HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 05151984 • S
'f
Meeting Sheet
lisle 1181111. .1.11. 1
101927
r 11
p
i
Box: 21
{
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1984
s
Document: PL MINUTES 05151984
''t
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• May 15, 1984
1 The meeting was called order by Chairman Zawislak, having been delayed until the
2 school board election polls had closed.
3
4 Present for roll call : Zawislak, Franzese, Bjorklund, Bowerman and Hansen.
5
6 Absent: Wagner and Jones (arrived at 8:05 p.m. )
7
8 Also present: David _Childs, City Manager.
9
10 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Franzese to approve
11 as submitted the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held April 17, 1984.
12
13 Motion carried unanimously.
14
15 Mr. Hansen will report the May 15 Commission minutes to the Council at their
16 May 22 meeting.
17
18 The Chairman explained the procedure which would be followed in conducting the
19 public hearings scheduled for that evening.
• 20
21 At 8:01 p.m. he opened the, public hearing on the request from KFC, Inc. for a
22 conditional use permit which would allow them to remodel their existing Kentucky
23 Fried Chicken Restaurant at 2520 Kenzie Terrace, as proposed, including the
24 addition of a 7 foot by. 16 foot 8 inch vestibule-on the front and to move the
25 six parking stalls to the rear of the building back to the property line which
26 would eliminate the 20 foot grassy strip now located in that area.
27
28 Chairman Zawislak read the notice of the hearing which had gone out to all
29 adjacent property owners within 250 feet of the subject property and the Manager
30 said he had received no calls or letters in response to the notice. No one
31 present reported failure to receive the notice or objected to its content.
32
33 In his May 1.1 memorandum, Mr. Childs had explained that a conditional permit was
34 necessary for the expansion because the restaurant is within 250 feet of a
35 residential zone or structure. He said the proposed parking changes would not
36 be in conformance with the City Ordinance which requires a 20 foot setback from
37 the property line. However, the 15 parking spaces proposed would meet the
38 ordinance requirements for a restaurant which seats 24. The Manager said he
39 had not researched the original permit for the restaurant and wasn't certain
40 whether a variance would be necessary for the proposed parking changes.
41
42 Jurij Ozga, Construction Supervisor for the KFC National Management Company-, .and
43 a man he identified as the KFC area manager, were present and Mr. Ozga told the
44 Commission memebers KFC is upgrading all its restaurants in much the same manner
• 45 as proposed for the St. Anthony facilities. The construction supervisor told of
46 the improvement which would be made which he anticipates would make the restaurant
47 more efficient and aesthetically pleasing than it is at the present. He told'
- 2 -
1 Commissioner Bjorklund other KFC restaurants with a seating of 40 would normally
• 2 have between 16 to 20 parking spaces provided. Because they just lease the land,
3 Mr. Ozga said he wasn't sure whether there was any provision for shared parking
4 spaces in the center.
5
6 Glen Gavick, 2605 1 owry Avenue N.E., whose property abuts the grassy strip which
7 separates his side yard and the existing parking area indicated he would strongly
8 oppose the removal of that strip and "putting cars almost into my front room".
9 He told of the problems he experiences now with parked cars with radios blasting
10 and of the litter from the restaurant which blows onto his lawn. He said the
11 restaurant was there when he built his home, but wouldn't want the parking any
12 closer than it is now.
13
14 Mr. Gavick said he had come not to make trouble for the restaurant owners, but
15 just to see 'if something couldn't be worked out. to. reduce the annoyances he
16 experiences. He showed on the blackboard just where his house was situated in
17 relation to the restaurant and told the Commissioners that he had put in the
18 fence and shrubbery which partially shield his home from the restaurant activities.
19 The homeowner indicated he had mowed the grass strip for the last seven years and
20 intended to.continue to do so in the future.
21
22 Mr. Ozga responded by saying the restaurant owners were most anxious to have a
23 good relationship with ,the-neighbors and would be willing to leave the green
24 strip and modify their parking plans, if necessary. He also said KFC would be
25 cleaning up the restaurant grounds and would be putting up a fence to protect
26 the neighbor's properties. Mr. Gavick responded by _saying, "Sounds good to me".
• 27
28 The hearing was closed at 8:25 p.m. for Commission consideration of a recommenda-
29 tion to the Council.
30
31 It was noted that other neighbors had consistently parked their family vehicles
32 on the restaurant property and a fence might free up that space for restaurant
33 parking. Mr. Ozga told Commissioner Franzese the yard light indicated on the
34 site plans would be directed downward and would not illuminate the adjacent
35 properties and are on an automatic timer.
36
37 Motion by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Bowerman to recommend
38 the Council grant a conditional use permit to KFC, Inc. which would allow them
39 to make the exterior and landscaping improvements, including the addition.of a
40 7 foot by 16 foot, 8 inch front vestibule to their existing restaurant as proposed
41 in the site and landscaping plans presented at the May 15, 1984 hearing on their
42 proposal , contingent upon their constructing a substantial , opaque 5 or 6 foot
43 fence along the east boundary of- their property and along the rear lot line to
44 connect with an existing fence, in the rear and to the rear of their building. .
45 The Commission further directs that the permit should be made contingent upon
46 the i.nformation staff is able to research regarding a possible parking variance
47 when the building was originally approved and the approval of the construction
48 plans by the land owner of the shopping center where the restaurant is located.
49
50 In recommending approval of the permit the Commission finds that:
51
•
52 1. Granting the permit would reduce the existing nuisance to the adjacent single
53 family properties in the forms of noise, litter, view and casual parking.
54
55 2. No opposition was expressed to the motion,. as developed, from the adjacent
- 3
1 neighbor or any one else.
• 2
3 Motion carried unanimously.
4
5 At 8:40 p.m. , the Chairman opened the public hearing on the request to rezone
6 the property at 3631 Harding Street N.E. , from R-1 (single family residence) to
7 R-2 (two family residence) and for the lot size and width variances necessary
8 to construct the proposed duplex on that site. He read 'the notice of the
9 hearing which had gone out to all property owners within 350 feet of the subject
10 property and none of the 14 persons present reported failure to receive the
11 notice or objected "Co its content. The Manager indicated he had received only
12 two calls related to the proposal , both in opposition.
13
14 The Commission had, at their last meeting, unanimously given conceptual approval
15 to.the Krueger proposal subject to the approval of the neighbors, perceiving
16 that the proposed structure had been so well designed that it would be hard to
17 distinguish from other single family dwellings and it would be built next to
18 another duplex.
19
20 In his May 11 memorandum, the Manager had reiterated that, in addition to
21 rezoning the property a variance would be required, since the lot is 10,400
2 2 square feet where the Ordinance requires 12,000 square feet, and is only 80
23 feet wide, where a width of 85 is required. He had also informed the Commission
24 that the adjacent property owner, Harvey Herzog, 3627 Harding Street N.E. had
25 changed his mind about the proposal , which he now opposes.
26
2 7 The eight people who spoke all indicated they were opposed to rezoning the
28 Krueger property for rental property, primarily because of the bad experiences
29 they had with the tenants and maintenance of a duplex in the neighborhood.
30 They told various stories of problems with the large number of cars parked
31 outside the duplex all the time, the transient tenants who showed little
32 consideration for the neighbors in their living habits which -made the residence '
33 a general nuisance for the neighborhood, .and. downgraded the property of the
34 other residents.
35
36 Mae Gerard, 3621 Harding Street N.E., said when she had complained about the
37 uncut grass she had been told by the City it had to be ten inches tall before
38 they would do anything about it.. She and Carl Jarva, 3632 Harding Street N.E.,
39 questioned why, if the zoning was wrong, the request had gotten to the point of
40 a public hearing. They were told every property owner has the right to make a
41 zoning proposal and the-hearing that evening was the second step in that process
42 which had been set up in the Zoning Ordinance. When Mr. Jarva asked why Mr.
43 Spellman's request for. a duplex a few years ago had gone no further than the
44 concept review, Commissioner Jones told him that, when that applicant for
45 rezoning realized there would be so much neighbor resistance, he had decided
46 not to pursue the matter further, since to do so, would involve. the payment of
47 an application fee for the public hearing which, in this instance, Mr.. Krueger
48 had paid in advance of this hearing.
49
50 Rick Werenicz, 3610 Harding Street N.E.., told Mr. Childs the reason he had gotten
51 so few calls about the proposal had been because Mr. Werenicz had canvassed the
• 52 neighborhood and secured 80 signatures on a petition which "strongly opposed the
53 rezoning proposal which he then read to the Commission. Those signatures
54 represented 56 households along Belden, Coolidge, Edwards, and Harding and Mr.
55 Werenicz said, only four of the 60 he contacted had indicated they would be in
- 4 -
1 favor of the proposal . He also indicated most of those opposing the rezoning
• 2 were especially concerned about the use of the property in the event the pastor
3 is transferred, which could very easily happen.
4
5 Mrs. H. McHugh, 3640 Coolidge Street N.E., said she owns rental property and
6 her experience has been that the tenants ruin the property. She said she is
7 opposed to any type of rental property in St. Anthony. Her sentiments were
8 shared by Jim Mancino, 3626- Harding Street N.E., who said, "tenants are never
9 the same as home owners".
10
11 Commissioner Hansen responded by saying the issue before the Commission should
12 not be renters versus private property owners, but rather, whether or not to
13 rezone the Krueger property as requested. He said the same problems with
14 renters are present when single family homes are rented out in the City and the
15 Chairman commented that he knows a .few home owners who are poor neighbors as
16 well . Commissioner Franzese indicated that she perceived an empty lot would
17 not be an enhancement to the neighborhood either.
18
19 When Elmer Beerman, 3622 Coolidge Street N.E., asked just what control the City
20 had over the conversion of single family property into double occupancy, the
21 Manager said the Ordinance provides for relatives living with families without
22 rezoning, as long as separate cooking facilities are not installed. He also
23 said because of the civil rights issues involved, the ordinance had been
24 rewritten to recognize up to six individuals living in a dwelling as constituting
25 a family.
26
•
27 The hearing was closed at 9:10 p.m.
28
29 The general- consensus of the Commission members was that the neighbor's were
30 not so much opposed to a duplex per se but that their opposition stemmed from
31 their unhappiness with the manner in which another duplex in that neighborhood
32 is maintained and the type of tenants which have come and gone there over the
33 years. Commissioner Jones disputed the impression that all duplexes are
34 maintained so poorly, pointing to several examples in the same area which he
35 believes refute that claim. He suggested the neighbors should report any
36 maintenance, parking, or noise violations to Mr. Childs who is "very accessible",
37 and to the Mayor or Council members who the Commissioner said, are always happy
38 to hear from their constituents. He complimented those present for their
39 vigilance of what is happening in their neighborhood and said it is a rare
40 occurence to have residents avail themselves of their privilege to affect City
41 decisions. The Commissioner said, without their opposition, he perceives the
42 proposal would probably have gone to the Council with the Commission's
43 recommendation for approval , since they had encouraged the applicant to seek
44 a public hearing because his proposal had impressed them so favorably before
45 they knew the neighbors would be opposed to it. Commissioner Bjorklund urged
46 those present to continue that vigilance by attending the May 22 Council meeting
47 where, he said, it is possible that the Council would reverse the Commission
48 recommendation of denial . The Manager indicated that he rather expected the
49 application would be withdrawn once Mr. Krueger learns of the opposition and
50 he promised to let the neighbors know if that- should happen.
51
• 52 Commissioner Franzese said she was prepared to vote for a recommendation of
53 denial but was nevertheless sorry the bad experience with another duplex had.
54 prompted so much opposition to this proposal which she personally believes,
55 would have, produced a well designed home which could have been aesthetically
- 5 -
1 pleasing to the rest of the neighborhood.
• 2
3 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner 'Jones to recommend
4 Council denial of the request from Howard Krueger for rezoning his property at
5 3631 Harding Street N.E., from R-1 (single family dwelling) to .R-2 (two family
6 dwelling) and the accompanying lot size frontage variances, finding that:
7
8 1. There was major and' significant opposition to the proposal from the
9 neighbors during the May 15, 1984 hearing which was reflected in the petition
10 of opposition signed by 80 persons from that area.
11
12 2. The rezoning would be contrary to the City's land use plans for that
13 neighborhood.
14
15 Before the vote was taken, Commissioner Bowerman suggested it might be advisable
16 to refer to the lot size deficiencies to which Commissioner Jones responded that
17 he could not accept that friendly amendment because, even if the lot met all
18 zoning requirements, in the face of all the opposition demonstrated that evening,
19 he would have voted against the request. Commissioner Bowerman withdrew his
20 amendment suggestion.
21
22 Motion carried unanimously.
23
24 The meeting was recessed at 9:15 p.m. and reconvened at 9:20 p.m., for- the public
25 hearing for a variance to the Fence Ordinance which would permit Ken Heibel to
26 construct an 8 foot 1 inch by 4 inch cedar board fence on his property at 3341
•
27 Skycroft Circle.
28
29 Commissioner Bjorklund had left the meeting during the recess.
30
31 In his May 11 memorandum to the Commission on the proposal , Mr. Childs had
. 32 indicated he would recommend approval of the fence variance as requested, but
33 indicated he would have some reservations about allowing the "ornamental"
34 rafters closer than 3 feet from the property line. No objections had been
35 received from the neighbors and Mike Heibel who represented his father at the
36 hearing, indicated the next door neighbor, Maurice Hugill , 3337 Skycroft Circle
37 had voiced no objections to the plan when it was presented to him. He said Mr.
38 Hugill 's garage abuts the fence which divides his property from the Heibel 's
39 and there are no living areas on that side.
40
41 No other person was present to speak for or against the proposal and Mike Heibel
42 said his family had no intention of making a roof out of the rafters, but rather,
43 planned to keep them open for hanging plants, etc. It was also determined that
44 the grade elevations on the Heibel property were lower than the neighbors' - so
45 an eight foot fence would not look strange where proposed. Commissioner Jones
46 indicated his first impression had been that the fence would be constructed
47 right under the eaves of the house, but having been assured the eaves would be
48 at least two feet higher, concluded that an eight foot fence would probably
49 provide- a better balance in appearance than one, two feet shorter. Commissioner
50 Hansen said he agreed, adding that, if the stringers area allowed, the six foot
51 fence would probably be much more objectionable.
• 52
53 Commissioner Franzese was told that, although the same application forms are
54 used for fence variances as are used for other variances, the criteria are. not
55 the .same as for zoning variances.
- 6 -
1 The hearing was closed at 9:50 p.m. (estimated)
2
3 Motion by Commissioner Bowerman and seconded by Commissioner Hansen to
4 recommend to the City Council that they permit Ken Heibel to construct the
5 8 foot fence with an open rafter attachment to his house, as he had proposed,
6 on his property at 3341 Skycroft Circle, recognizing that a two foot variance
7 to the Fence Ordinance requirements would be necessary, but also recommending
8 that the approval be made contingent upon the rafters being not less than 24
9 inches on center and that they never be covered in such a manner as to constitute
10 a roof or shelter.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14 The Commission members gave conceptual approval to the request from Mike
15 McGinn, 4021 Fordham Drive, that he be able to split the 124.5 X 295.9 foot
16 lot at 4017 Fordham Drive he had just purchased into two single family lots
17 each 62.25 X 295.9 feet, even though the frontages would be less than the 75
18 feet required by the Zoning Ordinance. They based their decision on the
19 precedent which had been set for other 62 foot wide lots in the same area as
20 pointed out i.n the May 11 memorandum from Mr. Childs; on the type of homes which
21 would be built and on the fact that no one in the neighborhood had opposed the
22 project when Mr. McGinn had canvassed the neighborhood.
23
24 Commissioner Jones indicated because of the past history of vandalism and
25 problems which resulted in the City police being called to the Equinox
26 Apartment complexes oftener than normal , he was recommending the City Ordinance
27 be modified to require double stalled garages for any future apartment complex
28 garage construction-. The amendment was tailored to give the' City the right to
29 demand that the Equinox garages be rebuilt in a manner which would provide
30 greater security and cut down on the number of police calls which the Commissioner
31 believes ar.e.a result of having four stalls between each fire wall .
32
33 Mot ion by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Bowerman to request
34 the City Ordinance be modified to permit only two stalls per partition.in
35 apartment complexes because of the problems the City has had in the past with
36 open spaced garages.
37
38 Motion carried unanimously.
39
40 The Manager gave an updtate on the tornado damage and the City's actions since
41 that time. He said a reasonable time would have to be given persons whose homes
42 were damaged to clean up their property but eventually the City would have to
43 enforce the ordinances. He said the City is no longer picking up refuse from
44 the streets- and it is now the home owners or contractors responsibility to do so.
45 The Manager.. indicated he would be meeting with the greenhouse owners the next day
46 to find out what they intend to do with their properties.
47
48 The possible redevelopment of the Walbon properties; the criteria set for the
49 City getting Small Business Administration low interest for the -under-insured
50 home and business owners, and Craig Morris' sign were all touched on lightly.
51
• 52 Motion by Commissioner Bowerman and seconded by Commissioner Hansen to adjourn
53 the meeting at 10:12 p.m.
54
55 Motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Helen Crowe, Secretary