Loading...
PL 07/25/1990 - 30722CITY OF FRIDLEY �"� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING� JIILY 25, 1999 .........r........,.........►.......�...r...,....r ...► ............ CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Betzold called the July 25, 1990, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Don Betzold, Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba, Sue Sherek, Connie Modig, Paul Dahlberg Members Absent: Diane Savage Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Jim Yungner, The Gym David Kordonoy, Steiner Development Kelly Doran, Robert Larsen Fartners �PPROVAL OF JULY 11, 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: � MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the July 11, 1990, Planning Commission minutes as written. IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP #90-11. BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT (THE GYM�: Per Section 205.17.01.C.(4) of the Fridley City Code to allow commercial recreation uses on Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, Paco Industrial Park, generally located at 261 Commerce Circle South N.E. OTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated Steiner Development currently owns the two buildings on Commerce Circle. The subject parcel is located at the intersection of Commerce Circle South and Commerce Circle Ea�t. The property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial, as are adjacent parcels to the east, south, and north. To the northeast is C-2, General Business, zoning; and M-2, Heavy Industrial, ;� � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. JIILY 25, 1990 PAGE 2 zoning along the railroad tracks. The building is approximately 20,000 sq. ft. in size. Ms. McPherson stated the Fridley Zoning Code allows commercial recreation as a special use in the M-1 District. The Zoning Code outlines five standards which must be met prior to the issuance of a special use permit. These standards include adequate parking supply, types of signage allowed, traffic on adjacent streets, and compatibility with adjacent uses. Ms. McPherson stated the most important standard is the adequate parking supply. The Zoning Code states that the parking supply must be adequate, not only for the tenant, but for full occupancy of the building. The subject parcel has 41 parking spaces. In analyzing the two tenants currently occupying the building, using the office and warehouse ratios within the Zoning Code, these two tenants currently require 27 of those 41 spaces. This would allow The Gym to have the remaining 14 spaces. Ms. McPherson stated the Zoning Code does not specifically have a ratio to apply for commercial recreation uses such as The Gym or other health clubs within the City. However, the ratio of one space per 435 sq. ft. has been used in the past to apply to commercial recreation uses (Northwest Racquet and Swim Club). Using this ratio, The Gym would need 13 spaces. The petitioner also owns the building to the west and has indicated that there is adequate space on this parcel for cross parking easements for the easterly building. Currently, there are 106 parking spaces on the westerly site, and 51 of those are currently required by the tenants. Ms. McPherson stated there is a historical parking problem in this area. Staff is looking at the parking situation closely because of past problems in the area and because of a request of one of the adjacent developers whose building is south of the subject parcel. That particular owner has requested that the City staff work with the petitioner to ensure that The Gym's patrons do not park in this owner's parking lot and that there be adequate space on adjacent streets to allow for various truck traffic that needs to get into the buildings in the area. The U.S. Swim & Fitness facility across the street currently has, not only its own parking area, but leased space from the Winfield Development to the south, and leased parking space on the lot lcoated to the north of the subject parcel. Ms. McPherson stated staff believes there is adequate parking available with the two parcels and that many of The Gym's patrons would be utilizing the facilty during "off peak" hours (after 5:00 p.m.). Staff contacted the two tenants of the subject parcel, and these tenants indicated their hours of operation were � 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 and 7:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. So, theoretically, n � � PLANNINa COMMISSION MEETINa� JIILY 25, 1990 PAGE 3 the 41 spaces available on site would be available after 5:00 p.m. Ms. McPherson stated the use does not increase the levels of traffic on the adjacent roadways and, therefore, would not impact the levels of service on adjacent public streets. The use would be compatible with the adjacent uses as the two current tenants are more of a warehouse-type use than a manufacturing-type use. Ms. McPherson stated that because the petitioner has indicated adequate parking space both on the subject parcel and the adjacent parcel and that the use is compatible with adjacent uses, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the special use permit request with four stipulations: 1. 2. 3. The tenant signage shall be limited to wall signage. The building owner shall inform prospective tenants that the property is zoned for industrial use. Future expansion of the commercial recreation use shall require a special use permit. 4. Cross-parking easements shall be recorded against both parcels owned by the petitioner (Lots 6, 7, and 8, and Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, Paco Industrial Park). Ms. Sherek asked there has been a problem with parking at U.S. Swim and Fitness. 6Jhat is the current parking ratio (spaces per square footage) both on their own site and with the leased parking? Ms. Dacy stated she did not know the answer to that question, but obviously parking is short. The other problem is that despite the adequate space in the U.S. Swim & Fitness lot, when staff visited the site to observe parking patterns, there were vacant spaces in the lot and people still parked on the street. The reason staff used the parking standard for the Northwest Racquet and Swim Club was because staff thought those standards were more accurate because Northwest Racquet and Swim Club base their parking supply on actual usage. Staff determined that the ATorthwest Racquet and Swim Club's usage is more intense than The Gym's proposed use. Ms. Sherek stated she is curious how that usage is determined. She would think the usage of court facilities and swimming pools is of a much lower intensity than a gym. It would seem the intensity of use on the floor of a workout room with free weights, etc., is much more intense than the use for racquetball or tennis courts or pool. n PLANNING COMMI83ION MEETING, JIILY 25, 1990 PAaE 4 Mr. Kondrick stated Ms. Sherek is correct, except that The Gym is a very specialized facility, and there are fewer numbers of people who use the facility. Mr. David Kordonoy, Steiner Development, stated that before coming to the meeting, he drove around the two subject sites, and there were only two cars parked on the secondary site to the northwest. So, basically, both lots are empty during off-peak hours. This is the time clients will be using The Gym the most. Mr. Yungner, owner of The Gym, stated that they are not a U.S. Swim & Fitness. U.S. Swim & Fitness has a lot of machines (Nautilus equipment) that can be crammed into a small area. With free weights, a lot of space is needed for this type of equipment. The Gym specializes in one-on-one training, working with individuals, and spending a lot of time with each person. Most other facilities do not do that. They cannot get overcrowded with the type of facility they have. Mr. Betzold asked about the clientele. Mr. Yungner stated the average person comes 4-5 days a week. The workouts take about 1 1/2 - 2 hours. Everyone is training for a different reason, but each person is a lot more serious about ^ their training goals than the average person at a U.S. Swim & Fitness. He believed that they might have 25-30 people maximum in the facility during the peak time. Peak time is from 5:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. In the morning from 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m., there might be 1-2 people to 6-7 people. In the evening from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. (closing), they might have 2-3 people to 6-7 people. Mondays are busier than Wednesdays. Mr. Kondrick asked about the staff. Mr. Yungner stated there will be one staff person. They plan to open at 5:00-6:00 a.m. It is possible they might have two staff inembers during the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mr. Yungner stated they do not foresee any parking problem. They would not want to go into a building where there would be any parking problem. The City of Plymouth was also very concerned about parking. The facility in Plymouth is 13,000 sq. ft., and He has never needed more than 35-40 parking spaces for that large a facility. Mr. David Kordonoy stated as the owner and manager of the property, they are also very concerned about parking. They believe this is a very manageable situation in terms of parking. Ms. Dacy stated she had done a quick calculation of U.S. Swim & � Fitness parking from an aerial photo. It looks like the parking is probably at 1 space per 200 or 250 sq. ft. It is probably a n PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING� JIILY 25, 1990 PAaE 5 design function of the parking lot facility that people just do not want to walk around the building to the front door of the facility. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINa AYE, CBAIRPERSON BETZOLD DBCLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:00 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend to City Council approval of special use permit, #90-11, by Steiner Development (The Gym), per Section 205.17.O1.C.(4) of the Fridley City Code to allow commercial recreation uses on Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, Paco Industrial Park, generally located at 261 Commerce Circle South N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. 2. 3. The tenant signage shall be limited to wall signage. The building owner shall inform prospective tenants that the property is zoned for industrial use. Future expansion of the commercial recreation use shall require a special use permit. � 4. Cross-parking easements shall be recorded against both parcels owned by the petitioner (Lots 6, 7, and 8, and Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, Paco Industrial Park). OPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on August 13, 1990. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP #90-12. BY THE ROBERT LARSEAT PARTNERS: Per Section 205.18.O1.C.(1) of the Fridley City Code to allow offices not associated with a principal use on Lot 2, Block 1, Northco Business Park, generally located at 7201 University Avenue N.E. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED � THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:02 P.M. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JIILY 25, 1990 PAGE 6 Ms. McPherson stated the special use permit request is for an office use not associated with a principal use in the University Business Center located at 7201 University Avenue N.E. This is a new development part of the Northco Plat that was recently approved. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the parcels to the south, east and north. R-1, Single Family, zoning is to the north of the site. Ms. McPherson stated the Zoning Code allows for offices not associated with a principal use in the M-2 zoning district. There is one standard outlined in the Zoning Code that needs to be considered prior to the issuance of a special use permit. That standard states that "The parking supply shall be in compliance with the requirements of Section 205.18.5 of the City Code and be sufficient to support full occupancy of the building. Parking requirements shall be determined by the City for each tenant prior to occupancy.�� Ms. McPherson stated the proposed site plan for the entire multi- tenant building provides 192 parking spaces. In calculating the parking ratio, this averages out to approximately one parking space for every 245 sq. ft. of building area. The office ratio as outlined by the Code is one space for every 250 sq. ft. of building area. The Zoning Code also allows for a speculative ^ building in which the parking ratio is one space for every 500 sq. ft. of building area. Ms. McPherson stated a proposed office tenant will be occupying the most southerly tenant space in the building and will take up approximately 12,500 sq. ft., of which 4,000 sq. ft. will be devoted to the research and development portion of the use. Using the office ratio of one space per every 250 sq. ft., this particular use would need 50 spaces. The City has already issued permits for three other tenants in the building which, using the office and warehouse parking ratios, will be utilizing 36 of the 192 spaces. With the 50 spaces needed by the proposed tenant, this uses 86 of the 192 spaces. In calculating the remaining square footage of the building, that equals approximately 24,500 sq. ft. Again applying the office ratio, the remaining square footage would need 98 additional parking spaces. Ms. McPherson stated there is adequate parking on site to provide for full occupancy of the building, solely based on the office ratio. It is highly unlikely that the remaining square footage of the building would be devoted solely to office. It is a building designed for office/warehouse/showroom-type use. For these reasons, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the special use permit request with the following stipulations: �1 1. The building owner shall notify the City upon change in tenant use and parking availability. � � � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. JIILY 25, 1990 PAGE 7 2. Expansion of the office use shall require a special use permit. Mr. Kelly Doran, Robert Larsen Partnership, stated that at this time, they are not really a retail center and are not actively discussing or contemplating any retail\outlet-tenants. The use is more showroom-oriented. The concept of the center is to deal with home improvement type uses. Mr. Doran stated that the two stipulations as outlined by staff are acceptable. Mr. Harvey Benson, 7301 Tempo Terrace N.E., stated his concern is what is planned for the property bordering 73rd Avenue. Mr. Doran stated the property is actually two separate pieces of property. They are developing on the southern half, and the northern half is a separate parcel. They have brought extra fill material from the southerly half and some material from off site to the northerly half to make the parcel buildable. They have a grading permit from the City. The material that is there will be stockpiled and ultimately used for phase 2 of the development. As part of the phase 2 development, they will be 100 feet back from 73rd Avenue, and there are plans for a berm along 73rd Avenue. There will be a curb cut at the property line on the east with a full movement intersection as agreed upon in the original plat. Ms. Dacy stated the improvement plans for 73rd Avenue are set for 1990-91. There is a certain amount of pavement addition that the City will make along the south side of the existing road bed. Also planned is a bikeway/walkway adjacent to the roadway on the south side. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED T8E MOTIOAT CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOBED AT 8:14 P.M. Mr. Dahlberg stated he is sure that the developer is aware and concerned about the use as retail and will be conscientious in making sure the parking requirements are not exceeded if any retail tenants go in. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend to City Council approval of special use permit, SP #90-12, by The Robert Larsen Partners, per Section 205.18.01.C.(1) of the Fridley City Code to allow offices not associated with a principal use on Lot 2, Block 1, Northco Business Park, generally PLANNINa COMMI88ION MLETING JIILY 25, 1990 PAGE 8 r"� located at 7201 University Avenue N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. The building owner shall notify the City upon change in tenant use and parking availability. 2. Expansion of the office use shall require a special use permit. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLAR�D THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOII3LY. Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to Council on August 13, 1990. 3. RECEIVE JUNE 19, 1990 ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY AND ENERGY CONIMISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the June 19, 1990, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission minutes. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL DOTING AYE, CHAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTIOId CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY. ^ 4. RECEIVE JUNE 21, 1990 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to receive the June 21, 1990, Housing and Redevelopment Authority minutes. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPE1t30N BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. 5. RECEIVE JULY 10 1990 APPEALS COMMISSION MIATiJTES: MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive the July 10, 1990, Appeals Commission minutes. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED QNANIMOII3LY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Mr. Saba, to adjourn the meeting. IIpon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Chairperson Betzold declared the motion carried and the July 25, 1990, Planninq Commission meetinq adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Resp ctfully sub itted, � ���- � Lynne aba - Recording Secretary