Loading...
VAR 12-86APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER -16,1986- '' PAGF. 3 fir. Barna stated all the older homes in the area were at about the same front yard setback. Mr. Clark stated he believed that was correct. MOTION BY MR. BARNA, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UPON AV OICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARINGSED AT 7:50 P.M. Mr. Barna- s ted he has lived in this neighborhood since 1970. He owned and recently sol a house similar to this one just two blocks north, lie had also built an addit n onto this house. Re stated the proposed addition was a very nice addition,a plans were well laid out, and he thought the addition would increase the value of the house. Ms. Savage stated she\varia with fir. Barna. The existing house was certainly inadequate for anyone in now, and it looked inadequate for the neigh- borhood. The additiocertainly upgrade the house and she would be in favor of granting thee. fir. Betzold stated it was also n incentive to others in the neighborhood to keep improving the neighborhood. By building onto the back of the house, it was not moving the house any close to the street. Mr. Barna stated one of the reasonsth City wants larger lots was so there was room for recreation with the house. his area was quite profuse in parks -- 1-2 blocks from the Mississippi River, abo 3/10 mile from Riverview Park, and about 3/4 mile from Springbrook Nature CbQter. There was plenty of recreational area so the substandard lot would of affect the intent of the city code. MOTION BY MR. BARNA, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE, TO APPR VE VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #86-34, BY DANA ELSEN, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205.07. , A, 2, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM LOT AREA FROM 7,500 SQ.\F7 THE PRESENT 5,500 SQ. FT.; AND, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205.07.3, D, 1, FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, OF THE EXIST177G HOM 35 FEET TO 26 FEET, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 16 FT. BY 27 1/DDITIOPI TO THE HOUSE, LOCATED ON LOTS 17 AND 18, BLOCK I, RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS, THE SAME, BEING 537 FAIRMONT STREET, FRIDLEY, MN. 55432, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE EXISTZNG HOUSE BE BROUGHT UP TO TODAY'S BUILDING CODE STANDARDS. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEALS COMMISSION 14EETLNG;'DECEMBER116;1?986`'' '..'' .'''. PAGE 4 2. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #86-35, BY SPRAYER SUPPLY, INC., PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205.1 .3, A, OFTHETRUIDLEY C1TY CODE, TO REDUCE THE ION OF AN EXISTING SITE, ON LOTS'1,'2, ArM 3. BLOCK 4. HAr1ILTON'S MOTION BY MS. SAVAGE, SECONDED BY MR. BARNA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:53 P.M. Chairperson Betzold read the Administrative Staff Report: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 5480 - 7th Street VAR #86-35 A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.14.3, A, requires a minimum lot area of 20,000 sq. ft. Public purpose served by this requirement is to avoid the condition of overcrowding, and to avoid an excess burden on the existing eater and sewer services. Section 205.14.3, C, 1, requires that permitted buildings and uses shall not be closer to the front lot line than 35 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide desired front yard space to be used for green areas and to add to the attractability of a commercial zone. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "The building was constructed before the present zoning codes that regulate higher lot areas and setbacks." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: This lot is located along 7th Street just south of Interstate Highway 694. The north property line abuts what was once 55th Avenue. The south property line abuts an R-3 residential district. The property to the west is vacant and to the east, across 7th Street, is a single-family home. A Naegele billboard sits in the northwest corner of the site. There is also a detached garage on the site adjacent to the main building. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER -16,1986 PAGF 5 This site is currently zoned C-2, general business, and consists of approximately 15,000 sq. ft. of lot area. C-2 zoning requires a minimum lot area of 20,000 sq. ft. The building has not been occupied since March 1985. Therefore, it can be considered nonconforming in terms of lot area, under the current zoning, since the building has been abandoned for over a year. The right-of-way for 7th Street fans out as it approaches Interstate Highway 694. It forms the east property line of the site as it angles in a northwesterly direction to within approximately 11 feet of the existing main structure. The Zoning Code requires a front yard setback of 35 feet. If this variance is approved, the staff recommends the following stipulations in order to bring the site up to code: 1. Building facade to be improved with siding or stucco; 2. Pave and curb parking lot as per requirements of the Code; 3. Install landscaping as per plan to include seeding of the lot; 4. No outside storage allowed; 5. Only wall signage allowed; 6. If garage is to be used for business, then connect to main structure; 7. Provide a $5,000 performance bond or letter -of -credit prior to occupancy. Mr. Clark stated the lot to the west, owned by Mr. Nedegaard, a contractor, was approximately the same size as the lot in question (actually a little larger becuase it had the benefit of having one-half the right-of-way of the vacated 6th St. That lot was also vacant. Mr. Clark stated one of the disadvantages of the lot to the west was it really did not have access to water and sewer. The closest water and sewer was off 7th St. In order to get sewer and water, that property owner would probably have to get an easement across the petitioner's lot. He stated the lot to the west should be taken into consideration when the Commission is making its decision on whether or not to grant the variance. Mr. Wayne Schroer, the petitioner, stated he was one of the owners of Sprayer Supply, Inc. Sprayer Supply, Inc., was presently located in Oakville, Wisc. They manufacture lawn care and turf product sprayers, pressure washer cleaners, some farm equipment, etc. He stated he was planning to rent this property from Naegele to use as a small retail outlet to distribute their products. The north end of the building would be used for office and showroom, and the south end of the building would be used for storage of parts. Parts would he shipped from this location to customers in Minnesota. He stated that, at most, there would be 1-2 cars a day at this facility. One salesman would check in once a day, and there would he one part-time employee working in shipping and answering phones. APPEALS COIVISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 16, 1986-- - PAGE 6 Mr. Barna asked what Mr. Schroer's intention was for the two -car garage on the property. Mr. Schroer stated it would be used for cold storage like metal products. There would be no chemicals on the property. Mr. Clark stated that regarding stipulation #6, to have the garage attached to the main structure, he did not know if that stipulation was really necessary. Staff's main concern was to have the garage upgraded. This stipulation could be discussed further before the City Council meeting. fir. Betzold asked about Mr. Schroer's timetable. Mr. Schroer stated, if all goes well, they would like to get into the building as soon as possible after the first of January and start shipping out to their customers. fir. Betzold stated that, with the normal process, this item would not get to the City Council meeting until January 26, 1987. Mr. Schroer stated this could cause a hardship for them because they do have people hired to do the improvements inside the building so they can start shipping to their customers. fir. Dennis Kmit, 3158 Arthur St. N.E., stated he owned the apartment building (5460 - 7th St. N.E.) directly south of the property. He was concerned about how this new commercial business would impact his property or could potentially impact his property. People drive by the apartment buildings and curb appeal had a lot to do with whether or not people choose to rent in his building. fir. Knit stated he would be concerned that this new business would have sufficient parking. He would not want people parking on his property. As far as the signage and aesthetics, he would"be concerned that signage and the general aesthetics of the property could potentially impact his ability to keep tenants happy and to continue to rent to new tenants. Mr. Kmit stated he had been hoping for some time that something would happen with this lot and with the lot to the west. The lot to the west was an eyesore. It has become a dumping ground. Large pieces of concrete have been dumped in there, and it was very dangerous for both adults and children. He stated he realized this was not the appropriate place or time to talk about the vacant lot to the west, but he planned to bring it up at the City Council meeting. Mr. Betzold stated that Mr. Schroer would be required to put in the appropriate parking and signage as required by city code. Mr. Clark stated he really did not think this business was a determent to this part of Fridley. He was concerned that if the variance was granted for the lot area, it would set a precedent and they would probably get a request for the lot to the west. Then, instead of one small business in this area, there would i APPEALS COf1MISSInN-MEETING, DECEMBER 16,1986 PAGE 7 be two small businesses. Once money was spent on this site, the- lot became that much more valuable and made it harder to ever buy out the business, tear the building down, and combine the parcels into one larger commercial site. On the other hand, if the Commission and City Council deny this variance request, that property might sit vacant for a much longer time in this unkempt condition. These were things the Commission would have to consider in their decision. Mr. Barna stated the City Council has to look at whether they want these two C-2 zoned lots left in this area, or should the City Council look at possibly rezoning these two lots to R-3? Does the City Council want to retain a commercial area in the midst of what has now developed into a large residential area, especially with the new development, Lake Pointe Corporate Center, to the northeast? Mr. Clark stated this probably would not make a very good residential property because of its proximity to I-694 and the fact that Naegele had a large billboard on the property. Mr. Betzold stated one question he had for the petitioner was would the petitioner be willing to have another commercial business with approximately hP same size building next door to his Building? Mr. Schroer stated he would have no problem with it. He stated he lived down the street from this property. He had been looking at the property for some time and thought his business would be a good use for the property and would improve the looks of the property. Mr. Kmft stated a renter definitely had different considerations than an owner. A renter could wall; away from the property. If he were the owner of that property, he would certainly be reluctant to improve it. That property was never really going to amount to anything as it was. There was no doubt in his mind that the value of the property would be substantially increased if the present building was torn down, the property was rezoned, and a 4-plex was constructed on the property. Mr. Kmit stated hp felt this site was not the most desirable business location, and maybe this property has outlived its usefulness as commercial property. Mr. Clark stated that if the two parcels were combined, a 13 -unit apartment building could be built. Each lot was large enough to construct two 4-nlexes. The biggest problem was the Naegele billboard. The value of the sign was �robably worth more to Naegele than the building. In order to combine the ots, the billboard would have to come down, and he did not know if Naeqele would be receptive to that idea. He stated maybe the two property owners, Naegele and Mr. Nedegaard,could be asked to get together to discuss some of the options discussed at this meeting before this goes to City Council. APPEALS COINISSION MEETING, DECEMBER"16,1986 PAGE 8 t MOTION BY MR. BARNA, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE, TO CLOSE. THE PUBLIC HEARIRG. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:40 P.M. Mr. Barna stated he was prepared to recommend approval of the variance request. He would also recommend that the City Council look into whether it was better to allow the improvement of a spot zoned area or look at forcing a zoning change and possibly look at the whole strip of properties along I-694 that are below standards for one reason or another. Ms. Savage stated she would be in.favor of granting the variance, but she agreed with Mr. Barna that the City Council should look at this area care- fully and see if this is really what they want to see happen with this property. fir. Betzold stated he was not quite sure he wanted to recommend to the City Council, based on their discussion, that this variance should be granted. This location might have been ideal for a grocery store alonq"Highway 100 and that was why it was zoned C-2. That was not necessarily what the property should he zoned today. As discussed, if this variance was approved, they would have to do the same thing with the lot to the west. He did not know if they were doing the properties any justice by having two C-2 lots which are strictly out of the way. At the very least, he would like this to definitely go to the Planning Commission before going to the City Council, so the Planning Commission will have a chance to give input on what they feel should be done with these properties. He stated the proposal by the petitioner was certainly a good one, but he was not sure this would be doing anv justice to the long range planning for the City. Ms. Savage stated she felt it was the Commission's function to approve or deny the request within the framework they had to work wi.th. She did not see why there was a problem with approving this variance request within that framework. That did not necessarily mean there should be little pockets of spot -zoned areas in residential areas, but the proposal before them would improve the property under its present zoning and was a better situation than they have now. Mr. Barna agreed with Ms. Savage. He stated he realized it would put a burden on the petitioner time -wise, but he also felt this should go to the Planning Commission before the City Council in order to get the Planning Commission's input and recommendations. MOTION BY MR. BARNA, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE,'TO RECO101END TO CITY COUNCIL, THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION, VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #86-35, BY SPRAYER SUPPLY, INC., PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205.14.3, A, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM LOT AREA FROM 20,000 SQ. FT. TO APPROXIMATELY 15,000 SQ. FT..; AND, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205.14.3, C, 1, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. FROM 35 FT. TO APPROXIMATELY 11 FEET TO ALLOW THE OCCUPATION OF AN EXISTING SITE, ON LOTS 1, 2, A17D 3, BLOCK 9, HAMILTON'S ADDITION TO MECHANICSVILLE, THE SAME BEING 5480 - 7TH STREET N.E., FRIDLEY, BN., 55421, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: t APPEALS COWUSSION MEETING, DECEMBER 16, 1986 PAGE 9 1. BUILDING FACADE TO BE IMPROVED WITH SIDING OR STUCCO; 2. PAVE AND CURB PARKING IAT AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE.- 3. ODE;3. INSTALL LANDSCAPING AS PER PLAN TO INCLUDE SEEDING OF THE LOT; 4. NO OUTSIDE STORAGE ALLOWED; 5. ONLY WALL SIGNRGE ALLOWED; 6. IF GARAGE IS TO BE USED FOR BUSINESS, THEN CONNECT TO MAIN STRUCTURE; 7. PROVIDE A $5,000 PERFORMANCE BOND OR LF•TTER-OF-CREDIT PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY. THE APPEALS COMMISSION WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND THAT, BEFORE. THE VARIANCES WERE GRANTED, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL LOOK AT THE POSSI- BILITY OF REZONING THE AREA. UPON A VOICE VOTE, BARNA AND SAVAGE VOTING AYE, BETZOLD VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 2-1. Mr. Betzold stated this would go to the Planning Commission on Jan. 7, and then to the City Council on Jan. 26, 1987. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. BARNA, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE DEC. 16, 1986, APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, (tKe-l-yl Ly6nh Saba Recording Secretary