Loading...
PL SUBCOM 03/15/1973 - 31135, � z `! �`, ,` � \ � . CITY OF FRIDLEY PLATS & SUBDIVISIONS- STREETS & UTILITIES SUBCONH�IITTEE MEETING MARCH 15, 1973 PAGE 1 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Schmedeke called the meeting to order at 7:15 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Schmedeke, French, Meissner Members Absent: Engdahl, Fo�ster O��a�rs Present: Darrel Clark, Community Development Administrator APPROVE PLATS & SUBDIVISIONS - STREETS & UTILITTES MINUTES: FEBRUARY 28, 1973: MOTION by French, seconded by Meissner, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities minutes of February 28, 1973 be approved as written. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 1. _--CONT�NUED..�- VgGA�ION_REQ�IE�T SA� �T3:--64, �Y`W��E--SIN�ONEAU: u�c�te " =5Z2 Ave�u� between Lots 10 through 16, City View Addition, and 6th and 7th Street N.E, Mr. Wayne Simoneau and Mr. Marvin Hartse were present. MOTION by French, seconded by Meissner, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee waive the reading of the Informal Public Hearing notice for vacation request, SAV ��73-04, £or the vacation of two streets and an alley in Block 32, Hyde Park Addition. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Schmedeke said this item had been continued from the February 28, 1973 meeting because when this vacation request was received, it was noted by the Subcommaittee that there was an alley and a street in this same area that had never been used and should be considered for vacation. The Public Hearing notice was sent to everyone within 300 feet of this areas being considered for vacation. Mr. Sclamedeke asked if there was anyone in the audience that objected to the closing of the North/South alley in Block 32, Hyde Park Addition. Mrs. Cecil Marler, who owns Lots 3, 4 and 5, said she had no objection. Mr. Clark said the only other person affection would be Carl Sorenson, who owns Lots 1 and 2, and Lot 10 was a tax.forfeit lot. These lots are all in Block 32, Hyde Park Addition. Mr. Clark said if this alley was vacated, the City should reta.in a 12 foot utility easement. Mr. Schmedeke asked if there were any objections to closing 58th Avenue between 5th and 6th Street on the North side of Block 32, Hyde Park Addition, which was a proposed street in an old plat. / _ . Plats & Subs.-Streets & Utilities Subco�mittee Meeting-March 15, 1973 Page 2 Mr. Clark said half the street had been vacated when Bonny Addition was platted. Half the street was left in Hyde Park, and this is what we are considering for vacation now. Mr. Schmedeke asked if there were any utilities in this street. Mr. Clark said there weren't. There were no objections to this vacation from the audience. Mr. Schmedeke said the next vacation to be considered was 57� Avenue between 6th and 7th Streets on the South side of Block 32, Hyde Park Addition. Mr. Schmedeke asked if there were utilities in this street. Mr. Clark said th�re was a water main five feet South of the North line of 572 Avenue. Mr. Schmedeke asked the administrations recommendation on this vacation. Mr. Clark said he had talked to Mr. Qureshi who recommended that this street should not be vacated unless we open Sth Street to extend to 57th Avenue. This street should be held for possible opening for traffic. Mr. Simoneau said his only need for having this street vacated W�S for a back yard. He said if there were valid reasons not to vacate the street, he would agree with them. Mr. Clark said that once we vacate the street, and then the City decides we need it, the City would have to buy the property back. Mr. Simoneau said he'd rather not put the City through that process. Mr. Clark said Mr. Simoneau had received permission from the Council to fence in this street because it got to be a catch-all and wasn't maintained. Mr. Simoneau said he has made it a part of his yard and that's why he had requested the vacation. Mrs. Marler asked if they would be taking part of her yard if the street was put in. Mr. Clark said that they generally only needed a 30 foot street in areas like this. If the City couldn't get any more right of way, or if no right of way was available, we could put in a narrow street, but there would be no parking on it. Mrs. Marler asked if she would be accessed:-for the street. Mr. Clark said the cost was pro-rated half way down the block, but she would have some assessment. He said there would be a Public Hearing before the decision was made to open the street. - �;_ � MOTION by French, seconded by Meissner, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee close the Public Hearing on vacation request, 4�'73-04, by Wayne Simoneau. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Schmedeke said there seemed to be no objection to the closing of the alley or vacating 58th Avenue. Mr. Meissner asked if there was�an�r.�pneference between opening 572 Avenue or in extending 5th Street. Mr. Clark said the traffic would probably be closer to the homes if 5th Street was extended. Mr. Schmedeke said if one or the other was going to be opened, 57� Avenue is the one to open. Plats & Subs.-Streets & Util. Subcommittee Meet�ng - March 15, 1973 Page 3 MOTION by French, seconded by Meissner, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee recommend to the Planning Commission vacation of the North/South alley between 57� Avenue and 58th Avenue Northeast, Block 32, Hyde Park Addition. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Meissner, seconded by French, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee recommend to the Planning Commission, vacation of all that part of 58th Avenue Northeast between 6th and 7th Streets Northeast, North of Block 32, Hyde Park Addition. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Schmedeke said he would like to refer the request for vacation of 57� Avenue to the City Council, and let them decide if they want this street opened or closed. Mr. Clark said that normally the Council waits until someone requests the street be opened, but obviously as this s��ee� fis o� no value to people living in the area, no one w�uld request this. If action is going to be �stitiafed;-it will hav� to be initiated'by the Cduncil. MOTION by French, seconded by Meissner, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee recammend to the Planning Commission denial of the vacation request, SAV �73-04, by Wayne Simoneau, to vacate all that part of 572 Avenue between 6th and 7th Streets Northeast, South of Block 32, Hyde Park Addition, and retain the right of way on 57� Avenue and request Council to consider the possible opening of the street. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 2. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT: P.S. �73-03, MICH,AEL SERVETUS I�ITARIAN SOCIETY: A replat of Lot 8, Second Revision Auditor's Subdivision _ No. 21, except that part taken by the City. Mr. Glenn Thompson and Mr. Wyman Smith were present. Mr. Darrel Clark said at one time the Church owned all of Lot 8. In 1970, they negotiated with the City, and the City purchased about half of their property for Meadowlands Park. They have enough land to provide eight 72 foot building sites or six 96 foot building sites. There is about 35 feet between the church's property line and a drainage ditch in the park. They could negotiate with the City to obtain 12 feet from the park a�ea, so the eight lots could be 75 feet wide, which would meet the ordinance require- ments. What we disagree on is that the City would like to have Oakley and 67th Avenue connected by a road. If the church was willing to give up land for this road, it would help the traffic flow and the drainage could be picked up at one low point and brought to the drainage ditch in the park. The church would like to have a cul-de-sac on the extension of Oakley Drive and a cul-de-' sac on the extension of 67th Avenue. If the cul-de-sac plan is approved, it means having two conduits which will have to be connected by a pipe: I think if the church would consider connecting Oakley Drive to 67th Avenue there wouldn't be much of a problem in getting the 12 foot from the park to make the lots 75 feet. I don't think the plat hinges on this however. Mr. Meissner asked what happens to the land to the South of the building sites. Mr. Clark the church and its parking lot are in this area. Plats & Subs.-Streets & Util. Subcommittee Meeting - March 15, 1973 Page 4 Mr. Schmedeke said this is similar to the Bayer request. Either there are eight lots under the ordinance requirement to six lots that are quite large. If the petitioner can negotiate with the City for the 12 feet then eight 75 foot lots would be satisfactory to the Subcommittee. Mr. Glenn Thompson said the City had obtained about half of what the church had owned, in an amicable arrangement, for the park. The church does not want Oakley Drive and 67th Avenue connected. We feel this would create a hot rod route. With this proposal we can get eight marketable sites back on the tax roles. If we contributed land for the connection of the two streets, we wQuld� be contributing four or five times as much land as we would get back for the 12 foot strip. Mr. Thompson continued that they would much prefer to contribute the land for cul-de-sacs and purchase the land for the 12 foot strip. We do not want to plat this into six 96 foot sites as 75 foot sites are much more marketable. Mr. French asked if all that land needed for the cul-de-sacs would be contributed by the church. Mr. Clark said a little of the cul-de-sac on Oakley would come from the park. Mr. Wyman Smith said that if the City feels strongly about the streets being connected, we could delay the platting on 67th Avenue. We feel quite strongly that we don't want the two streets connected. Mr. Clark said you have had a lot of vandalism. Maybe a car driving by onee in awfiile might help with this problem. Mr. Smith said they have had 30 cases of vandalism in the last two years. We thought if we had houses facing the church, this would help the vandalism';�roblem. Mr. Clark said that from a development standpoint, people do like to live on dead-end streets. Mr. Schmedeke said as he understands this proposal, if the cul-de-sac plan is approved, they would need two storm drains. Mr. Clark an�Aered if the storm sewer had to be put in conduit and there are two cul-de-sacs, then there has to be two pipes, one from each end. If the streets were connected then you could have just one collection point. Mr. Schmedeke asked who paid for the storm sewer. Mr. Clark said a small system is usually asse�s�d`irith the street cost. Mr. Schmedeke said if there was no problem in piping the drainage into the park, the storm sewer wouldn't have to be put in. Mr. Clark said that when the water runs into the ditch in the park, if it should cause a problem when the park is developed, they they would have to put in two storm drains connected with a 200 foot pipe. Mr. French said he was in favor of the cul�-de-sac plan. Mr. Schmedeke said the cul-de-sac on Oakley Drive would give an entrance to the park and a turn around area for the snow plow. Mr. Clark said he didn't believe there were plans for the park at the present time so if its a street or a cul-de-sac, it wouldn't make any difference as far as the park is concerned. Plats & Subs -Streets & Util. Subcommittee Mee�ing - March 15, 1973 Page 5 Mr. Schmedeke said he would be in favor of the plat if the petitioner ' can obtain the 12 foot strip from the City to make standard size lots. Mr. Clark said if they do obtain this 12 foot strip, the City should retain a 10 foot slope easement because this lan.d would be higher than the park. Mr. Schmedeke asked what the recommendation should be for the size of the cul-de-sacs. Mr. Clark said the normal radius on cul-de-sacs is 50 feet. Mr. Schmedeke said we should probably ask for a larger cul-de-sac on Oakley Drive. Mr. French said he thought an additional 10 feet would be sufficient. Mr. Clark said that would make a 60 foot radius. Mr. Meissner said the storm sewer is not part of this proposal but will have to be considered. Mr. Clark said it will be part of the development of this property. Mr. Meissner asked what plan we are con�idering. Mr. Clark said the administration plan shows the road being connected between Oakley Drive and 67th Avenue, and the church's plan is to have cul-de-sacs on Oakley Drive and 67th Avenue. It is up to the Subcommittee to recommend the plan they prefer. Mr. Schmedeke said he has always felt we should listen to the petitioner first, the neigh�or's,second, and administration last. If we feel the petition's plan has merit, this is what we should consider. Mr. Thompson said the church would have Ao objection to both cul-de- sacs being 60 feet in radius. Mr. Meissner asked if.75 foot lots would fit into this area. Mr. Clark said all the lots in the area were 75 feet and larger. Mr. Smith said we think the alternative of 96 foot lots would make them over-sized lots. Mr. Smith said they weren't asking the City for the 12 feet. They were willing to negotiate for this strip. MOTION by Meissner, seconded by French, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee recommend to the Planning Coumnission approval of the proposed preliminary plat, P.S: ��73-03, by Michael Servetus Unitarian Society, a replat of Lot 8, Second Revision Auditor's Subdivision No.21, except that part taken by the City, contingent upon the petitioner negotiating with the City for a 12 feet strip from the park, a 10 foot slope easement being retained on this strip, to provide eight 75 foot building sites, or else it be platte� into six 96 foot sites, and also approve a cul-de-sac on Oakley Drive with a 60 foot radius and a 50 foot radius cul-de-sac on 67th �venue. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanTmously. 3. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT: P.S. #73-04, VEIT'S SECOND ADDITION: BY LONDA ENGLUND: A replat of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 23, except that part taken by Veit's First Addition. Londa Englund was present. Plats & Subs.-Streets & Util. Subcommittee Meeting - March 15, 1973 Page 6_ Mr. Clark asked the Snbcommittee to .�Look at a map br�unde�d by East River Rd, 63'� Way, b�' Way and Riverview Terrace. He said that quite a few years ago, in 1961 or 1962, when Eva Erickson Riverwood Manor was platted to the South, we held hearings with the people who had lived in the area for a long time, to the North, which have heu�es that are quite far off East R�ver Road, and yet have driveway access to East River Road, directly. In the platting of Eva Erickson Riverwood Man.or, we made room for a possible 40 foot street going between Lots 3 and 4 to give access to the North up to 64th, a street that would more or less para11e1 Bast River Road. This would give the houses that presently face East River Road a different access. The petitioner owns Lot 15 and this proposal has one lot that would interfere with this plan. If the plat is approved as proposed, it would cut off the access to 64th Way. The easement for the road in Eva Erickson Riverview Manor will expire June 6, 1976. It will then become void if the City does not exercise its option for the right of way. We have sent out notices as late as 1970, and the people in the area have expressed no desire to split their property, or have a street run between 632 Way and 64th, just West of East River Road. Just recently there has been a change made by the improvement of East River Road, in that a median will be put in from 632 Way to Mississippi Street and the driveways will be cut off in�the North bound lane. Mr. Clark said the proposed plat is zoned R-1, and while S�et 1 is a large lot, it is only 63 feet in the North/South dimension, and it would be almost impossible to build a house on this lot under the present re- quirements, even without having a street running through it. Londa Englund said they don't have any plans for Lot 1. Mr. Veit wants to have this platted so he will be able to dispose of the property. Mr. Schmedeke asked how much would be left of this lot if it had a street easement going through the middle of it. Mr. Clark said there would be two lots with approximately 7500 square feet each. Mr. & Mrs. Dale Axiderson, 135 63� Way N.E., said that the median on East River Road was already going to generate more traffic on their street and they both oppose the opening of the street. Mr. Clyde Ford, 6410 East River Road, said the land is already there for the road, at least the easement is there. At the time this was developed, they told me they were giving me a street, but it never materialized. Mr. Clark said that what he w'as given was the opportunity to petition for a street if you want it. Mr. Carl Humble, 147 63� Way N.E., said he was against the opening of the road. Mr. Clark said there is no opening on this proposed plat for a road. Mr. Meissner said the whole question is would any of the property owners along the proposed road to the North, want to petition for the road between now and 1976. If so, should we retain some additional easement on this plat. Plats & Subs.-Streets & Util. Subcommittee Meeting - March 15, 1973 Page 7 Mr. Clark said even if the people express no desire for the road tonight, I think we ought to hold that possibility open and make all of Lot 1 an outlot, and hold it until the street p��posal expires in 1976, or plat Lot 1 into two 16ts, with a street easement between the two lots. If it is an outlot, it could be �ombined with other property, so it could be usable. Mr. Ford said he would like to see the street put in up to his property, anywa�. Mr. Herlin Johnson, 231 63� Way N.E., said he was against the opening of the road. Mr. Ford said he wasn't against the plat. He said he would like to see more development in this area. Londa Englund said the petitioner is against the road going through. Mr. Ronald Gorski, 111 63� Way N.E., said he was against the street proposal. Mr. Walter Luckow, 161 642 Way N.E., said he approved the plat if the area stayed R-1. Mr. Schmedeke said he didn't think the Subcommittee should make any decision on opening or closing this road. It would be better to leave it in limbo. Mr. Clark said it would have to be decided by June of 1976. MOT�ON h� Meissner, seconded by French, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets and Utilities Subcommittee recommend to the Planning Commission approval of the proposed preliminary plat. P:S. �73-04, Veit's Second Addition, by Londa Englund, a replat of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 23, except that part taken for Veit's First Addition, with the provision that Lot 1 be made an outlot and red tagged and not be allowed to have any construc�ion on it until the street proposal is determined by Council to approve or disapprove or expires in 1976. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 4. CONTINUED: PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT, P.S. �73-01, BY RUDOLPH BAYER: A replat of Lots 12, 1� and 14, Block 1, Spring Lake Park Lakeside. Mr. Schmedeke said he was surprised -14Ir. Bayer=�c�as�.'t <present. _• Mr. Clark said even if Mr. Bayer isn't here, I think you should make your recommendation the way you feel because this does come up before the Planning Commission next week. If you approve 72 foot lots on this plat, there are three property owners on the other side of McKinley who will want to do the same. I am not saying this is good or bad, but this is what will happen. I can see Mr. Bayer�s viewpoint and I can see the Subcom��ttee's viewgaint. Mr. Schmedeke said he thought they should not approve lots that are below the ordinance requirement and make the same recommendation they made when Mr. Bayer was present. Plats & Subs.-Streets & Util. Subcommnittee Meeting - March 15, 1973 Page 8 Mr. Meissner said he didn't dou�t that Mr. Bayer could build homes on a 72 foot lot, but these still did not meet the minimum requirements. Mr. Clark said the lots did exceed the square footage requirements. Mr. Meissner said he didn't think 90 foot lots.were all that large. Mr. French said he didn't think they were huge either, they would just be a nice size. MOTION by Meissner, seconded by French, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets and Utilities Subcommittee reco�nend to the Planning Commission approval of the proposed preliminary plat, �73-01, by Rudolph Bayer, a replat of Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 1, Spring Lake Park Lakeside, with the stipulations that the five 72 foot lots on McKinley Street be platted into four �p foot lots, and the twenty fee� t� the South of the plat on Lakeside be included in the plat as an outlot. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 6. DESIGNATION OF .9 MILES OF STATE AID ROADS Mr. Clark said if you are wondering why we are designating State Aid Roads it is as our total mileage increases, our State Aid increases. We are allowed to designate 20�/ of our total mileage to State Aid Roads. The advantage of having State Aid Roads are that we collect money to improve the roads and when they are improved, we get money to maintain them. We met with the District Engineer and they gave us their priorities. The first priority was the extension of Main to Osborne and Osborne Road and 79th. The second and third priority was to connect Rice Creek Terrace and Osborne Road about in line with Jackson and Monroe. We felt this would have too much impact on Locke Park. We would not want to see a bridge built over Rice Creek. Without a park in the area_; this would be a logical place for a road. The fourth priority was a cambination of Ly�ic Lane and Madison. �'he fifth priority was the extension of 7th Street up to Rice Creek Terrace. The sixth was 63rd and Monroe and the seventh priority was Arthur Street. We have talked it over at staff level and our number one priority would be a combination of 63rd and Monroe, and Arthur Street. Both these streets will have to be improved next year. Mr. Meissner asked what the criteria was the State used in making their selections. Mr. Clark said you have to connect two State Highways, or a State Highway and a County Aid Street, or two Municipal State Aid Streets, or a combination of any of these. Mr. French said he lived in the general area of Arthur Street, and they were having growing pains in this area. Mr. Clark said the more State �id Streets we have in the vicinity of Mississippi and Arthur, the better the chances were of the City collecting more storm sewer money. The State pays a good percentage of the cost of a State Aid route, such as curb, mat and drainage facilities, Plats & Subs -Streets & Util Subcommittee Meetin� - March 15. 1973 Page 9 Mr. Meissner felt that Sth Street should be considered for State Aid, and it would meet the requirements. Mr. Clark said 5th Street will be put in when the Reidel property is developed. Mr. Schmedeke said he thought this was the best one to recou�end. Mr. Clark said they should make their reco�nendation,'giving choices on what they recommended. MOTION by Meissner, seconded by French, that the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee recommend to the Planning Coumnission, their recommendation for designation of State Aid Roads as follows: First choice: �_ 5th sereet, and 63rd & Monroe. Second choice: 63rd & Monroe, and Arthur Street Third choice: Main Street, combined with any of the other three. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Clark said he would try and get in touch with District 5 before the Planning Commission meeting to find out their feelings on the 5th Street proposal. Mr. Clark said it is in our best interest to collect as much money as we can from the State on streets we know we will be improving. Mr. Meissner asked if we didn't dedicate the streets, who would get the money. Mr. Clark said it would divided among the communities requesting State Aid. So if we din't request State Aid, the money would go to other communities. The money comes from the gasoline tax. Chairman Schmedeke said he thought this would be his last meeting with the Subcommittee and he wanted to thank the other members for their cooperation and said he had enjoyed working with them. Chairman Schmedeke adjourned the meeting at 10:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, � Dorothy E nson, Secretary r------- ;----- ----- --� - � ��� � - �.- -- - _—L ------- �`!l . � / � 3 T �� � '' � / � C7 _ %ln" r �/!�%�! �c.!__ 1.L r /" ' _ – — � --- --- , �°� �l�%Gr2,.� - S-7_�_� -_7 —_ �7, � �'� ^_—�� �-��- �� �. --- -- ��c2 �� - --- �- ---- -------- _ �------ ---------- - -- _ -- , ---- �-----___ ., �- - , --- ----- .� , � � �ti �'_--_ iri - � 3_iz��--��� -- -- ------ - �a3 ��� �� �� --- ---- --- ,, � _ -----��o o _ /�i�� ._ �.,/��%=-�- _ ----- - -- ,^ � $ 4 i - 6� �--, N� _ -- ��.�- S � �- 1 _� ,_ , y_� �_ _� � �s �, �,� -�..� _� - ,�l ,� G� �- /" T/� ��• /C��� C� ` ..�.1� l �� G s � � -A - �,._ 135�-6�� � �� - 1,� � -�� %z� ---�1�_ ��_ � � ����----- �_�� -- �'� , - .