Loading...
PL 06/09/1980 - 30538;� � /� CITY OF FRIDLEY SPECIAL PLANN.CNG CONA�IISSION MEETING, SUNE 9, 1980 CALL TO ORDER• Chairman Harris called the Special Planning Co�ission meeting of June 9, 1980, to order a� 7:38 p.m. ROLL CALL• � Members Present: Mr. Harris, Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Langenfeld, Ms. Hughes, Mr. Oquist, Mr. Whar�on ' Men►bers Absent: Others Present: Mr. Treuenfels Jerrold Boardman, City Planner CONTINUED: PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHAPTER 205. ZODTING Pa,�e 5 0 205.12 P DISTRICT REGITLATIONS 205.121 Uses Permi.tted Mr. Harris stated it was his feeling that a11 of Item �1-B (public parks, playgrounds, athletic fields, golf courses, airports, parking area) should require a special use permit when improvements are made., because he felt these improvements impacted the neighborhoods. He stated that at the last Planning Commission meeting, this item was tabled until Ms. Hughes could be presen.t to express her feel3ngs. MOTTON by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to remove the item fram the table. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the motion carried unanimously. Ms. Hughes stated she has problems with special use permits. The philosophy of public use withou� a public hearing is that the determination is made somehow that it is for the overall public good, and the body making that determination can put the proposed fac.ility wherever that body chooses. Those considerations are considerations of noise, traffic, etc., but when 3�ou start nawing how that decision is made, a11 �hose things are what are normally required and expected in a public hearing. � Mr. Boardman questioned at what stage should public hearings be held--at a master plan stage or at the actual development stage, and to what extent should they control it? Ms. Hughes stated she did not think they coul..d be effective unless they kept track of every s�age from very early an up. She really felt it meant a series of public hearings. SPECIAL PLANIVING CONIMISSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1980 � PAGE 2 �'`� Mr. Boardman stated he did not see uthere they would want to have public hearings on public improvements in the Zoning Ordinance, b�cause he felt the public hearing stage should be a lot sooner than those improvements. '� Ms. Schnabel agreed that she did not think the Zoning Ordinance was the place to write in the demand for public hearings. Maybe this is the kind of thing that should be turned over to the Charter Commission and let them review it. Mr. Harris stated he did not care how it was done as Iong as it got done. The Planning Commission could have the Charter Commission review public -�-�-. hearixigs and submit a report back to the Planning Commission. He asked Mr. Boardman to write a letter to the Charter Commission for the Planning Commission's signature. Mr. Boardman stated he would check with the City Attorney to malce sure the Charter Commission was fihe right place for this to go. �1-Fe The Com�ission asked Mr. Boardman eo rewrite this paragraph to make the meaning more clear. Page 57 205.13 C-1 DISTRICT REGULATIONS � 205.136 Performance Standards ��3. Screening - Same changes as in R-3 District Regulations �k3-C-l. Change to read: "Any off-street parking area which:has more than , � 4 spaces and adjoiris a residential zone." �3-D. Change to read: "All loading areas must be located in the rear or side yards, and be screened from public right-of-ways or adjacent residential zones with a 6 foot minimum solid screening fence." Page 5 8 �3-H. Change "except solar collectors" to "altemating energy devices" Page 59 �5. Landscaping 2�ir. Harris stated that it was his concern that with so many restrictions.on small C-1 lots, it could make them literally unbuildable. Mr. Boardman stated that the Planning Commission might ��ant Co consider _ putting a percentage on a building permit on the cost of construction that � would go into landscaping. Some other communities.have been doing this. Right now Staft has control over the landscaping, but it gets done unevenly. - � SFECIAL PZANNING CONIl�QSSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1980 PAGE 3 Mr. Aarris stated he could understand Mr. Boardman's point in wanting some guidelines, but there has to be some sensible point to contral landscaping. Ms. Hughes stated she thought there was a real limit to what could be done. She objec�ed to too many requirements,but she could appreciate that Fridley is a mature community and interested in some of the amenities. She did not think it should be left �o the discretion of the staff, because it �id get applied unevenly. She could appreciate Staff's reasoning for wanting some standards to go by, She was willing to say a minimum figure in the building permit, because that probably would be negotiated anyway. Mr. Boardman stated he was really concerned about the people who plan the cost of a building but don't plan for the cost of the landscaping. If some- thing was in the books tha� said a percentage of the construction cost is going towards landscaping, it forces them �o have to plan ahead. Ms. Schnabel stated she has always been very strong on landscaping. Besides providing the amenities, it is good taste, and as a community, they should start encouraging good taste. Landscaping reflects a community tha� has gone beyond the growing stages and begiiis to sh�ow roots. She felt strongly that landscaping should be required, but she was not sure there should be a dollar figure or even a percentage put on it. - n Ms. Hughes stated there were three options in requiring landscaping; (1) putting � a percentage on the building permit; (2) a minimum set of dollar figures; or (3) leaving as is with iotal control by the City. Mr. Boardman stated he thought 12% of the total construction costs would be a good figure for landscaping. The Planning Commission concurred with 12% of the total construction costs as a requirement for landscaping. Mr. Boardman stated he would carite that into Item �5-B. Ms. Schnabel stated it should also be termed "natural landscaping" to avoid artificial landscaping. ,�5-D. Change "facilities" to "access" � ,�7. Essential Services - same changes as R-3 District Regulations 0 Page 60 205.14 C-2 DISTRICT REGULATIONS 205.141 Uses Permitted �1-M. Change to read: "Other retail or wholesale sale or services which • deal directly with the customer for whom tfie good � or services are furnished and are similar to those ' specifically allowed above." 0 5PECIAL PLAI�TNING CON�IISSION M�ETING, 3UNE 9, 19$0 PAGE 4 �2-A. Delete "Signs" Page 61 4�3-E. Change "should" to"must" in the second line. 4�3-E-1. Put a period after "definition" and delete rest of paragraph. Delete �3-E-2, �3-E-3, and ��3-E-4. Page 62 Delete �3-E-8. ��3-H. Change to read; "Facilities which may require eyterior storage of matPrials." Pa e 63 ' � �'3-J-2. Delete "the building shall be air con.ditioned" �4-B. Change "sha11 be req�iired" to "may be required" Mr. Boardman st�ated the bike rack requiremert should be include d in all commercial and indusCrial districts. 204.142 Uses Excluded ��1-A. Change to read: "A minimum lot area of 20,000 sq. ft. is required." Page 64 205.145 Building Requirements Delete ��1-B Page 65 205.146 Parking Requirements �1. Same change as C-1 District Regulations Delete �3-I, J, K, L as it is out of order. Page 67-68 $4-F. Change "minimum" to "maaimum" �4-I, 3, K, L- Same changes as C-1 District Regulations ,��5. Parking Lot Permit - Same changes as C-1 District Regulations ,''1 � � � SPECIAZ PLANNtNG COMMISSION ME�TING, JUNE 9, 1:980 ' PAGE 5 �l 205.147 Performance Standards �1-A. Same as C-1 District Regulations �� Page 69 . �3-A & B. Same changes as R-3 Dist�ict Regulations �k3-C & D. Same changes as R-3 District Regulations Page 70 �k3-H. "except solar collectors" changed to "alternate energy devices" - Same as C-1 District Regulations Page 71 �5-B. Same change as C-1 District Regulations . �7-A & B. Same changes as R-3 District Regulations Pages 72-80 n 205.I5 C-3 DISTRICT REGULATIONS Mr. Boardman stated the C-3 Districts were all of the previous C-2S zones. He would incorporate the same changes as per C-2 District Regulations. MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to.continue discussion on Proposed Changes to Chapter 205. Zoning. 'Upon a voice vote, all vating aye, Chairman Harris declared the motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT • MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Wharton, to adjourn, the meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairma.n Harris declared the June 9, 1980, Special Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10;06 p.m, Respectfully s bmitted, L " e Saba � Recording Secretary � � �