Loading...
PL 09/14/1983 - 30601'`"�� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIP�G, SEPTEMBER 14, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: - Chairwoman Schnabel called the September 14, 1983, Planning Cortmission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Al Gabel (for Mr. Oquist), Ms. Pat Gabe], Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Goodspeed, Mr. Saba, Mr. Svanda Members Absent: None Others Present: Bill Deblon, Associate Planner s Ken Thornton, 5571 E. Bavarian Pass Steve Butgusaim, 6160 Kerry Lane APPROVAL OF AUGUST 24, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY 1NR. SVANDA, TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 24, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOINAN SCXNABEL DECLARED TXE 1NOTION CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. 1. LOT SPLIT REQUEST - L.S. �i83-05: By Michael 0'Bannon, for Star Homes, Ltd.� o sp i o s , 29 and 30, Block 11, Hamilton's Addition to Fridley Park, into four building sites so the four unit building can be under separate o w n e rs hips.(see comp le te lega l in agenda), the same being generally located at 5455 to 5561 - 4th Street N.E. MOTION BY PlR. XONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TD OPEN THE PUBLIC XEARING ON L.S. �183-05 BY MICXAEL O'BANNON. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TXE PUBLIC BEARING OPEN AT 7:38.P.M. Mr. Deblon stated this property was located on 4th Street right next to the freeway. This development had been before the Appeals Cortmission to obtain four variances. The four variances were approved by the City Council on May 16, 1983. Mr. Deblon stated the struction is a 4-unit building with each unit having a garage entirely on each individual lot. He stated the structure was to be a condominijm, but there were circumstances having to do with the financing, timing, and a delay in setting up a condominium that caused the applicant to apply for a zero lot line request. ��, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 14, 1983 PAGE 2 Mr. Deblon stated that in the City's subdivision regulatio��, there is a zero lot line provision that was adopted in July 1Q82. This is the first request for such a dwelling over two units. The City has a��roved zero lot line requests for double bungalows, but this is the first reo��est for a zero lot line for a four-unit 5uildin�. Nowever, the subdivision re�ulations provide for this type of action. Mr. Deblon stated he believed the applicant has discussed further agreements with the four owners about the general use of the green space. He did not think the City's declaration of covenant directly addressed that,comnon green area, but t�e applicant is considering same type of clause to address that. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was anything in the zero lot line ordinance about minimum square footage of each lot. Mr. Deblon stated the subdivision regulations say the ]ots shal] be ':divdded as is reasonably possible with the restrictions in the existing guide;ines of the zoning chapter." Mr. Deblon stated there is also some turnback property, and the applicant is willing to accept that turnback property as the process continues. � Mr. Kondrick stated that apparently the owner is to�execute and record a declaration of covenant with additional restrictions as provided by the City. Had the owner considered a guideline to prevent fences? With 22 ft. widths on the two inside lots, that is pretty narrow. Mr. Ken Thornton and Mr. Steve Butgusaim were representing Mr. 0'Bannon. Mr. Thornton stated that from his experience, it was not a concern; but if it is a concern of the City, they can prepare a paragraph that there are to be no fences built without the agreement of all four owners. The only thing he would be concerned about is the party wall agreement which is the same as the FHA. What they would like to do is draw up a paragraph and ask the FHA if it would be appropriate. They had no problem with no fences in the back- yard as long as the FHA would accept it under the party wall agreement. Ms. Schnabel stated that Mr. Deblon had said the applicant wanted to change this development from condominium to zero lot line four-plex. What was the reason for the cf�ange? Mr. Thornton stated he originally wanted to do a townhouse development, but the City's ordinances require five acres, so they couldn't go with the town- house develop�nt. Mr. Deblon had suggested condominiums. He stated they had no objection to that. However, to go condominium, the process to get financing was quite ]engthy (at least six months) and quite expensive. Since the bui7ding has already been bui7t, they have to do something sooner � than that. Mr. Kondrick asked what the selling price of each unit would be. PLANNING COMMI_SSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 14� 1983 PAGE 3 Mr. Thornton stated the selling price of each unit is $62,900. Mr. Thornton stated the reason the building was was sitting the way it was - was because of the shape of the land and the number of variances required. If the turnback property had been available, they could have set the bui1ding more to t�e west. The Planning Coirenission members were concern� about the exterior maintenance of the four lots and felt they would like to see some type of association that would take care of the exterior maintenance of the building, the lawn, and cover some of the other concerns such as no fences in the rear yard. . Mr. Steve Butgusaim stated the party wall agreement does call for maintenance to be done without detracting from the property, and he felt that covered the concerns the Planning Comnission members had. Ms. Schnabel stated she did not think it took care of what happens with the open green space, for instance. Mr. Thornton stated that right now each owner is responsible for his/her own lot area. Me stated the owners wil] do that. The same societa7 pressures �--� operate here as they do for the single family detached homes. In watching other zero lot line developments (in New Brighton and Coon Rapids, for example), the properties are taken care of. Mr. Kondrick stated he had no objection to the lot sp7it except for the out- side maintenance. He was afraid they might find one owner mows the 7awn shorter than the next owner, one owner mows the lawn infrequently, and maybe one owner has lots of weeds in his/her lawn. He stated he would like to see some kind of common maintenance program. Mr. Butgusaim stated the part of this that bothered him was the word "associa- tion". They could have an association, and it would not be a problem to do so, but it makes for an apples versus oranges situation. He has never heard of a zero lot line townhouse with an association, and he did not think it would make sense to the government either. It would just confuse the situation. When the lenders get the packages and look at them for new mortgages, they do not know how to define this type of situation. A zero lot line townhouse with an association does not conform with most things that are on the market. Mr. Thornton stated the party wall agreement was the most acceptable agree- n�nt in the country for multiple unit type of dwe7lings. FHA uses it all over the country. Mr. Thornton stated he did not think there was any problem with changing some of the wording in the party wall agreement that no one can bui7d fences, but when they form an association and start to do things col7ectively, then they n are changing from one organization pattern to another and that is where they � would run into tr.ouble with�the lending institutions. But, this would have to be checked out with the FHA. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER° 14, 1983 PAGE 4 Mr. Goodspeed stated that the owners of Lots B& C would have to walk through Lots A� D to get to their own backyards with their lawnmowers. Ms. Schnabel stated Mr. Goodspeed had a very good point about Lots B& C � needing access to the backyard through the yards of Lots A& D. It was also a good argument against putting in any kind of fencing. Mr. Deblon stated he did not think the subdivision regulations actually addressed the 4-plex; it is geared more toward the double bungalow where both owners have side yards. Mr. Butgusaim stated that if they could change the term and call it coopera- tive yard maintenance, that would not constitute an association. .Mr. Thornton stated maybe they could have an attorney write a definition for �coo�erative yard maintenance that the lenders would not interpret as a secret way of getting an association. Mr. Thornton stated he thought the point brought up by Mr. Goodspeed about rear yard access was an excellent point. This kind of thing has gone through FHA's all around the country, and it has been applied to these four-unit developments, and this point has never been brought up before. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY 1�t. GOODSPEED, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC XEARING ON L.S. l�83-05 BY MICXAEL O'BANNON. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC �XEARING CLOSED AT 8:30 P.M. MOTION BY MR. GOODSPEED, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECQMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. #83-05� BY 1NICHAEL D'BANNON, FOR STAR HOMES, LTD.� TO SPLIT IATS 28, 29� AND 30� BLOCK 11� HAMILTON�S ADDITION TO FRIDLEY PARK, INTO FOUR BUILDING SITES SO THE FOUR UNIT BUILDING CAN BE UNDER SEPARATE OWNERSHIPS� THE SAME BEING GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5455 TO 5561 - 4TX STREET N.E.� WITX TXE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS; 1. THAT TAERE BE ND FENCES IN REAR YARD ON INDIVIDUAL LOT LINESp 2. THAT THERE SHOULD BE COOPERATIVE LAWN 1HAINTENANCE; 3. THAT THERE BE REA.R YARD ACCESS EASEMENTS TO ALL PROPERTIES� Mr. Thornton stated they would like to have it worded so as to provide some protection to prevent the access easement from becoming a nuisance. Ms. Schnabel stated that was reasonable and the Planning Commission had no problem with that. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIINOUSLY. Mr. Deblon stated this 7ot split request would go to City Counci] on September 26, 1983. �� � � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 14s 1983 PAGE 5 2. REVIEW OF AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 14 ENTITLED "PEDDLERS . .T ac a n ewct IU MCD ue c. n � r rn� , �r_ � n- � MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO CONTINUE TNE RE'YIEW OF TXIS ORDINANCE AT THE NEXT MEETING. Ms. Schnabel stated this is an ordinance the Comnission should review because of the local merchants who are the ones who get hurt by these types of operations. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CAAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOSULY. Ms. Schnabel stated this was also something the Community Development Commission might want to discuss with the Chamber of Commerce. 3. RECEIVE AUGUST 16, 1983, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECEIVE TXE AUG. 16� 1983, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr. Svanda stated that Darlynn Ronn and Lee Ann Sporre were at this Corr�nission -''� meeting to talk about the City's use of fly-ash for winter road maintenance. The reason they came to the August Corr�nission meeting was because of the timing, and they thought it was a point in time when the City and County would be executing contracts with local power utilities to get the fly-ash stock for the coming season. Ms. Ronn and Ms. Sporre wanted the Commission to pass a motion on to the City Council saying that the Commission was look- ing at this issue so that the City Council would then defer any possible action on executing any contracts, although neither of them knew for sure if new contracts were going to be let. Mr. Svanda reviewed some of the discussion at the meeting. He stated Ms. Ronn and the Environmental Quality Corr�nission had some differences of opinion concerning the environmental effects of the use of fly-ash on the river and creeks. Ms. Ronn also stressed the aesthetic environmental issue. Mr. Svanda stated the Commission was unanimous in its opinion that winter- time is a filthy time of year and without periodic snowfa]ls, the who]e metropolitan area looks b7ighted. All of the members of the Corr�nission that were present at this meeting also shared the opinion that they were not that upset with the use of fly-ash and felt the use of fly-ash was safer. He stated this will be discussed again at the September meeting. It was the concensus of the Planning Comnission members that they were essentially in agreement with the Environmental Quality Commission in that the fly-ash did not seem to be a problem and it seemed to work wel7 in Fridley. n UPON A YOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DEC.LARED THE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING= SEPTEMBER 14, 1983 PAGE 6 � ADJOURNMENT: PlOTION BY 1�2. KONDRZCK� SECONDED BY MR. GABEL, TO ADJOURN THE 1NEETING. UPON A YOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRW0INAN SCANABEL DECLARED TAE SEPTEMBER 14, 1983, PLANAIING COMMISSION 1�lEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:30 P.M. Respectfully sub itted, ,`�_ Lyn e Saba Recording Secretary �- �