The URL can be used to link to this page

SP92-08 A CITY OF FRIDLEY p 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY,MN 55432 (612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM PROPERTY INFORMATION, - site plan required for submittal; see attached Address: 7',G 0/7 S`Yellow t Property Identification Number(PIN) 6 3,-T7 1. ljY �� PS T Legal description: Lot s 7 % L3/yc k / �— Lot /&Y-'Block Tract/Addition Current zoning: Square footage/acreage17`1 g�71�q� Reason for special use permit: Ale w 61 Ca h n ( e. J C 67 //k ��c� Section of City Code: 70r027 Dl G61) Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? Yes No ' If yes, which city? If yes, what type of business? Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title) (Contract Purchasers: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to processing) NAME_ ADDRESS DAYTIME PHONE SIGNATURE DATE PETITIONER INFORMATION NAME o L ADDRESS �.Z L DAYTIME PHONE 6 SIGNATURE9- DATE 1-7L'�V9 L Fee: $200.00 $100.00/k for residential 2nd accessory buildings Permit SP# Receipt# *4 513 Application received by: Scheduled Planning Commission date: /I?,/C12— Scheduled City Council date: 8S i CITY OF FRIDLEY PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST Applicants for vacations must submit the legal description of the B. Site Plan: parcel (easement, street, etc.) to be vacated. 1. Property line dimensions, location of all existing and proposed structures with distance from boundaries, Complete site plans, signed by a registered architect, civil distance between structures, building dimensions and engineer, landscape architect, or other design professional, to floor elevations include the following: 2. Grading and drainage plan showing existing natural A. General: features (topography, wetlands, vegetation, etc.) as well as proposed grade elevations and sedimentation and storm 1. Name and address of project water retention ponds. Calculations for storm water 2. Legal description (certificate of survey may be required) detention/retention areas. 3. All existing and proposed points of egress/ingress 3. Name, address, and telephone number of applicant, showing widths of property lines, turning fadii abutting engineer, and owner of record rights-of-way with indicated center line, paving width, existing and proposed median cuts, and intersections of 4. Date proposed, north arrow, scale, number of sheets, name streets and driveways of drawer 4. Vehicular circulation system showing location and 5. Description of intended use of site, buildings, and dimensions for all driveways, parking spaces, parking lot structures including type of occupancy and estimated aisles, service roads, loading areas, fire lanes, occupancy load emergency access (if necessary), public and private streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike paths, direction of 6. Existing zoning and land use traffic flow, and traffic-control devices 7. Tabulation box indicating: 5. Landscaping Plan (i) Size of parcel in sq, ft. 6. Location, access, and screening detail of trash (ii) Gross floor area of buildings enclosures (iii) Percent of site covered by building 7. Location and screening detail of rooftop equipment (iv) Percent of site covered by impervious surface 8. Building elevations from all directions 9. Utility plan identifying size and direction of existing (v) Percent of site covered by green area water and sewer lines, fire hydrants, distance of (vi) Projected number of employees hydrant to proposed building (vii) Number of seats if intended use is a restaurant or place of assembly (viii) Number of parking spaces required (ix) Number of parking spaces provided including handicapped (x) Height of all buildings and structures and,number of stories b City of Fridley pUBl1C HEARING BEFORETHE pLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the 3431 Avenue Fridley Municipal Center, AugI 12,t1992ratt730 p.m. N.E.on Wednesday, for the purpose of: Consideration of a Sp ci ll u Permt, -C-(I)of O8,by Robert Liska,per buildings the Fridley City Code,to allow accessory other than the first accessory building,over 240 Spring Brook 1. Parkf egenerally located a8 2fet on Lots'15-114cLongfellow Street N.E. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons should contth actsabilit Robelrta es who require auxiliary aids Collins at 572-3500 nolater than August S.1992. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department at 571-3450. DONALD BETCZOLID AR PLANNING COMMISSION (July 28,Aug.4,1992)Fridley PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, August 12 , 1992 at 7 : 30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #92- 08, by Robert Liska, per Section 205 . 07 . 01.C. (1) of the Fridley City Code, to allow accessory buildings other than the first accessory building, over 240 square feet, on Lots 15-18, Block 1, Spring Brook Park, generally located at 424 Longfellow Street N.E. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than August 5, 1992 . Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department at 571-3450. DONALD BETZOLD CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION Publish: July 28, 1992 August 4, 1992 S 112 SEC. 3 r. 30., R. o� CITY OF FRIDLEY 05 ORE POP MR.! MEMO MIND PT MM INFIRM MINOR lawn UZ= Mmm MIAMI man UPI MW WI aim M�WWPMM MI _nKo� 15� mmi VIM M4 Robert Liska Planning 7/24/92 SP #92-08 MAILING LIST Council Robert Liska Earl Gemmill 424 Longfellow Street N.E. 468 Longfellow Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Robert Wellman Theodore Erickson 467 Longfellow Street N.E. 450 Longfellow Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Jerry Clifton Clyde James 455 Longfellow Street N.E. 430 Longfellow Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Terry Hoffa Edmund Baron 447 Longfellow Street N.E. 467 - 79th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Jeffrey Reedy Frank Pomeroy 437 Longfellow Street N.E. 455 - 79th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Nancy Fricke Ralph Overlie 427 Longfellow Street N.E. 433 - 79th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 James Delney Floyd Cole 417 Longfellow Street N.E. 423 - 79th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Rexford Ramsdell Gary Kinser 409 Longfellow Street N.E. 7899 Alden Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Elaine Scott Planning Comm. Chair 391 Longfellow Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 City Council Members Steven Rick 402 Longfellow Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Louis Sweeny 410 Longfellow Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Neal Gillett 409 - 79th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Nellie Lindsay 379 - 79th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 qZ ` 10 �� el1ow 5 - VE j-h,A /00 Aho k4; eo3. 1?0�evl y Z/-s/,/c, (//) 7�6 3 33 6 �2 (►,vl X33 - 2 3 6 Fr;dI/py g51 weh �;� � 7 �/- 7o n ppors�dt Gy aq f.� 96 o a ,Z/, J-, 0 972 sfv alk;o. w� J . 77 9, gi �rh Ar�� 74 IZ A 7<< profs e h�� -e 12 At Ta�/ �-- Y,► s. t S7"/� � • J ,. .- . r .. ... .- ., V 1 rE'!-..•CAy+. A�a• X31.�iYh .KT i.:Y}MM�'.kt.�ylyM. ... ,rx'^� s. A v";< �',i s,.y >• x '§7.�p Yf�.} '�,�x �Cb f y�� .Y't��E';P�t i,��A � iy��rt•S }t l row• , ' z�>��3 vg's' ,'c�a �'�� "SYY' K$< .. '�`„'�k3"'•tib..., f e .1 NOW3., � „a '3�r � $' <h"`��• � ��' .., � Y ty � WeAis ay a n� : ,, ,<• ��x�` < `£� ,� kkk4x„ f t � F: �� sin �'t r � s� �:xall;""`'�, � e 10 MUM SQ 'y 'v�.,:: R V r>k �S'F R9b E. £ >< �.,.,.q, .`� A;. �.c xk��. a�� `�5t�#�r '�o,�r'°� S '�Y�-. t• +g =��, .;4�. •� r >F§ yrs.�'.�. Phi `$!x^ra e`er £h�',��"•„ ;�^' .. ' s .moi'<' �'f� �'�•' ' �.7` y rs »'krz:r � 3' °�` •�'"''ss�s�< `'� s s s. '4 +� o . G,� � '�4 �` G�,��ak3 a�` ahrn✓n 3,�xr ,✓„�j ? � r�f'`i^x$< -�.l�7L }<`k> U • 3��3. 3 ✓ f o a�iy f ux $i s 6'8.xd..£k .<a�t�' �'u A .✓yrs! sSs'r. c £�. R • '' r ars'” : �, ..' `.•: £ -, ,k r.we; r fs i�j.-+3r s x"� tr�1:. r ....r � I Staff Photo by Jeff Wheeler Darold Gerby stood in the alley behind his house, next to a car,he races on the weekends Neighbors aro un . his north Minneapolis home have complained about the cars and assorted parts around his house. ' Trop hies ®r r�� l t� Neighbors want race driver'sCr, ar p f�,,. ' ad up 'By Ian Trontz "" To Minneapolis inspectors, Gerber's Many Minneapolis` residents, in'e1= Staff Writer . lot-violates ordinances that'prohibit feet, violate'i the.:.ordinance;''but.ih repairing, spectom only 'dismantling and storing " ,cometaround if somC . Darold Gerber keeps his.racing tro-'` `.`excessive':' cars on residential,prop-i;;one,complains "I:drove.through'thV phies in a living roorri•,showcase, erty. On`.Monday,:Gerber•will:be in - alley.andi;saw`everything the neigly- plastic memoirs neatly arranged be-o, ''rHennepin County,Housing:Court on:;' hors complained :ab'out,"=%Rainyillo tween. porcelain, plates and family' 'a charge,of not;complying with a city', 'said. .There<,were parts all over aria, order tphotos. o clean u his ro ert k .;hoods from a'couple`of cars nailed o ' 'PON But the garage:Iteries out to heaven W. But he keeps his real:'mementos in "' "I don't care where.he,goes with his -r:justice" and around.the garage,:of his'north cars,':'said 4iin:Strong,,assistant su-;, Minneapolis home: used'car.engines, p. isor`in;`the Minneapolis Depart Gerber, who is unemployed, said he pieces,of radiators,old hoses;,chains;, ment of Inspections:;"But.hecan't do +:simply'can't,afford:tolbring his'car tQ belts, tires,' hubcaps and engine what he's doing'on a.residential lot.'! ..a ,licensed<smechanic:"whenever `i! ' hoods'from junkers heohas,.bought, :' > '", needs,work."which is .usually•after.", fixed up, raced into the ground and Gerber said.the possibility of 90 days each Saturday;night race .? broken up into salvageable parts in jail and a$700 fine has,not,curbed ; ' "Y k his,race car habit.:"I'll dust;have to :The financial rewards of racing in the It's the trophies around the garage';',:work on the cars at:'different:times, ' TwinCities'area are small.He wonW' that neighbors around 49th.and when the inspectors'arena around," race;<at Elko'Speedway three weeks'' Humboldt Avs. N. aren't too revved, he said. ago and took home$50. up about. f r# , . : A He,keeps four cars in a rear driveway "All we want to do is have fun, he "The noise he creates and his house and another.•on the:street.' He also' :said.',"We4on'tdo,it for,the money7b keeping practices should not be toler has six others•stored m friends' ga t:y 3 ,;a w ated," said City Council Member Al rages'because'ahey"won't fit"on, his•;r Gerber s cars, always painted green, ' ice Rainville,who has received com property. g�,;in.„� i ;,"s"R{�F,rti , '1 J r; and white.with the.number"02'.and plaints from some of Gerber neigl.i '� ,, l.jl+@,`aXk �ti+ N;td;ftry,�l �.fa , a Ghostbusters.,`Slime�,embl m;`are born: "You can;move out y to the 1; All his cars.are bought cheaply,'usu :�;a recognized`fixture at the Elko ira&; country if you want to do those:,:ally for about $50,i and put into rac- outh''of-',.the;Twin'Cities in Scott ; things. It's not a positive environ-'•M,;ing condition with:i;parts 'stripped' County W, ment to live in." from,other cars F He can't afford not r'xl:o.r Y�f,kris i4 to own the cars,he said r ��i , +�i <r; :The only.'people I hang outwith are r To Gerber,'37;'his-pit.of gerber,-whose fa rease and �r ? M � �, < r'.,` ;�{r� " ti^ Znotor'*eads +said G metal is the womb,from,which he "When you run across deals like that,' rther'raced`cars. `.`Racing is my life.' 'emerges every.Saturday for another,: yqu can't lose the chance,”he said. His:',wife:sometimes races, against night of battering and,`now andthen, I' him; I sweet victory at area stock car races.. 'cThe;.city housing code limits home-'r owners,to:keeping two cars;on any'•Said<Strong,"I hope we can come to "We [race drivers] have one drug: lot.,It,also-prohibita repairs,of any an;�agreement about;this:, I':would going fast in the .corners, burning `'kind 'on: residential. property; you •.,hate to have to live next to this guy,.' ,someone, and maybe leaving a little ' can't even;:change your oil.inside bit of pait on their sides,"he said. your garage legally. i ` SEP 0 29 1 92 September 1. 1992 To: The Mayor and Members of the City Council, City of Fridley, Minnesota Sub.iect: Special Use Permit Consideration - ROBERT LISKA. 424 Longfellow Street, Fridley, Minnesota On August 12, 1992 the Fridley Planning Commission, by a vote of four to one I.Chair, Donald Betzold voting nay] decided to send above request to you Ladies and Gentlemen recommending approval, with certain additions to the recommendations of your Community Development Department [Michelle McPherson). At said meeting my wife and I, part of whose property abutts said property at the rear, voiced vigorous obJections to this recommendation. Only my neighbor to the East, Mr. Boyd Maine, appeared with said Robert Liska at this meeting. Mr. Maine apparently is a friend of Mr. Liska. Mr. Maine spoke with what seemed to me to be a somewhat reserved approval stating "I'd rather see a garage there than old cars stored around outside". Mr. Maine, when I had previously discussed this proposal with him, stated "I have worked with him [Liska) and why are you against this proposal?" [Our reasons will be re-stated below.] Webster's Dictionary states that a PLANNING BOARD is "a body of citizens appointed to PREPARE OR ADMINISTER A PLAN FOR THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF A CITY". Granting a Special Use Permit for a 14 foot by 24 foot storage garage on a residential lot does not seem to be a proper exercise of a Planning Board's function. I question whether this proposal would have even seen the light of day if said garage would have been proposed to abutt the residential property of any member of [1] the Fridley City Council [2] Fridley City Staff [especially an important one] [3] Police or Fire Department [4) above all - the Fridley Planning Commission. Longfellow is a pretty mixed bag of residential property. There are some very nice, and nicely maintained, homes and lots on it. However, at its westernmost dead end is a home in front of which there have been parked from four to six [or more) ,funk-type cars EVER SINCE BEFORE WE MOVED HERE SOME SIX YEARS AGO. In fact, this place, and a couple of others on that block [Mr. Liska's included) with their junk cars and trucks parked outside, either in front or at the back of the property, was one of the reasons we hesitated to purchase our present home. [Mr. Liska, although he keeps them somewhat hidden behind his house and one of his existing TWO garages, admitted at above meeting, that he had had a junk [to-be-restored] truck and car parked there 'for over a year . In fact, they have been there as long as I can recall first seeing them several ,years ago.] I understand Mr. Steve Berg is your "Code Enforcement Officer". He must never come into our neighborhood...perhaps he should do so...soon! As to Mr. Liska and his proposal: 8T AP I. This is not Las Vegas, or Beverly Hills, where people of extreme wealth and income have 'restored vehicles' as their rich person's hobby. Mr. Liska does not fall in that category, I don't believe. In response to my statement that I heard he worked for Sears, Mr. Liska stated he "didn't know where I got that idea" [it was from Mr. Maine, who said he 'worked with Liska'] BUT Mr. Liska did not volunteer to state .just where he worked or what he did for a living, nor did the Planning Commission pursue this, to me, perfectly logical question for a person who wants to install a. non-conforming installation on his vacant RESIDENTIAL LOT. L. Mr. Liska proposes to use said 4-bay garage as a 'storage place only' for his hobby of 'restoring vehicles'. By his own admission he now has 'outgrown his two single-bay garages and needs room to store four more vehicles'. Doesn't this sound more like a BUSINESS OF RESTORING VEHICLES than anything else? 3. One of the Planning Commission Members did wonder "what will happen if and when he wants to sell his property - will there be problems?" As a former Mayor of Crystal I could have told her "Yes, you can bet on it". 4. The enclosed Star-Tribune article appeared ,just a couple of days after above hearing. As many of you probably know, this is typical of what happens, and how difficult it is to clear it up, when zoning restrictions are not rigidly enforced. Mrs. Rainville's comment could be applied verbatim to what I forsee happening when Mr. Liska tries to START THE ENGINES on these restored cars. She said "The noise he creates and his housekeeping practices should not be tolerated. You [Gerber] can move out to the country if you want to do those things. It's not a positive environment to live in." Mr. Liska claims he has "a complete machine shop in my basement and I do ALL the work on the engines down there". He certainly can't grind down car or truck bodies, fenders, tops, etc, in his basement! He can't attempt to start the cars or trucks i7this HOUSE OR BASEMENT! [After.the most recent hearing he tried to start the engine in the old truck that has stood in his yard for years. Despite tremendous roaring, groaning, etc he was unable to do so]. Mrs.Overlie and I owned a garage-tire store for several years. Vehicles' engines must be started [or attempt to be started] with garage doors open. Mr. Liska's neighbors will suffer the annoying consequences. 5. The aesthetics of what he proposes to do are far from what should be allowed in a residental-zoned neighborhood. It would seem that a huge, out of proportion, garage [as large or larger than his present home] is not in keeping with this residential area. 6. My wife and I have just had installed an over $8,000 landscaping project in our front and side yards. Our house faces down Alden qday - one of Fridley's nicer neighborhoods and one reason we bought it. Mr. Liska, on the other hand, proposes to install what is in effect a CAR & TRUCK RESTORING BUSINESS in a residential neighborhood. Such a project, as Mrs. Rainville so aptly puts it, belongs in the country [on 10 or more acres, in fact]. Fridley, and the North and Northeast suburbs, have sometimes been denigrated and subject to disparaging remarks, and a somewhat tarnished reputation in the Twin Cities. Some of us are trying to turn that around. Now it seems to us that some of your staff members, and your Planning Commission, seem i bent on reversing that trend. [Notable exception - the Chair, Mr. Betzold, who seems to understand the function of his Commission.] We respectfully request that ,you take a long, hard look at this proposal. If you do [and if you tour the neighborhood] we hope, and believe, ,you will vote against it and ALL such future proposals. Respectfully submitted: Ralph . Jean Overlie 433 79th Way NE Fridley, MN 55432 Tel: Home - 780-1314 Work - 339-0120 f 8V COMMISSION APPLICATION REVIEW FILE NUMBER FILE DATE MEETING DATE FILE DESCRIPTION SP #92-08 CITYOF ii 40 7/ 10/92 8/ 12/92 Robert Liska; 424 Longfellow Street N.E. FRIDLEY Second accessory building. COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST AND RETURN TO PLANNING DEPT. 0*1413 D. COMMENTS MICHELE M. � to o JOHN F. 7,0 4CLYDE W.-743 �� CLYDE M. 7� <r F:�,LEON M. - I` 6- JIM H. (:2,;77z� i 7� rXt-9 Oat Os Om S-- CHUCK M 57!?vc-Tv �� S�vt= SJY�e= �/sDvc!-' C,4,00- T v t��STi.✓6 /.`r�.2�r�.7c.svr s ��v.� T�trG o.�' 0✓�=iGN�e2�vc1� . YTD G�FSion_,,.G. ��ss.✓ ,BC stf Otd�TrG�ic� s3a E ,l�S " SP #92-08 Robert Liska Alley ..EWW.- 24'-0" Prvpe�e C erege ; r 16'-0" J2'-0 } a2. cwr 0 1 O L � co 144'-0" c ,3'-6" t2'_6„ Q Cl) n 24'`-FY U House 1 � l 8'-6„ I i i J3'-0" r 120'-0" � =�� —ice►—��r►-— �■�—-�.��—-+�`- i � I I l urb Longfellow Street SITE PLAN A ca.xa MMi f �t C r S j* W }i SP #92-08 Robert Liska � CITY OF rHowsolv' RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS FA Q S IRON' RE ET 1z8 1 .. ..:0II I-- - ,2 1& SPRI i Bea A4 �'Q.Rv a BRON -64 STREET a A ILI �� I +T GL NCO 1 4 ?+ +1 PAR 6 1 + Y I K 4 Is JA ir ST 9 70 5 -v > LIBERTY ST. O %% 0 % TH WAY % %% RI V ER yi,�w 9z,6 REIGN k %% %% %% % •% %%% •••••/• 80 ZONING MAP EEIy , ;c sp ss 3� 1y J- sE S t° ;f k sass .� t -• � So � -- 50 a � y f�•3 f iSc non J� wT�� `490 !7v�G ��"`// ✓'d dir�b N \;`' 4 ) �) 3 ', o S.p Sc ° .r �� .� I�^�f ��01\ ;.�Co�uw/ `1/ � ^(`18?,i5 ,✓gg-�i°E I 7ff0/ isa 9 3 41 83c 3e jo 30 !0 -S i 1 BROOK b SPR/NG J7 w< a PARK ( �2N0 N I rK /4 /1 l� v f .y ° 3e Q ,° 'o is ' 9 - I ° W o• ��) 340 , ! � � j, is • I c j ��r• - � '^ o •�a �0�0 ' °PARK z°°� L tS E R I y p l ) ( �r ) 6 )7 14 �C c �a F 7 S X44 434.2 / Ab ;9�A 7 3- 1�'` 34 ee 7r ,r,' S f6^ "/ Ci L) G L) xe L > -° ��• o< 7 b 9 1 222 •1e�w�� ' ; ° � r° '° t^ ` :�" � WELL OW A/-j; 4 /Is �• I, �` S �7 � R, 4 � Jp _ wc`�� ?-__�r � // 4 l 'J '( ) � (.3 3 ce CL q 2 / �C 9 E i /c >7 :Z 3/ f 10 SA 0 G 3 4 (:s Z at CL \\ g 5 a p «s U j o - tA}?01 :f+tk sr.r •�' l u - iak 5,9 X898 t 1;115 pkc =3 3 e ,ys Y! jg"��dfJ,y �Piill Oe -4 17892. - •(� c 6 $ (3L) : ry E 4. �I. pR so g6 797 4�1 \ \ Y\ c 3c r e✓1 Y �9) t KS s �F .90 P -o \ Ks �,- 4 1 0._0., Alley 9,_0„ f I 3 f Proposed Garage 4'-4" f aw_0., f I f I t 22._0,. 16,_x,. 1 i ' f 21.-��.. -�► Garage f 20,_0., � i i a i i 144,_0" i a i +1 T-61i 12._6.. i Ln ; i i r I i i House 24._6„ U !. ! 30._0.. I 3$,_6„ , 53._0., �. 120'-0" 14'-r„ � t t Curb Long1'eIIow St. I N CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 12, 1992 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Betzold called the August 12 , 1992 , Planning Commi ion meeting to order at 7: 35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Don Betzold, Dean Saba, Sue S"- ek, Larry Kuechle (for Diane Sa"ge) , Brad Sielaff Members Absent: Dave Kondrick, Connie dig Others Present: Michele McPherson Planning Assistant Robert Liska, 4�Longfellow St. N.E. Boyd & Adeli cine, 423 - 79th Ave. N.E. Ralph & Je Overlie, 433 - 79th Way N.E. John & J n Rainville, 3257 Penn Ave. No. WZ22 ,V19912 , RLillian Radel, 6655 Anoka St. N.E. yrus, 6680 Anoka St. N.E. APPROVAL OF JUPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION by r. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the July 22 , 199 , Planning Commission minutes as written. UP A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE OTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP #92-08 , BY ROBERT LISKA: Per Section 205. 07. 01.C. (1) of the Fridley City Code, to allow accessory buildings other than the first accessory building over 240 square feet, on Lots 15-18 , Block 1, Spring Brook Park, generally located at 424 Longfellow Street N.E. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7 :36 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated this property is generally located west of East River Road and adjacent to Spring Brook Place. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, as are the surrounding properties. The proposal is for a special use permit to allow a 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 12 , 1992 PAGE 2 second accessory building over 240 sq. ft. The petitioner currently has an attached two-car garage, and he is proposing to construct a 24 ft. by 40 ft. four-car garage. The petitioner has a collection of antique cars and restores them as a hobby. The proposed garage will be of frame construction similar to the existing dwelling unit and existing attached garage. By Code, the proposed accessory structure cannot exceed 14 feet in height. As proposed, the accessory structure meets the setback requirements as required by Code and does not adversely impact the maximum lot coverage or maximum square footage of permitted accessory buildings. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner will not be allowed to conduct a home occupation out of the accessory structure as it is prohibited under Section 205. 03 . 34 of the Zoning Code. The petitioner will also be required to provide a hard surface driveway to the accessory structure. Ms. McPherson staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the special use permit request with the following stipulations: 1. The accessory structure shall be compatible with the existing dwelling unit and shall not exceed 14 feet in height. 2 . The petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway by September 1, 1993 . 3 . The accessory structure shall not be used for a home occupation as per Section 205. 03 . 34 of the Zoning Code. 4 . The petitioner shall not repair automobiles for profit. 5. There shall be no painting of automobiles in the accessory structure. 6. There shall be no storage of automobiles on the property or in the accessory structure which are not registered to the property owner. 7 . If conditions #3-##6 are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use permit. The petitioner, his heirs, and assigns understand that termination of the special use permit will require removal of the accessory structure. Mr. Betzold asked if this activity is currently being conducted at this site. Ms. McPherson stated that she spoke with the petitioner prior to writing the staff report, and he indicated that he has access to r PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 12 1992 PAGE 3 a professional auto body painting facility, and all his auto body repair and painting is conducted at that facility. Stipulation #7 is to alert the petitioner that such an activity would not be permitted under the special use permit. The petitioner is proposing to use the new structure for storing the restored vehicles; however, the petitioner has indicated that he does do some structural work and also reassembles the engines and trans- missions and mechanical parts in his garage. Mr. Betzold asked the petitioner if he is planning to do anything different at his residence if this structure is built than he is presently doing. Mr. Robert Liska stated he will not be doing anything different. He stated he presently restores cars. He does all the mechanical work and fabrication. He is a machinist by trade so he fabricates the cars, but he does all the painting and body work at a separate facility. Mr. Betzold asked if the petitioner uses drills and sanders at the present time. He is concerned about any noise which might be emanating into the .residential neighborhood. Mr. Liska stated he does not use any drills or sanders for body work. He has owned the house for almost seven years, and he has restored three cars. He is not aware of any complaints from the neighbors about noise. He does not make any loud noises beyond a reasonable time. He is very concerned about his neighbors. Mr. Liska stated he owns five cars at the present time. He wants to store them all inside and out of sight. He wants to keep the property clean and keep his property value up. Mr. Sielaff asked if the petitioner would be using any bright security lights. Mr. Liska stated he did not intend to have any outside security lights. Mr. Betzold stated that if the City started receiving any complaints about noise and excessive activity, can that be reviewed by other parts of the City Code? Even if there is no stipulation and noise became an issue, could that be grounds for revocation of the special use permit? Ms. McPherson stated that is correct. There are noise and nuisance codes which set specific decibels at specific times for the operation of certain types of equipment which create noise. If the activity became a nuisance and staff could not work with the petitioner/property owner to rectify the situation, then she believed there could be cause for revocation of the special use permit. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 12 , 1992 PAGE 4 Mr. Betzold stated wondered if it would be necessary to put in a stipulation to comply with the code when it is already covered by City Code. Ms. McPherson stated the Commission could choose to do that. Mr. Ralph Overlie, 433 - 79th Way N.E. , stated his property backs up to the proposed building. At the present time, the petitioner has two old junk cars in the back yard. They do not look like collectible cars. He stated he did not see the need for the petitioner to construct a building of this size when he already has an attached two-garage. With the proposed garage, he would have six bays. He stated the petitioner is not just doing this for a hobby; he is in the business of restoring cars. There are all kinds of old service stations that the petitioner could lease if he wanted to get into the business. A person cannot work on cars without making a lot of noise. If he, has a hoist, a hoist requires a compressor, and compressors make a lot of noise. The petitioner is proposing to expand a small operation into a big operation in a nice residential neighborhood, and it should not be allowed. He stated they are planning to put $8, 000 of landscaping into their property, and he hates to see the neighborhood deteriorate. He is completely opposed to this proposal. Mr. Overlie stated that he and his wife have lived at this residence for six years. At the end of Jefferson toward the river, there is a property that continually has 4-6 junk cars in the front yard. The City has never done anything about it. If Fridley is going to' improve and maintain its image, it cannot be considering this proposal which amounts to putting a commercial enterprise in a residential neighborhood. Frankly, some of his neighbors have items stored in their yards that should not be allowed either, and he did not know what Fridley is doing about this type of situation. Mr. Boyd Maine, 423 79th Way N.E. , stated he has lived in the neighborhood for 14 years and has known Mr. Liska for six years. He would rather have Mr. Liska build another garage than to have the cars sitting out in the yard. He stated he has never heard any noise coming from Mr. Liska ' s residence. Ms. Overlie stated she has heard noise on Sunday afternoons. Mr. Betzold stated that if the special use permit is denied, what are the petitioner' s plans? What about the two cars stored in the back yard? Mr. Liska stated that if the special use permit is denied, he would still have his hobby but with no additional garage space. He would probably have to sell the two cars that are stored outside now. He was planning to restore those two cars. He stated he is not in the business of restoring cars and selling them. He plans to PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 12 1992 PAGE 5 restore these cars and store them, and that is the reason for building the proposed garage. Ms. Sherek stated Mr. Overlie mentioned a hoist and a compressor. Would the petitioner be operating a hoist, a .compressor, or any of that type of equipment in the garage? Mr. Liska stated he would not. Most of his restoration work is done in the attached two car garage. The proposed four-car garage is for storage. He also stated that he will not be working on other people' s cars. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:00 P.M. Mr. Kuechle stated that this is a large piece of property which can easily handle this size garage. The lot coverage would still be quite low. The proposed building gives the petitioner the option of storing the vehicles inside rather than outside. He stated he would be in favor of adding a stipulation that there is to be no outside storage of vehicles even though the Code already covers that. Mr. Betzold stated he is not so sure that approving a special use permit for a four-car garage for the purpose of storing vehicles inside rather than outside is justification for granting the special use permit in the first place. He believed Mr. Overlie was making a good point that approving a special use permit for an additional four garage spaces for a total of six garage spaces to do work, whether or not it is a hobby, may not be appropriate in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Saba stated stipulations #4 and #5 that there shall be no repair of automobiles for profit or painting of automobiles in the accessory structure are difficult to enforce. It is good that the petitioner plans to store his vehicles inside, but he is concerned that the petitioner might purchase more vehicles and have more vehicles stored outside, even though it is prohibited. He did agree with Mr. Kuechle that the lot is certainly large enough for the additional garage. Mr.. Sielaff stated he did not have any strong objection to this special use permit, because the petitioner does own a large lot. If the petitioner wishes to construct a four-car garage on it, as long as he meets all the code requirements and there are no problems with noise, he did not have any reason to vote against the request. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 12 , 1992 PAGE 6 Ms. Sherek stated that a special use permit was granted about three years ago for a large garage for the storage of cars, and that has proved to be an asset for the neighbors and for the City. Her biggest concern is future owners and. the possibility of a repair garage being operated some time in the future. She would like to see a stipulation that if the special use permit is granted that the special use permit be recorded against the property prior to the issuance of a building permit so that future property owners will be aware of the special use permit and the restrictions placed on it. Ms. McPherson stated she did not believe a stipulation is needed. It is the City's responsibility for recording any action against the property. If the Planning Commission and City Council approve the special use permit, staff will follow through on that direction. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to recommend to City Council approval of Special Use Permit, SP #92-08, by Robert Liska, per Section 205. 07 . 0l. C. (1) of the Fridley City Code, to allow accessory buildings other than the first accessory building over 240 square feet, on Lots 15-18, Block 1, Spring Brook Park, generally located at 424 Longfellow Street N.E. , with the following stipulations: 1. The accessory structure shall be compatible with the existing dwelling unit and shall not exceed 14 feet in height. 2 . The petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway by September 1, 1993 . 3 . The accessory structure shall not be used for a home occupation as per Section 205. 03 . 34 of the Zoning Code. 4 . The petitioner shall not repair. automobiles for profit. 5. There shall be no painting of automobiles in the accessory structure. 6. There shall be no storage of automobiles on the property or in the accessory structure which are not registered to the property owner. 7 . All cars and car parts undergoing or awaiting restoration must be stored inside. 8 . If stipulations #3-#6 or any other provisions of the City Code are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 12 1992 PAGE 7 permit. The petitioner, his heirs, and assigns understand that termination of the special use permit will require removal of the accessory structure. UPON A VOICE VOTE, BETZOLD VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4-1. Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on September 8 , 1992 . 2 . CONSIDERATION OF VACATION REQUEST, SAV #92-02 , BY JOHN RAINVILLE• To vacate that part of a public street dedication described as follows: Commencing at the center line of Anoka Street on the North line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 30, Range 24 ; thence North 88 degrees 34 minutes west, a distance of 29 . 66 feet to the point of beginning. Thence south 30. 01 feet; thence North ' 37 degrees 0 minutes 40 seconds west, a distance of 38. 31 ,feet; thence East to the point of beginning. Generally located at 67th Avenue and Anoka Street. Ms. McPherson stated this vacation request is to vacate a portion of an existing public right-of-way located at the - end of Anoka Street and adjacent to Rice Creek Park. The property is zoned R- 1, Single Family. This request is in conjunction with a second request for a variance which was reviewed and tabled by the Appeals Commission on July 21 and will be reviewed ,, again on August 18, 1992 . The variance request is to reduce the front yard and side yard setbacks on this lot to allow the construction of a single family dwelling. Ms. McPherson stated the lot is located at the end of Anoka Street. It is currently heavily wooded, vacant, and has some very steep topography. The petitioner is pzoposing the variance in order to construct the structure on the .flattest part of the property. Ms. McPherson stated the proposed vacation request deals with a small triangle area in the;'northeast corner of the lot. When the lot was platted in 1963 ,,'in addition to the cul-de-sac right-of- way adjacent to the subject property, this particular triangle was dedicated as part of aK octagon-shaped right-of-way to provide some type of access int / the Anoka County park property. Currently located in this area of the property is a footpath which leads to the Anoka Count park facility. The petitioner assisted her in locating the primary and secondary pathways which come off the AnokaStree cul-de-sac and go down into the Anoka County park facility. Ms. Mc erson stated that due to the topography in this general vicinity and the fact that the property north of the subject PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 12 1992 PAGE 8 property is Anoka County park property, construction of a public road in this area would not be practically feasible. Staff is recommending that the vacation request be approved by the City ,only if the variance request is also approved. If the variance request is denied, there is really no reason for the vacation req}fest to be approved. The reason for the vacation request is to��provide additional buildable area for the proposed single family dwelling. Mr. Betzold asked if it would be desirable or necessary'to save any easement for public access to the park property. Ms. McPherson stated that is an option for the City/ however, there is public right-of-way directly to the east where the secondary path is located. Mr. John Rainville stated he is asking for the vacation of one corner of the triangular piece of land. T" path does go down to the Creek in that area, but there is ample land available to the east for access to the Creek. He did hot believe he would be encroaching on anyone' s opportunity b� develop the park land further. Mr. Rainville stated he has designed a house that he believes will work on this lot. He is willing to/work with the City on the size and placement of the house and th� garage. He would take care of any erosion problems. He could guarantee the City that he will not use treated timbers or creosotW treated timbers. He would use a cedar, redwood, or masonry pro ct. Moving the house back to where the deck is proposed would probably mean the removal of some hardwood trees. He works r the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Department, and he is op d to cutting down quality trees. Mr. Kevin Cyrus, 6680 A ka Street, stated that the primary and secondary path merge mi ay down the slope. The. secondary path is quite steep, and, if .t e vacation is approved, the Creek will be virtually inaccessibl . Mr. Radel, 6655 Ano Street, stated there is very little flat land on this property a it is all sand. There is no way that erosion can be prevented. / The petitioner should be required to follow City Code like every oe else. Mr. Rainville '-ated that if the size of the house is reduced, then he would likto put up a fence in that area to give him some security fro the traffic to and from the Creek. If the house size is reduced then an option might be an easement and the City maintaini the right-of-way. Right now, the primary path is the path of ast resistance. It is already on his property, so access will automatically get shifted over to the secondary path. There is adequate land east of his property for access. The two paths join within 20-25 feet of the curb line. D STAFF REPORT Community Development Department Appeals Commission Date Planning Commission Date : August 12, 1992 City Council Date : September 8, 1992 REQUEST Permit Number SP #92-08 Applicant Robert Liska Proposed Allow construction of a second accessory structure over Request 240 square feet. Location 424 Longfellow Street N.E. SITE DATA Size 17,280 square feet 8.98% lot coverage; 14.5% after Density Present Zoning R-1 , Single Family Dwelling Present Land Use(s) Single Family Adjacent R-1 , Single Family Dwelling to the North, South, East, Zoning and West Adjacent Land Use(s) Single Family to the North, South, East, and West Utilities Park Dedication Watershed District ANALYSIS Financial Implications Conformance to the Comprehensive Plan Compatibility with Adjacent Zoning and Uses Environmental Considerations RECOMMENDATION Staff Approval with stipulations Appeals Commission Planning Commission Approval with stipulations Author MM/dn ' Staff Report SP #92-08, by Robert Liska Page 2 Request The petitioner requests that a special use permit be issued to allow the construction of a second accessory building over 240 square feet for Lots 15-18, Block 1, Spring Brook Park, the same being 424 Longfellow Street N.E. Site Located on the property is a single family dwelling unit with an attached two car garage. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling as are all adjacent properties. Analysis The petitioner is proposing to construct a 24 ' x 40 ' four car garage on the subject parcel . The petitioner has a collection of antique cars and restores them as a hobby. The proposed garage should be constructed in a manner which is architecturally compatible with the existing dwelling and attached garage, and should not exceed 14 feet in height. The proposed location of the garage meets the minimum setback requirements and will not adversely impact the lot coverage or adjacent properties. The accessory structure shall not be used to conduct a home occupation as per Section 205. 03 . 34 of the zoning code. The petitioner will be required to provide a hard surface driveway to the accessory structure. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the special use permit request, SP #92-08, to allow a second accessory structure over 240 square feet, with the following stipulations: 1. The accessory structure shall be compatible with the existing dwelling unit and shall not exceed 14 feet in height. 2 . The petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway by September 1, 1993 . 3 . The accessory structure shall not be used as a home occupation as per Section 205. 03 . 34 of the zoning code. 4 . The petitioner shall not repair automobiles for profit. 5. There shall be no painting of automobiles in the accessory structure. 8P Staff Report SP #92-08, by Robert Liska Page 3 6. There shall be no storage of automobiles on the property or in the accessory structure which are not registered to the property owner. 7 . If conditions #3 - #6 are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use permit. The petitioner, his heirs, and assigns understands that termination of the special use permit will require removal of the accessory structure. Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend approval of the request to the City Council . The Commission voted to add an additional stipulation: 7 . All cars and car parts undergoing and/or awaiting restoration shall be stored inside. The Commission also voted to amend old stipulation #7 to read as follows and renumber to stipulation #8: 8 . If conditions #3 - #7 or any other applicable provisions of the City Code are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use permit. The petitioner, his heirs, and assigns understands that termination of the special use permit will require removal of the accessory structure. The Commission also directed staff to record the special use permit, if approved, against the property prior to the issuance of a building permit for the necessary structure. City Council Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning Commission action. 80 1 - i Community p p Development Department u PLANNING DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: September 3 , 1992 TO: William Burns, City Manager }}. FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Special Use Permit Request, SP #92-08, by Robert Liska; 424 Longfellow Street N.E. Attached please find the above-referenced staff report. The petitioner is requesting that a special use permit be issued to allow construction of a second accessory structure over 240 square feet. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request to the City Council with the following stipulations: 1. The accessory structure shall be compatible with the existing dwelling unit and shall not exceed 14 feet in height. 2 . The petitioner shall provide a hardsurface driveway. by September 1, 1993 . 3 . The accessory structure shall not be used as a home occupation as per Section 205 . 03 . 34 of the Fridley Zoning Code. 4 . The petitioner shall not repair automobiles for profit. 5. There shall be no painting of automobiles in the accessory structure. 6. There shall be no storage of automobiles on the property or in the accessory structure which are not registered to the property owner. 7 . All cars and car parts undergoing and/or awaiting restoration shall be stored inside. 8. If conditions #3 - #7 or any other applicable provisions of the City Code are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use permit. The petitioner, its heirs and assigns understands that termination of the special use permit will require removal of the accessory structure. Liska SUP September 3 , 1992 Page 2 The Planning Commission also recommended and directed staff to record the City' s action regarding the special use permit, if approved, against the property prior to the petitioner receiving a building permit for the second accessory structure. Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning Commission action. MM/do M-92-565 8L `.•..l.v.vv !:``:`:`::,`'.': ..v...v v.. .v.. v...' .." :`::!::::::::i:::::�>v`v..v.. v ....vzay.vv v. .� v.n.v��.v.v. i� .:V.,♦ F`.�1.v..v.v.)>..A. .t.i. v.v. .rl-v. v.3v.v..v..v.. v..v. v v........ ..�i� FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8 1992 PAGE 11 Councilwoman Jorgenson, and Mayor NfSOF d i favor of the motion. Councilman Billings abstained from the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. 7 . RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE MINU THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 8 , 1992 : A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REOU SP 92-07 BY MCCOMBS FRANK ROOS & ASSOCIATES INC. F WAL-MART STORES INC. TO ALLOW GARDEN CENTERS OR NURSERIE WHICH REQUIRE OUTSIDE DISPLAY OR STORAGE OF MATERIALS ERALLY LOCATED AT 85TH AND UNIVERSITY AVENUES: . MOTION by Cou ilman Schneider to grant Special Use Permit, SP #92-07, h the following stipulations: (1) Plat request, P.S. #92- shall be approved; (2) Bulk items shall be stored SP to the main building and screened from the public right- 0 and (3) There shall be no outside storage of chemical fe ilizers, pesticides, or herbicides. Seconded by Councilman tzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 8. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 12 , 1992 • A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #92-08 , BY ROBERT LISKA, TO ALLOW ACCESSORY BUILDINGS OTHER THAN THE FIRST ACCESSORY BUILDING OVER 240 SQUARE FEET, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 424 LONGFELLOW STREET N.E. : Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this request is for a special use permit to allow a second accessory building over 240 square feet. She stated that the petitioner currently has an attached two car garage, and is proposing to construct a 24 by 40 foot four car garage. She stated that the petitioner, Mr. Liska, builds and restores cars. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission on a 4 to 1 vote recommended approval of this special use permit to build the second accessory building with eight stipulations. She reviewed these stipulations with the Council. Mr. Liska, the petitioner, stated that he has spent over $17, 000 in renovating his home. He stated that there is an unattached garage on the property which was built in 1944 when the home was constructed. He stated that he wished to remove this garage and construct a 24 by 40 foot four car garage. He stated that the estimated cost for this garage is $17, 000. Mr. Liska stated that he meets all the requirements of the Zoning Code, and he did not plan to operate a business from the garage. He stated that this is specifically outlined in the stipulations, FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 PAGE 12 and he would lose the building if he did not comply. He stated that his hobby is restoring old cars, and he does one car every two years. Councilwoman Jorgenson questioned what this would do for the potential resale of the property, as the garage space would be larger than the home. Mr. Liska stated that he plans to add to the home in the future. He stated that he wants to fix the property and make it look nice. He stated that if he has to build a smaller garage, he would consider it, but he has requested the maximum space allowed under the code. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she has a difficult time with this four car garage since there is already a two car garage attached to the home. Mr. Liska stated that he has never had any complaints from his neighbors. He stated that the four car garage would only be used for storage, as he does all . his work in the attached two car garage. Councilman Billings stated that the City ordinance prescribes that an accessory building cannot be larger than the home. He asked if this takes into consideration combining the sizes of all accessory buildings or if no single accessory building can be larger than the home. Ms. Dacy stated that no single accessory building can be larger. than the home. Councilman Billings stated then that a person could have a 24 by 20 foot home and two garages 24 by 19 feet and still meet the code. He stated that a special use permit for a second accessory building is a legal use unless the governing body can show there is a problem with the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Mr. Overlie, 433 79th Way, stated that Mr. Liska made the statement that he only works on one car every two years, so he did not know why he needed a six car garage. He stated that Mr. Liska has stated that he has not had any complaints, and that is because he has not started these cars. He stated that it is difficult to get these old cars started without any noise. Mr. Overlie stated that he has no objection to a man having a hobby unless it encroaches on a nice neighborhood. Mr. Overlie stated that there are several eyesores in this neighborhood and that something should be done. He stated that he has spent over $9, 000 in landscaping, and those who try to improve the area should not have to put up with anything more than a minor hobby. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 PAGE 13 Mr. Overlie stated that, at most, Mr. Liska should only be constructing a two car garage. He stated that the neighbors on the east who were in favor of this special use permit do not own the property. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she would be in favor of a double car garage, but she has difficulty with a four car garage. Mr. Liska stated that he would be happy with a two car garage, if he could not construct the four car garage. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grant Special Use Permit, SP #92-08, based on the construction of a 24 by 24 foot garage, with the following stipulations: (1) the accessory structure shall be compatible with the existing dwelling unit and shall not exceed 14 feet in height; (2) the petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway by September 1, 1993; (3) the accessory structure shall not be used for a home occupation as per Section 205. 03 .34 of the Zoning Code; (4) the petitioner shall not repair automobiles for profit; (5) there shall be no painting of automobiles in the accessory structure; (6) there shall be no storage of automobiles on the property or in the accessory structure which are not registered to the property owner; (7) ' all cars and car parts undergoing or awaiting restoration must be stored inside; and (8) if Stipulation. Nos. 3-6 or any other provisions of the City Code are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use permit. The petitioner, his heirs, and assigns understand that termination of the special use permit will require removal . of the accessory structure. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Schneider. to receive the. minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of August 12, 1992 . Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 9. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION TING OF AUGUST 18 , 1992 : A. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR 92-17 BY ROGEREBECK TO UPGRADE A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE WHICH HAS B DECLARED UNSAFE BY THE CITY WHEN THE NECESSARY REPAIRS ONSTITUTE MORE THAN FIFTY PERCENT OF THE FAIR MARKET VA E OF SUCH STRUCTURE; TO ALLOW HABITATION OF A SINGLE FAM DWELLING LESS THAN 1, 020 SQUARE FEET GENERALLY LOCATED 157175TH AVENUE N.E. : Ms. Dacy, Community De opment Director, stated that this is a request for two var' nces, one to allow the repair of a non- conforming struct e which the City has declared unsafe and in which the repai exceed fifty percent of the fair market value of the structur and the other variance is to allow habitation of a FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8 1992 PZAE 14 single family dwelling unit less than 1, 020 square fe She stated that the Appeals Commission recommended denia of this variance request. Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Luebeck submitted a petitio from some of the adjacent home owners who had no objection to th variance, and there is a letter from the Holmberg's who object o the variance. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated that this is area where there could be a legal issue. He stated that e felt relatively confident about the legal question provided t at the valuation of the property is correct and that the evi nce on the cost of reconstruction is correct. He stated that ' order to support any Council action perhaps the City Assessor and Building Inspector should testify as to what they know about the property. He stated that possibly, the Council may want to ge an independent appraiser to certify the value of the structure He stated that the key question is if the repairs constitute more than fifty percent of the fair market value of the structu e. Mr. Herrick stated that another imp rtant question is to determine if the applicant was aware that t e City had informed HUD that a building permit would not be g anted. He stated that if the property was purchased and the p itioner knew the City's position, this could have some bearing o the issue. Councilwoman Jorgenson asked ' f the property is uninhabited for two .years, if it looses its non nforming status. Mr. Herrick stated that i does if it is a nonconforming use, but this is a nonconforming s ructure, and he is not sure if this time period applies to the s ucture as well as the use. Ms. Dacy stated that e knows the petitioner was aware that this item would be before ouncil, but she did not believe that he was present. MOTION by Counci an Schneider to table this item to the next. Council meeting or further research on this issue. Seconded by Councilwoman Jo enson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared t motion carried unanimously. 10. CONSIDE TION OF 1993-1995 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM/ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO EXISTING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that Addendum No. 2 to e existing Joint Powers Agreement covering the Community Developm nt Block Grant Program specifically prohibits the use of excessi e force by an agency' s law enforcement personnel (in this case, ridley's Police Officers) against individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations and against physically barring entrance to or exit from facilities subject to nonviolent s CRYOF FRIDLLY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER•6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432• (612)571-3450• FAX (612)571-1287 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE September 9 , 1992 Robert P. Liska 424 Longfellow Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Liska: On September 8 , 1992 , the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a Special Use Permit., SP #92-08 , to allow accessory buildings other than the first accessory building over 240 square feet. The City Council approved this accessory building to be no larger than 24 ' x 24 ' (576 square feet) , on Lots 15-18, Block 1, Spring Brook Park, generally located at 424 Longfellow Street N.E. , with the following stipulations: 1. The accessory structure shall be compatible with the existing dwelling unit and shall not exceed 14 feet in height. 2 . The petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway by September 1, 1993 . 3 . The accessory structure shall not be used as a home occupation as per Section 205 . 03 . 34 of the zoning code. 4 . The petitioner shall not repair automobiles for profit. 5 . There shall be no painting of automobiles in the accessory structure. 6. There shall be no storage of automobiles on the property or in the accessory structure which are not registered to the property owner. 7 . All cars and car parts undergoing and/or awaiting restoration shall be stored inside. Liska SUP September 9, 1992 Page 2 8. If conditions #3 - #7 or any other applicable provisions of the City Code are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use permit. The petitioner, his heirs, and assigns understands that termination of the special use permit will require removal of the accessory structure. You have one year from the date of City Council action to initiate construction. If you cannot begin construction in time, you must submit a letter requesting an extension at least three weeks prior to the expiration date. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the n ing Department at 571-3450. cerely, rbara Dacy, AICP Community Development Director BD/dn Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by September 23 , 1992 . Concur with action taken t- �- p015'73 STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS COUNTY OF ANOKA CITY OF FRIDLEY In the Matter of a special use permit, SP #92-08 SPECIAL USE PERMIT Robert P. Liska , Owner The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 8th day of September , 1992 , on a petition for a special use permit pursuant to the City of Fridley's Zoning Ordinance, for the following described property: lU d11VW cl.l:l'.CJJULy UiL1lLL tll b'J UL11C1 11i a11 L10= i1LJl. -1. C'JbUiy Jill lli till Jvc:i 211 fv square feet. The City Council approved this accessory building to be no larger than 24' x 24 ' (576 square feet) , on Lots 15-18, Block 1 , Spring Brook Park, generally located at 424 Longfellow Street N.E. IT IS ORDERED that a special use permit be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons: Approval with eight stipulations. See City Council meeting minutes of Se tember 8 1992. STAATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY OF FRIDLEY ) I, Shirley A. Haapala, City Clerk for the City of Fridley with and in for said City of Fridley, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy and Order granting a special use permit with the original record thereof preserved in my office, and have found the same to be a correct and true transcript of the whole thereof. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF. I have hereunto subscribed my handt the Citv of Fridley,rMi esota, in the County of Anoka on the ��1 day of 2 , - 19 DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 SHIRLEY H APALA, CY'YY CLERK .aon. (SEAL) s• FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 PAGE 11 Councilwoman Jorgenson, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman Billings abstained from voting on the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. 7. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 8, 1992 : A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #92-07✓$Y MCCOMBS, FRANK, ROOS & ASSOCIATES, INC. , FOR WAL-MART SMES, INC. , TO ALLOW GARDEN CENTERS OR NURSERIES WHICH REQUIRE OUTSIDE DISPLAY OR STORAGE OF MATERIALS , GENERALLY LOCATED AT 85TH AND UNIVERSITY AVENUES: MOTION by Councilman SchTieider to grant Special Use Permit, SP #92-07, with the foYfowing stipulations: (1) Plat request, P.S. #92-05, shall the' approved; (2) Bulk items shall be stored adjacent to the mein building and screened from the public' -right- of-way; ublic right- of-way; and (3j' There shall be no outside storage of chemical fertilizers,-pesticides, or herbicides.. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatri Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the mot' n carried unanimously. 8X�AG EIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF ST 12, 1992• A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT RE UEST - 8 BY O ' BUILDING OVER 240 SQUARE FEET. GENERALLY LOCATED AT 424 LONGFELLOW STREET N.E. : `� Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this request is for a special use permit to allow a second accessory building over 240 square feet. She stated that the petitioner currently has an attached two car garage, and is proposing to construct a 24 by 40 foot four car garage. She stated . that the petitioner, Mr. Liska, builds and restores cars. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission on a 4 to 1 vote recommended approval of this special use permit to build the second accessory building with eight stipulations. . She reviewed these stipulations with the Council. Mr. Liska, the petitioner, stated that he has spent over $17, 000 in renovating his home. He stated that there is an unattached garage on the property which was built in 1944 when the .home was constructed. He stated that he wished to remove this garage and construct a 24 by 40 foot four car garage. He stated that the estimated cost for this garage is $17, 000. Mr. Liska stated that he meets all the requirements of the Zoning Code, and he did not plan to operate a business from the garage. He stated that this is specifically outlined in the stipulations, I - '1 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8 1992 PAGE 12 and he would lose the building if he did not comply. He stated that his hobby is restoring old cars, and he does one car every two years. Councilwoman Jorgenson questioned what this would do for the potential resale of the property, as the garage space would be larger than the home. Mr. Liska stated that he plans to add to the home in the future. He stated that he wants to fix the property and make it look nice. He stated that if he has to build a smaller garage, he would consider it, but he has requested the maximum space allowed under the code. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she has a difficult time with this four car, garage since there is already - a two car garage attached to the home. Mr. Liska stated that he has never had any complaints from his neighbors. He stated that the four car garage would only be used for storage, as he does all . his work in the attached two car garage. Councilman Billings stated that the City ordinance prescribes that an accessory building cannot be larger than the home. He asked if this takes into consideration combining the sizes of all accessory j buildings or if no single accessory building can be larger than the home. Ms. Dacy stated that no single accessory building can be larger than the home. Councilman Billings stated then that a person could have a 24 by 20 foot home and two garages 24 by 19 feet and still meet the code. He stated that a special use permit for a second accessory building is a legal use unless the governing body can show there is a problem with the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Mr. Overlie, 433 79th Way, stated that Mr. Liska made the statement that he only works on one car every two years, so he did not know why he needed a six car garage. He stated that Mr. Liska. has stated that he has not had any complaints, and that is because he has not started these .cars. He stated that it is difficult to get these old cars started without any noise. Mr. Overlie stated that he has no objection to a man having a hobby unless it encroaches on a nice neighborhood. Mr. Overlie stated that there are several eyesores in this neighborhood and that something should be done. He stated that he has spent over $9, 000 in landscaping, and those who try to improve the area should not have to put up with anything more than a minor hobby. i FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 PAGE 13 Mr. Overlie stated that, at most, Mr. Liska should only be constructing a two car garage. He stated that the neighbors on the east who were in favor of this special use permit do not own the property. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she would be in favor of a double car garage, but she has difficulty with a four car garage. Mr. Liska stated that he would be happy with a two car garage, if he could not construct the four car garage. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grg p 0.1 SP #92-08, based on the construction of �..� iy ' 4 fooc3arag with the following stipulations: `.jIr the accessory structure shall be compatible with the existing dwelling unit and shall not exceed 14 feet in height .(2.) the petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway by September 1, 1993 ; (3) . the accessory structure shall not be used for a home occupation as per Section 205.03. 34 of .the Zoning Code; .(4)$ the petitioner shall not repair automobiles for profit; (5) there shall be no painting of automobiles in the accepsory structure; (,.6� there shall be no storage of automobiles on the property or in the accessory structure which are not registered to the property owner; (7) '.41all cars and car parts undergoing or awaiting restoration must be stored inside; and , ) 1 if Stipulation Nos. 3-6 or any other provisions of the City Code l are violated, the City reserves the right to terminate the special use permit. The petitioner, his heirs, and assigns understand that termination of thespecial use permit will require removal . of the accessory structure. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Schneider. to receive the. minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of August . 12, 1992. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 9. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 18 , 1992 • A. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #92-17 , BY ROGER LUEBECK, TO UPGRADE A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE WHICH HAS BEENDECLARED UNSAFE BY THE CITY WHEN THE NECESSARY REPAIRS,,-CONSTITUTE MORE THAN .FIFTY PERCENT OF THE FAIR MARKET VAb E OF SUCH STRUCTURE; TO ALLOW HABITATION OF A SINGLE FAM_IIL' DWELLING LESS THAN 1, 020 SQUARE FEET, GENERALLY LOCATET 1571 75TH AVENUE N.E. : Ms. Dacy, Community ge _Velopment Director, stated that this is a request for two yafiances, one to allow the repair of a non- co;str ing str ure which the City has declared unsafe and in l whe r airs exceed fifty percent of the fair market value of thure, and theother variance is to allow habitation of a r . FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 PAGE 14 \1 single family dwelling unit less than 1, 020 square feet. She stated that the Appeals Commission recommended denial of this variance request. Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Luebeck submitted a petition from some of the adjacent home owners who had no objection to the variance, and there is a letter from the Holmberg's who object to the variance. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated that this is an area where there could be a legal issue. He stated that he felt relatively confident about the legal question provided that the valuation of the property is correct and that the evidence on the' cost of reconstruction is correct. He stated that in order to support any Council action perhaps the City Assessor and Building Inspector should testify as to what they know about the property. He stated that possibly, the Council may want to get an independent appraiser to certify the value of the structure. He stated that the key question is if the repairs constitute more than fifty percent of the fair market value of the structure. Mr. -Herrick stated that another important question .is to determine if the applicant .was aware that the City had informed HUD that a building permit would not be granted. He stated that if the property was purchased and the petitioner knew the City's position, this could have some bearing on the issue. Councilwoman Jorgenson asked'`if the property is uninhabited for two years, if it looses its nor.fconforming status. Mr. Herrick stated that ;Lt does if it is a nonconforming use, but this is a nonconforming structure, and he is not sure if this time period applies to the Structure as well as the use. Ms. Dacy stated that/she knows the petitioner was aware that this item would be before Council, but she did not believe that he was present. r MOTION by Counc?ilman Schneider to table this item to the next. Council meetirc/ for further research on this issue. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared//�_he motion carried unanimously. 10. CONSIDERATION OF 1993-1995 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGkAM ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO EXISTING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT: Ms. Da Community Development Director, stated that Addendum No. 2 o the existing Joint Powers Agreement covering the Community Dee pment Block Grant Program specifically prohibits the use of exc sive force by an agency's law enforcement personnel .(in this c , Fridley's Police Officers) against individuals engaged in n;-violent civil rights demonstrations and against physically barring entrance to or exit from facilities subject to nonviolent - 10015'73 '3 Cs r•._� O co -F• UFRGE OF 900 M R=fi th STATE OF MR11.f;WA, COUNTY OF ANOKA I hereby oertlfY that the within instru- -�� trrent was flied M this otf ce for record OCT - 91992 and was dory recorded 4 7M=Z7 y � /may, IPS.. ��