Loading...
SP85-11 CITY OF FRIDLEY 6 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.F. ® FRIDLEY, MN 55432 SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP *85 - (6 12)5 71-3450 SPECIAL USE PERMIT FEE O. U RECEIPT # SGi EDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ION MEETING DATE: SCIiEEULEE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: PROPERTY INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS s LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT BLOCK Tf2ACT/ADDITION f Do - PRESENT ZONING ACREAGE SPECIAL USE PERMIT BEING APELIED FOR: SECTION OF TEE CDDE: OWNER INFORMATION NAME a.r• PHCNE # /� Y ✓ `� ADERESS ✓ /1 E _ SIGNATURE JLATE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PETITIONER INFORMATION Nm,E PHCNE # �- • y n ADERESS � 7'K O rPA SIGNATURE DATE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PLANNING COMMISSION: APFRa7EE DENIED DATE CITY COUNCIL: APPRa7ED DENIED DATE STIRJLAT IONS: The petitioner hereby understands that: 1. The City will notify all residents and awners of property within 200 feet of said property. 2. This application must be signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. 3. Responsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list the names and address of all residents and property owners of property in question, belongs to the petitioner. 4. A scaled plan of pr opo sed property and structure must be drawn and attached, showing the following: North direction Location of the proposed structure, and front and rear setbacks. Landscaping if appl ica bl e Street names Location and use of adjacent existing buildings within 350 feet. YgrAm man ■■■dame■ I///.!I ��V'1 ♦ •• iZdamell ii'.■■ SIIIIIIM :�i�1'.. •••�••_�•�< WI qp 1.801.9 4p lip • � 1 M©MEMO O ,�►� o��� �ao����s�o� a ��� 0 on9 v F. ® ®�► ® �. • r ar1ur�=�� - ® W- : NEURONE PvsI�©� �`�►•♦:+►�r�.i�a.-� " ., ��—Dai �. Voocig ���� i00199�9I mo mm Irs ..'M waa ��:ra ti PRIM !o" III NAM O ' NAM Rmi t7�'�vim PI aka rw Ar C.U.-C�� IFZSR��rlfii F.Q.am r' 710. Il'f�.i3� lr�l►tr1EyO �7syr!�,WW' rav vria ILi:viND711 E EVENSON "Um IRUp"Pi iiaii br-W w=0 w mur, run III mm resS SLAIJ MRAD'�.'4 sr. ON .�� '� ■ ", �a.o . n'A2 ir.•.noa a T,T Wr■`I?AR 7.in�lQAv Q+ IF Mar Efl� E �V!I �: r m Nlff nrT.e rrJ Ow Iw,f'w-fA /M f° d,00 ,ffl►„w,J !7S wR.210oSfS✓ SP #85-11 6425 Ashton Avenue N.E. 8 G Jerry Unglaub E.M4 COO Ale07 3-i- -3V CX NO.LAK _, r n • �, ' Y f 7't t4lti/ ii °j•\ 10O ♦ l :59 W r e3 �► a 6k417 ALO OK I / 416 S yl Srgrr - HI A Rr-7 444.6�3 I ` PL kmsAt ALI io its - S4MLLITE 4.TH WAY ! ►It i ! i w = /♦ /ki ,Eats j 100 3pTic 10.0 10/ ` f 1 r j f4 fi 13 7s �� ; xs. Its- jai • e ',Di I r 9 0,AV� 634 UFAlb i SYLVAN AY Z 2 v � •63 � 3 I I • �b � �I l f-O 0 4 z /z I , . . 637.2 4 /00 t� e zR .lg.:. I 63+x. ' V X35 tc7ff 401 u 1v s 4 6300 N q 3 RD WAY a o li bM�c toyh I I c a fo t I - 4o 4440 4A ao ° g L.3 \� 2 H i� •�u t �I ` ZIG22o � ns -� - AY z I' 62 h �Zj ( WG zio 10 w l SII' ,w 6t90 1 ,.r• 0! Ar �! T Z' . r�,. Phone: GReenwood 3-8352 SP „#85-11 ' $ H 6425 Ashton Avenue N.E. ARLEIGH C. 'S1 ITIMIaub Registered Professional Engineer and Land Surveyor 16215 Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota G ' PLAT OF SURVEY OF PROPERTY OF �kk .SSD 41.4JCJOI / Ndas JQllows: � --- -- N14 "C1h'`r�', Scale: I inch____feet. s0 40 Rays w "10 Z GAR 41 0 e CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUILDING CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY/� I hereby certify that on , 19_ I hereby certify that on 'J 19 S6 I made a survey of the proposed location of the I surveyed the property described above and that building on the above described property and that the above plat is a correct representation of said the location of said building is correctly shown on survey. the above plat. ; Planning Commission 9/20/85 7 City Council MAILING LIST SP #85-11 Jerry Unglaub Jerry E. Unglaub 6425 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Lloyd K. Pound 6461 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Edward M. Shaffer 6457 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Arnold E. Kastanek 6435 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Anna M. Huston 165 - 14th Avenue N.E. Minneapolis , MN 55413 Stephanie L. Bielawski 6468 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 John E. Glauvitz 6446 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Anella J. Lee 6434 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Kenneth D. Hughes 6424 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Arne H. Lundgren 6412 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 (Official Publication) PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE:THE .PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Plan- ning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 Uni- versity Avenue Northeast on Wednes- day 198,5, in the Council ChamberOctoat 7:3ber 0 p.m.for the purpose of: Consideration of a Special Use Permit,SP#85-11,by Jerry Un- glaub,per Section 205.07.1,C,I of the Fridley City Code, to allow the construction of a second ac- cessory building, a 24' by 32' utility shed on Lots 11 and 12, Block 13,Fridley Park,the same being 6425 Ashton Avenue N.E. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the,above stated time and place. VIRGINIA SCHNABEL Chairwoman Planning Commission (Sept.23&30,1985)-FRID r'' COMM SM ON APPLICATION REVIEW Department Num rFiIA ftA- Meet's Datta CI TYOF Planning 9/12/ 5 10/9/85 FRIDLEY File Address/Description 6425 Ashton venu COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST Second accessory building - 24' by 32' shed . RETURN TO PLANNING r r^ Jl M COMMENTS JOH � N [STDARREL_ -fftLYDE OMARK PROJN rry - c qt"ti -::f- r- ccs S�c�vc.r� C 6 q 0 — /-S -F(:>ems,— ,fS'/w 7 vac= S f•S' P � 8 CITY OF FRIDLEY i PLANNING COMPASSION MEETING, OCTOBER 9, 1985 CALL TO ORDER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the October 9, 1985, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel , Ms. Gabel , Mr. Minton, Mr. Kondricky Mr. Wellan, Mr. Saba Members Absent: Mr. Oquist Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator Jerry Unglaub, 6425 Ashton Ave. N.E. Harold Unglaub, 830 W. Moore Lake Drive APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1985, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO APPROVE THE SEPT. 25, 1985, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. EE II 1 . CONSIDERATIA 6F A SPECIAL USE- PERMIT, SP #85=11 , BY JERRY UNGLAUB: Per Section of the Fridley City Code, to a ow t o construction of a second accessory building, a 24 ft. by 32 ft. utility shed on Lots 11 and 12, Block 13, Fridley Park, the same being 6425 Ashton Avenue N.E. MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #85-11. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:37 P.M. Mr. Robinson stated this property was located just west of the tracks on Ashton Ave. and north of' 64th Way. It was zoned single family and was surrounded by other single family. The special use permit was for a second accessory building, 24 ft. by 32 ft. , located to the rear of the lot towards the tracks. The proposal was for 3 ft. setbacks off the rear and side lot lines which does meet code. The petitioner is proposing to build without a verifying survey which he can do with a letter from the adjoining property owner. An agreement from Arnold Kastanek, the owner of the property at 6435 Ashton Ave. , was included in the agenda stating that Mr. Kastanek had no objection to the con- struction of the utility shed. Mr. Robinson stated staff had no stipulations other than the building was not to be used for motor vehicles that would require a driveway as there was no room for a driveway. (r 8A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 'OCTOBER 9, 1985 PAGE 2 Mr. Jerry Unglaub stated he wanted the building for storage of boat, wood, truck topper, lawn mower, etc. He stated he only has a single car garage and in the three years he has lived in this home, he has been unable to use his present garage for anything but storage. The new building will help him clean up his yard, and he absolutely had no intention of parking motor vehicles in it. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. WELLAN, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #85-11. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZRG AYr, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABF.L DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:47 P.M. MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #85-11, BY JERRY UNGLAUB, PER SECTION 205.07.1, C, 1 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND ACCESSORY BUILDING, A 24 FT. BY 32 FT. UTILITY SHED ON LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 13, FRIDLEY PARK, THE SAME BEING 6425 ASHTON AVENUE N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABF.L DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. RECEIVE SEPTEMBER 17, 1985, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSInN MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. WELLAN, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECEIVE THE SEPT. 17, 1985, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr. Wellan stated Ms. Merriam has been trying to contact Mr. Beerman of Beerman Services to find out how the participation rate is in the recycling pick-UD program. Mr. Robinson stated they should probably invite Mr. Beerman to a EQC meeting to talk about the program. Mr. Minton stated he lived in a townhouse. He stated he and some of his neighbors put out recyclable for pick-up last month, but the recyclables were never picked up. When he called Mr. Beerman, he was told that recyclables were not collected from multiple units. Mr. Wellan stated they had pretty much restricted the pick-up program to single family residences. Mr. Minton stated that fact had not been made clear to him, and it would be nice if the recycling pick-up program included townhouses which were not the sane as apartment buildings. Mr. Saba stated a centrally located pick-up spot at townhouse complexes would be a good idea. Mr. Wellan stated this was something that should be discussed with Mr. Beerman. 8B PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 9, 1985 PAGE 3 Ms. S;hnabel suggested that some type of pre-printed card be developed and printed in the city newsletter that a homeowner could cut out, fill in the day and week of their pick-up, and post somewhere in their home to remind them of their pick-up day. Mr. Robinson stated something like that could be put in the city newsletter. Ms. Schnabel stated she had read that Ramsey County and Hennepin County and several other counties have composting sites. Since there still seems to be an interest in composting, she wondered if Anoka County would be willing to put a compost site somewhere centrally located where it could be shared with Frialey and Columbia Heights,for example. Mr. Wellan stated they have talked about composting in the City of Fridley many times. It isn't the problem of just dumping the leaves and grass clippings; it is the problem of maintenance. He stated they could discuss this with Anoka County and see if there was any interest. Mr. Robinson stated the mandatory law has passed that there will be no land filling after 1990, and 25-30% of all solid waste is grass clippings and leaves. Sonething will have to be done soon. Ms. Schnabel stated this was another good reason why the County should get involved. 3. OTHER BUSINESS: a, Parking Stall Size Mr. Robinson stated that as the Commission knew, about a year ago, Unity Hospital applied for a special use permit for the expansion of their parking lot, but because of cost problems and expansion, it was delayed. When they finally got around to putting in the barking lot, they decided to try for 9 ft, stalls with a variance rather than put in a piece of parking lot that might have to be removed at some point in time. The 9 ft, stalls would be only for employee parking. Mr. Robinson stated that as the issue moved through the Appeals Commission and City Council , there were some questions about what other cities were doing regarding parking stall size. He stated the suburbs were polled, and it appeared that Fridley and Brooklyn Park are the only two suburbs which require ten ft, stall widths. Six of the cities allow nine ft. stalls while three allow 82 ft. stalls. Several cities also allow for a percentage of the total stalls to be designated as compact stalls under certain circumstances. Mr. Robinson stated that the issue of smaller parking stalls was discussed a few years ago and vetoed by the City Council . Some advantages to smaller stall size are less hard-surfaced area, less cost for development, and less run-off. On the other hand, it is hard to get big cars in and out of smaller stalls. C i 8C PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 9, 1985 PAGE 4 Mr. Robinson stated that in the case of Unity Hospital , he felt the variance was warranted because the 9 ft. stall width was just for the employee park- ing lot. By reducing the stall width, they are saving green space and will have a greater buffer between residential and the hospital parking lot. Mr. Robinson stated the question has now come up: Should the City be looking at 9 ft. stalls? The City Council has asked for some input from the Planning Commission. Ms. Gabel stated the reason she voted in favor of the variance to 9 ft. stall width for Unity Hospital was because the 9 ft. stall width was for employee parking only. She felt employee parking was more stable parking. People are parking and staying at least a 4-9 hr. shift, and there are not cars coming in and out all day. Mr. Saba stated he thought what made logical sense at this point was to look at the possibility of a compact car percentage like some of the other communities have done. Ms. Gabel stated Unity Hospital was not in favor of the Appeals Commission's suggestion of setting aside spaces for compact cars. They felt there could be some problems with employees because of where the compact car spaces were located. Some employees with larger cars might not like it that the people with compact cars got to park closer to the building, or vice versa. Mr. Wellan stated that the cost of everything is a big concern these days, and the City should not overburden their industry by keeping limitations such as 10 ft. parking stalls. He felt a 9 ft. stall was adequate. He felt a 10 ft. stall was a waste of space, especially in an employee parking lot. Employees tend to be more careful and respectful of other people's cars than people do in a general parking lot. Ms. Gabel stated she felt the City has been somewhat inconsistent. Nine ft. parking stalls were allowed by the HRA and the Citv for the Target employee parking lot in the Center City Redevelopment area. They should decide what they are going to do and do it. If 9 ft. parking stall width is the wav they want to handle it, then it should be handled by changing the code and not with a lot of variances. MOTION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR. WELLAN, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE CHANGED TO STATE THAT 9 FT. PARKING STALLS BE ALLOWED FOR DESIGNATED EMPLOYEE PARKING AREAS. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. b. Possible Development on Southwest Quadrant of Center City Redevelopment District Mr. Robinson stated there has been some interest from a couple of developers in the southwest corner of the downtown area of the Center City Redevelop- 8D PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 9, 1985 PAGE 5 ment District. Some of the things that could be developed there would require a number of special use permits and possible variances. Thev are quickly getting into an area of development in the city where they will be seeing some parking ramps. The Fridley Plaza Clinic just received approval for two small parking ramps. The possible development on the southwest corner would require a parking ramp and others might be needed on the drive-in site. Mr. Robinson stated Staff's thinking at this point is that rather than go to the Planning Commission with numerous special use permits that they try to again utilize the S-2 District where a preliminary plan would be approved. With S-2 zoning, all changes would require formal review by the Planning Commission and City Council but would not require additional public hearings after the preliminary plan was approved with the rezoning to S-2. Mr. Robinson stated one problem was that the City only allows up to six story buildings in the City. The proposal they are looking at for the southwest corner was for a 10-story residential complex in conjunction with commercial . They are looking at a multiple story building on the drive-in site, so there are potential parking problems , lot coverage problems , and possibly other variances . Mr. Robinson stated the other thing discussed was the change to C-3 zoning in the Zoning Code to allow for greater lot coverage because of parking ramps and modifying the height restrictions so it accommodates the development. Ms. Gabel stated that "modifying the zoning to accommodate the development" was something that concerned her. That was saying--let's not let the develop- ment work within the community and the way it has developed over the years. She wanted development to happen, but she did not want the developer writing the code for the City. This particular area could very easily be over- developed. Mr. Saba stated he agreed. He felt there was a big danger in overdeveloping. Ms. Schnabel stated that the possibility of buildings over six stories should be reviewed with the Fire Department to get their reaction. Ms. Gabel stated there could be a lot of problems with a ten-story high building in this area. How close would the building be to the residential area and how high? What was the visual impact? What was the traffic impact? These were all important questions. Mr. Kondrick stated he would be in favor of a ten-story elderly highrise in this location. He felt it was needed, and the southwest corner would be an excellent location. Ms. Gabel stated it made good sense to deal with the neighbors first so thev know up front what is going to happen. If they just rezone the property to S-2, the ballgame is over. Then the developer can do whatever _he wants and that doesn 't mean the neighbors would then have any input; whereas, if they rezoned it with a plan to go with it, the neighbors would have a chance to give their input. 8E PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 9, 1985 PAGE 6 Ms. Schnabel agreed. Once the property was rezoned to S-2, if the developer is not able to follow through with the plan they have approved, then the S-2 zoning was already there. Ms. Gabel stated when they are talking about as big a neighborhood as there was in this area that would be impacted, she thought the City had some responsibilities to live up to the current zoning, and they shouldn't do something that would be imnactinq the entire neighborhood. There was no way she would turn her back on a whole neighborhood like that and say this development was for the good of the whole community. There was no way that it is good for the whole community. If the City has the neighbor- hood's input and the neighbors are given the opportunity to speak, the City can make these things happen in a way that is a lot more conducive to good public relations. She understood there were going to be some people who will not want any change, no matter what it is. Mr. Robinson stated there were three options: (1 ) rezone to S-2 with a preliminary plan; (2) change C-3 zoning to accommodate the development; (3) leave the code the way it is now. Ms. Schnabel stated she would be against changing the zoning code on C-3 zoning. The Commissioners basically agreed that rezoning to S-2 with a development plan was probably the best way to go. They were concerned as to who would make the judgement call to bring the plan back to the Planning Commission if there were substantial changes to that plan. When there are substantial changes to that plan, the neighbors should definitely be involved. Mr. Robinson stated they might want to put special stipulations on the development plan which related to significant changes to the plan. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE OCTOBER 9, 1985, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, L ynn e S-ab a Recording Secretary CITYOF FRIDLEY ('IVIG'CI-N"IT'R - 0431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 • PHONE(612) 571-3450 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE On _ October 21, 1985 , the Fridley City Council officially approved your request fora Special Use Permit, SP #85-11 , to allow the construction of a second accessory building, a 24' by 32' utility shed on Lots 11 and 12, Block 13, Fridley Park, the same being 6425 Ashton Avenue N.E. with the following stipulations : None. I you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the Planning Department at 571-3450. Sincerely, James L. Robinson ,'Planning Coordinator J!_R/dm Please, review the noted stipulations, sign the statement below and return one , copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department. Concur with action taken UNGLAUB, JERRY SP#85-11 6425 Ashton Avenue NE Special Use Permit to construct second accessory building APPROVED with NO STIPS. Deb to send letter AGREEMENT t owner of the property located at �S�i �D�7 �L AF f, have no objection to the City allowing the construction of a _-- k--A" to be / 7 located at ���� Lam/ k /)�' without the required certificate of survey that the City ordinarily requires for all new construction, signature Address Date aV mess