Loading...
PL 10/02/2002 - 30925� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 2002 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the October 2, 2002, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Diane Savage, Barb Johns, David Kondrick, Brad Dunham, Dean Saba, LeRoy Oquist Members Absent: Larry Kuechle Others Present: Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Dave McLellan, Van-O-Lite Bob Fulgency, Attomey for Van-O-Lite Glenn Hype, Van-O-Lite Stephen & Marisha Schletty, Van-O-Lite Stephen McLellan, Van-O-Lite APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 18, 2002, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES; MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Savage, to approve the September 18, 2002, Planning Commission meeting minutes. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Special Use Permit, SP #02-08, by Van-O-Lite, Inc., to allow unscreened outdoor storage, generally located at 5945 University Avenue NE. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to waive the reading and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:31 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioner is requesting a special use permit to allow exterior storage of containers in the C-2, General Business District, at 5945 University Avenue. Section 205 of the City Code requires a special use permit to allow outdoor storage in this zoning district. Mr. Bolin presented photos of the containers (and structure) for which the petitioner is requesting a special use permit in order to keep on the side of the building. City staff recommended denial of the special use permit request. The existing building was constructed in 2001 and required variances for this structure and parking requirements. As a result, the open space around the building is at a premium. This site requires variances to reduce the front yard setback for parking; there is a variance to reduce the required planting area in the front and also a variance to reduce the parking stall width in order to fit everything into this site. There is � not a lot of extra space on the site. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 2002 PAGE 2 Mr. Bolin stated that in the past, the petitioner applied for a permit for a mezzanine which would �,.� be used for the storage of materials. A mezzanine would be basically a second floor in the building. Currently the way the building is configured, there is office space above half the first floor area, and the rest of the building is open from the floor up. The petitioner had submitted a building application to construct a mezzanine in that upper area for storage. He stated the petitioner chose not to pursue construction of that mezzanine because of the sprinkler requirements that would have been triggered by the City adopting Chapter 1306 of the State Building Code. Mr. Bolin stated that according to staff s analysis, building a mezzanine is the best altemative for storage on this site, moving the storage from the outside to the interior of the building where it belongs. The containers are highly visible from 60�' Avenue and the residential neighborhood from the east. Even though they have been painted to match the building, they still stick out as storage containers. These may leave the City with undesirable image issues and would set a precedent for other commercial properties who would rather store goods outside than invest in their property to provide proper storage inside. Storage containers will potentially diminish the normal enjoyment of the property surrounding this site. Mr. Bolin stated fire roadway standards, Article 10 of the Fire Code, require a 20-foot width of unobstructed clearance to get around this site. The location of the containers provide 18 feet 10 inches befinreen the parking stalls and the containers, so there is inadequate room there. Because this site is already maximized, further reduction of the aisle space could potentially harm the firefighters' ability to maneuver on this site. Mr. Bolin showed a site plan showing the containers on the back side of the building and, ^ according to the petitioner's measurement, there is 18 feet 10 inches befinreen the containers and the parking stalls on that side. Mr. Saba asked how would this not be in compliance with the new proposed outdoor storage ordinance? Mr. Bolin replied the proposed outdoor storage ordinance is for industrial districts. Commercial districts are not included in that ordinance, and the Council is discussing a number of screening requirements that would be attached to that proposed ordinance. Ms. Johns asked what kind of fence separates the property from the residential property. Mr. Bolin replied there is a residential-style wood fence. This was a requirement of the variance and plat requests that went along with this development. Mr. Oquist inquired about the dumpster and its location. Mr. Bolin stated that needs to be located in an approved site that cannot interfere with the circulation on the site. Ms. Savage related a phone message was received from Donna Leach and letters were received from Paul Klein and Archie Lahti who are neighbors opposing the containers. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the letters. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 2002 PAGE 3 Ms. Johns inquired how the sprinkler system wouid be placed in the building when the � mezzanine is added and whether there is a sprinkler system currently in the building. Mr. Bolin stated any more square footage to the interior of the building would require a sprinkler. He did not believe a sprinkler system was installed at this time. Ms. Johns asked if that meant a sprinkler system would have to be installed throughout the whole building. Mr. Bolin replied, yes, that was his understanding. Mr. Dunham asked if the dumpster was in the right location. Mr. Bolin stated they would have to look at it. He knew it was a stipulation with the variances and that it also needed to be in a City-approved dumpster enclosure. They have talked in the past about different locations on this site and there are probably other options. Mr. Kondrick asked how high the fence was in the rear of properiy on the property line dividing the housing and the building. Mr. Bolin stated he believed it was approximately six feet. Attomey for Van-O-Lite, Robert J. Fulgency, made a presentation. Mr. Fulgency replied to the three reasons staff denied the special use permit as follows: � He pointed out the painting of the containers matched that of the building and how you could not see the containers from 50 feet away. He showed a photo of the fence as a view of what the neighbors would have. He read from Section 205.14, C-2, General Business Requirements, Section 7(2) which provides all materials and commercial equipment shall be kept in a building or shall be fully screened so as to not be visible from public right-of-way. He stated you cannot see the contents of the containers and the material inside is screened, fully complying with the City Code. In relation to impact of the neighborhood, there is none because of the painting of the containers, the fence, and the materials inside are screened. He pointed out that �rou cannot see the containers from the major city boulevard, University Avenue. Also, 60 Street is not a major boulevard. He also stated he measured the area and there is a 20-foot clearance. Mr. Fulgency provided a history of the business and stated that in 2000, Van-O-Lite secured a new site because of storage problems at the old site at 6041 University Avenue. They moved in January 2001. He stated one of the personnel called the planning office and was told, when he asked about outdoor storage containers, that they were not encouraged but were permitted. So, based on that information they purchased and used the containers and never heard from anyone for six months. Mr. Fulgency stated Van-O-Lite prepared new architectural plans to include plans for a mezzanine; but when they presented them, they were told by the Planning Department that a sprinkler system would be required. Van-O-Lite has applied for a loan to install a sprinkler system and will build the mezzanine and install the sprinkler system once the loan is approved. They are looking at a special use permit for only 6 months to a year while they install the mezzanine. � Mr. Kondrick asked if the distance of 18 feet 10 inches or 20 feet is from the outside of the containers from the building to the end of the road surface where a fire prevention piece of apparatus would be driving through there. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 2002 PAGE 4 Mr. Fulgency stated that if you measure from the edge of those storage containers to where a ^ car is, it is 20 feet in length. Only cars are parked back there. Van-O-Lite has an agreement with AI-Anon to use its parking spaces for a few months and not have any cars parked there. The president of Van-O-Lite, Dave McLellen, stated it was always their intent to use the mezzanine and they have been working towards that. Ms. Savage asked that if the special use permit is denied by City Council, what would they do with the containers? Mr. McLellen replied they would have to get rid of the containers; that they would have to sell them back. Mr. Oquist asked what would they do with the materials. Mr. McLellan replied that is what the mezzanine was planned for all along. Mr. Oquist stated that in the packet received from Mr. Fulgency, there is letter from Wells Fargo and JTD showing that Van-O-Lite has now applied and appears they now have the financing and are moving ahead. Ms. Johns asked whether they have approached the City on what those plans are. Mr. McLellan replied they are looking at a couple of options on the mezzanine and the modifications to further comply and/or qualify process. ^ Mr. Kondrick asked about the height of the containers? Mr. McLellan replied they are 8 feet high. Mr. Kondrick asked about the height of the fence? Mr. McLellan replied the fence is 6%z to 7 feet high. Ms. Johns asked if Van-O-Lite has considered using huge shelf-type units which she thought would be much cheaper. Mr. McLellan replied there are a number of aisles to facilitate the moving of a forklift. Ms. Johns stated they would gain in the height of the property, not the square footage. Mr. McLellan commented they could use a much bigger container. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:58 P.M. Ms. Savage asked if there was some temporary possibility allowing temporary storage? ,.� Mr. Bolin replied, no, state statute does not allow that. Once a special use permit is granted, it remains with the property. By approving a temporary special use permit, they would have a fight later in trying to revoke the special use permit. There is no sunset clause that can be placed on a special use permit. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 2002 PAGE 5 n Ms. Savage stated sometimes they grant some temporary outdoor storage and asked how is that done. Mr. Bolin repiied there is a special use permit that allows for seasonal outdoor sales and that there is a special use permit process that is specific to those items. Ms. Savage stated she recalled some other situations where there was just temporary outdoor storage for something special, i.e., an auto show. Mr. Bolin replied in the case of the auto show at Columbia Arena, they have a special use permit that allows them to have the outdoor sales three times per year; the permit is not temporary but limits how often they can have their outdoor sales. Mr. Kondrick inquired about the difference in the 18 feet to 20 feet distance between the containers and the parking spaces. Mr. Bolin confirmed it is 18 feet 10 inches from the container to the edge of the painted stripe. He stated the petitioner's attomey is stating that when cars park there, there is 20 feet from the edge of the containers to the small car parked there. Mr. Kondrick inquired if cars were not there, what would the distance be? He also commented that he could not see containers from the street behind the building when he drove by. Ms. Savage stated the fence it not very high and the residents can see from the upper floors of their homes. � Mr. Oquist commented the containers are painted now and really do blend in. Ms. Savage stated that by granting the special use permit, there is the danger of setting a precedent for others. Mr. Oquist asked if they could stipulate certain things. Ms. Savage stated that possibly the containers could be removed within a certain amount of time. Ms. Johns pointed out that then there would be a special use permit still in force. She also expressed concern about a fire and the business has no sprinkler system. Mr. Oquist commented they cannot put a time duration on the special use permit and there is nothing saying they could maybe do the mezzanine thing but keep the storage. They may need additional storage and the containers may stay there. He also commented about the precedent they would be setting. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Saba, to deny Special Use Permit, SP 02-08. UPON A VOICE VOTE - MR. SABA, MS. SAVAGE, MS. JOHNS, MR. DUNHAM, AND MR. OQUIST VOTING AYE - MR. KONDRICK VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-1. � Ms. Savage stated that Council will make a final decision on this special use permit on October 14. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 2002 PAGE 6 2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 28, 2002. APPEALS COMMISSION � MEETING. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, to receive the September 18, 2002, Appeals Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 5, 2002, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the September 5, 2002, Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 17. 2002, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the September 17, 2002, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. n OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Bolin introduced the new recording secretary, Denise Letendre. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to adjoum the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE SEPTEMBER 18, 2002, PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED AT 8:09 P.M. RespectFully submitted, �°vc��. � c��-� �- Denise M. Letendre � Recording Secretary ,�