PL 11/22/1978 - 305001 ' �1 a1
PLAIVNING GOl'9NIISSION MEh,'TING, NOVEP'�ER 22, 1978
CALL TO aRDER: ' .
�
Chairman Harr9.e called the Nove�ber 22' 1978D Pl�nnin� Co�maission meeting to order
at 7: 3o P. �t.
ROLL CALL: � �
`_
Members Present: LeRoy Oquist� Robert Pc�terson, Richard Harris� Vir�inia Schnai�el�
Jim L�agenfeld, Ned Storla (Mr. S�orla arrived at 7;�+0 P.M.)
Members Absent: None
Others Present: None
l. APPRO�E PLAI�TNING COA�RSSION MINUTES: OCTOBER 25' 197$:
MOTION by Nir. Langenield, �r�conded by Mr. Oq,uist, to appa�ve the (3etober 25� 1978
Planning Coa�iesion Minutes as taritten.
UPON A VOICE VOZ'E� ALL V�ING AYE� CHAIRMAN EARRIS DECLARED THE A�TION CARRIID
UNAlYIMOU�LY .
2. RECEIVE APPEA.LB CON1I�lISSTON SPECTAL MEETING MINUTES: �T�ER 2�+, 1978:
M�ION by Me. Schnabel, seconded by Mr, Peterson9 �o receiv� �th� Qctober 24s gg78
Appea�s Cc�is�ion SSp�cial Nle��in� Y�Tinutes.
^
�4s. Schn�b�l stat� that re�arding I�tem 1 on the first pa�� of' the minuteB� w1�8� t�r
mean by tbat is th�,t the�, as a C�ssi�n9 pref�r the fGZ�°t us�d izi th� existiag
ordinadnce, ra�her �han the formst used in the docu�e�t tl�y �rer� given to revie�r. �e
rea�on they grefea�red the old f��t w�s �h�t e��ery�thing R-3. �ras im on� section �3
everyth�,ng R-2 was in one section, e�c.9 whereas in the new format� they put �l drive-
W�yrs' etc' to�ether' �nd th� Ce�mmisaioners �elt it would be toa easy► �o m3ss s�thing
pertairaing to a speci�Pic buildin� area.
A�°. Oquist stated that the w�y the new �a�rlinance �ras sta�uctureci, i� woutd ne� ���ble
of content� aad an index in order to Pind tiaia�s.
A�s. SchnPabel stated that the oid fc��mat w�uld be e�,sier for the publ3c bec�ue� they
eould �ive them the section pertainin� to their �re�, and everythirag woild be c�ea�ed
in �that section.
Mr. Oquist su�geated that the r,hanges �nd discu�sions from a].,L the cam�is8iona be
co�p3.led into one document to avoid duplic�tions �nd to make it essier f�r the �laaning
Ca�mnission khen they d3scu.ss the recaa�ended. chan�es �r� the Commissioazs. If' the
reco�nmended changee weren't consolidated, it would me�n a lot of cros� referencin�
for the Plenning Co�ission, and since most of the Coanaissions were usin� �he sam�
process for reviewing the docua�nt, it would not be that diPficult to co�olidate the
changes. �
/"�
PLANNING CO�QSSION MEETING, N(1VEI�IDER 22, 1978 - PAGE 2
N�. Peterson stated that since the Commissions vere spendin� so much time on the
chenges, .he would like to see their discussions and recammendatia�ns a�cl suggested
a cut and paste prxess to consolidate the recommended changes, and did not �rant �
the onrer-ley editorialized becauae he did not Want tc �,ose �r part of it.
Mr. Oquist stated it �rvuld be too much for each Planning Camm�issiamer to have s
set oY each Co�isaion's minutes in front of them when discuseing the changea.
Aqs. Schn.abel agreed, but atreased the importanee of not having the minutes editorialized.
Mr. Lan�enfeld stated that his Cmmmission did not go through the document page by
ps�e� but his Caaanission Was conceraed ab�t the noise ordinance� the over-lay a�1
interim items� and ended up deciding not to recoam�end approval of the neW ordinance
as is� without changes. °
Ms. Schnabel stated that there Were instances �ere the Appeals Cam�i.ssia¢iers did not
feel that the ne�r ordinance wa� in ce�pliance with existing ordinances' for inst�nce�
the Maintenance Code has differeat def3nitions than the Zonin� Ordinance� and the
Appesls Coaunisaion felt those should be consisten�.
�+1r. Harris stated tha� each chairman see to it that their minutes� efter t}� cut at�
pasting grocess� were un-edited when the Planatin� Cmmmission discussed. the proposed
chan�es, and he Woald talk to stafP about hav3a� �he minutes consolidated �ad haw
they wcyuld like to have it done.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTII� AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED .
T�dANItdOUSLY. �
3. x�cE� � aPr�s co�sszoN s�cr.ai, r�rir� r�s: �vov�n� 1, 1978: �
1�IOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Nir. I.�nga�eld to receive the November l� 1978,
Appeals Ce�omissi.on S��cia3. Meeicin� Minutes.
Ms. Schnabel stated that reg�rding Item l, on pe�e 1, at the October 24, 1978 meeting
of the Appeals Ca�i.ssion, they discuESed iche de�ini�ions oF 19Family" and "Occupancy
Limit" and there was a motion by tbe Appeals Co�ission to brin� to th� Planning
Co�mnission a definition of �Family" and �'Occuparacy Limit" for �heir considerati� and
�hat a legal apinion be �iven on both definitions. Ms. Schnabel stated th�t the
Misne�ota Welfare D`partment uses three difinitions of Family and read them ae iollm�s:
1 A group of people Who b�r, prepare aad ea� their fo�d in c�on. (Fo�cl Stamp Pro�ram).
2; A child living with an eligible rel�tive relat�d b].00dl3nes, msrria�e; includes
perents, cousins, aunts and unclea, "grest"-relatives, etc. (AFDC). 3) Twe or ffiore
iadividuals relat�cl by bloodlines, �rria�e or edoption, sharin3 a housing unit main-
tained by at least one of them.(Generel Aseistance). A�s. Schnabel state�l thst those
are definitions of "Fsa�ily" aad in the Zoning Ordi�ance th�y ettempt to define "Feani�y".
In terms of "Occupancy Limit", Hud's definition was "Tota1. persons�bedro�/housing
unit� end ia 2�bedroam. Ms. Schnabel stated the Appeals Co�anission decided �that th�
definitian for "Occupancy Limit" in the Zoning Code should be "2 persons per bedroo�
per d�relling unit". Tiie Appeals �a�iseion would like s�e kind of legal interpretation
of the defini�ions.
�
PLANNIPiG COi�IISSION P�ING, NOVEMBER 22s 1978 � PAGE �
Mr. Petea�son stated t�at according to th�t definition, the f�mi.ly in � thr�e bedr�
house with a mo�ther and Pather a�ci five children �roulci be in viol�tic¢� of the ordin�nce.
;^� How w�ould they ha�le th�tt situation?
��
Ms. Schnabel atated that the probleffi aroae through the e�'efinition of "Occupa�ncy I,imi,t".
There are som� hou�ea in Fridley Whicb contain large n�bers oP p�ople who sre unrelat�
to each other and at least on� o� these h�s cause3 a lot of problems for the Cfty,
because of the ccmplai.nte about this house. As an att�pt to �et sa�e �ind of definition
that would give the City some le�al basis wlth which to handle this kind of problem,
the Appeals Co�ami.seion wan�ed a definition of "Occupancy T,{m{t" whfch would give the
City le�al recourse in this type of situation.
Mr. Peterson stated that Y�e did not like the 3de� of "Oacupancy Limit" because tiaere
are situations where people have a three or Pour bedrornn house with enou�h children
a�d the mother and father to put theffi over the le�al limit, a� did not lfke to gut
somethin� in the ordinance that would cause a problem f or them.
Ms. Schnabel stated that she unders�� that the situ�tion was that if there w�re no
coanplaints about them, there would be no prob�.em. .
Mr. (�uist stated that the situation cauld arise where a neighbor wauldn°t like tbe
family and there you laave a complaint9 it could cause aTl kinds oi problem� with an
�ordinance like thie.
Mr. Peterson stated that he thought Niinneapc�l3s had � non-related ox�dinance that h�s
been effective, bec$use basic�lly in that situa�ion, you �re run�ing a bo�rd9.n� house.
A f ive be�r�m h�us� �ith 30 unrelated people is b8eical],y a b�az°ii�ng hous�.
1+�. Iierris sugges�ed that they get a copy of Minneapoli�°s ordinaiace and r�v�tew it.
1'�r. 8az'x'is �lso stated that there �as $ Nu��ance (h�ciinance which sh�uld cover 8
situa�ion li.ke ta�t, that �he Zoni,n� p�d,in�nce $hould not be c�nsides�ed a cu,r��a�.]..
Ms. Schnabel stated th�t th� first inclinatioa of �he A�peels C�esion w�s to
�hro�w-out the dif�nition of "Famil,y" and not even �et iato "Qccupancy Limit�� but the
I�intenance Code has a defini�ion o�C "Family`Pin it �ahich readst A group o�F not mo��
t�an 5 Persons, who need not be relsted by b1�d, marriage or adog�ion livin� togeth�r
as a sing],e hous�keeping unit."
A�r. Peterson stated tl�t since it wa� already i.n the R�ai�,tenanee Cole, ichey sh�u].ci not
have to have e definition in th� Zonin� Code.
Aqs. Schnabel stated that ms�rbe when ��e Planning Co�ission discuesedl this, they would
decide to throw it out, �ahich was the Appeals Commissione' first inclin�tion, but as
they talked about it, they �reren't sure if there were other resso�ns the d�finition wae
needed.
Mr. Aarris �t$t� that he had talked with the City Attorn�r, and th� City Attorney
Would receive capi�s of their di�cussiona re�arding the propos�d chan�es� an�i he
could interject, during their deliberaicions� his legal opinions regarding the changes.
Mr'• Harris stated he would like to think about it and discuss it at a later time� unlesa
they hed a �pecific proposal.
h1s. Schnabel stated that the proposal was to have � le��l opinion oa the definitiona
n_of "Fami�j►" and "Occupency Limi,t", and wouid like to know if it wovld be enforceable.
Nls. Scr.nabel stated she would get the Nlinneapolis ordinance re�arding Boarrlfn,ghota�ee
and they could discus� it at the Planning Congaission meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, qLL VpTING AyE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE I�i0TI0N CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNIN(3 CON�+RSSION MEET�NG, NOVEr+IDER 22, 1978 - PAGE 4
�
4. RECEIVE APPEALS COi�A4IS3I0N MINUI'ES: NOVEN�ER 14, 19'j8:
MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oquist� to receive the Appeals Co�ission �
Minutes of November 14, 1978.
Mr. Peterson
40 foot lot,
lot of other
Pr�pertY and
they allowed
stated tY�at regarding Mr. Bruce Ned.e�asrd's request to build on 8
he felt that by granting it they would be opening themselvea up to a
situatione such as if a person h�d a noa-conforming use on s pieee of
it burae3 dovn� he could cc�ne back and sey that the precedent vas tha�t
it t� be built back to its origin�al status.
A�s. Schnabel stated that she had questioned the s�me thing and also had mentioned the
Hyde Park area. Ms. Schnabel ahowed the Co�iesioners a picture and aa aerial photo
oP the lot in question. Ms. Schnabel explained that the house presently on the lot
wae uninhabitable and if the variance request w�s not granted� the City would co�emn
the house and it �ould be removed. Zqs. Schnabel pointed out that the aerial photo
shaws several other �0 foot lots on the same street, so it was felt tha� building on
thie lot would be campa�ible with the neighborhood. Me. Schnabel also pointed out that
the house immedintely north was a very nice h� on a k0 foot lot. Ms. Schnabel atated
that as tbey discussed the request, it became apperent �Chat the neighbors �ere very muc�
in favor of Mr. Nedegaard building on the �0 foct lot, and since there were other homes
on �+0 foot lots on the same streete iic seemed. ressonable to grant the request, rather
thsn deny the request and let the City condemn �he house� have it torn da�Wn, �ahich
would take sa�e time� and then be left with an empty 40 foot lot. Ms. S�hnabel stated
that Clyde Morevetz hsd talked 6rith Mr. Iierrick, the City Attorney, and Mr. Herrick
felt it �rould mot jeopardize the law suit because the l�w suit �as concerned with a
per�on wh� had brought �che lots t�xx forfeit� this lot was a fuil priced piece of pro-
perty, there was the question of a corner 40 fo� lot as opposed to an interior �+0 foart �
lot, and the neighbors in this case were very ffiiach in favor og a new dwelling on this
�0 foot lot. The neighbors approached Mr. Pledega�rd and asked him to do this. A�.
Nedegaard lives down the street from the iot in question. Because of these facts, the
circumstances were quite different from the law �uit case, and Mr. Herrick xould be
vflling to write out a legal interpretation for the Ci�y Council.
I�tr. Harris stated that he eould see thst this would be �ood for the neighborhood ead
could understand why the neighbors �a��ted it, but iaae concerned about setting a pre-
ceden� thaay Would be sorry for later.
t�. Peterson stated that he had note3 that Pat Gabel eacpressed the same co�ncerns in
terms of her vote.
Ms. Schnabel st,e�ted she did too, in fact felt ti�at all the Coa�issioners did� but by
the saa� token, found it diffieult to come up with reasans to deriy it �rith the neighbors
there requesting it. Pds. Schnabel noted that Mr. Kemper had stated that if this had
been a vacsat loi, he probab�y never would have voted for it� but because it did have
a house on it thst was current�}r being used until just recently, he felt �re ca�fortnble
going alc�ng �rith the request.
Mr. Harris asked what the difference w�s between this lot aad another lot that•� vaca�,
other th�n this lart h�s s house on it.
�
��
PLANPTII�GG COA�IISSION I�'!'ING, N�IIi 22, 1978 - PAGE 5
Me. Schnabel atated that 1�kfng at 2t fro�a anothea° angle, if thie house Wae for
sale �nd aoQnebody bwght it an� decided to improve it� the City could do nothing
�„� about that.
Mr. Aarris stat�d the�t that could be done, easentia].l,y buildin� 8 house within a
bouse, if the present houae w�s that bad. Mr. Harris stated that personaL�y he Yelt
grantin� the variance would be a good tfiin�, but was uneasy about the consequsncest
mRybe ttot �ith the present court case, but a year £rom n�r.
Ms. Schnabel stated that they may be faced with these s� tyge of situations in �de
Park. ,
A9r. Herris atated that what they Were doir� then �ras continuing tbe uae of sub-atandard
lots� which they► had decideai not to do.
Nls. Schnabel stated that they had said they would aot permit ne�a conetructi� on vae�nt
sub-standard lots, but in Hyde Pe�rk they had said they would p�rmit �xisting use oY
sub-at�adard lots to continue. Ms. Schn�bel a�CSO st�ted ichat Mr. Nedegaax°d had in-
dicated that this 40 foo� lot cost over $12,Q� and because o� this she felt that be-
cauee cost� are sky-r�ke�ir�g so mucln, they msy have to a3.lo� this kind of thi� in
order to cou�inue to prov3de h�using.
l�. �uist g�stiorned whether they shc�u].d be conc�raed about providin� additio�3.
bous�tn� �heax Fridley wa� � developed.
I+�. Earris su�gested thE;y table thie 3tem for thr�e �nths� until Febr�arg*� vhile
$hey ��ur3y i�9 �d get s,jvdgem�nt �ir� the present cour� c�ge and 1�oEr wher� th�
ar� �oing with the prc�bleffie B�c�u.se evez�rthin� is �'r�z�n �s�r�y� 1�. RTe�e�aard �rauld
^ not be able to do anything with i� unt3� Spx°in�.
Ms. Schnabel state�i �hat on page 7, the �+th pare�r�ph �r�► �he top shoul.d reads
'�I�r. Couture �sked that �1..f' the �ars�� on Lot 5 were moved south 10 feet' it w�uld
e]1ow �or a 50 f'o�t �at ra�her than � 40 �lot, and �ou].d the Ci'�,y give a ear3.aace
for a �0 Yoot lat"
Ms. 8chnabel st�ted that �n P��� 7, the 5th par��aph fro� the top, tbe wor�e "�'r�
A2r. Tracz�.k" should be de].eted.
Ms. Sc}�nabel a�tated th�t on Page 13, �he �th par�gz°�gh from the bo�t�� it shoa�3.d be
8 �eet not � feet.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALi, VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLAR� Ti� ARa�I.'ION CARRIED
UNAI�TIMOU3LY.
MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. I�angenfeid to recon��1 �o �Council �hat
Mr. Nedegaard's request to build on the �+0 foat lot et kb26 2nd Street N.E.� be
t�bled Yor 90 dqys (December9 Januery and February).
UPON A VOICE VOTE, A�. PETERSON� NIl�. LAN^vENFEI�D, N1Ft. S'PORLA� N�t. OQUTST V�IPtiG AYE�
AI�ID MS. SCHNABEL VOTING NAY, CIiAIIZMAN HARRIS DECLARED TI� N�TION CARRIED � TO l.
�
,�
PLANNING CON�QSSION MEETING, NOVF•P+�IIt 22, 1978 - PAGE 6
5• i�i+'�ilYl'' L''I111i��1Y1•Ili'�HL �UriLi11 1.�1�►�'7SIOl1 �NVlr'►5'.' W°1V'D�[1 �.1J 171"•
MOTION by Mr. l.�angenfeld, aecoaded by Mr. Peterson, to receive the October 17� 1978�
Environ�ntsl Quali�ty Ca�ission lainutes.
Nl�r. Langenfeld stated that on page 2, letters fro� M�. Johnsaal ex�d Ms• Sclzau]-s should
have been included as part of the recox°� and were not.i.aicluded rrS.�h the minutes.
Mr. Langenfeld stated that there was a m�eting at City Hall on Monslay night which was
attended by FAA' NIACy.t�tro Council, City oF Fridley Council� and Marsha Bennett amon�
others. Mr. Langenfeld stated that the question of �rhether or not there �as �oing
to be airporic expansiari �as discussed, and also to incorporate u�er the MnDOT pro�ram
the discrepanciee noted by their Co�i.ssion and others. 2dr. Langengeld stated that
it laaked like the airport expansion idea wes in the makin�� and there was ta�lk oY a
Master Plan with the appraach of expanding piece �by piece, �Por example� first put in
�ome lights, then weather instrument f�yin�, with each thing being a major change.
Mr. Lan�enfeld atated �ihat there were 3ndica�tions of political iz►volvement also.
Hb�. ?,�ngenfeld s�tated that their Co�ission �ould be mee�ing with Idew Bri�hton EQC
��d vould be providing s�e kind of suffinary.
Mr. Langenfelci stat� t}�� regard3ng Ms. Sporre�s comments vn page 7, 6th p�r�raph
from� the battom, Ms. Sporre me�nt th��; if the ordinance could be enforced� she would
be w�lling to spend the time.
P�. Langenfeld notecl that they had a new member an his Ca�i.ssion, M�rvin Hora.
UFON A VOICE VOTE� ALL V�ING AYE� CAAIRM1AnT HARRIB DECLARED T� M�I'ION � CARR�
[AYANA�+IOL�LY. -
6. RE�EIVE PARI{S APID RFCREATIOIV C�SSION I�NUr''S: OCT�BER 23� Z978:
�TI�N by Mr. Pete�cson, secoud�d by Ms. ScY�nabel to receive the �tobe� 23� 1978/
P�rks a�. Recre�tie�n Commission minutes.
N�. Ls«g�nfeici a�ked if Mr. Petc:rsoa� thought tlaey could get conm�on �round for sno�r
mob3.li�g.
I�r. Peterson st�ted they had leased the S�ars Property last year and sereer� requesting
ft egnin this y�ar� but hadn't heard yet.
Mr. 7zau�enfeld �tated th�t he hop�d it wouldn't be I�cke Park.
I�. Peterson did not thiralc that would happen, because oP the problems with the Wild
life.
M�c. Harris asked �hat eould be done to d�:vide the outside rinks to separate the
bockey p�qyin� fra�m the ice ekaters.
Ialrr. Peterson stated that most of the rinks are already separated and most of the
designated hockey rinks are not used very much by the form�l h�key program, but
ere used by neighborhoocl kide.
�
� -�--�
�
PLANNING CON�+RSSION I+�ETIIiTG, NOVENIDER 22, 1978 - PAGE 7
Mr. H�rris etated he �as referrin� to the rink on �he Stevenson Scho91 prot�erty in
p�rt3.cular, �ahere �here he�� been s prob�em of hockey plqying on the �enersl rink.
P�r. Peterson stated that it was ��roblem of enfox°cement. The rules eta�e that there
are to be no hockey sticks or pucks on �ener�l rinks, and if there isn't a hockey rin�
�here' they ehould go to another rink designated for hockey playing. PRr. Peterson
atated that it Was written in their gener�l instructiona that ther@ Was to be no
hockey p].a,ying on �eneral purpose skating rinks.
Mr. Iiarris stated that he would like to �ee a sign posted on that rink prohibiting
hockeY P�Y� � ,
Mr. Peterson et�ted he would make a note to �et the �eneral skatin� area� poat�d.
The rinks with Wazmi.ng houses are p�steci a�i the at�endent� are suppoa� to enfo�cce
3t.
UPOId A VOICE VOTE� AL,L VOTING AYE� CAAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED Ti� 1�OTION CARR�
ITNAIJINIOUSLY.
7. RECEIVE THE HiT�4AN RESOL�RCES CONA9ISSION MINUl'ES; NOVEMBER 3, 1978:
MOTION by Mr. Storla, seconded by Mr. Oquist� �o receive the Human Resources NLinutes
o� Noveaber 3, 1978.
Mr. Storla not�d they had discussed the Intern�tional Yemmr of the Child on p�e 1 0�
the minutes.
,�••1 1►�.°. Storla point�d out Mr. Peter Fleming�s rem�rks regardin� the Memoranduffi of 1�re�-
ment on p��e 3 of the minutes and ststed �chat th�y had spent until. 11;00 on th�
I�I�mor�na.um oi l�greemenl; and realized �nat althou�h they knew all the parts and $heir
inter-rel�tionships, they were not groceedin� in �ny order. Larry Dobson suggestesl
�hey �tart cutting and pastirig to put i� in an order thst did make sense, and fina].].y
csme to the conclusion that even if �hey did maxi�i�e its understandibility, it wouad
still be vsgue and r�dundant. They then decided that the department should c� up
with a new one.
Mr. Qr�uis�C sta�� that he was con�us� about who wxote iche Memorandum of Agr��n$ e
Mr. Aarr3s explained that the Hu�an Resources Co�issiom received the Memor�nd,ut� of
A�re�ment fro� �he S�tste� aad when they came to the Plaianing Co�isaion wi�h it,
the Plaani� Ca�nnissiaan asked them to set up guidelines �nd �oa1s �s �o h�w they► would .
implement the I�emorax�um of A�reement. Whea they had finished writing up the guide-
13.nes� they had �in reality written up a new Memorandum of Agreement.
Mr. Storla atated that the original oiae that the Plann3ng Co�issioa had revie��l.�ras
the one fx°om the State� s�d �tiat was the one Mr. Peter Fleming had coaanented on.
Mr. Storls pointed out the Flow Chart on the last pa�e which they nrodifierl �rom the
one Coon Rapids had develop�d.
Mr. Oquist �u�gested that they devise their o�n Memorandum of Agreemeat and ask the
Sta'te to sign it.
^ MZ°. Storla stated that they �ould review the new one and if it �s ].ike the iast one�
�bey �aould have to came up �rith one o� their oFm.
PLANNII7G CONMQSSION N�.'TING, NOVEMBER 22, �978 - pA� 8
Mr, ftarris suggested they forget about sending s�}r ietters to �ihe State� as Mr. �
Fleming had suggested.
N[r. Storla staterl that they would not deal with the last Memorandum of Agreement� �
and if they were �oing to deal with the State, it Would have to �e �tith e different
one.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL �TOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS D�ECLARID T� MOTION CARRIID
UNAIJIMOUSLY.
$. RECEIVE THE E1�RGY PROJE�T COA9�lITTEE MINUl'ES: NOVEMBIIt l, 1978s
MOTION by Mr. Petersa�, seconded by Nlr. Langenfeld to receive ithe November l, 1978, `
Energy Project Co�aittee Minu�ies. ' �
I�. H�rris�stated that they have had another meeti.n� eince the November let a�eting� �
and pages 5 and 6 list so�e of the things they discussed at that meeting. Mr. Harris
stated that at the next meeting, they would be votin� for a chairman.
Mr. Langenfeld pointed aut �hat on p��e 2� he �as re�erred to as th� cha3rman �d it
shoul.d be N.�. Harri�.
-Mr. Harris etatefl he fel� ves�y optimietic about the Cc�mi�tee an� feels they have some
very gaod people on the Commiictee.
Mr, Langenfeld stated that the3r h�ed Mr. Bill. Dsvis from the St�te Energy Comm3.ssion
there ancl Mr. Dav'3s talked sbout s mini-audi� the�r h�d �i��.en on a large business in
St. Paial �nci wi�hout making sny major alteration� �o buildings or �h� like th�ic,
they just taged things like lights on, etc., a�. sa�red $25,000• !�
N1�, H2arx°is st�ted that N�g°. D�vis elso sta�ted that they were using the Fr�.dley Ener�y►
Project Con�ittee form�t r�nd charter as a model �or settin� up their Co�mittee. 2�r.
�arris stated �hat as they diecussed the d3fierent f�cets of ener�}r conserva�ti�,
Mr. Davis had �affie interestfng c�ments such as sa econa�ic erisis was what they were
really ta�king about. I+qr. Harris also st�ted thst �s th�y talkecl it seeffiec1 that the
State was not Willing to lead, but willing to fol.lc�. Af�er asking A4r. DavaLs various
queations, Mr. DQVis responded that they have the authority� bu� do not h$ve the en-
f�rcement authority.
Ntr. I,angenfeid stated that he had asked Mr. Davis wi�y they �rere bein� askeds �� iadividus2.s ,
to turn the thermostats d�wn, �,rhen 3.arge depar'�m�nt sicores �reren't and. Mr. Davis
replied that tbey do not have the authority to make the depart�nt stores turn doWn
their thermostats, all �hey can do is ask. ;
Mr. Storla stated tha� there Was proposed le�isl�tion thst if you sel]. your house, you
must have an ener�r inventory, and you must hire a person qualified to dm the �nergy
inventory� �. the eeller can v�ive the Yee.
Mr. I,sagenfelc€ etated that I�r. Wall h�d indicate�i an interest in Bl�k Parties� �rhere
neighbors w�u1�l aaal,yze each other's ha�e a�d then� iY nece�sery� purchase the insulati�n
ia volume to saue money.
Mr. Peterson stated the problem �as not in b�ing in volwne' but that there w�s nothing
�vallable to b�r that does the job, in terms o� sol�►r collector3 snd sQlas heat. �
�. I�rria �tated that the insulation c�mpanies cannot bupr insu�ation.
,��
PLARTNII�G CONA�RSSIUN MEETING, NOVE�ER 22, 1978 ����` PACE 9
Mr. Oqulat e�ated that he had insulated about two ye�rs ago and aas saving about
25� on his bill, bu�t it eppe�rs that as more people insulate and use less ener�r,
�� the rates keep goin� up because the utility coffipanies t�ve to meke their profit.
People be�in to feel that even if they insula�te� 3t would not save them money.
1�. Peterson stated that if they h�d not insulated� the bflls would have gone up
even more.
Mr. Storla etated th�t la�a iuc�e people pay ten t3mes ffiore of their gross incooae
on ener�r than middle income pec�ple.
Mr. Harris in�dicated that on pe�e 1 of the minutes, he had stated that the tar�et
date Was June 30� ig79, and that if they fel�t �hey needer3, more time� the Planning
Commission would extend it. A�r. Harris asked th�t Mr. Langenfeld give them progreEs
reports on the e�mani�te.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED T1� MO►rION CA.RRIED
UNANIA�IOi�LY .
8, CONTINUED: MEMOi3ANDUM OF AGREE:�I1��T
M(�TION by Mr. Storla� seconded by Mr. L�ngenfeld to table the Agemorandvm of A�reeffiea�
until the l�n�uage can be worke�d out �i�h the Sta'te Dep�rtffient oP Hum�n Righ�s.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, � V�ING AYED CHAIRMAN iiARRIS DECLARID THE M�'I'ION CARRTED
tJNAIJIN[OiJSLY.
^ 9. CONi'iNtIED; REVI�WW OF SIGN ORDIN.A�VCE AT DIR�CTION OF CITY C�UI�TCIL
MaTION by Nr. P�t�rson� se�onded 'by P�3r. Oqu3st to �tab].v the review of tlae si�a
ord nance.
UPON A VOICE V�'I'E, �LI, VpTIIdG qYE� CHA�tA7AN H�iIS DECLARID Ti� M�ION QARR�
U�TpNIM0U5LY. •
10. QT�t BUSIi�]ESS:
A. N1r. L�enfeld asked. that th�,y use the o�her l�ind oi books ��or th� ���d�se
because the pa�es s�il out of these.
B• Mr. LangenY�ld distributed let�cers r��a�ding tbe openin� of the Congregate
Din�ng Project, an� state� that the Com�missioners were �aelc�e to cane on
the c�pening dqy. A�r. I,angen�feld stateci that the people 3naolv�d �aith the
Fr3dley site are very excfted �bout it, and Mr. Lan�enfeld stated tha� the
program was very beneficial because it not only provides neede3 nutrition,
but allowa the people to sociali�e while they dine. A�r. Langenfeld stated
they sometimes have movies, s3ng-a-long8, or nutrition education afte� the
meele. ASr. Langenfeld et�ted th$t resez-vations must be made 2 daye in
sdvance.
Ms.• Schnabel asked�if the meals were prepared on site.
�--� Mr. Langen£eld sta�ed that the meals Were prepared by the N�trition Center
- in Minneapolis.
PLANP1INt3 COP�M'lISSION MINVI'ES, NOVEMBER 22, 1978 - PAGE 10
C. I�. Harris stated tiiat he and I�9r. Langenfeld and th� City Council had m�t
�ai.th the perspective conaulta��s on the revitalization of the dr,wntovn aree.
I+�r. iierris felt there were e Wide ran�e of prices Which �re inacurately quoted
in the paper. The low one �aas $15,50o a� if you added all the proposals �o- r�
�ether� which the paper failed to do, they ce�me to $35�000 or �+2,00�, whiCh _
Mr. Harria felt Was rather ex�rbitsnt.
I�. Langenfeld stat�l they were g�ing to do it in phasee.
Mr. Harris �tsted that he was not alto�ether sure they really ne�ed a consultaat
on tbe do�nntawn area� and felt the City Council should consider it furth�r.
29r. Harris stated that what they reca�menrled was that they stage the study in
pYiases, such as complete phase 1 and make a report aad then the City Council
could decide whether they wanted to go on to ph�se 2� etc. The Council asked
ihe consultants if they would do it that way, arad the consultants agreed. I�ir.
Harris stated that hopefully they would do it that w8y, becau�e he �ras not sure
they would vant to do the whole area.
Mr. Oquis� svgge�ted that Phase 1 should be t� decide whether they want to re-
vitalize iche dawntawn or nat.
I�fir. Asrris stated that Phase 1 would be an inventory of ti�e are� a�d cor�currance
of the people in th` �rea, and aftex° thst �aa� c�mpleted �they could decide if
�hey �ntecl to go on to Phasc 2. .
Mr, i�arris sta'�ed that he did noic think the Council should c�mmi�t themselvea to
the wh�le thing uniil Phase 1 was ccQnpleted. T�r. Harris suu�est�d tkiat �he
Comm�.ss� o�Qrs think about it and if they wanteo� to� they could �k�e a r�solu�c3� �
to Council st the next meeti�.
d�ir. P�-�erson ststed the�t �he Pl�naing G�issiora shou� b� i�nvolved ��he plannin�
procese �nd the r.iri� of consultan�s �ras eerts�n�y pr�rt o� the plannin� process,
ena� eo they should go cn record one way or anoth�r regar3ing this, and waxul.d iike
to se+e the consultaats proposa�s.
Ie"�. Harz°is r�quested the copies of the consul��nts proposals be sent to the
�mbers of �tiae Planning Commi�sion with th� neac� a�e�ae
A°i0TI0rd by P�ir. Pet��son� sec�nded by Mx�. Storla to ac'! journ the Norrember 22s 197�
pl�nni� Commission meeting.
�N A VOIC� VOTE� ALL '.V�I1�G AYE� CfiAIRMAN FiARRIS DECLARED T� MEETII� ADJOL�tNED
AT 9: � P. �t.
RES'FrECTFULLY SUBM[TI'ED:
,.� ,.
� ; /��
�'�"r' �c'i' �'C�"Cc"=� ^--
Katl�y Shel on� Recording 5ecretary
^ �
� ���