Loading...
PL 12/03/1969 - 31032� PI.ANNIN� COMMISSTON MEETING DECEMBER 3, 1969 PAGE 1 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Erickson at 7:33 P.M. ROLL CALL: Plaaning Co�ission: Members Present: Myhra, Mittelstadt, Erickaon, Jensen, Fitzpatrick . Members Absent: None Board of Appeals: Members Present: Mittelstadt, Ahonen, Harris, 0'Bannon, Minish Members Absent: None Others Present: Darrel Clark, Engiaeering A�sistsat � APPROVE PLANNING CONIMISSION MINUTES: NOVEMBER 19, 1969 Chairman Erickson called attention to a typographical error on Page 4, lst line of 2nd paragraph, the word to be corrected to "retarders". MOTION bq Fitzpatrick, seconded by Mittelstadt, that the Planning Com- mission mimmutes of November 19, 1969 be approved as corrected. Upon a voice vote, all votiag aye, the motion carried unanimouslq. RECEIVE BIIILDING STANDARDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOrIIKITTEE MINUTES: NOVEMBER 20, 1969 MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Mittel�tadt, tha� �he P�anraisg Commission receive the minutes of the Building Standards-Desiga Control Subcommittee meeting of November 20, 1969. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carri�ed unanimously. � RECEIVE PARRS & RECREATION COP�lISSION MINUTES: NOVEMBER 24, 1969 MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the Planning Commission receive the minutes of the Parks & RecreaY�ion Commission meeting of November 24, 1969. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried uaanimouely. RECEIVE �ARD OF APPEALS MINUTES: NOVEI�ER 26, 1969 Harris called attention to Page 5, Item 2, stating that the date should �1 be changed from 1917 to 1911. MOTION by Mittelstadt, seconded by Mqhra, that the Board of Appeals Minutes of November 26, 1969 be received as correctec}. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motiaa carr��ed unanimously. . � Plannin� Commission Meetin$ - December 3, 1969 Pa�e 2 1. REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SP ��69°O1) BY NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY CO1wPANY to expand and modernize a classificatioax y�rd begw�en 40th and 43rd Avenues West of Main Street referred to �s Tract "A01 and Txact "B11 (see Public Hearing Notice for full description�. 2. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA ��69-11, NORTHERN PAGIFIC RAILWAY CO.: Property between 40th and 41st Avenues in the vicinity of Grand and California Streets to be rezoned fxom R-1 to M-2 (heavy industrial) for xailroad cl�ssification yard. Russell Thompson, Superintendent of Northern Pacific Railway Comp�y stated that their proposal had been presented to most of the people present. Referring to the recom4nendations of the Bo�rd of Appeals in their minutes of November 26, 1969, the Northern Pacific Railway Company has no ob�ections to the conditions they requested. However, they did feel there was one item of . a debatable nature and this had to do with the property and the fact that mortgages would not be given if the railroad company planned to move the yard closer to the houses. The statement at that time was "no". An investigation n was made and it was found that right now there are no conventional lo� being issued to any great degree probably because of the i�nterest charges and the availability of moneq. There are very few FHA or GI loans being issued. In all cases, the reason is the tight money situation, and if money was available, there would be no trouble getting a mortgage. Mr. Thompson, indicated on the map that Minnesota Silca S�xnd w�s oper��i�a� within 300 feet of a residential area, and the close�t point for Northera P�cific would be 330 feet. The Engineering Assistant reported that he talked to George Brown, City Engineer of Columbia Heights,who said the Northern Pacific request was sent back to the Planning Coffiission which has not discussed the item as yet. Mr. Thompson said they had chan�ed their r�quest somewhat to meet their objections. He added that they are negotiating with Minnesota Silca Sand to purchase their property. Mr. Harris of the Board of Appeals said that he talked with some mortgage companies and received the same information that Mr. Thompson did, namely due to the tight money market, there were hardly any conventional loans being issued on houses and there were only a select few FfiA and GI Toans that were being �iven. It was called to the atteation og the people that the area West of l�in Street is now zoned heavy industri�l. Industries which would be unde�irab�e to have next to residential could be built on top of the bluff which could be far more objectionabie than �he railroad. �' I�r. Denis Bertrand, 4U41 Main 5treet reported that he had consulced three mortgage companies who gave him favorable an�wers regarding obtaining mortg�ges on homes adjacent to a r�ilroad qard. He said, "In aiew of this, I wauld like to retrect mq request that the rezoning be denied". The Planning Commission.told Mr. Bertrand theq appreiea�ed his honesty Q^d t�anked him for sticking with them through all this. T�, P1-annin� Commission Meetin� - December 3, 1969 Fa�e 3 Chairman Erickson checked the mortgage situation explaining what was being planned in this case and was told it probably would not have an adverse effect on a loan. Mr. Robert Pritchard, 852 - 66th Avenue North, said that he builds hoffies some worth $50,000 on land adjacent to railroad tracks and it does not present anq problems, not even in the ca.se of a pole yard; but there are problems if there is a smelly plant in the area. Donald Onstad, 4110 Main Street, N.E., asked where Minnesota Silica Sand would re-locate. Mr. Thompson replied that they are now getting sand from the area close to the residential district, but if the whole parcel was not purchased, they could move closer to Main Street with their plant. The railroad company would put a chain link fence, six feet high, adjacent to the berm prior to the time of blasting for an additional barrier and it would tend to hide the yard. It was suggested that the beran be high enough to hide sighting the yard only and not the view beyond. Mr. Thompson felt they could coordinate their work with what the people in the area actually want in order to have a view that is pleasing and yet hide the yard. A resident said he would want the berm for cushioning of the sound, as far as looks are concerned he did not have any special preference. n Mias Mable Gadbois, 4000 Main Street, asked about the rezoning request. Chairman Eri.ckson explained it was for a small triangle West of her property. Mr. Thompson said a topsoil would be uaed for the berm and would be planted with white clover. The slope would be 1:1, but Mr. Jensen said be did not feel it would be practical for an overburdened area. l�o a3goffipson said they might have to go to 1-1/2:1, and the commentt was that this would be ateeper than the highway freeway. Mr. Thompson also added that they have no later information on retarders. This is a high pitch sound and theq were tryiag to do something with it. As he pointed out before, it does not happen with everq car and the sound could prob�bly be heard at a considerable distance. He�said that the City of Minneapolis designs their highways from the metropolitan areas and tl�us therefore holds the elevation noise down. The houses right on top of High�lay 694 do not hear the roar of the heavy traffic, but when you get out on the end of the highway and it opens, it is more like a megaphone. Mr. Mittelstadt stated that in the City Code, the requirement ia 35 decibals, which ia slightly more than a whisper, and certainlq the railroad companq could not hold to this requirement. He felt thi� table of noise level should be changed. Mr. Thompson explained that the retarder is a metal sotimd asd thit ia why theq were boxing in the retarder area. 'i'hey are not uaed ali the time. He brought a drawing of the retarders to the Planainc Commission ahowing that they are constructed right on the tracko There will be 46 tracks side by side, or six groups and one master, and will fan out going East and �Test. Chairman Erickson read the conditiona requested by the Board of Appeals „� in their minutes of November 26, 1969, on pages 5�nd 6 including the last two ' paragraphs. The Citq Council of Columbia Heights has not acted on the request yet, the Columbia Heights Planning Co�nission recommended des�ial. There has been a change in the request, s� the railroad has withdrawn one half of the requeat to rezone in Columbia Heighta. 'They asked for 3 blocics ataating from . � 40th to a7th and on� �}��.� 1��ea�k W�st of Main Street to California aad the West r'"� Plannin� Commission Meetin� ° December 3, 19b9 Pa�e 4 side of California, and have withdrawn the Easterly portions. That would fairly well tie in with their request here. Eugene Lashinski, 4030 Main Street: He said he was at the meeting in Columbia Heights and as far as he could tell, the Commission was against the whole request. The only way the railroad company could get through would be by court action. The fact is that Columbia Heights is short of land and are trqing to utilize the land the best way it can. The mattex� of bl�stiaag is to be checked with the Mayoro They had a lot of trouble in St. 1°aul when they were going through with the freeway concerning p�operty damagem �e stated he was a resideat of Columbia Heights and a property owner here in Fridley. He asked where this would leave Dunkley after this is finishedo 1Kr. Thompson said he would be out of there, as his operation is right in the middle. Ant�wering the question regarding the development of the land North of Highway ��6949 Mre Thompson stated that eventbaally tlxey may need to expand, but the present facility shouid be good for some time. Robert Minish, Board of Appeals: He e�eplained that he was not at the meeting of November 26, 1969, but attended the other two hearings. His obser- vations were as follows: 1) As far as t�e was informed, there w�s ano evidence of red�nc�d �c�annde Yn fact, ttaere is a pene�sat�n� sc�eech �d �� reco�d�n� �c��Al� demonatrati ng less noise< �.,1 2) The railroad, in texms of haxdship, laas not sho� itc coixld �t build in other areas. They could possibi�g► c��t�°uct �mmo�he� yard furthex beqond Fridl�y. �'hey couid acqufre the homes or whatever is necessary for setback. The reason for the extension of the qard was not shown as being necessary for operation of the Northern Pacific Railway Company in the St�te of Minnesota. - Robert Ahonen, Board of Appeals: There has been a somewhat sad piece of planning taking place. The City Council amended the zoning ordinance for the City of Fridley durin� the per�od of tiffie this _ t�aab��c��t�aa h�� lae�aa t�lcimmg plaee. Unless I am in error, the amended zonin� ordinance doe� no� e�y this item ox those presentlq in process should continue under the old ordinance. I tt►inlc that in the new ordinance the expressed hardship should be �'��d���'e� in �he application. I think we cannot retain with the Board of Appeal� the pri�ttiled�e of granting special uae permits: The n�w zoning ordinance went into effect 1Jov�mber 12th. I ti�ink it would be good, although ineonvenient, to refer this hesring back to the Board of Appeals and have it done in its proper ordere I also haere eome commente_on the maral implications of this request. Mr. 0'Bannan had a�ked an indication of acres that this yard wauld be talking about in the uee of a rail switch yard,and was informed this would take approximately 20 acres. Tassble income from 20 acres would be lar�er than from �he switching yard. What is being asked here is for the City of Fridley to subsidize the state and taxeB will be.given entirely to the State of Minnesota. The Cfty of Fridley ie losing a taxable income and ia in exchange �etting a switching yaxd. The oa�lq thing a switchiag yard briags to any place is a lo� of noise. It would bring busit�ess if it �rere in Isanti or North of Blaine aad allow room for expaneion in the � City of Fridleq and the present switching yard has very little bearin�g wk►ether it ie located here or elsewhere. The charter given to the Board of Appeals ' states that they are appointed to act on behalf of the City of Fridley, not the State of Minnesota. ' (� I � I Planning Coffinission Meetin� - December 3, 1969 Pa�� 5 -The Engineering Assistant explained that the intent of having both the Board of Appeals and the Planning Commission he�r the Northern Pacific Railway requests was to meet both ordinances. Mr. Ahonen a�swered that the requests were taken ou� af order. It should have started out where the Board of Appe�ls acted on the variance and then the Planning Comnni.ssion takes the Special Use Permit. , _ Mr. Myhra, referring to the railroad moving outy said that the � a� ad has been here a long time and it seemed to him �they could not go quite that far. Mr. Minish felt that went beyond what they were doing here. We can Lrake things as they are, but the Board of Appeals is charged with reviewing a hard�hip request. They have not shown a hardship on this particular piece of propertty. Talking in terms of hardship in response they would have to go way far outo In 1911, I presume it was not very.well built up here and this was far out at that time, Miss Mable Gadbois was asked about the area around 1911 and gave an interesting resumee There were two railroad tracks, and as the tracks went up to Silica Sand the tracks widened out. They had a beautiful coaster hill there. That low piece of ground from the railroad tracka to Main Street was covered with several species of Oak trees and it was a good pasture. There were four dairies North of the property to 43rd. They tested for a well and it is 96 feet deep. to the top of the water where she now Lives. There are several layers of rock which you have to drill through. The rock runs diagonally from Silica Sand up to the place where she lives and on into Columbia Heights. There was, at one time, more noise from the railroad yard than there ie aow - she still remembers that bvanping of caxs. Mr. Harris added that at this time there was a fair amount of people living along the railroad tracks. Mr. 0'Bannon, from his own personal experience, stated how much it would improve the transferring of inerchandise from one yard to another and the number of �ays involved. He thought it would be a great asset to the City because industries will build up along side o£ it. In defending the atatement of hardship, Mr. Thompson said that operating coats have been consisteatlq higher, and if the railroad company would have to take the cars to another yard, as at the present time they are adjacent to other railroads,it would be a delay in the delivery of the cars. The fact that theq could not deliver business to the interchanges without considerable �����delay would reallq cause a hardship. Mr. Minish ssid he could see there is a delay in terms of freight, but they were talking about people who livp {*� this area and the inconveni.ence to them. I would tend to wei�h their interests. A member of the sudience asked if anq members on the Boards owned property �-,� in Fridleq that would be affected by action of the xailroad company. There was no oae. I� 0 Planning Gommission M�etin� - December 3, 1969 I'��e 6 The construction schedule as given bq Mrco Thompson, was that they would try to begin construc�ion in the spring;excavation completed by fall; con�truct tracks the°following year, and hope to be in partial operation by the fall of 1971. _°- R.H. Brokopp, Ge�eral Land Agent for the Great Northern �tailway Company � observed that t�te hardehip lies in the fact that there is no room for expansion even.though they are talking about a small parcel of land. �ey �u�t finished a really difficult pro�ect in planning their Great Northem Industrial _Park at Aighway ��694 ancl East River Road. There are 106 acres developed for industrial purposes. Minnesota Plywood is beginning to operate, they still have another 80 acres to go. Beginning with Fridley, it would be possible to get something goin� and create an industrial center. Minnesota Transfer has developed an area where Onan's, Dayton's, and Carter-Day are built now. The yards can only grow as fast as we expand the industriale You would realize this more if you.were in the railroad business. We would like to try to work out the yards so that we can handle the industries that are a part of Fridley. A member of the sudience, who did not give his name, said that he would compromise. His property does not have much weight on this matter, but if they buq Silica Sand and get rid of Dunkley, he would go along with it. � Mr. Mittelstadt said he wanted to comment on the Board of Appeals. He� addreased the audience saying that they could certainly see that the Board n is an excellent group of people. I wanted them here tonight for their co�ents, and specifically Mr. Minish as he wasn't at the last meeting. I want to thank • them verq much fox coming here tonight, every one of them. MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the Planning Commission close the Public Hearing on the rezoning request ZOA 4�69-11, Northern Pacific Railway Company of the property between 40th and 41st Aeenues in the vicinitq of Grand and California Streets to be rezoned from R-1 to M-2 (heavy industrial) for a railroad classification yard; and the reques� for a Special Use Permit (SP 4�69-01) by Northern Pacific Railway Company to expand and modernize a classificatioa yard between 40th and 43rd Avenues West of Main Street referred to as Tract "A" aad Tract "B" (see Putilic Hearin� Notice for full description) and to waive the readang of the Public Aearing 13�tice of (SP ��69-01). Mr. Myhxa brought up the fact that Silica Sand has written a letter stating tk►ey go along with the matter of the reaoning and ar.e wondering if the Planning Commisaion would get themselves in some kind of a legal question. One partq cannot reaone another party's land unless they hold the title. The Engineering Assistant said that this is probably something that the Council should handle. There will be at least three Council meetings, �nd the Ordinaiace would take the first readin�, second reading and public hearing. A delay on the final action could be made until the negotiations were completed bp thc� railxoad. � MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Myhra, that the Plannin� Commission � Lable to the December 11, 1969 meetin� the rezoning requeat, �OA �69-11, and � the Special Uae Permit (SP 4�69-01) by the Northern Pacific Railroad Company � to the December 17, 1969 meeting. Upona voice vote, all voting aye, the motioa carried unanimouslq. � - r� � Pla�,ning Co�mission:.Meeting - IIecember 3, 1969 P��e 7 2. �UBLIC HEAR.ING: REZONING REQUEST: ZOA ��69-12, ROBERT V. PRITCHARD: South 2/3 of Lot 4, Auditor's Subdivision 4�`108 Mr. Robert Pritchard was present and explained that the piece he w�s asking to be rezoned was adjacent to a piec� of multiple land now> Directly across from his property is the Onan �lant and he a�de�atood that when the first piece was rezoned, there was quite a bit of ob�ection to multiples. Mr. Pritchard was shown the atreet plan for the area which concerned the possibility of landlocked lots. Mr. Pritch�rd was unaware of these plans when the application was filled out and stated he would have to make some adjustments in his plans. It was unfortunate that his architect was ill at this time. . Mr. Marxen, owner of the lot to the East of Lot 4, discussed with Mr. Pritchard his plans. Mr. Jensen sa3d that the Planniag Commsission is committed to the street plan. The Planning Commission felt this atreet could be eli�n�t�d across lots 30 and 31. The design really would h�ve an �deerse eifect on the neighbors by eliminating the section acxoss thi� lo�fl Lot �Se In thi� cs�e, Mr. Marsen has provided and others to the East have pxovided � s�ree� so the City must provide them an outlet for that atreet. This whole plan is effected bq your lot and much thought must be given to the completion of this area. MOTION by Myhra, se�otgded by lvi-Littelstadt' tt►�t tkne Plas�aain� Commi�aion table the reaoning request, ZOA �69-12, Robert V. Pritch�rd of the South 2/3 of Lot 4, Auditor's Subdivision 4�108, to the December 17, 1969 meetin�. Upon a voice vote, all voting aqe, the motion carried unanimously. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL iJ DOUBLE BUNGALOW IN R-1 DISTRICT; Lot ,�o�-uz) : Haxi.n�u �. �s�xxa r�x , Block l, Ostman's 3rd Addition No oae was preaent representing the petitioner. Chairman Erickson recalled that the original request was for Lot 1 and 2. Mr. Mittelstadt read from the Board of Appeals minutes of November 26, 1969, on page 7. 1�TION by Jensen, secoaded by Myhra, that the Planning Commission table until the December 17, 1969 meeting the Public Hea�fng for SP �69-02, Harland P. Berry for a double bungalow in R-1 District on Lot 1, Block 1, Ostman's 3rd Addition. Upon a voir�e vote, all voting aye, the motion carried uaanimously. 4. MULTIPLE DWELLING STUDY IN CITY OF FRIDLEY: The Commission felt that "random" was not the proper terffi to use on Page 2, bottom half, Sectfon 3, the Memo, page 13. Mr. Mqhra asked i� �he �cport was of a con�identiai nature and was . � � � Pla�rixsin.g Commission Meeting - December 3, 1969 ���� � concerned about the part of the report that has yet to be comp].eted and is it the intention to get the figures? Mr. Jensen suggested the tablea be removed ��oa� th� r�poPt before th� report is given to the public. The report is valuable without the tablesm No action. ADJOURMENT: There being no furthex business, Ch�irman Ericfl�on �dj��a�e�1 ��n� Planning Commi.ssion meeting of December 3, 1969 at 10:45 PaIKo Respectfully submitted, , � `; > ' �.� �" , , I . < <'7 ,cJ '� �l `� HAZEL BRIAN Recording Secretary Si�� �?i ��i�e�� -- �,�e���-�b�Y3� �96j �1��-��� Co��«5�0� � __ _ _ / ( a�TT�`� _ �U�- Gi Y-�,S� __ _ � j — � � �/ ._ �c.���v ����--______ �% . _ �,�� (, G � ��, i7�-' , _ ��_� ,� - � , _ --. �a4� � � Y�. � . � �1L� �.� �!�-L � � ��� , , �d �o �,hi�� � �i ° • � ��� . -- - �� � � � ; � �1.�. �� ..� � 1�-e.��o , . � / � � :/ � l ' f