PL 07/11/1990 - 7133��
1
PLAHAING COMMISSIOH MEETIFG AGEPDA
WEDHESDAY, JULY 11, 1990
7:30 P.�.
Public
Planning Commission
i
City of Fridley
A G E N D A
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1990 7:30 P.M.
LOCATION: FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER, 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.
CALL TO ORDER•
ROLL CALL•
APPROVE PLANNING CO1�+IISSION MINUTES: June 20, 1990
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #90-10,
BY RICHARD MOCHINSKI:
Per Section 205.13.01.C.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to allow a
lodge facility on Lots 17 and 18, Block 2, Spring Valley, generally
located at Rice Creek Road and Central Avenue.
�2ECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 19,
1990
OTHER BUSINESS:
,ADJOURN•
��
e
CITY OF FRIDLEY
pLANNING CO1rIIrII88ION MEETING � J�PTE 2 0� 19 9 0
�r�.w�1►w�w..w��w.w►�r.�rr w.
•�w�A ��ti��A�����A��r�� ����A�����AIA�����A�r��������A�������^�w���wll�r�
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Betzold called the June 20, 1990, Planning Commission
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. •
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: paulBDahlbergDeLarrybKuechles(forkDiane
Savage)
Members Absent: Dave Kondrick, Connie Modig
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Rita Boyle, 6261 Rainbow Drive N.E.
Robert Bushey, Sears Outlet
Frank Kramer, rep. John Babinski
Phillip Leffel, Maaco Auto Painting & Bodyworks
APPROVAL OF MAY 30 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
Mr. Dahlberg stated
the minutes: Page
changed to "aptly".
that the following amendment�should� should be
l0, last paragraph, the word amply
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the May
30, 1990, Planning Commission minutes as amended.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CA.AIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP
�'90 07 BY PAT AND RITA BOYLE:
Per Section 205.07.O1.C.(1) of the Fridley City Code to allow
a second accessory building in ex�enerall 24 1 cated at e6261
Lot 1, Block 2, Sylvan Hills, g Y
Rainbow Drive N.E.
OM TION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER80N DECLAR�D THE MOTION
CARRIED AND THE PIISLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M.
r
�
pLANNING COMMI38ION MEETING JIINE 20 1990 PAGE 2
Ms. McPherson stated that the petitioner is requesting a special
use permit to allow the construction of a second accessory building
over 240 sq. ft. The property is located at the intersection of
Rainbow Drive, just west of the University Avenue Service Road.
The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, as is the
adjacent properties to the north, west, and south.
Ms. McPherson stated a single family home with an attached two car
garage is currently located on the lot. At the rear of the lot,
there is a carport which is hidden by a privacy fence. The
petitioner hopes that with the second accessory building, the need
for the carport will be eliminated.
Ms. McPherson stated access to the lot occurs from the University
Avenue Service Road and would continue to remain as it is today.
The existing driveway would access both the existing garage and
the proposed accessory building.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is requesting to build the
largest accessory building possible for the lot. She calculated
the remaining available square footage to bring the lot to the
maximum 25% lot coverage allowed by the Zoning Code. This allows
the petitioner to build an accessory building of up to 624 sq. ft.
Ms. McPherson stated that at this tiz�e, staff has not received any
plans or elevations of the proposed accessory building from the
petitioner. It is difficult for staff to make a determination as
to the compatibility of the proposed structure with the existing
structures on the lot and structures on neighboring parcels. The
City Assessor has indicated to staff that how buildings relate to
each other, both on the lot itself and adjacent properties, may
have a significant impact on the values within the area. Staff had
included some literature in the staff report. She stated, however,
that the Zoning Code does not outline any particular standards for
the construction of second accessory buildings.
Ms. McPherson stated that since staff is concerned about the
compatibility of the proposed structure, staff cannot recommend
approval of the special use permit. However, staff has outlined
three standards if the Planning Commission recommends approval of
this special use permit to the City Council.
l. The accessory building shall be located 17 1/2 feet from
the east property line.
2. The accessory building shall be constructed with wood or
vinyl siding painted to match the trim of the existing
house.
3. The height of the accessory building shall be limited to
14 feet (Zoning Code requirement).
" pLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JQNE 20 1990 PAGE 3
Ms. Sherek stated that if the Planning Commission recommends
approval, she would suggest that another stipulation be added that
the carport be removed upon completion of the construction of the
accessory building.
Ms. Boyle stated they are willing to comply with the restrictions
recommended by the staff and submit plans for approval when they
are ready to start construction. She stated one thing they have
a problem with is the 17 1/2 foot side yard setback. If the City
forces them to build the accessory building 17 1/2 feet from the
property line, then the building would be in the middle of their
back yard. That would not be aesthetically pleasing to them or
the neighborhood, and it would not be accessible to the existing
driveway.
Mr. Betzold stated it is not possible for the Planning Commission
to give permission to go any closer than the 17 1/2 feet. If the
petitioner wished to build closer to the side property line, then
they would have to apply for a variance through the Appeals
Commission. It is difficult for the Commission to make any
decision on this special use permit without plans and elevations
for them to look at.
Ms. Doyle stated the City staff has already told her how the
building should look, and she is willing to comply with that. She
just found out about the 17 1/2 foot side yard setback. She
thought the accessory building could be built 3-5 ft. from the back
neighbor's lot line, but no one had told her that she would have
to be so far from the side lot line.
Mr. Betzold asked Ms. Boyle if she needed more time to put her
plans together. �
Ms. Boyle stated she will definitely need more time, and staff will
need to show her how to deal with the 17 1/2 feet.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to table consideration
of special use permit, SP #90-07, by Pat and Rita Boyle to give the
petitioner additional time to work with City staff regarding the
17 1/2 foot side yard setback requirement, to be brought back on
the agenda at the petitioner's request.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
2. TABLED: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE
PERMIT SP 90-06 BY ROBERT BUSHEY FOR SEARS OUTLET STORE:
Per Section 205.15.O1.C.(8) of the Fridley City Code to allow
exterior storage of materials on Lot 1, Block 1, Shorewood
Plaza, generally located at 1000 East Moore Lake Drive N.E.
(Public hearing closed.)
pLANNING COMMISSION MEETINa JIINE 20 1990 PAGE 4
OM TION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to remove the item
from the table.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Ms. McPherson stated staff inet with Mr. Bushey and Mr. George
Applebaum on June 6, 1990, to discuss the alternatives to provide
additional warehouse space for the Sears store. It was determined
that there is adequate space on the parcel to construct a 57 ft.
x 150 ft. addition along the south wall of the building. The
proposed addition would bring the lot coverage to the maximum of
40% allowed by the zoning code.
Ms. McPherson stated there are currently 133 parking spaces on the
site, and the addition would eliminate approximately 17 spaces; but
an additional five spaces could be constructed along the west wall
of the addition. There are cross parking easements between Sears
and the old Shorewood shopping center across the street.
Currently, the Sears employees utilize the parking spaces directly
along the East Moore Lake Drive public right-of-way.
Ms. McPherson stated the building expansion would eliminate the
ability to drive around the building; however, trucks will still
be able to access the site from the east driveway and they will
drive through the parking lot and back up to the loading docks.
Ms. McPherson stated staff discussed this with the Fire Department
staff, and they indicated that because of the access through the
Shorewood Inn parking lot, the Fire Department would be able to
provide adequate fire protection for the rear of the building.
Ms. McPherson stated that in addition to the proposed expansion,
Sears is proposing to construct a second loading dock adjacent to
the existing loading dock. This would allow them to unload two
trucks simultaneously.
Ms. McPherson stated Mr. Applebaum is proposing to upgrade the
facade on the Sears store with a canopy similar to those canopies
on the new office building and the old shopping center.
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed expansion would screen the
loading activity as well as provide additional warehouse space and
will eliminate the need for the five dropped trailers. Two
trailers will still be necessary to accommodate daily deliveries.
These trucks will be adequately screened from the Highway 65 right-
of-way by the building expansion itself.
Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the special use permit request with the
following six stipulati�ons:
�
f pLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JIINE 20 1990 PAGE 5
1. No more than five trailers at any time shall be allowed
to be stored until construction of the proposed addition
begins.
2.
3.
Once the addition is completed, no more than two trailers
shall be stored at the loading dock.
The warehouse expansion shall be architecturally
compatible with the existing building.
4. The area between the south wall of the expansion and the
south property line shall be landscaped with appropriate
materials (sod, trees, shrubs, mulch, etc.) in a manner
consistent with the remainder of the site. A landscaping
plan shall be submitted in conjunction with the building
permit application.
5. The 5 foot sidewalk on the west side of the existing
building shall be extended south in front of the proposed
expansion, and appropriate landscaping shall be
installed.
6. Any utilities located under the proposed expansion shall
be relocated.
Mr. Betzold stated one concern he had is that if it takes Sears a
long time to complete the expansion, the existing trailers could
be left at the rear of the building indefinitely. What can the
Commission do to make sure this expansion project moves forward in
a timely manner.
Ms. Dacy stated the Planning Commission could recommend adding a
time frame to stipulation #1 that is agreeable with Mr. Bushey.
Mr. Bushey and Mr. Applebaum are working together on this
expansion.
Mr. Bushey stated they are having some difficulty in getting the
lease for the space across the street at 1099 East Moore Lake
Drive. They will be signing a one year lease with the idea of
looking at other possibilities, and expansion is one of those
possibilities. Sears is looking at a lot of different sites right
now, and the national manager has to approve the site. He should
know within six weeks whether the expansion at this site is
feasible. He stated that if the Commission wants a time
limitation, he can live with that; however, he would ask that he
be able to work with two trailers on a continual basis until this
is all approved. With the opening of the store across the street.,
he should be able to get down to two trucks.
Ms. Sherek stated she had no problem with Mr. Bushey's request,
but they should again table this request until the Sears' corporate
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 20. 1990 PAGE 6 ��
office makes a final decision on the site expansion. She would
recommend tabling the request for 90 days.
The other Planning Commission members were in agreement.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to table special use
permit request, SP #90-06, by Robert Bushey for Sears Outlet Store,
per Section 205.15.O1.C.(8) of the Fridley City Code to allow
exterior storage of materials on Lot 1, Block 1, Shorewood Plaza,
generally located at 1000 East Moore Lake Drive N.E., until a final
determination is made by Sears' corporate office, or 90 days,
whichever comes sooner.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERBON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Mr. Bushey stated he certainly appreciated the extra time granted
by the Planning Commission.
3. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. #90-
08, BY JOHN BABINSKI:
Per Section 205.17.01.C. (11) of the Fridley City Code to allow
exterior storage of materials on Lots 1 through 20, Central
Avenue Addition, generally located at 1290 - 73rd Avenue N.E.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIHLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:05 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this request is for the exterior storage of
equipment and materials at 1290 - 73rd Avenue. The petitioner
occupies the yellow building at the intersection of 73rd and
Central Avenues. The property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial, and
there is additional industrial zoning to the south and west. The
petitioner's site shares a common driveway with the Onan building
to the south. In order to screen the outside storage, the
petitioner is proposing to construct a fence along the public
right-of-way on the east side of the property.
Ms. McPherson stated that in 1980, the petitioner was cited for
lack of appropriate screening of outside of materials and equipment
as required by Code. Recently, Steven Barg, the City's Code
Enforcement Officer, has been working with Mr. Babinski to either
remove the materials that are currently being stored in the front
and rear yards of the parcel or apply for a special use permit.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner does have an existing fenced
storage area on the south side of the building. The materials
currently being stored within this storage area are listed on
Attachment A of the Staff Report. Currently, an old MTC bus is
�
beinq used
JiJNE 2� z7'" in
MEETING and►
,�IggloN l�ing materials: of so�e
of � e direct relation and
various types �ontracting business
to St �ould not determine
staff etitioner's l�er
addition, to the p roPertY.t°
materials business. s ace on the p
excavating adequate aadition Which would glin
there is s ace.
stated it. Warehouseft• of Warehouse i e�s that
MS. M�Pherson ft. X 100 500 sq• there are These
construct a 55 additional �rie storage ar and rear yards.
the petitionereitems within in the front the Staff ReP�rt.
addition to th Stored of
are currently beinq p,ttachment A constru�t a
also listed on is prap�sinq tO follow the
items are etitioner line which woula �o�ply
stated the p ropertY etitioner to
MS. M�pherson east P would allow the p
fence alOng This fenae the Zoninq code.
solid onan
public boulevard. irement of Woody Nelson �f ot
screening re°� n
with the contacte �riat the storage ar onan�s
stated staff Waconcerned difficult forthe tWo
Ms. McPherson Mr. Nelson wait is as it aan be docks ° will not
Corporation• larqer than docks. The load k parkinq any
be expanded anY loading tru that
their that access and conaerned with this
trucks to access ered s� Mr. Nelson Was loading
S are stag9 interfere
buildinq With each otherstoraqe area �oul�o the western
interfere of the access
expansion would limit the
type f activity and
e�it re�eSt is consistThe
dock areas. ecial use p req�irements.
stated the sp M_1 Zoning meet the screen�he
Ms. MaPherson the ends that
uses outlined bY the petiti�ner t recomm of the
w ith the Would alloW code. Staff approval
propose d f e n a e the zon i n g �i ty C o u n c stlpu la t i o n s:
of to
requlrements ission recomm� th the following
planning CO�' est of materials
Special use pe�it re� shall be �leaned �ontractinq
e area retail lu�er a t e folloWing
The existing storag to the only
1, r e lated u s e d t o store
not directan Shall be
business
items:
a.
three caterPillars
b.
one forklift
c.
one scraper
d_ pallets
one crane
e� a daily basis
used �n storage area.
2. Vehicle outside the
Stored
shall be alloWed to be
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 20. 1990 _ PAGE 8 •�
3.
4.
5.
The existing storage fence shall be reslatted.
The petitioner shall designate parking spaces at the rear
of the building for the tractor trailers currently parked
in the front yard.
The petitioner shall discontinue outside storage of the
following items which are currently stored in the front
yard:
a. school bus
b. motorhome
c. trailer
6. The petitioner shall install an 8 foot high wood fence
and 3 boulevard trees along the east property line. the
fence design shall be approved by staff prior to
installation. The boulevard trees shall be a minimum of
2 1/2 inches caliper. .
Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner has advised staff that they might
want to pursue constructing additional warehouse space, and the
Planning Commission may want to encourage the petitioner to explore
• that option.
Mr. Betzold asked if the petitioner is aware of Onan's concerns.
Ms. Dacy stated staff gave a copy of Mr. Nelson's letter to the
petitioner. It is staff's understanding that Mr. Nelson is
concerned about the expansion of the storage area, and it is
staff's intent to limit the storage area to what is existing and
not to increase the storage area beyond the existing fence line.
Mr. Saba stated he is concerned about the materials being stored
on the property. Have any environmental impact or soil tests been
done for this area?
Ms. Dacy stated that according to the petitioner, the storage area
is blacktopped and not raw earth. To staff's knowledge, no soil
tests have been done in this area, and that is the reason staff is
recommending the area be cleaned up and used only for the equipment
needed for the business. Staff has reviewed the stipulations with
the petitioner, and he has assured staff that he will separate
those materials.
Mr. Saba stated there is a storm sewer right outside the storage
area. Any contaminants will wash down the blacktop right into the
storm sewer.
0
� LANNIN(3 COMMISSION MEETING JIINE 20 1990 PAGE 9 ,
Ms. Dacy stated there is also a continuing concern about the
property next door and the outside storage for a welding and tank
operation. If there is any contamination, it is probably coming
from that location. The bottom line is that they all want the
petitioner's outside storage area cleaned up.
Ms. Sherek asked what the zoning code says about outside storage
of materials in M-1 zoning districts. Is storage limited to
equipment and materials related to the particular business, or can
anything be stored outside?
Ms. Dacy stated the language for the M-1 zoning district states:
"exterior storage of materials and equipment". In another section
of the al use mat be stored in the rear yard if they are screened
princip Y
from the public right-of-way."
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to receive the
letterat a Facil ti s 1 Onan Corporat onN t Donald1Betzoldirector,
Corpor
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Frank Kramer stated he is representing John Babinski. He
stated Mr. Babinski is willing to clean up the storage area of
materials not directly related to the retail lumber and contracting
business.
Mr. Betzolls there ny Citynst ff that can lookni tonthat?mental
concerns.
Ms. Dacy stated there is no one on staff qualified to do that. In
the past, the City has asked Pollution Control Staff to do an on-
site visit, and then have the property owner conduct soil tests
and/or samples of runoff as it discharges from the site.
Mr. Kramer stated that basically all they have stored on the site
are tires and smaller tanks. The larger tanks are owned by
Determan Welding located next to their property.
Ms. Sherek stated if it is the petitioner's intention to remove at
least one old truck body and the MTC bus.
Mr. Kramer stated they want to explore the possibility of building
additional warehouse space. They are a contracting business that
installs sewer and water and they do a lot of earthwork. The MTC
bus is used to store fittings for their sewer and water contracting
business, and they would like to keep the MTC bus. They are
prepared to cover it or camouflage it in some way.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 20. 1990 PAGE 10
Ms. Sherek stated she is very concerned because she lives in this
neighborhood. She asked if it is logically possible to accommodate
all the equipment on this site, particularly in the winter time,
without parking some of the vehicles either in front of the
building or behind the building?
Mr. Kramer stated they do have other storage areas for their heavy
equipment. Only about l00 of all their heavy equipment is at this
location at any given time. He stated they have removed almost
everything from the front parking lot. The reason the trucks are
still parked in front is because there is a severe vandalism
problem in this area. When the trucks are parked in back, windows
are broken, mirrors torn off, etc. In six months, they had 5
broken windows and one broken mirror.
Mr. Betzold stated that because of the vandalism problem, maybe it
would be more practical and more feasible to build a storage area.
Ms. Sherek stated that a slatted fence around the storage area will
not help the vandalism problem; in fact, it will probably make it
worse, because the vandals•cannot be observed from the street.
Mr. Kramer stated they would like to discuss with City staff the
possibility of a 5,500 sq. ft. storage addition. The addition
would be a pole, metal type storage building. The metal building
would be more cost effective, and the side facing Central Avenue
would be all garage doors so they can back in the trucks off their
existing driveway. The other two sides would face Determan Welding
and Onan's warehouse side. Before they start drawing up plans,
they wanted ta first get a feeling from staff and the Commission
on whether this type of building is feasible.
Ms. Dacy stated there is no specific statement in the code that
says metal buildings are prohibited. However, it has been the
City's consistent policy that additions are to be architecturally
compatible with the existing building. Mr. Kramer does raise a
good point about the visibility issue and what is surrounding the
proposed addition. She stated that, depending upon the type of
metal exterior, it is possible that it might not be offensive.
MoTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC BEARING CLOSED AT 8:35 P.M.
Mr. Saba stated he would be more in favor of a storage addition
than a fenced-in storage area.
Ms. Sherek stated she would prefer the storage addition, because
it is a more permanent solution than a fence along Central Avenue.
pLANNING COMMI88ION MEETING JIINE 20 1990 PAGE 11
Ms. Dacy stated staff, along with Darrel Clark, the Chief Building
Official, can discuss the storage addition with the petitioner.
Mr. Kramer stated he would be willing to table the special use
permit request as long as he can clean up the area, but not
eliminate everything until they arrive at a more permanent
solution.
Ms. Sherek stated her biggest concern is that the petitioner can
have the best intentions of resolving the issue by cleaning up the
storage area and putting everything in back. By having a fence
which might encourage more vandalism, she can see everything coming
back out front again, and that is not a solution to this storage
problem. She would like to see the petitioner explore the option
of a storage addition with staff.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to table special use
permit, SP #90-08, by John Babinski, to give the petitioner and
staff an opportunity to discuss the possibility of a storage
building addition.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
T8E MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP
90-09 BY LEFFEL INCORPORATED FOR MAACO AUTO PAINTING AND
BODYWORKS:
Per Section 205.18.O1.C.(12) of the Fridley City Code to allow
exterior storage of materials and equipment on Lot 2, Block
4, Commerce Park, and that part of Lot 2 lying in Section 10-
30-24, subject to utility and gas easements as shown on plat
and subject to any other easements of record, generally
located at 100 Osborne Road N.E.
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:40 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial,
with adjacent M-2 zoning on the north, east, and south sides of the
property. There is commercial and residential zoning to the west
of the property across the railroad tracks.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is requesting a special use
permit in order to construct a fenced storage area directly outside
the tenant stall of this multi-tenant building. The petitioner has
a contract with Shorty' s Towing, which has a contract with the City
of Fridley, to tow accident vehicles from accident sites to various
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 20. 1990 PAGE 12 •�
storage areas. The Maaco site would act as a satellite storage
area for Shorty's Towing.
Ms. McPherson stated the storage area needs to be a secured area;
therefore, the petitioner is proposing a chain link fence to fence
a 48 ft. x 80 ft. area adjacent to the southeast wall of the
building, which is adjacent to Maaco's tenant stall. Currently,
the area proposed to be fenced is a green area. The petitioner
would not construct a curbcut, but would use a wood ramp to access
the storage area.
Ms. McPherson stated that while this area is not highly visible
from any public right-of-way, staff is still recommending that
appropriate screening be required if the Planning Commission
recommends approval of the special use permit.
Ms. McPherson stated that since the proposed storage area is
relatively small and is not highly visible from the public right-
of-way, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the special use permit to allow the exterior storage of vehicles
and equipment with the following two stipulations:
1. Vinyl slats shall be installed for screening purposes.
2. The fence shall be no higher than 8 feet tall as outlined
by the Zoning Code.
Mr. Saba stated he would be concerned about accident vehicles
stored on a grassy area where there is the potential for oil and
antifreeze to leak into the ground.
Mr. Dahlberg agreed.
Mr. Phillip Leffel stated the vehicles that will be stored in this
area are less severely damaged and less likely to be totalled by
insurance companies. The reason Maaco is contracting with Shorty's
is because Maaco will have a better opportunity to acquire the
repair work on these vehicles. If a vehicle is not repairable, it
will not be brought to this site. Generally, the only leakage from
a damaged vehicle is radiator leakage; and the vehicles are pretty
dry by the time they reach the storage location.
Mr. Saba stated he would feel better if at least part of the area
was a hard surface area for those vehicies that m�gh� be leaking
or appear to be leaking contaminants.
Mr. Leffel stated he could look into the possibility of
blacktoppinq the area with the owner of the property. He stated
that based on the experience of other Maaco centers that have done
this, they average about 4 vehicles a month, so there would not be
very many vehicles on the site at one time.
s pLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JONE 20 1990 PAGE 13
Mr. Dahlberg asked if Maaco stores vehicles to use for parts for
repairing vehicles.
Mr. Leffel stated they
production and painting
supply the needed parts.
do not do that. They are primarily a
facility and deal with other people who
Mr. Dahlberg stated that if it is acceptable.by the owner of the
property to blacktop the storage area, the owner may not feel the
need for the petitioner to return the storage area to grass,
because another tenant might have a need for a blacktopped storage
area.
Mr. Kuechle stated he did not think a blacktopped area would do
what they want it to, and that is to contain any leaking
contaminants, such as oil and gasoline. Most of those are solvents
and they would either soak into the blacktop, or insufficient
quantities go through the blacktop. So, he was not sure this is
a valid reason to ask the petitioner ta blacktop the area.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that a blacktopped surface might be an
advantage to Maaco. With tow trucks coming in and out, the sod
area will get worn down rather quickly and it will be dirt and mud
when it rains.
Ms. Sherek stated the City of Fridley has a standard that they
require parked vehicles to be stored on hard surface areas.
Ms. Dacy stated Ms. Sherek is correct; however, an alternative
would be to excavate the sod now, put down a plastic covering, and
put in class 5 or crushed rock. That would make it easier for the
property owner to re-establish the sod.
Ms. Sherek asked if classified rock is an acceptable surface for
storing vehicles.
Ms. Sherek stated that, as Mr. Dahlberg had stated, the grassy area
will soon be worn down, and it is going to be a mess in a very
short time. The City requires homeowners to store vehicles on hard
surface areas, and she did not think the City should allow a
business to create a parking lot that is not a hard surface area.
It is creating a substandard space that could be a contamination
problem in the future.
Mr. Leffel stated he had no idea of the cost of blacktopping the
area. If it is very costly, it might not be feasible for him to
proceed.
Mr. Saba stated he could accept the alternative of class 5 or
crushed rock with a plastic covering under the rock. The cost
would be significantly less. If the Commission is agreeable, he
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 20. 1990 __ PAGE 14 •�
would recommend another stipulation that the sod surface be
excavated, lined with plastic and coated with class 5 gravel.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that if this is done, he would recommend the
petitioner remove a portion of the curb so the petitioner does not
have to use a wooden ramp.
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CBAIRPERBON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PIIBLIC HEARING CL03ED AT 9:00 P.M.
MoTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to recommend to City
Council approval of special use permit, SP #90-09, by Leffel
Incorporated for Maaco Auto Painting and Bodyworks, per Section
205.18.o1.C.(12) of the Fridley City Code to allow exterior storage
of materials and equipment on Lot 2, Block 4, Commerce Park, and
that part of Lot 2 lying in Section 10-30-24, subject to utility
and gas easements as shown on plat and subject to any other
easements of record, generally located at 100 Osborne Road N.E.,
with the following stipulations:
1. Vinyl slats shall be installed for screening purposes.
2. The fence shall be no higher than 8 feet tall as outlined
by the Zoning Code.
3. The sod be removed and replaced with class 5 gravel with
some type of liner or barrier between the gravel and the
ground to protect the ground from leakage.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on July 9,
1990.
4. REVIEW HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT fCDBG) HUMAN SERVICE GRANTS:
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to accept and approve
the recommendations made by the Human Resources Commission on CDBG
Human Service grants and recommend approval by the City Council.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
5. RECEIVE MAY 10 1990 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MINUTES•
�
� pLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JIINE 20 1990 PAGE 15
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to receive the May
10, 1990, Housing and Redevelopment Authority minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
6. RECEIVE MAY 17 1990 SPECIAL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES:
OM TION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to receive the May
17, 1990, special Human Resources Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMO�TSLY.
7. RECEIVE MAY 29 1990 ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY AND ENERGY
COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the May
29, 1990, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission minutes.
OPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOII3LY.
8. RECEIVE JUNE 7 1990 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to receive the June
7, 1990, Human Resources Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. .
ADJOURNMENT•
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to adjourn the
meeting. IIpon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Chaizperson Betzold
declared the motion carried and the June 20, 1990, Planninq
Commission meetinq adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully subm' ted,
Lyn Saba
Recording Secretary
�
y
� STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE
��NOF PLAIWNG CONMSSION DAT'E :.ruly 1�, 1990
F'RI DLEY CRY COI�IqL DATE ��� �=
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION
SITE DATA
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONtNG
ADJACENT LAND USES
8� zav%ic
UME$
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
F�VANCIAL IMPL.ICATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPRE�/E PLAN
COMPATfBILITY WITH
ADJACENT USES 8 ZONNG
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSfDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNWG COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
SP 4�90-10
Richard Mochinski
To allow a lodge facility
Old Central Avenue and Rice Creek Road
80,776.13 square feet
C-1, Local Business
C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family Dwelling to
North; CR-1, General Office to West; R-1, Single Family
Dwelling to East; C-1, Local Business to South.
Available to site.
Yes
Yes
Approval with stipulatinns.
� Staff Report
SP #90-10, Richard Mochinski
Page 2
Request
The petitioner, Richard Mochinski, is requesting that a special use
permit be issued in order to construct an assembly/lodge facility
for the Minneapolis Moose Lodge #38. The C-1 district states that
theaters, lodges, and assembly facilities having a seating capacity
of less than 300 persons requires a special use permit. The
request is for Lots 17 and 18, Block 2, Spring Valley Addition.
Site
The site is a vacant parcel located north of the intersection of
Rice Creek Road and Central Avenue, between the east Satellite Fire
Station and the Graystar Insurance building. The site is zoned C-
1, Local Business, and there is similar zoning to the north and
south of the parcel. Across Central Avenue to the west is CR-1,
General Office, and M-1, Light Industrial, zoning.
An open drainage ditch flows along the south property line to a
pipe under Central Avenue. There are aspen trees growing along the
east property line and native sumac along the north property line.
Zonina Historv
The petitioner filed a rezoning request in 1986 to rezone the site
to R-3 for a 19 unit attached townhome development. The Planning
Commission recommended approval with ten stipulations. On August
4, 1986, the City Council denied the request stating that the
proposal contained too many units.
Analvsis
The petitioner has submitted a site plan, a proposed landscape
plan, and building plans for the site. The proposed site plan
meets all of the zoning requirements of the C-1, Local Business,
zoning district including building setbacks, parking setbacks,
number of parking stalls, landscaping, screening for the adjacent
residential properties, and provides a storm water detention area.
A neighborhood meeting/other contact with the neighbors was
recommended to the petitioner. He indicated he was going to
contact each property owner on the public hearing list.
The proposed use will be an assembly and lodge facility for the
Minneapolis Moose Lodge #38. The proposed building is 7,000 square
feet and will include a hall, a dining area, a dance floor, a bar,
several offices, and a kitchen facility.
�
y Staff Report
SP #90-10, Richard Mochinski
Page 3
The Moose Lodge recently applied for a rezoning of the Suburban
Engineering building located at 6875 Highway 65. The Planning
Commission recommended denial of the request, as the site could
not provide adequate parking for the proposed use, and the hours
of operation would have been a significant change from the office
use which previously occupied the building.
The Moose Lodge activities include membership meetings on alternate
Tuesdays and Thursdays of each month, and also include dances on
Friday and Saturday evenings. The Moose Lodge is a closed club and
would not be open to the general public. The members of the Moose
Lodge are allowed to bring a single guest to an activity. The
member is responsible for his/her guest at that activity. The
representatives of the Moose Lodge indicated that the number of
people attending these dances would be 80 - 120.
As was stated earlier, the site plan meets the required parking
setbacks and the site will provide enough parking. There is space
on the parcel to provide an additional 38 parking spaces if it is
needed, or if a future expansion is proposed. The Moose Lodge
would be open from approximately noon to 1:00 a.m. The site plan
provides the buffer space required by the ordinance between the
proposed use and the neighboring adjacent residential properties
to the northeast and east of the site.
To accommodate the drainage ditch that flows from Harris Pond
located east of the site to Central Avenue, the City currently
holds a 15 foot drainage easement along the south property line.
The Engineering Department has requested a 30 foot drainage and
utility easement over the detention pond along the east property
line. -
Staff also recommends obtaining a 30 foot street easement over the
same area to accommodate a future street right-of-way in order to
preserve the ability for re-subdivision of the parcels to the north
and east of the site. Road easements have been reserved along the
rear of other lots in the area.
As a prelude to the Comprehensive Plan process, the Planning
Commission and City Council developed informal development policies
regarding the Central Avenue corridor. In the subject area, it was
generally agreed that re-subdivision could occur on the east side
of Central Avenue to promote a residential development pattern.
The lodge facility would not prevent this development pattern from
occurring to the north as long as a street easement is reserved.
Unlike the parcels to the north, the subject site is entirely zoned
C-1, Local Business, and does not contain any R-1 zoned land.
Given the fire station to the north of the subject site and the
multi-tenant commercial building to the south, the proposed
0
. Staff Report
SP #90-10, Richard Mochinski
Page 4
development pattern would complete the commercial development at
the northeast corner of Rice Creek Road.
Recommendation and Stipulations
The proposed site plan provides adequate screening and buffering
of the activity for the adjacent residential properties, and the
site plan meets all zoning code requirements, including setback
requirements and parking availability. The proposed use would be
compatible with adjacent and surrounding uses.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the special use permit, SP #90-10, to allow a lodge facility
with the following stipulations:
1. Lots 17 and 18 shall be combined into one tax parcel.
2. A drainage and utility easement shall be reserved over the
east 30 feet of the parcel, and shall be submitted prior to
issuance of a building permit.
3. A street easement shall be reserved over the east 30 feet of
the parcel, and shall be submitted prior to issuance of a
building permit.
4. A special use permit shall be approved prior to any building
expansion.
5. Maximum seating capacity shall be limited to 300 persons, or
the regulations provided by the Fire Code, whichever is most
restrictive.
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the
Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431
University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, July 11, 1990 at 7:30 p.m.
for the purpose of:
Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #90-
10, by Richard Mochinski, per Section
205.13.O1.C.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to
allow theaters, lodges and assembly facilities,
on Lots 17 and 18, Block 2, Spring Valley,
generally located at Rice Creek Road and
Central Avenue.
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an
opportunity at the above stated time and place.
DONALD BETZOLD
CHAIRMAN
PLANNING COMMISSION
Publish: June 27, 1990
July 4, 1990
Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley
Community Development Department, 571-3450.
r.i
. SP 4� 90-10
Richard Mochinski
Richard Mochinski
27540 Kirby Lane
Chisago City, MN 55013
Stanley Dahlberg
1384 - 64th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Mark Schwartz
1372 - 64th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Lavonne Kowski
6391 Central Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Leroy Tovsen
1356 - 64th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Sharyn Ramsey
1340 - 64th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Richard Mochinski
7256 E. Commerce Circle N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Rice Creek Properties
1315 Rice Creek Road N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Ervin Kassow
1400 Rice Creek Road N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Dorothy Miles
1370 Rice Creek Road N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Paul Litwinczuk
6291 Central Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Advance Companies
6400 Central Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Fortune Investments Inc.
4611 East 36th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55406
MAILING LIST Planning 6/22/90
Council
Ziebart of Minnesota
6300 Central Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
City Council Members
Planning Co�ission Chair
e
a
' L r
. r.
1 i
'�
1:1
' 16
r.
dv
�a�
i
S �/2
SP 4i 90-10
Richard Mochinski
SEC. /3, T 30.
C1Tr OF FR/OLEY
14
�
�24
/� 24
�
'�X ,
�� er
� bo
t�a,
' ��
�"�e
�
M� .
. � • �
I tS
--��'
4'
<�+� �
�
�
�
,
�
.�
�
�
�
u�
�
�,,
d
� ,
43
LOCATION MAP
L:_t t
� � _1
,'�; : �
� =; �
��, � d_�
'`� I
�
� � �1
� ��-- -
Q-._._
��
�.�
;
C�-�--==--
�
S
a
� ",
> � ;,
:
�
a
�
�
� j
o ��
o -�
o :I
� �0
o �;
N
m
r
Oo
m,
2
O
m
,..._. _ . , _ _.. ,- -� - -
, �- - �--
��,• : "' �e
_ _._ `. �
¢ -��'�� � .
. � , I I -----•
T � �I
.; _i
��
�� � � I �
I �
� � �� �,,,6 �,a �� � i
.
SP 4�90-10
Richard Mochinski
���
� � p'n�
G
��
n
O �
,7
6 p
0
00 O
O O j_
i �
� j. °ooc
,
� ��"'.�.,"' ._ .. --
\ �
. �
��
�:�
' I �� �
I
I
.�.
� � ��.: �j
� f �.
0
FLOOR PLAN
�
0
i�
"���__
� � ;�
�
� '
��
�
�
!
I
' �l
"' .r'�:
�.
��
"��
�
r
�
�
�i
;r �
�
� ' •
� I �
� ti �,� 6
;; �
, A „ �1
� ��� � �h'.
�"��1 tt ��1
SP ��90-]0
Richard Mochinski
m
eo
*
W
F �
W
W 0
�
W . O
o �
� °
J
Q
�
�
J
ELEVATION
�
,
0
�� �
�
�
��
�
0
�
� N
� �� g
� �-� �
r � �
�
.
�
:=T�
�` �' �
� �' �
� �.
��
�
.� !
-- -�- � --
-,�-
i ;�
--�-•
� � .�, `
�
��
�
_
i�
.!
�
E-
�
�
�
---"
� _ � �
I� � ' �
�E � !
��
I t
,
�---- --� �-�
� � �
�
SP ��90-10
Richard Mochinski
_ .. - _ _'- ----- �--i'i �i'1 � �
— --- � �' � � �,
� �_. � i �;����i
, . r.�i
�
� � i i �; 'i �
� � �'�
• � ��:
� � � .� �� i
�_� � �, -� � .l :;�
- A � � �����I'�1
.._ � ! �' ��„i; �
� � i ;:� � �
.,� _ j �. .I ,� �
�� �• ---� ' ��•���il �
i ''���'•��
,
, :,,�,,,
�,�__ "-_=_. . __.��
�
�
SITE PLAN
�
1`
SP 4� 90-10
Richard Mochinski
n
-- -'��..� ��,.,v�v�a�o.mo+amz..asQrroas��+
s� i >Y sr� - 1
�
� f � "=-,"' ; � �
p �i
� � O
� _ �� i ,,�, i
►�4�
� �aw;' �o �
`�i
K ` •
� � � �
� � �* �� �
. � �, �u,; � � �
� ° � _ °. �' � �
� _ ,-. .
m ,m� �:
0
�� � �80 � .
� , �� � # �
a s
i
� �: i � ' °
.
���
, Q:
� •
�
,,�g a
� �
I _rs >s t �.. �� -_ '� .'�E ._..._..__...._ �
i--
so+woo.s
��������
� ��� �
�
�
�
�
�
-- -- - - - - �
LANDSCAPE PLAN
1 �' cOL����
.
. _ �., �
__,,��
*��'N E S Ot
.
June 26, 1990
COU NTY OF ANOKA
Department of Nighways
Paul K. Ruud, Highway Engineer
1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD NW, ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 612-7543520
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, MN. 55432
Attention:
Subject:
Michele A. McPherson
Planning Assistant
Loyal Order of Moose Lodge #38
Site Plan
Dear Ms. McPherson:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the site plan for the above referenced
project. From the site plan we have made the follovv�ng assumptions and concur in
the site plan provided those assumptions are correct.
1) Drainage for the facility will be handled to the east side of the lot
where the construction of a holding pond and weir will release water to a
city storm sewer, which is not shown on the plan.
2) The right-of-wa� for Old Central Avenue, otherwise known as CSAH #35,
is 50 feet m width m front of the property shown on this site plan.
3) The permanent landscaping or berms are not located on the 50 foot of
County Right-of-Way on the east side of the centerline of CSAH #35.
4) Only one driveway to CSAH #35 is contemplated at this time and that
driveway is located approximately 340 feet north of the major intersection
of Old Central Avenue with East Moore I.alce Drive and Rice Creek Road
otherwise known as County State Aid Highway #6.
The owner should be aware that at some future date Old Central Avenue at this
major intersection may be channelized limiting the access to right-in, right-out at the
proposed driveway locations.
If you have any questions on this information, please feel free to contact me at your
convenience.
Sincer 1
G. lson, PE
eputy County Engineer
dmh/MOOSE
Aifirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
rp
f ,
7
�
CITY OF FgIDLEY
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, J�
19 , 19 9 0
___..........
CALL TO ORDER: the June 19, 1990� APPeals Commission
Chairp
erson Savage called
meeting to order at 7:3o p•�•
ROLL CALL'
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
iane Savage, �r� Kuechle, Cliff Johnson
D
Kenneth Vos
planning Coordinator,
Barbara Dacy, planning Assistant
Michele McPherso6001 - 4th Street N•E•
Robert SchmidneW ApPeals Commission member)
Cathy Smith (
__��wnT.l[� •
1990 AYr��L� -
AppROVAL OF �Y 22 Johnson, to approve the May
Kuechle, seconded by Mr• written.
MO� N by Appeals Commission minutes as D T$E
22, 1990, C�p,IRpERgpN gAVAGE DECI�AR�
VOICE �10TE, ALL VOTING AYi%r
nPON 1� D SANDR�'
MOTION CAR�IED IIN�IMOUSL • VAR 90-10 BY ROBERT AN
of the Fridley City
CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE RE UES 2•( c, •` C 1, , o� 17 . 5 f eet
SC�=- corner lot fr S ace
03.D.(
pursuant to Section 205'ard setback on a 001 - 4th Street
the construction of additional living P
Code5 5 feet to allowe y the same_beinq 6
to 1 gonny Addition,
on Lot 6► $lock 3► 55432•
Fridley, Minnesota, to open the public
N•E•► Johnson,
MOT ON by 1'�r • Kuechle , seconded by Mr .
hearing•
Cgp�IgpERSON BAOAGE DECLARED T$�'
�DICE pOTE, ALL VOTING AYEr
31 P 1'�
IIPON A IED IINA1dIMOUSLY AND
TgE PjTBLIC HEARZNG OPEN AT : •
MoTION �� is located at the intersection
the property The property is zoned R-1,
Ms. McPherson stated ro osing to construct
of 60th Avenue and 4th Street N.E.
Dwelling• The petitioner is P P to
le Family wall of the house wherh isl proposi g t e
Sing to the south The petition the
an addition 12 feet. and to continue
house an additional facade of the house
continue the existing
'sting roofline to accommodate the addition.
exi
'
.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 19. 1990 PAGE 2
Ms. McPherson stated that since there is also a two car garage in
the rear yard, the south wall of the house is the most logical
location for the addition as it does continue the current lines of
the existing house.
Ms. McPherson stated that because the petitioner could shorten the
addition by 2 feet which would allow him to meet the zoning code
and still give the petitioner an addition of approximately 260 sq.
ft., staff is recommending that the Appeals Commission deny the
variance.
Mr. Schmidt stated he has owned the house since 1976. His father
built most of the homes in this addition back in the late 1950's
and early 1960's. This house was called a"starter house". Most
of the rooms are quite small, under 10 feet x 12 feet. He has
spent approximately $10,000 renovating the house, both the exterior
and interior, in addition to building the garage. He is a second
generation carpenter so the majority of the work on the house has
been done by him.
Mr. Schmidt stated the first reason for wanting to go from a 10
foot wide addition as recommended by Planning staff to a 12 foot
wide addition is the architectural design. At the present time he
has an 8 foot bay window on the front of the home. With the
existing spacing on the north side of the bay window, the 12 foot
addition would allow them to use an identical bay window of 8 feet
with the same spacing on the south side of the existing bay window,
as shown on his drawing.
Mr. Schmidt stated the 12 foot wide addition would allow for better
architectural incorporation into the outside view of the home, and
it would also allow for more space inside the house. The proposed
rooms would be better facilitated by the addition of 2 feet. The
expansion would allow his teenage son to�have a larger bedroom and
for them to have a fairly large sized family room or combination
family/dining room.
Mr. Schmidt stated the traffic site lines would not be affected by
the 12 foot addition.
Mr. Schmidt stated he plans to completely remove the existing
siding on the house. He will put on masonite woodgrain siding on
the sides and back of the house and a full face of cedar on the
front of the house. That incorporates some of the designs already
in the neighborhood, so this should blend in very well.
Mr. Schmidt stated that when the structure is completed, he intends
to replace the entire roof. The approximate total completion date
would be August 15.
Mr. Schmidt stated he has contacted 11 neighbors and explained his
proposed addition. He stated he has received no objections.
�
PPEALS COMM SION MEETING JIINE 19 1990 PAGE 3
Ms. Savage stated that if the variance request is denied, what
affect would this have on Mr. Schmidt's plans.
Mr. Schmidt stated he had considered not having to apply for a
variance, but he was looking at a maximum room size of 9 ft. x 6
in. The 10 ft. width is just not going to work, so he is not
really considering anything smaller than 12 feet. He stated he
has talked to people who sell construction products, and with the
smaller width, they would be wasting approximately 2 feet. The
twelve foot width works out well for the way window and siding
products are sold as far as lengths, particularly the cedar siding.
MOTION by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:45 P.M.
Mr. Kuechle stated that without seeing the total house, it is
difficult to say what could or could not be done. However, he did
agree that a 10 foot wide addition is marginal at best. For that
reason and the fact that the variance is only for 2 feet, he would
be inclined to recommend approval of this variance to the City
Council. There is still 30 feet between the street and the side
of the house.
Ms. Savage stated she agreed. It is a minimal variance request,
and the spirit of the code is still being met by the plan as
proposed.
Mr. Johnson stated he also agreed. It sounds as thougYi Mr. Schmidt
is going to do a major rework of the entire structure. When he is
finished, it will not look like an addition has been added but will
look like part of the original house. The addition will make the
house more aesthetically pleasing, especially with the matched
windows. He did not feel the 2 feet would cause any obstruction
problem.
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Johnson, to recommend to
City Council approval of variance request, VAR, #90-10, by Robert
and Sandra Schmidt, pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(c).((1))
of the Fridley City Code to reduce the side yard setback on a
corner lot from 17.5 feet to 15.5 feet to allow the construction
of additional living space on Lot 6, Block 3, Bonny Addition, the
same being 6001 - 4th Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on July 9,
1990.
e �
1 �
i
,
i
ADJOURNMENT•
OM TION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Johnson, to adjourn the
meeting. IIpon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Chairperson Savaqe
declared the June 19, 1990, Appeals Commission meetinq adjourned
at 7:5o p.m.
Respectfully su mitted,
Lyn Saba
Recording Secretary