PL 10/05/1977 - 6619� �, ry ,
City of Fridley
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 5, 1977 7:30 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVE PLANNIN6 COt�dISSION MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 28, 1977
RECEIYE EPlVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COhiMISSION MINUTES• SEPTEMBER 20 1977
RECETVE PARKS & RECREATIDN COM�7ISSION MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 26, 1977
1. CONTINUED: PROPOSED MAINTENANCE CODE
2. CONTINUEO: PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLAN:
ADJOURNMENT:
.-
.�
CALL TO ORDER:
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PI,ANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOIIER 5r �977
Chairperson Harris called the regular October 5> >977�
Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:40 P,M.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Shea, Bergman, Harris, Bob Peterson,
Schnabel, Bruce Peterson
Lan�enfeld (Bruce Peterson was his
representative)
Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
APPROVE PL9NNIA?G COMMISSION MINUTES: S�T�•SBER 28, 1977
MOTION by Mr, Bergman, seconded by Ms, Schnabel, to approve
the September 28, 197'], Planning Commission minutes,
Upon a voice vote� all voting aye, the motion carried
unanimously.
RECETVE PABKS & RECREATION COi�'IMISSION MIhTUTLS: SEPTEMBER 26. 1977
MOTION by Ms, Shez� seconded by rir, Bruce Peterson, to
receive the Parks & Recreation Commission minutes of
September Z6, 1977. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously.
�
MOTION by tir. Bruce Peterson, seconded by Mr. Bergman, to
receive the Environmental Quality Commission minutes of
September 20, 1977,
Mr. Bergman asked Mr. Bruce Peterson to explain vahat 1aas
meant in the last paragraph on page 1 of the minutes.
Mr. Bruce Peterson said that the Commission �rasn't comfortable
as to the way the parks tivere being catagorized.
Mr. Bergman questioned the recycling project.
Mr. Bruce Peterson said that it ��fould probably be a recycling
center. He explained that the Commission hadn't actualZy
discussed the item as much as they had �ranted to. He said
that p1s, Metcalf �vould be giving a report at the next meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEFTING - OCTOBER 5� 1977 Pa�e 2
UPON A VaICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried
unanimously. The Environmental �uality Commission
minutes of September 20, 1g77, v�ere received at 7;50 P,M,
1. CONTINUED: PROPOS�D MAINTENANCE CODE
Mr. Boardman explained that Staff ti��as in the process ofrewriting
the Code.ar�d:makinq all the changes and corrections, He said
that it �Jas the intent to send it to the City 1lttorney
for his concerns and remarks and then bringing it back to
the Planning Commission at the October 19� 19']7, meeting.
MOTION by Mr. Bergman� seconded by P4r. Bruce Peterson,
to continue the Proposed Maintenance Code until the
October 19, 1977� Planning Commission meeting,
Upon a voice vote, a�l voting aye,the motion carried
unanimously.
2. CONTINUED: PARKS & OPEN SPAC� PLAN:
Mr, Boardman explained that a slide nresentation had been
given on this subject, He said that�what should be done
is to go throu�h the P]�an Booklet and describe rrhat ti�as
being done and vrhat i��ould be done. He said that it ti��as
the overall intent at that time to try to get items
straightened out in the booklet and then have a Public
IIearing on the document and then send it to City Council.
Mr. Bergman commented that P�ir. Ray Leek had given a presentation
and that he had done a very good job.
Mr. Boardman said that it would be given again at the
Public Hearing meeting.
Mr. Boardman said that the exact layout of the Plan ti�ras basic,
He said that the main pzrt of the document e�as in section 4
SUNIIdARY OF FINDII�GS and section 5 POLICY &:RFCOI�tENDATIONS.
He explained ho��� many of the statements e�ere arrived at and
vrhere the information came from.
Mr. Boardman said that to come up r�ith the Plan that Staff
had gone thrflugh the areas and the parks. He said that they
had hired a part-time landscape architect vrho had been �vorking
rvith the City as to erhat could be done �x✓ith the Park Systems.
Mr. Boarclman said what vras trying to be done eras to put
together what the City ��ould classify as a Park System and
ho�v it 1•rould relate together �aith the utilizat�n of park
facilities.
`,
� .
PLANIJING COMMISSION ME�TING - OCTOB�R 5, 1977 Pa�e
Mr. Boardman said that the SUI4MARY OF FINDINGS (section 4)
was based on the goals established by the Planning
Commission for Parks and Recreation. He indicated that
basically the City lacked a standard criteria for stategic
distribution of funds that vrere available for the Parks
anfl Recreation Systems development.
Mr. Bob Peterson oointed out that the City belonged to ihe
citizens and they ivere the ones thzt rrould use the Parks
and Recreation systems and they should be the most important
concern.
Mr. Boardman said that rrhat c�as planned v�as to develon a
long-rznge plan for the Park System. He said that the City
needed something to move to.�rards for tne future.
Mr. Boardman said that there t��ere several items brou�ht out
under the "Objective" portion of the Plan that relate to
Citizen participation and the need for citizen participation.
Ms. Schnabel asked hoi�r much of the Plan t�as influenced by
the £actors of the economics of the population, the age
population, and ivhat the trends were.
f4r. Boardman said that t�hat had to be looked at in the
development of a Park System ��as the flexibility of the parY.
He said that they rrould aevelop a system flexible enough
to make changes r.�ithout a�reat cost, He said that the
parks should be able to be utilized by all age levels.
Mr. Bob Peterson said that in a practical sense it e�as not
that great of a problem because so many of the parcels of
land rrere of such a size that there tivouldn't be that much
that could be done with thec�. He said that there were
relatively ferr areas that rrould fit into a total City picture
as far as being used as a Park System.
Tir. Boardman said that the Planning Commission should discuss
the Parks and Open Space Plan. He said that the first three
sections r�ere basically clear and not much that could be
challenged. He felt that the discussion should begin at
Section i�, Summary of Findings.
Mr. Bergman vranted to knor� if the Parks Department �vas
promot?ng this Plan or vras the City promoting it.
Mr. Bob Peterson said that it ��as basically put to�ether for �
fundin� purposes. He said that the Parks & Recreation
Commission helped in laying dotivn a planning tool. Ae said
that much of their time had been spent on the Plan. Iie
said that the Commission members had not gone through all
13 of the neighborhoods to decide step-by-step exactly
crhat should happen in each neighborhood as to the Parlc
System.
PLANNING CO2R4ISSION MP�TC NG - OCTOB�R 5, 19?7 Par�e 4
Mr. Ber�man asked if the Parks & Recreation Commission had �
revieti�red the plan in detail.
t4r. Bob Peterson said that three meetings had been spent
discussing the Plan. He said that the Commission had not
entirely decided on every issue in the Plan.
Mr. Bergman t��anted to kno��� if the Plan was a Specific Plan
or just a General Plan�
P4r. $oardman �aid that erhen Staff erent through the Plan�
they did go through all the parks and facilities and did
do a lot of concepts plans. He said that i��ith the
development of a Parks and Recreation Plan, there �iould be
actual detail dravtinge of each of the park areas, He said
that i�1hat ��ras intended 4ras to go to each of the neighborhoods
and hold neighborhood meetings and have discussions e�ith
the neighborhoods and develop a plan for a neighborhood park
facility and set up a booklet on each of the neighborhood
park facil.itxes. He said ihat a Public Hearing tvould be
planned for each neighborhood park faciZity.
Mr. Bob Peterson felt that the Plan was actually a Staff
recommendation. He didn�t feel that the Parks & Recreation
Commission or Parks Director had been that much involved in
terms of the vahole program.
Mr. Boardman said that the Parks & Recreation Director
had been involved in the development of the Summary of
Findings and in the implementation phases of the Park Plan.
Mr. Bergman said that he had had the general impression
that the Parks & Recreation Commission would spend a
coneiderable amount of time on the Park plan. He said
that he kad recently gotten the impression that the
Parks & Recreation Commission had not spent the time that
would have been needed for ihe Plan.
Mr. Boardman said that the Plan vJas a general guideline for
the development of a parks and recreation system. He said
that the specific details of design tivoizld be presented at
a later date. He said it �vould be an implementation phase
of the Program.
Mr. Bergman said that thers was a plan for every park in
the Plan. He was concerned about those plans.
Mr. Boardman explained that they were concept plans, He
* said they indicated erork that Staff had done when they
went out to the parks. He said that the plans tivere
meaningful to Staff as far as giving them an idea of �ahat
was in the park and tivhat concept could be developed for
that park. He said that the actual plans �vould only come
about after considering citizenry input.
PLANNING COMMISSION MFETING - OCTOBER 5, 1977 Pa�e 5
.� Mr. Bob Peter�on explained that at a Parks & Recreation
Commission meeting it had been decided that there ivould be
no detailed plans for any park until the Commission had
its input and thai the citizenry input v�as in the plan.
He said that the P1an ivas presently an overall planning
tool but that speciYics had not been added to it.
There was a brief disucssion regarding several grants.
Mr. Bergman indicated that the Community Development
Commission had discussed the parks and Open Space P1an
at their July 26, 1977, meeting. He cranted to kno�r tivhat
hanpened to the recommendations made by that Commission
regarding the Parks Plan.
Ghairperson Harris said that as the discussion came to
the items that the Commissions had discussion, it ���ould
be up to the representative of that Commission to input
their ideas,
Mr. Bergman tivanted to knorr if the recommendations made by
the Planning Commission �rould be included into the Plan.
Mr. Boardman said that if they got the innut before the
minutes vould have to go to City Council, then usually the
recom�endations would be included.
Mr. Bergman exnressed much concern that had been
indicated at the Community Development Commission that
it disagreed �rith the sizing of the neighborhoocis, He
said that one of their recommendations had been that
neighborhood areas be revie`red for uniformity in size,
population, and natural barriers. He used the example
that five separate neighborhoods put together took up
less area than neighborhood 13. His concern �vas that to
some extent the identification of an area as a neighborhood
tieould have some effect on the attention it got on the
atnount of park area or the funding or the grouping of a
neighborhood representation. He felt that the delineation
of neighborhoods <<ras most uneo,uitable.
Much discussion resulted from Mr. Bergman's statement.
Mr. Bob Peterson pointed out that the Project Committees
that had been set un had not have that complkint. He said
that the Committee had not been concerned about the
problem that r4r. Bergman and Community Development felt
existed.
PLANNING COA'IIv[ISSION t�1PrTING - dCTOP�R 5 i977 Pa�e 6
�
MOTION by Mr. Ber�man� seconded by P4s. Schnabel, that Staff
revie;v the delineation of neighborhood areas in order to
make them more equitable as to size, population, ancl natural
barriers.
Ms, Schnabel noted that there ivas also a disparity in the
ratios of parks to peoPle in the Plan also.
Mr. Bergman said that there was bound to be disoarities
v�hen existing areas crere inventoried. He said that one of
the purposes of inventory ti�ras to adju�t disparities.
Ms. Schnabel said that possibly the plan �Jas to increase
the acreage for parks rrhere possible to make it more
equitable in the neighborlioods.
Air. Bergman said that since it i�as a lon�-range Plan he
fe],t that if there �^rere errors in the P1an, the time to
correct those errors t�rere in the beginning. He also
said tnat the purAOSe for reviev�ing the Plan ti�ras to try
to improve the Plan. He felt th�t there vfa.s a gross
inequity in the size and ponulation representecl in the Plan.
UPON P. VOICE VOT�, Bergman voting aye, Shea, Harris,
Bob Peterson� Schna.bel, and Bruce Peterson voting nay.
The motion failed.
Mr. Bob Peterson said that he did not necessarily agree
erith all the findings and points in the Plan, but he
said t12at �fter the three meetings there had been a
consensus that all the Commission members did feel
comfortable rtith i�that had been reviec�ed and sent to
the Planning Commission rrith the understancling that there
vrould be later changes to the Plan because it t�ras not that
inflexible.
Chairoerson Harris read the Objective 1 in Section 4�
Summary of rindings:
Develop an order of quality park facilities that t��ill
be flexible to the chzn�ing needs of the community.
Mr. Bergman said that the Finding ��Most of I�'ridley�s parks
are lacking in those elements of landscape architecture
{ie, trees, shrubs, shade, interesting use of grading) that
enhance a park�s recreational value'� coulcl result in too
much landscaping to the extent that it might not be functional
for ac�ive sports such as playing bal.l,
�
PLANNING CC3Mi�ISSION MELPING - OCTOB�R 5, 1R77 Pa�e 7
>'�
Mr. Bob Peterson said that there v�ere some Commission members
that wanted the parks only to be trees, shrubs, etc., and
others uho only tiranted many different ball playing fields.
He said that the compromise eras that each park had to be
looked at as to ti�hat it tivas intended to do for the citizenry
of Fridley,
Mr. Boardman said that elements of landscape did not aluays
mean only trees, shrubs, florrers, etc. He said that it
would also include bufferin� that �ay be needed in park
facilities and the total lzyout of the park facility.
Mr, Sob Peterson said that the intent had been to perserve
the integrity of each individual park to best nerferra all
the functions that it could perform in a neighborhood,
Mr. Boardman sa.id that the concept plans that �+ere in the
Plan �tere solely for the Staff. He said that they tivere
Staff ideas that carae about only to heln estina�e costs
of developing different park systems.
MOTI�^I by P•ir. Bruce Peterson, seconded by Pir. Beroman,
to chax!ge the tvording of tne second Finding to x�ead,
'�Gooneration �nd cooraination 2mong State� Metropolitan,
County and rSunicipal levels of government and school
districts need to be imbroved in order to ensure z�ainst
duplication of facilities and ��aste of resources zvailable
for recreational development�',
UPON A VOICE VQTE� Aarris, Schnabel� Shea and Bruce
Peterson voting aye; Bergman and Bob Peterson voting nay;
the motion carried.
f•tr. Sruce Peterson aaid that The Fridley Enviroruaental
Commission hact �vanted to have "funciional classification"
in the first finding under Objective 1 uefined better,
He rranted to kno��t crhat type of things tivould be used as a
basis to the classifications.
Mr. Boardman explained that the basis crould be given
in the definition of each parls classificziion. He sai.d
that a Regional Park�s basis for determining r�ould be
based on certain items and that vrould be listed under
the classification of "Regional Parlc". He said that
erhat tiras being said by that narticul.ar "Finding�' tras
that the Ciiy lacks a classification system for its parks.
hir. Bergm�n didn't like the idea that the entire section
of Summary of Findin�s ivas negative. I�e said that I'ridley
cli d have many positive points, such as it has five natural
park systems. Ae felt that the positive points could be
listed and indicate that the I'ridley P�rk System ivas gaod
but that ii could be better by.....etc.
PLANNTNG COMMISSION MEETING - OCTOBPR 5. l�� Pa�e 8
-,
Mr. Boardman said that the 5ummary of Findings was meant
to reflect �rhat Staff found as items to be improved in the
System. He said that the Plan didn't say that the System
was good or bad, it merely states erha� ��rould be needed to
improve the Parks System. FIe said that the Summary of
Findings vras the initial stage in order to set up an
implementation process in order to develop something that
vras rranted in the City.
Chairperson Harris declared a ten minute recess at
9: z9 P.r�.
Chairperson Harris read the Objective 2 in Section 4,
Summary of Findings;
Provide innovative park design tivith a balance
of functional and �esthetic consideration creating
substantial recreational, educational, and
psychological experiences.
Mr. Boardman said that it u�as aost 8eceiving when one
talked about the amount of space of park land because
the actual park facilities that are serving the
neighborhoods and people, the City of Fridley l�aas actually
very short on park facilities.
Chairperson Harris said that Finciing �14 couldn�t be
implemented in a11 the parks, since sor�e of the parks
tivouldn�t be lar�e enough to handle all the items mentionec.
Mr. Baardman said that most of the neighborhood parks
should have the items that ��r�re listed.
Chairperson Harris said that r�hen you mentioned having
'�1�dequate and convenient toilet facilities, parking areas,
seating accomodations and drinking fountains�', a great
deal of expenditures as to the buildings, etc. ���ould have
to be considered. He said that even riith ��graht�� money
the costs for heat� lights, etc. �vould need a substantial
amount of City money.
MOTION by hir. Bob Peterson, seconded by Mr. Bruce Peterson,
that objective 2 be left open until the item could be
discussed at the other Commission levels, Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously,
Chairperson Harris said that the entire Parks and Open Space
Flan vrauld be left open for discussion.
PL�INNTNG COMt4ISSI0N idFFTING - OCTOBrR 5, 1977 Pa�e 9
.
-- Chairperson Harris read Objective 3 in Section ��
Summary of Findings: .
Promote people-oriented uarks through active
citizen participztion.
Mr. Bob Peterson szid that if the Planning Commission in
its coZlective v�isdom Lrould be able to devise a plan that
�rould ensure representative citizen narticipation, he said
tha� the Parks & Recre�tion Commission rrould appreciate the
benefit of their combined riisdon.
Chairperson Harris said that he agreed v�ith the first
findin� under Objective 3.
Mr. Bob Peterson said that tsro mailings every year are
mailed out to every resident in the City of Fridley listing
the entire Park and Recreation programs for a six-month
period of tine. He said that the efforts had been made
to inform the public of 17I12� �ras available.
Chairperson Harris said that perhaps the inform�tion
contained in those mailings could have been better assembled.
A4r. Bob Peterson pointed out that at the active part of
the Parks & Recreation prograc�s that the City of Fridley
gets a lot of citizen particioation at the crganized level.
Ae said that nuch citizen irnut is received frora the
organized level because the Czty has Fridley citizens running
the active activities (ie soccer, football, hoclsey, etc,),
He said that the parks and Recreation Commission meets rtith
the people running the activities on a schedul.ed 'oasis to get
the citizenry input on ihe active part of tha prograrrs, He
said that they haven't been very successful getting input
from the passive part of the program.
There <<�as some discussion �egarding the method of signing
up for the different types of orograms being offered.
Mr. Boardman cottmented tnai the sign-up part of the programs
could be done at the neighborhood parks, if the Park System
eras improved.
hir. Bob Peterson commented th�t erhen Friclley �+�as a younger
community, the bressure had been to develop the active type
activities rather than the passive types. He said that it
had beett only recently that the passive-type things rrere
being requested (ie £ishin� docks, etc.)
Mr. Bergman said that Fridley had much area devoted to the
passive activity.
Ms. Schnabel said that emphasis has not been made to the
fact ihat those passive areas exist.
MOTION by Mr. Bob Peterson, seconded by rfs, Shea, that
the Planning Comm3ssion continue the Parks and Oven Space,
Plan. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the mo�ion carried
unanimously.
PT ANPIIPIG_ CONA�iISSIOPT ME�TIP.TG - OCTOA;�R 5, 1927 Pat�e 10
3„ 1'JORK SCHEDUL�
t�Ir. Boardman said that at the October 1g, i977,
Plannin� Commission meeting he vrould have a 17ork Schedu].e
for the nembers of the Plannin� Commission. He explained a
few of the items that he vras avrare of that the Planning
Commission uould have to consider and revievr.
4. ADVISORY STI�NDARDS FOR LP.IdD USE REGULl1TIOI�
Mr. Bob Peterson rras concerned about the last t�•io paragraphs
on Page 8 of the booklet.
"The various organzzations cfkich have recomMended
standarc�s for lot size and house size do not recor.unend
standards for garages. These organizations have
recor�Mencied standards for d.ensity or 1ot size and house'
size because they have a cZear relationshiro to the
protection of health and safety. Garages do not have
as clear a relationship to the protection of health
and safety.
Although ��r�ge� are a desirable amenity, particularly
in the i�innesota climate, they are not a necessity,
Gara�es are an accessory structure £or the ourpose of
convenience.
The elimination of a garage reaui�r�ent is one of
the most obvious ��ays to provide for reducing the
initial cost of a house.��
Chairperson Harris felt that the Plannin� Commission did
consider Garages having a clear relationship to the protection
of health and safety.
The mernbers of the Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Aarris.
Chairperson Harris said that the City of �ridley did
require garages on most properties.
Chairperson Harris said that the City of Frid�ey was being
accused of adding to the price of the houses by reauiring
a garage.
Chairperson Harris �vanted to knoti� hoi°� much of the items in
the booklet e�ould have to be adopted by the City of Fridley.
Mr. Boardman said that at that time, none of the items �vould
have to be adonte@. He said �hat it t�rould be a large
debatable issue similiar io the Mandatory P2anning. He
said thai there iaas presently not enough backing to push
the issue through the proper channels.
PLANNIN(3 COMMISSION MEFTING - OCTOi3FR 5. 1�77 PaPe 11
.� ,-Mr. Bob Peterson asked if the Metropolitan Council had voted
or adopted this item.
Mr. Boardman said that he v�asn't sure. He said that the
Metropolitan Council was supporting the item.
Mr. Bergman said that he could understand hova the
Metropolitan Council had arrived at some of their conclusions.
He said that it had been stated in the booklet that the
purpose of this item tivas to make recommendations on vrays
to supply modest cost housing. He said that they u�ere
looking at ways to simply cut the costs of housing.
Mr. Bob Peterson said that he felt the report had addressed
the same issues that Fridley vras cnncerned with only they
had reached different conclusions than the City of Fridley,
Mr. Boardman pointed out that some of the recommendations
were to allom smal].er lot sizes, smaller house sizes� and
dropping the garage requirements,
Chairperson Harris said that the Advisory Standards for
Land Use Regulation would be closely considered rrhen the
Planning Commission ��rent over the Zoning Codes in November.
He said that cities should carefully study their land
usages to enhance modest cost housing,
Mr. Boardman said that the housing issue was a major concern,
Ae said that cities evere creating the problems oY less
home sites available.
Chairperson Harris asked that each of the Commission
members give careful considerations to the '�Advisory
Standards for Land "Jse Regulation" booklet,
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Mr. Bob Peterson, seconded by Ms, Shea, to adjourn
the October 5, 197?, Planning Commission meeting. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Harris declared the meeting adjourned at
10:l�0 p,M,
Respectfully submitted�
%%Q/LS3l�� ��Q.r��x-f"
MaryLee Carhill
Recording Secretary
";�YQ: All Hvmaxt &esource Commisaion i+fembers
�`ROM: Barbara Shea
73ATE: October 3r 19T7
�NRE: Cancallation of Oetober �C meeting
I vovld like to appologize in advance for caaceling
the October F3RC meeting, There se�s to be some diffi-
xulty that I feel you ahould be aware of.
Wt►ea I accepted the Chair of the Commisaion, I was not
avare that �r major duty voeil.d be that of a Pro�ram
direetor, which is what 5 have been doing for the
paet year.
I find fihai I no longer itave the time or inclination
for thie duty, I feel that it ia iacumbaat on ataff
to De aware of items that should be brought to the
attention of each co�nission arid that facta be compiled
and presented at appraprtate timea. i.e. We have
consistently over the past years reqneated that the
Human Resource Commissioa do aa aanual review o£ the
city�a aff3xmattve acti� program. This has been
requested enoug3s times that, bq now, ataff should
have been made automatical2y aware that thia ia done,
and the 3tem be prepared and broa�t before us.
It ia my hope that we ai22 be able to hold a meeting
ia Havember. Once again, I appolo�ze.
�
��
,
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COP44ISSION MEETII3G
SEPTEPiIDER 28, 1977
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Harris called the regular September 28, 1977, Planning Co�mission
meeting to order at 7;45 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present; Shea, gergman, Harris, Suhrbier, Gabel, Langenfeld
Members Absent; Peterson (Ms. Suhrbier was his representative)
Schnabel (Ms. Gabel was her representative)
Others Present: Ruben Acosta, Planning Aide
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: SEPfEMBER 14, 1977:
MOTION by Ms. Shea, seconded by Ms.
Planning Co�ission minutes. Upon a
carried unanimously.
APPROVE AMENDED AGENDA:
Gabel, to approve the September 14, 1977>
voice vote, all voting aye, the motion
1�A7fI021 by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Ms. Shea, to approve the amended agenda
as mailed out by the City. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion
carried unanimously.
RECEIVE APPEALS COA1PfISSION MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 20, 1977:
MOTZON by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Ms. Shea, to receive the Appeals Commission
minutes of September 20, 1977.
Chairperson Harris asked Ms. Gabel to clarify Item 3 regarding a variance
to reduce the required minimum square footage for a house to waive the single
stall garage requirement and to allow the construction of a house without a
garage at 7163 East River Road.
Ms. Gabel staCed that, basically, the problem was because Ron Holden had
been on vacation; and when they were doing the laying of the house on the
lot, Staff had neglected to realize that the owner needed a side yard variance,
also. Because there was a time element involved and the people would lose
ffnancing, the Appeals Covmission worked hard to find a way to handle this.
�ey decided they would go ahead and approve the request and that Staff would
work with the petitioner to notify the listed persons that were required to
be notified to see if there were any problems in order to make the time
requirement. The problem had evolved through a Staff error, but if it could
not be handled this way, then it would go on to City Council.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, THE MOTI�i CARBIED UNANIIMOUSLY.
��,
PLANNiNG COI�II�fISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 28, 1977 PAGE 2
1. TABLED: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP � 77-12
NASEEM A. ANSARI: As per Section 205.131, 3,A, L0, of the Fridley City
Code, to allow a public auto repair center use on the Southerly 805 feet
of the Ea$terly Half of the Northeasterly Quarter of the Southeasterly
Quarter of Section 3, T-30, R-24, except the Westerly 328 feet,according
to the plat thereof, subject to the easement agreement of April 12, 1974,
the eame being 7900 Main Street N.E.
MOTI�i by Ms. Shea, seconded by Mr. Langenfeld, to remove this item from the
table. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Harris opened the public hearing at 7;50 p.m. Mr. Harris explained
to Mr. Ansari that at the September 14th P2annzng Cou�ission meeting,
Mr. Boardman had explained the mode of operation and the general location in
the building in which this operation was to take place: He said there had
been several questions by the Co�ission members which Mr. Boardman was unable
to answer so action was tabled until Mr. Ansari could be present.
Ms. Shea suggested that Zir. pnsari read pages 9-10 of the September 14th
Pianning Coam�ission minutes to familiarize himself with what took place at
that meeting.
Ms. Gabel asked if Mr. Ansari would be providing the oil and the tools needed
or if the custamers would bring these things in themselves.
Mr. Ansari stated that it was very difficult at this time to really outline
in minute detail what would happen. He referred to the September 14th
Planning Commission minutes in which someone had mentioned that some of these
facilities had opened in the past few years and had iailed. Mr. �jasari said
the reasons were numerous, but what they had done was not available to him.
He had been spending considerable time on this project and either he had been
getting a dead end wherever he went, or he had not been able to get to some-
� ane really involved in this type of operation. Mr. Ansari stated he would
try different things until something worked.
Ms. Gabel asked if it was Mr, pnsari's intention to provide parts and sell
them.
Mr. Ansari stated it was not; that there were numerous auto parts bus3nesses.
They did not claim to know that kind of business and,at the same time, try
to get this business off the ground.
Ms. Suhrbier stated she was concerned about the liability. There would be
people of all abilities coming in and there would only be one person super-
vising. What was the liability to the CityY
l�br. Ansari stated there was no model plan on which he could base his answers.
He had asked his insurance people if insurance coverage would he available
for this facility and the iasurance people had assured him it would be.
Since people would be working on their own cars, it was understandable that
liability would be two-part; (1) injuries inflicted by persona upon them-
selves; and (2) responsibility of the garage when someone slipped, for
�
PLANI4ING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 28, 1977 PAGE 3
example. That kind o£ liability existed in every building and with the
or+ner of the facility.
t4=. Langenfeld read from Zoning Ordinance, Sectian 205.131, Item 10,
requesting a special use permit. He asked Mx. Ansari that of the follow-
ing, wha[ would be allowed in the garage: gasoline service stations,
accessory greasing, servicing, cleaning & washing of automobiles, minor
adjustments and repairs but not general repairs, overhauling, rebuilding,
demolition or spray painting?
�. Ansari stated that he would not have gasoline servicing, cleaning &
washing of automobiles, or demolition or spraypainting. He would have
accessory gxeasing, servicing, minor adjustments & repairs but not general
repairs, overhauling, and rebuilding.
�hairperson Harris asked if the request was for 9,000 square feet or
13,000 square feet.
Zir. pnsari stated it would depend on the availability of space. At first,
13,000 square feet had been available, but now he did not know how much
would be available as Mr. Brama of Bryant-Franklin Corporation could not
hold that amount of space for Mr. Ansari until Mr. Ansari had received
approval from the City and could get started.
Chairperson Aarris stated the reason he had asked that question was because
he wondered if there would be a physical retaining wall or a separation
wall.
Mr. Ansari stated that if they got into this facility, instesd of leaving
hays, they would remove the partitions and leave one unrestricted area.
In the contiguous bays they occupied, they would remove the separating
walls so there would be a better free flow of cars and better supervision.
In that particular building, the walls were Cemporary walls in every bay.
/►nother change he would like to make was that in the Planning Commission
minutes it had said there would probably be no hoists, but Mr. Msari
stated he would like to have quite a few hoists to raise cars up and down.
These would probably be electric, rather than hydraulic. There would be
personnel on duCy to help with these hoists. As discussed, their people
would bring the cars from the parking lot into the building, put the cars
on the hoists, and then the customers could work on their cars.
Ms. Suhrbier sGated she was concerned about the danger with one large open
space with no confinement of dust, etc. If it was partitioned, it would
help protect people working nearby.
Chairpersan Harris asked what section of bays Mr. Ansari would be using.
: �
�
'.. �
PLANN'!NG COF4IISSION MEETING SBPTEMBER 28, 1977 PAGE 4
Mr, Ansari stated he vould have gay #3 on. Mr. grama had been reluctant
to sublet the first two bays. Mr. Brama had said if the operation was
sssccessful, Mr. Ansari may get the first two bays also which would put
thia operation on Main and 79th, the south corner.
Ms. Gabel asked if the customers would be responsible for taking away their
own otl.
Mr. Ansari stated that the customers would not be responsible, that he and
his people would have utensils in which to collect the oil.
Mr, L�genfeld asked Mr. Ansari if he had talked to any people who had
had success with this type of operation.
ZIr. Ansari stated that, to his knowledge, no one had been saccessful on
the scale he was going on. pperations had been successful when there were
only two or Lhree stalls. But, he felt there was a need for his type of
operation and that it would work.
Mr, Langenfeld asked Mr. Ansari if he feZt there would be peak seasons
and poor sessons, thinking of the cold weather in January and pebruary.
Mr. ,ynsari stated that it definitely would be a seasonal business. It
would be a challenge to make it a pernianent business. They wouZd have to
promate and come up with services for the entire year because cars were
driven year around.
Chairperson Harris asked if Mr. pnsari intended to put in an exhaust sys[em.
Mr. Ansari stated they would have to, especially in s�e areas where the
car engines would be allowed to run continuously for long periods of time.
They would not need an exhaust system for the cars in for routine maintenance.
ge said it was going to be very difficult to keep the building warm in the
wiuter and there would be a lot of heat losa,
Chairperson Harris asked how many attendants would run the operation.
Mr. pnsari stated he would have at least two people--a mechanic who would
guide people on how to do things and anothex person to bring the cars in
and out of the tacility. These attendants would be on duty at all times.
Mr, Ansari stated they wece planning on being open 10 hours a day, the
peak hours beiag 12:00 noon to 10;00 p.m., at least to begin with.
Mt. %angenfeld stated he was interested to know how Mr. Ansari planned
to charge for people working in this garage, His concem was that they
might have to charge quite a sum to make money and hire a mechanic.
✓
YLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 28, 1977 PAGE 5
Mr. qnsari stated he would probably charge on an hourly basis and on a
per-job basis. He stated it had to be a paying proposiCion; but if these
rates were equated with the going rates at a regular garage, there was
quite a bit of room.
Chairperson Harris asked if there would be any outside storage of vehicles
and Mr. �nsari stated there would not--just a vaiting period in the
parking lot if the building was full.
MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Bergman, that the Planning
Conmission close the public hearing on the Request for a Special Use
Permit, SP � 77-12, Naseem A. Ansari: As per Section 205.131, 3, A>
10 of the gridley City Code, to allow a public auto repaii center use
ou [he Southerly 805 feet of the Easterly Half of the Northeasterly
Quarter of the Southeasterly Quarter of Section 3, T-30, R-24, except
the Westerly 328 feet, according to the plat thereof, subject to the
easement agreement of April 12, 1974, the same heing 7400 Main Street N.E.
llpon a yoice vote, all voeing aye, Chairperson Harris declared the public
hearing closed at 8:10 p.m.
Mr. qnsari stated that this operation was really a trial measure. This
was a highly specialized use of a building and this particular huilding
was not the real answer to this kind of venture. Zt would take a lo[
of money to put up the proper garage facility that should be used.
His iritent was to try this operation in this kind of building for a
short time;and if it was successful, have his own building which would
meet city code, special requirements, etc.
MOTION by Mr. Bergman, seconded by Ms. ghea, that the Planni[tg Co�ission
rec�moend approval to the City Councfl of the request for Special Use
Permit, SP � 77-12, Naseem p. Ansari; As per Section 205.131, 3, A, 10,
of the Fridley City Code, to allow a public suto repair center use on
the Southerly 805 feet of the Easterly Ha1f of the Northeasterly Quarter
of the Southeasterly Quarter o£ Section 3, T-30, R-24, except the
Westerly 328 feet, according to the plat thereof, subject to the ease-
ment agreement of April 12, 1974, the same being 7900 Ma3n Street N.E.,
with the following stipulaCions;
1. With the understanding that all codes, ordinances, and
other applicable regulations be met;
Z. That for purposes of this special use permit, a space
limitation of 15,000 square feet be understood as a
part of this recanmendation.
Mr. Langenfeld stated he would like to add for the record that due concern
for unnecessary noise and improper disposal of oil, etc., be regulated.
Mr. Langenfeld said Mr. Bergman encompassed this when he stated that a11
regulations would be met.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
�
YL,ANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,.1977 . PAGE 6
Chairpetson Harris told Mr, Ansari that this sequest for special use
permit would go before �ity Council on Monday, October 3, 1977.
Ct�airperson Harris declared a 10 minute recess at 8:40 p.m.
COZITINUED; PROPOSED MP.INTENANCE CODE:
220.43 Compliance
tyr, gergman stated that it looked to him that a compliance order may be
served on the occupant unless the occupant was also the owner. Legally
or otherwise, it did not make sense. He thought the owner was the liable
person and gerhaps the papers must be served only to the owner.
Chairperson Harris stated that the problem may be the occupant's tault
and not the owner's.
No. 4 under 220.43 Compliance was changed to read as followa; "Be served
upon the owner or agent and the occupant, as the case may require, such
noCice shall be deemed to be properly served upon such owner or agent,
and upon any such occupant, if a copy thereof is."
�hairperson Harris stated that even if there was another type of violation
that was the owner's responsibility, at least telling the occupant that
the City was doing s�ething about it was a good idea. gut, supposing
it was the occupant's responsibility for the care, custody, and control
of the property? Mr. Harris stated that perhaps the city attorney should
give some guidance on how thisshould be rewritten.
The Commission members agreed to automatically eifminate the words,
"his" and "him" wherever they appeared and replace them with "said person'!.
pir, Langenfeld suggested [hat No. 4, Item C, be changed to read; 'T,egal
action will be taken."
(�airperson Harris stated that this was another part that he thought the
city attorney should look at for the proper wording.
The Commission members agreed to eli�inate the words, "and Enforcement"
from 220,40 and add them to 220.43 to read; "Compliance and Enforcement"
(
220.44 Emergency Cases
Mr. Bergman stated that under emergency stipulations the code should
give the city the authority to take action if the case required. This
did not do that.
Ms. Shea stated thls was another item she £elt the city attorney should
look at.
!Y-s:..... .
A
✓ •
PLANI�IING COtMiCSSION MEETING SSPTE!ffiER 28, 1977 PAGE 7
Chairperson Harris stated he felt the City should face the situation
sthete people are living in a building and are ordered out and have
not the means to procure other habitation. Zt then should become
encwnbent upon the City to take care of these people.
4ir, pcosta agreed to look in the codes to find where it was listed
abwt a building being condemned and the tenants are ordered to leave.
He would also look to see if 220.44 couLd be more explicit and would
diacuss this with Mr. Herrick on the legal aspects.
Chairperson Harris stated they did not want people to suffer because
of errant kandlords.
22Q.45 Unfit for H�an Habitation
Mr. Bergman sCated that he did not read anything in this section where
the public was ptotected from hazardous situations by action hy the City.
It did not immediately remove the hazard from endangering the public.
14ie C�ission members agreed to add the following at the end of No. 3,
'Secure Unfit and Vacated Ihaelling;' of 220.45: "In the judgment of the
guilding Inspection Department, if the dwelling is of a hazardous nature,
the City shall take immediate steps to remedy the situation at the
expense of the property owner."
220.46 Execution of C�Pliance prders by public Authority
This section was changed to read as follows; "[Jpon failure to comply
with a compliance order within Che time set and no appeal having been
taken, the City Council may by resolution cause the cited deficiency
to be remedied as set forth in the compliance order. The cost of such
remedy shall be allayed against the subject property and may be levied
and collected as a special assessment in the manner provided by
Minaesota Statute, Chapter 429."
220.47 Right of Appeal
The question was raised of why the City Council was acting as the goard
of Appeals in this case when they did not for public hearing notices:
This section was reworded as follows: "When it is alleged by any person
to whom a compliance order is directed that such compliance order is
based upon erroneous interpretation of this ordinance, such person may
appeal the campliance order through the appeals process. Such appeals
must be in writing, specify the grounds for the appeal, be accompanied
hy a filing fee of $15.00 in cash or cashiex's check, and be filed with
Che City Clerk within ten (10) days after service of the compliance
order. The filing of an appeal shall stay all pioceedings, unless such
a stay would cause i�inent peril to Life, health, or adjacent property.
� O
j �
� i
PLANNING COI�4IISSION MEETING SEPTEM$ER 28, 1977 PAGE 8
220.48 Board of Appeals Deciaion
This section was changed as follows; "With at least five business days
prior notice to the appellant of the appeals process, the Appeals
Conm�ission shall hold a hearing."
220.49 Restrictions on Transfer of Ownership
The Co�ission members agree that the way this was written was against
the 1aw. It was agreed it should be reworded somewhat as follows: "The
owner shall be required to inform any prospective buyer or new owner of
any complianae order on the property."
MpTIpTi by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Langenfeld, to continue discussion
on the Maintenance Code at the next meeting. Upon a voice vote, all
voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLAN:
MOTION by Mr �ergman, seconded by Mr. Langenfelfl, that discussion on
the parks & Open Space Plan be continued at the next meeting. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
MOTTON by Mr. L8ngeufeld, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to adjourn the Planning
Commission meeting at 10;36 p.m. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously,
Respectfully submitted,
'u-�. ,(,.
Lynn Saba
Recording Secretary
FRIDLEY EN�IRONMENTAL COPII�SISSION
MEETING
SEPTII�ffiER 20, 1977
MEMBERS PRESENT: James Langenfeld, Bnice Peterson, Lee Ann Sporre,
Connie Metcalf
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dave Sabistina
OTEiERS PRESENT: Ray Leek, Planning Aide
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Langenfeld called the meeting to order at 7:43 p.m.
APPROVAL OF AUGUST 16, 1977, FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPIISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Bruce Peterson, seconded by Lee Ann Sporre, to approve the August 16, 1977,
Fridley Environmental Commission minutes. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously.
ADOPTION QF AGENDA:
The following items were added to the agenda;
"Recycling Project Committee Report" - Item B under "Other Business"
"Resource Recovery Technology Seminar" - Item C under "Other Business"
pis. Sporre requested that Item 2, "Tabled: East River Road Project Co�ittee
Discussion", be moved [o Che end of the agenda.
MOTION by Bruce Peterson, seconded by Lee Ana Sporre, to adopt the agenda as
amended. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
1. CONTINi1ED: DISCUSSION OF "PARKS AND OPEN SPACE PLAN":
Mr. Langenfeld read portions of the August 17, 1977, Planning Commission minutes
regarding the "Parks & Open Space Plan" in which he had indicated to the Planning
Coumiission the Environmental C�ission's concern on the urgency of accepting this
document and that it was the general conclusion that the pasC, present, and projected
uses of the parks hinged solely on the proper definition. Mr. Langenfeld had
stated the Co�mission felt this was a very important document and the Co�ission
could not even consider accepting it at this time until the definitions wese
clarified.
FRILY,EY ENVIRONMENT,AL COI�2ISSION MEETING SEYfEMBER 20, 1977 PAGE 2
Mr. Leek stated that it was his concern that the Commission was spending more time
on this document than it needed to, especial2y in light of the other projects
that the Commission wanted to get involved with such as recycling and noise
pollution control. It was a document that the Coum�ission could recou�end approval
or recommend approval of it conditionally with all the changes they saw fit and
all those changes would go before Planning Commission and City Council who were
the deciding bodies, and at that point would still have all the Gommission input,
Or, Mr. Leek stated, they could recommend not adopting the document. He felt
those three options would give the Commission enough latitude to take care of the
concerns they were talking about, about whether or not the definitions were
adequate, the concerns of whether or not they addressed Fridley's recreation needs
or not.
In answer to Mr. Peterson's question as to the deadline on this document, Mr. Leek
stated that the deadline for a11 mandatory planning materials was January 1, 1981.
That meant, in the case of Fridley, a co�plete update of the City's Land IIse Plan
which included a Housing PZan, a Transportation Plan, a Recreation Facilities Plan
for the City, regulations to ia;plement the intent of those plans or plan elements
done, and the writing of othez controls. The problem was that Fridley was in a very
fine position to get funding for some worthwhile projects, but were having diffi-
culty making applications because they did not have a City Council approved document.
The Staff's concern was not so much on the urgeacy of having the document done
itself, 6ut because there were a number of other plaaning activities going on that
required a lot oi field time.
Ms. Sporre asked Mr. leek if he would be more satisfied with the Co�ission�s efforts
if they presented their changes directly to City'Council when this went to Council.
I£ this Commission could not be used as an arena to voice its input, because of
some deadline, then it was the Commission's option to present their arguaients
directly to City Council.
P1r. Leek,stated that he agreed that this Comwission was an arena for expressing
their concerns, but he felt the way to express them was by collecting the concerns
and making a collective document of concerns, recommendations, and disagreements
and officially presenting them to planning C�ission and City Council. If that
meant the Commission be physically present at both the Planning Commission and City
Council, then he would say, "yes".,
Mr, Langenfeld stated it was really up to the Cou�ission to handle this in the way
they wished to do s o. He tended to want to approve it on a conditional basis
aad then have complete minutes involving the problems the Commission had with ih--
in other words, accepting the document looking for an in-concept type of approval.
Then, the Commission could discuss it more fully. He felt that the definitions
were Che biggest problem. He did not want this to end up Iike the mining ordinance.
FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIOII MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 1977 PAGE 3
Mr. Peterson asked that when this document was drafted,. what was the intent
behind it--as a plan to be followed with guidelines for what they wanted to do
or was it drafted as a document in which to gain acceptance so the city would
be eligible for funding to proceedY
Mr. Leek staCed it was not intended as a funding document, but as a plan to
provide direction for park development in the City.
Ms. Metcalf stated that she felt the Commission was spending a great deal of
time on the plan, and there were many other important cancerns £or the Commission
to consider. She hoped that the corrections could be organized in the most
efficient and effective way. She did feel that the definitions did need to be
talked about as there was disagreement. She also .stated that the total acreage
in tbe City of Fridley (10.2 square miles) and the total park land acres (451
acres) should be included in the plan.
MY. Leek stated that the chart in which the acreage would be included had not yet
been completed and would not be until they got complete agreement from the
c o�is s i ons .
Mr. Leek stated that in regard to the Coumission's concern about definitions, if
the Commission felt these definitions were totally inadequate, all the Commission
would have to do was propose an alternate set for presentation with the docucient
to Planning Co�ission and City �ouncil and let them decide if either set was
appropriate.
Mr, peterson stated this was a preliminary document and, as he understood it, the
Commission could cocitinue to make recommendations even after the plan wa, accepted
3n order to update it.
Mr. Langenfeld suggested that the C�ission continue to review the document in
the manner in which they had in previous meetings, but that they bypass misspelled
words, etc., that were insignificant so that they could get through the document
as quickly as possible. .
Ms. Metcalf stated that she felt the following sentence which had been added to
the lasC paragraph on Page l be added instead to the first paragraph on page 2;
"'14iis demand will increase even further because of the energy crisis." *
The Commission concurred.
Mr, yangenfeld staCed that there should be sbme genexal statement to update the
gacilities Map as this was an area of concern for the Coum�ission.
Mr. Peterson stated that at the last meeting they had goCten into the discussion
of definitions and he wondered if there was any reason why the parks could not
be classified in more than one category.
* See amended page 2 at the end of the minutes.
FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL CQ�IISSION MEETING SEPTENIDER 20, 1977 PAGE 4
Mr. Leek stated there was really no reason why that couldn't be done. It seemed
to him that the problem the Commission was having was one of data collections,
sets of impressions, and first-hand knowledge that indicated that certain parks
in those first two categories were being used in a variety of ways.
Ms. Sporre stated she agreed with Mr. Peterson, If the regional facilities were
"rich" enough to serve a very wide use pattern, they certainly were providing
recreational facilities,to some extent, at the Iocal Level. There were several
facilities like this. She would encourage Staff to include these overlapping
areas; for example, Moore Lake. West Moore Lake was one facility and was a regional
facility, but was also a local facility made up of several components, the Dunes,
the tennis area.
Mr, yeek asked the Commission, if they would like to make a list of all the parks
the Commission had trouble with and state specifically in what categories they
felt they should be Iisted.
Ms. Sporre state she would be in favor of that. As they went through this list,
she wanted the Commissioners and Staff to consider not only what facilities wera
in each park now, but also keeping in mind the policy decisions that they expected
to be implemented. There were going to be new buildings going in at both the
Islands of Peace and the Springbrook Nature Center, so that was going to indicate
a definite use pattern far in excess of what was there now. They should aiso
consider the areas that would be devel.oped and rank them according to those use
patterns.
Mr. Leek presented the followi.ng potential solution to this problem. He asked if
it would satisfy the Commission's concerns if something like the Facilities Chart
was done, but indicating in the text Dy graphic symbol, the appropriate categories
of activity areas and facilities offered, planned additions to each of those park
facilities, or proposed facilities that were close to decision or were decided upon
and already under construction.
The Coammission concurred that a graphic symbol be added to the gacilities Map to
indicate the planned additions to the park and recreation system.
The concern that there was a need for bike racks in all the major park facilities
was brought up and the Covmiission concurred that there was a need for bike racks
in all the major park facilities. .
Ms. Sporre stated that another concern she had on the Facilities Map was that
there should be a better indication of the overlapping service these parks had on
the co�unity. She wanted to know how this could be handled.
Mr. Leek stated that whenever there was a park such as Moore Lake Beach that met
more than one set of definitions and functioned on more than one level, a graphic
notation could be made in the margin with an explanation at the bottom of the
page that these parks "serviced the neighborhood, city-wide, and regional popula-
tions".
The Commission concurred with this.
FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 1977 PAGE 5
Mr. Leek asked the Commission to go through these categories and indicate which
parks ahould be classified in more than one category.
Special Use
Little League Field - O.K. as Special Use. The Commission agreed that more
data was needed to determine whether the Little League Field would be
classi£ied in any other category.
North Znnsbruck - O.K. as Special Use. The Co�ission concurred that all
pazks were also serving as neighborhood facilities parks and should be
so indicated at the bottom of the page of the Facilities Map.
West Moore Lake - O.K. as Special Use
Regional
Islands of Peace Park - O.K. as Regional, also Special Use, also could be
noted as an element in a linear recreational system
Springbrook Nature Center
at North Park - O.K. as Regional, also Special Use
Linear
Rice Creek,
Mahnomen - The Co�ission concurred that they could not make a determination
because of lack of data collection.
The Commissian concurred that there should be a listing under Linear
entitled, "Rice Creek Trail Corridor". Sublisted under that heading
would be Rice Creek Park, Locke Park, and Mahnomen County Park. Also,
the Rice Creek Trail Corridor with these three components should be
noted as being Regional in nature. .
Connnunity
Commons - O.K. as Co�unity
Locke Park - O.K. as Co�unity, also Regional under the Rice Creek Trail
Corridor, also Linear because it was a camponent of the Rice Creek
Trail Corridor
Moore Lake Beach
and Park - O.K. as Co�unity, also Special Use and Regional
The following discussion grew out of the discussion of how the parks should be
classified.
FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COtMYISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 1977 PAGE 6
Ms. Sporre stated that it was not evident in this document that there was a need
for buying additional land and it should be included in the document.
Mz'. Leek referred to the Policy & Reco�endations, page 23, Recommendation �2 under
Objective 1: "it is imperative that sufficient land area be set aside to accommo-
date program extension or expansion as well as reinterpretation';and Reconmendation
$3 under Objective 2 on page 24: "The City should attempt to obtain additional
land when and where possible to improve the usability of its existing neighborhoad
parks." He said this indicated the potential needs for those kinds of needs.
He also referred to the Existing Park System Map.
Mr. Leek asked the Commission if they felt a definitive statement should be made
in the Summary of Findings and in the Recommendations addressing the need fnr a
cou�unity playfield, specifically reverting Commons to use as a neighborhood park
and acquiring a larger parcel of land to be used as a conm�unity recreation center.
There was a lack of agreement among the Commissioners that this kind of statement
should be added.
Mr. Leek indicated that in the Summary of Findings, there was a statement stating that
certain neighborhoods in the City were not serviced by neighborhood parks and
were nnt serviced by neighborhood parks of adeqnate size.
Ms..Sporre stated this was of real concern to her and felt this issue was being
evaded.
Ms. Sporre stated that she had heard coam�ents that input from one of the Neighbor-
hood Project Committees had not been included in the plan when indeed that project
co�ittee had given their input.
Mr. Leek stated that this had come out at the Parks & Recreation Co�ission
also and the input had been gotten directly from the people involved. When the
descriptions were made of each neighborhood, there was no input from Neighborhood
�13. In fact, there had been input and it had gotten lost in the shuffle. That
situation had been remedied and the input would go into the descriptions of the
neighborhoods.
Ms. Metcalf stated that there should be some explanation in the document of the
make-up of these neighborhood project committees.
The Coowiission concurred that at the beginning of the neighborhood descriptions
a brief description of how the neighborhood project committees were developed
and implemented be included; also that the input from these project coumiittees
was on file at the City and available to the public.
Ms. Sporre stated she felt that each neighborhood project covmittee should be
contacted that there was a preliminary document for their review. The project
committees should be aware of the plans before those plans were implemented,
and there was no evidence of that being done in the document.
FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION I�ETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 1977 RAGE 7
Mr. Leek asked if the Co�ission then concurred that there should be a reco�endation
in the document that the general public would be notified of any review of
aeighborhood survey information and park design documents arising as a result of
this plan. The Commission members concurred.
Ms. Sporre stated that,referring to the neighborhood descriptions, Springbrook
Nature Center was an industrial park and probably was not reviewed as a
neighborhood park, although it was serving Neighborhood d�l.
Mr, Leek stated that
because of proximity,
Neighborhood �1.
it could be indicated in the neighborhood description that,
Springbrook did and probably would continue to serve
The Coumiission concurred that they were accepting the Neighborhood Needs Inventory
Chart, recognizing that the chart was based only on the neighborhood project
c�ittee reports and would be adjusted on the basis of any information from
neighborhood project committees that was not available aC that time. Mr. Peterson
stated that this should be so footnoted at the bottom of the chart and dated.
pn page 13, under ISLANDS OF PEACE, the second paragraph was changed to read as
follows: "Although the project is totally open to the public, it provides special
programmed recreation designed for the rehabilitation of the handicapped and the
elderly." In Che third paragraph, first sentence, the word "disabled" was
replaced with Che word "elderly". The Co�ission concurred with both of these
changes. *
pn page 15, OPEN SPACE LINKAGE, Ms. Sporre asked if it was clear in the first
statement that the City would be utilizing land other than city property to be
used to provide pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular access from one site to
another. She said if it was not clear, it should be. The Commission concurred.
Ms. Sporre also stated that there should be a transporation system (which had
not yet been written for the City of Fridley) that was designed for the pedestrian
and bicyle access,but was not necessarily a xecreation system.
Mr. Leek stated that they had to do a Transportation Plan for the City and it
was their intention, based on the input they had about the axisting Bikeway/
Walkway Plan for the City, to incorporate revisions into that plan based on the
fact that there should be increased accessibility, not just to park and quality
sites, but also commercial and other public facilities within the city.
Ms. Metcal£ stated that on Map 5, Proposed Stage Development, that since it was
a map of bike trails, it be so indicated on the map.
The C�ission wanted it made clear that they were concurring that Che Bikeway/
Walkway plan was only a statement of the present plan and they were not necessarily
concurring with the design of the gikeway/Walkway System Plan.
* See amended page 13 at the end of the minutes.
FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COI�IISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 1977 PAGE 8
Ms. Sporre stated that school £acilities outside Fridley that serviced Fridley
residents should also be shown on the map of the Schools, Map 7.
The majority of the Commission concurred that it would be appropriate for that
information'to be included in the descriptions of the affected neighborhoods
to the effect that "residents of neighborhoods or portions of those neighborhoods
were serviced by school districts outside the City of Fridley".
pn page 16, under "Findings" under Objective 1, second paragraph, the Coumission
concurred that ��and school districts" should be inserted after the word "government��.*
Under "Findings" under Objective 2, the Coum�ission concurred that the first
sentence should be rewritten to be more meaningful and expanded to include specific
concems,about policing, maintenance costs, and difficulty of scheduling facilities.
MOTION by Bruce Peterson (at 11:26 p.m.), seconded by Connie Metcalf, that the
discussion on the Parks & Open Space Plan be continued at the next meeting. Upon
a voice vote, Langenfeld, Peterson, Metcalf voting aye, Sporre, abstaining, the
motion carried.
2. TABLED:, MOORE LAI� DISCUSSION:
This item remained tabled as there was no information available at this time.
3. CONTINUED: NOISE POLLUTIQN DISCUSSION:
I�Ir. Leek stated that Staff would have a draft of a noise pollution control ordinance
at the bctober 18th meeting. He would also have the sources used in compiling and
paraphrasing the draft so the C�ission could see what they had worked frwi.
MOTION by Connie Metcalf, seconded by Lee Ann Sporre, to continue discussion of
the Noise:Pollution Control Ordinance at the next meeting. Upon a voice vote,
all votiug aye, the motion carried unanimously.
4. ENERGY SYt�OSIUM:
Ms. Sporre stated that there was going to be an update on the "Alternative Energy
gources Technology and Applications £ar Minnesota!' on October 11 and 12 at the
Radisson South. Itwas a follow-up to the Energy Alternative program done last
year by top people in the Minnesota Energy Agency of Agriculture, as well as
from the business field. Ms. Sporre asked the Commission if she could represent
the Coumiission at this seminar.
MOTION by gruce Peterson, seconded by Connie Metcalf, that Ms. Sporre represent
the Co�ission at the seminar, "Alternative Energy Soisces Technology and Applica-
tions for Minnesota'� and that the Commission approve the registration fee of $35.
Also, that this information be made available to other coum�ission members and
City Council. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
� See amended page 16 at the end of the minutes.
FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENPAL CONAIIS$ION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20,'1977 PAGE 9
5. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. REPORT ON ENERGY SHOW (JIM LANGENFII,D):
Mr. Langenfeld stated that he had attended the Energy Show and found it most
interesting.
B. RECYCLING PRQ7ECT CONA�IITTEE REPORT: �
Ms. Metcalf stated that things were underway and that by the next meeting, she
should have a report on the feasibility of a recycling center in Fridley. She
stated that if any of the members knew of any persons interested in recycling
who would be willing to serve on the project coamittee to let her know.
C. RESOURCE RECOVERY TECfINOLOGY SEMINAR:
Ms. Sporre stated that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was sponsoring a
"Resource Recovery Technology Seminar" in the hope of encouraging the participation
of co�unity decision makers who might be looking to the possibility of impiementing
a resource recovery system.
MOTION by Lee Ann Sporre, seconded by Bruce peterson, that Ms. Metcalf attend the
"Resource Recovery Technology Seminar" on Septamber 28-29 at the �ynbassador Motor
Hotel and that the Coum�ission approve the registration fee of $35. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, the mbtion carried unanimously.
6. TABLED: EAST RIVER ROAD PR0.TECT CON1�ffTTEE DISCUSSION:
MOTION by Connie Metcalf, seconded by Bruce Peterson, to remove discussion on
the East River Road project Co�ittee from the table. Upon a voice vote, a11
voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Sporre stated that she had agreed to find out what was left of the project
committee and had talked to Mr. John Fessenden, who was a member of that
project coamiittee. She had asked Mr. Fessenden to retrieve the records from
Mr. Paxipovich so Mr. Fessenden now had a11 therecords and had reviewed them all.
She had asked Mr. Fessenden if he would be willing to chair the project co�ittee
or if he would find someone within the committee. After a lengthy discussion,
it was Mr. Fessenden`s feeling that the East River Road Project Co�ittee would
remain inactive at this time. The reason for this was that in going through the
records, Mr. Fessenden said it was apparent that what could be done had been done
in terms of expressing opinion about goals for the River Road. Letters.from
A1 Kordiak had r.eassured the project committee that no further expansion would
take place because of the high noise pollution on East River Road. Mr. Kordiak
had reiterrated in his letter the fact that the East River Road noise study was
already in excess of prescribed levels. Mr. Fessenden felt with the assurance
of the people in the County and the coumitment of the people in the city; it
was appropriate for the project coamittee to remain inactive until such time as
further action or input was needed. Mr. Fessenden agreed to retain the files and
the membership lists.
BRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 1977 PAGE 10
1�ys. gporre stated she had talked to Mary Martin and had expressed the concem
that another chairperson was needed for the project co�ittee. Ms. Sporre
asked Ms. Martin if she would inquire to see if anyone in that part of Fridley
would be willing. Ms. Sporre had not yet heard from Ms. Martin.
Ms. Sporre stated that she did find one item through the Minnesota Department
of Transportation which would be of concern to the project coumiittee if they
were still active and was one reason why she thought the project committee should
be active. She referred to a brochure entitled, "The Great River Road Project"
which she felt indicated an interest on the part of the state on conservation
and preservation of the River Road Corridor. They had done a beautiful study and
brochure that would be of real interest to the project committee. She said the
brochure was a brief overview of the project's potential.
MOTION by Bruce Peterson, seconded by Lee Ann Sporre, to receive a letter from
Mr. Andrew J. Golfis, Great River Road Coordinator, of the Minnesota Department
of Transporation, "The Great River Road project" brochure, and "The Great River
Road Su�ary Report". Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried
unanfmously.
Mr. Langenfeld requested that Planning Coumiission members and City Council members
receive copies of "The Great River Road Project" brochure.
A4r. Langenfeld stated that the Sign Ordinance was nearing completion and he would
Iike any camments regar3ing it or questions from the Cu�issioa members before
he was designated to talk on behalf of the Co�ission. Since he realized there
were new members who were not familiar with the Sign Ordinance, he stated he would
bring a copy of the ordinance to the next meeting for these Commission members to
xeview.
The Commi.ssion members agreed that at this time, Mr. Langenfeld could proceed on .
the Sign Ordinance as he saw fit.
a� •il�
MOTION by Connie Metcalf, seconded by Lee Ann Sporre, to adjourn the meeting at
12;17 a.m. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
gespectfully sub itted,
C./,(/'wt�� <5v��
y�ne Saba
Recording Secretary
�"�;
This increase in demand is due in large part to the growing number of
leisure hours available to moat of the population because of shorter working
hours, earlier retirement and longer life spans. It is also the result of
greater population densities in and around the cities and the changing char-
acter of the population. This demand will increase even fnrther because of
t
the energy crisis. wf°�"%�+"*'" G��;,°_, ,!
P
�a.a.�Z.v, v.l ..�-�-c • �'-ea�'�
It r+ill not be enough in the future to provide only p�aygraands,
i
Parks and Recreation Departments rri71 have to explore nevr alternatives j
and provide more recreational opportunities for tfieir communities.
Comrnunities will continue to find themselves faced vrith��increased
; denand for recreation services from highly mobile populations living in situa-
ii
tions of cultural heterogenity in an age of sophisticated technology. (Brauer,
1972} In order to cope with rapidly changing and grovring recreation programs,
ci.ties tivill have to develop park and open space systems that are responsi've
� to recreation needs. These systems should provide mar.imum flexibility
",for use wi.th minimum deveiop„�ent and adequate reserve capacity to meet future
`� demands.
���.��.-� �,�This plan is a supplement to the City's Comprehensive Development Plan and
��
���'L fulfilts the Mandatory PlanningArequirements for a park and open space element
�in tite city's comprehensive planning. The plan is an inventory nf existi�ig
�
facilities and a guide for fiuture decisions about priorities for acquisition,
� ,�_u�- ?
park development,�provision of recreation service. )
s;�
�.
;�
e; _
0
1��
�
r
I
REGIOt7l1L R[CRfATIO"1 f?ESPOt15IC1LITIES
fIn addition to providiny recreation facilities for its residents,
the city often has the responsibility for providing recreational facilities
Ithat serve the metropolitan region. Fridley has tvio (2) such facilities,
both of a+hich are classified by the 14etro Counci7 as "regional, special -
use parks: they are Islands of Peace and Springbrook Nature Center at
� �
Piorth Park. • �•
ISLAfJDS OF PEACE T.r�TiK
�� �
The Islands of Peace,ar-e'located in the area designated as IJeighbor-
hood r3. The project is being developed and operated by the Foundation
for the Islands of Peace under a lease agreement ��rith the City of Fridl2y.
Although the project is totally open to the public, it provides special
progra�ed recreation designed for the rehabilitation of the handicapped and
the elderly.
The scope of development is unequalled in the State of hlinnesota
and is unique to the metropolitan area vrh2re a great number of the handi-
capped and elderly reside. Architectural barriers and parl; design with-
out consideration for the handicapped person has severely limited, if not
negated, access to the vast number o` natural and recreational resources �
that are available to the average citizen. ' .
NORTH PARK
North Park, desi9nated a Nature Center by tlie City Council in 1974,
is a 124 acre site in Fridley. 7he park features slightly altered to
natural vegetation common to lo,�land march, paririe grassland, oak savanna,
and oak forest ecosystems at this latitude (45°North). Wildlife abounds
due to the variety of vegetative cover and rich productivity resulting
from a mixture of }ieavy forest soils and alluviat sands. Three streams
briiig flo���ing waters into the area, Chimnkaman and Makiva Creeks from the
(13)
�
�
�
An inventory of the CiCy's existing park and recreation facilities led
to severa] conclusions about Fridley's existing system. These findings are
reportcd belo�•t, and are preceded by the Community (i.e., City) objective
whose attainment is affected.
Overall Fi�dinq: The City of Fridley is currently lacking in standard criteria
for the strategic distribution of the funds availabte for park system develop-
ment.
� Obb�ective 1 � �
Develop an order of.quality park facilities that vrill be flexible to the
changing needs of the canu�unity.
�
�
�
�
Findings
T�FI�J �
Fridley lacks a�functional classificatior�}system for its parl;s. Such a
system of classifications is essentia7 to the development of a total, :tEll-
balanced park system.
Cooperation and coordination among State, Metropolitan, County and Muni-
cipal levels of governmenC and school districts need to be improved in order
to ensure against duplication of facilities and waste of resources available
£or recreational development.
!iost of Fridley's parks are lacking in those elements of landscape ai•chi-
tecture (i.e., trees shrubs, shade, interesting use of grading} that enhance
a park's recreational value. '
Fridley could present a stronger, nore positive image to hotF• �•esidents or,
�, oD 1 non-residents as a 9ood place to 1ive, ti��ork and olay. The City's park system
� �s one vehicle through i•rhich that image could be changed.
�
Ouiective 2
� Provid� innovative park design r+itfi a balance of functional and aesthetic
consideration creating substantial recreationai, educational and psychological
expei•iences.
�� i
��rt
Findinqs
� Fridlcy's parks do not currently provide the flexibility necessary for
efficient prograrm�ing, operation and maintenance of the entire system. (EC�S• �
1'ark desi9n in the City has not taken into account individua] site peculiarities
{16)