Loading...
PL 05/09/1984 - 30619� i � �� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING.COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 - CALL TO ORDER: : Chairwoman Schnabel called the May 9, 1984, Planning Comnission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svanda� Mr. Minton, 1Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Saba Members Absent: None Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Specialist Michael Malone, 635 Ely St. Mr. & Mrs. Edward Andrajack, 5832 - 3rd St. N.E. Robert De Gardner, 1438 N. Danube Rd. Maynard Nielson, 7144 Riverview Terrace David Radabough, Woodcrest Baptist Church Gary Braam, 1441 Rice Creek Rd. (See attached lists) �' APPROVAL OF APRIL 18, 1984, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: 1NOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST� TO APPROVE THE APRIL 18� 19�4, pLANNING COMMISSION MIMITES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CAAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TFIE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: RE UEST FOR A SPEC_IAL USE PERMIT. SP #84-05 BY �'rL�iA�L�. �f�b�TE: er Secti on 0. .4. , D, o t e Fri ea'i y Ci ty Code, o a ow t e construction of a 16 ft. b 22 ft, addition to an existing structure in CRP-2 zoning (flood fringe� on Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block U, Riverview Heights, the same being 635 Ely Street N.E. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC fiEARING ON SP #84—OS BY MICXAEL J. MALONE. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCbiNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC SEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M. Mr. Robinson stated the property was on Ely St, just east of the river. He stated because the proposed addition is in the flood fringe, a special use permit is required. In order to build the addition, the petitioner must be 1.2 ft. above the 100 yr. flood plain. The 100 yr. flood plain is 823.25, and the petitioner has indicated he would have no problem meeting �'1 � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 2 �, that elevation. Mr. Robinson stated the e7evation of the street access needs to be within 2 ft, of this required flood plain elevation. That is grandfathered in at a lesser elevation and, essentially, the City will be granting a variance for that. Ms. Schnabel asked the petitioner if he would like to make any cor�nents. Mr. Michael Malone stated the entry is in the northwest corner which would be 823.19 ft. The step into the house is 7 inches above that, at 830.19 ft. He stated if that was not high enough, they would go with another 1 ft. course of blocks, bringing the height of the floor up to 842.19. That was weli above what was specified. Mr. Malone stated the addition will be in redwood siding, and all facia of the house will be replaced with redwood so it will tie the existing structure in with the new addition. Mr. Robinson stated there is also an 18-inch crawl space that should be figured into the elevations. He stated that if the Planning Commission approves this special use permit, more accurate drawings of the floor ele- vations should be obtained before this goes to the City Council. MOTION BY MR. SABA � SECONDED BY lyl2. MINTON � TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON � SP #84-OS BY MICHAEL J. MALONE. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DEC�ARED THE PUBLIC HBdRING CLOSED AT 7:45 P.M. MOTION BY MR. OQUIST� SECONDED BY Mlt. MINTON� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL _.-.�� APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP H84-05� BY MICHAEL J. MALONE, PER SECTION 205.24.4� D� OF TNE FRIDLEY CITY CODE� TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 16 FT. BY 22 FT. ADDITION TO AN EXISTING STRUCTURE IN CRP-2 ZONING (FLOOD FRINGE) ON LOTS 5� 6, 7� AND 8� BLOCIC U, RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS� THE SAME BEING 635 ELY STREET N.E., WITX THE STIPULATION THAT THE PETITIONER MEET THE ELEVATIONS FOR THE FLOOD PLAIN 1�REA. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIAIG AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to City Council on May 21, 1984. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #84-06, BY EDWARD ANDRAJACK: Per Section 205.07.1, 3, A of t� Fria e'� y ity Code, to allow t e construction of a second accessory building, a 22 ft, by 24 ft, detached garage, on Lots 7 and 8, Block 22, Hyde Park, the same being 5832 3rd Street N.E. MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO OPEN TBE PUBLIC HEARING � ON SP #84-06 BY EDWARD ANDRAJACK. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:4e P.M. � '�� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 3 Mr. Robinson stated this property was located on 3rd St. north of 58th Ave. Mr. Andrajack was proposing a second accessory building, the first one being an attached garage. The second accessory building will be located in the rear yard. It would be approx. 528 sq. ft, with a 3 ft. side yard setback and a 5 ft, rear yard setback. This meets city code. He stated the only requirement would be that the driveway up to the new garage be paved. Ms. Schnabel asked the petitioner, Mr. Andrajack, if he had any comments to make regarding his request. Mr. Andrajack stated he had no problem with paving the driveway. He stated the only change to his request was the width of the garage from 22 ft, to 20 ft. He stated they will continue to use the existing attached garage as a garage. MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON �_� SP l/84-06 BY EDWARD ANDRAJACK. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TNE PUBLIC XEARING CLOSED AT 7:55 P.M. � MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TD RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP #84-06, BY EDW�11iD ANDRAJACK� PER SECTION 205.07.Z� 3, A OF TXE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUC- TION OF A SECOND ACCESSORY BUILDING� A 20 FT. BY 24 FT. DETACXED GARAGE, ON LOTS 7 AND 8� BLOCIC 22� NYDE PARK, THE SAME BEING 5832 3RD STREET N.E.� WITH TNE STIPULATION THAT TXE DRIVEWAY TO THE NEW STRUCTURE BE PAVED. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MOTIDN CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to City Council on May 21, 1984. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING RE UEST ZOA #84-02 BY ROBERT D. DEGARDNER: ezone rom - one ami y we� ings to -�genera mu tip e wellings) part of Lots 3 and 21, not taken for street purposes, and all of Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, and Lots 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, Block 20, Fridley Park; and parts of Lots 3 and 24, not taken for street purposes, and all of Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7 and 19,.20, 21, 22 and 23, Block 19, Fridley Park, to allow the development of a 52-unit condominium complex between East River Road and Ashton Avenue on 61st and 61 1/2 Way N.E. MOTION BY l�2. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO OPEN TAE PUBLIC XEARING ON ZOA H84-02 BY ROBERT D. DEGARDNER. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCANABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC �", HE�RING OPEN AT 7:58 P.M. � PLANNIP�G COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 4 �` Mr. Robinson stated the property was bordered on the south by 61st Ave., . Ashton on the east, East River Road on the west, and 62nd Wa�y on the north. The pr�perty is surrounded by railroad property on the east, light industrial on the south, Stevenson School on the southwest, and single family. The - rezoning request is for a change from R-1 to R-3. Mr. Robinson stated the reason for the rezoning to R-3 was for the creation of 13 four-plex type units (one-bedroom Loft Homes) attached at the corners. There would be a central green space, also green space surrounding the buildings, with parking. � Ms. Schnabel asked how wide the lots were in this area. The petitioner, Mr. Robert DeG�rdner stated these are 40 ft. lots. They would have to put two toge�her to make one buildable lot. Mr. DeGardner stated he has lived in Fridley for 16 years and has built about 25 homes in Fridley over the years. He stated Mr. Maynard Nielson � owns the property, and Mr. Nielson asked his opinion about this property. Mr. DeGardner stated he looked at the site and fe7t the property was not feasible for single family homes with light industrial, the railroad tracks, and sor�e poor soil conditions. Mr. DeGardner stated he currently has three quad projects in Coon Rapids. He is proposing the Loft Home concept for this site. Loft Homes caters to single people and couples. It is a totally new concept. He stated the buildings are connected at the corners.to make a nice garden apartment. Every apartment is ground level with patios, quality built, oak woodwork throughout, air conditioning, all appliances, and very affordable at $39,900. Mr. DeGardner stated that in looking at the site, he felt this was the most prectical way to develop it. These buildings would make a nice buffer between the light industrial and the single family. Mr. Kondrick asked what the square footage was for each apartment. Mr. DeGardner stated each apartment was a little over 600 sq, ft, overall, which included a 16' x i2'loft bedroom which is open to the living room. Ms. Gabel asked if Mr. DeGardner would sell a block of these apartments to an investor who would rent out the units. Mr. DeGardner stated if they get VA financing,they are limited to 5%. He stated they should have no problem selling the units individually. There ��"� are investors a►ho would like to buy these blocks, but the units would be _ rentals and there would be an association so it would not be like other apartment rentals. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 5 Ms. Schnabel stated she did visit the Loft Homes in Coon Rapids and spent some time with the salesman there. From what the salesman told her, this last weekend there was an open house and about 150 people came out. Of those people who had children, they all turned away, as they did not feel the units were appropriate for families. The salesman said that of the units that were up, all were sold but two and he expected to sell them soon. Then the second phase of construction wou7d start. Most of the people buying these units are single people rather than couples. Ms. Schnabel stated the units were very attractive and appeared to be of good quality. The salesman stated the monthly maintenance fee the first year would be $23/month and $28/month the second year. Each unit contained a stove, refrigerator, dishwasher, garbage disposal, washer/dryer/ 30 gal. hot water heater, insulation acceptable in terms of R value, electric heat, with heat efficient fireplace. There was a lot of selection in terms of carpeting, tile, etc. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to make any comments about this rezoning request. Mr. Larry Newhorter, 32 - 62nd Lane, stated he has lived across the street from this property for 11 years. He stated when 61st and the stop light � by Stevenson School were put in, the area was filled with concrete. When Park Construction was digging up I-94, they dumped in clay, mud and concrete. He did not know how Mr. DeGardner could bui7d on this property with all the clay and concrete in there. Mr. Newhorter stated this property was zoned R-1 when he moved in 11 years ago, and he did not want any multiples across the street. He was also con- cerned about the height of the units. They would not match with the houses in the area. He stated these units are built for 1-2 people, but he could easily see a couple with a child living there. He would like to see single family homes on the property. In digging footings for a house with a base- ment,�they would probably hit sand, but he did not know if they could lay a slab on top of the peat. Mr. Richard Soj, 65 - 612 Way N.E., stated he has lived in his home for 21 years. He stated he has a walkout basement on the east side bf his house. His concern was drainage into his yard and basement if this develop- ment went in. He also felt these buildings were too high to have across the street from residentia7. Ms. Schnabel stated any project that is developed is designed to contain water within its own deve]opment, so there should not be any drainage onto any other property. Ms. Betty Rae Berkholz, 6103 East River Road, stated she was concerned about the children. She felt that when there are single people living in a home, �'�`� they are probably going to have parties. She stated this is a quiet neigh- _ borhood, and she would feel very uncomfortab7e because they do not know what kind of element would be moving in. She also felt there would be a considerable amount of turnover of ownership of these units as people get married and move to larger homes. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 6 Mr. Ed Ksolihowski, 35 - 62nd Way N.E., stated he owns 3% lots here. He stated he was against the project, and would like to have single family homes on this property. Mr. DeGardner stated that whether multi or single family homes are built on this site, there will have to be soil preparation. He felt single family F�omes were out of the question for the reasons mentioned earlier. With multi, they can get more units per acre; therefore, they can afford to do some soil preparation. As far as drainage, they will work closely with the people and the City to handle the drainage on site. He stated he would be t�n'lling to sit down with the neighbors to try to resolve the concerns expressed by the neighbors. Mr. Minton asked how long Mr. Nielson had owned the property and if he had attempted to deve7op the property before. Mr. Nielson stated he has owned the property for 7 years. He stated he had considered doubles and single family homes, but because of the financial situation, these have not worked out for him. When he met with Mr. DeGardner, they both felt this was the best plan for the property. Mr. Robinson stated if the property was rezoned to Q-3, Mr. DeGardner would be allowed 20% lot coverage. The proposed plan is for 16� lot coverage. He would need a minimum of 35I green space, and the proposed plan calls for � 56% green space. � Mr. Robinson stated one concern would be that this proposed plan is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. If the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning, the Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended through the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Oquist asked about a garage requirement. Mr. Robinson stated the code does not require garages for apartment buildings. The City does require 1z stalls per one bedroom unit. Mr. DeGardner stated garages can be provided if people want one, so those options can be built into the plan. MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY 1�II2. SABA� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZOA #84-02 BY ROBERT D. DEGARDNER. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCANABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC XEARING CLOSED AT 9:00 P.M. Ms. Gabel stated she was concerned about the density. Mr. Oquist stated he was a7so concerned about the density and the type of project this is. He stated a good point was made by one of the neighbors �"'� that single people do have a tendency to have parties. It could become a problem area. He stated it was fine to have low to moderate income housing /'`� PLANNING COM_MISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 7 for singles, but the City a]so needs to be considering low to moderate income housing for families. This is not a family development, so he did not think the low to moderate income was a positive issue here. Mr. Saba stated he thought traffic was an issue. He really felt this development did not fit into this neighborhood. He stated the Loft Home concept was very interesting and it may fit very well somewhere else, but not here. MOTION BY MR. KONDRIQC� SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST� TO RECOMl��ND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF REZONING REQUEST� ZOA #184-02, BY ROBERT D. DEGARDNER� TO REZONE FROM R-1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLINGS) Z'O R-3 (GENERAL MULTIPLE DWELLINGS) PART OF LOTS 3 AND 21, NO1' TAKEN FOR STREET PURPOSES� AND ALL OF LOTS 4� 5� 6, 7� 8, 9� AND 10, AND IATS 14� 15� 16, 17, Z8� Z9 AND 20� BLOCK 20� FRIDLEY PARIC� AND PARTS OF LOTS 3 AND 24� NOT TAKEN FOR STREET PURPOSES� AND ALL OF LOTS 4, 5� 6� AND 7 AND 19� 20� 21� 22 AND 23� BLOCK 19� FRIDLEY PARK� TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 52-UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX BETWEEN EAST RIVER ROAD AND ASHTON AVENUE ON 61ST AND 61 1/2 WAY N.E. Ms. Schnabel stated she also thought the concept of this development was excellent, and she commended Mr. DeGardner for bringing it to the City of Fridley; however, she also felt this was the wrong area for this type of n development. In the proper location, this type of development made very _ nice homes for people with certain needs. She stated she was very impressed with the units when she saw them in Coon Rapids. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT P.S. #84-03, LOFT , ER . G R: Being a Rep at o parts of ots an 24, not taken for street purposes and Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 29, 20, 21, 22 and 23, Block 19, Fridley Park; and parts of Lot 3 and 21, not taken for street purposes, and al] of Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20, Block 20, Fridley Park, to allow the development of a 13 4-unit condominium complex between Ashton Avenue and East River Road on 61st and 61 1/2 Way N.E. MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TD OPEN THE PUBLIC XEARING ON P.S. �84-03 BY ROBERT D. DEGARDNER. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOI�lAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC SEARING OPEN AT 9;05 P.M. Mr. Robinson stated they are basically talking about two parcels of land-- 3.08 acres combined. The proposal is for eight 4-unit garden Loft Home apartments on the southerly portion and five 4-unit garden Loft Home apart- � ments on the northerly portion. Mr. Robinson stated Staff's biggest concern was the lot coverage.. Because it is a difference concept, it does not quite fit into anything they have in the Zoning Code in terms of interpretation. If these were considered 4- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 8 plexes, they would have to have 15,000 sq. ft. of lot per 4-plex. As such, the southerly portion would only allow for five units as opposed to the eight being proposed. The northerly portion would allow for three units as oppoed to the five being proposed, for a total of eight (13 being proposed). Mr. Robinson stated Mr. DeGardner feels these are not 4-plexes, but are garden-type apartment dwellings. If this was a townhouse development which would fit under a special single family district, he would be required to have five acres. With that, if it was rezoned to R-3, he could build 3,000 sq. ft, per unit or 12,000 sq, ft. per 4-plex. On the southerly portion, he would be allowed six units as opposed to eight. On the northerly portion, he would be allowed four units as opposed to five, for a total of ten. Mr. Robinson stated that if these units are considered apartments, since they are attached, he wou]d be allowed to build as proposed, 2,500 sq, ft. per unit or 10,000 sq. ft, per 4-plex for 8 units on the south and 5 on the north. Mr. Robinson stated City Staff felt it was really a townhouse-type develop- ment and, as such, should follow the townhouse density which is 12,000 sq, ft. with a variance to a17ow for the new concept. Mr. Robinson stated Staff had some concerns on parking as laid out in the ^ proposal. The petitioner shows 9 ft. stalls. The City requires 10 ft. stalls. The petitioner meets the minimum amount of parking stalls, but the.v are substandard and they would have to rework the parking with additional setback requirements. Mr. Robinson stated another Staff concern was the petitioner needs a 15 ft. buffer space between the hard surface area and the adjacent R-1 zoning. Prese�tly, only 5 ft. of buffer space is shown. Mr. R�binson stated a concern expressed by Engineering was that Ashton Ave. may require additional easement for possible widening if this project progressed. That was sorr�thing that was not clearly defined at this point. Ms. Schnabe] asked if the sewer and water were adequate for a development of this type. Mr. Robinson stated he believed that because of the industrial zoning nearby, that the water and sewer were sufficient to handle a development of this type. However, this was something the Engineering Dept. should check into. Mr. DeGardner stated that when he first brought this concept to Coon Rapids, they expressed the same concerns being expressed at this meeting--whether it is a 4-plex or townhouse development. After discussions and looking at the concept, the Coon Rapids Planning.Commission concurred that this concept r^`� PLANNING CONIMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 9 was far superior to the box-type apartments.. He stated this concept meets all codes. Ms. Schnabel stated that where the Loft Homes are located in Coon Rapids, it is a much more open area, and there isn't any residential around it like there is in fridley. She felt there was a big difference between the two sites. Ms. Gabel stated she did go to Coon Rapids to look at the development there. She, too, liked the concept, but did not think it was correct for this piece of property. Mr. Saba asked about the storage of a boat, tent trailer, etc. Mr. DeGardner stated the owners can have 1-2 garages built if they want. The code requires 1z stalls per unit for parking. If an �wner has a boat, it is usually stored off the property. The association would regulate such things as outside storage, parties, etc., so these units.would be self- governing. Actually there is more control than there is with single family homes. Mr. Minton asked about the height of the buildings since that seemed to be ^ a concern expressed by the neighbors. Mr. DeGardner stated each unit was a 2-story unit with a peak. It would be similar to an expansion-type house with a peak. He would guess the height at the peak was 26-28 ft. Mr. Robinson stated the limit on height in R-1 zoning is 30 ft. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. MINTON� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC XEARING ON P.S. �84-03 BY ROBERT D. DEGARDNER. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCX27ABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CL0.SED AT 9:25 P.M. MOTION BY MR. KONDRIQC, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT� P.S. #84-03, LOFT HOMES OF FRIDLEY� BY ROBEsZT D. DEGARDNER� BEING A REPLAT OF PARTS OF LOTS 3 AND 24, NOT TAKEN FOR STREET PURPOSES AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 29, 20, 21, 22 AND 23, BLOCK Z9, FRIDLEY PARK; AND PARTS OF LOT 3 AND 21� NOT TAKEN FOR STREET PURPOSES, AND ALL OF LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, Z9 AND 20� BIUCK 20, FRIDLEY PARK, TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 13 4-UNIT CONDO - 1�lINIUM COMPLEX BE2WEEN ASHT'aN AVENUE AND EAST RIT7BR ROAD ON 61ST AND 61 Z/2 WAY N.E., FOR THE FOLLOY7ING REASONS: 1. THE PROPOSED PLAN IS NOT CON6ISTENT WITH THE CITY�S COA7PREAENSIVE PLAN. 2. TXE DENSITY, AS PROPOSED� IS TOO EIGH FOR THIS AREA. 3. CONCERN ABOUT AN INVESTOR BUYING BUILDINGS FOR RENTAL, CREATING PROBLEMS FOR TXE NEIGHBORS. 4. DRAINAGE BE CONTAINED WITNIN TNE AREA WXERE POOR SOIL CONDITIONS EXIST. 5. CONCERN AS TO WHETHER WATER AND SEWER LINES AFtE ADEQUATE. 6. PARKING STALLS DO NOT MEET ZONING ORDINANCE. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 10 7. BUFFER AREA BETWEEN R-1 AND DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE LARGER. 8. FACT THAT ASATON MIGHT XAVE TO BE WIDENED TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC GENERATED BY A DEVELOPMENT LII� TfIIS. - s Ms. Schnabel sta�ed she would like either the Planning Cormnission or one of the member cortQnissions (possibly Community Development Commission) take a look at a new definition for a condaminium/apartment development with density figures and come up with some recommendations. 5. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated both the rezoning request and the preliminary plat request would go together as a package to the City Council. She suggested the petitioner call the Planning Department to verify the date when this would go to City Council. aiiow tne con Holiday Hills REST Lruction or a muizi-purpose gymnas�urn tiype uui iuiriy u�� �utlot 1, Second Addition, the same being 6875 University Avenue N.E. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO OPEN TXE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #84-07 BY WOODCREST BAPTIST CNURCN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:35 P.M. Mr. Robinson stated Woodcrest Baptist Church was located north of Rice Creek, east of University, and south of 69th Ave. The property was surrounded by Columbia Arena on the north, R-1 on the east south and west. He stated the proposed multi-purpose gymnasium building would be located just south of the existing school and church and would be over 11,000 sq. ft. Mr. Robinson stated that in a church area, whenever a church does any development, it requires a special use permit. In trying to fit a church into different zoning areas they use CR-1 zoning, so a 30 ft. setback was required from the neighborhing residential. Otherwise, the church meets all the other setback requirements with the exception of the driveway which should be setback from the right of way 20 feet, but is only 15 feet. Mr. Robinson stated another concern looked at by Staff was tbe parking. The present lot has 272 stalls. The new addition would require 96 stalls with 8,700 sq. ft. of gathering area and 2,200 sq. ft. in locaer and shower area. The existing school, using a 1-250 ratio, requires 67 stalls. The existing church, using a ratio of 1- lOJ stalls (10,800 sq. ft.), requires 108 stalls. The total parking stalls required is 271, so there is adequate parking even with the new gymnasium, � Mr. Robinson stated the petitioner has indicated that the gymnasium would not actually be an additional parking burden to the complex and typically ,�. PLANNING COMPIISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 11 � , would not be used at the same time as the church activities. They have indicated the parking lot has never been full to overflowing, and this development would not increase the parking demand. Ms. Schnabel asked about the height of the proposed gymnasium. Mr. Dave Radabough stated he was Chairman of the Building CorrQnittee for Woodcrest Baptist Church. He stated the height of the building from the floor level to where tn� r.00f starts is 21 ft. From that point to the peak is approximately 9 ft, more. He stated it would be approximately the same height as the present auditorium the gymnasium will be parallel to. The back of the school is flat on top and is approx. 21 ft. Mr. Oquist asked about Rice Creek Watershed Board approval. Mr. Radabough stated they hav� gotten approval from the Rice Creek Water- shed Board. Although they did not have to, they considered the existing parking lot, as well as the existing building, in their flow into Rice Creek. They designed a flow restriction area as well as a skimming area to take care of anything that would go into the Creek. Mr. Radabough stated the initial building was built in 1964, and the school ^ was added in 1975. At this time, they are proposing the construction of a gymnasium to support the existing school. The reason they desire this � addition is because they have to transport the children by bus to other gymnasiums they rent for their Phy. Ed, and other programs. At these gyms, they do not have the use of showers which is important. He stated they make a lot of noise transporting the children back and forth; also there is the added risk of transporting the chi7dren. With the temperature changes from the gymnasiums back to the bus and from the bus into the school, especially during the cold winters, they have to consider the health of the children. Mr. Radabough stated they will be able to go from the church into the pro- posed gymnasium so there will be a quiet entry into the gymnasium. By having this facility, it would eliminate bussing, there would be less risk to the children and to the children's health. Mr. Radabough stated the gymnasium would also be used for recess time. Right now, 2-3 times a day, the children go out on the parking lot. In the winter time, they have recess in a 30 ft. by 60 ft, cafeteria/recess room, and this is not adequate. Mr. Radabough stated they are also proposing an apartment above the locker room. The apartment would be used to house missionaries or other pastors and families, on a temporary basis. Mr. Kondrick asked how many students attended Woodcrest School. r°-�, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 12 Mr. Chrisman, Principal of Woodcrest Baptist Acaderqy, 271 - 67th Ave., stated they have approximately 747 students in the school Pre K- 12. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to comment on this proposal. Mrs. Bev Eberhard, 436 Rice Creek Blvd., stated she was very concerned about the large size of the proposed structure, because the only view from the back of their home would be the side of this building. Mr. Dean Eberhard, 436 Rice Creek Blvd., stated he would like to submit to the Planning Corrmi-sion a petition of approximately 80 signatures of people opposing the construction of a gymnasium at Woodcrest Baptist Church. He stated he would like to address some of the major concerns expressed by the neighbors: �� 1. The traffic in the area. They are concerned that the gymnasium will increase the traffic due to expanded programs of the school and church. At the present time, traffic is a concern with activities at Columbia Arena, the parks, the athletic fields, and the church. There is no alternate route into their neighborhood; there is only one way in and one way out, and this also pertains to the egress and access to the parking lot at Woodcrest Baptist Church. They are particularly concerned about the traffic during the evening � hours and the activities that might occur at that time. 2, The safety of the children and the residents in the area, because they do have access to the park at the end of the block. 3. They are concerned about the noise levels because of increased traffic and the noise level of any athletic activities going on at the school. 4. Playground activities. The only playground area the church does have is the park area, and the neighbors are concerned about the requirements on �publ i c parks . 5. Future expansion of the church. They are wondering where this expansion will take place in the future as enrollment and/or membership in the church increases. It appeared to the residents that the expansion would have to either be by building up.on the existing educational building or acquiring property to the east which is residential. 6. The aesthetics. They feel the structure will give a warehouse-type atmosphere to the neighborhood. It will block out the view they now have and a few hours of sunlight in the afternoon. Will there be heating elements on the roof? Will these be aesthetically detractive to the property? 7. They are concerned that the use of the gymnasium will be for other groups. As a result, it will increase traffic flow and activities at the � church. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 13 8. Does the apartment dwelling require some special zoning? Mr. Eberhard stated that as a homeowner, he is concerned about the view they will have from their home. They bought their home in 1968 and purchased the home because of the view they have of Rice Creek. They are concerned about whether this structure will affect the market value of their home if they were to se71. MOTION BY 1�II2. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. MINTON� TO RECEIVE PETITIG�V NO. 6-84. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTIDN CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. DuWayne Bakke, 454 Rice Creek Blvd., stated he was concerned about the traffic, traffic congestion, the warehouse effect of the new structure, and possible future expansion of the church and school. He stated the church has only one entrance and one exit. In the evenin� hours and sometimes during the day, when activities are getting out, there is an enormous amount of traffic congestion in the parking 7ot. When activities are going on at the church and Columbia Arena at the same time, the cars really stack up at the intersection. He was also concerned for the safety of the children walking or biking to the park. �� ' Mr. Bakke stated the church will be using the last green area they have for "� this gymnasium� so that means some of the playground area will move up into the Fridley public park. As a property owner, he had a problem with the school using the park as a playground, because when the school children come , into the park, the rest of the neighbors move off. He stated he recently received a letter from the church apo]ogizing for them forcing the residents off the park. Mr. Bakke stated there are 147 students at the school. According to informa- tion he was given, 90% of those students are non-Fridley residents. Mr. Jerry Ulvin, 449 Rice Creek Blvd., stated to put the size of this new gymnasium in perspective, it would be very close in size to City Hall. Did the Planning Corr�nission feel a warehouse-type building of this size would be appropriate along Rice Creek? Mr. Radabough stated that regarding the concern that the new structure would generate more traffic, they will not be changing the flow of traffic from what is now. Ms. Schnabel asked about the school`s enrollment capacity. Mr. Chrisman stated the capacity was about 200. Ms. Schnabel asked about church membership. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 14 Mr. Radabought stated they have 180-200 membersf however, on a Sunday morning they average around 500 and have had some special times when the attendance is up to 900. They would never use the church and hold athletic events at the same time. Ms. Margaret Maeckelbergh, 425 Rice Creek Blvd., asked if a stage would be included in this new gymnasium. Mr. Radabough stated they are putting in a platform for a stage. They have one big play a year. Mr. Chrisman stated that 39 out of the 147 students are residents of Fridley. Eight of the 11 faculty members are residents of Fridley, so that equals ' rr�re than 10� who are residents of the City. Mr. Chrisman stated that in all the activities he has been involved in in the four years he has been at Woodcrest and in the State of Minnesota, he has never attended a Christian school sporting event or dramatic event that drew in excess of what the church normally draws on a Sunday. Ms. Pat Johanson, 424 Rice Creek Blvd., stated their back yard backs up to the church's property. They have seen as many as a dozen buses from all over, and that is without a gymnasium. With a gymnasium, she did not know what it would be like when they have competitive sports. She was concerned about what type of air conditioning or heating units would go on the roof. Right now there is an unsightly green metal unit on the roof. Mr. Chrisman stated the church has ten bus routes on Sunday morning to pick up children in the community for Sunday School. But, that is something that is going on right now without the gymnasium. There will be oo activity taking place in the gymnasium that will equal what they are already doing now on Sunday or any other night of the week. Mr. Radabough stated he did not know about a green metal roof unit, but he would be happy to talk to the neighbors and do something to make it look better. He stated they will not have any air conditioning units on the outside at all. It will strictly be a ventilation system for cooling. Mr. Quentin Freeburg, 301 Rice Creek Terrace, stated they live across the Creek from the church. They have lived in their home for approximately ten years. Their view of the current structures, as well as the proposed structure, is from their living room and dining room windows. He stated it appears the church has made an effort to try to get materia7s that blend in with the existing structures as well as the habitat. He stated they have no objection to the new gymnasium. He stated he would like to read a letter from a neighbor who could not be at the meeting. The letter was from Dr. David Zeigler, 315 Rice Creek Terrace, which stated they did not feel the proposed gymnasium would affect them and were not opposed to the building. ,� ,r-, ^, PLt1NNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 15 Mr. Freeburg stated they have been members of Woodcrest Baptist Church for 9 years and have two children who attend the school. One of the things that drew them to the church were the activities and that the activities were not upsetting to the comnunity. They would like to see the proposed gymnasium built as a supportive function to the school. Ms. Sharon Gustafson, 437 Rice Creek Blvd., stated she would like to address the aesthetics. She was sure the Planning Commission was aware of parts of the City that have not been planned very well. She stated this area is highly visible from Highway 47, and she felt the proposed gymnasium would be very detrimental to the look of the neighborhood and to the community itself. Mr. Roger Reed, 290 Rice Creek Blvd., stated he was directly across from the existing building and the proposed construction. He has lived in this location for seven years. He felt the church has maintained its building well. He felt the church was an asset to the community, and he did not feel it detracted from his property in any way. He stated he is a member of Woodcrest Baptist Church and chose to live in this location to be near the church. He felt the gymnasium was really needed for the children. Mr. George Lunde, 545 Rice Creek Blvd., stated he and his family are new- ^ comers to Fridley. They are also members of Woodcrest Baptist Church. � They joined the church about one year ago. They were living in White Bear Lake and decided to move into Fridley to locate relatively near the church. They decided on their home because it is a very nice neighborhood and is secluded. It is near University Ave., and he felt the church property formed a very good buffer between the residential area and University Ave. �ie stated he felt the value of property is really determined by the buyers coming in. If he was moving in again and the gymnasium was already there, he would still have moved into the neighborhood. Ms. Lana Freeburg, 301 Rice Creek Terrace, stated that in reference to the corr�nents about the people being aesthetically affected by the building, she did not understand how the neighbors could present a petition with 80 signatures when 80 homes are not even close to the property. She could understand the concern by some peaple regarding the traffic, but she would hate that to be the only excuse when there is already a significant amount of traffic from, not only the church and school, but Columbia Arena, the park, and the new ballfields. The traffic lights could be timed so the traffic can move through a little more quickly. She stated they have small children, and they do use the facilities at the park. The reason the church uses the park facilities is because they do not have facilities on their property. If the gymnasium was built, they would have their activities in their own building. Mr. G. DeShaw, 530 Rice Creek Blvd., stated this is one of the most unique neighborhoods in Fridley. It has the lowest crime rate in Fridley. It is � buffered by Locke Park, Rice Cree, and University Ave. There is only one way in and one way out.. They are concerned about everything that happens in their neighborhood. He stated the people have an honest concern about their property values, because this is a warehouse-type building going in. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 16 Pastor Clark Poorman stated he has been the pastor at Woodcrest for 14 years. The school was established in 1973. With rare exc�ption, he felt the young people have proven themselves well disciplined and there have been few incidents. When the educational wing was built in 1973, being new to the church and not knowing all the details, they did not check with the neighbors. They tried to make a number of concessions to try to maintain a good rapport with the neighbors. They want to continue that good rapport. They want to do something about the unsightly rooftop unit that was mentioned by one of the neighbors, but there isn't much that can be done to dress up a gymnasium- type building. He stated he appreciated the concerns of the neighbors. If he were a property owner on that street, he would also be concerned. He stated he hoped the Planning Comnission realized the church was willing to do every- thing they can to be amiable to their neighbors and hopefully this will not mean ceasing to put up something they desperately need. Ms. Schnabel stated she felt there was a real need for communication between the church and the neighbors. She would encourage the two groups to get together and discuss this proposal. MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #84-07 BY WOODCREST BAPTIST CHURCH. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC XEARING CLOSED AT 11:12 P.M. Mr. Saba stated that in looking at the needs, benefits, and detriments, he felt the need for a gymansium took precedent. He did not think there would be any traffic problems because of the new structure. He sympathized with t�ie aesthetic concerns, but this is a CR-1 zone and a lot can go in a CR-1 zone. Mr. Svanda stated he did not necessarily agree that the traffic was not an issue--perhaps with regard to safety. He did not like the warehouse-barn effect. He would not like to have a building like this 30 ft. from his home, and he was not in favor of the proposal. Ms. Gabel stated it seemed traffic was an issue in terms of health, safety, and welfare of the people, but aesthetics was not and had nothing to do in terms of the burden of proof. Mr. Kondrick stated he agreed that aesthetics was not a good enough reason to deny this special use permit. He did not think traffic was an issue because he did not feel the traffic would be any different than it is now. He would prefer to have the children in the gymnasium than in the parking lot. �\ Mr. Oquist stated he also did not think there would be an increase in traffic because of the gymnasium. He sympathized because of the aesthetics, but Ms. Gabel had brought up a good point, and he was not so sure the Planning Comnission could deny the special use permit because of the reasons that �� have been brought up. - ��1 PLANNING COMMISSIOfJ MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 17 Mr. Minton stated he agreed that the traffic was not a big issue. He felt that if the congregation has a need for a gymnasium which they have obviously demonstrated, the Planning Commission should make every accomo- dation they can to allow for that. There were two issues he would like clarified before he could vote on this: (1) The aesthetics. He felt that was a real issue that possibly could be worked out with the neighbors and the church. He felt there were a number of possibilities there. (2) The temporary living quarters. Is there any special zoning for that? Ms. Schnabel stated she was sharing some of the same feelings in terms of traffic. She did not see that as an added detriment. She thought the biggest traffic problems were being generated by the church activities, services, special events, etc. She was concerned about the aesthetics and was not comfortable with the design of the addition. She a5ked about the feasibility of sinking the building a few feet into the ground. Mr. Wayne Tower, Suburban Engineering, stated that to sink the structure into the ground was nearly impossib7e because of the elevation of the existing sanitary sewer. In order for the showers and the toilet facilities to function in that building, he did not believe they could push that ° building down to any degree to make any reasonable effect on the site. � Ms. Schnabel stated she did think there were some other options that needed to be explored. She did not see a cohesive plan that shows exactly what is being done, and no landscaping plan has been proposed. Both representatives from Woodcrest Baptist Church and the neighbors stated they would be willing to get together and discuss this before it goes to City Council. The neighbors stated they had been totally unaware of this proposal until about 8-10 days ago when they received the public hearing notice. MOTION BY MR. OQUIST� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF REpUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP #84-07, BY WOODCREST BAPTIST CHURCH, PER SECTION 205.09.1� 3� A, OF TXE FRID7�EY CITY CODE� TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-PURPOSE GY1�Pl1.SIUM TYPE BUILDING ON OUTLOT 1, HOLIDAY HILLS SECOND ADDITION, THE SAl� BEING 6875 UNdVER5ITY AVENUE N.E., WITH THE CONCERNS EJ�RESSED BY TXE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS AND WITX TAE RECOMMENDATION TXAT TXE NEIGHBORS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF WOODCREST BAPTIST CHURCH GET TOGETNER FOR DISCUSSIONS BEFORE THIS REpUEST GOES TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND WITN THE STIPULATION TXAT TXERE BE AN APPROVED LANDSCAPE PLAN. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel suggested the petitioner contact the Planning Dept, to verify the date when this would go to City Council. � PLANNING COMMISSIQN �EETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 18 ;� 6. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. #84-04 BY CYNTHIA J. BRAAM: Split off the North eet o ot 6, Bloc 2, Spring alley ddition, to make a new buildin site at 1443 Rice Creek Road. (Petitioner knows property is land locked.� Mr. Robinson stated this property was located north of Rice Creek west of Arthur St. It is a very large lot in excess of 37,000 sq. ft. He stated there is no plan for a road at this time, but there are a couple of road easements that have been picked up. Staff has no problem with this request, but one stipulation would be that the lot split is recorded at the County. The petitioner, Gary Braam, stated the lot split was for future development if a road shou7d ever go through. MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY Mlt. KONDRICK� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF LOT SPLIT REQUEST� L.S. #84-04� BY CYNTHIA J. BRAAM� TO SPLIT OFF THE NORTH 199 FEET OF LOT 6� BLOCK 2� SPRING VALLEY ADDITIDN� TO MAKE A NEW BUILDING SITE AT 1443 RICE CREEK RQAD� WITH THE 5TIPULATION THAT TNE LOT SPLIT BE RECORDED AT THE COUNTY. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. SALE OF PUBLIC PROPERTIES PROCEDURE: Mr. Robinson stated that if the Planning Commission concurs with the "Sale of Public Properties Procedure", they will be saying that the sale of these R-1 lots is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that they encourage development of R-1 in R-1 areas. He stated these properties are tax forfeit properties, park dedication propertfies, etc. He stated Mr. Moravetz indicated these properties would be turned over to realtors and sold. The Commissioners were concerned with Lot 11, Block 20, Fridley Park, as it was not a buildable lot. MOTION BY MR. MINTON� SECONDED BY 1�2. SVANDA� TO CONCUR WITX THE SALE OF PUBIIIC PROPERTIES PROCEDURE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IF A LOT IS NOT A BUILDABLE LOT� TXIS FACT BE MADE KNOWN IN WRITING AT THE TIME OF SALE. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING A�E� CHAIRF70MAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. RECEIVE APRIL 17, 1984, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY 1�2. SPANDA, SECONDED BY l�2. KONDRICK, TO RECEIVE THE APRIL 17, 1984, S111VIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr. Svanda recalled from the minutes that he was disappointed th�t Council had ap�roved the Hazardous Waste Ordinance prior to the Environmental Qualtiy Commission's approval. He stated the E.Q.C. should have been consulted prior to this action as more work needs to be done on the Ordinance. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CXAIRWOMAN SCHABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. � S �. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1984 PAGE 19 i 9. RECEIVE APRIL 19, 1984, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: 1�10_ TION BY MR. SABA � SECONDED BY A�t. SVANDA, TO RECEIVE Z'gE APRIL 19 , 1984, gOUSING & REDEVELOPI�NT AUTHORITY 1�IINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CNAIRWOMAN SQiNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. RECEIVE APRIL 23, 1984, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: , M0270N BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE TXE APRIL 23� 1984, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CAAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. RECEIVE APRIL 24, 1984, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. SABA � 1'O RECEIVE THE APRIL 2 4�.I9 84 � APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CSAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLZIRED THE MOTION �� CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 12. RECEIVE APRIL 24, 1984, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY 1�2. MINTON� TO RECEIVE THE APRIL 24, 1984, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING A3,'E� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS: MO' TION BY MR. SABA� SEG�ONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO REQUEST THAT ICE WATER AND POSSIBLY COFFEE BE PROVIDED TO TNE PLANNING COMMISSION MEM9ERS AT EACX MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� QYAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY AQ2. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA� TO ADJOURN TFIE 1�ETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� C9AIRWOMAN SGHNABEL DECLARED TAE MAY 9, 1984, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:Z5 A.M. Respectfully submitted, �, ��ti y Sa a Recording Secretary 1 . Planning.�;� �ssion Fleeting .�Y 9, 19�4 . Page 20 V� L� --'--��,� _, �� %P�,l'� � -' ' - �,�2�` ''�� �_ � �� f i,i�� ��� �� � :�%� u/ � � ��r,��.1�, ��1 — -%. /� /%� _,_, . � ; � . . ���� , a,� � 3 � --� � c,�..�� �� ��.�,��-_� . ;� �• \•/ Li S /�,/.���C' t � . � ��LC� v %� _� � �"- - _��� (si ��✓ G �G`--4�i '���-° rr =�io�� �.:����� , � -= � ,� � :,/ �, . c: t: • � �., '� � ��,�,_,�. �'_ I,�-t --c� - �( � ���3 �..� ^ J\ \` _ I � G_ l� � ��� c�.� f\; � i i 7 �r�',''%� �.��.� �,� 1 � ct�.'t�� . � � .l " � �7 �7 �'��/'� �� �"�zti1�' �� ���?� �'�� � - ;,. _�- �,.�,� .3�., �� � c��.�� �..�%� ��� _. - �,., � ; , � - /% , �� �� � � �� ,�-c.�.., 3 c . �, ��/ � �, �' � - � .�C�i�, 'l,tic�.� , � .r{,Y 'c t � � /� c� t7 / i `/ G' � ' I 2 , GC.' ' G �' i— i C"'� �'i�' - Y-� G�.�C-1 �� � l — � �` � ! /� , � , � � � `�� � :' � `��i � � ���� �� 1 � -- r���� � ' p u��,���!� .�;,.- �S�/ /'a � � . . . � ; �,�.,..., � ` �, " , � , �� � �� � �� � � n i1�r � 1�-6/�a ,�,�., / ,1 c� ��('/',�Jrl_ ��J _ l,(? /�.( / Z`r�-� ` �/��� �/ � �� ;� J J (o �% /V . '�LJ I�-_ ��-�.� IL�JU.. � !f% `'�' J i T � � � �,��/ o c��// V . , 9^� � j� "��.,�-. � /:� �.�.., ��� -- �- =r ► � ,,�, � .. } .�-�,�-i 1 � i ! �-�..��� ; � �� � ��� . , 3 ` �-� /���c� �: � � �/. � % _,.�<,��;� ��";,�,.��/-._ � • cA .�.^\ 4-C � � �0 / f�� --'1 `�-� I� �✓�`� r % /r i �- .G v � � , � r�,} �ir..� c /-� �j, .fr/F� -'/� S f "1 r.� z° `� �L� li►��� ��'- � . � � � �� � � � ( Plannin�ommission Meeting���1�4 Page 21 _ y0 / � � � 9� y r . /A% ����� l v� . �%', _ ��Gil'YL�/ 7��'� , , f . C �' �% , , (.�/ <�/�-t� C-C/�-t��t .� ,!F'�-� �j, = `_ ! � � � � _ � � 9 �i , -�'/,�'�✓'�C<,o �. �. �✓✓�.-�� � ��� � , � � � %� � i / ''�/.,• :� � /�% / �-/_�/✓?�'iv' �� �(i i � . ../�..�I�'✓ \' �/�/i i'�''^� � � � � � 9 �� �� C�1/'.�-,��z � r�l ��.- � 4 , C�! �c l �r.L �" � _ �,,� . ,� ,�'�� ` �._� � �l,�c=..,. �` � ,�,. i � 4 �.�L } l.� �� r:.-4i ��� �� � � �-�irv�,.z.i /�..c�:��d! , . , --� � ��� � . , � i: n � , . �� . .��� . ��� r/a,G�/ ,, �A _� �� / % / , ,/�C: "� � � % �/`�/ ? i , �/,J� /� �7�'��, --�- � �' � v '�,-�% _,�-���� ./��'c..t' - ��C,'-l- ; � ! (� - ,������ ��� C� y� ' � ;� �ti-t"�-�� l ' �.��s�i1,l� �� � ` �(J f�■ 1' , / ` ` � �' L/ ��-' (•�'��'l�1 i � , � o� a J tJ�� � `--- �� �J/� •..i �f � ��i���j /% �✓L. . '''t� �" �� %'�1�""".�:� ' ����, � _ : �_ �.....�.:- , �r� � /,'°, �, % l`/ �! 6t t r.� �..c ✓r-� :�C.E ti1�c..2-r" . y- i. i.�dJC:.� , � `!:; '� ,'O. � �',.y�% �%%% ;, { ✓! .—. �`' \ � ' ���`� ll\V1 1 .���L� `-1 . � � �,/i • ��G' � /(�ti[.� �i2�.f! ,� ��/� � ._- �..c��: � � �l � � ��tt� C` _,�ci.l, r°� f>"� ;t': 'f",=1 c-C<,l '� 3 fc �-JC Cc ���� � fG, �� � . / � t�"' , �� �--1 � y � ��� C�:��; (��t.•�4� -.�:%,.(� � �4 : f� � �r C�;� 3=� y `�.`� � -1 � � �1 � :,� . . ,_ � /� -� 4� ��: "� ✓t,�*�� l� �- ��/� " / � �, /A , � C/L/'7 . , �, �.� l� l� �� � � ��l►v �v�� �� � ,pI,/ ,� Yjr�-/ (';�� J��Z�� � � ������ , � s �� � � �' � ;, �- „ �� ����� ���; , � y y� l ,fi�c� �: �Cc� � _ � � -Z ti. ���� �� �.��� ����. � � �/ � � %�,� �_�- � . ��— „,� . , �= ''�`� `?'� ���C.� ��- ��,-�'� � /� . , u ' " '; , !� � � � ' ° C/C L���i �� :/ %1 -�' � . - /� 2 ��-. `l��C�� = i ,;.