Loading...
PL 08/11/1993 - 30777C��'������������`, ^ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIBT 11, 1993 _______________________________________________.,___________.,_____ CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Newman called the August 11, 1993, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Dave Newman, Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba, Brad Sielaff, Connie Modig Members Absent: Diane Savage, LeRoy Oquist Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Oliver Tam, 1150 Fireside Drive N.E. Joyce Moen, 1128 - 63rd Avenue N.E. Joyce Trebisovsky, 1130 Fireside Drive N.E. APPROVAL OF JULY 28. 1993. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: �--., MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the July 28, 1993, Planning Commission minutes as written. IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED THL MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOII3LY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT P.S. #93-03. BY OLIVER TAM. TAM ADDITION: To replat property described as that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of'Section 12, ToFanship 30, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the east line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 distant 726 feet southerly of the northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12; thence westerly along a line which, if extended, would intersect the west line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 at a point distant 726 feet southerly of the northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12, a distance of 661.45 feet to the actual point of beginning of the land to be described, thence continuing westerly along said last described line a distance of 288 feet; thence northerly a distance of 396 feet; thence easterly at a right angle a distance of 288 feet; thence southerly at a right angle a distance of 396 feet to the point of beginning. This property is generally located at �"'� 1160 Fireside Drive N.E. /'� PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEETING. AIIdIIST 11, 1993 PAGE 2 MOTIOAT by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:33 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is processing three land use requests. One is a plat request to subdivide the subject parcel which is addressed as 1160 Fireside Drive, located between the two mobile home parks east of Highway 65 into three lots. The second request is to rezone a portion of the subject parcel from C-3, General Shopping Center District, to R-3, General Multiple Dwelling District. The third request is a variance request to address the existing encroachments by the restaurant facility currently located on the property. On August 17, 1993, the Appeals Commission recommended approval of the variance request to the City Council. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing to replat the existing parcel into three separate parcels. Two parcels are proposed to be used for two new four-unit residential dwellings, and the third parcel is for the existing restaurant facility. There are currently two dwelling units on the lots proposed for the two new four-unit dwellings. ^ Ms. McPherson stated the lots for the multiple family dwellings meet the minimum lot area and lot width requirements as required by the R-3, General Multiple Dwelling District. Each lot meets the minimum 15,000 square foot area requirement and also meets the minimum lot width of 85 feet. Each parcel has a minimum of 25 feet of access from a public street. The second lot achieves its access via a"flag lot". While typically a flag lot is not an ideal subdivision pattern, there is adequate room on the remainder of the parcel for a cul-de-sac should the parcel change use at a later date, and additional right-of-way could be dedicated to the east of the easterly lot line and a public street could be constructed for a future subdivision. Ms. McPherson stated the remaining portion of the subject parcel is for the existing restaurant facility. The lot area exceeds the minimum of 35,000 square feet as required for the C-3, General Shopping Center District. There is not a minimum lot width requirement in the C-3 district, however, there is adequate room on site for the parcel to meet the minimum setback and parking requirements, with the exception of the two existing encroachments on the southwest corner of the property for the restaurant facility. Ms. McPherson stated a portion of the restaurant's parking lot and access does encroach onto the multiple family lot as �, proposed. Cross parking and access easements will need to be recorded against both the proposed restaurant property as well as the proposed multiple dwelling property. �, PLANNINQ COMMISBION MEETING. AIIGIIBT 11, 1993 PAGE 3 Ms. McPherson stated that as part of the overall plat request, the petitioner is proposing to improve the parking lot and provide the required B618 concrete curb and gutter as required by City Code. A landscaping plan should be submitted by the petitioner to provide adequate screening and buffering between the restaurant facility and the proposed multi-unit buildings. A detention facility will also be required as part of the parking lot upgrade. The Engineering Department will require the petitioner to sign and record against the property a storm water pond maintenance agreement. The Engineering Department has reviewed the preliminary grading plan and has submitted a list of comments via the surveyor to the petitioner. Ms. McPherson stated that as the plat request meets the minimum requirements of each of the zoning districts, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request to the City Council with the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall submit the information requested in Scott Erickson's letter dated July 16, 1993, regarding the stormwater pond and the grading and drainage plan. 2. The petitioner shall record against proposed Lots 2 and � 3, Block 1, Tam Addition, cross parking and access easements. 3. The petitioner shall submit a landscaping plan. 4. The petitioner shall execute and record against the property a stormwater pond maintenance agreement. 5. The park dedication shall be $1,500 per lot for the residential portion and $.023 per square foot for the remaining portion for the restaurant facility. (shall be paid at the time of the issuing of the building permit - for residential) Mr. Newman stated that access to the flag lot would really be through the parking lot and that the residential property would have to negotiate parking spaces with the restaurant property. Has the City ever done anything like this before? Ms. McPherson stated that typically most of the cross parking easements have ocaurred between two aommercial properties or two industrial properties. In reviewing this request, the City Assessor suggested that perhaps the flag could be rotated so that the flag portion is on the westerly side, and the access would then occur over the driveway for the other multiple family dwelling. Then, the back yard of the second multiple family �"'�, dwelling would be facing the restaurant facility. However, that eliminates the potential for any future subdivision and public roadway. n PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEETING. AIIGIIST 11. 1993 PAGE 4 Mr. Kondrick stated that when the restaurant is having a successful evening, the possibility exists that there will be times when there are no parking spaces for the multiple family dwellings. Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner is proposing a four stall garage. If that is a concern, the owner can post a sign reserving the first four stalls for additional parking. That has been done for commercial developments. Mr. Newman stated that if, in fact, the multiple family property is under separate ownership from the restaurant property, then how is the City going to get the additional 25 feet to put in the public roadway. Ms. Dacy stated that in answer to that concern, as part of the plat request, they should reserve a 25 foot street easement along the entire length of the flag to reserve that option. Maybe the following two stipulations should be added in the event the restaurant property should ever return to residential: 6. If the restaurant property returns to a residential use, the parking lot encroachment is removed from these two properties. 7. The dedication of the street easement Mr. Oliver Tam stated he is the owner of the Rice Bowl Restaurant. He stated he is very appreciative of staff's ideas and suggestions to make the lot work for everyone involved. Mr. Kondrick asked if the petitioner agreed with the stipulations recommended by staff. Mr. Tam stated he had no problems with the stipulations. Mr. Newman asked if the petitioner understood that the City may require a 25 foot street easement. Mr. Tam stated he had no objection to that, whatever works best for the property. Ms. Joyce Trebisovsky, 1130 Fireside Drive N.E., stated she represents Park Plaza Mobile Home Park and Estate Mobile Home Park. Her only concern is that if the parking lot is expanded to the right side of the property, there should be some type of barrier so the lights do not shine into the mobile home park. Mr. Newman stated that, at this time, there is no proposal to move the parking lot. If in the future, the owner decides to �� replat the restaurant property and break it into residential lots, then at that time a public street would go in. However, in all likelihood the parking lot would also go away. If any of � � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 11, 1993 PADE 5 this happens, there would be another public hearing, notices would be sent out, and this process would repeat itself. Ms. Trebisovsky thanked Mr. Newman for this clarification. Mr. Saba stated he did not think it is a good situation to have a cross parking easement between commercial and residential. Ms. McPherson stated the proposed multi-family units are not intended to be the typical general occupancy units. They are for Mr. Tam's family and employees of the Rice Bowl, and he will be the owner of both the properties. Ms. Modig stated that is fine for the present time; but if, in the future, Mr. Tam sells the property, then there is a parking lot situation with a cross parking easement and two pieces of property under separate ownership. Ms. Dacy stated there have been instances on commercial properties where signs reserving parking spaces are successful. The Code requires eight parking spaces for each multi-family dwelling unit, and they already have four garage spaces. That leaves only four spaces that are needed, and she believed those spaces can be reserved. She did not see a big conflict with the cross parking easement. Ms. Modig stated the only times she could see the parking being a problem is during private parties or large events at the restaurant. Ms. Dacy stated that if the Commission feels strongly about this, then one solution would be to flipflop the flag to the west side of the property. Mr. Saba stated he could not see a problem with a cross parking easement with commercial/commercial properties, but he did see potential problems with commercial/residential. Ms. Modig stated she did not see a problem now with the proposed usage of the multiple family units by Mr. Tam's family members. Her concern is for the future. If the property is sold and the new owners do not want the cross parking easement, does the City have to get involved? Ms. Dacy stated staff is recommending that the cross parking easement be executed as part of the plat approval. If there are any changes, then both owners would have to agree to that. Ms. Dacy stated that in looking at the plat, there might be enough area on site to create a little pad for four parking spaces on each lot separate from the commercial property. Staff � could work with the petitioner on this. � � �� PLANNINa CONIIdiISSION MEETING. AIIGIIBT 11, 1993 PAGE 6 MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to close the public hearing. IIPOld A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIN(� AYL, CBAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PQHLIC HEARING CLOBED AT 8:00 P.M. Mr. Newman stated staff has done the best they can with some undesirable choices. He did not particularly like the cross parking easement, but he did think that keeping the flag on the east side of the property preserves some options for the future. There might be some problems with the cross parking easement in the future, but those are the types of issues that are better left resolved by the property owners. In the cases of redevelopment, there are going to be some problems in working around existing structures. He stated he is comfortable with approving the plat with the stipulations as recommended by staff, with the addition of a stipulation to vacate the street easement and to terminate the cross parking easement upon change in use of restaurant or discontinuation of use of the lot. Mr. Saba stated he is not comfortable with the cross parking easement. It is a good situation now, but what about the future? What if the restaurant changes to a night club, and there are even more cars in the parking lot? He would like to see something else worked out with the parking. Ms. Modig stated that she did not have a problem with the flag lot. She would like to figure out something to do with the cross parking easement if it becomes a problem in the future without having to go through this whole process again. Ms. Dacy asked if the Commission members would like staff to explore the possibility of finding a separate area for eight spaces other than on the commercial lot. Ms. Modig stated she is just concerned about the cross parking becoming an issue in the future, and it may never be an issue. Mr. Sielaff stated that if it is possible, he would like to see the parking kept on the residential lots to prevent any future parking problems. Mr. Kondrick stated he would also be in favor of the present configuration with access into the lots with eight parking spaces on the residential lots. Mr. ATewman stated he had no problem with that, except that would mean blacktopping more area of the overall site to put in eight more stalls. Ms. Modig stated she would be comfortable with trying to put eight parking spaces on the residential lots. PLANNING COMMI88ION MEETING. AIIGIIST il. 1993 PAGE 7 ^ MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend approval of preliminary plat, P.S. #93-03, by Oliver Tam, Tam Addition, to replat property described as that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 30, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the east line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 distant 726 feet southerly of the northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12; thence westerly along a line which, if extended, would intersect the west line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 at a point distant 726 feet southerly of the northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the North�est Quarter of said Section 12, a distance of 661.45 feet to the actual point of beginning of the land to be described, thence continuing westerly along said last described line a distance of 288 feet; thence northerly a distance of 396 feet; thence easterly at a right angle a distance of 288 feet; thence southerly at a right angle a distance of 396 feet to the point of beginning. This property is generally located at 1160 Fireside Drive N.E., with the following stipulations: � 1. The petitioner shall submit the information requested in Scott Erickson's letter dated July 16, 1993, regarding the stormwater pond and the grading and drainage plan. 2. The petitioner shall record against proposed Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Tam Addition, cross parking and access easements. 3. 4. The petitioner shall submit a landscaping plan. The petitioner shall execute and record against the property a stormwater pond maintenance agreement. 5. The park dedication shall be $1,500 per lot for the residential portion and $.023 per square foot for the remaining portion for the restaurant facility. Payment of the park dedication fee for the residential properties shall be paid at the time of the issuance of the building permit. 6. 7. A 25 foot street easement shall be dedicated on the easterly portion of the flag lot for a future road. Staff shall work with the petitioner to provide eight parking spaces within both residential lots. Mr. Newman stated that although he would vote in favor of the motion, he did not think they need to require this additional �"�, parking. However, it is a good approach to a difficult situation. P_LANNINa COMMI88ION MEETING. AIIGIIBT 11. 1993 PAQE 8 ^ IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED T8E MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING ZOA #93-01 BY OLIVER TAM: To rezone property from C-3, General Shopping Center to R-3, General Multiple Dwelling on property described as that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 30, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the east line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 distant 726 feet southerly of the northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12; thence westerly along a line which, if extended, would intersect the west line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 at a point distant 726 feet southerly of the northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12, a distance of 661.45 feet to the actual point of beginning of the land to be described, thence continuing westerly along said last described line a distance of 288 feet; thence northerly a distance of 396 feet; thence easterly at a right angle a distance of 288 feet; thence southerly at a right angle a distance of 396 feet to the point of beginning. This property is generally located at 1160 Fireside Drive N.E. MOT ON by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE POBLIC HEARINa OPEN AT 8:15 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated that currently, the two dwelling units are located on the same parcel as the restaurant. These dwelling units are currently nonconforming as residential uses are not permitted in the C-3, General Shopping Center District. In order to allow the petitioner to even upgrade the existing dwellings or construct new ones as he is proposing, the property needs to be rezoned from C-3, General Shopping Center District, to R-3, General Multiple Dwelling. Ms. McPherson stated the rezoning request only pertains to the proposed lots for the multiple family dwelling units. The remaining parcel will remain C-3, General Shopping Center District. Ms. McPherson stated three criteria need to be evaluated in analyzing any rezoning request: 1. District compatibility with adjacent uses and zoning � 2. District intent PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEBTING AIIQIIST 11, 1993 PAaE 9 � 3. Whether or not the parcel meets the district requirements Ms. McPherson stated that as discussed earlier during the plat request, the proposed lots under the subdivision ordinance meet the minimum requirements of the R-3, General Multiple Dwelling District. Also, the proposed use of the two lots for multiple family dwelling units is also consistent with the purpose of the R-3, General Multiple Dwelling District, which is to provide zoning for multiple family, two family, and single family dwellings. Ms. McPherson stated the adjacent properties are zoned R-4, Mobile Home Park, so rezoning the two properties to R-3 would not have an adverse impact on the R-4 residential zoning. Ms. McPherson stated that as the request meets the criteria for evaluation of a rezoning request, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the rezoning request with one stipulation: 1. Preliminary plat request, P.S. #93-03, shall be approved. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public � hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWM�iN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC BEARING CL08ED AT 8s20 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend to City Council approval of rezoning, ZOA #93-01, by Oliver Tam, to rezone property from C-3, General Shopping Center to R-3, General Multiple Dwelling on property described as that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 30, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the east line of the ATorthwest Quarter of said Section 12 distant 726 feet southerly of the northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12; thence westerly along a line which, if extended, would intersect the west line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 at a point distant 726 feet southerly of the northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12, a distance of 661.45 feet to the actual point of beginning of the land to be described, thence continuing westerly along said last described line a distance of 288 feet; thence northerly a distance of 396 feet; thence easterly at a right angle a distance of 288 feet; thence southerly at a right angle a distance of 396 feet to the point of beginning. This property is generally located at 1160 Fireside Drive N.E., with the following �"'� stipulation: PLANNING COMMISBION MEETING� AIIGIIST 11. 1993 PAaE 10 ^ 1. Preliminary plat request, P.S. #93-03, shall be approved. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINa AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. Ms. McPherson stated the City Council will conduct a public hearing for the preliminary plat and rezoning requests on September 27, 1993. 3. SAV #93-03. BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY: To vacate all easements as donated and dedicated to the public for drainage and utility purposes and as shown on the recorded plat of Shorewood Plaza, as corrected by Surveyor's Certificate files as Document No. 176792. All in Anoka County, Minnesota. This property is generally located at the intersection of Highway 65 and East Moore Lake Drive between Highway 65 and Central Avenue. The subject parcels include the East and West Moore Lake Shopping Centers, the Northwest Racquet Swim and Health Club, and Sears Outlet. � Ms. McPherson stated the Planning Commission recently reviewed a plat request by the City of Fridley to replat the Shorewood Plaza plat which was approved by the City in 1987. New easements for utility, drainage, and bikeway/walkway purposes are to be dedicated on the new revised plat. In order to avoid any confusion, staff is suggesting that the existing easements which are not being utilized by the utilities or various bikeway/ walkways be vacated prior to recording the plat with its associated easements. A number of utilities constructed within this development were not located within the easements as they were dedicated. The City is ensuring that appropriate easements are being dedicated over those utilities to provide proper access for the City. Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of this vacation request. Staff will ensure that the vacation ordinance is recorded prior to the recording of the new plat. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to recommend to City Council approval of SAV #93-03, by the City of Fridley to vacate all easements as donated and dedicated to the public for drainage and utility purposes and as shown on the recorded plat of Shorewood Plaza, as corrected by Surveyor's Certificate files as Document No. 176792. All in Anoka County, Minnesota. � This property is generally located at the intersection of Highway 65 and East Moore Lake Drive between Highway 65 and Central Avenue. �'� i'� r"1 PLANNING COMMI88ION MEETING, AIIaIIBT 11, 1993 PAGE 11 The subject parcels include the East and West Moore Lake Shopping Centers, the Northwest Racquet Swim and Health Club, and Sears Outlet. IIPON A VOICE DOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERBON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. 4. RECEIVE_JULY 8, 1993. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the July 8, 1993, iiousing & Redevelopment Authority minutes. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIN(�i AYE, CBAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 5. RECEIVE JULY 27. 1993. APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES• OTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to receive the July 27, 1993, Appeals Commission minutes. IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWM�N DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting declared the motion carried unanimously Planning Commission meeting adjourned at Respectfully submitted, Ly Saba Recording Secretary Saba, to adjourn the aye, Chairperson Newman and the August il, 1993, 8:30 p.m.