Loading...
PL 03/16/1983 - 30589� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING CON�'IISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Oquist called the March 16, 1983, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svanda, Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Saba, Mr. Goodspeed Members Absent: Ms. Schnabel Others Present: Bill Deblon, Associate Planner Roger Mengelkoch, 6425 No. Willow Lane, Brooklyn Center Mary Mengelkoch, 6425 No. 4Jillow Lane, Brooklyn Center Henry Mengelkoch, 70 N.E. 70th Way Louis K. Schmidt, 7300 East River Road Bob Lange, 189 Loan Parkway N.E. Tom Stewart, 6040 Thomas Ave. So., Mpls. � APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 9, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION MIPJUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO APPROVE THE FEB. 9, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. Mr. Svanda referred to page 9, paragraph 6, in which Councilman Schneider had stated that, "he, too, was a little uncomfortable with combining the two cor�missions (Energy Commission and Environmental Quality Commission). The Energy Corronission is a very pro-active commission, whereas the Environmental Quality Commission seems to be a staff-dominated commission, With all the environmental issues that are happening right now, he would expect to be getting calls from every one of the Environmental Quality Commission members to find out what is going on, and to be taking some actions, setting up meetings, etc." Mr. Svanda stated he would like to offer a rebuttal with respect to those state- ments. He stated he was not sure if Councilman Schneider had a full appreciation for who the members are on the Environmental Quality Commission. If he knew, he might not have made those comments. Mr. Svanda stated he is Assistant Director of the So]id and Hazardous Waste Division of the MPCA. Within that division, they have a site response group which is the group that takes care of the hazardous waste sites in the State of Minnesota. They also have a group of people within this division who are responsible for looking at the proposed sites of the Waste Management Board. He stated he did not feel he needed to ask a second or third party removed from the situation on what is going on when he can ask the party directly related to the situation. /"� PLANNING CONP1ISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 2 /{, Mr. Svanda stated that since he has been on the Environmental Quality Commission, he did not recall ever having received any direction from the City Council. The Commission has had some meetings with the Council and has been received, but there has been no guidance. Since he has been on the Comnission, he believed that their Feb. 1983 meeting was the first meeting at which a City Councilman ' was in attendance. That councilman was Ed Hamernik, and Mr. Svanda was very encouraged by his attendance. The key thing the Environmental Quality Commission is lacking is input from the City Counci]. They have gone to the City Council with their workplans, the workplans have been received, but he did not recall they were received to the extent of getting any guidance or direction on what the City Council expected of the Commission. The City Council has also never asked the Environmental Quality Comnission for an opinion concerning any of these environmental issues. Mr. Svanda stated that with regard to Councilman Schneider's statement that the "Environmental Quality Commission seems to be a staff-dominated commission", Mr. Svanda stated it is not a staff-dominated corranission. The solid waste issues the Commission is a�dress ng right now were initiated by the Commission and not by Staff. Following the Cor�nission's discussions, the City offices are now recycling paper, there is an oil recycling facility at SORT, there was a Recyclinq Week, etc. He had to feel those were commission-initiated things and not staff-initiated things. Staff certainly assists the Commission, but not in any way as to define the Corrmission as being a staff-dominated commission, r Mr. Svanda stated he wanted to express his concerns regarding the comments raised by Councilman Schneider. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VIGE-CHAIRPERSON OpUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #83-01, BY ROGER H. MENGELKOCH: Per Section 20�,�0� 3, 0, of the F�ri �l ey Ci ty Code, o a ow an o epot and Pullman railroad car to be placed on Lot 18, Auditor's Subdivision No. 77, to be used for a commercial business, the same being 7355 East River Road N.E. (Subject to Council approval of L. S. #82-05, Kunz Oil Company). MOTION BY 1�. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP #83-01� BY ROGER H. MENGELKOCH. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CXAIRPERSON OpUIST DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:39 P.M. Mr. Deblon stated the location of the proposal is between Osborne Road and 73rd Ave., just to the east of East River Road. This proposal is part of a chain of events dating back to Aug./early Sept. 1982, with the Kunz Oil Company lot split.� That is when the Planning Commission first heard the subdivision request. That subdivision called for two parcels, Parce] A and Parcel B, r"� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 3 Parcel A has an existing bakery on it. Both parcels are about one acre in size and are zoned C-1S (loca] shopping). The subdivision went to the City Council with various stipulations, and the subdivider didn't agree with all the stipu- lations. Mr. Deblon stated there is now the potential of having the subdivision resolved. The major question of the subdivision was what was going to happen to Parcel B, and Kunz Oil did not have any proposal for that parcel. There is now this proposal by Roger Mengelkoch, which is quite a unique proposal. Mr. Deblon stated the proposal is in two phases. The first phase is to put in a Pullman railroad car, install it according to State Building Code, and design exterior improvements and parking. In the second phase, the applicant proposes to purchase an actual depot. Mr. Deblon stated the City would like to see landscaping and is concerned about the opening to the property. The code calls for a 32 ft. wide opening, so they would like to see that entrance narrowed to 32 ft. The long range plan for this area is to extend the service road a little further and have more of an opening on to East River Road. For that reason, the City would waive some curbinc� because it would probably be removed at some future time. The proposal�calls for a fence with landscaping for district separation. � Mr. Deblon stated one of the issues on the lot split was a 40-45 ft. easement for a service road. That was an issue because of the existing lease on the parcel where the bakery is located. The City would be willing to go with a ease- ment within a �ertain timeframe. Mr. Deblon stated the Pullman car will be accessible to the handicapped. It will be used as a hair salon. The future depot will be for small local shops and service-type businesses. Mr. Deblon stated there is a bil]board on the property. There is an agreement in past minutes that when this land is developed, the billboard is to be taken do►m . Mr. Deblon stated the applicant has been very cooperative. He is willing to give the easement and to work with the City on the fence for district separation and landscaping. Mr. Deblon stated one of Staff's concerns is they wou]d like to see some time- frame for phase 2 which is the depot. Mr. Mengelkoch has said if he cannot purchase a depot, he wil] build a depot on that site. Mr. Deblon asked Mr. Mengelkoch to explain about the depot in a little more detail. Mr. Mengelkoch stated he has been looking at purchasing different depots from St. Paul to Duluth. Because of the c]osin� of Amtrak, the railroads are putting the little depots up for sale in sealed bids and people can purchase them. There are a couple more coming up for bid this spring. He stated they decided to put � a depot on the property because there was so much property. He felt it was kind of a unique concept in putting together his business. He felt it would really attract people. He stated the businesses within the depot will be different specialty shvps because of the uniqueness of the development. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 4 �, Mr. Deblon stated any businesses in the depot would have to be consistent witfi the C-1S zoning. Ms. Gabel asked Mr. Mengelkoch when he would make the decision on whether to buy or build a depot. Mr. Mengelkoch stated he should know by the end of the summer when he sees what it will cost to purchase and move a depot. Ms. Gabel asked Mr. Mengelkoch if he already had the Pullman car and how it would be installed. Mr. Mengelkoch stated he already has the Pullman car. It will be sitting on its wheels on tracks and taes. The wheels are welded to the tracks so it is secure. He wi17 put some kind of brick skirting around the car to insulate it, Mr. Oquist asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against the proposal. Mr. Bob Lange, 189 Logan Parkway N.E., asked if the fence on the south would be opaque. Mr. Deblon stated, yes, it would probably be a solid wood fence with landscaping. �, Mr. Lange stated that took care of one of his concerns. It would give the resi- dents some privacy. He stated he did not know when it might occur, but eventually East River Road might be widened. He asked if the City had looked at what the County's needs might be on the east side of East River Road. Mr. Oquist stated that when they discussed the lot split, it seemed to him that one of the reasons for gaining the 45 ft. easement was, not only for the service road, but also for the County to widen East River Road, Ms. Gabel stated that is one of the problems why the lot split has not been granted by the City Council. The City Council does not want to grant the lot split without getting the easement. Mr. Lange stated he viewed the type of business and the description of the applicant's plan quite favorably. He had an interest in railroads and thought this was a very unique proposal architecturally. As he was a resident of the downstream end of the watershed, he would like to recomnend that there be an easement with an eventual retention pond in the northeast corner in the rear of the northern portion of land. He stated there is a very large amount of hardtop surface right now, some of which nothing can be done about, but the frontage roads could drain east from the highway instead of from the west across it. He is generally aware of the City's program requiring surface run-off in new developments. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 5 Mr. Deblon stated the Planning Cammission could make that a stipulation that there be a drainage plan; however, it is automatic and would come with the building permit. Mr. Deblon stated Staff was recammending the following stipulations: 1. A timeframe for the depot to be p7aced on the property 2. A fence meeting zoning code requirements and landscaping 3. Approval of the lot split with a 45 ft, easement 4. Removal of billboard 5. Required drainage plan (probably required by building permit) 6. Reduce entrance radii to 32 ft. 7. To put the owner on notice that the Pullman railroad car will be assessed as real estate. MOTION BY 1+�2. SAB.�� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #83-01 DY ROGER H. MENGELKOCH. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CXAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:25 P.M. Mr. Svanda stated that regarding a timeframe for the depot to be placed on the property, he would suggest 2-3 years, taking into account the economics and �` giving Mr. Mengelkoch time to get his business estab]ished. Mr. Mengelkoch stated he wanted to open his business around the end of June. Mr, Deblon stated Staff would recomnend not more than two years for the completion of phase 2. When the special use permit was reviewed in two years, if there was an extreme hardship, the special use permit could probably be extended, MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #83-01, BY ROGER X. MENGELKOCN, PER SECTION 205.101� 3, O, OF TXE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO ALLOW AN OLD DEPOT AND PULLMAN RAIL- RDAD CAR TO BE PLACED ON LOT 18� AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 77, TO BE USED FOR A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS, THE SAME BEING 7355 EAST RIVER ROAD N.E., [IITH TNE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1. A TIMEFRAME OF TWO YEARS FOR THE DEPOT TO BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY 2. A FENCE MEETING ZONrNG CODE REQUIREMENTS AND LANDSCAPING 3. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF LOT SPZIT WITH A 45 FT. EASEMENT 4. REMOVAL OF BILLBOARD 5. REQUIRED DRAINAGE PI�AN 6. REDUCE ENTRANCE RADII TO 32 FT. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTIOl7 CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. Mr. Oquist stated this would go to City Council on March 28. / ` LI _ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIP�G, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 6 2. �ECEIVE JANUARY 13, 1983, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. GOODSPEED, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO RECE3'VE THE JAN. 13, I983, HOUSING 6 REDEVELOPMENT AUTBORITY MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CXAIRPERSON OpUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. 3. RECEIVE FEBRUARY 8, 1983, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEP�T COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. SVANDA, SECONDED BY 1�2. KONDRICK, TO RECEIVE THE FEB. 8� 1983, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE FEBRUARY 15, 1983, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY !�. KONDRICK� TO RECEIVE THE FEB. 18� 1983, APPEAZS COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr. Deblon stated it was his understanding that there was a motion on Item #,1 that needed action by the Planning Comnission. The City Council had requested a recommendation on this from the Planning Comnission. � Ms. Gabel stated this was a surprise to her. She hadn't realized a recommenda- tion was needed by the Planning Commission. Ms. Gabel stated this was a variance request by Mr. & Mrs. Ing Siverts, 6850 Siverts Lane, to increase the maximum height of a fence from 7 to 10 feet in the rear yard and side yards. She stated there is absolutely nothing about the fence that is aesthetical]y pleasing. The Appeals Comnission felt there was no hardship, and that whatever lights or noise there realistically is, a 10 ft. ' fence will not take care of the problem. Ms. Gabel stated the petitioner had asked if he needed to be at the Planning Cormiission meeting, and she had told him that the Planning Commission would only be receiv�.ng the Appeals Commission minutes. She was unaware that any action would be required by the Planning Commission, and this had cane as a total sur- prise to her. Mr. Goodspeed stated that since the petitioner had not been notified about any Planning Commission action, he fe]t they should table any action until the next meeting when the petitioner could be in attendance. Ms. Gabel stated she did not feel any new or different information would come to light if they were to continue this discussion at another meeting. The information is a]ready here, and it is just a matter of concurring or not con- curring with the Appeals Comrnission. �, Mr. Goodspeed disagreed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 7 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE�CNAIRPERSON OQUIST DECI�ARED THE MINUTES RECEIVED. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO CONCUR WITH TXE APPEALS COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO INCREASE TflE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF A FENCE FROM 7 FT. TO 10 FT. IN THE REAR YARD AND SIDE YARDS OF LOT C� REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 3, TXE SAME BEING 6850 SIVERTS LANE N.E.� FRIDLEY, MN. 55432. UPON A VOICE VOTE, OQUIST, KONDRICK� SABA, SVANDA, GABEL, VOTING AYE, GOODSPEED ABSTAINING, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQiIIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Deblon stated that regarding Item #2, the City Council had already approved a srariance request for the Fridley Medical Center, but the approva7 was based on approval by the Planning Commission. Ms. Gabel stated that at the City Council meeting, she had questioned why Planning Commission approva] was needed when the Planning Comnission just receives the Appeals Commission's minutes. Generally, the Planning Commission makes a recommendation on an item only when it something that stands out and Planning Cor.mission input is requested by the Appeals Commission. She saw the variance request by the Fridley Medical Center as just a routine matter. � Mr. Oquist stated this is one more example of how the subcommissions are nat being utilized. All of a sudden the Planning Comnission has to concur with the Appeals Commission's motions. The charter of the Appeals Commission is that its motions go directly to City Council. If the City Council didn't want to rule on this item, they should have tabled it and asked for the Planning Commission's recommendation. If action is always needed by the Planning Commission, then there is no need for an Appeals Commission. MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY 1�2. SABA� TO CONCUR WITH THE APPEALS COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FT. TO 13 FT. TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION OF APPROXIMATELY 3�000 SQ. FT. TO BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL OFFICE AND MEDICAL SPACE, LOCATED ON THE NORTH 400 FT. OF TNE WEST 217.8 FEET OF OUTLOT 1, MELODY MANOR 4TFI ADDITION, TNE SAME BEING 7675 MADISON ST. N.E., FRIDLEY, MN., 55432, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE PETITIONER UPGRADE THE TEMPORARY CONCRETE CURBING TO PERMANENT 6-INCH POURED CONCRETE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CXAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMODSLY. 5. RECEIVE FEBRUARY 15, 1983, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MIP�UTES: 1�lOTION BY MR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY l�2. SABA, TO RECEIVE THE FEB. 15� 1983, ENVIR- ONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES. /�'\ UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 8 ,�, � 6. RECEIVE FEBRUARY 16, 1983, HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: !�lOTION BY MR. GOODSPEED� SECONDED BY 1�. KONDRICK, TO RECEIVE THE FEB. 16� 1983, tliJMA1P RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES. .UPON A VOI�E VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CXAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Goodspeed stated Staff and the Human Resources Cornrnission prepared and entered a National Office on Disability Awards Competition on behalf of the work accomplished by the IYDP project con�nittee and the Accessibility Project Corunittee. He stated they had just recently been informed that they had won a$1,000 Comnunity Program Award. Mr. Goodspeed stated there wi]1 be an awards ceremony on April 5 in Washington, D.C., and a representative from the City of Fridley has been asked to attend and receive the award. He stated he would like to know the Planning Commission's feelings on whether or not to request the City to appropriate funds to send someone to Washington D.C, to accept the award. He stated Bill Hunt, City Staff, will be vacationing in Washington D.C. at that time and would be willing to pick up the award. The Planning Commission members agreed it was great that the Human Resources Cormiission had won this awards competition, but felt City money should not be ^ used to send someone to Washington D.C, to pick up the award when there was someone from Fridley already out there who could do it. Ms. Gabel stated it would be nice to have a ceremony at City Ha]1 when the award arrives here. The appropriate people could be present, pictures could be taken, and it could be publicized through the media. Maybe Congressman Jerry Sikorski could be asked to present the award. MOTION BY MR. COODSPEED, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO HAVE SOMEONE REPRESENT- ING FRIDLEY RECEIVE TNE AWARD IN WASHINGTON D.C. AND TO ASK STAFF TO CONTACT CONGRESSMAN SI%ORSICI'S OFFICE TO SEE IF HE WOULD BE WILLING TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENTATION OF THE AWARD AT A CEREMONY AT FRIDLEY CITY HALL. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OpUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. RECEIVE FEBRUARY 17, 1983, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: 1NOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECENE THE FEB. 17� 1983, H�ISING 6 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNABIMOUSLY. ,r"1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 16, 1983 PAGE 9 8. RECEIVE MARCH 1, 1983, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SPECIAL MINUTES: MO1'ION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECEIVE THE MARCH I� 1983� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SPECIAL MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OpUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. REVIEW CONMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 1983 WORKPLAN: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO CONCUR WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMINISSION'S 1983 WORKPLAN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED TXE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ' 10. RECEIVE MARCH 3, 1983, HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. GOODSPEED� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECENE THE MARCH 3� 1983� HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VDICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DEC7�ARED THE MOTION � CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. 11. REVIEW HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION 1983 WORKPLAN: 1NOTION BY I�Z. GOODSPEED, SECONDED BY 1�2. KONDRICK, TO COI�jCUR WITH THE HUMAN RESDURCES COMMISSInN'S 1983 WORKPLAN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. GOODSPEED� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON O�UIST DECLARED THE MARCX Z6, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT .I0:00 P.M. Res ectfully s bmitted, � "� yneSaa Recording Secretary �,