Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 06191984 Meeting Sheet i 101925 Box: 21 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1984 Document: PL MINUTES 06191984 f _ t i CITY OF ST. A14THONY • PLANNING . COMMISSION MINUTES June 19 , 1984 1The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 P .M. by Chairman Zawislak. _2 3Present for roll call: Jones ,. Bowerman, Zawislak, Franzese, Bjorklund, 4 Hansen, and Wagner. 5 6Also present: David Childs , City Manager 7 814otion by Commissioner Franzese and seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund 9to approveas submitted the minutes for the Planning Commission meet- - l0ing held May 15, 1984. 11 12Motion carried unanimously. 13 14Commissioner Wagner will report- the June 19th Commission minutes to the 15Council at their June 26th meeting. 16 17The Chairman explained the procedure which would be followed that even- 18ing in conducting the public hearings listed on the agenda. 19 20At 7: 35 P.M. , he opened the hearing on the request from Mike McGinn 21 to subdivide without platting and the variance necessary for a lot 22width less than the 75 feet required by the City Zoning Ordinance, for 23Lot 9 , Block 4 , Moundsview Acres . 24 25The Chairman read the notice of the hearing which had been published 26June 6th and mailed to all property owners of record within 350 feet of 27the subject property . No one present reported failure to receive the 28notice or objected to its content. _ 29 30Because the land description of the .two 62 . 25 feet wide by 296 feet 311ong lots which would result from the split would be simple and uncom- 32plicated, Mr. Childs anticipates the County wouldn' t require the property 33to be platted. The Manager reiterated that a precedent for this type 340f lot split had been established in the Mounds View Acres area, 35including the- adjoining property. 37The applicant said he had gone to all the homes in the 4000 block of 38Fordham Drive and gotten the signatures on a document favoring the 'lot 39split and variance . Mr. McGinn assured the Commission members that 40all other setbacks .would be in conformance with the City Ordinance, 41except the width which the ordinance requires would be 75 feet wide. 42 43Walter Bochnack, ' who owns the lots to the rear of the subject property, 44was present and indicated. he ..would not oppose the lot split as proposed. •. 45He was asked whether he planned to develop that property and the - response 46wa,s-. th.at "there was a problem, in that he didn' t own the property in 47th'e middle" . Mr. Bochnack was urged by the Commissioners to work with 48staff to see if some method -of ;developing the lots he owns couldn't 49be worked out. t -2- 1 Mr. McGinn was accompanied to the meeting :by .two neighbors who chose 2 not to. speak on the request. The Manager indicated receiving no calls 3 on the request and the hearing was closed at 7 : 45 P.M. for Commission 4 consideration. 5 s 6 Motion by Commissioner. Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Jones to 7 recommend Council approval of the request from Mike McGinn, 4021 Fordham ttI 8 Drive, to. subdivide without .platting, Lot 9 , . Block 4 , Mounds View Acres 9 (.described as- 4017 Fordham Drive).- .into two single family residential " 10 lots , approximately 62 . 25 feet wide by 296 feet in length, totalling 11 18, 400 square feet. each, and to .grant the necessary variance to the City ; 12 Zoning Ordinance which requires a minimum lot width of 75 feet, finding f; 13 that: 14 ' 15 1. No opposition -to the request_was' demonstrated at either the May- 15th 6_+ 16 or- June 19th considerations or through .communications with City, staff - -- 17 - - - - - - 18 2 The applicant'-had _secured the :signatures, of� his-1neighbors :on a docu-. 19 Pentwhich indicated approval of the proposed lot split and variance. 20 21 3. The unique physical attributes of this property and the adjoining 22 lots , as well as the fact that the property to rear remain un- 23 developed along with the fact that a precedent for similar lot 24 splits exist in. Mounds View Acres and on the adjoining properties 25 where quality homes have- been constructed by the applicant. 26 �27 4. Platting the property would be expensive and cumbersome. i.:. 6, 28 29 Motion carried unanimously. 30 31 At 7: 53 P.M. , the Chairman read the notice of the hearing to consider 32 a petition from. Mike Pribula, 3.570 Buchanan Street N.E. , to allow the 33 construction of a 36 foot wide single family home on the. 50 foot wide 34 by 125 foot long vacant lot at 3231 Roosevelt Street N.E. , which would 35 require. a. one foot sideyard variance to the City Ordinance requirement 36 for 15 foot sideyard setbacks . The notice had been published June 6th 37 and mailed to all property owners of record within 200 feet of the 38 subject property. No one present reported failure to receive the notice 39 or objected to its content. 40 41 Mr. Childs confirmed that the lot is a vacant lot of record which is con- 42 sidered by the City to. be buildable under Section 12 , Subd. 1. 2 of the —__..4.3__ Zoning--Ordinance,.—The-manager- reported receiving no_objections to the 44 request, except a call from the neighbor- to the south who felt much -45 better when she learned of the 10 ' setback on the south side and that 46 the garage would also be on the north side. Mr. Pribula indicated he 47 was building the home for his own use . 48 49 The sideyard setbacks would -be 10 feet on the south, leaving 15 feet 50 between houses, and- 4 feet on the north, leaving 19 feet between houses, 51 according to Mr. Pribula who indicated there is- a house across the 052 street very similar to the one he wants to build. He also told the Com- 53 missioners that the existing trees on his property would not interfere 54 with. his constructing the home as he proposed. Mr. Childs indicated the 55 proposed -structure would -be in .alignment with the homes on each side 56 which are approximately 25 and 22 feet from their front property lines . s .i -3- • 1 There was no one present to speak either for or against the proposal, 2 and the Chairman closed the hearing'. at 8 :02 P.M. , for- the Commission 3 consideration and action. 4 5 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund - and .seconded by Commissioner Jones to 6 recommend the Council grant a one foot sideyard- setback variance which 7 would allow Mike Pribula to construct the single family dwelling he 8 proposes on the vacant lot -at 3231 Roosevelt Street N.E. , finding that: 9 10 1. The proponent had developed a proposal which would conform to the 11 wishes. of . his neighbor to the south related to the placement of 12 his garage. 13 " 14 2. There was no other opposition. from adjoining property owners . 15 16 3. Several lots and homes of. the same size have been developed on that 17 street. 18 19 4. The unique characteristics of this lot with the extended -shape and 20 no street address would appear' to constitute a hardship for the 21 applicant to construct his home according, to the Ordinance requirements. 22 23 Motion carried unanimously. 24 25 At 8 : 07 P.M. , Chairman Zawislak. opened the hearing to consider a petition 26 from Edwin and- Alyce Brown for a variance to the City Zoning Ordinance • 27 requirements which would allow them to reconstruct their home at 2702 28 33rd Avenue N.E. ,: which- was severely damaged in the April tornado, with 29 an entryway whichwould be two feet - closer to Belden Drive than its 30 existing distance of 14 . 2 feet. He read the notice which had been 31 publishdd. June 6th. and mailed to all adjoining property owners of 32 record within 20.0_ feet of the subject property . No -one present reported 33 failure to receive thatnotice or objected to its content and the 34 Manager reported- receiving. no objections to the request. 35 36 Gary Brown, 1317 -Hillside Circle, Chaska, MN, who had accompanied his 37 parents , to the meeting, -presented -their request, saying they wanted to 38 replace. the old'entryway- with another which would be two feet longer 39 and which. would not be so steep. The Manager confirmed .that this would 40 require a two foot variance from the setbacks established when the ' home 41 was built long before Belden- Drive was constructed. In his June 15th 42 memorandum, Dir. Childs had recommended the variance be approved per- 43_ceiving that the existing=corner lot which is only 42_. 2 feet wide could 44 not accommodate a standard size house, anyway, and .said there are 45 several other substandard lots -and homes in ' the same block which were 46 also grandfathered in with the City Zoning Ordinance. 47 48 The applicants '. son assured Commissioner Jones that the existing driveway 49 ended at the front door and .tha.t there- would- be no objections to having 50 it removed if there was a concern that it might be - used to drive around - - 51 the house. The new garage fronts on Belden, he added. • 52 53 Commissioner Jones indicated he perceives the reconstructed home would 54 be a real asset to the neighborhood and he believes this to be just 55 another instance of where the extra setback size required for corner 56 lots is not necessary. -4- 1 P4otion by Commissioner Franzese: -and seconded by Commissioner Jones to 2 recommend the Council grant a two- foot sideyard setback variance to the 3 City Zoning requirement- for corner . lbts to Edwin and Alyce Brown, which 4 would allow them to reconstruct their single family, home at 2702 - 33rd 5 Avenue N.E. , to within 12 . 2 feet of their property line on Belden Drive 6 finding that: 7 8 1 . The existing lot and building prceded the 1973 Zoning Ordinance and 9 the construction of Belden Drive. 10 11 2 . Many of the .homes . and lots inthe same block are as small as the 12 Brown's . 13 14 3. The applicants would suff.er. a hardship if they are forced to replace .15 the steep entryway on their existing home. 16 17 4 . There was no. demonstration of opposition to the request from the 18 neighbors . 19 20 Motion carried unanimously. 21 22 Motion by Commissioner Franzese and seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund 23 to remove .the. consideration''of - the request for signage for the St. 24 .Anthony Court Homeowners Association from the table . 25 26 Motion carried unanimously. `27 28 In his June 15th -memorandum., the -Manager' had recommended that in place 29 of the two signs. the City had permitted to identify the townhomes over 30 the winter months , a single two-sided sign would be allowed on the 31 existing berm north of. the main entrance, which Mr. Childs perceived 32 would better meet the intent of the Sign Ordinance and adequately 33 identify the property . Because of the close P .U.D. tie-in with the 34 signage. on the -barber shop next door, the Manager had referred to that 35 signage as another issue which- could affect the decision on the town- 36 home signage . He read aloud. the letters he sent to Craig Morris May 21st 37 and June 7th., urging him to be in attendance at the hearing which would 38 be held. at 8: 30. P.M. that evening. There had been no response_ to 39 either request that Por. Morris bring in plans for a permanent sign to 40 replace the temporary sign in -front of. his shop which had been damaged 41 by the tornado. and the Manager suggested the discussion of the St. 42 Anthony Court signage be deferred until after 8: 30 P.M. _43--_ -- — - 44 Motion by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund to 45 move the agenda. to item 7A. 46 r 47 Motion carried unanimously . 48 49 At 8 : 22 P.M'. , the hearing was . opened to consider the request from Reverend 50 Joseph-.A. Valtinson, :Jr. , Pastor of Elmwood Lutheran' Church, for place- 51 ment of a 12 foot X 65 foot mobile home on the north end of the church • 52 property at 3615 Chelmsford Road. N.E. , which -could be utilized. as 53 temporary Sunday School classrooms- during the time, not to exceed three '! 54 years, �during which time the congregation would be -conducting a drive 55 to raise. $95 ,000 with which to construct a sanctuary/classroom addition 56 on that `side of .the existing church structure. The notice of the hearing 1 S 5- 1 which had been published June 6th, -and mailed to all property owners of 2 record within 200 feet of the subject property, was read by Chairman 3 Zawislak. No one .present reported failure to receive the notice or 4 objected to its content. . Copies'.of the petition request for the 5 temporary structure and the explanation .of- the church 's proposal had 6 been included in the Commission packet along. with a copy of the May 24th 7 letter from Erling M. Weiberg, spokesman for the group of neighbors who 8 had participated in the previous planning for an addition on the south 9 side of the church, indicating that the neighbors were in favor of the 10 church -being permitted to utilize the trailer for classrooms until the 11 northern addition could be built. 12 I" 13 In his June 15th memorandum, .Mr. Childs had recommended approval for a 14 period of three years on the condition the trailer is skirted and tied 15 down. He also .indicated the- church -representatives had agreed to place 16 the mobile home ten feet from their building to meet the fire code. 17 Por. Childs indicated there had been-- no calls about the request. 18 19 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he .perceived this request did not 20 differ much from schools.. who. erect similar structures to accommodate 21 classes whilef they wait to see whether their student population would 22 go down. Commissioner Jones indicated he was not in favor of granting 23 ,permission. for the interim addition for as' long as three years , per- 24 ceiving the. church should know-whether they would be able to build the 25 structure within two years , and., at that time, they could request an 26 extension of their permit until the addition is up. Commissioner Wagner •27 was concerned that the structure would be sturdily constructed and , 28 suggested it might not be. needed .until October. 29 30 Reverend Valtinson indicated the church would be renting- space in the 31 Wilshire school building- for 100 pupils this summer but said it was 32 difficult to get the little ones to the school in the winter . He i 33 indicated there would be no plumbing in the structure and said some 34 of th.e church Council members had not been too impressed with the trailer 35 the church had first considered which had been used by Control Data 36 for business purposes . 37 38 Donald Esau -and Larry Antczak., 3505 and 3501 - 36th Avenue N.E. , the 39 neighbors who live closest to- the church, were present and Mr. Esau 40 indicated he was speaking on behalf of Mr. Weiberg who had been unable 41 to attend. He reiterated that .all the neighbors on 36th Avenue and 42 Mr. Hastay on Chelmsford had been contacted and all supported the new _4.3_plans_of the_chur_ch__and their-request-f.or-a--s-tr-uctur-e=to-use-as tempora-r-y 44 classrooms until. the new addition - is completed. He` said, since the 45 meetings on the south. addition, communications had been kept open between 46 the church. and the neighbors and, although, there was still some concern 47 about the slope of the land between the church and the neighbors ' pro- 48 perties , the church. had been keeping that area mowed this summer. He 49 attributed the change in feelings between the parties to the efforts of 50 the. City Council, staff, and Planning- Commission: Mr. Esau also 51 confirmed that none of the neighbors were against permitting the church �52 to use the mobile home. for three years . 53 54 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he believed two winters should be 55 enough. -and that staff should be authorized to veto any structure which -6- • 1 does not meet the standards of that residential neibhborhood. Com- 2 missioner Bowerman said he agreed that some restrictions had to be put 3 ,-on the request, but. did not believe the Church should. be forced to 4 undertake a $95 , 000 project sooner than. is fiscally. responsible . Com- 5 missioner Franzese said she recognized that the church should be able 6 to keep the trailer long enough to make it worth their cost and would 7 also be in favor of not imposing stringent conditions on the approval . k, 8 The Chairman indicated he was puzzled that, now that the neighbors were 9 in accord with the church.' s plans, the Planning Commission was the 10 party in opposition. . He sided-with the neighbors , believing the City 11 should let them work things out with the church. 12 `3 13 Commissioner Jones said he -could foresee many problems arising from the -i 14 use of the trailer which the neighbors might not see at this point. He 15 wanted the City Fire Marshall ' to check- out the facilities before so. 16 many children .ar.e permitted to use them and wanted assurance the exterior 17 ofthe structure would be well maintained while it was in use , which 18 Commissioner Bowerman questioned the City could force , citing several 19 instances of poor maintenance the City has not been able to control. 20 21 Reverend Valtinson indicated the congregation's concern for the welfare �. 22 of the children would prompt them to have a fire inspection made. He I 23 said the church would need to have the new classrooms in place early 24 in August so preparations could be made before the fall sessions began. 25 26 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Jones to 927 recommend the Council grant a variance to the Elmwood Lutheran Church I; 28 which would allow them to install a mobile home to be used for class- 29 rooms, to the north of .their existing church at 3615 Chelmsford Road 30 N.E., August, 1984 , fora period not to exceed two years , with provision 31 for the extension of that permit subject to the review and determination 32 of the City staff. In .recommending that . the variance be granted, the 33 Planning Commission finds that: 34 35 1. A proposed church addition to the existing church building, which 36 meets the. approval of the neibhbors , is in the planning stages, and 37 that project is the reason the temporary structure is needed. 38 39 2 • The temporary structure would be in an area where it could not be 40 easily seen. 41 42 3. There was no opposition to the proposal but was instead supported 43 in writing_bythe nei'ghborhood__spokesman_and__in_p-ers.on_by the—two-_ _ -44 closest neighbors . 45 46 4 . A precedent for allow such structures had been established in the 47 City prior to this request. 48 49 Motion .carried unanimously. 50 51 Commissioner Bjorklund questioned whether the propane tank in front of a �52 the American Monarch- building on 37th Avenue N.E. could pose a hazard 53 for .the residents across the street in the event another destructive 54 wind passes through the City. Mr. 'Childs indicated he would check with 55 the Fire- Department about the possibility, although he is certain they 56 know the tank is . there. i -7- 1 7-1 At 8 : 35 P.M. , the hearing on the St. Anthony Court signage was resumed 2 with Mr. .Morris having failed to make an appearance. Chester Krumm, 3 President of the Homeowners Association:, had resubmitted the application 4 for the two signs they were allowed over the winter with his May 24th 5 letter to which he had attached a rendering of the .Pine Cone Nursery 6 in Coon Rapids , illustrating the landscaping and plantings which would 7 be bermed up in such a manner that the legs of the existing signs would 8 be concealed. 9 10 Mr. Krumm .and another Homeowners Association member, Edward T. Mattson, 11 reiterated that they perceived 'the signs were important to distinguish ' 12 their driveway from- the Silver Lake Road and to prevent vehicles coming 13 from Apache. from-. driving. right into their property or making U turns 14 off Silver Lake Road on the driveway. . Their property needs to be 15 identified as private property from both directions on- Silver Lake Road, 16 Mr. Mattson said. Mr. Krumm also told the Commission the townhome 17 owners were also considering barricading the northern entrance to their 18 property because of the number of cars and semis who drive on their €� 19 roadway and break down the curbs . L 20 21 Commissioner Jones noted there is a street named Silver Lake Court not 22 too far away and he wondered if maybe the use of "court" on the sign 23 ("St. Anthony Court")_ might have contributed to the confusion. Com- 24 missioner Franzese suggested the Manager might contact Ramsey County I 25 to see if .signage could not be put up in front of the townhomes 26 prohibiting U turns. •27 28 Commissioner B.jotklund indicated. he recognized the homeowners' need to 29 identify their property but told them he considered the signs that were 30 up now to be cheap and not of the same quality or appearance as is 31 required by the City ' s Sign Ordinance. He cited several instances of 32 commercial signs which. more closely matched the type of construction 33 St. Anthony prides itself .as; demanding. 34 35 Commissioner B.jorkl.und indicated he had heard that the owner of the 36 barber shop at 3909 Silver Lake Road was going to sell his business and 37 he wanted the City to take, immediate action regarding the signage for 38 that business which was damaged in the recent storm because he believes 39 Mr. Hedlund still owns that parcel. The Commissioner believes one good 40 quality sign, for the townhomes should be the only identification sign 41 permitted for bothproperties in accordance with the P .U.D. 42 ____4.3__Commssioner Wagner questioned the value of signs which were probably__ 44 covered with snow most of the last winter. Mr. Mattson .indicated he 45 believed the:-berming be about 22 to 25 inches above present- ground level. 46 Mr. Krumm said the snow storage had been somewhat of a problem with the 47 exceptional snows we had .this winter, but the homeowners had kept them 48 pretty well plowed out, he added. x 49 50 Commissioner Franzese indicated she saw no need for two. signs and agreed 51 the quality of the signage should be improved over what' is there now. •52 53 Commissioner .Wagner. said .'he.would rather see one well designed sign x 54 ..replace the two signs that are in. front of the townhomes now. 55 -8- 1 Commissioner Bowermanhad no .objections to two signs as long as they are 2 easy to read from both directions . He hated to see the City put undue 3 restrictions on the signage which. the Association might not be able to 4 afford. 5 6 Commissioner Jones said he would .make a motion to expedite matters but 7 still believed two signs were needed to define the townhome location. 8 However, he would be willing to put off a final decision until staff 9 has had an opportunity- to work with the Association representatives on 10 signage which would meet the criteria set in the Sign Ordinance. 11 12 The Chair indicated he would also like to' see. staff meet with the 13 app-licants to get a better sign and he liked the idea of having the 14 County sign .the road in front of the townhomes to alleviate some_ of the 15 problems the owners have - said they have . 16 17 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he wanted to protect the interests of 18 the neighbors in that area who .had toiled away so many years to get a 19 suitable project for that property. 20 21 Commissioner Hansen said he would prefer one sign which could be well 22 designed so it could be seen -from both directions on Silver Lake Road. 23 He suggested that if .only one sign were developed, the money invested 24 in two signs could be applied to even better landscaping than proposed. 25 He wondered .if a "V" shaped sign might be- more effective and opposed 26 voting on a motion without assurance. that the .quality of the signage • 27 would be improved. 28 29 Motion by Commissioner Jones- and seconded by Commissioner Franzese to 30 recommend the Council grant the St. Anthony Court Homeowners Association 31 a variance to the Sign Ordinance which would allow them two signs to 32 identify their property, -which would be 10 square feet each, and to 33 recommend -the City staff work with the Association representatives on 34 the final plans for the signs which should be ground hugging; well 35 landscaped, as proposed; and of substantial materials to conform to 36 the quality of the construction of,- the townhomes . 37 38 Voting on the motion: 39 40 Aye: Jones and Bowerman. 41 42 Nay : Bjorklund, Zawislak, Franzese, Wagner, and Hansen. _ __4.3____ - - - 44 Motion not carried. 45 46 Motion by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund to 47 table action on the variance request for 30 days to give staff sufficient 48 time to work with. the townhouse representatives to develop adequate , 49 but quality signage to identify their property and (to recommend) the 50 homeowners be granted an additional 6-0 days to use the existing signs 51 while .the new signage is being developed. � 52 53 Motion carried unanimously . 54 55 . . -9- • 1 The discussion of the Morris sign resumed with Commissioner Bowerman 2 saying it was definite in his mind that the Craig Morris sign was 3 .intended to be only temporary in nature and that it was permitted in 4 lieu of permanent signage for the rest of the P.U.D. project, when, or 5 if, such a project was. developed for the rest of the Hedlund property 6 along Silver Lake Road. The Commissioner stated further that the Morris 7 sign didn' t come anywhere close. to the criteria set for a commercial 8 business. 9 10 Motion by Commissioner Franzese ' and seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund 11 to recommend the Manager be authorized to follow the course of action 12 stated in his June 7th letter to Mr. Morris if the barber shop pro- 13 prietor fails to take down. the sign which is in violation of the 14 ordinance . (within 30 days) staff be directed to remove it, after con- 15 sulting with the City Attorney. 16 ' 17 Motion carried unanimously. �. 18 19 There were four proposals listed in the agenda for which the Commissioners F 20 were asked to give concept reviewal and recommendations to the proponents . 21 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he believed four at one meeting were 22 too many, especially .in view of the number of hearings which had been 23 scheduled for the same evening. Mr . Childs said he would keep that 24 in mind in the future. ' 25 26 The first was a request from Mr. and Mrs . Eugene DeKanick, 3109 Wilson FF 27 Street N.E. for some direction regarding their proposal to expand their • t. 28 dining area on the south. side of their home out two feet at the same time 29 they construct a three season porch. on the back of .the house on the 30 same side, which would require no 'variance from the City. - Mr. DeKanick 31 indicated they wanted a .larger- dining room to accommodate large family 32 dinners and he could not see why his neighbor to the south objected to 33 the expansion because the dining room only faces the neighbors ' garage. 34 This neighbor was the only one who did -not sign the letter of approval 35 he took around the neighborhood, Mr. DeKanick said. Mr. Childs had 36 verified in his June 15th memorandum on the request that the neighbor 37 in question had strongly objected. to their proposal to come within 3 38 feet of the property line. 39 40 The Commissioners were polled for their preliminary reaction to the 41 proposal. 42 X4.3 Commiss.ioner.s_Hans.enand Wagner-had-no-objections-to the-propos-al - 44 45 Commissioner Bjorklund said he had walked between the. properties at 46 3109. and 3107 and perceived it was a tight fit in that area and that 47 the expansion might be considered a privacy encroachment and could make 48 access -between the houses difficult. He p.erceived.' there no real hard- 49 ship but only an inconvenience for the applicant if the request is denied. 50 51Commissioner Franzese believed the Commission should seriously consider •52 the neighbors ' objections and perceived the applicant had not satis- 53factorily addressed the three conditions under which such a variance can 54 be granted. 55 -10- - • 1 Chairman Zawislak had also seen for himself that the new addition would 2 face only the neighbors ' garage and . suggested that the neighbor might i 3 be encouraged ,to change his/h.er, :mirid. 4 5 Commissioner Jones believed the neighbors ' objections should be taken 6 seriously by the Commission. :; 7 �+ 8 Commissioner Bowerman said he hadnot experienced the same sense of 9 tightness .when he walked .between the homes in question. He pointed out 10 that the porch which cuts down somewhat on the neighbors ' recreational 11 area in the backyard can be -built without coming to the City at all and 12 the diningroom addition -would only y protrude into the area which faces 13 a garage wall. 14 k 15 In his June 15th memorandum, . the Manager had advised that the City 16 Ordinance does not address a business like Bumper Boats , which Dale 17 Broberg, 3336 Arthur Street N..E.. , is 'proposing he would install some- 18 where in the Apache Plaza complex. He explained how the activity would 6' 19 be run in the letter included in the agenda packet along with pictures 20 of a similar operation in another locale. 21 22 The Commission reaction was mostly negative. 23 24 Commissioner Bjorklund - doesn' t .belong in a community like St. Anthony, 25 better suited to an amusement park. 26 g •27 Commissioner. Hansen - probably become a hangout, possibility of a gas , 28 hazard. 29 30 Commissioner Wagner - . agreed not for St. Anthony, better in larger 31 amusement area. 32 33 Commissioner Franzese - would detract from image of a successful retail 34 center which. Apache hopes to create with the 35 rebuilding. 36 37 Commissioner Zawislak - foresees objections from the elderly residents 38 in Heights Manor on Stinson Boulevard. 39 40 Commissioner Jones —probably not addressed in the City Ordinance because 41 not perceived to be an appropriate use for a 42 community like St. Anthony. - 4.3 --- -- - r 44 Commissioner Bowerman - wouldn' t. vote for, for the same reasons . 45 f; 46 There was unanimous agreement that Gary Dooner, 2920 Silver Lake Court, a 47 would not .need .a variance for -all but one of the additions he proposes .x 48 to construct since the Commission interpretation is that the east side g 49 setback should not be interpreted as a street side, which would require 50 30 feet. The neighbors have all indicated they would not oppose the 51 12 foot- front .yard protrusion because it is at the end of the street •52 and would provide a barrier -for .them from theSilverLake Road noises 53 and because the average front. yard setback- in the area is, much less than 54 30 feet. 55 s V /1 -11... 1 Walter Sentyrz , 260.9 California Street N.E. , was also told there would • 2 be no Commission opposition to his proposal to place a 62 foot wide 3 home on the 75 . foot wide vacant lot on Highcrest, just north of 4 33rd Avenue N.E. , as long as there is. no neighbor opposition. The 5 proposal would require a. 2 foot si.deyard variance to the Ordinance 6 requirement for 15 foot sideyard setbacks , but- the Commission noted 7 there would be 19 feet between homes on one side and 14 feet on 'the 8 other and that the home could be. expected to be of high quality since 9 the, design had won three Reggie Awards- in the Parade of Homes . 10 11 Commissioner Bjorklund .said he had noticed there was another "night 12 crawler for sale" sign- which had been up for a few -months at 3106 13 33rd Avenue N.E. The Manager indicated the young person who had 14 erected the' sign understood it could only be there on a temporary 15 basis . 16 17 Mr. Childs told Commissioner Franzese the bank had allowed Arkell to 18 go ahead with the construction of the Kenzington with 40 percent of 19 the units sold. He said the decision regarding the 202 project would m 20 be made some time in September and he showed the Commissioners the 21 plans for a 32 unit development on the Walbon property at 33rd and 22 Highcrest, which the neighbors seemed to like. 23 24 Motion by Commissioner. Bowerman and seconded by Commissioner Wagner 25 to adjourn the meeting at 10 : 29 P.M. 2.6 27 Motion carried unanimously. : 28 29 30 Respectfully submitted, 31 32 Helen Crowe, Secretary 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 4-3 — --- - - 44 45 46 47 48 ° 49 50 51 • 52 53 54 55 .