Loading...
PL 06/20/1973 - 30377� �f PLANNING COMMISSTON MEETING June 20, 1973 Mr. Fitzpatrick called the meeting to order at 8:04 p.m. ROLL CALL: . .� MEMBERS PRESEN�': Fitzpatrick, Blair, Drigans, Harris, and Lindblad MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Darrel Clark, Community Development Administrator. APPROVAL OF PLANNING CONIMISSION MINUTES: JUNE 6, 1973: Mr. Drigans pointed out the last paragraph on page 7 and the first paragraph on page 8, and said that he did not recall Mr. Harris � saying that. Mr. Drigans said that he was trying to explain why he voted nay on the motion.. The reason was that if the Planning Commi- ssion referred the bus facility to the City Council directly, the subcommittees would be circumvented, and have to follow suit. Mr. Drigans said that it was Mr. Boardman�s statement that the City wants to retain a walkway. Mr. Drigans stated it should have read that the reason he voted nay r^� was if the Planning Commission referred the action to the Council that the subcommittees would have to follow suit as being subcommittees of the Planni,ng Commiss�.on. Mr. Harris said that Mr. Boardman�s statement was that if the City did not acquire tIie pxoperty, then the City.would want to retain it and use it for a walkway anyho�r,. MOTION by Mr. by Mr. Blair. unanimously. Drigans to receive the minutes as corrected. Seconded Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried RECEIVE PLATS F� SUBDIVISIONS�STREETS F� UTILITES SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES: JUN , 1973: MOTION by Mr. Harris to receive the minutes of the Plats � Subdivisions- Streets F� Utilities Subcommittee meeting of June 6, 1973. Seconded by Mr. Lindblad. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE BUILDING STANDARD:�-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES: JUNE 7, 1973: MOTION by Mr. Lindblad to receive the minutes of th Design Control Subcommittee meeting of June 7, 1973. � Mr. Harris. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the � unanimously. e Building Standards- Seconded by mation carried PLANNING CONIMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 20, 1973 PAGE 2 r-� �_ �"� RECEIVE BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES: JUNE 12, 1973: MOTION by Mr. Drigans to receive the minutes of the Board of Appeals meeting of June 12, 1973, Seconded by Mr. Bla�ir. Upon a vQice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. CONTINUED: PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING RE UEST, ZOA #73-06 MICHAEL SELEDIC JR.: Rezone from R-1 sin le famil dwellin areas to R-3 general multiple family wellings) Lots 3-10-14-20, Block 20, an Lots 3-7 19-24 Block 19, all in Fridle Park Addition to allow construction of a 9 unit apartment comp ex: MOTION by Mr. Blair to waive the reading of the Public Hearing Notice. Seconded by Mr. Drigans. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the mot�.on carried unanimously. Mr, �itzpatri,ck asked if the petitioner had anything to add from the meeting of two weeks ago? The petiti,oner, Mr. Seledic, said that he has not done anything outside of one meeting with Mr. Clark. The only thing that Fie could conclude was the easement for the road along the backside of the property and the easement for 61st to come through, was a controlled intersection. He said he had no objection to this. Mr. �itzpatrick sa�d tha.t one of his major concerns was the use of the pxoperty� of tlie surrounding home o�mers. Mr. Drigans asked if tFiere Iia.d been any changes in the plans since two weeks ago? The petitinner said�there have not, but drainage and traffic would all have� to be engineered. Mr. Clark said that 611/2 Way vacated, would have to be a cul de sac r o ad. The Commission would then want all parking areas o� the apartment site to bring access down 61st Way. He said that in vacating all of the other right of ways, they would like to see that the City get a 20 foot addition to connect 61st Way to 62nd Way and continuing north to 64th Way. He said this would be beneficial if and when there is ever a median down East River Road. Mr. Fitzpatrick said this would involve getting an easement from much of the property up to 64th. He said on his draft there is a difference showing between the railroad property north of 62nd and south of 62nd. He asked if there was any real difference in the situation? Mr. Clark said it has been platted. North of 62nd is kind of a sub lot. �"� Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Clark how he would propose to handle lots 20 and 21 in block 20 with that jog. Mr. Clark said the ownership probably doesn't jog like that. � ''1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 2U, 1973 �� � �AGE 3 Mr. Fitzpatrick asked why the City has chosen 61st for the exit for making a signalized intersection. Mr. Clark said that it was prob- ably looked at prior to the abandonment as 61st crossed the�tracks. He said 62nd Way, going west, may have access also. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that there was some discussion on the drainage at the meeting two weeks ago. Mr. Clark said that they really haven't done anything about this problem except talk about what can be done about it. It appears to be complex and involves property outside this proposal. Mr. Harris said it would be necessary then, if the project went, to install a storm sewer system. Mr. Clark said the drainage must be taken care of. The nearest is at 694. Mr. Harris said there was no storm sewer system in this area now. Mr. Clark said that there was another at 63rd and East River Road that would probably not be deep enough. He said the storm sewer system is � problem that will have to be solved. Mr. Fitzpatrick said it was apparent that they would have to ask the City for a proposal for drainage and traffic before acting upon it. Mr. Fitzpatrick opened the public hearing. Mr. Richard Brown, 6103 East River Road, said that this proposal sounds worse and worse the more he hears. First they just wanted a rezoning reQuest, and now other things are coming up. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that the street proposal would just be a dedication from the property owner. Mr. Brown handed the Commission a petition opposing the rezoning request of Mr. Seledic Jr. for building apartments in the area of 61st and East River Road presently zoned R-1. MOTION by Mr. Blair to receive the petition. Seconded by Mr. Harris. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mrs. Richard Soj, 65 - 61st Way N.E., said that the only way child- ren can go by now, is the back street. She said East River Road is too busy already without any apartments in the area. She said when they bought their homes there, a factory was supposed to be built, and that was it, She said that since there was no park in that neighborhood, it should be made into a park. There were six people in the audience who suggested they were opposed to this also. Mr. Drigans said he would like to hear some of the reasons why they are opposed. Mr. Richard Soj, 65 - 61st Way N.E., said that he was opposed for the same reasons as Mr. Brown stated. PLANNING CQ1��SSfiON 1�F�ETTN6 Q�� �'UNE 2Q, 1973 �'AGE 4 � � MOTION by Mr. Bl�.ir to close the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Harris. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unani- mously. ` Mr. Fitzpatrick said before they can act upon this, they need to have some 'specific recommendations on traffic and drainage from the City. Mr. Clark said that the traffic patterns will be easier to plan than the drainage because tTiey have fiad other studies with the traffic in this area, and the drainage would prvbably involve a large area of property. He said that the drainage study may take at least 30 days. Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Clark if there was any chance that East River Road changed, will leave the people without access to East River Road? Mr. Clark said coming from the north they woiYld have to go down Mississippi Street one block to Ashton, tfien follow Ashton along the tracks right of way, Mr. Drigans said the people on 61st 1/2 Way won�t be able to get through. He said they•will have to go all the way around and under the 694 underpass. NTr. Drigans said that ,..-1 he was concerned about rezoning a block with residential structures. He felt this would lower the property value. Mr. Harris said there are always two sides. He said looking at this area from the Comprehensive Plan, a multiple development, or some- thing besides an R-1 area, it is probably �he best place for apart- ments. He would like to see something developed there. But on the other hand the adjacent property owrrers would suffer, He said when the people bought their property, it was R-1 and they believed it wv�ld rem�in R-1. He said the general layout of the apartments look like army barracks. He said it renders the rest of the property unusable for further development. He didn't like the idea of "spr�t rezoning." Mr. Drigans said he would be more favorable towards R-2 than R-3. MOTION by Mr. Harris to recommend to the Council, denial of the petition for the Rezoning Request ZOA 73-06 for the following reasons: 1. The property owners would suffer as they are in R-1 zoning. 2. The general layout of the building is not good, it renders the rest of the property in block 19 unreasonable for further development. 3. There is strong objection from the adjacent property owners. 4. It renders the R-1 residents traffic hardships. ''~ Seconded by Mr. Drigans. Mr. Harris said that perhaps the petitioner could modify his plans in some way to make the development more compatihle with the sur- rounding areas. �'"� PLANNING COMMISS�ON MEET�NG OF JUNE 20, 1973 PAGE 5 � UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting�aye, the motion carried unanimously. CONTINUED: VACATION REQUEST, SAII #73-09, MICHAEL W. SELEDIG, JR• Vacate 61st Way etween East River Road an�. BurliZgton Northern ro ert ; vacate alle between lots 4-10 and 15-20, block Z0; vacate _11 2 Way etween lo�s -23, block 19, an lots 3-7, lock 20; vacate — . � ..�.. �� �r � a�.� yia 111lLltr L Gil1� A ition, to allow construction o an ap�xrtment complex. Mr. Fitzpatrick said this reauest was contingent upon approval of the Rezoning Request and therefore, they must act upon ii to recommend denial based upon the denial of the rezoning request. MOTTON by Mr. Harris to recommend dsnial of the aracation request based upon the denial of tFie Rezoning Request. Seconded by Mr. Bla�r. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unani- mously. CONT�NUED: FINAL PLAN APPROVAL: WALL CORPORATION: The areas ener- ally located between 5th Street an 7th. Street N E from Mississippi Street to 63rd Ave. N.E. Mr. Clark said that recently the petitioner had changed his mind about building apartments and wanted to increase the density in the R-1 area so that the total sites would hold 155 units. He said the Board of Appeals acted on this and made a recommendation to Council. Their recommendation was to drop the density to 140 units. This recommenda- tion went to Council and the motion Council made was to allow the 155 units. The petitioner, Frank Reese, from Reese-Robe � Associates, came forward. He said he had several site illustrations and actual details of the building itself with him. He said that they have taken out some of the town hou5es in the middle and added a sizable recreation building recommended by Council. He said Council aske�d for an indoor swimming pool, recreation facilities for ping pong and pool, and a room for changing ice skates in the winter. There were no members in the audience for�this item. Mr. Reese displayed another drawing illusirating the exterior walls that would be of prefinished wood, Some units will have fireplaces. The general characteristic of them would be gable roofs, asphalt shingles, and rough sawn boards for trim. He indicated that they w�ll be us�.ng a number of diffe�►ent color stains so that they won't all be the same. He said it will be combinations of tans, golds, greens, and browns. Mr. Reese said these ^ market in three years. unit and storage space 1/2 flight up will be Another 1/2 flight up flight up will be mast are designed for a rental market now and a sale He said there is a clouble garage for each for bicycles and other yard goods. He said the kitchen, living room, and dining area. will be two bedrooms and a full bath. Another er bedroom, shower-bath, and a walk in closet. � ^ � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 20, 1973 PAGE 6 Without the garages this is about 1300 square feet of space. The basement will be alittle over 400 sauare feet of finished space. This is floor tile, ceiling, sheet rock, and walls; but it won�t be carpeted or plush. The total garage space will be 428 square feet. The total square feet will be 2200 per unit. �They will be �tentatively marketed in the high $30,000 range. He did not have any figures on rentals. Mr. Reese said that the main concern in the site itself was the proposal on surface development. The critical part of this project is the ability of the interior area to retain water during an unusually heavy rainstorm. One of the requirements in the contract between the City and the Wall Corporation is that it retain 12 acre feet. He said that they know that the water comes from the south and that it is 7 feet higher than the catch basin on 7th and Bennett Drive, which �s a low point. The ponding area will be below the catch basin area. He said what they have proposed for� this project was a system of trails and club facilities. He said th�s space would be about 4,000 square feet. About 1/2 of this would be the swimming pool area. The building will run about $80,000 and about $5,500 for equipping it. Over the pool there will be a flat deck, He said that the•recreation area would include a fireplace and a k�tchen area for parties. He said he did not have shown, the qual�ty of the landscaping although he knew they were interested in �t. The budget set up now is approximately $100 per unit for plantings. He said there is public se�er, gas, and water adjacent to the site. Mr. Bla�r said that Mr. Clark mentioned that the drive-ways would handle 20�40 units, He asked whether that wasn�t a lot for one drive- way? Mr. Clark said no because he has seen others with 10 times as many that axe okay, Mx. Dr�gans asked if there �as any way to take that one unit exit on Miss�ssipp� and exit it through the one on 5th Street? Mr. Clark sa�d not conven�ently, but possible. A right hand turn only sign could be put in. Mr. Fitzpatrick said the Commission has heard the plan that is now approved and was before the Cammission at great length and what it was about was in reducing density along 7th Street, and having the apartments built in the southwest corner. He said they have reduced the overall density, but increased the density greatly along 7th Street. Mr. Clark said the Board of Appeals discussed that and all must�agree that it is one complex now. He said while some thought should be given to buffering along 7th Street, there is still one complex there. The Board of Appeals, in their motion, took R-1 densities and applied them to R-3. However, the Council felt this plan of•155 units would be acceptable and in part perhaps, better than 59 townhouses and 108 apartment units. . -�� � �� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 0� JUNE 20., 1973 PAGE 7 Mr. Harris asked if there wilY be a pump in the ponding area? Mr. Reese said yes and also some fountains. Mr. Harris asked what about the elevation of the Recreation building in regard to the f�ood stage. Mr. Reese said that the contract said that all living areas be 3 feet above flood stage, that included the pool etc. Mr. Harris asked what the $100 per unit for plantings would include? Mr. Reese said this would include shade trees -and individual plant- ings throughout each townhouse. The plantings do not include sod. He wasn�t sure if it included the trails. Mr. Harris said he didn't see how they could put in 3" trees in the proposed plan for that price. Mr. Reese said not every townhouse will have trees. Mr. Drigans said that this is a preliminary plan and he would like to review with the architect whether these things have been fulfilled before they recommend approval or denial. One thing is the applica- tion that shall be filed when the building inspection has been done, and the application shall be submitted to the Building Standards Design Control Subcommittee, so that they can review it and make a � recommendation. Mr. Clark said that would be done June 21, 1973. Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Reese if his firm was involved with the Larsen Townhouses? Mr. Reese said they were. Mr. Drigans said he was concerned with the appearance of the townhous�s. Mr. Harris asked what the exterior fini:sh would be? Mr. Reese said rough sawn prefinished plywood panels on tfie outside. The area around the eves would be red�rood stained, The trimming around the windows would be 1 x 6 rough sa�vn boards. , Mr. Fitzpatrick asked how many units have exterior fireplaces? Mr. Reese said they all have interior fireplaces but they would have plywood panels coming up on the outside ones. Mr. Drigans asked what kind of material will be on the roof? Mr. Reese said asphalt shingles in three colors. Mr, Harris asked if there would be sidewalks? Mr. Reese said not really. -Mr. Clark said there will be sidewalk� along 63rd and 7th Streets and there already is one along Mississippi Street. Mr. Blair asked if there will be any lights along the trails and paths? Mr. Reese said there would be lights every 50 feet with 100 watt lamps. Mr. Harris asked if there would be lights in the parking lots? Mr. � Reese said yes, they will be on at all times. He said they will prob- ably add post lamps on each side of the drive-waysalso. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETZNG 0� �UNE 2Q, 1973 �AGE 8 , 0 Mr. Drigans asked if there has been any thought to the garbage dis- posal in these areas? Mr. Reese said they will have a screened in garbage collection point. . � Mr. Drigans said he was concerned with the stucco areas. Mr. Reese said that the area is 2 ft high and 8 1/2 feet wide, there are the two bedrooms over the garage area. He said they will be having redwood dividers between each patio unit. Mr. Drigans asked if using brick in the 2 x 8 1/2 area would be more appealing? He asked if the cost would be much greater? Mr. Reese said brick is heavier looking and it would look good at the bottom of the building but no� at the top. , Mr. Harris asked if the chimneys are covered with brick. Mr. Reese said they are covered with wood. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark who will maintain this area. Mr. Clark said that while it is rental, the Wall Corporation will be maintain- ing it. Mr. Lindblad asked about the tennis courts. Mr. Clark said that the ^ Council wanted them but the developer discouraged them. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that one of the commission� chief concerns is the exterior appearance, Mr. Drigans said his concern was that not all of the plans were available, the project has been going on for over a year, and the commission is asked to give a good preliminary approval for recomm�ndation to the Council �ithout all of the plans available. He said he would like to see some work done on the project�to enhance the w�ole project. Mr. Drigans said that the Building Standards Committee should look at the other townhouses that this architect has planned on 69th and Stinson Boulevard. Mr. Clark said the Commission could make a preliminary plan approval. He said the next meeting isn�t until July 18, 1973. Mr. Drigans said he wanted to reemphasize that this complex is in the heart of the City, it is adjacent to a residential area, the density is extremely high, and considering all of this he thinks the aesthetic appearance of the entire project is more important to the City of Fridley; theref ore, the landscaping plan, the exter- ior appearance of these buildings should be scrutinized by Council very tightly. Any type of substandard appearance should be dis- cussed with the Wall Corporation so that people can look at this project with pride. �� � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 20, 1973 PAGE 9 MOTION by Mr, Drigans that the Planning Commission consider this as a preliminary plan and recommend to Council approval with the follow- ing stipulations: . � 1. That the 7th Street access be as close to Bennett Drive as possible. 2. That limited access be provided on Mississippi Street. 3. That those units in the Ral area be owner occupied within a period of three years after the completion of the construc- tion and at that time a two year extension on the time limit be granted by the Council if it is needed. 4. That the drainage problem be solved with the Engineering Department. S. That th� recreation building include an indoor swimming pool, party room, �arming room, sauna, and that a tennis court be provided. 6. Recommend that brick be used on the exterior of the complex. ,�, 7. That they have a complete landscaping plan. 8. That it is contingent upon approval of the Building Standards Subcommittee . 9. That a copy of the Model Association bylaws be available to the 6ouncil. Seconded by Mr. Harris. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #73-05, BY ICEITH S. SWENSON AND DENNIS D, SARKILAHTI (TEXACO SERVICE STATION): To continue a service station and permit the addition of rental of local and one�way truck and trailers, as per City Code, Section 45 101: MOTION by Mr. Blair to waive the reading of the Public Hearing Notice. Seconded by Mr. Harris. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr, Kei�h Swenson, the petitioner, and the representative for E-Z Haul, said �iis xequest is to use the Texaco Service Station located at 6071 University Ave, as a rental outlet for E-Z Haul trucks and trailers. He �elt it would be a good service to the residents of � Fridley and it would prove to be valuable. Mr. Blair asked how many trucics and trailers they plan to have put on this lot? Mr. Swenson said a maximum of triree trucks and five or six trailers, depending on their size. ,.,,, PLANNTNG COMMISSZON MEETZNG 0� JUNE 2Q, 1973 PAGE 10 r"� Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark �f.there was enough room on that lot? Mr. Clark said it depends on the operation of tfie station. He said that the site is large enough for this if there were not more than three or four.customer cars on the lot for servicing. He said that the three or four trucks that would be parked in back by the frontage road, might impair vision. He felt one should be dropped. Mr. Swenson said they took this into consideration, He said they would move one truck over to the other side of the building and move the other two trucks over. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that his biggest concern was that that was an awfully busy intersection. Mr. Clark said that there was an access to the south and two accesses to the north. Mr. Fitzpatrick said � that going off to the north there could be a problem with the street divider. Mr, Clark said they would not be able to get into the west bound lane from the most �esterly entrance. Mr. Drigans asked how many of these type services does Fridley now have? Mr. Clark said one has been approved for the �ulf Station on Osborne Road for U-Haul. Mr. Clark mentioned that you can make permits for six months or a year, whatever you want. Mr. Lindblad asked how much additional traffic would this kind of a business bring in? Mr. Swenson said primarily these trucks move only on weekends, and trailers primarily twice on a weekend. Mr. Drigans said hi's major concern was the visibility around the frontage road. Mr. Fitzpatrick asked Mr. Swenson that with that type of turn over, was it necessary to have three trucks. Mr. Swenson said it wasn't. Mr. Drigans said also, when they back the trucks in, they could have a lousy backer upper and he could back it up into the frontage road. Mr. Clark said there should be st'riping provided to outline these areas. Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Swenson if they negotiated only with Texaco Service Stations? Mr. Swenson said they negotiate with several stations. Mr. Drigans asked where their nearest location to Fridley was? Mr. Swenson said in Columbia Heights. Mr. Fitzpatrick opened the public hearing. There was no one in the audience on this item. ^ Mr. Clark asked what would the sizes of the two trucks be? Mr. Swenson said they would be 18 foot vans and 12 foot vans. Mr. Clark said that the drawings said 28 x 12. Mr. Swenson said that was the total length of the truck. Mr. Swenson said the size of the trailers would be 5 x 8, 4 x 7, and 4 x 6. ' r�-� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE Z0, 1973 PAGE 11 Mr. Harris said he thought two trucks and six trailers would be suf- ficient and they should put a time limit on the permit of about a year to see how the service operates. He felt�we need thisbservice in Fridley. � Mr, Clark said that if one is approved they will probably have more applications so they should be sure why they approved it and must then use the same criteria for others. He felt that the time limit would be wise. Mr. Fitzpatrick questioned whether they are about to recommend approval at a site that is not as good as some in the past. Mr. Swenson said that it wasn�t necessarily the site that was good, it was the location. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that the motion should state the reasons that approval was recommended. Mr.•Drigans said he didn�t think this was a suitable site. He was concerned with the traffic problem because this was a very windy road, He said they have no guarantee that these trucks, even though � they are striped, are going to be parked unless there is some kind of a barricade. In the winter, if that frontage road is slippery, the trucks will be a problem. He said it is tough to see around that corner. There is too much of a blind spot. He did agree that this type of a service is needed but this was not the suitable site. Mr. Harris said they would eliminate one truck and could put in concrete curbs so that the trucks don't back up too far. Mr. Clark said that they could put limitations on it or deny the whole thing . He said with the,two trucks there you could still see �'ox 1 QQ �eet ; �qTI;ON fi� 1�r, Ha,���s to close the publi,c hearing. Seconded by Mr. L�;ndfilad. UpQn a v�a�ce vote, all vot�,ng aye, the motion carried unan�nousl�, . 1�OT�ON by Mr. Blair to recommend the special use permit #73-05, for the following stipulations: 1. That the permit be granted for one year. 2. Th.at the parking area be marked. 3, That the number of trucks be reduced from three to two. � 4, That the parking of the trucks stay in line with the east wall of the station and the width be not more than 25 feet from the building. 5. To put restraints on tTie trucks from coming back too far, some concrete stops or other means of control. 6, To get a si,gn �erm�.t separatelY, r,,, �LANNING COMM�SSION MEETZNG 0� JUNE 20, 1973 PAGE 12 . Seconded by Mr. Harris. Upon,a voice vote, Harris, Lindblad, Blair, and Fitzpatrick voting aye, Dr�gans voting na�, the motion carried. Mr. Clark reminded that this would go to Council on July 2,`1973. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #73-07, ��y�M��n 11L1HL rnnn1CH11UlV 1N�. xezone Lots 1 Auditor's Sub- .7�,.�,......, Ib�n ----- . .. ... - - — - MOTION by Mr, Blair to waive the reading of the public hearing notice. Seconded bv Mr. Lindblad. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. The petitioner explained that the reason for the rezoning rec{uest was that they needed more room to expand. He said the rest of the property of theirs belongs to the railroad and on the south side it is zoned industrial, The lots facing Main Street are zoned Ra3. He said their work i� not heavy industrial and they have had no complaints for tIie pa5t 7 years. Mr, Drigans asked the peti- tioner how fax av,ray this ne�t location from the present location was. ,� The petitioner sa�,d about 6 or 7 blocks. He said there was an old vacant house on the new property, a garage that should be condemned, and a chicken coop, etc, Mr, Drigans asked if this type of operation would include any out- door storage? The petitioner said it woulc�. Mr. Harris asked about utilities and drainage? Mr, Clark said the water and sewer would come from Columbia Heights. The drainage would be out to the street or back to the railroad berm where it is going now. Mr. Fitzpatrick asked where the berm was, the east or west end? The petitioner said at the west end. But from the bottom of the berm over the hill top is approximately 150 feet. Mr. Clark said that this parcel is not presently M-2 and is less than the 1 1/2 acre.minimum requirement. He said with this plan, it meets all of the setback requirements except the frontyard requirement, He said it shows 35 and the zoning ordinance calls for 100.feet when located across from any residential zoning. The petitioner said we do have one industry located on 44th, he said they are 30 foot setbacks. He said they need 59 feet for ^ trucks coming in and loading. Mr. Clark said it might be better to have the loading and storage areas in the.rear yard. � PLANNING COMMISSTON MEETTN� 0� JUNE 2Q, 1973 �AGE 13 Mr. Drigans asked if there weren'�t any other sites? The petitioner sa�d there are some. One on 37th and East River Road and one on 32nd and California, but they don't want to move that far from Columbia Heights. b Mr. Drigans asked if this type of business had any noise level? The petitioner said it must meet federal and state code. He said they get more noise ��th the motor bikes and dunebuggies than they would �ith his compan�. He rem�nded the Commission that they have not xece�ved a complaint in 7 yeaxs. Mr. Fitzpatrick opened the public hearing. Mr. Henry Zimmer, 4021 California said he took up a petition to stop the Metal Fabrication Inc. from �uilding a welding shop for building truck bodies and a yard to store the bodies in. He felt that this building will interfere with their peace and quiet and beauty of the neighborhood, MOTION by Mr. Drigans to receive the petition. Seconded by Mr. Harris for discussion. Mr. Harris said there were 35 names on the petition and he wanted to know if they were all Fridley residents. n Mr. Zimmer said some were from Columbia Heights. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Zimmer said he did not think there was enough room to put that building in there. He said he did not think it would look very nice to have a lot of truck bodies out in the yard. Mr. Floyd Ryman 4004 Znd Street, said that they are supposed to build a park in that area for the kids and he felt the industry would stink up the neighborhood. He said he has seen them working on Sunday out by the street and if kids walked by there it could be hazardous. Mr. Anthony Picus, 4036 Main Street, said that this is going to drive down their property values. He said that the barn on their now,should be condemned. He said as far as complaints, he did not think there were more than five single dwellings on 39th where the business is now. Mr. Dennis Bertrand, 4042 Main Street, referred to the Zoning Ordinance on page one under the very first part He said building this would constitu�e spot rezoning. the noise would be auite high. Further expansion or a the owner could result in further deterioration of the from the residential standpoint. City's of the purpose. He felt that change in property, ,� Darleen Austin, 10 41st Ave. said she would not want the property value of her home to drop. ^ �LANNI:NG COMI��SSI:ON MEET�NG 0� ,7UNE 2Q, 1973 PAGE 14 Mr. Drigans asked the petitioner if they will be doing any work outside of the building. The petitioner said they do not plan to. He said they haven't worked on Sunday since January, Mr. Zimmer.said he thought the people have suffered enough already with the railroad. MOTION by Mr. Blair to close the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Lindblad. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Clark if this property was vacant right now? Mr. Clark said it is not being lived in. Mr. Drigans asked if this could be any type of a hazard, Mr. Clark said he was not sure since he had not seen it himself. Mr. Lindblad asked if it was a livable s�ructure? Mr, Clark said it had not been inspected. Mr. Harris asked if there had been any response from Columbia Heights as they were contemplating a park there. Mr. Clark said there had been no response from them alt�ough we sent them a notice. He said he could contact them again. He said they should have received �1 their notice two weeks ago. Mr. Fitzpatrick said he wanted to bring up the point that Mr. Clark brought up that any action by the Council to rezone this for any particular purpose also gives the variances, so the commission has a lot to look at aside from the rezoning. Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Clark if he recalled on the Comprehensive Pfian how much percentage is of unused land in Fridley. Mr. Clark said he could not quote a figure, however, there is a substantial amount vacant� . ' Mr. Drigans said that this constitutes spot re.zoning when an R-1 district is concerned. MOTION by Mr. Drigans to deny the rezoning request #73-07. Seconded by Mr. Harris for the following reasons: 1. Spot rezoning. ` 2. Depreciate the property value of R-1 areas, no buffer zoning. 3. Doesn't meet the minimum �.ot size area. 4. Plenty of M-2 zoning already in Fridley that is available. �� 5. Sizable objection from property owners. ^ PLANNING CONIMISSION MEETTNG 0� JUNE 20, 1973 PAGE 15 Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. REPORT ON SPECIAL USE FOR AUXILIARY BUILDINGS: No final report� yet. RESERVATIONS FOR DINNER MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL: The dinner reservations have been set for July 30th. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 12:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted: �� CARO MAD � Acting Secretary 0 �� 0 0 b �