PL 03/09/1994 - 30785CITY OB FRIDLEY
`�' PLANNING COMMIBBION MEETINt3, MARCH 9, 1994
�
........_.._____......__-__.._,.,._____..__________________,..._,._....,._,.___.._......
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Newman called the March 9, 1994, Planning Commission
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Dave Newman, Dave Rondrick, Dean Saba,
Connie Modig, Brad Sielaff, LeRoy Oquist
Members Absent: Diane Savage
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Steve Woodley, Wal-Mart
Chris Hamlin, Wal-Mart
Scott Lund, Rite-Way Mobile Home Repair, Inc.
Joyce Trebisovsky, Park Plaza
Delores DeMars, Park Plaza
APPROVAL OF JANUARY 12. 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION MINiJTES•
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve the
January 12, 1994, Planning Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT REOUEST
P.S. #94-01. BY SCOTT LUND OF RITE-WAY MOBILE HOME REPAIR:
To split the East 180 feet of Lot 3, Block 1, Central View
Manor 2nd Addition, and combine it with Lots 7, 8, and 9,
Block 1, Central View Manor, generally located on Highway 65
south of Fireside Drive and north of 73 1/2 Avenuee
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIN(3 AYE� CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARIN(3 OPEN AT 7:32 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated that since the petitioner, Scott Lund, was not
yet present, it might be appropriate to continue discussion on P.S.
#94-01 and ZOA #94-01 until later in the meeting.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to continue the
public hearings on P.S. #94-01 and ZOA #94-01 until later in the
'� meeting.
�
PLANNING COMMI88ION MEETING. MARCH 9. 199g PAGE 2
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINa AYE, CHAIRPER80N N�EWMArT DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY.
2. PUBLIC HEARIATG: CO1dSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP
�94-01. BY WAL-MART STORES:
Per Section 205.14.O1.C.(13) of the Fridley City Code, to
allow garden centers or nurseries which require outside
display or storage of inerchandise on Lot 1, Block 1, Wal-Mart
in Fridley, the same being 8540 University Avenue N.Ee
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICL VOTE, ALL VOTIN� AYE� CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED 711�TD THE PIIBLIC HEARINa OPEN AT 7s33 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this property is located at the intersection
of 85th and University Avenues. The property is zoned C-2, General
Business District. There is additional C-2 zoning to the south,
and R-3, Multiple Dwelling District, to the west. Springbrook
Nature Center is also located to the west.
Ms. McPherson stated that in 1992, the Conunission and the City
Council approved special use permit, SP #92-07, to allow the
,�-,� construction of the existing garden center. This approval required
certain design elements in the garden center including rock face
block knee walls and wrought iron fencing. The stipulations to
that request required bulk items to be stored adjacent to the
building and that there be no outdoor storage of chemicals.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioners are now requesting a special
use permit to allow temporary garden sales to occur from a"hoop
house'� and ��corralled" merchandise. A hoop house is a temporary
greenhouse constructed of aluminum tubing and plastic.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioners propose to locate this
temporary garden center in the southeast corner of the parking lot
across the driving aisle from the existing garden center. The
petitioners are requesting this second special use permit as a
result of the large amount of inerchandise which is shipped to them
during the growing season and which will not fit into the current
garden center.
Ms. McPherson stated that in 1993, Wal-Mart conducted garden sales
on the sidewalk in front of the retail store and also had materials
stored on pallets in the parking lot. Wal-Mart was informed by the
City that this practice was not permitted by code and requested
that the materials be moved.
Ms. McPherson stated staff inet with the Manager and Assistant
''� Manager of Wal-Mart to discuss the previous request, SP #92-07,
which permitted the existing garden center and the design elements.
Staff informed Wal-Mart that if the current request was to occur
PLANNING COMMI88ION MFETING. MARCH 9. 1994 PAGE 3
'� on a permanent basis, it would be inconsistent with the previous
request approved in 1992. The intent of the original request was
to require a more visually appearing location for the garden center
and to contain activity in that area.
,�
Ms. McPherson stated one of the managers stated they would contact
the Wal-Mart corporate office to see if the corporate office would
agree to the expansion of the existing garden center. At this
time, staff has not heard the corporate office's response. If Wal-
Mart is agreeabie to the expansion of the existing garden center,
this special use permit request could be approved by the Planning
Commission on a one year basis. Staff is recommending that the
current special use permit request not be approved as a permanent
activity.
Ms . McPherson stated the location for the hoop house and the garden
materials do not appear to conflict with the traffic on-site;
however, approximately 40-50 parking spaces will be lost. Sales
would begin in late March/early April and would continue until
approximately August.
Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the special use permit, SP #94-01, to allow
the garden center on a one year basis. Staff recommends the
following stipulations:
1. Bulk items shall be stored in the constructed garden
center where they shall be screened from the public
right-of-way.
2. Outdoor storage of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides shall not occur in the parking lot.
3. Wal-Mart shall submit plans for an enlarged garden center
for Planning Commission and City Council review by
November 1, 1994, for the 1995 sales year.
Mr. Saba stated he had a question regarding stipulation #2 which
refers to the storage of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides. Does that mean that chemical fertilizers, pesticides,
or herbicides could be brought out to the parking lot on a daily
basis for sale?
Ms. McPherson stated that the original stipulation stated: ��There
shall be no outside storage of chemical fertilizers, pesticides,
or herbicides." There is no condition as to whether these items
could be outside temporarily and them moved back into the store.
Mr. Saba and Mr. Sielaff agreed that they did not want the storage
or sale of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides
occurring outside the main building.
�
Mr. Newman stated the Wal-Mart corporate office has to agree to
enlarge the existing garden center in the future. If the
PLANNINa CON�II88ION MEETIN�. MARCH 9. 1994 PAaE 9
��� Commission limits the special use permit to this sales season only
and Wal-Mart decides not to expand the existing garden center, then
Wal-Mart has to take its chances as to whether or not the City
would approve the special use permit for another season. Did staff
have a problem with an additional stipulation limiting the special
use permit to one year?
�
Ms. Dacy stated staff had no objection to that.
Mr. Chris Hamlin, Assistant Manager for the Fridley Wal-Mart store,
stated that last week the Divisional Vice President did commit
verbally that he would approve the expansion of the existing garden
center within the next two years and possibly even by next season.
If stipulation #3 states that Wal-Mart must submit plans for an
enlarged garden center by November 1, 1994, then they will do so
by that date.
Mr. Hamlin stated that last year was the first garden center season
for this store, and they received a larger quantity of live goods
than could fit into the existing garden center. In order to make
a good presentation of the live goods they received, it was
necessary to take some of them outside the existing garden center.
This year they want to alleviate that problem by displaying live
goods outside in the parking lot. This special use permit request
is basically just a temporary measure. The ideal situation would
be to expand the existing garden center, and that expansion has
been committed to by the Divisional Vice President.
Mr. Hamlin stated they will be using a new radio-frequency register
which will alleviate the need for an electrical cord running from
the building through the parking loto
Mr. Newman asked if Mr. Hamlin had any objection to changing
stipulation #3 to read: "Outdoor sales and storage of chemical
fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides shall not occur in the
parking lot. ��
Mr. Hamlin stated he had no objection to that. There is no reason
to store these chemicals outside, as they would be ruined and
unsalable if they got wet.
Mr. Sielaff stated another concern if the chemicals were stored or
sold outside would be spillage which could go into the storm sewer.
Ms. Modig stated the driving aisle between the existing garden
center and the parking lot is very busy. How will Wal-Mart ensure
the safety of customers crossing the driving aisle to the parking
lot?
Mr. Hamlin stated that is a valid concern. At the garden center,
they always have an exit greeter. This person could help with
�� traffic and make sure that the customers cross safely to the
�
parking lot. He stated he would be open to any other suggestions
the Commission members might have about this concern.
�'1
PLANNINa COMMI88ION ME�TINa, MARCS 9. 1994 PAaB 5
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIN(3 AYE� CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARINd CLOSED AT 7s55 P.M.
MoTIOAT by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend to City
Council approval of Special Use Permit, SP �94-01, by Wal-Mart
stores, per Section 205.14.O1.C.(13) of the Fridley City Code, to
allow garden centers or nurseries which require outside display or
storage of inerchandise on Lot 1, Block 1, Wal-Mart in Fridley, the
same being 8540 University Avenue N.E., with the following
stipulations:
1. Bulk items shall be stored in the constructed garden
center where they shall be screened from the public
right-of-way.
2. Outdoor storage and sales of chemical fertilizers,
pesticides, or herbicides shall not occur in the parking
lot.
3. Wal-Mart shall submit plans for an enlarged garden center
for Planning Commission and City Council review by
� November 1, 1994, for the 1995 sales year.
4. Special Use Permit, SP #94-01, will be for one year only.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERBON NEAMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to Council on March 21,
1994.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT REOUEST
P_ G_ �lAd�i�i7 �it% ennmm TTTI�TT AT TTTT1 T.��at• ��w���� ������ ____ __ `
To split the East 180 feet of Lot 3, Block 1, Central View
Manor 2nd Addition, and combine it with Lots 7, 8, and 9,
Block 1, Central View Manor, generally located on Highway 65
south of Fireside Drive and north of 73 1/2 Avenue.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to reopen the
public hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CBAIRPLRSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARIN6 REOPENED AT 8:00 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this vacant property is generally located
north of 73 1/2 Avenue, south of Fireside Drive, and east of
Highway 65. The property is zoned C-3, General Shopping Center
'�1 district, and M-1, Light Industrial district.
PLANNINa COI�lI88ION MESTINa. MARCS 9. 1994 PAQE 6
� Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner ia proposinq to split off
approximately 180 feet of the easterly portion of Lot 3, Block 1,
Central View Manor 2nd Addition, and combine it with Lots 7, 8,
and 9 of Central View Addition. The petitioner proposes to
construct a 13,000 square foot building on the property with
parking and outdoor storage areas.
Ms . McPherson stated the proposed lot that will be created as a
result of the replat meets the 150 foot lot width requirement;
however, it does not meet the minimum lot area requirement of 1.5
acres. The subject parcel is approximately .11 acres or 4,791.6
square feet short of the requirement. Section 211.05 of the
Fridley City Code does allow variancea to the code requirements if
the Planning Commission or City Council find that certain
regulations are not applicable. However, the petitioner does have
an opportunity to work with the existing property owner to acquire
either an additional 15 feet along the entire westerly lot line or
approximately 34 feet along the northerly portion (Lot 3, Block 1,
Central View Manor 2nd Addition). It would make more sense to move
the entire lot line as opposed to just the northerly portion as two
odd shaped lots are left by just moving the northerly portion.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has submitted a site plan
showing a 13,000 square foot building. There is.parking in front
adjacent to the public right-of-way and the proposed storage area
� to the rear of the building. The building meets the setback
requirements for the M-1, Light Industrial district, and the
proposed lot coverage is 21.4�. The petitioner does need to revise
the site plan to provide a 5 foot hard surface parking setback from
the building along the west and north sides of the building. There
is adequate room on site to provide this required setback.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner will need to provide additional
screening along the north and west lot lines. A screening fence
is located along the east lot line. There is a screening fence and
some existing vegetation along the north lot line between the
mobile home park and the proposed building. Staff is recommending
additional screening by adding seven evergreens 10 feet on center
along the fence. The evergreens will not only provide screening,
but will also meet the landscaping requirements of the district.
A third fence should be installed along the westerly property line
with slats to provide screening from the public right-of-way. This
is required if outdoor storage is to occur at the rear of the
building.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has provided a preliminary
grading and drainage plan which was reviewed by the Assistant
Public Works Director who had some additional comments. These
comments are included in the Staff Report. The petitioner will be
required to comply with those requirements prior to the issuance
of a building permit.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has provided a preliminary
landscape plan. The petitioner will need to submit a revised
PLANNING COMMI88ION MEETING. MARCH 9. 1994 PAGE 7
� landscape plan which provides a three foot high hedge or berm
screening the parking lot from the public right-of-way.
Underground irrigation is also required. The petitioner has
indicated that he will be saving the existing veqetation and trees
which are located on the property. In order to receive credit for
these trees, the petitioner must provide information as to the size
of the trees. The petitioner needs to add four evergreen trees to
the three proposed in the landscape plan to meet the 30� evergreen
requirement in the landscape requirements.
Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the plat request, P.S. #94-01, acknowledging
that the lot area does not meet the minimum 1.5 acre requirementa
While is recommended that the Commission acknowledge the lot area
variance, staff has stipulated that the petitioner should attempt
to meet the minimum lot area requirement prior to the City Council
meeting. Staff also recommends the following stipulations:
1. The petitioner shall submit a revised site plan prior to
the issuance of a building permit showing a 5 foot hard
surface setback along the west and north sides of the
buildingo
2. The petitioner shall provide additional screening through
planting of seven, 6 foot high coniferous trees along the
� north property line.
3. The petitioner shall construct a minimum 6 foot high
screening fence along the west property line. The
screening fence shall be constructed of chain link and
contain metal slats.
4. outdoor storage shall be permitted if the following
conditions are mete
a. The outdoor storage shall occur on a hard surface.
b. The materials to be stored shall be less than 15
feet in height.
c. The materials to be stored shall not be seen from
the public right-of-way.
d. The petitioner shall install a gate with slats
parallel to the front line of the building.
5. The petitioner shall submit an amended landscape plan
prior to the issuance of a building permit with the
following changes:
,� a. Underground irrigation shall be provided.
PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEETINa� MARCH 9. 1994 PAa$ 8
'� b. The dimensions of the existing trees to be saved
shall be indicated on the plan to calculate credit
for the existing trees.
c. Four additional 6 foot high coniferous trees shall
be added to comply with the ordinance. The i
coniferous trees shall be planted along the north
property line for additional screening from the
residential district to the north.
6e The petitioner shall submit a revised grading and
drainage plan complying with Scott Erickson's memo dated
March 2, 1994, prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
7. Yf the fence adj acent to the mobile home park is removed,
the petitioner shall install a minimum 6 foot high
screening fence with slats along the north lot line.
8. The petitioner shall revise the plat to meet the minimum
lot area requirement of the M-1, Light Industrial
district.
Mr. Scott Lund, owner of Rite-Way Mobile Home Repair, Inc., stated
stipulation #8 seems to be the biggest concern for him. He has
,� talked to the property owner, Alvin Schrader, from which he
purchased the back portion of the property. Mr. Schrader is not
interested in selling an additional 15 feet all along the westerly
lot line and it would be cost-prohibitive if Mr. Schrader did agree
to sell. Mr. Schrader is reluctant to lose any prime frontage.
Mr. Lund stated stipulation #4-a requires that the outdoor storage
be on a hard surface. He does not propose to have any long term
vehicles stored in back, although his mechanics usually have one
semi-trailer that would be stored in the back indefinitely for the
storage of miscellaneous parts. However, since it is just a
trailer, there would be no leakage of fluidse
Mr. Lund stated he did not want to have to spend the money to
asphalt the entire back of the property. He would be willing to
put down Class 5 or something equivalent, and the area would be
fenced in for privacy and security.
Mr. Lund stated that from time to time, he does obtain some mobile
homes that will be parked on the property, but not for extended
periods of time. The mobile homes are used for the rental of
temporary housing for fire victims, etc., especially in rural
areas.
Mr. Lund stated he has no problem with any of the other
stipulations.
�
Mr. Oquist asked if Mr. Lund could identify the area needed for
the trailer and make that area hard surface.
�
,
PLANNINa COMNlISSION MEETINa. MARCS 9. 1994 PAGE 9
Mr. Lund stated it would be a waste of money to asphalt the area
where the mobile homes would be parked as they just sink through
the asphalt when the asphalt becomes soft.
Mr. Oquist stated concrete could be poured on the areas where the
tires would sit. That wouid prevent the mobile homes from sinking
through the asphalte
Mr. Lund stated that part of his building will be used by other
tenants. At this time, he does not know who those tenants will be.
Some of these tenants may need some outdoor storage. It would be
very expensive to asphalt/concrete the storage a=eas.
Ms. Dacy stated the proposed building is a typical size industrial
buildinq, and the ordinance is very clear that any type of
vehicular use area has to occur on a hard surface. It is going to
take some area for vehicle turn-around, and the site plan shows
adequate area to provide for that. Yn order for staff to be
consistent on all types of development applications, staff must
recommend hard surface. She realized that the asphalt does become
soft and sinks under heavy equipment, so maybe there is an option
of a certain portion of the area that is asphalt and a portion that
is of another type of material.
�� Mr. Newman stated he agreed with staff. He appreciated the
petitioner�s concerns; but if the City is going to have this
ordinance, he did not see any justification to not enforce the hard
surface requirement for Mr. Lund when they are enforcing it
elsewhere in the City.
Mr. Dacy stated that, practically speaking, she believed the
petitioner is going to need the hard surface anyway in the near
future, and it might be more cost-effective to install it now
rather than in the future.
Mr. Lund stated staff may be right; he just did not want to see an
asphalt jungle.
Mr. Newman stated no one wants to see an asphalt jungle. He
believed the recommendation is that Mr. Lund needs to figure out
what area will be used for storage, and then that portion used for
storage needs to be hard surfaced.
Ms. Delores DeMars stated she and Ms. Joyce Trebisovsky from the
Park Plaza mobile home park do not have any objection to the
development proposed by Mr. Lund.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public
hearing.
^ UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:35 P.M.
PLANNING COMMI88ION MEETINa. MARCH 9. 1994 PAa$ 10
`� Mr. Kondrick stated he will vote in favor of the plat request with
the deletion of stipulation #8. It will be a nice improvement for
this area.
�
Mr. Oquist agreed. This site has been kind of a dumping qround
for a long time. He also agreed to delete stipulation #8.
Ms. Modig stated she will vote in favor of the plat request;
however, she is concerned about the outdoor storage. There are
other businesses in this area that have never cleaned up their
outdoor storage. If they eliminate stipulation #8 regarding the
minimum lot area, does Mr. Lund need to get a variance?
Mr. Newman stated that by approving the plat, they are approving
the lot as it is. This is a variance of 1/10 of an acre. The City
has done this in the past for lots that would otherwise be
unbuildable, so a precedent has already been set.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend to City
Council approval of P.S. #94-01, by Scott Lund of Rite-Way Home
Repair, to split the East 180 feet of Lot 3, Block 1, Central View
Manor 2nd Addition, and combine it with Lots 7, 8, and 9, Block 1,
Central View Manor, generally located on Highway 65 south of
Fireside Drive and north of 73 1/2 Avenue, with the following
stipulations:
1. The petitioner shall submit a revised site plan prior to
the issuance of a building permit showing a 5 foot hard
surface setback along the west and north sides of the
building.
2. The petitioner shall provide additional screening through
planting of seven, 6 foot high coniferous trees along the
north property line.
3. The petitioner shall construct a minimum 6 foot high
screening fence along the west property line. The
screening fence shall be constructed of chain link and
contain metal slats.
4. Outdoor storage shall be permitted if the following
conditions are met:
a. The outdoor storage shall occur on a hard surface.
b. The materials to be stored shall be less than 15
feet in height.
c. The materials to be stored shall not be seen from
the public right-of-way.
� d. The petitioner shall install a gate with slats
parallel to the front line of the building.
PLANNINa COMMI88ION MESTINa. MARCB 9. 1994 PAGE 11
r� 5. The petitioner shall submit an amended landscape plan
prior to the issuance of a building permit with the
following changes:
a. Underground irrigation shall be provided.
b. The dimensions of the existing trees to be saved
shall be indicated on the plan to calculate credit
for the existing trees.
c. Four additional 6 foot high coniferous trees shall
be added to comply with the ordinance. The 7
coniferous trees shall be planted along the north
property line for additional screening from the
residential district to the north.
6. The petitioner shall submit a revised grading and
drainage plan complying with Scott Erickson's memo dated
March 2, 1994, prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
7. If the fence adjacent to the mobile home park is removed,
the petitioner shall install a minimum 6 foot high
screening fence with slats along the north lot line.
� IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER80N NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: COIVSIDERATION OF A REZONIIVG REOUEST ZOA #94
O1. BY SCOTT LUND OF RITE-WAY MOBILE HOME REPAIR:
To rezone property from C-3, General Shopping Center District,
to M-1, Light Industrial District, on the East 180 feet of Lot
3, BLock 1, Central View Manor Second Addition, generally
located on Highway 65 south of Fireside Drive and north of 73
1/2 Avenue N.E.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to waive the
reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWNlPIN DBCLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PIIBLIC HEARINa OPEN AT 8:40 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the rezoning request only applies to the
easterly 180 feet of the Lot 3, Block 1, Central View Manor Second
Addition, which is the northerly one-third of the proposed
development property.
Ms. McPherson stated that in evaluating rezoning requests, three
criteria must be met:
1. Compatibility of the proposed use with the proposed
^ district;
PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEETIN�� MARCH 9. 1994 PAGE 12
� 2. Compatibility of the proposed district with adjacent uses
and zoning; and
3. Compliance with the proposed use with the proposed
district requirements.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is requesting that the zoning
be changed from C-3, General Shopping Center district, to M-1,
Light Industrial district. The three lots to the south are
currently zoned M-1, Light Industrial. The petitioner has proposed
to construct an office/warehouse building which is a permitted use
within the M-1 district.
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed M-1, Light Industrial district,
would be compatible with the existing M-1, Light Industrial
district, zoning to the south and east of the subject parcel.
Parcels to the west will remain zoned C-3, General Shopping Center
district, and the parcel to the north is zoned R-4, Mobile Home,
and C-3, General Shopping Center. The mobile home park has been
located adjacent to the M-1 zoning to the east since it was
constructed in the early 1960s. There are screening requirements
in the M-1 district which require additional buffering and
screening for the residential zoning. Locating the M-1 zoning next
to the C-3 zoning, which is the most intensive commercial district
in the City is a compatible zoning practice. Also, rezoning this
� portion of Lot 3 would create a better development parcel.
Therefore, the proposed district is compatible with both of the
adjacent uses and the zoning.
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed development meets the minimum
code requirements for the M-1, Light Industrial districta The
property as proposed meets all the district requirements with the
exception of the lot area requirement discussed with the plat
request. The Council may grant a variance to the lot area during
the subdivision process. Therefore, the proposed use complies with
the proposed district requirements.
Ms. McPherson stated the rezoning meets the three criteria for
approval. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the rezoning request with one stipulation: The plat
request, P.S. #94-04, shall be approvede
Mr. Kondrick asked if staff has received any negative responses
regarding the plat or rezoning requests.
Ms. McPherson stated she received only one call from someone from
the SuperAmerica Station located south of 73rd Avenue who just
wanted information about the development but was not opposed to it.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPLR80N NEWM1Ald DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOBED AT 8:46 P.M.
PLANNINa COMMI88ION MESTINa. MARCH 9. 1994 PAa� 13
r",
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to recommend to City
Council approval of rezoning request, ZOA #94-01, by Scott Lund of
Rite-Way Mobile Home Repair, to rezone property from C-3, General
Shopping Center District, to M-1, Light Industrial District, on the
East 180 feet of Lot 3, BLock 1, Central View Manor Second
Addition, generally located on Highway 65 south of Fireside Drive
and north of 73 1/2 Avenue N.E., with the following stipulation:
1. The plat request, P.S. #94-04, shall be approved.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINa AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED ONANIMOIIBLY.
4. RECEIVE THE DECEMBER 21 1993 ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY & ENERGY
COMMISSION MIATUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the
December 21, 1993, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission
minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CBAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLYe
5. RECEIVE THE JANUARY 3 1994 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
� MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the
January 3, 1994, Parks & Recreation Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL DOTING AYE, CBAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRITsD IINANIMOIIBLY.
6. RECEIVE THE JANiJARY 6 1994 HOUSIATG & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MINUTESs
MoTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the
January 6, 1994, Housing & Redevelopment Authority minutese
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINC� AYE� CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED 'fi8E
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
7. RECEIVE THE JANUARY 11 1994 APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the
January 11, 1994, Appeals Commission minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, AI,L VOTING AYF, CHAIRPER80N N�EAMAAT DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
8. RECEIVE THE FEBRUARY 3 1994 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MINUTES:
PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEETINQ, MARCH 9, 1994 PAGE 14
� MOTION by Mr. Rondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive the
February 3, 1994, Housing & Redevelopment Authority minutes.
IIPON A VOIC$ VOTS, ALL VOTING AYE� CSAIRP8R80N NEWMAN DECLARED T$E
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY.
9. RECEIVE THE FEBRUARY 10. 1994. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the February
18, 1994, Human Resources Commission minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
10. RECEIVE THE FEBRUARY 7� 1994, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to receive the
February 7, 1994, Parks & Recreation Commission minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED T8E
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
ADJOURNMENT•
"�
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to adjourn the
meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Newman
declared the motion carried and the March 9, 1994, Planning
Commission meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully sub�,itted,
�� a
� ��� �� V ��� �����
Lyn � Saba
Recording Secretary
,�1