Loading...
PL 11/07/1973 - 7470� �� A G E N D A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: NOVEMBER 7, 1973 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE5: OCTOBER 17, 1973 RECEIVE BUILDING STANDARDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES: OCTOBER 18, 1973 RECEIVE BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES: OCTOBER 9, 1973 RECEIVE.BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES: OCTOBER 23, 1973 RECEIVE PLATS & SUBDIVISIONS-STREETS & UTILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES: OCTOBER 24, 1973 RECEIVE PARKS AND RECP,EATION COMMISSION MINUTES: OCTOBER 29, 1973 l. CONTINUED: ARMORY PROPOSAL: PRESENTATION BY GENERAL CHEESEMAN 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CREEK AND RIVER PRESERVATION ORDTNANCE (Ordinance sent separately) 8:00 P.M. PAGES 1 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 21 22 - �3 24 - 28 29 - 31 32 - 36 37 - 39 3. PJBLTC H�ARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED 40 - 46 REGISTERED LAND SURVEY, P.S. #73-08, BY HARLAND BERRY: Described as being 180 foot lot ext�nsions . into Loek� Lake, (part of Lot 3, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No. 23) of Lots 2-6, Block l, Ostman's lst Addition, Lot 4, Ostman's 2nd Addition, and Tracts A& B, Registered Land Survey No. 20, generally located along the West a d North shores of Locke-�Lake. � " > �.yl a � , _ ° �� r U • � ��� � �./�1�,� �� � � , i� �� � �� �� � �1 ^ CITY OF FI�IDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: OCTOBER 17, 1973 PAGE 1 Chair_man Fitzpatrick called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Fitzpatrick, Drigans, Lindblad, Harris Members Absent: Blair O�:hers Present: Darrel Clark, Community Development Adm. Jerrold Boardman, Planning Assistant APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 26, 1973 MOTION by Drigans, seconded by Lindb.Zad, that the PZanning Commission approve �the ninutes of the September 26, 1973 meeting as written. Upon a voice vote, a.ZZ voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. APPROVE PLAATNING COMMISSION MINUTFS: OCTQBER 3, 1973 Mr. Lindblad said a couple of statements he made were left out of the minutes. He said his statement that when it comes to -funding special City projects, such as the trail system, the City should try to fund it, and not request funding from the Federal, Stai�e, or Caunty government; because he feels that for every dollar the City receives this way, the citizens pay more than �he City receives back in taxes. He also said he �aanted a statement in the minutes that he was opposed to the trail system, especially on residential streets, because lirniting the parking to one side of the street could cause a hardship. MOTION by Harris, seconded br� Drigans, thaf the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the October 3, 1973 meeting as corrected. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimous.Zy. RECEIVE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 24, 1973 MOTION by Lindblad, seconded by I�arris, that the P1ar•ning Commission receive the minutes of the Parks & Recreation Commission meeting of September 24, 1973. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the rnotion carried unanimous_Zy. . RECEIV� BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 25, 1973 MOTION by Drigans, seconded b� Lindh.Zad, that the Planning Commission receive tl�e minutes of the Board of Appeals of September 25. 1973. Upoi� a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 11 � Planning Commission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 2 RECEIVE BUILDING STANDARDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 27, 1973 MOTIGN by Lindblad, seconded by Harris, that the Planning Commission receive the minutes of the Building Standards-Design Control Subcommittee meeting of September 27, 1973. Upon a voice vote, a11 votinq aye, the motion carried unanimousZy. l. PUBLIC HEARING: A R�QUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #73-10 BY TRYGVE OLS�N: per F'ridley City Code, Section 45.051, 2, A, to allaw construction of a second accessory building, a shed to be used for the storage of tools, on Lot.4, Block l, River-� wood Manor Addition, the same being 7145 Riverview Terrace N.E. Mr. Trygve Olsen was present to present his request. MOTION by Drigans, seconded by Lindblad, that the Planning Commission waive the reading of the Public Hearing notice on the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #73-10, by Trygve 01sen. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting a�e, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Clark gave.the plans submitted by Mr. Olsen to the Inspectian Departm�nt to the Planning Commission to look at so they could see what type of building Mr. Olsen wanted to build. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Olsen how. he intended to use this building. Mr. Olsen said it was for storage of lawn equipment, a boat, and a saw. , Mr. Harris asked if this building wo��d have electricity and heat. Mr. Olsen said it would have electricity, but would not be heated. Mr. Fitzpatrick asked what the first �iccessory building was. Mr. Clark said it was the attached garage. . Mr. Lindblad asked if this building would have a cement floor. Mr. Olsen said it would and it wouldn't have the pillars as shown on the plan. Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Clark if this cement slab would have to have footings for this size building. Mr. Clark said a floating slab was approved by the State Code. Mr. Clark said there were notices sent to the neighbors and the City hadn't received any calls about this. He asked Mr. Olsen if he had talked to any of his neighbors about this request. Mr. Olsen said there wasn't any opposition from the neighbors. Mr. Harris asked about the exterior of the building. Mr. Olsen said it would be rough cedar. Hi.s home is stucco with rough cedar trim. Mr. Harris said this building will blend in then. Mr. Lindblad asked Mr. Olsen if he was going to construct this ^ ,building himself. Mr. Olsen said he was. Mr. Drigans asked Mr. Olsen if he had a wood working hobby. Mr. Olsen said he did. Mr. Harris said he hoped Mr. Olsen was not going to operate a cabinet shop or similar business from this building. Mr. Planning Commission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 3 Olsen said this building was not going to be used for any kind ^ of business. Mr. Drigans said he noted on the survey that there was a fence on part of, the lot. Mr. Olsen said that fence belonged to his neighbor who has a swimming pool. Mr. Drigans said there was no fence between the school property and Mr. Olsen's. Mr. Olsen said the children were always supervised when they played close to his property. Mr. ritzpatrick said he thought this building might be an attraction for children because of it's placement on the lot, but if the children were always supervised this evidently would be no problem. � Mr. Harris asked i.f there were any drainage problems on this lot. Mr. Clark said there wasn't. MOTION by Harris, seconded by Lindblad, that the PZanning Commission cZose the Public Hearing on the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #73-J0, by Trygve Olsen. Upon a voice vote, a1.Z voting aye, the motzon carried unanimousZ�. Mr. Harris said he had no objection to this request. It was a nice looking building. He said he thought a stipulation should be made that there wotxld be no business operated from this � structure. MOTION by Lindblad, seconded by Drigans, that the P.Zanning Commission recommer•d to the Council approval of the request for a SpeciaZ Use Permit, SP #73-Z0, by Trygve O.Zsen, per Fridley City Code, Section 45.051, 2, A, to a11ow construction of a second accessory building, a shed to be used for the storage of tools, on Lot 4, Block 1, Riverwood Manor Addition, the same being 7145 Riverview Terrace N.E., with the stipulation that no business be operated from this structure. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 2. COAITIN.UED: REVIEW OF CREEK AND RIVER PRESERVATION MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE Mr. Jerrold Boardman made the presentation. Mr. Boardman said tahe main purpose of this ordinance was to meet the•State requirement to have a flood management program. This is r�quired of all cities that have had any type of flooding. The Department of Natural Resources hasn't gotten around to the cities that haven't set these up, but they will. Mr. Fitzpatrick said he thought this legislation was passed /'� . in 1971. � Mr. Boardman said we designated the areas that were inundated by flaods according to the Army Corp. of Engineer's report. The /'\ � Planning Com mission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 4 level of flood control that they used was the 100 year flood level. We have laid out the 100 year flood level on the City map in red and blue. There were two ways we could have gorie in setting up this program. We could have had it all in one zane and then we would have to use the most restrictive regulations which wouldn't have allowed any building at all except for some low damage potential buildings that would not be inhabit.ed. Otherwise we could set it up in two different districts, as we have done. One district is the flood plain, shown in red which is CRP-2, where you can have buildings for habita�.ion if they are protected to a certain elevation, or if they build above a certain elevation. The other district is the flood way, which is shown in blue and is CRP-1, in which you can't do any building at all for habitation. The Departmexzt a flooa way if what than one half foot. structures that are damage. of Natural Resources says yc�u can build in you build does not raise the flood level more This is limited to park shelters, etc., and no�t used for occupancy and have 1ow potential Air. Fitzpatrick asked about Rice Creek. Mr. Boardman said it was a matter of conveni.ence of zoning this flood way. It does not affect the existing home sites along the CreeJc. Mr. Fitzpatrick asked about the small area of red along the Creek. Mr. Boardman said this was because there was presently a home in this area, and �he Department of Natural Resources said the elevations could possibly be raised to over .5 feet without affecting the flood damage upstream because.of Locke Park�. Mr. Drigans said this special house along Rice Creek is very close to the Creek. Is any action taken by adoption of this ordinance going to preclude him from selling his house. He also wondered if the homeowner would get the value out of this house or qualify for a loan. Mr. Boardman said it could affect the value of his property, but with the proper flood management program and the purchase of flood insurance, the F.H.A, is supposed to mortgage homes in the flood plain area. Mr. Harris asked about the Riverview Heights area. Mr. Boardman said they�would have to get a special use permit and any construction would have to be according to the restrictions set by the Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Fitz.patrick asked what would happen if someone had to 'rebuild in this�area. Mr. Boardznan said it would be like any other non-conforming use. If it was over 50°s damaged or they wanted to mak.e any additions or alterations, they would have to builc� according to these specifications. . Mr. Lindblad asked how the 100 year flood level was determined. ^ Mr. Boardman said they gather all the information in a watershed area and determine what the maximum capacity of this watershed is if all conditions happen at one time. They feed this information into a computer to determine the frequency and level of the maximum flood and from this they can break it down to the level of a 100 year flood. Planning Commission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 5 ^ Mr. Clark said this ordinance has been sent to the State and they have said they �vill accept it. Mr. Boardman said this ordinance was modeled somewhat from the ordinance Edina has. He also studied St. Louis Park's ordinance. The State regulations were also incorporated. Mr. Lindblad asked if there were plans or a program to discourage building in the areas designated in red, and utilize the land for parks, for instance, if they were needed in the area. Mr. Boardman said if the red areas were filled up to 2 foot abave the 100 year flood level, this would be buildable land. Mr. Cl�rk said that if the State came in and set up the rules for this type of area, they would be more restrictive. Mr. Boardman said an� variance from the regulations would also have to be approved by the Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Drigans asked that where it states that.these variances or special use permits must be approved by all govening bodies, which are the Department of Natural Resources, the Rice Creek Watershed and the City, what would happen if there was a conflict. Two governing bodies cauld agree and one disagree. Mr. Boardman � said the City would have the final authority. Mr. Fitzpatrzck said if the City granted a variance, this would be reviewed by the Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Boardman said the way the ordinance reads is that 10 days from the time a request is received for a variance, this is to be sent to the Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Drigans said if someone wants to build in this area with a variance and they get approval from the State, but not the Council, what happens? Mr. Boardman said they cannot build then. The City has the final approval. Mr. Fitzpatrick said he anticipated that there would be a lot of questions at the Public Hearing on the resale of homes in the flood plain and how they would be financed. Mr., Drigans asked Mr. Boardman to explain.the difference in the two districts. Mr. Boardman said the CRP-1 was the most restrictive. It permits only uses having a low flood damage potential. The structures are not far human habitation, are firmly anchored to prevent floatation, and allows any accessory building that is not more than 150 square � � feet. All �ermitted structures in this zone, except for public uses, require a special use permit. Structures for public use require approval of the Council and all governing bodies. n Planning Commission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 6 Mr. Boardman said these districts are only overlay districts. Maybe only part of a lot falls into these districts. The part of the lot that is not �n the district can be built upon according to the regular zoning regulations. He said that we need to locate the lines in the field and draw a profile. The elevations have to be shown at each point where there was flooding and this has to be shown specifically on the zoning map. Chairman Fitzpatrick said then this is actually double zoning , in the areas affected by flood. Mr. Harris asked if someone lived along the river and wanted to put in a dock, what the restrictions would be. Mr. Boardman said this would be a permitted use, but it would have to be firmly anchored. Mr. Clark said this would require a Special Use Permit. Mr. Harris asked if property along a waterway had problem when the ice went out, and it could be repaired would this require a Special Use Permit? Mr. Boardman fill requires a Special Use Permi_t, but whether repair lot to the same elevation as it was befare, or whether to new construction, should be checked out. an erosion with fill, said any to bring the this relates Mr. Lang�nfeld, Chairman of the Environmental Quality Control ^ Commission, asked if over a period of years, due to ei:osion, the flood level could change and how would this be handled. Mr. Boardman said any change in the flood level can be handled by Council amending the profile. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that when Fridley sets up this type of ordinance, much of the debris is going to come from the North af Fridley. Mr. Boardman said that every community that borders on a CrePk or River will have to set up controls. Mr. Harris asked about trees along a waterway. These are not included in this ordinance. What if someone removed the trees from the bank. Mr. Boardman said you wouldn't be encreasing the flood pctential. Mr. Harris said if the trees were removed, through erosion, the bank could change. Mr. Boardman said this could cause a faster flow and there could be more of an erosion problem. There are erosion control measures. Mr. Harris said he thought there should be something in this ordinance about preserving existing conditions in the CRP-1 district. Mr. Boardman said we have district uses for buildings, and the ordinance says that vegetation must be protected during new con- struction or any alterations or additions. We have nothing that pertains to existing pro��erty. . /1 � Chairman Fitzpatrick said he thought the Commission would be prepared to answer any questions on the ordinance, but not on financing homes for resale. Iie asked if there would be anyone in authority on this who could be present at the Public Hearing. Mr. Boardman said he could check with the F.H�.A. but they have said they would finance homes that are covered in a management Planning Commission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 7 ^ program and have flood insurance. Mr. Fitzpatrick said at the present time, it is difficult to get financing even in a very desirable location, so he could see where people would be concerned about financing in this area. Mr. Clark said this ordinance will allow them to protect their investment with flood insurance. � Mr. Drigans asked if there were homes in the red and blue areas. Mr. Boardman said there were a lot of homes in the red area. This area can be filled. The blu2 areas only cover portions of lots, and the structures are out of the flood way, except the one lot shown in the flood plain in red, along Rice Creek. Mr. Lindblad asked what happened if one of these damaged less than 500. Mr. Boardman said it could be the �aay it was before the damage, but any alterations would require a Special Use Permit. homes were rebuilt to or additions Mr. Langenfeld said he thought the ordiance was misnamed when it was called Creek & River Preservation Management. He didn't see there was much protection for the environment. Mr. Boardman said it does pertai�n to fill and land alteration. Mr. Fitzpatrick said tY�ere could also be damage to the rive�, if structures were torn out by a flood and went in the river. Mr. Clark said the reason this was not called a flood ordiance was because there was a lot of resistaizce to the conotation of the name. We tried to come up with a name that did not have 'flood' in it. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that when the.Planning Commission had hearings on flood insurance, which would be very beneficial to the area, people were still afraid of the implications of having their proper.ty put in a"flood area". Mr. Lindblad asked Mr. Boardman if theoredically they could elimate the red area with fill? Mr. Boardman said they could if in final review by the Department of Natural Resources the flood plain area as set up by the City is acceptable. Mr. Drigans said that people will come to the Public Hearing and want to know how this ordinance is going to affect them. Chairman Fitzpatrick said he thought there should be someone present at the hearinqs that can answer these questions. Mr. Harris asked what happened when there was a flood and there were wash-outs on property that needed immediate action. Mr. Clark said that if it was him, he would fill, and ask questions later, but this point could be checked on also. Mr. Drigans said there was reference to the zoning administrator. Who would be the zoning administrator? Mr. Clark said it would be the City Engineer. . Mr. Drigans asked why variances to this ordinance would be �� • heard by the Planning Commission rather than the Board of Appeals. Mr. Clark said it was because the request for a Special Use Permit and a variance would most generally come together, and because any variances from this ordinance would be very complicated variances. Mr. Boardman said any request for a variance has to be sent to the Commissioner and the Department of Natural Resources 10 days prior � Planning Commission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 8 to the Planning Commission meeting and any approval of a variance or special use permit must be sent to them for review. Chairman Fitzpatrick said we are only reviewing this ordinance before the Public Hearing. I think one thing that has come out of this discussion is that we would li3ce as much resource personal as possible at the Public Hearing. Mr. Lindblad said he thought everyone should make every effort to call this the Creek and River Preservation Management Ordinance instead of a flood plain ordinance at the Public Hearing. , Mr. Clark said if any membezs of the Planning Commission wanted any informa�tion or anything that pertains to this ordinance before the Pub�.ic Hearing to give the staff a call. 3. PRESENTATION BY GENERAL CHEESENTAN ON THE ARMORY PROPOSAL Postponed because of a conflict of dates, rescheduled for November 7, 1973, as stated in memo from Paul Brown dated October 12, 1973. 4. 5�:���U�SION �N BUILDING�HEIGHTS IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE Mr. Lindblad said he had been at the Council meeting on � October 15th and in t.he discussion on the Unity Medical Center there was a questian on how many stories this building could have. Mr. Clark said that because it was in R-1 zoning, it could � only have three floors. Mr. Fitzpatrick sai.d he thought the hospital was hiqher than 35 feet. Mr. Clark said that maybe with the ba�ement it was, but it was three floors in front of the building. Mr. Lindblad asked how high a building could be in Fridley. Mr. Clarks said that in an industrial zone it could be 65 feet. He said he thought a grain elevator for Minnesota Linseed was probably about 125 feet but this was built before our present zoning laws were in effect. Mr. Lindblad questions if there would ever be any high rises in Fridley with the restriction of 6 stories on buildings. Mr. Clark said they could go for a variance for a high rise. Mr. Harris said he thought the 6 story restriction was put on for fire protection. Mr. Clark said the fire department has a 100 foot ladder now. Mr. Harris said another consideration would be that the City water tower was only 145 feet high. Mr. Lindblad said the reason he had brought this up was because he thought the area along the river, South of I.694, was a good area for high rise offices or apartments. Mr. Clark said it ^ would be a good area. Mr. Harris said no one has been discouraged about building this type of high rise. � Plannin Commission Meeting - October 17, 1973 Page 9 5. WALL CORPORATION Mr. Drigans said that he noted in the "Action Needed" notes of the City Council meeting of October 15, 1973 that there was a special meeting being held to determine the feasibility of change of plans by the Wall Corporation. Mr. Clark explained some of the changes the Wall Corporation would like considered. In the general discussion that followed, it was felt that the Planning Cornmission and the Board of Appeals had made recommenda-.�.. tions on what �aas supposed to be the final plan of the Wall Corpor- tion, and if there were going ta be chanqes in this plan, they would like to know what these changes are. MOTION by Lindblad, seconded b�� Harris, that the Planning Commission request a joint- meeting with the City Council to discuss the proposed change of plan by the Wa11 Corporation. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the mation carried unanimously. 6. FRIDLEY NEWSL�TTER Mr. Lindblad said he vaas very happy to see the it to the homeowners attention that garbage cans on ^ prohibited. He �aid it was really an eyesore to go and see garbage cans in the front boulevard of every article calling baulevards are down a street house. Mr. Clark said this started in the winter of 1965 when due to so much snow, the g�rbage haulers came to the City and said they were losing money on their pick-ups. The Council gave permission �or that or.e winter for garbage �cansto be moved close to the street for pick-up. People got in the habit of this and the practice has continued, mostly because he thinks people thought they were doing the right thing. He said all garbage cantainers should be kept out of view from the street, but if you have non-qarbage items for pick-up these should be put at curb-side. Mr. Lindblad said he thought this type of article should be followed up in the newspaper and subsequent newsletters. Mr. Clark said the S.A.C. charges were in this same newsletter and also the regulations pertaining to blind intersections. He said there were other things like this that can be improved by making people aware of the ordinances. He said most people will comply on their own, if the violations are brought to their attention. Chairman Fitzpatrick adjourned the meeting at 10:15 P.M. � Respectfully submitted, �Z��L:i'< h., l ��ti�n/ Dorothy Evr nson, Secretary r . /�. � � 0 �� BUILIIING STE1I`'D:1RDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBC0��IITTEE 1�9EETING OF OC;'I'OBE� 1�,•_,,, �. `�73 Dlceting tvas called to order by Chairman Lindblad at 8:05 p.m. i�fEbiBEFtS PRESENT: Lzndblad, Cariolano, Simoneau, Tonco TIEAIBERS ABSENT: Treuenfels OT'FIERS PRESE�,'T: Jerrold Boardman, Planning Assistant AI�TION by Simaneau, seconded by Cariolano to approve the minutes of. t�1�# Septer;�ber 27, 1973 meeting as written. liPON A VOIC� 1fOTE, all voting ayz, tlle inotion carriecl unanimousl��. 1, CO`:�T�ERf\TIO`: Or A R`��i1i�ST •ro c0.`�S'I'RllCT ti'� AD�ITTQ:i;L 'I'�;IRD FLC)Oj, 'I'J Ci:CUL:!R „�J1LI)I.`� ;�FCR :`�I%DI'1'IC�y^.I. �1):;I��JS`I'i.l�`l'1\'�: USL. ,� - J --- � : -- ; — �--- — � ,=: �, , :; — (CO:�tiS�I,tiiC`I'I : SI:�.;�L:\': 'i'0 �x:CC':�ll _�LQO�. Cir.tifS'1',,�;.:'I'�.�•,v i�:�D f�S PT�1? !'I..'�,:•i�: i'Ri_::.'�:�'i' I:•� Cl'1'�r' C,:�i ICi.S. ), 1.CCA'i'F1�) U:d 'I't-:I: ;�C;tTH 2 SLCi'�0:1 l�', ':`"2C�:L 65C�:!; `I';i,: 5,1�,i:;-L,)1T\G 6�7U Ci:;�;I'IZ'�L f�1'E\'UE, F}tilllL''Y, ;I.`t;�i���:�iA. (T;�:�'iUi�S'i' B'i i�1Ll)'i'i:0i•:ICS, G�?7Q CF.i�<'I';::1t, tl��'t.,�'1;�:, F1�IL111::�, , -----,..—c; '`i�) . — ;. �, ; i I:�'. i� S'.,'•'I :1 J \o one was present for the request. kio;�rever, T1r. Boardman said that� Atedtronics has already been throuJh all of the commissions and Council an�! received ap�roval on their basic plans, They are asking for the thirc� le�'E�� addition at this time. h1r. Boardman said it is mainly a rubber stamp ap��r•Gjv�tl. The Board asked to look at the mir.utes from previous Bui lding Stand.:>>"���� � Design Control meetings. They agreed the item should be xecommended <<�itl� t:t►c June 29, T972 meeting stipulations. � I�IOTIQN by Simoneau, seconded by Cariolano to recommend to Council tlic� appro��al for the construc�ion of the third leve? tivith the stipulations i�n����">�d or. I�iedtronics at the June 29, 1972 Building Standards-llesign Control z�iect i r��;• - UPO�I A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimous.l�'. 2. CO:;SID„R:�TIO'•� OF � Ri�(�U�;S'I' TO CC�i�;STI:LICT A 1��r?�+ SP1iCUL.�TIi1E I>UI_LIiI:�:G I,O�.�\'l;?D (�`d 1,C1'I'S S, u, ��nd %, 1,LUC;: ], C:��1',`�:�\Y Al)I)I'I'IO\`. 'I'1;�� � =' li.;l: .; %bG0 ,":;C\ S�"1'ficET � , Fl<7111��Y, __I;::;'t.:��'.)'.'A. (::i:^;;�:5'1 li�' D. � t;`t1:ST:�,D C0. ,?�:C. , 7101 IiiGl;(':�\Y ;r6� '\. L'. , FI:1BI,'_:1', :•;1\�:iiS(�7':1�55�r32) . -------- rir. .Dick Johnson was present for the rec�ues-t. i�tr. Johnson explained that Paco Atasonr.y, 7880 h9ain Street, and Atr: li:�t'~�tad decided to build a joint site. Paco Aiasonry went t:�rough�all of the co�runi'%'>iorts and Council and received all appr.ovals for ttle vari�nces, site plan, etc• �'»a started construction about a+aeek ago. D. 1V.. Harstad lias gone thr.ou^h 13����i'�i of Appeals and received approval on the variances,need�d. The reason £�r a,f���nt site is to cxeate 1 better looking buildiilg, better parking and side yarcls. The building tivill si�C from 5 to 6 feet lo�+rer thzn Paco, and �;i12 bU ����il5trl�cted of a brick and a break-off block in the front and scorcd block on t}ie s:i�I�,�;, The fourth �vall taill be t3ie dividing �aall bet►eeen tlie two buildings. 11ie b2<�c�- ��=11 be pai�lted. , _ . -.�,_Y_ I3UILDII�G STEIND:�P.DS-DESIGN CO\TROL SUBG0�1:�tITTEE biEETING OF OCT013ER 18, 1�J73-Page 2 ^ The I3oard. asked if the brick would match Paco'�s. I�ir. Johnson .said it taill proUably not be the exact same brick but ivill be compatible. Tlze �asic design of the bui lding �vi 11 be s.irni lar to Paco's . , A1r. Lindb lad noted there were retaining �� alls along the dock clriveways . bfr. Johnson said :his ieas needed as they liad to prcavicie a sloped side�va.lk for the llandicapped to meet State Building Code. and therefore could not level the land any more. �ir. Lind'nlad said if �this wall �vas o��er tliree feet a guardrail t��ill have to t�e provided. I•Ir. Johnson said }ie believed it tvas under three feet. �Ir. Boardman asked about the sidecaalk t�etween the rear of the buildii�g and the parking stalls. blr. Jo}�nson said it wi.11 be taken out and the Board of Appeals said an atta.c}led bumper guard siiould be placed on the building. t�ir. Johnson said he agreed about some type of bumper guard, but felt an attached bumper guard ��'oulcl be hazurdous to the building. The Board rnembers agreed. I�ir. Tonco suggested tihey use a 6" x 6" raooden post attached to the building and attach the steel r��ils to the posts. This woulci direct the impaci fxam the cax to the pests and not the building. Tiiis procedure was followed on the Paco t�9asonr.y buildin�. A4r. Johnson and the Board felt this would solve the problem. 11r. Lindblad noted that all • curbino, tilacktopping and radii }iad met cocle as slio�-.n on thc plans. He asked about refuse and security lights. �Ir. Johnson said all refuse is inside. !ie said he does ha.ve a plan ior the lights, �ut did not have it �,7ith hir:i tonight. He said the light plan is very close ta Paco � r4asonry's plan. I�4r.. Boardman asked about the ctrainabe p�an. btr. Jcl�nson said he did not believe t}iere �•�ould be a prablem as the land slopes naturally south and ta�aards Aiain Street. He did ask that the City stake the alley so they can l:eep the correct elevation for this natural drain�ge and not cause a drainage p�oblem. 1'he Board asked about the landscaping plan. r1r. Boardman said the open area bets,eei� the north edge Parking entrance and southerly drive���ay has to have at least a 3 footi�erm. I�Ir. Boardman also added a post cluster on ihe south side of � the parking lot entrance, rocks along the south �eal2 and back alley exit and sod on all ot}ler areas . T4r. Johnson agreecl on tne changes , T10TIQ� by Tonco, seconded by Cariolano to recommend to Council iiie approval. of the Uuildi.ng i��ith the follo��tin� stipulaiions: 1. A bumper guard attached to the building by �t�ooden pc�sts i,�ith attached stee� xails be provided. 2. The landscaping plan be uscd as presented and as chnT�ged by the City staff, including bermirig, soddi.ng, post eluster and rock. 3. Guardxails provided on retaining i��alls if �ti�alls are over tliree � fcet. � 4. Draina�e plan be �aorked out �vit}1 Engzneering Department. 5. F'oured concxete curbing and 10 foot radius be used on tlie entrances and parkin� lot. ,� �r� � 13UILDING S'I'��'D��P.DS-DESIGN CONTl20L SUBCO�i�tIT1'rE r1F•.ETING OF OCTOf3ER 18, ]973-Page 3 UPOi� A VOICE VOTE, all voting a��e, ttie motion carried unanimously. 3. C0�'SIllLiz!'1'fC`_OI�A �Ft��ll.:S`i' TO C(;�?STRUC"1' A i�P�\`i tIDDITIU;� TO Tfl� PR:_S}.i':1 t'i} i},j, j:;�; i�t)(: t�l)Dl'J 10��=�L (?'_�}� IC!: US1:, LCC.`.i-i:D 0�: ::Ui)I'!'OR' S SUt;I)11�ISI(i:; .`.C1�7n, 1':a.i;Ci:I.. IS�O, "!'i;r ��'•.'�i : ii}:Ii�t, .�il%0 '' • S7i 1 l�'1' ��:\I : h.i: � FI:II�i.��`i"� �il: �J'.SC"1':\. (t�i:i'.Ui;ti'1" iiY rULLf:i:'1'C�;� :•���'1't1L5, 5170 . hiEii'td S`FitL�;'I'�iv.i: , 1�:Ii)LI:ti', i�iI\:�)�Svi':\ 5;;132) 1•�ir. Sheldon Bernstein, architect, ���as presenting. the reqt�est. b1r. Chance and i,fr. Hendxickson, representatives from Fullerton I�ietals, �:�ere in the auclience. Mr. Bernstein explained the additi.on. He said the only� direction they can go is out toj�ards Rlai.n Street. �l north, south or second story addition ti�aould be imPxactical for the ofiice employees, an incvard expansion ti•�arehouse area) titi=ould handicap rrarehouse space and personal, plus the structural design. They have gone to Board of Appeals for. the front yar.d expansion varia.nce and this was granted. i�Ir. Bert�stein felt this front addiiion ��Tould be an advantabe to the commercial area (�i-2) as �vell as the resider�tial area across hiain Street. There �aill be new landscapina and berming in the front. Front parking will be r�o�:'ed � off of� P,1ain Stxeet (48 :foot to 76 foo� setba.ck) and more parking ��il I be provided to the rear of the building. iie said the entire front parking and drive��ray area� will have new poured concr.ete curbing and blackta�pinb. � Air. Simoneau asked what type of material ��ould be used for the outside of the building. P•ir. Bexnste:cnsaid it iti�ill be,brick, as closely matched to che , present structure as possible, an abundant mansard roof and front �aindows. The entxance on the present buildino i,�ill still be used. hir. Tonco asked �uhat type of shakes ��ould be �sed on the mansard roof. hir. Bernstein said he ��asn't sure of the exact type, but they iti�ould rreet code standards. The Boaxd also asked why the parking lot ►aas placed so far to the x�ar of the building. h1r. Bexnstein replied due to possible future expansion oi the build- ing, they felt it �ti�ould be wiser to place it at this distance then closer to the huildi��ig. b4r. Toiico asked about cuxbing around the rear par}:ing Iot. �•Ir. Fernstein said they had plannzd on an asphalt curbing. The }3aard felt tha.t a precast taould look Ueti.er and would not break clotian by the occasional truck traffic or break if hit by a sno�a plo�a. i�ir. Boardman questioried if trucks are back here c�uite often, if so thi.s area will have to be blacktopped. �ir. Ciiosen and Tir. tiendrickson came forward and ex- plai3�ec� that the trucks all unload inside, aitd. i�?ainly at the two front loUding docks. T}iese docks are bay docks so tlie trucks can drive thraugh the building if necessary. Occasionally oiie �+�ill ha��e to use the back ga2.age door next to the /'1 railroad tracks, but this is not ofte�z. A3r. Bernstein and the Fullcrton representatives pointed out that tllis area is seen only by tlicroselves, otlier conu,iercial si_tes and not residential housing, so it is not a visual handicap to aiiyone �y not hzving ttiis area blackto��pecl. . �. BUILDING STf�D�RDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCO�u1ITTEC i�9EETI3�G OF OCTOBER 18, 1973-Page 4 � ° ASr. Boardman said that since trucks back in this area are infrequent, blacktopping will Ue left to Fullerton's discretion, but if there is an}� type of regular truck traffic, provisions should be made to improve this area. t�ir. Boardman a?so said the �lrivei�ay leading to the rear parking can have an asphalt curb, as future expansion ��ould be along here. t_ir. Tonco asked if code iti�as met for parking stalls. AIr. Bernstein said yes, he �vill need at least 38 stalls and tlie plans shocr 39 stalls. • Tqr. }3oar.dman asked about the drainage plan. i•Ir. Bernstein said no final one is available. 'the Board said this plan ivill have to be iaorked out with tne Engineering Department. Tlie �oard asked about the landscaping plan. A1r. vernstein said.the front yard ivill be bermed up and green ash trees planned £or this area. Flo�vexino crat� and li.Iac is shown for the area close to the building, sod and rock iaill also be uscc�. `I'l,,e Boa.rd asked that tlley bring in a landsc�pe plan showing exact types, location and sizes. , . I�fr. Tonco asked the size of the green ash trees as they <<:ould be an aesthetic barrier bet�veen the A1-2 zone and �-1 zone. �4r. Bernstein said he did not knoz�1. ^ I�ir. Boardr:�an said tlze City code requires a three foot berm and a tree �,Tidt.l� of 1%" to 2'� 2 1'he Board recommended they bring in a final landscaping plan which tvill include all of the items mentioned above. , I<Ir. Boardman asked about the variance needed an the roof projection. _ hix. Bernstein said they brougilt t}iis out quite cl.early at the Board of Appeals meeting tliat fihey would like a variance from a three foot roof projection to an approximai;e four foot roof projection. , The re�.son for the rec�uest is that one, it �aill give a more visual residential appearance to blencl in �.�ith the R-1 zoning; and ti�'o, i.t ►vill eliminate the direct morning sun light on the office area. rir. Boardman said 'the point was brought out ai the Board o£ Appeals meeting, but h•as not acted on. lloivever, }ie_ felt Council could pass the variance rec�uested �ahen Fullerton goes to Council. TtOTION by Cariolano, seconded by Simoneau, recomnending approval to Council the addition �vith the follo�eing stipulati�ns: 1. �Precast curbing be placed around the rear parking lot, poured concrete curbing be i�sed on all front pa.rking aild driv:i�ig areas, and the drive- �aay leading to t}ie rear parking' lot can be lcft �to 1'Lillerton`s cliscretion, either asphalt or concrete curbing. � 2. Drainage plan Ue itiorked out ���itll the Enbineeiing Department. 3. Landscape plan sliow size, type and location of trees. �. Council action on tlie roof projection variance be followed. UPON A VOIC� V01'L-', all voting aye, tile n:otion caxried unanin.ously. , i' /'1 � � _ � �� BUII.I)I\G STA.tiDARDS-DESIGiv C0�ITROL S1tBC0�:�IITTEE �SEE'TING OF OCTOBFR I8, 1�73-�'a�e 5 4. . CC`;� �IDi: �"�TIC''J Or :'1 P,Ci�U;iST TO CC.':ST�'UCT �i�! �1DT?I'fI0`: �'0 TIIE tiACK U`r 7'iiL 1'I't51:;::'1' I�UlLD?i�G i=(?;: LlSL-' '�:5��� C:1::L`P,n:\'tU !?:lII�1:i. "i'0 RL•FL:�CL. 1Hc PI�ESi���l' li�;CI:`:i;',:.-1'i�0,:, i3OC::'I'f:D OPd LO'1'S 1,.2, a�?d 3, :�I.00i: 2, �, � A+cD LO'I'S ?S t�:�;i) `l9, :jLCC;: 2, GO �i:}ZCL l':1i:i:; '1'iiii S:�.,'�i�: I3i;:t'�G 250 - 05i�0;:::}� 1'0 �.U, i�}2I Lllii1', � il:`;\;i::0'l:'�. (i:I�i?Ui:S`i' i>1' Cv'�Si1: �3:::5 li;:ITi:D 1'C:� ii'tJ1'I;yC; -:;Uo -?.5v Oj::J.':2���i1 i�O:�D, 1�;�IDL'r1Y, i•i.I:�;���;SO'I':'1 551�.i2) AIr. Hadrath was present for the reauest. t�Irs. Treuenfels arrived at the meeting at 9:00 p.m. l�fr. Hadrath explained the addition �vould be for bailing cardbaard fox the purpose of recycling. `1'his apparatus would be replacinn the incinerator. AIr. Hadrath said he felt the bailer ���as better aver the incinerator as it cuts doi�rn air pollution and saves on our natural resources. He said the addition wi12 be 20' x 20', constructed of block.' 1,he Boar.d asked if the addition <<�o�ild rtatcii the present structure. ,�Ir. Hadrath said yes, it �-rill be painted the same. �ir. Tonco aslced if the roof ineets code. rfr. Eladrath lvasn't sure. AIr. Lindblad � said if it does not, it will r.ot pass the inspection b}� the City Euilding Inspector, and ►:Till have to be brouaht up to code. I�tr. Simoneau asked about soine possible landscaping around CUB. rir. Hadrath said this could be �vorked out. Air. Boardnan suggesied bringino in a plan for review. ��i0TI0N by Tonco, seconded b� Cariolano to recommend to Council approval of the bailex with the folloi��ing stipulations: . 1. The addition be painted to match the present building. 2. ?� landscaping plan be �vorked out with the Czty staff UPON A VOICE VOT�, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. AIr. .Lindblad asked r1r. Boardman if he would suggest to the people coming to the Building Standard-Desion Control subcommittee have a moxe complete land- scaping plan �ahicli tvould iriclude type, size and location of al1 planting. Chairman Lindblad adjourned the meetxng at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, �.��e� � ��� � � > Paula fi. Long � Secretazy n City of Fridley__ THE MiNUTES OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF OCTOBER 92 1973' �J The meeting was called to order by Chairman Drigans at 7:40 P.M. MENIBERS PRESENT : MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Drigans, Gabel, Crowder Howard Mattson - Pl.emel, Wahlberg Engineering Aide MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Gabel, to approve the September 11, 1973 meeting minutes as written. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. MOTION by Gabel, seconded by Wahlberg, to approve the September 25, 1973 meeting minutes as written. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. 1. A REQUEST FOR A VARIAI�TCE OF SECTION 45.052, 1, FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR A RADIO ANTENNA, ABO�'E THE DWELLING ROOF, FROM 20 FEET ABOVE TO 70 FEET ABOVE, TO ALLOW THE PL2,CIIKENT OF A RADIO ANTENNA ON LOT Z, BLOCK 5, BROOKVIEW TERRACE 2ND ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 920 OVERTON DRIVE N.E., FRIDLEY, r1INNESQTA. (REQUEST BY MR. RICHARD J. KREMER, 920 OVERTON DRIVE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA.) � Mr. Kremer was present to present his request. He explained that he recently became a Citizen's Band Operator, licensed by the F.C.C. for a five year period, expiring in 1978. He said he needs this as an additional means of communication between his home and his car. He said his father in law, who lives approximately 120 miles from Fridley, who has not been well, has access to a Citizen's Band � radio with a tower that is similar to the one proposed. He said if he could install this tower he would be able to communicate back and forth quite frequently . with him. He said he is legally able to communicate 150 miles with his radio but with his 5 watt station he is not able to span 150 miles with his present tower without going to illegal power. He said using the illegal power would cause television intexference which he does not want to do. He said with the �� 5 watt station and using a good filter, that there will be no interference. He added he does have a filter on order, that is quaranteed by the manufacturer, to eliminate causing any interference. Mr. Kremer stated the tower is also needed for additional communications as a second line of communication. He'said he does have valid reasons for this but he would not discuss them in public. He said his phone is used quite extensively in his home business and he needs the second line of communication. Mr. Kremer brought with him pictures and specifications for two towers that he showed to the Board. He said he had not decided which he would purchase. He explained the construction details and windload of each tower. He said the tower would be free standing (no guy wires) and would be bolted to the rear of the house by the use of a metal clamp with the base buried in concrete. Mrs. Wahlberg asked how long he had had a tower at his residence? Mr. Kremer answered he has had a tower since May, 1973 when he started receiving but he was not able to send until August, 1973 when he received his license. � Mrs. Wahlberg askecl what distance could be spanned with a 40 foot tower. Mr. Kremer said he figured with 5 watts and a 40 foot tower he could send approximately 90 miles. He said he is legally licensed to talk 150 miles. tes of the Board of Ap�eals.Meetin� of October 9. 1973 �.� Mrs. Gabel asked what distance did he want to be able to span? Mr. Kremer answered approximately 120 miles so that he could keep in touch with his father in law. He ^ said the tower he has is omnidirectional so it sends and receives in a 360 degree area. The proposed tower is a beam antenna which has a concentrated signal of S to 20 degrees. He said using the proposed tower and still using the 5 watt power the signal can travel farther. Mr. Kremer explained that in his neighborhood there are 3 other Citizen Band Operators and 1 Ham Operator so any interference that his neighbors might have could also be caused by them. He said it could also be the fault of the peoples television sets. On the new television sets a filter is installed by the factory so it won't pick up other signals. He said people who have an outdoor type television antenna, whether it is in the attic or on the roof, usually experience � no interference whatever and also if rabbit ears are fine tuned after changing channels interference will be eliminated or at least lessened, He added people usually experience some type of interference when they are trying to watch Channel 5. He stated this could be caused by some relationship of the Channel 5 fxequency to the Citizen Band frequency. Mrs. Wahlberg asked when and why does interference occur? Mr. Kxemer answered it occurs whenever an operator is using to much power or when he has no filters. Mrs. Gabel asked if there is a specific time of day when he uses his radio the most? Mr. Kremer answered�that anytime during the day he can be receiving and sending locally but he generally waits until the later evening hours to reach further out. � Chairman D�igans asked if Mr. Kremer had considered adding another telephone line instead of adding the higher tower? Mr. Kremer said he might have considered it if he didn't already have the radio. Chairman Drigans said that having a Class D License, the range for sending is 150 miles. What range does a Class A or B License carry? Mr. Kremer answered they could send world wide at possibly 1,000 watts but he added he has no desire to d� this. He said that would be used more for.a company rather than by a person for a hobby. . Mrs. Wahlberg stated she is concerned with the safety factors for the antenna. Mr. Kremer then went over the specifications which showed the stress points, welding, windload, etc. Chairman Drigans asked how it would be grounded? Mr. Kremer stated he plans to set it in 2 by 4 cubic feet of concrete. He will have 10 feet of reinforced rod that will be driven about 7 feet down into the hole with 3 feet extending beyond the concrete. He will be putting in the concrete, metal pipe at various angles to strengthen and also also to help ground the antenna. He said it will be able to take a bolt of lightening and dispense it into the ground. Chairman Drigans asked if the yard is fenced and Mr. Kremer said it was on two sides. • ^ Chairman Drigans asked if he had insurance that will cover the tower? Mr. Kremer said he had contacted his insurance agent who had told him his homeowners policy was adequate to cover any damage.that might be caused by the tower. The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of October 9, 1973 Page 3 Mr. Kremer pointed out that he is a volunteer fireman with the City and he is /1 willing to let the City use his radio as a back up radio in case of an �� emergency. Mr. Kremer said the height of the tower also coneists of his television antenna. The bottom of the tower would be the basic structure,�then his Citizens Band antenna and then his television antenna. The Board then discussed the F.C.C. regulations versus the City regulations on the antenna height allawed, It was brought out the F.C.C. regulations state the tower cannot be more than 20 feet above an existing structure (which could be a tree, an extended vent pipe, etc.) while the City Code states the antenna cannot extend more than 20 feet above the dwelli�g xoof. Mr. Glen VanHulzen, 901 Ironton Street, stated he lives across the stxeet from Mr. Kremer and he would like to state his objections. He said he has not had any interference from the cuxrent signals, but he said he would have to look at the tower which he didn't appreciate. Ae said it would not add to the neighborhood at all and because he cannot be sure it would or would not devalue his home he would also have to object to it. He added he is the father of three boys and he is worried as boys do have a tendency to get into things and there is the possibility of them getting around the antenna and trying to climb it. He said he felt the Ordinance was a good one and he felt the people should do their best to keep it that way. ' Mz. Quentin Watts, 991 Overton, stated they occasionly experience interference. ^ He said he dbesn't know that it comes from Mr. Kremer's radio. He said he has spent money to have his television repaired to eliminate getting interference and thexe is nothing left to do with it. He said the interference usually occurs ' later in the evening. He said a structure of that sort is a natural magnet for kids of certain ages even with a fence around it. Mr. Roger Plessel, 861 Overton, said he also objects to the tower. He said he has had interference on Channel 5 and he added it is very annoying as it completely overrides the audio portion of the program. He said he felt it would be an eyesore to the neighborhood. He said the utility companies have gone underground with their lines to get rid of the towers. He said Mr. Kremer already has two aerials �n his home. Mrs. Shirley Brimer, 941 Overton, relayed a story to the Board of how a telephone aperator had�cut into a buSy business line to relay an emergency message. She said if they would do this on a business line they would surely do it on Mr. Kremer's residential line if there was an emergency with his father in law. Ms. Lillian Westin, 940 Overton, said she has had a lot of interference on her t�levision and on her daughters stereo. She said she felt it would be an eyesore. She said since�she lives next door, she is also concerned with Mr. Kremer's insurance and she would like to see the policy to make sure it would cover any damage if the tower was to fall on her house. She said she has been told it would cause ghosts on her television and she said she can't afford a more expensive television. I"'1 Mr. Kremer stated the antenna he proposed is not an eyesore. It is all aluminum and the construction is not cheap. He said there will be mesh on the tower above the eaves so the kids cannot climb it. He said he is going to be very diligent in watching it until the kids get used to having it there. 0 The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of October 9, 1973 Page. 4�.g Mr. Kremer said the height of the tower would be out of normal eyesight as people � usually don't go around looking up in the air. He added one of the neighbors objecting said he had interference last winter so that couldn t have been his fault as he didn't start receiving until May. He said there are other operators in the neighborhood that might run on illegal power. He added the lesser expensive stereo sets and tape decks will pick up interference because they aren't made with any filters. He said he would buy television filters for the neighbors if they feel they need them. He said someone mentioned he already has two antennas on his roof which he has; One is for the fire radio as he mentioned he is a volunteer firema.n and the other is for the Citizen's Band radio. MOTION by Gabel, seconded by Wahlberg, to close the public hearing. Upon a voice ., vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. � Mrs. Wahlberg stated she felt there had been no real hardship shown. She felt an additional telephone line versus the cost of this tower to be installed does not balance out. She said Mr. Kremer will be using this radio more as a hobby opposed� to a business although he says he uses it as such. She said she had difficulty in seeing why granting a variance to this height was a necessity. She said the people in the neighbozhood all seem to be opposed to the antenna. Mr. Plemel said Mrs. Wahlberg also summerized his points. He said we all would like to think a man's home is his castle where he could pursue his hobby but the B�ard does have to consider the feelings of the neighbors. He said Mr. Kremer has stated he will never be going any higher, but for what this equipment will cost he eould have another phone installed for the next ten years. � Mrs. Wahlberg stated with his current license he has the right to transmit 150 miles but his existing equipment permits him to transmit approximately 90 miles which seems to be enough for a hobby. She said the reason of getting in touch with h is father in law does not seem to be enough of a reason to grant this large a variance. She said he also already has 2 aerials on his home. Mr. Plemel said he would assume one of those two wouid be coming down. Mr. Kremer said nei�her would be coming down. The one tower that is up is for 360 degree signals and the one proposed is for 5 to 20 degree concentrated signals. MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Plemel, to receive a letter from Carolyn Doyle, 921 Overton, in which she voices her objections to the tower. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Gabel, to recommend to the Council, denial of the request. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. 2. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 45.134, 6, PARAGRAPH 3, TO R�DUCE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IN AN M-2 ZONING DISTRICT, WHERE IT IS ADJACENT TO ANOTHER ZONING DISTRICT, FROM 100 FEET TO 80 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ONTO AN EXISTING BUILDING, LOCATED ON PART OF LOT 4, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION ��79, THE SAME BEING 5170 MAIN STREET N.E., FRT_DLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY FCTLLERTON METALS COMPANY. 5170 MAIN STREET N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55421.) �. �� The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of October 9, 1973 Page 5 ^ Mr. Sheldon Bernstein was present to present the request. He explained his firm was engaged by Fullerton Metals to advise them on their space problem. Mr. Bernstein, using a half-section map as reference, explained to the Board that Fullerton Metals in on a 5 acre tract of land that is zoned M-2. He said the whole area on the West side of Main Street is M-2 Zoning. He said the area on the East side of Main Street is all R-1 Zoning. He explained Fullerton Metals fronts on Main Street and Burlington Northern owns the land behind them. He said Fullerton has been in this location for 14 years and has expanded regularly. He said their business consists of selling metals to fabricators. He said they do no fabrication themselves, they are a warehouse only. . Mr. Bernstein explained the houses in the R-1 Zoning across the street all faee the East, so their back yards abut Main Street. He said there are garages exiting onto Main Street from these houses and there is a buffer zone of shrubbery that is approximately 15 feet high along these back yards. Mr. Bernstein explained Fullerton Metals would like to construct a 20 foot addition onto the front of their building which would be an expansion of their office area. He said the existing office area is 25 feet by 81 feet with only 2,037 square feet and the area is very cluttered. He said they need to expand but they have to make it useful space. He said they considered expanding back into the warehouse area but because they would be running into the electrical boxes and such, it was deemed unfeasible. He said to expand upward' was also considered unfeasible for their opera tion. He said to expand onto either the north or the south side of the existing � office would only be creating an area that would be 25 feet by 160 feet that would spread the office personnel to far apart. He said the only feasible way to add on would be toward the.front. Mr. Bernstein stated the parking for this business is in the front now, 48 feet from the curb. He said Fullerton will, if the addition is approved, put the parking area in the rear and would also be spending a sizable amount of money for landscaping. He said the landscaping (shown on the plot plan) would include a berm area with trees and decorative rock, shrubs and trees along the building and moving the parking to the rear. He said this landscaping would in essence be � screening the addition. He said the additional parking required by the addition would be no problem as there is alot of area for expansion in the rear yard. He said there would not be a great increase in personnel but they would be adding more office machines. Mr. Bernstein said he had checked with Anoka County and the City to see if they had any future plans for widening Main Street that would require Fullerton Metals to give up part of their front yard but he was told there were no plans to do this, Mr. Wally Chance, Fullerton Operations Man, came forward to explain the physical problems they have with the existing office area. He explained at times there are as many as 15 people within the office area of 2,037 square feet. He said this space includes a storage area, women's lavatory and lounge, and the men's lavatory and lounge which leaves 1300 square feet of useable office area for these 15 people plus the machines and file cabinets. He said this does not leave much square footage per person. � � ^ The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of October 9, 1973 Page 6 ZQ Mr. Chance explained their office revolves around a city desk function so it really all needs to be in one main area. Mrs. Wahlberg asked what percentage of their business is walk in. Mr. Chance answered about � percent or less. He said just about all business is transacted by telephone. Mr. Plemel stated it will be a nicer appearing building than what they have now. MOTION by Gabel, seconded by Plemel, to close the public heaxing. Up�n a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Mrs. Wahlberg stated this type of landscaping improvement will be refreshing to see. She said Mr: Bernstein has explained why adding on in any other direction would create an impossible situation for their office area. Chairman Drigans said they would be enhancing the community whil•e enlarging their own facility. MOTION by Gabel, seconded by Wahlberg, to recommend to the City Council, approva L of the request for the reasons specified in the discussion. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. . 3. A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES OF: SECTION 45 134, 4B, FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO Z�RO FEET SECTION 45.134 4C TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO 24.5 FEET AND SECTION 45.135, lE PARAGRAPH 3 ^ TO REDUCE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN A PARKING AREA AND A LOT LINE FROM 5 FEET TO ZERO FEET, ALL TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING TO BE LOCATED Oi1 LOTS 5, 6 AND 7, BLOCK 1, ONAWAY ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7860 MAIN STREET N E, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA (REQUEST BY D. W. HARSTAD COMPANY, INC , 710�: HIGHWAY ��65, FRTDLEY, MINNESOTA.) MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Gabel, to waive reading the public hearing notice. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. Mr. Dick Johnson, Secretary-Treasurer of D..W. Harstad Co�, Incorporated, was present to present the request. Mr. Johnson explained they plan to build a sma.11 industrial type building, for speculative leasing, like the other four they have built in this area. Mr. Johnson explained the previously approved variances on Lots 1 thru 4, owned by Paco Masonry, Inc. He said the City Council had approved the zero side yard setback with the understanding that when the Harstad Company developed their lots, they too would have a zero side yard setback to enable the buildings to have a continuous line with the 40 foot green areas to be on Lots 1 and 7. He said his campany had to sign an agreement to this effect. He stated the Council also appxoved the same rear yard variance for Paco,and all they are.trying to do is to line up with the Paco building. He said the lots are locked in, small and difficult. to build on but they are nice for rental buildings. Mr. Johnson stated the variance on parking should have read from 5 feet to zero feet ^ to�the building instead of to the property line. �� The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of October 9, 1973 Page 7 ^ Chairman Drigans explained that Paco had asked for a variance on the parking for from 5 feet to zero feet from the property line which the Board had denied. The Building Standards Subcommittee then had recommended to the Council that since the Board of�Apgeals had denied this variance, that the distance between the parking area and the building be reduced from 5 feet to zero feet provided that bumpers be applied to the building. Council in turn had concurred with the Building Standards Subcommittee recommendation. Chairman Drigans stated the variance should be changed as Mr. Johnson has pointed out so that both buildings are the same. Mr. Gary Lindgren, owner of Lots 8,9 and 10, thought the side yard variance . might be next to his property but since it isn't he has no�objections. Mr. Johnson said thexe will be double the required side yard setback between his building and Mr. Lindgren's lots. Mrs. Wahlberg asked what the two 12 foot driveways were for? Mr. Johnson answered that they were for the loading docks, He said they can't drive into the building from the front but they can from the back. Mr. Plemel asked how the buildings were going to be tied together? Mr. Johnson answered the walls of the two buildings would be against each other with a common footing and with a caulked control joint front and rear. � MOTION by Plemel, seconded by Wahlberg to close the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion caxried. Chairman Drigans stated that at the time the Paco variances were considered and approved, that it was with the understanding that the Harstad building would conform to it and that is basically what the agreement was about. MQTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Gabel, to recommend to the City Council, approval of the variances so that this building will be consistant with what the Council approved for the Paco building. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. Is � � �' �� The meeting was adjourned liy Chairman Drigans at 10:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, v MARY HINT Secretary � (1 TFiE rIIA'UTES OF TH� BOARD OF �iPPEALS MEETING OF OCTOBER 23 1973 +'�� The meeting taas ��.1iea to order by Chaixman Drigans at 7;38 P.ti. /"� MEMBERS PRESENT: brigans, Gabel, Plemel I�IEERS ABSENT: Crotadex, L�ahlberg OTHERS PRESENT: Hotaard Mattson, Engineering Aide ri0TI0N by P1eme1, seconded by Gabel, to approve the minutes of the October 9, 1973 meeting as wxititen. Upon a voice.vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. � , � 1. A REQUEST FOR A VAIZI[�1NCE QF SECTION 45 053 4, B4, FRIDLEY CITX CODE TO REDUCE THE SIDC, YARD REQUIRErLENT FOR A�T A'PTACN.ED GAP.AGF F3t0i�1 5 F$ET TO 2 FEET TO ALLOTd THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 6 FOOT ADDITION ONTO ,AN EXISTIP— a^'G STRUCTUP�.E, LOCATED ON ZOT 8, BLOCK 4, BROOKVIELd TERRACE 3xd THE S� $EING 810 RICE CREEK TERRACE N E, FRIDLEY, riINNESOTA (REQUEST BY CAROL ANN GUZY, 810 RTCE CREEK TERRACE N E FRTDLEY, MII�NESOTA� ------. r10TI0N by Plemel, seconded by Gabe1, to waive reading the public hearing notice. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the moti.on carri�d. tirs. Guzy r;aas pxesent to present her request. She explained that she had bought her house about tt,ro years ag�. She said she was a widow and dictn't need a tti,ro car garage at the time, but that now she is getting ma.xx�ic:d again and i.t will be a ttoo car fami.ly. Mrs. Guzy also said that trom the appearance of the si.de yard she maintained, plus an existing .£ence, it looked as if they had about 11 feet to the lot line. Upon having a survey done it taas found that the existing wa11 ].ine �oas only 8 feet � from the 1ot line leaving �nly 2 faet o£ sethack taith a 6 foot addition. Mrs. Guzy said that hex neighbor had no ob�ection as long as the g�,rage ovexhang was shortened and the rain spouts were redixected to the fxont and back. � Chaixman Drigares asked Sahat the distance was betzaeen the two houses and tirs. Guzy answered that it taas about 20 ox 21 feet. Mx. Plemel asked i.f the near end of the neighbors.house ��as ga.rage area or living quarters and 1�1rs. Guzy answered that it was the neighbors bedroom. Chairman Drigans asked �ahat size the addition.�uould be and rSrs. Guzy ans�oered it �oould be 6 feet wi.da by ehe depth of the garage. Mr. Plemel asked ��hat the estimated cost of the addition,was going to be and rtrs. Guzy answered about $I,800.00. rir. P1eme1 asked whether it would be woxth the e�pense since they Y,rould pxobably not get the money back out of the property. Mrs. Guzy said that �aith so many people having 2 and 3 cars, she had been told that her house tiaould be much more valuable. 8 _ � �c.<�:� The riinutes of the Board of � eals Meetin of October 23 1973 Pa e 2 The question c�;as aslced if thexe �aould be any fi11 used and rixs. Guzy sai.d that ^ vexy little if any fill would be needed since they t•reren't going that far. The subject of the outside saall of the addition baing a firewall taas explained to Mrs. Guzy. She xeplied that she taas sure the contractor would kr_o�a t,rhat to do about that. MOTION by Gabel, seconded by Plem�l., to close the publzc hearing. Upon a vaiGe vote, there bezng no nays, the motion carried. - � MOTION by Gabe1 to recom�-nend approval of the variance to Counci7.t,rith the following stipulations: That the outside wall of the addition be a fi.xewall; That the roof overhang be cut back so that it did not jut out past the lot 1ine; and, 1'hat the drainage flot,r be xedirected to the front and back xather than to the side. Seconded by Plemel. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. AD30U�NT• Chaixman Dzigans adjourned the meeting at 8:00 P.M. ' Res ectfully submitted, / ^ • �'"����zi/� , /� a�owAxn r�TTSO�r Acting Secxetary . � � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLATS & SUBDIVISIONS- 5TREETS & UTILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE D'iEETING CALL TO ORDER: 0 �� OCTUBER 24, 1973 PAGE 1 Chairman Harris called the meeting to order at 8:05 P.M. ROLL CAL'L e Members Present: Members Absent: Others PrPSent: Haxris, Christensen, French, Meissner Forster � Darrel Clark, Community Development Adm. APPROVE PLATS & SUBDIVISIOIIS°STREETS & UTILITIES SUBCOb4MITTEE MINUTES: AUGUST 1.5, 1973 h10TION by F'rer�ch, seconded by Christensen, that the P1ats & Subdivisions-Streets & Utilities Subcommzttee minutes of August 15, 1973 be approved as written. Upon a voice vote, a11 voi�ing aye, the motion carried unanimousZy. /�, l. CONSIDER.ATION OF A PROPOSED REGISTERED LAND SURVEY, P.S. #73-08, BY HfiRLAND E3ERRY: Described as be�_ng 180 foot lot e�tensions ' into Locl�e Lake, (part of Lot 3, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No. 23) of Lots 2-6, Block l, Ostman's First Addition, Lot 4, Ostman`s Second Addition, and Tracts A& B, Regi.stered Land Survey No. 20, generally located along the West and North shores of Locke Lake. Mr. Harland Berry was present. Mr..Clark said the lake bottom of I�r�cke Lake is under private ownership. It is owned by Otto Ostman. Some property owners on this lake do not own property to the water's edge. There were deeds drawn up, but because this is torrens property, the County Auditor would not accept a metes and bounds description. Mr. Berry said these deeds vaent all the way through until ,they got to the.Register of Title. ThP taxes were paid this year, but the pro.�erty owners can't get clear title until this Registered Land Survey is recorded. Mr. Christensen said this property is already on the tax rolls then. Mr. Clark said it was. +'"\ Mr. Berry had copies of tlie deeds which were shown to the Sub- committee. Mr. Harris said on some of the other lots they already have extensions into the lake. Mr. Berry.said this land was deeded before 1968, at which time the law was changed on torrens property. (l !a �� Plats & Subs.-Str. & Util. Sub. Meeting - October 24, 1973` Page 2 � Mr. Berry said all the property ovmers were in agreement with this request. Mr. Antell, 6801 Hickory Street N.E., and Mr. Bolkcom, 6821 Hickory Street N.E., were present, and Mz. Berry had the signa- tures of all the property owners who were deeded the 180 foot exten- sions. Mr. Harris said he thought_-at one time there was a proposal that the entire lake bottom was going to be platted. Mr. Clark said at the time that Donovan Schultz platted out Registered Land Survey No. 42, it was thought that all the owners could join together and replat, so all the property lines would come together in the middle of the lake. This does involve so many property owners that it doesn't look as if this will happen. Mr. Clark said from the City's standpoint, the more extension of property lines that can be handled together, the better, but I don't think we want to hold up this request because of that. Mr. Harris asked if Mr. Ostman owned all the Iake bQttom. Mr. Berry said he owned it all except for a small portion owned by Mr. Scherer in the Scherer Addition. Mr. Berry said this had gone tax delinquent about 10 years ago. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark to check on this property and see that it didn't go up for � sale in a forfeiture sale. Mr. Berry.said he didn't think it would come up again for sale for another three years. Mr. C1ark said the same thinq should be said for the -lake bottom if it shauld go tax delinquent. Mr. French said he thought this request was a good step in the right direction. Mr. Clark said this has been approved by the County and wiZl satisfy titles on the property you have deeds for. What it would mean if this was not approved is that it would be difficult to sell this property with a clear title to the next owner. Mr. Harris asked if the taxes were paid on this property. Mr. Berry said all the taxes were paid by Donovan �chultz so he could register his Registered Land Survey. He said he had all the checks from the owners to pay the taxes, but when he gat�out to the County he found that the taxes were already paid. Mr. Clark said.the Council should consider asking Mr. Ostman - for a deed for the balance of the lake bottom. - Mr. Harris said the City should have this, especially if they have to work on the dam. ^ Mr. Christensen said he hadn't been aware that this was all private property. Mr. Clark said the dam was constructed and paid for by Mr. Ostman and the City took over the maintenance of it. �G Plats & Subs.-Str. & Util. Sub. Meeting - October 24, 1973 Page 3 /"� Mr. Harris asked if there was a siltation problem. Mr. Clark said there is only normal siltation, however in 1965 when Highway #47 was under construction and there was flooding, there was a mass�ve siltation problem. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark that if the City got titZe to the lake bottom, would they be responsible for maintaining it, for instance, if it had to be dredged. Mr. Clark said they could be, however, the benefiting property owners might be assessed the cost for maintaining the lake. Mr. H�rris said he thought this would come under the jurisdiction of public waters. Mr. Clark said he could talk to Mr. Roy Schultz of the Departm�nt of Natural Resources and check on this. Mr. Berry said it was his understanding that the State �nly has jurisdiction on meaz�dE�r la�es and this can never be considered a mea.nder�d lake. Mr. W. Balkcom said the dam could be washed out and there could be a Creek running through the lake. Mr. Harris asked how this was affected by the Creek and River Preservatian Nlanagemcnt Ordinance. Mr. Clark said it follows the shoreline of Locke Lake. � Mr. Clark said the dam elevation can be controlled. Mr. Harris asked the property owners present, if they had any objection to the City owriing the lake bottom on the balance of th� Iake. They said they had no objection. . ' Mr. French said he thought it should be a stipulation of this request to encourage the City Council to obtain a deed for the balance of Locke Lake that is still in private ownership by Otto Ostman. This would ensure that if the property went tax forfeit, it would not go back into private ownership. Mr. Balkcom said a great part of the lake is only two to three feet deep. Mr. Harris a�ked why the size of the extensions were 80 feet by 180 feet. Mr. C1ark said that just haFt�,::ns to be the description on the deeds that were deeded away. � Mr. Clark said he thought th�:�extensions of�the lots should be combined with the lots they are extending, so they cannot be separated. They.should be all one tract or all one lot. It all depends on lzow much red tape there caould be, but the new tracts could be combined � � with the old tracts. There ar� deeds that are fileable. There should be one tax statement for each property. �� :�i' � Plats & Subs.-Str. & Util.�Sub. Meeting - October 24, 19�3 Page 4 Mr. Meissner said he was concerned about the size of the � extensians. The extensions by themselves, are buildable sites. As long as the deeds have already been started with the lot size, it would really complicate everything if the size were changed. Mr. Balkcom said they were made this size so there would be a margin if the lake went dawn. Mr. Harris said we are actually platting land locked lots. Mr. Clark said the lots they are extending are nat land lockec3, and if we can find some way to tie the extensions to the existing lots, there won't be a problem. We can have the petitioners first try to replat this to tie the extensions onto the existing lots, or else a legal document can be executed to tie the two parcels together. Mr. Harris asked what the taxes were for the lake bottom. Mr. Berry said they were about $65 a year. Mr. Balkcom said he hoped it wouldn�.t increase the taxes if the two parcels were tied together. Mr. Clark said it shouldn't, however, they should check with the Assessor. Mr. Berry said if these two parcels were going to be made into one parcel for each owner, it could cost about $1,000 per lot for surveying, etc. n • Mr. Clark said he didn't think the lots would have to be surveyed because they couldn't put st�kes out in the lake. He said he would contact Ro11ie Anderson, the County Surveyor, and see what this would involve. It might just be paper work, and the costs could be checked. Mr. Meissner said he didn't like being put in a posztion of agproving something that was already a fact. Mr. Clark said this was done inadvertently because there has: been a change in the law regarding torrens property. MOTION b� French, seconded by 1�7eissner, that ihe Plats & Subdivzsions-Streets & Uti.Zities 5ubcommittee 'recommend to ih� PZanning Commission approval of the proposed regi•stered Iand survey, P.S. #73-08, by Har.Zand Berry, described as being I80 foot Zot ex- tensions into Locke Lake, (part of Lot 3, Revised Auditor's Sub�3ivisioa No. 23), of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, B1ock I, Ostman's First Addition, Lo� 4, Ostman`s Second Addition, and Tracts A& B, Registered Eand Survey No. 20, generaZ3y located along the West and North shares of Locke Lake, with the following stipu.Zations: � 1. Encourage that P_S. #73-08, a proposed reyistered .Zand survey, include the now platted .Zand with the extenszon inta Locke �. Lake . 2• no e o.;, a.Zega1 document should be filed with the property that the two parcels cannot be separated. n � /"\ f °� {� r��'� Plats & Subs.-Str. & Util. Sub. Meeting - October 24_, 1973 Paqe 5 �: The City investigate the possibilit� of obtaining a deed to the r�main.ing lake bottom property. Chairman Harris adjourned �he meeting at 9:10 P.M, Respectfully submitted, �1;�°5 -'' �;�'� ,� :..°O• �.�.. r j�a�' K.. i Dorothy Ev�"�hson, �Secretary � 4 0 N►ZiVUTE,5 OF THE PARKS AND RECREAT�ON COMMISS�ON MEETING, oCTOB�R 29, 1973, �� ,.. _ � a� � Due to the lacic of a c�uorum, the meeting was not officially called to order, but � since there was a visitor present, gener.al discussion was opened at 7:45 p.m., by Chairman Blair. � 1�1EMBERS PRESENT: B1air, Peterson. MEM�3ERS EXCUSI:ll: Stimmler, Caldwell, ldagar. OTHERS PRESL-'NT: Otto Tauer, 5866 2nd Street N.E., Fridley, 55432, 566-8716, Skyline Park. Paul Brokm, Director of Parks and Recreation. Cathie Stordahl, Secretary to the Gommission. SKYLINE PRRI<� Mr. Otto Tauer wa.s present to inform the Commissioners of the problems which he is having in relation to his property �ahich is adjacent to Skyline Park. Mr. Tauer is the o��Jner of a foLir-plex and Izas expressed concer.n for his property and the vehicles owned by his tennants. Mr. Tauer opened his discussion by stating that the tot park was installed withotzt a fence which has created a problem since his drivecaay runs along the park side of the building. He explainerl that he had rec{uested the installation of a fence and Mr. Brown had taken caxe of his�rec�uested by installing a sriow fence until such time as a permanent fence could be insta.11ed. A snow fence is only 4' high and he feels that this height is not adec�uate. I�1r. Tauer displayed some rocks and a broken toy car which he had picked up ofi ;�i his driveway. He stated that the toy car had ^ punctured a car tix•e. Mr. Tauer said that it was his understanding that a four foot chain link fence i.s to be installed, a.nd he intencis to demand a higher fence. hir. Tauer further explained thai: Mr. Brown had informed him that according to the City Ordinance regulating the installation of fences, the maximum heighth for a�fence is seven feet. t��r. Tauer stated that he had checked �aith the fence companies and they do not make a seven foot fence, so he is rec{uesting an eigFit foot fence. He clidn't think �}�at a six foot fence wou.ld take care of his problem. Mr. Tauer asked the Commissioners to put their intentions in writing, so he would have a firm statement ta work with. � - Mr. Tauer further explained that there was a lot of foul language used at tlie park, the trash barrels are being over-turned, and the slide appears to be a target for the rock throwers. He has called the parents of the youths who are abusing the facility and has even talked to Lt. Rick of the Police Department. Mr. Tauer feels that the youth need a park, but ]ie pays,for a license to operate llis four-plex and he feels that Yie is entitled to some protection. Mr. Tauer stated that other neighbors don't care enougtl to complain becaus.e �the�;r do not o�,m their homes . If the problems get too far out of hand, they'11 rnove. +He stated that he was about the only property owner in the neighborhood. Mr. Brown stated that it was the Department's intention to install a fence, but no heighth or time table }las been devised. b�r. Tauer explained tliat ]le had already i�lstalled a 9 guage steel chain link fence on tliree sides of tlis property, and had cost Ilim almost $7UU.00. ' ^ Mr. Tauer referred to some pr.evious conversation which he had had with Mr. Brown wliere they discussed uilsupervised ctiil,dren playing in the Park. tie asked if there was some way that the parents cou.ld be forced to supervise their children while they are pl_ayiiig at tt�e Park? Mr. Brown ancl ttie Commissioners said that there caas no�. h1r. 1'auer. said tl�at if ttie City ctilould wri.te a letter warning the residents of thc neighborhoc�d to watch tlzeir children, he would personally aeliver the letters. r9r. Blair stated that the City was in no position to write such a letter. Minutes of the Parks �, Recreata.on Commission.l�leeting, Octobex 29, 1973. Page 2 SKYLINE PARK �CON`T), � /'� Lt. Rick had suggested that the neighborhood patrol be used and that he in turn would phone the parents, according.to Mr. Tauer. If this method of control.doesn't work, that the City �aould have to take legal �ction. Mr. Tauer reported that Lt. Rick had called three different.parents and it seems to have helped. They aren't certain though, because since that time, school has opened and perhaps the youth have less ti�ne to be out and earlier hours. T4r. Tauer �,iants the problems correctecl before school is over in the Sprzng. He xecormnended the installation of a night-watch light. Mr. Tauer repeated his request for an eight foot fence. Eie said that the venetian slats would be iiice, but would probably serve as a snow trap, so he is asking tl�at after the chain lii�k fence is installed, that another length of finer mesh fencing ve fastened to the chain link fence, to prevent the children from throwing rocks onto his drive�,�ay. He again askec� for a written statement of the Commissioners intentions. Mr. Blair remi��ded A4r. Tauer that they did not have a quorum present so they couldn't take any specific action. He asked Mr. I3rawn to do some research on the problem and prepare a recomn�endation for the November 26th meeting. �Ir. Tauer thanked the Connnissioners for their time, alid departed. Mr. Uro�an briefly reported on previous�conversations with i�1r. Tauer, and stated that the main purpose for the installation of the fence, was to protect the children from the drive�aay traffic, which the present 4' fence is doing. f�e stated that within ^ time, t.he Departmen� does plan to install a permanent fence, but that in his own opini.on, the obligation of the City goes no farther than the recommended 4' heighth. As far as the additional screening attached to the fence, Mr. Brawn didn't feel it . was necessary. Tlr. Brown said that he would research son�e prices and report to the Commission. . Mr. Peterson stated that he could understand I�4r. Tauer's concern, since he lives next to Locke Park. He decribed, briefly, his own experiences. Mr. Blair said that he, too, lives adjacent to a Park, Plaza Park, and he felt that the only people who were haviiig proUlems were bringing them on theirselves. Mr. Peterson etplained that has a legitimate complaint. meeting to furt}ier discuss SCOREBOARD FOR COf�'V�10f�JS PARK � from his own experiences, that he feels that Nlr. Tauer Mr. Blair said that they would wait until the November the situation. The discussion was turned to the memorandums prepared by Mr. Brown, regarding the donation of a scoreboard for the Commons Park, and the possible construction of a scoreboard / storage building to be built witilin the park. Some general �iiscussion followed �aith the"Conunissioners trying to determine just where the responsibility lies titi�ith the cost af constructing such a building. I�1r. Brown said that it would service the Pootball Association, kIockey Association, and Babe Ruth Association. It would also coiitain the concession stand and controls for the scoreboard. � Mr. Blair asked that Dan Sullivan be invited to attend the November 26th meeting of tlle Commission, to further discuss the situation. Mr. Sullivan has been appointed as the liason betti��een the three groups and the City. POSSIBLE DQNA7ION OF A BUS� Mr. Brown referred to the possible donation of a bus by thc Jaycees. Ile stated that l�e hacl danc a study for tlie CitY Admini.stration, regarcling costs, liabilities, etc., Minutes o£ the Parks F, Recxeation Comntiss7.pn Meeting, October 29, 1973. Page 3 BUS iCON�T): � and reported back on just what the actual o�eration of the bus would cost the City. Mr. Brown pointed out that the monies spent annually for bus transportation are quite sizeable, and perhaps, with the addition of this vehicle, we could both cut the costs of transporting individuals to events, ancl in addition, provide other services which we presently don't offer. Mr. Brown will report again, to the full Commission. MINI-BIKES: Mr. Blair asked is there had been any further ctiscussion regarding the mini-bike problem. Air. Bro�,�n responcled by saying that he had met tilith Bob Schroer, owner of 13ob's Produce, and the President of the Fridley Sno-Snoopers, regarding the use of some property which is located to the north of the Produce Ranch, and that N1r. Schroer had offcred the use of this propexty for mini-bikes and snowmobiles, mentioning tliat �erhaps somethiilg could be taorked out with the City regarding the taxes on said property. T}iis is sti.11 in very preiiminary stages and that nothing had been finalized. A1r. Brown will keep the Commission informed of the progress, ADJOURN(�1EP�iT � Since the meeting could not be officially called to order, no formal motion to adjourn, was made. General discussion was ended at 8:30 p.m. �� The next regular meeting will be held on Monday, November 26, 1973, at 7:30 p.m., in � the Community Roam of Pridley Civic Center. Respectfully submitted, L�;,t"�s'�.�J CATHIE STORD�l1L, Secretary to the Conunission. ^ 32 Planning Commission Meeting - Marnh 7, 1973 __ Page 15 /'�. MOTION by Schmedeke, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the Planning Commission recorrnnend to Council approval of lot split request, L.S; ��73-02, by Amber Construction Company, to split off the North 20 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Worrel's Addition, and add it to Lot 18, Block 1, Amber Oaks Addition, to make a 50 foot lot a buildable site. Upon a voice vote, aIl voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. /�. ✓ V� :/ /'\ 9.. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L,S, ��73-04, BY DENNIS C,CZECH: Divide LoC 15, ,Parcel 1080, Auditor's Subdivision No. 129, into two building sites. �Mr. Dennis Czeeh was present. c Mr. Clark s�id this is part an•old plat that was left out of Gunderson Terrac , between Onon ga and Fireside. He said Mr. Czech's lot is 120' x 250� and he wou like to keep 130 feet on the lot where there i`s an existing house, o provide a larger back yard. The house on Onondaga is 52 feet bac from the property line. The remaining parcel will be�75' x 120',�whic will be the new building site. Mr. Erickson sai� this would meet the minimum requirements. Mr. Fitzpatrij,c�k sa this split isn't in line with the other lots in this block. �tr. Clark said it was oft 10 feet so the 10 foot utility easement would,all have to be taken off the one lot. Mr. Clark said he would have��to check the asements on the other progerties, and line the easement,iup with the oth lots. MOTION by Minish, seconded�by Fitzpatrick, that the Planning Commission recomme�}d approval to Council• of lot split request, L.S, 4�73-04, by Dannis C. Cze�h, to divide Lot 15, Parcel 1080, Auditor's Subdivision No. 1�9, into o buiTding sites, subject to the alignment of a 10 foot utility ease ent on the 130 foot lot. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the mot on carried unanimously. ' 10. Ai�M_ORY �FERRAL � William Cheeseman, Adjutant General of the State of Minnesota was present. � Genera2 Cheeseman said he was here aC the request of Mr. Clark to expand or answer any questions the Commission might have in regard to location or site, if a National Guard Unit is established in the City of Fridley, and for your recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Erickson asked General Cheeseman how much land they would need. General Cheeseman said they would need a minimum of 5 acres, which is required by Federal directive, and we have to have.fee simple title to the property. By we, I mean the State Armory Building Commission. Mr. Erickson asked who would purchase the property. . General Cheeseman said the land must be donated �y the community to the State Armory Commission, who in tura, turn it over to the State of Minnesota. � �� p�annin� Commission Meetin� March 7�973 �a�e_16 Chairman Erickson asked how large the armory would be. General Cheeseman said it would be approximately 18,000 square feet, with an additional 28,000 square feet used for an a.sphalt road, sidewalk., parking area, etc.. Mr. Minish asked if the armory would be available for cor�unity use. General Cheeseman said civic functions where no profit is made, and it doesn't cost the armory money, there.would be no charge for the use. Once the building is up, it doesn't cost the City any�hing for maintenance �r. upkeep'on the building, If the use does cost the armory money, there wou�d be a rental charge. Sf the Firemen or Chamber of Co�rnerce �aere to use it for a dance, for instance, there would be a charge. Mr, Fit�patrick asked if there were gyumasium facilities of any kind. General Cheeseman said the floor was concrete and the assembly hall c�2s 7,000 square feet. This is large enough for a full b�skett�a�l court ariu they do install the baskets. As far as sports are concerned, it wau1G have to be used for fntermural sports because there are no iacilities far an audience. • �e said the National Guard would only be using the armory during �lz� week end. Mr. Fit2patrick said ther� is a need for xecreational areas £or the Park Board. General Cheeseman said the armories have been used for this � purpose and there are locker room and shower facilities. General Cheeseman said the Federal Government pays 7570 of the cost of ' the construction of an armory, within the specifications they set up by military ordinance. 2hat leaves 25% which actually gets to be about 3{�/0, that they won�t provide, that must be paid by the co�unity and the State. The State puts money in its appropriations and this money is for:a new • armory to lease the facilities from the State Armory Building Cvurcnission. The armory does not belong to our department. That mQney goes into pa.ying off the bonds. Also there is a payment by the comtnunity, as provided for by law, in regard to tax levy on taxable property. T�iis is payment by the Gity, to retire the armory bond. , General Cheeseman said, in Faircnont, Minnesota, where they just built a new armory, it will cost that City $6,000 a year for about 23 years. There is a basic plan for an armory, and this particular armory, was more expensive than most. They asked for additions, and every City has different requirements We can add anything that the army can share the use. We had to turn down one request for an armory because they wanted an ice arena in connection with the armory and this cannot be considered a shared use. Mr. Erickson said, in essence�, the City is buying a piece of a building and if they want to use it, there would be some fee for using it. Genera� Cheeseman said he thought it should be brought out that this will be Fridley�s Guard Unit, and so was a part of the coc�unity. The charge for civic uae ^ . would be very minimal, just the cost of clean-up,.light$, and heat, if ecessary. He said for intermural sports the fee is $6.00 an hour and for a'dance the fee would be $75.00, .. . 3�� Planning Commission Meeting - March 7, 1973 Page 17 � '^ 1�Ir, Erickson asked how much equipment would be stored on the property. General Cheeseman said that would depend upon tfie type of unit, but it would be vehicular equipment, Mr. Minish asked if our code calls for atorage of all eq�lipment, how this would be handled. General Cheeseman said this is what he meant that by meeting the requirements of different cities, the cost of the building could vary. � General Cheeseman said that out oi twenty communities, we only want an armory in five of them. , Mr. Erickson asked how many men would use the�armory. General Cheeseman said a single unit armory has 120 men. General Cheeseman said we do need highway access and should be able to move our equipment without driving on residential streets. We also need all the utilities. There must be sewer and water available. Chairman Erickson asked if General Cheeseman had looked at any sites in Fridley, General Cheeseman said he hasn�t looked at any sites. He said we are making it known we want to locate five armories in the Minneapolis area, If a community shows an interest in ha�,�ing an armory and ther.e is some sort of a commitment from the Council to support an axmory, which he said is quite intangible, He said he didn't want to wav� the flag, but it needs the patriotic an d univeral support of the community. He said the Council has shown an intereat by referring this to the �lanniug Commission. He said a site should be selected and ear marked f-or an armqr•�. Th�e should be no transfer of property until a r'equest goes into the Federal Government for an armory to be located here. . Mr. Erickson said if the City Council said; we want an armory at some designated location, then how long would it take. . General Cheeseman said it takes some time. They are working on a ten , year plan. He said the City would get a letter saying it is our plan and ' program to build an armory in Fridley, and give them a firm year. He said the Council woulc� then be asked to appoint a citizen's committee that � would work with someone from the military, appointed by the Governor. • � Mr. Schmedeke asked if they are meeting with other suburbs also. General Cheeaeman said they felt that Fridley would be a good location or an armory. � �,,,,� hairman Erickson thanked General Cheeseman for coming. � 'T 11. REVIEW OF MINUTES ON ZOA ��72-11 and SP 4k72-18, UNION OIL COMPANY � Mr. Erickson sai3 they asked for a review of their minutes because the &tatement had been made that the Planning Commission didn't understand the proposal. . Mr, Erickson said they did understand the proposal, but the traffic solution presanCed with the proposal caused a lot of controversy at the Public l�earing. '�}�e Plaaning Cammiss�on also felt there could be a better eolution: ' _ �J JP1a�fn� Comcn�.�:,it�n Meeting - n�rii 4, 1�73 _ Pa�� 7 . , ^ : KOTIi�N b� Zeglea, seconded bq Fitzpatric�C� that the Planning Cou,mis�ion sonti�ue� th� exten�ipn of the Special Use pernii�, SP ,�71-0�, by Green Giant Haaa�e and Garden Genter Pool Center, located at 7622 University Auenue Northe� uutil Apri,l �8, �97�� Upon a voice vate, all voting aye, the motion carried una�imously. . Chaixmaxe �ricluson said he would like to see th� p;evious minutes on this Special Use Per�it sa th�y had �he histnry o� it. ,/ 6. CONSIDE&�T�ON OF NATIOI�,42, GUARD AR.*IflRY PROPOSAL V Gha�x�aan Erickson asked Mr. Fitzpatrick i�E ha haci discussed the �naory propoaal with the Parks � Recreation Commi��ior►. Mr. Fitzpatrick said h� hadn't. He said he had come a�ay fram the mesting after General Cheeseman waa hsre,'feeling tha� the City would have to be willing to put a lo� of money into the armory if recreation �acilities were gofng ta be pzov�tded . � Mr. �Iinish said if this was going to be a primary concern in c°ns�ide�in$ the armory proposal, we could put up zecreationaZ facilities for a�ot iess cost than payin� for them in an armory, � . Mr. Fitzpatxick said the Parks & Recreation Commission is making a aomp�rehensive study o£ cost in providing recreation and this study COLI�.CI �, includ� tha cost o£ providing recreation in an armory, Chairman Erickson asked if anyone on the Gomm�s�iQn felt we had a �ive acz'e gaxcel we could purchas� fos this use that would meet a11 the �equireme�ts the� ax�moxy must m�et. �tr. �'itzpatrick said he thought a sits would be dif£icult to find �tten F�ridley Was aliteady so well developed. Mr. �rickson said we ar� having a prob],em finding a site for a library. I�c', Minish said GeneraZ Cheeseman had said the cosr�unity has to be �� ��vor o£ the armory and give it gaod support, ��an't see that st�rong , , sup�orC ccxning �rom �ridJ,ey. J �'. �xickspn sai$ the prapoeai was so vague, and there was no commitment ��� t�� ��Y• �. Minish sa�d it would be five year� ox more befors we . � wou�,d have a def3.�i�e ' co�nmitment . � Chairmau Erick�on said the City is invalved in Ch�se Zsland, the Noxt2� P�rk area, Che Ice Arena ar��i other project$ tha,� are all going to haVe to fit�d a place ia the budg�� an� I dou�t feel we should lock up a �a�ce1 of �and for years when we don't �aow i.f an azmory wi11 ever b� �QCated hexe, Kic. 8itzpatrick said that Fridley wi13, have done its share as a � coQUaii�x� ty * � , � �b P],anning Cammissi�oz� Mee�ing - Apral 4, Z97� . .. Pege $ � , MpTIQN by �egZen, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the Planning Gommission �eGOmmend �o tha Counc�.l thaC since the City has a number ofrinter-crxnmunity prQ�ects already i.n existence and under development, euch as Locke Park, Moore Lak� $�ach, Gal.umbia Arena, NorCh Park, and Ielanda of Peace, it would aot be in the besC inteXea� of F�idley to ad3 the additional facility of a NaCional Guard Armory whi,Ch would require the purchase by tha City of about 5 acres of choice zeal estate for an ix�definite period of tima for a use which could be easily provided by one or more surroundin� communities �hose land availability is such, �hat kheix �ax base would not be eroded by such purchase as would Fridley�. Upan a voice vote,'aii voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. � Chairman Erickson adjounied [he mee'tiag at 11:OQ P.M. � . /'� • Resp�ctfully submitt�d, , Aorc�thy E nson, Secxetary , .. � . �� � /'`� . . _ .)�� I OFFICIAL NOT�CE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLTC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday:; November 7,. 1973 P.M. in the Council Chamber for the purpose of: Consideration of the adoption of a new Zoning District called Creek and River Preservation District. The purpose of the new Zoning District is to guide and regulate the orderly development of such land, to preserve and protect the natural state of the Creeks and Rivers, to prevent polluting materials from being carried directly into the natural streams, to preserve adequate ground water in filtration, to protect surface and ground water supplies, to promote public health, safety and general welfare by minimizing losses due to periodic flooding, and to elim- inate the obstruction'of flood flow that would cause hazard to life and property. The following described parcels will be all or in part affected by this new zone. � All properties abutting Locke Lake, Rice Creek and the Mississippi River in addition to; Lots 12-16 Lots 21-30 Lots 22-31 Lots 20-33 Lots 17-39 Lots 11-43 Lots 1-44 Lots� � 1-44 Lots 1-39 Lots 1-31 Lots 1-21 Lots 1-31 Lots 18-23 Lots 13-23 Lots 1-32 Lots 1-26 Lots 1-39 Lots 1-26 Lots 1-6 Lots 12-23 Lots 1-3 Lots 25-28 Block 0 Block P Block Q Block R Block S Block T Block U Block V Block W Block X Block Y Block Z Block K Block L Block M Block N Block AA Block BB Block 8 Block 7 Block 1 Block 1 Riverview Heights Addition �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� Spring Brook Park Addition �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� Of f icial Notice �� Public Hearing RE: Creek & River Preservation District � Page 2 Outlot 1 Block 4 Pearson's Craigway Second Addition Lots � 1-6 Block 4 �� �� „ „ Lots 1-17 Block 5 Lots 5-12 Block 7 ° �� �� �� Lots 5-7 Block 2 Elwells Riverside Heights Addition Lots 11-14 Block 1 Oak Creek Addition Lots 20-24 Block 2 Sandhurst Addition Auditor's Subdivision No. 37 Lots 1,7 Block 1 Valley View Manor Addition Lots 3-8, 11,12 Brookview Addition Lots 4B,4C,4R,4S Second Rev. of Auditor's Sub. No. 21 Lots 1-10 Dennis Addition With the adoption of the ordinance for Creek and River Preservation Management, the City will become eligible for flood insurance through the Federal Subsidized Insurance Prog�'am• This hearing will be open to all residents of the City. Anyone desiring to be heard in rPference to the above matter may be heard at this time. Information regarding the Zoning Ordinance is available at Fridley City Hall. Please feel free to call our offices. Telephone 560-3450. /'� Publish: October 24, 1973 October 31, 1973 /'\ EDWARD J. FITZPATRICK CHAIRMAN - PLANNING COMMISSION �"� � MEMO T0: MEMO FROM: Planning Commission Members Jerrold L. Boardman, Planning Assistant MEMO DATE: October 31, 1973 RE: Flood Plain Information Requested I talked to Jim Wright of the Department of .Natural Resources about the questions that you had raised at the October 17, 1973 meeting and can report the following: l. The City of Fridley has sole priority on the decisions within its boundaries. Approval by other bodies are not necessary since there are merely recommending to the City. 2. Any fill, even from washouts, should require City approval, although filling in emergency situations � can be a matter of City policy. The reason for this is that the City should have control over the type of protective measures taken in order to control future erosion. 3. Removir�g o.f trees in the flood way would not increase the level of flow and would therefore not be a necessity to control in a flood management ordinance. However, it could be incorporated in.our ardinance without affecting the validity of what we want to achieve with our ordinance. I also talked with Mr. Jim Haner of the Department of Housing and Urban Development - F.H.A. Division. He said that the mortgage value of the homes within the flood plain would increase because of the availability of mortgage money with the purchase of flood insurance. He didn't feel that -the actual housing value would decrease in those areas affected by this ordinance (such as Rice Creek) because we are not restricting�any land improvement in the floodway, only habitable structures. Mr. Kirk English, Department of Natural Resources, and Mr. Jim Haner, HUD, will be present at the meeting of November 7, 1973 to help answer questions. � . JLB/.de 0 � C'�l'�J /"\ OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMI5SION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, November 7, 1973 in the Council Chamber at 8:00 P.Ni. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Fegi�stered Land Survey, P.S. #73-08, by Harland Berry, described as being I80 foot lot extensions into Locke Lake (Part of Lot 3, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No. 23) ^ of Lots 2-6, Block 2, Ostman's First Addition, Lot 4, Ostman's Second Addition, and Tracts A and B, Registered Land Survey No. 20, all lying in Section 15, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. _ , Generally located along the West and North Shores of Locke Lalce . /"1 Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at this meeting. Publish: October 24, 1973 October 31, 1973 EDWARD J. FITZPATRICK CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION � CI'I'Y OF PRIDLCY MINNFSO"1'A �� TYPE OI� REQUrS'I' PLANNING AND ZONING POltht Rezoning � � � Number P.S. #73-08 APPLIC�NT' S SIGNATURC HART AND BFRRY ' • � � • . _ . • � ' ► - Teleplione Nwnber �Rq. 2g�9 PRUPEI2'I'Y Oi4'NF:P.' S SIGI�/l'1'llRE Address Telephone Nt�inber Special Use Permit X Approval of Preliminary Plat Approval of Final Plat Strcets or Alley �'acations Other Sireet Location of Property�aenerallv located along the West & North shores of Locke Lake Le�al Descrip�ion of Pro�eity Lots 2--6, Block 2, Ostman's lst addition, Lot 4, Ostman's 2nd addition, Tract A& B, R.L.S. #20. 180' extension of these lots from Part of Lot 3, Rev. Aud. Sub. #23 Present Zonin� Classification R-1 Existing Use of Property Proposed Zoning Classification, Special Use, or other request Describe briefly the Type of Use and Improvement Proposed This is necessary because this is torrens property and a metes and bounds description is not acceptable by the County. Acreage of Property Has the Present Applicant Previously Sought to Rezone, Plat, Obtain a Lot Split, Obtain a Variance or Special Use Permit on the Subject Szte or Part of It? . ta�,��1� � What �vas rec{uested Pee E�iclosed$ FEE RV�AI��D Date riled 0 Datc of Iiear. ing � ,� 0 �'g„�j�kljj;r, ¢N!� ZOttT1iG T'Ui�t�f t�tr�b� r.-� P..�5�. #�.� �- n 8 PACi; � � r �a �?��c��¢�f?,�e� underctenras that: (a) A 1fAt of all resident� �r,r�. sr;��c;rs ag �°:t:'c�- ;. . � perty witltiin 3Qb fect czca�t i��e �ttoci�c� (;� Ci�is epg�l�cation. Cb� 'lhf.s ���yfc�;ti�i7 c::ust be a�.;;a.�c� h�t r,4i o�.rne�s of th� prol>erty, t3� ; n e•r�.A,itatt:a��.,�:-� �,i��c�n �.�ti�r �nis fr� not �he ��:��:. . (C) �:espon�inil.fty �o: c�n� caei�ct f.e3 �h� ;zbn:- c���itn�;'.; x�,tsui.�ing �ra�a Che ���i��e tci ���:;�;� thr_ nrt�t�.f ,��ncl aacire^«es �� �.Z�. kee��rs�nt;;� b�d p::apert� o.t<<er� o�' �rn�e}�� �ronti;y��:� •,�:: � fr;�t of thG �ro, c-r�:� in c��leub�c�no be�c�,'����; tn �h� undersi�ned. . �',.����'`c��k:� �t��' C.�a:F°a-� af 1-'�.��,���;r c�itl�it► �0� �c�l: �'�:l i � �:r'i3 �s l';�LT�at.:. S 5 ,�.�*:�:•�---._.._.�.�. — .Y_..�_,_ �:;�, . � �- ..�..�,.�...,�.�;;.�.,. �° . . O'1 �„�r,,,,,,,,,.�,,.,,,,,.,,,,e,5.�,�,_ a t t a rh E�.�..L,].,S,t, ,,,.q..,..� . _...�.�..e...,...�..�.�.. � � �--*�^� . , . �----r---�----- . _ � ����q�c�t o� p�op�sed propexey �nd �tr.uceure c�u�C be dre4�n cn �h� bnck cs� Ghf�� ��aW`� p� ���ac��;ci+ �howirag �h� foll�cain�,: I. � csYt(� I3ircetfon 2. L.oc�tio� af �'r��ro��d �trtictc:rQ c�N�. 1c��� 3. I�i�:�n�lons af pr���::rl�t � ra� Q^�;� ' � cta°u�ture� �:�d �ront �nd �fd� a�e��b��^t;;:�. . 4. S�reet taac:es S. Y,oc�t�,on r�nd use of ��}acent cx����.c.; t E�uildfr,�,s (wiChin "�Q� 6e�t} . �� u�de�s��;ned her�by u�cscla�.;�s ehs[ �11 the iacts anc� rerr�cesttatbas�a �CaCed �.� ��i3�g c�p�b�.c�t�on �:e �r�e �n� co�exect. �'y�`� S TGi�1i t'tJ'rZE . . �A�rLFCl�ra�) . .«, ��r����r�a� �;�:�YQVe�i �vai�;d 25y ths �a�sd �� ap;,sc.4�e Eo�a�?ct .f:� tk;c F'oilo�tns Cond$tion�s: � , • ..� ��:.�,�. �,�.'g��av�:d I��r�LNCi by ehe Plannia� Ccx�i�aian nn �a��Q�� tq t�� i:;�sflla�ain� C�: ditLan�; r���, ,t�,^hroved L�cyicd by eh� Councit �� 4��h��c� :.� che F41io��fng Cons�itlan�: � � c�cpt� �or� rc �ea � � Locke Lake R.L.S. P:S. #73-08 Harland Berry MAILING LIST ^ � m � Theodore Zawislak 400 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley 55432 Donovan Schultz 15 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Bel Air Corp. 443 8�h Ave. N.w. New Brighton, Mn 55112 Mr. & Mrs. Eugene Gruenberg 6963 Hickory Circle N.E. Fridley 55432 Harland C. Berry 7099 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Carl Zuk 281 Rice Creek Ter.race N.E. Fridley, 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Hebert 271 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley, 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Howard Grivna 261 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Bernard Wolke 251 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Art Christenson 231 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Herbert Winge 221 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley, 55432 Adelbert & Agnes Wilm 211 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Janke 201 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley 55432 �3 Plannzng Commission 10/23/73 Council MR. & Mrs. Calvin Hamilton 181 Rice Creek Terrace N,E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ralph Parsons 171 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Robert Buekley 54 Locke Lake Road N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. :. Timothy Urista 3509 202 Ave N.W. Cedar, Minnesota Angela T. Wolke 290 Rice Creek B1vd. N.E. Fridley 554?2 Leona Hubley �,86 Rice Creek Blvd. N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Michael Kuzyk 280 Rice Creek Blvd. N.E. Fridley, 55432. Mr. & Mrs. Benito Diego 276 Rice Creek Blvd.. FridTey 55432 � Mr. & Mrs. Albert Larson 270 Rice Creek B1vd.N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs.Miles Gallagher 266 Rice Creek Blvd. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ronald Larson 260 Rice Creek Blvd. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Marvin Artmann 254 Rice�Creek Blvd. Fridley 55432 Thomas J. Murphy 250 Rice Creek Blvd. N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Schillinger 240 Rice Creek B1vd. N.E. Fridley 55432 � 0 Mailing List Page 2 Proposed RLS � P..S. #73-Qg �iarland Berry � Mr. & Mrs. Andrew Kohlan Mr. & Mrs. Ernest Block 236 Rice Creek Blvd. N.E. 71 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Michael Wang 230 Rice Creek Blvd. N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Wilfred Geiger 226 Rice Creek Blvd. N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Laurance 220 Rice Creek Blvd. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Allen 77 Rice Creek Way Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Donald 81 Rice Creek Way Fridley, 55432 � Bergqui�st N.E. 5mith N.E. Anderson Mr. & Mrs. Frederick Halverson N.E. 85 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Henry Parkes 216 Rice Creek Blvd. N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gordon Aspenson Y7 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 � Mr. & Mrs. Charles Turbak 23 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 � Mr. & Mrs. Stanley Guzik 29 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Silverstein 6675 East River Road N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Allan Puro 6795 East River �coad N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Theodore Savchuk 6785 East River Road Fridley 55432 Lida Robidoux 6675 East River Road N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Herschel Heutmaker Mr. & Mrs. David Larson 35 Rice Creek Way N.E. 6765 East River Road N.E. Fridley 55432 Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Robert Ritter Ailie Thompson Eyinck 41 Rice Creek Way N.E. 6755 East River Road N.E. Fridley 55432 Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Miller 47 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Otto Ostman 53 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Raymond Foster ^ 59 Rice Creek Way N.E. ' Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Carroll Groth 65 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Akbar Sajady 6745 East River Road N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. James Antell 6801 Hickory Street N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Leroy Peterson 6825 Hickory Street N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Wilfred Bolkcom 6821 Hickory Street N.E. Fridley 55432 � f /`� � Mailing List Page 3 Praposed R.L.S. Mr. & Mrs. Theodore Johnson �� 6817 Hickory Street N.E. Fridley 55432 . Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Date }� 6 813 HicJcory Street N. E. Fridley 55432 Vincent Blair Jr. & X Lois Berg 6809 Hickory Street N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr . & A4rs . Gary Hansen �C 6807 Hickory Street N.�. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Frank Nebel 6961 Hickory Circle N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gary Mastro 6959 Hickory Circle N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Charles Rieland 6857 Hickory Circle N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr . & Mrs . Abraham ��'ichols 6949 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Roger Wilson 6941 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Rueben Olson 6933 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 M. & Mrs. Robert Schmidt 6925 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Clarence Mitchell 6917 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 � Mr. & Mrs. Theodore Lester 6909 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 Mrs . Lorraine i�anson 6901 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley 55432" �J P.5.#73-08 Harland Berry R�ice Creek Watershed P.O. Box 283 Hugo, Minnesota 55038 State of Minnesota Dept. of Resources Div. of Water Oils & Minerals 3rd Floor Centennial Bldg. St. Paul, Mn 55155 • ATTN: Shoreland Management Unit Mr. Roy Schultz . f • � � � . � . �..w� ` . ` /�, H � R � i . '`°? •, ', -- - , ���' � � ; � ; • ��! �� � . , � � ' 1 / , ,f�� ; � � �' ' �` (p / T / Q N ��'`:' , l � �g � ; A �. rs 1f , ., :,,-� � � / !9 i I . / a � . �i� . � Jo \ � � � / , . ` ` �j.. . _�/ ' ` i � � . --^--'�- �� .l1 {` ito � - i - pl,t v` � � O � . = O • �sp ,_ _____ ; \ / _ � �f � 11 � w` I . � � � / � r.so� q` � r ' � �. I r se/ B �o���/�6�R0��li �Oti0�f6��l9�j•e�or� °' E . � � • � I � � Y �� � ^(�/` . . . ' � F ' � � 4 �\ � � w I ° _ �" � r • w i - '.�� � ii.r /:,t`S c� �t�: : - �to « : . s � � e� � � �r^ o :7- c�� r 0 1P �, . p� - - � � , . . � ��� _ .__., . ,� . - �� - � �._.____ -- - g� : - ,�, � R `° R�" V l S�r D •' 0 �J 3-- = �, r,a<,� E ': � . �,a` \ J � rt.• v �i� '' � . . ' � �� � . . 1 's.... p ( � i+o ^ � . ! : . {. _ .i•� m � � � •-- • �( ' { ...• .a--�- �--� - -- ' . s A UD / i'0 ���'� r . .i ` o 0 r ,�� �� m T G,� .�' � ii.��..r€Peoo..�i�roeexue � �l �_ - , i :x: :.__ � --- � '"'�=` _ : . SU�. 11/0. 2.� � � _. „ . - -� ' . G a r. � G � . � r - � � io�,' ..�, •-m ' � i.�� r _ - -J s w _ _ � s /� s . d \ ����:,Y i � t o � n �: � � ! , '►5 :'� r � � . � �`. / ' � , �dio�e � r.ac� /! �� _ �V i � JD °'�. �. ,�� ,� �� 3,� 1�,1 S � S�C�1 � ,,� t � � . �, ,�4' ; ; .� �a� T�onr, j ,,s �, -- -� - e�t.��. �� 4i!/�6t���Y� �i�.��� � ' ��y (,�• �� � J r ... , i � �/in+J ' �� � �\ \ �� / J � _ _�_ E� \ . . . • • - - •� 3 � ,\ -. _ - - --- _ " \ , .,. � , /? \ .. /'�fd`l B ` -- \ ' . <<;f - - . �� rR � � , , � "� . �� � �• , �• _ •:L �'' \ � 1 � � i . ! , G•A / `� ' . / \ ! f iY / . , i � �'� 1 � ��, �� �i ,. / ; ; . �\\ � � � � `� ' � .. c., r ! � � . •;-�•. �� "� � � s. ; . : .,��. � � "", Locke Lake R.L.S. (Harland Berry �' �� P.S. #73-08 , being a replat of �� � art of Lot 3 Rev. Aud. Sub...#23 �,� I P . � to allow 180 foot extensions of _ / � �R Lots 2'-6, Ostman's lst Addn, Lot /�� �, �, �, _� 4, Ostman' s 2nd Addn . antl Tract / _�_�_�\ �� � �� � A & B, R.L.S. #2Q �' ( � � �i . . ._ _ _,_ --' � :. ` , n.�� ., a 0