Loading...
PL 08/26/1987 - 30670CITY OF FRIDLEY � PLAMVING CO�MISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Billings declared the August 26, 1987, Planning Commission meeting to order at ,:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Steve Billings, Dave Kondrick,.Dean Saba, Dona�d Betzold, Richard Svanda Members Absent: Sue Sherek Others Present: Jim Robinsan, Planning Coordinator Jock R.obertson, CommunTty Development Director Arthur Leighton, 45D0 Main St. fJ.E., Rubber Research Terry Martinson, 4500 P�ain St. N.E., Rubber Research Roy Goranson, City of Columbia Heights, 590 -40th Ave. Pd.E. Linda Fisher, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly � Lyndgren Ken Belgarde, 7841 Wayzata Blvd. APPROVAL.,OF AUGIJST 5, 1987, PLANhdifJG COMh1ISSI0N MINUTES: /�'1 ' MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 5� 1987, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITZ'EN. •- UPOIN A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLINGS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PER�IIT, SP �87-16, BY RUBB�R.RESEARCH: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, Sp #87-16, by Rubber Research Elastomerics, Inc., per Section 205.18,1, C, 9, of the Fridley City Code to allow exterior storage of materials and equipment on part of Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 79, the same being 4500 Main Street N.E. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, 5ECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO WAIVE THE FORMAL READING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLINGS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:3I P.M. Mr. Robinson stated this property was located on the west side of Main Street. The company took occupancy (last year pf the southerly five acres of the CECO Corporation, which was approximately ten acres in size. The property was zoned heavy industrial, M-2, and was surrounded on the west side of Main Street by other industrial p.na�erty and singl�e family on the east side of �1ain Street. �, ;� PLANNING CO�P�ISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 2 Mr. Robinson stated that earlier this summer, a Staff person, Daryl Morey, noted that there was outside storage of materials at the site without the bertefit of a special use permit. Since that-time, the owners of the property have voluntarily applied for a special use permit. Mr. Rob2r�son stated there was an existing metal building at the extreme west end of the site. The rest of the property was open. There was a concrete block wall interrupted by a cyclone fence-in the center with slats. The block wall was approximately 8 ft. high, and there was about 150 ft. of grassy area on the east �nd of the site. The storage material at this time was approximate7y 12 semi-trailers which were stored approximately in the middle of the site.and-approximately 100 - 55 gallon.drums toward the western end of the site. Mr. Robinson stated Staff had some concern about the contents of those drums and that was checked out by the P1PCA. They had recei ved a r�emo from Greg Berger describing the materials �tored there as non-hazardous. This was obtained from an inspection at the Minneapolis site, and it was promised that the MPCA would inspect the drums at the Fridley site also. He did not know the status of that inspection at this time, but it was his unde.r�tanding that these were the same barrels that were transferred from the Minneapolis site from which the company moved last fall. � Mr. Robinson stated that last December, a building permit was issued to the � company which included a few stipu]ations: (1) there be a watermain loop at the time of the next building expansion (Rubber Research does have plans for expansion). (2) landscaping and hard surface parking with curbing to be installed by June 1, 1988, or with new office building, whichever comes first. (3) automatic sprinkling for front lawn to be installed with landscap�n� per City's plan (part of Planning Commission agenda). Mr. Svanda stated that earlier this year, there was a fire at this location. What was the cause of that fire? Mr. Arthur Leighton, Vice President of Rubber Research Elastomerics, Inc., s-tated the fire started in some finished goods that.were put into cardboard containers at too high a temperature and consequently the rubber caught on fire. This fire was inside the facility. Mr. Svanda stated there had also been a fire at the P�inneapolis site. What was the cause of that fire? Mr. Leighton stated the fire at the Minneapolis site was currently under liti- gation. It was the cor�pany'� all�gation that a sprinkler company,in attempting to thaw out the sprinkler system with a blow torch, ignited the wall and the building burned down. Mr. Billings asked what type of business the company was in. � n �'�1 ^ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 3 Mr. Leighton stated they make base rubber compounds for the rubber industry, specifically they sell rubber that is used to modify GAF asphalt and shingles, they sell the rubber that is found in hardware stores for caulking. He stated their rubber was used for pressure sensitive adhesive tapes, etc. They do not make any finished goods. Mr. Billings asked if there were any odors associated with this business. Mr. Leighton s�ated that generally there were no odors. They do use petroleum products, some of which have what is described as a"sweet odor". At their Minneapolis facility which operated for 25 years, and now at the Fridley si��e, they have not received any complaints about odors. There was an odor that was occasionally detectable inside.the facility, but not outside the facili��. Mr. Billings stated he was on the northern portion of the site and as he progressed to the western edge of the site, he could smell a sweet ordor coming out of the large door. Mr. Leighton stated that was the odor of natural rubber which was compounded at their Fridley facility for shzpment to their Babbitt tire recycling operation. Mr. Billings asked Mr. Leighton if he could give an estimate of how many days per year they would be making that particular product. Mr. Leighton stated that, assuming 250 manufacturing days in the year, he would expect they would be making that particular product approximately 100 days. Mr. Billings stated that at Main Street, he did not detect.any odor, and on the partic�lar day he was at the site, the wind was coming from the southwest. He did not think that occasional odor would be a big problem. Mr. Robertson stated he would like to ask_the representatives of the company if they have any hazardous materials on the site at this time or if they plan to�have any hazardous materials on the site with the expansion in the future. Mr. Leighton stated they do not generate any hazardous waste and the letter supplied to the City from the MPCA stated there were no hazardous materials at the Minneapolis.site. They have introduced no new materials to the Fridley site that they have not had at the Minneapolis site and do not contemplate havir�g any hazardous waste or any hazardous materials on the site. Mr. Betzold asked if the company had any evidence of break-ins or vandalism since the company moved to the Fridley site. Mr. Leighton stated they have not. Mr. Robinson stated the screening of the storage yard was fairly good except for the cyclone fence that was slatted in the middle. ;�"1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 4 Mr. Robinson stated he had a conversation with an architect who is working for Rubber Research, and he gave Mr. Robinson a good description of the development plans. It was a growing company, and they do have a priority to build a warehouse facility of 10-15,OOO.sq. ft., primarily used to store the barrels inside. They w�uld like to continue to leave the trailers outside. They also plan to build some lab space and office space. The Planr�ing Commission might want to consider a time frame for the construction of that warehouse. Mr. Leighton stated he had plans available for the proposed expansion if the Planning Commission members were interested in loaking at them. He stated they hope the expansion will occur some time next summer, based on recent projections. Mr. Billings asked about the semi-trailers that were stored on the site. Mr. Leighton stated these were old unroad-worthy trailers, used to store raw material and materials that need to be reworked. Mr. Kondrick asked Mr.Leighton if those trailers would be removed from the site when the expansion was completed. Mr. Leighton stated they do not foresee the absolute elimination of the � trailers, simply because of the nature of their business. They are essentially in the recycling business. The tire recycling they do gains them some press, but the business they hade been doing for 25 years was recycling rubber. Normally, they get in truckloads.of material, they have to go through that material and winnow out that which is salvageable or recyclable and that which is trash. At any one time, they will have trailers on the site. He would assume the storage trailers would disappear once they have the storage warehouse; however „ because of the nature of their business, they would be recei.ving truckloads of material. These would not be stationary trailers. Mr. Billings stated he had noticed that some of the.grassy area toward the east end of the site inside the fence had some very high weeds. Does the company periodically mow the lawn and maintain the site? Mr. Terry Mortenson stated.CECO Corporation.was still storing some materials on the property and until those things are removed, it would not be a good idea to be running a lawn mower. through there. They will be maintaining that part of the property. The Planning Commissiop members too�C a few minutes to look at the company's future plans for expansion. MOTIOlV BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO CLOSE TNE PUBLIC HEA.RING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER50N BILLINGS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HARING CLO5ED AT 7:55 P.M. �, � PLANNING COMMISSIQN MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 5 Mr. Robinson stated that if the special use permit was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission,he would suggest that the three stipu- lations he had mentioned earlier b� put on the special use permit. The Planning Commission could change.the date of June 1, 1988, to Octoberl, 1988, to give the company a little more time. Mr. Billings stated that since they do not have a timetable for the construc- tion of the storage building, maybe they should add a stipulation requiring gravel and/or crushed rock in the relocated storage area with the provision that the City review the special use permit in one year to monitor the progress of the inside storage facility. MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF 5PECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #87-16, BY RUBBER RESEARCN ELA5TOMERICS, INC., PER SECTI0111 205.18.1, C, 9, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO ALLOW EXTERIOR STORAGE OF MATERIALS AND EgUIPMEIVT ON PART OF LOT Z, AUDITOR'S SI7BDIVISION NO. 79, THE SAME BEING 4500 MAIN 5TREET 1V.E., WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1• P�ovide a water main-loop �t the_ti�e_ o� th� building expansion, 2. Provide a_J�n�'scaping and hard surfacc parking lot and driveways -w3�t1� _ cur�zing. - - ,, _ . 3. Automa�ic-sprin3�ling for front lawn to be inst�alled with landscaping as per Ci�y's pZan. — 4. Prov3de cr�shed zoc1� or �sp�ialt in the relocated storage area. n 5. Sti.pu-��ions tb be accompl�shed prior to OCtDbes' ,1 � I988, or prior. to occ�zpancy of the new building, whichever comes .�'irst. 6. S�ipulat2Bns of'�he 1Z�22/86 bui�ding permit to be extended to October 1 r • • `i�98'&: � _ UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER50N BI��INGS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRI�D' �INAN.fMDUS�Y. Mr. Billings stated the special use permit would go to City Council on Sept. 14. 2. CONSIDERATION OF RECODIFICATIOPd OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL rr�� nn� t • Mr. Robinson stated that as a follow-up to the discussion at the last two Planning Commission meetings, Staff had prepared a draft in ordinance form for first reading of the recodification of the M-1 and M-2 zones and also the definition section of the Zoning Code which deals with allowing some limited commercial businesses in office/warehouse type of developments. He reviewed the drafted ordinance with the Commission members. Mr. Robinson stated Mr. Dave Newman, City Attorney, had reviewed this draft and Mr. Pdewman felt there should be a red�finition of C1ass II restaurants, also a change in the definition of °Commercial Recreation". Or���gin�lly, Staff's thought was to limit commercial recreation to health clubs and gs�mnasiums but apparen�ly that v�ould not be a��.t��nageable so�t�tian in that there realjy � was no reason to make a distinction bet�ueen health clubs and billiard ha}1s ^, or bowl ing• �al l�ys. PLANNI�dG COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 6 �� Mr. Billings stated that if, for example, a large development decided they needed a"Rapid Oil Change" operation or a"Firestone Tire StQr.e" to service their employees, how would this fit int� the "Commercial retail and service us�s..� within office/industrial mixed use buildings which are supplemental to and for the convenience of the operation of the zoning district and which provides goods and services which are primarily for the use of persons employed in that district..."? Mr. Robinson stated an argument could certainly be made to that �ffect; however, the limitation of size and signage would make it prohibitive for such an operation as described by Mr. Billings. Mr. Billings asked who made the determination on "which provide goods and services which are primarily for the use of persons employed in that district.."? Mr. Robinson stated that once the special use permit was granted, that would be a staff determination tin the process of monitoring each tenant's occupancy. He stated the buildings really.did not lend themselves to that type of operation. Mr.�Rof��nson called the Commission's attention to the City of Roseville's Zoning Code, "Permitted Uses in B-4 Retail Office Service Districts". He stated that apparently the City of Roseville created a new district which they are utilizing in their redevelopment areas, and it seemed.to be specifi- ,� cally directed at the service economy... The uses permitted were medical and dental services; offices, business, and professional; private clubs or lodges; motels and motor hotels; mortuaries; ;research, design and development establish- ments; restaurants over 5,000 sq, ft. in area; banks and financial institutions including drive-in facilities. As discussed in the Fridley draft ordinance, Roseville also allowed health clubs; bowling alleys; blueprin�ing and photo- copying establishments; catering establishments; clothing and costume rental shops; linen towels, draper.ies, and similar supply services; orthopedic and medical appliance stores; pet.shops; recording studios; manufacture of elec- tronic equfpment and medical instrumentation devi�es. It also allowed certain things with special use.permfts on an individual basis such as office service building ; retail sales and service structures; automotive type uses; construc- tion trade and operations; wholesale businesses (provided the area allocated to storage not exceed 50% of the total floor area of the build�ng); exterior storage of trucks; public utility facilities; automobile service stations; printing shops; off-sale liquor stores not located in shoping centers, etc. Mr. Robinson stated one of the more interesting sections in the Roseville Code was that each building built in this district requires a special use permit regardless of what was intended to go into the building. At that time, all the site development, proper landscaping, etc., was critiqued by the Planning Commission and City Council. After that, if any of the uses cited were desired to be part of the building, then an additional special use perroit would be required. ^ Mr. Robinson stated if Fridey was to use the type of system Roseville was using, they would be creating a new zoning district and would have to go back and rezone all the existing office/warehouse deve]opments. It would be feasible but certainly more time consuming. The benefit might be that it � PLAf�NING C0�1'�ISSION MEETIfJG, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 7 might open up new areas for the use of these structures by various other commercial businesses. Mr. Billings.stated the Roseville ordinance certainly provided an entirely di fferent appraacfi tharr wha� -t�e P1 anni n�g Com�ni ssi on had bs�n �lno�ki-n� at for the last couple of weeks. What was the feeling of the Planning Commission in light of this potential philosophical change? Mr. Saba stated it was possible that the uses would change over several years to be more of a retail complex and get away from the industrial character. Mr. Robinson stated that in looking at the tenants in the various office/ warehouse buildings, a number of them were very much retail-oriented (retail showroom or retail warehouse). This change.in the ordinance would open up the market to a larger•yari�ty of r�taii� o�ie-rativns: � Mr. Robinson stated at the last meeting, the Planning Commissi.on set a public hearing for ��ed., Sept. 16. The Planning Commission had also requested that public hearing notices and the proposed ordinance be sen� �o anyone who has or is proposing an office/warehouse development in the City. He stated Dave N�man had recommended that Sta�Ff talk to the Chamber of Commerce and either attend one of their meetings or invite them to the public hearing in order to �e�G.the Chamber's input also. '� Mr. Betzold stated Staff should make the City Counc�l aware that there is a second proposal, and this could be brought out at the public hearing to see if there �is any interest in it. Mr. Billings asked Ms. Fisher or Mr. Belgarde if they had any statements to make regarding the proposed draft ordinance. Ms. Fisher stated they have been monitoring the progress of this ordinance and have.provided some information to City Staff in preparing the ordinance. She stated they had reviewed the draft in pretty much the same form as the Planning Commission had reviewed it; however, they had not had a chance to review the Roseville alternate': - She had worked with the Roseville alternate because she has represented.developers in Roseville, but she did not know whether Mr. Belgarde was familiar with it. Ms. Fisher stated they would like to complement Staff and Planning Commission on their deliberations in this matter. She believed that if the changes were made in the ordinance to allow, under certain circumstances, commercial type establishments in the industrial district, it was going to be an overall benefit to the community in terms of marketing mixed use buildings. She also believed the restrictions in the draft ordinance which were extensive were definitely going to limit the type of uses that might be coming up. The parking restrictions were going to make it difficult for an existing office/service center project to allow a major commercial user and still meet parking requirements. � � � n PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 8 Ms. Fisher stated they were generally comfortable with the ordinance as presented by Staff. �r. Belgarde did have a question on the hours of operation, and they would like to discuss that with Staff. Ms. Fisher stated Staff could pr.ovide the Commission information on the benefits or disadvantages of the Roseville ��dinance,.but she thought if the City was to go with the text.of that ordinance to create a new district and were then to wait for a developer to request a rezoning, if the developer has an existing development and has a tenant tha� �ight fit into the develop- ment, the City might be setting up a fairly cumbersome procedure that might discourage a lot of good tenants the City might wish to have. As the Commissioners knew, the City's rezoning process was long, and there were not going to be very many tenants that were going to be able to wait for that lengthy process. For example, with East River Road Business Center, if Mr. Belgarde had to start�a rezoning process after the first of the year when the City adopted a new ordinance, it was really questionable whether he would go through that process. Also, whenever there is a rezoning, the developer had a�ifferent burden of proof legally than he/she does with a special use permit and it was more difficult because.the City would have to look at the plans, etc., and she just thought there were a number of restrictions. She was not saying the Cammission should reject the Roseville ordinance, but it would be creating a much different animal. Roseville was creating a whole new redevelopment district, and Fridley already had a redevelopment district. Mr. Kondrick stated he would like to recommend that they change the hou�s of operation in the drafted ordinance from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Mr. Robinson stated that Mr. Newman had also suggested that imposing hours of operation might be an unnecessary hardship, and the hours of operation might be able to be eliminated completely from the ordinance. ��r. Billings stated there was going to be a public hearing, and he felt they should leave the hours of operation.in at this time so they can be discussed at the public hearing. Mr. Robinson stated he would send copies of the proposed ordinance to interested developers, the Chamber of Commerce, etc., with a cover letter signed by the Planning Commissior� Chairperson inviting them to the Sept. 16 public hearing. Mr. Robinson stated the public hearing was to get input on the proposed drafted orclinance, and the Rose ville ordlnance did not.need to be discussed at that time. Mr. Robertson stated the Roseville ordinance had been provided to the Commissioners for informational purposes.showing a completely different approach. � P•t:����F�� ;��9�ISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1987 PAGE 9 3. RECEIVE JULY 9, 1987, HOUSING � REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MIP�UTES: MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRIGK� TO RECEIVE THE JULY 9, 1987, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES. UPO1V A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRP.�R30N BILLINGS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE THE AUG{JST 3, 1987, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD, TO RECEIVE THE AUGUST 3, 1987, PARK5 & RECREATION COMMI55ION M.I�IIUTE5. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLIN6S DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY. 5. RECEIVE THE AUGUST 11, 1987, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTIOIV BY MR. BETZOLD, SECONDED BY MR. 5ABA, TO RECEIVE TAE AUGUST 11, Z987, APPEAL5 COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr. Betzold called the Corrunission's attention to the Proposed Variance Informational Handout to be.given to people requesting variances which � explains to the petitioner w��t is required in the variance process. He stated Mr. Herric�, the City Attorney, �ad.reviewed it and felt the handout contained nothing technically wrong. This handout was now going on to the City Council for approval. The Planning Commission members felt the handout was an���ellent idea. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLINGS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. BET�'OLD, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER50N BILLINGS DECLARED THE AUGUST 26� 1987, PLAN111ING COMMIS5ION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:50 P.M, Respectfully sub itted, . y e Sa a Record-ing Secretary � � „$O d ./i(/t �,�/ � r � � /��ti�� � � LfS-�"D !�I<► •.� ST' ��u �1�feR �l°.�'pAR G"l , l�� y Gap� h so.� � >•r� � ,� ca� ���r$ -��o� �a �,�..� �, �_ � �