ,/'Z /9 !2 :'2 �` 'Z � 4, � (/�~. i � �r, ti' �. i • a U� n„�1,. �i . n . ! � ;� � � �. �,� . 6�1`� N��4 •�Fi �• �`� i �C� �V�� ; �� %4 _ !i ,/.j `7 Vi �t} t,"'1 �/ �---- � � .�- -� _-�;,� �.., /' :5 C� L..S 7t� i tt ii ►�✓j ai " r� � s� !' V p 2 � ;^y i/G , i�. : .r• . � �... � ^ � � � a �i (� ,� t `� � . : � � � I ��S.rO"i srNJ ,�� a :� v Q�" w{ �� I a 66 7 H ti! AVt. N. E. : . �. � {� � 1 �� ' � � ti t.,`..��,.%_ � . .c.Tti � -�•j�.�l � � ^� Yt . ,1 - s� w.� .. r• .. .�.• � "=_. �ot:� ` t`� \ 7 i=� �� ' +a ,��. ��(, 1`'�00� ti !'J . �j� _ /` : lJ =o / ��.1`,j' + • ' ,i � �� _} �_`�� V3�� i/sz�).. -�1;0 �� 1�� iil v(' � �� 2� � z sy ��- L1 = �-17J!_�'�.� \ 'r '�'�r� �� v f n_1�'Sj'��` a� <` IjC �i� 5Li (. _b, 3 -� f'' -�3 F-' 3 � a ,2� , ��, � �rsrJ �,,rs_�� r� �� hru') � (/.r:c� t7 4 }= '� 4 fn � t�,i,s, • � ` ` -- rr (1 , �p' � 1 ir.. �j.. .,.�r , J � I � � --- - N �� L. St.. .V !14 C � r'��.� tr'l._= _ h./�J�a.�t.�/.., ,,'"�� I, :..!_ � I [L' _' — � �— � W 4 ^ jI' � `^3 � ✓� - . � � f . _._ � �'.� � IfI'. — � a� � � d� 7 a 4 7 J 9 _�'`� I �_ � � '��\ �� 13 _ C.T � 23 Ff �I- _ �a'� _` L,�r�`; ��l_,'= C/ � � f- � .,;,� ;. .7 ,' o . ,, �< <, a z? - , Q j- .� � � --- = � � :'` • t�> > : . 1,.._ ! � ^ �„ � � �1 .o _, .e ,� _� , . �.` - �• . . - -- -- r V.,�- ,, fst:) � tA' Q ;; �� I ? I � � 20 _ :/ zo // /' (r�:: ^d� �^o _ '�� f� + '�d��l�i�' i.i��vl .a�q. +.� �� /'f)aa) . —_ ; /9 _ - ---- -- , <e+l, ;. .. S �..i.�a ' ,.L-'_`✓J = - _ �' , � 5 %2 �9 �z iz ,: n .. . �_ - —11�_..7.— �' : 'L : � `�'`ti� � /B /3 /bt_ /3 J � d � ; ?�..::.� ..�� ; to �� 4 ? l�h� 2 LL / � �.: � � "v ��J � ��_ _. � ,r� _�� ,a ' � 9 a ; � ,. wt� 1�ri� �� '�' �' ��e t / � /�S i ae i /G /!. �0 1 �,�i�.- ... � , � „ � . _ . . � � '• '' ��" i ��lt_--��1�_-C:�!L'_r_._ �r� �_-��.-�i-'�---�^�rs_�_uei�_t�_ . .,_ . ---------� � pLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY FEBRUARY 9, 1972 PAGE 1 The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Fitzpatrick at 8:15 P.M. ROI,L CALL : ___-_._� Members Present: Minish, Zeglen, Fitzpatrick, Schmedeke Member Absent: � Chairman Erickson Others Present: Darrel Clark, Engineering Assistant APPROVE PLANNING CONIlKISSION MINUTESs JANUARY 12 1972 MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the Planning Commission minutes of January 12, I972 be approved. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. � . RECEIVE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: DECEMBER ZO 1971 � MOTION by Minish, seconded by Schmedeke, that the Planning Commission receive the minutes of the Parks & Recreation Commission meet.ing of December 20, 1971. Upon a voice vote, a.I1 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. ^ - RECEIVE BUILDING STANDARDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOMMZZZ'TEE MINUTESt JANUARY 13 1972 MbTION by Zeglen, seconded by Schmedeke, that the Planning Commission receive the minutes of the Building Standards-Design Contxol Subcommittee meeting of January 13, 1972. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Acting Chairman Fitzpatrick stated that, with the approval of the Commission members, Item �1 will be deferred until the petitioner arrives and Item ��2 will be the first on the Agenda. � � 1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: RE UEST FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP �71-17 DON'S GULF SERVICE STATION: Request for U-Haul rentals on Easterly 351 feet of Lot 12 and Easterly 351 feet of the Southerly 20 feet of Lot 11, Auditor's Subdivision ��155 except that part taken for highway and street purposes, per Code Section 45.101, 6, 3-E, zoned C-2S. � Donald J. Michaels, applicant, and Gerald Rummel, attorney for U-Haul were present. 2. � C.D. Hu CE STATION: Request for U-Hau1 rentals on Lots 1 ana �, tslocx �, inson Addition per Code Section 45.101, B,3-E, zoned C-2. Ronald J. Plomdon, applicant, and Mr. Rummel were present. s.ion Meeting - February 9_, _1972 2 Mr. Schmedeke said that he hadn't changed his mind since the last meeting �. regarding U-Hau1. trailers being parked in service stations. He had checked with ^ a number of people and the majority would prefer to have the U-Haul people come in as a segarate business and operate as a separate enterprise. He did not think the Gommission should be cluttering up the service stations with this tyge of activity. He knew of a man who was a trailer rental operator and did a great busi- ness. He didn't think the Fridley service stations are designed or planned to acco�odate trailers. There is a trailer rental on 50th Avenue and University, so that a person would not have to go too far to zent a trailer. He would favorably consider an application from U-Haul for a separate place o€ business. On 61st Avenue-and University there was an EZ Haul in the service station. The station was told to move the trailers which they did. If U-Haul is�allowed to come in, pretty soon the service stations will be in the rental business. That is something we do not aeed. /'� /'� Mr. Minish asked if there were any stations with special use permits granted to rent trailers. Mr. Clark answered there is one Gu1f Station on 73rd Avenue and Central Avenue, which was actually a relocation, and happens to be U-Haul, and the Commission will be getting a request from them very soon. The other one is on 62nd Avenue and Highway ��65, the Texaco Station across from the bowling alley. The Texaco station was in business before the ordinance required the special use permit. Mr. Minish then asked that if, when you move, is the grandfather clause no longer in effect? If that is so, why are the people on 73rd and Central allowed a special privilege? Mr. Clark said these are the people who will be coming in within a few waeks asking for a special use permit. Asked about at Osborne Road Highway 4�47. other companies applying, Mr. Clark said Ryder Truck might apply and Highway ��47 and EZ Haul wi11 be applying at 61st Avenue and Mr. Zeglen said that he, too, agreed that the U-Haul is a business in itself. He would not have any objections if they occupied a place of business of their own, but if you let one trailer rental in, you have to Iet another. Some are going to be husy, some not so busy. • Mr. Minish said the City has an ordinance that �ras drafted with minimum criteria. They tried to get away from storage on service station property. There seems to be very little difference between this operation and sale of camping trailers. fle felt that they should have either an arbitrary restriction or a separate location for the operation. Mr. Rummel arrived and Acting Chairman Fitzpatrick explained to him that the item under consideration was the request for U-Haul trailer permits. The gist of the statements so far has been that several of the Commissioners would not have any objecti.ons to a business of this kind operating individually as its own business rather than renting out to a s2rvice station, and another state- ment was that there is a question if this kind of permit is issued would it set a pattern. We would have a number of the same kind of requests from other companies. That pretty much summarizes the discussion at this point. .. , � -� - Fehruary 9, 1972 Page 3 Mr. Fitzpatrick said that even though the public hearing has been closed,.if ^��' ��there is anything new or pertinent, the Commission wi11 hear it at this time. Y _` ,. Mr. Rummel said that in order to run a business strictly on a rental of U-Hau1 trucks and trailers, it is virtually impossible unless you have a huge . operation -- 50 pieces of equipment or more and a volume turn over on that type of equipment. Otherwise it is not economically possible to run it. Strictly on that type of business, U-Haul has found in the 25 years they have been in business, it does not work out. Where they put in a limited number of pieces of equipment in the service station, and where the equipment can be serviced by the operator, it gives the operator additional income. Going Co the other way, it has not worked, -otherwise he was sure U-Haul would be renting the trailers themselves. They have tried it in some Iocations and have gone out of business. In the seven years he has represented them in this metropolitan area, they have had the same type of control either through leasing or special use permit. Through controls, there has been screening, designated area where equipment is being kept. With these controls, if there were violations, the.rental contract can be closed. They have controls • with the contract, too. � They reali.ze problems wi11 come up even with controls as with.any type of _ business, not just service staCions. There have been 3 ar 4 stations that have been closed down by.II-Haul. Mr. Sc�imedeke said he did not think any of the members of the Commission were _ trying to pick on II-flaul in any sense of the word. When a permit for a station comes in, the people applying never tell us that they are going to put in U-Hau1. � Sa we have felt we are not interested going inta that type of thing. We are not picki�tg on your company. You have a franchise on.50th Avenue, one in the other end of the City and another under the grandfather clause. -_ Mr. Rummel said he would not disagree with that viewpoint._ If an operator could, under a special use permit, screen off the area, and the station is not _a messy operation, he did not see where this is really too objectionable. It is the individual operator who lives in the Gity who wants to make a living operating a station. He has got to meet the overhead and wants to make a living. He can gick ug some additional income this way and it can make the difference of being in business. You may feel you have too many stations, but I assume you would not Iike to have a lot of them shut down and sitting there vacant. , Mr. Zeglen said that the station on SOth A�enue was, the last time he was there, a mess -- trailers were moved all over the glace. He did not know what kind of inspection II-Haul has, but this situation could happen any place. Mr. Rununel was asked if it would be possible to put the trailers under a roof. He answered that U-Haul is trying to offer a service to people.where they can go ahead and economicaliy move themselves. They can't be put under a roof, it would be too expensive. Mr. Minish said that one point which has some validity and the Commission should be eoncerned, was the idea this is a service to the community for others besides U-Haul. In considering the granting of these requests, he wondered if they were tabled until after there were requests by others. � Chairman Fitzpatrick.said that along the lines af the opening statement, he agreed and rejected the idea that we can assume our neighboring suburbs will ..` Planning Commission Meeting - February 9, 1972 � Pa�e 4 supply the service. We have tried to set up a criteria for the operation of filling stations and we might be one of the first to reverse this recommendation. � It was noted there were three requests for U-Haul, one request would be coming in for EZ Aaul, and there prabably will be one coming in for Ryder Trucks. MOTION by Schmedelce, seconded by Minish, that the Planning Commission recom- mend to Council approval of the continuous use of Don's Gu1f 5ervice for gasoline sales, under the request of a 5pecial Use Permit, SP #71-17, on the Easterly 351 feet af Lot I2 and EasterZy 351 feet of the 5outherly 20 feet of Lot .i1, Auditor's Subdivision #155 except that part taken for highway and street purposes, per Code Section 45.101, 6, 3-E, zoned C-2S. Upon a voice vote, a1I voting a�e, the motion carried unanimously. • MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the PZanning Gommissior� recom- arent denial to the Council for that part of the Special Use Request by Don's Gu1f Service Station, SP #7Z-17, for the rental of U-Hau1 trailers on the Easterly 35Z feet of Lot 12 and EasterZy 35Z feet of the Southerly 20 feet of Lot,1Z, Auditor's Subdivision #I55 except that part taken for highway and street purposes, per.Code Section 45.101, 6, 3-E, zoned C-2S. Upon a voice vote, a1I voting aye, the motion carried unanimousZy. Mr. Minish asked if this denial would refer to this specific situation or to all requests. When a building permit is issued for a service station in Fridley, he was sure they do not have this type of use in mind. Most stations do not have enough parking space for trailers. If this request is O.K.'d, they will get at least two other Gulf Stations demanding similar treatment. In Don's Gulf the � proximity to Target Store and all the traffic on 53rd Avenue during the rush.hours would not be desirable. Mr. Rummel added that as to the reasons given, you might consider this, whether or not you consider it valid enough. Every community that he has been where a conditioned use or lease has been allowed, U-Haul can't encroach upon the aff street parking necessary for the station. The stations have been given so many parking spaces for employee cars, cars being serviced and that area can't be used for parking by U-Haul equipment. U-Haul realizes when they apply for an application, they were not going to get into a location where there isn't room to allow for the off street for the station itself. It won't work out because it is encroaching and over erowding. MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Minish, that the PZanning Commission recom- mend approval of that part of the Special Use Permit, SP #71-18, by Ron's Gu1f Service Station to the Council for the continuous use of Ran's Gu1f Service Station as an qasoline outlet on Lots 1 and 2, B1ock Z, C. D. Hutchinson Addition per Code Seetior� 45.10I, B, 3-E, zoned C-2. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. • . MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the PZanning Commission recom- mend denial of the Special Use Permit Request, SP #71-18, br� Ron's Gu1f Service Station for U-Haul rentals on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, C. D. Hutchinson Addition per Code Section 45.101, B, 3-E, zoned C-2. ^ The comment was made that if the Commission approves this permit, they would be letting themselves in`for a flood of requests for every service station site in the City o£ Fridley. Meeting - Februa�y 9, 197 e 5 UPON A VOICE VOTE, Zeglen, Schmedeke voting aye, Minish and Fitzpatrick voting • nay, the MOPION FAILED. ,� Mr. Mi,nish said he felt different about this station because of the location. The Co�unission should consider whether the use of this type should be allowed at one or more of the locations as a service to the citizens. It has been indicated that there will be another request for a Special Use Permit for U-Hau1 rentals on • Central Avenue. He would like to consider this request in relation to the other one. This may give the Commission time to see if EZ Haul would apply. He would like to have this portion of the request tabled. � MOTION by Minish that the Planning Commission table until March 8, 1972 the Special Use Permit request, SP #71-18, by Ron's Gu1f Service Station for U-Hau1 rentals on Lofs 1 and 2, Block 1, C. D. Hutchinson Addition per Code 5ection 45.101, B, 3-E, zoned C-2, to see if, in the interval, other applications have been indicated that they wi11 be filed and consider other sites and number of operations the Citg would Zike to have. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF 5ECOND. Chairman Fitzpatrick said the action then would�be for the Planning Commission to pass this request on to the Council without action and the minutes should show that these motions were made for the second request being a permit for U-Haul rentals. � � The petitioner-was informed Council would receive his request on February 28, � 1972. Mr. Minish said for the time he has been on the Planning Commission they have had several requests for service station sites. He has always wondered if the City doesn't already have too many stations and that it would be difficult for them to make a substantial prof it. Now we hear that station operators need additional means of income to stay open. We should keep in mind what we heard tonight. 3. PUBLIC HEARING• REZONING REQUEST, ZOA ��72-01, BY ALVIN A. NITSCHKE: To . rezone from R-1 to R-3, Outlot �i�l, Rice Creek Pl.aza South and Lot 32, Block 4, Lowe11 Addition to Fridley Park together with the vacated street lying between the before mentioned parcels. Mr. Nitschke was present. MOTION by Schmedeke,'seconded bg Minish, that the Planning Commission waive the reading of the Official Notice for the Public Hearing of the Rezoning Request, 20A #72-01, by Alvin A. Nitschke to rezone from R-I to R-3 (general multiple family dwellings) Outlot #1, Rice Creek P1aza 5outh and Lot 32, B1ock 4, Lowe11 Addit.ion to Fridley Fark together with the vacated street lying between the before mentioned parcels. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimous�y. Mr. Clark said that about a yea,r ago Mr. Nitschke applied for a special use permit to build a double bungalow and was involved with trading of lands where � the City traded a portion..of its property with Mr. Nitschke. This Cransaction has taken place. He has deeded the amount of the property as agreed to. ; �Ylannin Commission Meetin - Februar 9 1972 Pa e 6 � He will receive the City's deed for the 20 foot Outlot. He wants to build a three • family townhouse type of building on the same lot as contained in the special use .� � permit. He did not proceed with the special use request. The land area is in excess of 10,000 square feet which is large enough for a triplex and R-3 zoning does a11ow a triplex. ' Mr. Nitschke explained that he did ha�e some of the elevations.and Darrel • saw them. Unfortunately the architect was using them to complete the plans. The structure will be a townhouse, quite similar to the type that is being built � now, the front court provincial type. There will be five parking places, two double garages and additional parking space in between. He will be living in one of the units. He would try to make it look as nice as possible as it is not a speculative project. .He changed the request because it would be more economical to have a triplex. _ Mr. Clark said he had seen the plans. The garages are on the front of the living area. There is a court between the garages and houses. The only thing he would want to comment on was the front yard would be mostly blacktop or concrete. He continued that the building site is 80'x136'. There is a two family structure in the block to the North, the Park is to the South, single family dwellings off Mississippi Street and across the street the land is zoned light industrial. There are apartments on 2nd Street. MOTTON by Sohmedeke, seconded by Zeqlen, that the Public Hearing be closed for the Rezoning Request, ZOA #72-OZ, by A1vin A. Nitschke. Upon a voice vote, ^' aI1 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Minish, seconded by Schmedeke, that the PZanning Cormnission recom- mend to Council denial of the rezoning request, ZOA #72-01, by A1vin A. Nitschke to rezone from R-1 to R-3 (general muZtiple family dwellings) Outlot #1, Rice Creek PZaza South and Lot 32, Block 4, Lowe11 Addition to Fridley Park together with the vacated street lying between the before mentioned parcels, for the following reasons: This request is out of keeping with the rest of the block which is residentiaZ with one double unit; objects to blacktop facing the street; the proximity of the park and the extz� cars this triplex would have makes it undesir- able because the park does not have enough street parking area; and is inconsis- tent with surrounding one and two family residences. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 4. PUSLIC HEARING• REZONING REQUEST, ZOA 4�72-02, BY ROBERT L. MC GREGOR: To rezone from R-1 to R-2 (limited multiple family dwellings) the North 824.7 feet of the West Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13. ' Mr. McGregor and Mr. F1oyd Foslien were present. MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Minish, that the Planning Commission waive the readinq of the Public Hearing notice for the rezoning request, ZOA #72-02, by Robert L. McGregor. Upon a voice vote, a11 votinq aye, the motion carried ^ unanimously. _ . , � si.on Meeting - 197 � Mr. MeGregor explained that they are proposing to put in a townhouse project. � ► Suburban Engineering has been employed to do the general layout. He has known .^ about the property for some time and he has been a resident of Fridley for ten qears. He consulted the designer, Herb Fritz, who worked with Frank Lloyd Wright, but they wiZ1 use a structural engineer licensed in Minnesota for the townhouse project. ^ The groject will be called Timber Ridge. They plan to dig out an area and create a series of ponds going down to the creek. They would pump water out of the creek into the pond and then drain back down to the creek by gravity so it will look like a stream. The alternative would be to dig a well to supply water to this pond and discharge the excess water into the creek. In the winter they would close the lock�and make two skating ponds for the children and gut up a warming house for the children. Qriginally in the greliminary drawing the idea was to front the townhouses on the gonds, but they might want the entrances to exit on 69th Avenue. Mr. McGregor continued that R-2 zoning would give them 43 townhouses on this property. They would deed property below the 890 contour to the City for park. That would be a little over 1QI of the area they own. Mr. Clark said that this was the Kaye Westerlund.request and was agproved for R-3 zoning for 109 units providing he wauld dedicate the Southerly 60 feet and purchase the 0utlot from Mr. Foslien, and deed it to the City also. Another stipulation was to dedicate 17 feet along the Easterly edge of this parcel to go together with the 33 feet of land we got from the East. Mr. McGregor said there would be no problem to give Iand for a common road. ..This would make a second egress from their property to the road. They plan to have the townhouses owner occupied and a.townhouse association type of arrange- ment. There will be a double car garage, either "drive under" or "attach to" and there wi11 be no single car garages. Mr. Clark said the request meets the townhouse ordinance requirement in density. The area next to this property (Roger Larson �ownhouse development) is R-3 and the density is considerably higher. �� . Mr. Foslien said that this looks like a nice project. M4TION by l�linish, seconded by Zeglen, that the Planning Commission close the public hearing of the Rezoning Request, ZOA #72-02, by Robert L. McGregor to rezone fxom R-Z to R-2 (Zimited multiple family dwellinqs) the North 824.7 feet of the West Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section I3. Upon a voice vote, a.Z1 voting aye, the motion carried unanimousl�. Mr. Schmedeke said that being a Iayman on this type o£ construction, he would like to make a motion to table the item until Mr. Erickson, being a builder in his own right, gets a look at it. • MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by ZegZen, that the P.Zanning Commission table the rezoninq request, ZOA #72-02, by Robert McGregor until the meeting of � February 16, 1972. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. sion Meeting February 9, 1972 Page 8 5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING• REZONING REQUEST, ZQA ��71-10, BY MR:S_._LLOYA ,'1 MURPHY: To rezone from C-1S to C-2 (general businc�ss areas) the Westerly � Half of Lot 18, Block l, Spring Valley Addition for a miniature golf ' putting course. The petitioner was not present. At the last meeting, the.request was made to write the City Attorney for an answer to the question if it would be possible to grant a Special Use Permit under C-1 zoning. Darrel Clark said an answer was received from the City Attorney. His opinion was "no". The letter was included in the Agenda on Page 19. Mr. Minish saidithat because there is no provision under the present zoning, that the request can`t be granted by a Special Use Permit. Chairman Fitzpatrick suggested recommending an amendment to the zoning ordinance. Mr. Schmed�eke asked Darrel Clark if he had requested Peter Herlofsky to write the letter to the City Attorney and Darrel answered "that was correct". Mr. Schmedeke then read an excerpt from the Planning CoIIUnission meeting of January 12, 1972 at the top of Page 5t "MOTION by Minish, seconded by Schmedeke, that the Planning Commission table the rezoning request, ZOA ��71-10 ----- and ask the:; City Attorney whether or not a Special Use Permit could be granted under C-1S zoning for this request --." He read the last paragraph of the letter from the City Attorney found on Page 5 of the Agenda: "That ff the zoning ordinance permits certain uses of property in C-2 and C-2S districts by special use permit and the zoning ordinance does not state that the same use is permitted in C-1 � districts, that the omission is intentional and, therefore, not permitted." Mr. Schmedeke said he did not want to be pursuaded into a zoning change, but if this parcel were rezoned, they would have other requests for rezoning in the area. The whole area probably should be studied. Here is where we run across what he calls the Hyde Park Addition "Spite" Ordinance again. In 1968 he asked to rezone Lots 16 through 19, Block 12 and Lot 30, Block 2, Hyde Park Addition from R-2 to C-2. The following excerpt from the Planning Com- mission meeting of February 29, 1968 is fram a prepared statement by Mr. Erickson: "---It appears to me, however, that the petition represents the type of spot re- zoning that we should not condone. It surely will lead to a steady stream of xezoning requests for adjacent and neighboring property". and "I would like to state at this time that I have a completely open mind about the proper use for the 3rd Street area and am not saying that all or part of the area should not be cammercial. I say only that if it is to be, it shouZd be done in a reasonable manner." Excerpt of the.motion at the same meeting "MOTION by Erickson, seconded by Myhra, that the re2oning request, ZOA �68-01, Eldon Schmedeke, of Lots 16 through 19, Block 12 and Lot 30, Block 21, Hyde Park.Addition to be rezoned from R-2 (limited multiple districts) to C-2 (general business districts) be denied ---." � The following two excerpts are found on Page 3 of the same meeting: Tom Myhra: "---If an error was made in zoning seventeen years ago, he could not believe the present Planning Commission has a moral obligation to make a correction in ^ the apparent short while before professional help �aill become available.---" and "Mr. Jensen wished to malce a statement relative to the second paragraph of Member Erickson's motion. He thought the point was well taken relative to a steady � Commission Meeting - 9, 1972 P stream of rezoning requests, and he thought it should be pointed out that this � "stream of rezaning requests", which could be anticipated, would put the Planning � Commission in the position of being unable to turn down any request, even though unreasonable, once spot zoning takes place." Excerpt from top of Page 4: "Chair- man Hughes said he agreed entirely with that analysis, as ft would be the logical result if the rezoning application were approved." Council Minutes May 4, 1970: Dave Harris speaking of the Hyde Park Spite Zoning Ordinance -- "The City ordinance does say that there must be 200 feet frontage and this could put sQme people in the position of not being able to use their property." Excerpt from boCtom of Page 5 and top of Page b, May 4, 1970 Council Minutes: "Mr. Carl Paulson asked if the Z00 foot frontage minimum would be unconstitutional, and the City Attorney said no." "Councilman Harris said that this was one of his original fears, that there would be same isolated lots that could not be used. There is a minimum of 25,000 square feet required." "Councilman Liebl pointed out to Mr. Paulson that Councilman Harris felt very strongly that there should be a minimum square footage. It was felt that if the parcel was bigger,'it would give a commercial development a chance to grow. This was adopted for the whole of Fridley." Excerpts from Council Meeting of May.18, 1970: Page 2 and 3: "Planning ^ Co�nission Request -- Mr. Eldon Schmedeke said that as to the Walquist request, the Planning Commission would like some guidance on what they should do witH �.he smaller lots under couuaercial zoning. This lot is neither 240 feet front footage or 25,000 square footage as the zoning ordinance required. It was gart of an older plat. He asked if there should be an Ordinance change in regard to the C-2 zoning." "Councilman Harris said that his intent when this was discussed was that the stipulations be either 200 feet front footage or 25,000 square feet, buC not necessarily both. He felt that it should be either/or. As it reads now would produce some unbuildable lots. Mr. Schmedeke said that there would be other parcels with a similar request." . , � Continued excerpts from Council meeting of May 18, 1970, pages 19 and 20: "Receiving the memo from the City Attorney regarding Oliver Erickson Request: The City Attorney said that as concerns the requirement of 200 feet front footage and 25,000 square feet in a C-1 and C-2 district, he felt that in most cases, variances must be granted by the Board of Appeals where the use of the property would have been proper under the old Ordinance. It was agreed by the Council that the intent when discussing the Ordinance was that either the 200 front foot- age must be met, or the 25,000 square foot requirement, but not necessarily both. An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance is to be prepared for the June l, 1970 Meeting. MOTION by Councilman Sheridan to receive the memorandum from the City Attorney concerning the granting of variances, as brought up by Oliver Erickson, dated May 18, 1970. The motion was seconded and upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Harris Pro tem declared the motion carried. r`MOTION by Councilman Sheridan to instruct the Administration to bring back ^ an amendment to the Zoniiig Ordinance to allow for meeting either the 200 foot footage requirement, or the 25,000 square footage requirement in C-1 zoning." End of excerpts. � /'� � � Commission - February 9 1972 Pa�e 10 Mr. Schmedeke said in summary that he could not see where we can live by this Spite Ordinance. The area it was created for has not used it. He believed that the ordinance should be changed and he will work for its correction. It is too stiff and it was just done for one area. We will have to change it to smaller square footage in C-2. He thought some of the people are entitled to it, but it should not be made so stiff that they will have to get a variance. If you are C-2, you are C-2 and let's get it done so people can live with it. Chairman Fitzpatrick said that an ordinance that applied to one area and is accepted in.many other cases, and that the opinion here that we could rezone an area immediately creating a non-conformance by rezoning, should be considered further. The item under consideration now is the request for a rezoning from C-1 to C-2.. He continued that unless there was further discussion of the merits of this particular case, he thought the Commission was prepared to make a recommendation. Recommending approval would immediately create a situation that would not conform within the zoning we are moving to. It would create a lot in C-2 that can't be used for C-2 purposes without a variance. Darrel Clark said that we do not have very much land in C-1 and C-1S that is vacant. The area requirement for a11 C's is the same; they require 200 front feet or 25,000 square feet. He did not think when the Planning Commission was studying this ordinance in 1969 that it included lot area for commerciai. He be- lieved it was added at Council level. Mr. Schmedeke said that between the Engineering Department, Council and the Planning Commission they came up with some of these zanings, square footages and the like. Chairman Fitzpatrick said that unless there is further discussion of the merits of this particular case, he thought the Commission was prepared to make a recommendation. In his opinion to recommend appraval would be to immediately create a situation that would not conform within the zoning they are moving, i.c. C-2. It would create a lot in C-2 that does not meet the area requirements. Other reasons for denial were listed as temporary use and can't be used after temporary use is given up. There is a problem to begin with that the Commission can't grant a special use permit for this in a C-1 dist'rict. If a special use permit could be granted, there would be less tampering with a zoning district. There should not be an area requirement in which there is a continuous granting of variances . MOTION b,y Minish, seconded by Zeqlen, that the Planning Commission recommend denial to the Council for the zoning request, ZOA #71-10, by Mrs. L1eyd Murphy for the Westerly Half of Lot 18, BZock 1, Spring Val.tey Addition to be rezoned from C-1 to C-2 (general�business areas) for a miniature golf putting course and further recommend considering amending the zoning ordinance for C-Z to a11ow a 5pecial Use Permit and specify certain types of Uses which'would a1.Zow golf putting course and 1et the petitioner then submit a request for a Special Use Permit under the present zoning to avoid the problem of rezoning back and forth a11 the time. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motian carried unanimously. Darrel Clark was asked if the Engineering Department could get a survey o€ substandard commercial lots and the size of other communities' size of commercial lots. _ • � � ' \ / ! P lannin Commission Meetin - Februar 9 1972 Pa e I1 Mr. Clark stated that there were many substandard commercial lots; however, most are adjacent to other lots so they could be combined to meet the area or footage requirements. . ADJOURNNIENT : There being no further business, Chairman Fitzpatrick adjourned the meeting at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submi� ted �; f . Cr ,%��.c.«,.1.. ; � Haz�O'Brian Recording Secretary � 0 0