Loading...
PL 01/20/1971 - 31093�, PLANNING ()OMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 20, 1971 8:00 P.M. PAGE The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Fitzpatrick a� �:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Fitzpatrick, Schmedeke, Zeglen Members Absent: Erickson, Minish Others Present: Darrel Clark, Engineering Assistant APPROVE PLANNING_ CArIlKISSION MINUTES : DECEMBER S'', 1970 MDTIDN by Zeglen, seconded b� Schmedeke, that the Planning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1970 be approved. Upon a voice vote, aZZ voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. � RECEIVE BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES: DECEMBER 15, 1970 MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the Planning Conm►i.ssion receive the minutes of the Board of Appeals meeting of December 15, Z970. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. � RECEIVE BUILDING STANDARDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOI�Il�4ITTEE MINUTES: DECEMBER 17, 1970 �- 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST: ZOA 4�70-07, R.ICHLAND, INC. BY R.C. ERNST: To rezone from R-1 to R-2 (two family dwellings) the South 395 feet of Lot 1, Lots 2 and 3, Lot 4, except that part of the West 132 feet lying South of the North 328.9 feet, Lots 5 and 6 except the Sauth 230 feet thereof, Auditor's Subdivision No. 22. The public hearing notice was read by Vice Chairman Fitzpatrick. The Engineering Assistant read from the Zoning Ordinance Adopted November 3, 1969 the "Uses Permitted" under R-2 Districts (Section 45.06, 1-A) as follows: 1) �Yao family dwellings, 2) One family dwellings, 3)Agriculture, including farm, truck gar�ens and orcharda, but excluding animal and poultry raising, 4( Churches, parish houses aad convents, 5) Townhouses, under the conditions atated in the townhouse development Section 45.14." Ae s�ed it up by sayi�g R-2 does not include any larger unit than two family dwellings. Mr. Ernst was given the floor to explain his project. The maps were dis- pla}ced so that the audience could observe them. Lot 1 was in the original plan, but the owner has, since then, asked to be excluded at this time. The other exclusions were along Rice Creek Road where homes are now located. The total area of the requeat is approximately 32 acres. The intent is to subdivide the property into single family and tw� family uses. The main internal street will line up with Anoka Street at Mississippi Street and continue to Rice Creek �F,, Road. One cul de sac will be South of Mississippi running East, the next one _' will be North of Rice Creek Road with a single cul de sac to the West and a donble cul de sac to the East which takes care of a larger area. The intent is to excavate a large pq�d or lake using materisl from the excavation to fill � �-,� � Planati.�g Coimnission Meetin� - January LOs 1971 Pal,e 2,.�_ the surrounding lowlands and fill for the area to the North abutting Mississippi �Street which they propose to dedicate to the City for a City Park. They feel ' there is a need for this type uf housing -- single family mixed with two family dwellings in a price bracket which will ultimately allow the people to own their own homes. They did not have, at this time, a breakdown as to the number of double bungalows, two family and single family units they will constri+ct. They intend to offer lots for sale with the buyer having the option of hav�n.g his own contractor or use the contractor for the project. Regarding the ponding, a small lake would be constructed provided with an overflow with a control structure at the outlet of the lake. In this way, the water level would be maintained the year aroundo From the control structure, the water would follow a West drainage ditch through the property out on Old Central Avenue to Moore Lake. They felt that this is an inexpensive solution to the storm sewer problem to the area and one which benefits everyone by main- taining a water reserve in the area and would have an aesthetic appeal to the neighborhood. Roy De Mars, 1442 Mississippi: He said that eight years ago there was talk of draining the same area, and in the same way as suggested this evening. He asked where is the water from Moore Lake going? When you raise the water level too high in Moore Lake, it will overf low the highway. They wanted us to pay for a storm drain going across into Moore Lake where all that water builds up and Moore Lake has not gotten an adequate drainage system to take care of the overflow water. He understood that there is an overflow pipe from the Lake to Rice Creek and that it is too small to take care of the storm water now. �: Mr. Ernst answered that he had been advised otherwise; that Moore Lake � overflow has the capacity to handle the storm sewer problem from this area. They felt creating a large retention basin such as the one shown in their plans would retain the water and then allow it to go into Moore Lake. In answer to the questions raised regarding the development, he listed them. 1) Apartments: This was answered at the start of the hearing. They did not intend to develop apartments in this area. 2) Cost of storm sewer: He did not have the answer what the storm sewer would cost to run into Rice Creek, but he understood several hundred thousand dollars. What they are pro- posing to use would cost considerably less. 3) Traffic: Rice Creek Road is a major thoroughfare road on the South and Mississipp3 Street on the North will be more than adequate to handle the traffic generated from the area. This area would contribute an insignificant amount of traffic. 4) Design of Buildings: ' He understood there was some concern that identical types of buildings would be built which would depreciate the area. He believed his prior statement of having lots for sale to buyers where they could contract with their own con- tractors or have them build using their plans or the plans of Richland, Inc. would protect the neighborhood. 5) Low cost: By obtaining R-2, they felt this would provide the opportunity of building two family dwellings which could eliminate low cost housing occurring. 6) Ecology in the area: They have gone a long way to keep the wildlife in the area. The neighborhood has appreciated the natural beauty of the area and have enjoyed this to the cost of the property owners. 7) School children: He could not predict the number of school children that this area would develop and did not believe anyone else �--�� could. Based upon a survey that the City of Fridley made about a year ago, �la�as�xig Co�ission Me��in� - January ��fl 1�71 Pa�e 3 he would expect ithere would be fewer cl�aildren from a development such as the one � they are proposing which contains 74 lots �cezoned R-2 against 105 lots if zoned R-1. Robert W. Erickson, 565 57th Avenue: He asked for more information about the natural drainage systemo The Engineering Assistant explained that a retention pond would be developed with an open ditch to Central Avenue and it would have to cross property other than that of the project. The property owriers would be contacted, and the �:ity would have to negotiate with them offering what they consider a fair price. I£ this is unsuccessful, the City could go to condemnation, the court appoints three appraisers. Both the City and the property owners can appeal the outcome of the court's decision. Mr. Erickson asked if there were sufficient water supply in existance or would the major supply have to be increased to take care of the needs of the area. And how about the sewer? The Engineering Assistant answered that the system is adequate. Sewer and water were designed to take care of this area for R-1 dwellings and the number of family units would be a�out the same for this pro�ect. Mr. Erickson asked if the valuation of the property would change with rezoning. Darrel Clark sa�d that taxes are basically set on valuation and whether or not the land is homesteaded, but he could not really answer questions on real estate taxes. � , Mr. Erickson said the whole area is R-1 with single family residences, and there is no need to rezone t`he propertq. David A. Weiland�, 1450 64th Avenue: Ae wished to present a petition against the rezoning request. He stated the people contacted w�re told duplexes were goin� in and not apartments. The original petition was presented with the aseurance given Mr. Weiland that Council would also see the petitions. 1NOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Zeglen. that the Planning Commission receive the petition presented by David A. Weiland, 1450 64th Avenue, petition- ing against the sezoning request, ZOA #70-07, Richland, Inc. by R. C. Ernst. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Weiland then asked permission to read the heading of the petition which listed the reasons to disallow the present and all future rezoning of subject area. fle said that 169 residents signed the petition, and 98% of these were property owners. He then d�scussed the items separately. 1) Ecology: Talking about revenue and ecology, ecology loses. Mr. Jerald Tjader approached the Metro- politan Council. They showed interest in the area and are sending out an ecologist to see if this area has value for a reservation for wildlife. There are ten fmailies who are definitely interested in the ecology. 2) Environment: They referred to duplex areas in Hilltop. They are run down. For every pro, he would give a con. 3) The school is not overcrowded now. 4) Future property value: Ae cited 64th Avenue as an example of a street which was upgraded at /�'� a rapid pace after the people had a street put in, got FHA loans and put up '� �garages. 5) Additional assessments in the form of increased capacity sewers, � water and streets, at the cos� c�� ex����ng property owners. The City Engineer told him �f the job is done right, an underground sewer is the only answer, anything lse is an eyesore and an attractive nuisance to kids. The cost of r�°' �lannin� Commission Meetin,� - Januarv 20, 19?1 Pa�e 4 the sewer the City Engineer was talking about was approximately one million dollars. The Federal Government turned down th3s project twice. If this storm � sewer put in, other property owners would be assessed $10.00 for every 100 square feet. The average piece of property is 75' x 135°. 6) Zoning System: Mr. Weiland had prepared a City map showing the R-2 areas colored green and the R-3 colored yellow. He felt the rezoning request was arbitrary and not to the best interests of the people. Mr. Robert Erickson felt it shouid not be necessary to rezone a residential area when there is ample acrea�e in the northern part of the City, and there- fore, this request should not be considered. He could not express an opinion great enough and strong enough that he did not want any rezoning. Mr. Ernst should try the area to the North and develop a new area where there are no problems such as this area has. . Mr. Roy De Mars:They do not have sidewalks and gutters and that would cost all of them more than $2,000 per family because they have 125 foot front property. What they are trying to do is force the property owners down to smaller pieces of property because a lot of them cannot pay those ta�ces. If you approve the request, you are going to have to put the sidewalks down the streets, you cannot get away from it. He would guarantee this could not be done for less than $2,000 because they have an acre of ground. If a street were put between 64th and 65th, they could sell the back half of their acreage. Mr. Harold Thielen, 6515 Fridley Street: The water comes down Fridley and Anoka and drains into a little pothole. How would that water be taken care of? The Engineering Assistant said the water also comes down on McKinley Street. �' Some catch basins could be installed and the water piped to the pond. This would not be the ultimate system, but is far less expensive than a storm sewer. However, eventually the storm sewer would probably go in. Walter Tyler, 1456 64th Avenue: Five years ago they moved into their house. The lot is four lots away from the proposed property. They had water in the basement at that time. He understood the original ditch was put in 25 years ago. In the past five years there has been no water, no problem because he filled in the ditch and landscaped the yard. He would object to the open ditch. Mr. Richard Janiak, 1655 Mississippi Street: Mr. Ernst pointed out this drainage ditch would cost only $50.00 per lot. Mr. Janiak said he called Councilman Relshaw who said he didn't believe the City would allow an open drainage ditch for a period of more than one or two years. The cost of a drainage ditch would pay a good part of the price of the storm sewer, he believed. Mr. Richard Kok, 6517 Mc Kinley Street: He said that Mr. Ernst mentioned 74 lots, and also said this would not be a burden on the school di�trict. If there are 74 lots with double bungalows, there will be 140 units. Mr. Ernst answered the 74 lots would have mixed dwellings, single and two family. He did not know the ratio of the single to the double at this time. H�aever, if they were all single lots, there would be 105 lots. What effect � would this be on the sewer and water was asked by Mr. Kok. The Engineering Aseistant said the answer on sewer and water is that the design used for put- P1�nnin�Com�aission Meetin� - Janua�y 2v, 1971 Pa�e 5 ting in the municipal system includes a large safety factor so that 105 units r"�� versus 148 units is such a small,percentage in the total of the area, it would not cause a problem in the capacity of water. Roy Holman, 6500 Fridley Street: How can Mississippi Street handle the additional traffic from this project when it cannot handle what ther� is now? Darrel Clark said he was sure Mississippi Street will have to be widened whether or not this development goes through. Mr. Weiland asked if Chairman Erickson will have any vote in this matter? Will he vote and make recommendation to the Council? Vice Chairman Fitzpatrick said he would not know whether or not Mr. Erickson would vote. He did know that quite often one member or another exempts himself if he has an interest in the request. Mr. Weiland felt there would be a conflict of interest in this case. Mr. Walter Tyler said the people on 64th paid for their street out of their own pockets. If 64th Street went through to Stinson Boulevard, he was wondering what the traffic would do to that 3 inch base temporary street? Would that street last until 1977 if it takes additional traffic. The Engineering Assistant said this development does not have many lots with direct access to 64th Street. He did not think the increased traffic � would be on 64th. Mr. Walter Tyler commented that when Mississippi Street becomes crowded, the people will take the side streets, especially in the morning and night. You have got to realize all the shopping centers are on the West of this area -- Target, Holiday, Shoppers' City, Country Club. There is nothing on the East except the New Brighton Super Valu. Mr. Robert Erickson said that it is obvious at this point that the plan Mr. Ernst brought in is not acceptable and is definitely not the proper zoning. Mrs. Willa Gonsior, 1601 Rice Creek Road: She and her husband are the main owner of the proposed property. She said that when a person gets up to social security days, one has to sell some of the holdings because of taxes. What are they supposed to do? Mr. Robert Erickson told her that he thought it was beautiful property, but not at the expense of additional taxes to the rest of the area. Mr. Ted Gonsior, 1601 Rice Creek Road: He said it was now that he needed the money. Speaking to Mr. Erickson, he asked him if it were his property, and if he were in his reclining years, how did he think he could handle it? He was not able to get money like you fellows are getting now. He worked for $2.25 an hour. Since 1950 he had been paying taxes on this property -- $5,000 a year. He had tried to get a permit to fill in the property but the City would not allow him to do so. He lived on the property since 1962. � Mr. Robert Erickson said he left Chicago ten years ago, where he saw the slum a�ea creeping into a residential area when the land was rezoned. This is why he was going to fight to maintain the present zoning. To go to any other zoning from what there is in the existing zoning, degradation will begin. Planni�� Comflnission Meeti�g ° 3anuary 2�9 �971 Page 6 �e felt Mr. Ernst had not presented a full proposal. �, Diane Maloney, 6550 M�Kinley Street: She wondered where the people will be found who will want to live next door to the proposed project. She objected to the rezoning. � Mr. Jerald Tjader, 6563 Fridley Street: He said he had been tallcjing with Mr. Ernst and Mr. Clark. fle was not in f avor of R-2 zoning, but neither in R-1. These people that have the land right now, are paying too many taxes. He thought the City of Fridley should step in and either make it a park or let the State axid Gounty do it. He would like it to remain as it is now. He thought someone should take this land off these people's hands. He had talked with people inter- ested in conservation on the local, state and national level. They are sendin� out people to look at the land. A staff man of thQ Metropolitan Gouncil said they are interested in hearing about this piece of land and of other land for conservancy. He was going to pass a petition to the people of the neighborhood to present the land to the City for park and the petition will be given to Mr. FY tzpatrick on Monday. If the rezoning request should be turned down, and if the people wanted to sell, the next step would be to see if the City has the funds to buy the land. Daryl Wolf, 6446 Arthur Street: He had all he could do now to pay the taxes let alone bringing in more sewers. He felt the City does not need any more rezoning than what it has now. He approved acquiring the land for park. Robert R. Pence, 1489 64th pvenue: Ae suggested studying the petition and � the names on it. He felt the members of the Planning Co�ission knew a lot of the people. Ae didn't think the signers of the petition wrote their names just ' for the fun of it. He had heard both sides. Re didn't need rezoning regardless, but he knows what he likes and the previouS gentleman's statement about a park is the solution. Mr. LaMoine Follingstad, 1626 Rice Creek Road: About all these people that talk about parks -- when the Park Department came out with a program for proposed parks,� and asked for approval for a Park Bond, everybody shot it down. They wanted no part of it. Vice Chairman Fitzpatrick said that and that there would have to be some such what the people are proposing. it was true there was a park bond issue, thing in the future to provide funds for Mr. Alvin E. Flanders, 6501 Anoka Street: He said he signed the petition against the rezoning. He wished, again, to go on record as opposin� it. MOTION by Sclunedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the PZanning Commissic�n close the public hearing of the rezoning request, ZOA 1170-07, Richland, Incorp�rated by R. C. Ernst to rezone from R-1 (single family dwellings) to R-2 (two �amily dwellings) the South 395 feet of Lot 1, Lots 2 and 3, Lot 4, except that part of the West 132 feet lying South of the North 328.9 feet, Lots 5 and�6 except the South 230 feet thereof, Auditor's Subdivision No. 22. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. � i��' Member Schu�.edeke sum�arized his feelings as follocas: Ecology -- he, to�, was interested in ecology, but he also sympathized with the property owner. The . F'lanning Commission is an �dV�,�ArY Body to the Council. They do not make the final decision. The Planning Commission considers the property owner, the residents and pro�ert�r owners within 300 feet of the property in question, and the City comes last. This evening was'th� fiYSt time that you� side of the Fl�n.nin� Cont�L�s�on Nleeting - 3anuarv 20, 1971 Pat�e 7 story has been heard. Two weelcs from now, the Planning Commission meets again. � He was going to make a motion to table�this item until the next meeting. The reason for this is, in the first place, whether or not to rezone. He sympathized with the owner because he also owns property and he would surely hate to have someone say to him "you have a besutiful piece of property" and then have it taken for half of what it is worth. The City has parks now that a�e a�ot developed We have been given a piece of property by View Con (South of Garden�., West of Stinson Boulevard) which will be park property. Maybe there is need for another Bond issue, he did not know. But he could not see telling a man who owned property a long time that his petition would be denied or he should take half of what it was worth to make a park out of it. There are always two sides to an issue. Referring to the map presented earlier in the meeting, Mr. Schmedeke said the Hyde Park area was colored in green which was the designation by Mr. Weiland for R-2. Hyde Park is zoned R-3 and C-2 and was rezoned within the last six months. He continued that anyone can come in and ask for rezoning, and the petitioner this evening has the same right. It does not mean that he, personally, was going to vote for the requeet or that he was going to vote against -- he was not saying. Then, as "food for thought", Mr. Schmedeke asked what would be the feeling if the petitioner came in with a plan for R-1? Mr. Robert Erickson: He said he felt some of the land should be R-1 and some wildlife preserve. Mr. Walter Tyler: Referring to the drainage ditch, he said that it must be about 20 to 25 years ago the ditch was put through there. He moved in 1965. All the property in the area was condemned because of water. The people have � brought up their property from the condemned status. Now what will the property be if another ditch is put through there? Mr. Roy De Mars: The three housea on the South side of 64th Avenue begin- ning at the corner were new homes and condemned because of water in the base- meats. Mr. Schmedeke, referring to the traffic, said the Planning Commission had the same type of problem with Viewcon. Whenever someone builds, there is going to be traffic. One way or another, vacant property is going to be developed. He did not think the traffic would be heavier with the present request or another one. A citizen said that there are ways of routing traffic so that it does not go into residential area. Member Zeglen said that he agreed with Mr. Schmedeke, that the Planning Commission has to have more time to study and evaluate the request. He also felt there should be at least four members to vote. MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the Planning Commission table the rezoning request, ZOA #70-07, Richland, Incorporated by R. C. Ernst, to the February 3, 1971 meeting. Upon a voice vote� a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. At the reguest of Mr. Robert Erickson, the following motion was made: � MOTION by Sahmedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the Engineering Department be instructed to mail to the people listed in the January 20, 1971 Agenda a notifi- cation of the February 3, 1971 meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Plan.nin� Commissi.on Me��ia�.g �,7aacYUary '�OA 19�1 Pa�e g 2. LOT SPLIT REQUESTo L.S. 4�71-01, CHARZES R. LA BEAUX: To split off the � S� of the F� of Lot 34, Auditor's Subdivision ��92. Mr. La Beaux was present. Mr. Schmedeke explained that this request was before the Plats & Subdivisions- Streets & Utilities Subcommittee earlier in the evening. Mr. La B�a�ax is attempt- ing to sell the house on the front part of the lot. The lots to the South, Lots 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51 and 52 have been acquired by the City for park purposes and the possibility is that the City will want a street access at the northern edge of the proposed park. Mr. La Beaux has agreed to give a 30 foot easement on the South end of his property which will also line up with a similar easement on Lot 35. The City would be asked to put a red tag on the South Half of the lot until such date that street, sewer and water are put in before Mr. La 8eawc can build. The recommendation to the Planning Co�ission was approval. The Engineering Assistant added that some people worry about this sort of property going tax forfeit. In this case, with a park adjacent, if this property or adjacent property were to go tax forfeit, the City would take the property to extend the park boundary on the North. If it should go tax forfeit, it would not be a piece of ground lying unused. MOTION by 2eglen, seconded by Schmedeke, that the Planning Commi.ssion recom- mend approval of Lot Split #71-01, by Charles R. La Beaux to split off the South Half of the Esst Half of Lot 34, Auditor�s Subdivision �192 with the stipulafion of the dedication of the Southerly 30 feet of Lot 34 for street purposes, and � that no buildinq permit be granted until the lot can be serviced by sewer, water and street. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unani mous 1 y . 3. LOT SPLIT RE UEST• L.S. ��71-02, TEiOMAS R. SWANSON: Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 5, City View Addition. To make two 60 foot lota from three 40 foot lots. Mr. Swanson was present. Mr. Schmedeke explained that this item was also presented to the Plats & Subdivisions-Streets & Utilities Subcommittee earlier this evening. This is one of the normal things that seems to be happening in Fridley -- taking three forty foot lots and making two 60 foot lots. The Subcommittee approved this type of request a number of times in the past and they approved this one, too. He was certain the homes Mr. Swanson would build would be compatible in this area, and probably more so. The homes will be facing 57th Place and will be seen from the front and back as the backyard would abut 57th Avenue. Mr. Swanson said the houses would be ramblers and he would use Masonite. Darrel Clark added that there were homes on either side of these lots, so that there is no more land available. �� Fl��aa� Co�mmission �ec�in� -�ara�a�y �0. 1971 PaAe 9 MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Zeglen, that the Planning Commission �W, approve Lot Sp1it #70-02, by Thoma� R. Swanson to split Lots 3, 4 and S, Block 5, !`' City View Addi tion in order to make two 60 foot lots out of three forty foot Zots. Upon a vdice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 4. CONFIRM PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Request for a Special Use Permi�,e °" ��71-01 by Albert M. Johnson to permit cons'truction of a double bungalow in an R-1 District as per Fridley City Code, Section 45.051, Paragraph 3, Subsection D, to be located on Lot 7, Block 1, A1 Roae Addition. MOTION by Schmedeke, sec,onded by Leqlen, that the Planning Commission con- firm the public hearing date of February 3, 1971 for the Special Use Permit request, SP #7Z-01 by Albert M. Johnson to permit construction of a double bungalow in an R-1 District to be located on Lot 7, Block 1, A1 Rose Addition. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 5. CONFIRM PUBLIC HEARING DATEo Rezoning request, ZOA �l{71-01, by Wyman Smith for Viking Chevrolet, Inc. To rezone from M-2 to C-2 a parcel 600 feet in depth along the centerline of proposed 83rd Ave. from R/W line of Univer- si.ty and 1,675 feet North from centerline of proposed 83rd Avenue. MOTION by Zeglen, seconded by Schmedeke, that the Planning Co�ission con- firm the public hearing date of February 3, 1971.for the Rezoning Request, ZOA #71-01 by Wyman Smith for Viking Chevrolet, Inc. to rezone from M-2 to C-2 a parcel 600 feet in depth along the centerline of proposed 83rd Avenue from �, R/W line of University Avenue and 1,675 feet North from centerline of proposed 83rd Avenue. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNI�NT : There being no further business, Vice Chairman Fitzpatrick adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 10:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted �/�G���-_ Haz 0'Brian Recording Secretary �"",� � ..� �� � � � � � � � � � , � � d � ��Fs��..� ��1� lIl/� � %5"S/ � r � � - -- ; -- G�� .� �? C� -- ��� /� / /�.- . / `� / � �� 7- , Y s���°� �/-= .� - ;f, ,� ?t: '`" „J;��':�_ �