The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 04/21/1976 - 6583� ; 1 . �i � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: CITY OF FRIDLEY A6ENDA APRIL 21, 1976 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES; APRIL 7 1976 RECEIVE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES• APRIL 1, 1976 Recommendation from Youth Project Corrmission on Teen Center rroposal RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: APRIL 13, 1976 RECEiVE COi-i'riUNITY DEVELOPMENT MINUTES: RPRTL 13, ly%b 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR k SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP. #76-D5, BY ARLYNE R. JOHNSON: Per Fridley City Code, Section 205.051 2, A, to allow the constf�uction of a second accessory 6uilding, a 20' x 22' detached garage, on Lot 5 and the East 1/2 of Lot 4, Block 5, City View Addition, the same being 420 57th Place N.E. 2. VACATION REQUEST: SAV #76-02 MRS. RAY PRESTEMAN: To vacate that part'of j�nimproved Johnson Street thdt lies North of 53rd Avenue and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition, the same being 1391 53rd Avenue N.E. 3. f0AL5 & OBJECTIVES � ,�,��4� �� ° �3'' f/ �� " r � � � 1� � � V � U" � � / . � 7:30 P.M. PAGES 1 - 28 29-34 35 - 38 39 = 42 43 - 47 48 - 51 At Meeting .. - '�'��' - � � � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIN6 APRIL 7, 1916 CALI TO ORDER: Chairman Harris called the meeting to order at 7:45 P.M. ROLL CALL: PAGE 1 Members Present: Shea, Bergman, Harris, Peterson, Wahlberg, Langenfeld Members Absent: None Others Present: Darrel Clark, Comnunity Development Administrator Mrs. Wahlberg said that before the Planning Commission began their agenda items she wanted to propose a timetable for the Commission to follow in dealing with this agenda. She said the Planning Commission meetings had been running extremely late, and her proposal would allow 30 minutes for each item on this agenda so they could be through by 12:00. Mr. Bergman said that at the last meeting, some of the petitioners had to leave before their item came up on the agenda, so if this time- table could be used as a guideline, he was in favor of it. Mr. Harris said he was in favor of it also, but if there was an item that brought in a large audience, he felt that every citizen who wanted to speak should be heard. Mrs. Wahlberg said that she thou9ht the only .alternative was to hold additional meetings to handle the large agenda's and she wasn't in favor of additional meetings. MOTIDN by IangenfeZd, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commission follow the guideline proposed by Virginia 64ahlberg which would Zimit the time spent on each agenda item to 30 minutes. Upon a voice vote, a1Z voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MARCH 17, 1976 Mrs. Wahlberg said she didn't understand the motion made on the bottom of page 8 of these minutes. Mr. Harris said it should say Appeals Commission minutes instead of Appeals Commission meeting. MOTION by Peterson, seoonded by Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission minutes of the March 17, 1976 meeting b2 approved as corrected. Upon a voice vote, aIl voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE PARKS& RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: MARCH 22, 1976 MOTION bg Peterson, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission receive the Parks 6 Recreation Commission minutes of the March 22, Z976 meeting. Dpon a voioe vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: MARCH 11, 1976 MOTION by LangenfeZd, seconded by Wahlberg, that the Planning Commis- sion rebeive the Human Resources Commission minutes of the March 11, 1976 meeting. Upon a voice vote, a12 voting aye, the motion carried unanimous2y. _ . . . _. . . . . . _ ... . . .7�`r _.. Planninq Commission Meetinq - April 7, 1976 Page 2 RECEIVE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES: MARCH 23, 1976 Mr. Peterson questioned one of the recomnendations on 40' lots from these minutes, but Chairman Harris said that as the 40' lot problem • was the last item on this agenda, Mr. Peterson should save his remarks until that time. MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission receive the Environmental qua�ity Commission minutes of the March 23, 1976 meeting. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE REQUEST FROM BURLINGTON NORTHERN, 4055_ EAST RIVER ROAD, TO HAVE LUNCH & LOGKER RDOMS`�OR FREIGH7 CAR IN.�P,,F�TORS _� RAILWAY MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYE�`—`�`� Mr. B. Lee Johnson, Rssistant Area Engineer for Burlington �orthern, was present. Mr. Cla�k said there wasn't administrative report� Prepared for th°se two requests. Mr. Peterson asked why there hadn't been staff reports on these two requests? Mr. Clark said ii.was because we still haven't gotten confirmation from all the railroad officials in concurrence with what the staff was going io recommend. Mr. Clark said that basically what the railroad wanted was to move an existing stick built building to a location under the present overpass. They later brought in another p}an for another structure 7ocated between the railroad overpass and the sewage treatment plant. This building was . of inetal construction. He said that we were told that the first building was going to be out of view from the East River Road traffic. We told them that the City was quite discouraged that the landscaping that had been talked about for four or five years that none of it had taken place. We informed that railroad that we definitely needed a landscape plan before any building permits were issued, for any structure on railroad property. We went down and looked at the site and found that both structures will be in full view of East River Road. Therefore, the staff feit the structures should be built out of brick since they will be adjacent to another brick structure that the railroad had already built in the same v7cinity. We couldn't reach the right officials who could say they would put up brick or they wouldn't put up brick. Mr. Clark said that what he thought the Planning Commission couid do was to tell the railroad that the faciTities that they �aant to put in at these locations would be all right, if the structures were the same architectural design as the buildings they were adjacent to and that they would bring in landscaping plans for the oil storage tank, the sewage tt�eatment plant, the berm and around the hump tower. They should agree that they would bring these landscaping plans in with a timetable for these plans before they request a building permit for these two buildings. We couldn't get confirmation on the brick construction, therefore there was no administrative staff report written. , Mr. Clark said the Planning Commission had several choices. TheY could continue these requests or they could just appro.ve the type of facilities � �that these buildings were going to house at these locations if ihey meet the architectural design, brick, and the screening plans are brought forth:� �� Plannina Commission Meeting - April 7, 1976 Page 3 Mr. Lee Johnson said he would like to further explain what was involved in this request. He said that he was not directly involved in the Northtown � yard project and he was not in a position to discuss the landscapin9, but he could explain the use of these buildings. Mr. Johnson said that first of all the small building that would be located under the bridge would be used as an office, lunch and locker room for our car men. The location was convenient to their work area. It was important that they had that building at that location. The second larger 6uilding would be used as a luncheon and locker room for our main line track forces, bridge and builder forces and our water service man. This location was picked because � the track forces have on-track main line maintenance equipment and they have to have access to the main line. The buildings we are proposing to use are good second hand surplus buildings that were presently located in the City of Minneapolis. The reason we have not proposed ne�a buildings was because of economics. We already have these buildings, and we wou1d like to use them. and we would be willing to screen the area if these buil�ings were approved. Mr. Harris said tfien what Mr. Johnson was telling the Planning Commis- sion was that they wanted to move twv buildings from Minneapolis into Fridiey, to these sites. Mr. Clark said he understood that the smaller building was being mcved in, but he didn't realize that.the large metal building was an exist- ing building. The stick built buiiding was open construction so it could be inspected as far as the construction. Mr. Johnson said this • was a wood frame building with aluminum sheeting. It was a modular build- ing. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Johnson if the larger metal building was a manufactured building. Mr. Johnson said it was a Armco building with colored panels, and they intended to paint these buildings so they would blend in with other existing buildings. Mr. Clark said there were other metal buildings on this site, but they were surrounded by other buildings and were not visable from the street. Mrs. Wahlberg asked what would happen in case of fire for this building that was under the overpass. Mr. Clark said the bridge was quite a bit higher than this 6uilding. He said this structure was only about 10' high. Mr.. Clark said the staff saw no problem with this. Mr. Clark said that at the present time there was no fire hydrant, but that ane would be instaJled. Mrs. Wahlberg said that the administrative staff report would have requested that these buildings conform to the exteriors of the other buildings that are adjacent to them. Mr. Clark said yes, and also that they bring in landscape plans and a timetable of when the various plans would be completed. The staff felt that all the buildings between the railroad tracks and East River Road should be compatible. Mr. Harris asked how large these buildings were. Mr. Clark said that the small building was 10' x 56' or 560 square feet, and the large building was about 1200 square feet. They aren't very large buildings and they are one story structures. Mr. Clark said it may be possible to bring in heavy � growth year around screening for these structures. Mr. Harris said that what bothered him was that there was a metal building almost directly across the street from this location which was put there by the City of Minneapolis who didn't have to ask Fridley about anything. �.. _ P]anning Commission Meeting - Apri] 7, 1976 Page 4 • Mr. Clark said that these structures would be located 30, 40, or 50' away from the boxcars. Mr. Harris said that because of that 7ocation, • masonry construction may not be the best solution, with box cars humping around the area. Mr. Johnson said that it was a matter of economics, or they would construct new buildings instead of using used buildings. Mr. Narris asked if they reaily thought they were going to be savirtg money by the time they tore these buitdings down and moved them and put them up again. Mr. �ohnson said they would only have to dismantle the large building, the sma11 buildinq could be moved on a.flat car. Mr. karris asked if they really thought they were going to save money? Mr. Johnson said that was not his decision. Mr. Harris said he had brought this up because economics was the criteria they were using for bringing in used buildings. Mrs. Wahlberg said Mr. Johnson mentioned that these buildings would be painted to match existing buildings. Mr. Johnson said they wouTd be painted light green to match the existing diesel shop and car shop. Mr. Clark said that what the railroad reaTly wanted to know was if the City had any objections to the railroad having these types of facilities at these locations. Mr. Ctark said that he couldn't see any problem with having these type of facilities. Mr. Clark said that if it would help get the railroad off dead center in providing the various landscape plans, he saw no problem in giving concept approval to these requests. MOTION by Langenfeld that the PZanning Commission accept the � conversation that has taken place, but not approve any bui2ding permits ❑ntil we get an admznistrative staff report and the complete package, because this was quite incompZete.to make a decision. Mr; Clark said he thought the railroad wanted assurance that these facilities could be located at these locations. Mr. Peterson said they could make a motion accepting the concept and principle, expecting further clarification, which would not qive them permission to move the buildings in, but wpold give thero the assurance that we have no objection to these faci7ities it they meet our recommendation. MR. LANGENFELD WSTHDREW his MOTION. MOTION by Peterson, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission has no objection to the_concept and_principle of B�rlington Northern locating a freight car inspectors Iunch and locker room and a lunch and Iocker room for railway maintenance employees at the proposed locations on their property, expecting further clarification of the buildings themselves and var�ous landscaping plans. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT: MEDTRONIC, INC: 6975 Central Avenue � Northeast for a production and storage addition. , MOTION by Langenfe3d, seconded by Bergman, that the PZanninq Commission receive an administrative stafE report on a production and storage addition � LJ r1 LJ � Planninq Commission Meeting - April 7, 1976 Page 5 to Medtronic, Inc., 6975 Central Avenue N.E. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motton carried unanimooslg. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPOR7 for: t�edtronic, Inc., 6975 Central Avenue N.E. General Description: This permit is located at 6975 Central additional 67,2D0 square existing design. En.ineering: for an addition to an existing manufacturing plan Avenue N.E. This addition will be pi�oviding an feet to the existing facility and will match the lJe foresee no engineering problems. Environmental: Yle Toresee no environmentai problems. Design is compatible to the surrounding ai�ea. 7he company is extremely conscientious in the preservatiun of Rice Cree6: and provides every precaution in maintaining its natura7 setting. Rice Creek Watershed has been notified and approva7 is for�hcomina. Buildinc Permit Stipu1ation: 1. Tfiat the landscap�ng on the Plorth parking lot along Old Central ano along the North property boundary be completed with th:s addicion Mr. Clark said there was a berm without any plantings on it and we feel that this landscaping should be completed along Central and also along the North boundary line for at least 200' West of Central Avenue. He said they did show some heavy landscaping between the building and Central Avenue, which was acceptable. It may change slightly from what was shown because this hasn't been approved by the Board of Directors as yet. They are goin9 to the Rice Creek Watershed, prior to this request going to the City Council. He said the estimated cost of this addition was around two million dollars. Mr. Langenfeld said he felt it was a little premature to say that the Rice Creek Watershed had been notified and approval was forthcoming. Mr. Clark said that Medtronic had verbally talked to people from the Watershed and they said that they saw no problem with this addition. It has not had official action. They have brought their plan to the Rice Creek Watershed consulting engineers. Mr. Harris asked if there would be any traffic problems or parking problems. Mr. Clark said no, they still have quite a bit of empty space in their North parking lot. They weren't anticipating increasing their employee load very much. Most of the addition would be used for their existing emp1oyees. _�� Planning Commission Meeting - April 7 1976 Page 6 MOTION by Peterson, seconded by Shea, that the Planning.COmmzssion concur with the Administrative Staff report on the reqaest to construct • a production and storage addition to Medtronic, Inc., with the stipulation that the landscapin9 on the North parking 1ot aIong OSd Central and a3ong the North property boundary be comp2eted wzth this addition. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting age, the motion carried ❑nanimously. RECEIVE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT: LAMBERT PETERSON, INC. 7691 Central Avenue N.E. for an office building. MOTION BY Bergmen, seconded by Wah2berg, that the P2anning Commission receive the administrative staff repoxt for Lambert Peterson, Inc., for the construction of an office building at 7691 Central Avenue N.E. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. ADMINISTRATIUE STAFF REPORT For: 7691 Central Avenue Northeast by i.ambert Peterson, Inc. General Description: This permit is for a four unit office building to be located at 7691 Ceniral Avenue N.E. The building is a brickstructure with a mansard roof design providing approximately 2,704 square feet of office space. The building meets all zoning code requiremenCs and is providing larger parkiny facilities than is required by p�°esent codes. • En ineerinq: �—._� . We do not foresee any engineering problems. Environmental: ke do not foresee any environmental problems. Th2 design is coiripatible with the surrounding area.. Building Permit Stipulations: No stipulations necessary. Mr. Clark covered the points in the administrative staff report and said this building would be located at the intersection of Old Central Avenue and Osborne Road, in the Southeast quadrant. He said it did meet all the setback requirements and he thought Mr. Boardman had suggested more berming to protect the lots to the rear of this praperty. MOTZON by Bergman, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commission concur with the Administrative Staff report on the request to construct an office bui2ding at 7691 Central Rvenue N.E. by Lambert Peterson, Inc. • Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE ADMINISTRATIVE STAfF REPORT:: MAPLE LANES, 6310 Highway 65 N.E. for inside improvement and outside development plan by Donald Savekoul. ` J n U � Planning Cor�nission Meeting - April 7, 1976 Page 7 � MOTION by Bergman, seconded bg Langenfeld, that tfie PZanning Commission receive the administzative staff report on the exterior development plan to be part of the interior davelopment at Map1e Lanes, 63I0 Highway �65 N.E. by Donald SavelkovZ. Upon a voice vote, a21 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT For: Maple Lanes, 6310 Highway �65 N.E. General Description: Interior remodeling. Engineering Environment YJe foresee no engineering problems. We foresee no environmental problems. This item was brought before the P7.anning Commission only for ihe purpose of infnrming you of the required exterior landscaping that will be tied to this building permit. Building Permit Stipulation: 1. That the exterior development for hiaple Lanes be completed according to the attached plan dated 4-7-76. _ _ _. _ Qauaue,cme.uYS ., ..h'r.5aod/�...,-1 atPr. ..—�. O�ac�u�on f�'7 <� Z_7� . n . _ ...,..... . . . . _.... � ; 0 �.ro�...a. s .. s. na _e..� ..eeie e.�s �v kcceeo • . ACCAr�6E��4uT wKK fAPN.6 lYqEa � Qlwvne�[a¢, i • �. $�uc4Y1Q a M>, i, w,e +�;� i:�� ; i I� � � r---=--- � T� S �"_ � ' — 1 .� i {I _ tlil:'_ :_� i• ' ,� �; �j.'j I _�_ = j-- �+.�...�.a.a�u. ;' :' j .�'i}�I��`11i�i�ilL�j� ). =1'� I� III�IIIIIiII -;; r�-r'-��—� � � ' i :Y- �� 1� t � � � � I I{ � i j •y— —`'! r-_' r_ I��i��li��_�� —�,�. f L__=...II 4 . _,� • �� —'I . r I`� _ � ' I � "' Illllii;i��ll! u-� _. ; i�;!�II,;!i�l_i!�! ,-'`; ililiiliii,f.,i�i --;�j _ ��;'i:iiil �- naur _ r�-=.-�.e �a�;:� (z�o r_...,.. :.. ...•.� Fi� � r l,l " Ea..,+:�::'a,z= – AY t.ls�c l,1i77 .. — ,.... . _. F?r/4� r ::. .. ... � _._ 'i :i: . I -1 +. .�� —R63T oe La„oe.cno.�a 'ru r-�:, mv.e�mreo w.�. NGCO Fa4 {+.00tsfoYOt �Fa3o/L Fw¢t�o4 6y I.iaY I� 1979 �..- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - April 7, 1976 Page 8 Mr. Donald Savelkoul was present. Mr. Clark said that Maple Lanes was going to convert part of their eating area and some vacant drea in their building to a restaurant so that hopefully they can obtain a liquor license from the C�ty.Council. The exterior of the building viill not change in size. He said the planning and Engineering Department have been mostly concerned about the exterior development. He said the scheduling of outside improvements have been scheduled over a three year period as shown in the small drawing of this property. The dates on this plan were agreed upon by our planner, Jerry Boardman, and Mr. Savelkoul. He felt the plan was self-explanatory. Mr. Savelkoul said that Maple Lanes had attempted to cooperate with the City and we have agreed to the upgrading of the property. We have encountered about $12,000 in road improvement, and even while that was going on, we have agreed with the City to landscape and we have put in $2,000 in landscaping along the service road. We also installed a sprinkler system so this landscaping will be perma��ent. He said that when he met witfi Jerry Boardman, he toid us what the City wou7d like to have done to further upgrade this property. He said that they wanted to do it and wanted to cooperate 100% with the City. C� MOTION by Berqman, seconded bg Peterson, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council that they_concur with the l�ndscaping plan for Maple Lanes, 6310 Highway 65 N.E. Upon a voice vote, a12 vot�ng aye, the motion carried unanimous2y. RECEIVE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT: 7765-7795 Main Street N.E. by Richard • and---��a Harris Chairman Harris asked Mr. Peterson to take over the Planning Commission meeting for this item and excused himself from the Commission. MbTION by Bergraan, seconded by Wahlberg, that the P2anning Commission receive the administrative staff report on an office-F7arehouse building to be located at 7765-7795 Main Street N.E., by Richard and Harold Aarris. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REFORT For: 7765-7795 Main Street N.E. , by Richard & Harold Harris General Description: This permit is for a 100' x 110' speculative office-warehouse building to be constructed at 7765-7795 hlain Street N.E. The bui7ding is the first phase in a t��ro phase developmenC proposal, in which another structure, 100' x 170' wou]d be attached to this structure and extend North. It will be a masonry structure, with a break-off or split block texture, The building meets all the zoning code requireo�ents. . .. . �. � . . . _ . . . .. ... ...... . . . .. . . . .. .. _. . . .... . _"�.,�T-• � Planning Commission Meeting - April 7, 1976 Paqe 9 Engineerin9: We don't foresee any engineering problems. The site provides sufficient easement to handle dr�inage. @nvironmental: No foreseeable environmental impact on the area. will be located t•ihere present siyn storage is 'caking placc. storage will now be removed. Building Permit Stipulation: The building 'Ihis sign 1. To provide for share<1 driveway easements along South property line. Mr. C7ark said there had been discussions between Mr. Harris and the staff for a couple weeks on this building, but when all the material had been assembled it was too late to put this item on the agenda, but there was time to prepare a staff report, so this was why it was being handled at this time. Mr: Clark said that tnis would be a block structure which will be • built on land presently used by Signcrafters for sign storage. The staff report was quite self-explanatory. He said the driveway was on the property line, which normally should be five feet away. He said that Mr. Harris would probably build another structure South of this structure, and will put a drivetivay adjacent to it. There wi31 be joint use of thi�. driveway so there will be have to be some sort of an agreement for easement for this driveway. so that each arould have rights to use 20'feet of the other person's driveway. This building will be quite similar to other buildings in the area and he was sure it would be an asset to the area. Mrs. Wahlberg asked if Mr. Harris owned the adjacent property where the easements would have to be obtained. Mr. Clark said he did, and this didn't present any prob7ems. Mr. Clark said the City encouraged the use of joint driveways because then there were less driveways out onto the street. Mr. Bergman asked what the zoning was in the area. Mr. Clark said it was industrial. Mrs. Wahlberg asked Mr. Harris if.he intended to sell this property or to lease it. Mr. Harris said the building would be leased. MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission concur with the Administrative Staff Report on the request to construct an office-warehoase at 7765-7795 Main Street N.E. by Richard and Harold Harris. Upon a voice vote, a12 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. • 1. INKLtU: NG ION OF A PRE- OPMENT CORPORATION: Qeing a replat of Outlnt B, Innsbruck North Addition, along with Lot 49, excePt the Westerly 210'. Auditor's Subdivision No. Planninq Commission Meeting - April 7, 1976 Page 10 92, generally located Nnrth of North Ennsbruck Drive N.E. and West of Black Forest Apartment. � 2. TABLED: A CONTINUATION OF A CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED TOWNHOUSE Public Hearing Closed Mr. Darrel farr and Jim London were present. MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Shea, that the Planning Cozranission receive the exerpt from the minutes of the Human Resources Commission meeting of Apri1 1, I976, on the deZiberation on Darrel Farr's appZica- tion for deveZopment of Innsbruck Village. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTZON by Peterson, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission receive the Ietter written by Darrel A. Farr Development Corporation to the Planning Commission members dated April 2, 1976. Upon a voice vote, a21 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. htr. Clark said the City had received a petition that was directed to the City Council, but as it concerned the develcument of Innsbruck Village he thought the Planning Commission should see it also. MOTION by LangenfeZd, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commis- � sion receive PetiEion #6-I976. Upon a voice vote, a�Z voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairman Harris read the petition: "Petition the Fridley City Council to condition acceptance/approval of proposed Preliminary Plat, P.S. #76-02, Innsbruck Village Addition, by Darrel A. Farr Development Corporation, being a replat of O��tlot B, Audi- tor's Subdivision No. 92, all lying in Section 24, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota...inciuding the request to waive the City Setback Ordinance from 35 to 0 feet. We the undersigned: hereby petition the Fridley City Council to condition acceptance/approval of the above captioned project upon compliance by the developer, Darrel A. Farr Development Corporation, with the following restrictions: I. "That the City of Fridley in consideration of its tax paying residents, establish standards of year-round maintenance for the North Innsbruck Drive Extension (that section of black top road beginnin9 at the Black Forest Apartment, and running East to Silver Lake Road) shall file a suitable performance bond with the City of Fridl�y, which shall be renewed annually, and shall be adequate to properiy maintain said � road through completion of construction activities in the Innsbruck North Addition.° � Plannin Commission Meetin9 - April 7 197fi Page 11 II. "That the City of Fridley disallow waiving the City Setback Ordinance ! in the above referenced area on grounds that it would be discrimina- tory; that it would create an unsafe condition due to a minimum of two blind spots on the proposed City maintained road connecting North Innsbruck Drive to Arthur street; that due to the narrowness of this City maintained road, and in view of assumed parallel parking on both sides of this road, it wi11 prove to be a major hinderance to Fire and/or Police emergency vehicles access; and as a result of garage/dwelling structures close approximation to the road itself, prove to seriously inhibit adequate snow plowing of road surfaces, sh�rt of truck removal from the immediate area, at City expense." III."That the City obtain from the Darrel A. Farr Development Corporation an official and acceptable understanding as to Quad-Townhouse homeovrners financial responsibilities for maintaining all non-City maintained roads in the above referenced area, as well as the upkeep of townhouse exter- iors and common grounds." Sincerely, Concerned Area Resid2nts, Innsbruck North Addition" Chairman Harris said this petition vras signed by many names. � Nr. Clark said the staff had a meeting with Darrel Farr after the date of the letter written by Mr. Farr to the Planning Commission, but prior to us receiving it. There were a couple of items that were verbally agreed to that would change come of the comments in the petition also. The first thing that wasdiscussed was the width of West Bavarian Pass. He said the other streets in Korth Innsbruck were 28 feet back to back. Mr. � Clark said that Darrel Farr was proposing that West Qavarian Pass 6e built to 31 feet wide. Mr. Bergman asked for clarification of the street width. Mr. Clark said that North Innsbruck Drive and Matterhorn Drive were built to State Aid standards, but North Danube, South Danube, West Danube and East Danube were all 28 foot streets, and they are public streets. Mr. Clark said they recognized that there might be less.residential parking on these streets than there would be on West Bavarian Pass. As a compromise, we have agreed that the 31 feet might be adequate, provided no parking was allowed on one side of the street, preferably on the inside of the curve, so you could see around the curves easier than if there were cars parked on this side of the street. He said the second item that they discussed was the setbacks. He said that if the 31' street was approved, there would be about a 10 foot boulevard, because there was a 50 foot right of way. We felt that the garages should be at least 5' off of the right of way so that we would have 15 feet for the storage of snow. The exception to the 5 foot was at the point of a sharp curve in the road. • He said that the minimum sight distance on a residential street with a 30 M.P.N. speed limit was 200 feet. To get that 200 feet of sight distance, one garage would have to be located about 10 feet from the right of way. Pianning Commission Meetin - April 7 1976 Page 12 Mr. Peterson asked if Mr. Farr had agreed to this and if there was room to move this gara9e in 10 feet? Mr. Clark said this data was just compiled by the Engineering Department and this was the first the developer was hearing of this. He said that Mr. Farr did agree that whatever it took to get the 200' sight distance on a 30 M.P.H. residential street, that he wou7d abide by that. Mr. Farr satd that was correct. Mr. Clark said that the third item discussed was the maintenance of the extension road of North Innsbruck Drive to Silver Lake Road. Darrel Farr agreed to. keep up the surface, patchin9 it as necessary, the same as was done on any other residential street. He asked the City if we would plow it. We have said that we would, but at the lump sum of $50D a year. Mr. Clark sa9d that should be more than adequate if we plow it when we plow our own streets, and sand it when we sand our own streets. Mrs. Wahlberg asked Mr. Clark what conversations there had been between the City of Fridley and the City of New Brighton regarding that extension road. Mr. Clark said that North Innsbruck Drive will be connected to Silver Lake Road, but not at the present alignment. This was definitely a temporary situation. He said that New Brighton had no plans for when this road will connect, but we do know that it will be a State Aid street. A lot will depend upon the development of the land in New Brighton. He said that if someone came in and purchased this Tand, this road couTd be compieted as soon as next year, or it could be as long as ten years. Mrs. Wahlberg said the reason she asked the question was because she wondered is some agreement couldn't be worked out with New Brighton that they would pay Fridley something for maintaining and plowing this street as New Brighton was receiving the taxes on the property adjacent to the road. Mr. Clark said he didn't think they would go along with anything like this because New Brighton could care less if the road was there. It was not a road that was necessary to New Brighton. It was a road used by the residents of Fridley. Mr. Clark said that as to the maintenance of this extension, when the developer:finishes th�onstruction of the last townhouse, the maintenance of this road would revert to the City of Frid]ey, because we own the ease- ment.for this road. Mr, Peterson said this easement was 66 feet and he didn't think that a 26' street would serve this area for 10 years. Mr. Clark said the street width was adequate for what it was being used for. Mr. Clark said that the problems that have occurred with this road in the winter time was because of the way it was plowed. It was probabiy only plowed to about 16 to 18 feet. He said that when the City plows this street to its full width, this should eliminate a lot of prob]ems mentioned at other meetings on this development. He said that 26' was two 13' driving lanes, and this was adequate when there was no reason for anyone parking on this street. Mr. Bergman said it was brought out at the Public Hearing that there were many people who walked this road to catch the bus at Silver Lake Road, and he didn't think that this road was wide enough to handle both automobile and pedestrian traffic. Mrs. Shea asked why Mr. Farr was the only developer in the area that had to maintain that extension road. Mr. Clark said it was because he had been the petitioner for rezoning this property, and the City wanted � C� . � Pl�nning Commission Meeting - April 7, 1976 Page _1_3 • this road so that it would be used during the construction of the townhouses and provide another access for the homeowners in this area. It seems as this road was a more.convenient route to I.694. He said that if this road had only been used for automobile traffic, it wouldn't have broken up as it has. Mr. Clark said that if this extension road had been a public road, it would have been posted during the sprin9. As this was about a 7 ton street, and the construcCion vehictes using this extension were probably about 9 ton, was the reason why this road has broken up. Mr. Peterson said that after listening to people from this area complainin9 about this road until all hours of the night, he felt that something would have to be done with this road, but he didn't feel that this was completely the problem of the Farr Corporation. He felt the City was going to continue to have problems and complaints on this road. Mr. Clark said that iP Darrel Farr wasn't involved in this str^et at all, and it was the sole responsibility of the City> as this was only a temporary location of the road he couldn't see spending tax dollars to up9rade this road to a wider width. Ne said that when the City plowed this street, they cauld probably put the wing down and plow the boulevard so people could walk along the side of the road. Mr. Bergman said he had a problem with this because no one could • put a time frame on when this road would be permanently construeted in New Brighton. Mr. Harris asked if New Brighton would take over this connector road when it was constructed in New Brighton, or 4�rould Fridley still have an obligation. Mr. Clark said that the road in New Brighton would be a State Aid road o-�hen it was constructed and there wasn't a tax burden on maintaining a State Aid road, so there was no reason for Fridley to have an obligation in �ew Brighton, when the road was permanently located. Mr. Harris said the Planning Comnission was concerned because in the memo from �erry 6oardman to Dick So6iech that they had received, it was stated that the City had no responsibility for this extension, but it was also brought out at these meetings, that the contract between Darrel Farr and the City had expired, so it seemed as if no one was responsible for this road. Mr. Clark said it was the intent of the agree- ment that the developer would maintain this road until the construction was completed, and then the City of Fridley would take over this road until the permanent alignment was constructed by New Brighton. He said the extension of this agreement during construction should be part of the plat approval, and Mr. Farr has agreed to this if the City would take over the plowing of the road. Mr. Peterson said that he felt that the problem still hadn't beeq', solved with this street. It was so constructed that water stood in the street, and it was not wide enough to provide for either pedestrian or bicycle traffic. • Mr. Clark said that the solution would be for the City to widen the str.eet and install sidewalks. In order to do that, the City had to get the money from some place, so we would hold a Public Hearing on the improvement. He would venture to say that the residents of Fridley may not want that improvement made, when they had to pay for it. Mr. Narris Planning Commission Meetinq - April 7, 1976 Page 14 said he didn't know who the City could assess to improve this road. Mr. Clark said then the City Council may be reluctant to order that road � improved. Mr. Bergman asked if the City had a set of specifications for curb to curb street width standards. Mr. Clark said there were many different widtfi streets in the City. He said that it may not sound logical, but there was logic behind each street width. He said that on residential streets that were side streets where there were no homes facing that street, the normal standard was 31 feet. On residential streets such as North Innsbruck and Riverview Terrace, the width was 36 feet, and these were residential streets thai had housing facing these streets. He said that most collector streets were 40 ft. to 44 ft., unless it carried a heavy traffic )oad, and then they could be as wide as 50 ft. He said that some service drives, where'there was no parking, are 26 ft., where we have a 30 ft. right of way, but in industrial parks, these can be a wide as 36 ft. Mr. Peterson said then the extension of North Innsbruck Grive was cl�ssified as a service road. Mr. Clark said there was another..width such as on.Nor�� DdHtfbe and Sou`th 6anube where the street was concrete the full width, and this was 28 tt. Mr. Peterson said that he was sympathetic to the Darrel A. Farr Corporation because he felt they had tried to cooperate with the City and they seem to have developed a good rapport with the staff in terms of their willingness to compromise, but he felt 6adly because we were not solving the prob7ems of the citizens in Fridley who have been to these hearings complaining about the road extension. • Mr. Harris said that rather than widening out this extension street, he wondered if it would be possible to grade a strip 6 to 8 feet wide along side of the road that couid serve as a waTkway. He asked Mr. London what kind of soil was in this area: Mr. London said it was clay. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Farr if it would be possible to have his bulldozing equipment grade a 7 foofi strip along this road. Mr. Farr said he would be willing to do this. Mr. Clark said that if the City had any extra wood chips available, they may be able to use them on this walkway, so it wouldn't be so muddy, but he could not make any commitment on that. Mr. Harris said that if the City plowed this area in the winter time, it could provide a walkway in the winter also. Mr. Peterson said that if the City would plow this street to the full width, and if a walkway of some type was put in along the road for pedestrians, he felt this was as far as they could go at this time in solving the problems with this road. MOTION bg Wah2berg, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Cormnission take the consideration of a preliminary p2a�, P.S. #76-02, Innsbruck Vil2age, and the consideration of a I00 unit townhoase development, T-N76-02, for Innsbruck ViZ2age, by Darrel A. Farr Develop- ment Corporation, from the tab2e. Upon a voice vote, a11 vot..i.ng.-.aye, the motion carried unanimoosly. Mr. Bergman said that it seemed to him that Darrel Farr was doing � his job, but it seemed that the City of Fridley was remiss in putting forth any effori for the residents of the City. Planninq Commission Meeting - April 7 1976 P� � Mr. Harris said that probably in a moral sense, it should be the • City of Fridiey putting in the walkway, but to be realistic, he didn't think that Fridley had the kind of equipment that would be needed for such a job. There might be complaints if Fridley equipment was seen working in New.Bright�n. He said t4at with the equipment that Mr. Farr had, this job could probably be done in six hours, and it would take much longer for the City to get it done, and it would cost a lot more money. Mr. Bergman said his concern was more for who paid for this, rather than who did the job. . Mr. Farr said he thought that Mr. Harris' suggestion was a good one and he agreed with it. He said that he agreed that the City should do it, but they won't, so fie would do it. Mr. Harris said that he really appreciated that. Mr. Bergman said there V1as a wash area in this road that should be handled. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark if there wasn't an old culvert a��und that Mr. Farr cou1d use. He said he thought the City should cooperate with Mr. Farr also. Mr. Clark said that probably wouldn't be any problem. ' Mr. Peterson said .that in tfie last meeting tt,�..staff -had witYh Mr Farr that they were in basic agreement on the plat as presented except f.or the parking on the street and the changes in the 0' setbacks. Mr. Harris said that he would rather see a 36 ft. wide street so • parking could be on both sides of the street. Mr. Clark said this town- house plan was a little different than the other townhouse plans, in that there could be parking in the driveway to the garage. He said that if the street was widened there would be less room for snow storage, and more snow to put there. Mr. Harris said he thought that parking on one side of the street could be a cause for nei9h6orhood friction. Mr. Clark said that if the road was posted for no parking before the townhouses were sold, people would knoFa that this was the way it was going to be, and there would be a townhouse association to settle any neighborhood problems. Mr, Harris asked how many units would be next to this street. Mr. Clark said 60 units. They would have one car garages with space in the driveway to park one car, so there would be off street parking for two. cars for each unit. He said that these were one and tv+o bedroom units, designed toattract the retired couples on a fixed income, and young marrieds, so they felt that most people would only have one or two cars. These townhouses weren't designed for large family units. Mr. Clark said ' that Mr. Farr has tried to have housing in all price ranges, and if there were wider streets and two car garages in this development, then the costs would be much higher. He said that to provide housing in this price range, there wouldn't be all of the amenities that you would get in higher cost housing. Mr. Bergman said they weren't talking about two car garages, they were talking about an extra 5 feet of street width. Mr. Clark said that would add to the cost of the construction of these townhouses. Mr. London � said it would cost $3500 to widen this street. He said that in the Vienna Townhouses, there were one car garages with no parking in the garage area, and when people buy these units, they know what they are buying. Ne said they inay have lost some sales on these townhouses because of this, but any problems the people had were handled internally by the Townhouse Assn. Plannin4 Commission Meeting - April 7 1976 Page 16 Mr. London said he was not in favor of a wider street. He would rather see more green area. Mr. Clark said that if the Planning Commission felt strongly that they would like a 36 ft. street in this plat, then that was what their reco�mendation should be to the Council, and let the Council decide how they wanted it. Mr. Langenfeld said that he had never seen a group of business people such as the Farr Development Corporation who were so accommodating to the City, but he thought that all the problems on this street should be settled so they don't have another problem like the North Innsbruck Drive extension, Mrs: Shea and Mrs. Wahlberg said they lived on a 30 ft. street, and there has never been any problems with parking or the movement of traffic as far as they knew. Mr. Peterson said that he felt that the extra 5 ft. of green area that ihey would have with a 31 ft. street was very �mportant. �Mr. Langenfeid asked what street width was origina7ly proposed for this plat. Mr. London said 24 feet. Mr. Langenfeld said he thought 31 feet was already a compromise, so he was agreeable to the 31 foot width. � MOTZON by Peterson, seconded by Langenfeld, that the Pbarming Commission recorr�end to Council approvaS of a pre2iminary p1at, P.5. • #76-02, Innsbruck Vi2lage, and approva2 of a proposed townhouse develop- ment of 100 units, T-#76-02, for Innsbruck Village, by Darrel A. Farr Develogzrrent Corporation, being a repIat of Outlot B, Innsbruck North Addition, along with Lot 49, except the Wester2y 210', Auditor's Subdivision No. 92, generally Iocated North of North Innsbruck Drive N.E. and West of the B1ack Forest Apartment, with the following stipulations: 1. Plan specifications for streets.and utilities are to be submitted to the City for approvaL 2. Developer deed to the City, Innsbruck North Park, before any plat approval or building permits are issued. 3. The part of Lot 49, except the Westeriy 210 feet, Auditor's Subdivision No. 92, that wasn'tpart of the plat, be dedicated to the City, as this Was adjacent to Innsbruck North Park. 4. Two tennis courts wiSZ be baiZt by the develop8z on public park property, the location to be dec�ded by the City, with the completion of 20 townhouses in Innsbruck Village. 5. xoad design on West Bavarian Pass must meet City approva2. 6. West Bavarian Pass sha1Z be 31' wide, with no parking allowed on the Western cvrb of this street. 7. The minimum setback for any garage on West Bavarian Pass sha11 be 5'feet, with one garage being approximately 10 feet from the property line so that 200' sight distance from the cnrb � Planninq Commission Meeting - A'pri1 7 1976 Page 17 is maintained on the curb. i 8. The developer will maintain the extension of North Innsbruck Drive from the City of Fridley Iine to Si2ver Lake Road untiZ the last townhouse was completed. This extension wi11 be p2owed by the City of Fridley for a fee of $500 per year, to be paid by the developer. 9. The deve2oper wi1l bulldoze a 7 foot strip aZong the extension road to be used as a walkway. Mr. Bergman said he questioned the setbacks for this plat. Mr. Clark said that the reason they weren't following the 35' setback was because it would push the units back so far that there wouldn't be any open area. Mr. Bergman said the problem he had was that the City of Fridley had set up certain standards and one of those standards was that structures be 35' back from the property line. He said that he didn't understand ihdt if a 35' set6ack was de��ned good in all residential districts, why it wasn't deemed good for a townhouse development. Mr. Peterson said that he was sure that the houses on Rice Creek Boulevard where he lived, were not 35' from the property line, and he assumed that this was done to preserve the integrity of the back yard which was next to the Creek. He said that in looking at this townhouse plan, he personally felt that the open space, the effort that had been made to have these units fit into this site, and the integrity of the natural landscape and the trees, was more important than a 35' setback „ because he didn't • see anything sacred about a 35' setback. He said that the setback requirement sometimes resulted in land waste, and as Will Rogers said, they aren't making any more of it. Mr. Peterson said that the way this plat was being developed was good sound planning. Mr. Clark said that the difference in a residential development and a townhouse development was that there were no setback requirements in the townhouse ordinance. He said the only reason the setback require- ments applied to part of this plat was because there was going to be a pub7ic street to meet the f.H.A. requirements. If this was a private street, the 35' setback would not apply. Mr. Bergman said he didn't think it was ri9ht not to have setback requirements for townhouses. Mr. Clark said then the code would have to be changed. Mr. Langenfeld said that in Section 205.051 of the Code, it states " for other uses, other than dwellingunits, permitted uses and uses , requiring a special use permit, requirements as to lots, setbacks, build- ings, parking, landscaping, screening, and exterior material shall be at least comparable to similar uses in other districts, but also subject to additional provisions as provided by the City:" He thought the Planning Commission would be the one to establish the additional provisions and therefore, we can eliminate the 35' setback. Mr. Narris said that he Felt that this proposal tears up less landscape than if it had to have a 35' setback. He said that if this � development was held to a 35' setback, it would destroy the natural characteristics of the area. He said that in his travels through the townhouse areas that have already been completed by the Farr Corporation, he felt that they had done an excellent job of fitting the structures into the landscape. He said the proposed plan for Innsbruck Village . ' - -�...r, Planninq Commission Meetinq - April 7, 797b Page 18 _ was the best way to fit the units into the existing landscape. He said that he did not favor a 0' setback on a public street because if a small error was made, a structure could encroach into the public right of way, � but with a 5' setback, there would be enough room so that this shouldn't happen. Mr. Harris said that at this time he would like to make a statement to the City Administration, 6efore we vote. As we are allowing a 31 ft. street in this development, he felt it was incum6�nt upon the City Engineer- ing Department to treat everybody else in town equaliy as fair, and it was not necessary, therefore, that every frontage street be 36 ft. wide in the rest of the City. Mr. Clark said that there was a street being built this year that wouldn't be 36 ft. wide. Mr. Harris said he objected to that because he feli it was arbitrary. Mr. Clark said that as he has said before, it might not be logical, but there was lo9ic behind these decisions. He said that he was referring to the Leif Henrikson plat off of East River Road, where there just wasn't room to provide for a 50' right of way and a 36' street. Mr. Harris said that if they were going to pave Riverview Terrace and it was 36' wide, he would have to pay for that. Mr. Clark said that was not necessarily so, because there was a Public Hearing before any improvement was ordered in, and if an entire block said they didn't want a 36' street, it would not be ordered in. Mr. Harris said that in the ten year street plan, which must be almost compieted, he felt that the att�tude was to take it the way it was proposed, regardless of whether the people in the area agreed or not. He said he felt the City, the staff and the Engineering Department had been arbitrary in the meting out of street widths and assessments, and that it had been unfairly administered. He thought he could find 30,000 people in Fridley who would agree with him. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL voting aye, the MOTION carried unanimovsly. Chairman Harris declared a recess at 10;10:,P.M. and reconvened the Planriing Commission meeting at 10:25 P.M. 3 e IDERATION OF A replat of Lot 39, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No parcel 5640), generally located on the West side of of Osborne Road and East River Road.(Same property Plat which was never recorded.) N�.: �eing a 77, {excepting the intersection as the Dorstad Mr. John Doyle, of Leigh Investments, Inc. was present. MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Bergman, that the Pianning Commission open the Public Hearing on the consideration of a pre2iminary plat, P.S. #76-03, Leigh Terrace, by Leigh Investments, Inc. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting age, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 10:26 P.M. � Mr. Clark said that Mr. Doyle and the staff have worked on this plat � for some time. He said that the original plat that Mr. Doyle submitted was a plat in which the lots were served with a cul-de-sac off of Talmadge �: . _..-.� Planning Commission Meeting - April 7 1976 Page 19 _ Wey. Mr. Doyle thought this was a good plan for his plat because he � wouldn't have any through traffic. Mr. Clark said the old Dorstad Pla� joined 75th Way to East River Road, in the.close proximity of Osborne Road. The developer didn't feel that this alignment would induce a quiet neighborhood type atmosphere, but after the petitioner had discussed the plat with the City, and was informed of the problem that would arise if this alignment wasn't followed, he did bring in a different plan. This p1an has gone back to connecting up 75thlJay with Osborne Road, about 50 feet North of the present center line of Osborne Road, which means that the County or the City would have to bring this alignment up to meet the street in"the plat. This can be d'one without the purchase of any structures. Mr. Doyle has also dedicated additional land for the widening of East Rivei° Road. Mr. Clark said the Engineering Department gave Mr. Doyle three differ- ent alignments for the connectir�g street and Mr. �oyle chose the align- ment that ��3s being presented at. this meeting. This plan was perfectly acceptable to our Engineering Department, the exception being that the center line of Osborne.Read should be moved 5 feet to the South, which Mr. Doy,le has agreed to, so we olould not have to obtain addition land unnecessarily across the street. Mr. Clark said the p7at consisted of 11 lots. They all meet or exceed the lot requirement of 9,000 square feet, with the exception of the 3 lots North of Osborne Road. Lot 1 will be 7,700 square feet, � and Lots 2 and 3 will be 8,000 square feet. Mr. Doyle was going to try and negotiate ti�ith the St. Paul tJaterw.orks abaut being able to use the 40' St. Pau1 Watervrorks easement as part of the lot. Obviously the use of that part of the lot would be restricted as to having any structures oi� it, or the planting of any large trees, etc., but the use of the easernent for yards and gardens would not be prohibited. I£ he can utilize this land, then these 3 lots would meet or exceed the 9,000 square ft. reyuirement also. There is some question as to whether the St. Paul Waterworks has fee title to this 40' strip, or if was just an easement. If it was just an easement, then it would be Mr. Doyle's land, and there would be no reason he couldn't include it with the lots, because he would be the fee owner. If the St. Paul Waterworks was the fee owner, then Mr. Doyle would like to get permission from them to allow a fence to be put on this property, and from the street it would look as if the easement was part of these lots. Mr. Clark said that Talmadge Way �aould probably come up and dog-leg to meet Osborne Road more or less at a right angle. � Mr. Peterson asked Mr. Clark how this plan affected the Heveloper in terms of lots as far as if it were developed according to the cul- de-sac plan or the plan presented at this meeting. Mr. Clark said he would have one lot more with this plan. Mr. Peterson said then they were not working an economic hardship on the developer by insisting on this plan. Mr. Clark said that if you counted numbers, no, but if you could • the ioial value of single family residential lots, then maybe yes. Mr. Peterson asked if from the City's standpoint, if it was necessary to have this thoroughfare on the plat. Mr. Clark said that he could only respond,to what the Engineering Department had said, and that was that in _ _ _... Planning Cortvnission Meeting - April 7 1976 Page 20 wbrking with the County, they were trying to eliminate as many streets as possible coming on to East River Road at uncontrolled intersections. This would allow the people in this area to come out to a signalized . intersection on East River Road. Mr. Peterson said that because of the problems we have heard about on East River Road, he thought this was desirable. Mr. Clark said the County Engineering Department has been confronted with this plan, and they: were in agreement with it. Mr. A. J. Hogen, 133 75th Way N.E., asked what the viidth of the street would be on the proposed Osborne Road in this plat. Mr. Clark said the right of way width was 60'. The pavement width would be between 40' to 46' where they have the center median. It will allow one lane of traffic coming � in and two lanes of traffic g�ing out. Mr. Hogen asked if this property was going to be developed as R-1. Mr. Clark said that it would be. Mr. Doyle didn't have any plans to rezone the property as far as he knew. Judy Beine, 18Q Talmadge Way N.E., asked if 75th Way would be joi;�ed to this road and if it would be improved. Mr. Clark thought that when this plat had been approved by Council that Talmadge Way mi9ht be upgraded, but then there would be a Public Hearing before any tmprovements were made. Mr. Clark said that the North-South portion of Talmadge Way was an unimproved street at the present time and was used for traffic between Talmadge Way and 75th Way. Mr. Hogen asked if there was anything about stor,m sewers in this p7an for 75th Way? Mr. Clark said thatalT the area in the plat will drain to . East River Road on the road. Mr. Hogen said that some drainage was all that he wanted. Mr. Clark said he couldn't answer that question. Mr. Harris said that Mr. Hogen had a special problem where he had standing water in front of his residence, and he wassure thatwas what he was alluding to. He said that Mr. Hogen wanted to know if there was some way to drain this water through this plat. Mr. Doyle said that he felt there was a very big problem with this area. He said that on the South side of 75th Way, they were faced with the problem of two water pipes which were 72" pipes, which would make it impossible to put any kind of storm sewer from the South to the North without going prohibitabiy deep. Then you would have the St. Paul Waterworks to fight it out with, so you were almost faced with having surface drainage. Mr. Clark said that he had misread the question. He thought they were asking if a storm sewer system would be put in. He said that he didn't think the Westerly part of 75th Way was high enough to drain to East River Road. He said that part of 75th Way was built to drain that way, but at some point, and Mr, Hogen would know where that was, it was designed to drain towards the river. There was a low swale that We� apparently right in front of Mr. Hogen's property. Mr. Clark said that originally there was a shallow sump constructed on the St. Paul Waterworks easement, for the water to drain into. Ne said it may work in the summer time, but he could understand that during normal winter • thawing, that the water would stand in the street: He thought the only way to remedy the problem was to put in a storm sewer eonduit which would more than likely have to run to the Mississippi River. Mr. Hogen said that had already been proposed, but the St. Paul Waterworks would not Planninq Commission Meeting - Rpri1 7, 1976 Page 21 _ allow their property to be used for the water going towards the river. He said they had blocked this proposal before, and they probably would . again. He said that sump was in the yard, but it did not drain any of the water from the street, because the curb kept it from going into the sump. Mr. Hogen felt that if they hadn't put that swale in front of his house, the water would have drained to East River Road. Mr. Clark said he didn't think the land in that area was high enough to drain to East River Road on the surface. He said this road was dirt for many years, which was sand. The reason there wasn't any water probiem then, was because the water just drained into the sand. When the street was constructed, it was put in as flat as possible and drained as much as possible toward East River Road. It got to the point that to continue that, it would have got above the yards on the North side of the street. . � Mr. Harris asked why they couldn't have crowned the streets so the rest of the water could have drained towards the river? Mr. Clark said the corner that Mr. Hogen referred to was probably three or four feet higher than 75th Way, and in order for the water to get-to the river it would have to run to Alden Way, North on Alden Way, around the corner to the catch basin on Alden Way, a little further to the North. Where Alden Way was going North and turns West was another hill. He said that between 75th Way and the catch basin on Alden Way was where the hill was located. Mr. Hogen said that 3' hill could have been graded down. He said that they have been pleading for a ditch on the side of the road so the water could drain into a ditch, just to get it off of the street, but they won't give it to us. He said he had dug some by hand, just to get the water out of there, but the sand was hard to dig because when it v�as dry, it was just like cemerrt. Mr. Hogen said the ditch ��as supposed to be part of the original plan for this area, but for some reason the City would not give us this ditch, which was some thing he just couldn't understand. Mr. Clark asked where this ditch was supposed to run to. Mr. Hogen said they just needed the ditch to hold the water until it had *ime to soak in. Mr. Clark said that tr:s problem could not be solved at this meeting. He said that he recalled that a sump was put in 8 to 10 years ago, and maybe this was silted in and wasn't there anymore. Mr. Narris sa•i.d that maybe Mr. Clark could check on this to see if they couldn't get some of the water drained from in front of this man's house. Mr. Clark said there was a small house on one of the lots in the pl,at. The alignment of the street wouid make this house the required 35' from the street. The alignment would necessitate the removal of the garage. He said that if the road was pulled down to save the garage, there would be another lot that would be too small to make it feasible to build on. Mr, Doyle said he had talked to the Engineers of the St. Paul Water- works concerning the use of their property, and they declined in making any absolute comment about whether it would be allowable to use part of their easement on the three lots adjacent to this easement. He was 9oing to discuss this with the Commissions, but he did assure me'that there were many people making use of this easeme�t for green area. Essentially they do object to the placement of buildings or trees on this easement, because these things would have to be removed if they had to come in and work on these lines, but ihey didn't object to grass or a garden. Ne said the Engineer said they were also working with the County and the City, and he wanted to reserve and comment until they had it all in one package., � Planning Commission Meeting - April 7, ]976 Paqe 22 . Mrs. Wahlberg asked if it would be the developer's responsibility to inform the buyers of these three lots that if they were ailowed to use this easement as part of their lot, that they couldn't locate any structures or plant any trees on that portion of the 7ot? Mr. Doyle said he would put a covenant on those lots, so that the buyers would be aware of the restrictions on this easement. Mr. Clark said that if it was a private covenant, it would be part of the abstract. Mr. Langenfeld said he would like to have the East River Road Project Committee look at this development. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Langenfeld if he thought this was going to have a significant impact on East River Road? Mr. Lan9enfeld said he thought that giving them a chance to review this proposal would be in order. He said that if the Planning Commission recommended approval of. this plat at this meeting, then they could review the recommendaions. Mr. Clark said there would still be a hearing on the final plat by the Council, so there would be time for the Environmental Quality Commission's project committee to review the plat, even if it was approved at this meeting. We are getting to the time of the year when any deveioper was anxious to get started on their projects, so this had to be a consideration also. He said that by the time the contracts had been let for the sewer and water and the streets, sometimes weeks, or even days, get to be quite valuable to the developer. Mr. Langenfeld said it wasn't his intention to hold up the approval of this plat, or to delay the developer. Mr. Doyle said that this plat was the result of very close coordination between the Administrative Staff of the City of Fridiey and the County of Anoka, taking into consideration their apparent plans for the improve- ment of East River Road, which included the area up to 79th. This plat was the result of those plans. He said that Osborne Road would be blocked off on his plat until the intersection of East River Road and Osborne Road had been improved. Mr. Bergman asked about drainage and utility easements on the plat. Mr. Clark said that all the necessary easements were already included in the plat. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Doyle if he had considered underground utilities? Mr. Doyle said that he would explore the possibility of having underground services, but it would depend upon the existing area and if Northern States Power Company felt they were practical in this area. Mr. Harris asked if there had been any negotiations by the City or the County to obtain the property they would need to change the alignment of Osborne Road. Mr. Clark said he didn't think so. Mr. Clark said Osborne Road and East River Road wPre both County roads, so he didn't know who would be negotiating for the purchase of the property. Mr. Peterson said that Mr. Doyle has already dedicated land from his plat for the widening of East River Road. Mr. Bergman said he was concerned about the configuration of Osborne Road in this plat. He said the present 7ocation makes Lots 1-3 less than the 9,000 square ft. code requirement, and due to the extensive changes thene would have to be across East River Road to have the!Osborne Road meet •this extension, he wondered if it wouldn't be better to have the Osborne Road in this plat moved still further South. Mr. Clark said � • � .�?... Planning Comnission Meeting- April 7, 1976 Paqe 23 then Lot 7 would be unbuildable. Mr. Bergman said there wasn'.t much land � to work with. Mr. Clark said the configuration of Osborne Road was not the most desirable because it wasn't.at right angles, and pulling it up to meet the Osborne Road of this plat will improve that situation. He said that as far as Mr. Doyle's comments on whether he would be able to use the St. Paul Waterworks easement in this plat physically or on paper, as you drive past this area it will look like it was part of the rear yards of these lots. Mr. Hogen asked if there would have to be any more land dedicated for the widenin9 of 75th Way. Mr. Clark said there was enough of the existing right of way to allow the widening of this street. MOTION by PeterSOn, seconded by WahZberg, that the Planning Commi5sion c2ose the Public Hearing on the preliminary plat, P,S. N76-03, Leigh Terrace, by Leigh investments, Inc. Upon a voice vote, aZ2 voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing closed at Z L•ZO P.M. . MOTION by Peterson, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council approval of a preliminarg p2at, P.S. #76-03, Leigh Terrace, by Leigh Investments, Inc., being a rep2at of Lot 39, Auditor's Subdivision No. 77, excepting Parcel 5640, generally Iccated on the West side of the intersecion of Osborne Road and East River Road, (former porstad P1at), with the foZlowing stipulations: • 1. The alignment of Osborne Road be moved 5' to the South. 2. That confirmation be obtained from.the St. PauI Waterwork5 as to the specific use of the property, and that be reflected in a � private covenant to be filed with the p1at. � Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motian carrzed unanimously, a. PUBLIC HEARTNG: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA n76-01, JOHN W. HALUPTZOK: Rezone from C-1S local shopping areas to M11-1 7ight industrial areas), Lot 17, Block 2, Central View Manor Addition, to make zoning consistent with adjoiring property, generally located just West of 1240 73 1/2 Avenue N.E. MOT1'ON by Bergman, seconded hy Peterson, that the Planning Commission open the Public Hearing on a rezoning request, ZOA #76-01, by John xaluptzok. Upon.a voice vote, a11 voting age, Chairman Narris declared the PubZzc Hearinq open at II:11 P.M. Mr. Clark said that this rezoning request was the result of a stipulation of the Planning Commission on a previous rezoning request, ZOA #75-07, to rezone Lot 78. This will make the zoning consistent with the adjacent property. MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commission close the Public Xearing on a rezoning request, ZOA #76-OI, by John . Halaptzok. Upon a voice vote, a1Z voting aye, Chairman Narris declared the PubZic Nearing cZosed at Z1:12 P.M. MOTION by Peterson, seconded by Wah2berg, that the Planning Commission . Planninq Commission Meeting - Apri1 7, 1976 Page 24 recommend to Conncil approval of a rezoning request, ZOA N76-01, by John Xaluptzok, to rezone from C-1S (1oca1 shopping areas) to M-1 (light � industria2 areas), Lot 27, Block 2, Central View Manor Addition, to make zoning consistent with adjoining property. Upon a voice vote, a2Z voting age, the motion carried unanimously. 5. REQUEST FOR A LOT SPLIT; L.S. #76-02 BY DONALD F. SEXTER: Spiit.Lot 3, Block 1, Froid's Addition into two bualding sites, each at least 10,000 square feet, for the construction of double bungalows. (Property zoned R-3}, generally located on the corner of East River Road N.E. and Ironton Street N.E. Mr, Donald Sexter was present. Mr, Clark said this property was zoned mu)tiple, and as recently as last October, Mr. Sexter planned to 6uild an 8-plex on this site, and due to the harldicap requirements that come into play when you build an 8-plex, and other problems relating to the lct, such as drainage, made it economicaTly unfeasib7e to build the 8-plex. He was now proposing to split the lot into two pieces and construct double bungalows on this properiy. Mr. Sexter has presented surveys of the two lots which show that both lots will exceed the 10,000 square foot requirement for double bungalows. Mr. CTark said one of the surveys shows the setback as 30' for the structure, and this will have to be moved back 5' to meet the 35' front yard setback requirement. Mr. Clark said there was another small probiem in that he did not quite meet the garage requirements for a doub7e bungalow. The zoning code states that you have to have 1 1/2 stall garage for each . unit of a double bungalow. Mr. Clark said that if you use the parking stall requirementof 200', this would mean that there would have to be 300 square feet of garage area for each unit. He said the garages in this plan total 572 square feet. He said he felt that it was the intent of the ordinance to provide two stalls for storage, and one stall for parking. Mr. Clark said that maybe the garages could be enlarged to meet this requirement. Mr. Clark said Mr. Sexter didn't want to widen the garages because it would obstruct the view from the house, but tfiey couid be built two feet deeper. Mr: Bergman asked Mr. Sexter if he was in agreement to increasing the size of the garage by 2 feet? Mr. Sexter said he was in agreement beca�se the house could be moved back two feet on the lot. He said that everything could be adjusted so they met the setback requirements of the code. Mr. Clark said the staff recorronendation was that this lot split be granted. MdTION by Bergman, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council approval of a request for a lot split„ L.S. #76-02, by Donald F. Sexter, to split Lot 3, B2ock I, Froid's Addition, into two bvslding sites, each at Ieast 10,000 square feet, for the construction of double bungalows on R-3 zoned property, generally Iocated on the corner of East River Road N.E. and Sronton Street N.E. Upon a voice vote,�a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimous3y. • . Planninq Co�ission Meeting - April 7 1976 Page 26 Mr. Harris said that he was more concerned with what size house they were going to allow to be built on 40' lots. He said it was addressed � by sayin�. that there be no varianceald�owed from the present ordinance requiring a maximum of 25� lot coverage. Mr. Clark said that most 40' lots had about 5200 square feet. This would mean that the house and garage could only cover 1300 square feet of the lot. He said this would allow for a 1,020 square foot rambler, which was code, with a 14' x 20' garage. He said that if they built a split entry home, they could build one with 768 square feet of living area with a 252 square faot attached garage. Mr. Bergman said they didn't want to get more restrictive on 40' lots and that was why they stayed with the 25� of 7ot coverage which was in the existing code. We recommended that no variance be granted which exceeded this requirement, because this would tend to control the size of the house on these lots. Mr. Clark said it would be possible to build a marketable house on these lots, even if they had to stay within the code requirement. Mr. Narris asked if the City Hras requiring attached garages. Mr. Clark said they were required on a two story house. Attached garages were required except on ramblers and split level housing. You also have to have an attached garage on any property that was the result of a lot split. Mr. Peterson said he thought it would be consistent with the � housing plan they had developed that they encourage the development of 40' lots because it would decrease the cost of building a home. If we don't encourage people of different economic levels to move into our City, the� we wouldn't be following the goals that we established. Mrs. Wahlberg said that if they allowed more than 25`,0 lot coverage, then there would be more variances needed also. She wondered if they could set the maximum square fo�tage they would allow for a house on a 40' lot such as 1300 square feet for the house and garage. Mr. Clark said he would hesitate to mentior. square footage, because some lots may be 39' and some may be 42' so the square footage allowed in the 251 of lot coverage could vary also. Mr. Harris said that maybe they could have a standard requirement for the size of a house on a 40' house. Mr. Clark said this would just be something else that they would ask for a variance on. Mr. Clark said he thought that these recommendations were meant as a guideline and the Appeals Commission can try the 25q and if this was unworkable, they may have to come up with a dif�erent percentage then. MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission felt that 40� Zots should be developed in Fridley, each lot to be considered on an individual basis, subject to the guidelines set forth bg the various Member Commissions. Mr. Harris asked how they were going to deny a variance for a � house on a 40' lot just because there was a vacant lot adjoining it. Mr. Clark said that every time you denied anything, you could end up in court, but he �thought that the Commission owed it to the other people in a block who h�d built on 2 40' lots so they had 80', to try to have the other building site be 80'. This would depend upon the perso� who had a lot to sell, offeriny . '�'�'s _' PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - APRIL 7 1976 Paqe 25 6. :�r:r� 0 40 FT Mrs. Wahlberg said she appreciated the consideration that each of � the other Corr�nission's made on this request that came from the Appeals Comnission, through the Planning Commission. She appreciated the diligence and speediness with which they were able to get this information back to the Planning Commission, because she was sure that the petiii>oner who wanted to build on a 40' lot was anxious to have his request handled so he could stari construction now that the warmer weather was here. Mrs. Wahlberg said that she thought what the Appea7s Commission would like would be a surmiary of the recommendations made by the Commissions. She said that most of the recommendations were quite similar, and the only thing that bothered.her was the recommendation that each 40' lot be handled individually. Mr. Clark said he didn't think these lots could be handled any differently than that, because it was a variance to the zoning cade, and he thought what they were saying was that there shouldn't be one standard placed on all 40' vacant lots in our City. Each one should be considered Separately, and_have separate action because each lot may be unique in its own way. Mr. Langenfeld said that he thought the recommendations of the Human Resources Commission could be used as the guidel5ne. Mr. Bergman said he would like to call attention to the recommendations � made by the Community Development Commission at their meeting of March 9, 1976. He said that the Environmental Quality Commission concurred with these recommendations, and the Human Resources Commission's recommendations had some of the same stipulations, so he thought they couid use the motion of the Community Development Commission as a guideline. Mr. Bergman said the first recommendation was "If the land is available on either side which can be purchased such that the lot can be brought up to code, then building would be denied on a 40 foot lot". Mr. Harris said he didn't think that recomroendation would stand up in court. Mrs. Wahlberg said that back in 1971 they did make some recommendations as to what type of home should be built on a 40' lot, but she didn't think that recommerdation was good now with the presant housing trends. She said that one pertinent fact was that water, sewer and electricit,y vrere already in on these lots. so they problably should be developed. Mrs. Wahlberg said that she had a problem with the 3rd recommendation that the proposed house on a 40' lot blend in aesthetically with the rest of the neighborhood, and her guess was that most of these 40' lots were in older neighborhoods. Mr. Bergman said he cou7d understand the problem with this, but these recommendations were only meant as 9uidelines, and maybe they all couldn't be met all of the time. Mrs. Wahlberg said that what she got from all the Commissions was that there was concurrence that building on 40' lots shou7d be a7lowed in the City of Fridley. She said � that had been the basic question that the Appeals Commission had. They didn't know if they shou]d open the door on this kind of a request. Planning Comnission Meeting - April 7, 1976 Page 2� i.t at a reasonable market value price. Mr. Clark said that if two 40' lots were side by side and under two ownerships, he thought these owners � should reveal to the Appeals Commission what their differences were in regard to the price of either lot, Mr. Bergman said that anyone who owned a 40' lot had a problem lot. The purpose of the first recommendation was that the Corr¢nunity Development Commission felt that the owner of such a lot should make some effort to solve that problem. They felt that if there was vacant property next to tfiis lot, that an effort should be made to purchase the lot, so thdt a house could be built on a combination of lots that would meet the code requirements. He said that in that context, he thought it was a reasonable request. Mr. Harris said he had a problem with the denial ofi a building permit on any 4Q' lot, whether there were two vacant lots tog�ther, or 10 vacant lots together. Mr. Harris said he thou9ht the combining of 40' lots should be encouraged, but he didn't want the City to be in a position of using a club between two owners of 40' lots. Mr. Harris said they could try it, but if any denials were made, the reasons for the denial should be stated and documented. Mrs. Wahlberg said she would like the Appeals Commission to get a copy of these minutes on this item, and she would like the guidelines put in a concise form, so the Appeals Corrm�ission could refer to them for any requests to build on 4Q' lots. � Mr. Narris said that if this was going to be a policy statement, he thought that would have to be approved by the City Council. Mrs. Wahlberg said the Appeals Commission only asked for an opinion from the member Commission's and the Planning Comnission. Mr. Harris said that any policy statement had to be approved by the City Council. Mrs. Wahlbery said the Appeals Commission was concerned with the request they had tabled on a variance for a 40' lot and this petitioner had been delayed quite some time already. Mr. Harris said it would be better in the long run to have Council approval on a policy statement, but they could use the recorranendations from this meeting as guidelines until the policy statement had been approved by Council. Upon a voice vote, aZ2 voting aye, the motion carried unanimousZy. 7. ELECTI�ON OF VICE CHAIRMAN OF PLANNIN6 COMMISSION Mr. Harris said that the Planning Commission hadn't had a Vice Chairman since Mr. Drigans resigned from the Planning Gommission and he thought they should take care of this at this meeting. He said he was open to nominations. Mr. Bergmannominated Mr. Peterson, and Mr. Peterson nominated Mr. Bergman. Mr. Harris said they would vote by ballot, and when the votes were counted, he declared Mr. Peterson Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission. 8. TIME SCHEDULE ON PLANNING COMMISSION A6ENDA • Mr, Harris said he felt that setting a time period on each agenda item was a�good idea and thought it should be continued. Mr. Clark asked how they'wanted to handle this. Mr. Harris said that after he received his � Planning Corrmissi�n Meetin4- April 7 7976 Page 28 agenda, he would call Mr. Boardman or Mr. Clark, and they could work out a time schedule so the petitioner could be told approximately what time their i.tem would come up on the agenda. Mr. Peterson said this would � eliminate people waiting three hours for discussion on the item they were interested in. ADJOURNMENT: MOTIDN by Shea, seconded by Peterson, that the meeting be adjourned. Upon a voice vote, a21 voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Planning Cormnission meeting of ApriZ 7, I976 adjourned at 12:16 A.M. Respectfully submitted, � z��J Dorothy Ev�nsq,�^, Secretary+ �/ � •. . -++��r ,. t��L I, 1l�,� ,' P�'t': J�illiaar Scott, ;�ax�2 6raee.Lynch, H�ro�c ��, ea, Nancy iamb�rt, m � _A�#�': Nvne : S F��AtT: Darre2 Farr - Appi.icaztt, �arr Corporation Jim London - Eng��eer`€s�r Farr Corporation Jim.fuk�atsaewski - In�sb�aek North Townhouse Assoc. Ja�3c.La:ndstrom - InA�la�tzck North Townhouse Assoc. Fa� Brerinen - Leagu,e-of .W<�men Voters I�ezl Starla. - 1'�C Denise'Lynch -:YPC Laren 2ieEcalf <. } PC : �i`e�son Scott opened t3ae meeting �t -7;#5 p.m. , by`Barbara shea, secanded:by Nancy I�asnbert, to approve the 's+f the Mareh 17., 7:976 Hwean Hesiaurces Commission meeting -C�, t3pori a vQice vote, a11 v��.� a�+e, the motion carried ��sxy. � ,��tna: : : �j�-,�taney Lambert,°seconded by H�bara Shea, to suspend the �;�e` purgose af �onsiciei�ing, �3}� z�ecammendation of the �c�}�e� Committee on.a tee�:eenfi� sr� £ridley. Upon a voice ,3� voting aye, the motion earri�.u�;animousiy. '£EN C£NTER 1 ��.a stated the Yr,utY� P�uj�et Co�3.ttee feels Fridley i�sue a; teen centss�. D�ni6�e -�.read aloud the � proposai of the Youth• i'rc�j�+c#' �ittee: �AS, :over 4,31,;nf F,ridl�y's p4gss-lation is under 18, and :RiAS, Fridley doe�-nat h$ve a-center for its youth, and �; e�ttx� e�rvey shaws �tha� r�� a€ Fridley's youths �R�1" d�'Sfl't�87E�.s � �� .. . . . I: . . �. : . . .. . �e�rs of the. Fridle}r Youth Pro.`�Y Gommittee recw�mend "e�pesrary youth eenter be establ�slied in the Fridley :�st�. We prefer fhat it be 7.Q�c#�;ed fn th� room preaentiy l AY t�� Park.s and Recreation D�p�taiient. Ho�ever, if �hest Feasible, oua second ehoi�e �s the room that w�,s, ' .QS��pi.eci b�.; the 1�Drary. � , �, , i -� � ':j � �� ,. _ _ . _ � _�s . _ ___ ._.___ _ _�. _ . Y �_. , ..��i � _ �`io - Ht?MAN R�S(?UKG�� ";l�a.�;s ydu#Yt. certt3 c�nsi�ti�g of s; ' �u�a� �tembe��; t� 3�r t�e £riG�; �oa�.��.t�n; an�; two �sy �the fritt; memb�.t* sha11 be by the F'ridley ^; Tiie �e�porary bi 3(1 days �#uring '' #he �,nte�+�t ru1� eleetiAn#; foY+ re; ex-af f iciv memh� Adm�.ni.$t�tivsl; - s�f tite. Parks art� superr+i�e�,and a, bcsar� �f d� "reat� t�fr. �t�s�t prai� waric or� the te� P!Fs . I.�b�rt as� Mr. Sto�ia s�.• !3�'#'X�3id by Nan�; 't%=ts�n eente� �it�ort c�rried H�. ��gum ask� r,ea3y to �o th, Mr. 3�'or3a stas qf fi3t� :':Board o; i�v#1�%ng this fi�.� La�ert st< f� a , very Ia�iq �ie�tand : ax�3i. 7��'a � � � °� M43T24N�H��i uman Res�re� � as' � e :�'"�it � k � ��err� �ter��ttn �r t k �F' �y .��'� �• �'�� L"�� ffl'T�Oi�: �y Ba'i� rultrs f�r �he` � � P�e+3�� `�a�.-��c E� � . �� ; _ ,� � � � �- � _ __ _ . .,��,� �; _._ . _� ttr �e� �ry � �s.. a �i �� tY I�i d �� 1 �7 ti��: �D�T �3�1'£ETlidfa ,��''R�L 1, j 9:97 6 - PA� �. ha�Ve a�tempc�.��**y 3�oard 4f dsrectars n» .�a` anshn»a:;:. � ndr i�c: X—S3�.f l � O�� E{�l'�y .: �$� ° the Fri xnnent .:; s to �ite '� > serve o� t'C�i Pra j ec*. "�'+ �+oposa�'. �la about -�� atel.y 50 �ea Upon a •; � � o s �i er . e �'pl�awing gr�+ups i , tit�;, F�a.siley 'Plannir�g �ui°�e� Cotnmi;ss#.an�;and :; :�.. Ort� ex-of�iai:o � �;ity Cot�ncil and pne ; ; ;a serive for nat moFe'than { e 'Che ehsrter, establish :` nc� f�Cilita�Ce : the ' an��t bo&�d: fihe appointed ;,; e pa�ane�f :ba�rd. ;;:: be ttnder th� �t�spiees � � W,i31 ass��r�. staff �o }" bls;shed Iiy the ` ' I te+� fim i�e�.r daZigent � . Vr�te, �11 ve !t sollie o� �e mr+re s�5ec2i h ha�+e been w�Jcing on t} at�'t#a Rally. ea11y. i�g; �.j+�, the cssal t�s ve lagtl�nt . nsib.il"�ty wQrk �r�?�al ��y: t� rom thetit' at ;'ti�s t ime . �. �� , __ ;_ ;. onded b °_I�faa�c <, `mber�t, tt�at th� ..�o�s�a�.,l t"�'" �`: ' utha f � "' ; il],IIkIIiiS1V . . � . �� : � � � ; �� . .. �c�" ��C+t � tc� eu the � i �-'��C=�� liD�i1.9S��-.-�T1 d �s� .�n a uo%�e vc�tey all � r� t.. - � , , t :m� __�:.� � `� � �; � z*z �: �- ,: � ��SI�?N _ if£ET�(G, -a �rkE:#� the League of t�a� 'C ��c :3#ay 2U an . open for d..�ii�te Itea�ue of Women Y� ttey. tney Frouta :y would Iike ta r Fi+i.diey Ht�aan Res� � �31 �'£RS : >xplained-they Would like :qttal Rights Am�ndment. o=the ERA deserves open � and con £RA p�°esented. �-spansorship of this [arold Belgum, secondetl; try C,xe��$ , Lynch, #hat the Human :Qi�u[i�sion• eo-sponsor th�. g�g� - Equal Rights as �Ite regular Fridl�q='E��*�oa:>�o� May 20, 1976, in � witi� the League of Worae7�`-��3rs. Upon a voiee vote, aye,,the mo#ion carried �sly. � wi11 be -heid �.n the ComauT3�'�r. Avom at the Civio Center. added they were trying �p a�sq involve the Women's �- Mrs. Jay�ees in this �gram. ; rt: ��9t1��tski read aloud the' gositio?�; of 'the Board of Direc�Cors �:;,:I�nsbruek North Tflwnhouse Assoc%atio�i on the Farr devel- F;s�k� -klre land_.x�vrth of Innsbruck i2rive. Their position reads �:liaats s �; ;;�i�t�. to some ao�►�usion t3tat �:s'ts, 2et's make ceY+tain �c� is set 'straight--the .tor�3hsimes proposed in this area n-np"way, formally or informal��r,''tu be eanstx�ued as part � euistirtg assQCiat�on. • +'�,. ihe #otanhames planned #c�r ti��. area, if properly: �ct,'do not &eem to pres�t,a.ny:ad�erse effects to our �r3soc�i. The eiesz�n, eos# 3eatsge �rt� �roposed developmeat �e beez� ac�idered in that.s#atement. We do have one F9s 3:n t3te realm af �Che maintsnanee oi tha# property: �. 3�te. b�ix�tre� the townhomes' ��; to be par� of �as- asaoe�.dtion, a1:�3�oug2i we �ave no" hasis £or tha�E b�lisf . . b. 5da belieue. the maixt#ena€satt� 3nd upkeep oP �hat ' deaelapment will be uex+y' tti:fficult if an ° � assaciation is no't fs3rmerti, : 3� ::'��nt ci�y planning stttdi�8: a�in. to indicate a hxoad e.base in a neighborhofld fs a.desirable attri�ute �:.. � .�.. -r . ... .. , � . :.:, , � � , .�. .;:� . . . . . ��, ,. - . . . � ownh�nise A�+��n, the singl+i=f�mily s new ;,as�aci�r�ix� eontinue ta �i��i.n there wi�,� ��imal Problems 'its ��i�: _..�,k_. _ � _..___ � � Ht1L�AI�1 ��Sf��l'RG�' Mr. Lukaszsaes�: uz�a�que glan foa �: �e�,gum as Ir�rislZi��C Idb� t%� assc�ia��: Ms. I,am2�ert a smaller ones' are�te all ks� ow�e� � s� Assoc fee is prese�t ` nevt assaciati :month per fam Mr. i3el�um a� stateci they � • guidel�.�es se sible wi'Ch th �s. s�a agx�a ment. `Hr. Fa '�heir 3prr�p�r� i�s. u�e� �ske `31 �ee't wide. Ms, %,�a�er� a stree� and i�E the plan fvr #�. Seott str� ��tt�*,.. He � ti�va�,apatsnt � `:�s�" ghe�t�9�.za# he w�s' ��rpas$ rang� 'fn the' d2d ��t, a�nt loraes� tcot�om : st�, ci��upant o '•t� epme to d iate area wou . `Ms. S� s�� St�ee'C�� 3� � Ms . Laia�erfi .� no't bs much I; Ms. Secrt� st� -�tb r�da th3�. , is 2��.r}g a�'� g. t9�, :�r�i�it�K3� = P!�.s*�* I�� = 5�1�?�-e�sa3lt� � � .r. � ,. .r w . . � �_ opa. � - �arF e�s t4 be_d comp@t�nt and : � ;sed of 7 -largEr a 'nrmed. :ms in�lt 1'lae Inn. a� month red wiJ:l � assoe: ection �z t stated es that 1t at ti a i it3r ynur�g c r�tin down . `� L`iYT . ' �nd two r many ' e. , t3e sta .` thing h `e3.t Mx . �2e axt�a ��e th�s � ��e pr�eently a�ar't of the �; P�. 7,ukas�e��l�i stated #ans�3i��. {' ��t�.c�s� rather than` sev��l i �. 'Fa�r stat�d ;this wbuld .ttg pa�blems wi;th the Fiome- F �uek Nt�rth Tawr�}tq�se Association � faaa�l�. 'Phe fee ftir the j' ' ��ipz^crtcitnately `$28.4Q per ` ;, 7��n �i21 be �oi^a�ed. Mr. Farr ,. ` :>��ie� basiaa�ly follows the ? a:tt�r3�ee1 as clQSely ;as pos- t . t�le €eel a�out thi.s develap- �sr, bui th�s c�il1 not affect razs�d about -Eha road he�ng � �:s ct �lnd,ing ra�j,n street. liv�s vn a 31 foot za%de � b�t, t3�at sh� wou].d not deny :��es�s his ��nc�r�s dn'the �:8�csblems ae�e��ing this �".��: Scc�tt stated ��erhen he spoke s9t��i�i:catioi�.. , FIe stated :�ea�t�.ti lake tb; sae a greater � ava.i7.able. • _Hs stated he .� :etsz�id be a.aentifie3 as the .:-.s#as�ed beCauSe 3ze has been: : °ur��ts .�or a �.�+r� time, he ,C�re� ;as r�side��s, the immed- : .�t�:� a�+�a was acr4ss the •` i ��oa� tc��a°nhaus� r ihere wauld � .�#re��t,: } , .�t nsxti b� fair td ask Mr. Farr ;, het�eu�� that Me`tro Council �d men�i-0��d., � , �t i�s., mi.,�sxn� the �thole ; � �.��#tp, I� `"was more �� ,; i '�' �l , .. _ _., .�..h ,,..,r,....�, ., _. . -, -�.....r.,i�i CSSION ME�T�it�, � �1� this pia°; 33 �1�76 : PAGE 5 : iZe ��aPProved. '� Upon a voic s�. , to amend-the an associats.o ai�;��?a unanzmous.FY• t'�> Q� GHAI32PERSON: �#t� ogened namir�a�i:qns for the }?osi.tion of Chairper"son of �tsn R��ourees �omami.ssion. �1�Aert nomir�ated Barbara-Shea f€�r the position of Chairperson. ay�c�t� r�ee9nded the qomination. i�: '`�`eott called for further �tiar�ns,: �"h�re beit►g no furtYier �am�nations, he declared 1�98�t;�d'�7.OR$ L.}.dS�f�... ._ . . . . . . . . iN by ti$rol,d Selgum, eeconded by C�±aee Lyneh to declare a *. 33allot for Sari>ara Shea as Chai:rpe�son of the Hwaan Resources i��n. f�ppn a voice vote, all ��S�tg aye, the motion carried �4�asly- ` �T�AI 4P iTI.CE�CIiAIRPFRSON: : 3�g� opeAed the noma.nations_ f,e>r 'tt�e position of Viee-Chairperson �e �n.Resouress Commissr��n:., ,��rnch s'Eated she t,TOU1d like to no�irtate Nancy Lambert as -�"�saa�+person of the Human IiesQ�rees`�ommission. Mr. Scott a�;�d the nominatio�. Ms. Shed callec�'for further nominations. �-:being none,sbe deelared t�e nomi�Tia�ions closed. tay ��a�e I�yhch, seconded ;b3t 6i'iIL`i;a�: Scott, to declare a ' �� ;ba�.�st far Nancy Lambert as '�ice-Chairperson of the Human �e$r3str�s Commission. t,ipon a voiee �rqte, all voting aye, the e�mp#�a;carried unanimausly. �� .', � � _ � _ . �css�r� �.vruz��ivna: � �. '%r �3arold Belgum, seconded"by I�3.7.�iam Scott, that Barbara �p7gt�sue to serve an the L�agtte of Human Rights Commissions ��+�Y� of the iiwaan Resourees ��ion. Upon a vcvice vote, �.��g;aye, the motion carried �r►��ously. . ;.. HiTAi/1N Tt�SpEJ��3 �4 � APPLICATIQ2�F �� .'i MO'FiU� by Wiil�am ; c�ar submit i� aj A�A�9� ;{B�PZkcat't�.o�a •,: C4�1SiAERATZ�� i� .� `Ms. Shea explaine� in Bl�zom,ingtc�rr: .2'Y�i at tktis n¢eeti�. #�. Set>tt sug�eates m�etirig. '« t�fEk��{�ri' by Wi3.7�.am, ;: .RsEar�tir�g �eaz?etar^ :and. �iiaf her ��e �i� �13 voting ayey,.thi ADJOt�MENT : M�TION;, T�y Wi}.I1.� 7 'ChE �ee'ting ai. 9:�ii �iti�m carri�d �na� Respe�t�ully`�u�` 8.1y _' nsag� . � `Re�Qrcii�g �ee�e�a�; :: ;; _ � ,� % � <�: � � - i \ , .. ,.�_ �,> s.._� ..- , _ �_n� _,� � ��I ME£TiNG,�{.{�?��I. l, 1976 PAGE & ii��t KIG�iTS- ��; � �s, .s�eond�ed �q ��a��y I�mber'k�� ai ihe� ��ion with �t� 'att�cl�ment af the 4riginal �4��t�N TO THE �+�GUE Ct?NYENTTt}AI: � ;� �tould 2se h�€�d ;M�,�€ 8 at the Rt�ac2way Inn ; �a.��+; Human' Ri��s A�aard �il]. ;be givez� out �� - � � � � �I� �embexs o�."'ti�� Ctr�Nnz'ssion.at�enel' this = �' : > i `; 4�=,-`-seeone�ed,3sy� �raee Lynch.�l�at Hol�y Tonsager� < r�, �e Commis��i�i also at�end this meeting ' si�?by the: Cc�n��s�an. U}san a�oace vote, �' ��ipn carrzed::��animo�s�ly. . �`,q'szconded �* GxaEe �,ynah, #a adj�urn s�:,;;; t7gon a v�i�e vote, a21 ��ir�g aye, the rt�3:y . � [�a "� � � � � � �' � . - _ ; ,z e � �_ - � �� , � av � � � _.. �� j i �'��: � � � � �; x w�.- . _�u . . . . � _ . n LJ � • FftIDLEY APPEALS COP4iISSION MEETING APRIL 13, �976 MENIBERS PRESII3T: Virginia Wahlberg, Alex Barna� Pat Gabel, Dick Kemper� Jim Plemel ixc • �: OTHERS PRESENT: None Ron Holden, Building Inspection Officer The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Wahlberg at 7:30 p.m. MOTION.by Dick Kemper, seconded by Jim Plemel, to approve the minutes of the March 9� 1976 meeting. Mrs. Gabel said a correction should be made on page 6, item it� changing re- elected to read reappointed, Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unani.mously. A VARIANCE OF HEATED FAMILY ROOhi 1� MOTION by Pat Gabel, seconded by Alex Barna, to open the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye� the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Andrew Pappas was at the meeting to present the request, A survey of the property and photographs of the lot were shown to the Board. Mr, Pappas e�lained he would like to winterize the addition without going any fhrther toward the neighbor's house. He said it would be a total of about 22� feet long by 10 feet wide. He stated he felt the need for this expanded Samily room� and would make it as nice as possible and compatible to the rest of the house Which is redwood triromed with white siding. Chairwoman Wahlberg asked Mr. Pappas to explain the photographs, and he pointed out the distance between the neighbor's house and the lot line. He said there would be more than twenty feet betxeen the houses. He showed the Board the picture of their present sun porch� and explained it would be moved towards the street a total of about ten feet. He said it would still be behind the front of the house. He told the Hoard he had the neighbor's approval, and showed them a signed statement saying the neighbor didn't object. �5 �:-� �6 FRIDLEY APPEALS COMNIISSION MEETING OF APRIL 13, 1976 - PAGE 2 MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs, Gabel, to receive the document signed by Mr. Raymond Beyer of 6721 - 2nd St, N.E., Fridley stating he had no objection, i Upon a voice vote, all voting aye� the motion carried unanimously. Mrs. Gabel asked why the addition wasri't lined up svith the entire structure of the house, and Mr. Pappas replied it was for aesthetic purposes. Mr. Kemper asked Mr. Pappas if the tree on his property would be affected, and he ansxered that it would be sa£e, but would have to be trimmed a bit on one side. Mr. Plemel asked if he would be doing the construction himself, and Mr. Pappas replied he would be doing it with the help of his brother-in-law, who at the moment was an unemployed engineer. Chairwoman Wahlberg asked Mr. Pappas to state his hardship, and he said his family of si�c in a three-bedroom home £elt the need for more living space. She asked iF the distance between his house and his neighbor�s would t�e approximately the same� and Mr. Pappas replied it would. Chairwoman Wahlberg asked Mr, Iiolden i£ the £act that there is a fence there would create any problem as far as a£ire hazard, and he replied it would not. Mrs. Wahlberg asked when the construction would begin, and Mr. Pappas answered that he would begin the last part of May and finish in September, He stated the outside shell should be completed within s couple of weeks. Mrs. Wahlberg questioned how he pianned to heat this, and Mr. Pappas replied he would use . the furnace in his basement, and explained that there already was wiring to that area. MOTION by Jim Plemel, seconded by Alex Barna, to c2ose the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. ADMINISTRATZVE STAFF REPORT A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENTS: Section 20$.0$3, ltA, Side yard setback of 10 feet. Public purpose served by this section is to maintain a minimwn of 20 i'eet between living areas to: l. reduce exposure to conflagration of £ire between structures, and, 2. to allow £or open areas around residential structures to maintain aesthetically pleasing surroundings. B. STATED HARDSHIP: Family of 6 needs more living area. C. ADMINISTRATNE STAFF REVIEW: Staff ineasurements indicate approximately 28 feet between propased and existing livi.ng areas to the north wbich is we11 in excess of the 20 feet separation required by the Code. Unless the neighbor to the north has some objection� staff would recommend granting the variance. If agreeable,.staff would like to restrict the neighbor to the north to � limit anp future expansion of living area to no closer than 15 feet to his south common lot line in order to assure the minimum of 2Q feet between living areas. - _. "'�"'"�f�.' FRIDLEY APPEALS COPiMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 13� 1976 - PAGfi 3 �� MOTZON by Pat Gabel, seconded by Dick Remper, to receive the Administrative Staff Report. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairwoman Wahlberg asked what the legal ramifications were to restrict the neighbor to the north� and Mr. Holden replied if that neighbor wished to build� he would have to submit a request £or variance and it would come before the Hoard for their approval. MOTION by Jim Plemel, seconded by Pat Gabel� to approve the request for variance. Upon a voice vote, all voti.ng aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairwoman Wahlberg explained-to Mr. Pappas that he was now free to apply ?or his building permit, 2, RECENE VARTOUS MINUTES FROFf SUBCOt�LTTTEES 6N h0 FOOT TATSi Chairwoman Wahlberg explained that at the neact Cormnission meeti.ng of April 27, 1976, they would be receiving from the City Council final apnroval on 1�0 foot lot reguJ.ations. She said it had come before the Plazning Commi.ssion at their last meeting� and they concurred with the stipulations on page 1t from the Cormnunity Development Commission. She noied that the Environmental Commission and the Human Resources Commission also concurred. She told the Board she felt if they got this information at this meeting they would have time to become acquainted with the topics, and on the 27th it could be • discussed in relation to what the Council said. Mr. Kemper asked how the petitioner's request fit in with the four stipulations of the Comrnunity Development Commission, and Chairwoman Y7ahlberg said there would be at least one stipulation he would not be meeting--that being the one requiring a maximam of 25a coverage. She informed the Board that this person was proposing a$36,000 house to be located at 11800 - 21-� Street. Chairwoman Wahlberg said that it had been found that the !�0 foot lots were mostly on corner5, or were adjacent to other lots that were also 110 feet. She said that it was recommended that if there was land available on either side that it be bought. Mr. Barna asked if it had been discussed how a person could be forced to buy an adjacent lot, and Chai.ruroman idahlberg replied that if the Board felt the adjacent land owner was asking an unreasonable sum� it shou].d be pari of the Board's recommendation that somehow this would have to be worked out between the two parties. She said the person next door could not ask an exorbitant amount just to prevent the neighbor from buying. Mr. Barna suggested that if they were asking an extremely high price� the land should be considered not available. Chairwoman Wahlberg said that the concensus was that building should be allowed on !�0 foot lots, but there was no clear cut feeling on how to go about it. She noted that any denials the Board came up r�rith rrould have to be firmly stated in writing, and their feelings should be made very clear in order to avoid any possible lawsuits, She asked the members of the Commission ito study the discussions by the next meeting. • �IDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 13, t976 — YAGE � ADJOURNMENT; Chairwoman Wahlberg adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Respectflxlly submitted� ��.\1�2(,'t:�''�,a?. 1„t�, l rrrnlY's'./�P. Sherri 0'Donnell Recording Secretary �� u � .�s CQMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION April 13, 1976 � . MEMBERS PRESENT: Herman Bergman, Hubert Lindblad, LeRoy Oquist, Dennis Schneider � MEMBERS ABSENT• OTHERS PRESENT: William Forster Jerry Boardman, City PlanneY Chairperson Bergman opened the meeting at 7:40 p.m. CHANGES IN AGENDA: Mr. Schneider stated he would like a follow-up report on the Youth Pxoject Committee's plan for a teen center. Mr. Bergman stated this proposal will be submit`ed to the Planning Commis- sion when it is completed. Mr. Schneider stated he felt it was imporYant that this final proposal be reviewed by the Community Development Commission also. Mr. Bergman stated he will request at the nexC Planning Commission meeting that the Community Development Commission have the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 9 1976 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT_COM- MISSION MEETING: MOTION by Dennis Schneider, seconded by Hubert Lindblad to approve the minutes of the Maxch 9, 1976 Community Development Commission meeting as submitted. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION ON SECOND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: Mr. Bergman asked denial were for a buiLding over 240 is on the City to bozhood. Mr. Boardman what the reasonable grounds for special use permit to build a second accessory square feet. Mr. Boardman stated the burden prove this would be detrimental to the neigh- Mr. Oquist stated he saw no problem with the present code as long as these buildings are properly maintained and professionally built. Mr. Lindblad and Mr. Boardman agreed. Mr. Bergman stated the question he raised at the Planning Com- mission was "Should there he a limit to the ratio of the house to an accessory building,whether it be the first or second accessory building.° � Mr. Oquist stated he did not feel a man should be denied the right to build a garage which was larger than his house: He added it was his opinion that neighborhoods look better if the automobiles ,.are kepC in garages rather than in the streets, etc. Mr. Lindblad agreed. L�O COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETZNG APRIL 13 1976 PAGE 2 Mr. Schneider asked whether there were any means of protecting the aesthetics of the neighborhoods. Mr. Boardman stated cost � limitations will control much of this. He added the lot coverage will, in effect, control the size of the accessory buildings. MOTION by LeRov Oquist, seconded bv Dennis Schneider to recommend to Plannin� Commission retainment of the present code as adequate treatment. Upon a voice vote all voting a e the motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION ON SIGN CODE: Mr. Boardman stated City staff will draft a new ordinance on the sign code. However, staff is looking'for some direction as to whether putting a size limit on signs is good or 6ad. He added staff was looking in terms of a project committee established to determine what those rules should be. Mr. Oquist stated he could see no need for billboards, flashing signs, etc, He added he was strongly.opposed to a project cammittee composed of people from the Chamber of Commerce and the sign companies. Mr, Bergman stated the members of the sign companies would not have voting power. They would merely be resource people, The Commission members read aloud the lists they had £ormulated on problems with signs. Mr. Schneider asked how other states had disallowed signs. Mr. Oquist responded,this can be stated in the ordinance. Mr. Bergman stated he felt a businessman had a right within the community also. Mr. Schneider felt they should be allowed to advertise in a non-offensive manner. Mr. Boardman sLated the business community has to be recognized. They are an essential part of the City. Mr. Bergman stated he felt this could best be handled by a project committee chaired by a member of the Community Develop- ment Commission. Mr. Schneider agreed. He felt this would be a more valid approach to signs. i Mr. Oquist, also felt the idea of a project committee was a good one. He stated he did not feel the Commission had the expertise to handle the sign code. He felt the project committee should be composed of ordinary citizens of Fridley. MOTION by Dennis Schneider, seconded by LeRoy Oquist, that a project committee be established ior review of existing sign materia2 and recommendations to staff for development o£ the sign ordinance. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,the motion carried unanimously. . 41 COMMUNITY DEVELOPM�NT COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 13 1976 PAGE 3 � Mr. Bergman called for nominations or volunteers for the chair- person of this project committee. Mr. Dennis Schneider volunteered for the position and was designated by the Commission as the chairperson of the project committee for review of the sign ordinance. MOTION by LeRoy Oquist, seconded by Hubert Lindblad, that Dennis Schneider, chairpeison of the pioject committee, establish a seC of goals for the committee and bring them back to the Community Development Commission for approval. Upon a voice vote, Bergman, Lindblad, Oquist voting aye, Schneider abstaining, the motion carried. Mr. Soardman stated he would advertise openings on the sign ordinance project committee. The following suggestions were made as to the make-up of this project committee: 1. 2. . 3. 4. 5. � The Planning Commission recommended a member of the Appeals Commission sit on the project committee because of their � familiarity with variances relative to sinage.d2 "�r� ��O � - The Planning Commission recommended a sign com anv member should provide input to the project committee. It is not suggested that he be a voting member, but for informational putposes only, Mr. Bergman stated Mr. Craig Lofquist from the Naegele Sign Company has volunteexed to do this. A member of the Chamber of Commerce was also suggested. A-member of the League of Women Voters was suggested. An employee of Sign Craft (a local sign company), Mr. Jim Stafford has also volunteered to serve on this committee. The Commission agreed a project committee comprised of seven members with input from resource persons would best suit the purposes of the committee. The Commission will make the final decision on the membership. SSION ON BIKEWAY- ISS PROJECT COMMIT Mr. Boardman stated it was proposed by the City that the Bikeway- Walkway Committee now serve as a project committee of the Community Development Commission for the purpose of reviewing the problems of the system and making proposals. Mr. Boardman added this project committee would probably meet.twice a year, once in the spring and once in the fall. [�`� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MF.ETING APRIL 13 1976 PAGE 4 M�TION by Dennis Schneider, seconded by Hubert Lindblad, that the existing Sikeway-Walkway Committee be made a project com- � mittee of the Community Development Commission. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Boardman stated he would talk with Vern Moen, Chairperson of the Bikeway-Walkway Committee and have them put together a statement of the committee's purpose for review by the Community Development Commission. ADSOURNMENT: MOTION by LeRoy Oquist, seconded by Dennis Schneider, to adjourn the meeting at 9:37 p.m. U�on a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, _�a��/ /�tn� �P,� .l Holly TL6nsager � Recording Secretary � . � LJ OFFICIAL N�7ICE CITY OF FRIDLEY P,UBLIC HEARING BEFDRE THE PLANNIN6 COMMISSION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given thai: there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning C��r,ission af the City Gf Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on.Wednesday, April 21, 197b in %h� C�uncil Chamber at 7:30 °.M. for the pur{�ose of: A request for a Speciat Use Persnit, SP #76-05, by Arlyne R. Johnson, per Fridley City Code, Section 205.051, 2, A, to allow the construction of a second accessory building, a 20 ft. x 22 ft. detached garage, on Lot 5 and the East 1/?. of Lot 4, Block 5, City ltiew Addition, all lying in the North Ffalf of Section • 23, City of Fridley, Cour�ty of Anaka, Minnesota. Generally located at �+20 57th Place N.E. ,' Any:and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Publish: Rpril 7, 1976 April 14, i976 � RIGHARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION •tu :.� �� ... �1:1.1.Y VI• 1 �uuLUr r'unnea�nr� ,1 PLANNING AND ZONINC PORM NUM(i1iR T-� 7�'US� APPLICAN'C'S SIGNA'l'URG /;t�li 'l�.tia-.�1-� iAddress � D �%Z`� ��'� Telephonc Number S'�7 f— %� 7- � PROPCRTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE Address Telepiione Number Street I.ocation of TYPG OP RLQUGS'P Rezoning 1� Special Use Pernli.t Approval of Prcmin- inary F, Final Plat Streets or Allcy Vacations Other 0 CJ �y\- �i re�, Receipt No. OL� � Property %}�_O � %� �-�/��/%%� Le�al Uescr.iption of Present Zoning Classification 11 -- � Existing Use of Proper*,.y Acreage of Property Describe briefly the proposed zoning classification er Cype of use and improvement proposed Has the preseift applicant previously sought to rezone, piat, obiain a lo� sp1iT. or •variarce or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes � no. What was requested and iahen? The undersi�ned miderstands that: (a) a list of all residents and owners of prop�rty within s00 feei (350 feet for rezoning) mast be attached to t11is application. (b) This application must be signed 6y all o�ene:s of the property, or an explanation given ialiy this is not the case. (c) Responsibility.for any defect in the proceedinos resulting from the failw•e to list the names and aduresses of all residents and properYy o�vners of property in question, belongs to the undersigned. p sketch of proposed property and structure must be drawn and attached, showing the follaaing: 1. �orth Directi.on. 2. Location of .proposed structure on the lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks. 4. Street P]ames. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing Uuildings (within 300 feet). 'I7�e Lmdersigned hereby decllres that all the facts and representations stated in this app3.ication are true and correct. . DATL� ' a 7' `7 (D _ SICN�\7'URG_ �P (APPL A\'C) Date Piled Date of l�caring_,_� o�/� /�1710 � . Planning Canmission Approvcd City Council Approved (dates) Dcnicd (datcs) Denicd_ • -�- �— � C� � MAILING LIST Special Use Permit SP �76-05 Arlyne R. Johnson, 2nd accessory building Mr. & Mrs. Ra7ph Franke 369 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Robert Amborn 405 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Fay Benjamin 5630 6th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 John Tiller �� 417 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Dani K. Johnson 451 57th Place N.E. •idley, Mn 55432 ,� . Mr. & Mrs. Robert Engstrom 455 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Glen Ramsdell 400 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Ann M. VanderVeen 410 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Arlyne R. Johnson 420 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Carl Paulson 430 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Frederick Bohr 440 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Timothy Taveggia 450 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Planning Commission 4-6-76 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Hippen 464 57th Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Peter Neururer 390 57th P1ace N.E,. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Leslie 5671 6th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Darlene R. Sorenson 5632 6th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 John R. Osterloh 5639 5th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Alvin Schnobrich 5649 5th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. David Abrams 5659 5th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Raymond Gullickson 5648 5th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 y a7 . _�, - r�V�I ,1AN ANSEN 13907 Spring Lak� Rosd . Land Surveyor Hopkins, Minn. E53d3 P LAT O� S U RV EY Tetephone 938�gG78 Civil En¢ineer � OF PROPERTY OF ��n�t8 Or�k A�ildera � �� ' � LOCATION /✓Y/" 77�h °lece, Fridlev, Sfinne,ota �ESCRIBED AS POLlOWS 1�ot 5 IInd tha b'est 1�2 of Lot �� Block 5� City View� AnokB County�� .Y:inne�otl. : � f�� ,�' U°!�'�i � �� . � - �-�-��`,a�-� A A 4o�6f - so.6 e %He+s= --- �– � , � �: �o. – � ; � � , I p " ! ' �� I � n��_f', Ya IIN.is . I % Z�P �f � I � � ��f /' � � n �\ I � � -•_� "�j/ /� ya — 1 � ,..,o j io.ro � � ttt n�i�i7 / ! fi � `_ l � v U � I'� i �G"`�,� „ 0� I " 3' V �e � -/�t W I . ' 1 � v� I Py4o -�� `\ �.e yo: . .--' — — �� da.G3%i/r�x Ga�,/./- .^ : � ; � b� � � .0 � � � �M a ¢--�i- �"�`—,–�-��--� � — � •h . r, I . � , ` I sc�/� : /.r�ti - yu �� o .I7�no%r iion �nvrfcr CERTIFICATE OF LOCATIO\ OF BOfLDI\G . CtBTIFICATE OF SURVEY �� ' [ Aereby ttrti[y that on._..�?��. �_T� —19 7/ 1 6ereby crrtify tfiat un_,_ 19—_ � made a survey oI the locatmn ot �he'buildingFp un the above I surveyM thz propeny described above and that tht atiave pla� escribed properry and that thc lucation of saiJ building(i) is is a wrrcct reprcsenlauon of uid sun•ey. . earcctly shown on the above plat. . � . �, .�� ,n. � �. � __-_r�� I ). . J. HANSEN, REGISTEREO SURVEYOR NO. 6 : . � � . ., ' . �� f.. n { '^ �.1.1 1, �{'+ n' f71 J ::� � � '. i:> :_ . . '' /¢ '� 3 � : ti . *% w -. .. '. . . .J.IC . I � /�/-/J �JilO . J. /AK'J � � ^ � ; -t - SP #76-05 Arlyne R. Johnson �t' r �^_ . irl�> ; - . � �• � :. �•-' � a� On Lo� 5 and the East Half . ' i<3'ei- -"" �� j',�.•. ��•,'- .'•"- of Lot 4, B1oCk 5, City VIeW �� Y�'a s q: � �!/ � �: h , �z � S : Addition, 420 57th Place N.E. � . :Lia! . ,3y /.•cl � n .a . � � ^ dc�i _ . . ... �•�a � . ..1_ :'o�� _- ,. � .. .. . . =. . �� - �� c .i- .a�,�/ g '� e .:,r .- ,za:�� , � !/ y E a ,� ,;/ . ,, h n � �n. ! �{ � � - - � t�..i� �OV' 11�11 . ..°�: '—. �1��1L �_ iJl.�; , - , -{ ` �_ Q 7l0 � � K.'>•%' .. s �� ` ICI�" -�_ � F., :'_ 2 " � , ;- . T � , �o ;; y � : �'�4 P P g �Z -- . . ? ; ��` _ ..'I.`� t- ' •� .�! ��E.!� .!r �f-_ '_" b __- (I . [� ', . .Ad'_ �r ' o cti 9 h � �.. h Y' ° � t' `�' � _ � � . 4- . 1 _ �� (d" JS F 4� 5 � `� �� GC �� >� � 4. ' Lr ; r �. 'L � i9 � ,_ y � - � � fa\� C, iV. E. s:.,::: ' : _ � _ _ . . , � �� : � -� � � i �. � � ; � i , � � , _ , ' J l,' i ,� , j . `, �. a�, ro / ��. .> .r�i^ .r ��i°�� , .`z {3 .� s �n , �3 ,, ' � � , - i I I i �.a -� a-a! � i REGi� FF . ..�. i ° - � .9 PLAC� �_nra� .s � ' �� f, ' �^ � � � �� , � ' �y: :, 2 3 ¢ 5 a.T '/O i/ /Z�/�j¢�i /�: (a'� 7 G�:��7'�v //�/z.3ldl�/�°�c�. �Nd.. .,i I � � , �..I �� . � I ;` _-� -. � ; ,: .,�s=_ Jn . � . .. . )� ,��I� . . . . .. U .. . _ A / /I ------5?-T�t--A'lEiVllE N.� .,�.�, > - _.� �- �(;� „ -.,�°%".=,-�-3 � (r . /�<�f � � � � i � i.si 6e � /•'J..+: ONa A t 1 FyS Q�Qp , o• � '�_�.� � !e '✓i. .�_o r 4 6 < i.c i _ 3O_ � _ . 2l � fb' 6 e ,pa � y n� � �O -°. _ . JG - . / ` y . ifbtTai a� 9 � � pa � l t . Y 79 v P v - �e Zs G�e� 1_ � � >n, �- { � �29 � � � C t�n - v r � r .: 1p 3 1s 3_ `. A 3 _ . zB : ) _� 1�:ri, i - e ��17 A 77 9 -. � e7 , 4_ �I C `J%Y{'? zs - s re s ,-ZO - S �E _ s_ ��, i:, i i.`; tS L �1J L � ^'? � , ` 9S ' _ _ l ; : 1/ $ N� �; 19 �1 �°� �� 1 Zf 7 79 7 . • 24 7 ;� I - � �i• ; ` '� � ' . — — . � >,�..,� rs .,�.� :." ..B 13 9 1i _ B ' 23__ =`6 � .�e . . �_ 1-� - - "-- —_ . Rt - 9 � �� s :� � � i+ z� ' g - <"z _ 9 _ _ --=---- - - — �,' 1; :� �. p ic ---z/ _ �v : Z/ �o - ti( j; . ': � - ': ZC // Ic �// _ , %° _ H _. � - . . .e. : . t�-` � — f9 : /P °'it�s . i ' . ._ _ : y ` L. /I . I9 /. �9 . IZ � � � . . � � i / /3 j"" /ti �i (_'" /B : U �:,; a � i � i � �� _ , s : (fA i ie � n � • Cri „ � f.!Y � ' � . .' i i ' - - -- i ; . ! � I c' '.+ { � ' ' •',__" - :, . �� ' ��r.' fe i .. . ' iSs.a.v` Le i6r• ':N iSS � � � X' L ,/_ _ ��. !)is _,� . :. _ r. • a _"s._—"'_— ' . i � °\ •,:'4;Q�zJ��,i-f.' i��., �.�. � � ! r' o . � - .�.�, w., o,..s 2 . P' n..ii' - � ".x.w :`� . ' '� ii : . ..... ^ a .'9 / a •so' � �9 . • _ � �� @ +! � / �• �' 3p / `� _' - .i 3 I i ^+ ( � ; {� ,- a .a -•. --�: ,� � � ! z , . T3�: a :. x �a3 : : z . . F'-'-•--�`-----�� ^ : --j -,4±3 _f �1F 3 I . - 1 ' r ea J' s r_•� : ` " — -- - 1 � ' `: r-•-R_,- ��'--;- --- T 2,�'-_..s . :�, •d T z� Q ; . ! � i � r- ----+' -• --•-- ----•--��-- � wy•g ----s .._ ra s • ` � '� ,r . a •• li d �� S�-T,%� ^V `� • .r ' � �; � � 1, ' '_"""': ' Ys 11� (, . �'b�S ' i . b ' �:.', ZS • :I�: 6 � r � � I. Z' _"'� "_'• •. ;__""'.'li" . .. . _�r 1.� �ir�'1.L.� - .. �."_'_" : � ' . � ) W��- '.""' �___ '.'/r '�__•� �'d. .el�i� 7_� � S�f--�-'-:-�"'i �. 1! ' �, ,,� ' /_ S � � J9 ,X, p .i �. ' d3 8_ '� ' �ee j ! ��^�_�"'� ' . r _:... �1f '._" �I .!f i -'---� � �;Z--�_" 9 "'� s ��; ��"-:-. .. � , : v �� 11- � - 9- - -..li----- - ` � ! . , i , �� j , Y _' ..r. "' _ ' itt..-._ ,�.. .�� _ _s".� �- _�+r-_�. ,�'�_ �ic �i +l R z/ � b' '� I • (. ' : ' 1 .. . , . ... _._ � � i�__ ..___:_'""'�.r.......�.�: I` .. _. �! a � � � �--� � .i�.�.. '. . � ._.. . . ' .. � � l: ' '�j.��'T'� ,� �� S 1 1 •, � _ . _ ��,.�� :�'_ � i - �--:: _ � . : . _ .'`.� _�°�-� 1 i � � �:4 . :1 ��_ , :,, ,N � . :s '� � °� : �,,:, ��s �, ° \ 1NT � � ' 1� " � �._ ._ �.. i- ... r' � � .. ' J _ _ _ � ' i �s s ' "�.�'�+��' i, e A 1 l---'--�-r..__�_ .� �---.�-- ,: � '_ �� ' ----' �7-.:'3 .��• -� _ '+-'�--`-.�� . �''- . ... _. . . . �--r- - • —� .. _ i . _ . . '?.•- .. ! \ . ..-+� r �.� .� � -- � t . .�__ _..,. . - . . . .. .�.�-+ , _. ... ----._� . __ _... - - .: . T I �_ ' � � ....�__:. . _ ,.r+'t`� � COT�i �� 1��...�Y 8431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, M�N�NESOTA 55432 . TELEPHONE (812)571•3450 � April 16, 1976 WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This is to inform you that the Planning Corianission of the City of Fridley will be holdi�g an informal hearing on a request to vacate that portion of unimpnoved Johnson Street, that lies North of 53rd Avenue and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanson's Court Addition, the same being 1391 53rd Avenue N.E. This hearing will be held on April 21, 1976, in the Council Chambers at the above address. The meeting starts at 7:30, and this item should be on • the agenda by 8:30 P.M. RICFtARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING C�MMISSIQN � �`UflON ?�' 8�1^ i : u W � 9� � °� ri�e luta i CI7'Y OP 1�RIDI.GY MINNGSOTA PU�NNING AND ZONINC FORM NUMI�V:R 1�L�%G-dY APPLICM!'f'S SIGNA7'URU /�Z� ✓ 2!i'�-`'»��'`J Address� ��%� v��/� ��'�� '/ � � Telephonc Numher ur7�_ �' �� y PR�PERTY OIVN�R'S SIG�ATURG Address � }% � `5 J �� i �J rE.-_ �9 �vs or RGQUESI' Rezoning Special lJsc Pennit Approval of Prcmin- inary $ rinal Plat � Streets or Alley Vacations Other Telcphonc Number "��- l' �G � �� Fee�Receipt Na. Strect Location of Property �.; �� ` _�.2�/� l� y%�� oF �,,� q�` p,,,, q6r�r_, ' u� �y,� Legal ��escription of Property ,,.�Fti '� ��"f��'� Y � . p 2,�.,Yyi.'.i�a.�` r"' �� Present 7,oning Classi£i.cation�l- � _ Existing Use of Property °Z.��-^ �' Acresige of Froperty DescriUe Uriefly the proposed zoning classification or type of use and impro�•ement proposed ,.O _' _-� � ^ i?� .L�r� L�y�^it�''�.� �7� �}las the present applicant previcusly sought to rezone, pl.at, obcain a lot s lit or variance or. special use permit on the subject site or pa.t of it? yes .,� ro. 1'�9iat ivas reyuested and when? The undexsi�;nr,d uuderstands L'hat: (a) a list ef all residents a;d owners of prope�ty �aithin 30� feet (350 fcet for rezoning) must be attaclied to this application. (b) 'I'his a�plication must Ue signed by all o+vners of tlie property, or �n explanation g,iven ti�hy this is not thc case. (c) Responsibility for any defect in the proceedings xesulting from the faiiure to list t��e names and addresses of all residents and property oianers of property in question, belongs to tite undersigned. A sketch of proposed property and structure mnst be drawn and attached, showi.ng the follo�:�ing: 1. North Dircction. 2. Location of propesed structure on the lot. 3. Dimc.ns:ion:; of property, pronosed structt�re, and front and si.de setb�cks. 4. Street N�mes. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings �wi.t:hin "s00 feet}. The uiidersi�ned hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this aPplication are true and corrcct. � • / q /�_ IJA'PE �'� �' %� SIGNA'fURE / ,�G2�. <cr , �i�to/!�n-:^'�, — . �nNi>�rcr,:��' • Date Piled Date of llenring • Planning Commissior Approved � City Coc�nci: Approvcd _,._. (dates) Ucnicd (dates) Denicd _,_ . • �� Planning Commission 7 —/�� %� MAILING LIST Council � SAV �76-02, Mrs. Ray Presteman 1391 53rd Avenue N.E. �, i � Mr. & Mrs. Ray Presteman 1381 53rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Albers 1390 SXywood Lane N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Robert Oulicky 5332 Matterhorn Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Larson 5316 Matterhorn Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Albert Villella 5300 Matterhorn Drive N.E. fridley, Mn 55421 �v f .SC4tbi d0 /.� � ' (��eJ I .., ! i ; �L..ifie I iric .�.. ..U, I ^ "; � (� � J � tl � � ��,�. ♦ o 'r--��{�j��,::.'.!1 �{�iCG '�' � @ TI � ` 1 i .�6�"y-:a^ _ =-'rt..rr 4.r s: `;I 7 �� I Ei f f.t~ �y -� ,/ ;� i �, r.-f.' -/ a'I � , k Z °� _ f�.. . ; ;' Y xt .�.F 'v B� s ^. .sr r. . � � 'e'� �P�J . %s ±' � o, j. 9` z �,: / eQ 4 '� � � � Er � fl«*O�1GTf�9�t�� Sr, p, py . � , 9 g � ' �A � ..r's � c� - � cr �., �, � s ��3-.�NH:, � .;� �- ` � ��R;ISQ .`" F.. , , ° z �� = y� ��: E, � i � � ♦ ,'tZ' / i F �y /.i ; 4 � .� ,. ,,. � � i a F� * �m � �� s � , k V� � n � s.. 6� i � '- s.fl- �' . 2 f h � e • ,w,f � `h� ^ �+ � J S$ , O (7 .+^i Q Q 7 � � �� [ , ;� �� . yj�. � Q` �4 "4b /� d k . � �' \ rJi s4i3 L�i f�� Ug �t / � .le _ � Y i � // Q 4.. � 6 / r`i' �-.�� 1� I p NcI �i � 2�17 � I f, 9�` e� f�: /J� fs A i�f � y�4,. f � n aw. = n � 1 : a C . � r; Z l(�*. � �/': � �: • ° � a i , �o ;J`8 "��- ;`; .... I � - t � e: � e° ; � p � � n7/.Tg/+�y� I ' r r. � .s <i� `� �C'. 9 �' + !J °M v ; � �� +� F � }�,, fr � , i.,,,4'. rr�"' •. �.n�a � �'w�:-'n�v .YY.r � N'i.',..' ♦ � 3 e .\q � g.� '7� i � � . .� .I� � � � $ i �� y�! � .Q B E.e.: . s.�sw .n° . sxe�i ."ri-e.' 'bz risp _ �� N r 'C a � 4h % f3o Zfm :: JXJ6 �0. � W ♦ 9 .E �:a rN'sJ� ! fY � � ...� �y� j•� � `�l�� / �o z � ''3 I 4 � Nr" - � �` .r " \$ �i P'�i�� `i. w � � L��'L�J�/,� : .4. , � � < _ k �..,:. � °� �� : � l . e. .,. 3 � k. K¢� e'm ,y'... C�w"# e� "a ?� � � ' ��1�[l�%J � .kd.,b�.. v.��s.r<s,rr � E., i g 3'� ' i.mx . `'� �s � f¢rtn:. ( ab : y : �` ` � � Y . 6 '� � i r�?K� '{� . � ° 9 • �%i ,. . _ _ _ ��u o"''¢?_ . 5 l � Z + � ryn /•sPTOta{ ��_��i( . i e� - 'i_' �� =A'u�"_'_Y't+� +� � a ct 1/,�•rs� w \ ° ei. �6 .� � �r7� _ i r „'� : � : � � RV `. � �.+ kl � 'N ` __+R�"a'Rx� - ��. k: 4 � n y : �ss � o ` __ _ �' rN� . L� - ' �° _ - - �_'_ -- •__ .. r,�ry-4,� �.§ r a '�f ro '-.p� '� '--�_ --t- s• �Y - _ : '8 .'"f ----,._ �, �` ` � ? r .; ' L `' � � , �, °` ; �: - ___�.� g4 f ti :, o � __ ,� �� r � � � �~� : � �� b -- .-- ��-�„� - ; .,,,„ r:: ,,,, �. ...- a . , ��'°'��i.-` � � SAV #76-02 2�irs. Ray Presteman '�� i�, �—'�� vacate unimproved Johnson � � � � _ ...,. 'A -..,�..... ��—;�-� - �re t �,�Sl' ' � " a, , _ =,_.... ��(j ��{ � � �� .w f • a8� .� ` " v l+"��.: � '�� m�° �+�1� d' .,t.0 •' _ � I , �L� �YC� � COURT " ` g; : �-y.,�_ � , --ti_; ....� x, - `� � ,S!/ F" I j' � •• .�„ _ _ «.• nu � : � I" . ': �9'f'�i_' .d � .r ' ''t.M �� • S i 3 l L 'r � f. �." -,a'., '12r . � ` 7 .�' ' f `� � i � �' �sc ..ro� OS, (i� / � � } t �� i a ' �` - . � f, "' ...�y. ... , • a � - � M f . "wn...�. _. �^ �� MF .. ` � , . SKYWOOD L�1NE `�'�.,r, µ7.->. .,.- _.. ��,,,,, � _� ` �r-----=:o _ I�y 4 p K. b M .. __'_ •. •' � A Le_ i r .. C� iO Jii b p N�,� Yi.y� �" A��u �p�� /y M'M /�/� � 'T �Y�[T TLiT V!{1r'. V I x� R. a . . �.. s .,•,a or=;�v- r � � aViJ'U� y a s D�' � . � � ,..« ' ,y'r { . � . a r � Q o ' :0 ` r.F . ; y � ��Z iS` s s t.w`:� ' 4/ T � ,.,,.n.r . -_ - . G : s 2 y �\'� qIj �� Lr. -�.�� ib�qC !`j�} �� ,• j�y`�� '?QO_� ��tw : � L. e n _�r V _� �' �N.�. .. .. �^ '�i ' / V�.+ �Fi�.:n�!� .— o./! ! ,¢y � t �SJ i"' 8 . � '*�, C�. 1 �V� 42�`� ' � II .. y . � I �" 4 Q � 3t �� .� � f� i .+rMf .::~ �1�ra�„ �. Aa��,°n�.� r..n✓ ./l � �.Mnf ;;�.r� v c�tv ° n�.r. w�., r �u .r..i �e .r.0 4�'= ' v' ��-3�,:� �; Sv��'�»3`' ua �e w a, I � � A M N ! �w�i �_-'. �'� ��'1;I� . .. �p4�. : . . _ � . � 4 i �r,' .. . . . � -� � . ..�,�� . �- . CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 21, 1976 PAGE 1 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Harris called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Shea, Bergman, Harris, Peterson, Wahlberg, Langenfeld Members Absent: None Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner APPROVE PLANNING C0�IISSION MINUTES: APRIL 7, 1976 %OTION by Peterson, seconded by LangenfeZd, that the Planning Cor�ais- sion approve the minutes of the April 7, Z976 meeting as written. Upon a voice vote, a1Z voting aye, the motion carried unanimouslg. RECEIVE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: APRIL l, 1976 MOTION bg Shea, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Coffiaission receive the minutes of the Human Resources Commission meeting of Apri1 1, I976. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimousZy. Mrs. Shea called attention to the recomnendation from the Youth Project Cortmittee on the Teen Center proposal and to the motion made by the Human Resources Comnission which was to approve the resolution of the Youth Pro- ject Comnittee and ask the City through the Planning Cortmission to dring the Youth Center under the auspices of the Parks and Recreation Department. Mrs. Shea said she wasn't sure how this should be handled. She said she didn't know if this should go to the City Council before it went to the Parks & Recreation Department. Mr. Peterson said the Parks & Recreation Cortmission would like to review this proposal before it went to the Council. Mr. Peterson asked what the thinking was behind this recommendation. Mrs. Shea said the Youth Project Comnittee felt that the.� would like the teen center to be under the Parks & Recreation Department, and they would like them to be the administrators. She said that the Human Resources Cortmission felt that this comnittee had done all they could do. She said they had the backing of the City Manager to either have the use af the room in the Parks & Recreation Department or the room formerly occupied by the library. Mr. Peterson asked if they were talking in terms of a program or of a physical facility. Mrs. Shea said it was both. Mr. Bergman said that this proposal has been under discussion by the Community Development Cortmission and the majority of the members stated that they wanted to review the proposed youth center. Mr:s.Langenfeld said the Environmental Quality Commission was interested in this proposal also, and they would like to review it. MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Peterson, that the recoa¢oendations and program which resulted from the combined efforts of the Human Resources Co¢¢nission and the Yoath Project Co�ittee for a teen center, be referred to the Parks & Recreation Coami.ission, the Coumrunity Development Cormni.ssion Planning Gorm�ission Meetinq - April 21 1976 Pa9e 2 and the Environmental Qvality Cou�i.ssion. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimousSg. Mr. Keith Larson, Vice Ehaieman of the Youth Project Committee said they would have a representative from this Committee at all these meetings. Mr. Boardman said that in the Youth Project Comnittee's proposal they mention that a temporary youth center be established in the Civic Center. How tempo�ary would this be? Mr. Larson said it referred to the way that all the youth centers we have screened and examined in our proposal have started, which was on a temporary basis. Either a City organization, or the Police Department, or a special interest group started such a center, and then with the development of interest of people, usually one group would take it over. Mr. Larson said the location of the teen center would be permanent. He said that as the developme�t of interest developed in the Center, they would be looking for people from the Police Department, pesple from the Junior and Senior High Schools, members of the Planning Cortmission and Numan Resources Comnission, as volunteers to help with thss Center. If they had help from all these organizations, it would help decrease the staff they would need from the Parks � Recreation Department. They would hope to �ventu�lly be a self-propelled type of a center with volunteer chaperones. Mr. Peterson said that he would like to ask the staff to provide the proper information for the Parks & Recreation meeting which would be held on Monday, April 26, 1976. .RECEIVE APPEALS CONR7ISSION MINUTES: APRIL 13, 1976 MO2ION by WahIberg, seconded bg Langenfeld, that the Planning Com�.s- sion receive the minutes of the Appeals Coirmi.ssion meeting of April 23, I976. 1 Mr. Harris said the City Council had received the minutes of the Planning Commission on 40' lots and wi11 study our recomnendation at their workshop meetin9 on April 26th. He said that a policy statement and recomnendations on sub-standard lots would be coming fran the City Council. Mr. Boardman said the Appeals Commission would be acting on the one request they have had on a 40' lot on April 27th, but this would then be going to the City Council, and they would make the final disposition on this request. UPON a voice vote, a1S voting aye, the motion carried unanimovsly. RECEIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COM+IISSION MINUTES: APRIL 13> 1976 MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Co�i.ssion receive the Conar+unitg DeveZopment Comnission min�tes of the meeting of 8pri1 I3. 1976. Mrs. Wahlberg asked how the development of the Sign Ord�nance Project Committee was progressing. Mr. Bergman said that Dennis Schneider would be:,Chairing this project committee and was in the process of forming it. Mr. Bergman said that his Cortmission felt that �r, K�aig Lofquist from Naegele Sign Company had volunteered to be on this Commission and they also wanted representation from the Chamber of Comnerce. lhey relt that anyone Planninq Comnission Meeting - April 21, 1976 Page 3 who didn't live in the City should be on this Committee for informational purposes only, and that the Chamber of Comnerce representative shouldn't vote because they had a�ested interest. Mr. Peterson said he took exception to tfiis because this Committee was being formed to give input on changes that should probably be made in the sign ordinance, and the people who were really involved in this ordinance should be full members of this Committee. Mrs. Wahlberg asked if a member of the Appeals Commission was still being considered as a member of this Comnittee. Mr. Bergman asked Mrs. Wahlberg to discuss this with the Appeals Commission, and then she should call Mr. Schneider and tell him which member would agree to be on the Comnittee. He said that they felt there should be a limit of seven people on this Committee to make it a workable group. UPON a voice vote, aS1 voting aye, the motion carried ananimousZy. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #76-05, BY ARLYNE R.�OHNSON: Per Fridley C ty Code, Section 205.651, ��to allow the construction of a second-accessory building, a 20' x 22' detached garage, on Lot 5, and the East iJ2 of Lot 4, Biock 5, City View Addition, the same being 420 57th Place N.E. Mr. Barry Satterlee, ihe Sussel Company, was present to represent the petitioner. MOTION bg Peterson, secronded by Bergman, that the Planning Conmti.ssion open the Public Hearing on the request for a Special Use Permit, SP # 76-05, by Arlyne R. Johnson. Upon a voice vote, a1Z voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Pvblic Hearing open at 8:12 P.M. Mr. Boardman said the petitioner had:.a single attached garage. He said this property had double access, one access from 57th Place N.E. and the other access on 57th Avenue N.E. He said this garage would be 2b'' x 22' and would meet all the code requirements. The staff had no. objections to this special use pexmit being granted. Mr. Barry Satterlee presented pictures of the site,_ a drawing of how the garage would be located on the lot, and a statement signed by the two adjacent property owners. Chairman Harris read the statement from the two adjacent property owners which stated: "We the undersigned have no objection to a double garage being constructed at 420 57th Place and the present single garage attached to the dwellingremaining open and being used as a garage." He said it was signed by Warren Sunderland of 410 57th Place N:E. and Carl Paulson of 430 57th Place N:E. MOTION bg Langenfeld, seconded by Petarson, that the Planning Commission receive the signed statement from the adjacent property owners. Upon a voice vote, aZl voting age, the motion carried unanimous2y. Mr. Satterlee said that Miss Johnson lived alone and for security reasons would like to continue to use the single attached garage for her personal car. She was going to use the second garage to store a boat and a second car. Planning Commission Meetinq - April 21, 1976 Page 4 MOTION bq Bergman, seconded by Shea, that the.rPlanning Commission close the Public Hearing on a request for a Special Use Permit, SP #76-05, by Ar2yne R. Johnson. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing cSosed at S:I6 P.M. MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Peterson, that the PZanning Co�uni.ssion recommend to Council approval of the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #76-05, bg ArSgne R..Johnson, per FridZey City Code, Section 205.052, 2, �, to allow the construction of a second accessory bvilding, a 20' x 22' detached garage, on Lot 5, and the East I/2 of Lot A, Block 5, City View Addition, the same being 420 57th P2ace N.E. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Satterlee to be sure the petitioner was aware that it was a code requirement to have a hard surface driveway. Upon a voice vote, a1I voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 2. VACATION REQUEST: SAV #76-02, MRS. RAY PRE�LEMAN: To vacate that part qf unimproved Johnson Street that lies North of 53rd Avenue and adjacent to lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition, the same being 1391 53rd Avenue N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Ray Prestemen �ere present. Chairnwn Harris said this request would be handled as an informal public hearing. Mr. Boardman said that a portion of unimproved Jahnson Street was vacated in 1970. At that time, this portion of Johnson Street was not vacated because the petitioner wanted to maintain that area for an access. They have Ghanged their minds and want it vacated now. There wi11 have to be an easement re�ained for drainage and utilities on the East 20' of the vacated street. Mrs. Albert Villella> 5300 Matterhorn Drive N.E., said that their house was on the ather side of this unimproved Johnson Street, and she wondered how this vacation would affect her property. Mr. Harris said this road easement for Johnson Street was 33' which was half of an easement for a street> so it would all go back to Swanstrom's Court Addition, so this wouldn't affect Mrs. Villella's property at all. Mrs. Vi17ella said that if the petitioner was going to construct something on this 33', then it would affect her property very much. Mr. Presteman said that they were going to construct a new attached garage on their property, which would be built 2 feet from their present property line, so the vacated street would be used just as part of the required setback. They didn't intend to Use.any part of the vacated street for any structure. Mrs. Presteman said this �nimproved street has been used as a dumping ground by all the surroundi�g neighbors. She said there has been concrete chunks, tree branches, etc., dumped here, and she was the only one in the past ten years who has made any effort to clean up this area. Mrs. Yillella said that they had just purchased their home last spring, and they had tried to clean up the area closest to their property. Planning Commission Meeting April 21, 1976 Paqe 5 Mrs. Presteman asked the Planning Cortmission if they knew how much this vacated street would add to their real estate taxes. Mr. Harris said he didn't think it would raise the taxes too much because this would 6e considered as one building site, and although they would own all the property, 20' of it would have a drainage and utility easement on it. Mrs. Presteman said that if the City Council approved this vacation, they would like to construct their garage before the vacation process was completed. She said that no part of the easement would be used for the construction of the garage because the garage would be 2 feet from their present property line. Mr. Harris said the Planning Comnission could not make a determination on this, it would have to be done by the City Council. Mrs. Villella asked how close this garage would be to her property. Mr. Harris said it would be 35' from her property line. She said she had no bbjection to this. M0220N by Wahlberg, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning CommisMrsn Fecot�aend to Council approval of the vacation request, SAV #76-02, by Ray Presteaian, to Vacate that part of unimproved Johnson Street that lies North of 53rd Avenue N.E. and adjacent to Lot I8, Block 2, Swanstrom's Covrt.Addition, the same being 1391 53rd Avenue N.E..with the stipulation that the City retain a drainage and utility easement on the EasterZg 20 feet. Upon a voice vote, aZ1 voting aye, the motion carried unanimous2y. 3. Di�CUS�iON ON SECOND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: Chairman Harris had asked Mr. Bergman to delay the discussion of this item until the canpletion of the public hearing items. Mr. Bergman said he was bringing this to the attention of the Planning Commission for any treatment that the Planning Cortmission deemed necessary. He said the Community Development Comnission had discussed this because of a request for a Special Use Permit on a s_€cond accessory , building that was larger than the existing house. which they felt was in conflict with the primary use of a residential district. Mr. Bergman said it was the unanimous consensus of this Commission, after 9n-depth'disc�ssions, that the present ordioance was as good as anything that we could come up wi.th. The concerns sere ihat the City should not prohibit what a person could do on t6ein own property, and to be too restrictive was a violation of individual rights. The 25� lot cover- age maximum, they felt was a reasonabl,� valid control over the abuse of second accessory building size. It was felt that we shouldn't get too concerned with what kind of private business or hobby a person might want to conduct on their own property. Mr. Bergman said they felt �t would be difficult to validly deny an accessory building, with the burden of pro�f resting on the City, and it would be difficult to inspect or control. as`.to the present owner, or if the property changed owners. Mr. Peterson said he agreed with this completely. Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 1976 Page 6 Mr. Harris said that he agreed with this in principle, but he was concerned with the use of some of the accessory buildings. He said that there seemed to be more and more businesses that were being operated out of garages, and he thought this was bringing co�nercialism into what should be complete1y residential neigh6orhoods. Mr. Boardman said the home occupation secfrion of our code does not allow any business to be conducted fran an accessory building, it all had to be confined to the residence itself. Mr. Harris felt that there were flagrant violations to that section of the code. He said that he felt there were many body shops being operated in garages, and this was unfair ,. to some�rne, who was operating a body shop in the proper`zoning and paying out for overhead, when someone else was operating a body shop illegally in their garage, with no overhead. Mr. Langenfeld offered as a suggestion the guidelines laid out by insurance companies on what was a comnercial use in a residential area and what wasn't. He said he felt this would be quite helpful to the Planning Cortmission in making a determination of whdt was a home opcupation and what was a comnercial venture. Mr. 8oardman said he felt that would be a help, but he would prefer not to have the zoning ordinance worked on in a piecemeal way. He said that the Planning Comnissnon would be reviewing the entire zoning code, and he thought that the concerns that they had should be part of their recomrr�nded changes to the code at that time. He said they could also consider business licenses for home businesses at the time they reviewed the new maintenance code. Chairman Harris declared a recess at 4:10 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 9:25 P.M. 4. GOALS & OBJECTIVES Mr. Boardman said he had set up five goal areas. They were Housing, Human Development, Access, Security and Comnunity Yitality. He said the Housing Goal had been completed. Mr. Boardman said that under the Human Development Goa7 they would cover Parks & Recreation,and every thing that deals with human resources: library, fine arts, the humanities, the school� and education, etc. Under the Access 6oa1 we will handle anything that has to do with the movement of people and services, and the maintenance of those accesses. The Security Goal will har.dle individual public health and general welfare. Im the Vitality Goal �hey would handle anything that concerns the cor�,�unity's growth. Mr. Boardman said they would consider the Human Development Goal at this meeting. Mr. Boardman read five goal statements under this goal. The first goal statement was to "Provide adequate park facilities and recreational opportunities to ensure the health and well being of the residents and provide for a quality living environment:" He then read four other goal statements and then reviewed the Program Objectives for the first goal statement which were based on the goals and objectives from the Parks & Recreation Comnission. _,. Planning Comnission Meeting - April 21, 1976 Page 7 The Planning Commission was in general agreement with the presentation by Mr. Boardman, but Mr. Harris said he thought they should take the material with them to give themselves a chance to digest it, and they shou7d be ready by the next meet9ng to review this �mrst goal under Human Developuient.=•.M�. Boardman.sai� the 4�rks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan would be based on this first goal. 5. PERMIT PROCESS Mr. Boardman said he would like to have the Planning Commission's reaction to the staff reports used for building permit requests fqr�:cormnercial and industrial development. He said that at the present time, when someone makes a request for a building permit, we write up a staff report. He said this was sent to the Planning Comnission, who were not required to take action on the report. It then goes to the City Council, and they are not required to take any action on these reports either. He said that the staff did wait to issue a permit until the staff reports had been through the Planning Comnission and Council. He said the intent of this process was just to inform the Planning Cortmiss�on and Conucil of what was going on in the City. Mr. Boardman said he thought that a better way to handle this, as far as the staff was concerned, was to eliminate the staff report. He said the staff reviewed all building permit requests to see that they met all the requirements of the zoning code. He said a list of permits issued would be given to the Planning Carmission and Counail so they would still be aware of what was being developed in the City. Mr. Boardman said that when the Building Standards-Design Control Subcomnittee was eliminated during the reorganization of the Planning Cottmission, it was thoughtr the administrative staff report would be a transition from this Subcommittee to a process that would still keep the Planning Commission and Council aware of building permit requests. Now we would like to phase out the administrative staff reports. He said that by just sending a list of permits issued to the Planning Comnission and Cauncil this could speed us the issuing of permits by two to three weeks. Mr. Harris said he was concerned about developers not having any �e�ours8 if they didn't agree with the staff's interpretation of the zoning code. Mr. Boardman said this was taken care of in the Code, where anyone could make an appeal of any staff decision through the Appeals Commission. Mr. Harris said that he had no objection to building permits being handled by the staff as long as there was a way to appeal these decisions. The ather members of the Planning Comnission concurred. They all agreed that staff should make the citizens aware that there was an appeal process to their decisions. 6. SF.REET STANDARDS Mr. Bergman said he wanted to bring up,the subject of street standards with the idea that it was better to be forthright to do something other than to canplain or gripe. He said that at the last meeting he had:asked what the standard was for street width, and was told that there were many, and he was bofhered by this. He asked if there �as anything the Planning Comnission could do to correct this. Mr. Boardman said that most of the streets were � Planning Comnission Meeting - April 21, 1976 Page 8 already in. Mr. Harris said he felt it was never too late to establish standards, because this was an on-going thing. Mrs. Shea felt that this could be under the Access Goal to establish standards for road widih. Mr. Ber.g�an said he felt a little bit embarrasse� tBat at this point in time we were talking about establishing street standards. Mr. Boardman said he would ask the Engineering Department for a report on how street widths were determined at the present time. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Peterson, seconded by Wahlberg that the meeting be adjourned. Upon a voice vote, a21 voting aye, Chairman Harris dea2ared the Planning Cormnission meeting of Apri1 22, 1976 adjousned at I0:57 P.M. Respectfully submitted, c� Dorothy;Even , ecretary