PL 07/26/1978 - 30495�^'�
CITY OF I'RTDLEY �
PLIINNING COA4P�[ISSION I���TING - JULY z6, 1978
CALL TO �RDER:
Chairperson FIarris called the July 26�.1978� Planning Commission
meeting to order a� 7:43 P.M.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present; .5torla9 Harris, Modig, Schnabel, Langenfeld
Members Absent: Oquist (Modig representing), Peterson
Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Plan.ner
APPROV� PLANNSNG COMMISSION MINUTES: JULY 12, 1978
MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. I,angenfeld, to approve the
July 12, 1978, Planning Commission meeting minutes. Upon a voiee
vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
1. PUBLIC HEARING:
L1 1�VL.u111 1�.L:.�LwJVlv. 11:r11 1'111LL.U1 V111 VVL.U� aJ1�V11Vltl LV f�V f 1'L��1�
TO ALLOL"J THE CONSTRUCTION OF A S�COND ACCESSORY BUILDING,
A 24 FOOT BY 24 FOOT DETACHED GARAGE AT 524 RICE CREEK
TERRACE NE. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THIS PROPERTY IS
LOT 7� BLOCK 3, RICE CREEK TERRACE� PLAT �. .
� MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Ms. Modig, to open
Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion
unanimously, The Public Hearing tivas opened at 7:45 P.�.
��
�>
the Public
carried
Mr. Robert Nelson of 524 Rice Creek Terrace NE was present at the
meeting.
Mr. Nelson said that the outside dimensions of his attached
garage was 20 by 20 feet. He said that he needed the extra s�ace
because he owmed three cars, two motorcycles, snowblo�rer, lavrn.mower,
and various other items. He said that everything would not fit
into his present garage. He said that he would be willing to
place the garage on either the rear Northeast or the Southeast corner
of his lot. He said that if it �vas positioned on the Southeast
edge of his lot the driveway v�ould go out onto 68th Avenue.rather
than onto Rice Creek Terrace.
Ms. Schnabel asked if Mr. Nelson planned to use either of the
garages for any type of home business (ie repair work, etc).
Mr. Nelson said that it caould be used only for the storage of his
belongings. He said the only repair work done would be tivhat he
would do on his own cars and engines such as oil changing or tune-
ups.
PLI�NNING COMMISSION P��F�:TING - JULY 26, 1978 ____ Pa�e 2
Mr. Nelson poir�ted out that Western Garage Company would be building
�he second accessory building.
Mr. Boardmari explained the setbacks that wou7.d have to be adhered
to if the garage tix�ould be positioned at the Southeast Corner of
Mr. Nelson's lot� He also explained ��hy the garage should not
be placed at ihe rlortheast corner. He said that once the setbacks
erere r�et, there �lould bs. very little room leit for a drive-way
going to the rear Northeast corner.
Mr. Langenfeld asked if Mro Nelson no�v wanted the Planni�.g
Co�nmission to consider ihe positioning of the garage at the
Southeast Rear Corner of the lot with access to the garage off of
68ich Avenue:
Mr. Nelson said that he would position th.e garage at the rear
Southeast Corner of his lot.
Mr. Doran Eding�er of 536 Rice Creek Terrace said that he was not
in favor of the garage being constructed at the rear Northeast
corner of the lat rrith the driveway off of Rice Creek Terrace.
Iiowever� he said that he did not objec�C to the location of the
arage at the Southeast corner of the lot with access off of
�8th Avenue. He said that he did believe that Y�Lr. Nelson needed
the additional space and he did not object to his having a second
accessory building. He said that he could not anticipa�e any
problems.
Mr. Dan Gourde o� 6800-7th Street NE said that if the garage was
placed at the Sou�heast corner of Mr. Nelson's lot, it would be
adjacent to his house and garage. He pointed out that his garage
was 50-60 feet from the street. He said tha�t if the bu.ilding
was allocJed, he v�ould want the garage placed at the same setback
as his garage so that there tivould be an even line of sig�,t. He
also pointed out that the curbing on that street were very new
and lie really ha�ed to see it ripped up so soon,
Mr. Gourde said that there tivas already a drivetvay to the North
of his property line. He said that r.e did not like the idea of
having ttvo driveways abutting his property. He felt that they
raould act as a detriment to the value of his house.
Mr. Gourde said that he was opposed to having the driveway off
of 68th Avenue. .He felt that the neighborhood was already
developed and the rear yards �vere presently all open. He said
that there ti�ere no other buildings located in the rear yards
and he didn't drant to see a precedent set by allo�ving the
construction of the second accessory building.
�``�
��`1
�
��
PLANNING C�MMLSSIOr1�TING - JULY 26; 1978 Pa.�;e 3
^ Mr. Richard Larson of 506 Rice Creek Terrace said that he was
mainly concerneci about the adverse efiect of property values on
the adjacent land ovrners. He said that the rear yards were
relatively open and there vrere no other buildin�s located in the
rear yards. He said.thaic the construction of the garage at that
location would cause the removal of a tree and he didn�t believe
that ti��ould be .good for '�he aesthetics of the property.
He said that even thou�h Mr. Nelson didn't plan on any outside
business bein� conducted, the property could change han.ds and the
netiv owner could decide differently.
Mr. Larson said that any detached building was undesirable. He
felt that the adverse effect of property values should be considered
in the Planning Commission's deeision. .
Mr. Doti�uie Bou�a of 525 Rice Creek Terrace said that he was also
concerned about the adv$rse effect of property values. He said
that most people had items that they can't store in their garages.
He said that through-out the area there �vere storage warehouses
that tivere built for the�main intent of aiding property otivners in
being able to store items that they didn't have room to store at
their residents. He suggested that Mr. Nelson store any seasonal
items in one of the warehouses.
Mr. Richard Fischbach of 681Q-7th Street NE said that Mr. Nelson
prssently had a nice rear yard. He said if he put the garage
� 3n .the rear yard he ivould have to take out some fencing and some
� trees. He really didn�t feel that the garage tivould look nice
and the adjacent neighbor should not have to look at a garage. The
entire openess of the area �vould be gone.
Mr. Nelson explained�to the Commission the contour of his lot. He
inclicated hoFr he planned to position the garage. He did not feel
that the garage could possibly cause any undue hardship to the
adjacent neighbors. He said that the top of the garage would not
be much over the natural incline already present on the lot.
He said that the tree that seemed to concern the neighbors �vas a
weeping �rillow tree that had to be taken doti�m any��ay . He sai�
that �rhether or not the garage would be located at that location�
the tree �vould still be removed.
Mr. Nelson explained how he came ta buy: in the area. He said
that he�presently considered remaining in that house for a long
time. He said that there tivere no plans in the future of a move.
He sai.d that they now had a house and an. area that he and his
familg liked.
MOTION by Mr. Lan.genfeld� seconded by Mr. Storla� to close the
Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion
carried unanimoulsy. The Public Hearing v�as closed at $:19 P.M.
,�
PLANNINC7 COMr�ZISSION M��TING - JULY Z6. 1978 Pa�e 1�
Mr. Lan�enfeld indica�ed that he was �Neighing both sides 3n trying
ico make a fair decision. He felt that the accessory Uuilding
should be compatible i�ith the surrounding area. He said that
it ti�ras the property ovmers yard. He also said that if Mr. Nelson
did not have an accessory building� he could very well store the
items in the yard. He said 'that he �vas concerned aboui �he
aesthetic value of the area.
Chai.rperson Harris pointed out tha� the burden of proof for
denial was upon the city. He said that in the case of a denial
the Commissian would have to list the reasons.
MOTION' by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Storla� to recommend
approval of the request for a Spec_i_a1 Use Permit, SP #7$-06 by
Robert Nelson: Per Fridley City Code' Section Z05.051,2�A� to
allotiv the construction of a second accessory building, a 21� foot
by 24 foot detached garage at 524 Rice Creek Terrace NE. The
legal description of this property is Lot 7� Block 3� Rice Creek
Terrace9 Plat 4� with the �tipulatiors that the garage be located
at the Southeast corner of the rear lot �rith access off of
68th Avenue and that all easement and setb ack requirements are met;
and that the alignment of the second accessory building be as
closely as possible tivith the abbutting property odvners structure
withou�: causing undue hardship on the petitioner.
Chairperson Harris suggested that S�aff help �rrork out the best
location possible for the second. accessory �auildingo
Mro Langenfeld read a portion of a memorandum from the City Attorney
to the City Council regarding Special Use Permits; "If evidence is
presented at the hearing that the requested use is compatible �rrith
the basic�use authorized within the particular zone and does not
endanger the public health9 saiety, or general welfare of the area
effected or the community as a�vhole and. complies with such other
standards as s�ecified� the Special IIse Permit should be granted
and a denial tivould be deemed arbitrary� unlawful� and in violation
of �the applicantTs constitutional rights.��
Mr. Gourde wanted the drivet�ay accessing the second accessory
building to be the same as Fiis driveway. He wanted some
excavating done so that there �vould not be the four foot drop
from his property to the proposed drivec�ay.
M�. Schnabel felt that it would be an undue hardship to the
applicant.
Mrs. Marilyn Larson of 506 Rice Creek Terrace said that the
additional drive��ray onto 68th Avenue �vould cause a safety hazard.
She said that 68th Avenue was a well traveled street and she
wanted that considered if the drive�vay was to be allowed. She
also pointed out that the area was developed tivi.th homes having
attached garages. She said that by allo��ring Mr. Nelson to
construct a separate building in the rear of the property may set
a precedent. She said that if everyone decided to have the second
accessory building� the area would become very aesthetically
unpleasing.
�;
i"1
�
4.. ,.
*, :
PLANNING COMMISSION MrETING - JULY 26, 1978 Pa�e 5
� Mrs. Larson pointed out that the slope of the land in question
was an important issue. She said that problems could develop
if the garage was construc��d withou.t considering the lay of the
land. . _ .
Mr. Langenfeld pointed. out to the people opposing ihe mo�ion
�that he had dveighed all the statements and concerns expressed
by all the people. He said that he had to abide by the rules
and even after listening to everything being said he did not
feel there vrould be enough information to deny the request.
Mr. Storla said that Mr. Nelson had seemed very flexible with
anything that ti��as being suggested. He said tha� he wanted the
garage an.d i�ras agreeable to �vhatever stipulations the Cammission
wanted to put on the approval.
Mr. Langenfeld said that the request �vould go before the City
Council on August 7, 1978. He told the people in the audience
that they should also attend thai meeting.
Chairperson Harris said that the action of the Planning Commission
was to recommend an. action to the City Council.
Chairperson Harris explained that Mro Nelson would have to abide
and adhere to �7.1 f.he Building Codes. He said that the construction,
the materials used� and the general design of the accessory building
/� �vould have to conform to the existing structure and v�ould have to
be approved by the Building Depart�ent.
Chairperson Harris said. that he did not share the concern of the
grade differential as �as alluded to by some of the neighbors. He
said that he did look at the property previous to the meeting and
he said that � the minimum grade of the structure �vould have
to be 18 inches to two feet. He said that with those statistics
the grade differential �irould only be approxima�ely 3 feet. He said
that it appeared there �ras enough land bet�veen the structures that
the accessory building could easily be handled.
Chairperson Harris said that he did share the concern of the
surrounding property otivners that a grecedent could possibly be
set. He said that the Commission had to keep in mind that the
Special Use P ermit was granted to the property and not the person.
He said that he �ras not certain that the structure vrould be in
conaert with the rest of the neighborhood; hoa�ever' he sa:i.d that
with Mro Langenf�eld�s reading of the directive from the City
Attorney, the Planning Commission bvasn�t left with much choice
because there tivas no real proof that the construction of the second
accessc�ry building �vould be a health� saiety, or general welfare
hazard to the neighborhood� He said it would be very difficult
for the Planning Commission to deny the requ�st.
PLI�TNING COMMISSIOPI MrI;TING - JULY 26� 1�,�8 Pa�e 6
Mro Boardman said tha.t home occupa.tions are not allotived to be
carried on in �accessory buzlciings. He said that if anyone did
conduct a business out of an accessory building they vrould be
in violai:ion of the City Or�.inances. .
Mr. Nelson said that a complaint froin any of the neighbors thai;
they felt a business U�as being carried on in the accessory building
would bring immediate action from th� City.
UPON h VOICE VOTE� all voting aye� the motion carried unanimously.
The P�anning Commission's recommenda�ion for approval of Special
Use Permit, SP 7#78-06, with stipulations was sent on to City Councilo
2.
RIVER LOTSB
STT;EET NE.
l� LOT SPZIT� L.S. �78-OL�}q BY ROD VJAARA, EDINA
IT OFF THE �dEST 100 F�FT OF THE EAST 200 F��T
IILOPtG THE TTCRTH ZINE 9 OF ZOT 1� BLOCK 2� HAYES
THIS PARCEL d"dILI, BE �DDRESSED AS 1!�0 CHARL�S
Mr. Boardman saa.d that there �tas set�rer and vrater in Charles Streeto
He said that the property in question �a��s zoned as R-3. He said
that �rith the split off of the proper-ty� there would be approximately
�0950o square feet of land that could he developed tivith a duplex
or icrip"lex. He said that there was an existing house on Zot B.
�'�i
Mro ti'Vaara said tha� �he inten� was •�o split off the westerly 100
feet o� the existing lot. He said that the plans �aere to deve�op �
�ar�cel A tieith either a duple� c�r a tri.�lex. He said that the
triplex would only be considered i� a suitable plan could be found,
T�r. Boardman sa�:.d that the City �vould require iive foot easemei�.ts
on a11 sic)es of the lots. Tn addition, he said that the existing
utili�y easement along parcel B be extended to 20 feet to allo�v
for Bikerray/�"dalki�ay easements as �fell as the drainage and utili-ty
easements. � �
Chairperson Aarris asked if they came up tivith a triplex plan
that could �eet all the parking and easements condition� tivoulc�
that be plalane� for the lot.
Mr. 1�laara said that basically a dupleg �vas being considered. He
sai.d that from an investors standpoimt� they v�ould like a triplex;
ho�►ever� he rrasn� t sure that all tlie requirements could be met on
that particu.lar lot.
I�ir. �faara said that they �rere requesting a lot split and that they
�vould work out the details �uith the Building Department.
�
PLANNING C01��I �SION MrFTING - JULY 26,� 1978 Pa�e 7
MOTI�N by Mro Lan�enfeld9 seconded by Ms. Schnabel, that the
Plannin� Commission recommencl ap�roval of the request for a Lot
� Split, LS #78-04q By Rod �'laara� �dina Realty: Split off the
West 100 feet of the East 200 feet as measured along the nor�Ch
line of Lot 1� Block 2, Hayes River Lots. Tliis Parcel urill be
addressed as 140 Charles Street N�, �rith the stipulations oi five
foot easements along all sides of Parcels A and B and the 20 foot
easement along the east portion of P arcel B to be used as Bikeyvay/
� 1"Jalk��ray easement as vrell as utility and clraina�e oasementse Upon
a voice vote9 a11 voting aye9 the motion carried unanirnousTy.
�
�,
3o CONTINUED: LNERGY PROJECT CONQ�ITTEE DISCUSSION
A. Geneva Harperg State of.Minnesota Energy Agency
Ms. Harper had an emergency in her family and was
not able to appear before the Planning Commission on
July 26' 1978.
Mr. Board.man suggested that the Planning Commission act on
the Energy Project Committee and to consider using Ms. Ha.rper
as an in�ormation resource for the Energy Project Committee.
B. Review Scope
Mr. Boardman indicated that the ad for membership on the
Energy Committee had been put in several ne�rspapers as
well as on Chs Reader Board in front of City Hall and
on Cabel Tile He said that the response� had been slo�
but believed it �ould improve as people had more time
to give it soffie thought.
Ms. Schnabel said that she had talked to several people
regarding the Energy Project Committee. 4ne of the
people vras Pat Brennan of the �eague of �Jomen Voters,
Ms. Brennan recommended that the The Energy Project
Conmittee get in contact iaith the Anoka County Communizy
Action Program resources. This Prograyn has done much
on �he subject of Energy. Ms. Schnabel suggested that
the group be contacted either as a possible membership
on the Energy Project Committee ar as a resource.
Mr. Storla referenced the Right to Light Bill. He
said that the bill gave the authority to the City to
'�ake ��Jhatever measures necessary to protect anyone
�rho i�ould plan to utilize solar collectors, etc. to help
in the conservation of energy.
Mr. 5tor1 a felt that one of the things that the Energy
Project Committee should do is come up tivith an Energy
Plan for the City and have the 19Right to Light�� a part
of the regu�.ations.
��
PLAIdNIrdG COP�P4ISSIOTI MEETING - JULY 26, 1�78 Pa�e 8
Mr. Boardman said that it tiArouldn�t necessarily be the function
of the �nergy Project Committee to develop certain regulations. ,.-,
He said that it �t�ould be t�eir responsibility to make
recommendations to the Planning Commission for action to the
City Council for the specific direct�n of an Energy Policyo
Chairperson Harris said that it would be the responsibility
of the �ner�y Project Committee to develoP an energy policy
for the City of Fridley and not to develop ordinan.ces.
Mr. Langenfeld felt that the Right to Light Bill should be
incorporated in every existing ordinance that was applicable
Ms. Schnabel felt that the Energy Project Committee could -
develop energy conservation ideas tivith the goal that the citizens
of Fridley could obtain a�reduction of en.ergy �onstt�ption.
Chai.rperson Harris said that �aould be included in the implementation
phase of the Committee.
Mr. Langenfeld wanted to knoer what was the point in the discussion
that took place at the July 11� 1978� Community Development
Commission meeting regarding the Energy Project Committee.
Ms. Modig said it c�ras decided that most people don�t really believe
that there is an energy problem. She said that the Comm�ssion
basically hoped something more specific could be recommended �
to�the citizens to help them reduce the consumpt'ion of energy. �_
Ms. Modig personally felt that there should be some provision
in the tax system that crould give people tax credit �rhen they
do an. energy saving procedure to their homes rather than re-
assessing the property and raising their taxes.
Chairperson Harris said that some energy saving projects can be
used as income tax reductions.
Mr. Boardman said that as long as the taxes are based on the
assessed evaluation and if someone isn�t paying their share
of the market assessed. value of their pro�erty because they
�aere getting a credit on that assessed value� the amount that
the person receiving the credit doesn't pay has to be passed off
to someone else. He didn�t believe that anyone could expect
any credits on assessed evaluations because they produce an
energy consumption reduction improvement to their homes.
�
PL7LI'1NTNG COP�II'�[ISSIGA� M�I�TiP1G - JULY 26� 1978 Pa�Q 9
,...� Mr. Langenfeld said �:hat if peo�le tivere �oing to be assessed for
mak.in� ar� energy savin� improvement in their homes� then it would
seem that the cJhole purpose would be destroyed.
rir. Boardman said that many people are installing energy saving
devi�es because the cost of energy is going up and even though
tliey ti�ould be . assessed they ��roulci probably be saving in the long
run because of the high cost of energy,,
MOTION by P4s. Schnabel, seconded by Mre Storla� to adopt the
Scope of tihe Energy Project Committee of the Planning Commission
as wri��en. Upon a voice vote� all voting aye� the motion
carried unanimously.
�.. CONTINtT�D; PROPOSED NOISE CONTROL ORDIN�NCE
Mr. Langenfeld sta�Led that the Proposed Noise Control Ordinance
was enforceable.
MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld� seconaed by Mr. Storla� to receive
the P�Iinnesota State Regulations regarding the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency' Noise Pollution Control Section� and the
Snoti�obile Requirements, Section 121�.0?. Upon a voice vote�
all voting aye9 the motion carried unanimously.
^ Mr. Boardman said that he �rould locate aIl the referenced
documents and have copies sent to the Commission membsrs.
Y�lr. Boardman said that Sec. 121��04 General Testing and T�easur�ment
Procedures listed on Page 29 should be revrorded to sayg �� e� e 5�1311
be kept on file at City Ha1:l by City Official.t�
Mr. Boardman indicated that the first Part of the statement under
Sec 121�.O�E� ��The City Official shall adopt guidelines establishing
the test procedures and instrum�ntation to be utilized.o..�� should
be a policy set up that could be revie��ed. He didn�t feel it should
be totally set up by a City Official,
Mr. Boardman said that th� first statement on the top of page 40
Noise Impact Statement� should be deleted from the text.
Mr. Boardman. said �hat ihere should be very strict guidelines
set up to judge vrhether or not a Noise Impact Statement �rould be
required.
Chairperson Harris said that when a City started laying down
limit�� they had best be sure of what is actually being talked
about. He felt that the PCA was vague on some items.
n
pLAI�TP,_ Z�GOMMISaION MrF�'I'ING - JULY z6, 1978 Pa�e 10
Mr. Boardman said that there tivere certain thin�s in the Noise �
Ordinance that are good to have a control on� but he said that
the control �vas already in the Zonin� Ordinance. He said there
would be no.��ray to reduce the noise level oi a road system
without changing all the tiresy all the road surface patterns� etc.
Mr. Langenfeld suggested that vJhen they received all the copies
of the documents from Mr. Boardman.� the Commission members should
revie�a them and then decide exactly hoti� they felt about the entire
package.
Mr. Boardman said.that throughout the Ordinance the �erm "Noise
Officer" dvas used. He suggested changing the term to "City
Official�'.
Mr. Boardman said that Item D� Comprehensive Plan� on Page 41
should be termed� "Site Plan".
Mr. Boardman referenced Sec. 124.07, Snowmobile Requirements�
p age 41. He said that it �7as mentioned tha� the Snowmobile
Ordinance be amended to include the noise regulations.
Mr. Boardman said thai the noise regulation should be in this
document ti�i�th the �nention of the regulation in the Sno��lmobile
Ordinance. He explained tha� the reasoning ti�ras that it �Trould
be much less confusing and less complicated to bring these
ordinances into this document, than to take these ordinances
and put them into the Snorrmobile Ordinance and then document
this Noise Ordinance for ihese regulationsa
Mr. Boardman explained that several items of reference had
be deleted because the Sections referenced did not exist.
IInder section 12�..089 Operation�_l Limits� Item (a) a there
no Section. 8.68; Item (b) there was no Section 10.29002.
to
�vas
�
Mr. Boarclman referenced page 42� Section 121�.09� Public Nuisance
Noises Prohibited. He said that enforcement of the entire section
�vould be impossible. He read over several of the items and explained
why they vrould be unenforceable.
Mr. Boardman referenced Section 124.10 Exceptions� on page 1+3.
He said that if there would be any exceptions to the rules, that
decision cannot be made by a Staff person. He said that the
exceptions had to be done by due process that would have a set
procedure.
Mr. Langenfeld said that he �vas not very pleased �.th the Noise
Ordinanc e.
�
�1
PLANNING COMMIaSIOPT MErTIr1G - JULY 26, 1978 Pa�;e 11
, �`
Mr. Boardman said that possibly v�hat should be done is to take '
� the different��ections o� the Noise Ordinance and incorparate
them wi�h already existin� Ordinances0 He said that the part
of . the N'ois.e Ordinance dealing ti�ith Snot*rmobiles could be
incorporated in the Snov�mobile Ordinance� and the section regarding
industrial noises could be included in the Zoning Ordinance� and
so on..
MOTIOIV by 1��so Schnabel9 seconded by Ms. Modig� to table the
Proposed Noise Control Ordinance until it can be put together
in some other form. Upon a voice vote� t�Ir. Storla� Aqs. ��fodig�
w Mr. Harris� and Ms. Schnabel voting aye� Mr. Langenfeld abstaining�
the motion carried.
5.
,�
�
.:.-
Mr. � A. L.1K:�sserli oi 5505 l'Vest Danube Road� was present at the
meeting regarding this item,
Mr. Messerli revie��red the correspondence tha�t had taken place
regarding the area i$ questiono Copies of the exhibits
were included with the Agenda Package.
T�r.Messerli in�licated that he had become interested in the subject
�"'� a couplE of years ago� alc�ng ivith many neighbors, He said that
they became at�Jare of various lots that pertained to �ublic Net�ands.
He said that he talked to the DNR and Mr. Ronald D. Flarnacl� the
Regional Hyc�rologist'had issued one of the exhibited letters
to Mr, Darrell Clark indicating that the lots in question �xrere
Type IIT �vetlands and should be considered Public 6'daters.
Mr. Langenfeld said that the entire Environmental .�uality Commission
took a tour of the area. He said they �ere concerned because
some of the �retlands are being filled right nov� ��.th "junk�� (cement�
foundry Castings� 50 gallon drums� etc.).
Chairperson Harris said that the County tivas very specific on the
type of fill that can be used for fill.
Mr. Boardffian said that if the person doing the dvmping �vas caught�
the City �vould. make that person remove rrhat �vas dumped. He pointed
out that it �ras quite impossible to ticatch" the guilty people.
Mr. Messerli �sked if Building Permits had been issued for any of
the lots in question. He also tivanted to kno:v if land could be
filled �rithout the issuance of Building P ermits. He pointed out
that at least 50 large truck loads of fill have been put into
the lots.
�
PLI�TING COP�'�ZISSIOTt MErTING - JULY 26 s 197F3 Pa�e 12
Mr. Lan�enfeld saicl that during the Environmental Quality
Commission�s tour� they all observed the debris on the lots in
question. He said that the en�ire commission wanted to rectify
what is happening. He said that it ti�ras not only happening in
this paxticular area9 but throughout the Ci�y of I'ridley. He
said �hat they a1.so discovered that several permits that had
been issued had not been adhered to as far as draina�e� etc.
Mr. Langenfeld indicated that Z�etlanc�s definitely served a purpose.
He said that if the lots in question tivere classiiied as Type III
6Vetlands� then a DNR permit had to be granted. He said that there
was definitely a►�tiarong" situa�ion in Innsbruck North.
Mr. Langenfeld said that the issue at han.d v�as to try to impose a
moratorium to halt any further dumping in the area until all items
are carefully considered. He pointed out that if the moratorium
was refused� he has been requested by the �nvironmental Qu.ality
Commission to vrrite a letter to the City Attorney to get an
injunction to stop any further fill until the question is clarified.
Mr. Boardman pointed out that if the DNR issued a permit to fill
tvetland.s� then it behooved the City of Fridley to also issue the
permit to fill the lJetlands.
�
Mr.Messerli saia that he ti�as su,re that the DNR had not issued
any permit for one of the lots in question that dumping �ras occurring �
�on.�
Mr.Messerli inclicated that several of the vretlands in the area
have already been dredged. and filled. He said that some of them
had to be dredged to a depth o� 35 feet and then filled. He gave
some examples of �he construction that has occurred in the past
on lots in the designated wetland areas. He said that some of the
homes had basically no rear yard area.
Mr. I,angenfeld presented the question for thought that once a11
the t�etlands were filled in� �here rtill the �rater run-off go.
Mr. Boardman reierred to the Drainage Report that had been made
by Suburban Engineering. He said that a drainage system for
Innsbru�k Nortli had been set up �rith the understanding that all
the lots �vould be developed, He said that the Drainage System
ti�as approved by the Rice Creek Lliater Shed District. He said
that there �vas a�system of ponding areas set up to take care of
a11 the ti�ater run-off. He said that the t�tater ti�lould eventually
end up in Long Lake �►hich is a feeder for the Rice Creek.
�1
.,.�
PL�NNING COMMISSION MFETING - JULY 26, 1978 Pa�e 13
Ms. Modig wanted to know v�hat the purpose was in dec�aring the land
Type III Wetlands if they are going to allow permits to build on
the land.
Mr. Boardman said that the regulations that designated the land as
Marsh Developments did not take effect until after the Platting was
approved in the development. One of the requirements of the
development was to handle all the storm water if any Marsh Land/
Wetland areas were to be filled in. A Storm l�later Plan had to be
deve�.oped. He said there was a question at the time the Plat was
approved as to whether the land was actually classified as ��7etlands.
He said that under the Environmental Quality Commission it wa.s .
required ico get an Environmental Assessment Statement on any marsh
areas or combination of Marsh Areas in excess of five acres. He
said that the City received a letter from the DNR stating that
they could not issue any building permits on the Vdetlands area
because they were protected State public waters. He said that
the DNR was informed by Fridley that � if they required the City
n.ot to issue building permits in writin , then the City would
not do so. However, he said th�i� State issued a permit
and the City would no� issue a building permit, then the City
would be involved in a legal issue because a contractor had
purchased the property and the City was not allowing building
on that property.
Mr. Boardman said that the reason for the unequal assessment
was because the developer had asked the City of Fridley to spread
n the assessments off the ��etlands lots onto other.lots so that the
Wetland lots could more easily/economically be developed.
Chairperson Harris explained that the reasoning behind the unequal
assessments was that the City of Fridley was afraid that if the
assessments were spread equally, it would only be obeious that the
better land would be built on first and.it tivould have been possible
that the lots in quesiion would have land costs, plus special assessments
which would make the cost of the land so high that the
petitioner may let the land go tax forfeit. He said that the City
of Fridle�y was afraid that they would be ��stuck" with appro�mately
fifteen lots.
Mr. Langenfeld said that the main point trying to be made is that
the houses being built on the wetland lots are having water
problems. He said that if the lands are being filled, the tivater
has to go someplace and someone will be having critical problems
with tivater.
�
��
PLANNING COMMISSION M�ETING - JULY 269 1978 Page 14
Chairperson Harris said that �here were s�ipulations on the plat.
He said that one of those stipulations was that basements had to
be put in 18 inches above the medium water table. He said that �.
should someone decide to put �he basement in at a level less than
the stipulation, then that person will have water problems.
Mr.Messerli said that he has been led to belieee that building
permits have already been issued for Block 3, Lots 5, 6� & 7.
He can't imagine how homes could actually be built on those lots.
Mr. Boardman wanted to know the intent of requesting the
Moratorium.
Mr. Langenfeld said that main reason was to prevent any further
dumping on the lots. He said they also �anted a thorough study
of the �etlands to see tivhat impact it would have on the surrounding
homes and on the entire environment.
Mr.Messerli said that he was sure that the problems are most
likely with the DNR. He said that perhaps �he City would have
some influence.
Chairperson Harris explained�that without the DNR/�tate directing
the City not to issue those permits, then the City was in a
difficult position not to issue the permits.
Chairperson Harris said that the discussion was on approximately
32 acres of land or approximately eight feet of water. He said �
that the existing ponding system shot�d adequately handle that much
wa�er. However� he said that the fact is that there is water up
to property o�vners doorsteps. He said that it is evident that
there is something �vrong. He said that before much more is done,
the reason for that type of situation should be looked into.
Chairperson Harris said that the dumping of �Tjunk" on those lots
had to be stopped.
Mr. Boardman said that it was very difficult to con�trol the
practice of dumping on vacant lots. He said that many times
people are known to be dumping and the City informs them that
they have to remove the dumped items; however, he said that the
people ignore the order.
Ms. Schnabel said that if it cuas discovered that a particular
contractor was in constant violation of a City Ordinance, the
City had the authority to fine those contractors.
Mr. Boardman said that the City had the right to remove his
license to operate in the City of Fridley.
�
�
�,
�
�
PLIINNING COMMISSION MFT�TITIG - JULY 26, 1978 _ Pa�e 1�
Mr.Mess���:�: �vanted to know why the contractor could be using the
la.nd for fill when building permits had not been issued.
Chairperson Harris said that there vras a possibiiity that the
contractor had a land alteration permit from the City. He said
that the contractor had to have some type of permit to lawfully
be filling in land.
Mr. Lan�enfelcl said that it was not the intent to stop any
development, but to have the vrrong correc�ed.
MOTION by Mr. Lan�enfeld, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, that the
Planning Commission recommend approval of the requ.est for a
Moratorium on Lot Development in Innsbruck North Addition from
Environmental Quality Commission; Block 2� Lots y.,5., &6;
Block 3, Lots 5, 6, & 7 for the period of one year or less wi.th
the instructions for City Council to appaint the proper governing
body to investigate the problems.
Mr. Langenfeld said that he would also like to incorporate the
fact that the fill must come to a halt and that the wrong being
done can be haliced�
Mr. Langenfeld quoted a portion of the Interim Development Control
Ordinance, Effective Period. "The Municipal and County Planning
Acts both provide that an Interim Control Ordinance may be made
effective for only a period of one year subject to a one year
rene���al thereafter. �r�lithin this limit the effective period �for
a Control Ord.inance should be only as long as the expected time
it tivould take to cor�plete the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent
zoning amendments. The period of effect should be clearly stated
in the body of the Ordinance and if the Planning and Zoning
amend.ments have been compZetecl prior to the expiration of the
Control Ordinance, the governing body should void the effect of the
Control Ordinance ti�rhen it adopts the Zoning amendments.t�
Mr. Lan.genfeld sa:i.d that there should be an immediate stopping
of the dumping in the lots in question.
Mr. I3oardman sai.d that the dumping would be stopped now! !
Iie said that the dumping rras already in violation of a City
Ordinanc e.
Ms. Schnabel said that the dumping on the lots was one of the
situations that the Staff could have stopped immediately. She
said that there vJOUld be a one year moratorium to have proper
offic3.als of the City Staff as �vell as the City Council itself to
adopt an attitude that there would be no further development
in the areas designated as bvetlands until either a study is made
or the current study is reassessed or the DNR malies a committment
so there tivould be no future homes built on the particular lots.
���
PLl1NIVIPIG COMr�IS �IOP�T MFTTIPIG - JULY 26, 1 �78 pa�e 16
Chairperson Fiarris said tha� on the lots �hat already have permit�s
issueds it vrould be very difficult to stop the development.
Mr. Langenfeld said that at least an ativareness has been created.
He said that it is most obvious �;hat someone is not doing their
job 'right. I3e said that a gross mistake tivas made by someonei
Mr. L"angenfeld asked that Mr. Boardman report his findings regarding
the dumping on the lots in question back to the Planning Commission.
�.
Mr, Boardman agreed to report his findings to the Planning Commission.
IIPON A. VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion ca_rried unanimously.
The Moratorium �n Lot Development in Innsbruck North Addition
was recommended ior approval to the City Council.
6.
�
or1 aF M�r�o
THIS n'JILL BE A CUN`l'l1V U�ll 1'1
V. HERRICK� CITY ATTORNEY).
MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Storla� to receive
Memorandum #78-�+2 from Jerrold L. Boardman, City Planner,
regarding Commission Activities, dated July 26, 1978. Upon a
vo�Lce vote� all eoting aye� the motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Harris asked if there had been any communication
from V. Herrick regarding the Memorandum of Agreemente
Mr. Boardman said that they had not.
Mr. Lan.genfeld said that.the Environmental Quality Commission
was in favor of set-ting up a Project Committee ta review all
areas where possible drainage �roblems could arise.
MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld� seconded by Mr. Storla, to continue the
discussion of the Memorandum of Agreement from the Human
Resources Commission until something �vas received from the City
Attorney. Upon a voice vote� all voting aye� the motion carried
unanimously.
7.
MOTION by Mr.
the July 11,
minutes.
ION P�fINIITES:
Langenfeld, seconded by Ms. Modig� to receive
1978� Community Development Commission meeting
�
'"1
�
PLANNING COMMISSION M�ETINr - JULY 26, 1978 Pat�e 1�
Chairperson Harris wanted to kno�rr vrhat was meant in the seventh
,^ paragraph on rage 3 of the minutes,
Ms. Modig said th�t th�y ielt someone should chair the Energy
Committee that.would not have a conflict of interest.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� all voiing aye� the motion carried unanimously.
8. OTH�R
ADJOU RI��IENT :
MOTION by Mr. Storla, seconded by Ms. Modig, to adjourn the
July 26, 1978, Planning Commission meeting. Upon a voice vote�
all boting aye, the motion carried unanimously. The meeting
�►as adjourned at 1 z; 22 A.M.
Respectfully submitted,
�
M aryL e C arhil l
Recording Secretary
�'�1
.�1
�