Loading...
PL 04/20/1977 - 6608� � City of Fridley AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 20, 1977 CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: aPPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: APRIL 6, 1977 1. 2. 3 #//-U�, 6r GNKY NtItKSUN: Kezone from C-I (tocaf bustness areas ta R-2 two family dwelling areas) Lots 3, 4, 22 & 23, Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, to allow the construction of Double Bungalows/ Cuplexes, the same being 1326 and 1355 Osborne Road N.E. and 1331 and 1345 Meadowmoor Terrace N.E. Public Hearing Closed Continue until May 4, 1977 at petitioner's request FOR A LOT SPLIT. L.S. #77-02 the Southerly 120 feet of Lot 1, Block 3, Commerce Park, to make two parcels for tax purposes, the same being 7300 and 7320 University Avenue N.E. (Zoned C-2). (See Appeals Commission minutes of April 12, 1977 for variance approval). HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, �ri�fcley City Code, Section 205.051, 3 E aad F, to Construct housing for the elderly and automobile parking lot for off-street parking in an R-1 Zoning District, on Lot 1-7, and the Northerly 215 feet of Lot 24, Block 1, Alice Wall Additio�i. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST f�R A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #77-03, BY B RRY C. BROTTLUND; To permit the cons�ruction of two duplexes and/or double �ungalows, in an R-1 zoning district(single family homes), per Fridley City Code, Section 205.053, 3, D, to be l�cated on Lot 11, Auditor's Subdivision No. 23, together with vacated Grand Avenue as dedicated in the plat of Fridley Park, the same being 6431-33 East River Road and 6435-37 East River Road N.E. �� 5. REQUEST FOR A LOT SPLIT, L.S. 77-04, BY BARRY C. BROTTL—T1ND: �plit Lot 1,5� A. S� 3, toget er with vacated Grand Street as plated from Fridley park into.2 building sites each 76.66 ' of frontage. 7:30 P.M. PAGES 1 - 12 13 - 27 � 35 - �i9 41 - 45 � � i Planning Co�nission Agenda April 20, 1971, Page 2 6. PllBLIC HEARINr.• CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINA P.S. �77-02, REPLAT OF MARXEN TERRACE, BY THO MARXEN, the purpose^being to have the plat me new street pattern for the area. PAGES AT' 46 - 51 7. VACATION REQUEST: SAV #77-02, 8Y THOMAS E. MARXEN: Vacate the existing right of way for Marxe� Terrace - decribed as the 50' right of way located between Lots 3, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, Marxen Terrace, and the South 50 feet of the North 355 feet of Lot 6, that part of said Lot 6 that lies within a circle whose radius is 50 feet and whose center is located at the SW corner of Lot 8 of said Auditor's Sub. No. 108. � 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. CONTINUED: 60ALS & OBJECTIVES: ACCESS CONTINUED: GOALS & OBJECTIVES: COMMUNITY VITALITY APPROVAL fORMAT FOR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES CQNTINUEO: PRQPOSED MAINTENANCE CODE: CONTINUED: RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN CHAPTER 212, MINING ORDINANCE 50 - 52 13. RECEIVE LETTER FROM NEIGHBORS ON 45TH AND 2 1/2 STREET 53 - 54 14. REC�IVE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: MARCH 2&, 1477 15. RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: APRIL 12. 1977 55 - 61 62 - 74 � � CITY OF FitIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING /�RIL 6, 1977 CALL TO ORDER• Chairperson Harris called meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Iiarris, Bergman, Schnabel, Shea, Langenfeld Members Absent: Peterson Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, CiYy Planner APPROVE PLAIQNING COMMISSIQN MINUTES: �RCH 23, 1977 PAGE 1 iirs. Schnabel requested that page 9, second paragraph at the bottom be amended to read as follows: The sentence that starts "Mrs. Schnabel said perhaps what Mr. Coddon was saying was aC the time he made the statement before the Council..." should be changed to reflect that although he did not own the building � at Che time, he perhaps failed to say that he would own it in the future. :20TION by Shea, seconded by Schnabel to approve the Planning Co�ission minutes. Upou a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: ^.EZONING REQUEST, ZOA �i77-01, BY GARY PETE°SON: Re- zone Lots 3 and 4, and Lots 22 and 23, all in Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, fram C-1 (1oca1 business areas) to R-2 (t�ao-family dwelling axeas), the same being 1326 and 1344 Osborne Road NE and 1331 and 1345 Meadowmoor Drive NE. MOTION by Schnabel, seconded by Shea to open the Public Hearing on rezoning request, ZOA �k77-01, by Gary Peterson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 7:40 p.m. Mr. �ary Yetersona the petitioner, was not present. Mr. Boardman explained the nroposal to the Planning Commission stating that the petitioner is requesting to build 4 duplexes, 2 facing Meadowmoor and 2 facing Osborne. Chairperson Harris asked if the petitioner was in the audience. ihe petitioner was not in the audience. The Chairperson asked if there was anyone in the Msudience agafnst this petition. Bernard K. lieille, 1k18 Meadowmoor Drive, presented a petition to the Planning Commission. He said that this land is zoned commercial and was �naware that it was anything but xesidential. He said that he wanted to see it stay resi- dential. Planning Commission Meeting - April 6, 1977 Page 2 Chairperson Harzis asked if he vnderstood that is was not now zoned commercial. i•x. Heille stated he knew, but felt, it should be single family hames. Schnabel asked if Yhose in the audience were opposed to R-2 and would like it � to remain co�ercial. T-Ir. Aeille stated that he would like to see it zoned R- which everybody was led to be2ieve existed in the first place. Bergnan asked Mr. Boardman to read what was not allowed in C-1 zoning diserict. tfr. Boardman read the C-1 zoning code. t4r. Bergman stated that he wanted the audience to be aware that the pxoperty owner has the right to build any of the allowed uses on these lots. Nancy Melbie, 1346 Meadowmoor Drive, said shQ lives directly across the street and she is very much opposed to the proposal. She wasn`t told that it was commercial property and felt it was the responsibility of the City to inform her as such. idalt Lizakowski, 1402 Meadowmoor Drive said that he had moved in 5 years ago and was told by the City that the whole area was R-1 single Eamily dwellittg. Rolla Morin, 7635 Meadowmoor Drive, said she was told last year by the City that they were sing,le family homes. If they would have known anything other than R-1 they would not have purchased their home. Nancy Melbie also stated that there were lots of kids in this area and duplexes would provide additional kids in the neighborhood. 4lilliam Sharp, 1377 Meadowmoor Drive, said that the idea of building a business in the middle oE a residential block is beyond his understanding. � Donna Czupta, 7620 Bacon Drive, said we live about a block away and if businesses go in on Meadowmoor it will affect my children, but I'am also opposed to duplexes. If you put in 2 duplexes on Tieadowmoor Drive that will mean 4 additional families which will mean added children. I don`t think we can handle the population. It would seem to me that the population should be spread out a little more in- stead of cramming it into a two-block area. I would invite you to drive down our block and see that there are a lot of children, and we don't need the added children,we are content with what we have. She said also, we don't need the added traffic that this proposal would generate. Chairman Harris read the petition. The petition reads, "We the undersigned, request that Lots 3 and 4 and Lets 22 and 24, Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, address 1326, 1344 Osborne and 1337 and 1345 Meadowmoor zoned C-1 local business, remain zoned C-1 or changed to R-1 single fam3ly dwelling and not rezoned to R-2 multiple family dwelling; a duplex or a double bungalow. Larry Von Mosch, 1392 Meadowmoor Drive, asked the commission what was imrolved in rezoning this property to R-1. Can't the land owners around, petition to have it changed? Chairperson Harris explained that the City or the property owner could petition for rezoning however, it is ihe policy of the City to receive only a petition from the property owner in order to rezone the property. Richard Morin, 7635 Meadowmoor Drive, stated that the way it stands is that they either get R-2 or C-1, and unless they can petition the owner oE the land� to change his request to R-1 they will either end up with a duplex or a parking lot of some co�ercial property along Osborne. PlanninR Coimnission Meetin� - Anril 6, 1977 PaRe 3 Councilman Schneider asked if staff had tried to get Mr. Peterson to build . single iamily homes. :?r. Boardman stated that he was not sure whether Mr. � Peterson was approached with this idea. Counci7inan Schneider stated that he thought maybe a compromise of .R-2 along Osborne Road and R-1 along Meadowmoor Drive could�maybe be arranged. � � Ro11a Morin stated she was concerned that the lots not go commercial on Meadowmoor Drive. ?irs. Schnabel said that she looked at the area and felt the worst thing that could happen was that camnercial be build on Meadowmoor. Mr. Langenfeld said that he would like to point out to the audience that memhers of this Commission are also concerned citizens;as they are. It is our duty to review the actual request and review the audience to see if the request was in order. He said that there caas no way that we could enter into R-] zoning without the request of the property owner, and that the Co�ission could either suggest that the audience discuss a change with the property owner, or the Planning Commission take action on the problem as presented that night. William Sharp asked if all 4 commercial lots could be joined together and a large commercial building be built. Chairman Harris said that this could happen. Langenfeld said that he would Like to point out to the Planning Commission that there had been several people who had stated that they had received false information fro�a City staff and highly suggest that whoever gives out this information know e�ractly what they are referring to. .'lso, he pointed out to the audience that sometimes the Commission members look at the lesser of two evils. £.i.chard Morin said that if it stands that they get either duplex or co�texcial he would rather see the duplex. Mr. Bergman read the petition and questioned whether the people who signed the petition realized that they signed either for or against co�mnercial. There were several people in the audience that stated that they were not aware that this was what they signed. Chairman Harris suggested that the petitions will be placed on the front desk and that anybody wishing to remove their name from the petition, be allowed to do so when the discussion on this item was completed. Bernard Heille said that he felt there had been a teYrific loss between this area and the City from the day of it's conception and it has proven right down the line the lack of willingness of the City to respond to the needs of the people in Meadowmoor. Iie said he felt like the people in the area lack City services, lack response from the City, lack police services. };e can't keep gas in his car and feels that it should be more responsive. LeAnn Hennes, 7600 Arthur Street, said that she called city hall when there was a street light broken and the broken glass was not even swept up. She said that the City had just forgotten about them. PlanninR Commission MeetinR - April 6, 1977 Page 4 Walt Lizakowski, 1402 Meado�anoor Drive, said he felt the services had been real lax. He has had to call in for snow removal every year for 5 years � and when they come througfi, they come through tfie middle and leave one side unplowed or they wi12 come throvgh so late that a foot of snow is packed down, Last year they called about sweeping and they swept it once all year and now there 3s glass on the street and has been for the last 2 weeks, and they won't sweep it. :ir. Langenfeld said that he would Iike to indicate here that he was gl.ad to hear these cormnents because this was the place to begin them and they would defin�tely reach the top from here. He said he would also like to make a comnent to the audience that they could suggest that this could be zoned to R-2 and reduce it from a commercial nature, and then suggest to ihe audience that they talk to Peterson be£ore it goes to the Council and maybe suggest to him that it should be R-1. Chairman Harris said that he would feel remiss if we acted on this before having a chance to talk to the petitioner. Ms. Czupta asked if there is a possibility in this rezoning that the 2 lots on Osborne remain zoned C-1 and that the 2 lots on Meadowmoor be rezoned to the R-2. Chairperson Harris said that this could be done because it was a lesser re- Quest than what the petitianer had requested. She stated that it was her concern not only with the zoning, but the amount of people already in the area and felt that this suggestion would make everybody happy by cutting down on the population and would allow the developer to gain part of the xequest that he wanted.. She said that she was the one that made up the peti- . tion and the reason it reads that way was that she was trying to make this point with as Iittle woxds as possible. Chairman Harris asked if the 2 parcels on Osborne would meet the requirement of C-1 zoning. Mr. Boardman said that these lots would meet that requirement. Mr. Bergman said that he would like to encourage the people in the audience to contact Mr. Peterson and discuss with him thoughts on the rezoning of this property. P.ichard Morin said that he would like to re-emphasize one point, that they all feel that they were deceived as far as what the properties were zoned as, and he wanted to get that in the record one more tzme,that they called on it before they bought their property and were told that it was zoned residential as were a number of people, and he would like the Flanning Commission to reassure them again that it mill be looked into because it is not some casual mistake that a clerk made. It affects them severely. Chairman Harris wanted to give a piece of advice to the people in the audience that felt they were misled, in fact, they may not have been purposely mis- led by somebody on the statf. He advised that in the future if they are going to make a purchase of a property or a house that they don't leave any- thing to chance, and come into the City office and look at the zoning map hanging on the wall. � PlanninQ Commission Meetin� - April 6, 1977 Page 5 � Iletgman said that he would lik� by a show of hands, which people in the audience through direct contact, felt they had been directly mislead or misinformed as to the zoning. Mr. Bergman stated that for the records he would like to indicate that nine persons indicated that they were misled as to the zoning. MOTION by Langen£eld, seconded by Schnabel, the Planning Co�ission close the Public Hearing on rezoning request, ZOA /177-01, by Gary Peterson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing closed at 8:45 p.m. MOTION by Schnabel, seconded by Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission continue until April 20, Public Hearing: rezoning request, ZOA ►i77-01, by Gary Peterson: �ezone Lots 3 and 4, and Lots 22 and 23, all in Block 2, P4eadowmoor Terrace, from C-1 (local bus'iness areas) to R-2 (two-family dtaelling areas), the same being 1326 and 1344 Osborne Road NE and 1331 and 1345 Meadowmoor Drive NE for the reason that in all fairness to the people,, the petitioners should be at the meeting and allow the people to discuss this item with the petitioner. tipon a voice vote, all voting aye, the moYion carried unanimously. Langenfeld would like to add tt�at the audience had shown concern about City services in this area and would like the City to step in to resolve some of the problems such as broken glass, stealing of gas and proper police patrol. � MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Shea, to open the Public Hearing for a Special Use Permit, SP �177-01, Certified t4obile Homes, Incorporated. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Lrnie Pasborg and Mr. �;axwell of Certified Mobile Homes were present. 2. FOR A SPECIAL USE MOBZLE HOrfES, INCORPORATED: Per Fridley City Code, Section 205.102, 3, fd, to allow the continuation of a mobile home sales lot to replace SP �f71-14 which will expire on Apxil 17, 1977, located on the WesCerly 600 feet of the Southerly 320 feet of the Plortherly 750 feet of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 12, the same being 7625 Viron Road NE. Mr. Boardman explained to the Commission that this special use permit was granted for a period of 5 years and expires in April and because of the condition placed on special use permits at the time it was issued the requirement was for the issuance of a new special use permit. Mr. 3oardman explained the 19 stipulations on the old special use permit and would like to indicate certain changes that were allowed by the City Council when the present owners took over the property in 1974. Ster.i /ill caas changed to allow for a minimum of 6' distance between units and 50 units in the display area. Also, Items �E14 and i115 were removed. Shea asked the petitioner how raay units they had on the property. ?•fr, Pasborg said that he thought somewhere around S0. ':!r. Pasborg stated that the amount � of room ihat they had on the property if properly distributed, would hold around 100. Mr. Langenfeld asked Mr. Boardman if the staff has had any problems with [he stipulations to date. �fr. Boardman stated that in general, all of the stipu- lations as listed have been met. Planninp�Commission MeetinQ - April 6, I977 PaRe 6 ldrs. Schnabel said that in v�ewing the pxoperty before the meeting, it seemed that there were other stipulations that had not been inet. Item 1{9 � which states tfiat the office will be skirted had not been met. �ir. Pasborg said that they had just taken the skirting off because tfiey wanted to put additional siding on the�mobile home that will e�ctend all the way to the ground to give the appearance of a permanent structure. Iirs. Schnabel said the other item was 1l14 stating that there would be woodwalks to all units. Mr. Pasborg stated that Item qi14 changed because the whole area was black- topped. Mr. Boardman stated that Item Jil4 and ii15 were waived by the City Council in 1974. Schnabel asked about Item 1i7 discussing easement for roadway to Osborne behind Frostop Drive-In. Mr. Boardman stated that no easement had ever 6een received and would question the necessity of the easement for this development. Mr. Yasborg stated that presently, they do bring units across that property, but this is with mutual consent of the property owner. He also stated that he had seen the plan showing a road with a cul-de-sac coming across that area and stopping at their oroperty, but to his knowledge, was never platted. Mrs. Schnabel asked if for any reason they were not allowed to bring mobile homes across this property, d o they have reom to bring it in on their own property? Mr. Pasborg stated that they did. :ir. Pasborg stated that they wanted $60,000 ior germanent access across the back property and that they couldn't justify that on a 3-year special use permit. tfrs. Schnabel was concerned about encroachment on Strite-Anderson property. � Mr. Pasborg stated that if that was the case, it would he remitted. i;rs. Schnabel explained that when a motion is made she would Iike to bring out three points and onQ was that they added siding to extend to the blacktop, two, «as that the units in the display area be 6` apart and the units in the Lstorage area be 1' apart and three, that a security fence be provided on the south side of the property as stipulated in Item 1i15. Mr. Boardman reitterated that Item 1�15 had been waived under the condition that they received a letter from Strite-Anderson regarding it. The letter was received from Strite-F>nderson and the item was then waived. c10TI0N by Bergtnan, seeonded by Shea, to close the Public Hearing for a Special Use Permit, SP #77-01, Certified MobiLe Homes, Incorporated. tipon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the public hearing closed at 9:10 p.m. i30TI0N by Bergman, seconded by Shea, that Planning Commission recomnend approval of the request for a Special Use Permit, SP /177-01, Certified Mobile Homes, Incorporated: Per Fridley City Code, Section 205.102, 3, N, to allow the contin- uation of a mobile home sales lot to replace SP 1171-14 which will expire on Apri1 17, 1977, located on the Westerly 600 feet of the Southerly 320 feet of the Northerly 750 feet of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 12, the same being 7625 Viron Road NE, with the following stipulations: 1. Tront setback be changed from 15 feet to 20 feet. 2. Pre-stressed anchored concrete curbing around all blacktop areas. � 3. Crushed rock parking area for trailers be oiled. � • Plannin� Commission MeetinR - April 6, 1977 Page 7 4. All landscaped areas to be sodded. (This includes the two 20' x 75' strips along the service road). 5. Special Use Permit granted £or a period of 3 years at which ti.me it will be reviewed. 6. [�Then permanent facilities are built, the owner is to provide an easement for roadway to Osborne Road behind tlie Frostop Dxiye-In. 7. The area outlined on the plot plan is to be blacktopped. (Parking lot) 8. The office is to be at least 24' x 48' on concrete blocks and to be skirted to give the appearance of a permanent structure. 9. The landscaping is to be done according to the landscaping plan and blacktopDed and curbed. 10. Units in the display area are to be minimum of 6` apart with a ma�cimwn of 50 units. 11. 12. The parking lot to be striped for customers and employee paxking. There shall be not less than four security lights around the perimeter. 13. All vacant property to be graded and seeded. (The City En&ineer states that this was agreed to with the previous owner and he feels that agree- ment would still cover it.) 14. The sign is to conform to City Ordinances without a variance, and to be the proper distance back from the service road. 15. The office will be taxed as a permanent structure. Upon open voice vote� all voted aye and the motion carried. 3. LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. /`77-03, THO�fAS BRICKNER: Split off the West 5' of Lot 24, Block 2, Harris Lake Estates (1671 Camelot Lane NE) and add it to Lot 23, Block 2, Harris Lake Estates, (1661 Camelot Lane NE) so the property owners of Lot 23 can install a swi�ing pool in their back yard. Mr. Boardman explained that Thomas Brickner wanted to sell off a 5' portion of his lot to the adjacent property owner to allow for the development of a swimming pool on his neighbors property. ?:r. Brickner's lot is presently undeveloped and this lot split will not affect the code requirements for his Iot. MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Bergman to recownend to Council the approval of Lot Split L.S, s177-03, Thomas Brickner to split o£f the Tdest 5` o£ Lot 24, Block 2, Harris Lake Estates (1671 Camelot Lane NE) and add it to Lot 23, • Block 2, IIarris Lake Estates, (1661 Camelot Lane NE) so the property owners of Lot 23 can install a swimming ponl in their back yard. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried. _ . _ _ __. . _ Plannin£ Commission Meetin� - Apri1 6, 1977 Page 8 4. *LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. 1I77-02, PARK METROPOLITAN INVESTMENT, INC.: Continued until April 20, 1977 . 5. *CONTINUED: STUDY OF INTERSECTION AT 53RD AND CENTRAL Pfr. Mortenson was present. Mr. :•fortenson said he discussed the plans with Menards and they both agreed to the improvement shown as Plan B. Mr. ;?ortenson requested however, that the road be designed so that the transformer pole be included in one of the land- scape areas. Mr. Boardman stated that he could see no problem with that. Mr. Mortenson asked what the approximate cost wou�d be, Mr. Boardman thought that it would be around $10�000 -$12,000. �:r. Mortenson said that he would check with Menards as to how they want to pay far this and wiil have some decision back for the Council on Aprfl 18, d977. MOTION by Schnabel, seconded by Langenfeld, that the Planning Cammission re- comnend to the City Council that the street improvement as agreed to by i4r. Mortenson (Plan B) be approved for construction. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried, '+lQTION by Schnabel, seconded by Langenfeld to suspend the rules to allow Councilwoman Kukowski to address the Planning Coccmiission. Upon a uoice voCe, all votin� aye, the motion carried. � Councilwoman Kukowski wanted to discuss the issue of absenteeism that has been pointed out several times in the minutes and has been quite obvious on the Planning Commission. She said that she realized that everyone is a volunteer and tries hard to attend the meetings, however, the vice-chair often is not in attendance when the chazrperson is absent. She wondered if some encouragement should be sent down from the Planning Coumiission when attendance becomes a problem. She said that her concern is that with one member absent, that the Planning Commission is not getting accurate information from all your commis- sions & therefore, how can the Covncil feel that you are passing something accurate on to us. She said that she really feels that if you are appointed to do the job by the commission, you should do the job. Mr. Langenfeld said that sometimes we have to update any missing members as to what happened at past meetings and therefore, waste additional time. blr. Bergman said that the atmosphere that comes down from the Council kind of negates any action that could be taken by the chairperson. The Council is reluctant to remove anyone without first getting a letter of resignation. Councilwoman Kukowski thought that maybe some policy should be developed by the Planning Counnission for Council approval, in dealing with this problem. She said that she doesn't feel that the Council should pass down recommenda- tions to the Planning Commission, and because you're working with the situatio� you should let us know and give us a couple of alternates. Plannin� Co�ission Meeting - April 6 1977 PaRe 9 � :4r. Bergman asked the other members if they have had any of the same problems that the Community Development Cqmmission has been having. Shea stated that her co�nission has not had any problem with absenteeism. Langenfeld said that they have had some bad times when attendance was down. Schnabel stated that she also has had some attendance problem with the Appeals Commiss3on. She said also, that if the Council sees that there is a problem, it should be the responsibility of Che Council to do some policing in this area. , Councilwoman Kukowski felt that the policy should come fram the Planning Commission. Schnabel said that she felt since the Council set the directives for the op- eration of the coimnissions, it should be upon the Council to be included in the coffinission ordinance. Gouncilwoman Kukowski just wanted to bring this item up and would appreciate any further input back from you on this item. 6. *CONTINUED• RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN CHAPTER 212, :�INII�GzFRZDLEY CITY CODE Mr. Boardman reiterated the changes that were suggested by the Planning Commis- � sion at their. last meeting at which time they had recoffinended a public hearing process be established to allow for the mining operation. Mr. Boardman asked if the Planning Coffinission wants staff to make the changes and send these on to Council. Mr. Langenfeld would like to have the final draft back to the Environmental Commission on the 19th of April and back to the Planning Commission on the 20th for final approval before going to the City Council. MOTION by Schnabel, seconded by Shea, to continue recoramended changes in Chapter 212, Mining,Fridley City Code until April 20, 1977. L'pon voice vote, all voting aye, motion catried. 7. *CONTINUED: PROPOSED MAINTENANCE CODE Schnabel wanted the Planning Coffinission to receive an article from the Minne- apolis Star dated March 22, 1977� and wanted to make sure that when the co�nis- sion develop this ordinance that they don't put any unnecesaary burden on the City staff by making their review a subject for a lawsuit. 410TION by Langenfeld, seconded by Schnabel to receive an article from the Minneapolis Star dated March 22, 1977 (attachment to the minutes). Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried. iThere was some discussion as to how the maintenance code should be reviewed. �l�nning Commission Meeting - April 6, 1977 Page 10 Shea reqssesied that we aet up a separate meeting to handle this item. � Mr. Langenfeld asked Mr. Boardman if the doc�ent they had before them was the final staff recommendation. Mr. Boardman said that it was the revised document that was suggested by the Planning Commission. MOTIOtd by Langenfeld, seconded by Shea, to set up a special meeting on April 18,- 1977. Upon voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 8. *CONTINUID: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: ACCESS iir. Boardman explained the goals and objectives of the goal area access. MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Schnabel, to approve goal and objectives A100 through A190. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried. 9. *CONTINUED: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: COM[1IINITY VITALITY *Check previous agendas for background material Mr. Boardman eacplained goal area Coffinunity Vitality. Mr. Boardman stated that he set up two goals under this goal area. One � would deal with the economic well-being of the co�unity and the other on effective goverxmtent operations. He then explained goals and objectives under each area. Mr, Langenfeld suggested that the wording in V110 be changed to read more smoothly by eliminating "the kind of mix of". *_�IOTION by Bergman, seconded by Shea, to approve V100 through V240. lipon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried. Schnabel asked how we are addressing the community response of our business community. She thought that we should have some statement which would include the business community. Mr. Boardman £elt that this could be included. MOTION by Schnabel, seconded by Bergman, that an asnendment be added to the original motion that a program objective V150 be added, which deals directly toward the City's objective towards the business cotmnunity. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the amended motion carried. MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Schnabel, that staff reword all areas of the goals and objectives where there is implied business to specifically indicate business. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried. • Shea said that she wanted to bring up one other thing. She said that she finally found the Human Resources fund. The City sent her a program budget in which there are two funds. One is a Community Development �und, Out of _ _ _. _ Planning Commissiou Meetinfi - P_pril 6 1977 Page 11 � this fund we gave $1,060 to North Suhurban Family Services, SACA got $500, Red Cross got $160 for the "Baby" and the County W3nterization Program got $750. The other fund is in Parks and Recreation from which, Fine Arts was given $1,OD0 and $2,000 was given to the Senior Citizens. MOTION by Iangenfeld, seconded by Schnabel, to receive the information from Canadian Financial Corporation on their Golden Valley Dover Hills Project, upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the information was received. Schnabel said that she really reco�ended that the members go to see the pro- ject before the meeting on the 20th. f.DJOURNMENT: MOTION by Langenfeld, seconded by Shea, that the meeting be adjourned, tipon voice vote, a11 voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 1977 adjourned at 11:35 p.m. � Ctfully submitted, ��?s��G��'���,�r�� ld Boardman, Planner i ❑ � � U • SELLERS, EVALlIATaR A�CilS�D 5lan, �lz,/iJ . F . } ` �,,; ��: �, . �. .�, t , ^ ��;. > .._ � a � f "S By GWENYTH JONES son says, he already has spent Minveapolis Stat S�aFF R'rihr 5220 to repeir tfie rcwi and will A man who sa}�s he wzs misled have !o !eplace it, because of nu- by the report g:ven t� him under mecous hotes and rotting, ec e the Minneapolis truth•in-housing wst of 53,000. ordinance Aas sued [he couple Swanson also sa�s the Flahertys who sold him a house and the �ured him that the heatinq and housing evaluator who made [he air-cond.itioning sysrems were in report on the house. good cor,didon and that the cost It fs believed to be th<. first suit of operating them was 53S a filed under Lhe ordinance, which month. He says [he systems xre wes passed in 1975. inadequxte and mcs[ be replsc^d The ordinaace requlres�the sell- � at a rnst of 52.142. He aleo has er of a house to provide a written ha6 to spend $700 on additio�al evaluaGOn by a certitied t!ousing insulation, [hc complaint says. evalualor, revealing any major Leaks in the basemert have code violations or defects, or to cost Swanson E35D, according to obtain a cerdficate of wde com• the complaint. plianca from the city. . It chargrs that Hedquist pe:- H. 2icharA Swanson's svit ;n formed his inspection "in a negli- Bennepin District Court says he &ent maimer" and failed to report relied on a ceport made by Don any problems with t6e root, insu- Hedquist, vn � evalua[or, about a �ation ot hcating and air-con6i- house at 4600-4ti02 Fotwell Dr. tloning systems. when he bought the house in May The suit asks b6,932 from [he from Joseph and May Fiaher[y. Flahertys and Y5,842 from Hed- quist. SWANSpN SAYS he asked about [he conAiUon ef the roof THE PLA}IERTYS deny any and Flaherty assured him [hzt i[ misrepresentations and have filed WaK in good condition. But, Swan• e 550,000 rnunterclaim for mati- cioas prasaution, sayiug that they are etderly and have been worried and upset by the allega- tSons an8 by havSng ta hire a faw- yer to defend themtelves. fiedquist, wlro was 'sn the city InspecUOns depar[mmt tor seven yeass before leaving to become an evaluator, has (iled a genera! de- nial. Ir an aftidavit, Le says he could give onfy his "bzst opi¢ion" xs to the rnndition of the roof because he did not esamine lhe rafters and raofboards. The p�licy for both city inspecrors and pmate evaluators, the affidaci[ says, is to esar,.ine the roct from the i.�side only when t6ere is a wa!k-up at- tic, oot just a crau�i space. But, he says, his report did no.e that [1�ere was evidence of seepage from the roof. His affidavit says he maGe no representations aoout the ccoling system or the insulaHon 6ecause the official report form, adopted by the city muncil, dces mt cover those i[ems. Nedquis. said tAat the examina- tion is designed to reveal ma'pr defects that would be dangerou to health or safety and that an in- adequate healing system is not such a deiect. For��� LOT SPLIT APPLICATIO�d CITY OF FRIDLEY i ._�.___ .� � � � Y � � � ya U � � � � � �, �� m � wa��o �°'.°c+'� � ra m O .-�i � � +�+m� � .x �,� m � N i�'.0 �am+� �,. ,�. > • �;`��- �� � Ann�ss: (�95� /'�'�a�.u,:'1�:�«�;�»..,ss�o�i Street City Zip Code TELEPHONE # ,�,� `l S - 3 ? `� 3 Home •Business PROPERTY OldN�i(S) '�'TI"`"'�-'�- ►�• �. TII,EPHONE #(S Applicant's t�ame Lot Split �� %/-ooL Date.Filed: Fee:B ?�ff �'"�eceipt #�� Council Action:Da.te REMARKS: __ ���2, L t City Zip Caie t/�,�/ � City Zip Code � ! "�� l'�.-� � Business Property Location on Street A' or Exact Street Address (IF ANY)�� .1- %3��7 %��.� �� � , Legal Desc^i�iion of Property: ��l' �,G .j' l��-��,,«../ ��zi✓ ; _ _ ��cu Area �y. /; �-r, j � ����7 -�, .� � ��,.,�.- � �.�-,.� �--� ty sq. ft. Present Zoning , i� �" _v The undersigned hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this appl,i�cation are true and,� —,. correct. j�^�fa �-Gu?�-e�.�;,,. �w"a"�.:1�-�]'_�� �� u � �4 1 � %1 , '! �( DATEe/f1:x�t` t � � ;��F,j �! �IGNATURE d�'"1� l�Y�` �T_!? n �'�-=?l � RELOIJ FOR CITI tJSE ONLY (Sea reverse side £or additional instructione CAECKED BY STAFP DATE �- /�- % �_ Hemarks • PI,ANNIIdG COMMISSION: Date oS Coxisidexation - 3-� 3' Remarks: CITY COUNCII,: Date of Consideration - Remarks: � P �` e h O h� p � � � � � � 0 � ' _a, -- /J20./B-- N.W. 9 olSec:•/� �'w,d.•90, Aqe. 29 _ .�. .. .. . . - � i � I 4 :;; STEVE CODDON: ZOA ��E70-02 �� L. 1, B1. 3, Commerce Park Rezone fro�n C-1 to C-2 for car wash and gasoline sales (Spec. Use Permit requested) �^ �—_ I e L �3 � 1 e.s � I �� � !\` � � I J -- � \--� - j' �� � I � ^ ' � P � a � ��� � � � �� � �� �"� p l ' ' (`\ I "'� 0 ���... �� \ `\ �� \ ~ � `i � � � 4 � V ��i � •.� �{ _ ` /B4 7S � __ I � __ I I � •.-.;. � `� • T OFFICTAL NOTICE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING B�FORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO WHaM IT MAY CO�GERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley will meet in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Wednesday, March 4, 1970 to consider the following matter: Consideration of a rezoning request (ZOA #70-02) by Steve Coddon, to rezone the following described parcel from C-1 (Local Business Areas} to C-2 (General Business Areas). All located in Lot 1, Block 3, Commerce Park, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, State of Minnesota. Generally located in the Northwest corner of 73rd Avenue and University Avenue, Fridley, Minnesota. Anyone desiring to be heard witfi reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. PUBLISH: February 18, I970 February 25, 1970 OLIVER R. ERICKSON CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION �J � ❑ � � ._ 1� OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBUIC HEARING BEFORE Tti2i PLANNING COMMISSION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTIGE IS HEREBY GIl'EN THAT the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley will meet in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Wednesday, March 4, 1970 to consider the following matter: A request for a Special Use Permit as per Section 45.101 (3H), Fridley City Code, to permit the construction of an automobile car wash in a C-2 District to be located on Lot 1, Block 3, Commerce Park. The same being the Northwest corner of 73rd Avenue and University Avenue, N.E., Fridley, Minnesota. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this meeting. PUBLISH: February 18, 1970 February 25, 1970 OLIVER R. CHAIRMAN PLANNING ERICKSON COlyll�f I SS I ON , � � � � � / � �4� PLANNING CO2AfISSION MEETING MARCH 4, 1970 PAGE 1 The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Acting Chairman Jensen. ROLL CALL: MembeYS Present: Myhra, Jensen, Fitzpatrick Members Absent: Erickson, Mittelstadt Others PresenC: Darrel Clark, Englneering Assistant APPROVE PLANNING COMHZSSIOAI ?ffPiUTES: FESRUARY 18 1970 IlOTION by Myhra, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the P2anninq Commissio» approve the PZanning Com�ission minv�es of Februarg 18, 2970. Upon a voice vote, a11 votinq aye, the motion carried cu�animously, RECEIVE PARKS S RECREATION CONR3LSSION M'iNU'TES: rEBRUARY 23 1970 1NOTION by Fitzpatrick, seconded�by Myhra, that the PSanr,ing Cocurussion receive the minutes of the Parks & Recreation Corrmiission meeting of February 23, 2970. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimor,sly. ORDER OF AGENDA: The Agenda was to be considered in the order wzitten, and added as Item 5, was the Lot Sp1it �70-02 by Eugene Bonnett. Acting Chairman Jensen stated that Items 1 and 2 would be considered together as both were public hearings rela[ive to the same property. /� 1. 810CK �, c;o�erce Yark to rezone (general business). : Lot 1, to C-2 2. PiIBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL_USE PSRMIT, SP 070-01 STEVE CODDON: Lot 1, Blocic 3, Co�erce Park. Foz automatic car wash gasolene sales and self service car wash. The public hearing notice for the rezoning request, 20A 670-02, by Steve Coddon for Lot 1, Block 3, Co�nerce Park to be rezoned from C-1 (local business) to C-2 (general business) was zead by Acting Chairman Jensen. The public hearing notice for the Special Use Permit, SP l�70-01, for Steve Coddon on Lot 1, Block 3, Commezce Park requesting an automatic car vash, gasolene sales and self service car Wash in a C^2 District was read by Ac[ing Chairman Jensen. Mr. Coddon introduced Mr. Ron Heskin, attorney, who represented Dameron, Ine. Mr. Heskin showed a scale size model of the automatic car wash and com- mented on the capacity of the two types of car aashes involved in this develop- PlanninA Commisaion MeetinA March 4, 1970 � Page 2 � aent. He indicated that there would be no access onto University Avenue or y 73rd pvenue and that the accesa off the service drive vould be 75 feet from__ ` the corner. p:'a 3� � The Acting Chairman asked for co�ents fzom the public -- there vere none. , . � 11pTION by Nyhra, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the public hearinq for the rezoning reqaest, ZOA N70-02, to rezone Lot 1, 81ock 3, Co�erce Park iuy Steve Coddon from C-S (local business) to C-2 (general businessJ and the public hearing for the SpeciaZ Use Permit, SP #70-01 by Steve Coddon for an aatomatic ear wash, gasolene sa2es and self service car wash, be closed. Upon a voice vote, a12 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Heskin said the automatic car wash Would be masonry and have a Man- asrd roof. Inasmuch as the Dameron, Inc. is a Southern Co�any, the plars o2 the buildings are now being adapted to the Mlnnesota climate and the Uniform Buildiag Code. The huilding design and layout.would go before the Huilding Standards-Design Control Subco�ittee. MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the Planning Corrmeission reconm�end approval to the City Counci2 of the rezoning request, ZC1A N70-01, Steve Coddon, to rezone fmm C-1 (local business) to C-2 (genera2 business), Lot 2, B1ock 3, Coam�erce Park. opon a voice vote, a12 voting aye, the motion carzied unanimously. MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Fitzpatrick, that the P2annfng Coaaaission rewnmiend to the City Council approval of the Special Use Perm.it, SP N70-D2, to construct an aatomatic car wash, gaso2e:ie sales and self service ca: wzsh requested bg Steve Coddon, on Lot 1, Biock 3, Commrce Park. Upon a voic� vote, aS2 voting aye, the e�tion carried i:naniaausiy. � 3. PUBLIC iIEARING: RE20NZNG REQUEST, Z09 �70-03, GEORGE N. 1vBLSON: T'�e N� of Lot 30 and the N� of Lot 31, except the North 125 feet, of Auditor's Subdivision Ai29 rezoned from R-1 (single family) [o R-3A (apartmant and multiple dwellings). 1NnTION by Myhra, seconded by Fitzpatiick, that the Planrung C^.�!a�ission dispense with the reading of the Pablic Hearing Notice. Upon a voice vote, � a21 vottng aye, the motion carried unanimoasZy. Mr. William Merlin, lawyer for Mr. Nelson, Sr. and the Investment Co+.m,�any, eaplained that the rezoning request was approved by the Planning Commission lsat year and the Council had asked that the request be held up until c:ze apartment atudy was completed by the Planning Commission. At t:�is sLage, they were especially interested ia making the middle of the lots £avarabie tor proper development. Mr. Nelson, Sr. said they would like to develop the South Half of the lots for aparementa cons[ructing the kind of buildings vhich vould be an asset to the co��mity and economically aound to operate. The area near R-1 would be used for parking and open space. They feel there is P need for this type of tmits. Mr. Otto Schmid of Urban Planning and Design, Inc. eaplained further the plans for Lot 30. The rezoning reques[ was for an R-3A Diatrict between a � R-1 and R-2 District, and using the problem area 1n the middle of the lot for parking and recreation. He continued that the most prominent thing en !h_ _ .�t PAGE 37 THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL PUBLIC I�ARING AND WORKSHOP MEETING OF APRIL 13, i970 � Mayor Kirkham called the Special Public Hearing and Workshop Meeting of April 13, 4 �� 1970 to order at 8:00 with an appology for the lateness oP the hour. He ex- plained that the Council had a meeting be£ore the Council Meetinq with the Spring Lake Park Council regarding their pazticipation in a storm sewer project. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Council and audience joined in saying the Pledge of Alleqiance to the Flaq. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Harris, Breider, Kirkhaia, Liebl MEMBERS ABSENT: Sheridan ADOPTION OF AGENDA: It was agreed that the Agenda could be adopted as presented, and additional itelns could be added during, or at the end oE the Meeting, it was noted that the City Manager had an item to add. NOTE: Items not taken in order to accanmodate members oP the audience waiting for specific items. MOTION by Councilman Harris to adopt the Agenda as presented. Seconded by #Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSZDERATSON OF A REZONTIQG Rc UEST (ZOA #70-02) TO REZONE FROM C-1 TO C-2, GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 73RD AVENUE AND UNIVERSITY AVENUE AND REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE pE&NIT BY STEVE CODDON: Mayor Kirkham read the Public Hearing Notice aloud to the audience and the City Engineer said that this request was to Yezone Lot 1, Block 3, Commerce Park from C-1 to C-2, and a special use permit for allowing a car wash business. The recon¢nendation of the Planninq Commission was for approval. He then called on Mr. Ron Heskin, of Heskin and Associates of Minneapolis, to make a presentation. Mr. Ron Heskin came forward with a site plan and said that the proposed project was for an automatic car wash with gas pumps on the corner of 73rd Avenue and University Avenue. Splitting the two sections of the station would be a green strip. Exit and entrance would be from the University Avenue ser,vice road. He said that he did not feel that it would create any traffic probl@m. There is a green strip all around the development. He then presented a scale model of the station, and an artists drawing, which showed the relationship of the other buildings now in existance in the area. As was pointed out in Planning Commission this was originally zoned C-2 and was recently zoned to C-l. Councilman Liebl asked how the traffic would be regulated. Mr. Heskin showed on the artists drawing how the traffic flow would be controlled. The entrance is (75' back from the corner. Councilman Liebl asked how many cars could be handled without creating stacking problems. Mr. Heskin said about 60 total, the split would be 40 for one section and 20 Por the other. ,l I :L�. � �` •I � � BPECZAL PUBLIC HEARING OF APRIL 13, 1970 YAIaL .)O i Ntayor Kirkham asked if�there was anyone in the audience that wished to speak on this item with no response. Councilman Breider asked what the general building material would be. Mr- Heskin said that it would be cement block with a mansard roof. He added that there is a station like this on Highway #10. Most of the buildings in the Co�aerce Park area are cement block, some have bxick facing. Councilman Harris said that he would be required to have sane brick Pacing. Mr. Heskin said that he understood that this would be taken care oP at the Building Board Meeting. Councilman Harris said that the south and east sides would have to be brick accordinq to the zoning ordinance. The City Enqineer said that he wanted to point out that he did not Peel that there was adequate storaqe for cars on the land. He said that he would work further with them. Councilman Liebl asked the estimated cost. Mr. Heskin said the total cost, including land costs, equip�ent and building wsts, would be spproximately $225,000 for just about one acre. MOTION by Councilman Harris to close the Public Hearing on the rezoni.ng zequest by Steve Coddon. Seconded by Councilman Liebl. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,�Hapor Kixlcham declared the Public Hearing closed at 8:13 P.M. ON THE CONSZDERATION OF SHOAEWOOD PLAT Mayox' Kirkham read the Public Hearing Notice to the audience and the City Enqineer showed the general area on the screen and the plat on the easel. He said that this was for splitting the property for ease in descriptions. 1t would make the Sears property easier to describe, and delineate the Planned Development l.ot. He pointed out that the rest is all zoned camnercial. The secommendation of the Planning Commission was ior approval subject to dedication of some easements and resolving the dzainage problems. The drainage now follows the area owned by the City, and drains into the lake. This is the area of the requested vacation. Councilman Liebl asked the petitioner if he agreed with the stipulations of the Planning Commission. Mr. Wyman Smith, Attorney for Mr. Max Saliterman, said that he was not sure what they were, but he did not recall any objections by Mr• Saliterman. Councilman Liebl then read the motion by the Planning Commission. Mr. Smith said that they would concur with this, and that Mr. Saliterman would have no objections. This plat is somethinq the City has wanted. The City has had sewer and water pipes running through the land without any easements. He said that Suburban Engineering has done the work on the plat. The plat will accomplish designating and outlining where these easements are and break the land into lots. It will also separate the Planned Development lot into a separate parcel, arid will separate the Sears parcel. ' Councilman Harris said that he could recoqni2e a potential problem in that Mr. Wyman Smith is representing his client, but is also a member of the same firm as the City Attorney, Mr. Juster. This could put Mr. Smith into a difficult position, and rather than have some possible impxoprieties, he suggested that this hearing could be closed and discussed at a later meeting. He said that he understood that Mr. Smith has handled Mr. Saliterman's affairs for some time, and as Mr. Juster just became the City Attorney. perhaps there was not time to �� � REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 4� 1970 PAGE 2 MOTION by Councilman Breider to adopt the Agenda as amended. Seconded by Councilman Liebl. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor HarXis Pro tem �� � declared the motion carried. VISITORS: . � � � Mayor Harris Pro tem asked i£ there was anyone present who wished to speak on any non-Agenda type item, with no response. CONSIDERATION OF SHOREWOOD PLAT AND VACATION RE�p'ND DISCUSSION REGARDING DELAY OF INSTALLING BRICK ON SEARS STORE. MA7C SALITERMAN: iTabled April 20, 1970) The City Engineer said that this was a request for the vacation of about l�s acres of property. He said that he would recaamend that if the vacation takes place, there should be some negotiation for an exchange of groperty. This easement is for the drainage of the property down to Moore Lake. He said that he had requested Mr. Saliterman or his representative to be present. Theze was no representative present, so he suggested laying this over to later in the Meeting. � X ORDINANCE #452 - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF TAE CITY OF FRIDLEY, �� MINNESOTA BY MAKING A CHANGE IN 20NING DZSTRICTS: STEVE CODDON.;__ (ZOA #70-02 / to rezone fran C-1 to C-2, Generally located in the northwest corner o—f 73rT� � Avenue and University Avenue and zequest for special use permit) The City Engineer said that this is the second reading of the xezoning ordinance for commercial zoning. He also wants a special use permit for a car wash having gasoline pumps. He is dividing the property into two sections. The north one is for a self service type of operation and the souYh one is automatic. He said that the facilities seem to be satisfactory but he wanted to point out that there may be some car stacking problems at peak periods. He felt that this type of operation is subject to peak peYiods. He requested an additional lane from University Avenue to the Service Road, there is only one lane at this time. He pointed out that this building should be mostly brick as it would be setting a precident for the south end of Co�erce Park. This should be a condition of the special use pern�it. Councilman Liebl said that he assumed that the road was designed for co:mnercial enterprise and the City Engineer said yes, the road was designed for industrial and commercial use. Councilman Liebl asked if the applicant was agreeable to the stipulations imposed. Mr. Ron Heskin said yes, they agreed with working something out. They plan on taking a portion of the green stxip and making the additional turning lane. Councilman Liebl said that the City dces not want to create a stacking problem and Mr. Heskin said that this is why the entrance and exit have been placed on the Service Road. Councilman Breider asked if the buildinq would be brick. Mr. Heskin said that this would have to be worked out. They would rather use stucco with a mansard roof. at least for the self service section. He felt that brick for the self service section would be uneconomical, but they were goinq to use brick for the automatic car wash. He said that they would meet � the City's standards, however. He pointed out that all four sides of the building ate exposed, and then showed an elevation of the building. Council- man Harris pointed out that this would be brought before the Building Standards - 4l � REGUTAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 4, 1970 PAGE 3 F e') Aesign Control Subcommittee for their approval. Others in Co�mnerce Park have , �� � been required to come up to the City's standards as far as the brick is con- cerned. Mr. Heskin said that their contractor looked over the various types of building materials and came up with what he felt to be the best and most economical. Councilman Harris said that this request will have to come back before the Council before the permit is issued anyhow. Mr. Heskin asked if the special use permit would be granted when the plans are approved and Councilman Sheridan said yes, it would not make sense to grant a special use permit for something that may not go in there. There is a possibility that a£tex their deliberations, they may decide not to build there and the special use permit would be useless. MOTION by Councilman Breider to adopt Ordinance #452 on second reading, waive the reading and order Che publication withheld until the plans are approved and the special use permit granted. Seconded by Councilman Sheridan. Upon a roll call vote, Sheridan, Liebl, Harris and Breider voting aye, Mayor Harris Pro tem declared the motion carried. i CONSIDERATION OF SECOND READING OF Aiv O GENERALI,Y LOCATED �BETWEEiJ BENJAMIN AND AVENUE: RE UEST BY LORRAINE KUSCHKE: ION OF The City Engineer said that this item had the first reading with no objections, but now there is some concern by some of the property owners using this access. Mx. P.W. Cazlson, 1633 Gardena Avenue N.E., asked why this was turned back to the City. The City Enqineer explained that originally this was a 12.7' easement and she wanted to ge't a mortgage on her property to sell it, so she gave the City a deed for this property. Since then she has remarried and is living in the house, does not want to sell it, and would like to have the property back. Mr. Carlson said that he lives on the same street and did not know about this before a few days ago. There are two other persons using this easement besides Mrs. Kuschke. He wondered how she could deed this to the City without the other people being informed. The City Engineer said that she owned the property and that Mr. Carlson has an easement over it. He said that he would still have the right. Mr. Carlson asked if the City would maintain it, and Councilman Sheridan said that the City does nat maintain less than 40' street right o£ way with a driving surface. This is only 12.7'. Councilman Harris pointed out that Mr. Carlson would still have the same easement and his access would not be taken away. Councilman Sheridan said that this was a private easement until she dedicated it to the City. She owned the property. Mr• Carlson said that she had to drive across their property to qet to their house and could not see how she could own it. Councilman Sheridan said that the information the City had was that she was the owner and she had fee title. He suggested that as there is some question raised that perhaps it should be turned back to the legal depast- ment for further study. The City Engineer pointed out that Che City filed the deed, so she must have been the property owner. With the request to have the property turned back to her, the City Attorney advised that the City should go through the legal steps for a vacation. The City Engineer agreed that as there is some concern shown on the part of the other property owners, that this &hould be researched to assure these people that they will not be losing anything. • MOTION by Councilman Sheridan to table consideration of this ordinance fot the vacatioa request by Lorraine Kuschke, and refer to the legal department for further research. Seconded by Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vo�e. all voting aye, Mayor Hatr3S Y=o tem declated the moti9p carx}ed, . .��_-_ , Building Standards-Design Control MeetinA Minutea of May 21 1970 PaRe 2 � Hr. Housenga said [hat they are going ta remodel [he outside of their porcela3n building. They �,.ill be using 1/2 inch brick veneer panels on a Aail base composition backing oa three walis and the back wall will be painted. It will have a mansard roof made of aluminum shingles, It was also stated that the Building Inspection Department should check the condition of the aluminum shakes after a hail storm and make a report to the Board so they might be able to use the information on any future proposed aluminum shake surfaces. 3. • �_ • The Board felt that the addition of some shrubs and sod in Landscape areas between approaches and driveways should be made part of the permit. Also that a Light be installed in the rear of the building located so as not to interfere with residential area to the rear of the building for protection purposes. The milk depot and excessive number of signs must also be removed. MOTION by Tonco to recommend that a permit be granted subject to [he notations marked in red on the plans, Seconded by Hart. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. N',r. W. G. Housenga was present to present the request. Mr. Housenga stated that this building had a porcelain exterior which would be removed and the 1/2 inch brick veneer panels on a nail base composltion backing would be fastened onto the block subsurface. They caould paint the existing rear block wall. The Board stated that the condition of the landscaping around the building should be improved. MUTION by Hart to reco�end that a permit be granted subject [o the notatians marked in red on tNe plans. Seconded by Tonco unanimously. OF A t�:1ii:� Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried ST TO BY TWO CAR WASH'S ON LOT 1 300 AND 7320 UNIVERSITY A Mr. Ronald Heskin of Heskin & Associates Inc. was present to present [he request. Mr, Gnerre arrived at 9:00 P.M. Mr. Heskin stated that these were going ta be two individual operations, one a self service car wash and one an automaCic car wash. Because it was economically impossible to put brick on the ,elf service car wash, they wanted to use stucco oa Chat one. The automatic car wash would then be all brick. The roof was to be machine cut cedar. Tj�gy Wpuld also have a 3 foot cedar boerd fence 6 inches off the ground for screening. �� ;. BuildinR Standards-Design Control Meeting Minutes of May 21, 1970 Page-3- . It was then stated that the buildings did not conform to the zoning ordiaance which requires a 15 foot minimum setback for each building or a common wall between the two buildings which would meet the fire safety standards. Mr. Heskin agreed to make the following changes to comply with the ordinances. They would move the two buildings together so that they woula have a common wall. He would also change the roof elevatlons of the two buildfng so [hat they would be of equal elevation and reduce the width of the rock garden between the buildings from 10 feet to two feet or change to a two foot concrete walk. The Board asked Mr. Heskin if he couldn't put some brick on the self service car wash so that the two buildings would match better whea cambined. Mr. Heskia stated that because of economics it would be impossible to add any brick to the self service car wash. He also stated that the two car wash's would be operated by two different people so he crould like them to look like two separate buildings and still blend well together. Mr. Gnerre felt that the brick and stucco would look all right together because many houses have brick fronts and the rest of the house is stucco and they look all right. It was then decided that Mr. Heskin would brick Che south wall of the self service car wash and stucco the north wall of the automatic car wash. • MOTION by Gnerre to recommend approval for granting a building permit for the car wash's as discussed and according to the notations marked in red on the plan. 5 � Seconded by Hart unanimously. RECESS• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried Chairman Harris called a brief recess. Chairman Aarris turned the meeting over to Mr. Tonco to act as chairman. TO CONSTRUCT AN OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE ON ONAWAY ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7710 � 7 ESOTA. (REQUEST BY HARRIS ERECfION COMPA FRIDLEY 'Mr. Harris was present to present [he request. Mr. Harris stated that their building would be a scored block building with a brick face on the office part. The rest of the building would be painted. Mr. Harris said tha£ the curhing and landscaping would be installed as soon as the City s[reet project was completed. He also said that they would blacktop the 8 foot easement on the back of the property. MOTION by Gnerre to recommend approval for granting a building permit subject to the notations marked in red on the plaas.and as discussed. Seconded by Hart. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried uAaaimouslY. �i�t � .f � � REGULAR COUNCIL HEETING OF JUNE 1, 1970 - PAGE 5 2. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO REMODEL EXISTING STANDARD OZL SERVICE STATZON LOCATED ON IATS 16, 17, 18 AND 19, BLOCK 13, HAMILTON'S ADDITION TO MECFIANICSVII.LE ADDITION. THF SAME BEING 5311 UNIVERSITY � AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MIPINESOTA. (REQUEST BY STANDARD OIL 1405 MELROSE AVENUE, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA): The City Engineer explained that this is for general sprucinq up of the station. It is recommended that they Yemove the milk depot which is in the City right of way, fix the chuck holes in the driveway, remove the tires that they have been using for curbing and put in some curbinq, and remove their excess signs. Councilman Liebl said that he was glad to see that there wi12 be some housecleaning done, as it is badly needed. Mr. Richard Harris reported that at the meeting, Mr. Housenga of Standard Oil made the statement that he was glad to have these requixements spelled out and made a pazt of the building pesmit so they could use them as a lever on their leases. It seems that it is sometimes hazd to qet the lessee to agree to general maintenance and improvements unless they are specified on a pezmit. MOTION by Councilman Leibl to concur with the suilding•BOard and grant the permit subject to their stipulations and the above mentioned items. Seconded by Councilman Hreider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. 3. STATION IACATED O S AND 9, BLOCK 12 AVENUE N.E.. FRID TO REMODEL AN EXISTING STANDABD OII, SERVICE The City Engineer said that this is also fox cleaning up their station. He added that this station is better maintained than the previous one. He said that there was some landscaping needed. �- � MOTION by Councilman Liebl to qrant the building pezmit to Standard Oil �y ?a Company subject to the notations of the Buildinq Board. Seconded by Council- �6 �� man Breider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. �� 4. BLOCK 3, COMMERCE PARX ADDITION, TE� UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E_. FRIDLEY. 29ZN TWO CAR WASHES ON I.OT 1 The City Engineer said that these car washes are located in the southeast corner of C�erce Park. The Building Standards - Desiqn Control reconmended approval of the permit subject to some conditions. They plan on making the automatic caz wash brick and the self service stucco. Mr. Ron Heskin of Heskin and Associates Inc.� said that the automatic car wash has brick facinq all the way around. They felt that brick on the self aervice buildinq would be economically unfeacihle and came up with an alternate. It is to be a stucco building with red cedar stripping, both to have a mansard roof. 1 rG.� G� � I i i i l C\ J REGULAR CWNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 1, 1970 PA� � Councilman Sheridan said that he felt that it was hard to visualize two businesses cospeting against each other. He questioned allowing a deviation fran what was required of other builders in the area, although he admitted �, � ,..,� that this was an attractive layout. '�� The City Engineer felt that there should he some language included in the special use permit to guarantee c�aintenance. The City Attorney said that this could be written in. Councilman Breider pointed out that the license has to be renewed every year. MOTION by Councilman Breider to authorize publication of Ordinance N452. (Second Reading held May 9, 1970). Seconded by Councilman Liebl. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. MOTION by Councilman Breider to grant the special use pecmit on Lot 1, Block 3, Commerce Park Addition with the requizement o£ an additional traffic lane when the City requests it, subject to the stipulations of the Building Standards - Desiqn Control Subco�ittee, except the buildings be kept 5eparate as originally planned, and that the maintenance has to be satisfactory at all times. Seconded by Councilman Liebl. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. MOTION by Councilman Breider to qrant a building pexmit for two car washes requested by Steve Coddon as shown on the plot plan June 1, 1970. Seconded by Councilman Sheridan. Upon a voice vote, all voti.ng aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. Mr. Heskin told the Council Thank You for all their help, and time that was taken with him. 5. 10 & 7720 OF A REQUEST TO CONST&I7CT AN OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE Oiv 9� AND 10,.HLOCK 8, ONA4�Y.ADDITION, THE SAME BEING SN STREET 23.E. FRIDLEY MZN'�i]ESOTA.� (REQLJEST BY FiARRIS NY. 6210 RIVERVIEW TERRACE, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA): The City Engineer said that they have already built two buildings in this area and this is an expansion to the north. The Building Board recommended appzoval. This is much the same type of building as they built pxeviously. It is a block buildin9 with brick on the office portion. Mr. Richard Harris said that he assumed that the manhole is at grade, as this is what he will be determining the elevation of the building on. He added that his company plans on using this building, rather than leasing it out. The City Enqineer said that there might be a future need for additional parking space, however, this could be worked out. He added that this is the responsibility of the land owner. Mr. Richard Harris said that he was sure that th¢re was enough room. Mr. Harais said that they needed the culvert at Main Street as they store equipment across the creek. There is not enough rootn to store the cranes. The City Engineer said that all equipment must be stored within a privacy fence and {Kr. Harris indicated that he was aware of �his. MOTION by Councilman Bzeider to approve the permit, subject to the Building Standards - Design Control stipulations, and with the additional pazking to be p=ovided as needed in the future, as per City's request. Seconded by Councilman Sheridan. Upon a voice vote, all vebiq9 aye, Haypr Kirkham declared the motion carried. M � SPECIAL USE PERMIT City of Fridley, Minn. BUILDING PERMIT � Date: September 9, 1970 pqPAer; �._ StPyp l:nrlrinn pday'Egg _,2��,. (_iradd AvPniiE,_�S�lyYh 533� 9 : r= -- N° ' 1�822 . � ,,�a./� /�'t' 3 �o � �,�19 ��7 g.a " �J�1 y,-,��,�: g�p� FxPrn iv�j)P,�ig_n ConSUltan�g TIIG. J Address 2�06 Wes.t_5.4.th�^.tl.eer LOCATION OF BUILDING Na, 7300-20 gy�t Univexsit_�venue N.E. p� of Lot Lot —__1__—_ Block 3 Addition or SubDivi�on �oNi[�4�C����+�d_? �3on Coraer Lot _-- 7n�de Lot Sewer Elevati� Setback Sideyard — Fotmda4� Elevation � DESCRIPTION OF BUiLDING To be used as: Self-servid�6^'-=0Q" 28'0" 15�-0" 2�072 22�770 2 CaLS�lashF'r' � FfOIIt �'beP� 32 �_ ��� Height 1��" Sq. FY. 2. 270 ��, 31� 780 FYont —� Depth Heig4t Sq. Fk �LS�. E�'t. Type of Construction AlasonrY ��, �_ 52 000.00 _ To be Completed _S_�t. 1971 Stipulations: 1. Install the additional lane on the South side of property along •with curb and gutter and dedicate this pxoperty to the City. 2. Maintsnance of the building and landscaping and parking area and outside development be kept neat and clean at all times. 3. The Special Use Permit is only good for the operation of 1 self service car wash and one automatic a car wash along with the service pumps. no other business will be operated without explicate approval of the Council. 4. Both �axmi8a car washes are on one permit and on 1 parcel of land and if at any ti.me ownership changes on either of the car washes a lot split will have to be apprwad by the Conncil. In consideration of the issuance to me of a permit to cronstruct the building described abave, I agree to do the pmposed work in accordance with the description above set forth and in compLance with all provisions of oidimnces of the city oY Fridley. ����,� .�Oti��' ��.r—.� ;�.� 208.00 Sewer Connection_ Charee !f�«-..t f`�.-` u��. 7n camsideraUon of the payment of a fee of $__21QII0.—. permit is hereby gianted W �ecutive Des ign ConsulYants._Snr-. to constxuct the building or addition as described above. This permit is granted upon � the express conditioa that the person to whom it is �anted and his agents, employees and workmen, in all work done in, around and upon said bullding, or any part thereof, shall mnform in all respecta W the ordinances oE Frtdley, Minnesota rngarding location, construction, alteratioa, maintenance, repair and moving of buildiags tvithin the dty limits aad this permit may be revoked at aay Ume upon violation of aqy of the provtsiona of said ordinenCee. -- • BulldinB Inspectrn' NOTICE Thb V�naM doa �M eewr th� uenroeNe�. InmlYNon fer W4ie0. P�ba. Yr M�Ney, swp a w�Nr. M wn b w 1M WlldieB Inp�der fer s�yw�n P�� (or IMw hrnr. � � . �i ) � ,/ 1 � �� � C� Caty of Fridley, Minn. BUILDING PERMIT ��: November 24, 1970 S' `�/� N. 109G2 . ;� , _. p�r; ___Damaron� Inco�orated g��. Executive Design Consult., Inc. Add1'Ces --�+���3 M7'.nne}+aha A��pn�iP Sp�itl_ AddICSB 'L%�6 We.S.�.�9�1'L�Si@�� LOCATION OF BUILDING Na �300 gp�t University Avenue N.E. � p� of Lot Lot —7�.�__ Block �__.._�� Addition or Sub-Division . Cot�¢nexce Paxk Addition Corner Lot __ X Insde Lot Setback �_.�.—_ Sideyard Sewer E7evatioa Famdation IIevation DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING To ue u�a es: Affir-e �t _,�_ j�epffi 6� Height $� Sq. FL Ca. L't � Front Depth Height Sq. F't. C�1. b't. 7ype of Construction —PPs�n�.._ F�k Cost 800.00 To be Completed _ Jan 1, 1971 \ Ia consideration of the issuence to me of a permit to construct the building described above, I agree to do the proposed work in accordance with ihe description above set f and in compliance with all provisions of ordinances oP the city of FYidley. p�/ J.Gt ! /.� �— In comaideiation of the payment of a fee of y��� permit is hereby granted '[o �ec. Design Consult. to construct the building or addition as described above. This permit is granted upon the express condition that the person to whom it is granted and his agents, employees and workmen, in all work done fn, around and upon said building, or any part thereof, shall cronform in all respecta W the ordinsnces of Fridley, Minnesota mgarding ]ocation, constnution, alteratioo, msuntenance, repeir and moving of buildings within the city limits and this permit may be revoked at aqy Wne upon violation of aqy of ihe prov�ons of said oxdinnnCes. �_ Buildins InsPector - AL D. BAGS NOTIGE: Thi� p�m�h dep naf wwr 1M sonM�nim. 8nn1611e� fee vrlriny, pluaWey, �a M�tleea. wK x rNV. B� wn a w tM Buiidlny M,pMer Ior wpu�h p�rmih /er 1�u� NNm. � � - � � � � PUDLIC HEARING BEfORE TNE PLANNING CQMMISSION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: �. _ 2� Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley will meet in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue N.E, o� Wednesday, April 20, 1977 at 7:30�P.M. tv consider the following matter: A request for a Special Use Permit, SP �77-02, by Canadian Financial Corporation, to construct hausing for the elderly and automobile parking lots for off- street parking in an R-1 Zoning Oistrict (single family dwelling areas) per Fridley City Code, Section 205.051, (3), E and F, on Lots 1 through 7, and the Northerly 215 feet of Lot 24, Block 1, Alice Wall Addition, all lying in the South Haif of Section 14, T-30, R-24, City of Fri'dley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Generally located on all the property East of the Fridley Branch of the Anoka County Library at 410 Mississippi Street N.E., bounded by Mississippi Street and 7th Street N.E. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this meeting. Publish: April 7, 1977 April 14, 1977 RICHARD H CHAI RhiAN PLANNING HARRIS COMMISSION CI'fY OP 1'RIDI..IiY MINNHSUTA • _ JO PLANNING AND ZONING FOR6f NUMDER {� %D� Y E �:RE•Qj1ES� • � /�� , . i( a..t.�..i APPIICANT'S SIGNATURC (���.�i�t� �Gy�,����1�3�Y' Rezoning ✓ • � Adciress �U d%�L.�l�.tia,litia � r.c�� �� _,�— Special Use Permit 7�pcD X�.Lj..� �-�-� -, � S ��3 / Telephone Number _ F a.� �3 73 Approval of Premin- ,, �% " i inary � Final Plat G� ,� �/ �� ' ; �s� PROYERTY OA'NER�S SIGNAT11RLt ��p.,,-;��'!/�j Streets or Alley ', - Vacations Address /% ,•� SG� .�/���.-,�.. /�,/� �`� . � �. f� � �y.�/�'� Other Telephone Number' �.�5 �/� a a-� U"/J � � ree �'z d Receipt No. Street Location of Property��_, ,,> �%Zrn Qi -- �3 1 a' aw 7t,� AJ 7lf/ - - - ' • y Legal Description of Property�,y� / — Present Zoning Classification r�l �' � 3 F�cisting Use of Property �%,c��,.,.-� • Acreage of Property or type of use and Descrihe briefly the proposed zoning classification proposed _ .s�, z�$. i� /_ Has tlie present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part.of it?_ ( yes no. iYhat was requested and when? ��(��.�.,,i-`d �7�✓ .�,Z The undersigned understands that: �(a) a list of all residents and owners of property within 300 feet (350 feet for rezoning} must be attached to this application. (b) This application must be signed by alI o�.ners of the property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. (c) Responsihility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list �he names and addresses of all residents and property owners of property in question, belongs to the undersigned. A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drawn and attached, showing the following: 1. T3orth Direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on the lot. 3. Uimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks. 4. Street Names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 300 feet). The undersigned hereby declares that all the" Facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. DATE SIGNATURE (APPLICAN'f) . Dato Filed Date of }lcaring Planning Commission Approved City Council Approved (dates) Dcnied (dates) Denied � � � SP # 77-02 Canadian Financial Wall Property MAILING LIST Corporation Richard S. Kahn Canadian Financial Gorporation 2030 Northwestern Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis, Mn 55431 The Wall Corporation 820� Normandale Btvd. Minneapolis, Mn 55437 Anoka County Library Attn: Jerry Young 707 Highway 10 Minneapolis, Mn 55434 Planning Commission 4-7-77 4 �B City Council Mr. & Mrs. Joel Baggenstoss 503 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. James Long 495 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mr,s, John Wollery 465 Massissippi Street N.E. Board of Directors Fridley,Mn 55432 Mike 0'Bannon-'. 5298 Fillmore Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Chuck Hungerford General 7elevision 350 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. �erry Dziuk 548 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Tapsak 510 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Manly 520 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Henry Rosbottom 531 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Wallace Erlandson 521 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Roger Freitag 509 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Boriss A. Zile A31 Mississiopi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Paul Schwartz 421 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Bennett Sorum 411 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ranko Schuur 401 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gearge Meissner 373 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Clifford Nelson 365 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Otto Marsolek 355 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Roy Olson 501 Bennett Drive N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Roman Chock 513 Bennett Drive n.E. Fridley 55432 Mailing List Page 2 Mr. & Mrs. Arvit Mil7er � 525 Bennett Drive N.E. Fridley� Mn 55432' SP #77-02 Mr. & Mrs. 5tanley Stefans 537 Bennett Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Chester Rejman 549 Bennett Drive n.E. Fridley 55432 Agnes Gallagher 500 Mississippi St. N.E. Fridley 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Elmer Hanis 506 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Karen L. Zimpfer 6431 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Leonard Kroska 525 63rd Avenue N.E. � fridley, Mn_55432 �.!_ i Mr. & Mrs. Archie Huss 501 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Steven Takle 6311 7th Street n.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. James McGregor 6321 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Diane L. Dean 6331 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ekstrand 6341 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Walter Peterson . 6351 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 �:'_ � 3� Bonita I. Burrow 6371 7th Street N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Allen Kragness 6371 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Frank Shelton 500 Bennett Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Robley Stuart 536 63rd AVenue n.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Merlyn Arenson 524 63rd Avenue NE Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Kent Waterman 512 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Wane Sanunders 500 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Douglas Juenemann 6280 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Herbert Hyrt�es 623Q 7th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Reginald Cobb 6281 6th Street N.E Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Leslie Coyle 6271 6th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 - Mr. & Mrs. Ralph Sommer 6101 6th Street N.E. Fridaey, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Day 6270 6th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Albert Climek 6271 5th Street N.E. Fridley 55432 Mailing List Page 3, SP #77-02 ._ 3� Mr. & Mrs. William Sims � 6281 5th Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 W. Gustave Doty 6441 University AVenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Sidney Messner b262 5th Street N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. James Mensinger 378 64th Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Arthur Smith 362 64th Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 � �J � �r �l ��� , � , � INorth }inc oi $W IjU � ��„� `� �"'� f-jo} Sec. 14. 1Np. ; ; I 130, kgc. .24 J t; �. �A, ,.,.,�� ��o� � _ "' EAST ��.��a.��i � � „_- ^- 21GO " °A1ISSISSIPF�- e � r� ,� " �,���� ,,,� ; �, '2 FAST 30 iO �47.51 I- � n � = l,' ;���`\I�'� I - �'� v 34 ^' r` � - � �6 v, ��rr_`i -- = i } sr�EET , � , .,,,, �,,, . , $ . , :,�,,-„ r„ , W �,� �1 6000 UJ00 79Lo5 �_ .��.• ; . 3 1 I.-g A: f9°IS'DO' -- u ; W + H�2000 Q •0 3 0 ; � �'31.IS °3(,� � 0 0 � o� 2 o-n 3 00 0 4 a,,. 0 0: a o o° 'D °s, c l(') a o�n wli aci ; � � N�O O O N I�O �% ', lCi i IG oi i EAST..•-.'__ � O O b A ��� I ;� 30, �/ . � `,; r + 0 � - �,? UJ �-'- �I � I- V/ 2 N r� t 5_4: p - lgC.00---�' 8000'--I-'� Q �. .239 3� EAS' � �O �� O ./ . �� Urainagz d Uti'.ity Easemer! - �- 0 0 ��(� C t✓ N i � 0 I1C_]6 aCPST �.�. b V \ V ,� c N � > -1 � -+ �. ., M � w�a N o P8 �! O 0 O F Yf : N � q O ~ � * r• P •J � • ° 0 V W O r r � � Z NN nd z��o..� izesn � E45T � 7 ^ � - - - - - - , azn.=s: _ _ • . '� " E/�ST Z�Y.00 ` £R�°59•e3°E------ — -lEAST P���.'��. . O � � - - ; � �„ a - ieo.00 i - - `•. / �, �� � I m I Bo , / � �f N'9°59 i f/ �� � - _�zo.o_ A / i 1D��.- Drxinzce d�Utili , / m _ : i �� --_.� �� n�e / �35C'��OtS o � �' , _ � � � � 8 . � , , � `� 1 --"e°—°'° '.I __ � `rsecn --- . i`�zo.ci � k6>°i9'33"M' � � � T. � w + � w : in � M ��(� O Q •VI $ Q O a J � � P O w i / � ~ � � 3�i _� 0 � I �r"4� W o � I ° W o � � °�« ° ° I1! C' C m . � � � ��e N69°_5��}"g i i j "—. 11JG1 ... � � W ' /•4, j o :�, � � ° V �oti ; . �p�, �� m P° ° b � h � � �5 � _�k89°59�33"x' W 2 4 :�' --� -�zoo; - _ °� b'3 � � ' �;a ^ � ' 12 � ,� N 2 lt �� ' � l I N � �>e ° . _ __ 'JB)°S9'33 _K �'� � �zcoi� r, o i �ja w � ; �• g. - -� :: :; I j � ., e !." '.� „ � �1 �' � " � c� a e �NR9°59��3"W '� � � n � - —� -�zo oi---'— : _ �f..,�o -�° , ' 14 `�' SRb°59�SJ'�1 I � i ��. s �� OO N .q� n _, Drarnac,c d Ulility . E�ucmeni: . r 1 � I I Ntl9°S•l'33��'N --. -- izo oi - '- — ^�O `, ' N I J� � �- � 15 • . � 1` � C�r . \�✓ \/ i , \�\� \.�•i .: C; \T � i 1=43'J> q= fiG.iL �-- . _ So�.2��.�� i � _ a 3 ��� C.tlRG ' �'°` �- ' iI �J1, 5 l�� L --._ . r Cv n�•-- � �'���r�v�., � C � -' ; lsl � 3 c �� N ' �� r � 0 _ - ' � �) 1 1 + �. V • ; ; -_ j i � t�1 I �•J II- V �!J 'MIN � I I� i� � i�' � ! . PUE3LIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNI�dG C01�t4ISSI0N TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: 1 � l '" Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on 4lednesday, April 20, 1977 at 7>30 P.M. to consider the following matter: a�c� A request for a Special Use Permit, SP �77-03, by Barry C. Brottlund, to permit the construction of tw� duplexes and/or double bungalows, in an R-1 zoning district (single family d�aelling areas). per Fridley City Code, Section 205.051, 3, D, to be located on part of Lot 11, except the South - 240 feet, Auditor's Subdivision No. 23, together with the West half of vacated Grand Avenue as dedicated in the Plat of Fridley Park, the same being 6431-33 East River Road M.E. and 6435-37 East River Road N.E.,.all lying in the 5outh Half of Section 15, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. � 6enerally located at 64th and East River Road. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this meeting. PUBLISH: April 7, 1977 April 14, 1977 � RICHARD H. HARRIS CHAI RhiAN PLAIQNING CQMMISSION � O NUt•t13ER 7 7 ^ '3 CTTY Or PRIDL�Y MINNGSUTA • PLhNNING AND ZONING C•Ofthf �� ��APPLTCANT'S S7GNATURE��-�,�.� f��zs Address �240 Colorado Road No. Telephone Number 566-7848/781-7484 PROPERTY OS4NHP.�S SIG�ATURE Address 6434 Riverview 7'elephone Number 560-4560 �,q , 33 6y'�'s7 Street Location o£ Property 6431 E. River Road_ Legal Description of Property See attac hed j f , 35 � TYPE OF RGQUGST Rezoning �_ Spccial Use Pcrmit Approval of Premin- inary F, Final Plat Streets or Alley Vacations Other Fee/ZD� Receipt No. �h'!/�- Present 2oning Classification _ Ri Existing Use of Property vacant Acreage of Property 36b Describe briefly the proposed zoning classification or.type of use and improvement proposed -- duplexes (double occupancy) special use permit to allow 2 •Has the present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes X no. h'hat xas requested and talien? The undersigned understands that: (a) a list of all residents and oiuners of property within 300 feet (350 feet for rezoning) must be attached to this application. (b) This application must Ue signed by all owners of the property, or an eaplanation given why this is not tl�e case. (c) �esponsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list the names and addresses of all residents and property o�cners of property in question, belongs to tl�c undersigned. , A sketch of proposed property and structure must be dra���i and attached, shoiaing the follotving: l. North Direction. 2. Location of proposcd structure on the lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front �nd side setbacks. 4. Street I�ames. 5. Location and use of aJjacent existing buildings (�aithin 300 feet)• The undersigncd hereby declares that all the facts and represent�tions stated in this 8pplication are true and correct. .-� ; �QATE March 30, 1977 SIGNAT'URE Datc Filed ��/- 7% Datc of Planning Commission Approvcd (dates) AenieJ --�� ��� _` \ l: _�c� � .� \ I�,\Y1') ,? � �C� /- . � %7(F . _ /971,� City Council Approved � (dates) Denicd � �� v- C� �p�l • N� • MAILING LIST SP #77-03 Barry C. Brott}und 64th & East River Road Barry C. Brottlund 7240 Colorado Road North Minneapolis, Minnesota 55429 Leif Nenricksen 6434 Riverview Terrace Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Oliver Lee 6434 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Planning Commission 4-7_77 Clyde Ford 6410 East River Road Fridley „Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Kimbler N.E. 80 Mississippi Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Edward Sakry 121 54 1/2 Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Walter Luckow 161 54 1/2 Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Larry Gilmer 141 64 1/2 Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Murco Stations, Inc. 200 Jefferson Street E1 Dorado, Ar 71730 —Mr:--& Mrs. Elmer Johnson 649d Rivervtew Terrace n.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Zera, Inc. 6500 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Harold Beckman 6430 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Raymond 6420 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Leora Smeider 6414 East River Road Fridley,! Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Sibe11 6408 East River Road n.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Leo Carda 6443 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Warren Palm 6421 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Kenneth Gillette 6409 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 William A. Duvall 740 River Drive St. Paul, Mn 55116 Mr. & Mrs. Eugene Emerson 99 64th Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Hughes 6424 shton Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gilbert Felt Route 2, Box 727 Wyoming, Mn 55092 Mr. & Mrs. leRoy Erlandson 60 Mississippi Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Donald Wescom 1 U Mississippi Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Arthur T. Veit 7900 North Lakeland Minneapolis, Mn 55445 �i " �'cav r•tint F7��Fo •I-�er Real Estate� IIiC. Nonheast Office Wayzata � • Mlnnetonka • Etlina . �J ; _ %'�e 3901 Silver Lake ROaO • Sl. Anthony. Minnesota • 55421 • 812�781-7484 Northeast • Downtown MinneaD011s • WestBloominp�on PRESENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY That patt of Lot 11, except the south 240.00 feet of said Lot 11, Auditors Subdivision No. 23, together with the west half of vacated Grand Avenue, as dedicated in the plat of Fridley Park; a-1 according to the plats thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Anoka County, Minnesota. � �.��' � � �E� � � FR/D� EY >-� �� rRRet „p. R•�•�'� DD� 2 �i e� p { ��� � /ra��1-r' �ze.. ��1 .^�^. J'�' `s •o'�Ql� �a � ' +R"�i ' •, 1;; e�'� R �. 3 -. 3�`a 7;7f; . '� � a7.6f � "� A1 1= •gi+ . ��u'' P ��.. ) i _ S�` �, �liJ `�!�Oo y�1S_ oq - �' �1 :;1 /�� z ..:s �j :r�µ�� A � � � s.,s'� 1'a� c�N �\\P � A''��',- f� 1!� ' Pl �- C. ,�p v , M�SSt5S1P ...p.H `3� y ,i� _\��'zltit `� NeFe : Oi.rnrwi�on e� Sw.�/� /.w� e� /ef35.%,r)i.�.r�i7i% 8.210RSe'lro�O.f ss'�K � �'�� . s-. 1»r y� _ I . 3 . �a _ 39 �=r----- -- --. Y'°=�. MlSSISSfPPI-- . ,� � / JJ i!J o / J �� i� 3 °y � l'�' : � : „ � :t� z e � ' S° i ` � ` y3 _— . n s Z : s = `�' , n ' Q :�g�� — �,�. r. . > b �v--- • T� i �' jr i f ' i � ier=� °���V � .L.r= .'�� ��J 9� ., � t�,�, n ' �I • .iJ 8 rl �� " � 1 •'O' :✓d /%% ! �4'7vZ _ � .• _ �`'_ �Y//� : �� � .l- . �,r . . o� f�l' c--�-:�'%— .\, l ,� � zi f 9 ,4<. % .ai .h �Ow' - .�� .. n�- • w'. � 'I.' `T _.__' � tYi` ' . � �tl� _.�".�' .zf!'- . �� �D - Zr �O y ,G ,�� � -- - -, . � ,ba a �'�' n x�1 � •,� ,' -• � � _ Z : - � a : o i ao �� 1 �� � _ �,� _-�==:. a'� o � -- ; , �_ , . • l`^a� �G' /'/� b ,c� t4;�o /(��s _ . y , � .� �z . �� �i4y,�a.. / ' ii �f S) W � V�� ��(i� � 1� w0 „ �� � � . w:,�e> i;.: � �.J?-;,.�' ^ ��27v V M : ` s �'i � /3 � .:y°, ► , r�� }° ., i5 �y�G> . _ - �,-� . ,._ .:o,�: ,.. .__ ; ,,:sr�cY�:'�� ///�• ..: RS `;; 1�90° "° _==�,:1 _ ;� �f kb Z• �s � � •�'�' e..i°i ( w� �O � �✓iiM"��/�' •,c. � � '�' A : /S _ • 1 (� r� ✓ at ,c � � � \ 1 ° 4� —'p l/ 1'��iD, r �`�Q�E �� L� ��94 � �a� , � � ,• , . - �� y /�.' �_ i t����p y;� Q " _ y 4 .e "-]6a�y °��:,� .'T_�A/] �� i`��39i0) \ � 4;TH .-WAY '� ' ; i . � w �.��� �`��,�}'1 °`��/$qO 'i� m /�E'qs�/ . �� � .�>� pTa - i - � - ±- � , - ,aa � � } . i � iSP � ' � ��a�y�� �tS�Q�•a,�:y� ��b,��� / `�ss' } _� /�// /o�;d �7 �L �S i4 �3 :Z� / � f o) �`' � °E � r�" ' �aa ;�t� � -�, - . �,;�! r� z � , -� � _ � _ , I _ , � � , �s 3i � ���a=I��,N� T 13� ,Z������� � d� -� , :,. . �,_ - � �go� ,,1;-s � i� �. ! a 1Q'�w 6 "l y K '±' a> 1,w �s 1 .o - . _ 1 _ .o . I �` ' -� ^ 1�1;-��� � s3 \�}��![{ y; " �,w-:'.7 l` � 1fioJB l9..20�2/ZZ ' ZS d�27 � .-"'b�5� � �b"�r�� % -: � , �` _wk�r—� , �i;o � ,,� ;��� 7 L � 39 t9 �� ' � . � L " . � . . �° .A c f re . . . :S Y.., ��--6�fit�`. '^I";: o.. �38�1����3y=�,�Zz ;� �. '�� ia`-63 V2 WAY � �'� ,.,� x'- � C P," 2 _ k � ` .� tt 2�� � tqN'�1�/� , i� ' � a � �,, „ � _ . _ �, ,�: , .�. _`.� b�V���� n.:_' s�y •J:' �.J> � '�O� � D �oi� � �0 4 I• T �,tit[e_� + a` ��' � >t�'��m` '�f,.. — /:(O 9'8 �6 S 4 3 ��.. � I b p s +- �. ��: '�+� 7: �t _� Q.• � �� �. � � !�3 :. �, m'� d . � °����"'/5:1��6� 17�i (3' _. � ' � _' � ' � �( ,1 n ' rt � /o �� �l�l° ��� ly) Rl���� �, i �f� � i , � � � al � '" ,. �`��., �S, � .a� . � �. -: � 2 +� .,� '/ : !� � � , 1'��, A o .. ru _,� �i' yZ�74�/s;/ 7'/d��:/9 2��tl.Z a� a� �--- s 3-- — wk'f —�- — t�tE:-- h. �� . � . - �-,; � ��,_ I__.� ' ,�33 �.,1-�.- l-' . ,.. �. -, . ,s , - -> `_�a,--.�-- - --- -,:._._ �_ t..a ..,- -'. -....-1::::'. _'' ,— -- --- ---- � _ �' ,f a� ,� C�,�.� ! � , i 177 �1.,UaN i1 � %�-� !J _ ,.., �i�'..� ..'.U-��'� ' - a� �`�?�"x�.' ��,�°«/r,�.�. �d2L G-ri- L<- �: o�L 0�' �t$� , �.�GFu-�Zc�t / F .� ������ G �� - � s ��� �-L:.�.., ,�'� .v-� y�r �.s =.�� y ���� :�� . ��-.�. ��ti ..�� a��`� CL-�u�/o'z- � C�„o-ra,E� � • c*-�,' �-%�� ,�?��,� , �"� ; i/ //•.� c�2c'. c��' `4Lc� CL�Q r����..eGil:�i��.�3 Lt'tz�2,�..{�.Q • r,,:' � �% �- J � - � , -4- dv� ' pw %�+�fs� �a,j r��,-EGCy CIi4 �' wJ� u-�2et�i /J��'��-�% �'r�� c'-�.. - ��,� ��.,/v�`.. G� �`S aa� �-d= u,� : �- C- .Z'��o✓ a-�t.�L �'� . � �c�-�= ..r'iKC--ic- `� �• -�n'�fi, ����"�^..-�..;�%;" - . ,�1 � / .t�r�r{ rc�f �' E`x�:� �rnc�[{ �lL�yc�.�.��cc�t'�6`�c� // G: �. ��Ll.��G-� � .C�ti�-u,=C-L�.Z�� .2�^..�.c.� �,��i-r.�/t-' �� _ l��<-- `�. ,�. �u,.,�w .-ewc� �� ,a�.�� Ci y'sJi �.� �!��e a.z.� G,.i��'C��; �CvxclT..i�u .-�`s�cz.- F�x�C�...,�,......� �Lc�./ . U � ��� �/ eti�l-�, .�.�J �. _ __ . _ • %��z ���,.,,�.� _ � -� � �-� orm ���, L�l 5k'L1 I Hr�� i�.n� ►uiv . � 41� CITY OF FRIDLEY +� �. �KR� m 5 � � m ��� N +' � d •� � R 3 0 o .c j� i� N N f� � O ���� w o � v o ,1 m •�+ {v.�� � m � m d o 0 x R� � m m O H •r� � �'wm� • APPLICANT: TELEYHONE � ..�•�+ � BARRY C. BROTTLUND 7240 Colorado Rd. No. Zip i 6434 Riverview Terrace, Fridley, MN 5 Zip Applicant's I�ame �,.� Lot Split # 77-D��r Date Filed: � �/- 7) Fee:S�n`�Receipt �{�; Council Action:L`ate RII4ARKS: Street City Zip Code TELEPAONE #(S� 560-4560 same Aome Business Property Location on Street or Exact Street Addresa (IF ANY) 6431 East River Road Legal Description of Property: See attached Reason for Lot Split: Want to build two familv dwelling�{do��a� a� h yP .. building sites. Area of . it. ( Present Zoning Clas� The undersigned hereby declases that all the £acts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. DATE• � �i � �1 $ELOW FOR CITY IISF OTdI,Y (See reverse side for additional instructione CHECREll BY STAFF DATE HemarY.s : . , . PLANNING CCMMISSION: Date of Consideration - 8emarks• CITY COUNCZL: Date of Considexation - Remarks: � � • I� � t'�ICr Flint Ftedridc �o Real Estate, Inc. Na,t�aaa, o,,;�e Weysele • Minnetonka • Etllne 7" 3901 S�IVer LekB NOatl . SL AM�Orty. MinOesote . 55421 • 812/781-718< Northeaet • Downtown Minneapolis • Weel Bloominpton PRESENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUB.iECT PROPERTY That part of Lot 11, except the south 240.00 feet of sa3d Lot 11, Auditors Subdivision No. 23, together with the wesC half of vacated Grand Avenue, as dedicated in the plat of Fridley Park; a-1 according to the plats thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Anoka County, Minnesota. � . 4S '�'� MINfVESOTA VALLEY SURVEYO►-'ZS C,t ENGINCERS CG�P. 12005 72Tii AVEf�UE SOUTH BURNSViLLE, 1.11i�N@SOiA 5�337 Phonc: fi90-7750 P;arch 23, 1977 PARCSL B Yhat part of Lot 11, escep:. �. e sou:.h �40.00 `e�t o;. said �ot 11, �udi�ors Ji:�(11Jiu^iCII ::0. -'J� ..:;oP..`.:.3� ::i,`.1 ..:3 :.....� �:1i� Oi 'v :C�i.C:� L'-7.�^C�i = :.....:.3� 2S C'.8u1C3.`..^-.il iII i.18 y'J�3= O'? 1"L'i:i'_�y �.:YiC� .1� �. �.^.CO=.�_�o i.0 i:i..^. yJ�1iS �:-�=.°..:i_ L:1 =ile �:3 of :e.,.._1 i3 ..aa o�=....., o� �.:s C�� �;� '�co_:l�r, �:..::a Cc... �;�, ----:��:.::a . ��JCwil�iv� 4J -O?,�.�J� v.'._"'�_:"� ui ��3 ...._.`.::Q..^..:a� .... _:3T O_° ...._:1 �—^.... '1't'p ��:....�P . ..........::...._.,_?i° `�-'?'�'�-j ��:3 ..:._�'::....."''_ �''3 O.�'. ..__� 7.0: �� .^.. __....`."".. �_ '�iJ,�� __�.. �� _'^_ _.,_"' _ —o C=.,,.0 �1 J ., ._ .._j �_^3 0= '-^_J,. 1=..... __'.j ,._��C3 DCi�r,. ..a,v...._.'.j .._.."� ✓�_;i .... _1� __Yjl __„ _'0=°..3?j 1_nn� 1 Q_.,__'_iC^ Ci iJrG:� iCC_ LJ �.3 ..:.. .� �h� ^a_cel *_o �^_ .._.___��1; __,��_ c��s�------^� �c�_:_c^��c-:?y alr..� c�':-1 --_�::- @30LC?�}� P��ilC�Oi—..�j S2F.0� .�.. C�_IIt.^.n?CC Of 92.�% r'C�L� C!:C-^-CC ...._�...,^Oi..^..-iYs deilcr�in� to r'�� en`_:, 35 dc�r�os, 1� ...�^+�tc�, ?0 �c�c�ds, a uic_._:�� .._ �3.C� fe�t to the z�est l;r.e of said v�cated Grr_ad Avcnue; tt2ence eastcrZy at ri�ht er.�?as to �aid c:est line, a d� tance of 27.70 fect to the casC li^� of �:i� r.�at hslf of vacated �*^^3 Avenu�; th�r.ce r.or�he_ly a2eng caid e��t Lz��-o, a d'_�L'��;^a of 102.12 fc^_t to the ietersection ��it3i n l�ine draen northirester.lv frc-� ��d • pnra11c1 vith t:�e nor*_h line of �aid I,�;t I1 fro� the poznt of bc�ienin�; th^�ce southc--±stcrlq alcn� the last dcscribed lir.e, a 2?.stc�ce ef Z�r9,6n fc^^t to tiie �•�ii;t n� h...,t-.'1.n;. �('C:St�_?1'.^� �.".�i3 �C^i_^•� ���-�������� a� S�ag�re�, � I� T v ,% �� � 00 �4 P 0 h ` ! 1,S,F N� 64a� . �G�S•� 8qo � � �59�� ! "�, �; � o �> � � �, G., G� �... Q `� `\ ��i �� � _N, ��. c �.. o a � <o �, x z? '�' A�� \�� e L � a % �� 2 �. J � �.\ a \\ o- • ��,i �� r : FOX- HERFURTH Rf , 1 �qRCE►- A a�R�s J �c a = . 28 �o � i � � CY�Si �- R ,.'S9-i �� iC'._ :�Northeast corner of Lo! 11 I� a � C D � I U ! O _� u D o�> JI �i O 0� d; � c� N N oi3 �pRA�E ` �, --c B _; �A;� �� � � � � AREA = .283 , ,, ���� � J \ T �; ^ f ; ; � 'Yso, � °:�., `, .. , T'. \; \ \ � Q � 0 � W a �U > 2746 � � a � 0 � C N ,� O O v a �: — O LLi N 3 � Ih r� � �.��.---��� �B �3 � �aaaae. � �-. � � � 0 � � ;� I E• i E i� D : > f � I v I° � i p � � C 0 ,W r ?�,o� � `PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Comnission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, Apri1 20,1977 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Proposed Plat, P-5. #77-02, a Replat of )4arxen Terrace, by Thanas E. Marxen, the purpose being to have the plat meet the new street pattern for the area, located in the North Half of Section 12, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka Minnesota. Generally located South of Onondaga Street and North of 73rd Avenue N.E, in the 1600 Block. • Myone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at this meeting. Publish: March 30, 1977 k1pr9'1 Z, 1977 n U RICHARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION �r CI77 Or TIZIpLEY h1INNG5U'fA • �`�"'QY P1.hNNING AND ZONING POIth1 NUPIBGR J , APPLICAN7''S SIGNAIUR� ,�-,.,y�a, ���T,c,.� Address / 49 � R ,.i Q1 at� e� T.�, A.✓o,�/•0. Telephone Numbcr 7 �� Z�; 7? - PROPERTY OA'NGR'S SIGNATUR� �✓� � �� � . 4� TYPG 0� REQUGST Rezoning Special Use Permit � Approval of Premin- inary F� Pinal Plat �e Streets or Alley Yacations Address /�it 5 S !I '� �.���r P s�e _9.✓i,t'r! • . Other Telephone Number },- z Z S 9 z � v Fee x Receipt No. ���G Street Location of Property qO.pa '� Legal Description of Property ,�f�y,pXE'n/ �rP,PAC'C � �a<c`/ K/�iXn� .' Present Zoning Classi£ication /Q- / Existing Use of Property - Acreage of. Property �/o 000� �°�� Describe briefly the proposed zoning classificatior • or ,type of use and improvement proposed /lp /�LAT �0/1 3 L DTS " �— —.w /� iY_ n �.. �s f�l... �T L.i 'i�' f� w% w� AT. L�Y l i 1 ia. i � -- /ji91�T oF ulA�( To i�e ERS T%e��c/r7`./ �oAR�F,P. ' � • Has the present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or � variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? }( yes ' no. � What was requested and iahen? AT �o ✓AL - N �E� . . � ,� 970 The undersigned understands that: (a) a list of all residents and owners of property within 300 feet (3S0 feet for rezoning) must be attaclied to this application. (b) This application must be signed by all owners of thc property, or an erplanation given why tliis is not tlie case. (c) Responsi6ility for any defect in the proceedings resulting irom the failure to list the n�mes and addresses of all residents and property o�.mers of property in question, belongs to tl�c imdersigned. . A sketch of proposed property and structure must be dra���Y and attached, showing the following: 1. North Direction. 2. Location o£ proposed structure on the lot. 3. Dimcnsions of property, proposcd stri�cturc, and front and sidc setbacks. .' 4. Street Names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing 6uildings (�+ithin 300 feet The unc]ersigned�hereb�• cleclares that all the facts and representations stated in tliis opplicatia� are true and correct. . DATE ��� /Sl //�%7 SIGNATUP.G PPL,ICA�T) Datc Filed Datc of Ilcaring Piunning Connnission Approved City Council Approvcd (dltcs) Ucnied (dates) Dcnicd — - - - � � � AfAILING LIST P.S. #77-02 Thomas E. Marxen Replat of Marxen Terrace KBIN INVES'R�tENf OOMPANY 1619-73rd Avenue NE Fridley, AMI 55432 Vincent E Jr. $ Sheila R. Tappe 1600 Onondaga NE Fridley, &H�I 55432 G�y Soren $ Cheryl M. Halvorson 1618 Onondaga Fridley, ;'A1 55432 David J. $ Linda R. Tyree 1641-73rd Avenue AIE Fridley, i�AI 55432 Virgil D. Ishang F Joan Ishang 1473-75th Avenue NE Fridley, NHV 55432 Kenneth L. Fritz 1655-73rd A�enue NE Fridley, I�HV 55432 I�vid L. $ Evelyn A. 1660 Onondaga NE F`ridley, D1N 55432 Duane R. �, Sandra L. 7376 Stinson Blvd. Fridley, MN 55432 Planning Coimnission Idarch 31st, 1977 Council ,: James K. $ Alice M. 'Itxrner 1685-73rd Avenue NE Fridley, '•A1 55432 Jerome M. $ Patricia A. Parker 7436 McKinley Street NE Fridley, raI 55421 Roy D. $ Shirley R. Scherer 7418 McKinley Street NE Fridley, MN 55432 Earl J. $ Kathryn E. Follmuth 1621 Onondaga A�E Fridley, '.�'AI 55432 John Alexander $ Iblores 0. Gornian 1611 Onondaga NE Fridley, i•1N 55432 Robert Glenn $ Sandra K. Locker 1601 Onondaga NE Fridley, hIIV 55432 Thompson Robert H. :�icBeath $ Joyce M. Peine 7419 Lakeside Road NE Fridley, hA1 55432 Peterson Jerry L. $ Beyerly A. Jrton 7418 Stinson Blvd. Mpls., h4V 55432 Lee R. $ Nancy J. Johnson 7360 Stinson Blvd. Fridley, DW 55432 Robert C. $ Marilyn bi. 7340 Stinson Blvd. � Fridley, �Qd 55432 Byrd $ Ruth L. Norton 1667-73rd Avenue NE Fridley, b&V 55432 Thomas A. Ouelette $ Judith Ouelette 7400 Stinson Blvd. Fridley, MN 55432 Bertram James Collodora 1671 Onondaga NE Fridley, ACV 55432 John R. f, Constance L. Manning 1651 Onondaga NE Fridley, AR�I 55432 Mailing List Page 2 P.S. N77-01 Replat of Marxen Terrace Wallace H. � JoArui M. Roeker _ � 7419 McKinley Street NE Fridley, "�I 55432 Ronald L. Money 7437 McKinley Street NE Fridley, A9V 55432 Thomas E. Marxen 19958 Pine Ridge Drive Anoka, Mn 55303 Donald M. Leier 519 3rd Avenue N.W. New Brighton, Mn 55112 � r� L _ �� • � i r4'7'I . . .. . F�KOC:.z.t'�.,. _. �� �: REPLAT OF MARXEN TERRAC 1��/lr::'. `:�c T,c`i',�ce._ k:-' C\TY o:� �K�O�.C^.`( �� � . ---`- 1-O��o�t�c�i.[. A�:.T kE , h.�a�.�„�c-�.rt, � I . . ._i; — `--- --"-.'--f ---- — 1 �. i � � � � / � LG��i,,;C`Z� n ti.-. r � �.' / . I �` ��z.ty �i Z�_oci���_ • 3 a i ' � � : / W � � � : .( ` �. � 00 � �i �e°.�r::. _- f F I .�:\�/� ../;� ' • ;:-: ;"_ �t"-'��'" _ r - —�,.., , �: i � � J ���ti�-- j �' �\`/ ., - I C � e , r,r= ,— i � � .; ; , .�-- • �� '�5'�.rc>'�' vs,� :..,. 1 :'} ._, � ° � . —' :i _ _' �—'l� ;.___ -. Atvae..H �� �� �,. .�.. � � � . � j �� r..i_ _. � i� .0 1--� ' ♦ � 3 ��' � L/.( - _ _I % �GlaaK 2 \�..:� ` _� ) ��� ` 1c�i i ' z'%.' I c% ` � ' . rl-�-3� ��.�_J' _ . .... 1 �� Vw � ` �= `� � - \ ' � `� I I �LOCK 2 ` t.,:- -1 \ � ^ I ,� e tAli'.I�c )0- Iti • L.a�nl ca�c�.w '40 a /v ci l+� ��r•l I 'u4 ;.p. C `f T���nro e�w�. 1 i••�' I`'✓:I � C ry 9 I 'I - P/1 ° u f `E I = I _ __ ��v1-1 _ _I I � el � � �i -1! - _ . _ I .__ I ��G '! r' :�v:: ri.':. ;�:/!r•JC c 'f' %S/:1 qY.: :: � �.�.�. �-�.�7' �\._".�.__����__"'_�" :�l�i•.!._ / i t� f � 1 � ���. v � ��`�`— ` /99.�'g %��`-,c /'..-.-��a �n. `Z�w yl�..��.-,,.. �� ' �� /'..,r.y � i 3- Z�'r 2• S1 . . _ . rC- /fi/ �� ��-ccl � ../ . . . _ .. . . _ . _ / . . v?�� N�.[�w�-t�u.t",c� �✓`C' /"! L'a% . l...t % ��� ; �C��� l�:y: z /�.- Cl�.��a. �� � -�-�-���- _ ��.� Gs �� o �. �i .���-�- . ..�„ � . _ G� .�t�.�u' wi�-�_' .�-�`�u-r` a 1F.,c�..� ..� c� v;( �t�—c /'ce • ��� ��� / v ! GZ--�P _�'l-<. .�u�.�-�.�...� �����%: ,� _ �� � � � / , � rC�.t �.it�- .- ��-�-o�-c,-•c w�: �v�j,�i.�Gi✓ ..�G�?/l�rC✓.�r .%s � �LC�G2y�iC' . ! • � ' ��I���l %2,�-c �v .; �� � � z`r�� � �� �� r j�c:.-cY C.:_c�t f �ct.._�.% Lt -c,� .��.-i cZ j-c r- �--'f ! . _y� �(.�� ��� / �1 %O. Gl-( .�/_-.�-�...t-'.--...X �� A�Cc.' ( ��o�✓..�� af ^ ..�G�✓J 4iC.Ct�.,-.f �1 f�`f .'C-�--N � // A ,—�'--•/�r,�> c 5% ,�'/ -°—° G__c(' �� G�-cr+ti-.:-C.Gc.cc.�`cr � � ;rC_� c�y �� ��_'���•: �� �-�° .� � � y �-� -..�� .� �� .�-� �<.:-� �� � � ; Z. � ��' � ���� .�1..� .� -� � , , • �G�`''��olj i t � %�' rr� /a v. Cr ` ��r— �1 CI7'Y Or rRIi)LBY NINNBSOTA • • PLANNING AND ZONING FORM NUtif6e %� � 7 -O Y APPLICAN7''S SIGNAIUR!���'^'�-m� � /v ���L.� •: Address / 99 � B %�.✓� /1, ar e T,rt. A,✓o,!/,p, Telcphone tdumber 7� � Z$ i? PIlOPERTY 011`NGR'S SIGNATUR�/ Address �91.j $ �:r.QierP � A.✓i.�'A• �� �� . Jti TYPE OF RL•QUBST Rezoning Special Usc Pcrmit �^ Approval of Prcmin- inary $ rinal Plat �_ Streets or Alley 9xcations Other Telephone Number �- p L S 7 Z -- � u C Fee � Receipt No.� Street Location of Property q�,p� � Legal Description of Property /J%��q,pxEN % �P2ACE ��� o<� �� - Present Z4ning Classification /�- ( Existing Use of Property — Acreage of Property 3�T o��'} Describe briefly the proposed zoning classificatioi � or ,type of use and improvement proposed /�P PLAT /Co/1 3�- a Ts -- %�j� Ei✓O aF PRcPolEb 71i= S/ EXT �ir '1%Ac .QTc ExrsT��_ /li9hT oFLClA� To "TSe EAS T i�P•�eR�Y, 24cA/1�F�P. �Has the present applic nt previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or�part of it?�_yes no. What was requested and when?�L A% APP•Po ��+L I�ARx �.v �.P�PA�E- _/ 97a The undersigned understands that: (a) a list of all residents and otianers of preperty within 300 feet (3S0 feet for rezoning) must be attaclied to this application. (b) This application must be signed by all rnvncrs of the property, or an e�planation given why this is not the case. {c) r,esponsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting froa� the f�ilure to list the names and addresses of all residents and property owncrs of property in question, belongs to thc undcrsigned. A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drati��t and attached, showin� the folloiaing: 1. North Direction. 2. Location of propnscd structure on tlie lot. 3. Dimensions uf property, proposc3 structurc, and front and sidc setuacks. .' 4. Street Names. 5. Location anJ use of adjacent existing buildings (iaithin 300 feet `J The undersigned�hcrcU}• dcclares that all thc facts and representations stated in this application are truc and correct. CiI�� „ // / UATH �il�r� /� /�7% SIGNATUI:G � Y��� � � 'PLICi\N'i ) Datc Filed Datc of flcaring Pluflning Commission Approved Ciiy Council ApprovcJ (datcs) llcnicd (datcs) Denicd_ � � Eichasd Harri.s, Presideat Fridley Planning Commission 6431 Univexsity Avenue NE Fri37.ey, 1�I 55432 Deax Sir: 1Iarch 16, 197T This letter is in follrna-up to the Plaruiing C�missim meeting of 3/9/77• At that meeting there was a discussion ahout an addition to the �'arage at 4591 2� Street NE, Fridley, making it into. an appa.nent • commerci.al building. During that meeti.ng, �ir. Donald Kopecky, owner and resident of that nroperty, stated that the addition was to be used to atore a c�ercial product. He stated that the product would be left overs £rom alwainwa siding jobs. He 1'urther stated that there would never be rnrer $1000 oi product stored in that building. L;r. � Kopecl�y Bas to advise the Planning Caos?.ssion of the size of his busi- ness at this tisae. He atated tha,t there xould not be ar�Y increase over that present size. �he Planning C�ission stated tha.t there r,as to be no regular local traffic by trucks or cust�ers for c�mercial purposes at that address. The Planru.ng Co�mission further stated that all evidence o£ a commercial business was to be kept indoors: �he main intenest and worry of the undezsigned is the possibility of a chan�e in the zoning fran a single family �esidential zone to an- othex type zone. There have been attempts in the past to attempt to cnange the zoning code in our nei�hbnrhood. We do not want � change from the present one family residential zone. The Planning Cortunission stated at this meeting that they would not allow this anparent commercial building in ar�y �vay to afiect the current zone structure. . 53 � � � Page 2 of 2 As long a9 t}:ere is no atter�pt to rezone, no increase in vehicle traf£ic and no viaible signs of a cammercial operation, the undersigied except the Planning C�missions decision on the above. 'Phe undersigied live within a 300 foot radius of the property mentioned. --f�-�7 - � "" '�/ � Z - N� iZ9i�E �s�l�����. l?.�' aDn.�ss �., �� I� u � , ;� �5 �s� ��`��- �1.�_ ��s 2—�� � ., . � ; `�� 1� - ��'�J���.. �. . �S �� � ��1�.'' �5��%v'd �5 6/— �� -�`1 •�'.�- annx�s �i`s ��'> �Sr ,u �� annaFSG � �,,.,e 1�SV 7l � !-,_. `>� %/�� �5 � � � � ��� � �; �� D 3 ����" ti) � dDDRESS � � ; .� � rYi + i . . s.r �I-�."j � �{ � . � � 1�L4�1�pipf��{�M`/��� {i{/� � 1'm�Y1Jill1 MAg�g 28, 1977 � - �; t. Da�re: Hs�e�#,�k �,arvey -S�Iagar, Jan Seeger.; .yeanard Moore �}gg�P; Bcb Yetersoe ��$�': �harles B�dreau, : parks 6 Becreatiaat piiector Jacl�-&irk, Prog��"Supervisor $dria.Suhx#fer, pppoiated pax�cs & 8eereation Co�i.ssion member �Eank Novak, f�241 - Sth St.'�.5., Fa3:dley Senior Cit3zen -�1Kt gzcz�ch, 4820 - 3rd St. N.B-, �idley S�ior Citizen ,�: T��f�1�As , 's-��s�te�son H,arris calied the meeting to orde.i at 7:40 p.m. � ; �� �� �by �ssYey S�gar, eeC�taded by Leoaard Maore, Ca agprave the February 28, 1977, $,�,eq��ti� Co�issi�s miautes as vritten. Upoa a voice vote, all voting aye, 3.s�g��os ia�riea_ uaauimonsty. . �.-��,�dd+a�i-the foYlow#ng £t�s to the agenda uddar "Director�s xeport"; C. •SPr#IlS Nevsletter 8: ,�gringbz+rok Boundation Letter:of Iuvitation $- 'i?ereotsael H. �e sta� he srauld I�l�e ta edel "&iverview Terra¢s" s& Item.B uader �'New Business". . ;i�+p :�azVey Iiqgar, saccaazded by Jan Seeger, to appa�ove the agenda with the above �. .', :,��on.a voice voCa, a11 votfng aye, the mt�f� carried unanimwsly. �`�1►#s �at i�t the maeting, Dis. 8obin Suhrbier �aasx�a�zoduced to the Comnissioa �w . � �. N � .:'J. - . � � � � 4� _�� . . �. ' B 1�a�' .. .. .. 'e��_: . . . � i��R.i �.1�CR�1[2�tfN ��55T� 2�ETIDIG, MARCH 28r i477 PA�B 2 DIRECTOR'8 XBP(�T: � i A. �ogram Supervisor - Intr+ncLucLiqn ` ` � !I, '� Mr, goudreau aCated that a� Che Commission 3iegd been aware, Ci�y Council had � gfven him;germission to adeertise for a Program S�Pervisor, Hr.;$audreau then i 3ntroduced tTx. Jacl� Rirk i�lta sra� from Cooa �apfds wher� he haQ va�ieed as the �ean �enter CoordirFator � C4mr�sr�ity Services. Mr• $dUdF68ll said he €elt this Vas a giane sCep #arward as far,as the recreatSon p��gz�m was.coruerned. ;� ; i ; . , ';B. Sva�er Joh AFP1icaEions I �. Baudreau stated that tisey�would be clos%ng summer job applications on II itednesday, March ,3Q. He i48id ttiey have haci r��Fnerous sppli�at�ions frcxn people j Vfth all varietfes' ai be�j�g,rduruda. He ?stated that pne of the first duties- o£ ;�. the program �uperv�,sar vc�it�.d be;ta go through these apglicatiQns with the Play- ij grouad Sup�rv3sor Co obt�fts qu�lified geopfe i� order'to m�inCain s�er glay- � $round' p;ograms equal to, i if n4t better thaxt, past s.ummer playgroe�nd pzograa�s . � They plan to opetcatQ.12-I3 glay'�rounds plus a T-baii program .1nd a variety of � OYher offexi�tgs. �e Sta��d tha�'.they are glanniug Co ruu the p}.ayground oueration ,'I in the afternoon hburs atul early evening hours,-to try to encouxage-more family � activities in the;i�arly e�+ening hours. Mr. Bottdreau also stated that they will � try to hire Fridle� resid�pts first. , II ° a l�fr, Hsrr£s sCated'that Yi�e Gb�4ssion go ;on.zecor& ia suggcst%ctg�that Lhe City � j hi,re ioeal people 4rhenev� locai people a�e qya�i£ied to assume the joba availabl� -� C. $F�ing Newsletter � Yfir', goudzesu brou�tt the �issian's attent3on to the latest spt3ng newsletter �,, and at� of the th£n�s th�` Park� & Recreation Departaie�tt are attempting: to do xo ;,'r ltzflsderi cotim�unicatfoa wi�t t3�e �GiCizens of $�ridley; and' also tp hxing ;their ; ' atteutian to the variety ir� services that are available. �r, 2�rris stat0d �hat t�re are people wh4.}�s�ve iadi¢ated an ivterest� in seeing , that whateaer was'8one in'Lhe $j:ce Creek Watershed area was cc�uui:cated to the I public and that, h�pefully, t3a�E would be dan� in the same mapner as the Parks & � Recreaticsn'activi�es are;:becaixse that has bee� a reereativn.a� foundation or i divis�.oa of gover�ental xespotkpibilities. H�-said Circle Pines, Lino Lakes, '., �ew B�igBton, Vadaais Hef�hts, and a nembes'of other commnnities are having a � l�mx}ing c�entary'-to co�e� thoiRe:meetings t�at pertain to ths R3,ce �reek Water- � shfid and its relationshig;to ttte eanmunities for cat�ich it serwed, Fridley was � �he onlp c€�unitp, as he':und�rstood it; th�t was aot,providiug that information � fia thefr citizens. I3e w�kd ho�e that in the future, they woul� make this I infurmation availabie to.�th8 p�pple. He stated that maybe the Commission should go;on record suggesting �aG sct�eone from gtaff:or a voluatee�'from the Go�ission � Sttend these meetit�ga of�t�7ie 8fce Creek Watershed DistricC and gine Chat iaforma- � kiari ta the Co�is&ieg, � pla�piniqg Commission, aad the City Couneil.. � � � � .� � � � � �� ,� . - �.�. „ . .�,: ,�,.:�:,._ . 4 . _ . �. - �; � �.� �� �. . � �, � Lyyqyq 26y �� - _ . : .; s 5"� '� r� s �. � ; s�.at� (cant'£tlt+edj �- au at$tGd tbat-..oue step-wwld be to wc�.-�e Lo the Rice Creek Watershed rnl reqeest the,m#aates of their msetings.and any additional input on �. ,ihsy have capiag ug.or thiags they are doiag that might be inckuded �-�or: the ci�t�eas . „ � w'sYB't�d;that �£t� $J:c�a i��ek iiateashed Distr�.ct h,�ve operatiag guideliaes `;�¢ �{�Sy as�e g�°�en. �e responsibility sad Glrg=pYeCection under the hat go�ezn watk6�shed.districts vhich ailsss;ih8m to assess on the basis ia mf�.lsge. Iie:believed the Riee Creek"-%I4eershed Mstrict assessed 3/8 fur maitiC�nss►cs; of theo-;;�;ce Creek liatershed Arsa. In other �rords,. those :hin Che Riea Creeh iiates�hed area paid:up to 3/$ of a mill to protect �eAG, the basks, rsBervoirs, etc., o€;Ehe`Rfce Creek Watexshed: District. bPi;sye aa�+ woYlc;�ad been done nuder �iaC prwieioa within the law; and �me stood up xo '�io earething, nothing irwld bg done . �;�t�t�d thaC thete was $ represeutative £zom the City of Fridley, �saugelo, wLa aC�teaded;the Rice Cree$;it#er8hed District meetings, but ��espassible to report any of this ia£oraation to the City. �vgg�g,ed t,�at.�tgbe the C�issiam sh�id reqaest that Mr. Petrangelo 5t�e the CoannY.saian : . .. ��� g�� p�� this saas an envfroomeatal problem; and that maybe tbe �tiii�a�atal Cea�issicn►:should also be iavited. :�eapg�'sl Moore, seeoaded by Harvey Wagars that Mr. Tony Petrangelo, the �;eretttative ou- fhe Rire �reek laatershed. Bis[rict, meet with Ghe Parics b� t:Comm�seion and the.$ridley ISavir��gl-�a�i$$ion jointly at �p�s'c�tven4ence to:dfscuss what wss.-cfauapirin8 wiXhin the Rice Creek iDistr-ict and t�r-relay-ti►at iaiormatiou tQ Ehe tvo comotssions. Upon a ��, all vntiug a�e, the awtfon carried.unauimouslY. ated°that he - i - together vith Ms. Petrat�gelo and the Buv r� �a:they alt could agpear at a re$ular Parks 6� [ report ba�k to;;C�e Ca�issfon. sppe tha; Staff would be ready to ask questions �a the Gommissft�a. �gdt th`e recaoo�adation that : the .CdawiB�� : :P=esied to a;f,��td this meatin$. �e;�' t .ipi�g, a1Qa,g_�� es'ee&: the C�i,&a�a6 �+,?��:�J : �oC�ld,Iiice �s;rezed: She sai8 she, st�s�&[�x tted� �gecially those people living ��,A gYee Creek ltatershed District meetiags, kno �rshed Diatrict had. � invite thoss people ualess they heard from knoFr what questions ed that people vho , Creek, had noC atteaded � how muuh povrer the ; y` r m._Fti t �;� ` ; �, � � � � �. � � PAR1F�^'&�RJS'CREATIUN"C�3S�Ul�f'116ETI�G MARCH 28 1977 FAGE 4 � ;: C. SFring Newsletter; (�auEiii�ted) � �: .; piOTIQN by ,Tan Seeg�x� see�inded Dy Harvey Wagarr that the City°of Fridley Spring �� pewsletter also incittde a�ty in£vrmation pertiaent tfs the CiCy.of Fridley, such ; I as xhe Rice Creek Watersh�d 1yts�riet, car anythfng �ise of importance to the residents of the City of Fridie�:. Ii ;; Ms, $eeger-stated that, tmti]. �idley had a.ct,�mnnanity aewspaper, tt�e newsletter � the anYy meati�+.of coa�iux�it�f:an. glie waa'tznt �hi�king of pa��s o€ doeument buC items :o£ parti�ular %tti�eres�, espee3alip �Ytsn grougs are meetitig such as the i ;p gic� Creek Watersh�d Dis���tt.;.°' `,� It1K�`1 A VQICE VOT�, .lI,L t�� k�, THE MOT%6�=�ARRIED iR+TANTMOUSLY. ' � 'I D. S�ringbrook Natu�e Centei� ��d"ation LetCe�, cr�' Iavitation . � r,'.'.� �. .. . �. � . � , , i 1�Dt, Bswdreau read '`the le�ei' f�om the Spri�gbi�aisk �iateu'e Center Hauadation dated ri %IBxeh 25, 1477, iu�riting t�is Cc�mission memhe�s,al�g with others, on a tour of . I �� E�m Creek�l�ature' °�nte� qp'�l�,g�i3� 23, 1q77. �$e saiit'Ehe Cnmmiesibn memberQ�could ;�� geC back to him if they t�f3�'t;�ke to atteeut. s, ;i �r. �arris stated ice had=%v��y'much enjoyed � Erip to Eim Creek aad urged the � mpmbers to, attenct.; j � Ms�. geeger�sLated ':-at f��s tipt��she would i#�ke��to pag� out a€i;ier concerning ��'��� a series of three �semiva� spor{Sored by the=Sp�ingbtook Nature �enter Foundation y #eaturing �r. Wa1Cer $re¢;&�it�ic�e as tlie .gt�s.� sp�a�ce�. Theae seminars are bein� � h+2td at the Frid�ep �i,g6�" " aoi'March 28> AprXY'4, &nd APril 18. �he arged the � members to att�uel: .' , 4 ;, , , ti I�t1TTON bq liarveq 6ia8ar, �cbntiesl by Leqnard tioare, to receiv� tTie eo�unication = ct�ncerni�ag the seminars th Dr. Walter Bre¢lcenridge. Upon a voice vote, a11 , voting ape; the motion t��fed unanim�s2y. S. Pefisonnel � ,; �c', goudreau' stat�ii that as a matter o€ i,u��rx�atinnr :for the Goumtission, he had i kY ��� .�._. submitted a lstt�x to th1� Cfty Manager reqtsesting the reallocsat3ou af personnel '� �vtthin the departraent of:ane p�rson from'o�€e divisiqn to anorher division: He said ; lE w8ukd m�ke £o�` �etzer�u�ilization of peopl�rand �heir fal�nts and equipment. I � � OLD;$iI�72dESS: � � � �� � � ��; q p. 1'�rpase Sac�wmobf��"Po�.iG� � �, yiarris stated -tinat t,�tiis pa�.icy was open for d#�cu�sion. He stated that as .�: he hacl indicated'aC tfie ��-C4umission meeting; aomething shauld he presented as ?- iufarmation mater�ax but;tii�t it was nnt crecessary for the Ce�ssion to make a a €irm and fast defision ¢�i#,s s�xYing as snowmobiliag had'beea curtaii.ed, but that :� sorr�zthing should !�e cen8�dered prior to pctoiser. Iis said he thaught there might be sc�me pruhlems �ith Cl�3-�}aalic�e and maybe sc�me xccs� #or interpretation. He � �i� � � �J � = � -� � — �` _ " �"� �� � .��.0 = In ��>>.. � � � , 59 s �.y� ,, .� .,. � . - �� ht�te Pq�ir�°;{csiIIt9,nued) `� : ,:� the,Gaa�i6sion memhers take thie pallcy with them and think about �#mst, tt�a would discuss w3.th mewber8 of the Co�ission his i,t a�d Che iGammiasioa members eaa�ld discuss it at their next '+�� ��8 • � �Ea�eed tFiat, a.1aAg the same li�s as the ��owmobile policy, he felt ,;�q�i.r�, s#nuld lt8�e been dr� ap cc�ncerniug. �etor bikes in the parks �e i�=t� Go�ise�n S�+ufd consfder �that. � r-,=ga�si.s .stated he ague¢�d �ith Mr. t600re but thst �aybe there should be two L#¢ieq.+ope'�pz suMim�ohi,les aad oue for motor-b3kes. as there are some differences. ' ; ,�pu�3t�su stated he c�ild ac�c- the Director of publ3c Safety to draft up a ni�.s¢--gaiiey r�ardittg �otor bikes. ,- ��a#�t titat he xould like to suggest that when the re.rmaining �oimiasion ;:g��c i�e snawmobile pciic9 over that they:.8et a public hearing as:he �ie interest�d should be heard. ��firs��X'� 3�tvi4, �.sQ¢anded; b9 J� Seeger, thu�,.Cha "Saowmobile roltcy�� et:�+at� €or fusth�e= discnssion with the aaar Ccunmission me�bers at the !�hs 8 RpersaC�oR Cammfssion meetiag in 1�3�. tTpon a voice vote, all �� b�� �- regu�� ,� �roCf�g � "�,: .• 1! _s '� �.. �P � ��1 ' s �� � —^, eii . �� a �� v. �. � � `v f 5 x y r �, the.�tit� Carrled.vaaaimously. �is_sta�ed.that he would hope that the Commission me�bers vouid hold.a �eu�ng:tM! the'suewmobite_palicy acsmetime betweeu May and September. He � Stai� to send out copies of this poliep.LO'the nev Co�isaion members t:�ixl has�e..time'�o review it before the I�y beetiag. tg •l�inance _#b33 �f�t�+d,that he_#eIt Lhis ordinance vas uacoastitutional and reqnired attal:[rer6age. 'He said he could see tap problems; (1) The coptrol � g8� �&�CC�eatlan 6a�ission; and (2) It is a discretionary thing 4qt.have any gufdeYines. He felt those thiags aha�ld be spelled•out �ce.,-He alsu felt the ordinance should'be reviewed by the C�issioa adationB gaesed on to City Cosmcil. eo�alcrd �aore, seconded by J� SeeBer: ��at the PLatting Ordinance #633 b2tc& fat further discuseioa with ti� u� Co�isa3oa members at the trs �'Recteati� Cm�issi� meeting fn �<< I7pon a voice roote, all tlte.matioat.cat�'i.ed unanimously. r � !� \..., .`� ' � . ''�`a. ±�x= Sil } � t-: � � ..�a :., - �.�sa_, __� .. , �� �. F�.:. .. . . . . . � PARK3 & RECR$ATiON L'11�#9 t� � a �- GL b : ,� 2iEW BIISINESS• � ` � i. A. Officials Pay Policy � Mr. goudreau stated that t#�e Ctm�ission had pas�ed a motion thait bcginning with } the-1976-77 season,; all ho�key`a£f,icials mus� bQ regietered by the State. He said 'i he was �ow hol.ding:�hree p�ychectcs �ran thsee indivf�inals who had r��sreed some ho�&eq games and Mr. Boudtaeau ha�,:just fQUnd out that these thCec irid�viduals had no'registration caxds. }}e eaid 1�e waated the C�ission's dirQCt�on on!what to da`with these three gaqchecke. �r. Harris su�gested thata]'�c. $snidreau c�ithhokd-a cextSin portion of these.checks Gn pay the $10 fee'for the�;,�esta. He aiso felt thaC Mr. Don Howa�ed should be I �� Ye�rimauded� for thfs as Af�. Hotterd knew -the't�aema�s8ia�n�8� firm gQe#tton- xegardf,ng . registration. �;. 2�C�r gvudseau stated' Cttat na one would referee im the coming° ye�r without first ` having a registrati;taa card-. #3UTT�T by Leonard i�ore, aecondEd by Aaxvey l,lagar, th�t the three- individuals who dfd not eonfcrrs� t4 tkt� tagu#ations stipu�tt�ed hq the Co�isa£on concerning the required regfs:Cration;before afficiatin� hbekey be given Che�ir payehecks, but that they not ti�e all�� to officiate agai�t until they have passed'the,test for the 1977-78 s�;ascm• �1pon a voice vote, a�.Y votiug aye, the motion carried vnanimously. �ir, Wagar �tated he waulc} li%e �ir. Boudzeau to;get in touch with the President of `A.A.F. and ltatTe. the pr�si.dent -write a lett�r to 4i.A.ii.X; p�otesting the $10 charge €or referee.regist�acior�. �. Harris suggeste8 that-mayb� the Hockey Associatirns should re�mburse tha $10 to those persons wi�o tak�'tl#e test and pasa it. g�I(� }�y �arvey W�gar, ��eonded 6y Leoaard Maore; Lhaf hackey re£erees who take t�A.x.A. eesz ana pass' in be reimbursed,far the testing fee by the �oekey Association. UPon $ vaic0.vtste; all voting ays, the motian carried unanimously. $. Ri9erview Terrace ; �': lsoore stated f#�at du� to 3.tncxeased hik�.ng; biking, waiking, and playing on ti� weekeuds, and`beoaus� o€ the increase i�s tra#f�.c, some pepple felt it was geiting out of haad. TEieX b��h� their re�u�st �o Mr. Moore: to brit�g be#ore ihe C�mission that all �saffia be eliminated from Riuerview Tertace, Kimball through Fairmont, on Suuiiays.,' Zit: goudresu stated ha s�ltld �� happy to ta�k to 1Hck-fiobiech ahoat this request. � , � � f� ;i � ; ,I 4 , � �, ;,, j � , �; p • _ _ _ _ � � ii : �` ," �... _, . . . .. ..� :y � .,.. � . . . �: #� � _ _ _,_ ' ''+� �� �..�. �z.��r -s. r��� _ . .. . � E� s . , ta t�te , (�i ,.._ „_�_, .:. ,a o ti':i i i>e� e �� i' . _ . 4. .:_.� .. . . � �,ye�eseed his-CT?attks to Mr. Harris and;�r. Wagar for their contribution af�i,oa and hpped thaC they continued to keep in Gouch. stated he want�d to take this opgortunitq tp thank Mr. Wagar for the good done as a mea�her pf the Coamission. ��egsed his ap��ciation to Mr. Harrfs and the members of the Caamission ::�.�cl bee;t-a pleasure serring on the Co�ission, e7 :6' �arvey ►�agar, seconded bg yeonard Z(oore, to adjaurn the meeting at 4;57 p.m. ,e vate, all voting aye, the moCion carried unanimously. =�pectfukly submitted, 'S� :��ardin8 3ecretary : �- . =�..'� � � .� .: � ; • � � �� � f: _� , ; : � � � �J � t;..�. �ft, - a.«., .. t � . . . � � ., � . . . . .. . ��� .. � � . . „M . .. . .. . . . , . . � .. . .. . . .. .:_ ..__� . . .�,. .. . �, � i APPEALS CUNPIISSION MEETIN6 CRLL TO ORDER: City of Fridley APRIL 12, 1977 Chairwoman Schnabel called the meeting to order at 7:40 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Schnabel, Gabel, Ptemel, Kemper, Barna None Ron Holden, Building Inspection Officer APPROVE APPEALS COlR�1ISSION MINUTES: MARCH 15, 1977 � Page l Mrs. Schnabel asked that the last sentgnce of t}le fourth paragraph from the bottom of page 2 be deleted as it was not tfie question she had asked, and that the third paragraph from the bottom on page 8 be changed from "No Right Turn", to "No Left Turn", and that Lincoln Street be changed to 79th. MOTION by Gabel, seconded by Barna, that the minutes of the March 15, 1977 Appeals Cortrtxnnission meeting be approved as corrected. tfpon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 1. VRRIANCE OF SECTION 205.103. 4B CITY CODE, TO Selby Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55104}. . , 1595 MOTION by Kemper, seconded by Gabel, to open the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 7:43 P.M. A. L•� AOMINISTRATIYE STAFF REPORT PUBLIC PURPOSE SERUED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 295.163, 4B, requiring a side yard setback of 15 feet from the co�non property line. Public purpose served is to provide for adequate open areas around comnercial structures, maintain clear access for fire fighting and reduce conflagration of fire. STATEO HAR�SHIP: � Two existing buildings under separate ownership can not place individual mort9age or obtain separate tax statements. One parcel of land is leased with building owned separately, needs to be sptit to stop problems. C. ADMINISTRATIVE S7AFF REVIEW: 63 Appeals Commission Meeting April 12, 1977 Paqe 2 The properties in question were rezoned from C-1 (local business) to C-2 (ganeral business} to aTlow gasoline sales and a car wash, in dune � of 1970. The permit for construction issued in September of 1970 stipulated that Council must approve a lot split if separate ownership of the two businesses is intended. This variance request the, is being requested in conjunction with a lot split request on the property. The proximity of the structures with regard to fire fighting was discussed in the June 1, 1970 City Council meeting. The discussion was resolved by Mr. Robert Aldrich, Fire Prevention Bureau Chief, at this meeting, who felt this wouid be no issue. He stated "the structures are low and he would have no reservations in the construction of (or) plaeemeni in the event of a fire. The trucks could get around the buildings easily." The reduced setback invoived is from both buildings tp the new common property line. Distance between the structures is 10 feet, with 6'4° of the building walls directly across from the other, {see plot plan). The position of the buildings does make for a lesser fire hazard with regard to conflagration of ffre. It should be noted that tfie structures are not located exactly as shown on the plot p7an �n as much as there is an overlap of adjacent walls of 6'4" not shown on the proposed plot plan. Both buildings have a mansard roof with 2 foot overhang extending into the common sideyard. Mr. Steve Coddon, Park Metropolitan Investment Fund, was present. Mr. Holden showed the Appeals Commi.ssion a plot plan and said that when ihe buildina permit was issued for the two buildings it was stipulated that if they ever wanted to have these buildings under separate ownership they would have to go back to the City Council for approval of a lot spiit. Mr. Holden said tne 6uildings were not located on the property exactly as they were proposed, but the corners are opposite of each another,. The buildings are IO fi. apart and he assumed the lot would be split right down the middle of the two buildings,.which would make a 5 ft. setback for each bui7ding, instead of the required 15 ft. setback. Mr. Coddon said that the property use were two separate owners. We have a proble the problem of having one building paid for, the party went through bankruptcy, and ther this request was just to ease the technical � would not change. He said there m with proration of taxes, we have and the other buil'ding isn't because e is a financing problem. He said problems for a lot split. Mr. Schnabel said that Mr. Codden had been at the March 23, 1477 Planning Commission meeting on his request fow a tot split. Jhe Planning Commission had continued this item until April 20, 1977 so that the variance request could be heard by the Appeals Commission befbre they made their final recommendation on this lot split request. During the discussion at the Pianning Commission it was determined that they would like to have the background material on this property as to previous minutes and the original building permits. 7his material has also been supplied to the Appeals Commission as you probably noticed when you received your agenda. At this point, the lot split has not been granted. Mr. Coddon said that he felt a de facto variance had been granted at the � time approval was given for the location of the buildings, with the stipulation that if the buildings went under separate ownership, it would need Council approval of a lot split. He said that there were two separate water and sewer services for � u C� Appeals Comnission Meetinq April 12 1977 Pa e 3 this property, two different addresses, in fact, everything was separate except the legal title. Mrs. Schnabel said that she felt it should be pointed out that Mr.Coddon owns all the land on this parcel and one building. The other building is under separate ownership. Mr. Coddon said tBat he would like to sell the huilding he owns with the land to the person renting the building. He would like to divest his interest in this property. Mr. Kemper said he felt that this was more of a housekeeping item. Mrs. Gabel had some questions on the advertising signs on the property. Mr. Coddon said there were two different signs, one for each property. Mrs. Gabe1 questioned if one of the signs were legal, but said that could be checked out by City Staff at a later time. Mr. Coddon said that it was probably confusing because one sign was for tfie service station and an automatic car wash, and one sign was for the self-service car wasB, which were two separate businesses. Mr. Holden asked Mr. Coddon if there aas anything inflamable stored on the premises for the automatic car wash. Mr. Coddon said he didn't think so because they had all underground storage tanks. Mr. Hotden said that he had just spoken to Ro6ert Aldrich before this meeting, and he agreed that his statement was still stood as far as this property was concerned about the danger of conflagraiion of fire. Mr. Holden said tfie construction of the common walls 6etNeen the two buildings did meet all the requirements of the building code. There were no openings in the cornmon wall area. MOTION by ?lemel, seconded by Barna, to close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, aIi voting aye, the Public Hearing was closed at 7:50 P.M. Mrs. Schnabel said that she was glad that Mr. Holden had checked with Mr. Aldrich for his concerns on fire protection, because she thought that would be the main concern of the Commission. Mr. Plemel said that the buildings were not going to move whether there was a variance granted or not. Mrs. Schnabel said tha� one of the concerns of the Planning Corranission was that the ownership might change on the self-service car wash building, and that owner could change the nature of the business in that building. If a building permit was requested for a change of use of this building, there would have to be a check made as to what type of material they were going to use or store in that building, but at t6is point, she didn't think that was an issue. 1�TION by Kemper, seconded by Barne, that the Appeals Comnission recomnend to Council, through the Planning Corrmission, approval of the request for a variance of a sideyard setback from the required 15' to 5' for 7300 and 7320 University Avenue N.E. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 2. YARIANCE OF SECTION 1 ey, Minnesota 55432). A, FRIDLEY CITY COOE ve N.E., E MOTION by Gabel, seconded by Plemel, that the Public Hearing be opened. � Appeals Commission Meeting April 12, 1977 Pa e 4 Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing opened at 8:03 P.M. A��IINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 1i5.02, 5, A, requiring fencing that shali prevent the entrance of children and be without hand of foot holds that would enabie a person to climb over it. Pubiic purpose served by this requiremettt is to protect unescorted intruders from the dangers of the pool area. B. STATEQ HARDSHIP: Had I been properly informed, I would not have used rt�y existing fence as a pool fence. (Thi's is a surmnary paraphrase of petitioner's accompanying letter.) C. ADMINISTRATIVE STRFF REVIEW: • The existing fence which was used as a pool enclosure is a horizontal 6oard on board fence wfiich does afford external foot and hand holds. A letter from 5teven Olson, Environmental Officer, dated October 13, 1976 to Mr. Bill Schumacfier of Aquarius Poots was included when the permit was issued. Tfiis letter contained several requirements, including "A fence or oti�er suita6le barrier, a minimum of six (6) � feet higfi, that affords no external hand holds or foot holds and which is inpenetrable by toddlers, must be provided around the entire - perimeter of the pool:" A copy of the letter was sent to Mr. Ricfiard � Rignell of 1171 Lynde Drive. The matter of tfie fense was discussed witFi tAe owner and City Staff and i.t was determined that tfie fence failed to meet the requirement of being "non-cltm6abl.e". The owner was informed by letter on October 28, 1976, ta e�ther reconstruct the fence ar obtain a variance to retain the fence as is. Mr. Richard Rignelt was present. ; - Mr. Ron Holden said there were some pictures in the file that Mr. -Rignel9 had given to the City. He said that basicaliy there was some misunderstand- i.ng between the petitioner and City Staff on information he had received over the � telephone well in advance of construction of the swimmirtg pool, as to what the requirements were for such construction. At the time the pool permit was taken out, a copy of the requirements were given to the poot company with a copy of the requirements going to Mr. Rignell. He said this letter was dated October 13, 1976. He said that he thought that most of the misunderstanding came from this being a board on board fence, but the fact that it was horizontal board on board makes it climbable, almost like a ladder. Chairwoman Schnabel said that all the members of the Appeals Commission had received a copy of Mr. Rignell's letter that accompanied the variance request and s� wanted that letter received so it would be part of the record of the proceedings. MOTION by Plemel, seconded by Barna, that the Appeals Commission receive the ietter from Mr. Rignell explaining his hardship. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. .. �peals Co�mnissinn Meetinq - April 12, 1977 Paqe 5 Mr. Rignell said that it was unfortunate that he didn't get anything in �writing when he questioned the City Staff over the telephone. He said that he made the decision to have a swi�ning pool assuming that the fence he had would meet ' the requirements for a pool, and it wasn't until after the building permit for the pool had been issued and construction fiad almost been completed before Mr. Qlson inspected the site and said that the fence would not meet the requirements of the swimming pool ordinance. Mr. Rignell they addressed the Appeals Commission to show them on a dr.awing where the fences of other neighbors were located and whe-e there was open area. He said t6e point he was trying to make was that the area Was not very accessible. Mr. Piemei asked if there wasn't some way that this fence could be aitered to meet the code. Mr. Rignell said that when you start moving redwood around a lot of it would break and he felt it would be a complete waste of lum6er. Mr. Holden said that another alternative would be to move tfie inside board to the outside and fit it into tFie spaces. Mr. Rignell said that he had di_scussed this matter with his insurance agent who was witfi a reputable company, and its their contention that having a six foot fence that anyone who gets over that fence, he can not he liable for. Mr. Plemel said the the courts can interpret things much differently than an insurance company. Mrs. Gabel wondered what tfie legal ramifications would be, if we were to approve a variance from the City Code, and allow a climbable fence as a pool enclosure, and there was an unfortunate accident. Mr. Holden said that in cases like that, they tend to sue everyone in sight. � Mrs. Schnabel said that besides the children in the neighborhood who would be aware that there was a pool on the`property, she was also concerned about the ', children from North Fark Scfiool which is less than a block away. She said tbat when she visited the site, tfie portion of the fence that was closest to the gate was not 6 ft. high. Mr. Rignell said a board had been removed during construction of the pool, and because of the terrain in this area, the fence looked lower. Mr. Rignell said that he felt one deterrent was that you had to get right up to the fence before you could see the pool. It was not attractive from a distance. He said that he had not chased a child off this fence in the four years he has lived at this location. Mrs. Schnabel said that she was distressed that Mr. Rignell had not received the correct information from City Hall and that he had such a difficult time in gettinq any information.. Mrs. Schnabel said they did encourage the neighbors to voice their opinions on any variance request, and if they got no response from the neigh6ors, then they had no way of knowing if the neighbors agree with the variance or not, so in this spirit she hoped that Mr. Rignell would realize that the neighbors should voice their concerns and hoped he would understand that this was a necessary thing. She said they had received a letter from one neighbor, a Mr. & Mrs. James Legett of 5701 Regis Trail. MOTION by Barna, seconded by Plemel, that the Appeals Commission receive � this letter. Upon a voice vote, all votin9 aye, the motion carried unanimously. . Mrs. Schnabel read the letter which made two goints: (1) They have a 13 month old child and have people visiting them with small children, (2) There is a tiny tot proqram in the surrmer at the school across the street, and 4 year olds 6� �peals Commission Minutes, April 12, 19Z7 Page 6 could be very tempted when walking home on a very hot summer day. Mr. Douglas Strong, 5720 Regis Drive, asked that when a pool permlt was taken out, when was the first inspection made. Mr. Holden said that when they .._r • called in for an inspectian. He sai.d the e7ectrical inspector and plum6ing inspector made the first inspections, and there weren't many inspections on a pool until they were completed, He said tfie inspections were made by the Environmental Officer then. He said that pool construction as opposed to building inspection, there wasn't much inspection that could be made �hen they were pouring concrete. Mr. Strong asked who checked on the location of the pool. Mr. Holden said it was up ta the contractor and owner to see that the pool was located as they had proposed to locate in on the survey tfiat was presented with the request for a building permit. Mra Strong said that fie fe7t the City had put a burden on Mr. Rignell when after #he pool was already constructed, they then told him he fiad to have a 6' unclimbably fence. He said that there 7ot was back to back with Mr. Rignell's property and he had a 6` vertical fence. He said tfiat he had a 4 year old and two otfier children, and he said he fiad a problem with the wording of toddlers and cfiildren, because he knew t�at his four year old had climbed the fence, but had not gone over the fence. He said that this week end he had counted 8 children under ten,playing in his yard, and they were concerned about one of those children climbing over tfie fence. He said they were upset with the City also, because this puts a burden on us, and we have to live with aur neighbors. Mr, Kemper said that he was looking at a copy of the bu9lding permit that was issued for this swirt�ning pooi on October 13, i976. On this permit it states that the stipulations are in the letter from Steven Olson dated the same date. 7his was settt to the pool comparty and to Mr. Rignell, and �tem 7 of the stipulations does give the fence requirements for a swi�ing pool enclosure. He said that it states no hand holds or foot holds, and the picture that you have presented of your fence, clearl� indicates that this `ence would not meet this requirement. He said he didn't know if Mr. Rignell had been led down the primrose path, but the stipulations or� the building permit were crystal clear. Mr. Kemper asked wfien construction on the pool was started. Mr. Rignell said they broke ground on October 23rd and finished the pool on October 25th. Mr. Strong said that he thought if a board was edded on one side of the fence, this would eliminate the objections from the neighbors. Mrs. Carol Eppel, 5721 Regis Drive, said that she agreed with Mr. Rignell that if somone was over the fence, they d9d not be]ong there, but that was a� afterthought if an accident should happen. She said she would not like to see the variance granted. There were over 50 children living in this neighborhood, and whether Mr. Rignell did or did not get the correct information from the City, it still is a climbable fence and she would like to see this changed. Mr. Rignell said there were alternatives to making this fence not climbable, bu� he didn't see how the City could be held liable if this fence was left the way it was and the variance was granted. Mr. Kemper said he wasn't concerned about liability, he was more concerned about a human life. Mr. Kemper said that if the Appeals Commisston did recor�nend denial of this request, he didn't think they should stipulate how the fence should be changed to meet the code. He said this was a matter of economics and it shou7d be Jeft to Mr. Rign�`s discretion on how this fence could be changed to meet the code. Mr. Holden said that Mr. Rignell was given a deadline of April lst, 1977 to either change the fence so that it met the code, or request a variance. He said that he wanted to apoligize to Mr. Rignell for getting eitfier the wrong information or not . -, �peals Co�nission Meetina April 12 1977 Paqe 7 not the information he needed when he contacted the City. He said this � problem had made the City Staff consider a new policy for pool permit. Before any pool permit would be issued when the use of any existing fences or other structures was proposed, an on-site inspection would be required. The existing structures would be checked for compliance and any questions answered for the homeowner. He said the pool companies wouldn't be very happy with this delay, but they didn't want to have a reaccurrence of wfiat happeneQ to Mr. Rignell. Mr. Barna said he wanted the Council to know that he did not feel that a chain link fence met the requirements for a non-climbabie fence. Other members of the Comnission agreed with him. MOTION by Barna, seconded by Kemper, that the Appeals Comnission close the Public Hearing. Upan a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was closed at 8:50 P.M: Mrs. Gabel said she felt this was an extremely unfortunate incident, but this was something that could happen when there was a new ordinance. She said she was sure that this would not make Mr. Rignell any happier because it was at his expense. She still felt that she could not go along with this request, because after seeing the fence there would be no deterrent to stop a small child from climbing this fence. Mr. Kemper said it was a climba6le fence and we have neighbors who � are opposed to the variance, so he was not in favor of it being granted. Mr. Plernel said that it was unfortunate that the petitioner was - going to have to come up witfl money aut of his pocket to modify.the � fence, but if ihe City had made the inspection even a year ago, this fence would still have had to be modified before he could get a pool permit. Mr. Barna said we could discuss responsibility, liability, and toddlers and children, but he would hate to have a child have an accident in the pool, whether the owner was liable or not. He said he felt this was a moral and emotional issue rather than legal liability. MOTION by Kemper, seconded by Plemel, that the Appeals Comnission recomnend to Council, through the Planning Co�nission, denial of the request for a variance to allow a climbable fence to be used as a pool enclosure. Upo� a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 3. OF SECTION 205.053, 4,A, FRIDLEY CITY CODE TH nr�nu� n.c. rntuL4�> r�a�.nwuin. �rcequesti D,y JOflll H. JdCC0lfldq� � 7th Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55432). � MOTION by Plemel, seconded by Barna, that the Public Hearing be opened. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 9:00 P.M. �� e �peals Commission Meetin April 12 1977 Paqe 8 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT A, PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMEN7: ` Section 205.053, 4, A, requiring a front yard setback of 35 feet. Public purpose served is to allow for off-street parking..without encroaching on the public right of way. Also for aesthetic con- sideration to reduce the "building line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: Hardship would be a 20 fte wide nouse instead of a 24 ft. wide house. C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: 7he lot in question is zoned R-2 (single and two family dw�llings). ?he only size house that one could be able to build without a variartce would be 20 ft. deep. There are no adjacent houses facing 54th Avenue on this side of the street. There is approximately seven feet of boulevard in this area. Mr. John Saccoman was presento 17r. Hotd=n said this would be the onTy dwelling facing 54th Avenue. 7he lot was 130' x 80' and due to the shailowness of the � lot, this was the onTy way the house could be built to meet the other set back requirements. He said the property to the rear of this lot was the parking lot for the apartment complexe ' Mrs. Schnabel said this must be going to be an up and down duplex instead of a side by side. Mr. Saccoman said that was correct. Mr. Saccoman said he had a solar energy system build into the house to be used as auxilliary heat, but he didn't know if he could get financing on the house with this option, so he may have to scrap that part of the plan. Mrs. Schnabel said there were a lot of trees on this lot. Mr. Saccoman said that most of them were in the center of the 7ot where the duplex would be built so most of them would have to go. He said he could probably save a couple of trees on the back of the 7ot. Mr. Holden told Mr. Saccoman that the garage was too small to meet the requirements for a duplex, but there was enough width on the ]ot to increase the size to meet the requirements. Mrs. Schnabel said there was a 7' boulevard so the house would be 38 feet from the street. MOTION by Barna, seconded by 6abel, that the Appeals Commission �. close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, ali voting aye, the Public Hearing was closed at 9:13 P.M, MOTION by Barna, seconed by Gabel, that the Appeals Commission �o Appeals Comnission Meetina April 12 1977 Paqe 9 �recomnend to Council, througb the Planning Commission, approval af the . variance to reduce the front yard setback from 35' to 31' to allow the construction of a duplex and garage, Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. � � 4. Upon 9:15 MOTION by Barna, seconded by Kemper to open the Public Hearing. a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Nearing was opened at P.M. ADMINISTRATIYE STAfF REPORT A. PUBLIC•PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.104, E, 1,:Qrnhibitiny park�ng on comenercial areas within ' the 20 ft< required front yard. (This includes the rear yard on double frontage lots). _ Public purpose served is to limit visual encroachment into neighbor9ng sight lines and to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas adjacent to a public rigBt of way. B. STATED HARDSHIP: The owner feels that this will be a high volume location and will need additional stalls to serve business. Owner also feels he should be able to park in areas similar to adjacent properties who are parking up to property line. C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT: This area is zoned C-2 (local business} and the proposed use wi11 be a Pizza Hut. The owner is able to supply required parking without encroaching into the front yard, but feels, his "high 4orume:' business warrants the additional parking and requested encroachment. The apartment to the East and Holiday Auto Center to the West, both have parking in the front yard on 57th Avenue. This variance is being requested for the areas next to 57th Place, but will not exit on to 57th Place. Mr. Warren Hanson of the Antler Corporation was present to made the petition. Mr. Hanson said this property would have the Tngress and egress, on 57th Avenue, but they would like to use the property up to the property line on 57th Place for additional parking, which would be in line with the two adjacent properties. He explained the plot plan, indicating where the �'r�i Appeals Commi:SSf6n Meeting April 12, 1477 Page 10 green areas and landscaping would be. He indicated that while the plot plan showed 50 parking spaces, about 3 of those would be replaced by � additional green area, making a total af 47 parking spaces if the variance was granted. He said he thought this business would add to the area, rather than detract. He said the trash containers would be behind a 6' fence and that they wouid be contained ligfiting of the property, so it wouid not shine into the residential development in the area. Mrs. Schnabel asked if it was their intention to fence the North property line. Mr. Nanson sa9d he would say no. He said this property would be well kept and t6ere wouid 6e a green area from the property line to the street. He said he didn't know if tfie members of the Correnission had been out to look at the condition of the fence for the Holiday Auto Center, but the condition of the fence did not add to the area. The Corr�nission members agreed as to tfie condition of this fence. Mr. Holden said that it was part of the City Code that tfie fence had to be maintained, and this would be checked by the City Staff. _ Mr. Plemei said there was residential development across the street from this property to the North. Mrs. Schnabel said that was the reason she asked about the fence. Mr. Hanson said tfiat Pizza Hut's really kept up their sStes, because tRey wanted the business to be inviting to the pu6lic, which was a much different business from an auto canter. He said the properties were zoned the same, but it was a mucfl different land use. Mr. Nolden sa�d he tfiought a higB berm would 6e pleasing as a buffer � between this business and tfie residenti.al development. Mrs. 5abe1 asked the seating capacity of this business. Mr. Hansorr � said it was 92. Mr. Nolden said the Code stated that they only had to provide 30 parking stalls, but that the developer thought this was a high volume type af business and wanted to Rave 5Q stalls, whicB was now reduced to 47. Mr. Hansan safd a Pizza Hut had been built on Highway 12, and they had followed the parking stall requirement of the code there. This was such a high voiume locati�n, that this business has created a traffic hazard. Ha said the franchise holder would have to pay $$,D00 to have the gas compeny relocate a:Jarge main that ran between Block 7 and 61ock 8 in City View Addition. This main was located now, just where the bui7ding would be located, With the cost of the property and this additional cost of $8,OOQ, the owner feit he had ta have high volume to make this economicaily feasible. Mr. Ed�Nard Jonak, 133 N.E. Craig Way N.E., who saici he owned the property at. 26] 57tFi Place, said he was concerned a5out the trash blowina from iiis property. He said they got so much trash from Holiday and Country Kitchen naw, that the cantainment of trash was his primary concern. Mrs. Schnabel said the reason she had suggested a fence was because she was concerned about people driving from the parking lot onto 57th Place, and a green strip would not be a deterrent to some people, and � also to reduce the visual impact of this business from Lhe residentia7 developrnent. Mr. Ri1ss Ridde], 247 57th Place N.E., said that the way. the garbage 61ows across this 7ot, he was in favor of a fence. Helen SQyplinski said she was �� appeals Corronission Meeting April 12, 1977 Page 11 was so tired of having Holiday garbage hauled away that at times she felt � like picking it all up and throwing it back over the fence. Mr. Hanson said that it was true that the propertx (the vacant lot) was a mess from b7owing trash. Mr. Jonas said that he reall� would prefer a berm for aesthetics, but due to the trash problem, he rrould have to go along with a fence. Helen Szyplinski said that she would be in favor of a fence also. Mr. Kemper asked the neighbors who had spoken about the fence, if they would be in favor of the variance being granted if a fence were put it. The neighbors agreed that having the parking to the property line or 20 feet in woutdn't make much difference if a fence was installed. Mr. Plemel asked if the automobiles would be driving around this building. Mr. Hanson said they would because there would be two entrances and two egresses on 57th Avenue. Mr. Hanson said that if the neighbors wanted a noise barrier and a shield from the headlights of the cars. they would be willing to put up a 6 foot solid fence. Mrs. Schnabel said that the ordinance did call for fencing on commercial property if it abutted a different zoning district. Mrs. Gabel said there would be a problem with trying to enforce this as a code item, because the property that was still a residential development was the same comnercial zoning. It was the same zoning, but a different land use. Mr. Riddel thought there should be "no parking" signs installed on � 57th Place to discourage parking for this business. Mr. Hanson said they could petition the City to do that. Mrs. Schnabel said that if the fence were to continue down tfie East and West property lines South for about 50' •, that this would eliminate people parking on 57th Place for the Pizza Hut. Mr. Hanson said they would be wi]ling to do that. He said the Holiday fence turned and continued toward the South, but he did�'t know if that was on the property line. He said that he would agree to this additional fencing regardless of where the fence was placed on the Holiday property. Mrs. Gabel said she wasn't convinced that the 20 additional stalls were really needed for this business. Mr. Hanson said that he was not trying to threaten in any way, but it was just a fact, that if the owner of this property didn't get the additional parking, he would not make tne investment. He wouid need the high volume to get a proper return on his investment. It was a matter of economics. The neighbors asked Chairwoman Schnabel what other type of businesses mould be allowed in C-2 zoning. Mrs. Schnabel read from the City Code the different allowable uses and the uses allowed with a Special Use Permit. Mr. Janek said that if the problems of noise, light and dirt were reduced by the installation of a fence, then he had no objection to the variance being granted. The other neighbors agreed. � MOTION by Kemper� seconded by Barna, to close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was closed at 10:12 P.M. '73 Appeals Comnission Meetinq - April 72 1977 Pa e 12 Mr. Hanson mentioned that they would be serving beer with the pizza. � Mrs. Gabel asked if there was a pubiic hearing on a beer license when the business was close to residential development. It was determined that this was not done. She said she was concerned about this and Mrs. Schnabel asked her to bring this up later in the meeting. Mr. Plemel said it seemed to be the concensus� of opinion that there should be a 6' fence on this pro�erty, and if there was a fence, the people on the outside coufid not see the business, and he did.�.rit think the granting of the variance request would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Mrs. SchnabeT said she would like to see this fence cover the er]tire North boundary and then turn down the fast and West property lines to the South and the petitioner indicated that he would be willing to go 50 feet. Mrs. Gabel said it should not be a cyclone fence because you could see through that, and it shouid be non-climbable a1so, because they would make it go into disrepair that much faster. Mrs. Schnabel said she thought these things should be spelled out in the recortmendation and that it should be a solid fence, so that headlights could not penetrate it. Mr. Barna said he thought this was a good trade-off. Without the variance, there would be no need for a fence, and with the variance, there will be a fence.,+. which will be a help to the residential area. MOTION by P7eme1, seconded by Barna, tha.t the Appeals Goirunission recommend to Council, through the Planning Comnission, approval of the � request for a variance to allow off-street parkin to t6e 0 foot property line with the stipulation that a solid 6' fence be installed along the , North property line and extended down the East and 4fest property line to • the South a minimum of 45 feet, Upon a voice vote, Piemel, Barna, Kemper and Schnabel voting aye, Gabel nay, the motion carried. 5. RECOMMENDATION ON BEER AND/OR BAR OR LIQUOR LICENSE Mrs. Gabel said she was quite concerned that a beer or bar=7.tcense be approved by Council close to a residential development with no notification to the people in the area. She would like to have the Planning Correnission discuss this problem. MdTION by Gabel, secanded by Barna, that the Appeals Camnission request the Planning Corranission to review t�e policy of issuing beer, bar, wine or liquor licenses for an establ5shment that was within 200 feet of a residental area without notifying property owners of such a request. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 6. ATTENDANCE AT COMMISSTON MEETINGS Mrs. Schnabel said that Councilwoman Kukowski had attended a Planning Corrnnission meeting and explained the City Council's concern with attendance at Commissidn meetings. She said that everyone should make every effort to aktend these meetings, even if it did involve a personal sacrifice sometimes� 7. ELECTION OF OFFICERS IN MAY Mrs. Schnabel said she wanted the Commission to be aware that this would be on the May agenda, and they should be thinking about this before that meeting. � � � Appeals Comnission Meetinq April 12 1977 Page 13 8. BUDGET Chairwoman Schnabel said that the she had received a copy of the Appeals Comnission budget and would like to'let the other members of the Commission see it also. This the Commission did and were surprised there was a budget. Mrs. Schnabel said most of the budget weRt for salaries of the staff who worked for this Commission. ADJ�URNMENT: MOTION by Barna, seconded by Plemel, April 12, 1977 be adjourned. Upon a voice meeting was adjourned at 70:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, C/ � ���/ Dorot y Eve n, cting Secretary that the Appeals Meeting of vote, all voting aye, the � � � :,�,� � ,�� � ���� � �c.�.�� : ��� �a. �' ��� �� . Tr � �r�'l� a _� > ��,� ;�,�',�" ��- _ �� ; ,� �--�,1� �� �� � a o- a a J�� ��( ,�'� ., �� � / b 'f�- �lb • 'wzc-� YJ t- J d � `��1 ' ....r� / �/ %l,� �-�-' ' � � ��� ��-,�..�., � � �i �--/� -� �1� � � 'c��-.+� w�:�.ti. 7 a �', / / 9 `�' ,��,,�,c,� �. .�, `��.-cc�,�,� 1 �-r3 - �s-�t f.hr� �'i. � , ��r� `i �r.-�%� L 3// � 7=-�% �t1 t. �� �a-�Ce� G3// - %� � _ '° . -, t�, „� %� b D-� o'°c.�G�F' %' � i ��ca�Sl,`�1 i a b 5 s. �Ci�e�:, `�, �, ,�8-rt/}'U.2> I 0 4 5 S, t;�/�CXx� �, �� ��- � ,� . , �,�' �.c.e� (�.-�r-_,._,,.d,ci l0 6�'J �+�LCC�_a� ��a , 5 7�` - o/ 0'7 ,(�.�c�i-vt�r.c/ � 6 9s- 9� Yf� o�pU/� ,� 7/- ( 7�y� ��-e-��.il�..� ar.�� la 1 y .::� �� N �` ��� _ �6�a �`,'t-e-l" l% ra L �/.�o �.s.�..� ✓ � �. � �'-d �-%��oZ , %� f �7�° � ` �u j l (o ' � - ! I Ll . � �< � � �'� Id 6 k' rc�o- -ch,c. � d � � ;' ���f1 � .. �� iab8 � �.�,�.� �� 7g�- "% ; , �� U��.rfc:_. ��„t.--'�`""r��.e- -r�'d �4! %r'a:-•'��y..�7 -0"1� , ,�%/ - ?v � �/J � G .�"� ✓1Cnz� �.�J4i�� -`_� 30 r . ��..L�,+f% ���� . .S� %/- .i G' 7'�,�{. �G,u-��S ��T�yo,.— /4 it D [`�s n.� � � .. 'Y ��l � V / ��i�._„� `;�-�-� 6 d r���1�` 't;G - . sb�- �s �j� i � � �a,�� c� -��'e..�e�oc� G 4 Y%Z�.l;a,r��'v ��-a� � G 0 � �'1 � � ����woJi� �, )� �� �-+�__ '`�-1� : U'�l5 G��� �°�, G � �':? �',� ��. , _ .. -� � f "�fQ _�� �il�'� �c�n%� ���,:1�:� �, .. �f G-j� �� !C , 4 :, � ��� �� ��ti� �,(-��� ,,2z- �v c� �Q ���� .� ,' J ���. r � F � � V � ��, �� �aa-o-��-S7-�rs 5 �i-6�s9 `_ :,�,�,;.. �/so �� s7, JU� � l.,p�� %o l ��� (ri�` N- � ,,�',w.�.u-� �/ � ��Z ,� �-�� �+l'� �.,�,v ��� ��.� - �- .� � f 55—�v – � "°� ��' � , � � � �. , � ,��,�,� � ��� �a��. �, ��, � , �c��Q� CkS�RANn 6 3 y/ 7�-' S'l` 2 F . ' - - �- � �.� 7/— ���/ t: t�.o�c�-Frc P %��a��, �asi- �� ��.,vF Q,P.���� � �.v� � � 3 9- ���.�� �l ' `�. i��nu�. ��.e.,f � 5 0 0 �� f� fJ�. ���.;. �'�. d':�., . r � � `!����� v �� / I � �� '—� / L'%//�� i, ' ' s � —� �i �'. ��G �i ���-�� ��'j�'�J3�1 �" S�D..3 "��/�..��. � ! ' /��y/� 7� / r , . �3M .i/ [/._Y LL✓.�i ;,).c:4 6�...- f:. :')� _. _ _ -� G+ f�/�.� .. .-!�� �- . . �p �f /e y ;; (o Gcy�c,i �%s='�t.arM1 �" `? � * t - � j� '- c.L t �: / I - 1l+r<'�t �ta'XYl3-a , . � , g4z4 f�s�,�or. j�ae n1 E" G`� ,�'.��, �S'1� �s/r=�H �re. H� �: � ;����,,Q - /� '� s r, �, � j1,,1� };��-a� s/o , �'/.� � %1%n,a �� � ��- ��S" ��---��'`:� . r .- `�. � � �,..�.,...� n?�o Ce[��� �.! �G - /1f 9S$ �•'✓Pl�;�C^r.E .1��- �t/� � � 7yt� 131 v�e � 1t�� �� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — APril 20, 1977 Paae 1 CALL TO ORDER� Chairperson Harris called the meeting to order at 7:4❑ P.M. ROLL CALL= Members Present: Me�bers Absant: Others Present= Shea, Bergman, Harris, Schnabel, Lagenfeld Peterson Jerrold Boardman, City Planner APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES� April 6, 1977 Mr• Bergman requested that page 2, the first and sixth sentences, the word °not^ be eliminated. Mr. Lagenfeld requested that on page 3, the sixth paragraph, the last sentence be eliminated• Mrs. Schnabel requested that on Page 10, the fifth paragraph from the bottom, the first senten�e, the word ^of^ our business community be changed to read ^to^ our business community• Third paragraph from bottom, page 10, third line, the word ^toward^ should be changed to ^with^• It should read �.•• which deals directly with the �ity's objective with the business community- MQTzQN by Shea, seconded by Schnabel, that the Planning Commission minutes of April 6, 1977, be approved as amended• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• 1• CONTINUED= P�BLIC HEARING= BY GARY PETERSON: Rezone from C-1 {local business areas} to R-2 {two family dwelling areas} lots 3, 4, 22 & 23, Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, to allow the construction of Dauble Bungalows/ Duplexes, the same being 1326 and 1355 Osborne Road N•E- and 1331 and 1345 Meadowmoor Terrace N.E. Mr• Gary Peterson, the petitioner, was not present. Chairperson Harris explained that this particular item was moved to May 4, 1977, at the petitioner's request• Mr. Boardman explained that all people concerned had been notified by mail that the hearing would be continued on May 4, 1977, at the petitioner's request• Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Paae 2 Chairperson Harris asked why this was being done• Mr• Boardman explained that Mr. Pete�son wanted to wait so that the variance would go through at the same time• Mr. Bergman mentioned that perhaps, since this was a public hearing, that anyone that did happen to be in the audience should be able to speak. Chairperson Harris asked if there was anyone in the audience in regards to the item. There was no one, mainly because Mr• Boardman had notified, by mail, all concerned people• MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Lagenfeld, that the Planning Cotranission continue until May 4, 1977, Public Hearing: ftezoning Request, ZOA t77-01, by Gary Peterson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• 2• CONTINUED� REQUEST FOR A LOT SPLIT. L.S• �77-02, BY PARK METROPOLITAN INVESTMENT FUND� Split off the Southerly 120 feet of Lot 1+ Block 3, Commerce Park, to make two parcels for tax purposes, the same being 7300 and 732❑ University Avenue N.E- {Zoned C-2}- {See Appeals Commission minutes of April 12, 1977, for variance approval}• Mr• $teve Coddon, Park Metropolitan Investment Fund+ was present. �r- Boardman explained that presently located on this property is a gas station and a car wash. The property and one building is owned by one party and the other building is oWned by another person. Mr• Boardman explained that the request is to split the property• He explained that the buildings are ten feet apart and by making the lot split right down the middle of the two buildings, there would be a five foot setback for each buildinq• The property does meet the requirements as laid out for the commercial zoning on the property. Each building has a front footage of 160 feet• Reference was made of the Plan�ing Commission minutes from y970, where action was taken• At that time, the Commission had made a statement that if at any time �hey wanted tnis property under two ownerships, the lot split would have to be approve�-fiy-Counci :— Mr• Codden made reference to the Appeals Commission Meeting of April 12, 1977, at which he had made a variance request, that Mr. ftobert Aldrich, Fire Prevention Bureau Chief, had reaffirmed his statement made June 1, 1970, regarding �Tre protection. Mr. Aldrich had stated that the structures were low and he would have �o reservations in the construction of {or} placement in the event of a fire. He said that the trucks could get around the buildings easily• Mr. Codden felt it would be sensible, at this time, to have the lot split• Mrs• Schnabel verified what Mr. Codden had said regarding the April 12, 1977, Appeals Commissio� Meeting• �lanning Commission Meetin — April 20, 1977 Pa e 3 Mr. Lagenfeld made the statement that accessabilaty of this property posed no problems• Mr= Lagenfeld asked Mr. Codden if it wasn't his intention to sell this property• Mr. Codden confirmed the statement that it was his intention to divest himself of the ownership of the self-service car wash. Mr. Bergman made the statement that the Planning Commission has received the request to do a lot split regarding two structures which do exist and are, in fac�, ten feet aparte He stated that even though they do involve a conflict of city code, in reality the buildings do exist and he felt that at this point, it should be recommended to City Council= MOTION by Mr= Bergman, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the Planning Commission recomme�d to City Council approval of a lot split, L.S, t77-02 byPark Metropolitan Invenstment Fund,,-to split off the Southerly »n fi� t nf � t 1 u� �� r,--.- � o � tn maLo twn narralc fnr tav mirn SeS - the same being 7300 and 7320 Un�versity Avenue N.E., zoned C-2. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Harris stated that this request would go to the City Council on May 2, 1977. 3. PUBIIC HEARIflG:. RE UEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #77-02, CANADIAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION: :er r�dley City Code, Section 205.05 , 3 E and F, to allow the cons— tr o of housing for the elderly and an autanobile parking lot for off= street parking in an R-1 Zoning District, on Lots }-7, and the Northerly 215 feet of Lot 24, Block 1, Alice Wall Addition. MOTION by Mr= Lagenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, to open the Public Hearing request for a special use permit, SP }77-02� Canadian Financial Corporationa �pon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 7:55 P.M= Mra Richard S� Kahn, Canadian Financial Corporation, was present- Mr. Boardman explained that the original plan for the property in question was for a 144-unit conventional apartment building. However, the financing for that particular project did not come through, and Canadian Financial Corporation stepped in with an immediate proposal on that property. Mr• Boardman explained that the first proposal received was for 138 multi-family units• The Staff went out to the Golden Valley project which Canadian Financial Corporation is involved in, the Dover Hill project• This project was carefully looked at alonq with Canadian Financial Corporation• He worked with Canadian Finance in dsveloping a proposal for �QY �ulti-family area and 104 unit eldlrly strucLure• The multi-family unitt �rould be located in a presently sontd R-3 erea that was zoned for apartaynt buildings= The elderl,y by�,� �roul�i be, loFated o ern e- zoned property; inclu ing ots� riif or7, Planniny Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 4 Under the proposal for the 104 unit multi-family and_104.unit elderly, we would have required a special use permit to allow the elderly building in Zone R-1 and also a special use permit to ailow a portion of the multi-family area to be in the R-1 zone• Also with the 104 unit proposal �t- would have required a variance. The maximum number of units allowed on that portion is 92 units• The Canadian Financial Corporation went ahead with the 104 units at this time with full knowldege that a special use permit approved, they would go for a variance• This proposal has been sent to the Human Resource Commission and the Community Development �ommission. These commissions recommended to Canadian Finance Corporation that they may want to bring the number down to 92 units• Canadian Finance Corporation agreed to do this• Therefore, the plan now is for 92 units multi-family and 104 units elderly. This would eliminate the need forthe Special Use Permit to attow�parking�in the R-1 zoni� for the multi-familv com�l�x. _____� ____ Mr. Boardman also pointed out that they are still proposing the single family development along seventh street and 63rd 8 64th Avenues and eliminate lots 1 thru 7 but keep lots 8 thru 22- At this point Mr- Boardman turned the floor over to Mr. Richard Kahn from Canadian Financial Corporation• Mr• Kahn presented more background material on how they arrived at their present plan. He explained that back in November, the Canadian Financial �orporation had been working with the Wall Corporation on a proposal that had previously been approved by the City Council for that property for a 144-unit cortve�tio�al type building. As they progressed with this particular proposal, the State Housing Finance Agency came back and said they should consider a plan more oriented towards family townhouse units- This required them to come back to the city with a whole new concept. The reason they chanqed the plan from family to combination family/elderly came after some discussions with the City of Fridley Staff. The Staff felt that a project the community had the greatest interest in was a combination of both• Mr• Kahn stated they had taken the Staff for a tour of the Golden Valley project and $taff had given encouragement to duplicate the Golden Valley Plan. Therefore, Canadian Financial Corporation then came up with a new plan that would call for a Senior Citizen mid-rise of five stories, with 104 unita and 104f�nily townhous�-type units. Based on further discussions they had with the Staff and during meetings with the Community Development Commission and the Human Resources Commission last week they had again modified their plan slightly and came up the the plan that Mr. Kahn had displayed• Mr- Kahn then described the plan. He explained that the larger gray area on the plan was the Senior Citizen mid-rise building consisting of 104 units, five stories high, with all units having one bedroom. There would be a half-moon pick-upJdrop-off area in front of the Senior Citizen building. There would be no parking allowed here, however, the area would be biq enough for a bus turn-around. There would be parking behind the Senior Citizen building• There would be a SOi parking Capability for the senior citizens consistinq of parking spaces and garages. Plannina Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Pa9e 5 Mr• Kah� continued with his description of the plan. He indicated that the remainder of the area was the multi-family units• He said that after discussion with Staff, instead of 104 multi-family units, there would be only 92 units� Therefore, he explained that there would be no request for a variance on that part of the proposal• Mr• Kahn then went to the drawing of the plan and pointed out to the Commission a few of the things he had added such as a tennis court, a court for basketball/volleyball+ a play area for the children, and playground equipment for the smaller children• He added a building of approximately 2,4D0 square feet for a community center• He indicated that they would be doing extensive landscaping, especially around the pond• He said there would be a walking path, well lighted, with benches at various points around the pond- Also he indicated a pic�ic area for both the senior citizens and family areas. He added that the Senior Citizen area would also have a putting green, qas grills+ and a community room located in the building• This community room would be approxiamtely y,200 square feet in size and would be made available to the Senior Citizens of Fridley for their various meetings and activities• There would also be several multi-purpose rooms available for the use by Senior Citizens• Mr• Kahn indicated that one parking space and one garage would be provided for each of the 92-unit multi-family townhouses• Mr• Kah� then went into some detail with �ega�ds to what Canadian Financial Corporation has done in Golden Valley• The city of Golden Yalley was very extensively involved in the Dover Hill project- Golden Valley had been very resistent at first to have this kind of proposal in their community. They indicated that if they were going to have this type of project, there were two things they had to know — {y}they had to know that they would fiave control in designing the project and {2} know that they would have control over the management of the project indefinitely into the future• Mr• Kahn indicated that Golden Valley did control the design of the project from start to finish• In terms of management, what the City of Golden Valley did is in the zoning approval Canadian Financial Corporation received, that for all times the City Council of Golden Valley would control the management policies of the complex and if there was ever a time that Canadian Financial Corporation was doing something with that project in terms of management that the City didn't like� they could, through the Council, issue an order to have Canadian Financial Corporation change it• If the City didn't like the way the grounds were being maintained, if they didn't like the kind of programs that they were offering to the residents, if there were complaints from neighbors about something they weren't doing, all they would have to do is simply order them to take care of the matter and Canadian Financial Corporation would have to do it• Planning Commission Meetin9 — April 20, 1977 Page 6 Mr. Kahn indicated that the City of 6olden Valley also established a procedure where the Human Resources Commission would review the operation of this project on a continual basis• Four times a year the Commission would review the operation. Twice a year they would make a report to the Gity Council as to how they were doing and if they felt that there were things that would have to be changed, they would make recommendation to the City Council. The Council, in turn, would indicate to Canadian Fina�cial Corporation that such things were to be done immediately• Mr. Kahn said that the City of Golden Valley has become so involved in this Project that Canadian Financial Corporation meets with a representative from the Human Resources Housing Community Development Commission, a social services director, and a resident manager and go through applications and unanimously agree on who should live in each unit. Ne stated that in the instance of poor tenants, there was a court procedure whereby within 3❑ days, they could be evicted even if the lease had not expired• Mr. Kahn said that thev were not reluctant to do this� Mr• Kahn stated that he felt that this process-was one of the reasons that this project has been so successful- Mr. Kahn proceeded to say that because this project has been so successful, they would like to duplicate this idea in Fridley• He said that Canadian Fina�cial Corporation would like to set up some arrangement whereby on a long term basis, Fridley, like Golden Valley, would be able to control the management of the complex and through Human Resources or Community Developme�t Commissions iwhichever manner Fridley decided to structure it} they would consta�tly be working with management from the City in developing management policies and determining wfiat kinds of people should be living in this project; and, in general, making sure that the Project is being operated the way the City of Fridley would want it to be operated• Mr. Kahn continued with his presentation by explaining that all the Senior Citizen units would be subsidized- Under that program, the tenants would pay 25 percent of their monthly income for rent. This would mean that those tenants on Social Security payments of �400 per month would pay �100 per month for rent. �r• Kahn indicated that the multi-family section would also be eligi��e for this plan. Mr. Kahn gave the breakdown of the multi-family units• There would be 40 one-bedroom units, 40 two-bedroom units, and 12 three-bedroom units. In closing, Mr- Kahn, said that some preliminary �esearch had been done and Fridley has a relatively high degree of people approaching 65• Canadian Financial Corporation has found that when people retire, usually they want to stay in the community they have lived most of their lives4 however, many times they are forced to leave because their ability to pay for housing had gone down, while housing and rents had gone up. Planning Commission Meeting — April 2�, 1977 Page 7 Mrs. Schnabel asked about plans for single family dwellings on the remaining lots• Mr• Kahn answered that upon approval of the plans, there is presently a contractor interested in the remaining lots to build single family dwellings• The price range of these homes would be in the �50-60,000 range• Chairperson Harris asked if the driveways emptied onto Mississippi• Mr• Boardman answered that all accesses are on fifth street• The drop off/pick-up area in front of the Senioc Citizen Building would be the only driveway onto Mississippi Street- Mr. Boardman indicated that he didn't feel that this would result in an extensive amount of traffic- Mrs. Shea expressed concern for the lack of a plan for tornado shelters.. Wanted to know if some provision could be made for such shelters• Mr• Kahn answered that he assumed that some provisions for tornado shelters would have to be draWn into the plan before the proposal couid be approved. Mr. Bergman commended Mr. Kahn on the fact that ma�y of the items of concern and considerations brought up at the Community Development Cammission meeting of April 12, 1977, have been entered into the new plan being presented• He felt that, in deed, Mr• Kahn had an improved plan. Mr• Bergman asked Mr• Kahn how Canadian Financial Corporation had arrived at the size of the Senior Citizen building and the number of units it would contain- Mr. Kahn answered that Canadian Financial Corporation assumed that the height of the building would be a matter of concern in Fridley• Therefore, they decided on five stories, which because of the size of each unit, would best handle 1�4 units• If a need was expressed for more units, then it would mean they would have to add more height. The reason they wouldn't make the buildinq longer is that it would be too far of a walk to the elevators for the residents living at the far ends of the hallways• Mr. Lagenfeld wanted to know the approximate turn-over in the Project• Mr. Kahn commented that in the Senior Citizen building there would basically be no turn-over. Generally, once a person moves into a Senior Citizen residence, they 9enerally stay• He estimated that in the family dwellings, the turn-over would be about 30-35% per year• Pianning Commissio� Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 8 Mr. Lagenfeld asked Mr. Kahn to explain the screening process- Mr. Kahn responded that the process would be whatever the City of Fridley decided• It could be made the responsibility of the Human ftesources Commission or the Community Hevelopment Commission. It could be handled the same as 6olden Valley• :=ra'_°:. Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know the breakdown of the 92 multi-family units� Mr. Kahn indicated that the larger building would consist of eight one-bedroom units and eight two-bedroom units. The two-bedroom units are two-story townhouses that will be 1,200-1,300 square feet. On top of each two-bedroom unit ia a one-bedroom unit. The other buildings would be either two or three-bedroom units• The overall breakdown would be 40 one-bedroom units, 40 two-bedroom units, and 12 three- bedroom units. Mrs. Schnabel wanted to know about guest parking for the senior citizen building• Mr• Kahn indicated that approximately 1/3 of the tenants would have cars• There are 52 parking spaces available for the 104 units• Therefore, he felt that there would be ample spaces for the guests to park. He indicated that at the Golden Valley project, there are always plenty of empty space• He added that guests would enter from Fifth Street and then proceed to the Senior Citizen Building. Mr- Kahn continued that at the Multi-Family section they have allowed for one space and one garage for each unit. Not all families will have two cars; therefore, again, there would be ample parking for guests. Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if there would be a guest room in the Senior Citizen building for visiting families• Mr. Kahn indicated that in the past, when Canadian Financial Corporation asked the Senior Citizens what they wanted done with extra available space, most of them indicated they would like to have a semi-medical clinic that would be available for them. The tenants felt that the utilization of the extra space would be more beneficial to them as a clinic than a guest room. However, Mr. Kahn, indicated that they would leave the decision of what to do with extra space up to the tenants themselves• Chairperson Harris wanted to know approximately how many children would come out of the multi-family area. Mr. Kahn responded that studies have come up with an estimated number of .7 ehildren.per,uni-t� Chairperson Harris asked Mr. Boardman if anyone from the Fire Prevention Bureau had checked the plans in regards to the height of the Senior Citizen Building• Plannin� Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Pa9e 9 Mr- Boardman a�swered that � there would be no problem handling the five story building• � Chairperson Harris wanted to know if thers Would be any screening process for the Multi-Family section. . Mrr Kahn responded that it would be the same as explained for the Senior titizen Building• Chairperson Harris wanted to k�ow what will happen to the rest of the R Y 1 Zoned lots 18-22• Mr. Kahn indicated that they would be sold to another developer who would build single family homes.in the 550-60,OOD price range• Mr.-Kahn indicated that he noticed that there were many people in the audience who had been at.the Dover Hill Project in Golden Valley and he assumed they would have some questions they might want answered• Mrs• 3chnabel wanted it to be understood that the reason the Planning �ommission was not asking many questions ass that the Commission had been invited out to Golden Valley to see the Dover Hill Project and maAy had gone and had asked numerous questions previously• At this point Chairperson Harris asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to comment about the Project• Mrs. Maddmsen of 7311 Oakley Street N.E. commented that she was very much interested-in the Senior titizen Building- 3he said sha was presently living in a Mobil Home• She presently had Eo do ail the lawn work, all the shoveling, and general upkeep of the property• She felt that it wouldn't be long before she wauldnf.t`_fee���i�e opeme able to do all the work necessary• She said that there wasn't any place in Fridley a person could go to get this type of accommodations. She felt that Fridley should definitely consider something of this tyQe for its Senior Citizens. Mrs. Gladys Peek of 1047 North Circle N.E• commented that the Senior Citizens would all like to remain in Fridley where they have lived for many years. She said that it was becoming increasingly harder to find an apartment that a Senior Citizen could afford• She said she would be delighted if this buiiding could be in Fridley• Mr. Steven Takle of 6311-7th Street N•E• waa�ed to know what would happen if the Federal Subsidy Program was cut back in coming years• What is being planned to take care of this problem? Mr. Kahn responded that before construttion is even started, �anadian Financial Corporation would sign-a contract with the Government for 40 years, guaranteeing this re�tal subsidy program- Mr. Takle asked if there was a firm agreement with the contractor to build the single family dwellings on lots 8 thru 22• Mr. Kahn said that yes, there was an agreement and the contractor was ready to go ahead as soon as the project was approved• Plan�inq Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 1❑ Mr. Takle asked about the completion time, should the project be approved• Mr. Kahn said that he hoped to begin construction this fall and figured that it would be eom�L�d i��ahuu� �e:�ear• Mr. Takle quoted Mr• Kahn as saying there would be one parking space and one garage for each multi-family dwelling. He Wanted to know if any provisions would be made for the many things that accummulate in a family like bikes, wagons, and other play things• Mr. Kahn said that this would be the responsibility of each family to keep up their yards• There will be policies made up governing this type of thing and the management will take care of the matters immediately• Mr. Takle asked if the Senior Citizen and Multi-Family g�wu►rs}� would be kept up by the same people• Mr. Kahn said that yes there would be the same up keep on both grounds• Mr. Takle commented that the�e was�� perk close by and would there be walkways provided from the project to the park. He wanted to know who would be assessed for these walkways- Mr. Kahn said that they have not included this type of walkway to the park in their plans. Mr. Boardman commented that there would be walkways all around • and throughout the project. He said that there would be a sidewalk to the park, but that it would not be a part of the project. Mr. Boardman submitted a letter received from the County Commissioner of A�oka County offering the support of the County Board to the proposed senior citiaens' housing project planned for the Wall property in the City of Fridley• � MOTION by Mr- Lagenfeld, seconded by Mrs. Schnable, that the Planning Commission receive the letter from Anoka County, Mike E• A'Bannon, County �ommissioner. Chairperson Harris read the letter. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the letter was received• Chairperson Harris said that the letter will go in a file to go to City Council- Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 11 Mrs� Olive Hedman of 5695 West Moore Lake Drive commented that she had gone out to the Golden Valley Project and she felt that the Senior Citizen building was a nice, secure place to live. She said that there were a lot of high-rise buildings for seniors, but none of them were in such a safe neighborhood as the one in Fridley• She said that she really liked Fridley a�d would like the opportunity to stay here• Mrs. Helen Burtson of 1091 North Circle N.E. said that she really couldn't add anything to what everyone else had said• She _iust said that she would really like to have the Tenior Citia�n-BUildi�g• Sue Shelton of 500 Bennett Drive N.E. commented about the abundance of water runoff whe� it rained• She wanted to know where all the water would go• Mr- Boardman commented that with the development of this property they would be making it possible for the pond to handle a 50-year flood• He said that the purpose of the po�ding area was to handle the water run off; basically a holding area for abundant water until the water could gradually run off into the sewer systems- He said that this would eliminate the need to completly update the entire sewer systems in the area- Sue Shelto� asked if the Senior Citizen Building and the Multi-Family buildings would be managed separately or by one and the same- Mr. Kahn said that Canadian Financial Corporation will manage both areas• Mr• Schnabel asked Mr• Boardman who would be assessed for the storm sewer system. Mr• Boardman said that the sewer system would be totally withi� the property itself. Mr• 6eorge Meisner of 373 Mississippi Street expressed concern about driving onto �ississippi Street from a driva�ay• His concern was from the standpoint of what another driveway will do• He also felt that a five-story building would have a negative impact on the area. Mr• Kahn didn't agree that it would be a negative thing• He said it didn't seem to produce any hostile feelings at all in Golden Valley and they have a seven-story Senior Citizen Building. Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 12 Chairperson Harris asked Mr. Kahn if he had elevations of the buildings- Mr. Kahn showed the commission the exact comparison to the library that would be right next to the Senior Citizen Building• The arches on the library would be about 1/2 as high as the Senior Citizen building• Also he explained that the landscaping and grading of the grounds would be such that it would help neutralize any problems. Mr•Meisner wanted to know if the extensive grading involved would be included in the proposal and if it would be all done at once• Mr• Kahn responded yes to all comments• Mr• Meisner questioned the security procedures that would be i� the Senior Citizen building• Mr• Kahn explained that they would have a full security system with intercoms and buzzers• The building would be locked at all times. The residents would have to go to the door to give addmitance to anyone• Mr• Meisner wnated to know if this was only an apartment complex for the elderly or perhaps sometime in the future� will families be allowed to rent. Mr. Kahn responded that this would be an apartment compiex for Senior Citizen ONLY• Mr. Meisner want to know the difference in regards to the special use permits. Mr. Boardman said that only hospital clinics, housing for the elderly, rest homes or senior citizen residences can be built in an R-1 Zone with a special use permit. Apartment complexes cannot. Mrs• Joseph Tapsak of 510 Mississippi Street N.E. expressed concern for the children in regards to the pond• She wanted to know if a fence would be installed. Sfie�wanted_toe�nbm how deep the water would be• Also she wanted to know if there would be something done regarding insect control• Mr• Kahn said they had no plans to fence the pond as they found fences were more of a challenge to children than a safety factor• He said that special precautions were being taken to have the pond have a gradual slope and no sharp drop offs. Mv. Boardman explained that t6e water would probably be two to three feet deep except during a storm, at which time it would be considerably deeper pny o�erf�om of water i� the ponding area would go into the parkings areas and gradually be handled by the storm sewer system- He indicated that actually they didn't anticipate this to be a frequent event. He felt th�t this method would be a temporary type of thing that would have to be lived with. Otherwise, they would have to enter into a substantially expensive re-modification of the total sewer system in the area• Plannina Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 13 Mr. Boardman also explained the capability of the ponding area to take care of 12 acres of water, one foot deep- Mr. Kahn said that Canadian Financial Corporation would do whatever the City of Fridley felt was necessary as far as insect control• Mr. Boardman said that presently there was a plan in the proposal to keep the water in the pond from becoming stagnant• He felt that this could possibly tie in with the insect control for the complex• Chairperson Harris asked what was presently being done in regards to insect control in that area- Mr. Boardman stated that presently nothing in particular was being done• Mr• Arvid Miller of 525 Bennett Drive N.E• asked if the storm sewer system is updated in the future what would Ytaµp�rr to the pond area• Also he wanted to know who would handle this assessme�t. Mr. 8oardman explained that if something like that was done, the project would handle their share of the expenses• Regarding the pond, the area would become open space in the project. He said that the area would remain open space and not build on• Mr. Takle wanted a verification that the Senior Citizen building would be for senior citizens able to take care of themselves and not a nursing home. Also wanted verification of the parking space available for the Senior Citizens- Also wanted to know about overflow parking during peak visiting times• Mr. Kahn verified that the senior citizen building would be for people capable of taking care of themselves• He explained that parking would be approximately 50 percent and that in Golden Valley, this amount of parking space was adequate• Chairperson Harris commented that since the County of Anoka stated that this Senior Citizens' housing would be in conformance with the plans of the County Library Board and the County Board af Commissioners, perhaps something could be worked out with the Library to utilize their parking area on special holidays {Christmas, Easter, etc} when the Library would not be open. A senior citizen from the audience made the statement that basically most senior citizens spend holidays with their children and the parking would probably be less of a problem on these days. Plannina Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Pa9e 14 Mr. Lagenfeld said that he went on the tour of the Dover Hill project in Golden Valley and that he found it to be most impressive• He looked at locks and pounded on walls to check for hollow spots• He said he was very nosey, more so than he figured Canadian Fi�ancial Corporation had expected• He felt that the construction of the Senior Citizen building was superb. He said that each room had a smoke detector and a central smoke detecting unit in the hallways; in other words he felt that as far as fire protection, this project couldn't be beat. He indicated that some people made comments as to this being a^high rise^• It seems that immediately a person would think of some kind of skyscraper sticking out like a sore-thumb. He didn't think that that was a�:ail �rue even with the seven stories in Golden Valley• He went on to say that he tried looking at the project from the outside, putting himself in the position of a citizen of Fridiey as to how this really would appear. He really felt that once completed, this project would actually blend in with the surrounding areas and would be an asset to the City• He indicated that many people think that the project will be subsidized, therefore that it would be sub-standard• Mr- Lagenfeld indicated that NO WAY• He felt this was a really beautiful structure. He felt that the City of Fridley would really be able to say they were proud of this project• The city would be able to take pride in the fact that they were finally getting something for the Senior Citizens• He also induaatect that we really do need this type of rental unit in our community. There was applaud from the audience. Mrs• Schnabel indicated that for four years or more she has wanted to see a Senior Citizen housing project in Fridley• 3he had always had the opinion that this pa�ticular piece of property would be ideal for this type of project• She really felt that this Senior Citizen plan has been a long time in coming. Mrs• Schnabel asked Mr. Boardman if there were any plans regarding the intersection of Mississippi and University avenues as to improving it for pedestrian safety. Mr. Boardman said that he fe�t that this was something that really had to be looked into- An observor from the audience came forward to add the comment that the intersection of Mississippi and Hwy 47 was scheduled to be reviewed- He said that many things were being considered such as turning lanes, improved pedestrian cr��.irrg�r and possibly an overpass• Chairperson Harris asked Mr. Boardman if Staff had read through the Ma�agement Plan- Mr. Boardman said that they had• He indicated that Staff was in complete agreement with the plan as drawn up• Tfie only point that needed more wording was the opening of the building for community Senior Citizen fuRCtions• Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 15 Chairperson Harris asked Mr• Kahn if he had seen the list of Stipulations� Mr• Kahn said that they have seen and read the list. He agreed to go along with all items. Mrs• Shea indicated that Mr• Kahn has been most willing to answer any and all questions that the members of the Planning Commission have had. She indicated that Canadia� Financial Corporation has also been most cooperative to any concerns or ideas the members have had. Mr• Lagenfeld made the statement that the Senior Citizens living in the Dover Hill project seemed most satisfied• He also wanted to point out that this project would be centrally located• He felt that it was true that some problems would have to be ironed out, but he was most confident that the Staff and Council wouid be able to clarify everything• MOTION by Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Shea, to close the public hearing: Request for a special use permit, SP �77-02, Canadian Financial Corporation. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing closed at 9:1� P.M. AOTION by Mr= Bergman, seconded by Mrs• Shea, to recommend to City Council approval of the request for a special use permit, SP �Z7-I12, Canadian Financial Coroorations Per FridleY Citv Code.: 205.051, {3), E, o a on o ous�ng for t e elderly, on Lots 1- 7, and the Northerly 215 feet of Lot 24, Block 1, Alice Wall Addition, with special note that the special use permit for automobile parking on R-1 property is no longer re4uired, and with the stipulations contained in an agreement to be considered by the City Council. Mr= Lagenfeld pointed out for the records that the Environmental Quality Commission was 1�0 percent in favor of this project. Mrs- Schnabel also wanted it mentioned that the Appeals Commission was in favor of this plan and were pleased to see the project come about. The had one question regarding the list of stipulations previously approved by the Planning Commission. She wanted to know if the additional stipulation regarding insect control would be added to this list or would tha� be acted upon by City Council. It was indicated that the additional stipulations regarding insect control would be incorporated by City Council• Mr= Boardman indicated that Canadian Financial Corporation has gone over these stipulations and probably would be adding them to their proposal• UPON A VOIC� VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairperson Harried said that this item would be considered by City Council on May 2, 1977• Planning Commission Meeting — April 2U, 1977 Page 16 4. PUBLIC HEARING= RE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP �77-03, up exes an or ou e bungalows, in an R-1 Zoning district {single family homes}� per Fridley City Code, Section 205:053, 3, D, to be located on Lot 11� Auditor's Subdivision No•23, together with vacated Grand Avenue as dedicated in the plat of Fridley Park, the same being 6431-33 East River Road and 6435-37 East River Road N.E• MOTION by Lagenfeld, seconded by Schnabel that the Planning Commission open the Public Hearing on the request for a special use permit, SP �77-03, by Barry C• Brottlund• Upon a voite vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 9:15 P•M. MOTION by Lagenfeld, seconded by Schnabel that the Planning Commission read the letter to Mr• Harris dated April 11, 1977, from John W• Kimbler and Joyce E• Kimbler concerning the property located at 6431-33 East River Road and 6435-37 East River Road• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairperson Harris read the letter in opposition to this request. MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr• Ber�nan that the Planni�g Commission receive the letter to the Planning Commission dated April 11, 1977, concerning the property located at 6431-33 East River Road and 6435-37 East River Road from Mary Carda and Leo Carda• Even though this letter was a part of the agenda, Mr. Lagenfeld felt that the letter should be read for the benefit of the audience- The letter was read- �PON A VOICE VQTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the letter was received• Mr. Boardman gave the Commission a background of the request- He stated that the proposal is for a double bungalow/duplex to be constructed on Lot 11 {referred to agenda page 39}. The intent of the proposal is to divide the property into two parcels for construction of two structures• Mr. Brottlund was coming before the Planning Commission for a special use permit that will allow for the construction of double bungalows in an R-1 Zoned area• Mr• Boardman explained that both lots would be approximately 12,000 squre feet• The requirement for a duplex is 10,000 square feet; therefore, they do meet the requirements• Mr• Barry C• Brottlund was present at the meeting. Chairperson Harris invited Mr. Brottlund to speak before the Commission on this subject• Planning Commission Meetin9 — April 20, 1977 Paye 17 Mr. Brottlund explained his intentions of how the construction would be done and approximately what type of construction he had planned for the property. He said that the structures would be two units each. His plans are to make property values in the area be�efit by the structures- He said that the units would be very attractive• They should do nothing but add to the attractiveness of the area• He went on to say that there are several plans available that will give these duplexes the appearance of being a single family dwelling• He did indicate that at this point in time he didn't know exactly what he will be building • Mr. Lagenfeld ..--�,--� . � , �t._y,..ty..._ _r asked him if he had any pla� at all at this time? „ r 7�. �1,_ - ,�� _ �:-,.- " y -� . {1r. Brottlund answered that he didn't have any plans at this time• Mr. Lagenfeld asked if he had any idea of any similar type of structure somewheres in our City. Mr. Brottlund answered that there were fou� such structures in the City of New Brighton, He said that he had been in contact with the single home owners in the area, some directly across the street. These people did indicate that when they first were aware of the units, they did show some concern, as I am sure anyone would• However, since the construction of these structures, they have all been happy with the type of people that have been living in them, primarily owner occupied. Most have been impressed with tfie structUres. Mr. Lagenfeld asked if he has looked into the feasibility of constructing single family dwellings- Mr. Brottlund said it had been considered• He said there are accommodations on the property to take care of either single or double family units. He said that he had looked over the area and felt that there was a trend for good looking, well cared for double family dwellings. Mrs. Schnabel wanted to know if Mr. Brottlund had an option o� this land or if he owned it• Mr• Brottlund responded that he had a purchase agreement. Mr. Schnabel wanted to know if he was intending to build for sale of the property or if he was planning to lease them- Mr. Brottlund explained that he had three different plans: {y} To market them to builders that will build them for sale {market the land}• {2} Most preferable way, that he has contacted two builders that were most interested in putting up the type of buildings he had mentioned, for sale purposes. Planning Commission Meetinq — April 20, 1977 Page 18 {3} To put the structures up himself and lease them. Again, Mr• Brottlund indicated that he was most interested in pursuing the second choice• Mrs. Schnabel asked that since he has a purchase agreement on the property, that if he would hire a contractor to build on the property for sale purposes, who would retain ownership of the property• Mr. Brottlund indicated that the contractor would retain ownership• Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if Mr. Brottlund was in the construction business himself- Mr• Brottlund responded that he was not. Mr. Schnabel wanted to know if he had any ideas, if he was to develop this property, if he would have driveway access onto River Road or would he plan for a turnaround on the property itself. Mr. Brottlund said that this was one of the things he discussed with Mr• Boardman. He indicated that this would definitely be a consideration since both lots are large enough to have turn-around areas• Mrs• Shea wanted to know who owned the garage that is on the property. Mr• Brottlund said that it belongs to the present property owner and that it goes with the property. Mr. Lagenfeld wanted to know what kind of landscaping, fencing, etc• he had planned to put on this property• Mr. Brottlund indicated that presently there is fencing across the front of the property from one driveway to the other driveway, about 15 feet from the curb• He indicated that the price range of this planned st�ucture would be betwee� $65-85,aan and that the cosmetic appearance of the property would be comparable to the price of the home• Mr- Lagenfeld asked if this particular idea was just a speculative venture at this time. IMr. Srottlund indicated that, in part, it was a speculative venture; but he personally felt that it would be to the benefit of the area. Mr• Bergman believed that the total block in question was zoned R-1• Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 19 Mr- Boardman clarified that Lot 10 was zoned Commercial, however, that the rest of the biock was, in fact, zoned R-1• Mr• Bergman wanted to know the Zoning of Block 12- Mr• Boardman indicated that they were R-1• Mr• Bergman wanted to know if there were any other duplexes in the area. Mr. Boardman explained that there were none east of East River Road• He said that there were some further down on East River Road• He then discussed the locations of present duplexes in the area• Mr• Bergman wanted to know if there were any hardship in Mr• Brottlund's request• Mr• Brottlund explained that he felt the lot was extremely large for a single family unit+- He felt that two units, double or single, make better use of the land• However, he said that there was no hardship involved• Chairperson Harris asked if there was anyone in the audience that wished to address the issue• Mr- Ke� Hughes of 6424 Ashton Avenue N•E. indicated that he not only owns his lot but also owns lots 20, 21 & 22• He restated that thie entire area consisted of single family dwellings• He felt it would be wrong to bring in any type of double dwellings• He wanted to know how much of Grand Avenue that Lot 11 included- Mr• Boardman indicated that half of Grand Avenue went to Lot 11 and hal�f would go to Lot 22. Basically 27•7 feet would go to each lot. Mr• Hughes said that he was led to believe that when 6rand Avenue was dedicated. to be a street, that the land had been taken from Fridley Park and when the petition was approved to vacate the land, that it was to go back to Fridley Park. However, when he checked with City Hall, no one could confirm this• would Chairperson Harris commented that if this land came from Fridley Park, then it would go back to Fridley Park. Mr• Hughes quoted from the legal description of the subject property -•.together with the west half of vacated Grand Avenue, as dedicated in the plat of Fridley Park ....• Chairperson Harris indicated that Fridley Park MAY have included those lots on East River Road• Mr• Hughes believed that if this property was from the Park, then double dwelling structures couldn't be built. Plannina Commission Meeting — Arpil 20, 1977 Page 20 Chairperson Harris indicated that the plat better be checked out• He said that as he recalls, this lot in question is a very old plat and that t6e Pla��ing Commission would have to go to the County and hope they still had the records. Mr. Huqhes feit that the building of these structures wou�d definitely lower the real estate in the area• Also he indicated that since there were no parks or playgrounds in the area, where would the children from four additional families play• He said that presently the children in the area have to play in yards or in the streets and adding four more families would only add to the problem- Mr. Hughes manted to know the required frontage for a double dwelling- Mr. Boardman responded that the required frontage was 75 feet and that Mr• Brottlund was showing 76.6 feet on one and 92 feet on the other. Mr. Hughes asked if Mr• 8rottlund would have the required square footage if half of Grand Avenue was not included• Chai�person Harris referred to Page 38 of the agenda and indicated that this was how it was registered in the County of Anoka. He added that if this was incorrect, it would take a Court Action to correct it and Mr. Hughes would have to bring this action• Mr. Lagenfeld asked Mr. Hughes why he felt that this type of dwelling would lower his property value- Mr. Hughes indicated that if he was to plan to buy a home, he would look for a home in a single family dwelling area. He also added that he felt if two double dwellings were built in the area, it would only make City Council more apt to allow more to come in the future• Mr. Gene Emerson of 99 N•E• 64th Way agreed with Mr. Hughes and against the proposed building of two double dwelling uniis• He requested the Commission to consider the feelings and wishes of people living in the area• Chairperson Harris said that the Commission would do this- was the Mr. Warren Palm of 6421 East River Road said he was opposed to the bualding of the proposed two double family dwellings• He felt that Mr. Brottlund was very vague about what he is going to build• He thought that the Commission should make him be more specific as to what exactly his intentions were� Planning Commission Meeting — APril 2p, 1977 Page 21 Mr• LeRoy Erlandson of 60 Mississippi Way wanted it clarified that the wording of the request meant that there would be four families• Also wanted to know about whether the units would be single or double level structures• Mr• Brottlund confirmed that there would be four families• He indicated that he was leaning towards the split entrance structure• Mr• J• Cadwallader of Wayzata was there representing Mr• Brottlund• He indicated that he had gotten legal descriptions of the property made by the Minnesota Valley Surveyors and Engineers Corporation and he has found no restrictions on the property• He indicated that they were dealing with a piece of property southeast of the corner of Mississippi and East River Road• He said that in driving through the area he saw a considerable amount of multi-family apartments and such and the actual corner of Mississippi and East River Road has become cammercial• Mr• Cadwallader felt that the area i5 really set and looking for a buffer zone between single family dwellings and multi- family units• He said that they were loaking for a place to build two two-unit buildings• They have checked into this property and have found that they have the required square footage of land and also that they have the required front square foota9e• He said that they have looked into the access and egress from the property because of the fact that East River Road is quite busy• They felt that they have tried to meet all of the requirements of the City of Fridley• He said that they were not looking for a rezoning, only a special use permit and indicated that if it would be necessary to tie the special use permit to a particular type of building, thep that would be a possibility• He indicated that the city has supplied this land with the necessary requirements for this to be a two unit site• Mr• Cadwallader wanted to make iC clear that they are presently requestinq the division of this property into two separate parcels and that the special use permit is for the separate zoning for a multi-dwelling and that the special use permit is not for the division of the land• He did not want this special use permit and the request for a lot split {item 5 of the agenda} to be considered together• Mrs• Shea asked Mr- Brottlund if he would consider putting up two single family units on this property• Mr• Brottlund responded that yes, consideration has been taken, but that it was only a secondary consideration� MOTION 8Y Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by Mr• Bergman that the Planning Commission close the public hearing on the request for a special use permit SP #77-�3, by Barry C• Brottlund• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing closed at 10:�5 P.M• Planning Commission Meeting — April 20� 1977 Page 22 MOTION by Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by Mrs� Schnabel, that the Planning Commission deny the request for a special use permit SP �77-03, by Barr�C• Brottlund•, to permit the construction of two UU�IICJCCD/vr- uVUU�c uw�yuivnop ��. ..�� �. . �......�� .,.__' '__ �'. _ __ „ . _ per Fridley City Code, Section 205.�53, 3, D, to be iocated on Lot ll, Auditor's Subdivision No. 23, together with vacated Grand Avenue as dedicated in the plat of Fridley Park, the same being 6431-33 East River Road and 6435-97 East River Road. Mr• Lagenfeld indicated that the grounds for denial are the facts that there are no apparent hardship, there doesn't seem to be exactn�ss in the planning and since this is a special use request he doesn't feel it conforms with the Statement that when a special use permit is issued, it must be subject to conditions — the conditions must conform to the following standards: to protect the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare• To avoid traffic congestion or hazards or other dangers or to promote conformity of a proposed use with the character of the adjoining property and uses and the district as a whole or to protect such character• The reason for the denial request was that Mr• Lagenfeld felt that it was not in harmony with the area and does not protect the characters as stated• Mrs• Schnabel seconded the motion because she had several concerns• One was because the petitioner did not have any particular hardship• 3he also was concerned about the development of this property in that Mr� Brottlund has only a purchase a9reement on the property and does not own it• Also that he has three different ideas of what he would do, none being firm• It is because of these that she goes along with the decision to deny the special use permit• 1lPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairperson Harris declared the request for a special use permit SP �77-03 by Barry C• Brottlund be recommended to Council for denial• He indicated that this would go to City Council May 2, 1977• 5• J[J11L LOb y1�� as plated frum of frontage• OT SPLIT, L•S• 77-04, BY BARRY C• BROTTLUND= .S. �, toge er wi vaca e ran ven e Fridley Park into two building sites each 76•66* Mr• Boardman commented that since the legal description of this lot was quite len9thy he had talked to Mr• Brottlund and they decided that instead of a lot split, they would go Plat on the property. He-alse commented that with a notion of the possibility of a denial for the special use permit, he had asked Mr• Brottlund if he would still be interested in splitting the property• Mr• Brottlund responded that he was definitely interested in splitting the property• Chairperson Harris asked how they wanted to handle the request• Mr• Boardman commented that if Hendrickson does own the portion_of the vacated Grand Avenue then it is his right to sell� Planning Commission Meeting — April 2p, 1977 Page 23 Chairperson Harris commented that there may have been a mistake in the vacation ordinance, and felt that the City Attorney should look at it• Mr• Boardman pointed out that the plat would have to go through a public hearing process• He indicated that he would start the process the next day• By that time they should have some indication from City Council regarding the special use permit so that when the plat comes through, we would be able to know what should be done as far as an R-2 or R-1 zoning• Mr• Brottlund made a formal request for the withdrawal of the request far a lot split• Chairperson Harris want the records to show that Mr• Brottlund was withdrawing the request for a lot split, L-S• 77-04• 6• , for the area• N T, P ave the p at meet the new street pattern MOTION by Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Shea, to open the Public Hearing on consideration oi a preliminary plat, P.S• �77-02, replat of Marxen Terrace, by Thomas A• Marxen• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 1U:14 P.M- Mr• Thomas A� Marxen of I,995B Pineridge Drive N•E• was present• Mr• Boardman made reference to the Replat of Marxen Terrace on page 50 of the agenda• He explained that the cul-de-sac did, at the initial plating, extend past Marxen Terrace and cul-de-sac'd on the back properties to the east of Marxen Terrace• He indicated that opposition was received from some property owners regarding the cul-de-sac; therefore, the cul-de-sac was pulled off that area to where it is now within Marxen Terrace• Mr• Marxen commented that he had brought the land from Mr• Hall who had initiated this section about ten years ago with the dedication to this land of the right of way- Mr• Marxen said he brought the land five years ago and built a home on it• Mr• Marxen ended up selling this home and the adjacent lot to it on Onondago Street• Hawever, he indicated that he still owned the back land• He indicated that there seemed to be no other way to make this into a paying project� Mr• Marxen pointed out that several home owners on the Stinson Blvd side of the area in question are opposed to this• They don't want it to affect their property• He pointed out that by moving the cul-de-sac as stated, it would not affeeE� their property• Planninq Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 24 Mr• Boardman clarified that the request was to replat the cul-de-sac to the way it was originally plated• Also he indicated that the second request was for vacation request of the existing right of way described as tne 50 foot right of way located between Lots 3, Block 1 and Lot 1� Block 2 and the south 50 feet of the North 355 feet of �ot 6• Mr• Boardman showed the members of the commission exactly what was in question on a drawing from the plat book• Mr• Virgil Ishaug of 1473-75th Avenue N-E• stated that he was entirely in favor of this particular replat• Mr• Boardman also wanted to point out that with the approval of this replat, they would also be approving a 30 foot setback on the 6ack property• {Again, Mr� Boardman pointed this out to the Commission on a plat drawing}. Mr� Ishaug wanted to know how 'many homes this plat called for now- Mr• Marxen indicated that it called for three homes• Mr• Ishaug wanted to know if this was initially plated for multi-dwellings• Mr• Marxen said that it was all single dwellings• Mrs• Schnabel questioned the lot lines resulting from this• Chairperson Harris showed her the lines on the drawing they had before them• Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know the approximate dimensions of Lat 6• Mr• Boardman explained that it was 276 feet deep and 66•4 feet wide• Mr• Bergman claimed that the Plat Book did not show the plat as dedicated• Mr• Ishaug manted to know if that lot mas vacated, would he be able to put trees all the way back on his property• Chairperson Harris responded that, yes, he would be able to plant trees• At this point the Commission continued to look at the Plat Book and discussed among themselves the area in question• Mr• Marxen brought up the question of Re-Plat fees that he had to pay• Ghairperson Harris informed him to bring this up with the City Council• llannina Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page_25 MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mrs- Schnabel, that the Planning Commission receive the letter from Mr• Thomas E• Marxen reqarding the charges for Re-Plat fees of Plat PS 77-�2• ___ —_— -__ Upon a voice voteo all voting aye, the motion carrie d unanimousZy and the letter was received• MOTION hy Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr• Bergman that the Rlanning Commission close the public hearing on the consideration of a preliminary plat, P•S• #77-02, repZat of Marxen Terrace, by Thomas A� Marxen• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the public Hearing closed at 10:30 P-M• MOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded by Mr• Lagenfeld, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council approval of a preliminary plat, P,Sa �77-02, replat of Marxen Terrace, by Thomas A• Marxen as proposed• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairperson Harris indicated that this would go to City Council on May 2, 1977• 7• VACATION REQUEST: TAV �77-U2 BY THOMAS E• MARXEN: Vacate t e existing right o way or Marxen Terrace described as the 5�' right of way located between Lots 3, Block 1, and �ot 1, Block 2, Marxen Terrace, and the South 50 feet of the North 355 feet of Lot 6, that part of said Lot 6 that lies within a circle whose radius is 5❑ feet and whose center is located at the SW corner of Lot 8 of said Auditor's Sub• No• 1�8• Chairperson Harris indicated that the Commission had already discussed this and that Mr• Marxen W��e,&�T to vacate the section that will not be used• Mr• Bergman stated he didn't believe there to be any problems with this request• Mr• Boardman explained that this had been dedicated prior to this with Marxen Terrace• MOTION by Mr• Bergman, seconded by Mrs• Shea, that the Planning Commission recommend. ounci approval of the vacation reouest, SAV #77-02, n .ate the existing right of way for Marxen Terrace, described as the 50 foot right of way iocated between Lots 3, Block l, and Lot l, Block 2, Marxen Terrace, and the South 50 feet of the North 355 feet of Lot 6, that part of said Lot 6 that lies within a circle whose radius is 50 feet and whose center is located at the Southwest corner of Lot 8, of Auditor's Subdivision No. 108. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Harris indicated that this request will go to public hearing on June 13, 1977 before the City �oencil. Chairperson Harris declared that the Planning Commission would take a ten minute break at 10:35 P.M. Chairpersan Harris called the meeting back to order at 10:45 P•M• Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 26 8• CONTINUED� GOALS 8 OBJECTIVES: ACtESS Mr• Boardman indicated that all the goals and objectives had previously been approved• Mrs� Schnabel indicated that at the time they approved items A100 - A190, however, there was no item A180• She said that there had been a mistake in numbering• The approval should have been for items A1Q� - A1B0• 9• C4NTINUED: GOALS 8 4BJECTIVES� COMMUNITY VITALITY Mr• Boardman indicated that all the goals and objectives had previously been approved, with the exception of item V150• Mrs• Schnabel commented that item V11Q<had not yet been corrected• She said that it sould read •••• kind of activity ••• instead of .••• the kind of mix •••• Mr� Boardman presented to the Commission mhat he believed item V150 should read� ^promote industrial and commercia2 efforts to provide 6usiness services and employment opportunites to the residents through the encouragement of technical assistance in supporting their efforts to the extent that such proposals are reflected in area development^ Mrs• Schnabel indicated that it was business community that the City of their continued business in Fridley• Mr• Boardman explained his wording• her main idea to assure the Fridley wants to encourage Mr• Bergman wanted to know how we would encourage business growth and development to our residents- Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know how we would encourage a favorable climate for businesses• Mr• Boardman responded that a favorable climate can be extended to a degree when you have things like zoning restrictions, zoning code requirements, etc• He explained that the thing we want to do is to promote industrial development through the use of things we have available to them• $uch things as technical assistance, etc• Mrs• Schnabel indicated that she wanted to go beyond those technical services in that she would like to see an atmosphere in the community that encourages businesses to stay here• Plannin Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 27 Mr• Boardman agreed to change the wording ^Promote an atmosphere that would encourage industrial and commercial efforts in providing business services and employment opportunities to the resident in supporting their efforts to the extent that such proposals are reflected in area development^ MOTION by Mrs• 3chnabei, seconded by Mr• Bergman, to accept item V150 under Community Vitality, Program 06jectives• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• 10� APPROUAL FORMAT FOR GOALS AND 48JECTIVES Mr• Bergman indicated that he thought the format was great• M4TION by Mrs- Schnabel, seconded by Mrs� Thea, that the Pianning Commission approve the format for goals and objectives• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• 11- CONTINUED� PROPOSED MAINTENANCE CODE MOTION by Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Shea, that this item be continued until May 4, 1977• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motian carried unanimously• 12• C4NTINUED= RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN CHAPTER 212, MINING ORDINANCE Mr• Lagenfeld made reference to Item 2Z2•�5, Exceptions• He indicated that the unnecessar-y wording had been struck out and that it was recommended by the Environmental Quality Commission that this be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval• Mrs• Schnabel made reference to the situation that had just octurred where three boys were caught in a sand cave-in� She said that it was sand that had been brought in for construction of homes in the area• She wanted to knaw if the Staff had reviewed this item• Mr• Boardman indicated that the staff recommendation on the entire Mining Ordinance would be not to allow any type mining in the City of Fridley except if the party has a huilding permit• Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if there weee any safety precautions required in land alterations• Mr• Boardman indicated that since the same application is used for Mining and Land Alterations, the same safety precautions are required• Mr• Lagenfeld wanted to know if this recommendation would eliminate the Mining Ordinance• Mr• Boardman indicated that that was the recommendation- Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1477 Page 28 Mr• Lagenfeld wanted to know what would happen to the Ordinance presently in the Books• Mr• Boardman said that it was the opinion of the City Attorney to eliminate this Ordinance• MOTION hy Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the Planning Commission accept this Ordinance as written and send it to the City Council for their recommendation• Mr• Berqman asked for clarification of the underlined words in 5-Operating Standards, {b} and the items on the last page• Mr• Boardman answered that it was done to denote a change on the final form• Mr• Bergman didn't like the wording ^no less than^ in 212•07, 2 {a}. MOTION by Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by �rs• Schnabel, that item 212•07, 2{a} will read ^within five feet of the right-of-way of an existing public utility• UPON a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• 13• RECEIVE LETTER FRdM NEIGHBORS ON 45th and 2-1/2 STREE1' MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr• Bergman, that the Planninc� Commission receive the Ietter from the neighbors on 45th and 2-1/2 street regarding an addition to the garage at 4591 2-1/2 Street NE, Fridley, and its use. ______ _ Mr• Lagenfeld made reference of the meeting where he told the neighbors to watch each other• UPON a voice vote, all votinq aye, the motion carried unanimously and the letter was received• 14• RECEIVE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: MARCH 2$+ 1977 MOTION by Mr• Lagenfeld, seconded by Mr- Bergman that the Planning Commission receive the Parks and Recreation Commission minutes of March 28, 1477• Mr• Lagenfeld made reference to Page 57 of the agenda, fourth paragraph from the bottom, in the motion by Leonard Moore regarding the Rice Creek Watershed Disirict as to what was transpiring within the district• Mr• Lagenfeld indicated that whenever the date was set for the meeting, he would try to attend• Planninq Commission Meeting — April 2p, 1977 Page 29 Mr• Bergman felt that someone should have been at the Planning Commission meeting representing the Parks and Recreation Commission• Mrs• Shea commented that each commission should be informed that they have a responsibility to attend the meetings• UPON a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the minutes were received• 15• RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: April 12, 1977 MOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded by Mrs• Shea, to receive the Appeals Commission minutes of April 12, 1977• Mrs• Schnabel made reference to Page 73 of the agenda, number 5, Recommendation on eeer and/or Bar or Liquor License• She indicated that this article was acted upon and the Planning Commission was be requested to act on this problem• She continued by giving some background on the problem• The Pizza Hut on 57th pvenue would be applying for a beer license {defined as non-intoxicating beverage}. The question arose at the Appeals Commission meeting whether or not the neighboring residents would have to be notified• The answer came as no, this was not required• It was the feeling of the Appeal Commission that the Ordinance should be reviewed with the idea that residents within 20� feet of an establishment that is applying for a Beer/Wine/Liquor License should be notified• Mrs• Schnabel clarified that she Was referrin.g to on-sale licenses• She continued with her discussion• 3he indicated that none of the residents were even aware of the intention of the Pizza Hut to apply for this particular license• The pppeals Commission feels that these residents should have been notified that the license was being applied for• It was the concern of the Appeals Commission that this should be brought to the attention of the Planning Commission with the idea that this be written into the Ordinance• Mrs• Schnabel indicated that at any time, whenever an establishment planned to apply for licenses for on-sale liquor, that the residents should be notified• She said that especially as a parent, she would want to know if an establishment bordering on her property was to begin selling liquor• She felt that as a parent she should have the right to know what is happening that close to her home• Mr• Lagenfeld suggested looking at the Ordinance and see exactly what it did say in regards to this subject• Mr• Boardman looked it up- The ordinance indicated that no public hearing was necessary on a beer license, on or off sale• The Ordinance stated that in regards to Liquor Licenses, a public hearing shauld be held� Notification of the Public Hearing should be published in the newspapers ten days prior to the public hearing� Planning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Page 30 MOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded by Mr• Lagenfeld that the Planning Commission chairman received the motion of the Appeals Commission concerning the review of the policy of the Beer/Wine/ Liquor License applications of establishments in a residential area with the intent of notifying property owners of such requests and that the Chairman would pass this request to the appropriate Commission for their review and action• Upan a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the Appeals Commission Meeting minutes of April 12, 1977, were received• 16• RECEIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION by Mr• Bergman, seconded by Mrs• 3chnabel, that the Planning Commission receive the Community Development Commission meeting minutes of April 12, 1977• Mr� Bergman made reference to the item at the boCtom of page 6 of the minutes regarding the traffic related problems on East River Road south of 79th Avenue N•E• �hairperson Harris suggested that the Community Development Commission and the Environmental Commission study the intersection and come up with a recommendation as to whether there should be signal lights, turn lanes, or whatever appropriate safety features should be located at that intersection• Mrs� Schnabel indicated that the original recommendation was to have a study of the traffic flow on East River Road from Osborne Road north to the City limits with the intent that some recommendation be made identifying potential traffic problems• Mr• Boardman was not sure that this item should be handled at this time• He indicated that an extensive study was going to be done on East River Road• Chairperson Harris indicated that he wasn't interested in an entire study of East River Road; he wanted a recommendation as to what to do with the intersection of East River Road & 79th Avenue N•E• {proposed location of 7-11 Ttore}. Mrs• Schnabel indicated that the real problem is that there mere more dangerous intersections on East River Road other than - 79th Avenue N•E• Mr- Boardman commented that every intersection is a potentially dangerous probiem• P.lanning Commission Meeting — April 20, 1977 Pa9e 31 Chairperson Harris suggested that a proposal be put together with Staff concurrence• 6ring the proposal in, make recommendations, and send it to City �ouncil• This way City Council would be to make a decision• He indicated that in this way the Planning Commission would be officially on record as asking for a modification of that intersection• There was much discussion by members of the Planning Commission regarding this subject• Mr• Bergman suggested that City Staff get with the County to identify what their plans aee?as_compared to what the City's view is as to actually what should be at that intersection and then they present to the Planning Commission their recommendations rather than getting the Planning Gommission involved in a rather broad objective• UPON a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the minutes of the Community Development Commission meeting of April 12, 19?7, were received• MOTION by Mr• Bergman, seconded 6y Mrs• Shea, that the Planning Commission accepts the general attitude of the Community Development Commission, that they not study East River Road problems at this time• Mrs• Schnabel indicated that she Was disappointed to hear this motion• Mr• Lagenfeld asked the Commission not to call a Special Interest Meetin9• UPON a voice vote, four ayes one nay, the=motion earried• MQTIQN 6y Mr• Bergman, seconded by Mrs� Schnabel, that the tapes be checked in regards to Mr� Bergman's motion on Page 6 regarding the approval of Special Use Permit SP �77-01 as to specifically verifying the request of the 15 stipulations• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried• The tapes will be checked• 17• RECEIVE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr• Bergman to receive the minutes of the Human Resvurces Commissian meeting of April 14� 1977• Planning Commission Meeting �inutes — April 20, 1977 Page 32 Chairperson Harris aske� abo�t the,��s of the public hearing on tenant/landlord relations - consideration of establishing a tenant/landlord committee• Mrs• Shea indicated -.that it was going to 6e discussed again on April 26, 1977• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously to receive the minutes of the Human Resources Commission meeting of April 14, 1977• MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr• Bergman, that a memo be sent to all Commissiuns before their next meetings, stating that elections are to be held• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried• ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr� Lagenfeld, thai the Planning Commission meeting be adjourned• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Planning Commission meeting of April 20, 1977, adjourned at 12:25 A.M- Respec£ively Submitted, � �L.��..eD M�RY'LEE C�HILL, ecretary