PL 11/17/1976 - 30456r'�``,
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMIgSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 17, 1976 PAGE 1
CAL� TO ORDER:
Chairperson Harris called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Harris, Bergman, Langenfeld, Schnabel� Shea
Members Absent: Peterson
Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
APi'ROJE PLANYJING COMMISST0�1 MINUTES s NOVEMBER. 3, 197b
�.
,�
� MQTIUN by Bergman, seconded by Shea, that the Planning Comrnission minutes o:f
� November 3, 1976 be approved as written. Upon a voice vote, all cotin� aye,
the motion carried unanimously.
l. PUELIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST: ZOA #76-06 BY GEORGETOWN MOTEL INC.:
Rezone from M�2 heavy industrial areas to C-2 general business areas ,
that part of Lot 2, A.So ,�78, lying Westerly of the Westerly right-of�way
line of Main Street N.E., l,yi,ng Easterly of the Easterly railtsay righ�t-of�
way line of Burlington Northern, Inco, lying Northerly of �the Northerly
ri�;ht-of-way line of Interstate Highway #69l�, and lying Southerly of a
lir�e drawn Wes-ter].y,:at a right angle to the East.line of said Lot 2, from
a point on said East li.ne distant 507.60 feet Southerly from.�he Northeast
corner of said Lot 2, except the Westerly 218.61 feet of the described
property, subject to easement to Northern States Power Company, the same
being 5600 Main Street I�.E. .
Mr. Carl George was present representing Georgetown Motels.
MOTION by I,angenfeld� seeor_d�d-by Gabel� that the Planning Commission open
the Public Hearing on rezoning request ZOA #76-06, by Georgetwon P�Iotel, Inc.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public
Hearing open at 7:lt0.
Mr. Boardman explai.ned that this was a rezoning request tfl allow a motel-restaur�nt
,� facility on Main Street across from Holiday Vi�lage Idorth. He said there were
_ several things the Commission would have to take a look at, and one was what
pl�in� �ormnission Meeting - November 17� 1976
Page 2
would have to make some "'' l
the total area was zoned (M-2)• He stated they did rezone that property,
an at this meeting or in the next few �hetings whether that zoning .
determinati ln the area, a�d lf Y
was actually a proper zoning
oi,n to happen to the rest of the I�-2 and was the rest of the M-
wh�t �ras g g
properly zoned?
lan to the Commission, and explained it was
ro osed p ro.osal that was submitted
Mr. Boardman showed the p P aisles were wider
a resketch done by City Staffe He stated th�.t the p P
had more p ointed out that the new plan showed more landscape
arking than was actually needed and the drivzng roved
than what was needed. He p stem and this had been aPP
areas within the same context of the motel sy �
by N1r. George. He said there would
lained the proposal was in two phases.
rqr. Boardman eXP
wine, and that sort of
be a iast-food re�s� sa d there�would be�threeeunits;
21� units in the first
thing. �'• $O� and the next two units woul�o osed
one and alsa the main office of the motel, stem was a chain motel
��its each. He shai�ed the area wheTee oj�d�o�el Sy �� �its were p P
1�0 un
for theth�oughout1thedUnatedaStatesGeo g
system .
thing they could do to clean up t e
way they could do that
Chairperson Harris asked if there �aS any ton Northern t�anted to plat
legal description.
rqr� goardman replied that the only
woulci be with a plat, and he didn't �think Burling ton Northern� s Land �
, handled real estate for anything �;
at this time. He stahis afterno naand�he.l t� �rling ros ective buyers or
Development CompanY t
other than industrialo He e�P�en ebefore t enBuri ngton Northern Board of
developers in this area, they
Directors and they turned the property aver to the buyer.
d explained th at the proposed motel
e approached the Board an roximately l 2 years.
�,. �axl Georg er concerning
had been under consideration for deveC �keand theaCpty I`�anag roceed and get
He said they had firs't met i+�-th Tlr. etown people to P
ariicular area, and they told the Georg �ould get the parcel
this p it in to see if they lo ees and
everything done and then bring
rezoned. He explairied the mot�le�'statedethey had aachoice ofpfoubed auseroft
commercial traveler5. �'• �eO g chose this one
areas tha�� the Burlington Northern owned ar►d they
ximit to Hwy. 69� and also because i� was close to the raatible toe�
the pro Y ��ted to be in an area that was�asmpretty well
oifice. He added that they
this particular kind of business, and the area South of 69
developed�
that the City itself would like to
Mr. George said it was his understanding articular area North of 691�,
see something other than industrial in this p either
and they
had made the site plan with that in ndnd• He stato S�a �i�g be a
good area for their business �atlarea.ld be the beginning
commercial or residential ln thing other than
B N L, they did handle every �.-,;
Mr. George said that concerning �rl�gton Northern to
the industrial. He explained they were created by ,�
�
i
B
S
,
�
�
Planning Commission Meeting - November 17� 1976 Page 3
�^�
do this and to develop this land faster. He stated that in a lot of areas
commercial has grown up around railroad land and industrial has grown up
axound it, and the industrial wasn't compatible. He said they felt this
plan was compatible� and that was why they picked that particular parcel.
Mr. George,stated that �heir motel system was a little different than the
Holiday �n or Ramada. He said that they were basically a motel, not a
convention center. He stated that the3r rooms were the same size (1J�' x 2It�),
caxpeted, individually temperature controlled and.air conditioned and contained
a 19" color television set. He said they had taken out the things that were
not necessary for a motel such as catering services� etc.� as this was
reflected in the cost of the rooms. Mr. George explained that most catering
departments in the.large motels did not show profits, so that cost went into
the cost of the rooms. He said that although they felt those are needed,
they also felt there was a need for a motel that had the comfort of their
rooms without all the extras. He stated that they didn't make food people
out of their employees, and that was why they located a restaurant along with
their motel. He said in this instance it would be a full-s�rvice restaurant
open from 6:00 A.M. until 1:00 the follo�ri.ng morning. It t,rould have a menu
that was more earied, he said� than Sambos or Country Kitchen, and the
restaurant would caxry itself. He said they felt food service was very
important, and just a block from their location was a 21t-nour Country Kitchen.
Mr. George stated that their motel rooms carried no overhead other than the
e� overhead of the room itself, and that was why they were able to rent i;he
rooms for $10 single and $12.50 double. As far as the construction, he said�
theirs was equal to or better than Holiday's. He stated that they had a good
quality room, and they didn�t construct the building for a fast dollar but
tried to determine what the customer needs were now and what they would be five
or ten years from now. He informed the Commission the outside of the motel
would be of cedar and brick, the interiors were a washable-type textured
coating, and the furniture was built by one of the foremost manufacturers of
motel furniture. The bathrooms would be very similax to �hose of Holiday, he
said. Mr. George said that their motel had a11 the comforts but didn�t have
the meeting rooms9 ball rooms� or catering services of the larger chains.
� Mr. George said that in their feasibility study done in this area, they
expected this unit to run at 95% occupancy. He s�.id he felt there was a need
in the area for a unit and. felt {,his was a good location for it. He added
that they actually felt this would upgrade this particular axea or at least
be a"foot in the door" for other commercial ventures in that area. He showed
the Coramission data sheets put out by B N L on the area, and said that if this
was changed from industrial to commercial they would like to have a feasibility
run on the need for office buildings because they also developed office buildings.
He stated that if there was a need, he thought this would be a good spot because
they usually need a place off a main freeway and with a lot of parking space.
He said he �aould be happy to answer any questions.
^ Mrs. Shea stated she had been concerned with the rest of the property, but
he had answered most of her questions concerning that. Mr. George said
Planning Commission Meeting - November 17, 1976 Page �
that they were looking for uses for it. He explained that they couldn't ask �
for rezoning at this time for that property without going through both Boaxds
(the Board of Burlington ATorthern Industries and that of B N L Development),
and a use had to be found first. He said the land had to be turned over from
Burlington IJorthern to B N� L� and both Boards had to decide if it was a good
use. He s aid they would then run a MAI and that told whether or not it should
be a profitable project. Mr. George sa.id that when these things were done
the area would be open for other ventures going into that property, as the
data sheets stated.
Mrs. Shea said that the only access that U�ould be acceptable to her would be
right past Holiday (57th), otherwise there would be traffic going through
residential areas. Mr. Boardman said the only access that they had to the
motel from 691� was on University, 57th and Main Street. Mr. George stated
that all of the'railroad personnel would be bu�ed.by the motel to and from.
He said that in other words they would not drive, but be picked up by a motel
van at the yaxd office and taken to the motel, and back to the ya.rd office
by the van. .
Mr. Bergman noted that this property and the property North, West and �outh
was all zoned M-2 and asked �rhat the zoning was for the Holiday property.
Mr. Boardman replied it was C2-S. I�Ir. Bergman asked what Mr. George's
axrangement would be with B N I, if this motel came to pass, and Mr. George
replied it was a lease. He said they had a 25-year lease with a 25-year option�
anu' they did have clauses worked into the leasing arrangement iahere every five
years it was reeiewed ior the valuation of the lana. He explained it was not
open for any type of negotiation, and if the land didn't go up in value there ,�1
would be no change in the lease. Mr. Bergman asked what escalation guage was
used, and Mr. George said it caas done on the basis of the MA.I appraisal. He
explained that five yeaxs from the time of the signing of the lease9 another
appraisal would be done.
Mr. Bergman said that he was not familiar with the motel operation directly
tied in to the railroad personnel,or railroad operation� and asked if Burlington
Northern had any other such axrangements in the Twin Cities. Mr: George
replied they did not, but they hoped to have the same arrangement in other
cities. He said that now the railroad personnel were housed in some of the
hotels in downtown Minneapolis because they couldn�t afford to house them in
the very best motels. He explained that this way they would have new facilities
to put them in with transportation furnished� and for the motel it worked very
well because they were guaranteed a certain number of people per day for
occupancy which guaranteed profitabili.ty for the motel.
Mr. Bergman stated that he felt a bit a�rkward with �Chis piece. He said that
within a large M2 they �rere talking abou� rezoning a sma11 portion, and felt
it almost bordered on spot rezoning. He said he was looking at the site data
which app�rently considered the p�ssibility of additional commercial development
to the size of this total site. Mr. Bergman no�ed that P2r. George had described
a process where it would be out of context for �3urlington Northern to come in
with a rezoning request for this entire parcel rather than this small corner
with the understandi.ng that if the larger scale plan developed then another �..�
planning Commission Meeting - November 17� 1976 Page 5
�section would be rezoned a piece at a time to the extent of this total parcel.
Mr. George said if they could find a use for it, that was correct. He added
that those data sheets went out to developers throughout the country. Mr•
Bergman asked if the code specifically precluded construction of a motel in an
industrial zone9 and Mr. Boardman replied it did.
Mrs. Gabel stated that she was concerned about the traffic, and said there.
�as a good deal of congestion at the corner of University and 57th already.
. Mr� Boa,rdman said he didn't see any problem with the tr.affic at all with the
signalization there. Mr. Bergman commented that he thought the traffic would
be reduced if this was commercially used as compared to industrially used.
Mrs. Gabel said she felt that wasn't necessarily true. Mr. Boardman said he
thought they would find there wouldn't be that much off-the-highway business.
He said he thought the majority of the business would be industrial and
railroad business, and with that probably most of the traffic pattern to at�.d
from the motel would be South, along Main Street. Mrs. Gabel stated she thought
the traffic by Holiday was about at its maximum. Mr. George said she v�as
probably talking about lt:30 or 5:00 in th� aiternoon, and the tr�.ffic trying to
get off of 69�. to the motel would be at 7:00 or 8:00 PaNi. and not the 3:3� to
5:30 rush�.hour. He explained the men would be bussed in crews of five to ten
people at a time, and the main time for checking into a motel was usually
from 6:3� to 8:30 P.M.� not the rush hour.
Mrs. Gabel said another concern she had was �that Staff should see �;here zaas
r"1 proper screening or some type of buffer from �he residential area across the
street, and also.so the traffic wouldn't somehow end up going down =°esidential
streetsm Mr. Boardman said that the actual motel construction would be quite
a bit South of the intersection of 57th and Main. He said it was actually
across from the rear parking lot of Holiday Village North, and he didn't think
there would be a lot of traffic that would go North on Main Street North of
the 57th intersection. He said there was room for�extensive landscaping, and
he just didn't think they were going to find that kind of a problem as far as
the use of Main Street. Mr. Boardman said he did have several other concerns
on the property as far as possible usageof the entire section that went to 61st.
Mrs. Gabel said it did seem to be spot rezoning without knowing what was
'intended for the remainder of the strip of land, and added she would feel
more comfortable if the whole parcel would be rezoned.
Mre I,angenfeld commented �hat he could tell be listeninHetstatedGthegCommassion
his clientele wouldn't be walking into a'osurpirise".
�ras basically concerned with the zoning, and the City would like to see this
land utilized to the best possible advantage. He said that in listening to
the discussion he felt that a motel and restaurant would be complimentary
to the other surrounding businesses. He stated he noticed Mr.
George had
projection figures of 95� occupancy, and asked if he could tel:l from that
projection approximately how many people a day would be involved in this on
an average. Mr. George said there would be approximately 60 people a day
from Burlington Northern, with space for more. �He stated that eventually
they would like to have 2500 occupancies per month, or 81� people a day.
n Mr. Langenfeld asked what the actual dimensions were that they should be
concerned about� and Mr. Boardman replied it was 551•3' � depth and 366.5'
Planning Commission Meeting - Nonember 17, 1976
Page 6
wide on Main Street. Mr. Langenfeld asked how many square feet that was� and
Mr. George replied it was l�+ acres, or 188,000 square feet. Mr. Boardman
said that was about one tenth of the total property.
Chairperson Harris stated�the first thing on his list of concerns was road
patterns. He noted the main access to the motel complex was 691� to University,
University to 57�h and over to Main Street to the motel. He said it was also
possible to get in there ofi of Main Street from the South. He asked if Mr.
George was looki.ng for any other access besides those two routes, and Mr.
George replied he was not.
^
Ghairperson Harris noted that the area was approximately l�+.acres, and asked
what minimum lot size was on commercial. P�Zr. Boardman said it was 20,000 square
feet, so they were way over. Mr. Harris said he wanted to get irito the constructian,
and asked what total units would be buili. at the time of onset of the proposal.
Mr. George said �wo 1�0's and one 2!t unit would be cons.tructed at �`i,he time .of
onset (10l� units)� along with the restaurant. .
Chairperson Harris asked if there was going to be a recreation axea, and P7r.
George replied there was not. He said, however� that if they had an expansion
and they saw it was necessary, they �Tould lool� into it. He said that in motels
they had found that pools had a 5% usage of the total occupancy of the motel
on a twelvs-month basis' and there were many problerns with vandalism with pools.�
Mr, George explai�ed that they were dealing primarily with the commercial
traveler who was on the road ten or eleven months out of the yeax and whose
expenses had gone up and was looking for some way to cut costs. He said, howeve.��
tha�L they did have corporate accounts; for instance, in DeKalb they had a11 of
General Electric's business, all of Continental Telephone's business and a
good part of DeKa1b Bag's business. He said that they did have a lounge and
game area and each unit had a 19" color television se�, but there was no pool,
dancing facilities, etc.
Chairperson Haxris asked where other such matels were located presently, and
Mr. George said they had one operating in DeKa1b and had plans for units in
Davenport� Staples, Jamestoti,m, Fargo, ar.d Davenport. He said they were also
loolcing to Denver� Colorado and Aurora, Illinois.
Pir. Langenfeld asked about employment as far as the City of Fridley was concerned,
and Mr. George said they had a manager, a twenty-four hour room clerk set up9
and maids. He said that most of the maintenance was done by contracts, for
instance, they had a permanent contract with RCA for the maintenance ot a11 the
television sets. Mr. George said that in the restaurant they would have cooks,
dishwashers, waitresses' etc.
Chairperson Haxris a.sked if they had taken signing for access into consider�.tion,
and Mr. George repli�d they �ad a sigri s,ystem that told people where to exit
and �rhich w�y to turn. He addesi that they also had a mailing.system that went
out, and in this area it would probably go to about 2,000 businesses. He
explained that this i�as how they recruited the business from General Electric
in DeKalb; they have an open house and invite industrial and commercial people �
�
Plar�ning Commission Meeting - November 17, �976
Page 7
in to see the rooms and what the charges are.
Chairperson Harris asked Mr. Geor.ge if he was aware there was another complex
in Fridley that went by the name of Georgetown, and Mr. George replied he was
awaxe, but there was no connection.
Mr. Boardman said he was somewhat concerned about tl�e property that is West
of this facility that is sti11 owned by Fiurlington Northern in the back. He
asked Mr. Beorge why he hadn't purchased all the way back to the track.
Mr. George replied they very possibly will, but right now they saw no need
to pay lease on that ground. He said he would like to put another building
there if this zoning went through as he actually saw a need for 250 - 300
rooms in that cQmplex before -�hey were done with it. He explained they had
to pay lease money on every square foot of ground so they took just what they
needed, but they could come back and pick up additional property. Mr. George
further explained that the parent carporation bought a particular amount of
stock in B Pi L Corporation9 and B�N L bought the property from the parent
corporatior.. He sai.d that usage had to be developed before they could actually
go to the.Burlington. Northe�n Board and sa� they had use for that land. He
said that studies had to be made so they could be assured of a profit on that
project before they could ask for the ground.
A°.r�, Boar.drnan said he r;aas concerned about rezoning in s-tep phases. He said
that once they started develop�.ng this into whatever they f.elt it should go,
'� they should have some guarant�e �th.�.t they would not be stuck with a mishmash
of industrial uses, residential uses and comme�cial uses. Chairperson Harris
said he would like to talk to the gentlemen from Bi� L Corporation, because he
thought their advertising on this parti�ular parcel was misleading. He said
he thought they should come �o the City and talk about it on a total develop-
ment package. ,
Mr. Boardman said he felt uneasy in several ways. He said he would like to
see the whole thing rezoned to a different zoning as he didn't think the
industrial zoining was needed. He said he felt it encroa.ched on the resid.ents
of the area>to the East and the North. hir. Boardman said he vrould like to see
some multiple or some kind of residential developMent on the Northern portion
of that, and maybe �some compatible office or commerci�al South of that. However,
he said, he fel.t uneasy when it was zoned industrial and there was notlzing coming
out that could show them this was the way they want it developed. He added he
would like to see a trend established. Chairperson Harris said he would like
a compreh�nsive plan, and asked what their comprehensive plan said about this.
Mr. Boardman said the comprehensive plan for this a.rea said it should be
industrial, but he didn't agree. He stated that one of the reasons it needed
an immediate revamping was because they had looked at it as if the City would
not initiate any rezoning, as�d therefore they had handled most areas as �Lhey
were presently zoned. He said that he strongly felt this area.should no.t go
indusi:rial, and'said he might also add they presently had three industrial
buildings on this sectioM.
� Mr. Langenfeld said he suported Mr. Boaxdman's statement, and he thought that
_ due to the maturity of the City and the changes that have taken place, the
industrial designation of that entire area was really not appropriate. Mr.
Planning Commission Meetin� � November 17, 1976 page 8
Boardman said one of the problems was it was all well and good to say this
area not go industrial, but the fact of the matter �ras it was presently zoned r,,.`
industri�l. He suggested they get some kind of concept ideas from Burlington
Northern as to what they �rould like to see in there.
Chairperson Harris said that it must be obvious from Burlington Northern
turning the property over to B N L Development that they do not intend on
running the thing as an industrial site. He said that B N L handled just
commercial and no industrial, so their intent must be in a direction other
than heavy industrial.
Mr. Boardman said that in talking to B N L, their real problem was they did
not get any property turned over to thern, nor did they get the opportunity to
rezone property, unless Burlington Northern wants it rezoned. He stated that
Burlington Northern did riot �aant it rezoried unless they had suitable clientele
at the time, arid added that Burlington Northern wanted the most options avail-
able to them with the least restrictions. �1r. Harris said he thought tha�
B ry L should come in to the City, or perllaps Burlington N��rthern should come
in. He explained to Mr. George that they had dealt with Burli.ngton Northern
before. He said they had a svritch yard which started out to be a 23 million
dollar operation and now was around l�8 million, and. not all of the commitments
made at that time have been xealized, and�that was six years ago. He said that
therefore he had a little trouble trusting Bu�lirigton Tdorthern implicity.
N1r. Langenfeld brought up the problem of drainage, and Mr. Boaxdman said that
}3u:�lington N.orthern did have .a storm seti�rer pipe along their property and it
might be possible to connect with that; otherwise the3= would have to get
permission from the State Highway Depaxtment to drain off �f their draina.ge �
right-of--way. rirs. Gabel asked if extra drainage was needed to handle that9
who would pay for it? Mr. Boardman said it would have to be the property
owner, and he didn�t foresee any costs to the residents. Mr. Bergman asked
if �Lhere were any other concerns of a utility nature such as water9 and Mr.
Boardman replied that water and sewer would be ex�ended down from 57th to the
property.
Mr. Bergman asked how critical timing was to Nir. George9 and Mr. George replied
that timing was very critical. Iie stated that prints were drawn for the project,
and they had e�:pected the railro�,d to have moved faster in their development
of the leasing arrangements and things like that. He added that they were
thinking that this'�aould have been done in April, and they just had the land
signed over for zoning in October. He stated that even if there was 24 - 30"
of frost this coming April, they could still starto I�ir. Langenfeld asked if
it was their goal to complete building number 1 by the end of 1977, and Mr.
George said the whole complex would be co;npleted by then.
Ai0TI0N by Langenfeld, seeonded by Bergmans that the Planning Comrnission close
the Public Hearing on the Rezoning Request ZOA #�76�06 by Georgeto�,m Motel, Inc.
Upon a voice vote,�all voting aye� Chairperson �iarris declared 'the Public
Heaxing closed at 9:00.
��`1
Flanning Commission Meeting - November 17, 1976 page 9
MOTION by Bergman� seconded by Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission defer
,� Rezoning Request Z0A #76-06, by Georgetown Motel� Inc.� with the following
considerations:
1. That the presentation made by Mr. Carl George is of a generally
favorable impression with regard to the motel and specific property
development.
2. This body is in general concurrence with rezoning the przsent
industrially zoned land from 69� to its extension to 61st Street.
3. That the Planning Commission is in�general disagreement with paxcel
by parcel spot rezoning, .
1�. That the Planning Corrunission request from the property owner a
comprehensive plan concerning the intended use of the total industrially
zoned parcel.
Mr. Boaxdman asked if that was actually what they wanted, or if they wanted
an opportuni�y to talk to Burlington Northern about proposed development in
the area. Mr. Bergman said the motion requested a plan from Burlington Northern,
and until he saw that he wouldn't know how to respond. He stated that the
motion did require more than conversation. N1r. Boardrnan�said that his impression
from dealing with Burlington Northern and talk�.ng to B N L was that their plari
in the area vlas industrial until proven otherwise.
,...� Mr. L��ngenfeld noted that Mr. George had a tentative timetable which would be
altered as a result of this motion, and it would detain him a bit. He stated
that he personally felt it would be unfair for I41r. George to feel that the
Planning Commission was detaining this, and it would be more appropriate to �
say that if Burlington Northern had pravided better information to consider
this further the Planning Commission would have been able to act immediately
as far as zoning. Mr. Boardman said he did ask a representative from B N L
to attend this meeting, but he declined. He added that he thought they should
get somebody �rom Burlingi;on Northern as they were the controllers of the propertyo
Mrs. Gabel said that she realized it seemed unfair to detain him or make him
extend his timetable, but on the other hand if she had to vote yes or no at
this time she would have to vote no. She stated that after looking at the site
plans, it just boiled down to the fact that �rorn what they are using as criteria
on there as potential developers� it could end up to be a hodgepodge. She addEd
that if t,hey taere asking for the whole thing to be rezoned, she would have no
objection to that, but right now it was just a potential mess.
Chairperson Harris sai.d that he didn�t see this as a spot rezoning and he
cer-�ainly wanted to see that 17b� that runs next to the tracks included in
C-2 zoning� and he shared everybody�s concern on the remainder of the property.
He added that he thought this particular development would be a great plus for
the City, and he agreed with Mr. George�s concept. Mr. Bergman said that he did�
too. He stated that although he may not have adequately complimented the concept
�
r1�ing Commission Meeting - November I7, 19?6
Page 10
put forth, he thought the City would like to have it. He said that they were
concerned:with the total developnient of the property and that it be done in
some planned fashion, and would like to see a better plan of the propert .
�,
3�'• Langenfeld said that it seemed strange that Burlington Northern ha y
such a large strip� didn�t have a better overall future plan �'or the �g
they owned. He said he felt that Burlington Northern should have been more
properties
informative to Mr. Geo�ge as to the possibilities of what they intended to
do to the Nor�th of the proposed motel site.
over that, and tlio�ght office buildit�gs would be compatibletto this projecte
He said he was under the impression that office buildings came under commercial
zoning, and sai.d they wan-ted to have a feasibiliiy study done on the need for
office buildings. He said he had also asked about the possibility of housing
for older people and if there was a need for that, so.they were looking to
other uses for this paxcele Mr. George said that they felt this was now their
land for a period of fifty ye�s and that B
to it if it was rezoned. He said he could seeLthetCommission�sgconce n aaboutt
the rest of the property because it did not have frontage, and anything that
didn�t have frontage was not going to be condusive to something desirable�-commer-
cially. Mr. George said he could remedy that by including that strip in the
rezoning request and pay the lease on it, and that way they tiaould have it when
they were ready for additional builda.ngs to go on it.
aski.ng for the rezoning because they were obligated on thes anddtfor aheeriode
of fifty years, and it was actually the same as rezoning subject to p
H'e,;said he had worked with these people for two purchase.
with the City for a ear or so. Year's on this project, and
y He stated he knew the feeling was the land
was still industrial, but if Georgc:-toyan p,otels didn�t have faith in th�se
people that it would not be used for industrial they would never have made a
million dollar investment in this project. He said. that as a matter oi' fact, �
his organization would like to be the users of part of the property and would
like a feasibility study run on it for office space.
Mrs. Gabel asked if Burlington Northern had indicated how they wanted this
zoned� and Mr. Boaxdman replied that the only indication he had gotten was
they were looking for the maximum number of o tions.
he didn�t think they would want to tie themselves intoHa differentazoningtas��
it was presently M-2, which is the highest possible land use that is available.
Chairperson Haxris stated that it seemed to him it would be to Burlington
Northern's benefit to have some sort of idea as to what would fit into this.
He said he was under the impression the reason Burlington Northern set up
B.N. Land Development was to get this land that had been laying dormant for
fifty to one hundred years into �
him that in order to do that theyrshould�haveHsomedideahas to hat would wor
�aell on that landa � Mr� goa,Y.�� Said he thought the motivation behind that k
was they had to start paying taxes on all this unproductive land, and nota the
problem was how to promote the property as fast as they could without having
to go through a feasibility study on every piece of ro ert
commented that he thought he already ]mew what theirpcomprehensive plan was,d
and that was if the dollar was ri,�ht for a particulax piece of land, that was
, the way it was going to go.
�
.�
�
Pl�ruaing Comrnission Meeting - November 17, 1976 Page 11
� Mrs. Gabel asked where the City stood as far as saying ta Burlington Northern
that �Lhey would like to have this land rezoned commercial and developed that
way. Mr. Boaxdman said he didn't think the Ciiy wanted to tell Burlington
Rlorthern they had to rezone this because right atday there would be a�egal
fight. He said the land was presently zoned industria7. property, and Burlington
Northern.was looking for other possibilities of development.
Mr. Boardman said he had one other question, and asked if the Commission felt
that a motel was compatible use to that area if the rest of the property North
of the motel rema�ned industrial, and if so, why the table? N1rs. Gabel commented
that she felt it was spot rezoning unless the whole thing was rezoned. AIr.
Bergman said he would like to answer that questian� and stated he �as concerned
that it be parcelled up in logical planning parcels and the strip between the
rezoning request and the rail:coad- tracks he felt should have been part of the
rezoning. Chairperson Haxris said that he was not sure that the M-2 was
compatible with the C-2.
Chairperson Harris said that from his own standpoint, he thought Mr. George's
proposal was compatible with the total area, and he -`�hought that was what 1;hey
were trying to look at--the total area and not just the existing zone. He
stated that perhaps this would be a progressive type zoning operation9 and he
hoped it would be a step. Mr. Harris said he didn°t know if they needed a
� comprehensive plan, but did think they should talk to the peogle from B N L
and find out what direction they were looki.ng at. He said he also felt the;y
should talk to someane about the particular flyer Mr. George h�d shown them
^ which,said t�potential commercial"a
UPON A VOICE VOTE9 Haxris, Bergman, Langenfeld and Gabel voting aye, Shea voting
nay, the motion carried l� - l.
Chairperson Harris said he would like B N L or Burlington Northern to come in
to the City Staff and ask for assistance in deciding what could be dflne with
this parcel. Mrs. Gabel commented that she thought the point was they had
to look out for the future af the entire city. r1r. Boardman suggested to Mr.
George that he make the initial contact with B N L or Burlington Northern
to meet`wi.th the Planning Commission on December 8th. �
2. LOT SPLIT REQUESTt LoS. #76°12, BY DICK GRrGORa Split the balance of Lot
31, Auditor's Subdivision 129, lnto two bu�ldzng si�es9 each 138' x 110�
which excepts the West 129 feet of the South � of Lot 31, and excepts the
North �, and allows for a 25' road dedicatian for 73� Avenue.. Lots will
be addressed on 73rd and 73 z Avenue N.E.
N1r. and Mrs. Dick Gregor were present.
Mr. Boardman explained that this was a lot split request to split the East
half of lot 31 in half North�and South, and he thought this was in keeping
with the area. He suggested there be a stipulation that the 25' streeti
dedication occur at this time on 73'z Avenue. •
�
Planriing Commission Meeting - November 17, 1976 Page 12
Chairperson Harris asked if block 31 was all under one ownership, and Mr.
Gregor said he only owned the portion East of the existing structure. Mr. �
Boardman stated he had been under the impression those were under the same
ownership, but regardless of that, they would have to have that 25' street
dedication. He said they would have to deal with the owner of the West
portion of block 31 individually. '
Chairperson Harris asked if the remaining lot sizes would be sufficient,
and rir. Boaxdman replied they would have a 92.75 �ridth. He stated the depth
ti�ould be approximately 137', so the lots would probably be around 12,000
square feet. Mr. Harris asked i.f there were any other easements required,
and Nir. Boardman�sa.id there were not. Mr.. Harris asked if Jim Lund hadn't
purchased some of that�land tax forfeit so the county had a little bit wider
right-of-way on 73rd, and Mr. Boardman replied that was correct.
Mr. Langenfeld asked if the West portion of Lot 31 would be split some time
in the future, and Chairperson Harris noted there was a structure in there
now that sat almos� in the middle of the lot, so he doubted there would be
a split. . .
Chairperson Haxris asked Mr. Gregor if he was in agreement with the dedication
of the 25� street easement, and he answered that he was.
MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Shea, that the Planning Commission recommend
to City Council approval of Lot Split Reques� I,.S. �76-12, by Dick Gregor:
Split the balance of Lot 31, Auditor's Subdivision 129, into two building .
sites, each 138� x 110' which excepts the West 129 feet of the South � of
Lot jl, and excepts the North 2j and allows for a 25' road dedication for� '�
7 2 Avenue. Lots will be addressed on 73rd and 73 2 Avenue N.E. Upon a
voice vote, a11 vating aye, the motion carried unanimously.
3• REVIEW OF SPECIAL US� PERMIT SP #75-28 UNION OIL COI�IPANY: Request for
a building permit to construct a new service station. See Planning
Cammission minutes 12/3/75).
Chairperson Harris said that one of the stipulations of the Special Use Permit
had been that k�hen they came in for a building permit request that this be
reviewed by the Planning Commission again.
Mr. Boardman iraformed the Commission that Union Oil was planning a self-
service type concept, and the only building they would have was an attended
station. He said they would be taking the present building down, and there
were well-designed landscape areas within the concept itself. Mr. Boardman
said that the redesign of the intersection there did create some traffic
concern within this property, and it looked like they had taken that into
consideration.
Mrs. Shea asked the size of the cashier station, and Mr. Boardman informed
her it was 11� � x f3 �.
��
�
Planning Commission Meeting � November 17, 1976 Page 13
Chairperson Haxris asked if this met the requirements for restrooms, and Mr.
r'"� Boardman said that Darrel Claxk and looked at it so hs imagined it met the
requirements. Mr. i�arris noted-there was a folding curtain on the restroom,
and that did not meet the handicapped code. Nir. Boardman stated he didn't
think this would fall under the handicapped code requirements, and before any
permi.t was granted it would have to meet all necessaxy code requireme�ts.
Mr. Bergman commented that he would be amazed if this met code it it was to
be used by the public. Chairperson Harris stated ii must be open to the public
because he saw.it contained display racks so they must be selling things over
the counter, and noted that the back of the shelf was the screening wall for
the bathroom.
Chairperson Harris suggested that they could make stipulations on the Special
Use Permit, but Mr, Boardman said they couldn't make any stipulations that
�would be. more restrictive than the Uniform Building Code. In other words,
he explained, if they had a 3° door and the City �aanted them to have a 3�r'
door, they couldn't make that a requirement. NIr. Harris said that if this
structure met code, he thought they should write some letters. Mr. Boardman
said that if it didn't meet the building code, it would meet �he building
code before it was built. Chairperson Harris said he would think that the
Union 76 Company could afford a door for the restroom.
Mr. Bergman said that compared to the way other gas station operations got
treated which also required special use permits in their zoning, he thought
perhaps they were being a bit oppressive on �;his particular operatic�n� 2rtz�.
Harris said he thaught the intent of th'is was an aiznual review by Staff, and
� this was done as a matter of procedure for most Special Use Permi°i,s.
Mr. Bergman con¢nented �Chat he didn't understand the traffic pattern. He
said he had never seen a self-service station that complicated, and thought
it was very curious. Chairperson Haxris said he -thought they would have
some direction signs or arrows, and he thought t�ere should be direction
axrows on the driving surface.
MOTION by Bergman� seconded by Langenfeld9 that the Planriing Corrr�mmission
recommend to City Council approval of Special Use Perrnit, SP #75-28, Union
Oil Company: Requ�st for a building permi� to construct a ne�r service
° sta�ion, and the proposed building plans9 with the following stipulations;
l, That traffic patterns be heavily indicated on the physical si�e.
2. That a11 applicable codes be strictly checked with concerns for
sanitary facility adequacy, for the handicapped in particular.
Upon a voice vote� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Haxris declared a recess at 1Os20 P.M. and reconvened the meeting
at 10:35 P.M. •
��
P�anning Commission Meeting - November 17, 1976 Page l�
�. CONTINUED: PROPOSID MAINTIIdANCE CODE:
^
Chairperson Harris declared a 1�5 minute time limit ori this item with the
concurrence of the rest of the Commission.
Mrs. Gabel si:ated it seemed to her in going through this that one of the
things that was really pertinent was what exactly the job of the Fire Inspector was
and what areas he covered, did the Hcalth Department enter into this, etc.,
so ther� wasn't an overlap. Mr. Boardman said th at the Fire Inspector inspected
only those public areas such as hallways, entrances� fire extinguishers, etc.
He said that the.Fire Inspectors did go through every industrial building in
the City every year and check according to fire codes. He stated that the
only problem they had was that.they never adopted a Uniform Fire Code. He
said that if one was adopted, it may overlap them in the industrial/commercial
area, and they may taant to do azaay with that portion of the maintenance code.
Chairperson Harris said that would make more sense to him than an industrial/
commercial maa.ntenance code.
Mr. Boaxdman said that in most communities they had a residential maintenance •
code which dealt with multiple family and duplexes. He stated that in most
cases the programs were relatively large and in some cases they went on a
complaa.nt basis only. To his lmowledge, P7r. Boaxdman said, St. Louis Park
was -the only cominunity at this time that was going into full-fledge inspection
programs. Mrs. Gabel asked if FHA or GI didn't go through the homes and
x�equire that things be brought up to code beiore the house could be purchased.
Mr. Harris said they didnet require it be brought up to code9 but up to their �
standa.rds. Mr. Boardman explained tha� in sor��e cases their standards were �
high on certain things and lo�r on others. Chairperson Harris said that concern-
ing commercial loans, they usually sent out an appraisal. He stated that if
the house didn't have adequate heatir.g facilities or plumbing facilities, that
would reflect in the appraisal of the property and how much the lending
institution would lend on the property. I4Ir. Bergman asked if the extent of
their inspection or whether they inspected at a11 didn't depend primarily on
how much money the potential buyer wanted to borrow. Chairperson Harris said
that to�his lrnowledge they were always appraised, but �hey did not apply
standards.
Mr. Langenf'eld s aid that he wished to indicate to the Commission that he had
done both types of inspections, and they did catch everything. He said that
Mr. Harris was correct in i:he way it operated. �1r..Langenfeld said that in
the past meetings the word 1dmaintenance" t�ras questioned, and read the definition
of the word from the American Heritage Dictionary: a. The action of continuing
cari.ng on, preserving, or retaining something. b. A work of keeping something
in proper condition. Mr. Zangeni"eld said he liked this definition procedure,
but he thought somethitzg like a"flush water closet'� was a bit ridiculous. He
sa.id that many of the terms in the proposed code weren't used in common
language. He asked if they �aere going to divide the code into sections. Mrs.
Shea commented that she had gotten the impression at the last meeting that
this proposed code was not tdhat they wanted. Mr. Langenfedl said he had read
through it again and had marked a few things he thought were good, but the
rest he would vote agai.nst. He suggested using the proposed code as a guide-
line. �
�
Planning Commission Meeting - NUVember 1(� 1976 Page 15
Mr. Bergman gave one other definition of maintenance which he said came faom
� out of a contract he had for maintenance, being "the preservation of that
which exists". He though_t the code discussed something other than that. For
example, he said, upgrading was not maintenance, or having to add a window
was not maintenance. He stated that i.f they wanted to address things like
that they should not call it a maintenance code because the definition didn�t
app�-y. Mr. Langenfeld said he felt in a way it was similar to an insurance
concepto He stated that when a loss occurred, the idea behind the insurance
was to replace that property to the nearest or same condition it �ras before
the loss. He sa,id he felt they should tr^,� to keep.this dwelling in as close
to the same type condition as it was at the time of purchase.
Mrs. Gabel said she didn�t think they could use existing conditions because
existing conditions may not be safe. Mrso Shea suggested using the word
"s�andard", She added 1;hat when they were talking about some of f,his property,
rental homes, ete., some were substandard and pret�y bad and the occupants
couldn't get help. T�r. Bergman commented that the rent would go up �,rith the
improvement,s, and Mrs. Shea agreed that was true. Chairperson Harris said thGt
was a real tough problern. He added tha� so many tim� thE low�income got�all
wrapped up in subs-tanciard, and that shouldn't be. rirs. Shea said that the
low income person didn't know where to go�for help, and if the Ci'cy couldn't
help, who could? Y�1r. Bergmasi stated they coulc: move out and find a place
that did have a toilet, heat, or ��hatever. P�Irs. Shea said the rent would then
be $200, which they couldn't afiordo Mr. Bergman said if they required a11
�hose things of the dwelling they �*ere in, it would be �20C� a rnonth also. He
si;ated that a rerson who v�as managing rental property couldn't be� told to sr�end
� $20,000 upgrading tYiat prop2rty an� not raise the rent. IJLr, Langenfeld said
that it was human nature that a person who didr�'t actually own his property
didn't trea.t iL the same as if it was his o�m� and that was where the deteriora-
tion took place. That in turn, he said, forced the land owner to say he couldn°�t
afford to fi�;. it and then he got a lowermincorne type of person in there and it
just snoi�aballed, N1rs. Gabel said t'1at then they should realize that if th�se
things were to be brought up to mi�imum standarci there would be that many
more people applying for assistance. AZr. Boardman said that in order to get
assistance on housing anyway, it had to rneet certain code standard.s.
NIr. Bergman s aid that on th� subject oi fire inspection, �ahat codes did the
Fire lnspector have that he now followede He s aid he would like to suggest
that the Commission.ask t�at type of question applicable to every trades
or maintenance or housing ele►nent �that they had. He suggested that wherever
there was sc�me inspeciion function, appraisal function or requirement function
such as HUD's requirements' or some other body that had some inspection codes,
that the Gity of Fridle� judge whether or r�ot those were adequate and if so,
merely reference them and delete them from duplication in the maintenance code
and get on with what was left.
Chairperson Harris asked the Commission what they thought should be in a
maintenance code. Mr. Langenfeld said he thought it should contain some
common sense. He said he would like to see it start off with definiti�ns�
and added that so many words jus.t didn°t have to be there. pirs. Gabel stated
that she didn't think there was a need to get so cumbersome. She s�id the
� '
Planning Commission Meeting - November i7, 1976 Page 16
City should require adequate heat, adequate �ater and sewer, adequate ventilla-
tion, non-toxic paint� no holes in the floors� etc. She suggested they just r"°�
use basic things, and said this didn't have to be so complicated. Mrs. Gabel
stated that if the carpet was �aorn that was not a safety hazaxd; but if there
was a hole in the floor� thai; was a safety hazard. As for the exterior,
she said the roof shouldn't leak, the foundation should be checked so rodents
and pests couldn't get in� etc.
Mrs. Shea stated that she liked Mr. Langenfeld�s idea of dividing the code up,
and she would also like to see three separate sections: R-1, Single Family;
R-2 and R-3, Mul�iple Dwellings9 and R-1�, Mobile Homese Mr. Bergman asked if
there should be two sections under R-1--o�mer occupied and rental. Mr. Haxris
said perhaps there should, but l�e didn't lmow why R-1 owner occupied should be
any different than R-1 rental. Mrs. Shea said that would depend on the way
they were enforced� but the standards should be the same. Mr. Haxris saa.d that
enforcement should have two sections. He continued that R-2 and R-3 were almost
always rental, but R�2 could address both owner-occupied and rental, such as
a double bungalow. He asked why �hey would want to handle the standards any
different in a R-2 and a R-3 if it w�.s owner-occupied. ' Mrs. Shea suggested
putting R-2 with R-1 and leaving R-3 hy itself. Mr. Bergman suggested one
section on single-family dwellings and one on multiple, and merely break
those into Qwner-occupied versus rental. Mr. Boardman said that the problem
with that was they had a certain control on rental property that was not R-l;
they licensed R-3 but did not license rental R-1 or rental R-2.
Chairperson Harxis asked if it was agreeable to the Commission to run R-1 and �
R-2 tvgether, and have R-3 be a separate section, and they agreed it was. �
Mr. Harris said that R-1� would be like R-1 except it would be mobile homes.
Mr. Harris stated that the code should then be broken dotian into those sections,
and each handled sepaxately.
Mr. Boardman said that the total package they had been presented vaith was a
four�section document: Structural R-1, R-2, Rd3 and R-1�; �terior maintenance;
Commercial - Industrial; and Exterior for Commercial and Industrial. He said
that perhaps they should ask if they really needed the exterior maintenance
for residential and commercial, or if instead of providing maintenance codes
they should require more stringent regula-Lions or definitions within the zoning
code itself. He asked if those s�andards of maintenance should be layed out
in this, or if they wanted to try to put more standards within the zoning code
a.s fas� as what was classified as "shall be in good maintenance". Chairperson
Haxris sa.id he would like to handle this as an entity by itself without getting
commercial and industrial in it. Mr. Boardman commented that most communities
only handlecl. residential maintenance.
Chairperson Haxris asked what was covered regarding exterior maintenance, and
Mr. Boardman said that was talking about removal of snow and ice from parking
lots, steps, walkways� etc., and also exterior lighting. He asked if they
wanted this type of thing in there or if they wanted to handle this under the
zoning code. rir. Harris.commented that it sounded like R-3. Mr. Bergman asked
if there was anything in the City Ordinance right now which said the walkways
in an R-1 area must be shoveled, and Mr. Boardman replied there was not as �
the walkways they had were maintained by the City. �
�.
Pl�nning Commission Meeting - November 17, 1976 Page 17
Mr. Langenfeld stated they had a,lready broken this dowri into three divisions,
� and he would now li�e to see them determine mini.mum standards for each of
the three units and simplify this thing. He said that to try to answer Mr.
Boardman�s questyon, he really didn�t think they wanted a whole page on every-
thing. Iie said that through the discussion he suggested they might find a
minimum standard w�uld apply to all of the units, and they could progress from
there.
Chairperson Harris said he thought Mr. Boardman�s question was whether or not
they wanted to include the exterior maintenance in-this code� and Mr. Bergman
said definitely. Mr. Langenfeld said he was sugges�ing a general outline so
they could really tack this thing. Mra Harris said maybe they could break
each one of the three sections they had into subsections--interior maintenance
and exterior maintenance.
A7r. Boardman said tha-t he would like to lmow exactly what they wanted to
include in the maintenance code. Did they �rant to include just residential
or residen�.ial and commercial; exterior and interior or just structural?
He said that before they broke one portion of that doVm into R-1, R-3 and
R-1a., maybe they should make some determination as f.o what they vranted to
include here a.nd what other areas could handle that. Chairperson Harris
said that they had to siart someplace, and he thought they had decided to
start out with the residential in three sections: R-1 and I�a2, R-39 and R--1�.,
and �nder each oi these sections have a subsection of interior maintenance
d.n�' ex�erior mainten,�nncem ?ie Explained ii; t•:as just an organiza�tiur�a.l thing9
� an.d he thaught it would be much easier this iaay for peoplz to find a czrtain
section.
Mro Bergman suggesi,ed that perhaps subjects should be itemized ancl then Mr.
Boardman could fill in from that type of outline. The Cornmission concurred,
and decided the subjects should be healt,h, sa.fety, and appearance (for lack
of a better term). P�Ire Boardman said safety would be anything that would be
hazardous such as structural or any physical dei'ect that could cause injury
or harm to the occupan�. P�ir. Bergman thought electrica]. and gas services
should also Ue included under sa,fetya He added he was thinking of a fifteen-
page document m�irnum to cover all residential. Mr. Boardman said the only
way they could get fifteen pages maximum would be to combine areas WI11Cr1
said the same thing. He said if they could categorize items into one section
�rhen they were idenLical it would save paper and not be so repititious.
Chairperson Harris asked what else should be i.ncluded in the outline besides
health� safety and appearance. Mrs. Gabel suggested they go with that, and
they could alt�aays add more if they found something else. Air. Boardman said
they would also have a definition section' and they used building code
definitions. Mr. Boardman suggested they a].so include enforcement, and Mr.
Langenfeld sugges'�i,ed responsibility. The Commission decided responsibility
would come under enforcement. Mr. Bergman commented that safety was an
awfully broad section. He said he would put gas and electrical service under
a hazaxd section, and put shovelin� sidewalks under saiety; the need for
adequate heat and adequate plwnbing would fall under health, but adequa�e
� �
Planning Commission Meeting - November 17, 197b • Page 18
�
ventillatiori wouid be under safety,
Chairperson Harris noted that their time li.mit was almost up, and suggested
the Commission let the City run vrith this general outline and see what could
be put together for them. Mr. Boaxdman mentioned that he thought they would
be surprised that a lot of what they mentioned was in the proposed code.
Mr. Bergman said that before they got in any position to finalize this� he
tirould like to see a list of present applicable codes and enfo-rcement that
concern themselves with the same kind of things that they were discussing
here because �here was no sense in duplicating something that everybody else
was already doing and had a license to do. He said he was thinking of
the Fire Inspectors� State Health Department, Department of .Labor and
Industry, etc. ,.
�.� goaxdman said that was why he thought that perhaps they should eliminate
the industrial-commercial section of the maintenance code, but they might want
to keep an exterior maintenance code on industrial-commercial.
5. CONTINUED: HUMAN DFVELOPMENT GOAI� AND OBJECTIVES
Mrb Roardman informed the Commission that this was not ready, but would be
continued to the nex't meeting.
/'�1
6. RECEIVE PARKS & RECREATION COMI�ISSION MINUTES: OCTOBER 25, 1976
MOTION by Shea, seconded by Langenfeld, that 'the Planning Commission receive
the Parks and Recreation Commission minutes of October 25, 197b. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mra Langenfeld commented that he weuld like to see some of the initials
defined, sueh as F.Y.S.A�, H.AoF., ri.A.H.A.., A.H.A.S. He suggested they be
spelled out saY:en they are first used, and after that just the initials could
be used. Chairperson Ha.rris said he had a good point, and Mr. Boardman said
it was so noted. .
7. RECEIVE HUNL4N RFSOURCES MINUTES: NOVEn2BER �t,_1976
MOTION by Shsa, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission recei�*e
the Human Resources Commission minutes of Nov�ember l�, 1976.
Nlrs. Shea stated that Mrs. Lambert had resigned and she wanted to urge that
somebody be appointed as quickly as possible to take her place.
Chairperson Harris said that regarding the discussion with James Hill, the
Public Safety Director, he found the figures astounding. Especially, he said,
in the area of juveniles. He stated this was very disturbing, and asked�rSf ,-�
Human Resources was going to try to come up with any recommendations.
Shea answered that this saas just informational for them and the public. She ��
Planning Commission Meeting - Novernber 179 1976 Page 19
said they were trying to find out �hat the Police Department was doing. Mrs.
n Shea explained that most of them didn't see what the Police Department ��as
doing, and that was important. She added that P�ro Hil'1 didn't feel this was
a major problem, and they really weren't.so bad off compared to some other
cities.
Chairperson Harris said the report disturbed him because it looked as if there
was a trend developing. He asked if Mr, Hill had any recommendations that the
City could do or areas they could work in to help this situation. Mrso Shea
replied that Mr. Hill had said finding more jobs would help. She explained
that the major cause was just plain nothing to do, and jobs were not available.
Mrsa Gabel asked if I�3rs. Shea didn�t ieel this was indicative of the need for
the Youth Center9 and T2rs. Shea•replied that Mr. Hill thought one could work,
but he wasn�t real enthusiastic.
Chairperson Harris stated thai this whole thing might be the product of an
af'i'luent society. I�'lrs. Gabel said that brought up an interesting point, and
asked if th�se juveniles who were picked up �rere from affluent homes. Mrs.
Shea stated that rlr. Hill didn't have records on -that. �
Mr. Bo�.x�dman said that even more disi:urbingy 1�5j of all persons arrested for
murder zrere under the age of 25, 77i of all persons arrested for robberrt,� were
under the age of 25, and 85% of all persons ax�rested for burglary were under
the age of 25. Mr. Langen.ield corrunen-ted that the claims for theft ztiTere get�ing
to �e tremendous.
,� Chairperson Harris said he didn't notice much discussion in the report rela-ting
to drugs, and he wondered ho�a much of the 85% in �he burglary was rela;ed to
trying to procure money for drugs. Mrs. Shea sa.id that �hese figures were
from the F.B.I., and Mre Hill had commented he didn't rely on them too mucho
Mr. Langenfeld. said he would like to bring the Gommission's attention to the
second to last paragraph on page 1�7, which stated that if the youths �,rere
kep�, busy or interested in somethin�y there would be a reduction in crime.
Chairp�rson Harris said he would like a copy of this sent to Scnool District
1l�, and hiz�. Bergraan suggested including District 13, also. 1�7r. Langen�eld
suggested the �un Newspaper. r7rs. Shea said they hac� tried to get this in
the newspaper, but they ��ouldn�t priii-L- it, I�ro Langenfeld suggested that perh�.ps
churches would be interested in this, and said they should get it moving out
of the minutes and into the eyes of the public.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, al_1 voting aye� the motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Gabel9 that the report by James Hill, Public
Safety Directory be sent to all school districts and the Sun Newspaper with a
cover letter fram the Planning Commission. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,
the motion carriea unanimously.
8. REC�IVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: NOVE?�9RER 9, 1976
�� MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Gahel, that the Planning Commission receive
. . ._ .
�
Plarining Commission Meeting - Idovember 17, 1976 Page 20
the Appeals Commission minutes of November 9� 19?6.
Mrs. Gabel said she would like to comment that they had a request for a sign
variance by Perkins Cake and Steak that asked for a vaiiance from 80 square
feet to 119 square feet. She expzained that when they got into this at the
meeting it turned out the sign �aas only 81�.3 square feet, but had been deter-
mined in its rectangular shape. i�irr. Boardman said that the square footage
on the actual application did state 118 square feets and the sign ardinance
said a sign could only be 80 square feeto Mrs. Gabel asked if they should
address shapes of signs in working on the sign ordinance, and Mr. Boardman
said it should be 80 square feet regardless of shape.
Mrs. Gabel said that N1rs. uchnabel"had asked her to remind a11 the members
of the November 22nd meeting with the City Council, and to ask Mr. Boardman
if he had come�up with some type of outline or agenda concerning the 1�.0' lots.
Mr. Boardman said that would be ready.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
9. RECEIVE CON1NiUNITY DEVFJ�OPT�iENT COMMISSTON MIN(JTES s NOVEMBER 9, 1976
MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission receive
�the Community Development Commission minutes of November 9, 1976.
,.�
�"�
Chairperson Haxris noted that the.Sign Ordinance Project Committee was coming �
along, and asked if Mr. Schneider �rould have this ready before he resigned.
Mr. Bergman replied he would not, and explair�ed that I�1r. Schneider would be
chairing one more meeting in December and would hand in his resignation at the
next Community Development meeting. He stated that the Sign Committee would
have bEen short a Chairman, and it did make Community Development short a
membere He explained that at the last Sign Committee meeting, the subject of
replacement had come up and it worked out ve•ry well. He stated they had
something between an elected replacer�lent and volunteer, and explained that'
Mrs. Gabel had agreed to chazr the Sign Committes through the completion o�
the project. He added that while �hey were short a member of the Project
Committee, he thought it would be finished up with the present membership and
Mrs. Gabel chairingo He stated he thought they were doing a good job, and
commented �hat there was a lot of detail. Mr, Bergman mentioned that they
had talked toward a Maxch complel:ion goal of the Project Commil:tee, and Mrs.
Gabel said she hoped that could be achieved.
Mr. Bergman asked if he should tarite a letter concerning a replacement on
the Cornmunity Development Commission, and Mr. Boardman said he was sure that
Mr. Schnezder would submi.t a letter to the City Council. Mr. Bergman noted
that it seemed to take a long time to get a replacement.
�,
�°
Planning Commission Meeting - Navember 17, 1976 Page 21
Mr. Boardman �aid that in the Community Development minutes there was a motion
to be acted on and sent to the City Council, and it had to do with the
� Bikeway/ Walkway Plan. Mr. Bergman explained they in•Co.-�munity Development
had agreed that the ball was with the City rather than the Bikeway/Walkway
Committee, and from that point Comraunity Development indicated concern for
lack of action. Mr. Lan.genfeld commented that he concurred with the motion
reflected in the minutes. Mr. Boardman stated he thought a11 they �rould
need was a concurring motion, and said that actually the motion ti•rould go
to the City Council whether the Planning Commission acted on it or not.
Chairperson Harris commented on the item of receiving the Articles of
Incorporation of the Fridley Youth Center on page 6 of the C.D.C. minutes,
and said the last paragraph didn�t make sense. Mr. �ergman said that
paragraph 5� on page 6 shoulci be revised to read ��The Comrnission rnembers
expressed concern over the possibility that the Fridley Youth Center would
not be able to use the pump Yiouse at Locke Park. It had been.their clear
understanding �hat the pump house had been assigned for that purpose."
Mr. Bergman said that C.D,C. felt conce�n that the Fridley Youth Center
might be dropped. . .
Chairperson Harris said he would like �o rnake a report on the Fridley Youth
Center to the Commission. He explained that the Planning Commission's meetings
had been lengthy and arduous9 and he hadn'� had a chance io fill the Commission
in on what the Project t;ommittee had accomplisred as far as the Fridley Youth
Cen�er. He stated they had dra��m up the Articles of Incor�oration as
guidelines and wanted i,hem submitted to the City Attorney to get eve•rything
. in the right contexto He explain�d they fel� they had to get the ball moving
� and that was why the push was on to get it into the City Council's hands
so they coL?ld direc� the �ity Attorney to carry on this function. I�ir. Harris
explained th� felt at this �;ime that the pump house facili-cy was not going to
be adequate, and they tried �,o deal with District l�. for the use of the Hayes
School annex and so far had run into a lalank wa11. He said he had gone to
the School Board members informally and tried to set up lines of communication
between the City Council and the School Board9 not only in �the area of the
Fridley Youth Center but in other areas as wellm
Chairperson Harris s�ated that a meeting had been set up and��here was an
agenda and they were going to start discussir?g some items �hat related to
both schools and �he C.ity9 but he hadn't heard the results of it. He hoped
there had been some lines af communication established and maybe they could
start taorking toge�,her, He co:runented that he just c�uld not believe at the
time he made the approach ttlat the Gity and tiie Schools �,Teren � t cooperating
better than �hey had be�n. Mr. Harris said the School District had the
facilities, and as the City grew they needed facilities. Mr. Boardrnan said
that the thing that concerned him was that it was the �ax payer� money, and
the tax payer°s couldn'-t use it.
Chairperson Harris said it was his feeling that if the pump house was used,
there would be 50 kids standing outside. Mr. Bergman reminded the Commission
that C.D.C.'s recommendation was specifically City Fiall space, recognizing
they had to ].00k at priorities. He stated he still ielt that was a good
� recommendation in his opinion.
�
UPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Planning Commission Meeting - November 17, 1976 . Page 22
Mr. Bergman asked the Commission to notice on pages 2� 3 and � that Community ^
Development reviewed the East River Road proposal and did make an attempt to
do this in what they felt ��as a proper fashion. He explained they had looked
at the goals and objectives; and Mr. Boaxdman had come in with the Metropolitan
Council traffic projection which was a great disappointment b�cause it didn't
treat East River Road at a11, although a,n eaxlier City of Minneapolis trans-
portation plan did. He pointed out that they did end up making the motion
which appeared on page �.
Mr. Langenfeld said he would prefer not to go into�the East River Road item
and asked the Commission members to e�ait an.d refer to the upcoming mi.nutes
from the last Fridley F.hvironmental Quality Cotrunission meeting. He explained
they would shed a little light on the entire subject. Mrs. Gabel noted that
Mr. Paripovich had tests run on the noise level, and they fas exceeded standards.
N1r. Langenfeld said that would be in the minutes at the next meeting.
MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission concur
with and pass an -to City Council concern for the lack of timely progress in
the coinpletion of bikeway/walkway implementation plans as described in the
Community Development motion as follows: '�70TION by Dennis Schneider'
seconded by William Forster, that the Community Development Commission
goes on record as being disappointed with the progress being made towards
implementation of the Bike�ray/TnTalkway Plan9 specifically with regard to the
development and enforcemenl: of ordinances regulating use of bikes and the
bikeway system�.with regard to the overall effectiveness of the current
educational program being conducted, and with regard to the level of signing �
currently in existence; and that the Commission recommends to City Council
that all practical efforts be taken to expedi�e implementation of this plan."
Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unani.mously.
Mr. Langenfeld iniormed the Commission �that the Metropolitan Council was having
local Government Planni.ng Zdorkshops on the Land Planning Act. Mr. Boardman
added that they were ha�Ting them at several locations, and the one he was going
to was at the Coon Rapids City Hall on December 9th. Mr. Langenfeld said the
workshop would cover the hows and whens of tY�e Act and �ahat it means to local
planning. He said it would provide information on the sLatus of funding to
assist local plannin�, and provide a directory for cornmunities seeking prof-
essional planning assistance. Chairperson Harris asked how much this would
affect them, and Mr. Boardman said it would affect them. He said they would
be revietaing the present comprehensive plan and making recommendaiiors on that.
Mr. Boardman brough� to the Commission�s attention the report on.Modest
Cost Housing from the Private Housing Advisory Gommittee of Metropolitan
Council that �aas handed out at the meeting. He said he would like the
members to review it, and although the Public�Hearing was scheduled for
the next night the records were held open for thirty days so if someone wanted
to make a comment on it they could so so at the next meeting. He stated that �"`�,
�
Planning Commission �ieeting - November ll, 1976 Page 23
� as far as Staff was concerned, he thought they followed the recomm�ndations
by the MMA. H� explained that the NIIJIA was supposed to be a representative
body of inetropolitan communities, and hopefully they Vrere looking out for
our interests on this. Mr, Boardman e�plAined th�.ttheir position was that
there were some points in this that could be handled in the communities, however,
they were putting the burden o? the cost af housing mainly on the general
municipalities. He said they were leaving out one major point, and that was
the financial institutions. N1r. Boaxdman said financial institutions hadn�t
even been considered in this modest cost housing. �
MOTION by Langenfeld,.seconded by Bergman9 that the Planning Commission
receive the report on Modest Cost Housing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,
the motion �arried unanimouslyo
Chairperson Harris said he had one o�her item' and that was to remind the
Cor�mission of the Idovember 22nd discussion on 1�0' lots with the City Councilo
He iniormed the members it woulci be Monday evening at 7:30 in the Community
Room, and urged them all to attend,
MO`1'IOT�d ty Shea, S�COIIC�.@d ��r B�:�grnan, that the *ne�tiilg l�e adjourned< Upon
, a voice vote9 all voting aye, �r�airperson :�arris declared tne Plannin�
� Commission mee�ing of Novemqer 17, 1y76 adjourned at 12s20 P.I�1A �
Respectfully submit�,ed,
' ' �-//'
, , � f'/'r r^� ,�`. .�1�v�/,Y?:',-!�/
Sherri 0'Donnell
Recording Secretary
�i
�