The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 05/09/1979 - 6653PLANNING CaMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL' CITY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA WEDNESDAY, MAY 9, 1979 APPROUE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: APRIL 18, 1979 1. TABLED #79-01, BY MARVIN & KVtStKI trcl�Kaurv: 5pltt ott tne westerly 74.99 feet of Lot 10, Auditor's Su6division No. 89, to make two building sites for double bungalows, the same being 12E5-II7 and 1295-97 Norton Avenue N.E. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Ol 7:30 P.M. PAGES 1 - 22 23 - 25 in�., �sr �cuii HULMEK: Kezone Lots 9 and l0, Block.l, Moore Lake High1ands 3rd Addition, from C-1 (local business offices} to C-2 (general business areas), and Lot 11, Block 1, Maore Lake Highlands 3rd Addition from CR-1 (general offices and limited business) to C-2 (general business areas), to a11ow a carden center and future building expansion at 6319 Highway �65 N.E. - 35 3. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMTT, SP #79-03, 28 - 35 THE LIFT-SKI & BIKE, TNC. BY SCOTT HQLMER: Per Section 205.101, 3, N. to allow a garden center on Lots 9, 10, 11, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands 3rd Addition, the same being 6319 Highway #65 N.E. 4. VACATI�N REQUEST, SAV #79-01, BY KATHf2YN GEftARD: Vacate the alley36 ' 4� in Block 3, Plymouth Addition, bounded by 48th and 49th Avenue N.E. between 2nd Street and 2 7/2 Street. . __ 5. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN R�% Plus APPROVAL ��F b: 5: APRIL 17 7, RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: APRIL 2A, 1979 � NG 9. RECEIVE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSIQN MINUTES: APRIL 23, 1979 10, REGEIVE ENERGY PROJECT COMMITTEE MINUTES: APRTL 24, 1979 11, RECEIVE BLUE YELL6W PINK 6REEN WHTTE BLUE � � PLANNTNG COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDRY, MAY 9, 1979 Page 2 12;. CONTINUED: DISCUSSION ON DRAFT OF COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SEPARATE 13.. CONTINUED: PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHAPTER 205 ZQNING SEPARATE i4,. OTHER BUSINESS: ADJOURNMENT: � CITX OF kRIDI.EY PLAP�N7TdG CO2�ft7SE>TOPd I�:G`I'TNG - APRIL 18� 19'T9 __ __ CALL TO ORDER: � Chairmnn }Ier�la culled the April 18� i979, meeting of the Planning Coamiasion to order at 7:3p P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Precent: Mr. Treuenfels, !dr• Oquist, Mr.Harris, Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Hora (for Mr. I.�ngenfeld) Nkymbers Absent: Ms. SuhrMer, ffir. Langenfeld (arrived at 9:�+5) Otkiera Preaent: hSr. Boardman, City Planner Mr. Leek, Associate Planner Idr. Nitsekieke, 6661 1�Sain Street N.E 1. AFPROVE PLAb1NTTdG COD�SIS5IOPi 1�IPNiTS: APRIL 4� 1979: ASt}TION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by P•1r. Oquist, to approve the April �}, 1979, minutes of the Plannin� Commission. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Boards,sn how tha Council reACted to the Planning Coicmission's stetemen� regrarding the six members on the Envirorvr.entql Qvality Cozmni.sefon. hir. Boardnan stated those minutea had not yet gone to Council. They would come before Council on April 23� 1979� UPON A VOICE 4QTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CIiA1RfMN FIAFtRIS DECLAf�D TI� I�i0TI0N CA_RRIED UNANIl`•10USLY . 2. APPROVE PLAA'i�]ING COMt+IISSIOP� tdTNIT['G5: APRTL 11� i979: MOTION by D9r. Oquist, seconded by Dts. 5chnabel, to approve the April 11, z979, minutes of the Flanning Commiseion. Ais. Schnabel stated thqt she wished they had more time to read the minutes. She asked how iar they got 3n the discuseion. Mr. Harris stated they had A Y'A'Lt1C:T lengtY;y discucsion on housing. Nh�. BoardmAn statec3 ti�ey brought up highlights throughou't the document and did not reall,y start �rith goals snd abjectives. They discussed issues primarily. Mr. Harris atated they discussed housing and the attitudes towArds it and xhat we tBought our attitudes should be. He felt it was a good discussion. IJPON A VOICE VOTE�.ALL VOTING AYE� CHATRMqI4 HltRRIS AECLFtRED THE NATIOfl CARRIED 1JNANIMOUSLY. , PLANNII3� COMMISSION M1"�TTNG� APRIL lbt 1979 , PAGE 2 � i 3, RTC�]VE APPEALS COMMISSTON MIt1UPES: APIiIL 10, 7�979� M6TION by Ms. Schrzabel, aeconded by Mr. Oquist� to.receive the April 10� 1979, m-�nutes oY the Appeala Commiasion. Ma. Schnabel stated thst the diacussion startin6 ou page 4 af the minutes centered on the item that had been before the Plannind Comm3ssion previously. The item was a request by Alvin Nitscheke, 6661 Mriin Street, to rezone his property. It came to Appeals with a variance request. She stated that she was quite shocked when she Nent over and looked at Mr. Nitscheke's property because she did not renlize Prom the Planning Commission minutes that there was a multiple use on this piece oP property. She d!d not know if the Planning Ca�issioners had looked at the property� but it didn't come out in the minutes� and it bothered her tremendously. Mr. Oquist asked what she meant by a muliiple use. Ms: Schnabel stated there was a cormreercisl use in the garage. Part of the garage was converted into a State Farm Insurance Office. So it is a eonnnereial use oP the property as well as being a tri-plex. The commercial use is an open violation of our zoning code� but that was not 1;he question that the discussion centered around. As yau can tell from the list of questions at the end of the minutes, they had a 7.ot oP questions concerning this piece of property and others that will come up ].ike it. They were not zeroing in on this piece oP property per se, other than it has brought to their a'itention many questions cottcernin� density, l�ow the City would lfke to see property reclassiiied in the future, lot sizes with regards to these types of requests and a Iot of other questions they felt ahould be di�cussed before the Board of Appeals made a decision on this particu7.ar xequest. She assumed that the conmtissioners had read the minutes and eitlaer had questions of their o*,m or some answers L-o the Appeal's questione. She felt they had some problems with the current zoning ordinance and they should perha�3 address these prob].ems in the new zoning ordinance as they rewrite it. One of the questions was the number of units. Do we still want to require a minimum of 60 vnits in a new townhouse development? That is what our code currentJy requires. It also requires 5 Acres of land, and so maqy square feet per unit comes down to 60 units as a minimum development for town- houses. Another question �ras in regards to existing units. If there is an exi,sting unit in an R-I District it requires more square foota�e than the same existing unii built in an R-3 District. There wss a diserepancy thexe in our configura�Lion:,. 4'here wag a discrepancy in our zoning ordinance concerniug garages. There was one set of rules for townhouses and another set of xules for double bunga2ows. That was not necessariZy consistent in terms of rental.property, yet we see that kind of property also coming before them for a reclassification such as this. There was a difference in cubletting. If you have a townhouse development in an R-X Zane, you cannot sub- let that property. It must be owner occupied. The same ia not true if it is in an R-3 Zone, yet it could be the same building in both zohes. There were a lot of questions they felt the Planning Commissicr� should look ut ancl same of t2�e sub- eommissions might slso want to look at them also. She stated that first of all they should try ta zero in on this particular type of situntion so that the Appeals Coaunis�ion could act upon 3t. N,sybe the thing to addresa is �leting units aTUl then get into new development after that. � . '' PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 18, 1979 _— PA�� Mt�. Boardman stated that he queutioned whether it made tY�at much difference ae long ae the densities remained the same becauae the purpose of zoning in the Pirst place ia density. Ms. Schnabel stated that it Btruc� her in reading the minutes tbst the attempt was to reClaesify it into what is so called the eaeiest classification to work with. It scems that someone went through the code book and took a look at whst required the lesst amount of variances and came up with the realization that a townhouse would zequire the least amount oP variances� so they recommended to the petitioner that he apply for a townhouse. M�ybe this piece of property and othsrs like it mould be 'hetter off with an R-1 alassification even though 3t requSrea more varisnces than a townhouse clasaificstian. " Mr. Boardman stated he would have some real problems with that because that would vary the denaity in an R-l� it wouZd vary the lot si2e in sn R-1� and they would end up with a 30 foot lot ittstead of a 40 foot lot which they were not sllm�ring other people to buiZd iu an R-1. _He felt there were some real problems with re- zoning to an R-1 just because they were trying to control ownership on a piece of property. Ae did not see where there wes a problem in trying to control pwrxership. Whether they had ownership or rental in a situation like this he did not see a�{y problem because the density was eet Por R-3 and it was being developed ior R-3. The reasoning behind the townhouse definition of it was because they had no other definition that wou2d allow this type of split ownership wbere they had houses butting right up next to esch other. Ms. Schnabel referred back to the question of owner occupied dwelZings, because this was one of the key points in this issue. The selling point was that iP it became a townhouse it woul.d be owner occupied and as a resvlt there•.�would be more pride in the property', the dwelling would be kept up better, etc. She stated that was not require@ under our code. If that was an R-1 zone it must be owuer occupied. In an R-3 zone� which this is, it does not have to be owner,occupied. So a person coul.d come in an buy one of those units and turn around and sublet it. Mr. Boardman stated he would question that because if they require owner occupied in this in an R-1 zone yet they don't require owner occupied in an R-1 zone in a. residentiel area for a single family house. He questiqned the r�asoning behind th8t. Ma. Schnabel stated that she agreed with Mr. Soardman but thst�s the wqy the current code book reads. She brought it up because she felt it was important for them to discuss it and understand it,so that when they do rewrite the code they would have a better idea of where they ere going and what they want to say. Mr, Boardman ststed he undexstood that but felt that going to an R-1 zone and then bringing variances to al2ota this Would be opening them up for other areas such as 40 foot lots or 50 foot lots being split into two ownership units and dividing the 40 or 50 Yoot lot into two 20 or 25 foot lota as long as they had 3,000 square foot. They �ould run into real.problems with that wheress if they look at existing pro- pertiea and allow existtng properties by density aud trien set up some controls on new property sueh as s patio home development; as least they could handle the PLANNING COMMISSION i+�L7'ING� APRIL 18� 1979 __P?��_5 existing propertiee ba�ed on density and look at ideals �or density on tihe new units. He felt t;he whole issue came down to the fact thst the zoning is based on density. They were trying to protect a certain density within an area and there were oLher things that entered into that such as setbacks and those types of things which esi�ablish standards wathin an area. Those standards are set bssed on a density. Mr. Harris asked if this was zoaed R-3. Mr. Boardman str�ted thcst was correct. Mr. Harris asked if in a townhouse association the lands were held in common. Mr. Boardman stated that in some situations they were but in this case it would not be that way. In this case, the way it's set up, the lot lines were being flivided all the way throu�h the lot so each unit has a separate yard area. blr. Harris stated that bothered him. Mr. Boardman stated that each of the units would be responsible for the maintainence and ugkeep of their yard area. Mr. Oquist asked why that bothered Mr. Harris. It's no different from a single family private dwelling. Mr. Harris �tated they chpuld iook at uhat could happen. If they split it up into three parcels, he assumed there woutd then be three different tax statements, three different water meters and three diiferent gas meters. Mr. Boardman stated that would depend on how the utilities were set up. In this case there might have to he a common utility agreement. He was not sure what the situation was on that. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Nitscheke if he had one uater meter or three. Mr. Nitscheke stated that he had one water meter. Mr. Harris stated that if they in £act split it into three ownerships, they should have three different water meters. Mr. Boardman stated they wou].d be looking at that or comparable agreements for the nse oi the utility. � Mr. Harris stated ihe problem was that 1f so�eone didn�t pay their b311� what would they do? Turn the water off on the ot&er tWO? Mr. Nitscheke asked what they did i❑ townhouses2 Mr. Harris stated that townbouses were a separate deal because that was held in cormnon by the association. Mr. Boerdman stated that in a townhause, the lands were held in cormnon, but the utilities were separate for each un3t. PLANNING COt�4�IlSSIQ� ME�TING, APRIL 18, 1979 PAGE 6 Mr. Horris ststed that then 1f they did divide it into three parcels they would � have to have three tax statementa. Mr. Bosrdmsn agreed and ststed they would slso hsve to have preferab7.y three vater and sewer hook-ups. But it may not work that way. They might have to have some kind of agreement with even the potentiality oP having a sewer and Water Yund available £or repaira and that type of thing in which those people would heve to put money in escrocr. Mr. Harris stated that easentially then they were talking aboui getting to an aesociation type setup for same of those things. Ii certain repairs were needed on the build3n�� like the roof� how wouZd they handle it if sIl three garties didn't agree on the tteed for repairs? Mr. Boardmsn stated we wouldn't handle that, it would be up to the people. I�tr. Harris stated they vere putting themselves into a very strange situation. Mr. $oardman stated it was the same situation in a townhouse where they had eigbt uaits side by side. He didn't understand Mr. Harris's point. Ms, Schnabel stated tt�at she was not too hung up on that and that's a problem those people would have to worry about and hopefully they would hire sttorneys to handle that. Mr. Aaxris stated they woul.d he cresting the situation. He would be more com- fortable �rSih this proposal 3f they handled this particular piece of property just like they handled their other proparties. Instead af splitting it up into three separate Zots, they should have the peopZe form an association and the association wouZd be responsible for the e�cterior oP the property. Mr, Boardman stated that what he was saying thea wae they should se12 the land only under the buildin� similar to a townhouse. N�, Harris stated that was correct and he would feel more comfortable. He stated they could be putting themselves in a box with the 40 foot lot business by doix� something like this. Because we would be creating small lota that are substandard Zots. Mr. Oquist stated that theae units were joined together by c�on walls� they were not individual lots and individual buildings. Itts like a zero lot line. Ms. Schnabel stated they could not know what would develop in the future if they did develop this into three individual substandard lots. One point brought up was that if you had two adjacent 1F0 foot lots and someone came and he and the other• awner wanted to tear down the dwellings on the adjacent �0 foot lots and put two buildings together with a zero lot line. One on one �+U foot and one on the adjacent 40 Yoot, v�ould 'we permit that. Mr. Oquiat asked what �rss wrong with thst. PLANNTNG COhiMISSION I�E2'ING� APRIL lFi, ig�9 PACE 7 Ms. Schnabel stated there might be nothing rrrong with it� and it�s very aimilar to what`s happening l�ere. Mr. Harris stated there wse nothing wrong wlth that if they allow conatruction on %H7 Poot lots and it has been Cii�y policy ta not dp that. Mr. Oquist stated that then the aseuucption Ms. Schnabel made was not va11d. Ms. Schnabel stated there was another example that had been brought up. What if eomeone owned two structures on two eeparate lots and they decided that, since we were allowing tri-plexes to be sade into townhouses, assuminq that's what we do, wY�y don't they build a building in the center and attach the two that are separated now by the buildin� in the center. And say those ara each on �t0 foot lots which would make an 80 foot width. Now they would have a new structure that straddles the middle so than why not �o throuAh and segarate these and make three separate lots out of them. It becomes very complicated. As land bec�es more valusble, these are the options. Mr. Iiarris stated he was not too concerned about whether they allow this or not but more the way in which it is done. If we split this up into three separate sections, we would be dealing with three different people as fsr as the exterior of the building. i�fr. Oquist asked what they �ere doing with a double bungalow with two owners. Ms. Schna�el stated that by definition they can't turn a double btw�alow into s townhouse. Mr. Boardman ctated they were getting reo,uests to al].ow two oi.mers in a deuble bungalow and they should discuss that also. Qne of the problems we have is our definitions. Mr. Oquist stated that one definition they have not talked about is tri-plexes or rvw houses. Mr. Boardraan stated that the situatzon they had was by definition of some oP the current projects is tsngible. It's a home that has more of an ownership than just under the bui2d3ng itself. It hr�a a land rnanershig that is broader than just the building. A townhouse definition is the land under the building is the owuership and the rest of the property is common property. In a condominium� just the unit is rnmed with co�on ownership in the facil3ty. We have problems in here because our townhouse definition does not �sy that. It does not say ownership just under the building. NI�. Bosrdman read the townhouse definition as follows: "Structures housing three or more duelling units� continous to each other, only by the sharing of one coa�on wsll, such structures to be of the town or row house typs as contrasted to multiple dwelling spartment structures. No single structure shall contain in e�ccess of eight (8) dwelling units and each dwelling unit shall have separate and 3ndividval front and rear eritrances." Mr. Harris stated they don't even allude to the amount o£ property. Ms. Schnabel etated that it did address that 2ater on in the code. PLANNII� COMMZS3ION �NiGETING, APRIt, 18, 1q79 � PAGE $ tfir. Bosrdman read from the Special Requirements in the code book as follows; "Any and all common open'spaae shall be labeled ss such". It doesn�t ssy that ar�y property under the building haa to be ca�rmon or open apace. He continued reading "and as to dts intent or designec3 funetion and provisiona for maintensnce ownership� and preaervstion shall be made in accordance with ;the provieions of the "Apartment Ownerahip Act" ... and it shall include all groposed covenants, restrictions sttd easements to run with the laad together with any prwisions for release Yrom same; provisions for dedication of essement for public streeis . . modified as deemed necessary by the City CounciZ. .. the development in R-1 shall eonsist of owner occupied units ... and membership in the townhouse develop- ment shall be msde a part oF the agreemerit oY the sale o£ the dwelling unit." Nowhere in the c2assification of townhouses do they talk about whether that owner- ship has to be just the rn�mership under the buildin� end ar�y and all awnership of the outside lands as a common ownership. So besed on our dei'inition of what a to�mnouse is this would also fa12 under our @efinition of a tormhouse. The on2y difference is that we've got the 9,000 square Yeet which is a requirement for.an R-3� they've got the front an@ rear entrances which is a requirement� but the only difference is that it says that every townhouse plat has to have five acres, That's wk�y they need a variance. Mr. Oquist asked if a townhouse required en associatipn. Mr. Boardman stated it does not require that. If there is canmon awnership of aqy of the uti.lities or property, tben there has to be en assoe3ation to gavern those things as deemed.necessary by the City Council. He atated they could have a town- house development without common ownership. That's the way he reads it. Ms. Schnabel stated that under the Fina1. Plan� a�copy of the bylaws of the proposed association oY owners is required. Mr. Boardman stated he understood that to mean only if there was an association. If there isn�t cortmion ownership then they don't need an associstion. The Way the present code for tawnhouses is layed out� it doesn't say they have to have common ownership of property. Ms. Schnabel stated that we should put that in our new zoning cale. Mr. Treuenfels stated that he vnderstoai that some of the utilities in this case, especially the water, was aerved through a c�on meter, so this would require an sssocixtion and bylaws. Mr. Boardman stated that he was not saying they would not need an agreement in this particul.ar case. They wou2d have to have agrPements Yor usage of that water and of hoW they would pay for that wster and the agreements would Ys ve to be filed with trie deed when anybocly purck�ased into that property. Al1 the code says is that it muat be submi.tted with the plan for review with the City Council and the Council can mality it if they chose. But it doesn't say they have to have common ownership oY land and it doesn�t say that this is not a townhouse because it fits the town- bouse defittition. It s�ys s townhouse can be built in an R-3 zone and the only requirement it doean�t meet is the 5 scre parcel. ' 1 PJ..ANNTNG COMMISSION P�ETING� APRZL 18� 1979 - __ PAGE 9 Mr: Harris stated that then they have to get back to some basic philosophy. Are we go3ng to a11ow this particulAr type of activity? And also sre we going to allaw the indiv3dual oanership of a double7 IY we sgree to allow it with a tri- plex then it Yo2lawa that We should allow it rrith a double bungalow. Ms. Schnabel stated that this is where we get into the question of denaity. What type of denaity do we want on a multiple living building. Mr. Harris stated there would be no problem iaith a row house but 1Y it's s multiple story like a duplex there eould be a problem. t�m. Boardman stated that in order to qualify as a townhouse, there cannot be one unit on top oY another. So in that situation� we wouldn't be able to alloN a split or �ee would Yiave to split it under a condominium type situation� or a co- operative 'type of situation, which is similar to a condominium. The problem is tbat the existing density is there and do we allow that density to continue? We may have to a13,ow that density to continue because it's existing. What kinds oY problems would we have if we go to ownership on those density or if we don�t go to ownership on the densitys He doesn�t see any problems other than legal problems and those legal problems are the problems of the people who buy into 3t. Mr. Oquist asked.if ve as a City shoulfl be concerned about the welfare o£ owners. Afr. Harris stated thst ae far as genara.l health and eafety goes, yes. Mr. Oquist stated that he meant should the City be conoerned if the owners cannot agree on repairs or, kinds of sidang, etc.? Mr. Harris stated that' in a way we should because right now we require a license for this particular unit and it's controlled by tbe maintenance ordinance. We are supposed to make inspections of the unit. So, because it�s rental property, there are some basic things we can do to keep a handle on it. If we go to this particular type of operation, we don't have that control. Mr. Boardman stated that are we saying then that we like rental property because of more control over rental property and theref'ore should we rent out all our single fami�Y homes because the ordinance states that in order to ren� a single family unit a license is needed? With the license we can control tbe upkeep of single family units. Do we want that control? Mr. Harris stated that his point was if they were sold as individual units, then the City does not require a license. IP there was an association, he Yelt the property stoal a better chance of staying in good condition than if it was just three separate parcels. He woul.d feel better about an association as far as the grounds held in comaron. Mr. Boardman statad tBat he fe],t there should be some common agreement between the praperty ownera for msintenance of the structure, etc. if there was common rnmer- ship of the property. However, the way it's plaiied there wpuld be no coironon owner- ahip. Mr. Oquist stated there was common ownership hecause there vas s co�aon wall between the units. PLANNING COMMiSSION MEEPING, APRIL 18� 1979 PAGE l0 2✓r. Boardman stated tl�at there were no common walls� there were double walls which is e requirement of townhouses. It is elso a requirement of owner occupied units. He explained that there were two series of stude with a cosrmaon space between those etuds. The reason for that is legal. If one owner causes damage to a wa21, it is his reaponsibility to repair that damage. The Building C aZe requires two separate stud walls between two owner oecup3ed eullts. Mr. Oquist stated that was a contrafliction because there was another place in here that required they share a coimnon wa3.1. It was in the townhouse definition. There- fore we do not have townhousea in Fridley beesuse they do not share s co�rion wa11. Mr. Boardman stated that rental unita such as apartmenta do not require double walls. Owner occupied units do require double walls. Mr. Oquist,asked if in this case there were do-able Nalls. Mr. Boardman stated that vas correct. Mr. Schnabel stated that if Mr. Nitscheke didn't live there, then he wouldn't of hsd to put up double ws1Zs. This points up discrepancies in the zoning ordinance that we shoul.d review. She asked what kind of walls a double bungalow would have. Mr. Flarris ststed double bungalows were rental unita� therefore they did not require douple walls. t�..Harris stated that we cann't go through and plat this because it 8o�sn�t fall witlzin the guidelinea of our platting ordinance for minimum 1ot size, Mr. Boardman stated that'the on],y thing it says is that a townhouse must have 3,000 square feet. Mr. Aarris atated that no matter what they caZl them, they are making three separate parcels out oY a piece of ground �rhetker it's R-1, R-2 or R-3 that's 80 feet wide and 1h0 Peet deep. Essentially they are cutting 80 feet into three pieces. Mr. Boardman asked if that wasn't what they do in a townhouse plan. Mr. Harria stat@d those were c�nnon grounds. What we�re doin� is platting sub- standsrd lots, If something happens to the structure, we are left with a parcel oY ground zoned R-3 with less than 30 foot 2ots. Ms. Schnabel stated that the PZanning Coaunission had already approved the prelimiriary plat on this. Mr. Iiarris atated they may have made a mistake. If they go ahead end do this they +aould be jeopardizing the �+0 foot lot deal. PLANNING COMMISSION MFIETING, APRIL 1$� 1979 PAGE 11 Mr. Boardman stated they would have to decide on how to handle the issue. _.. Mr. fiarris stated that if they do it according to the townhouse ordinance, and they are cAlling this a tawnhouae, they coul,d say that all they were bi�ying is the land under the townhouse snd the rest of the land would be held in coffinon. Mr. Basrdman etated that �ras not a requirement oY tawnhouses. Mr. Ilarris ststed they could make it a stipulation. Mr. Boardman stated that our definition states strictly What a townhouse building is and in the tocmhouse area of the Building Code there is no requiremettt for ownership cf the land just under the building. Ms. Schaabel ststed that maybe it was &omething we could raake as a etipulation in approval o£ the plat no matter what plat it is. Mr. Harris stated he felt very uncomfortable that they did it this way. If some- thing happened to it and it was totally or over 50�p destroyed what they ]aave created is three R-3 lots oY About 26 x 135 Peet. Mr. Boardman stated that the msin ��ng they should do is change the definitions. The Comnissianers concurred. N's. Boardmsn asked what they were goin� to do with condominSumsT What is our direction going to be for the otimership for the previous densities which are rental? Mr. Harris stated they were not changin� the density. They woul,d not be doir.g aRy- thing different from what they were doing now. Mr. Boarda,au asked if they would have a problem with people cozning in and ask to do this. All they want to do is change the o��niership, not the density. Mr. Harris stated that was the key point. He wanted to make sure that people who buy into this are protected. Also� he wanted to make sure that the City and the surrounding residences are protected from the standpoint that the property will be maintained. Iiis third concern was with public services. That tbe City doesn't have a problem when they are sQld. Mr. Boardman stated that then our primary direction wou].d be similar to some of the other car�unities. They don't hsve ax�y problem as long as the density doestt't change and that there are association bylaws that are drawn up and attached to the deed. Ms. Harris stated he would have no problem with that. Mr. Boardman stated that the msin point would be to get definitions oP condaniniums, townhousea and patio homes. The Cominissioners agreed. PLANNINC COI�fTSSION ME"ETING, APRIL 1f3� 19'(9 PACE 12 bk�. Baerdman ehowed the Commisaioners a design oP s put3o home. Ms. Schnubel ststed shc was not sure she liked the coneept of a patio home in terms of density. Mr. Boardman stated they mc�y have to look at that type of units based on the chsngittg patterns of home oxnership. Ms. Schnabel stated that in the new proposed code she didn't see Where they h�d spelled out R-2 or R-3 for condominfums. Mr. Boax+dmn stated they didn't $nd that was something they would have to get into. Me. Schnabel stated they should discuss the 5 acre minimum Por townhouses. That is the question before Appesls ia the varianee request. Mr. Oquist asked wt;y we had a restriction of 5 acres, Ms. Schnsbel stated it probably came about when land was cheaper and more available. Mr. Boardman stated that ihey were looking at developments 2ike the Darrell Farr Devel.opment where they have common recreation areas, etc., and in order to provide all the amenities that go along with townhouse Ziving, tbey felt that 5 acres was necesssry. 'He questions the need for that at this point in time. Mr. Harris asked to see a copy of the plat the Planning Commission had approved. Mr. Boardman showed the Commissioners a copy of it. He stated thst if they wanted to do it like a townhouse� they would have to actuslly piot out 6 psrcels and the rest with co�non ownership. htr. Harris stated he Pelt very uncomfortable With the way that plat was. Mr. Boardman stated that it boiled down to a policy decisioxi. Ntr. Harris stated he felt they should plot it into 6 parcels w9.th co�on ownership for the rest of it, I�. Boardmsn asked Mr. Nitacheke ii he had a prob7.em with that. Mr. Nitscheke stated he would not. Mr. Harris asked if the attorney had seen this, Mr. Boardman stated that he had looked at it and siated he didn�t have any prob2ema with it as Iong as it met the requirements of a townhouse and as long as they got a varience. Mr. Oquist stated that the attorney also wanted to reviev the association by laws. Mr. Harris atated he wou2d feel much better with it this vqy. pLAIVrIING COMMIS5I�N MGETING APRII. ltf, 1979 PAGE 13 Ms. Schnabel asked if the Covunissioners then Pelt that the 5 acre requirement is si:ill valid. Mr. Iiarris stated that on a11 new construction} yes. Mr. aquist stated he wasu't sure he would ga elong with tha'G. Mr. Bosrdman stated there were ways to get around that. Mr. Harris stated that they should maybe set up the tawnhouse ordinance a little bit dif£erent. Mr. Oquist atated he would like to eliminate tY,e term 5 acres and set a certain percentage for grean area. Mr. i3osrdman stated that was alrea8y said. In an R-1 they are allowed 1 unit Por every 9,000 square feet, in an R-2 they are allowed i unit for evexy 5,000 square feet and in an R-3 they are allowed l unit Por every 3,000 square feet. Idr. Oquist stated they could then eliminate the 5 acres� but in an R-1 area for single famil,y they have a 25�, lot coverage for green area. P�aybe� they should do something like that for townhouses. Ms. Schnabel asked why they said so many square Yeet in R-1, so many in R2, and so many in R-37 D",r. Boardman stated that the philosopY�y was that they want to maintain a certain density in eacli zone. Mr. Leek stated that the philosophy derives basically from the values of the community. Atc, Harris stated that he would like them to retain the 5 acres for a townhouse development beeause it has crorked fairly we.11 up tc> now. He asked Ms. Sehnabel i£ she needed au answer irmuediately. He Yelt this should be talked about. Ms. Schnabel stated thai if what they have discussed is the direction they want to take and if they want to make a proposal and vote oa it, she would then take that back to the Aoard of Appeals and they would act on the request. They had tabled the request. If the Planning Cotcmission felt it needed more discussion, maybe they should table the discussion. She also asked if the Co�uniiy Development COmmission wovld be interested in looking at it. Mr. Oquist stated that he felt they would. He felt the first eleven questions were things they should talk about when they discuss the ox�linance. , Ms. Sci�nabel stated that ber impression from th3s discussion was that provided the proposal for replatting would be changed�at the Council level� then philosopbically, the Planning Conan3ssion would have no probbem with any tri-plex being converted into a tormhouse classification if it falls into the townhouse guidelines discussed here. In other words common property and individual property ownership, PLANNING COhII�fISSION MEETING� APRIL l�t 1979 PAGE 14 M"r. Aquiat atated he would Iike to clariPy one point. When we talk about coumion property� it is the lattd left over. The association would be responsible for � maintenance oP the common praperty and the building maintenance.. That rrould be part of the by laws. Ms. Schnabel stated that then shc understood that they had no problem with converting tri-pZexes such as this to townhouses provided the lot si2e remains generally common property with the land under the building having individual ownership and as long as the density doesn't change. She cauJ.d tske this back to the Appeals Coumiission and felt that the rest of these questiona shotil,d be discusaed along with duplexes and dpuble bungalows. They had also touched oa the park and open space situetion. Sf the deneity 3sn't going to change, that would not make any difference. She said they had also discussed taking� Yor example� the strip of land across the street From Mr. Nitacheke's groperty, which is currently zoned industriel, and re- zoning it R-3 and a series o£ townhouses were put on the property. It wou7.d be less than a 5 acre site, but wouZd be compatible with the neighborhood. Would they like to see something like that dons? Mr. Harris stated he wouJ.d Iike to thfnk sbout that. Ms. Schnabel stated that enother thing they had discussed was the number oP garages. She understood that there was no requirement for number of gara�es in a townhouse, development„ but there is a garage requirement for duplexes, double bungalows, apartments and siugle family. Mr. Boardman stated there were xio requirements for apartments. Thst was parking spaces. Mr. Harris stated they should address that in the townhouse ordinance. Ms. Schnabel stated thst there shoul.@ be something in the minutes to indicate iP they have had a change of mind on the xe-plat. Mr. Boardman stated that since Planning had already responded to the initial plat, they could say it�s an indication of the Planning Coumm3ssion that the policy for converting this type of unit must be similar to a tcnrnhouse area which would require co�on open space plans and that they recommend that these type of situations be considered in the re-wxiting of the ordinance for policy direction snd in the mean time the Appeals Cormnission could,act on the variance With those conditions. Ms. Schnabel stated thst Appeala had no pawer over the re-plat. Mr. Hosrdman egreed and ststed that should be included with the platt3ng. He felt there should be an indication to the City Council that this shauld be looked at by separate ownership under the units with cou¢non ownership of property and they should malce a recommendation to Couneil that the plat should be modiPied to reflect that. Ms. Schnabel suggested thst the Appeals approve the variance with the stipulation that Plnnning reconsider the replat. PLANNING COMMISSION MEET2NG� APRTL 1tS, 1979 - PAGE 1� MOTSON by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Schnabel� that"in light of recent discussion and a review oY the proposal, the Planninb Coffinission wishes to change it's recouauendation co�cerning P.5.79-01 as follow3: That the property under the existing dwellings become private ownership and the rest of the land became ground held in common which would be consistent with existing trnrnhouse developments as eurrently known in Fridley snd the Plannir� Co�iUsion further recommends there be association. by laws to control tHe operation of tlzose couunon properties. UPON A VOICE VOTE, AIS, VOTSNG AYE� CHAIF3MAN IiARRIS DECLARED THE h�TION CARRIID UNANIMOUSI,Y. _ _ Ms. Schnabel stated thai; she would take that back to Appeals and they xould act in light of this discussion. Mr. Iiarris asked Yor more discussian on the Appeals minutes. Ms. Schnabel stated that tbe rest of the items could be discussed when they review the zoning c ale.. I�. Harris stated they could then vote on receiving the Appeals minutes, UPON A VOICE VOTE� AIS, YdrTNG AYE, CHAIkZMl�N HARRIS DECLAFtED THE MOTIOPI GARRZED UNRNIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE EiUN3p,N RESOURCES COM.MISSIOPd MINtIPES: APRIL 5� 1g79: MOTION by Mr, pquist� seconded by Ms. Sclwabel�, to receive the April 5� 197g, minutes of the Hc�man Resources Commission. Mr. Harris stated thst the discussion with Mr. Saunder's at the last Planning Coaunission meeting indicated that the N:wr,an Resources Co�ission would like the �hairman of the Planning Connnission to present the proclamation for the Year of the Child to the City Co,uacil. Is that what the Human Resources Commission decided? Mr. Treuenfels stated that they had decided to put it before the Planning Co�nission and see what the Planning Commission wanted to do. Mr. Harris asked when they wanted this to come before the Planning Commission? Mr. Treuenfels atated he vould like it to be discussed tonight. Ae pointed out that a copy of the proclemation Was on page 1 of the minutes. Mr. Harris stated that after they receive the minutes� they could make a motion regarding this, Mr..Langenfeld saked i£ they had selected e person for the Handicapped Awareneas Week? Mr. Treuenfels stated that he had contacted bis friend and his friend was intereated and would speak on what liYe was like for a handicapped person and also the 2ega1 aspects of being handicepped. PLANPIING COt�RdISSION MEETING, APRIL 1�, 1979 PAGE 16 Ms. Schnnbel stated.that it had come to her attention during the elections last year that one of the problema han@icapped people had was getting to the voting placea. Mr. Treuenfels atated that they should be more aware oY the problems of handicapped people to attend a11 civic funetions including voting because of the inaceesaibility oi buildings. He indicated that they would look into having a central location for handicapped people to vote at. UPON A VOTCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN FUaRRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIID MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr, I.angenfeld� tt�at the Planning Co�iission concurs with and encovrages the Human Resources�ConBnission to present the proclama- tion for the Xear oi' the Child to the City Council. Nh�. Harris asked Mr. Treuenfels who they wanted to make the presentation. I Mr. Treuenfels felt it would be nice if both Ns. Iiarris and himself made the presentation, Mr. Harrla dgreed. UPON A VOICE VO'i'E, ALL VOTING AYE� CHATRHAN HARRIS DECLARED THE M()TION CARRIED UIdANIMOUSI,Y. 5. RECETVE COi�R�UNITY DEVELOPMENT COA'A7TSSION MIIV[TPES; APRIL 10, 1979: MOTIOt1 by Mr. Oquisti �ecanded by Ms. Schnabel' to receive the April 10, 1g79, minutes of the Cos�unity Development Commission. Mr. Qquist stated that Mr. Boerdmun and Mr. Leek had presettted the Comprehensive Develapment Plan. Tsro of the members didn't have a copy, so they scheduled a special meetri.n� for next Tuesday to finalize the discussion. H� also atated they had he13 elections and he was elected chairman agsin. UPOP7 A VOICE VdPE� ALL VOPING AYE� CHAIRD7AN EiARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY. Chairman Harris declared a recess at 10:15 P.M. and recanvened the meeting at 10:25 P.M 6. G'ONPINUED: ATSCUSSION ON Di�tl�'T OF COMPREIiENSIVE DFVELOPMENT PLAP1: Mr. Harris stated that at the last meeting they got into land use patterns. The minutes of the last meeting indicate they had a l�ng diacusaion on residential land use, He asked Mr. Leek where he wAnted'to start the discussion. Mr. Leek stated thst he would like to look at the input from the Parks and Recreation Commission. - Mr. Harris sisted that in view of the fact that the cot�ission member from Park� end Recreation was absent tonight, they should hold off on that. Mr. Leek agreed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIIdGj APRTL 18, 1979 PAGE 17 Mr. Harris su68ested they diecuss the environmental section. Mr. Boardman stated thet until they had the input from the Environmental Commission, they could possibly diacuss juat the generaliiiea and concepts throughout the document. Mr. Karris suggested they take it in order. Mr. IIoardman stated they should talk about the general concepts for the planning process. Under land use they crere looking at the number of hnxsing units required� density, and What s£fect the addi+ional units woul.d have on the City. That's what they were looking at in the policy under land use. Linder the resources section, the prime thing they were looking at vras what kind of quality ,tandard they would try to set up for the City as far as a natural resource base Por the City. What is the effect of wetlands? What is the effect of developing-the weGlands? What are the efPects of mriintaining those wetlands as to the control of t�ater Plow y�ith- in our area? They will be looking at these tbings in other cormnunities also be- csuse all of the wetland areas are supposedl�v recharge areas for the ground water whieh is 3efinitely ef'fecting the City of Fridley because of our well system. Another thing to look at is what is our policy going to be in the direction of water clarity. We have a lot of problems with non-point source pollution. There are a lot o£ things we just started talking about in the last three or four years as to how they are effectir� water recharge areas, the clarity oY water, the quality oP water with Metro Council's 20f3 Plan. One of ihe big issues is the Moore Lake area. The lake area is dyin� if not already dead particularly if we're trying to prctect it. 4'he proUlem is the water discharge fros residetttial streets and everything tnat go into these ponding areas that are essential2y £iltering areas in order to filter the water before it flars into the river. Should we be lool�in� c�t Moore Lake as anytning but a filtering area? These types oi questionc should be looked st. Mr. Finrris stated he would have to take issue with Mr. Boardman as far as A7oore I,ake being dead. Tt may be dead as a lake� but is not dead as far as whtzt tdoore Lake really is. Mr. Boardman stated that "dead" was just an expression. Are we trying to bring Moore Lake back to somethin� it shouldn't be in the iirst place? Are we trying to make it more than what it is1 Some of the other areas we have to look et is that we have a Rice Creek Watershed District within the City that controls the flow of Rice Creek 4!atershed and controls the quxlity on runoff within the Rice Creek area. Hpwever, there are other areas within the CitS� of Fridley that have no controls. They are out of the control of the Rice Creek Watershed and the onl.y controls are from the City. There are other things we should look at as our runoff goes into the Mississippi River. Under th> 2�8 Plan there are suggested quaiity standsrds. Mr. Leek stated that the 208 PZan essentially establishes the standards that have to met by 1933 in terms of the inhabitability of water ior wild life� £lora, fauna� and in terms of recreational standards. Mr. Boardm[sn stated these were the types of issues in the environmental section that we should deal with and look at. PLANNII� CONA4ISSION MEETING, APRIL 1$, i979 pAG� 1� Mr. Boardman etated that other things in the environmental sectfon would include a policy on energy in this section. Mr. Leek stated they were looking at incorporating scene statements with regard to energy conservation and energy conscientiousness tn Fridley.� This section also addresses in it's policies air and noise pollution� and other issues. In Fridley the area that seems to get hit hardest ia water and water quality because one of the most important and unique resources for Fridley as a metropolitan commun- ity is that our drinking water supply doesn't come from the Mississippi ftiver but rather fran grourxi water recharge area and it is extremely importsnt that we main- taiu not only the capacity of those recharge sreas but the quality of water entering those reehsrge areas and that is the funetion of drainage from surrounding areas into our co�unity and a Yunctioa of the way that the water filters in the recharge areas. Mr. Harris stated that on page 15 he had a problem with a statement. He rePerred to the last paragraph on that page. Mr. LsngenPeld stated that he had noted that the current capital expense may be minimal but concern should be towards overall impact and cost. Mr. Boardman stated that the question on that would be "what is minimal?" tdo `matter whether they feel the costs are minimal, they are being deveZoped and the reason they are.being deve2oped is that they are marketsble. If they are marketable then the cost must be minimal to the point where they are going to get their money aut oP it. Mr. Harris stated he was looking for a diYferent way oP ssying that or saying it diPferently. Ma,ybe they should say something to the efPect that Mr.Iangenfeld alluded to. Mr. Leek asked iY he was ssyin� that current market conditions for this kind of land makes it cost efYective? Mr. Harris stated he would feel more comfortable with that. He stated that he had a question on pa�e 16. He questioned the statement "the Mississippi River has the potentia2 to become one of the City's finest amenities for recreational purposes". He asked whai they were sayin� there. Mr. Boardman stated thst referred to cattoeing, viewing, overlooka� and bikeways will be developed slong the river. • Mr. Leek stated tY�at in Park Planning there is a kind of prioritization of Yacilities and amenities that it's nice to heve and the Pirst of those is v�ater. In any kind of recreational facility it is advisable to have some wAter body or vrater course which adds visuel relief and psychologically ties the person closel,y to the s3te. The river is that kind of amenity even if it's not useful Yor the kind of wide range recreational activities in sane of our areas. PLANNZNG COMMI5SION MEEI'ING AI'RIL 1H, 1979 - PAGE:19 Mr. Harris stated that when he read that atatement it misled him anti he got the feeling that ii was Por boating, fishing and swimin�; which is not true during all aeasons of the year. He felt they should clarify tha'G. Mr. Aarris referred to page I? regardfng the discussion on Moore Leke. He asked iP the Planning Cormuisaion should take a poeition on Moore Lake? . Mr. Boardman stated they should look at it in the Parks and Recrestion section as e gotential recreational body and what it could be used for. There is a problem when we look at the amaunt af money it would cost to bring it back to a usable recreation souree for awimming. He felt that Moore Iake wae totaly acceptable for possibly Pishing and canoeing in one area. Also it provides a visual site. Eut they shoul.d look at the actuaS use of the water for a xecreational use such as swi�nning. Ms. Sehnabel stated that she found a contradiction on the bottam oi' page i7 and the top of pege 18 where they talk aboui how bad the lAke really is and-then they say "but" we wi7.l remedy that because they have already initiated this program to pre- serve tve recreational and aesthetic value. hir. Leek stated that the present situation is that the City Cauncil has taken tne position that Moore Lake can be saved as a recreational attd aesthetie a�enity. They fe2t it necessary to report that £act. Mr. Zangenfeld stcxted that they made that statement by saying "if successful." Mr. Leek stateci they £urtY:er qualified the statement by saying the number of years and accor3ing to the consultant ii zarn:ld be 10 years. Ms. Schnabel stated that in reading it it seems contradictory. She sug�ested they ssy "may" rather than "will". Mr. Bosrdman stated that the statement "if the project is successful" would take care oP that. D^.s. Schnabel stated that if she were on the Metro Council and read this section she would think tnat the City is not following what it just got through saying on the previous page. A�. Langenfe2d agreed. Mr. Leek stated he did not real].y see any conflict because what is essentially being said is that Moore 7�ke is a lake in the process oP becomming what it originally was� a marsh. And becctuse oi that tbe conditions o� the water are not currently suiteble for swi�ing activities but at the same time it is possible to undertake tne effort to bring the water quxlity up so that it is suitable for swi�mning and there we are looking at the kind of go2icy determination that rir. Boardman and Mr. Harris mentioned, and that is, is the cost of doing that worth the results. We don�t attempt to make ai�y judgement about that. �� PLANNTNG COI�ffSSION MEETING, APRIL 18� 1979 PAGE 20 Me. Schnabel stated tha� her point rras that theix doubts about that were caning througki on paper. Mr. Tangenfeld stated they should look at the cauae of the problem. Iie felt it vae the ruxioff into the lake. Mr. Boardman stated they addressed that on page 17. Mr. Zangenfeld stated he understood that but questioned uhether they were to take any action to eliminate that cause. Mr. Boardman stated that would have to be a po2icy statement. If the City is going to take action to divert the storm sewers or do something� the question thr.�t will come up is is that inappropriate at this time when one of the purposes of Moore lake is a Piltering process. - - Mr. Harris st$ted it was very valuable for tYeat. He stated that if everything west of the highway were in cattails� it would do a better job. Mr. T,eek stated that there is a determination that hssn't been ma@e in the City yet and the question is iP it's more valuable as a recreationsl resource ior aetive recreational purposes or is it more valuable because of the function that it Pills. Nfr. Harris stated that he felt that no matter what they do„ ft�s going to do what it wants a�yway. Mr. Boardman stated that the City could force it into a 1ake� but it would be very e�cpensive to do that. 'i'he policy direction at this time is that the Council is taking e£forts to modify or redirect the use of Moore Lake as more oi an active use ares. The question is if that's the policy direction we weat to go or do we want to let 1+loore I�ke go hack to it's natural.state as a fi2terYng system. Mr. Leek stated that the consultnnts report indicates that even given the kinds oY ePforts such as diverting the storm sewers awqy from the Lake, their calculations indicate that the City is looking at Moore Lake in ten years as being at tbe same level of pollution and congestion as it is now, Then simzlar efforts would have to be taken. Ms. Schnabel asked where they covered it in the policy pZan. Mr. Boardman stated that was the dlrectian from the City Council. Ms. Schnabel stated they shou].d address it then. Mz�. Leek stated it wa, addressed generally on page 3�F� hut Moore Lake was not specifically addressed. � pLANNFNG COt�2L5SI0N MEE`PINC; API?IL 18 1979 - PAGE 21 Ms. Schnobel etated that she felt that this issue was not adequmtely addreseed. Mr. T3oardman questioned whether it should be addressed in a policy plan or in a system statement. Ms. Schnabel stated they sl�ould do it in both p].aces because the eystem really fo2lows the po2icy. N¢�. Leek stated that he understood that Ms. Schnabel was s$ying that nei�ther tiie policy plan nor the system p24n address speci.Yically the question of Moore Lake. Ms. Schnabel. stated that was correct. Mr. Harris questioned the statement on page 33 under 5311 �l. He questioned the first paragraph in that section and stated he was not sure they cauld have all of those. Mr. Leek stated that was taken from the 208 plan. Mr. Harris stated that when you say recreation 3n the water� people think of swi�mning and boating, and the water can't be everything to everybody. He felt that the City hss to be corrunitted to actually trying to'do it. Mr. Boardman staied they could chan�e the word "promote" to "provide". Fie noted that the Parks snd Recrestions Commission hed reccnrmended this throughout. He stated that these �rere issues that had to be broe;ght up. Mr. Leek stated there was a potentially a gap in pol5.cies in that area because we haven't addressed the xesponsibilities oi not onl.y the City but of other agencies tha� are viblators of goal surf�ce control runoPf ineasures. Mr. Langenfel3 stated that when he read it he had made the note "make it stick". Mr. Boardman asked iP they wanted mare discussion meetings bePore they received input from the other commissions. The Commiseioners agreed to wait Por the other co�issions. MQTIOPt by Mr. i,angenfeld, sec4nded by Mr. Oquist� to continue the 8iscussion on the drait of the Comprehensive Development Plan. UPON A �'OICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN IiARRE5 DECLARED THE MOTIOAT CARRIID UNANlMOUSLY. 7. CONTTNiIEA: PROPOSED CHANGES IN CHAPTER 205• ZONiPdG; MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels, ta eontinue the proposed changes n Chppter 205. Zoning. I7PON A VOICE VQTE� AI�L VO'I`II3G AYE� CHAIRMNN HARRTS DECLAR� THE MOTION CAREtIID PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 18, 1979 PAGE 22 8. OTHF�2 BUSTtdESS: Mz'. Harris asked what co�mnissions had nat yet held elections. Nu°. Boardmaxi sta�:ed that Parke and Recreation snd the Appeals Co�mai.ssian had not yet held theirs. MOTT�N by Mr. Langeni'eld� secoaded by Mr, Treuenfels, to adjourn the April 18� 1979, meeting oY tne PLanning Cormnission. UPON A VOICE VOTE, AIS. VOTING AYE� CHAII3Ma1N HARRIS DECIk'�RED THE MEEPING ADJOURI�D AT 11:10 P.M. Respectfu7.2y submitted; �� ;-�`�� thy helton, Recordin� Secretary. « ��, s � n�1 d � 0 .� V . � � � � :3 O .�: d� N � p. � o N O •rl ,L^ -N �v m d O U r1 fR •ri jN.� r-1 N i� [d O O D N � a�� if . _ . APPLICISI'P:,��tl, � `t'- f' �.v ^ � ,�„ , c�� c v .,1 ADD1t�SS : � � � �/ � / �1 ,n.�! a ll :.� r . � R n , . ar S�'S�!? � Streei: L'ii.y Zxp Code T�LEPIIOPTP �F 7� 5- S rl.� 9 7 S`7 �� 4�0 � Iiome Bueiness PROPEE2TY OL7N�Ei( S�/ii� /� �� rJ �� F- , G i< r a n 1 . � �. It �� a �-� � r c/i S d�! � TEI,EPHOIIE ��(S}1 c s � � � �� iness ✓ t c imv' r^r nnr; r �:�.t�� : ' i . llute�Filed: �-5�`� Fee: S4�"i �eceipt �1 • S. Couricil Action: Date RIMAIiKS: _ sS�/? 3 Code c-� �� J i �-- Yroperty Location on Street �( ` or Exact Street Address (IF ANY� �F� �/',�_�� '�+��_ �!��%'Tn�— cf`c � Description of �«,� �a. � 5��, �� Nr�l �_ _!� for I,ot Spli� ��. %a '� � ..^.�.....�-.— Area of Propes � /� 5v ft. 1 Presen `ti--v7% � siYication The undersigned hereby declares that all the tacts and xegresentations stated in this application are true and coxrect. � r. J} . � + �ATE: � 33ELOW F�R CITY IISE 0,Y CHL.CKEll BY STAFF Remarka: PI.tiNNING COMMISSION: RemArka: Aate oS Consiclerat'ion - ,�" � �' � � CITY COUNCIL: Date of Consider�tion - Rem+zrks: f . _ ... _. . . . .. . .�.. � . . . .' L . . . . . �.. .. .. ,. .e.,.�. . . ._ , . 2 � . . .,�.... : : . ; . . _ , � L.S. #,79-01 Sp1it Lot 10, ' t A.S. #i39 .into ilding sites. ' '. ��. : . , ' CENTER - , SE t�---- . 'C/r[�'fno."Cr � � � ODAb�P9Rs.396 ..,�._� . i� . � . . .' ♦ . - . . AT. 236.�f.6' : � � � . 1 .., P./.23S+JtC . � . . . �� d O' 9%'?1. �' � � � p O•/S� . r iro.a' .. � . (aa�)� . .c� [ 280.0• .. . . Srpsi-AaiiuS/e/rons/x , - . . .. . � xii.4. .. I'G. Zi��/9 �' � .: . � - . ��SQ� . o �z0� l24f NjnneJOta Gnor- � � : Co. � Int. 7 ( �i � AUDITORS -�a�. --- . � . � (r.o) . 'I{5{ ,.id,:�k.,ti�. 4 �roI 1200 2 .� suBi � (s.�� Yrc,ri<o•/G✓iir�tJ .. r�.,� 3 . n .s�-� .vor� � �� x� ( '� � .. I ��t izsg i ssz - � - �.� ' Il (�> vo�o, I ►i�o izoo r !6�) � � � Li � %1 <�. a.i+�.ar, —' s F o Ci ' s Tzzo � iHin�esvta/ndrstii>/ . . . _��ar�4s/.��/��y�fHafn�i � . i305 ; � 1 � 1 � 13 : . � � i - �-- � �+'�'vc B � X - ��'00� � ✓. i✓s .s,.�Rv,if � . � � Em/Aa �geo� � vtcin►,� l • •— _ - 1 ais...... � : . �3 i � �oo� �� I .. __za vv � .os — — ' Ae) �6M) (865} .l� o Pi�/.fi 7 8 h.�x ✓o,.. � Q � , 9E,�:,, t245 �251 �-y� 130f �r s' w f� rai �"�te n Ifr3� �� y5� � (lo�o) 1 S V 6 rzia <,,_ (snal (szo) 7!' O ?o � v h� rx G.eso) 'r + ,�a�..s.�.ss . .... zd�:c,.. ..... ........ ......... � � " _._ . ,...zAO'..... ._.. i'" �_ . ......�ls ........ .. _... �i�f�iF`` �_ `�� . `— �� . . . -.: � ,—, _� - �--,`. _ �.. ` ` `� \� � \ �\ �� ``�_ -�. ,� ` ' . , \ _ . - 1 �''��. ��.. " `' `� � `�-;�\,�' . ; L!P.l. s d D'H •.y ;- " i� ' i� ' .` . - _. . . _-+. �� . , . • �i . ' , i ` . � � F a Z �z�^ �< W <x= {�� a�� J Z x �a�3 � y" Q �. � v �' w ��p Y• 0 � � � 0r 0 '� � �� ' 3 � Y � ya .i � � M Z � WZ�Z� Y1�Y $u�Z J s3�� wz wop= �� W--� � z o� rv � T--� 1 y r� � W fi o � "ti -s z Q �� o � p - � O .�j � � z „ � � � m � � N � N b � s � � r �g � $ � � � e �z i �4 9 M1 � n �.w J 6 V UK C �05 1 O 1 ' ~' -' i N < � N� �O O W {- ?�u U L O G'� k U H � � H > a � r --------'�=---� ,�. , �. c � �J . �ti ... __G�69 °N 'P4^S P»y � or �07 ,�� i -�sna __-�___ _ .�^�, - - � d a+.� rv3j ,� ,! � O� o . p p � y� �r. �; �, v� ; r � a', ", � °v � �^ w � ,, a e v� �'. ��: �� of � \ �-=. , � � Q e � W Y, s � � � � 1 4 ,� F � � Y_ a � � � o� ` � i o (!��' 0 v ° m "c 'U u � fi �t \' \ ` � P ^C W o� �� S Q ` `^ 7 V ,� � E a � i+ o (� .la �i�- o o A « � � d O N a) `c D +� r� N I� ° ;� fll i'. W {1j a' i y •r� O W o �° Cn ? N O O ` a •ri 1� � t� 4? o o� 'O O ,L.' .O �. SS �� y� � v U�l O � N i� ° -D � 1� O T7 m ° q a N cn p} n.., 9 � � Q � � � L� U 41 N 4� '^ o ON.0 �O ~~ �� y� �n a�. �o � N 2 a ,� v �ti�o[iw..�� r�i � d •� .�+' 2 « a o �a,�+a F . c., .-� a� ; a s � tp � N f. N p� � . � k a�w u� ; y� y 4 �.. ; a oo>r, a�p �;, ° .-7 z¢ a� c) v. 3 v° �n' PUBLIC NEARING ;y, ,'�'� BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Commission of the City af Fridley in the City Nall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday> May 9, 1979 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a rezoning request, ZOA #79-01, by the Lift-5ki & Bike, Inc., to rezone Lots 9 and 10, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands Third Addition from C-1 (local business areas), and Lot 11, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands Third Addition, from CR-1 (genera] office and limited business}, all to C-2 (general business areasj to allow a garden center and future expansion of the present structure, all located in the South Half of Section 13, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Generally located at 6319 Highway #65 H.E._ _ Anyone desiring to 6e heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. • Publish: Apri1 25, 1979 May 2, 1979 RICHARD H. NARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNIN6 COMMISSION �� ! ✓ ' CI'!'Y �I' I'ltIDLCY 611NNIiSO'1'A � ' • �� /U Jp3,11NNIhG AND 7.ONTNG FORM NUht�3�.lt s i'li�i (� IGT-Sttl �d-r3rrt/a, lNG. APPLIC �7''S STCNh'fUltti �t,v-�-�•��+'+�ti� ('n-�S, ..: (U 3! 9 �1 +.+ Y Co i Fr2 / D t r y ��, �.v.v, 5'SYS 2 /1dJress - Telephone Numf>er ;5'7 f- lo b'So . 9,�,.,,, �,�,-..,�. ,Q.y, .d� !'ROrliR7'Y OI'fNGR' S SIGA�TUiIE (p 31 � G v�`�S PA!+ Y • i TYl'P. Or RGQUGSi' , �� Rezoning W sI 5pecial Use Pcrntiit Approval of Premin- �naxy �i Fin11 Piat Streets ar Allcy , Vacations Address .:LG.H 4 t ri H sT. N.w . N�S +•• rs•��vH� �K i . 5 sa7 Other � '_'��S�Ct � � • Teleph^ne h.�mUer �'2 33- 2 t q3 _ C�/��`3a - Fee�n�ccipt No. SY.reei Location of Propexty 30l -Cv3J9-(a3 Nw'rlcS . Legal Description oi Pxoperty �br'$ 9!O +�!__,_/_� °Ctt ! M.uut2r• RAKr t-I��+�e,a.+as, • ' �,�e \\ . ��p f40OltlUN Present Zoning Classification�,1 ,}.CR t Existing Use of Property�rz�'i{+L S7'un.r'zS Acreage of Property y�,SUp st2,�� _ Describe Urieily the proposed zoning classificaCier� or type of use and im�rovement proposed r2�z.ou� �.uTg► Tu G-� r`oR- �'�'�n�s� To c=a �F`JaGQ��n.iNfr [',En.n�T Fvrt GArenr�.N C¢�vT� 2 2�2.Un.�� -OTS i C7 �/! ro2 FuT�+.t� 3ui�otHG- r�cnH�s�UnJ. � ----� Has the present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot sPlit or v�xiance o:• special use permit on the subjece site or part o£ it? yes x no. . What tiaas requested and uhen? ' 'Phe undersigned understands t3iat: (al a list of all xesidents and owners cf property t;itl�in 3fl�J feet (�50 ieet for rc�onin�) n;ust be attached to this application. (b) This application must be si.gr.ed by a12 otimcrs of thc propi�rty, or att c�planatioi� [�1Y811 1�7i;' i�:IS 1S t10� ii13 C.:S::. �:%j rC=i:'�`?`-1}?x�=x: ��r 1P; C�t.iP.C't 2R t�)E �TOCC0d111�'� rvsulting from the failnre to list the namcs and addresses of all residetits and pxoperty owncrs of p:�operty in questio�i, bclongs to Liie uncicrsigned. . A sketch of propose;i property and _structure must be drai�i; and attached, sho�+�ing the following: 1. Nortti Direction. 2. Location of proposect structure on the lot. 3. Ui�ncnsions of property, pr�posed structurc, and front aiid sidc setbncks. �t. Street. Names. 5, Location a��d use of aJjaccnt cxisting Uuildings (witliin "s00 fect�. Ttie undcrsi£ned l:ercby declzres that ali the facts and representntions stated in this npplicutian 1rc truc and cvrrect. : nnre� -2 � -'? `� src�tn�•unr•._ �-c�t2. N�P.n.�. (APl'l.1C:1N f') . Date Fzlcd Datc oP llearin� Plm�ning Coi�uaission /1��provcd Ci.ty Co�tincil Appro��cd (dltcs) 1)cnicd (Satcs) Denicd r� ?�_ � � PUBLIC HEARIN6. ' BEFORE THE �,- __ RLANNING COMM�ISSION TO WHDM IT MAY CONCERW: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, May 9, 1979 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #79-03," by the Lift-Ski & Bike, Inc., per Section 205.101, 3, N, of the Fridley City Code, to allow a garden Center to be located on lots 9, 10 and 11, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands Third Addition> the same being 6319 Highway #65 N.E. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. RIGHARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN • PLANNING COMMISSION Publish: April 25, 1979 May 2, 1979 -�`s ��,,, , . CI'fY Ol� I'RIOL�Y Ai1tJNIiSUTA ?� uti,re �71-�33� PLANNING ANU Zpt�INC 1'ORM � . � � Yr+t itr-; -s�el.d-r3�t«Z, �ue. APPLiCAN7"' S' SICNA'lUftl: ,Q�l'L , 31c�r.� /�✓(.'L s• • � Address (� 319 H�.✓Y 6 5' l=rtt OL�'c Y� �s�uH. Ss+{32 Telephone Number ,j''�l=�n�So F�... t�%M. �t--��_ PROPERTY OlV'NLR' S SICNATURE � 3 t 9 C 6 r� nA�+`( � AddTeSS 2ic � 9 / i'`� ST N.w. 1y�w Qn�L-�tTS>`�t2 Telephone N�mber %��"- 2r 9 3 tc 3 .t 9 - Co3 � Stxeet Location of Proper.ty j� 3�f -� �� Y �.loi-It Legal Descriptzon cf Property TYrc or RcQuLST Rezoning � Special Use Pcrmit Approval of Prcmin- inary $ rinal Plat Streets or AlleY Vacations Other -=--Tl,saea Fee�i eceipt ho � �a��` � !o S . M ao2 � N e (rH� Anro 5 qPn � ri on+ Present 7.oning Classification C- ! Existing Ifse of Property� rai e. s To.i« S Acreage of Property 7� oa sL2.F �=tiescribe briefly the proposed zoning classificat�or ox type o£ use and i�aprovement pruposed R€z�.�r2- *-o C-2 Fon t�un_r�os�z, o�= ,�j,L�u�ri,r�G- r4n.r,,i Fv2 Cr�R-ov_n� SrFV�. Has the present apFlicant p?•e�•iously sought to iezone, plat, obtain a lot split or t�azi.ance or special usc permit on the suUject site or part of it? yes�,no. SVha.t 1J3S requested and iahen'. . , r 'the undersigned understands thr:t: (a) a list ef atl residents and owners of proger:y r;zthin 3^t1 feet (350 feet for re�oni�ig) mus± be attached to tliis application. {b} This applica*_ion musL Ue signedl 'oy all owners of th.: property, or an cxpianstien � b`ll'C::1 �:i2}' ii12� 15 liG�� t�;.°. C.1SC. {Cf RCSI'.O1lSjt�:ISi:V f�7T any (iCF$/.:i lil �ilC YTOCCCC�llli��i resultir,g frorn the failure Yo list Cne names and addresses of nll residents and progerty oscn:rs of property in question, bclor,gs to ttie andcrsigned. . A sketch of proposed propc:rty and structure must he drai��n and attached, shosa'vig the folZowing• 1. Nortii Dircction. 2. Loeatior, of propnsed structure on Lhe lot. 3, Dimcnsions of property, prapo�od structure, and Lront .nd �i.cic seLbacl:s. .' 4. Strcet Names. 5. Location aud use of adjacent cxis[ing Uuildings (ti��itiiin 3�0 fecc; The undersigned'hcacUy declares that all thc facts and representations stated in this applic.ation 1rc ta•uc and corrcct. . , UATC 3— 2`� -`? i STGNATURF.__2'�'�c''c�!, f2 �/ c*�i+�++�ti (API'LIG+LN"I') Aate riled Date of ilcaring Pl�nnin� Go�nmissiou Al�provcd CiYy Counci.l A��prn��cd ,(daics) Dcnic� �---- (datc.sj Dcuicd . MAILING LIS7 ZOA #79-01, and SP �79-03 by"the Lift-Ski & Sike, Inc. Scott Holmer The Lift-Ski & Bike, 6319 Highway �65 N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 St. Anthony ' � 6225 Highway p65 N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Planning Commission 4-24-79 City Council Norman E. Schuldheisz Inc. 1256 8th Lane Anoka, Mn 553D3 - John 5wanson Village Shopping Center, Inc. 5835 Central Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Gottwaldt Inv. Co. 416 West Moore Lake Drive Fridley, Mn 55432 Fridley Recreation & Service Co. 6310 Highway #65 N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ge�rge Comiskey 6390 Dellwood Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Ms. Dorothy Mchuren 6378 Dellwood Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. 6erald Long 6366 Deilwood Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Vernon Mills 6324 Dellwood Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Patterson 6328 Dellwood Drive NE Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Terry Dalzen b308 De7lwood Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Martin Burditt 1065 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Kay & Jeanne Ingebrightsen. 58A1 West Moore Lake Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 0 Arnold C. Elmquist 8140 Long Lake Road N.E. Minneapo7is, Mn 55432 Lillian A. Clark 1128 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Mathew Trymucka 11}4 63rd Avenue N.E. FridYey, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Bergstrom 1086 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mary Timm 1072 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Henry Peterson 6312 Pierce Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Ronald W. Sherman 16938 Weaver Lake Drive Osseo, Mn 55369 M�rvel Perrin 6300 Pierce Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 William C. Hauan 6301 dellwood Drive N.E. Fridley, P1n 55432 John W. Keller 6315 -0el7wood Drivet a.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 a � Mailing List 'Page 2 ZOA #79-01 & SP #79-03 Lift, Ski & Bike, Inc. Mr. b Mrs. Richard Ficocello 6329 Dellwoad Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Eugene Quellette 6343 Dellwood Drive N.E. Frid7ey, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Isaac Saari 6367 Dellwaod Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Robert Taurville 6379 Dellwood Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 �� s PRQPERTY LOCATIQN: Owner : 6301, 6319 Hwy 65 Service Road Buiid4ngs: Lift, Cross Country Lift ..< ' . � � . �P.S .� S�te Gomments : Code Requirements 1) 28 total parking stalls are required for existing structures. 2) 15 total additional stalls are required for building additions. 3} A 5 foot landscape or poured concrete area is required around all buildings. 4) A screened dumpster area is required. 5) The parking lot surface is to be asphalted, curbed, and the parking arrangement lined out. General Comments 1) 900 square feet is the maximum allowable space that can be added on the west side of the Cross Country Lift. 2) 1200 square feet is the maximum allowable space that can be added on the north side of the Lift. a 3) There are 51 parking stalls avai7able. 4} The area outside of the Cross Country tift is used as a garden lot in the summer. This area is fenced. �. N e i �:�„ .r�,. ss seRVic� R�. � --� :: �.: :_ --_��_; ,; - '� soo ; � vt,j' ` ' C.C. LtFT y,� �w, � FTu CC�r—i� c �:�,:� �' `�q� T�IE Lt�T LIFT �� ' ;�, �p.. � { i2oD ''-- � i------ i; --- :._t' , FENCE ��" , �� a��l�� ';N�QI ' . � - / � �t = 50` ,. . .. . -� �h..��V� ��Y�� .:�~� • aty ��' e� � LOCATiON.�.�P��$ ��_��iIC� P�D DA7E L-1 FT�r G'�I`.� GL�JtJitZ"( L.I � __, KEY Q'll6�N V�Ri�iY . SIZE =� f1��T�t � 34 P�rJ � `f 24'� 3 � �.1t�1' 3" �� 3 ZA t� H�rJ�-��cJGK �. Z'' T G � NT ��,� o i i 1� A it � �� T ��' '' EN � `t ��_ .� ��c r ��a.:� �� 7 � � TD �o nr rLt o - z . h ; _ __ ' � k r �� ! 1 � . .. _ . . _ - -___ ._ . _ . . __.. .._ . _ .... _ : . _ -- - --------- -_......_.......�_...._...� ...�,...,..... �,,, � � ZOA #7Q-Ol & SP #79-03 r ��, . The Lift-Ski & Bike, Inc. `' ' � '� I J L._.____� L , � � ��,�, .� q,; . ,.,�.;,, -----._ ____ __ _ ____._ . ., _ ; --- --,---add,.__.,�. _Y__._;,Cf1.Uf'JTY, ST/aTE—�41f} HffHr'�F1Y� ��. �; . 7TG ' . `� ip� . y i ;�'.i... � � �>a I 197�i. ��Q . oi � ;.oe, �i � �. �), 0 yi�. T ry � � N . {! I I n �„� �j,l Z L�! .. , :+ / � ��ba44 ' a I�"y` � �Q�� ".. a 4 �`4 j : f` _ _ �� 6a3a n cn °a' 642G � _! J� ti : JoN �, Q i 9 Ya '�F 503� � ,1�51 1� �. hl. � 6489 , � i i s� 6A 7G 6. �,°° F� . 5. �� i yf32 �, r.;a.j /S.�c) y 1200�l210 �12Z0 ; (�zcJ � � � � e '<sr� :/ ✓+evd..�Au � I s., - 7 ;5 ; 7� '& . �.i�a.o.. s /a: nrrs ' wj � i � ,G�3 3�+�' ' ' Hffr..,, � : � �� z �� .. � �.q-�t � � i30o I /FaAn .nis✓Kosa/> � ^ ' � : N ' '__ 'R4o(�/ ...�_} ' � ' . lo., . I � 8 / V'ISG l00 /�O i/!O _ A•J ... _.� �h . 1 {J! % (f�/j� 5� . . _ ��o_ _ � ° � � 6 ` 6!�q �A51I'iJ6r) oS •. :� r'.' __ f1C--! ��j} . f` o o Y o °lt��.. f�� j (�! T � K � �;uDf�r,� ,�� . ' 6Q S�.J��IYIJ/o'Y � �90 /�os._ !! . : � , N � , I �:=soJ � 64'97 ��.yb936 E �, � s. 6A4'Ysf�� I Q; �� ax� � lv�n.� P fk f �` � G% ° "J,C p Lf)' c"y . , _ it,._ ��rO ' '� �� ! � �6�ia1 (�A40 Q ba:3 , - v__ ._-fl ''�. �f.70 .�5.. .. -(Gfo%._ � __. � �� e L� 0 1; t �rns. 64�1ao) 'i i � o �c�i Y.: a. (iQ15 /AnnJ � �C., n r� / . � � ��i i�� 4rf�l� EKnS r yriondi.f�iy� /SC`�as . /5oG4x$ � ��,' ___13 r ;: � � � Io i/✓i/✓i�dAq senro.'+v e41 (� � Z , i - A.: ' . itC� . � 2 ! � � ' � t r� �� .__.l-�-i- ' 90,7�� 9l' s-..r}.•.y7 ','� c. � l� �7 tS.i ::.��.� _I i ''-' t . n ! .. � ` , ... o � ti n a ids . 5�a+ o �fq_q� ^ ___ �i� o �.j 0 '", �� ^ /6 w ` ` c� Ec�� 6 �s; - �'" ' � � 6417 �.: , j6Q16 `� ° 4 � o `2- h � , �. 24 0 0 �, f�.: 6 1�«s ._ IaS ^ �..1 i o �-.�1sa � ' �y�:�,� a p '� 6393p �,`p� 63�0 � J 63Q I �3 gg �° � i3 � ' ":•F � - ` i � ,b� !� li��d.r'F��2 ^ ''. � �: 23 •{ 9 f : . o & (j ; �"" ` q,�.,w, . �. G ; is� tas _ _!S� lso � "s';_ ,.�,: �� ;; i� If �_ 6374 6�7$ � i p 63�7i9 �� 6 076 o a: � .�j9a i� 90 ! 9n �� I n /=� °{_� 3 tt • .� G 2 � y �' v �� . � `� �.n 105�� UbQ ��` :� i � j Y P (�367 � kd J,636 b, ,, �3bY �636�. "' ��e a r .- . � � l� � � � �- �t: i .. � , �� { `� • • , � ; o i.��.� rr �'¢ o � � 2 � ° !� ^ , .Li �� P h n t'�' . __�LT_o_k3_ °�_�/ln.sF _ [��'� /.`?JZ .dyilb/ �4< �(',qo o +� - �p4 " c� ' 63a3 63a2 , � py`��:.�ssa�' . �e o � �•. V ��,,i.J. q�<t1��. �� I � �z � S �� A yf,�,�'•*2p^�4/� 5w 4 p �.. F� 1 : EY.ra :� :� I� � F�2R p.� f�N� p a St ��. i .g 1 �S ■ -p ' -f y �b � h � �o32�ii � b � '' � b z q � i> g k i o rtc. � 0 4 r�e ; � � 63 fo v,y ° F�.�.o.��{ ; _� ��F�`� 6�j�` <� P �is ��ijacp.�,3 a h�3'; �, . �i.�i.� 1 � �"_ _ JJi_..� TS.V6 _ �iJ/./l h l�4?.°p u�0 � 1. : .� j�3�9 � b�oo n �E`'°� �,4:� �+6 r. � � 0 �' J(/ILOr/ �:�od � 7S i 75 � ;`C ,, rf o ^°� &�/1j O,� 3 p {s �`+� . . ':� 7S b� ��a . F •y �ei,. _ a„., ._....I }v � ■ b3o1r.� 1065 " 630�3�s a31z/5�"� `�� '� e''�. � rr..• Ae e�w...-f 1 . . �. ?w.r�. � _.ne.w " � � � p h �e ) a� f7 � w � / S. � �' S �� 4� . . y ?j!f_'. '_. ,o .� . f .'„` . .e »cJ" (i+ ' �� ¢ � I� � . �1•�S'i11�'L ..�z .-.L /E.t 1 p� �' • �3j `` r. �_ _ _. �" , � _ o ' ,� . ,Ja . . b360 r.. � 11b q� � 1. � ) -- � _...__.., �,•2 �,]{'� � ' � � �i�, �o�7J f1L/. �.. .. . . . . s_ �. `yl .� v ��. �/ 3! � ` � � � ° . 7vn� � �-o.aa ��-s?------� _ I � f� iu�L�� 10�2,, �� 5°� '��.:.' q { �i4rcFir.eUin {' r.C'� ��f � � �.. ' Y'�; % •.�� V � . l.:�I �' . z'�` � .�SO.0 ' • � �:soo} � 625b. � > >��tl��6.� 4y� 6251 � � . �., R . ----- - -:.t` "� - "� r . `<t30i y�ype�/ �� /��y�l/�'^/��i......__. �i./ q.'�I"�d.i V ��i�iQ: �.____ .. .7 . �y r •.� .�;.� � � � � s o} � , 6�� ' ��1(7 }, tlC' nr,,,,.... � � �� , . N� ! �'Y � '' � ;� i, , y � � ��: 2.�,� � � ' . P� . r y �� lt. . � � /� 4 � a ;: �'� �r r i r; � � ' J ��V .. ,,,, ,\ �� `�V ?. I 1 1 : bzg9� j,� �j 6 ' �og6 � �� • � I ! � �, i % . �t.� �:,� �J 1 !�/- �. ��lQ �: ,�� ,.. � �„ .4�111a�?.3 . 9 s. [ -rv;.. �� f ' , ,. �� t�2 2 5 - ` a nhpvta� � I C. ENiElL. �:•,'r1 � atJD{TaRS I�e / 2�%� � �b � � e��y y��l � ti ti�. �r,��_' ��% �.��,�� ,� �'r,'° [%/',/ f .�,ZOA #79-01 & SP #79-0�3 for '� t 5: �9> �V' Y/ The Llft-$k1 & `"' i: �Q ` r�/��nvR� Bike, Inc. , N,.. y/'` q g.- znZ °- �,. ..�' .�' � � . .. I fe�a� J/.' >-." �6. "7f. .� �- � ��.. �.' T�-� pf�ty�titi{qinRt7iturt��yn mv ��1� � � � �� r �., p � �., �"n !. (�. (7 C. -. :� C C' . . � � . �. . . . . i / ' . . � ' � .... .... - f ' W a r f L `. �. . LOCNE '_%1RK �� "' _ �� !- � �. C > . ' . ''} Q �� _ �/� / � /r ' ' � ' . . �yy`.`l ''�i.ai / %�. C,(<C . � _ � � � � � �� : ��..'tf : p. ,.� i, -. ' ..J .I � i . `4�. \/�/��/� I _�.V . )y � �. 1 . .� �. / + B , c��E, � 7 i �.. � - .2 � . j .. _ � 3 �� . ... : ��P��C, . � . . < . ..D�. : . �l K. ��f�,p'• � I o� � H � /S �O se.w i. ,.�'/� ,�S � ,�.�1. � � �:�' r"� ��, 9 � = �' � �i _ � � m � � o ��c �y ¢ �•'% ,� il � �. �' `?AR ; z �' � � 1 .i� �"� '� • �' Q �.�/�� S � �g - AUD/TO 'S OB =� � "� (- �. . . ."":i' �... , i�. F�i? '. } ,\ ' .. . �TM _ ..�.. `nc� - � ,ae'c cEC. U� i � .d { , . . sn� cAe n ..f+ _ _ �. c _ ti' , � = �n 't� �1 � r � � � J ,.. 'S ., . � a � `'��. � a � � a � f r� - u ', _,t�.-; :��^�� c. �� I R1c`�d' _ r•�•". .. �hT�'DO(tyJFN �� y cteu 7 - � � �, � � � � � H 3 ,� ^• � __. . scNVDti . ` -^ ^ �� ' ,a� � . �� • M [ 0451 ik� b o F x -oK x f� I. N�vES � ri i -Q. G� /i �O[ `./ I EIENEHiARY ~ _ $GMpOI f0i5T 141 - . m , C � - - ' � ` ��. '�siw } [Ci tl oVx v'•••� l. �iE a.o � ]o� I ' �An � _ ��. � :CN. �'` � � � SU�- L \ ssr . i � ' ` '/�,'+WJ I,'; � a � �aBa ;� � r��,�� n� „, ii IE :� � w d" P� 4 �T,. ( w.o�i� STATES i'. DN '' "`iir . �.�5 �, 3,� 1 Y �pi I � E � , �M y l �� .f � ,l�i &-1 - � �j '� r�� ' � _�-•_� , � � ,1 _ R �r/ , ; ' .,�T `�-i � �^ c a. ` - • • „ CEc•�-+C �C P E<+ v C�`�-< � I"b�"' � . ,I•I' s' j C f . �f �cl �' p „ , d J c..�%� � t wc:� �F�C �� nuaro s � � •I• � -i �`C. 1 �+ i^ -( i:' �. tJ V( l� �� 1 P� � �.1 q L J C f� F111�1LY p� _ ��. . � I� L� ¢+3'S \ / s �c��r.� �-� � G m Ml�n Sc�obi�.� . �.Z. � '� N�R :� i,-��;�i . i, VFNN, � � e t' (> V r: y(. ' . . . j, fR_ "��y ._, Y{ ' p� _ ,�� [ w� 51 jx `" � � �i � !11' �. uisrxitr i�,5�{„' o- aa a �e � � +� 1 � ^�� pj4 ir � �� .�iq10lEY �('c t, .� �.,.� �j-.�.. f o s nFl S' � i" i� . �.. 7:' � i fsPt.�'�a� 1J' I GONNDN$ � �: .. rC � ( ^' � r 1 f �� 'QU v. • @z I � .^n -. ��9�� I � . . .� .. '✓�S .��a � lif..._ n!� C �� PAREVI eM��' ; . SFNIO�EY� � 1 ��l� .� � .� . �'- ,'..j �v �F l �'i a� •� vr �9)1 � t � , il " 9MSrr �� . �sn.,.�icx ScHO�J �� n ��[�. p ,' I----�'1 � , I .�'1 J:,,�o��eY ,�' I ..ti,�•� .��y f p �lIi ± J i' p11D141 HY' V% �� ', . � . � /If �) � F� `n .i� �� ✓ .�'�ri�'„ 'N p� J 'L' � + . '��.Do�'9�. ��nen�J�� ool� n �_J.�L-�.' . '/� <.' ^ :.a ' � �� J ' 0 ��,`��,��;' �� -" i� , ��`,c` a°.. Lv�'o4aN� c.� ' `'� ,!i J .J ^ �,.:.��J'�J'-,� � �{ K� o a, .,`�cnuotd. 5 �� } �1 , .� � � � J � e el � d !� C i. f' � '�. ` �," �. . E4EU � o � }�t"' �: .�, � � • ��.- , .:, . a a "� . . �� r-' � � . , � . �� ' 4 ,_ �` r� � .i I Y.rp iF N`� P�at\ON y . � l� ..; , L 1.4 . ! a" � C �� %� ; . t` 4 ��00� GRACE CATMOLIC -- c<..�: c'1- C '_�. ! � �'�, ' � __ `�� HIGN SCMOCL -r . : .�II 2 A A + *�� ° . ; — ti �� c � I � � a ' ;s. „ �,��ax� L}�y-§} C� r� - 4\ � �' ��(� '� �//� g� ��I�, ��1 t'.I�� ' • � �� =�_a.__�� s—�'��' \ /CifJs;r/,�-'th+�"-:*V/h-PW�'4'°t"i�-�`4"r�' . , �. ' � . ._ .' ,� t' nii..� .. -� ! s 6319 CEPITRAL AVENUE NORTHEA5T FRIDLEY,MINNESOTA 55432 t�ttr. �r�ei�o li. @ureatsi Prid2ey CitT �ensaeer 6432 vniversity Ave. Frtd2erp, �inzi�soLa SS�3� �.�T �!.'r Q11TlF8}l'j.t (612) 5716850 s f �=�r . ,..,. Etssah 28� i9?4 sinae 197�, I h�va ag�z�ted �'h� LltG �4ki �hop at 6319 �7 �S• Lsst !lpr21 T inquired at Cit� Ha2i about peratite requfrcd for erectinR a ok►sin litilc f�nce art►�d en acttdaar R'e7cd�n �hop. Z was told �h�L no perssita �crre requ2rsd. Apparently� th�re �aas a�aisunderst�sding Y�et�eea f.he ol.erk and �,pselt, �a i r�as intorc�ad 2tt �L�!-su��r that a Sgeoiai U�e Pex�li 1S ie$ttiTSd. �4L ttia� t��e r did uaE eepplg� for bhe pu►�mit becanse af tv�a res�orss; 1 i R�e Farcien eeeson �ras 1��aifl�I2� Finiehe�t st tha tfs�e Z�r�s msdm aware of Permit 3e4�ir�ent�s, aad* 2i 3?�-zanin�a trv� Gi tc C•-2 ia �neceaeai-�r far aapzov�2 of tYs� �FeQiel V�se. Fer�it. � delayed an �a-z�nlr�,� beaau�e ot i�tiendit�r, chan�ces !xt ooanership of Lha G+Lteinass +z�td re�4 �ntate* ss v►e1.3. as Ya;ture eq_uisitlon of Lot 21 �o the i�asarediates �orth. fihe oxrsersh4�+ oT th+� �usires�a a�nd zRe�I s�tste �ras ol�rified on Deae*�ber 1� 29?8. Hti�ever, �aquisitl�re oF Lot �1 xma 3�aC iaclu&ed ia the �s�zree�rent of i�ea. 2st. Tk�e ainslr�g cta'te tvr Lhe pureh�$e of Lot if is a+ahadu2ed tar �pr�I 20„ 19?9• �o�r that al2 pereela ot �Qroro�rtS are eae�er co�zson a�reership, I hc+ve applied fax re-zQnSn�e ta G2 �nd h�ve ai�o s��pl2ed far ihe 3pec1�2 Use Pazseit. 5eeir� es hor theae requeete erill �rat�bl� requlra 6Q ��rs, I erould �si�h to tte �ra+.nted s� v�riar►ae t'or apening the grtrde� shop on or abou� Apr3I 2Q�k. g thank you Set aQvsaee �'vr �onr oaopaz�eEic3t in thla �stter. H•2;�erds! 8mott 8. go2mer �'�""� � ciTY or raioi.�:Y Mir�Nr:so•rn PLANNING ANU ZONING rO1tM NuMnea �� 79-0/ n�rLZenw�r+s srcNnTUat:�� naar�ss y�,/c` �� • �1. � • i� Telephone Number �(O� .�� S , PROPERTX OWNL•R'S SIGNATURE Address f1-d Telephone Number�� -S,3' Street Location of Property • �� , TYPti OP RtiQllGST Reaoning Special Use Permit Approval of Premin- �inary $ Final Plat Streets or Alley Vacations Other Pe �.�d--��eceipt No.�� Legal Uescription of Property /�� I Present Zoning Classification �-`% Existing Use of Property��fliv,��L�r II filo.��5 Acreage of Property_��. Describe briefly the proposed zoning classificati.o:: or type of use ar�d impxovement proposed��0� D� /7�`C�i� Has the present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a]ct split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes no. }Yhat was requested and m�hen? The unde.•signed understands that: (a) a lisr. of all residents and owner.s of property within 300 feet (350 feet for rezoning) must be attached to this application. (b} 'Miis application must Ue signed by all oti�ners of Yhe propexty, or an e�:planation given �ehy this is not the case. (c) Responsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting irom the failure to list the names and addr�sses of all residents and property oti.mers of progerty in question, belon�s to the undersigned. A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drm,m anii attached, shor:ing the follo�aing: 1. North Direction. 2. Location of pxoposed structure on the lot. 3. �imen;ions of property, proposed structurc, and front and side setbacks. q, Street Namcs. S. Lc�cation and use of adjacent eaisting buildings (�ritLin 300 feet). The undersigned hereUy declares that all the facts and representations stated in this appli.cation are true and corrcct. pATL SIGNA'1'URG _ � (APPLIGAN'1') /1 ✓� Date filcd Date of Hcaring ,� 2 �0 / Pl�nning Commission Approved (dat:es) Denicd_ City Council Approved (dates) !)enicd Planning Commission � '' � � % �1 City Council MAILING LIST SAY #79-01, by Kathy Gerard Vacate A11ey in Block 3, Plymouth Addition Mr. & Mrs. Theodore Thonnes 4g8p 2 1/2 Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Randall Kno11 4868 2 1/2 Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 . Mr. & Mrs. Bruce Roberts 4856 2 1/2 Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mary J. Beyer 4844 2 l/2 Street N.E. fridley, Mn 55421 Margaret Jansen 4832 2 1/2 Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Georgia Kramer 4820 2 1J2 Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Casmir Grossy 4808 2 1/2 Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 008 - Spring Company 4285 Sheridan Avenue South Minneapolis, Mn 55410 Mr. & Mrs. Michael Tuzinski 4803 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Miles Gerard 4815 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. William Doyle 4827 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Neil Robinette 4839�.2nd 5treet N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 � . :. Mr. & Mrs. C. A. Larson 4851 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 M"r. & Mrs. Charles Nolman 4861 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Adlore Braaten, 487i 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 George Austin and Jeanette M. Green 4881 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 John Eddy, Manager General 7elevision 350 63rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 �� a Minnegasco c!a Leo Caouette, Communications 733 Marquette Avenue Minneapoli�, Mn 55402 L. K. Rodman Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 6540 Shingle Creek Parkway Minneapolis> Mn 5543� Warren Johnson Narthern States Power Company 4501 68th Avenue North Minneapolis, Mn 55429 �f � . , - �' ; ��''' Ci"i'Y O� F9�LQLEY r � 8431 UNfVERStTY A.VENUE -N.E., FRIDLEY, MINMESOTA Sb432 � TELEPFIONE (812�571-345U May 2, 7979 TO WHOM IT MAY CaNCERN: The Planning Commission will be holding an informal hearing on a request to vacate the alley in Block 3, Plymouth Addition. 7his will go on to the City Council u�ho will set a date for a future Public-Hearing and all property owners will be notified officially of that Public Hearing. This letter is sent to give anyone who so desires to be heard at the Planning Gommission meeting. The Planning Commission meeting will be on Wednesday, May 9, 1974, in the Council Chambers at 7:30 P.M. This item will be fourih on the agenda, and although it is hard to judge the time for each item, I shouid think that this item wouldn't come up until at least 8:3Q P.M. RICHARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION N ,. , } ,,_ �- W !/4 COANER SEC. 26 . . ` . . . . . _ � ..r� - , � . . .. .- _ { . . . . . ..''.. �� . . . . . . . . � , 4 . � . - . . .� . . ._ _ .� . , . .. . , ..- . - _ . ,. •. .. .. . _ . . , . : �: . . . �� .. � . ' . . , �.. .. .• ' .� w. � (_ � '- T . . ttAA"1A �n �r � . ��g��'^�w"�'� ,' 'k��+�� .. p c;+, . , . y : ' �� s � �� Y � tl b ��W- �°.p' . _ ` G%%� f. ..__ -----49�H.- _ ---- ; Y. . �' - - � . in'� Ga .T-'N'3>`;::" /1 . •": , ?IGo i�,.� �� 6e 'Q�g. �"'�"�`�?�Jf.J�� 4= ,f�� :; . z�. :��. q z -�% s s.-: zr o • � $s i'� . ., ,�� _48r!( r �:. zs � ��i� -. Jf 7 g ;:.,:Q�-Z�r.,y a.., . z1 . 9 . `'7= , . _ . -_ 9 � � v:�' a �� -- , :ro :�_ . �N � /J ; .,a r.• , .a µ . - r �,: ._� '�f�;�o. � • • 99 �5_ .-�r - . .�„�., .�� = m a : "-r- � r , f� 3 ' Tr � n , . ,. , r _ ¢B�6 � • ' a��j. Ir "r- . y , , z 39 ' • 849-. Q9@ 9 z7 ,� , . a�� . _. - -z� • q e �r q�,s . ,�a � � q8�5 � N �� `q�aa „ 4�a" 4 � 3 .. : ,,.,.: . �„ $a_ . ,� „ AVE. i ��?�_ 4�3 � rx �Q7�4' L � — to �T,i � � 47g 9 � - j � � , 7D 6 i i 7as : �r � f�.� � z `r. . i " „ 477H. � �'-T .—f. � � " ;'� cL.t 'n _ �1 F= � ' J '� � ' —'--•}i. 4 --s -�-7-j - -`---� � �i �� . �° �a` �I s �.�! . .... _v �: L -•--- , ,--' u ��: . , ,, . . : "'""'.r.�: 1! � ^H-�+; __--��i .p �..:. � �tu. J +° — j_._ t•,� .. I � j 2f R 'r IL _ �.J 7� "' ' i 11 f z' - � -- - 7/ __�'' � i 1D _ . �_' _� � � �"r -�rn �,�� - - °� i� ='_8--; _� �' ± ` .. _f �?.{'^ V� . � Tl - N �l: ?2. " +} Fe .r �TI,'r. i9 /1 i� � 'q7�5 - �;;(�, � � - -•--^'.: ` �a3- -- �.r�� . ,. �� ; � - - : �� , � �:. --'-�.h1ic� � �Y ?ti�,�i7 _ry�. .,� � i�` �.��. CITY OF FRLDLEY , PETITION COVER SHEET Date Received Mav 2 1974 � Petit ion No. 5�1979 --;r� o6jece to vacate the alley l�na between dnd 5treet and 2; Street, 48th Ave�g �nd 49th Avenue N E. which is located in 61ock 3, Ply.�g isth AddjYion Petition Checked By Percent Signing Date Referred to City Council May 7, 1974 _ Disposition � � Y We, the undersigned, are the property owners abutting the atfiey lying� between 2nd Street and 2Z Street, 4�th Avenue and 49th Avenue N.E. ,{ �� We petition the City Council of the City of Fridley to vacate said;;,. alley, which is located in 61ock 3, Plymouth Addition. PROPERTY OWI�ER SIGNATURE ADDRESS TELEPH�NE �-/P/5 � f� :�- /�� S�/ a � S'3 ' �a-�2� �✓.��-� . - .3��0 - �/ %��Z � � � ry� L��"�3 �� -r-� �` ,��. 5�=�1/� Sd1- �.�38 �� `� ��,Z,7 2 � � ° ✓�-w- ��,� � � �� fY'�° ��D �3tia� I � � � �� , �-,-- �-�a �-�/ � � -�-�, �i' ��v� f��a _ �/�- . '� � � �. , .��D-��/ � ;�,.��, C�� r � �� a'� s+ �� . �� .P � J� �` �� /-3 7 e f � ��/y- � � . `� � �T <vx-�./I ,�� .- % /_ . C�� i., 'y� � O a/�. S i q/ c; 5��'/ a��J / , ��' � - � �f ��-- � �% ,5�i, �� , . J 6'D �-- �!'D2- R � C[Lon�.x�z- - L/��-j,,�,� Q ��7-�✓�, �s6G^3�� /i /��U /�j�/u�,7� �� G ��c.- �- � �'3'HtilS.z�+ g C, / � S'7' A�G- S6 c1 "" / b� C1 _-��=-� G ��..�.�._ y , . . ,!�-. _ _.�ti� `s�i l�� .��>1,�-� �8S 1 d2��/� �"� 5� d -- �'0 8� , �.s.-+-�-� ��""^", �'y�-�-� �-I�SL `6 ot ��z S 1� N Z . S��C ( — � Q c � �.J � _._.._ _ �r r.� i �+ ? ' /�� A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION • � OF THE CITY OF FRRIDLEY FINOING THE FRIQLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY'S ' URBAN, REDL-VELOPMENT PLAN IS CONSISTENF WITH THE COMPRENENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CI7Y OF FRIDLEY WHEREAS, the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authoriiy has submitted an Urban Redevelopment Plan to the Fridley Planning Commission as per Minnesota Statute, Chapter 462; and WHEREAS, the Fridley Planning Commission has reviewed the Urban Development Plan to determine consistency of said pian io ihe Fridley Comprehensive Development Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TNE PLANNIN6 COMMISSTON OF THE CITY OF F�RIDLEY: � That the Urban Development Plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Development Plan of the City of Fridley. ADOPTED BY TNE PLANNING COMMISSI6N OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS OAY OF , 1979. CHAIRPERSON - RICHARO N, HARRIS AT7EST: CITY CLERK - MARVIN C. BRUNSELL �. . _. ; ; : � � , : "' ':��,. ;.. s�� :� a$ �r�t��. �; a��a��a ct� � � _ �: ��.��; ..s..:-� -, �,�.,�z<� � ; ,._ �� ;" . :: '�. 4i�` �� : �#?X?8Di1. 6 �s � s�z � 1't�r�+ ��r�� St a whiC� �a �t�o�t� F `'3�� +'`aa ��u� �` �o.� 'sri%�.� g y al`�._`� ' . k�f� �� '��i � k-C��.�� dG'imD�si- � f` c '� � ; i r�,� :': � � �' �,'�� „ �, F� , • u � _ �s ' �M;: �' � _ . .. . -, .. �.xs'.o-v��x��w i s . , . � Y"a � � . . .�- �§��'.r�. '_ r . . , C.<r . i�u Q� `: C�.i�i&8.�� , �Q�3 �: : , ' ;- .'�. ��'i��' ; 6•� :� � � � ., ArtO�#�;,?t� * .„ '". . . ... ��Oi11�" , � , [ 4f . �,ehaLd �i.�e.` ��g$8&� T� � �t@: .3i24j.' 8i, `• %�?ES$ed' �ro r Yiu1t :ituls3. ; �ately ` €'keu�uaC� �e.-:�A� ., il�_ Sa, � '1�+.'di.s1 : nsai . . �ust�il's ;� � � � , ��; �.; ��. � �=. �� s. � � `� � � s .a � °r � , x � �. �. �at k � F ' �� , �� '� �.`,.�,�'�`� ' � � r r*� ,� a 5*�. � , . ,�'�.:� ��+ >jk'�r� , �� x:� .v "':".: . � .�.<.<. . .. . �� R.'�s �` �`: r S: 'F -�.a°.'" , , . .., a�.��'2-v� �.. _''� se. •-. ��. v _ . �•� r,� z , �,z f il' i i �' � : — a ;-. sr u C,'i i 'i� d ''1 i: .� +�� `i: i�� „" j"i, -i�y 4:: {fc{ 1'� #" 't.: c, � ' f �. � • CITY OF FRIDLEY ppPEALS COMMISSION MEETING - APRIL 24 1979 CALL � ORDER: Chaln+omas Schnabel called the April 24, 1979�,meetiag oP the Appeals Coa�iaeion to order at 7:35 P•M• ROLL CAIS.• Members Present: Mr. Plemel, Ms. Sohnabel, Ms. Gabelr Mr. Barne Members Absent: Mr. ICemper Othera Present: t�'. Moravetz� Engineering Aide / Administrative 1. APPROVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINtTrE3: APRIL 10� 1979: M(YI'ION by Ms. Gabel� aeconded by Na�. Barna� to approve the April 10� 1979, minutes oY the Appeals Co�iasion. 1✓�a. Schnabel stated that on page 15, the last line� the word "maybe" should be inaerted after the worde "was that"• Up4I3 p VOICE VOTE� ALL VC/STNG AYE� CHAIRW4MAN SCHI3ABEL DECLARID THE MINUPE3 APPROVID AS CORRECTEB. , 2. ELECTION OF CHAIRPER50N APID VICE CiiAIRPIIiSON TO SERVE FROM 5I1�79 to 5%1�EOt MOTION by Ms. Gabel� seconded by Mr. Barna� to move this item to the end oP the agenda. ' UPON A VOICE VQTE� ALL VOTZI� AYE� CIiAIRW0�4AM SCHNASEL DECLARED TAE I�OTION CARRIID UNANIh�USLY. 3 MJTION by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barner to remove this item from the table. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNAEEL DECI.ARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated thet et the last Appeals meeting they had a number of questions which they directed Co the Planning Commission asking,their opinion on this type of situation. The Appea],s Commissioners have been given copies oP the Planning Co�miasion minutes and as they could see, the Planning Coam�ission apent a considereble amount of time discussing the entire eituation. She noted that Mr. Nitscheke had ettended the Planning Caur�ission meeting a� participated in the discussion. APPEALS COMNIISSION MEETING, APRIL 10, 1979 -' PAGE 2 Ms. 3chnabel stated'thet.the Planning Coffinlsaion Pelt there was no problem with this type of request based on the fact thet the density wea not changing. So, in regarda to our question as to whether or not they would like to see this type of sitvation occuring� the anawer was that they had no problem uith it. However� they Yelt they had made an error when they apprwed the lot split on thia request� and after reviewing the Appeale Covm�ission minutes end havittg more discusaion et the Planniag Co�ission meeting� they decided that rather than treating thia property and any like it as e lot aplit, it should be trested the same as ar{y other townhouse development. There should be a townhouse aesociation developed between the three owners with their own bylaws. Instead of sp23tting the property three ways from street to alley, the properiy should be divided up so that only the land underneath the buildtngs would go to�the awnership of the people and the rest oY the land vrould be held in coffinon. This ie what the motim on page 15 refers to. They are now recov�ending to Council that•Conncil vnderstand they £eel they made a mistake in their original recoamiendation snd they would like Council to concur with their . new reco�mnendation. With regards to the rest of the questions, they felt these could be answered as they draft the new zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission indicated that they appreciated the Appeals Coimnission bringing these queations to their attention. In terms of this particular request� they did not seem to have s problem reclassiPying it as a townhouse because of the fect that the fleneity woul.d not change and control over the complex itaelf in terms,oP maintenance would be best controlled by the townhouse essociation having the responsibility for caring for the property in the co�on and also the exterior maintenance of the structures. She asked Mr. PTitscheke if he cuncurred with her s�.�ery of the events of the Planning Cormnissioz hSr. NitscBeke stated that he agreed, but wauld ati22 perfer.the lot split. He did see the need for a trnmhouse association for msintenance and the problems that wou].d arise. As far as dividing the land, he felt the original recanmendation was good. Ms. Sehnabel stated that he shou2d cwderstand that the Planning Commission did not reveree it's original decision. Their original decision �rill go �o the Council reco�nending the lot aplit� however as a follow-up the motion they psssed last week will elso go with the original recor�endation. So everitually, the City Council will make the final decision. Another reason the Planning Commiss3on decided to reconsider the lot split was that if there should be a disaster to that property or building and it were 50� or more destroyed, the City would end up with three sub- sta�iard lots. As an added protection, it was felt that it was better not to split that land. Ms. Gabel aeked what the front footsge was. Ma. Schnabel stated it was 80 feet total. Mr, N3tscheke asked 3f the vsr3ance would hold up if there was a loas of 50� or more so the structure would h�ve to be rebuilt in accordance with City code. Ms, Schnabel stated that iY over 50�, oP it were destroyed the variance would be void and to reconstruct they cou2d conceivabl,y end up witb one owner not wishing to re-attach. In a strictly l�ypothetical situation, that's the kind oY thing they want to avoid. , -*� APPEALS COt9�1I3510N MEETING, APRPL 24+ 1979 PAGE 3 Mr. Nitscheke stated that hia contention was that in order to reconstruct the building� it would have to meet City code. It would be the same as if an apart- ment were destroyed� the City could not force the apartment owner to rebuild. He felt the question was almost mute because under the law� the City couldn't foTCe at�yone to rebuild. Ms. Schnabel ststed that the thought was that perhaps one oP the three may not want to rebuild aharing co�on walls. Mr. Nitscheke stated the agreement would ba that iP they didn't want to rebuild� they would have to se21. • Ms. Schnabel stated that hopeful7y, the City Attorney wou7.d look at some of this and offer a legal opinion. One of the main points was that they wanted to avoid ereating three substandard lots. • Ms. Schnabel asked iP in view of what the Planning Commission decided, a�y members of the Board had a�y questiona. Mr. Barna stated thst any action on this now would be stating that this would be similar to a normal townhouse development with the general property owned in common end the property under eaeh home would belong to the owner of that home. He stated that-he Would be more comfortable with that than with the three ald-shaped narrow lots. Ms. Schnabel stated that the other things that were discussed was that the utilities would have to be aeparated and that tcnrnhouse bylaws be drafted. I�'s. Moravet2 stated that there should also be a separate meter for tbe co�on grounds for such things se watering the grass, yard lights, etc. It should be located on the exterior of the huilding so City personnel could read the meter. Ms. Schnabel asked if the Council wonld want to look at the townhouse bylaws, and would they want them by the time this item reaches Council. Mr. Moravetz stated that Mr. Herrick would probably want to review the bylaws to see just what the City involvement would be and also Council should review and they can decide if they want to take action on them. Because it is a unique situation, he wae not sure wl�at the legsl ramiPications would be. Ma. Schnabel stated that this probably would not reach Council until May 14th and she suggested that Mr. vitscheke tslk to so�one on Staff and find out exact�y what Council R*ould want and when they vant it. � Mr. Moravetz stated thst it probably would not reach Couttcil until Msy 2lst. Mr. Nitscheke stated ti�at would be no problem. Ms. Schnabel suggested they reviea vhat the Planning Co�iseiott did so they can decide if they want to take actfan. ' , .� APPEALS COMMISSION MEEPING, AF'RIL 24, 19T9 PAGE 4 Mr. Barna felt the question had been well covered, but.he esked i#' it wae a replat or a lot split. Me, Bchnabel etated that Mr. Nitecheke had applied Por a xeplat. Mr. Plemel stated that hadaTt been recorded yet because it l�adn't reached Council yet. Mr. Bsrna stated that this had confused him the laat-time. In looking at it as a townhouse development� he was thinking all this was cot�on ground and the msin thing with a taWnhouae development is the common ground with the park and recreational ares, which was wk�y he had brought up the park next door. Tn a townhouse development they were creating a community within a community Por recreational and open space purposes and in this particulax instance they cpuld satisfy all those situationA with a townhouse type ownership. With common property surrounding the structures and private ownership under the structures, adjacent park boardering the property which basically belongs to everybody in the coffiunity including the owners oP the three individual units �ives thP recreational area co�only owned. in his mind, that vould satisfy sll the townhouse requirements. Whether it's a 5 acre townhouse, or a 4 acre townhouse or a 22 acre tcrwnhouse there is� in this instance� recreational Yacilities available just as close sa they would be in a regular tawnhouse develop- ment, Ae felt more comfortable with t8e co�non property. Ms. Gabel stated that she agreed and had no problem as l�g ss they don't creste any substandard.lots. Mr. Plemel stated that he was not present for the original discussion regarding this� but for a variance to be granted a hardship must be staied and he noted that there t+as no hsrdship given frith the application. He asked what it was. Ms. Schnabel stated that the hardship came out during the initial discuseion. The hardship basicall,y was that Mr. Nitscheke felt that as.a development it had become diYficult to collect enough rents to make this a reasonable investment. Because he felt it was limited in terms of the amoimt of rental income� he would like to instead sell the individual uttits off. That is the hsrdship. Also� it would be difficult to Yind a buyer for the vhole unit. Mr. Plemel asked if there �rere garagesY Ms. Schnabel stated thet were two units s�ith one garage each and one unit with a double garage but one stall in that garage wae present]y being used se an office. MOTIdN by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. P1eme1, to cloae the public hearing. UPON p VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCFINABEL DECLARID THE PUBLIC AEARING. CLOSID AT 8:07 P.M. Mr. Plemel aeked Mr. Nitacheke if he still planned to record that replat. Mr. Nitscheke atated he had psid a replat fee sad would hope it would be refunded if the replat wasn�t poseible. Ms. Gabel etated it eouldn't be replatted until Council looked at it. --� PAGE h%Y!'ION by Mr. Barna, secondefl by Ms. Gabel, ta recau�end aPProval of the variance reques�','pureuant to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code� to reduce the.minimum area Por a taunhouse development fram 5 acres to .25 acres� to`allcn+ an existing tri-plex to be sald as three individual townhousea located at 6661 - 6671 - 6681 Nain Street H.E. and that the Board a� Appeals coneurs w1tM the Planning Coucnission's reco�endation that the land be left as one plat F*ith the exception of the land un@er the building rather than be split 3nto three lots and it be treated as a tawn� house development. Fux'ther, they should vork with the City to determine how the City wants the meters set up and also they work with the City in developing tawn- , house association and bylawa. UPON A VOICE VOTEs ALL Vl7i'ING AYE� CAA7RWOMAN SCIINABEL DE�� T� M�T=ON CARRIID UNAISiMOUSLY. Ms, Schnabel informed Mr. Nitscheke that the variance was reco�ended Yor approva7. and suggested he call. Dick Sobiech, Public Works Director, and find out when it will be at Council and if he would need a copy of the association bylaws at that time. She stated that Council would determine the platting. The Board of Appeals made the recommendation that they approve his concept and that they concur with the reco�endation oY the Planning Commission that it not be platted as split lots� but that they sell the property underneath the building and the rest of the property be held 3n common. Ms. Gabel stated that she Pelt that Counoil should be made aware of the multiple use on this property. , MOTION by Ms. Gal�el, seconded by t9r. Barna� that there is a multiple use existing on thia property and Council should he acrare of it and there should either be a 5pecial Use Permit applied for or the additional use should be ceased within a reasonable period of time. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHA7RWOMAN SCANABEL DECL1S�tFS) TF� MOTION CARRIID UNANI2�%1USLY. 4, ItEQUESP FOR A VARIANCL` PURSUANT TO CfIAPR'ER 2�S aF T� �� C� REBUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FRab1 7'.HE t'1lyu`fU:�'� �4�EME� OF 10 FE FEET TO aLLO'd THE CO:VSTRt�TION OF A 1 F�QT BY 32 F� A�DITION TO OF A HOtJSE AT b517 N�KINLE"1 �fiREET Y.E. AN AD�ITIONAL VARIA+dCE IS BECAUSE AT THE TTP�� OF THE COI3STRUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL HOIISE THE SEi'BACK WAS REDUCED TO 33 F� IIJ�SEAD OF THE REQilIIItED 35 �ET• Richard Kok� 517 McKinley Street N.E.� Fridley� t�tn. 55 32 • N�TION hy Mr. Barnsa seconded by Ms. Gabel to open the public hearing. TO � UPON A VOiCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUELIC HEARING OPEN AT B:15 P.M. Ms, Schnabel Tead the Administrative Staff Report as follow*s; APPEAL3 COMMISSION MEETING, APRII. 24� 1979 -_ PAGE 6 ADM1t�I5TRATIVE STAfF REPO{tT 6517 McKinley St. N.E. A. PU6LIC PURPOSE SERUED QY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4, (6,1) requiring a 10 foot side yard setback for 7iving areas in an R-1 z�ne. • Public purpose served by this section of t6e code is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living areas in adjacent structures and 15 feet between garage and living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to conflagration of fire and also to allovr for aesthetically pleasing open areas around residential structures. Section 205.053, 4, A> requiring a front yard setback of 35 feet. P�b]ic purpose served is to a71o�+ for off-stheet parking without encroaching on the public right of vray: Also for aesthetic consideration tu reduce the "building line of sight' encroachment in the neighbor's front yard. B. SFNTED HARDShIP: I have to add to the house in this �vay in order to get�a good size bedroom.and have an entrance to my existing bathroom, and to have a good size family room. C. ADMINISTRATI:�E STAFF REVIE�: Tf�e reason for tne front yard variance request is to bring the existing house into conform�r,ce if reGuest is granted. The side yard variance, if granted, v;ould noi: reduce the distance bet�veen the Kok home and the neiyhbor to the North, as the fiome on the lot to the North is iocated further 41est than thz petitioner's is. Therefore if the Commission grants these twu requests we are not recommending any stipulations to be attached to tiie arproval. Mr. Xok stated that he had stated that his hardship wae to get a good sized bedroom and famil,y room but should have stated that if the original bui2der had put home on the property square� he wouldn't need a variance. Ms. Gabel stated that he probeb2y did that because the street was curved. She noted tLat the house to the north sits even further forward than Mr. Kok's. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was en easement on the north side. Mr. Moravetz etated there was not. -*s nrpEazs ecx�[ssioN t�rirrc arxx�. 24 1979 PnG� .� Ms. 3chnabel etated that in terma of where the neighbor'a house sita in relation- Ship to the eurvey, he eits e little bit fon+ard of Mr. Kok's house. 5he ssked if that was a 35 £oot aetbsck? Mr. Moravetz etsted it was Yairly c2ose to a 35 foot setback. He etsted that the road curves aubstantially to the west. Ms. Gabel stated he was visual�y more forward becauae of the aay the road curves. Ma. Schnabel stated thst she didn't think the neighbor'8 houee was 35 �eet back. Mr. Moravetz stated thst the files did not have s survey so he was not sure of the exact aetback. He also stated that the middie oY the neighbor's hou5e wou].d pro- bab7,y line up with the front of Mr. Kok's house. He felt tY�at xas a pretty close approximetion. He stated that the addition would not come a�Y closer to the neighbor's house tHan the existing structure does. Mr. Barna stated that if you swung an arc off the southeast corner oP the house to the north you would probably find that their addition would go fsrther away from that arc on that existing corner. Ms. Sctmabel asked ii the deck on the survey was currently existing. Mr. Kok stated it wss. Mr, P7.eme1 stated tbat the whole thing could 6e shiPted to the south but with the deck there it would be a problem. Mr. Kok stated that the deck Uould be coming ofY. Mr. Pleinel asked if it wouldn't be possihle then to ahiYt the whole addition to tbe south. . Mr. Kok:stated that wovld put his kitchen xindow into his family room. He felt tktat appearance wise it wouldn't be too good. Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Kok if he planned to do the work himself. Mr. Kok stated that all the rough work would be done by a professional. Ms. Schnabel asked khat he planneci ior the exterior. Mr. Kok atated it would be just like trie ex3sting exterior. Ms. Schnabel reYerred to the Administrative StafP Report and stated that the front year setback was self-explanatory 3n terms of hardship and because the house was built the way it was. ' Me. Gabel stated that the house Tooks nice the way it sita. _ � , , _ . APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 24�.1979 PAGE 8 Ms. Gabel asked Mr. Kok if he had talked to the people who lived in the srhite stucco house to the north. . - Mr. Kok ststed that he was going to do the construction. Ms. Schnabel asked for comments from the audience regarding this request. There were no coroments. h�YPION by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TFiE PUBLIC IiEARING CLdSED AT 8;25 P.M. Mr. Plemel stated that be felt thia would be a nice addition to the residence and since it would be na closer to the other structures� he would have no problem with it. MO'SIOYd by Mr. Plemel� seconded by Ms. Gabe1, to approve the request Yor a variance pursusnt to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code to reduce the side ysrd seiback from the minimum requirement oP 10 feet to 5.9 feet to allow the construction of a 16 foot by 32 foot addition to the rear of a house st 6517 MeKin2ey Street N.E. An additional variance is needed because at the time of the construction of the original house the front yard setbsck was reduced to 33 feet instead of the required 35 feet. . UPON A VOICE V�� ALL VOTING AYE� CAAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TF� MOTION CARRIID UNANIMOi�LY. Ms. Schnabel informed Mr. Kok that he was free to app],y for a bui2ding permit. Mr. Kok thanked the C�nnissioners. 5. REQUEST FOR_A VARIANCE PURSUANT TO Cfit1FTER 205 OF f+�TION by Mr. Barna� seconded by Mr. Plemel� to open the public heariag TO UPON A VOTCE VOTE� ALL VOTII� AYE� CHAiRWOMAN SCHNP.BEL DECZARED THE PUBLIC AEARING OPEN AT 8:27 P.M. Ms. Schnabel read the Administrative Staff Report as Pollaws: APP�ALS COh44iS5I0N MN�E�EPING, APfiIL 2�: 1979 ___ PAGE 9 ADI4INTSTRATIVE STAFfi REPORT •- �.-._.._ 5207, 5211, 5215, 5241 Pierce Street N.E. A. 'PU131.IC PURP�S[ SERVEJ 6Y REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4, A, requiring a front yard setback of 35 feet. Public purpose served is to allova for off-street parking without encroaching on the public riyht of ti��ay. Also for aesthetic consideration to reduce the "buildir�g line of sight" encroachment in to the neighbor's front yard. (3, STAT[D HARDSHIP: Qad lots need fill and each 1ot must be compacted. 4ie are approximately 16 feet low f;hat must be filled and compacted. C. ADtAIf1ISTRATiVE STA�F REVIEW: 7hese lots are 7ocaied along th? east side of the street. The existing grade fal'is off rather steep away from the street. Tf the homes vrere built at the normal 35 foot seiback, the lots would require more fi11. If variances are granted ihen tt�e home on Lot 17, arhich has the normal 35' settiack, should have some ccns�deration by having the nouse on Lot 16 maintain a 3G �o�t set- back. This would resuit in a more gradual setback change and would lessen the encroach�nent into the "sight iine" from Lot 17 or 5251 Pierce 5treet N.E. Lot 13 was granted a variance down to 25 feet last October, however, a reapproval wouTd exten� the time period to one year from new approval. Mr. Mattson and his asspciate Mr. Hassler came forwerd and P�ir• Mattson stated that his problem was that it would take approxirmte�y another 8000 yards of fill to Pi1I'because it hss to be compacted. The fill that is there w311 have to be moved off because it is not buildable fill. He would like to level do�m the hill also. Ms. Schnabel asked if he wae talking about filling up to the road level? Mr. Mattson stated it would be below grade and they would all be walkouts. If he got the variance it would el3minate 10 feet of fil1. Also, if they coul,d move up 10 feet it would give him an extra 10 feet to alope the hill 3n the back so the people behind von't have water problems. Mr. Mattson stated that Mr. Hassler would be building his own house on the cul-de-asc. He noted that he had spent about $24,000 on the retaining wall aad they weren't done yet. They could be • putting in another retaining wall: They thovght they could bring the fill up from the lower land they Lad bought but it wasn�t enough. They vould still have to bitY 8000 yarde df fill. Ii' they could have the 10 foot variance� they wou3d have s better back yard. � � APPEAIS COMMISSIQN MEEPING, APRIL 24; 1979 PAGE 10 Ms. Gebel stated they would sti11 have to buy a lot of fill. Mr. Mettaon stated thst wus correct and elso atated that he vrould never have tackled thie.if he hsd reallaed ell the problems there woul.d be. Ma. Gabel asked what the road was that winded down behind it. Mr. Mettson stated that was a dirt road they used Yor hauling the fill snd it vouldn't be there after they were done. He stated that the closer he cou18 get to the street, the better he would be able to slope the baek and he would put some ties in there so it would baVe scv�e aesthetic value� not on�y for the neighbors sake but because Mr. Hassler wou2.d te lfving there an8 he wants it nice. Mr. Hassler stated they would bring in enough fill to have s nice drivewsy no matter xhat it eosts. He stated that if they could bring it Yorward 10 Peet there would be e little yard in back on the first three lots because it was not as steep as the other lot. Tt would slso give it a nicer slope and help the runofP. Ma. Gabel asked about the drainage. Mr. Hassler etated they were setting as3de 35 feet on another lot for a catch basin. Ms. Scl�nabel referxed to the Administrative Staff Report and noted that StafY had recommended that the house on Lot 16 maintain a 30 Yoot setback. • Mr. Mattson agreed and stated that it would look better. Ma. Schnebel stated that the house next to the lot was setbeck at 35.4 Yeet Yrom the street. If lot 16 was setback 30 feet it would give a more gradual setback change. Ma. Schnabel stated that on lot 13 they showed oxi the aurvey a setback of 13 Yeet on the south side. hfr. P1eme1 asked if they would need a ver3ance fqr that. Ms. Schnsbel stated that sbe was not sure. Ms. Gabel st�te@ he already had it and asked if they were chasiging the variance, Mr. Hassler stated they were not changing it. Mr. Mattson ststed they vere not asking Por side yard setbacks. Mr. Fieasler stated he had made a mietake and they wouldn�t need a side yard variance. Ms. Schnabel asked for ccm�ments irom the audience and expleined Mr. Ma'ttson's request. Mr. Iarry Case, 5251 Pierce St. N.E. came forward and stated that his house and the one aext door to him is setbsck 35 feet. So even 1f the lot next to him xss set- back 30 feet, it would still be e 5 foot difference: He understood the problem with filling in the back but etill Yelt thet the 5 feet Wss too grest e distance. APPEALS CaA4ffSSI0N MEkTI14G, APRIL 24� 1979 PAGE 11 Ho Pelt that the lote iYp to the cul-de-sac ahould conform to the 35 foot setback and thought the builder ehould design the houses to accomodate the slope. He had no problem with Lhe cul-de-sac� but felt tk�e 1in� oY aite should be maintained down the atreet. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Westeren� 5222 Pierce Street N.E. came forward and stated thst he agreed vrith Mr. Case. He elso atated that another neighbor who couldn't be here also objected. Mr. Hassler stated they would be willing to compromiae. He suggested that lot lf be aetback 33 Yeet� lot 15 be setback 30 feet a� lots lk and 13 be setback 25 feet. This would make for a more gradual change. Mr. Case axid Mr• Weateren agreed aYter some discussion and after looking at the topographical map. Mr. Plemel stated tt�at S.t seemed like a reasonable compramise. Me. Schnebel agreed and stated that they had a definite hardship. Mr. Case ar�d Na�. Weateren agreed. MOTION by Mr. Barna� seconded by Mr. Plemel to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VC/l'E� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PLiBLIC I3EARIIJG CLOSED AT 9:10 P. M, Ms. Schnabel stated that the coiupromise that was worked out and agreed to by the petitioner and the neighbors was that Lot 13 end Lot 14 would have a setback of 25 feet, Lot 15 would have a setback of 30 feet and Lot 16 a setback of 33 feet. Ms. Gabel stated that it seemed 13ke a resonable req,uest arri thanked the petitioners for being willing to compromise. Mr. Plemel stated that it seemed like a reasonable solution. A�1.'IQN by Ms. Gabel, secanded by Mr. Barna, to approve the request for a variance pursuant to Chapter 205 of the FriHley City Code� to allaw the required 35 foot front setback to be reduced to 25 feet on four �uilding sites to allow construction of sfngle family dwellings at 5207, 5211� 5215, and 5241 Pierce Street N.E. with the stipulatioa that the setbacks be as follows: Lot lf> will have a 33 foot setback� Lot 15 will have a 30 foot setback and Lots 1_ and 13 will have a 25 foot setback. UPON A VOSCE VdPE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCFiNABEL DECLARED TI� NOTION CARRIID UNAP1IMOiS.SLY. Ms. Schnahel informed Mr. Mattson thst since an egreement bed been xeached� the variance request had been approved and he was free to proceed. Mr. Msttson thanked.the Cp�missioners. � �, � APPEAL3 CO1�IIdISSION MEETING, APRIL 24, 1979 PAGE 12 � MOTION by Ms. Gabel� seconded by Mr. Barna� to open the public hearing. UPON A VOTCE VOTE� ALL VOTII� AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCIINABEL DECLARID TFIL PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:20 P.M. Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Fehn to come forward and read the Adminietrat3ve StaYf Report as Pollows; . ADt�9It�ISTRATTVE S7AfF REPOR7 1601 Gardena Avenue N.E. � A. PU[3LIC PURPOSE SEi<V�D E3Y R�(E UIREtrENT: Section 205.053, 4, A, requiring a front yard setback of 35 feet. Public �urpose served is to allou for off-street parking without encreach�ng on the public right of t•1ay, kiso for aestliei;ic cons�iderat9on to reduce the "building line of sight" encroach,nen� into the neighbor's front yard. [3. STFlTEG I�ARDSHIp: None stated, however, thF house already exists and the approval of t.he variance request would legalize the location of the existing house. C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVTEW: This house is 7ocated on a lot large enough for two homes, however„ when the front lot is approv��d f`or a building site, it changes the front yard on the exist�ng house ft^cm Gardena to Denjamin. 'fherefore, the required . set6ack requiremeni from Benj�imin changes frer� i7.5 feet to 35 feet. Tf the Coo;mission approves this request, ;ve w�uld recommend two stipulaticns: 1. Change the address on f;he existing house from iGOT Gardena to 5921 Ben�amin SLreet Pd.E, 2. Change tiie existing sewar and �ti�ater service to the existing house frcm� Gardena to Benjamin. API'EAI,S CONA7iSSI0N MF�'PINCy APRIL 2k, 1979 ___ - PACE 13 Ms, 8chnabel that this particular lot received an approval for a lot aplit Yrom the Planning Commission. At the time of the approval St wae noted thet the exisbfng sewer and water should be changed from Gardena Street to Benjamin Street to service the existing house. Also, the part that vras split off which is called Parcel A which is the Parcel which boArders Eenjamin and Gardena, would receive it*s water and sewer fra¢a Gardena Street, and Percel B, the existing house� would receive it�s sewer and water from Benjamin Street. i4r. Plemel noted that wss auite e�cpensive to do� but the wa}r it is right now the new house wauld sit on the sewer line. Mr. Fehn stated that he was not awsre that the Planning Commission had recoumiended a ttew sewer hook-up. He stated that rie knew where the sewer line was on the 1ot and if a neW house was built� it vould not be anywhere near tbe sewer line. Ms. Schnabel stated there was a serrer clesn-out in the center of the lot. Mr. Plemel asked how he would huild a residence there and escape the sewer and vater lines. Mr. Barna stated the lines would have to be abandoned at save point in order to build. Ms. 9chnabel stated t2hat the Planning Cormnission did not include that in it's motion but it was talked about. It was mentioned in the mi.nutes that when the taps are done for Parce2 A� they could also be done for the existing house. She read Yrcan the Planning Co�mission minutes to explain what Planning had discussed. Ms. Cabel asked hoW he would swin� tBe driveway to meet:.the two garages? Mr. Fehn drew a picture of what he intends to do. He explained that his problem was thet be couldn�t use the loxer half o£ his house. On one eide was a supporting wall and on the other side was the fireplace atructure ahich goes Yroffi the basement all the way through the house. On another side was a boiler room. Ta get down to the area they have to go throu�h the garage, through the laundry room to enter the recreation area. There is also an outside door. There are no stairs from the in- side of the house to get down there. Also, during heavy rains and during the melt there is a water proUlem throughout the lower level. So he cann't use it sll winter. What he plans to do is build a double garage and make the house into a split entry because the back of the basement is already half into the ground. He would fill in the front area to bring it back to it's original level. The garage would be on the north side pf the house. He noted that the £ront oY t}ae property was deteriorating and didn't want to spend money fixing it without making the rest of the chan8es. Ms. Schnabel asked who would do the work. Mr. Fet�n stated he would hire a contractor. Ms, Gabel stated that after he filled it up� it would create a drainage problem on Parcel A. Mr. Fehn stated there wae a natural drainage thet rune through the property. AYPEALS COMMISSION MEETINC, AP'RII. 24� 1979 PAGE 14 Mff. Gabel stated that the front ysrd wae very big and beautiful and couldn't understand wk�y he didn't want to retain it. Mr. Fehn stated that to him it was not beautiYul, it has 300 feet of drivewey that hae ta be sho�eled. She understood that but wondered vi�y he wanted another house in his front yard. Mr. Fehn stated that he didn't use the front yard that much anyKay and it attracts a lot oP kids which is a problem. Also� it's a 2ot of up keepr Ms. schnabel askeii iY the atructure on the east side oY the lot be7.onged to Mr. Fehn. Mr. Fehn stated that he had a metal storage shed back there, but the garage there belonged to his neighbor. Ms. Schnabel asked what be would do with that area. Mr. Fehn stated it was gravel now and he was planning to put about 6 inches of black dirt there. That area is a natural drainage area between his lot and the lot to the esst oi him. The lot to the east belongs to Mr. Costello. That will remain a drainage area but he would put soil on it so he can seed it or sod it. The dfiiveway would then be non-ex3stent. Ms. Gabel sbated that she questioned the hartlship stated in the Administrstive Staff Report. Current]y this is all legal and only becomes illegal with the lot split. She wasn't sure what the t�ardship and ff"there is one it would be se1Y- iraposed. Mr. Plemel asked if Council ha@ approved the lot split. Mr. Barna stated that Council had tabled it. Mr, Plemel stated that the structure was there and 3f the lot eplit is approved, the variance may as well be grented to make it compliant. Ms. Gsbel asked wha�E the hardship would be then. Ms. Schnabel stated that the k�ardship would be that in order to maintain the existing 35 goot setback, he would have to tear down part oY the existing house if the lot split is approved. Mr. Barna noted that ke eould achieve the changes to hia house that he wants to without splitting the lot. The lot split ia not a necessity which would mean that the variance would not be s necessity. Ae can make the changes to the house witkout a variance. Ma. Schnabel stated that one of the reesons for the 35 foot setback is to provide Por off street park3ng. She stated that if his drawing was correct� he would be putting his gerage back Yurther trian 35 feet. Mr. Fehn stated it would be closer to 45 or 50 feet. "�, ._ . . z �.±:.�.._- _ l�fr, Plemel asked 1€ he was going to put e detached garage there? Mr. Fahn stated that tras correct. Nh�. Plemel atated they should make that a stipulation to forestall the problem with the parking, Me. Schnabel stated that her point was that ia terms of their requirement to keep the parking off the street could be accomplished with tha'� setback. The other concern wovld be the building line of site and the houae to the north which is be- hind the existixig house� has a�+C1 foot setback. So there would be a difference there. Mr. Plemel state3 thst the house was already thexe. Ms. Gabel stated that to get right down to it� �ranting the lot split causes the variance. If the lot split is granted� they almost have to grant tY,e variance. In lookin� down the road� they would also need variances for the house tbai: wou18 be built on Parcel A. Mr. Barna stated that was one oP the things khat was mentioned at the Council meeting. Granting the 1ot split creates the variance. On a lot split, the burden oY proof falls on the City and on a variance, the burden of proof Palls on the petitioner. That's why they put the variance beiore the lot split. They also wanted adclitional public input from the neighbors. They had wondered ho*�r manY neighbors had been notiYied. Ms. Schnabel stated that question had come up at the Planning Corr�ission meeting. They had asked if the petitioner had talked to his neighbors and he stated that he hadzi't. When they asked if there had been a�y response frcm the neighbors, they were told that because it was a lot split, there Was no need to notiYy the neighbors. That's the way the orciinanee reads. Ms. Schnabel stated that they Pelt that was vmong and the neighbors should have an opportunity to co�ent. So this public hearing tonight would be helping that situation. Mr. Plamel atated that he thought the lot split had been accomplished and i£ it wasn't� they didn't neecl a varianee. Mr. Barna stated they had tabled it so Appeals could hold a public hearing for the variance. Mr, William Costello, 1623 Gardena Avenue, came forwarci and stated thst he had no objection to the variance or the lot split. Ais house is directly east of 2+�. Fehn's house. Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Costello and the neighbor who ovned the house located west of Mr. Fehn's house across Benjamin Street, to caae iorward and e�cplained to them what Mr. Fehn wanted to do. She explained that Mr. Feha would like to split hia lot 1n half. `Phe problem is that the City requires a 3$ �'oot front yard setback. Because of tbe way he is splitting the lot� he wouid have to call the side that faces Ben,jamin 5treet his front yard. `Phe narrrnr per't of the lot is slways the front of the lot. instead of being 35 feet back from Benjam&n the bouse ie 24.10 feet back. If a new house was put on Parcel A� Benjamin Street would also boax'der the front of that lot. So the new structure vould also have to meet the 35 faat ;� �� : APPEALS COI�A�SSION MEETING, APRIL 24, 1979 __ PAGE 16 setback from Benjamin Street. There would also have to be a•17 Poot setback from�i Gardena. Thie is not to say that the front door would have to be on 8enjamin Street. It could be on Gazdena. But for the purposes of the City� the narrrnr part of the lot is considered the front of the lot. So they waul.d be 35 feet baek Prom Benjamin and a minimum of 17 feet back frami Gardena. No•matter what kind of house they put there, it would be considerably in front of Mr. Costello's houae. Mr. Costello was cancerned about the placement of the garage for the new structure and asked iP they could put in a stipulation regarding that. Mr. Barna stated that they couldn't do that because they were not asking to build on that lot. Ms, Schnabel stated that legally, she did:not think they could do that. Ms. Gabel stated that some of the houses around there are 80 or 90 feet back from Gardena and if she remembered correctly Yrom the laet variance� some oY the houses sround there are jogged. So it could wind up being more than 1$ feet bec$use they would take the sverage. Ms. Schnabel stated that this w&s a corner lot snd she wasn't eure they would go across the street Yor that. Ms. Gabel state@ they would still take the average. Ms. Schnabel read Prom the ordinance regexding averaging setbacks. "In a block where the average of the front yard depths of existing buildings within a distance of 100 feet on both sides of a buiZding to be erected is more than the minimum setback required, then the setbacks of the said building could be 6£eet more or less than this mean depth but in no case shall be lesa than the required setback for the dtstance". So if they went 100 Yeet on each side, they would have to go across the stree-t and 100 feet down eaeh waY. But it could be 6 feet o£ the mean depth of these two. Mr. Barna stated tk�st would mean they couldn�t build on that lot. They could only have about a 5£oot deep house. Ms. Gabel stated that then whoever wanted to build on it would need a vaTisnce. Mr. Barna ststed that would put a handle on it. The neighbor who lived to the west across the street asked if they had a�y stipulatione Yor corner lots xegarding which way the house has to face. Ms. Schnabel statefl that they did not. The only tbing t}ae City does is Yor the ' purposes of declaring setbacks� they declare the narrowest part of the lot to be the front oR the lot. Mr. Plemel stated that iY it Yaced Gardena and kept the 35 foot setback, they would need a vsriance for the xear yard. Ms. Gabel stated that there was no way they could build on that lot without a variance. Ms. Schnabel asked the neighbora preeent if they had ar�y objection to the setback 2dr, Fehxi was requesting. y... . Mr. Plemel stated they shou].d keep in mind that the building ie already thexe. Mr. Barna etated that all they were rea2ly doing wea changing the terminology. The neighbors etated they would t�ave no objection to this variance� but would object to the proposea house on Parcel A. Ms. Schnabel etated that if theq want to object to that ihey should attend the Council meeting. The Board of Appeals has no control over the lot split, so thst if they want to object, they should go to the Council meeting. She suggested they call the City i3a11 and £ind out when it will sppear on the Council's agends. The neighbors reiterated that they had no objection to the variance. MOTION by Ms. Gabe2} seconded by Mr. Plemel} to close the public hearing. UPON q VOICE V01'E� ALL VQTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCI�iABEL DEGLARED TRE PUHLIC I�ARING CIASED AT 10:10 P.M. Ns. ScYmabel stated that ahe thought it could be on the Council's agenda for the meeting of Msy 7• Ms. Schnabel stated that they should highlight in the minutes that the StafY had recommended two stipulation one of which regards the sec�er'cleen totit iPthel should look at the sewer clean-out problem and what would happ lot split is approved and also how the owner of Parcel B would have access to that sewer clean-out. Mr. Plemel stated that if Mr. Fehn sold Parcel A, he would have to retain an ease- ment if he intends to keep the water and sewer there. Ae felt it would be to Mr. Febn's advantage to change the water and se�rer lines to Benjamin. He noted that if repairs were needed, it would be quite expensive to make the repairs on someone elae's property. Mr. Fehn agreed. Mr. Moravetz ststed that it would not be a very attractive lot to sell iP the lines were retained there. Mr. Moravetz also stated that in addition to the cost of constructin� a new line off oY Benjamin, there could be some additional assessments. Ae informed Mr. Fehn that he could call someone in the S�ecial Assessmex� s Depsrtment for more infoxmat3on on that. Ms. Gahel asked iP she understood correctly that the neighbors were not concerned about this variance request but were coneerned about the lot split7 Ms. Schnsbel stated thst was correct. APPEALS CO[�1MISSION MEETING, APRZL 24� 1979 PAGE �g MOTIflN by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barna� that if the lot split ia spproved they recom¢nend approval o£ the request for variance pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Caie� to reduce the front ysrd setback from �the required 35 Peet to.24.10 feet because a request for a Iot split has made the side yard into the front yart; xhich wi21 be addressed on Benjamin Street N.E., presently addressed as 1601 Gardena Ave. N.E.� Fridley� Mn., with the following stipulationa: l. Change the address on the existing house from 1601 Gardens to 5921 Benjamin Street N.E, and 2. Change the existing sewer and water service to the existing house from Gardena to Benjamin. I t7P01V A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNpBEL DECLARED THE MOTTON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. " Ms. Schnabei, atated this wou].d go to Council on May 7. Mr. Moravetz siaggested that Mr. Fehn call and make sure that it is on the agenda for Mt�y 7. Ms. Schnsbel. deci.ared a recess at 10:20 P.M. and reconvened the meeting Qt 10:35 P.tft, Ms. Schnabel stated that during the recess a question t2ad come up as to what Council's aetion wae on the 1ot split request made by Mr. Fehn. Mr. Bartta stated that he was at the meeting and the lot split request was tabled until the first meeting in Mqy. 7. ELECTION OF CHAIRPF�SON AND VICE CHAIRPIItSON TO SERVE FROM $�1�79 to 5�7.�0; MO'i'ION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr, Barna� that Ms. 3chnabel continue as Chair- person and Ms. Gebel continue as Vice Chairperson for the period of 5�1�79 to 5/i/eo. UPON A VOICE VOTE�.ALI, VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED Ms. Schnabel and Ms. Gsbe1 thanked the Commissioners £or their cqn£idence. 8. CYPi�R BUSINESS: Ms, Schnabel stated that on Saturday the Metra Council has a program open to the public. The program costs $2.00 per person. The topic is the condition of the oZder part oP the region and what do the vital eigns show. �t sterts at 9:30 snd goes unt11 4:30 at the Landmark Center in St. Paul. Ms. Schnabel stated that she felt it wou7.d be very pertittent to Fridley. Mr. Plemel stated that the City should pay the expenses for it. Expenses should include parking, mileage and 2unch. Mr. Boardman stated they should keep their recelpts for sll their costs and the Ciiy would reimburse them. . M(YPION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barne, that anyone attending the meeting given by Metro Council be reimbursed by the City for ell expenses including ihe entzy fee� parking, milesge� and lunch. . UPOI3 A VOICE VdI'E� AiL VOTING AYE, CFiAIRWOMAAT SCHNABEL 7�E�LA�D T� M�T?ON CARRIID UNANIMOUSLY. MQTION hy Mr. Barna� seconded by Ms. Gabe1, to adjourn the April 24� 1979, �eting of the Appesls Coum�ission. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTiNG AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TAE MEE7'ING ADJOURNED nm ia:45 P.r�. Respactfully submitted: ��i :f�'�//!/ �-<- Katk�y SYteltbn, Recording Secretsry , � � �. _.. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN7 COh�1ISSi�N SPECIAL MEETIN& ` APRIL 24,1979 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ken Yos, Connie Modig, A1 Gabei, Sharon Gustafson Leroy Oquist (arrived late) MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT; Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Ray Leek, Associate Planner At the 6eginning of the meeting, the Comnission decided to to review the policy sections of each elemeni of the Comprehensive Development Plan in order. The Commission recommended the foliowing ch�nges and posed certain questions in their discussion. LAND USE AND ZONING PATTERNS 1. V120-1: Ho� will the City provide alternative housing? (p. 17} Z Proposed tand Use Map: Rice Creek should also be designated as a Protection Open-Space area on the map ENVTRONMENTAL RESOURCfS 1, P.33: Rewrite the explanatory paragraph following po7icy S311-1 CRI7ICAL AREAS 1. The Great River Road should be designated on the Parks and Open Space System Map. ' HUUSING 1. The Commissian questioned whether or not Policy H120-2 opened the door for 40' loCs in the City. 2. The Commission questioned how Policy H130-4 was to be implemented. Mr. Boardman responded that the program would be administered jointly by the City and Anoka County Library and that it would be housed in the library. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE 1. Ms. Gustafson asked if the maintenance of tocke Park would be turned over .. , _ _ . ._ . � � � "��.� to Anoka County. Mr. Boardman responded that fie hoped that in tMe future Locke Park would be classified by the County as a part of the regionai system o€ parks. He said that if it was, then the maintenance of Locke Park couid be turned over to the County. 2. Mr. Oquist asked if the draft of the Parks and Open Space Plan found in this document superseded the previous draft that they had worked on. Mr. Boardman resQonded that it did. TRANSP____ ORTA7ION 1, The Comnission suggested that the City shouid conduct an intersection study to eva7uate tra€fic prob7ems in Fridley. Mr. oquist commented that the intersection of Oid Central Avenue and T.H. 55 was a part- icular Qroblem area due to the iarge flow ofi traffic down Old Central. 2. Ms. 6usta#son conmented that the Park and Ride site at St. Phillips Ci�urch was not shown on the Public Transit Map and should be added. The meeting was adjourned at 1D:lb. ��a PARKS & RECRLATION COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 23, 1979 MEMBERS PRESENT: Robin Suhrbier, Jan Seeger, Betty Mech, Barbara Hughes, Dave Kondrick MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PHESENf: Charles Boudreau, Parks & Recreation Director Jack Kirk, Recreation Supervisor Connie McMillion, Program Supervisor Siah St. C1air, City Naturalist 3errold Boardman, City Planner Larry Bendel, President, FYSA Soccer Lenny IIeMann, Lasco Concessions, 11740 Jefferson St. N.E Ct1LL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Suhrbier called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. L�LECTION OF OFFICEP,S TO S�RVE FROM M�Y 1, 1979, TO MAY 1, 1980: Ms. Suhrbier suggested that since she had resigned from the Commission and Chere would be another new member, the election of officers be post- poned until the May meeting. MOTION by Dave Kondrick, seconded by Betty Mech, to postpone the election of officers until the May meeting and that Jan Seeger ace as temporary chairperson in the interim period. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, , Vice-Chairperson Suhrbier declared the motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MARCH 14 1979 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Barbara Hughes, seconded by Dave Kondrick, to approve the , March 14, 1979, Parks & Ttecreation Commission minutes as writ�en. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Temporary Chairperson Jan Seeger declared the motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The following iCems were added to the agenda: Comprehens3ve Development P1an - Item H under New Susiness Larry Bendel - FYSA Soccer - Item I under New Business PARKS & RECItL�ATION COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 23 1979 - PAGE 2 MOTION by $arbara Hughes, seconded by Robin Suhrbier, to approve the agenda as amended, Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Temporary Chair- person Seeger declared the motion carried unanimously. I. DIRECTOR'S RBPORT: A. Introduction of Staff Mr. Kirk introduced Siah St. C1air and Connie McMillion and himself to the Commission members. B. Slide Presentation Mr. St. Clair showed the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Depart- ment slide pzesentation for the new commission members. C. Planned Projects for 1979 Mr. Boudreau stated he had invited the staff to share with the commission some of the projects planned for the rest of I979. He asked Mr. St. Clair to talk about some of ttie things planned for the summer and for the fall in the Naturalisr Division. Mr. St. C1air stated that he had given each of the commission members a brochure which outlined the things that were going on now. He stated the A-trume at the Innsbruck Nature Center had been remodeled. The main office had been moved upstairs so that the whole main floor was open for Exhibits. Lighting had been put in for night progra�ing. The A-frame was going to be open seven days a week during the spring season. This was experimental to see what kind of response they received. They were planning to have it open six days a week during the summer. If thexe was a lot of interest for the Sunday hours, they could continue that into the summer. Mr. St. Ciair stated that during the summer they would be having a day nature camp program at Innsbruck, midnight nature walks a[ Springbrook and Znnsbruck, and activities with the playgrounds. At the end of the summer, they would be writing up a curriculum for use in the fall to send out to a11 teachers in the area so that the teachers would know what programs were available and for what ages. This would include all school districts involved with Fridley. Mr. St, Claix stated he also did work with Boy Scouts, Ae stated the big thing would be working at the Springbrook Nature Center in setting up Lhe future of Springbrook which would involve a lot of intensive planning. Mr. Kirk stated he would like to go througfi some of the new items in Yhe recreation area. At the next meeting, they should have the summer brochure, and he would go through it at that time. . -� PARILS & R�CREATION COMMiSSION MtiETT.NG AYRIL 23 1979 - PAGE 3 Mr. Kirk stated that on Wednesday, April 25_, from 5;00-6:30 p.m, at Commons Park, the Parks & Recreation Department was cooperating with the Minnesota Twins Baseball Association in putting on a baseball clinic for both boys and girls, ages 8-18. This was a free clinic. Mr. Kirk stated that the Parks & Recreat3on Department was in a cooperative venture with Unity Hospital's "Wellness Program". As part of this, the Parks & Recreation Department was operating a"Fun and Fitness Running Program" every Saturday morning at L0:00 a.m. at Locke Park. Each person participating will receive a certificate of participation. Unity Hospital will be selling T-shirts to promote the program. From this, plans were to develop some sort of running or jogging club from the people who participate. Mr. Kirk sCated the Parks & Recreation Department was workiag with the local Burger King in sponsoring a Pitch, Hit and Run competition for boys and girls, ages 9-12. This was a national competition set up with Burger King and the National RecreaCion and Park Association.. Loca1 parks and recreation departments handled the compeCition for their cities. The competition for Fridley wi11 be held May 19. Mr. Kirk stated they had improved Che garden p1oCs and would have the plots again this year�. Mr. Kirk stated the picnic kits had been sCarted last year or two years ago, and this year they now had six ofEicial picnic kit boxes (containing volleyball, bocce ball, frisbees, football, horseshoes, badminton, croquet' etc.), along with a picnic booklet'for families or groups to check out for $10/weekend. Mr. Kirl� also stated that this year there were 98 teams signed up Co play adult softball. Mr. Boudreau stated he would not discuss the park projecCS at Chis time as Che Conunission would be reviewing the capital outlay items in the park and some of the park projects would be discussed at that time. D. Ethnic Festival Day ' Mr. Boudreau stated that Che Ethnic Festival Day was presented in cooperation with Community Education, Fine Arts Committee, and the Parks, R�creation, and Natural Resources Department. There were over 1,000 people in attendance. It caas nicely done and everyone was looking forward to the second aimual ethnic festival day next year. E. Playground LocaCions - 1979 Mr. Boudreau stated that Ms. McMillion would be the playground director and would cover the playground locations.for this year. PARKS & RECREATIOIQ COMMTSSION ME�TING APRIL 23 1979 - PAGE 4 Ms. McMillion stated that most of the playground locations were the same as last year--Coonnons, Hayes, Rice Creek, Sylvan, St'evenson, T.ogan, North Park, Madsen and Flanery. At this time, they were talking about splitting Craig and Ruth Circle and having Craig on Monday and Thursday and Ruth Circle on Tuesday and Friday because of the low registration last year. Gardens was still itt the talking stages as there were some problems. Ms. McMillion stated that they were expanding the PITS (Playgrounds In The Streets) program this year to five locations; Ruth Circle, Rice Creek Townhouses, Summit Square, Windemere, and Oak Hill. PITS was a mobile recreation unit with two staff inembers, which goes out to locations that do not have playgrounds available iaithin a close proximity. They had also expanded the PITS program to the full five days as opposed to the Mon., Tues., Thurs., and Fri. with the Wednesday as excursion day. Wednesday was excursion day for the regular playground program. F. "Donation - H. B. Fuller Co. Mr. Boudreau stated that the H. B. Euller Company had agafn donated $2,000 to the City of Fridley for the planting of trees in Locke Park. The Company employees would be planting the trees in Locke Park on Friday, April 25. G. Shade Tree Pro�ram Mr. Boudreau stated that the information on the Shade Tree Disease Control Program was basicaliy the same as last year. The city was required by 1a�i to have a Shade Tree Disease Control Program, To date, Ehey did not know what the subsidy, if any, would be from the State, It was quite an expen- sive program tor the city to be involved in. H. Weed Program - 1979 Mr. Boudreau stated the Parks & Recreation Aepartment was also in charge of the weed program. Last year they gave out 101 notices on ioeeds. Basically, that came from comp2aints, but they did try to spot check every year for weeds over 10 inches high. The property owner was given a notice and encouraged to cut the weeds. If the weeds were not cut ' within 10 days, the city had the legal right to cut the weeds and bi21 the property owner. I, Metropolitan Council Grant -$365 000 Mr. Boadreau stated that Che Metropolitan Council had recently granted the City of Fridley $365,000 for improvements at the Springbrook Nature Center. Metropolitan Counci7. should have a contract to the city by the end of May, This was a big step forward. The $3G5,000 grant was without any match monies from the City of Fridley. PARKS & RECR�ATTON COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 23 1979 - PAGE 5 J. Harris Park Meeting Mr. Boudreau stated L-hat the Rarris Park people had a meeting ar the request of the residents and Councilman Schneider. About 20 people attended the meeting. They Calked about what to do with the Harris Lalce pond. He thought the concensus of the meeting was that they would like landscaping on both ends o� the small area to provide buffers for the homes, some playground equipment, open area down the middle for frisbee, touch football, etc., did not want a shelter building, would like the ice kepCopen on the lake during the winter months, would like to have the easement off of Dana Court into the paxk somehow marked for access, and would like picnic tables and some burners. Mr. Boudreau stated that most of these things could be accomplished this year as the City Council had given $3,000 to try to correct some of the damage done to the park last fall. Ms. Suhrbier suggested that a meeting be held with the Innsbruck North people concerning park facilities. The people in that area were very upset and frustrated as there were no park facilities in their area. Mr. Boudreau stated there was not anything staff could do. He suggested Ms. Suhrbier contact Councilman Schneider to set up this meeting as Councilman Schneider was the one who set up the meeting for the Harris Lake people. He stated he would be happy to attend any meeting that was set up. xi, r�w suszr�ss: A. Request by Commissioner Seeger Ms. Seeger stated she would like to attend the "Marketing and Earth Sheltered Housing Seminar" on Apri1 29-30 aC the Holiday Inn Downtown. She asked if any of the commission members would like to attend. MOTION b Barbaza Hughes, seconded by Dave Kondrick, to approve the funding for Jan Seeger and Barbara Hughes and one staff inember to attend the "Marketin� and EarCh Sheltered Housin� Seminar" on April 29-3o. a voice vote, a11 voting a otion carried unanimouslv. B. Proclamation - Recreation & Park Month Mr. Boudreau stated he would like Che Commission's concurrence to forward a proclamation to the City Council to declare 3une 1979 as Recreation & Parks Month. - Recreation 6 Parks Month. June 1979" be to City Council. Upon a voice vote, all voting Seeger declared the motion carried unanimously. on PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSTON MEETING APRTL 23 1979 - PAGE 6 C. Request bv Mr. Lenny DeMami - Concessions Mr. Boudreau staCed that the Commissioners had received a copy of a letter from Mr. ➢eMann, who would like the Commission to consider his leasing the concession buiiding at Moore Lake. Mr. Soudreau stated that the city had not run a concession there last year for two teasons; (1) the County Health Department had checked the building and a lot of money would have to be put into tixe building to bring it up to health codes; (2) they Eelt they were running a program on�Moore Lake Beach and were not in the concession business. They had also lost money on it in the past. Mr. DeMann stated that, at no expense to the ParIcs & Recreation Department, he would like to bring the concession building up to health standards. With that, he would need more than a one-year lease on the building. If a lease was drawn up, a cerCain percentage of the gross profit would be given back to the Parks & Recreatiou Department. He stated he did have two mobile units he runs in Anoka County and he had another building at a baseball park in Elk River so this type of operation was not strange to him. He had talked to the Health Department about the building at Moore Lake, and they had explained to him ��hat repairs were needed. Mr. Boudreau stated this had not been explored in depth because Mr. DeMann's request was the first request of thi.s type. Before they could come to any conclusions, they would have to come to terms �aith the eiectricity, water, liability insurance, additional trash clean-up, and those types of things. Ms, Seeger asked if the Co�ission should be considering any other use for the Moore Lake building? Mr. $oudreau stated there plans were to use the building for a first-aid building. Ms. Seeger stated she liked the idea o£ having a first-aid building on l-he beach. Also, the city was always needing areas for storage. Mr. DeMann stated that maybe the Commission would consider the possibility oE his Uringing in one of his mobile units if they did decide to use the building for something else, such as first aid, • Ms. Hughes stated she did not think there was a need for a concession stand on the beach, but it was a nice amenity, a convenience, and might we11 be useful. She was more inclined to want to hide the concessfon operatioil in a building rather than on the parking lot, just for general looks, but did not have strong feelings either way. She thought that Uy not having refreshments, it might become more of a neighborhood park, rather than a regional draw where people came and stayed a11 day, PARKS & RECRLATION COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 23 1979 PAGE 7 Mr. Kondrick stared he liked the idea of having a mobile unit and save the building for housing equipment, etc. What concerned him mosC was the extra trash. Ms. Hughes asked Mr. DeMann if he would consider patrolling the area and picking up the trash. Mr. DeMann stated he would consider doing that. Ms. Hughes stated that she would like the Commission to look into this situation much £urther. Mr. Boudreau stated he would check the city ordinances, talk to Mr. Virgil Herrick concerning the legal problems, and explore this request with other staff inembezs, He would then report back to the Commission at their next meeting. The Commission thanked Mr. DeMann for coming. D. Adopt "Fair Share" Concept Mr. Boudreau stated that to try to be in keeping wiCh what other municipalities were doing, he would like to reco�end that a"Fair Share Concept" be adopted. His recommendation for implementing the program was as follows: 1. A11 non-residents sha11 be placed on a waiting list for an activity during the first week of registration. At the start of the second week of registration, the non- residenCS on the waiting Iist shall be entered on to the regular class list grovided there are openings. 2. All non-residents sha11 pay a"fair share" fee which will he an addiCional 25°/, on top of the regular Fridley resident fee. Barbara Council the adoption of the "Fair Share Concept" outlined abov a voice vote, a11 voting aye, Temporary Chairperson Seeger dec motion carried unanimously. E. Approval - Softball Tournaments to Ci Mr, Boudreau stated that for the new members' informat-ion, on softball' tournaments there was a policy approved by City Council that the Commission was allowed to give approval to four softball tournaments per year, Those four had already been esCablished--Jaycees, Hockey Booster Club, Fridiey Covenant Church and the Fridley Fire Department. This year the Fire Department would not have a tournament so this le£t three. PARKS & RECREAT'ION COMMISSION MINUT&S APRIL 23 1979 - PAGE 8 Mr. Boudreau stated l-he Commission had received copies of the requests from Pridley Covenant Church and the Hockey Booster Club. He stated.they had no problems with either request as both groups cleaned up and did a top-notch job of running the tournaments. econded bv Barbara Hu�hes, to recocrunend the approval of the Fridley C6venant tournament request for July 21 and Hockev Booster Club tournament request for June 15-17. Uoon a voice F, Recognition of Past Commission Mem6ers Mr. Boudreau stated that the Commission might want to recognize the out- going coIISnissionexs. He stated that Mr. Bob Peterson and Mr. Leonard Moore were recognized at a City Council meeting with certificates of appreciation. He stated that the Parks & Recreation Department, in house, has awards that read, "Certificate oE Recognition in the Cause of Municipal Recreation". He would be happy to give these awards if the Commission so wished. The Commission agreed they would like these certificates sent to Bob Peterson, Leonard Moore, and Robin Suhrbier. Ms. Hughes requested that Ms. Seeger s'ign the certificates as temporary chairperson and that Ms. Seeger also write a letter of appreciation to accompany each certificate. G. Report by Mrs. B1iss Mr. Boudreau stated that, again for the new co�nissioaers' information, the-city had a policy whereby anyone whose home was located next to a park cou�d request from the City of Frzdley a four-toot cyclone fence to block traffic from the park with.a 50/50 cost split. Mrs. Bliss currently had a redwood fence on her property which children were climbipg over; therefore, she was requesting a cyclone fence in addifion to the redwood fence. Mr. Boudreau stated he would attempt to talk to Mrs. Bliss and see if there were any alternatives, such as plantings, etc. At this time, he was just making the Commission aware of this request. MOTION by Barbara Hughes, seconded by Dave Kondrick, to receive into t record a letter dated Anri1 13. 1979. from Mrs. Warren Bliss. II�on a voice voce, aii vocing aye, lempozary cna�.rperson seeger aeciarea cae motion carried unanimous2y. H. Comprehensive Development Plan Ms. Hughes asked Mr. Boardman where the Comprehensive Development Plan revisions were that three of the Commission members had put together at a special meeting. The whole canmission needed to look at it. Mr. Boardman stated it was before the Planning Commission. He apologized as he had not Ueen aware that the Commissibn had not received it. He state he would have it sent back to the Commission. PARILS & RECREATION COMMISSION ME�TII3G APRIL 23 1979 - PAGE 4 Ms. Hughes stated she Lelt the Commis�ion should have a special meeting L-o discuss t-hose revisions. The Commission set up a special meeting on Monday, May 7, 1979, at 7:30 p.m, I. Larry Bendel - FYSA Soccer Mr. Bendel stated his purpose for being at the meeting was to request that the Parks & RecreaYion Department pick up a portion of the refereeing fees as was done last year. He passed ouC to the crn�ission members a list of the operating rules for the soccer program. Mr. Bendel stated they had expanded the program this year.in that in the "Under 12" and "Under 14" age brackets, they were going to have what they called a'!Major League Soccer Team". Try-outs would be held on Saturday, April 26, and the 18 best players will form teams in those age brackets and play 16 scheduled games--8 home and 8 away. The other:kids wi11 play on a recreational soccer team with 4 games home and 4 games away. Ages 12-19 are the traveling teams, ages 10-under was the house league with 5 teams this year. They will play against each other in Fridley. There was an instructional league with 42 children signed up this year, ages 5-7. Total players signed up for this year are 271. Mr. Bendel stated that the total soccer budget was around $4,000. Registration hrought in about $2,000 and the deficit was picked up by the FYSA. Last year the Parks & Recreation Commission had passed a motion to reimburse tha FYSA $700 for referee fees and some basic equipment. This year they were asking the Coumiission to approve $400 as the Parks & Recreation Department's share of the referees' fees. Mr. Boudreau stated he had talked in depth wieh Mr. Bendel abouC this and the city's share on this was not out of line with what the city did for the other sports in the FYSA. The Commission members must also remember that the FYSA had given the city a flat donation of $2,500 for capital improvements on the areas they utilize. Mr. Bendel was also looking at buying each coach a set of nets because of vandalism and . scheduling problems. ,ti'40U to the FYSA - Soccer Program as the City's fair share of the refereeing fees, Upon a voice vote all voting a e Temporary Chairperson Seeger declared the motion carried unanimously. III, OLD BUSINESS; A. Update Neighborhood Park Plans Mr. Boardman stated that the Commission was aware that the Planning Department had been working on a Comprehensive Development Plan and, as part of that plan, they were also doing neighborhood park redesigns. � PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 23 1979 - PAGE 10 Mr. Boardman stated that in t-he Benjamin-Briardale area, they had a tract of land with a development. They did a design on that neighborhood park in order to start the neighUorhood concept- going. They used this area as a demonstration neighborhood on design where they notified people in the area by mail, held three cneetings in the neighborhood as far as design criteria, what the people looked for in their neighborhood park, etc. This I12CI worked so we11 that they had decided to do the same for the rest of the classified neighborhood facilities. Mr. Boardman stated that in order to get started on the process, they had a survey. Their goal was to attempt to survay 3(Y/, of the residential units in the city. They were able to survey 62% of that 3CP/, (1934 housing units or 6,800 people). After the surveys, Mike Franzen, Landscape Architect in t[ie Planning Department, put together potential designs for the nine neighborhood parks, except for Benjamin-Briardale and Commons. Mr. Boardman stated theq did initial designs;and when they had formulated final designs, they decided to also do models of these park designs. They then notified the neighborhoods and set up meetings with them. They had good meetings and the meetings were finished in March. At this point iu time, they were starting to put together neighborhood booklets that would discuss design criteria, basic ideas, and basic recommendations on park design. Hopefully, those would be completed for the next Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. , • B. Meeting Dates for 1979 The Co�issioners concurred with rescheduling the regular Parks & Recxeation Commission meetings on the alternate Wednesdays between Planning Commission meetings. The next meeting coi11 be held on May 16, 1979, at 7:30 p.m. A➢JOITRIQMENT : MOTION hy Betty Mech; seconded by Dave Kondrick, to adjourn the meeting Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Temporary Chairperson Seeger declared the April 23, 1979, Parks & Recreation Coummission meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. , Respectfully submitted, � �� Lyt��(e Sab�� Recording Secretary SPECIAL ENUIRONMENTAL QUALIT� COM��tISSION MEE7ING APRII 26, 1979 MEM6ERS PRESENT: Jim Langenfeld, Bruce Peterson, Lee Ann Sporre, Marvin Hora . MEMBERS ABSENT: Connie Metcalf, Gordon Wilson CALL TO ORDER: Chairpersan Langenfeld called the meeting to order at 7:44 p.m. DISCUSSION OF COMPREHENSIUE DEVELOPi�ENT PLAN: Mr. Leek suggested that the Com�nission's major consideratior, shou1d be of the "Environmental Resources° and "Critical Areas" section and, secondarily the "Parks and Open Space Plan." hir Leek harded out copies of an °Envi•ronmeiita1 Resources Policy P1an Revisior," �ated Aprii 26, 1974. Staff felt thUt it was necessar� to address the r��estioi� �� e�ergy usage in the future, especialiy in liyhi, af the fact that the Ci?,:y v+as a7ready innving in that dircction thraugh the Er�ergy Pro,jeci Comn�-ittee. �!e also handed out copies of a memo to Jerrold Boardman and all Commissicr, nembers regarding"Clarificationof Need and Demand Statistics fcr Housing as repor•ted in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Developm�nt Plan." D1r. Peterson again expressed his concern that when Che document was conipiled there be a more extensive ta61e of contents and cross-referencing. Mr. Leek stated that they w2re in the process of making the tables ofi contents for each section more extensive and listing page nuinbers. In a fevl of the policy sections, "Critical Areas", "Environmentai Resources", and °lti'aste Water� Managenient", there was already some crpss-r2ferencing. COMMENTS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN RELATED TO THE ENI�IRONi�1ENTAl. RESOURCES SECTION: Page 12: Amend first paragraph under "INTRODUCTION" to read: En�+ironmental resources in Fridley include, but are not limited to, the followir�g: -w�tlands and lowlands • -natural and artifiCial water bodies -groundwater recharge areas -soils and slopes (erodible) -forests and woodlands -bedrock -areas of historical significance ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMI;SION MEE7ING, APRIL 26, 1979 - PAGE 2 Pags 14: 5311 Mr. Hora stated that the word "pollution"was omitted and it should read; "Promote air, water and noise pollution control measures." Page 5310: amend to read: "Promote efforts in identifying and evalua - ting problems and pursuing solutions in the maintainence and improvement of the environmen 5314: Mr. Peterson stated that he thought this objective shou]d be broadened io include recreational areas. 15: After the first paragraph, Mr..Langenfeid mentioned that it should be flagged because wetlands serve an important function as retention areas and that should be stressed. Delete the last seotence of the paragraph. Ms. Sporre stated that she wou7d like to see the following sentence inserted: "Typical adverse soil conditions have an effect on water management costs that render ihese areas unbuildable." Page 16: First paragraph: "tvro major watercourses" to "five watercourses" In the format, there shou7d be included the Mississippi River, Rice Creek, Stonybrook Creek, Springbruok and Oak Glen Greek, giving the same co'nsideratien to tne 7attcr tl�ree creeks as to tlie prev�iaus two v�aLercourses. It might be reasonable to include the val they provide as is done with th� other areas. In the second paragra.ph under Rice Creek the sentence should read: "The service provided to the City by these watercourses are twofold". The last paragraph should be reworded to read: "Stonybi°ook, Spring Brook af�d Oak G]en Creek all adjoin and serve the Mississippi River as tributaries." Ms. Sporre stated that Rice Creek had a watershed District and Stonybrook, Spring Brook and Oak Glen Creek did not have governing watershed districts. This shouid be indicated in the Plan under #2 under Rice Creek. Ms. Sporre therefore felt that there was even morE reason for the City to be involved in the planning for these areas than for Rice Creek, 6ecause all of the creeks serve a drainage funci 6ut only Rice Ct°eek is part of a Watershed District. Page 17: First sentence: "one major body of water" changed to "two bodies of water". Locke Lake shouid be inc7uded and a paragraph describin9 Locke Lake as was done for Moore Lake. Page 18: Second paragraph, last sentence:� "swi��ing for" inserted after "wai:er qua]ity" Page 20: Last paragraph, first sentence changed to read: "Groundwater resaurces are an essential public resource." Page 21: Ms. Sporre stated again that the other three creeks, Stonybrook, � Ety'lIRONM[NTAL QUALITY CQMMISSION MEETIP:G, APRIL 26, 7979 - PAfC 3 Spring Brook and Oak Glen Creek, should be included after the Che secund �ara- graph, and the fact that there presentl,y existed no management districts for these creeks. ' Ms. Sporre stated in �l2 and #5, the word "should" be changed to "shall" and both paragraphs be inserted under Policy (5311-2). Page 26: Paragraph 7, "North Park" changed to "Spring Brook Natui°e Center", 27 "Innsbruck Nature Center" changed to "Innsbruck Nai:ural History Area", and "Islands of Peace" changed to "Islands of Peace Park". Last two paragraphs amended and inserted in proper order in "Systems Plan:" Second to last paragraph: "shauld" be changed to "shall" Last paragraph amended as follows: "In order to preserve as much of the existing tr•ee cover as possible, developers shall designate on a landscape site design the location ofi er.is veaetation, proposed removal, and ro osed plantin9s. PQLICY PLAN Page 33: 5310-1 Re�lision dated April 26,1979 S31Q-2 Amend to read: The City shall identif,y water courses, water bodies, wetlands and-- w ands... 5310-3 Amend to read: "The City shall adapt subdivis�ion regula- tions for the prQtection of ground water recharge areas io ensure adequate guanti�, and hiqh ouality of domestic water supply�. 5311-1 Amend to read: "The City Shall pr'omote compliance with staie and federal water quality standards which provide..." Page 34: S311-3: Amend to read: "The City does not support the concept of a so- lid-waste disposal site in Fridley due to a lack of suitable sites." Page 35: 5310-1A Amend to read: "Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Developmar;i Plan, the City will inventory and prioritizc for protection water courses, water bodies, wetlands and lowlands within its corporate limits." � Mr. Peterson expressed a concern in the.policy section on the protection of ground l,�ater and recharge areas that something additional or stronger was needed in regard to what is going to be attempted as far as controllirrg corrrnerci� and/or industrial contamination. EN�YIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSIDN I�CETING, APRIL 26, 1979 - PAGE 4 Ms. Sporre stated that the discussion of that policy should include informat.ion on the impact, o` water velocity and water quaTity from the Construction Activities document. She recommended the following policy: "The City shall reyuire development plans to demonstrate that the proposed development will not increase the tota7 run-off rate, the peak run-off rate, or shorten the overall run-off rate or increase the natural rate of absorption of storm water." That was something that the Commission had passed as a motion previously. Page 35: S310-3A Last sentence: "shoul�" changed to "shall" Paye 36: 5311-1A. "should" changed to "shall" 5311-1B. Amend to read: "The City will support the continuation the MPCA program of periodic surface water testing of state waters (the Mississippi River) and aTso urge the Rice Creek Watershed District to expedite its water quality management and monitoring efforts The City shall monitor the quality of S�rin Bg rook Creek. S311-4A. �4: Delete "un a complair�i: basis° S3]4-•TA. "The City shall desiqnate natural preservation areas._. areas so desianated shal.l be Gsed urimarilv to protect th ecoioqicai svs Page 34: S314-1. Ms. Sporre proposed the followin9 policy statements: "The Ci� shall promote efforts to,preserve iiidigeno ._.._�_..:__ �� h1s. Sporre stated that it was not reflected in the CDPo but the Metro Council has identified the areas that have soils with severe jimitation 5 ft�r ur6an development and they include a large part of Fridley. That should be refiected in the CDP, and there should be a map on soil conditions. Mr. Leek stated that there was such a map and that it svould be included in the C�P. ADJOl1RNM[NT: MOTION by Bruce Peterson, seconded by Lee Ann Sporre, to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m. EI3ERGX PRQTECT COMMiiTTEE MEETTNG APRIL 24, I979 MEMBERS PRESENT; Jim Langenfeld, Dean Saba, Giles McConville, Betty Enkhaus, Donald Wall MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Wharton, Dennis Anderson OTHERS PRESENT: Mayor Bill Nee CAI.L TO ORDE&: Chairperson Langenfeld called Che meeting to order at 7:39 p.m. APPROVAL OF MARCH 14 1979 ENERGY PROJECT COP4ICTTEE MINUTES: MOTiON by Donald Wall, seconded by Giles McConville, to'approve the March 14, 1979, Energy Project Cammittee minutes as written. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Langenfeld declared the motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION hy Dean Saba, seconded by Betty Enkhaus, to approve Che agenda as written. IIpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Langenfeld declared the motion carried unanimously. DISCIISSION ON DRAFT POLICY: The Cor�iteee made amendmenCs to the "Zntroduction" (Proposal B). , Mr, Wall stated he had attempted to write something on the ca�ercial, industrial, and institutional sectors, but had come to the conclusion that he did not think Che City of Fridley alone could deal effectively with those three areas. He stated that each of those secCOrs had different problems, and what co�ld the Cos�ittee besC do as a group? He felt maybe the best thing they could do would 6e to get these people talking to one another (perhaps the Committee could recommend that) and also have someone in government to see to it that these sectors did get together. �� $NERGY PROJECT COMMITTEE MEETING APRIL 24 1979 - PAGE 2 Mr. Wall submitted a"Draft Proposal for Review by Fridley Energy Committee.° MdTION by Betty Enkhaus, secoaded by Dean Saba, to receive the "Draft Proposal for Review by Fridley Energy Committee" (hereaEter referred to as Proposal C). Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Langenfeld declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Wall stated he was looking at the leg3timate role of government as being one of a coordinating function. His proposal was a way of organizing that so it could be done. Mr. Saba suggested that, as part of the policy, the Committee could recommend that there he a coordinating function. MOTION by Giles McConville, seconded by Betty Enkhaus, to accept the first ffve paragraphs of Proposal C as part of the consideration for the statement of policy. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, Chairperson Langenfeld declared the motion carried ananimously. The Cn�ittee proceeded to review the Draft ProposaZ (Proposal A) submitted at the previous meeting, making revisions where they felt necessary. Mayor Nee expressed his concern that the Committee look at the city's building codes in regard to solar heating. He thought they ought to look at what limitations they had stzucturally in the law that were antithetical to their goals in energy conservation and alternative energies, making adjustments and recoa�endations to the City Council. Another aspect was the conversions to wood burning space heaters and furnaces and whether or not the Committee wanted to address that as a special ftem. Mayor Nee statad he felt the citizen bodies, such as the Energy Project Committee, really served a real purpose in keeping Staff sensitive. Mr. Wall stated he found it difficult to understand how government interfaced with industrial or cocrmiercial operations in the city from the standpoint of the tremendous amount o£ energy they consumed. Re did not know if there was any precedence for the city in cooperative efforts with industry. He asked Mayor Nee if there were such things and how could they relate government to those things,or should they even try? Mayor Nee stated they did not have any police powers that addressed it correctly. Until the Legislature gave other powers in this area, the question of.police powers at this point came down to health, safety, and welfare. They would be more than happy to facilitate financing any remodeling which had an energy conservation element to iC, which would be quite a substantial advantage. The same would hold true on pollution control abatemettt. The last couple of years they had participated in a Beautification Progzam, but did not have the power to enforce it. When it came to energy, peer pressure has not been as obvious. � „�, ENfiRGY PRQTECT CONAIITTEE MEETING APRIL 24 1979 - PAGE 3 Mayor Nee gave the Committee some literature he felY the Committee might be interested in using. MOTION by Donald Wall, seconded by Aean 5aba, to receive the "Energy Options" and "Energy Dilemmas" published hy the League of Wamen Voters and "Architecture Minnesota", March issue. Upon a voice vote, all voCing aye, Chairperson Langenfeld declared the motion carried unanimously. SET AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING: -- _, The next Energy Project Committee meeting will be Tuesday, May 22, 1979, at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Langenfeld seated tfiat at the next meeting the Committee will continue_ to discuss the dra£t policy. ADJOURN2�tL�NT : MOTION by Dean Saba, secoizded by Giles McConville, to adjourn the meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson LangenEeld declared the Apri1 2l+, 1979, Energy Project Coum�ittee meet3ng adjourned aC 10:32 p,m. Respectfully submitted, �� 1 SABA REC RDING SECRSTARY �-r:a CITY OF FRIDLEX PZANNING CONA7ISSION MEETING - MAY � 1 CALL T0 � Chaire�n Asrrie e�11ed the May 9, or8er at 7:30 P•M. 1979 �eting of the Planning Caa�iesion to ROLL CALL• Afembere Present: Mr. Oguiet, Me. Hughes, Mr. H�rrie� Mr. Treuenfele� Mr. Hora Mss�.Schnabel arrived at 7:35 P.M. Membere Abeent; NQne; Others Prassnt: Mr. Boardm�w, City Planaer Councilman Schneidar Dean Dvyscher, ProYessional Planning & Development Co. 1, pppRpVE pLAA1NIPIG CObA�IISSION MINU'PES; APRIL 18, 1979: MOTION by Mr. Oquist� eeconded by Mr• Aora to approve the April 18, 1979 �nutes �e Plaifaing Ca�is�ion. Mr. Boordnan reforred to page 19 � the minutes and atatQCl that Mr. I.eek had stAted aceo�ing to the coneultaat it would be 10 ysare. TLiis was in regarde to th@ diaeuasion on Moore I.ake. Mr. Boar�iman etated they had cheek�l into thie further anfl this statement was in error. Aecording to Hiehcock & Associates they vould be looking in exces6 of 50 years. UPC)N A VOiCE VOTE� ALL VOTIAR'. AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARID THE MOTION CARRIID AND THE MINUPES APPROV&D AS CORRECTID. 2. E� 8e ROBIItT ERICKSON: a es sr ee� of Zot 10� Auditor�s �uuaivision �rv. v7, to sRlce tvro building sites for double bungalowe� the eame tetn8 1285-87 and 1295-97 �� Av�nue x.E. Mr, BosrdmAn �teted this vas located on the corner of Norton Avenue and Central. Theae lots are preeently zoned R-3, Which is a multiple zone and would allaw duplex conatru¢tion. The lota are in exeese of 10�000 equare feet which ie a requirement �nd in the case ei the corner lat they xsre looklns at, vith the lot split, 75 Peet. Generally �+e like to aes 80 feet mn a corner but an 80 foot lot is not necessarily required on s cornsr. Since the lets are in excese oY 10�000 aqu�re ieet, it would •llov e dupl�x. Mr. Oquiet aaked if both buildings would face NortonT blr, B�rdman etated thet both buildings would face Norton and both builflinge xould have aceese otf Norton. Mr. Aerris prksd if they �nere in exceea of 10,000 aqusre Yeet1 Mr, Buat�twn atated that the lot to thQ west �a 1Q,050 and'the other lot rras also over 10�000 square feet. H� did nut havo the sxact figure. He atated that StaYY ha�1 np probl�oa with the lot aplit. He also stated that sew�r and water wera av¢ilnble in Norten Avtaue. PLANNING COA4ffSSI0N MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 3 Mr. Boardmqn eteted they eould just leave it that v�y. Nh�. Harria aek•d what the ma�ciaum lot ewerega vas there? Mr. Beu�rdnen stated that in R-2� msxim� lot coverqge wae 25',�. Mr. Harris stat4d that as long as the garages s+ere part of the structures, there rrould bs no preblem. Mr. Boardasn aBreed on there vi.th the 1' no problem. and statai thst �s long as they couid fit the structures Mr. Harris askad if there �ras plenty of deptht Mr. Boardman stateci there rras. There vere no ca�ente Yr� the audience regarding thie item. it vould be txYPIOH by Mr. Oquist, secoud•d by Ms. Sehnabel, to re�c�end to Council approval o�tTie requsat for a lot aplit, L.S. �'(9-01, by Msrvin & Robert Erickson to split oYf the vesterly 74.99 feet of Lot 10� Auditor's Subdivision No. $9� to meke two building eites for double bungaloes� the same being 1285-87 and 1295-97 No�� Avenue N.E. UPON A VOICE VO'FE, ALL VOTING AY&, CHAIRMAN HARRI3 DECLARID 'PHE MOTION CARRIID iJNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Harris informed the petitioner that this would go to CounMl on May 21, 1979. The petitionsr thanked the Co�iesioners. 3. PUBLIC HEARII�: REZONiI�IG REQpEST, 2AA �i9-Ol, THE LIb'E-SKI & � al:V1R� n��t�fr:tt: xezone 1,ote y ana tu, rilOCK 1� Moore t.ase n�.gnte�s jra naaitiioa ram - ocal buainees offices) to G2 (geatral bueineas areas), and Lot 11, Block 1� Moore Lake Highlande 3rd Addition fre+� CR�1 (general offices and limited businesa) to C-2 (general businese ax�ets), to e11ow a garden center e� future building expanaion at 6319 xighway �65 N.E. M�TION by Mr. Oquist� secanded by Me. Schnpbel, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIIdG AYE� Cf1AIRMAN AARRIS DECLARED Tf� PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7;50 P.M. Mr. HcarBsan etatsd that this was lxated on Higlnray 65, just north �f the li4uor_ store; Last year the LiYt put in a garden eenter. They own t�ro buildings on thst location. One eas e Yilling station and zama wae a grocery atore. They took these over and developed one ae a croes eountry aki eree and the other as s dowu hill eki and those types of thinge. The grocery atore building� bsaed an it's locatioa� is over the presaat lot line by 7 Yest. In other woxde� it vas built on property it didn't owu. Thie property is present�y zoued C-1 �o the south whieh ie where tbe filling atation �aaa snd the old grocery etor� vasi snd it ia zoned CR-1 to the north. They rrould PLANNlNG COa9+B3SI0N MEETTI�, MAY 9, 1979 _ PAGE 4 like to reEOne this to all C-2 ec��ercial vhich vrould allov them to operat� in tbst tunctiari. The reason they froat to go to C-2 ie based on the Specie2 Use Permit be¢nuee ox► open area like the garden center ie on]y allch►ed in s C-2 area. They �►aat to combine the uses into a C-2 use and eliminate the CR-1 on the north and the C-1 on the eouth. He noted that then had been some street improve- ffieat on the serviee road � Highvay 65. With that improve�nt they �id get some initial bcwl�vsrd planting, sod and a curb � the etreet side to improve the looks oY the building. They put in acne msrked parking areas in front of the brick building. He referred to page 3� � the agenda and stated thet Mr. Holmer had givea them a rmugh sketch vhich they put into a landaeape plan according to the planting achedule on the other side. Whst they wvuld like to do on th3s� if they do apprmve the resone and the Special Use Permit� is to have this landacape plan sttached as part oP the stipulation and a echedule developed for the coa�pletion of the lan�scaping and completion of the entire facility. It could be a period of two or thrte yeare but they vould like the developer ccmpaitted to thi�. Mr. Boardman atated they were looking at getting the curbing� blaektaiping and vtintever landscaping wpuld bs neceasary to �ke the praperty completed. Right avw the lots to the north where the building sit is preaent7y gravel and ia presently utilized for parking. It ia �ot necesearily established as a parking area� but peo�gle park there. They would like to get it firmed up. Ms. Schnabel asked if it was the intention of ths petitioner to put an addition on the gravel area tv the northt Mr. Boardman atated they were looking at vhat th� patential Would be for aa additios� on te the etructure so k3.thin the plan th�y did teke that into conaideratioa for parking requirements and landseaping requirementa. It �ras noted on the drawing what the maxximum expansion could bc. Ms. 3chnabel atated that she asked that because iY they were looking for atipulations on the landscape plan Por example� the petitiouer might nat vant to complete a lsnd- scape plan if they intend to put an addition oa the building. Mr. Boardaan statad that there Warte things they eould do with the lendsea e lan t would not interPere w3th the addition. In the arsas srhere they might disrupt an area bec4uae of an eddition, they wauld put those thinga st the end of the schedule. He ielt they should get atarted on the prioritiea cm the development of the thing. Things like the peri�ter fencing and the perimetsr planting and ihings like that eould get daua. They could atart with the perimeter affi vork into the lot. � Mr. Holmer stated that regarding perimeter Yencing� he felt they ehould ask the e�3acent groperty �rmers vhat they wa�at. The person on the corner lot might preYer the visw oY IiigYnvay 65 rather than a 6 Yoot Yence. FIe stated he would co�p�y with vhat ie required but als0 �rith What the adjacent property owners Frould like. There is exieting fencing hehind two of the lots. At Par as the CR-1 lot, the reason they purchased that lot vse becauee they were 7 feet into that lot. Aleo� that made that lot a aubstan�aard lot for building on. He stated thRt present�jr he could not afford to do ar�ything with the CR-1 lot Wh3ch ia the lot to the north. One year Prom norr he eeuld, but not this particular au�er. The reason for the rezoning request wes tv logal],y operate the gerden center. Ae far sa ths expaneion, i�t is a little pre- msture. He xould like to expan8 the crosa country ahop firat sad then expand the PLANNIftG CUAAtI88I0N MEE"EING, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 5 aaturt ehop. However, that might not come through. He might tear dmm the old gas atation ani expsid the other shdrp. He ha� not really eettled on and�thing. It depe�ed on a lat of things like profits and how the business goea. Right aovi, his major concern zrae to le�slly operate the garden center. While thia application was in� it vas easieat to get it all as one integr-tsd lot st thie time. As far as the laudscaping� he vants it to lmok ae nice as poaeible� but felt it would not be wise to atart g],�nting in one area at this point in tiae. Mr. Boar�msn stated tLat he rrould like a ec�itmeat to a plan and nodifieetion of that plsn could take place. But he weuld like at least a co�itment to a landscaping plan. Mr. Riehard Patter�cn, 6326 Dellwoad Drive, stxted thst he livad behind the Lift. He aeked if the C-2 aas Y� a twa story building? Mr. Bosrdmaa stated thst C-1 wculd allar a three story building. C-2 could allaw a six story building. He etated that the limi.tatione they looked at here were the staouat oP p8rking apaces avail.able. Even a three stArg building vould be difficv3t to put on the aite because it would require additional parking. If the room is aot available, the additional parking requirements would kill the project. But that aleo woul¢i depend on the eiae of the Rtrueture. If they tore both buildings dovm and built e ttrree etory office bu3lding there� thet could happea. He etsted that he did nat see it going to a six atory bui].ding because the parking was not avsilable. Mr. Patterson atat�d that he Pelt goiag to a C-2 srould devaluate the properties be- hind tYu lots. He asked rrhat vas wrong with the C-1� the vay it vas preeently zonedT Mr. Board�n stated thet a garden center is not allm+ed in a C-1. The on],Y zoning it vould be ellowefl in ie a C-2 District.�rith a 3pecial Uee Permit. So they need the C-2 zone to operate the gerden center. They can operate the Lif� and the crosa country eki ahop in a C-1 zone. Mr. Pattersa¢� ststed thst he had no'thing against the present operation� but what if Mr. Holmar �old the propertyi Mr. Bc�rBman stated thst iY enyone wanted to build there, they srould be looking at a maximum of three atories because of the size of the aite. Mr. Patteraon aaked if they ecau].dn�t put in a stipulatiou that Stould prevent aRything. larger going in there7 Mr. Harris ststtd that they could put in eame etipulations aa�l as long as he signs it vould be binding even iY hs sold. Ms: Sehnabel atQted that no matter rho the wner +,aea� they would be hsrd pressed to put as�rthing biggar than a three story building because our cale limits are so strict they vcruld acrt meet the aode requiremments. PI,ANNING C01�4ffS3I0N ME'E"rING� MAY 9, 1979 - PAGE 6 Mr. Norm Shurlheis� 4815 �cond St. N,E.� stated that he oFmed the apart�nt builSing juat north of the eite. Iie asked if feneing was reguiredY Mr. Boardman stated thxt fencing was requ3red and it must be solid screen fencing between co�ercial property and residential property. Generally they require a wood screening Yence. Mr. Oquist asked Mr. Holmer iP he planned to p�t in the garden center like he had it last year? Ms. iiughea stated it was there now. Mr. Boardman state8 that Mr. Holmer k�ad sent a letter to the City Council and Council allaRred them to continue the operation of the center witil this procese �rent through. Ms. Hughss asked Mr. Aolmer if the rnmership oP the property had been resolved? Mr. Holmer sta�ed it had been reaolved. Fie etated he represented Mr. Peterson and several other peaple. FIe had sold the property to them and they are in tura backing his bank loana. Ma. Hughea asked if there was essential�y one ownert N�. Holmer atated there �ras a partnership called 6319 Compa�y. Counci].nan Sehneider asked if C-2 would allar for ary}r semi-industrial businesses or body ahopa or gas etations� etc? Mr. Boerdman etated they were allos�ed on]y with a S�iecial Use Permit and it would hsve to go through the Plsnning Ccmm�iseion aixl City Council for approval. Also, �the neigjibors vould be notified. Me. Schnabel stated that ft seemed to her that the property in question, and the owner had demonetrated� a very solid intent on improving the property and has in Pact eubstsnt3Ally improved them over the period of time he has been involved with the specifie busineas operation in there. The exteriore oY the t�ro buildings blend to- gether and the signa have been tasteful]y done. She did nat see eny problem With rezoning the vhole parcel and felt it would probably be to the advantage of the pxw perty to have consistent zun6s. It Would be in keeping with Whst the City intends to do with property and that is to have 3t all within one specific zoning so that the property becomes �n�geable. The consequencea ii we denied this zoning would be that xe wculd have a psrcel of land �r1th two sepaz�ate zoning and the ovmer may xant to expanS at so� point or aell at so� point qnd it m�y beco� a hardahip on him to sell because of the srpa�td zoning. From that atand point, it makes sense to clesn it up and zone it all the same. Mr. &arrie asked vhat the total sqnare footage was on this propertyT Mr. Boardmen stated it vas about 40,500 squsre feet. PI.ANNENG COM+L[33ION MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 7 Mr. Harris atated that t+as almost double irhat they required for a C-2 building. He asked what the lot ewerage percentage wae in C-2! Mr. Poaxdmsn ststed he wasn't svre, but thought it was �+ �or one story� ��r for tvo atoriea� ete. As it goes up� the lot coverage decreaees. Mr. Harria etated that if they went to thre� stor�ee� it aould be 30;6. So the maximum sise build3ng they could get on there wou18 be 16,000 equare feet. Mr. B�x�dtean atated that he doubted they could even get that much because 16�()00 equere foot of office space would require about 80 parking spaces. There is no �y they could get 80 parking epacea. Mr. Hol�r etated that the lot that ia present�y zoned CR-1 is a subetandard lot therefcre it could not be sold off. The only logical spot Yor that lot is to be part oY the +rhole parcel. Mr. Harris stated that on page 29 he �aw a figure of 27�000 square Peet for acreage. Ae esked if tk�at iacluded the other lot? Mr. Bosrdmsa stated that on the zoning he had 40�500 equare feet. He atated thet tfiie was on the 3pecial Use Permit. The Special Use Permit would only be granted to lota 9 and lo. Mr. Harris aekeci Mr. Holmer iP it woul.d be agreeable if they reco�e�ed the rezoning that there be se�me sort of a developed plan initiated as Yar ms the screening along the property lines abutting the residential areas? Mr. Holmer stated that as Ysr as seraening goea:by the apartment� there is sonne natural eerssning there present�y from ae� tsees. He could not see tearing out those trees. Also, there w�s same screening� ma,ybe lcnrer than eode required� be- hiad lots 9 and 10. There ie fencing thsrc. Mr. Herrie atated that in tha near Yuture they ahovld have a maeter development plan written. Mr. Hol�r stated that at this point in time he did not have a� use for L�t 11. If they n.ed a Pence on the north side� that could be dotte. But as far as a�y _ additional larndacs,ping on that lot, he vns not pla�ming on az�y. Mr. FIarris ctatad that his psrem�al feeling waa tlut they needed a Yence along the lot line on Lot 11. Aleo, they should set a target date for the completion of the rest of the development. Mr. Board�n stated that he fe2t that a three year co�itment weuld be resliatic. Mr. Holmer stated that ahould be realistie becsuae by that time he should have his building plena implemented. He saas one year away fron soaae addition at this point in time. PLANNING COI+Rd[3SION MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 9 Mr. Oquist statad thet he agreed vith Ms. Schnabel's commente that it would be •dvantagsous to rezone thie property and get it all in a cor�on zone. %e Pelt the paople hsd done a nice job there and made the pra�perty preeentable. Mt�TION by Ms. S¢hnsbel, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to reccrffinend to Council approval � rezoning requeet, ZOA #'j9-01, The Lift-Ski & Bike, Inc.t by Scott Hol�r, to rezoae Lote 9 and 10, Block 1� Moore Lake Highlanda 3rd Addition, from C-1 to G2� and Lot 11� Slock 1� Moore Lake Highlande 3rd Addition from CR-I to C-2, to alloa a garden conter and future building expanaion at 6319 xt�,way #b5 x.E., vith the stivulati� that a leadseaue vlan and scheclule over a three year time pariod Mr. Aarris informed the petiti�er tkiat this rrould go to Council on Msy 21� 1979 �nd the public hearing wwld be on Ju�y 16� i979� 4. centmr on ote 9, , � ock 1, Moore I,ake same being 6319 Highway �b$ N.E. �79c-o3t,, _T� �-sxz �fr . to al os+�a gar�e a 3rd Addition� the NATION by Mr. Oquiat, aeconded by Mr. Treuenfela, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARID THE PUBLIC F1EaiRING OPEN AT 8:35 P.M. Mr. Boardaan etated that wa� oa the same pmoperty and located in Pront on the coraer of Lc�t 9. Our observation wae that the fecility vas rrell kept and is a very clean operation. The garden center is maintained 'very well. Mr. Oquist stated he had been there last year ani it xea s very neat area. P�r. Harris saked vhat they used that property for rhen it wasn't a garden cettter? Mr. Holmer atated that they uae it for parking in the winter ti�. Wiater is their busy seaeon a� h� vould be lining that for parking apacea also. They take drnm tvo pisces of fence and use it for parking. Mr. Harria asked iY they hsd any night operation in the garden center4 Mr. Holmer stated they rrere open until 9:00 P.M. He atated that they were basical],y in the ski businese and he did not Want to be a full time nursey like Frank's. This is so�mething to iill in tho su�er. He plannai to open it When the aeaeon starta on Msy 1 arni cZose it on July �+. Mr. Harrie asked iP there vae any lighting out thereY Mr. Holner stated there �rae on�y the lighting that ¢ame with the Texaco Station. PLAPTNING CONQ�ffS3IQN MEE'PING, MAY 9, 1979 - PAGE 10 Mr. Harria asked 2M. Aolmer if he intendad to put in additionsl lightingt Mr. Hol�r statad he did not bsesuse the months that he 3s open it is still light until 9:00 P.M. Mr. Harris asked if he intended to put a�* a�ee�eory buildings in frontY Mr. Hol�r stated he did not. He had put up a t+ind vall for the outside counter but that has be•n they for a year. He did not see tht need for any sdditionsl struatures. Mr. Oauiat aeked vhen the public hearing vould beT I�. Boardman stated that if they vent by the narmal process it would be Ju�y 15. Mr. Oguist etatsd it stould bc cloeed by then. bir. Boardman atated tHat was Por the zoning. A Special Use Permit 8oes not require s public hearing before the City Council. However, there were several things they should look at. A Special Use Permit was not permitted in a G1 zone. Therefore� they can't grant the Special Uae Permit until the zone is in. He added thst although the July 15 �eting is the acheduled meeting it� if they are notified that they should acivertiae it before the meeting oY the 21st� then they aould be at the June 11 maeting. They will send out notices to the property ovners before the public hearing at City Council. I�TION by Ms. Schnabel� seconded by Mr. Oquist� to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARID THE PUBLIC HF,ARII� CLOSID AT 8:40 P.M. 1+�7PION by Mr. Oquist� seco�led by Mr. Treuenfels� to rec�anend to Council approval he requeet for a Special Use Permit, SP �'%9-03� The LiYt-Ski & Bike, Inc.� by Scott Holmer: Per Section 205.101� 3� N. to allovr a garden center on Lots 9, 10, 11, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands 3rd Addition� the same being 6319 Iiighv� #65 N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL V(iTING AYE� CAAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARID THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIl�A[JSLY. Mr. iiarris informed the petitioner tY,at thia wuuld go to Council on M�y 21 snd would probably be tabled unt31 the zoning is approved. The petitioner thanked the Co�iaeioners. 5. VACATIOIQ REQUEST� j SAV -Olt BY KATf�tYN GERARD: Vacate the Alley in Block 3� $'�vmout""�i Ad'di�fon. o �v q ti e$'�nd�fi �nue N.E. betsreen 2nd Street and Street. PLANNING CO2�AlI9SION MEETING� MAY 9� 1979 PAGE 11 Mr. Boardmnn referred to psgds 40 and 41 oY the agenda book. He etated they had received a petition to vacate the alloy which vas signed by all the property cnmors along the alley vith the exception oP the oFmers of 4871 and 4861. Katt�y Gerard, l+815 �� reet^N.E. stated that the people at 4871 came to her house today ax� eigned the petition. The reaaon the people at 4861 hsd not signed rras that the houae ie rented anfl they couldn't locate the owners. I�K)TION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oqui6t� tc reeeive the petition to vacate t�Te alley. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CEAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNAIQIMOUSLY. Mr. Iiarz�i� eta�ed they had also reesived a letter from PiSP addressed to Mr. Dsrrel Clark, Co�unity Development Director, City of Fridley. The letter was signed by Mr. Warren R. Johnson, StaPf Aesistant� North Division. The letter reads as Pollowe: "In regarda to vacation oY the alley in Block 3� P�ymouth Addition, bounded by 48th and 49th Avenue N.E. between 2nd Street and 2� Street� ve have an overhead single phase distribution line located in thia alley. If this alley is vacated� we vriah to retain a utility easement for our Pacilitiee." NXITION by Mr. Oquist� seconded by Mr. Hora, to receive the letter Prom NSP. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLRRED THE MOTION CARRIID iTNANIlM�USLY. Mr. Harris aak�ci vhy they vere vacating this alley? bh�. Boardmen etated they `rere doing it beeauee the neighbore wanted it done. Mr. Aarria esked if it vas unimproved7 Mr. Boardmen etated it itea unia�roved, Mr. Iiarris aeked if there rrere ar�y garagea facing it or ar�y accesa fro�n 3tT Mr. Bonrdmaa atated it was sll lavn and Yencea a�l vas non-acceasible. Me. Schnabel stated that NSP had not stated hov much of an easement they wented. Mr. Bosrdman stated they wouid maintain the whol� aree as a uti],ity easemen$. Ms. Gerard etated that she didn�t underatand that. Mr. Harrie etated that beeauee NSP has power lines in there� they must have an easement eo they can serviee those lines and retain their goles. PLANNING COt+�7ISSI0N MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 12 Me. Hughes aaked if there vas the possibility th�t thry would need a bike or hiking systrm in that area? Mr. Bd�rdm�n etated they have a bike system oD 3x+d Street. The traffic trould aot warrant a syetem there. M(YPION by Ma. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels, to reco�nd to Couacll apprwal 'o�e Vacatioa Request, sav #79-01, by Kathryn Gtrard; Vacate the alley in Block 3, �lymouth Addition� bounded by 48th aad 49th Avenue N.E. betsrreen 2nd Street s�l 2� Street, with the atipulatic3n that an easmeat be reteined domm the vacated UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HAiiRIS DECLARED TFIE M(Yi'ION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Harria 3nformed the petitioner that this vould go to Council on M�y 21. 6. HOUSIPTG 8o RIDEVELOPMENT A[fi'HORITY REDEVEIAPMENP PLAN APPROVAL: Mr. Boprflmen stated that the Co�mnissionere had reeeived with the agenda a doc�ent entitled "Phase 1, Center City". That �ras the actusl inventory and ana]ysia of the Phase 1 portion of the Center City Project. With that ana]ysis, the City Council modiiied our proposal on page 2, primsrily because vithin Phase 1 they looked at the Peaaibility of financing on it and the tax increment financing proposal vas probably more feaaible than a lot aP the other types oP Yunding they had looked at. So, in order to carry out the process they vrent to the City Council with the reco�endstion that instead of going with the originai Phase 2 groposal srhieh wes to study the dlYferent iunding posaibilities thst they go right in and develop a tsx increment financing distriet or re8.evelogmeat distriet ea allrnred under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statues. The City Council appraved this� made the changes to Phase 2 and started them Srorking on the development of the tax increa�nt plan. The doc�nt the Coa�iasioners received tonight was dlstributed quite late and Mr. Boerdman agologized for that. Fk stated that aYter the decision was msde by the City Council on April 23 to move ahead, they had aeveral eonversations with their attorney& and other people rega�rding tax increment iinance legislation. They felt it iras in the beet interesta oP the City of Fridley to move on the taa increment p7,an eund get thd tex increment plan establiahed. Tht Aousing & Redevelopment Authority (fTRA) hae been imolved 3n this closely. They had a meeting on Mqy 1 with the HRA. The HRA had a leng�tti�y diecuasion vith them on the development oF the syetem. Mr. Boardmen displqycd an aerial photograph for the co�iesioners of the area in question. Ae stated that they vere iollwing through on a11 the legal pro- cesees neceseary to set up the tax increment dietrict. The legal process requires 10 days aotice before the public hearing. The publie hearing notice� were in the paper on the 3rd. The public hearing will be held on the 14th and 15th of M�y. Ms. Hughes aeked which property the hearinge vvuld be onT Mr. Boaxdman stated it would be ior the whole diatrict. Dorm from 61st and wer from 5th Street to 7th Street including the Village Green property. He referred to the ether document he dietributed vhich was the "CMrc�nological bisting of Events Lsgding to Davelopment oi the Center City Project^. He reviewed this document a�1 PLANNII� COLII+IISSION MEETING, MAY 9� 1979 PAGE 13 etated that the project started on Februsry 15� i978 when they received a letter from the Chamber oP Co�aerce to the business people regarding a meeting concerning the future development of the University and Mieaiasippi Street area. There vas a queetionsire from the Chamber oF Co�erce at that time indicating interest to imprcrve the Uaiversity�Missiasippi Stroet area. On February 22, 1978, there wsa a Concern�d Community Buainess Men'a meeting rnd on April 14 the City received a letter Yrom the Chamber of Ccr�erce to the Mqyor indicating a su�asry of the meeting of the 22nd� rrith interest fram that mseting to pursue Yurther davelopment. Siace that timo� we have had five Council meetings whieh dealt with the diseussion ot hiring a consultant io look at the ares aad what types of thinga they would be looking at in the area. On November 16� 1978� the agenda and attendance list of meeting to hear coneultant's pr�posals. On December 18th� a consultant was decided upon. It took a y�ar Yor t}ut procese to take Blaee• Mr• Boardman etated that his point srith all thia vas to ahov the Caummiesioners that thtre hsd been a lot of diacuseion and a lot oY discusaion with the bueinesa men in the area that has been going on and it ie an on going process that they started a whole year ago� on Febivary of 1978. After e consultant wae hired, thcy set up the Businesa Taak Force Committee. The Businean Taak Force Co�ittee had several me�tings where thay diacusaed the iseuae involved, the tax inerement financing� assessment districts, etc. to finance projecte within the area. At those ti�s this area was pretty much lqyed out in tbis me�nner so to date the discusaions heve primsri]y been coneerned with thia area. Mr. floardman indieated Un the map the area he had deacribed above. Mr. BoardIDrn went on to atAte thnt on Februsry 29� 1979 there was a joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Ccu�ission and the ARA to discuss thr Center City Project, So they have involved the City Council, the Planning Caaonission and the HRA in the proceas so thia is not necessarily the first time the Cam¢aissioners were looking at it. Unfortunate�y, because of the tlme table they have had to follow during the past week and a hald�'� the planning process has speeded up considerab]y. He statsd there were several things he wanted to point out at this point in time. Picrt o:il,y wae the Busine�s Task Force Co�ittee astablished but there was also a Managea�ant Task Foree Co�ittee established which included primnrily all of the interested partiea on the City Staff. The members of the Management Task Force Committee included Mr. Qureshi es the City Manager, NTr. Brunseli_ as far as the Pinance goes, Mr. Sobiech as far as the Public Worke goes, Mr. Turnbull fr� the Pplie� Department and himself, Mr. Boax�dman, the City Planner. Sc> sll oi the areas of the City Hall were involved in the Tsek Force. They held a series of Manage�nt Taek Force meetings all through the process starting with when the ecrosultant was hired for the project. They have also had within the proeess and w3thin the Business Task For¢e several oi the property mruera involved. Those property oFmers not involved in the Taak Force were met with a�td the eencepts and ideae were diecusaed. Mr. Boardman atated that he and Mr. Doyscher had also �t with Mr. Levi who ocme a major portion in the srea and alao with Norma 3wanson. Mr. Boardman atated that Gus Doty vas on the Task Force along vith Merk Haggarty. He stated that the City holds a contract for deed on a major portion of the Christenson Center,__ , They have also diseussed and hsd meetings with St. �Williams Church regarding the Project. As far as the County involvement goes, the City Menager� Dick Sobiech and Mr. Boardman ast down with Ralph MeGinley on May 2, 1979 and discussed the potential on this. They went to the County Board and had a Couaty Bosrd meeting on TueeBay, May 8, 1979 and the County Board passed a resolution supporting City Council action in the development of the tax increment district. PLANNING CONAffSSION MEE'PTNG, MAY � 1979 PAGE 15 Ms. Schnabel r�ferrcd to a separate piece of �aper that was distributed to the Ca�irsionere and aaked what it xasT Mr. Boardman stated tk�at was the modiiicatiau oP ons sectian vithin the plan and thet was on pege 1 after the resolution. It referred to a atate�nt regarding a HRA development Yor loir income Yamilies a� elderly. They eliminated that state- ment fraa this �aection but it is in the document. The resaon they removed it at this point was primari�y legal. They were looking at ineluding Village Green. Hovever, whw they talk about Yreezing the taaes et the level� they were talking abeut freezing taxes at the level of 19'�8 and payablo tn 1979. B�eauee of that situation, ttu 19'78 s8$essed veluation on the property wae the asseased valuation without developasnt sad by leaving that statement 3n there at this point in time and saying that it includes this ia this;project� they vanted to maks sure that they had tim� to cheek vfth the ltgal stsYf on this to eea what kind of problems they m3ght get into. So at this goint in tim� they took it out and '6efore the public flearings if they need to replace that, ,_' �they will put it back in. But they Want to check with the legal staff on thst. With the iaclusion of the Village Green they have a very viable �roject. There was no question in their ninda tl�at it was e viable project because what it dces is it substantial]y creates tbe Yirat atag4 c�pletion which gives thsm a tax inerement to go into the other phases they:need to go into. What it does ia secures the project as Per as financial secur�goes and also givea tl?�'a buYfer Yor s� problema they msy run into. Another thing he wanted to mention wae tbet tax increment wea s tool the City usee. The City dces have an option. After eetting up the diatrict, they do have the option oP removing parcels from that district. He brought up that point because within a tax increment district they could remove pareele vithout going through the process but in order to inerease the size of the diatrict they would have to go through the same process they vent through in setting up the district. Anether thing the City has an option to do in financing a tax increment dietriet is that if nothing happene and they don't get s�V development� they;�an __ turn the money back with interest to the County u�d the School Distriet �d $fi� City as far as the taxes that have been collected over and abave that froaen level. . _ ,-_ ,. _ Iie rmu3a like to strese again i;hat tax increment is mere�y a tool that is available and can be used by the City. NL. Sehnabel asksd vhat would hsppen ii the School came dawn and esid no. Mr. Boardman etated that they did not require School District apprQv��aor;Ctountx „,,. apprrnral. They on�y approval necessazy is apprwal by the FffiA�, and the City Council. They would pass a resolution and that resolution must be passed by our City Council and at that point in time the tax increment district would be set. What they would tEien � nee s sometri�ng from t�e Counfy Auditor to=eerfi€y thrase valuesc They don t n�ed r_� _ aagrova� fiom t�i� County Auditor, just_the certifying of the values. What that means is they give the County Auditor a liat of the area With the assesa�i3on on it and they send it to the County and the Couaty looka at it and eqys those values are certified as the valuee that are going to be frozen at tkut level. Ms. Schnabel aeked how long they would be frozeni PLANNIxG CoD'AlISSiON MEETIriG, MAY g, 1979 PAGE 16 Mr. Boardmtn etated they aould remain frozen ae long aa the period vf time that the tex inerement diatrict ia in existence. He did not believe thore was a max- iaun time limit. What happena ia that they would be Srozen until the City pays aff ite bonde or bonded indebtednesa and co�plete� ita project. , � ,. - Mr. Ikan Doyscher came Yorvard and stated that he was the president of the Pro- fesaional Planning aiui Development Ca�pany and was under contract with the City of Fridley regerding the Center City Redevelopment arnl Revitalization Project. He etated that he would like to make sure everyone undsrstood what tax increment Pinancing was, but before he rrent into that he wanted to make sa�e statements rega7rding soate �ords that have been used here tonight auch as Preezing valuations and freezing taxes. When vre s�y s+e have to certif�j a value With Anoka County and Anoka County freezee a value and you are a taxpqyer in that distriet or a praperty rnmer in that diatrict, it does not freeze your value or your taxes. Your values will increase based on improvemente� inflation and other decisioss nRie by th� City� County, Sehool District and Stste Legislature. TherePore it also dces not freeze your taxes. All it dces is establish a mechanism for reeord keeping ior Anoka County to say that the City ef Fridley frooze or established this as the base year. On the base year ihere vas so much valuation. One year later there was this much vnluation. People are paying those additional taxes based on those additional valuations. The diYYerence then is what they call the the capture increment. Ifr for example, they freeze this and it all has an asscsse8 valuation of $100�000 and based on a L0� inflation of property assessed valuea in 1979 or 1980 it would have an asseased value of $110�000� thoae people wo�3].d pay taxes based on assessed valuee of $110,000. The County vrould eollect taxes based en $110,000 but they would onl,y diatribute moniee to the taxing jurisdietions based on $100�000. The other monies or the mill levy times 1A,000 Would be distributed to the City of Fridla:y ssid the City of Fridley�s HRA. So� peaple Who do bueiness here� own property or pay taxes do not aee any changes in the normol course of whats been happening over the past years and what rrill heppen to all!other propsrty in the City of Fridley. Ms. Sehnabel stated that was aseuming that the mill l�vy R*ould remain the sa�e. Mr. Doyscher stated that the mill l,evy vrovld have no basis here. The mill levy on the ineresaed valuations, if the mill levy is inereased, it will also be applied PLAPINING CONAff33I0N MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 - PAGE 17 ageinst the increased value aad those tesing jurisdictions vill get th� differenee in the incrense in the mill levy. So we don't freeze a mill levy on an,qbc�d�. Mr. Oquist atnted that they were not free2ing axS}rthing then. Mr. Doyscher stated they vere not freezing e�thing Yor the taxpayer. Just in the matter of how the �ney ia distributed Yrom the County. The County collects sll taxes and the County diatributes taxea based on the City budget� the School District b�get an8 the County budget a�nd the other specisl tr+xing diatriet'a budget. They dietribute only to that Yrozen lenel based on 1978 vsluea. The diPference betweea the 1978 value oY $100�000 and the 1979 Qalus of $110�000� tYiat $1A�000 vill be distributed to the flRA to accomplish the gosls �nd objectivea of the Center City Redevelopment Project. They are also asking that the HRA sign contractual agreemeats with the City of Fridley so that the City of Fridley is the Yinancial agent end reaponeible for the adminietration. The reaaon they feel that way is because the HRA etafP ia the same as the City staff and the City has the financial Where with all mecl�aniema present]y at it'e disposal to handle thia tyge of accounting�for_ type of decisiaars. The HRA will alwe�ys p3�y it�s rale in deciding on redevelupment objeetives, gcal;;,policies� evalueting private developere proposals� amending the plan ii n�eessary and all oY those activities. A11 financiel obligations 3ncluding the aetual determinations of aequisition of property, the selling of general oblige- tion bonds and the like� will rest with the City Council. Mt. Oquiet asked if the HRA would then recammend the disbursement of funds but Couacil etill �kes the final deciaionsY Mr. Doyscher statad in terms of the arrangemant in the City of Fridley� the City Council �ri.11 be prime faetor in the decision makiag. ids. Hughes etated they aould nOt be legally esta6lished. Mr. Dc�acher etated that legally , they rrould be because they are �igning a contraetual arrangement beteeen the ARA and the City. Lh�. Hoardman atated that what that dces is put the City Council in the situatipn where thexe ie a Houaing Authosity but it is contraeting with the City Council to carry out the Housing Authorities Punctions. Mr. Doyecher stated that additiona27,y there were Minnesota Statues regulating the iasuance of general ebligaiion bonda� a�d it alwaye rests srith the City Council; no mntter vhat City you are talking about, to iseue ar;y bonded indabtedness againet 3t's residents and it�s property. Whea they talk about risk on this project� the nal risk is the f3nsncial riak and that riek is evident in the iasuaace of bonds and repaying the bonds. 7'L'hat vill always rest �rlth the City Council regardless of vhat they say in this document or regardleas of vhat kind of contractual arrange- ' ment provided in Minnesota law. City Councils are the only ones that issue general obligation bonds. Ms. Hugh�s atatacl that ahe vas �urprisad that the HRA could eign avay it�e respon- eibilities. She statsS ah� didn't understand thst but it wasn't important right na�. PLANNING COZfi+�LL3SI0NMMEETING, MAY 9� 1979 - PAGE 18 Mr. Doyacher stated he felt it was important to undcratand what the role of everybody is eo we don`t get those confused. Tax incresbent legislaiion appears in two different areas of Mi.nnesote Law. One is the HRA and one under s special piece oY legielation eslled tax increment Yinancing larrs. There ar� a whole hoat of reaeons rri�y we choose to operate in Fridley under the Housing & Redevelopment Authority. Prim�ri7y� the tax increment law as a eaparate piece of legislation� limits project areas to six acres� no more than six ecres� no more than one percent oY the City's aeseseed valuation� no more than three percent of the City's planned area. It hss special requirementa and dcea not need a HRA at all. It only needs s City Cc>uncil to do that kind oY legielation. The HFtA 1aw on the other hand also allwe the establiakiment oP a redevelopment district financed by tex increment through the sale of general obligetion bonda or through the sale oY revenue bonds. It ie legal to sell revenue bonds but historical]y no one has agree8 to se�:l them. It allasrs larger areas. It allws more flezibility in the redevelopmeat process. Thoae wers the t�+o key areas to establish thia d3atrict. The six acre thing would wlmost nake ua get into the same clifficu3tiea that� in hie opinion, the Centcr City hae been in anyvay which ia amall lend parceling.in cne of the prime co�ereial areas of the City. Mr. Doyacher steted that tax incre�nt is alloired uader those two areas. The baeic purpoae oY tax increment iinancing is to redevelop. It �ras originelly deaignad for twe purposes. To cause a redevelopment for housing and safe, sanitary snd heslthful. conditions tor loW and moderate inca�e familiee, and also to redevelvp areas that are deteriorated or blighted. Some of the vordage iaeludee Paulty planning, amell land percela� saYety hazaxds and the like. Tax ia¢rement financing is thRii under the Redevelopment Authority a finsncing vehicle. It doea not require a statemeat at the Pront end that each p3�ce of property rrill be developed 1n a very apecific manner. But it allmre us a financing tool in the mnnn;r he described previous]y, housing re-evaluatians-where r,+e get the gains. A very specific example here is the Village Green area. It will genexate substsntial caeh Ylcxta to the City and Housing Auth�rity in the very near future. Next year in fact. It will give the City the finaneial feasibility and where with all to meke decisions on other property acquisitions or street trmffic improvementa or utility impravements end things oY that nature in thia who2e are�._ hfr. Oquist ssked how Villsge Green srould give us that money? Mr. Doysckur etated that vas because we are Preezing those values a'� t e last certified date. The last izertified dste ie 19�7 values. The resaon 1979 values� altheugh they are pre3iminari�y caleulated� are not certifiable values because sll tax equalizetic�n hearinga have not been held an�1 ad,justments made� time spans are still in efYect for psople to aek that adjustmenta be made on their assessed values for 1979, etc. So that is not certifiable value and would nat be a certiYiable �alue until October at the earlieat. You slveys pay taxea on last year's values. What do v� have then far 1978 values? in i978 vilia8• Gresn was vacant property. On Jxnuary 1, 1979 that project was probab]y 40� camplete. On Janus�ry 1, 19�0 it will te 100'� ccmmplete. There is a substantial dif�erenee betvreen tbat Yrozen velue of vaeant property in 1978 a� the fully developed prdperty in i979� Mr. Qquiat atated that then it would be taxed according]y and we get the difference which would be the capture. PLANNING COt�RdI$SION MEETING, MAY 9� 1979 PAGE 19 Mr. Doyscher ststed tlut wea correct. He etsted thpt basically they thought the follrnring was aecurate: As cacant property be tHrought it had an aseessed value of around $15,000. On January 1� 1979� or the essea�ed values in front of the tax equalisation board now, has an aesessed value of nround $2,000,000. In 1 G� it will have au esse�sed valued oi arou� $4�0�,000. It ia also a projset of a special nature in that it ie financed by the Minnesota Huuaing Finanee Ageney and the Dspartment of Houaing and Urban Development, and reYerred to as a Section 8 Project. In a Section 8 Project, halY oP the value ie forgiven for tax compu- tation purpoece. So a project like that� inatesd of an aesessed valus at basically 40� of market v�lue� this project is 20� of the market value. So our asaeseed values are ac�aasWhat lesa than, whett he says $4�S?OO�OQU that's a market-ualue� and the sssesaed value is around $1,000�000. �` . So minua the $15,000 we wonld have a capture o� $985;000. This irill generate subataatial moniea. He thought they were in the neighborhood of $75�000 to $120,000 nnnually for the Fridley HRA. Couneilman Sehneider asked if that money� tha $75,000, would go strictly to th�e tax inerement districtt I� doea not get mixed in with the general fund or be used for other things. Mr. Doyecher stated that was correct. Tht money would go direct],y into a apecial aceount ior the Center City Project and it would be eceounted Yor under speciel funds and the City will report to the County and to the School District a�ually the ststus of that account. Mr. Harrie asked if� as far as thie account gces� could that money be invested or ia it like an escrow secount7 Mr. Doyscher stated the money could be invested. Mr. Boardman steted that if for some reason tt�at diatrict is nat cyperable or some- thin� like tkiat� the money earned an the inveatment must be returned to the County and the School Diatrict. Afr. Oquist esked what the School District �rould do with the money if it were return�d7 Mr. Doyecher stated that �f it were returned to the County they xould have a great deal of latittixle as far ae what they could do vith it. But the Schocl Dietrict would be reatricted under, he aseumRd, the present restrictions of property taxea which Would generall,y mean it could not be used for operatian, salaries or admin- istration, but generally for retirement of capital debt and land or building iar provements. Mr. Boerdm�n steted it could alep go for those things not covered by State revenues. Mr. Aoyecher atated that Anoka County and School District 14 did not have ax{y reason to get excited for the following reaaons: First� they eontinue to receive the taxes on the valuation at the 1978 values. So ia easenee they are not losing avytHing. Hiatorical7y� this area has not� in the paet ten years� made any aubstantial im- provements, So histortcally the Ceunty and Sahool have not seen any great valustions anyz+sy. Aqy rsdevelopment that xcurs at the end of this increment period will be captvred by the City, County and School Dietrict. Up unttl that pofnt there hasn't PLANNING COI�4ffSSI0N I�ETING, MAY 9s 1979 - PAGE 20 hiatorieally b�en any changea so that anything that over the long run vill imprave this area snd cause valuations to increase and therefore tax revenues are a poeitive influence. The 3chool Dietrict especially ia not har�d because of the conatrainte of the State law. He th�vght the County mad concerns and investments in Miaaiaaigpi and University Avernie with the State Highwqy Department improvements there and the County olso has general land uss considerations they are planning so they would like to aee iaprove�nts. Neither oi them are in effeet losing revenue Yram what their present history haa been. Over all, to Anoke County, this i� a minute amount of frozen valuations. The rsaaon Hennepin County has concern ie because the City of Minneapolis has sold bonds aad made investmsnte and the redevelap�nt has not occured. Also the City hae aequired property and cleered it a� reievelop�ent hae not occurrad. That's vhere yeu get negative flows which requiree Hennepin County to work out with the City of Minneapolis:,hcnr they are going to pay. And Mtnneapolis has a problem beeauaa they are not making enough money to pay ofY their general obligation bonds eo they sre atarting to have to look at their rnm geaeral revenues to pqy the bond holdera. This happened because Minnes�polis took riska in terme of b�ing lsnd� clearing it and making it available for development or redavelopment and those things didn�t oceur in a timely fashion. The consternation betrrsea Hennepin County snd Minneapolis hae been becauae oi the monQy flar, not the concept. That is part of the reaeon for the changes in the law. The ehanges in the law give the County more authority in determining which values are Yrozen and fcr horr lomg they are frozen and rrhich ones you should capture and which onee you cannot espture. It severe]y limita eoll�eting revenuea from areas vhere you really didn't cause ax�ything to happen. It happened because their ovn— p�vafe market places rrem responding to the supp],y and demand and the City really didn't cause a�thing to happen therefore the Couaty is not going to allow them to capture. The County will also set requirements in terms of when things have to be bonded for and when they have to be repqyed. So there are some changee in the laW in that regard. He stated that he had been on legislative advisory co�itteea for tax increment Yinancing. They heve beea Lefore the State Legislature for at least four yeare that he is aware of on changing and they hsve yet to change. There are lots of reasons they haven't changed. They met with League of Minnesots Municipalities or League of Minneaota Cities and it is that orgsnization that has been primari�yr responsible for carrying the compromises between the counties and cities and advieing the State I,�gislature. In fact in this legislative session they are doing the same thing. He went over this project with the League stafY for two reaeoae: Fir�t, how vould it fall into any aea laWS or chsnges that they see and two, ia this the type of project that the State sees as a reasonable pro- ject as appoeed to eom� of the people vho recent�y critized Bloomington Yor their tax increment project. The League oY Minneeota Cities eays that this ie s project of the nature and type that the State Legislature concurs srith and the League concurs with and that it is a viable project. Mr. Doyecher stated that the role of the Planning Cc�n.ia�ion was to adviee the HRA that the proposed land usee are in conformance rrith overall City goals and lend uee policiee. That is vi�at we are asking for. PLAI�7NIHG CONAIC3SION MEETING, MAY 9�1979 =__ PAGE 21 Councilman Schneider stated that tea years our property taxing atrueture Will be iifferent Yrc� vhat it is todqy aPtsr a fev yearo of legislative changes pnd he asked how that would efPect value of the captureY Mr. Doyacher stat� he �rould give him a negative. In CaliYornia tax Proposition 13. What Praposition 13 and the heighth thst it got ia other state legislatures con- sidering cPoher states adop�t that legislatiam. In eesence xhat Propoaition 13 Nas to roLt back property valuea. The Cities and Counties of CaliYornia did not increase mill levys but they had very fast increaeing vslues so they had big value adjuetments on those same mills• In Minnesotx that is a little diPferent. But if such a atate legislative acti�n Were taken vhera property values were rolled back or hw ymu j�lge property valuea vere to subatantiall,y reduce� you weuld atart to generate negative flws. No question that this is a concern. At the time the Celifornia legislation was being i�rped around the nevn media, there was a concerted effort at thst time to form a Lo�al Urban Aifairs Cv�.i.ttee in the Senate and House. What Would happen to tax increment projecteT If thay Were going to make a roll back in vslues in responae to tax atructures� these dietricts may be conaiderad aa speeial districta or Prozen. That is a possibility. It wsa his feeling that right nrnr tture were a good number oP districte for wortk�y public purpoaes and they hace sc�e merit. But he couldn�t guess, nor wouid he intend to, guess what the State I.egislature might do. They could make adjustments so thia is sa�ething thmy have to te careYvl of. You can etill meke miatakea. The other thing you have to be eareYul of is plugging in inflation numbers. 5ame tax inerement districts are created strictly on inflation. Inflatiea is an up epd dorrn thing and maybe prw perty won't inPlate so to baae it on that kind of judgeaent you could make an error. The State Legialatures really control the �thodology that we use. Councilaan Schneider asked if it vae fair then to eay that a�y change they Would make in the method of caleulating values or taaes could ef�'ect itt What if they don't change the mect�enism for calculat3ng values but change the formula for cal- culating taxes. Mr. Doyscher etatsd that almoat sll of this vas baeed on value� preperty values. So he vould see that as bein� the critical faetor. As far se the method of collacting tazes� you can aay all that you want about it, but 1t really is based on rrhat values you aet and then you juat put numbere to it. If you are going to allw or eay City Couneils �rill no longer collect propertp texes at all and ve will distribute on a State aid Yormula. Conncilnan Sahneider stated that brought to mixxl the MeHutehin's Bi1L_ ___ . Mr. Harris aeked Mr. Doyscher if he saw tLat kind of a move on in the Legislaturei Mr. Doyeeher atsted that things have shiYted. It you were to ask h3m a year ago, r�rith aore Do�ocrata in th� i3ouse� there was a atrong force to say that property taxes are an unfair taxatipn method and that inco�e tax ia a more fair ta�xation methai. The less you depend on praperty tax and tht �re you collect on income and distribute baak to your political subdivisione� the more fair you are being. But tl�t philoaopY�y didn�t go anywhere even with ths splita that vere in sesaion a ye�r or two ago. But there was eonversation about it. He did not see that being PLANNING CODA�88ION MEETING MAY 9 1 79 PAGE 22 ths same. Hc saw more today that we vould like our lxal or political subdivisions be more Yinaneially responsible and programatically responsible unto themselves� with leee state ma�ates. He saw a shiYt to that kind of philosapt�y. So far no- c>ne hae besn afraid to eotablish tax increment projecta becsuse of a11 the etate legislative coaversationa. The League hae so much interest in this because there are at least 80 to 120 cities that Y�ve so�me sort of tax incre�nt projects at eome level of indebtedneas. Me. Hughes asked wi�y they had the tail on the distriet. She referred to the aerial photograph. Mr. Doyscher �tated that he saW the area ag being a neighborhood convenience area. That inclucled the whole thing. The area to the aest is a single Pamily reeidential neighborhood of superior quality and not in need of any apecial attention. The area deYined is all similar in terms of being a neighborhood retail and con- venience service ares. Almost all oY it including the tail has substant3nl arese of vacant property and prime eo�ercisl ares. Some srt the businesaes, even in the: tail� have high turnover as�rl less desirable uses than could be exgected in such a prime co�nercfal area. So�ee are in need of general repairs and improvements and certainly a need for overall parking and traffic impravements. It allrn+s us the possibility to interact ne�r development in a broader area. All the centers are neighborhood related. This is a goal locstion and has the possibility oY servicing office and expanded retail uses and special housing funetions. It could beccme an attractive area with improved pedestrian walking and ca�unications especially for the elderly and high density fami�jr projects built near here that are poor naw. The vacant land areas have little visibility and poor a�cess and therefore are not developed to the economie advantsge oP either the land rnmer or the City. There are a lat oi coniliriing land uses. They have s3ngle Yami�y atructures abutting co�merical use areas� warehouses vith outside storage. They have vacant land that hae been propoeed for develogmeat but never developed becauee of conflicting land us�s. Ms. Schnabel stated tkiat in regards to finencing� *ahat if there is a recession? This is a real possibility in the minda oY some economiats a� what iY we are iato this. What would happen to the City's obligationsT I�. Doyacher staked that once the City makes Yinancial obligations it is Yinancially obligated. When people bqy bonds, they expect to be repqyed. Citiea don't like to go into default. Once the City makes a decision to go into finaneial indebtednesa it lu s ths legal obligation to follo�a through. if it is in thet aituation of financial i�ebtedneas and a receesion happens to such an extent that all property values are dropped eubstantiall,y, it Would be very difficult. Ms. Sehnabel etated that then if the City �rere to proeeed with this and do it 3n various phaees that would be better. hfr. Dayscher stated it vould limit it'e financiel obliga,tion to that phase. He referred to page 9 of the documeat with the Table of Contents on the front. He quoted the follarirag from the second paragraph: °Eneh phase of reflevelopment shall reguire financial Pindinge of feasibility� separate contractusl s�reementa between the City ead a developer, City apprwal oi land use, zoning and such other requiremente that may be establi�hed, and compliance a*ith the goals and objectives of thia p1an." What they are s�ying here is that the City is not guing to enter PLANNING COA7ML3SION MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 - PAGE 23 into that phese of redevelopment until there is a coatractual agreement with a d�veloper. In the second half of that etatement is where we get into bonded iiuiebtednesa. Phase 1, ire d�cide to aequire and clear larai• We on],y do that vith e contractual agreement with a developer that he will develop it. That contraetual agrea�nt is apoken about in the Laud and Real Property Acquisition Plan and the Land Diaposition for Redevelvpa�ent Department in the Plan, which etates that they csnnot do it for speculation and they must meet certain require- ments. Ms. Hughea stated that Ms. Schnabtl's question real�}r gete drnm to if s�ething drastic happened aFteT the contract was signed a�d the land vas cleared� if they went bankrupt or there �ras a recesaion or so�thing like that, that would be the r.al problem. Mr. Doyacher etated that there wa� no queation that eities have the opportunity ta make miatskes. What they try to do is make decisions in a reasonable manner and meke findings of feasibiiity and mske judge�nts. Mistakes are made. We hope that we have enough protection in thia document and that City Council acta in a moet reasonuble manner in the future so those are eliminated the beat thcy een. Ms. Hughes asked iF he had any more negativeaT Mr. Doyscher etated that one of the goals oi this plan ia to create denaity in thie arq, to c�use redevelopment of atructures and people using those structures. The arg�ent aP scme of those people is that there are already traffic YloW pro- ble�� anci traffic hazard problems and safety probleme to property and life. By inareasing flws rre mqy in fact be increasing those kinde of problems, unless ve are very careYul about trying to imprwe internal movements on property which are nov exiting and left hand turn movements especiall,y at the interaections. That is an iaeue ell of us muet bc arrare ot. hh�. Boardman atated he would like to sdd that if an,y developer xent in thers now, even in the light of the developementthat ia existing ve would still have an inerease in traffic flosas. There are issuee involved in thia that xe cannot do a�thing about and that is the traffie flow that moves through thie area. It creates a problem a� if nathing is completcd or nothing is done then the trafPic patterns on the property like Holly Center, then even minor development may cause the same typea oP prnblems that we have wi.th major developmoat r+ith mod3Yications. i�. Oquist asked if the City could terminste this plan at a� time. Mr. Doyscher stated it could unless it has legal and financial obligstions. Mr. Oquiet etated that barring that� if �re cannot find developers *,rho vrant to come in here !or varioua reasons, aasuming we have no other obligations are can terminate the tax increment district? Mr. Doyecher atated tYuy could do one other thing whieh would probably be considereai at thet point. They could make a decieion not to collect the revenues and to readjuat the Frosen baae until you were more sure about d�velopment and to turn that money back �rith interest and allow them to stsrt eollecting whstever increases there are. PlANNING COlMff3SI0N MEETING, MAY 9� 1979 - PAGE 24 Mr. Oquiat at�ted he meant aort oY like table it. Mr. Doyscher atated they vould set the certiPication of values sside until sa�e- thing else vould help to span the legal establisl�nt u�ier the district. The certifications of valuations ie the real question. Ms. Hughea asked wk�y the dentist'a office included which ie right across fram another major part of the districtf Its right next to Holly Center. Mr. Doyscher atat�d he did not think there �ras eir�y overall by-proceas there. Ms. Hughes asked 1f it vas because that property vvner �aould be opposed4 Mr. Doyacher statnd that if they look historieslly as to hc>Fr the C3ty has viewed this area thc way they had defined it vas alWqye the azes. Ma. Schnabel asked �t he saw as the gosls oY a Center City Project bcing_done in FridleyT What do you hope to sccomplish out of itT She stated that she was having probl�ms because repeat�y throughout the dx�ent it says it 1s primarily a neighborhood center. Mr. Doyscher statmd that she rras reading the Phase 1 document and in.the other document we have gosls and objectives. l+bs. Sehnabel stated there �rere trro �ys she could �qy this. If you wsnt to speak speciPically to your goals and objectives she vazld ha^se eo�e ca�ents about that. She felt they were in the wrong oxder and she would make eame changes on that. In a lamg term goal and objective for the Center City Project for the whole project� basically they said it was s nieghborhoo3 center aad this is repeated time and agnin that it is a neighborhood conveni�nee service center. Mr. Boardmnn atated that Was sa it is exieting. Ma. Schnabel stated also ea it will be in the future. She hcis read in h�re that it ie not likely to change. Thet it will always be a neighborhood convenience eervice center. Her queetion ia if that ia true are there other goals she is missing that they think will be accompliahed as a result of this projeet? Mr. Doyseher stated he believed that the srea was a neighborhood convenience service eenter. The reaeon they say that is becsuse When they firat started rorking on this it bscame apparent thAt it �s a service center. Some people refer to it as a retail center but it ie a personal service area net a retail area. At one point it was a retail area. By geraonal services he meana dry eleaning� laundry, barbars, etc. as opposad to a�oeery �toxg. Hol�y Center is a retail center. Moon Plaza is a service center. It cras important in the inventory to let everyb�dy know that we believe it ie a service center. Unless something happens it will continue to ba tk�at and it will decrease in its imgortance. The reason Yor that is because it now drave froa� not only this neighborhood but frami aome neighborhoods on the near nortb, Coon Rapids and thoee arees rrhere there are more developments occurring. Ms. Sehnabel stated that was to a diminishing degree. PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 25— Mr. Doyseher agreed aud stated it would beco�e lees important. Even though it has mor� traffic� that traffic is on its wsy out. The gosl then is not to mska a reglonal center. He did not believe it et�uld compete with a regional center euch sa Bxookdale or Northtrnm. It doea heve the possibility of be- coming a co�munity ceater but it will on7y do that if there are planned parcele large enough for people to develop. They don't have that size psrcel availsble right nair. He believes its nature ia to be a neighborhood conven�ence eenter and the �y to keep ite viability up e� to improve it is to bring more p�ople into the i�ediate pro�rimity of the neighborhood and we can do that in several manners. We could bring in office developments. Oi'fi¢e developmenta will have geaple there at least froai 8:00 to 6;00 snd those people may choose to walk to restaur.nts, drug storea� etc. It vould be an improvement oP the good deal oY vacant land they presentiy have. By bringing in additionsl hous#ag like Village Green. In that regard they would be talking about soaie sgec3alized housing for elderly, disabled or handicapped. It would be a very suitable loc�tion £or that sort of thin� because aY its nearnesa to and adjacent to residential areas and yet vithin close promimity to convenience areae. Whet might be feasible is to allow ofPice develapment in trro parcels and a housing development in another parcel and to cause enough pedestrian traffic flo�r and aite improvements. We may be able to rehabilitate and enclose Moon P1aza so it bec�es a more viable center ttun it is now. We could also make sarue improvements in the Hol�y Center. Thoae would continue to be neighborhoad convenience centera but they would a greater dr�wing population base and they would hsve an overall improved area to draw on and they would have a more suitab�jr develoged area rather than vacancy and the un- kempt kind of there is right now. It vould also keep eome atrength in the existing centers.oY some size. Some of those need structuael improvements. Me. Schnabel stated that then basically rrhat he ia s�ving was they were hoping that through the Center City Froject they would bring more people into a closer proximity to the existing co�ercial establishments. Mr. Doyscher added it would also improve the general conditions axxl better utilize the land resources. Ms. Schnabel ststed that another problem she kiad was that it srould not neeesssrily attract more people to the area from those areas that are now diminishing or not being attracted. Mr. Doyacher agreed unless they got some specialized reataursnts or sa�ething thet responds during the day to aPfices a�l are attractive enough. Mr. Bo�rdman stated that another thing we have to look at is the traffic flow problem. We have some problems r3ght nw because some people who are reslly in close proximity to the arca do not use the area becauae they have no access. We have accesa problemn� to look at too. IP ve can solve samie oP those problems and provide an easier flox v►ithin the aree as far as traPfic goes� we may be drawing more of those people that live in the area in close proximity for utilization of that area primarily because it mskes it easier Yor them to use that ares than to go to Northtovm. It may not have the same attraction as Par as Northtown but there are servicea there that the people Would use if they were easi],y svailable. PLANNII� COHfidI83I0N MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 - PAGE 26 Mg. Hughes asked hov thC four quadTants of Miasiselppi and Univeraity tie together or will they ever? Will they alvays be quite separate? Mr. Doyschtr stated that he did not think they rould tie together. They could tie togother north�south. Aside from adding aome turning improve�nts and soms aignalizAtion imprwementa xhich the City intends on doing it �rill be an imprwe- ments. This is a atate highrray and they are not going to iund depressing the highrray. Their gc�sl is to meke traffic mrnre fsster and the goal of the �ople in the arsa is to slaRr it down. The state rrill win because there is a lot aP demand to get the traffic going. To bridge it with n pedestrian walkway� the proof of those things is that unless thcy chain link feace it sud give people no slternative but to use it, they are like�y net to use it. The idea is to take this elder]y building and toWnhouse and this park a� another area where they would ez�eate an oiPice and create pedestrian mwements and hopeful�y make it move back and Porth. This whole area is oriented to the automobile� ncrt to people and ualess they mske soa�e changes pmopZe walk a lot differently acrose a parking lot than they walk along a sidewalk. So he didn't think they vo�YYld get pedeetrian movcment in th� Whole area. It is very likely that it v�ill remain auto- mobile oriented. That is the nnture of etrip co�erciel areas. He f&lt they could create so�e pedestrian movement from the tm�mhouses along Misaissigpi to University. Mr. Herris atated they aould kiave to build in same specific waye of moving people eho �re handicapped or disabled eo they can move essi�y i'rom the elderly area denmm tc the shopping area e� that is not poesible norr. Mr. Doyscher stated if they set redevelopment gaels for the developer as to what they vant they could start to interconnect same of it. Mr. Aarrie etated they have to tie sa�e oY it together. They have six phases wnd the first phaee is the Chriatenson aree. We have already got the elderly reaidence and somehow as atert each one oY the pLaees they have to build into each phetee sc�+eway of getting people drnm to thait area. He agreed that every- one of those facilitiea wa� automobile oriented. We don't even have a sidevalk. They m�y even have to jump the gun in �hsae 6� which is the lower area. Ckwirmen Harris declared a recess at 10•15 P M and reconvaned the meeting at 10:25 P.M. - Mr. Oquist asked if he was a developer or busineaemsn whst xould entice him to come into this area. Mr. Doyacher stated he would e�caggerate it a� anavrar his question. Whst if he said_he wauld give you four acres of land for $1.00 and g�y for ell his parking7 Would you nov came in? They would give you four aereas oP the best land located one mile ir� the intersection of 694, uaderground parking and p�y for your utilities for $1.00. Mr. Oquiat stated he vas exaggerating. PLANNII�; CONA9ISSION ME�E'PING, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 27 Mr. Dcryscher agrecd but said he could do that and mske it work becsuee of the money they are getting back. Mr. Oquist etated there vas a point where tbe City has to stop t�oygh. Mr. Doyscher stated they could use the increment i� the following. For the purpcsss of diseussion, assumc they generate $50�000 a year. In ten years that Would be $500,000. That 50,000 wouid be generated off the V311age Green. Thet ie s conservative amount, we will generate more than that. So we generate $50,000 a� in t�n yeare we have $500�000. It coets us to acquire� for eacample� the coatract for deed on a etructure for $275�000. Llet�� sqy that it costs us $500�00o to ac u req this and xe �ell it to you Por $1.00. We still have tl�at increment and ten years Yrom now we vill have $500,000 again, but you meke a ca�itment that you will build a strueture on it. Right nox this area generates very little in taxee. YQUr nerr structure will geuerate �re so we would get mure increment. So we sell it to you for $1.00 and increase our cash flow even greateT than what 3t vas previous7y. The wqy we do that is we don't save up that $500�000 Yor ten years� we lmoror that it's comiag in so we pass a general obligation bond and get $500�000. Now� Yor Phase 2� `+e have this incr�ment that is going on but ve have another one that will etsrt Yeeding into the incre�nt to help paY for this. The hiatory is that once you do one or ttm� the rest happen by themaelves. Mr. Doyscher stated that this area aeeds a public incentive right nrnr to cauae it to redevelop. Ms, Schnabel asked 1Y he said they cleared the lanei bePore they had the develapert Mr. Doyscher stated he was a�yying they should have a contractusl agreement that this.dev�lop�r xill buy Pcur acres and build.on a time schedule and that he bonds for that and if he doesn't Follasr through the performnnce bonds srculd be p�yable to the City. So if he dcean�t follow through� he has a performance bond and that bond xould p�y to co�lete the project. Once the et�ntractor eays that the City contractuel�y eays they will prwide the four acrse cleared and available Por and in suitable condition for development in some tims period. Can the City meet s time periodY The City can meet a time period and the reason cities do these prcajects and not private people is because the city can cause ttiese people to move out and cause to bq}+ thia praperty saithin s time achedule. Mr. Boerdmsn stated that priva�e developers cannot do that. Mr. Oquist asked iP they meant to pk�reically clear itT Mr. Boardman atated that rras correct. The City has the tools available to put packegea together where developers don't. Ms. Schn�bel askea if the City of Minneapolis got into it's trouble beeause it vent ahead axxi cleared the land beYore it had d�velopers7 Mr. Doyaeher stated that wae correct. Here� �re are eaying that the City will not acquire land before 3t has a contraetu9l agreement with a developer. 'I'hat rr111 prevent that Yro� happening here. PLANNING COLAliS3I0N MEETING, MAY 9, 1979 P� � Mr. Oquiot stated that statement was in the doctmment but what makes thnt bi�ing? He asked ii this was a binding document for the City CouncilY I�. Boardman stated it rras a legal document and the ora�y way they covld change thst_ia by changing the actual tax incre�at plan. Mr. Oqui,t asked if the documents in the front were for that document and stated that the City was obligated to do that7 Mr. Doyecher etated those documents continually refer to the Center City Project. Me. Hughes asked if the Plan xould be published? �ir. Boardman stated it did not need to be published. The onl,y thing thet needs to be published is the district. Mr. Harrie stated tkiat it may be necessary to put in scme facilities in other districts vhile we are in Phase 1 if We ere going to tie the north aud south districts together. It me�y be necessary to put in some sidewalke or saime sort of interior street or iralkt►ay or bikewqy betvreen other phases. Mr. Doyacher steted tk�at legal�jr� sssuming that there ia financial Peasibility� we can mqke genaral improvementa of a public nature in a� geograBhic portion of this district. Aea�e that a developer had ca�i.ttsd and we vant right then to tie into eame kind of walk pattern or we vant.to create aome kind of landacape standards or lighting eta�ards throughout the whoie distMet. It is gossible at that point to set those standards and put all that in. It srould be part of the inerement. The follrnring are eligible increment p�nt costs; Lend acquisition, land pre- garation, relocation coste/ provision of public Paeilities and public improvea�nts auch as atreeta� aceesees, srater� sewer and thoee type� oP things� on-aite iIDprove- �nts including parking if that is a deteriorating condition and general public beautificatiar sta�ards. What would not be legal would be building the building for the person� Yinancing the peraon� remodeling or pt�ys3cal 3mprwemente, buying a structure and meking it available for resale is not 1ega1. The kind of thing that Mr. Harris was talking about �uch as looking st a broader range aad maybe doing mvre than juet that phase is permiasible. Mr. Eiarris stated they may have to do it. Mr. Doyscher stated they may have to in a�e cases like the service road. It is not servieing as well as it was intended ancl wm mey want to divert sc�e of the move�nt. So they might be talking about publie improvements that reqnire improved eccesses. The incre�nt should pqy for that. Mr. Herris stated that one ot the problems with the whole areasis tra£fie and sccess and that msy be the pri�ry groblem and the reason it has developed the way it has. It may be neceseary that we go in and solve the trafYic and asaess problems before it rrill work. PLANNING COIyAiLSSION I�TING� MAY 9, 1979 - PAGE 29 Mr. Doyecher stated that the other thing they want to be careYul of is sometimes ve anticipate uses and then a land developer comes in end rre hQVe to go back and meke changee. IieA R+ould prefer in this instance to set some averall goals and standards but to permit thst developer or redeveloper to plug in and mflke sure that our eoncerna are knos,m and aork with that land without some givens already tsking place. Me. Schnabel stated this brings up the goals on pe�e 8. She felt that some oP those should be rearranged and she felt that C and D should come before B. Mr. Doyecher stated these gosls rrere not in order oP iaiportance. Ms. Schnabel stated tHat if that was true end the first phase was the Christensen Center property. 5he had a problem because What iY the stated objective in here is to generste people and one of the methods of doing that is through an office building. It sounds good but then they talk sbout needing Your acres of land� and when �he read this she wanted to kno�r why xhen they had four acres of vacant lsnd on the southxeat corner are they not talking ebout putting that sa� oYfice building th�re. If this is s valid argument for this property� wby hasn't tkiat already happened? Where has the need been demonstrated that there should be an oYFice building.oY thet size and that nature and if there was a need wby hasn�t anybody built it theret Mr. Doyacher atated that sometimes ac�uers do not develop property for a whole host_of reaaons. They could be financial reaeons or their own goals and objectivea. The rnmer may not be Willing to ris� the developmest of office space. Also, the rnmer may have values aet on it which other people believe to be unreslistic. A third reason is that he may not go out and active]y promote construction on it. What we esn do is make the land very attractive in terma of price, me could supply s lot of other improvements thet are irequently needed in an office space such ss parking and ve can go out a� pro�ote th$t plan with the development of pro- apectus' and imprwe�nts to meke it available. We can do mary}+ of those things tk�t a private person could not 80. Ms. Schnabel asked if it wmxld not be cheaper in the long run Por the City to conde� thnt vacant lsnd under this type oY plan than to go through the acquisitlon and condemnation of a21 thie other property vhere they have to pay relocation costs. Mr. Doyacher atatad they have to conaider other goals. ,It is not e good exiating use, not in good condition, inadequate parking� g�neral unkempt appearance, con- flecting land uaes. It would be a reasonable gc�al for the City to try to mske sc�e improvementa in this area. Ms. Schnabel stated that her point vras that they have a piece of property elready auited for what they are aaying should go oa there and theyr choose to ignore that. Mr. Doyscher atated that he did not choose to ignore that. There is another given. The City wos eoncerned abaut thia property too and in faet exercised a contr�et for deed to b�r it. Thet contract for deed hes time limits and expiration dates which meeas the City either folloas through or legal�v givts up the contraet for deed. There are decisione that took place in the past that need to be thought abaxt. PLANNING COMHLISSION MEETING, MAY 9, 1q79 PA� 30 Mr. Doyacher went on to say that he thought office space xas a via��e option beeause ire have Pive neighborhood convenience centers and we dontt need any more. To briag in another retailer we have to make an asaumption tkiat this retsiler will do so�ething different from Holly Center or hbon Pla2a.othexviec vhat they might be doing ia hurting Holly Ceater. He didn't think that would be in the 6eet interest of the project. Ms. Schnabel stated that she still Yelt it vould be better to put the office building on the other property. Mr. Doyscher stated he eas not arguing that there shouldn't be an office there. In fact he Peels it should be an office or housing unlese they clear so� of this out like the Rice Center anci put in a better ki� of center. But When some of that land was sold, it eliminated access. In his opinion the eliminstion of two oT three of these centers wauld aot be all thet negative. We could do something about ofPice or retail if we do so�ething about site design. Another thing is that he Yelt this had a market area for housing� deasity type housing. Ms. Oquist stated that vhat he �ras hearing was they vant to clear that area out because it is blighted and there is no blight oa_the vacant land. He also under- atood that they were trying to develop the esst side oY Univeraity rather than the west side. To start erith they want to concentrate on the east side. Mr. Doyscher stated that if they could cause development of a euitable nature that meets the goals of thie plan they would not be looking to spend public money. It can heppen by and oY itselP if it is a+ned by one o�+ner aad is vacant it is likely to happen. Ms. Hughes asked what the possib3iities oY the City imposing s deadline on this Por itself. Mr. Doyecher stated he vould not reco�end that. Mr. Boardman stated he did not think that was a good idea. Based on development end the �rket place they could be restricting themaelvea more than they real�y ahould because of market plaee attitudes. Me. Hughea aake� if they couldn't say 15 yeara or 10 years and the reason she •�ksd that wse ahe wornlersd if that would really be signiPicantY Mr. Doyscher etated thet the real deadline was the district. They operate the diatrict for the term of ita indebtedness. When that indebtedness has been payed ofY and the goala kiave been achieved� this dietrictr,3s no longer in e�cistence. The problem with a lot of deadlines is that a lot crL' diatricts Were �*+��distriets_ � for one usreel. Our diatrict is aet in nhases so that we can go out of debt and into debt intthe same year. How long tPiat Will go on ia a response to the initia- tive oY the City and the general ece�nomlc condition of Minnesota and things we have no control over such as market places. We are not legally required to place a limitation. We are legally required to pay off the indebtedness. PLpPtNING CO2�ATT83ION MEE"PFNG, MAY 9� 1979 - PAGE 31 Ms. Hughes stated ehe was thinking as a taxp�yer. Mr. Doyseher atated that as a taxpqYer they were reslly gaining. Mr. Hora asked about the humen elementY What about the people rrho are already there7 Mr. Doyecher stated thst the plan includes a plan ior relocation. The bueineas ogeratora and o�mera will be payed relocation benefits even iP they don't o�m the property. The City will gay to relxate them in an area of their ehoice. Mr. Oquist amked,what would happen if they didn't riant to move? Mr. Doyecher etated they trould have no chaice. Th� will try to me.ke it as fair as possible. Mr. Bonrdman stated if they wanted to stay in the area� they could possibl,y �ve into a new building therE. Mr. Harria ata�ted that they irould have to look at the stvnm sever service in this area a�d vould have to have a comprehensive plan Yor the vhole thing. It is all tied together. Mr. Doyscher stated it would be a mistake to use sll the Yinancing to solve the sever problmm. There vas the option that the developer pay asseasmenta aleo. Ms. Schaabel sekcd if pepple in the other areas of ths City *+oiild be psying in some r�y for the Center City Project? Mr. Dayscher etated that the only way they rrould pqy is if the City sells general obligation bonds and the redevelopn�nt doesn't pa4y general obligation bonds, then the City xill either have to generate nev taxes or take out general revenues to pay bond holdera. The only other Wqy they vould p�y ie if ViL�.aga Green was aat included in the increment district� those taxes aould then be distributed probab�y 20'� to the City� 60�, to the 3chool District and 25`� to the County. That's 20� of the reveaue bonds that goes to the City that is not ncs�+ going to the City. The question is most of the aree eith the exception oP Village Gre�n there would not be any increase. It�s not ♦ loea oY inca�e they have already been getting, it's just not an increase. Mr. Boardman stated that they were tal3ting in the Center City area oP an assessed valuation of $2,666�000 or in that area. For Dietrict 14, the asseasad valuetion i� around $78,000�000 to $80�000�000. So� they are talking sbout $2,000�000 as c�pared to $80�000,000 tote�l. It effects the School District by about .3 mil. It effeeta the County by about 7�lOth of 1;6. Those are generallY the Yigurea that ' we look at. � -- - - - - " � � --- ---- - _ �'- __ — .._ PLANNING COT�IISSION MEETSNG, MAY 9, 1979 PAGE 32 Me. Hughes ;sked if thia would ePfact any other ana of the Cityi She vas coneerned about the area north on University rrhere there ia some ecr�mereial development and vhat the impact vould be on that aren. Mr. Boa�rdmen statsd they were looking at tvo diiferent types of ec�ercial. Thie co�ercial is more service oriented. Those co�esreials will survive no matter rhat they do because they are the suto dealerahips, and the typea oP things tka4t thrive �long the high traffic volu� typs erea. They are trying to limit theae types of strip co�aercials sa much as poesi'hle r+ithin the City juriadietion. As far as the othsr areas go� the area 'to south ia Holid�y Vil].�ge aml that is an eatablished use and x111 remain no matter what happsns. Tha Mac- Donald's and restaurant chains are also going to remain because they are eetablished uses And thrive on strip type traffie. The other ac�ereial areas are in the City are the Skywood Ms12 and Tsrget district. That area Will remain because it ia s high traffic movement area and pulls in a lot of difieront areas. The Skyvood Mall ia service oriented but to the extent that it aervices a difPerent population. The on],y other service area that msy be effected ie tkce Shorewood Plaza. That is also a vory limited usage area es far as its orientation and it probably needs aome imprwement and at a�e point in time the City orili have to look at that center as a viable center area and ses what type of imprevement ie needed. It's a very turn- over type area and w will have ta look at it avd eee vhat we can do to make it a more viable area. He did not see where by not developing this area they would help the Shore�+ood area. Ma. Hughe� aeked Mr. Harrie' opinion rras of the projeet7 A4r. Fiarris atated he wwld like to lmow iirst ii ar�yone else had any questions. Mr. Treuenfels referred to page 6, Redevelopment Goals and Objectives, #D, and at$ted that nothing was said with respect to minorities or hand3capped people. fte asked if that vae implieit in the plan or @id they want to esclude those peopleR t�. Dayseher stated that he felt it was implicit and he Pelt that when the City of Fridley created the HRA had to certify and has� in the Section 8 Prpject, that it was an equal opportunities plan, a fair houaing plan and the like. Becsuse the City has adc�pted the Psqual Opportvnities Plan sizty action they take sre under those suspicea. Mr. Harria etated that he hnd read the doc�ent but Wish they had more time to think about it. They have beon talking about doing something rrith this particular intereQCtion area for same time. Th4 problem has been that of aceess and traffic. Another problem �rae that of the max�y ownerahips af porcels. PTobody could get the thing togather. It wculd take so�ething like this to move ehesd with thia arn3 put the project togather. There vere some things ti�at bothered him but it was diificult to put his f3nger on thsm. He called them loose eade and YQlt that loose omds slvays came back to haunt them. Mqybe they had thc�e loose e�le because they WerQ puahiag eo fast but he understood why they viere puahing so fast. On the other haud, if ax�ything ia ever going to happen to this ar�a, Tre have to do eomething and sc�eons hae to take the initiative and there ie no cme ela� around to do it but the City. He etated they hsd a large inveetment ri�ht here in the City Hall and they hsd a long discueaion wfth the City Council regard�ng`�ii1e. The Christenson pro�perty to the north of the Citq Ha].1 is legall,y and ltterally blighted. So to protect PLANNING COAIIrtCSSION i+�ETING, MAY 9, 1979 _ _____ PAGE 33 the City'a interests We reeo�ended st thet time that the City mske a mave to tie up the cnmership on the Christenson progerty bacsau�e it was going to be parceled otf in emall ineremeate. With all of th@ aisgivinga ve have about the project, he etill felt that iP we are ever going to meke this area int� anything ve are going to Y�rve to 8o it. And thc xay things are going in the state legis- laturs� it appeara thAt this ia kind of our last ehAnee. Thts is the s3tuation vre are faced with. If ve are going to make aqything of this ares and protect the City's inveatmeat right here� he Felt it would be a rrorthwhile project. Mr. Oquiet stated that the thing that mede the project attractive wss that we woulfl ttot bs obligated to as�Ybodg but the City, ourselves. The concern we had 15 Yeara ago was th�t we vould be obligated to HUD� tho Federal Gavernment� and they r+ould have cantrol. In this case, rre� the City� would have control. Mr. Harrie stated thgt in looking at Pt�ae i, if we ean get that ofY the ground, the rsst will kind oY take care of itselY. Ms. Schnabel statQd that she haa watched this area d�velop and felt it had developed very pswrly. She had problems bscause� first oP all� ahe agroed that something had to be dona with the area, but rrhen all is said and doae they would es� up with eseenti�l�y the s�e u�e they have nrn.r. The uae would not change. She saW them spinning e lot of wheels and doing a lot oY things. She had a specific groblem vith the St. William's Church property. She etated that had been tex exempt property for all these years and has a problem vith the City going in and buying it. She vns conaarned about separationeof Church and State. Mr. Oquiat stated that he didn't see a�y problem vith the City b�ing that property as long as they had sameone �rho agreed to develop it. IY the Chureh is not going to use that property they might as vell get it into the tax rolls and get some use out of it . Mr. Boardmsn stated that property vas originally purchased for the expaneion of the Church. They have gotten indicetions irwn the pastor that it probably won't t�ppen. They Would juat be looking at the un$eve2opad porti� of the Church praperty. Mr. Boardman and Mr. Dayscher tutve aat dmm vrith the ChUrch and have had some discuesions with the potentisl of a handicapped housing sahich requires a non-profit sponaor. In that rray it woui,d be an ideel situation 3f the Church xould provide the aponaorahip for that type of development. The Church nt thie time is not that interested in becomning a sponaor, but thet mqy chenge. It is still a poLential. Mr. Harris asked wtqr they didn't ck�ange the aize of the district and wby they included the Q Station. Mr. Boardaan stated tMat by including the Church to the district they s+ere not picking up aqy taxes and by ttot including the Church they xere not losing any __ tsuces. They me�y have to lose that Q Station se far as access or something like that goss. He aaen't saying tbat Would happen� he waa just saying they might have to have that for aceess. They felt they should include some of these arcae for the purpoae of modification or c}�ange it neceasary. PLAI�NING CONIMI3SION N�'PING, MAY 9s 1979 - PAGE �4 Bfs, Schmbel stated she atill had a groblem wlth �by some of the vacant land ha�da't devslpped on it's owa and if it is viable ls�i wi�y hasn�t it developed• Mr. Boardman stated the ansver to that sras primarily cost and poor plsnning. Ms. Sehnabel stated that ehc wasn't sure that doing this would change that. Mr. Boardman stated there were tools available tkiat would spur that change. With the tax increment and other financing tools, they could give the area a shot in the arm. Mr. Ffarris stated thet if we don�t do something with this area now, the alternative is that this area will continue to decline and keep going dovnhill. He reYerred to the Christeneon Center in particular. Mr. Doyscher referred to the business survey taken with the people who operate businesacs in the area. The majority oP the paop�u Pelt it was a good place to do business. The people in Holly Center ie�l they have good to excellent profits. The people in Moon Plaza try to move to Holly. The people in Christensoa and Fridley Centers feel busincss is poor, and When asked iP they felt they could mske more mottey in s diYYerent location� the answer waa yes. Regarding the turn over rate, 25'� of the pecrple who do business here have done it Yor 28 months or lesa. Those are all loe�ted in Rice, Fridley and Chriatenson Centers. The people who felt business was pretty good� felt that iP it was cleaned up and the trsffic sltuation improved, they would make more money. Mr. Oquist asked iF we went through with this plan a� 1n three to Yive years Pound it vould not vork, hoW mueh would Fridley be outt Mr. Doyscher stated they vould out about $3�400.00. Mr. Oquist felt it was worth trying then if all we would be out is $3,000.00. Mr. Harris stated he cou7.d not see a viable alternative. Ma. Hughes stated that the critical thing Was the �ney that could be captured fro� the Villege Green and that vouldn't last. The t�pportunity was noir. Mo. Schnabel asked vho the �mbers of the Fridl�ey Houaing and Redsvelopment Authority�wereY A4r. Boardman stated the members were Elmer Priedites, the chairman is Larry �offiners, the vice chairman is Russei Iiouck?_86xo1yn SYensen,_and Y�st� _Aznold St�e. Mr. Harris atated that in the "Table oY Contenta" doc�ent on page 1, #4, that senten¢e ehould 6e changed to read as follows: "That the rerievelopment plan conforma to a general plan for the development oY the City of Fridley." (change redevelopment to development). E'LANNII� CO�SI39ION t�ETING MAY 9, 1979 - PAGE 35 ASOTION by Mr. TreuenYels} aecondad by Nfr�.,,Oquist, that the Plnnning Ccm�issi� 8��i a resolution that the Planning Co�ission of the City of Fridley finds the . — — Fridley Housing and Kedevelopment Authority's Center City Redevelopment_Plan consistent w��i tTie �preTiansive IIevelopment Plan of tfie City of Fridley and recotmnends_.�agroval of the Plan to the City Council. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CAAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE t�XYPION CARRIED '�. RECEIVE ENVII20NMEtfPAL QUALITY COi�ASISSION MINUPE3: APRII. 17, 1979: bt@��BN by Ms. Schnabel� seconded by Mr. Oquiet, to receive the Environmental ua ty Ct�isaion minutes oY April 17, 1979. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Boardaen iY they had received isput irom the Environmental Commiesion on the Compiehensive Develupmeat PlanT Mr. BoarBmnn etated they would be having anotkur meeting on thst. UPON A VOICE VQT'E� ALL VdTING AYE� CHAIRMAN H4RRIS DECLARED THE MO`PION CARRIED [TNANIB70USLY. g, xECEIVE APPEAIS CoN4ffSSIOx MlrltrrES: aPxII, 24, 1979: R�TION by Ms. Sehnabel� seconded by Mr. Treuenfels� to receive the April 2�+� i979 minutes of the Appeala Coamiaeion. Y�. Harris asked what had heppened vith th� townhouae business. Ms. 3chnabel atated they had sent it to Council with a recomme�lation Yor approval with the idea that the platting be changed ae diacussed at the Planning Cc�isaion. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE NR7TION CARRIED UNANIh10USI.Y . 9, RECEIVE COMMUNITY PFVELOPMENT COI�AfISSION SP�7CIAL MEETIPIG MIN[1TES: aPxlr. 24, 1979: MOTION by Mr. Oquist� seconded by Mr. Treuenfela� to receive the April 24, i979 miau—�s oP the Co�unity Development Conm�ission spe¢iel meeting. Mr. Qqeaiet stated he was not able to atte� tha'� meeting. Mr. Boardman stated that beeau'e of a conilict� a eeeretary vas not available so atsff provided the minutee. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL YOTING AYE� CiiAIRMAN HARRIS DECLAiiID THE M(YrION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. �EIVE PARKS &$ECREATION COB4�9ISSION MINUi'GS: APRIL 23, 1979� MOTION by Ms. Hughes� seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to reeeive the April 23� 1979, minutes of the Parks and 1?eereation Co�ission. PLANNING CObASIS3I0N MEETING, MAY 9� 1979 - PAGE 36 Ms. Hughes stated they had gotten through the Compr�hensive Development Plan and there vould bt scjme written yagea forthca�ing on that. Mr. Harris stated that he understood they had gotten the person involved in the Harris Iake Park businesa and that person was doing some clean up work. h�. Hughes stated there wssn�t ae mueh damage as they original�y thought. She eleo stxted they hxd received the 5pring Brook Nature Center grant of around $3Q0,000. The Park Ccmmmittee� Spring Brook and the City Council would be interviewing arch�tecta on the 16th and they expeet one will be hired within the week. Mr. Boardman stated they had gone through a revie*.r process and narrowed it down to three. UPON A VOICE V(YPE� ALL VOTING AYE� CfiAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARID TAE MOTION CARRIED UPtANIMOUSI,Y. l.�l. RF.CEIVE ENERGY PROJECT COhAfITPEE MINUTES: APRIL 24, ig79: MOTION by Mr. TreuenYels, seconded by Mr. Oquist to receive the April 24, 2979s m�nutes of the Energy Projeat Cammittee: Mr. Treuenfels referred to page 3 oi the minutes as esked if the publications "Energy Options" and "Energy Dile�as" would be available to other ca�missionsf Mr. Harris suggested he ask Mr. IangenYeld� the ek�irman of the conanisaion. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARID THE MOTION CARRIID UNANIMOIJSLY . 1�. RECEIVE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COI�ffSSION SPECIAL I�fEETING MINUlES: APRIL 26, 1979: AE)TION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels� to receive the April 26� 1979� minutee of the Environmental Quelity Co�iseion special �eting. Mr. Iiarris noted they wantad to make sure they had the input of the Environmental Quality Co�ission when they discuss the CamQrehensive Plan. UPON p VOICE VOTE� pLL VOTING AYE� CFiAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARID THE �%Y�ION CARRIED UNANTbAUSLY. 1�. CONTINUSD: DISCUSSION ON DRAFT OF COMPREfIENSIVE DEYELOPMENT PLAN: AlOTION by Mr. TreuenYels, seconded by Me. Sehnabel, to aentinue the diacuasion �he C�mpr�hensive Development Plan. UPON A VOICE VO�PE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HAIiRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIID UNANIN�USLY. r , � PLANNING C�SSION MEETING� MAY 9, i979 P�E 37 14. CONPINUED: PROP03ED CHANGES TO CHAPTER 205. ZONING• _ I�Yi'ION by Mr. Oquist� seconded by Mr. TreuenYela� to continue the proposed changes to Chapter 205 2on3ng. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN IiARRIS DECLARID THE MOTION CARR� i7NANIMOUSLY. 15. art� Bus�ss: Mr. Treuenf�fis atated that N�. Ray Leek vould soon be leaving the City of Fridley and auggested the Planning Co�iaeion express their appreciation for the good service Mr. Leek has pravided. MOTION by Mr. Treuenfels, seconded by Mr. Oquietl that the Plsnning Co�ission expreeses their appreeiation tor the vrork Mr. Leek hae done a� wishes him �ell. UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTII�R; pYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS I7ECLARID THE P�(YPION CARRIED UNAN�C6LY. Ms. Schnabel stated that ahe would like to suggest that when a publie hearing is be3ng held, that the membere of the co�iseio� make an effort to go out and pera�al�y look at the praperty in question because it vould save ti� during the �etinge and be helpful in msking a decieioa. MOTION by Ms. Schnebel� seconded by Mr. Treuenfels� to adjourn the Msy 9, 1979 meeting tit the Planning Co�ission. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTII� AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MEE'PING ADdOURNID AT 12:10 A.M. RespectPul�y submitted: Ifn� , eco ing e rc etary � CENTER CITY REDEVELOPMENT PT.AN DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 1. Introduction The City of Fridley is located on the east bank of the Mississippi River just north of Minneapolis. Including Minneapolis Fridley borders seven municipalities: Columbia Heights, Moundsview, New Brighton, Spring Lake Park, Blaine, and Coon Rapids. Fridley is located in the corridor of Anoka County and serves as the passageway between Minneapolis and the North Central suburbs, and is an important center of development in Anoka County. Fridley is a first ring Minneapolis suburb and as such developed initially as a"bedroom community" with only neighbor- hood convenience centers along major access routes. Fridley failed to develop a commercial concentration because no areas were planned that would support a large diversified center. Consequently, Fridley is served by regional centers outside its boundaries and is served with scattered and strip commercial developments. Center City is such a strip commercial development. The City of Fridley has a long standing concern with Center City. Immediately after the destructive tornado of 1965, the City began an effort to redevelop Center City. This 1965 redevelopment effort was not implemented. Since that time, very little development has taken place within the Center City area. The important aspect of recalling this 1965 effort is to illustrate that the redevelop- ment project not being undertaken is an outgrowth of many past decisions and is not a reaction to immediate problems. Center City is legally described in a separate section of this plan and constitutes the land area for the Center City Redevelopment Project. The area included approximately 73 separate operating businesses primarily located in five neighborhood centers. �