The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 02/06/1980 - 6670PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIN6 CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: � City of Fridley AGENDA WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: JANUARY 23z 1980 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT P.S. #$0-01, UNIVERSITY IN6USTRIAL PARK advertised as East Ranch Estates 5th Addition , BY ROBERT SCHROER: Replat of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 af Section 2, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley> MN, Nnoka County, except that part taken for State Hi9hway No. 47;.except the South 284 feet of the West 460 feet and except the West 460 feet lying northerly of the south 66b feet. Generally located between 74th Avenue and 81st Avenue N.E., on the West side ofi University Avenue. 2. PUBLIC H 3. 4.. � : : �SiL�►I� #80-07, BY ROBERT SCHROER: Rezone Lots 2, 3, 4, antl b, �iocK 3> and Lots l, 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8, Block 4, ef proposed plat, University Industrial Park (adverttsed as East Ranch Estates 5th Addition), from C-2 (general business areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas) located in the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 2, generally located between 79th Avenue N.E. and 81st Avenue N.E. VE LETTER FROM ING THE COMMIS VE ARTICLE FRO F WEDNESDAY 5. CONTINUED: PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHAPTER 205. ZONING: 6. RECEIVE ENVIRONMENT, 7. ING & 8. OTHER BUSINESS: ADJOURNMENT: MI H 7:30 P.M. PAGES � 4 � 7 �- 14-15 16 - li 18 SEPARATE BLUE WHITE CITY OF FRIDLEY pLANNING COMMISSION MEETYNG, JANU?ScY 23, 1980 CALI, TO ORDER: Chairman Harris cailed the January 23, 1980, Planning Commission meeting to �der at 7:45 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present; Mr. Harris, Mr. Treuenfels, Mr. Langenfeld, Mr, Oquist, Ms. Hughes, Ms. Schnabel Membexs Absent: None Others Present: Jerrold BoardmansCity Planner Bill Debion, Associate City Planner AFPF.OVAL OF JANUARY 9 1980 PLAI�R�TING COMMISSION MIIVIITES; MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels, to approve the January 4, 198Q, Planning Commission minutes as corxected. Mr. Langenfeld wished to have ehe minutes further explain his feelings noted on page 2, paragraph 6. He stated hi.s concern was noC only personal, but also was concerned for the possible political implications because the Spring Brook F�undat'ion _. had not renewed their contract. Ms. Hughes added that the Park Commission was not upset because the i�oundation had not renewed their contract. The Commission felt what was set out to do by tha Spring Brooic Pazk Foundation had been accomplished and Che City should take over the park at this point. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYEj C:IAIRPIAN IikItRIS DECLARED THE NiOTIQN CSP�P.IED. 1. CONTINUED: PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHP.PTnR ZOS. ZONING Mr. Boardman e}cplained all previous corrections and changes given to sCaff 6y a11 the cocmnissions had 6een incorporated in this dxaft. CHAPIGES AND CO&RECTIONS PAGE 1: Bottom paragraph - delete duplicate line PAGE 3: Definition no. 21 - add the ward adoption after. the word marriage PT.AITNING COPII�7ISSION MESTZNG, .TfuvUABY 23. ?980 ph.rE 2 YAG� 5: Definition no. 43 - change permitted to i.ncluded Add definition for "Recyling Cente:" PAGE 10: No. 4- Mr. Harris felt the term fair market value should be deleted from thia item. He felt iL would difEieult to determine that cost if a building was damaged. Mr. Boardman zeplied because this building in question was of a non-conforming use, we want to get rid of the structure and we should have some type of dollaz amount to de- termine the value it would cost ta replace the structure. He also stated this standard comes from the state- and they use a dollar amount. The commission reworded the icem to xead ...�50%) or more af its assessed vaieation as determined ... PAGE 14: The commi.ssion took no act9.on on section 205.047 (Environmental Quality) until updated state charts are brought in by member Barbxa Hughes. PAGE 17: No. 5- Mr. Harris asked the coRanission members if a 350 foot radius of propexty owners was large enough. for notification on commission Uusiness. Mr> Boardman stated this was in line with state requirements for notification. The commission agreed it was adequate. PAGE 20• No, 3- Same question as £or page 17, except for a 200 foot radius. Ms. Scllnabel sai.d the Appeals Commxssion telt this distance was fair. However hex commission felt thexe should be some type ef notification to adjoining property owners when a lot split wa� requested. PresenLl,* there was no notification. Mr. Soardman stated he would cneck into tfiaC request. He thought it would require a modification in the Platting Ordinance. YAGE 22: First paragraph change bonded to secured. No. 4- Ms. Schnabel said the Appeals Commission felt some type of tfine period should be placed on a building permit. For example, work must be cnmpleted within 2 years after the building permit was issued. The Appeals Gommission felt there were many, and continuing instances in Fridley where projects caere skarted by private individuals and never completed. This causes a visuai and possible dangerous situation foz a neigh•• boxhood. Mr. Boardman said he cuould have to check into the legality of that requirement. Ms. Hughes asked what the city could do to someone who has not completed construction within the time period. Ms. Schnabel said one recourse could be revoking the building permit. The city should have some sort of recourse, PLi,T�NIP7G COi��IDfISS;ON MEFiT.ZidG, �l.i:'tiAP.�,2� l�R(1 � PAGE :7 ._ Ms, Hughes pointed out if the percmit was xevuked, the construction would never be com- gleted. Tf there was a danger or problem to the neigl�borhood, that could be handled because of the health, safety, and welfare factors already pxovided in the ordinance. PAGE 23: Section 205.06 (DistzicC Provisions) Mr. Boardman stated this section was not included in this draft but will be included in the final copy. PAGE 24: Correct section number on top o£ page to 205.071 No. 2A-2 - The coummission felt the wording oE this sentence was not clear and should be reworded. No. 2D - This section refers Co mothes-in-law apartments, Mr. Harris aaid this Cype of housin� was needed but feit there should be some type of follow up from the city, for example the fire marshall, to make sure there was adequate ventelation and exits in case of a fire oz emergency in these apar.tments, Mr. Boardman suggested a license could be required to have a unit like this in your home. This would give the city the legal means to ensure ail safety factors are being met. Ms. Hughes stated a license would not cure the problem oh unsafe conditions if Che homeowner does not apply Eo� a license. The unsafe condiCions will be er.isting even before that area of the home was converted to an aparCmenC. The license was one more example of control on top of control on top of control. She felt it was an unnecessaxy invasion of privacy and the safety factors were more important. Mr. Harris said the license would give the city the 1ega1 means to go into a home and make sure the apaztment was safe. If it did not meet requirements, the ciCy c wld revoke the license and shut down the apartment until safety precautions were taken. He stated the license fee should be very minimal. Mx�. Oquist questioned the definition on limited dwelling. Mr. Boardman stated a limited dwelling was a completely self-contained unit withzn a single-family dwelling. It will be occupied by a family membex and must have at least one main entrance through the main single-family dwelling structure, Ms. Hughes quesCioned i£ a walkout 6asement would be legal. The outside door could be ased as a main entrance to allaw for moxe privacy for both parties. Mr. Boardman replied it would be legal so long as the entrance inside the home was not blocked off. No. 3A - change wording to: 5econdary accessory building as per section 205.071. No. 3B - Mr. Boardman stated churches and private schools were placed under the special use pexmit secCion. PLANNING COMhIISSICN ME:LiING, JAiv'UARY 23, 1980 PAGF 4 No. 3C - change wording: A11 non-commercial, golf couzse, country club, yacht clubs, tennis courts and swimming pools and additional recreatfonal uses and not an accessory use to the principal uses in R-1 District. PAGE 25: G - delete Section 205.073 (Lot Requirements and Setbacks) Item 1- Mr. Oquist stated' the minimum lot size was now 7,SOo square feet. The Co�tunity Development Commission felt this size was adequate and followed the rem mmendx tion oE the Metro Councii, Eecause of land shortage and land costs, any size larger becomes prohibitive. He also pointed out the 60 fo�t width requirement £or lot size. ifr, Harris questioned if setbacks should be changed because lot size requirements had been made smaller. He thought it could be hard to place a house on that size width 1ot and still meet all the setback requirements. Mr. Oquise said the setbacks were not to ensure a certain size house, but to ensure adequate space between homes for health and safety. PAGE 27: Ms, Schnabel asked the Commission to jump ahead to page 27 where minimum floor area requirements was discussed. She noted on the last para�raph oE page 27 the coork or should be the word of. Ms. Schnabel said the Appeals Commission had come up caith a recommendation for minimum floor requirements. 1. Lot of 9,000 square feet or larger - 1,020 squaxe feet on Che first floor, including garage area. 2. Lot of less than 9,OOD square feet - 768 square feat on the firse iloor, eacclusive . of garage area. Tlte Appeals Commis�ion felt they would lil:e to get away from home style definitions (split level, rambler, etc.). They also felt these lots could handle �he recc�iunended size heme and still be consistent with the area. Mx. Oquist questioned the fact that a house on a smaller lot was almost as large as a home on the larger lot, euen though a garage had been included on i:he laxger size lot. The Appeals Co�nission supQorts the including of a garage because a garage no1: only houses a vehicle, but also cuas a storage place for combustible items that normaily would be stored in the fiome; storaoe of miscellaneous items (6ikes, trailers, yard equipment, etc.) that would be unsightly; and they fele a garage would not be a financial bur�en on someone who buys a lot of at 1easC 9,000 square feet. Mr. Oquist pointed out a garage was an expensive item and could make the difference between someone being able to purchase the home or not being able to purchase the home. Mr. Oquist qnestioned if garages were even needed as a requirement. He did not think it was fair to place a garage requirement on a caxtain sfze home and not another size home. The question oi a garage need was not aestketics, but safety and welfare. Mr. Boardman pointed out Y.he Appeal's recommended floor requixements would give the same visual appearance ii there was a gara�e or not. PLt�?iIdSNG CO;�C`iISSIO;? PIEP.TIJdG. J?�^JA'RY 23 ?9�0 PAGM 5 Ms. Hughes stated she thought the city in the past had not required attached garages. Mx. Boardman said the requiremant was for detached garages. The city had desired to aee attached garages more recently. Mr.-0quist stated again that financially some builders may desire noC to build garages because that would help lower their costs and there£ore make mnre people able to pur- chase the home. Ms. Hughes felt a vote should be taken to see if garages should be required, �ben if they were not required by ordinance, it would not prohibit the construction of a garage. MOTION by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Oquise to delete Section 205v075 (Parking Requirements), Ieem 1(Garage Requireir.ent) and change Ttem 2(General Provisions ) to Item 1. UPON A VOICE VOTE, OQUIST� H[JGHES� IIARI2IS, TREUINFELS, LANGENFELD V�TING AYE, SCHNA3EL VOTING NAY, CHAIRMAN HARItIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A 5 TO 1 VOTE. PAGE 25: (Continued) Mr. Harris questioned if 60 feet woul.d be wide enough for a corner lot. Mr. Boardman said a house could be designed to fit the lot and meet all requirements. PAGE 26: No. 4B-3 ^ Ms, Schnabel said since the commission was not zeqairing a gaxage to be 6uilt, did they want to change the side yard requirement o£ 13 fe.:t to something largex so a garage could 6e built in the future. She pointed out that 13 feet would n�t give enough room for an attached gasage and recommended a 17 foot sideyard requirement. Mr. Boardman said the city cannot control if adeqsate space was left fox an attached garage, just so long as minimum requirements crere set and met. Ae stated a detached garage cneld be built instead o£ an attached garage. Ms. Hughes said she thought Mr. Boardman stated earlier detached garages were not allowed. Mr, Eoardman corrected himself. He also said the city's responsibility was to only allow area for the possibility of a garage and that was what the 13 feeC did, If the homeowner desired to build an attached garage in the future, he would have to plan foX that when he built. The 13 feet was only a minimum sideyard and the homeowner could leave more if he chooses. Ms. Schnabel said that was why she felt this section should read 17 feet and not 13 feet to a11ow for the futuxe. Mr. Oquist pointed ouC that the ordinance was not a reminder to the homeowner on how. much room to leave for future expansion. It only sets the minimum sideyazd requirement and i£ the homeowner want to leave more room he can do so. Mr, Boardman suggested xewording this sentence to: Where a house is constructsd without a garage, a sideyard of thirteen (13} £eet is required. The co�mnission agreed to that. PLANTQIP7G COMMZSSI01� TfEETI?�G JAtdL'.��.RY 23 1980 PAGF: 6 PAGE 27: No. D2 - omit "or welfare" from last sentence. 205.074 (TSuilding Itequirements), Item 2(Minimum £loor area) Ms, Schnabel referred to her previous stated recommendations on minimum floor area: 1. Lot of 9,000 square feet or larger - 1,020 square feet on the first floor, including garage area. 2. Lot of less than 9,000 square feet - 768 square feet on the first floar, exclusive of garage area. The Appeals Commission felt there should be a stated number of square feet required to be consistent with the rest of the city. The new ordinance copy has no �tated minimum required square footage. Mr. Boardman stated theg were using the state code. Each type of room (bedroc�m, bath, kitchen, and livingroom). has a stated minimum squaxe footage area required, This way if a builder only needs to build a 2 bedroom home, he would only have to build a squaxe Eootage area for 2 bedroons, bath, kitchen and livingxcom and nothing extra. This would help cut down on wasted space and dollars. Mr. Boardman said he did not have the minimum souare footage for each type of room as stated by the state, Ms. Schna6el asked the commission to hold off any decision on this section until they can look at the state figures and compare them with Appeal's recommendation. PAGE 28: Change paxt 3 of Parkirg Requirenents to 2 and (2) to {1) in same section. 205.076 (Perforcnance Standards) No. 7A - Chan�e tc: All materials shall be kept in a building or shall be fully screened, so as not to be visibl.e from any public right-of-way, e�ccept crhere the ... 3B - delete PAGE 2.9 : 4A - chunge to: All open areas of any site, except for areas used for parking, drive- ways, nr storage shall be sodded or seeded, �nd of R-1 District MOTSQN by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr, Treuenfels to continue the discussion on pro- posed changed to Chapter 2Q5. Zoccing, UPON A VOICE VOTE, AI.L VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN RARRIS DECLP.REB THE MOTION CAR�CIEU. Z. RECEIV� HOUSTNG AND P�DE(�ELOPrfEN'C At7THORITY MINUTES; D�C�ER 13, 1974: MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Oquist to receive the Housing and Redevelop- ment Authority mznutes of December 13, 1979. PLAi�;VIN� G0:'4iIS5702. N�`r,'TING SE7�LJ2ScY 2:5 1980 PAGE 7_ Mr. Langenfeld pointed out the discussion on page 2 about either a Pt]D (PLanned UniC Development) Ordinance or Special Use Permit Eor the Overlay Zoning District. Mr. Boardman said it was still under discussion with Mr. Herrick, but that he preferred the special use pexmit. Mr. Boardman also stated the Center City Project had some proposals and they wi11 be pzesented at the .7aivary 24, 198o meeeing of the Housing and Redevelopment Authoriry. UYON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING A'YE, CHAIRMAN IiABItIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. 3. 1tECEIVE COr�I[TNLTY DEVELOPMSNT COMMISSION MIN[J'�5: JANtJARY 8. 1980 MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Hughes to receive the Community Development Commission minutes of January 8, 1980. Mr. OquisC said Mr. Herrick was sti11 reviewing the condo convession draft ordinance. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL V�TING AYE, CIiAIRMAN IiARItIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED, 4. OTHER BUS7NES5 2ir. Langenfeld read a copy of the lettex he sent to the City Manager and Council in response to being asked to be on the Energy Commission. IC stated he £elt the people who served on the Energe Co�nitCee were all very tale.nted and they all had worked very hard and with great speed to set up the guidelines and policies of the Enexgy Coimnission. They were under the impre�sion that the aew commission was greatly nerded. However, he felt, as of yet, thexe had been no real action taken on using their work and geCting this commission going. Ms. Rughes said she received infor.nation that the League of Plinneso�a Cities has set up funding to help cities establish a noise ordinance and noise planning area in their cities. Mr. Board:nan said he received the same information and it will be presented to the Council at their ne�ct conierence �aeeting for discussion. MOTSON 6y Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels to receive the Guidelines fox the SetCing of the Prioritization of Funding Requests as prepared by Citp staff and to be passed onto the Human Resource Commission for xevie�a and co�ent. i3PON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRNtAN IIARRIS DECLARED THE MOTIOI� CARRIED> Mr, Harris asked Mr. Treuenfeis to have his cor.unission look at the document, add to or amend as they desire and bring it back to the Planning Commission. MOTLON by Mr. Langenfeld, secondad by Ms. Schnabel to receive the memo from Mary Cayan. I3PON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRl`SAN IIA12ItIS DECI.ARED TIiE MOTION CARRIED. This memo was an outline of the meeting with the i�iinisterial Conm�ittee of Fridley, city staff and Planning Corrnnission members to see what type of social sexvices are provided already in the city. Ms. Hughes said she noted some duplication of services rz.�n�tvzNC cora�zsszo��= *Tr�x�:nc, _anr,�t�x z�, l9ao ____,______� rnc� � provided by the various churches, but �elt that was good. That would give the opportunity for someone to go more than one place to get hel.p or services. Mr. tlarris said they also had a meeting witi7 community schools and the commiss�on should get a similar suu¢nar� on that meeting. They would be meeting with the county for the same reasons soon. Mr. Langenfeld said the various resouxces of sociai services st�ould pool their inforaia- tion into one'media. Mr. Treuenfels ssid the Fridlev Com.�nittee Se.rvice Bulletin does just thaC and they do try to cover a11 areas and agencies. Ms, Schttabel said the city should handle this pooling of resources. Tt cannot be handled by the school because there are numberous districts in the city. Mr. Boardman said th�t was the purpose of these meetings. We don't know what the needs axe yet, we have to identify them, see what agencies provide the service, and then see where the city can fielp, Mr. Harris resd a notice from the Metro Council about a seminar to be izeld oi� 2/�?/$0, at the ka3isson South. Any intexested commission members should let Mx. Boardman know by 2/4/80 iE they want to actend. Mr. Langenield felt the commission members ehould get a gas alloaance for attending monthly meetings. MOTION Uy Mr. Langenfeld, ceconde3 by Ms. Schnabel to have Council �rant e morti�,i7y �pence for gas oi $5.00 per person. t7PON A VOICE VOTE, OQL?IST, HUGHES, TP.EUEIVFELS, SCHNAI3FL, LAIr'GENPELD VOTIIVG AYi;, I36T.iPP�IS VOTTNG NAY, C1iAI&�SFiN HF,RRIS DECI.rllZED THE MOTION CARRIF.0 BY A 5 TO i VO'PE, ADJOU�:1+^?NT ifOTTON by Mx. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Oquist Co adjourn the January 23, 1980, meeti.ng of the Planning Cocm;�ission at 11;15 P,M, Fes�ect£i.11y submitted �� Jr.��_,Q =,.._. � Gr Yaula i2. Long, Fecar �g Secretazy I � PU6LIC HEARING BEFORE TNE PLANNIP�G COMHISSION ROTICfi IS HERE6Y GIVEN thet there will be a Public Nearing of the Planning Commission of the City of fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue ' Northeast on Wednesday, February 6, 1980 in the Council Ghamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat, P.S. #20-01, East Ranch Estates 5th Addition, by Robert Schroer, being a replat of the Northwest Quarter of i:he Southwest Quarter of Section 2, T-30, R-24, Anoka County, Minnesota, except that part taken for State Highway No. 47> except the South 284 feet of the 41est 460 feet and except the 4lest 460 feet lying northerly of the , South 666 feet. Generally located between 79th Avenue and 8lst Ave�ue N.E., on the Idest side of University Avenue N.E. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this tin;e. Publish: January 23, 1980 January 30, 1980 RICHARD N. NARRIS CNAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION m CITY OF FRIDLGY MTNNCSOTA � �� ` PLANNING AND ZONING FORM NtlhlBER V 'd • ��d'0} APPLICANT'S SIGNATURB r Address ?��-a uA�� v�nr � r� �t/� � Telephane Number S� 1— GG�-d PROPERTY OWNER'S STGNATURE � Addres s%b yo LiNt d�/i !'r T�i �i ✓k �(/• �• Telephone Number S i�- 6 6� M Street Location of Property 74T/l Legal Description of Property �! � 10 TYPE OF REQUEST Rezoning • Special Use Permit Approval of Premin- inary Fr Final Plat Streets or Alley Vacations lOther , � Fee�%� Receipt No. 30 , '�'✓ � � - �Y�voi rr.�.�. Present Zoning Classification M-/- Ha.-('o,Fvcisting Use of Property �y,n.� Acreage of Property zd.c �UA CiZd3 Describe briefly the proposed zoning classification /` xa7t ) • or type of use and improvement groposed il �— . 1�1 i- —�e� �i��?CC�L Has the present appli.cant previously sought to rezoae, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes �( no. What was requested and when? The undersigned understands that: (a) a list of all residents and owners of property within 300 feet (350 feet for rezoning) must be attached to this application. (b) This application must be. signed by all owners of the property; or an explanation given why this is not the case. (c) Responsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list the names and addresses of all residents and property owners of property in question, belongs to the unde:signed. A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drawn a.nd attached, showing the following: 1. North Direction. 2. Gocation of proposed structure on the lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks. 4. Street Names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (wittiin 3U0 fe�t}. The undersigned hereby declares application are true nnd c DATG � Datc Filed that all the facts and representations stated in this Date of Hcaring ��' r� �/`� O Planning Commission Approved (daCes) Dcnicd City i,omicil Approvcd (dates) Ucnicd . __.. ... .. . f . ..._. . _.._ ... ...__ �___'. ::'�'..'.;:' r�f ,,,,.' �� . W✓ � i' �� a onurunr�r.r. rio. c�a • , . '• Ail OROIt1AlICC /.!tEllfllllG f.IG1!'T(It 211. $E[CifO�l ?11.OG3 OF THE FItIOI.CY CI'SY CUUG PEPoTf�IqitlG TO PUL'lIC !�R[J�S FO�t Ll��U SOG;IIY1510t! .. � . � ! i . s. i TIIE Gl1Y LpUtfCll OF TNE CITY OF fRfDIEY DOES OR�AIIi h5 FOLLO'A5: . ; i � That Chaptcr ?.11.UG3 be amernted a5 follrn+s: ' �� . ; ._ , 211.OG3.Pubiic l4rcas • ' • ' : , , ' , Eaeh plat of a su6division shaTl be reqoired to deJicate land, or pay { , tnto the City fund a ca;b payment cquiealenk, for public land uses, �` ' , fncludin� schools, parks, p1�Y7ronnds and other public purpo,es oiher ,' �� ..� than public righi oF way, in tl�e followir.g nanner: .' • �. , �1Q7; of the gross area of residential zor�ed proper•ty ,�• ; • to Ee Subdivided; ' � �3% of the gross area of canmercial or indvstrial zoned property to be subdivided. , , . hny land cledicaticn in excess of Che t0;; or 3`A rer�uirenertt shall be . : . tcserved for a period af ts.o yeSrs during which tirie the City or uther � public body may huy such land. • • t • The option of a tand dedication or cash.payment is at the discretion • of the City. , • � � • - -•c.. . . - , � • � . . . . . . � � �. �f . PAS5ED At_D ADfiPTED EY 7HE LITY COUNCIL OF THE CI7Y OF FRIDlEY THIS 1M1iN D}fY OF FEBRUARY, 1977. - • A1TES7: GI7Y CLERK - P�r1R13N C. 6RUVSELL First Reading: February 7, 19�7 Second Aeading: February 14, 1477 Publish.......: february 24, 19)7 � YOR - H1LL1F;7 J. NEE i. . , � �..„,.�..�,,.. ___..__..._ . �s . � ' . . � • � . � �: . , ? � . • i ! • ' ,. ; i e , � . . � . .. i, i � • , �. . , .. t . ..._....�......._._ .....-....._: .. . . . .. .. ..r.�. � .-h��n, �� UBURBAH n� NQINEERIMO �j tN .� �: ;� � Cioil, Mundcipal & Enuironmentad Engineering a� l.and Surueying • Land Planning • Soi! Testing Main Office 571•6066 6875 Highway No. 65 N. E. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 South Off+ce S90•6510 1101 Cliff Road Burnsville, Minneso• Il 7 January 4, 1980 C ... .__.._.. _._ _ __ .. ... _a.i._.n_. • Yi -..�. • . � �� \ < �� . . . .. ....-.�--- f � � �� SLYYV�T2'IFS�"� LTPltL� The ISorthwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 2, Township 30. Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, except that part taken for State Highway No. 47. except the South 284 feet o£ the West 460 feet and except the West 460 feet lying northerly of the South 660 ieet. Robert Minder. Reg. E�. E.A. Fnthbun. Riy. S�no. lVm. E Prrc'e, R.g. 6t9 Gnry R. Harr'�s. Reg. Suro. Pvirr' J, Mnlmum. R�q. Fnp�. Wm. f. Jensen. Rry. Eng. L:�illiom J. &ezinsAy, Rc9. E�. H. Willinm H�grrs. RrR� S��ro. Sn�ce A. Pale�san, Nea. En9. Rohnri E. Lund, Ney. E��y. 7haiws F. Duwh�w. Rrg. EiNj. Planning Comnission �anuary 22, 1980 City Council MAILING LIST P.S.#80-01 East Ranch Estates 5tfi Addition ZOA #80-01 Rezoning Request (5oth for Robert Schroerj Ro6ert Schroer 7620 Un�versity Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Roger M. Jones 8371 Lower 138 Court Apple Ya11ey, MN 55124 Viking Cfievrolet 7507 Highway #65 N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Ruth B. Finkelstein 2859 Aquila Avenue South Minneapolis> Mn 55426 Bryant-Franklin Corporation 7921 Beech Street N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 Park Construction Co. 7900 Seech Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Gerald P. 8ury 7479 Able Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 JS Realty 7000 57th Avenue North Minneapolis, Mn 59428 P & K Properties 7000 57th Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55428 Raymond & Mary Jane Carlson 7875 Ranchers Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Graham Testers Inc. 7880 Ranchers Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Talco Inc. 7835 N.E. Main Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 City af Spring lake Park 1301 85th Avenue Nortfi Spring Lake Park, Mn 55432 12 � S1ST , ��_�.r: _� =1so. _ � � , , • ' .��t . i i _ � � Y,— ; � i • i 3� , ,�, 13 �i l � � .,, to ; ' ,� ' ; ' , { . � - � ;,, ,, _ � ^6 � .1,, , . � m , i � � � � s G� � 1 � �, �� , 1 i � 1 � ,� COM. � � i M� , M-11ND� I �: COM, �''�; - � �.� t � . / � � / }a• ialf4Nf I I� / �. IT1_ � _ . . ... � � % � i _'�_ _.422~ .�WSi � 1 t `� � � /� � I � ` � 1 O �o " �L� �� //' � O� � � �� { � �_ _ _. . . -.1.-. � J � i � '�� .'� I k� I ' e �dj � ( C� r� (�,Q ° � �� 2 ° � � 2 �� hrt' 1� `�} �-�-�1 �i`� i �_IVI�1 IND. ry� ��.M-1 IND. � ` COh1,_ i , `. .r- �. ' � - - � � --:� � nz nzl � /�zeo � ( . . : . ' ` i -" - � i .. t. /� I % �� i � �.. ___ . . � �'� - _ �� . �7 l � • � C� _ ` �� / o� �% •- / o' ... `�� 11Yy�� 0 � _ �`, �/ M O � + /�' WI / `Y + �-=""°�s=- ,__ `_ �`_, 5l•1 iN4. ; 3 ; � � � �a i � {:`-�-� —.��_,��M,-, � � .At-1-rND. � COM� i =�_-;�_<,=r _ ` ' , i c3.. ( �` <��_ = � - � � , � e i 1 _' _.T-'c= . _ -.-=r � ' � = � � ]a' usEU Yr . �. �z80� �f « � . _ � / 1'i i x S6 icar .ka�� ` ' ___ _ _ `` � �/ �+ 1 I —7- i� F - ` - , � _ 'c ., ". — -' `� 1 1 � � 1 � � :�.`� �� \ � 6i.i V � � � � I � � � j �� I `. (/� � �� ! �� d� �� 'C` ��A� � � I S � I�d�"� � ., � S.�„ or. � 8 --p � � _I ----- .2.fNp r ��a � " _ � �=• ``��=_ _\_- _--, N � , `� � t�—a� `� � iV �� !N-i� IND. �•i l�a:'� �, ; ��tfYF,-- ' I � , '" � ' � i �� I l � aas __ 1j I� �. i - �n �„_ .�-• _`� �— _�' - .. � �.Ip 12 �-•"� j � �� k � � �;� e� � � � � � �_: ��ai i�j � � � � `I --'------"�` ��65-_ i� I i�j ;'ii � o �� . 6 w\�1 f� � 1IJI'qM1 �, 7 � o � \� a i°� _ ( Ii N-2 IND. �. �� ;� M-1 INb. «- 5 �"' 7 : I � �` �i i ��u' � ' � M-1 lND.\ COM. a,, ��a � ( �� :��,.� . � �' ` �� 1' ' ' ka', . �ae � II .17;11 ��` � -_ --.uz.— -- . ns 4� � � ` 1 _._{;S'f-- ��-Y �Y I ��, --�\ iY' [�sfMFMI—__1;05 :``V �� II � •j i{ � ` ♦ . � . �`^s`� � � _\ �� 11��1� ( �� I \ ' 1�� 11 I � � $, � " � �$ ' '�\� ni.a�� 7 i �� ` �" e'� � ' � �'�s � �Q 1 ii��;i� $ i g.\ - �`. 6 . ,,.� 2 j ", ("��<� J�� 1�1i�1,� M�1 �4Q• �� 4 �' N C�)� � . I Y/ `� ii � �I il'�, I \ � � � � , I � o i//� % �I� � � o ��o i wno� ' 385 �� I' � li3 It I50 t 1 / ,', 79i� � � .�,.�� _�--- �.._ _ —, ___, _ — - — - — �� ` I � \; • ttio ' • _ _ � ` I j �� ' � I '� f f � � ! � , � '�Q' i ,. _ � � ' � i �� ' 1 � ( � a I I I � i O� ' I i u i � � � �'`� M _ $ � ; ! c I �; ? �� ( P� ._ . .__._ I � � � �P � ��p � 1 i, , �' � _ - PUQLIC NEARING BEFORE TNE PLANNIP�G COMMISSIQN � 14� NOTICE IS HEREBY GiVEN that there wi71 be a Public Hearing of the Planning Cortmission of the City of Fridley in the City Na11 at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, February 6, 1980 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpase of: Consideration of a Rezoning Request, ZOA #80-01, by Robert Schroer, to rezone Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 3, • and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 and S, Block 4, of proposed East Ranch Estates 5th Addition, fror� �-2 (general Business areasj to M-1 (light industrial areas), located in the Northwest Quarter of _ the Southwest Quarter of Section 2, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Generally located between 79th Avenue NE. and Slst Avenue N.E. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. Pubtish: January 23, 1980 January 30, 1980 RICHARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSIQN �l� ( . '" � W L. �---� -.__� ---' +1: � " � » { . �Ye � I �» � � � � � `� I ,�� z P � 1 � . ! 1 � ,�' - ', � �k� , � ,,1.. �� , , i , , ,� U��, i � { % 1 i o_ - i 1 ' COM. � � �• M•11ND, : COM � ''*> "� ' �i .• � . � , � � � j 1 i }I' II:INNT� i� i � na_ I _ . _ _ _ ' _ _ I � � -- �... .�u wa � I% , � i i �,`�1 i�'o - 1 � � � � , - Od� , �.� �[ O , y1�' � I / > . , � % `\ ` � /�/ � � � � p � 1 S� �J�.,Q i � �� 2 � � � 2 • �� y�ti2� 1� � � � `;,' S�`{' �i� � .M�1 �ND. � -.M•1 IND. ' COM,_ f � . . _ `, � ' � � „: �:� i � �' z� � ` ' �. N : � � ^ � �� -. � ! �`, � �� ' f _ -- . `. - � - , � . ' c _ � , J� ° '" ^ , `„� ", �.'� o � - =__==-- �`, ' " � ° - 3 , �i --';ti � � �:=�'ti=� -"','- �� M•1 iND. '� tu i -:-�=„��=;_ ; __� �, - �-�-rNU. 3� eor�, � - - = - � =�-�_.� . � , , � � / _�._ _ T.� ��LI�I.fiF� �� ? ; .�m==-� � ` ,i° ut��t �• izeo_ � „�', � 6+5 � �-_ �1u`nt'T�sltii�n._tbtr_�i�`__, i � - _1 _-__ ' __ �\\_ . �\ � 1 �y� H � �__ � . � � ` Ybr � . 1� � � � �� , �� , _ � � . ;. . - S ; . .,,.;;;;.; , , . � �� ♦ „ i 1 ' 1�� 0p\ \\ '� 1\ 4 �y � � t I �P�! � �° $ y-J�\\��.� �� `^` � � i------M'Z"��-eso.� � i�� M-1�IN0. M-llir�:�```^V_-��tM�=_==-- �� , � �� ' ( �° �-.r � � -- . ! ! ^ '� ji� �[, �' �n � - � .I ' �._��F�� {S:�il \,.'^� ' � � � I '___�.:-_-M �� 1 � t �1 ��in ��i � '^. �\ � ) '� ��8G6-�� V 1i� ij � o A b' �� S�I�J . 7 i �° � d �� M•Z IND. �-, ;i ;"!'� M-1 IND. �' � 5 q"' ii � �; �.�;� � `.� � M-1 IND.`, i I.II \ \ � �as \. � � `�. � � \� @ -- - -iTt.�— '— ns � �l � ---135 t—' 'rjj-j "�r I i�`�" _�\ to' useue�i -�; as � . { � i� .ta � � � � �q��'�� 1 � �� \ � ' �(\�� +jiii�' ti i `. , o � $-- , ��: li�' p � � " � Q � 11��;+ � � � a �`. 6 - +G�� , ,.:�"?„ �' M-1 I40. �� u�, � � � � o � ni; �'�''�'i �� ` �o ; iee �� ' iza "° � ieo ' . �, ' 79i� ' � —� `�\�--��;��-�_-° � __ , __ _ � __ �,a _ � ; j i ` � � C ' � �� ; . � , ;; I .�P �� t�' � �� l I iv, � � \O�` . �! � _ 8 ► � � � � �� . I� � r� ��' ..w . � � I _ j �� ' I �Q 1 ...._�... � � . . � ' ti � �� , , , � 7 COkI. �� '°" 1 � 2 CDht. � � I wao� � � I ��,. _ �� , i I L; N c � � r � �6 �E�.�TRAL� � ' - �: FOR FAMILY RESOURCES ��"�TER �"'�' � January 29, 19&0 Mayor'William Nee City of Fridley � 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Aear Mayor Nee and City Councfl: On behalf of the Central Center for Family Resources, we wish to express our appreciation for your conCribution of $5,000 in support of our Center. We will be sending you our quarterly report documenting our services to date. We are pleased to report Chat 65 families have or are receiving counseling services at our Center with 14 families on our waiting list. We have contracted an additional counselor because of Chis need for services. We have conducted Family Education classes and work- shops for 51 people and, in addition, have 17 people scheduled for oux February class, and also have a waiting list of 20 for a subsequent ciass. It would be impossible £or us to offer these professional services at Iow cost without the support of the cities of Fridley, Spring Lake Park and Blaine and the organ- i2ations who have responded to the need for this service. If you have any £urther questions upon receipt of our quarterly report, we would be happy to answer them. -z- � 17 We appreciate Che time and attention we received from the Fridley }iuman Relations Commission and the Planning IIoard who recommended our project favorably, as well as the input of the Fridley citizens who are represented on our Boards. Sincerely, Lee Carlson, Project FacilfCator Dean 0. 5abby, Director Central Center for Family Resources LC:DOS:jel CC: Human Relations Commission Planning Soard � Wed�esday, Ja�vary 30, 1980 ' 16 Pages 5 e : a._�. : R a�M,-, ..,. ,rt.,.,r,��- 25 CENTS p *�" ' :� r . ;�" .�_ i�� .•s 5.. ,� f _ t ' ;— �f n�a • ' }�;. �. Bp VIC STONER two units in the Dakotas. An area in Fridley near the The Fridley site is one oE five FMC plant on East River Road is new sites NSP is looking a[. The one of eight sites being con- remaining [hree sites are loca- sidered by Northern States tions where tiSP now has power Power (NSP) for a new coa]- plants. In addition to Fridley, the tired power plant in the Twin new sites are Coon Rapids, Rose- Cities. _ :: ��,;;__i.,mounE, Shakopee, and Cottage Represensatives [rom' �iSP -'Grove. The existing sites are btlefed members of the Metro- N5P's Riverside plant ia ll-Iinne- polltan CounciPa Physicai De- apolis, the Black Dog plant in velopment Committee Jan. 23, on Burnsville and :he High Bridge ihe utility's fuwre energy neede plant in S[. Paul. and how it proposes to meet those The Fridley site is the smaffest needs. A oew 2�0-megawacc of the eight. It is just 90 acres, (MW) coal-fired plant in the and its SraalI acreage is one of metropulitan area is just one the wncerns NSP officials have measure NSP will take to meet about the site. Other potential its customer demand for etec- disadvantages include its prox- tr3city: imity to Easl River Road causing Members of the council heaM it to have high visibility from the representatives project that by coad and aearby residential de- 1989 there will be a ganerati�g v�lopment. deficit ot 85a ta i?00 M�V aftar Otherconcernsindudethedes- the addition ot a new 800-biW ignation of the portion o( East unit in the mid-1980's. To reduce River Road in Fridley as part of the shortage, NSP is plaiming at the Great River Corridor, the least one other 200-Mti4 plan[ in developmeni ot the Istands of the metrapolitan area in the ear- Peace Park to the northwest and ly 1990's, a 600-MFV coal-fired efforts to have areas along the plant in Wisconsin in 1987 and riverturnedinto a regional park. � Off➢cials pt NSP said tLey have ,_�,�_ been etudying locnting a piant in tfie'metropolitan area becauae ot some staie agencies' and pablic interesL in loca[ing geoeratirtg units cinse to [he area they serve and 6ecause it woutd facitltate develop�nen. of distriet heating for residential or induetefal neighborhoode. � � . But the representatives •said that NSP is uncertain at this time whether a new coal-fired p(ant is licensable in the Twin Cities area, "but we are committee to studying the possibility." Each community within a 20- mile radius of the Twin Citles was studied far land availability and facility layouts and environ- men[al review for each area have been completed. NSP ex- pects to make final site selection and begin preparing applications to the proper state agencies in the summer of [his year. NSP tooked at tracts .ot land that have a sufficientwater supp- ly and access to a raii line or barge facility so that fuel could be delivered; in addition it looked for sites in which environ• mental and social impacts would be minimized, according to the representatives. � � ; i�3'Y3.ii;R9"4"�aa. G0�1:3E MB�i�°8;�7 Gf'�E �You:, �4ssociate, P�ffi , ,��m�laii: by Ms . Spior�e: �,i,oFSa .are maef�e;bp ;, reeaYd, it caas her Ctte; En�ciran�etiCal i City CoFitui� i�egn?a proble+u i.tt �.CS�iti�¢�X�1'S m�:'. . �i" t�t@ 91�.iltlie9 . �. t.,iike. to h�ve �� t��-s si�o�Ic1<� � �._E�nei1. It a4� - �rset stat� - � t � , en ia�� I�ke.-ta have.�2��w td' $8�ess�Ty.'. x� �sr#.�ttg this u�P��`3 P tg.C�isaion!8 �+ �-�-_, ;,•.��._---�.a:� �•2tT 3' � 4' ��.. �3ig � � { `v�K2] � 4 � l `� � � � � i � -} r„Savi.ro�mental. Q�tality i n7 f �. -2 "� �il:�$�4iTB � -7 � <m ' ��9iCR4 MINlIJ'�3:. ` '9ue, the Decs�mber 1B„1979t: tprax? �,'boice vdt�, sll � �srr�[ed eutaait�e�sl�. �is��wi Co rQCeive'; ' x �tanding ti�aG the�e : es3:� minuCea�tta be'. i ; rst, because �e wfi ;�3d ncttt alioays' � `� i '� #f, $uitt@I�IiC$ L�}l2T� �''� a k+�' iaa.�ritti the minut�s � #eastble to xe�og. �"�tze�. g�..� _ � _- fi she w�s s a�emb��. �� as wueh 3.ui�fii�a , " � �ianning ��Coa�niSSien '� mt i.t . -� �.,�F2 a's,cttbli.�h svme ' � °�ui� ga aba�ek geEt�g `� t�tSl . � .�-:� � .. - --- P. ... d S� � n cr ; C � .s` � � �:t ;� �- : �:�; � � .' x% - „f: � �'� �,��; ��. '4� _ �, 8 � =�iarch 3, 1� �tr. 3}ebicat :�.�fne-merntr�: ' ��'rd;altqe��d �tie'88�rrP�, ' L�� sut F ` kupp3y fier r,rS.i�i rk�°�� ' x _ . �s: :.. v �1:pQY`t `l�$�4` C W38; ;ttfeld , fntf 1;�'� � ttte � i t . Tit� � �Lt� �tated e tise Fe#rtt�*"��h ��t�mp . t�rmi't: � �, , : Comm#�si�=wt�s coiic�iett ,ife ir3'71rt�lAV_�.�:it�es6itiac+ei� ive. Atatfi�e `' nt [liac recu�rane: 'te airp7 ktz � ^ b` ; � ?„ ;�� ,;; �� .' ' .._ _ ,._ - . �T} G �L�TaD ti � t`= � <K � ri � . Z .. 5 F��= � ` -: � � �� l�y 3 S� � c +�� y� � }'. �i ��}gCi��lif 3 C��.'�..�f�t'BCttiT . ��.-:B'�wai�.'i�',ig; ��" �� . ,:s l�.a��;Q�$�c��:�l $I{Gj ..'� � �;+: $1".�t!BdI; 'C�1$6 ' ;�. deC��tt� el� �' ��*�; �� !. �. of t�: �t�, �s ` �;a �� `` "�;' ;._hh ; �. !s�l� "t'tt =th� � S�lattt�.��•��t,�niss3on� � ' h��= ei#�$ier �r�� Karpela ' : Ca�i��=nm� �ag to F ' �; ��L.asc�ise iti: ' � '1 "S . �~#.8' �1$t �°` '' �� ,8�� +�@ �tAt-Ed �. '� � . �a ��tz�e if it�_ � , ��"t _ �t�sion �. ° i, �- `:� . � .`` °; �� := �e,�T the Feb. bth � #' t�pin� t�iat t�� Uli!C�,.�, ': +�iLx .11�E ,�€y.� 3 � �. lYV t A ;. ,r. - ,�5�` . �f1i. s :� _ ; � �aC�a�%ty; � X� s: � ".�'33E?T�ON ; t' � '�, 4 ��#oa► ar� '� ��. �� a� � _ C � '�. S. � +.L." 4� .i � . f` 7 �' �1 t� x c _ `�: ; t sw : ,. t� � r t : �t r : ,s.: _ , ��_ aixPVx� � � its>1 �e�CeT, � she ;�rate �� :ls lac�c agvtraki.��: u� s to,gfye �i bal�� en i'� .ia�Y be s la 4`A'3 G+�,�', ..:: � �sn �;__ �, ;., �e-, iato Ei�e rec�ra � nteriors�daEed -` �� ior� CI�;e A �k.a �o�eitp- � e� f�azde��en.tkt �%e '� oa�i,ssi, nn �� Cit� Gauneil. '; �k.D DECLRREIS' `P� F9Ea%30N s: �i ;memo fFC+m Aasi�, Quses�ii -a e �ayone to that Task „y �Yings sad g�L aYl t}te j k Far�e. Sh¢ rea&�q feZe : had resd the WorR Seope to se11 tha-Anaka �ount3+ FvY the Co�ais��ers! regaesting. f�r�I�e�: . " Yated the df�ff,ess�.��t�ii�t$ �� 3end them yttur gokYit uame' := �.�w ycsc�r c�an�e to=be ly inve�lvefl ia static+g ' =z d Ka«s#BEe'tine3r case, � 4ilfl' fram the State=:Govern- �s#on com�ng..?atGtz �vka , ��ie ase gotS�:-�> �' ' 1�:. Ti�s 42ar� Scoge is�$ Lhat` the citiae,i4s - +t xhe membe�s hav� ;3?a . _ e��ing to s8e what � way she did-*aas tl�a�-if.,. arn3 :they vexe �aillia$. _ Dr,-Breckeririd$e; wtco is Tas�: Bvrce . �tl�.th@ ai�por-t CE�e��Y - ��e.spscifiCa�iya ` qSe o# the ¢ottflicC �itb n �'f�� Federal Gdvar�at's =' �.s iic clse wct�Tcs, '� �; '� t�a8; nat going to ne�ae z •':�� ii,: S�r�e �t�i sF� �ad �=3� ` ��ci��,c�"��.A� ��; t�e Ft�z��se : nt ��'�ita�e� ta„�Bciii �ga�d�sig t��c ;e: p�?a��n;*�ega�d;, :� `so� ste�k�tod:i �qui�' �'#tp �' �tAA;`i�it3s 3s�u�: : � �;°�'h#rtd,;;6�ca+ v ', �., Sgarte stat� ��;�r �;egi.siat�io� ',.it;�ivTt +Bx}tBSY's�3 TI�ft4 �`Si��1bY`�' i'gg,; s. � .�iY.�..,��SB�Y�:bYl:-StME1 =,�;�t �� i��i i ' ��,9��ara" b�?'go�. Di ba' : :�vv�'e-$eay be ;, � _.. ,�.,v ` , ii�ls : �az�e: stat� � � �h+� �r�e�t ai3. tl to':� `"a"-�t$ 'iss� , .:i�G�t�"s bill ..r�,";: ,��'EY"�3Yl2 8� t�,�i�t b�si� s, ,; ��`�`��e�E�:. -�.- �, � 3�.y�ry`ikr. ,Pi .. �, t6R�ir�t�C� �.j�' � f. ai'�XPmrs�n � {�- � �a � �� a �il;; � u.'¢0�,3�#E;.'�f �2 .f� . �i�.`� �"�y•�'�H$7 j . �iF��AT'��t��'.�7 : .y��6': ,$�145�'2'9�`Bt4 � :9+if�"4��:�C,�,QS �7 ` ��`�."8�RN9',�$ t9 @t �� TNG;; 3� , wtfat' what` ie rt?',13 aispo� a��z,,,,v- :aun�: 3C L�+ : ioc+ �t cau§� �� , ��+i1ss3,� n �e� ��it �t e �"1SY 0�C �j3 �„ ��. '�ti:Maita.g�+r l f�°t�XY ,�^--=,� 3 I�ke to see 9 s�tbcRl.{I £i�'S� b� #�ht: ca i Y': 3ve :..aag1 �et#qgs. i�- ��w �� ' � " < ��.�" ;:� � �. � v� � '�i8tit�, �e�p� .�:d@�iak#.on. H: �i�e;4 ; �"��lei �� i�es a s"os^y .:lcefe'rettdc� Yis�C_� ic'- �#s° Co decide "Fi�di�y: s+ms °r ; Y.', �'8' �ftli rQ s c `�a ava�s ar- _��e 'pe�sie � • ��/ie� LQ18 . y .' € �� _�- �� , �b�ECt , � -Gpqs� af � : 2c�a� 3eve1. � � � ti�8`,,, aad � 8�� a�: y+i.: , � r i ��- �"t ��s act � `' �€s�#era � -,. ' on ; : ��1 vcfiing g � �, r � .0 �t �� • � : 1:= A9�.Y1�09 � � � fi`6 tri'�� GU7'2@iIC � .- � � ; � �' �� y .. C �fif�lt$ 6fOi@ ° aIIlll�;�0i4. � s `. £ f � � ' R S +'$�': w�.:'. _� €��taph in.che � ��S Che Aaoka G�uc �� "wpulil Y ike �ko ,np� �scns , 3'lae: sirpv�e; fic.;�:�ma�.l coa�es £o� �se p�tr�as�a. aisagr�ea ct;ar >tc s�a �� ta t�`'�� iere "r��s N�ot1i. 3t : zasa9 ait issae . ; � Co�.seion acxE.'tci' t$� nb Public daeis� �f' �ife f2ct��'. ' It �ce, -�aci aOt" me Lr �d bq.`?�k'. i'e�e�€'Stm Ge next meeting, ; U� at�d C� mot-icsn cet �NTA3. SEPSI#AR--�i I �e :a ; s�as. yss , : �,. . k�'`£�'13?t .�ig C,3.`Cj� U� �:$X. }�8i1�-i72 �#:SG�QfI`5�.�$;%,6R9X�' �. ' . ��.' r� % . »_ . .. ,� r..c ., : _ . � � . . i�a - �e4o � � � , tlr. Pe�e� �� r� ' " rstte wau3�1; � 4 t ��vs�•��, � ,� � � �a - e�t€ :u�. 6o-h'`� } °.k: '�— ! i _T . � MVM9%'`ee �y.4'+'Mw�.•.ann�v�.x��aw.�..�....�.E�s-,�� . � �°Y, ?^�, k vl ` ,y,:^£.` fbF 'x� - r.,j 5 � L(T�. � i: 3 � X �, Flaami.nst = , MY'-. D�bloh Ltad ? K�o€fi ;ta=��Lel�ed�a�e �� 24 hat�-aha�ied on}d Ia�,-�tk«�e. C�ded;mai�1� £�r. �a &�aty AixFt�ct . asge traffic. ' �' 4r��ie�t heifc�at`ri,��;. ras :s helics��er t�{t�C t8a�,�here a� r�o� ' ed.:atiygl8cE .it�4�e�3.�Fly,.; ' �Y�';,�n theg lan�d �in i�.� ta urge, the ": , te ti�at "plane� itave ��='�irade s�9trt Chat, 'j �:�iE ipf public he�lth, ; `' ��Y • °� l.�.�scussian �:` ,. � vate ai�i vtrt �,�'' . �.� rs-- �� C§fs last sedeiaar.; 5 ��ads and their imp��ct teted housing aad ; eiF` for staCe en�rg�, R� W�.LY1x�t8Rj' ZOCgI�: "'.> roducts �- Ssspinar ; :xAgn2�tsn" Giitrneil s '� � vn a uts�,tae ;� the �aCic� ' � 3 �...��s . . .. x� fi, �`�y¢I�€.�• � y . M��Vi n��; �5 P�� a^ � " �Y �� ', Si� e ° i�d�iol�d%f ' ��-^ r, . 4, � . � M� � Si ? k y � � �_� � � � � �,; � . '..'�1: �.. � � { tt �, � �- F L� 1 :- ; �. x� s � � � ; � �_ 3 ` i e`-} 3� ' S �.y p � S � A � x # q � �. �� #* *.= �; 4) �S M Y. 1 r}' � '., a �i, �y: �3: ;{� ': y'` S� � . x � � _ y , � a � �' �� ' >� �`� S "r. +;'R Y .�. �� v,'� f-g�� K 'Z '@ � i . V�. ?,'�': .�6�e �., ? �, t-"` � �v y' � 'S. � . f � � 3 ...,�_...ar.. �.S"�i.n.� Y � F, B i � l ' � , , 4 1 I i c 3 �' X � ,�` r �� t� y� r�' z- x �F I ��x �� t y b a �� o_.. A. �_ ,. _�,. i'r' { � e� x '3 � �Y� J : '�r � �. � �: N : �. ! i; ,P F�": T 'r, A.� � s-. i � -. } � k_.. � ,, s§ i_ ` ' e 1 �� f � � : r; �f j � i � � � : � �h .� i j �. � } ��1� ARCHITECTURE ENGIIJEk.RING PLANNING INTERIORS Mayor, City of FridTey City fiall Fridley, Minnesota .55432 Dear Mayor; January 4, 1g80 The Minneapolis-SainY Paul Metropolitan Airports Comrnission (MACj is preparing a.master plan for future development at the Anoka CounCy-Blaine Airport, wiih TP.A Airport Consultants coordinating the pla�ning. A major goal of the study is to solicit and integrate local citizen concerns, opinions, and input into the entire planning process. TRA has establishea a broad citizen Qarticipatio� program tfiaL >>>ill insure both that the public will be kept continually informed, and that public input can make a meaningfu4 contri- bution to the master plan. A major comnonent of that program will be the worlc of a Citizens Fdvisory Task Force, through a series of ten weeknight workshops to be held over the next t�velve montfis. 1Je would like to invite you to designate a Task Force representative from your city. . In addition to designated representatives fram each adjacer�t city, the Task Force will include numerous locat citizens who have aiready expressed interest. In this manner participation by all communities ar.d interests �si;i Se insured. TRA will a{sp ue periodically issuing nev�s]e.tters actd Yri �l hold thr.ee.large public rneetinys and three informationai open houses at key points dur.ing tne study. The meetings will Yecerd comments into the pubiic record, thereby �air.iag input from the general pubiic. The enclosures to tfiis letter contain further informatiQ� on the Task Force workshop topics and schedute. The workshaps will 1�e informai workina sessions and wilt encourage active participation by all members. Eecause of che iarge number of tapics to be studied it �•�ill be essentiat that the workshops occur in a consistent sequence, each buiiding on infornation presenled aY pre��iou; ti,ork- shaps. Thus, Task Force membership necessarily requires a commitment to partici-` pate throughouY the process. Will you please return the enclosed card to iRA when you have designzted a �epresentative. ThaC person vrill receive notific�±ion of the first workshop, to be he7d aC 7:30 PM on Thersday, January 31, 19E0, aY the Social P.00m at St. Timothy's Catholic Church in Blaine. Thank yuu for your censideration. We look forward to working with you. Sin erely yours, C�� b/ ' �(�i/L� rl l'. �o art, Ph.D. Airport Planniny Director [nclosures 962UU. 01 ec: Nigel Finney, PfAC; E. K. NcCagg ii, 7RA 215 COl ll,'Uf[31A, SFAT7LC. N;1SfiIP�(;TON 9fl1Pi T[I.[I'NUNE (L'OGI ff32�11;f3 7�L[X 3212�JE3 THA SEA . . _.,,',�.. _� TNE CITIZENS ADVISOftY TASK FORCE FOR TNE ANOKA COUNTY-6LA1NE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN . . � �. - � . , . � � . ' . . �I Introductio� . The Minneapolis-Saint Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is required to prepare long-range comprehensive plans for airports it �.-.- operaYes in the metropolitan area. 11AC is carrying out that responsl- ^ bility by preparing a master plan for future devetopment at the Anoka County-Blaine-AirQort. While MAC is obli9ated to plan the facility respective of their responsibility to.the entire region, consistent . with the Metropoiitan Development Guide, they clearly wish to formally Incorporate:,locai public considerations into that decision..- . TRA Airport Gonsultants has established a broad citizen participation .. program that will ensure both that the public wiil be kept continualiy fnformed, and-that public input can make a meaningful contribution �.:o the master plan. . Citizen Participation Goal !- The goal of the overall public-participatien program is to provide the --<_.-public tvith the i�formation necessary to understand the-current probiems °,�-' and needs at.Anoka Gounty-Blaine Airport, and the possible aitarnative solutions and their effects; and to encourage the public to e�aivate atternative solutions and contribute to the development of a masYer plan. -7ask Force Role A major component ai the program wilT be Che work of the Citizens Advi- 5ory iask Force. The Task Force will serve as the official citizens� -�- group-insuring that all tocal citizens' concerns are represented and �- -� considered in the master plan study. MAC wiil also be considering comments from throughout the community, 6ut is particularly interested in what the Task Force can contribute. ,,.. -.., -�While other spokesmen will be recognized, they will be encouraged to sxpress their concerns through the forum of the 7ask Force. , Equally important as keeping MAC informed of public opinion, the Task Force will be contributing constructive input to MAC's selection of..an �-- alternative. This contribution will take severai forms, inciuding: 0 � Aiding in the evaluation�of the significance or imporLance of the social and environmental impacCs; Aiding in the evaluation of the celative impacCS and benefits of each alternative; _... _ .,.. __ . 2 o .Suggesting priorities for proposed alCernatives; o Aiding in the develoQment and evaluatio� of potential mitiga- tion measures and implementation strategies. TRA will work with the Task Force to frame concerns In terms of specific technical project components, so that both 1�SAC and the Task Force can See what actions or project changes wouid be required in order to improve public acceptance. Workshop Schedule Workshops ], 2, 5. and 6 will be held on Thursday evenings in the Social Room, St. TimoChy's Cathoiic Church, 70) -$9th Avenue NE, Blaine, Minnesota (telephone: 784-1329)• The workshops will run from 7:30 P11 Co approximately 10:00 PM. Workshop 3 will be held on a Tuesday evening at the same location and time. Workshops 4 and 7 wi11 be all-day (eight-hour} informal open houses scheduled on eitfier Saturday or Sunday.' The open houses will Yake place in an easily accessible pubiic location and will include graphic dis- plays of the project components.and the Task F'orce's work. The Task Force mem6ers will 6e present and wili be able to engage Yhe public in tndividual discussions. 4lorkshops 8, 9, and t0 wiil be scheduled for sometime after MAC f�as selected an alternative. They wiil review, ca�nment, and have input to the detailed design oP whatever a]ternative is selected. The dates and topics for the first seven worf:shops are as foilows: WorMshop Date Topic 1 Jan. 3t, i980 Introduction to Citizen Participation (Thursday) PPOCess; Public Issues and Concerns; Master Plan Technical Analyses -- status. 2 Feb. 21, 1y80 Social Impact Issues: (Thursday) Noise, Safety, Light Emissions, others. ldentify miti9ation measures. 3 March 11, 1480 Environmental lmpact lssues: (Tuesday) Air Quality, Water Quality, - � Soils, Vegetation, Kildlife, Historic and Special Sites, oYfiers Identify mit+gation measures. , , .. .. �.`,;' , . �� 3 �1 Weekend Public Open Nouse -- Saturday or Sunday "' March 29-3�, 1980 " 4isplay and discuss individuaily � with public social and environ- " mental impacts. 5 April 3, 1980 Evaluate Aiternatives: - (Thursday} • Compare all alternatives for all • social and environmental impacts. 6-� April 17, 1980 Prioritize Alternatives _. " (Thursday) . .- - - ,� . � Weekend Public Open House -- Saturday or Sunday May 3'k, �98� Display and discuss individually with public work and conclusions of Task Force. Workshop Format TRA planners wilt moderate ail workshops and discussion. Workshops wilt open with a presentation by the TP.A planning staff of the pertinent technical information for"the workshop topic. fhe presentation will jd"entify the questions ant� concerns that have aiready been stated through- the Cortununity Involvement Survey and Yhe first public meeting,.and will attempt to provide infornative answers to as many yuestions as possible. The 7ask force will then be divided into smaller groups �5`to 8 persons per group}, each dealing with a soeci`ic aspect of the issue under study. The smaller q��oups will be asked to frame concerns in terms of major and minor concerns, and Yo develop specific technical.questions to which they desire answers. The TRA planning staff will circulate among grouos to help them do so. One member from each smaii group will serve as a recorder and wiil keep notes on the major and miaor concerns and 'those camments nr questions to be put to MAC representing the 7ask Fat'ce as a whole. •- - After approximately 30 minutes, the entire Task Force will come back -` to9ether. 'ifie recorder from each group will make a short verbal report �*� to'the rest of the Task force on their major and minor concerns. At •"" ?• this point discussion will be open among the entire Task Force. The .. - °°planning staff will provide additional answers or information if possi6le. At the end of the group reports, the entire Task Force will conclude as to what unresalved questions and concerns should be directed to MAC. At the conciusion of each wotkshop, the planning staff will briefly � review the major unresoived concerns to be expressed to MAC, and wiil "" also give a brief preview of the topic of the next workshop. _.. __ __. .__ . ,.,_�,�..r _ �.., , HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETTNG JANOARY 24, 1980 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Larry Comners called the January 24, 1980, Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Commers, Russell Houck, Elmars Prieditis, Carolyn Svendsen, Duane Prairie Members Absent: None Others Present: .Terrold Boardman, City Planner Mary Cayan, Human Services Assistant Nasim Qureshi, City Manager Mayor Bill Nee Cheryl Moses, City Council Dennis Schneider, City Council Marvin Brunsell, Finance Director Mervin Herrmann, City Assessor Dean Doyscher, Professional Planning & Development, Mankato International Multi-Housing, Inc. - Developers JoinC Venture Developers APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 13, 1979, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES; MOTION by Mr. Houck, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to approve the December 13, 197°, Housing & Redevelopment Authority minutes as written. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers declared the motion carried unanimous2y. 1. CENTER CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS: A. INTERVIEW WITH INTERNATiONAL MULTI-HOUSING, INC, - DEVELOPERS: Mr. Doyscher stated Chis was kind of the culmination and the beginning. tFp [o this point, they had done some strategies in terms of es[ablishing some financial feasibility, putting the district together, giving them- selves the authority to act in a district, and inviting proposals. The thing that appeared very obvious to him was that when you invite [he private marketplace to show s�e designs, these designs are frequently much better and more real than it is when you try to set up a11 kinds of design standards. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 2 Mr. Doyscher stated his recomnendation to the Authority was that, as they hear the presen[ations, they be prepared to ask questions and get some background knowLedge. The decision is going to be a difficult one to make. Mr. Boardman introduced Mr. Jerry Remmer, President of International Multi-Housing, Inc. (IMI). Mr. Re�ner stated he would Like to thank the Authority for the opportanity to present theiz proposal. He introduced the members of his staff-- Mr. Frank Hirons, Vice President of IMI; David Russ, President of Real Estate Professionals; and Gary MacKenzie, architect and architectural consultanC. He stated that Mr, MacKenzie would begin with the architectural conceptions and the plans they have, and then would open it up for questions. Mr. MacKenzie stated they viewed the City's proposed renewal area as one renewal project with many phases, rather than several new projects. The area has tremendous potential, but for this area to be fully realized, they felt one development team should be designated for reconstruction. Their proposal eucompasses the developmenr of all six parcels and, in addition, they envision the potential for undesignated development. Mr. MacKenzie stated that at the beginning when they were studying the renewal area, it was apparent to them that there was a very physical split between east and west, which is IIniversity Avenue, In discussions with city staff, they were in concurrence with the uses that should occur. It was their opinion that the east side of University Avenue should be developed along office, civic, and entertainment uses, and Che west side, since there is an existing center, should be developed into an additional center which would incorporate many of the tenants into larger and new facilities. They feel this service center should at some time be remodeled to a service center and that the grocery story, drugstore, and retail services be located in a new center. Mr. MacKenzie stated that it also became appazent to them that for the success of any type of development with University Avenue cutting it in half and with the tremendous amount of traffic generated on IIniversity Avenue,something had to be done with the vehicular circulation to get the peop2e in and out of the project site. It was their proposal that the north- bound traffic on University Avenue be rerouted, if possible, with a controlled intersection to the east on 61st Ave., up Sth St., this being a major vehicular loop, and that a11 the access to the current City Hall, proposed office and entertainment structures be off of Sth St. They propose that ail their parking be underground with some surface and above-ground parking, but with ali parking being accessible to Sth St. This loop could continue with a controlled intersection at Mississippi Ave. and Sth St., going westerly to the controlled intersection at University and Mississippi, create another controlled intersection at the westerly end of the new shopping complex and existing shopping complex. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JANUARY 24, 1980 - PAGE 3 Mr. MacKettzie stated that, in addiCion, with Che potential of ali the people that can be employed in one area and with all the people being potential shoppers at a commercial area, there has to be some means considered to connect the people on Che east side of University with the people on the west side of University. Their proposal is that a shuttle Uus-type of service be strongly considered. This shuttle bus would have a central drop position aC the civic complex/office complex area, come to the Mississippi St. area, proceed westerly with a drop-off spot at the existing Holly Center, another drop-off spot at the new proposed shopging center, out onto University Ave., back to blst Ave., and east again to Sth St. He did not know the exact mechanics far a shuttle bus service, but he thought a levy on some o£ the commercial properties would be a possibility for subsidization o£ the operation of it, possibly mass transit would be interested, or any number of other possibiliCies. They were looking at around 1,500-2,000 automobiles, and it makes sense for a person to be able to arrive at one of the three major parking locations and be able to leave the automobile and use the shuttle bus service to arrive at any of the other points within Che development. Mr. MacKenzie stated that as to the actual proposal on each of the parcels, the City has designaCed Phase 1 to be the southeast intersection of University Ave. and Mississippi SC. They were in agreement with that. Their proposal was to develop on that parcel an office complex varying in height from 1-3 stories and c�ntaining approximately 107,000 sq. ft. Their proposal is also that the total site have a one-story underground parking facility, and Chat parking facility would accommodate approximately 448 automobiles. They propose, in conjunction with or at some subsequent stage, this underground parking facility be extended under what is now Eisenl�ower Park to provide additional parking for the office facility and for the employees of City Hall. Currently, the city site accommodates about 75 parking stalls, and they feel a reasonable estimation woutd be 100 stalls for use by the city, and that is cahat they are proposing. They also propose that in the future, tney build an additional three levels above grade stepped back thaC would accommodate anethe'r 200i- parking stalls, accommodating approximately 1,000 automobiles in this area. Mr. MacKenzie stated that once they established 107,000 sq. ft. of office space with people occupying that space and a city canplex with its numerous employess, they are proposing that they would perhaps have enough people to generate an entertainment center at the south end. This could contain a large resCaurant (liquor/nightciub type of theme), a full service coffee shop, and theatres. To get people from the office complex and the city hall complex, they are proposing a cLimate-controlled pedestrian thoroughfare. They envision the thoroughfare could streCCh from Phase 4, the northern-most designated renewal property, a11 the way down to and including Phase 5, mostly climate-controlled, Mr. MacKenzie stated they propose also that the structure located north of Mississippi be a future three-story commercial office building con- taining approximately 85,000 sq. ft., and that it be tied into the existing first-phase strucCure with a skyway over Mississippi. This skyway could HOUSING & REDEVELOYMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 4 have some commercial use, perhaps a cafeteria or another eating establish- ment. They have established that the 1,000 par[cing stalls would be more than sufficient to serve this 85,000 sq, ft. of office space, the 107,000 sq, ft. office complex, City Hall, and the entertainment complex. Mr. MacKenzie stated he saw the pedestrian spine connecting with Fridley State Bank and could be covered to that point. If the bank would ever want to have a second-story expansion, they could then continue to main- tain a totally enclosed pedestrian-way across their service lot and over to Phase 6. For practical purposes at this time, they have 3ndicated that the pedestzian-way come into grade at the Fridley State Bank and then continue open-air with some kind of landscaped plaza, through the parking lot, across 63rd Ave. to Phase 6. A possible use for Phase 6 would be a sports and health club or health spa and space for limited pazking. The spine then continues to Phase 5. They see the property west of Phase 5, which now conYains a service center (Moon Plaza) as a possible expansion of the renewal area, because they feel that the estsblishment of a remodeled service center wi11 probably draw many of the tenants out of the Moon Plaza area. They see perhaps an expanded Phase 5 which would expand all the way from Sth St. to University. This covld contain a single tenant office facility with underground parking and some type of multi-family residential facility with underground parking. Mr. MacKenzie stated that west of Univezsity (what the City has labeled Phase 3) would contain roughly 110,Q00 sq. ft. for the Penny's Food Markat, Snyders Drug, and a relocated Eridley Hardware. They also propose a small family restaurant located in the parking lot. Mr. MacKenzie stated they have indicated a strong pedestrial cirulation pattern on the easY side of University connecting all their uses. They have not indicated atty solution to a pedestrian circulation pattern east/west across University. They couZd live with an overhead pedestrian bridge, but from experience, people don't use them too much. That is the reason for the proposed shuttle bus service. Mr. MacKenzie stated that right now the City has a problem getting fire access onto southbound University Ave, They are proposing the relocation of the Fire Department in the ramp structure, so they could have direct access to Sth St. and easy access to a controlled intersection. They would suggest that the vacated space by the Fire Department be expansion space for City Hall. However, they have also indicated expansion space for City Ha11 directly south of the existing structure. Mr. MacKenzie stated they are proposing to replace Eisenpower Park with an earth surface over the parking facility that would be sufficient to support plant growth and Iandscaping materials. On Phase 2, they are proposing that a very big percentage of the property be left green for pedestrian use. Mr. MacKenzie stated they were now open to answering questions. _� HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24, 1980 PAGE 5 Mr. Prieditis asked Mr. MacKenzie to outline the phases as Che developer saw them built. Mr. MacKenzie stated that they agreed wiCh the City's proposal on Phase 1 and would be ready to begin immediately on Phase l. At the same time, Chey would like to begin the acquisition process of the other parcels. The developer would prefer to go from Phase 1 to Phase 3 and to Phase 4 as the demand arises, then to Phase 2 and Phases 5 and 6 as the demand arises. Mayor Nee asked how many of the present structures would be removed. Mr. MacKenzie stated that with the Holly Center, they would like to work with the existing owner to renew modest expansion and perhaps include some type of enclosed pedestrial route. In their opinion, what is designated as Phases 1, 2, and 4 will be razed, and everything in the area of Fridley Hardware, including Fridley Hardware will be taken off. All they see remaining on the east side of University is the existing City Hall, the Fire Department, Fridley State Bank, Northern Cablevision, and the Rice Creek Office Buildling. They are reallp talking about total reconstruction. Mr. Schneider asked if any residential housing was in the proposal. Mr, MacKenzie stated that possibly there would be residential housing in Phase 5. They think the need will show itself as the development proceeds for multiple family residential--coop or condo, but they have no idea of figures. Mr. Schueider asked if there was any kind of timeline for this proposal. Mr. Hirons stated they have made quite a few contacts of possible tenants for this property and are excited about the ineerest. He stated eheir basic concept is to help Fridley develop a community center. This world of transporation and highways has dictaeed the shape of communities, but the fact remains thae people still feel they want their home in a community and to feel a part of that community. So, they have tried to use this philosophy and they feel the community of Fridley will benefit greatly and will attract people and business if there is this sense of community. He stated that later on they could talk more about the design and how they would build the community. As far as phasing and timing, that depended on several factors, one being the economic facCOr--how quickly sane of this property can be used. It was difficult at this time to give a direce schedule of time, but they would cerCainly move as fast as the demand was there. Mr. MacKenzie stated that Mr. Hirons had brought out an important fact and that was that this was a concept. They feel very sCrongly about the use they have designated, but at this time it is strictly concept. HOUSING & I2EDEVELOPMETIT AUTHORITY MEETING .TANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 6 Mr. Hfrons stated he also wanted to make it clear that they were very much ittterested in working with the coimnunity in the development and design and were open and pliable in terms of a2tering or changing in order to meet the best interests of the community. When the best interests of Fridley are met in this whole program, then their best interests are met. So, it is important to have as many people involved as possible. Ms. Moses stated that in looking at the drawing, she had the feeling there was very Iittle left that started out being in Fridley. She was not totally prepared for redevelopment to that extent. Her concern was for the business people in those areas and how cooperative these people are going to be when it is suggested their buildings be removed. Are these people in favor of this? - Mr. MacKenzie stated they did not know. It was their opinion that, assuming rents aren't drasticaLly increased, the majority of the existing business people will relocate in a new facility. They would want the business people's input and would work with those business people. The major thing is to try to get the project organized and try and get the full poCential out of the existing property. The full potential then brings a larger return for the city and makes the city more able to supply the services the citizens expect. Ms. Moses asked if the bvsiness geople would be justiy c�pensated for relocation. Mr. Boardman stated that, yes, they would be justly comgensated. If the City condemns, the city is required under any federal action or any governt- ment action to pay relocation costs and all moving costs. They would attempt to relocate as many of the businesses back into the business area as possible and would work toward that. Mayor Nee cited the concern about the traffic volume that would be generated on a residential street. Mr. Boardman stated they would have [o do a lot of work with the developer to see what is needed to handle that icind of traffic, The one thing that has to be understood is that if the City of Fridley wants to develop this area and increase density, which is what the total concept was in the beginning, they are going to increase traffic, It was a matter of how they want to deal with it, control that tra£fic, and try to limit the affect on the people surrounding the area. Mr. Prieditis asked if IMI had any previous experience with [his type of project. Mr. Re�er stated, no, not as a unit. They currently have a$10 million pro,jecC under construction in St. Louis Park in conjunction with the St. Louis Park Housing & Redevelopment Authority, They are just finalizing HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24, 198� - PAGE 7 another purchase of $S million in St. Louis Park. Their associates are in the process of constructing $lz million office complex that will eventually be $5-6 million. This is also being done under industrial revenue bond financing with the City of Eden Prairie. Their particular development group has been associated for 1? years and currently has $112 million under construcC3on, has achieved financing of $17 million"and has another $llmillion on the drawing boards, Mr. Doyscher asked if IMI would be willing to do Phase 1 only. Mr. Remmer stated it was possible, but they would like to have time to consider that alternative, Mr. Doyscher asked that if IMI was selected, would they be willing to commit to each one of the phases,not only in terms of legal agreements, but also in terms of periodic and scheduled cash payments to the city, payments that would be forfeited if they did not perform? Mr. Remmer sCated that there were a lot of unanswered questions, and they would want those questions answered before they would commit to that. They, as a development team, have made a total commitment to the project. They are open to discussion in firming up that commitment. They are very sincere and have spent a great deal of time and money toward the development. They are willing to commit additional time and money into the developmenC. But, they would hesitate to commiC Co a deposit-type of thing. The money market is very tight. They have very strong credit lines and their financial statements would be open to the City as the chosen developer or prior to that. They also have additional individuals who would like to come in to the project with them with heavy financial statements. Mr. Doyscher asked what per square foot construction costs were they talking about in terms of office space for Phase 1? Mr. MacKenzie stated it was about $40/sq: ft. for office space and $2�-25/sq. ft. £or underground space. Mr. MacKenzie stated thaC in terms of what they, as developers, would want from Che City, they would need the cooperation of the city staff in trying to handle the traffic flow. If Sth St. does become a major vehicular spine and has to be upgraded, they would expect the City to provide them with Che means for the access to the site. They would also expect utilities to the sites that would accommodaee the buildings. When they determine they need a controlled intersection at Mississippi and Sth St „ they would need the cooperation from the City on that. Mr. Doyscher stated that, in terms of office space, were they talking about insCitutional office usezs? Mr. Re�ner stated that the bulk of the office space would be'institutional. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 8 Mr. Schneider asked that as the energy crisis geta worse and people are looking more at mass transit, was it wise to plan around such a heavy use of the automobileY Mr. MacKenzie stated they would be phasing and are not looking at this being completed within the next 2-3 years. He thought the next 2-3 years would dicta[e a lot of the private automobile usage. He would think that if they went ahead with the first phase and did huild in 448 parking staiis and at some future date, they see the demand is not there, they can either forget the parking or make some other use for thac space. Mr. Commers thanked PIr. Remmer, Mr. Hirons, Mr. Russ, and Mr. MacKenzie for coming and giving their proposal. He stated the Authority would give it their best consideration. Chairperson Commers declared a ten-minute recess at 9:15 p.m. B. INTERVIELi WITH JOIN'C VENTURE DEVELOPERS: Mr. Boardman introduced Mark Haggerty and asked him to introduce his development team. Mr. Haggerty stated that they were here tonight to make their presentation to the City. He stated he was with the firm of Smith, Juster, Feikema, Malmon & Haskvitz. With him tonight from the architectural firm which is one of the partners of Joint Venture Developers were Mr. Saul Smiley and Mr. John Suzuki, architects. Also with him is Mr. Gary Holmes, who works very closely with Sheehy Construction and is a developer himself with M-M Development Corp. He stated that he had given the Authority members a list of the four partners--Smiley Glotter Associates; Smith, Juster, Feikema, Malmon & Haskvitz; Sheehy Construction Co.; and M-M Development Corp.--with addresses and contact persons. Mr. Haggerty stated he would give a little background on who they were and how the partnership was put together. Two years ago they had the first meeting of the businessmen in the area that was subsequently desig- nated as the Center City Project area and also designated as an HRA tax increment district. They decided they would like to see a center city in Fridley. As they developed further and the legislation was passed last spring, the law firm of Smith, Juster, Feikema, Malmon & Haskvitz decided they definitely wanted to make a proposal. They contacted Smiley Glotter Associates, which has 25 engineers and architects and has been in business for 35 years. Smiley Glotter Associates has not only the developers and designers, but has the capability of doing just about everything from the preliminary plan al2 the way up to the supervision of actual construction. � HOUSXNG & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORZTY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGG 9 Mr. iIaggerty stated they decided they needed to have as parC of the group a strong well-known financially solvent construction company. ThaC is where Sheehy Construction and M-M Devalopment Corp. came inCo the picture. Sheehy Construction has been around for over 25 years and the slide presentation will show a number of the projects they have built. The slide presentation will also show a number of projects thaC Smiley Glotter Assoc. has been involved in, and, in some cases, has actually developed. A number of the ideas and concepts shown on the screen are ideas they hope to incorporate in the structures they would design and build if they are given the opportunity. Mr. Haggerty stated Chat Gary Holmes, who works very closely with Sheehy Construction, has developed a numUer of projects himself, again soa�e of these will be shown in the slide presentation. Mr. Holmes has worked for Sheehy ConsCruction for over ten years, and actually owns a couple of developments. Mr. Holmes was involved in the construction of the Earle Brown Towers, as was Sheehy Construction. Mr. Smiley's fi� designed and were the architects for Unity liospital. Mr, Haggert stated that his law firm has been in the community for a number of years. He and his partner, Mr. A1 Malmon, CPA, have had a tremendous amount of experience in increment financing, tax exempt mortgages, industrial revenue bonds, and things like that. He feels their development team nas a wealth of experience and a wealCh of expertise to develop the psoject. Mr. Haggerty stated that Mr, Smiley would give a slide presentation showing the projects they have worked on before, jointly or individually, and would explain the site plan for their prczposal. Mr. Holmes would be talking about the marketing aspect. Mr. Smiley stated that as they brainstormed to arrive at an outlined program, they began to see Che possibilities of a center core that would really hover totally around City Hall, In developing that program, they thought offices, shops, specialty shops, restaurants, and a theatre would be logical generators for an exciting center. Again, they thought it would be great if it was accessible by car, by pedestrian, and was con- tained under a singular roof. BeFore going into their approach to the development, he would like to show a slide presentation of samplings of projects they have done which are in all areas of development and construc- tion, ranging from office buildings to housing to shopping centers, commercial, industrial, institutional, etc., to show some flavor of the work of Joint Venture partners and their capabilities in doing work that is imaginative, exciting, attractive, and to meet the economy and budgets as desired, Mr. Smiley showed their site plan, bordered by the frontage road or University Ave, to the west, Sth St. to the east, Pfississippi St, to the norCh, and the bank property to the south. This area is represented as Phase 1 and 2 in the City's proposal. They are breaking it up inCo three parts and propose to develop it in three phases, rather than two. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUT1i0RITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 10 Mr. Smiley staked they expect to utilize Phase I, as identified in the proposal, in its entirety. They would propose an office building only with 72,000 sq, ft. and surface parking for 300 cars. They would have access for public transpoxtation off Mississippi 5t, and a curb cut to allow for public transportation. There would be parking entered from Sth St. or from Mississippi St. At Mississippi it would be entered at grade level. Off of Sth St, it woula go down hill to Che level of the grade of the poLice entrance at City Hall, and that would be the lower level of the o£fice building. The continuation of the center wouZd be Phase 2 and Phase 3. Mr. Smiley stated they are proposing an office towez-to the north connected with a two-story level of shops, restaurants, theatre, and other use spaces connecting to the city parking ramp. From there they would be able to go through a continuation of shops through Phase 3 that would come across to the other side of the site and to the last o£fice tower. Mr. Smiley stated there would an approach to City Hall from the frontage road with a drop-off in front of City Ha11 or there would be the same drive- through for the emergency vehicles fran the frontage road or from Sth.St. to be able to go underneath the shops and be able to park in a coumion parking lot, which would be marked off for emergency vehicies, and would be parking for patrons of the center. They view that as an atea where they would be able to provide specialty shops, sundry shops, boutiques, restaurant, theatre, and other activities of that nature, in larger and smaller spaces at levels throughout the center. Mr. Smiley state3 there is the possibility of the Fire Department vacating the westerly building. If it did, that was something that could ultimately be incorporated in the handling of the parking area aad the emergency vehicles with a complete separation so there was no crass interference of those vehicles. Mr. Holmes stated in going about an undertaking of this type, one important thing was the economics, More importantly, they feel they have a viable project and, in doing so, they would start one phase at a time. In doing the first phase, they would start with the 72,000 sq, ft. office building. They have talked to 4-5 major companies who have expressed interest. They have received strong znterest for 25-3�/ of the buiZding. At the same time, they wouLd concentrate on getting the retail users and would phase the retail space as they could develop it. Mr, Haggerty stated some of the key factors of the whole program are the numbers. He reviewed the Tax Revenue figures (contained in the proposal books) with the members of the Authority. He stated he was trying to show the economic sense of tax increment financing and tax exempt mortgages which would give them the construction financing, as well as the permanent Einancing. � HOUSING & RL'DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 11 Mr. Haggerty stated that for their permanent finance selection, they have gone to underwriters in the community. They have received firm offers to underwrite this entire project through tax exempt mortages. So, they do have the construction financing lined up and the permanent financing lined up for the of£ice building. Mr. Smiley stated that relative to the size and scope of the project, they have divided it into three parts and have approached it from the standpoint of parcel by parcel. They do not Chink it is realistic to come in with any huge undertaking or the entire project in one fa11 swoop. As it generates and develops, they anticipate going through the total project over ehe years, and it, too, is going to reflect on a surrounding development as we11, but it has to build momentum. Mr. Haggerty stated there was some discussion about a parking ramp and maybe trying to install it in the first phase. One of the problems Chey saw was that the parking ramp itself would cost approximately $3,500-4,000 per car. Under the existing city code, for every 250 sq, ft. of building space, there has Co be a parking stall. The ground level is very cheap and the Phase 1 site lends itself to ground level parking and the exact number of parking spaces required under city code. �hey felt that to build a xamp at the same time was not economically feasible at this phase of the game. They have limitaeions as far as the type of bonding they can do, as far as the dollars go. There is a$10 million limitation, and they are looking at $3-4 million in bonding. They did not want to use up all the resources for the entire city in one fall swoop, and their group thought the ramp would be more feasible docm the road when they develop a larger portion of the property. Mr. Boardman asked what they saw as the ultimate amount of parking stalls they would need for the development. Mr, Holmes stated thexe would probably be a toeal of approximately 1,300 parking stalls in both Phase 1 and all of Phase 2. Mr. Haggerty stated that it should be emphasized that they would be designing this with the amenities, the fountains, the green areas, the aesthetics, to compensate for a loss of the actual park. Mr. Suzuki staCed there also could be some flexibility with the ramp parking. They could take some of the surface parking out and add some more ramp parking if they saw the need for more green space, Mr. Prairie asked what the time frame was. ' Mr. Haggerty stated that, realistically, they were talking about ten years to complete all three ghases, the City`s two phases. Mr. Doyscher asked if they had approached potential tenants and what kind of tenants were they talking about. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMGNT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 PAGE 12 Mr. Haggerty stated that they had about four major industries in Fridley that had given serious interest. A certain portion of the tenants would be smaller businesses, but a major portion of them would be major industries within the area. Mr. Doyscher asked if Toint Venture Developers would be willing to do Phase 1 only? Mr. Haggerty stated they had not considered that and would like the commitment for the City's Phases I and 2, They did not at this time envision developing Ho11y Center. Mr. D�yscher asked that if Joint Venture Developers was selected, would they be willing to make cash payments to the City, payments that would be forfeited if they did not performY Mr. Haggezty stated it was something they could negotiate. Obviously, they would prefer not to do that, but if it was part of the program, they would certainly take a look at it. One condition he would want to put on it was that any payments they would make could be used during the con- struction phase as a contribution to equity and the actual structure, rather than just paying. Mr. Commers thanked Mr. Haggerty, Mr. Smiley, Mr. Aolmes, and Mr. Suzuki for their presentation. C. SET MEETING DATE FOR REVIEW OF TWO PROPDSALS: Mr. Boardman stated he would like to set up another meeting, possibZy as a selection meeting. At that meeting, he wouid like the Authority to select one developer so they could start negotiations. Mr. Commers stated he had a problem with making a selection at the next meeting. He wwld first like to see something in writing as to what main things should be considered. Ms. Svendsen stated she would like to see some financial check on the two developers' references. Mr. Boardman stated he and Mr. Doyscher would have to sit down and look at each project as i.t compared to the �oay the tax increment development was initia2ly developed to see the consistency to that plan. They would also look at the pros and cons of the types of developments being proposed and whether they feel these developments can be workable. Mr. Doyscher stated he fett the next meeting should be just a discussion meeting. The meeting was set for Tuesday, .7anuary 29, 1980, at 7:30 p.m. _-J HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENf AUTHORITY MEETING, JkNIIARY 24, 1480 - PAGE 13 2. RESOLUTION APPROVING INITIAL NEGOTIATION FOR ACQUTSITION OF 6025 3RD ST, Mr. Boardman stated that at the last HRA meeting, the Authority had passed Resolueion No. HRA-4 authorizing the acquisition of 5832 University Ave, N.E., properey of Vern 3ohnson. This resolution is for the acquisition of the Parlin property which the City is .also negotiating. Mr. Boardman stated thaC with this negotiation, the City had some discrepancy in their appraisal. The first appraisal came in at $22,500. The review appraiser felt that appraisal was low and that the appraisal range should be between $23,000 and $27,000. They told the Parlin's Chat if they weren't satisfied with the City's appraisal, they could get an appraisal on their own. The Parlin's did and their appraisal came in at $29,000. The City had another review appraisal done on that, and the review appraisal came in at $26,500. Mr. Boardman sCated they talked to RUD aad were approved to make an of£er on the property. He stated that with attorney fees, condemnation costs, inflation costs, etc, Chey have negotiated a purchase price of $29,491.$8. Mr. Commers stated it did not seem right that the City's original appraisal should be off about 3�i or more. He stated this was the second time it had happened. If the City is going to be hiring appraisers, they have to rely on them in some way. When the City continuously seeks ways to meet the iniCial appraisal of the other people, he was not sure they were doing everything in the best interests of the City. Mr. Boardman stated that it was not necessarily Cheir intent Co meet that appraisal price an the other property. They knew there were substantial assessments on the property, and that was the point of negotiation. Mr. Boardman stated that regarding the property at 6025 3rd St., Lhere are several things involved. First of all, it is a very substandard pieee of property. The family living there are living under what the City considers hazardous conditions. The City has inspected the unit for a potential rehab project under another program. What their consideraCion was at that time was that the unit was substandard and not rehabilitaCory.and should be condemned. Mr. Boardman stated the whole purchase program was based on removing substandard units and trying to provide standard units for large family units. This unit is probably one of the worst units within the c�ry of Fridley. If it is not purchased under this program, one action the City might have to take is to get a signed waiver from the owner stating that the City is not held liable for any damages or any hazard. Since the City has inspected the unit, Che unit should have been condemned. Mr. Coc�cners asked why the City doesn't take the normal channels in condemning it--tagging it, and making the ownar either bring it un to code or making the owner move out. � HOUSING & REAEVELOPME27T AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 14 Mr. Boardman stated that had been discussed and che City Attorney did not think that would 6e the pxoper way to go. When this program was approved, it was approved with the condition that there would be no condemnation action. They had talked to the Parlin's about the rehab program, and when thaC wasn't possible, they told them there may be a purchase program that couZd help them. So, the City Attorney advi.sed that instead of taking condemnation acxion, they try to work them into the purchase program. Now that they have tried, they have delayed six months on tagging since the initial inspection. Now if the City comes back and says they can`t negotiate a purchase price and are now goi_ng to take the legal steps to tag the property, they may run into negative publicitg as far the Housing & Redevelopment Authority is concerned. Mr. Boardman stated that if the City purchases the property, the City has to relocate this family. They have inspected the unit that the family wants to move into in Blaine, and it falls within the standards f.or comparable housing. In addition to the $29,000, there are Federal HUD requirements of $15,000 for relocation costs. MOTION by Mr. Houck to adopt Resolution No. HRA-5. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK QF A SECOND. Mr. Boardman asked that since the resolution had failed, what direction did the Authority want him to take? Did they want him to negotiate farther down on the price or stop negotiations at this time and [ry to locate another piece of property for acquisition? Mr. Couaners stated it was his feeling that Mr. Boardman should repart back to the owr.er of the property that the Authority was unable to pass the resolution and discuss with the owner any other options other than the one presented. If anything else can be worked out in the meantime, the Authority could look at it at the next meeting. If the owner is adament in his position, then he thought it would be necessary for the City to look for another project. The other members of the Authority agreed with Mr. Cocrmiers. 3. SELECTION CRITEKIA FOR LARGE FAMILY LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING: A. Set up recommended procedure for approval: Mr. Boardman stated that under the same program, they have negotiated and gotten signed purchase agreements with Vern Johnson, 5832 University Ave. N.E. In Che next 2-3 months, they wi11 be tearing those structures down. At this point, tfiey want to start working to try and find families' that are eligiUle for the program and start working with the 265 units. In order to do that, they were bringing before the Authority what they felt should be the "Selection Procedure for the Large Family Home Ownership Program." HOUSING & RL'DEVELOPMENT AVfHORITY MEETING JANUARY 24 1980 - PAGE 15 Mr. Boardman staCed that Co meeC the HUD requirements the grant was provided under, Chey are looking at large family classifications only-- a family size of 5 or more persons. The income must be verified to fall wiChin the Section 8 income guidelines as outlined by HUD. The family must meet the qualifications of the 235-265 Program administrated by AUD, as a maximum construction cost of $52,800 and with a maximum mortgage allowed of $44,000 Mt. Boardman stated the selection of families would be done by the Authority on a first-come/first-serve basis and be numbered as the applicants are received. They felt Chis was Che best way to go, and felt they would hinder the program if there was a deadline or cut-off date. He stated that in order to find and gee qualified people, it could be a 7-9 month process. Mr. Prieditis stated his concern was that along with the first-come/ first-serve basis in paragraph 4, it be amended to state ehaC the families must also apply in person. Mr. Boardman stated that couLd be added in. MOTION by Mr. Prieditis, seconded by Mr. Houck, to adopt Che "Selection Procedure for the Large Family Home Qcanership Program" as amended. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Ghairperson Commers declared the motion carried unanimously. The Authority also agreed to delete the words, "with review and approval of HRA'� in paragraph 5. AATOURNMENT: Chairpezson Larry Commers declared the January 24, 1980, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting adjourned at 12:05 a.m. Respectfully sub iitted, L e Saba Recording Secretary � � i • ` j CITY OF FRIDLEY ` � PLANNiNG CONAIISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 CALL TO ORDEB: Chairperson H�rris called the Fehruary 6, 1980, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. 80LL CAI,L: Members Present: Mr. Harris, Mr. Treuenfels, Mr. Hora (for Mr. Langenfeld), Mr. Oquist, Ms. Hughes, Ms. Schnabel Members A,baent: None Others Present: Jerrold Soardman, City Planner &ob Schroer, 810Q University Ave. N.E. Roger Jones, 7620 University Ave. N.E. Warren Johnson, Northern States Power APPROVAL OF JAN[JARY 23, 1980, PLANNiNG COMMISSION MLNVfES: MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels, to approve the 3anuary 23, 1980, Planning Commission minutes. tds. Schnabel stated that the following changes should be made: Page 2, last paragraph, add the following sentence: "The other possibility would be a renewal fee." Page 4, third paragraph from bottom, second 1ine, delete "normally would be" and insert, "possihly could be". She also wanted Co point out in that same paragraph that, "There always is an appeals process even if something is written into the ordinance." UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON HARRIS DECLARED THE M?NUTES APPROVED AS AMENDED, 1. UNIVEBSITY II�IDUSTRIAI. PARK,BY ROBERT SCHROER: Replat of the NW 114 of the SW 1/4 of Section_2, T-30, R-24, City_of Fridley, Mn, Anoka County, _ _. except that part taken for State Highway No. 4�; except tne South 284 -- _— -_ � _ _ feet oY the Weat 460 feet and except_the West 60 feet lying northerly - - _ - _ -- - _ of the south 666 feet. Generally located betweea 7ytn Avenue and 81st Avenue N.E., on the West side of University Avenue. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to open the public hearing for P-,$,;9i80-01, by RoberC Schroer. Upon a voice vote; all vcting apea Chairman Harris �ared the nu�lin hearing open at 7:40 P.M , � PLANNING COTAtLSSION MEETING FEBRUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 2 Mr. Boardman stated that SCaff had looked at this proposed p1at, .and there are several things within this plat that should be put into the record. All the easements are recorded on this plat, but some easements are missing on an ex#sting water line along TH 47, so a 20-foot easement should be shown on the plat along that sewer line. That comes in on Block 1, Lot 1, and Block 2, Lot 1. Mr. Boardman stated that with Block 3, Lot 1, which is a ccmmercial property, and B1ock 4, Lot 1 and 8, which are shown as M-1, they may have the same problem here as they had with the Paschke property where the setback on industrial properYy has to be 100 feet off any commercial property. It may give some problems as far as the setback for building. They may want to do the same thing they did with Mr. Paschke and that is, along with the plat, to recommend that a variance be granted stating that all loading and parking be in the rear yard. Mr. Boardman stated they have not yet rec.eived any drainage plans as far as ponding or stormwater run-off, so that should be a stipulation under the building permit. Mr. Boardman stated that in this plat, it shows S1sC Ave. on the north. He stated they have had a discussion with the genEleman just north of this property who owns the driving range and is not happy with 81st Ave, going in. However, Staff feels 81st should at least connect to Ranchers Road; whether it go through to Main St. at this time probably is not necessary. If 81st Ave. was not tied into Ranchers Road, they would have to deadend Ranchers Road, which is not a good situation, and the Engineering Department would prefer to see it attached at that point. Mr. Harris asked how they would handle the ponding. Mr. Boardman stated they do not necessarily look at on-site ponding as a requirement. They look at water retention, If the builders can figure out a way to hold water on the rooftop or in the parking lot so that the rate of run-off is not greater than the existing property, that is generally what they Look at. They go by the same regulations they must meet when they go into the Rice Creek Watershed DisCrict. Mr. Roger Jones stated he owned the Fridley Golf Range at 8100 University. He stated he was not against the development or the plat; he thought that was good. He stated he could appreciate the fact that the City did not want to deadend streets, but he had to look out for his own interests and the fact that his driving range would go out of business if 81st went in because of the narrowfng of the property, and because of the possibility of damage to automobiles on the road from stray golf balls. He stated he thought he saw that all the properties could be served with utilities in the proposed plat, and would not need a through street. If the City was to develog the area between 79th and 81st, which is a normal growth area and let that build up, it seemed like the wise way to go. If they put in 81st Ave., they are trying PLANNING COMhff5SI0N MEETING, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 3 to develop 79th and the whole package at one time, and the growth is not there at thia time to do iY. He also felt it was putting an undue hardship on the existing property owners to pay assessmenCS, taxes, etc., waiting for development to come from 79th on through. Mr. Harris asked what Mr. Jones thought of the proposal to just put 81st Ave. to the new proposed Ranchers Road. Mr. Jones stated he was not in favor of it, because it was doing essentially the same thing as hav3ng 81st all the way through, as that was his working area. Mr. Harris stated that if this land was platted and Ranchers Road was put in and a service drive and both streets were made deadends, there would be a problem with emergency vehicles--fire, police, and also snowplowing. Maybe it would he posaible to put in 81st so a loop would go around oneo Ranchers Road. Mx. Jones stated that would still create a problem for him. He did not know how to get away from the situation. Gars have to travel along the road and there is no way io control a golf ball. � Ms. Schnabel suggested that Mr. Jones put up some kind of screening--fencing and trees or shrubs--that would help block the flight o£ a golf ball. There must be other golfing ranges with the same problem. Mr. Jones stated he presently had a fence which was quite worn, but he believed the fence was about 20 feet high. They still lose about 6-7,000 golf balls a season that go over Che fence, so the fence was not totally effective. A 30-foot high fence would probably contain considerably more golf balls. Mr. Schroer stated that he and Mr. Jones had talked about this several times. He stated he felt the biggest problem for Mr. Jones was the amount of asses.s- ments going on his property, and he could appreciate Mr. Jones' concern. He stated they were going to put in Slst a couple of years ago, but decided it was not necessary at that time. He felt it was getting more necessary now. Was there any way the assessments could be delayed or something to help Mr. Jones' situation? Mr. Boardman stated he thought there has been some deferred payments on assessments; however, the assessments have to be paid at the interest rate at the time the assessments are gaid, so interest rates could be considerably higher at that time. It might be beCter to pay the assessments now, rather than ten years from now. Mr. Harris stated that he had teviewed his notes and it appeared that about ten gears�agodmhensHic�Joua�•.eame in for a special use permit to build a golfing range,there was some discussion and Mr. Jones understood that at some point in time, sanething else was going to happen to his property besides a driving range. As Mr. Harris remembered, the Planning Cammission said the reason they were recommending a special use permit was because there was not much activity in the area, and they would like to see the driving range in that area to kind of get things moving, PLANNIN6 COt�A1ISSI0N MEETSNG, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 4 Mr. Jones stated that, yes, he had understood that. Ae stated he also under- stands that Mr. Schroer needs access to his property for development of that property. Ais question was: Is it really necessary to go in and do this now as it is somewhat stopping the operation of his 12 acres? Mr. Harris asked Mr. Jones if he had thought of platting his property in the near future. Mr. Jones stated that, yes, he had, but, until the area from 79th to 81st is developed, built, and sold, it seemed fool�sh for someone to skip ovex that property and build on property farther out. Mr. Boardman stated that there is development at access points, and access points are at 79th and 81st. Generally, development is done first at the access points and then development is done inside. Mr. Jones' property is at an access point, so his property could possibly be developed before Mr. Schroer's interior lots. Ms. Hughes asked Mr. Schroer that on the lots along &lst Ave., what kind of businesses would be going in there? Were they businesses that would attract a loC of people and generate a lot of trafficY Would these businesses require the development of 81st? Mr. Schroer stated that Che commercial business would generate a lot of traffic, but the indusCrial business would not. He stated, yes, it would require the development of 81st. Ms. Hughes asked what the time schedule was for the streee construction. Mr. Harris stated that the streets would probably be dane by fall of 1980. Mr. Harris stated again, that in an industrial area, they cannot put in dead- end streets because of emergency vehicles. Although the City does have some cul-de-sacs, they are not all that successful. Mr. Jones stated he was not asking for a cul-de-sac, and he was not out to stop the development, but there has to be some workable solution, rather than putting an undue hardship on an individual. If they could put in a street that would go back to Ranchers Road, he would go along with that and would work around that, He would maybe need assistance in putting up a retainer wa11 to protect cars and people from seray golf ba11s. Also, if there was s�e way to get deferred asseasments, so that when Mr. Schroer's property was developed, then the rest would be ready for development. He felt there was too much land to be developed and they were trying to do it too soon. If 81st has to go in, he would prefer to see it stop at Ranchers Road. Mr. Oquist pointed out that if they stopped 81st ae Ranchers Road, before long, they will have developers of the other property coming in wanting 81st continued all the way to Main St. PLANNiNG COMI�IISSION MEETING, dANUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 5 Ms. Schnabel etated that she was very sympathetic to Mr. Jones' problem. She __ — _ --- _-- felt uncomfortable as to how to solve the dilemma that the development of 81st Ave. would present to Mr, Jones and his property, but she also felt that in the City's best interest, the development o£ 81st was bound to come soon, if it was not due right now. From Mr. Schroer's standpoint, the development of 81st was probably crucial. She thought the point Mr. Jones made was very valid in the delineation of streets and the philosophy behind the way those streets are platted. She did not see an anawer that would acc�odate both people. MOTION by Ms, Sehnabel, seconded by I�. HugheB, to close the public hearing on P.S. Y80-01, by Robert Schrpez. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the public hearing closed at 9:05 p.m. Mr. Oquist stated he agreed with Ms. Schnabel that it is inevitable that 81st is going to be developed. He also appreciated Mr. Jones' dfiemma, but did not honestly know what could be done. Mr. Harris stated that, as far as the financial burden, maybe the Pianning Commission could recoum�end to City Council that assessments be delayed to a later date. kc. Eoards�n etated that he would like Mr. Jonea to think about that, because inter�at rates could go higher. MOTION by Ms. Hughes, seconded hy Mr. Treuenfels, that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of Preliminary Plat,�.. 4180-01, by Robert Schroer, being a replat of the NW.1/4 of Section 2, T-30,'$-24, City of Fridleg, ____- Mn, Anoka County, except that part taken for State Truck Highway T3�. 47' except the South 284 feet of the West 480 feet and except the West 460 feet lying northerly of the south 666 feet, generally located between 79th Avenue and 81st Avenue N.E., on the West side of University Avenue, with the following stipulations: 1. An acceptable storm water drainage system be designed for the plat. 2. That a 20 foot easement be dedicated for Block 1, Lot 1, and Block 2, Lot 1. 3. That 81st Avenue N.E. be extended from Main street to University Avenue N. E . 4. That the assessments to the property owner be delayed, if the owner so wishes Ms. Hughes stated that if there was not excellent control of water in this plat, she would hope that whatever means available are taken to prevent any develop- ment of the land. .11M �;� Mr. Harris stated they should discuss the drainage situation. It was his feeling that he would like to see the &ngineering Department do a comprehensive study of the whole area as far as drainage. Tfiis study should be pointed to the possibility that at some future date, the City acquire land for a holding pond in an advantageous area near the tracks. Now is the time to do it before there is a lot more development in the area. PLANNiNG COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 6 UP� A VOICE VOTS, Ai.L VOTING AYE, CHAIRPE&S�T HABBIS DECLABED THE M(1TION CARRIED UN�NIl�USLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A RBZONING REQUEST, ZOA N80-01, BY ROBERT SCHROER: Rezone Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 3, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8, Block 4, of proposed Plat, University Industrial Park, from C-2 (general business areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas) located in the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 2, generally located betweeen 79th Avenue N.E. and Slst Avenue N.E. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels, to open the public hearing on ZOA II80-01, by Robert Schroer. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the public hearing open at 9:25 p.m. Mr. Boardman atated that the property in Block 3, Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, and Block 4, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8, were presently zoned C-2. There is a wide band of commercial that �s going up through this district, and Mr. Schroer felt he cannot market that amount of commercial property. So, Mr. Schroer had suggested that all the interior lots be rezoned from C-2 to M-1. He stated Staff has no problems with this, except for the fact that the 100-foot setback requirement makes Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8, Block 4, hard to build on. Mr. Boardman stated that one thing he would like to see is as much parking and truck loading as possible in either the rear or side yard and not facing the atreet areas. He �lso felt they could move the setback from 100 feet to 35 feet on the corr.er lots. MOTIOH by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oquist to close the pu6lic hearing on ZOA #80-01, by Robert Schroer. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the public hearing closed at 9:43 p.m. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oquist, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of rezoning request, ZOA I180-01, by Robert Schroer, to rezone Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 3, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8, Block 4, of proposed plat, University Industrial Park, from C-2 (general business areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas), located in the NW 1/4 si� the SW.1/4 of Section 2, generally located between 79th Avenue t3.E. and 81st Avenue N.E., with the inclusion that Lots 1 and S, Block 4, be granted a 35 foot setback with the stipulation that the loading be to the rear of the building on the propertY• _ _ --- UMI� � VOICE VOBE, ALL VOTING AYB, CH�IBPi�i� 1iWLLS DiCi,�1tLD THE I�TION C�IID UN�NIISOiTSLY. Mr. Boardman stated this would go to City Council on February 25 and a public hearing could be set for titrch 10. Chairperaon Harris decl�red a ten-minute recess at 9:48 p.m. PLANNiNG COhAfISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 7 3. RECEIVE LETTER FROM CENTRAL CENTER FOR �;��I MOTION by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the letter dated January 29, 1980, from Central Center for Family Resources. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the motion carried unanimously. 4. RECEIVE ARTICLS FROM FRIDLEY SUN �: MOTION by Mr. Treuenfels, secanded by Ms. Schnabel, to receive the Fridley Sun article dated January 30, 1980. NIr. Johnson stated he was with the North Division Office of NSP, and he was the liaison worker with the co¢miunities of the North Division, of which Fridley was one. He had a little background in this plant siting and was present at the meeting to try and answer any questions the Planning Commission might have. Mr. Johnson stated that the article in the paper was factual. The reporter had appeared at the Metropolitan Council meeting and this information was relayed to him at this time. Mr. Johnson stated that one of the reasons the site was selected was because NSP was asked by state and private groups to investigate the possibility of putting a smaller plant in the metropolitan area, the plant to not only develop electricity, but to be used for co-generation, either steam or water, for industrial and residential use. With that in mind, they looked at various spots and tried to pick locations in all areas of the metropolitan area. Mr. Harris asked if NSP was aware of the proposed park across East River Road? Mr. Johnson stated that, yes, they were. They had met with Mr. Boardman and have reviewed plans, and they feel they are not enfringing on the park property. Mr. Harris asked how NSP would draw water from the river. Mr. Johnson stated they would draw water from the river in a closed circuit in about 12-inch pipes underground, so there would be no visual impact. Mr. Harris stated that he assumed the coal would come by xail. Mr. Johnson stated that, yes, that was the reason for the site by the railroad. Mr. Harris stated he was concerned about where NSP would stockpile the coal. Mr. Johnson stated he did not know the exact location, but it would probably be somewhere close to-the railroad tracks. Ms. Hughes asked Mr. Johnson to describe the configuration of a 200-megawatt plant. Mr. Johnson stated there would be one stack, one water-cooled tower. The building itself would probably be 150 ft, tall with a stack. PLANNlNG COhAffSSIDN MEETING, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 8 Mr. Johnson stated this plant would add 75-100 employees and would bring in approximately $600,000-700,000 in taxes to the City every year. Mr. Johnson stated that NSP will select 3-4 sites to be turned over to the State. The first thing they have to do is go before the Minnesota Energy Agency and prove their need for the plant. After that they have to go before the Site Selection Approval committee with the Minnesota Equality Board. Each one of these will have a public hearing with input. An environmental impact statement will also have to be made. All of this will take approximately 2-3 years, and then the State will decide where the plant will be built. NSP hopes to make their selection of the sites they feel would be most valid for their usage within the next 2-3 months. Mr. Harris stated that the City Council had informally directed the Planning Commission to study this NSP site in Fridley and get back to City Council with a reca�endation. He asked Mr. Johnson if he would supply the Planning Commission with as much information as possible for the Planning Commission to study, they could get together again for further discussions. He would also like enough copies so the Environmental Quality C�ission, Community Development Commission, and the new Energy Commission could also study it. Mr, Johnson stated he would get this information to Mr. Boardman, and then the Planning Commission could contact him when they would like him back again. Mr. Harris thanked Mr. Johnson for coming to=the meeting. Ms. Hughes stated she would like someone to keep track of the Certificate of Need, because without a selection of site, Fridley would not normally be notified of this. Maybe NSP could keep Che City informed about that. Ms. Hughes stated she would like to draw the Co�ission's attention to the article, third paragraph from the bottom on the right, where it states: "NSP is uncertain at this time whether a new coal-fired plant is licensable in the Twin Cities area". That is probably because of the sulphur oxide emissions in the ltain Cities area where there is sti11 some violation, Ms. Hughes stated, Those standards are being reviewed now and could legally change. IIPOI3 A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON IiARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION TO RECEIVE THE ARTICLE IN THE FHIDLEY SUN CARRIED i1NANIMOUSLY. 5. CONTINUED: PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHAPPER 205. ZONING: MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Hughes, to continue discussion on Proposed Ghanges to Ghapeer 205. Zoning. IIpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the motion carried unanimously. 6. RECEIVE JANUARY 22, 1980, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMFIISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Treuenfels, seconded by Mr. Hora, to receive the January 22, 1980, Environmental Quality Commission minutes. PLANNiNG COI�4ffSSI0N MEBTING, FEBRUARY 6, 1980 PAGE 9 Mr. Boardman stated referred to the motion made by the Environmental Quality Commission on page 2 recommending that Planning Commission and City Council send a Fridley representative to the MPCA Board meeting on Feb. 26, 1980, reflecting the concern of airport and freeway expansion. Mr. Boardman stated that the MPCA Board acted on this on Feb. 5 instead of Feb. 26. He stated that this motion was taken directly to City Council on Feb. 4, the City Council passed a resoluCion supporting the prioritization by the MPCA for noise control for airporss and highways, and Mr. Virgil Herrick hand delivered that resolution to the MPCA Board meeting. Mr. Boardman stated he did not know what action the MPCA had taken regarding this resolution. Mr. Harris stated that regarding Ms. Sporre's statement on page 5 where she staCed Chat Mr. Harris should not make statements that, "planes have to land somewhere", he would appreciate it if Ms. Sporre would not take his statements out of context. Ms. Hughes stated the same thing was true of the statement she had made in the Dec. 5, 1979, Planning Commission minutes that "air quality reviews on current Highway 10 were so bad, there was no choice except relocation." Ms. Sporre had also taken that out of context. The discussion had been that with the current Highway 10, the air quality reviews were so bad, you couldn.`-t possibly expand current Highway 10. If you were going to build a highway, ie would have to be the relocated Highway 10. That did not say one thing about the desirability of building the new highway. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION TO RECEIVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COh4ffSSI0N MINUTES CAHRIED UNHNIMOUSLY. 7. RECEIVE JANUARY 24, 1980, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES; MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels, to receive the January 24, 1980, Housing & Redevelopment Authority minutes. Mr. Harris stated he had some discussions with members of the HRA. The HRA was having a meeting with one of the developers on February 7. He stated the HRA would like some input from the Planning Commission sometime down the line. Mr. Harris stated he told the members that he did now think it was the proper time for the Planning Commission to give input and told them that when the HRA had something more definite, the Planning Commission would be happy to give their input. Mr. Boardman stated the Planning Commission wi1l have to get involtied after the HBA makes a selection of a developer and they get into actual eovmiitments. Now was not the praper time. Mr. Harris stated that members of the Planning Co�iasion were invited to attend the HRA meeting on Feb. 7 as individual citizens. PLANNING COrAffSSION MEETING FEBRUARY 6, 1980 pAGE 10 8. OTHHR BUSINESS: Mr. Harris stated that Mary Cayan and himself had attended a meeting with the Anoka County Welfare and had some discussions with them, There was a meeting scheduled for 10 a.m. on Thursday, Feb. 7, with the CAP Agency. He stated he could not believe the lack of coordination between Che agencies--the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. He stated that after all the meetings, they would try to put the whole thing together as a pacicage for the Human Resources Commission. The Human Resources Coumiission would then make rec�endations. Hopefully, the Planning Commission will also see the package to act on it and send recommendations on to City Council. AATOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Hora, seconded by Ms. Hughes, to adjourn the meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the February 6, 1980, Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m, Respectfully su mitted, Lyn Saba Recording Secretary