Loading...
ZOA 83-03CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the May 16, 1983, P1 order at 7:34 p.m. / ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Mr. Nielson (fob Members Absent: Brian Good ing Commission meeting to quist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Saba, Mr. Kondrick, . Svanda) Others Present: Bill D Lon, Associate Planner L. R ert Erickson, 85 - 3rd Ave. S.E., New Brighton Ma aret A. Seger, 1401 - 73rd Ave. N.E. e attached list APPROVAL OF 4 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: !LOTION BYR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST, TO APPROVE THE RAY 4, 1983, PLANNING ;;;ISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARWIED UNANIMOUSLY. ' 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA P83-03, BY. L. ROBERT ERICKSON: ezone the West Half of Tot �, and all of Lots 5 6 and 7, Lucia Lane Addition, from R-1 (single family dwelling areas] to R-3 (general multiple family dwellings) to allow the construction �i inium project, the same beim - tssisstpp� Stree MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZOA 1183-03 BY L. ROBERT ERICKSON. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:36 P.M. Mr. Deblon stated the property is located on the corner of Mississippi St. and TH 65, west of Lucia Lane. The proposal is for a rezoning from R-1 to R-3. and would consist of a condominium development where the occupants form an association and own the land jointly. The proposal is for three twin homes •; combined with an eight -unit carriage -manor type home. Mr. Deblon stated the project has been moved over to the west away from Lucia lane with access onto Mississippi because of the developer's sensitivity to the existing single family residences. Q 16 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 189 1983 PAGE 2 Ms. Gabel asked if the project met all the setback requirements. Mr. Deblon stated a variance from 35 feet to 25 feet would be needed on the north property line. Mr. Deblon stated the plan meets all the parking requirements, and there is the. potential to make visitor parking. Mr. Deblon stated that condominiums can be dissolved and the properties sold individually in the future, so Staff had to take into consideration the possi- bility of the properties being split without further variances. With the new zero lot line subdivision regulation,some of the double bungalow units could go zero lot line as a twin home. This has been allowed in Fridley in the past. This plan does meet most of the requirements for a possible subdivision in the future. Mr. Deblon made the following additional comments on the proposal. 1. A variance is required from 35' to 25' on the north property line. 2. Fencing and landscaping is required for district separation. 3. Drainage plan is required (Rice Creek Watershed District has .to approve this drainage plan). 4. Concrete curbing and blacktop per standard code requirements 5. Will need an additional 20 foot easement for bikeway/walkway ,roadway. 6. Engineering Department has a concern about the location of the access onto Mississippi St. in relationship to the access onto Highway 65. The distance is only 160 feet. With the County's plans for widening Mississippi for a right turn lane and the number of cars already existing on Mississippi, Engineering was very concerned that there could be congestion and some problems. Mr. Deblon stated there are some rather deep lots north of this property. He did not know if any of the owners of these lots had any plans for subdivision. He stated there is enough square footage to divide, but they would not be very optimum lots because of the traffic on Highway 65; however, the City has to consider any future access to these lots. It was a judgement call that might have to be determined as to whether these lots would ever be split. Ms. Schnabel asked where the garages were located and which way the buildings would face. The petitioner, Mr. Erickson stated the garages were located in the inner court. The rear elevation and backyards will face Lucia Lane. The rear elevation will have a deck and patio door on the upper level one-half flight up. Ms. Schnabel asked if Mr. Erickson had built any of these types of dwellings in the metropolitan area. Mr. Erickson stated he has built in Coon Rapids, Eden Prairie, New Hope, and Brooklyn Park. r PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 3 Ms. Schnabel asked that of the buildings he has built,were any of them rental units? Mr. Erickson stated that since 1980, he has built only owner -occupied. All these units will be owner -occupied and will be FHA/VA approved. Ms. Schnabel asked the approximate price of the units. Mr. Erickson stated the twin homes will run in the mid -60's with the double bungalows being just under that. Ms. Schnabel asked what type of screening Mr. Erickson would use between this property and the R-1 properties. Mr. Erickson stated he was thinking of wooden fencing; however, because the lot is so heavily wooded, it was hard to decide what to do for landscaping. He stated he would save every tree he could. Mr. Saba asked why the rear of the double bungalows would face Lucia Lane. Mr. Erickson stated there were two reasons for this: (1) He wanted to keep the project centralized so everyone could use the same road for snow plowing and other maintenance; and (2) the biggest complaint from the neighborhood seemed to be to not put any more traffic on Lucia Lane. By facing the buildings in, this kept the traffic off Lucia Lane. Ms. Schnabel stated she was a little bit concerned about the plainness of the rear of the buildings facing Lucia Lane when all the rest of the homes on Lucia Lane are facing front. It seemed inconsistent with the neighborhood, yet she understood what Mr. Erickson was saying in terms of traffic. Mr. Erickson stated this is not inconsistent in condo developments. A number of condo developments are done this way. Mr. Saba asked Mr. Erickson if he would consider turning the buildings around to face Lucia Lane. Mr. Erickson stated he would consider turning the buildings around; however, because of the heavily wooded area, he did not think the buildings could be seen that well from Lucia Lane anyway. If the buildings were turned around, a lot of trees would be lost because of the driveways. Ms. Schnabel asked for questions and concerns from the people in the audience. Mr. Russell Burris, 1150 Mississippi St., stated he would like to submit to the Planning Commission a copy of his objections. He reviewed it for the Commission: 1. Spot zoning. 2. Traffic congestion - exit on Mississippi St. would be hazardous. 3. Good or poor construction and cost per unit rental or homeowner. 4. Sewer problems - Burris and Lane are on dead end sewer line. City has to backflush this from time to time to keep sewer line open. A separate sewer line to Lucia Lane is a must for which the homeowners would.be assessed on their yaxes. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 4 5. What would prevent an investor from buying a unit and renting it out? 6. Garbage pickup - where would cans be placed? 7. 14 units probably would mean up to 28 cars. How many children? 8. Back of condo faces Lucia Lane which would not enhance the neighborhood. That would also mean children playing in backyard and running out on Lucia Lane. Mr. Burris stated that a few years back, the City of Fridley hired a reputable zoning company, and paid good money for them to rezone Fridley. Said company conformed the original findings of R-1 and recommended this property remain R-1. Mr. Burris stated it has been the concensus of the homeowners surrounding this property that three nice residential homes could be built on the property. This would then solve the problem once and for all. The homeowners would like to see this area developed as it should, according to the regulations and requirements of the zoning commission. Ms. Schnabel read the following letter from June Johnson, 6600 Lucia Lane: "Inasmuch as I cannot attend your meeting tonight with reference to the property on Mississippi and Highway 65, I would like to express my thoughts on the matter. Lucia Lane has been zoned for single family homes for many years with the exception of the apartments on the north end of the Lane. I do not feel it to be proper to have a multiple dwelling of the size proposed for the corner property. I feel there would be too much disrup- tion of traffic because of the entryway on Mississippi. Traffic going in either direction will be hampered by the cars going into or out of the lot. I purchased this home with the belief that this would remain a single family area, and I would like to have it remain so so that my property values will not be affected. We have a lot of extra traffic from the apartments and the Knights of Columbus Hall at the north end." Mr. Clarence Timo, 6517 Lucia Lane, presented a written petition for denial and objection to the rezoning request. He stated his objections were essentially the same as those expressed by Mr. Burris. 1. Spot rezoning 2. Traffic problems and hazards a. Traffic from KC Hall and apartments to the north already cause congestion. b. Highway 65 and Mississippi St. intersection already has a history of many serious (and some fatal) accidents. c. The driveway area within the complex would be like a huge parking lot, with possibly not enough room to safely accommodate up to 28 vehicles. Traffic movement within the area would pose dangers to residents and small children. d. Heavy traffic flow on all three sides of the proposed site would definitely pose a safety hazard to children whose play areas would be adjacent to the traffic. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 5 3. Depreciation of home values a. Loss of beautiful trees b. Duplexes and multiple dwellings are not as carefully maintained in general as single family homes. 4. Burden on homeowners a. Sewer and water mains are not equipped to handle such a large increase in population in such a small area. A sewer back-up problem already exists. 5. Increased density would not be consistent with urban and city planning which is designed to protect the quality of residential life. 6. Residents bought homes with the knowledge this property was zoned R-1, and they want the area to remain R-1. Ms. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated her concern was with off-street parking. Besides the 14 units with possibly two cars for each unit, there are also going to be guests. Sometimes it is easier to park on the street, and -the only place to park would be on Lucia Lane. With the apartments north on Lucia, there is ample parking, but still there are cars parking on the street. That had to be stopped with "no parking" signs in front of the homes. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was guest parking within the interior of the development. Mr. Deblon stated that according to the first draft plan, there is no guest parking, but some areas have been discussed for guest parking. Ms. Irene Haedtke, 6540 Lucia Lane, stated she would be very unhappy if she was "boxed" in by this development. There are beautiful trees on this lot, and in looking at the drawing of the development, she knew there would not be one oak tree left on that lot. Single family homes would be fine, because some of the trees could be saved. For ecology reasons, she did not think the development was feasible. Mr. Eugene Lane, 1132 Mississippi St., stated he has lived in Fridley for 32 years. In the morning between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 and between 4:00 and 7:00 in the afternoon, the intersection at Mississippi and Highway 65 is very busy. It is not feasible to put that much additional new traffic onto Mississippi. Mr. Henry Melcher, 6500 Pierce St., stated he would like to reinforce what the residents have already said. At 7:00 a.m. he has trouble making a left hand turn onto Mississippi. At 3:00-5:00 p.m., the cars are backed up past Lucia Lane past his house to get through the Mississippi/Highway 65 intersection. Mr. Timo had talked about the great number of accidents at this intersection, and Mr. Melcher stated this could be reinforced by looking at the police reports. Mr. Melcher stated he and his wife paced this area off, and if this development went into this area, there would virtually not be any oak trees left on the lot. He stated this is also too high a density to put into this area. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING,*MAY 18,'l983-- PAGE 6 Mr. Cory Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated his house would be facing the back end of the two double bungalows. He stated he has been delivering papers for six years, and he knows a little about what people leave in their back yards. He did not think they should have to look at these back yards and what might be left there. If there is only one garage for each unit, where are people going to store their lawn mowers, equipment, bicycles, and other things people usually store in a garage? Mr. Joe Randall, 1210 Mississippi St., stated his family was involved in an acci- dent at the intersection of Mississippi and Highway 65. He stated he rides the bus and has a difficult time crossing Highway 65 to catch the bus. It is a highly congested area. The oak trees are fantastic. He would like to see this area stay zoned residential as the zoning commission originally said. Ms. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated that in hearing the price range of the condo units, there is likely to be a lot of families with small children. She did not see any additional planning for play areas for these children. Mr. Dean Thomas, 6550 Lucia Lane, stated he also agreed with everything that has been said. He would be very unhappy to see this development. It is too many people in too small an area, and they would lose the beautiful trees. Mr. Darrel Goerdt, 6610 Lucia Lane, stated earlier in the meeting Mr. Deblon had mentioned the deep lots and whether any of the owners of these lots would consider subdividing their lots in the future. He stated he bought his lot because it is a deep lot, and he would never consider subdividing it. Mr. Erickson stated that some of the remarks he had heard seem to imply that second class citizens will be going into this development. He disagreed 100%. There will be a homeowners' association which has very rigid rules, so there will not be any trashy back yards. The maintenance is all hired out and none of the owners have any responsibility for the upkeep. Ms. Gabel stated she agreed with Mr. Erickson. It has been her experience that homeowners' associations do a very good job in maintaining a condo project. She also agreed with the comment that with the price range, these units will probably be first family homes and starter homes, and there probably would be a lot of children. She thought the idea of a play area should be considered in the project. Mr. Erickson stated he would be paying a large park fee and he felt that was adequate. He thought the bulk of the buyers will be empty nesters, retired people. This is based on the flow of buyers that are turning up in the different condo projects around the metropolitan area --Apple Valley, Eden Prairie, North Oaks, Coon Rapids. Ms. Joyce Swanson, 6601 Lucia Lane, stated this was all pure speculation, and they really do not know who will move into these units. This is an R-1 zoning, and there will be a density problem, traffic problems, and sewer and water problems. There will be no oak trees. There will be children. There will be parking on Lucia Lane, and people will be walking through back yards. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 - PAGE 7 Ms. Bystram stated that at this point, she thought they had to be realistic and maybe there needs to be some kind of balance. If this property was rezoned to R-3, was there any possibility of the developer reducing the number of units? She would like to see this as an option. Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Erickson if he would consider reducing the number of units. Mr. Erickson stated he would not. MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY JdR. SABA, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZOA #83-03 BY L. ROBERT ERICKSON. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:20 P.M. Mr. Saba stated that one of the main objections expressed by the citizens was the sewer problem. Was there really a sewer problem? Mr. Deblon stated that was a question that would have to be answered by the Engineering Department. Engineering had not expressed any concern regarding this proposal. Routine maintenance is being done continually on the sewer system. He stated he would check the record to see if there would be a problem as far as capacity and get this information back to the Planning Commission or the City Council. l Ms. Schnabel stated the sewer problem should definitely be checked with Engineering. Also, no matter what development eventually goes on this lot, something else that should be checked with Engineering is what the County's intention is in terms of a right turn lane. Ms. Gabel stated she had to speak against the rezoning. She felt it was a spot rezoning. The -zoning is inconsistent with the neighborhood and the planning done over the years. She was also concerned with the sewer, and they needed more information about it. The traffic problems are obvious, but the biggest problem she had with it was the spot rezoning. Mr. Oquist stated he agreed with Ms. Gabel. It was spot rezoning; however, some- thing will be done with this property, and he did not think anyone would be putting in single family homes. He was also concerned about the traffic. Mr. Kondrick stated it would be great to be able to leave that property vacant; however, they have to consider the overall good of the community. Housing is needed in the City. He liked the set-up of the homeowners' association. He also could not imagine anyone wanting to live in a single family home on this corner. He agreed that it was spot rezoning, but his main concern was the traffic. Mr. Saba stated he did not have as many objections with the spot rezoning, because he felt it would never be developed as R-1. He had a problem with the density. He would rather see the double bungalows facing Lucia Lane, and he would prefer to see two more double bungalows instead of the carriage -type homes. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING,'MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 8 Mr. Oquist stated the other side of the issue is that the City needs to provide ' what is called "affordable housing", and this is affordable housing. Ms. Schnabel stated she was concerned about the density.. She felt At was more, units than she would like to see go into this area. 'She, too,shared the concern about spot rezoning, but also did not see single family homes ever going in there. Mr. Saba stated he liked the concept despite the objections. He could see a development like this going in there eventually, but with fewer units. , Mr. Deblon stated he looked at the positioning of this development as creating a quieter environment for the homes on Lucia Lane. He stated the concerns expressed were very valid, but he thought this was a positive aspect of a develop- ment of this nature. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #83-03, BY L. ROBERT ERICKSON, TO REZONE THE WEST HALF OF LOT 4, AND ALL OF LOTS 5, 6 AND 7, LUCIA LANE ADDITION, FROM R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AREAS) TO R-3 (GENERAL MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS) TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 14 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT, THE SAME BEING 1133-1145 MISSISSIPPI STREET N.E. Mr. Oquist stated the sewer issue and the County's plans for widening Mississippi and putting in a right turn lane should be resolved before this item goes to the City Council. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY lei. SABA, TO RECEIVE INTO THE RECORD THE LETTERS FROM RUSSELL BURRIS AND JUNE JOHNSON AND THE PETITION FROM CLARENCE TIMO, AND TO FORWARD THESE ON WITH THE MINUTES TO CITY COUNCIL. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated that on June 6, the City Council would set the p earing for June 20. 2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. #83-01 MARGARET A. Split off the southerly 104.02 Feet of Lot 1, Block 2, Sprin ark Lakeside, the same being 7650 Lakeside Road N.E. (Origin - 1586 Osborne Road N.E.) Mr. Deblon stated this n informal hearing as required by the subdivision ordinance for a to it. Mr. Debl ated this lot split was requested back in 1975. The request came be the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission recommended the Councilman Fitzpatrick stated sometip0000 feet from a certain point involves a lot of people, howeve n the case which Ms. Martin is referring, if you take into co ration the width of East River Road in figuring the 500 feet, too many people are involved in the notification. Mayor Nee request a report from the staff on what might be cone in these particular 4 MO, k' 9 ; . LA0!►. : ';1► MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 7:45 p.m. Mr. Flora stated the property involved in this rezoning request is in the northeast corner of Highway 65 and Mississippi Street. He stated it is proposed to rezone this area from I-1 to R-3 for a condominium development. Mr. Flora stated the rezoning was presented to the Planning Commission and there was a considerable amount of negative comment received from residents in the area, and the Commission recommended denial of the rezoning request. Councilman Schneider asked what is the total area of the proposed rezoning, or how many single family homes could be located on this property. Mr. Flora stated there is space for three single family homes to be constructed on the property. Mr. Mark Haggerty, attorney representing the developer, Mr. Erickson, stated there were a number of letters and items presented at the Planning Commission meeting which he did not attend, and in reviewing the minutes of the Commission he noted a few items. Mr. Haggerty stated in regard'to the traffic congestion, it was requested an investigation be made on what the County may do at this intersection. Mr. Flora, Public works Director, stated the County does have plans to improve the intersection of Mississippi Street and Highway 65 by adding the right turn lanes on Mississippi Street. Mr. Haggerty stated there have been many requests in the past for proposed uses of this property. He further stated the staff recommendation regarding the traffic and access was in contradiciton to what the neighborhood wanted and the access proposed to Mississippi Street was to satisfy the residents in the area. He explained the configuration of the buildings could be changed so there would be less traffic on Lucia Lane. Mr. Haggerty asked about the adequacy of the sewer line. Mr. Flora stated there is adequate capacity and this development would probably actually help the sewer line. :C/ The Regular Meeting of the Fridley ,City Council was called to gtder at 7:40 p. m. by Mayor Nee. 7 Mayor Nee led the Council and audience in the Pledge of egiance to the Flag. MEN wM PRFSEff: Mayor Nee, Councilman Barnet , Councilman Schneider, Councilman Hame 'k Aland Councilman Fitzpatrick MEMBERS ABSENT: None Mayor Nee stated Mr. Tessmer was to receive this certificate of a of the Energy Commission and, th him. to attend the meeting this evening ion for his services as a member , requested this be forwarded to MOTION by Councilman Fit Patrick to approve the minutes as Seconded by Councilman Ochneider. Upon a voice vete, all Mayor Nee declared the ption carried unanimously. presented. voting aye, Mayor Nee request an item be added concerning a petition from the FYSA regarding a tempo ary permit. MOTION by Cou cilman Schneider to adopt the agenda with the above addition. Seg6nded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor N declared the motion carried unanimously. Msg�e ry Martin, 133 Stonybrook Way, appeared before the Council regarding hearing notification. She stated the reason she is bringing this Council's attention is because East River Road intervens, it s up a lot of footage, therefore, not many people in her area were fied of a public hearing. Mayor Nee asked if streets were figured in the distances for purposes of public hearing notifications. Mr. Flora stated the footage of the streets is not taken into consideration. It W*.1\. 1 r1DiWI#I IIi Mr. Haggerty stated in condominium development, there is a homeowner's association and that FHA and VA have very stringent requirements which must be met. Mr. Haggerty stated it is proposed that although this area is zoned single family, it doesn't lend itself to single family development and that it be allowed to develop into quasi -single family in order to meet the needs for some lower income housing in the City. Councilman Schneider stated he felt on of the key points was the density which was not discussed by Mr. Haggerty. Mr. Haggerty stated they have 14 units and believed there is a total of 58,000 square feet gross area and this comes within the density requirements of duplex housing in the City. Mr. Haggerty stated they want to be sensitive to the needs of the residents of the are and try to accomodate their concerns, as well as the staff's concerns regarding traffic, and to have input from the Council. He requested, therefore, for this hearing to be continued to the next meeting to give his client an opportunity to talk to the neighborhood residents and try to come up with a reasonable solution for development of this property. Councilman Schneider stated, prior to the public hearing before the Planning Coamisison, he had told Mr. Erickson this was one of the most creative developments, but had recommended he meet with the residents of the area before this item went to the Planning Commission. Councilman Schneider stated he had also told Mr. Erickson he would not approve the developments at the present density. Mr. Haggerty stated Mr. Johnson, the owner of the property, has talked to the residents, however, because of the configurations of the property, rezoning proposals have been denied. He stilted the reason he is asking for a continuance is to get input from other Council members and then go to the residents and try to come up with a package that would be agreeable to. Mr. Russell Burris, 1150 Mississippi Street, submitted a written proposal dated June 10, 1983 on what the residents would like for this area. This was read in full by Mayor Nee and stated the homeowners in•the area want the property to be built as R-1 or single family homes as the property was purchased as I-1 property and should be developed accordingly. Mr*. Clarence Timor 6517 Lucia Lane, stated he presented a list of objections to the Planning Commission. Mayor Nee stated the Council has the convents submitted to the Planning Commission which was made a part of their proceedings. Mr. Timo stated he would agree with Mr. Burris' comments that the property was zoned R-1; the buyer bought it as R-1; and it should be developed as R-1. He stated, in urban planning, property should be developed in accordance with the surrounding neighborhood and this spot rezoning isn't compatible with the R-1 zoning in their area. A couwIL mMF'Fmm of JULY 11, 1983 PAGE 4 Mr. Timo asked the Council to consider his comments submitted at the Planning Cammission meeting and deny this rezoning request. Mrs. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated as she looks at this situation indeed something will be done on this property in the future. She stated she is certainly willing to talk and felt something should be done in term of what is reasonable as far as traffic. Mr. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated he wasn't involved in the discussion at the Planning Commission meeting for this rezoning, but was present at a hearing several years ago. He stated, as a person who has no experience in developmental activity, he would be at a distinct disadvantage if he was involved in a discussion without the kind of resource they need for a qualified judgment. He felt if he had trust in the people involved in the negotiations, he could benefit from discussions and there probably should be some staff input. Mr. Bystram felt the intersection at Mississippi and Lucia Lane is a problem, particularly in the winter because of the slight incline. Mayor Nee stated the problem involving staff in such discussions is that it may prejudice their objectivity. Mr. Haggerty stated they are to the point now where you are as close as you can get to single family residential usage. He stated both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Erickson want to work with the neighbors and be honest about what they are trying to do and to also accommodate the recommendations of the staff and construct a nice development that will work with the neighborhood. He stated he would act as an arbitrator in trying to work out something that is mutually acceptable. Councilman Schneider stated Ms. Schnabel at the Planning Commission meeting had asked Mr. Erickson if he would consider reducing the number of units and he indicated he would not. He further stated, although the traffic and sewer capacity have to be considered, he felt two crucial issues were the quality of the housing and the density. Mr. Haggerty stated he felt anything is possible, however, whether it is probable or not, they would have to look into this further. He stated they are willing to be flexible or else he woudn't be here, but, on the other hand, there are some elements in the neighborhood that are inflexible and hopes to bridge this gap of inflexibility. Mr. Burris stated it is not feasible to put 14 units on this site. He stated he now has to back into his driveway in order to be able to get out on.the street. Mr. Burris felt it would be tragic to have the access directly on to Mississippi Street and that three or four homes are the maximum that could be built on this site. Mr. Burris stated the developer knows what the residents want for his property and yet they are still trying to force this proposal. Councilman Schneider explained, under the normal rules of procedure, the Council wouldn't take action on this rezoning this evening as it is customary to hold the public hearing and take action at the next Council meeting. s ,,,,.,.,r•r. NEETI r_ r) mr Y 11. 1983 + Mr. David Dayton, 6435 Highway 651 stated if fie rezoning was approved, thea could come in with any project they wanted and this is the reason they want it to remain as R-1. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, felt there are some steps which can be taken to protect the residents to assure a certain development would be constructed. Mayor Nee pointed out that what the Council is now considering is the rezoning issue, and not approval of the proposed project. Mrs. Haedtke, 6540 Lucia Lane, felt 14 units was too many for this property and didn't feel the additional traffic could be handled. Councilman Barnette stated he knows everyone's feelings, but the biggest problem with this property for R-1 development is the location as he didn't feel someone would build a $100,000 home on this corner. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated the consideration is if the property should be R-1 or R-3 and how this fits into the total development picture. Councilman Hamernik stated he felt the density is a primary concern, but felt any dialogue between the developer and residents would have some value. Be felt those lots today are not ideal single family sites. Oouncilman Schneider stated the density is the key issue in his mind and it would be his intention, if an agreement is reached with the residents, the rezoning would be granted for a specific project. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to continue this public hearing to the next Council meeting on July 258, 1983. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Mayor Nee stated he didn't think a case has been made to rezone property beyond the client's interest. He felt il(hasn't been shown that it is in the best of interests of the neighborhood and community. UPON A VOICE VOTE ZVMN CN THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by cciocilman Barnette td'waive the reading of notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Co Upon a voice Tote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declar unanimously and,,the public°`hearing opened at 8:40 . m. �L Mr. Flora, Public rkp"Director, stated is request feet on 54th Avenue of 4th Street een 12 and 13 is made by the two rty owners on "cher side. Mr. Flora stated,,one of tld roperty owners wishes to and garage onAhe vacatrtion of 54th Avenue, easement r ired by thi Mr. Flora stated, approved, may wish ti late that any consteasement d have to beintai d by the property the City d to make any repairs or improvements to th 'public hearing lman Schneider. motion carried to vacate 130 d the request uct a driveway whi h is also the if a vacation is ruct on on the city own r in the event e uti ity line.