PL 06/20/1990 - 30721r"1
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMI83ION MEETING, JIINE 20, 1990
wn�YN w Mw�M tiM Ar tiMw�w�N wMMwIrMNr�YNAr tiw�Mw.titi�M�YMMMMMwN�Y�Ytiti�rrMM�titititiMMMMMMMM� V
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Betzold called the June 20, 1990, Planning Commission
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Don Betzold, Dean Saba, Sue Sherek,
Paul Dahlberg, Larry Kuechle (for Diane
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 NlAY 30 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
Mr. Dahlberg stated that the following amendment should be made to
the minutes: Page 10, last paragraph, the word "amply" should be
changed to "aptly".
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the May
30, 1990, Planning Commission minutes as amended.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOI,D DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
l. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP
#90-07. BY PAT AND RITA BOYLE•
Per Section 205.07.01.C.(1) of the Fridley City Code to allow
a second accessory building in excess of 240 square feet on
Lot l, Block 2, Sylvan Hills, generally located at 6261
Rainbow Drive N.E.
MOTION 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, CHAIRPERBON DECLARED T8E MOTION
CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M.
�
PLANNING COMMI83ION 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 5ervice 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 tirae, 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.
1. 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 COMMI83ION MEETING. JIINE 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.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
2. TABLED: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A 5PECIAL USE
PERMIT. SP #90-06 BY ROBERT BUSHEY FOR SEARS OUTLET STORE
Per Section 205.15.01.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 COMMI3SION MEETING. JIINE 20, 1990 PAGE 4
,�
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to remove the item
from the table.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CIiAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED QNANIMOIISLY.
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
40o 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
�"1 follawing six stipulations:
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. Once the addition is completed, no more than two trailers
shall be stored at the loading dock.
3. 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 COMMI38ION MEETING� JUNE 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 205.15.01.C.(8) of the Fridley City Code to allow
exterior storage of materials on Lot l, 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.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED iTNANIMOIISLY.
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 BABIIVSKI •
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 PIIBLIC HEARIidG 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
PLANNING COMMI83ION MEETING JIINE 20, 1990 PAG� 7
r",
being used to store various types of plumbing materials; and, in
addition, staff could not determine the direct relation of some
materials to the petitioner's lumber contracting business and
excavating business.
Ms. McPherson stated there is adequate space on the property to
construct a 55 ft. x 100 ft. warehouse addition which would give
the petitioner an additional 5,500 sq. ft. of warehouse space. In
addition to the items within the storage area, there are items that
are currently being stored in the front and rear yards. These
items are also listed on Attachment A of the Staff Report.
Ms . McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing to construct a
solid fence along the east property line which would follow the
public boulevard. This fence would allow the petitioner to comply
with the screening requirement of the zoning code.
Ms. McPherson stated staff was contacted by Woody Nelson of Onan
Corporation. Mr. Nelson was concerned that the storage area not
be expanded any larger than it is as it can be difficult for Onan's
trucks to access their loading docks. The loading docks of the two
buildings are staggered so that access and truck parking will not
interfere with each other. Mr. Nelson was concerned that any
further expansion of the storage area could interfere with this
^ type of activity and would limit the access to the western loading
dock areas.
Ms. McPherson stated the special use permit request is consistent
with the uses outlined by the M-1 zoning requirements. The
proposed fence would allow the petitioner to meet the screening
requirements of the zoning code. Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of the
special use permit request with the following stipulations:
1. The existing storage area shall be cleaned of materials
not directly related to the retail lumber and contracting
business and shall be used to store only the following
items:
a. three caterpillars
b. one forklift
c. one scraper
d. pallets
e. one crane
2. Vehicles used on a daily basis shall be allowed to be
^ stored outside the storage area.
PLANNING_COMMI3SION MEETING JUNE 20, 1990 PAGE 8
''1
3. The existing storage fence shall be reslatted.
4. The petitioner shall designate parking spaces at the rear
of the building for the tractor trailers currently parked
in the front yard.
5. 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.
�°1
�
PLANNING COMNlIS3ION MEETING. JONE 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 code, it states: ��Vehicles directly related to the
principal use may be stored in the rear yard if they are screened
from the public right-of-way."
MoTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to receive the
letter dated June 18, 1990, from Norwood Nelson, Director,
Corporate Facilities, Onan Corporation, to Donald Betzold.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY.
^ 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. Betzold asked what can be done about any environmental
concerns. Is there any City staff that can look into that?
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.
n
�
PLANNING COMMI38ION 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 to 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, CHAIRPER30N HETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING 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.
n Ms. Sherek stated she would prefer the storage addition, because
it is a more permanent solution than a fence along Central Avenue.
PLAATNING_COMMISSION MEETING. JtJNE 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.
�s. 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, C$AIRPERSON HETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOII3LY.
^ 4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP
90-09, BY LEFFEL INCORPORATED FOR MAACO AUTO PAINTING AND
BODYWORKS•
Per Section 205.18.01.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 shot�n 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 PUBLIC IiEARING 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 COMMIS3ION 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 vehicles that might be leaking
or appear to be leaking contaminants.
Mr. Leffel stated he could look into the possibility of
blacktopping 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
n very many vehicles on the site at one time.
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 20. 1990 PAGE 13
Mr. Dahlberg asked if Maaco stores vehicles to use for parts for
repairing vehicles.
Mr. Leffel stated they do not do that. They are primarily a
production and painting facility and deal with other people who
supply the needed parts.
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 to 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. JUNE 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.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CL03ED AT 9500 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
205.18.01.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� CHAIRPERBON 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 (CDBG) 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.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERBON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
5. RECEIVE MAY 10 1990 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MINUTES•
n
PLANNING COMMI33ION 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.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOU3LY.
6. RECEIVE MAY 17. 1990, SPECIAL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES•
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to receive the May
17, 1990, special Human Resources Commission minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
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.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
n 8. RECEIVE JUNE 7 1990 HUMAN RESOURCES COMIMISSION 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, CIiAIRPERBON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOOSLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to adjourn the
meeting. Upon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Chairperson Betzold
declared the motion carried and the June 20, 1990, Planninq
Commission meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully subm' ted,
G��
Lyn Saba
Recording Secretary
i"1