PL 03/10/1982 - 30571,--1
�
CITY OF FRIDi�EY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEET�NG, MARCH 10, 1982 �
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice-Chairperson Oquist called the March 10, 1982, Planning Commission meeting
to order at 7:34 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svac�da, Mr. Kondrick,
Ms. van Dan, Mr. Saba (arr. 8:45 p.m.)
Members Absent: Mr. Harris
Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
Scott Wheeler, Planning Intern
Ron Miller, 5705 Jackson St. N.E.
Mark Anderson, 556 - 37th Ave. N.E:
Allen Stahlberg, 305 - 89th Ave. N.E., Blaine
Donna J. Miller, 6430 East River Road
Peter D. Eisenzimmer, 6535 Oakley Dr. N.E.
APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 24, 1982, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICR� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 24, 1982�
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. •
1. TABLED: RE UEST FOR A LOT SPLIT, L.S. #82-02, BY MARK ANDERSON: Split off
e ort 8 feet of ot 8, Au itor s Su ivision o. 2 9 3 ississippi
Street N.E.) to �nake a buildable lot, the same being 6530 Oakley Street N.E.
MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO REMOVE L.S. #82-02 BY
MARK ANDERSON FROM THE TABLE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Boardman stated this item was tabled at the last Planning Commission meeting
because Mr. Anderson was not at the meeting. He is at the meeting tonight.
He stated it is Staff's recommendation that the Planning Comnission approve the
lot split with the condition that a 10 ft, bikewayJwalkway easement be retained
along Mississippi St. He stated this easement has been discussed with
,� Mr. Anderson. He stated Mr. Anderson has applied for variances and those variances
will be going through the Appeals Commission. Staff wil] tie both the variances
and the lot split together before going to City Council.
PLANNI_NG COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 10, 1982 PAGE 2
Mr. Ron Miller, 5705 Jackson St. N.E., stated he and Mr. Anderson will be
p�rchasing the new lot. He asked Mr. Boardman to describe the bikeway/walkway
easement.
Mr. Boardman stated that right now there is a sidewalk along Mississippi St.,
and the City needs to room to expand the sidewalk for a bikeway on the north
side of Mississippi. At one time, a bikelane was striped on Mississippi, but
when the County changed Mississippi to a four-lane road, they eliminated the
bikeway. That is why the City is requesting a 10 ft. �ikeway/walkway easement
on all new requests.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF LOT SPLIT REQUEST� L.S. �82-02� BY MARK ANDERSON� TO SPLIT OFF THE
NORTH 81 FEET OF LOT 8X� AUDITOR'S SUBbIV25ION NO. 21 (953 MIS5IS5IPPI STREET
N.E.) TO MAKE A NEW BUILDABLE LOT� THE SAME BEING 6530 OAKLEY STREET N.E., WITH
THE FOLLOWIAiG TWO STIPULATIONS:
1. THE LOT SPLIT BE COA►DITIONED UPON THE APPLICATION FOR
REAR YARD VARIANCES.
2. THE CITY RETAIN A ZO FT. BIKEWAY/WALKWAY EASEMENT ON MI5SISSIPPI ST.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, DICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Boardman stated the variances will go to the Appeals Commission on March 16,
and then both the lot split and the variances should go to City Council on
March 22.
(Mr. Saba arrived at 8:45 p.m.)
2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. #82-03, BY DONNA MILLER: Split Lot 1, Bdock 1,
Veit's 2nd Addition, and Lot 26, Auditor's Sub. No. 23, combined into three
lots: (110 - 64 1/2 Way N.E.) The easterly 65' of Lot 1, Block 1, Veit's
2nd Addition together with the easterly 75.19' of Lot 26, A.S. #23, and
(120 - 64 1/2 Way N.E.) The Easterly 140' of Lot 1, Block 1, Veit's 2nd
Addition, except the easterly 65', together with the easterly 150.19' of
Lot 23, A.S. #23, except the easterly 75.19', and (710 - 64 1�2 Way) The
westerly 128.01' of Lot 1, Block 1, Veit's 2nd Addition, together with the
westerly 121.23' of Lot 26, A.S. #23. (This lot is presently,addressed as
6430 East Ri�er Road, but if the lot split is approved, it will require an
address change.)
Mr. Boardman stated this layout has now been changed and the 7ega] description
has been changed. Before, the lot lines were uneven, and they have now evened
up the lot lines for a simpler lot split.
FIOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECEIVE TXE REDEFINED
SURVEYOR�S MAP OF THE LOT SPLIT.
/"''
�
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ''�
;� PLA[VNING COMMISSION•�EETING, MARCH 10, 1982 ___ PAGE 3
Mr. Boardman stated this is now a very simple lot split. There are presently
two buildable lots, and Ms. Miller wants to posttion those lot lines to make it
easier to build on and to make three lots. All� of the lots are over 9,000 sq, ft.
The surveyor's drawing shows that a portion of the property is on fast Riv�r Road.
That is probably dedicated as street easement, but it should be cleared up before
final approval of the lot split. He stated Ms. Miller should check on this, and
the Planning Commission should tiake.the recommendation ihat if the easement is
not there now, it should be. It is also advisable that the petitioner apply for
a vacation of the drainage and utility easement, but that is up to the petitioner.
MOTION BY MR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF LOT SPLIT REpUEST� L.9. �82-03� BY DONNA MILLER TO 5PLIT OFF LOT 1�
BLOCK 1� VEIT'S 2A1D ADDITION� AND LOT 26� AUDITOR�S SUB. NO. 23� INTO THE
FOLLOWIIVG THREE DESCRIBED TRACTS: (140 64 1/2 WAY) , TRACT .I: THE SOUTHWEST
138.01' OF LOT L� BLOQC 1� VEIT�S 2ND ADDITION AND OF LOT 26� AUD. SUB. NO. 23;
(120 64 .Z/2 WAY)� TRACT 2: THE SOUTHWEST 204.1' OF LOT 1� B7AQC 1� VEIT'S 2ND
ADDITION AND OF LOT 26� AUD. SUB. NO. 23, EXCEPT THE SOUTHWEST 138.1' TXEREOFj
AND (110 64 .Z/2 WAY)� TRACT 3: LOT 1� BLOCK 1� VEIT'S 2ND ADDITION� AND LOT 26�
AUD. SUS. ND. 23� EXCEPT THE SOUTHWE5T 204.01� THEREOF� AND EXCEPT THE NORTNEAST
28.5' OF SAID LOT 26. TRACT BEING USED FOR EAST RIVER ROAD BUT OWNED BY CLIENT:
THE NORTHEAST 28.58� OF LOT Z6� AUD. SUB. NO. 23j AITH THE PROVISION THAT THE
PROPERTY OWNER CSECK ON THE EASEMENT FOR THE 75' x 28.58' PORTION ON THE EAST
SIDE OF THE PROPERTY EXTENDING INTO EAST RIVER ROADM AND DEDICATE SUCH EASEMENT TO
r'� ANOKA COUNTY, IF THIS HAS A10T ALREADY BEEN DONE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIl�?OUSLY.
Mr. Boardman stated L.S. #82-03 wou]d go to City Council on March 22.
3. RECEIVE FfBRUARY 17, 1982, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE FEBRIYARY .I7� 1982� HOUSING
& REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Extension of Special Use Permit, SP #78-10 by Allen B. Stahlberg
Mr. Boardman stated the Commission had received a copy of a letter
from Mr. Stahlberg. Mr. Stahlberg got a special use permit in 1978
for construction of a single family home in the flood plain. Since
that time, he has had three extensions.. At the last extension, the
City Council stipulated that it be the last extension and that if
there were any further extensions, Mr. Stahlberg would have to reapply
for a new special use permit.
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 10, 1982 PAGE 4
Mr. Boardman stated that special use permits are set up under the �^,
Zoning Code to last for a period of one year. If the action that
the special use permit was applied for does not take place within that
one year period, the petitioner is required to go through the Planning
Commission and City Council to request an extension. Since Mr. Stahlberg
has already had three extensions, the City Council stipulated that no
more extensions be given.
0
MOTION BY 1�2. KONDRICIC� SECONDED BY l�t. SVANDA� TO RECENE TNE LE2'TER
FROM 1�2. ALLEN B. STAXLBERG DATED MARQi 8� 1982.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CAAIRPERSON OpUIST DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Stahlberg stated that it is not that he has wanted to come back so
many times for extensions, but it has been a matter of economics. He
was laid off his job about a year ago, and he is now hoping to get back
on his feet this fall in a new occupation. That is why he is requesting
a one year extension, rather than six months. Right now he has plans
with a builder to get an estimate. Just completing the bid process may
take a few months. but he is trying to move as fast as he can.
Ms. Gabel stated that if the Planning Cor�nnission does not grant the
extension, Mr. Stahlberg has to reapply for a new special use permit, go �-.�
through another public hearing,and the findings are probably going to be
the same.
I�r. Boardman stated the Commission has to understand that every time
there is an extension, there are staff costs--meeting time. review time,
etc. He thought that was why after so many extensions, the City Council
said there would be no more extensions.
Ms. Gabel stated that normally she would agree with that, but she is
wondering what there is to review about this. It is not something that
is extremely complicated, and she just did not think the review time
involved could be very significant.
Mr. Svanda stated that if the Planning Commission denies the extension,
Mr. Stahlberg has to go through the special use permit process all over
again. Referring to Mr. Boardman's comment about staff costs, that
$200 special use permit fee may or may not recoup the staff costs for
reviewing, writing memos, and attending meetings to bring it back before
the Planning Commission, and nothing has really changed. Granted, there
have been a number of extensions, but it seems they were because of
things that were possibly beyond Mr. Stahlberg's control. He thought
they should give Mr. Stahlberg one more chance at it, since nothing has
materially changed on the request. It is going to cost a few dollars
just to process the $200 on a new special use permit.
�'1
''_1
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 10, 1982 PAGE 5
MOTION BY 1KR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY M8. GABEL� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AN EXTENSION OF ONE YEAR FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP #78-10�
BY ALLF.N B. STAHLBERG� FOR THE FOLLOWING R�ASONS:
1. REQUIRING MR. STAHLBERG TO GO THRDUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN
WOULD RESULT IN XIM XAVING TO SPEND ANOTHER $200.
2. IT WOULD REQUIRE TXE EXPENDITURE OF ADDITIONAL STAFF TIME
ABOVE AND BEYOND WXAT liAS ALREADY BEEN EXPENDED.
3. IT IS FELT THAT THE $200 WOULD PROBABLY NOT COVER THAT
ADDITIONAL STAFF TIME COSTS AND IT COSTS MONEY TO PROCESS THE
PAYMENT.
4. NOTHING HAS APPARENTLY CXANGED TO WARRANT AN IN-DEPTH RE-REVIEW
OF TAE SITUATION.
5. DELAYS XAVE BEEN BEYOND MR. STAHLBERG'S CONTROL DUE TO A JOB
LAY-OFF AND THE POOR HOUSING MARKET.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Boardman stated this would go to City Council on March 22.
ADJOURNMENT:
�� MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A
VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON pQUIST DECLARED THE MARCX 10� 1982�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJC�URNED AT 8:30 P.M.
Res ectfully subm�tted,
�
y e a a
Recording Secretary
�
;
�