Loading...
SAV 83-01CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGAUNE 8, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Vice -Chairperson Oquist to order at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mr. Ocydist, Mr. Mr. oodspeed Members Absent: bs. Schnabel e 8, 1983, Planning Commission meeting Ms. Gabel, Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Svanda, Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Richard & Sonia Peterson, 247 - h Place Lawrence & Joyce Zimmerman, 5380 4t St. N.E. Laura Vagovich, 5400 4th St. N.E. APPROVAL OF MAY 18, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO APPROVE THE JUNE 8, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.• 1. VACATION REQUEST: SAV #83-01, PETITION NO. 4-83: Vacate the Easterly Mau feet of 54th venueeta weeno ksT2—an�c 13, Hamilton's Addition to Mechanicsville, by the owners of 5380 and 5400 4th Street N.E. Mr. Boardman stated this was the area where Dr. J. C. Schurstein had proposed to put an office building back in Dec. 1980. There is a service road that comes in and cul-de-sacs right along University Ave. There is an unpaved alley at this location that is used to service the backs of the properties along 4th St. It also services apartments and some businesses. Mr. Boardman stated the vacation request is for a portion of 54th Ave. between Blocks 12 and 13. The vacation request is being made by the two property owners on either side. Mr. Boardman stated the alley is being used and at some point in time, the City is going to have to pave that alley as long as it is being used. If the alley is paved, theywould have to make sure there was access on both ends. At this point in time, the City has been opposed to a vacation of that portion of 54th Ave., primarily because there is no way out of the alley, and the logical way for circulation within that area would be to come up to 54th Ave. An alter- native would be to come down and connect into the cul-de-sac, but that may not be an appropriate way to go. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE -8, 1983 PAGE 2 Mr. Boardman stated that when Dr. Schurstein proposed the development of an office building in this location, as a condition of the permit, the City Council required that Dr. Schurstein pay for the improvement of the alley. Because of that, Dr. Schurstein did not build, and the alley is still unimproved. Mr. Boardman stated that in their consideration of this vacation request, the Planning Commission should consider what is going to be done with that alley and at what point they want access. The Engineering Dept. has said the best possible way for access is back up to 4th St. That would be in direct conflict with this vacation request. Ms. Laura Vagovich, 5400 4th St. N.E., stated she has lived in Fridley for 34 yrs. Her house was moved twice, once for Highway 100 and again for I-694. She has maintained this portion of the street for 34 years. She stated she would like to have the protection of not having people going through there. People drive through there and dump things in the bushes and trees, and she has even had things stolen out of her garden. She stated she had assumed for years that this road was already vacated and had maintained it because she thought.it was vacated. Mr. Lawrence Zimmerman, 5380 4th St. N.E., stated it was his intention to put up a retaining wall and use the 30 ft. gained from the vacation to build a road to a garage he would build on his property. Mr. Boardman stated that even if they vacated the street right-of-way, they would want to retain the southern half of the street for storm sewer. Mr. Zimmerman stated the most logical way and the cheapest way for the alley access was to go out on the cul-de-sac. Mr. Oquist asked if it would be feasible to put a turn -around area by using the portion of 54th Ave. that is not vacated plus the portion of the street they want vacated. Mr. Boardman stated that if they are going to retain 30 ft. for easement, why not retain another 30 ft. so if the alley is ever improved, they can get access. He stated if the property owners wanted to fence this portion of the street, they could do so right now. The problem is that if at any point in time a road would be required to go in there, that fence would be removed at no cost to the City. Mr. Zimmerman stated the main reason for the vacation request is so he can build a garage with access off 4th St. He did not intend to use the alley, because it is 2-3 feet below his property. He is going to have to put up a retaining wall at the back of his property. Mr. Boardman stated it was his understanding that if the property owner put a fence or a driveway over the easement, if the City has to dig up that easement, the City is not responsible for putting back blacktop or fencing. It would be the property owner's responsibility to put back whatever was torn up. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 8, 1983 PAGE 3 Mr. Boardman agreed with the fact that there is never going to be a street connection in there that would utilize the whole 60 ft. He had -no problem with vacating the street right-of-way, but they should retain the storm sewer and access easement. In that sense, the property is no longer owned by the City of Fridley but by the property owners; but the City would still retain an easement so if they need to go through with a road or access for the alley, they can use that easement. Mr. Oquist stated another alternative would be to access by the highway property if the Highway Dept. turns that property over to the City. .Ms. Vagovich stated that, as Mr. Zimmerman had stated, the main purpose for the - vacation is so Mr. Zimmerman can build a garage and access onto 4th St. They will jointly maintain the property. Mr. Boardman stated that if Mr.,Zimmerman puts in his garage and accesses onto 4th St. over the 30 ft. easement, if the alley is improved and comes up to the street grade, it in effect replaces his driveway and he would still have access onto the alley. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF VACATION REQUEST, SAV !183-01, PETITION NO. 4-83, TO VACATE 54TH AVENUE ALL THE WAY TO THE HIGHWAY PROPERTY AND THAT THE CITY OF FRIDLEY RETAIN ACCESS EASEMENT OVER THE TOP OF THE EXISTING 30 FT. UTILITY EASEMENT. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Boardman stated the public hearing at City Council on this vacation request would be on July 11, 1983. 2. LOT SPLIT RE T L.S. #83-02, BY RICHARD & SO A PETERSON: Split off Lot 12 and the terly 30 feet of Lot 13, BXck 1, City View, to make a new building site, the me being 241 - 57th P ce N.E. Mr. Boardman stated the pets 'oners own Lot 12, 13, 14, and 15. These are 40 ft. lots totalling 160 ft. of t area. hey are requesting to split off Lot 12 and the westerly 30 ft. o of 1 so that Lots 12 and 13 will become a 70 ft. lot. The depth of the lot i 0 ft. It does meet the 9,000 sq. ft. lot requirement and meets all other uirements as far as lot splits. A lot split does require a park fee of 00. he park fee is payable at the time of approval of the lot split reques ; however, the City Council may defer collection to the time the building permi is requeste or individual lots created_by such a lot split. This would depen on whether the p itioner requested the City Council to delay payment of the par fee. The petitioners were in Ae audience. 3 Mr. Flora stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacation, with the City retaining an access easement over the top of the existing 30 feet utility easement. Ms. Laura Vagovich, 5400 4th Street, explained she has maintained this portion of the street for 34 years and would like the protection of not having people going through there. She stated she assumed for years that this road was already vacated and therefore, had maintained it. Mr. Zimmerman, 5380 4th Street, stated he intended to put up a retaining wall and use the 30 feet vacated to build a road to a garage he plans to construct on his property, with access off 4th Street. Mr. Zimmerman stated he understands there is a storm sewer easement that will remain, but there is no way to get around this issue. Mr. Flora identified the three options the Council could consider in providing for development of an alley without 4th Street if this vacation request is allowed. No persons spoke regarding the proposed vacation on 54th Avenue. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9:08 p. m. MOTI by Councilman Hamernik to waive the reading of the public hearing notice d open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a 'ce vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimous1 and the public hearing opened at 9:09 P. m. Mr. Bill Hun14 Personnel Officer, explained that Section 3.07 of the Charter relatesNto publication of ordinances in summary fora. Mr. Hunt stated the rdinance is substantially the same as Ordinance No. 757 adopted in IF rua& by the Council. He stated it is presented to the Council again because a required public hearing not held and any changes are, basically, organization and phrasing in order to clarfiy paragraphs. Mr. Starwalt, Chairman of the Cha er commission, stated the Commission was in favor of this amendment and t the effort staff put into it makes it a more understandable ordinance and now before the Council or their consideration. No other persons in the audience spoke regar this proposed amendment. MOTION by Councilman Barnette to close the public acing. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all vo g aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public h ring closed at 9:12 p. m. MjWTT,• lG=E OF JnrY 11, 1983 PAGE 51 Mr. David Dayton, 6435 Highway 65, stated if'& rezoning was app ed, thea could come in with any project they wanted and this is the eason they want it to remain as R-1. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, felt there are some steps ich can be taken to protect the residents to assure a certain d elopment would be constructed. Mayor Nee pointed out that what the Counci is now considering is the rezoning issue, and not approval of the pro sed project. Mrs. Haedtke, 6540 Lucia Lane, felt units was too many for this property and didn't feel the additio traffic could be handled. Councilman Barnette stated he everyone's feelings, but the biggest problem with this property fo R-1 development is the location as he didn't feel someone would buil a $100,000 home on this corner. Councilman Fitzpatrick sta the consideration is if the property should be R-1 or R-3 and how thi fits into the total development picture. Councilman Hamernik s ted he felt the density is a primary concern, but felt any dialogue een the developer and residents would have some value. He felt th lots today are not ideal single family sites. Councilman Schn der stated the density is the key issue in his mind and it would be hi intention, if an agreement is reached with the residents, the rezoning uld be granted for a specific project. MOTION by uncilman Schneider to continue this public hearing to the next Council ting on July 25, 1983. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Mayor stated he didn't think a case has been made to rezone property beyo the client's interest. He felt if hasn't been shown that it is in th best of interests of the neighborhood and community.. A VOICE VOTE MMM CN THE ABOVE MONION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Z 2 PUBLIC HUMNG ON VACATION , SAV 183-01, PETITION 4-83, TO VACATE tt LUYrs Rr v 130.70 FEST OF 54TH STREET N. E. (ZDUUMMAN AND VAGOUCH) : 4 14 , MOTION by Councilman Barnette to waive the reading of the public hearing �0 notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:40 p. m. Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated this request is to vacate 130 feet on 54th Avenue west of 4th Street between 12 and 13 and the request is made by the two property owners on either side. Mr. Flora stated one of the property owners wishes to construct a driveway and garage on the vacated portion of 54th Avenue, which is also the easement required by the City. Mr. Flora stated, if the vacation is approved, they may wish to stipulate that any construction on the city easement would have to be maintained by the property owner in the event the City had to make any repairs or improvements to the utility line.