PL 01/21/1981 - 6748■
City of Fridley
AGENDA
_ ;
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, �ANUARY 21, 1981
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: JANUARY 7, 1981
1. CONTINUEDc: DISCUSSION ON REZONING REQUEST ZOA #80-05 SY
WINFIELD DEVELOPMENTS, INC: To rezone Lot 2, except the
Northerly 50 feet, and Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 inclusive, Block
1, Paco Industrial Park, from C-2 (general business areas)
to M-1 (light industrial areas} to a71ow the construction of
a 98:000 squar.e foot building to be used for office and office
warehouse, light manufacturing and service, the same being
7151-7251 Commerce Circle East.
Public Hearing closed.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #80-06 BY W G DOTY
RND GARY A. WELLMAN: Rezone the following described parcels
from M-1 light industrial areas) to R-3 (general multiple
family dwellings): That part of Blocks 8 and 9, Lowell
Addition to Fridley Park, lying South of the North line of
Sylvan Hills Plat 8, together with the Easterly one-half of
vacated Elm Street, and that part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 7,
Lowell Addition to fridley Park, lying Southerly of the
Westerly half Qf vacated street, located Soutfi of Mississippi
Street N.E., and East of the Burlington Northern right-of-
way.
3. UACATION REQUEST, SAV #80-14 BY W. G. DOTY AND GRRY A WELLMF
Vacate t at part of Minnesota Street, as laid out in iowell
Addition to Fridley Park; or Mercury Drive, as laid out in
Sylvan Hills Plat 3, now known as Satellite Lane, lying West
of the Northerly extension of the West line of Starlite Blvd.,
also being the, East line of Lot 1, Block 4, Sylvan Hills
Plat 3.
4. CONTINUED: GO�JSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED NOISE OR�INANCE
5. CONTINUED: PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT Fn cuavTFe �nF nF -ruF F
6. SPECIAL CONSIDERATION AF SECTION 205.157, CREEK I�ND RIVER
(Must be acted on separate from rest of Code> due to timing)
7:34 P.M.
PAGES
1 - 12
(see m9nutes)
13 - 18
19 - 21
22 - 28
DLEY ( SEPARATE )
29 - 40
�
Planning Commission Meeting, January 21, 198]
Page 2 of Agenda ,
'
7
E�
8. RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: JANUARY 13, 1981
9. OTHER BUSINESS:
ADJpURNMEtdT: -
WHITE
YELLOW
, i �� �. ,
r
J
PR�o'�� — v�..-� a�--�. °u,�-'.
���� ��� �� � � �
�2��CNG,.�. 5 /CdGt.�toR,>. )�.�
6z��1�6z7z �
G2Cy�626�.. —
625y�615,L � 3 � S
bz`IY/LzyL �
��3y (613,. _
J t�r�ez,�„�,., (�v,..�� �. � ��
W� h��%; /,,,�,�,., �, � n�-�/ ,,,,. r�;o�,,,2�`j U---�
� � � �,�. �r,�- y.t�, p,�� • � �-►r-Y.��=�- '�.�
✓ S � .�'r-,^w�- � �I.Q�'.�`'°"' - f�,�^^a-� •
�i 1 �R2.) tr.. ��C M � `�rv}- w-C. �'�' �
0 " /
��
CITY OE FRIDLEY
PLANNI�G COMMISSION �fiEETING, JAPJUARY 7, 1981
CALL 70 ORDER:
Chairman Harris called the January 7, 1981, Planning Commission meeting to
order at 7:37 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Mr. Harris, Mr. Treuenfels, Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquist,
Ms. Hughes, Mr. Wharton
Mr. 5vanda
Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
Bill Deblon, Associate Planner
Ed Clausman, 4544 Meadow Road, Minneapoli.s
David Steiner, i0532 Zion, N.41., Coon Rapids
Ray Cunningham, D. A. Farr Development Corp.
Mary Knutson, D. A. Farr Development Corp.
Brian Goodspeed, 731 Rice Creek T2rrace
Stan 'fhompson, 4760 - 147 Lane N.W., Anoka
Rick Martin, 5275 Edina Ind. Blvd.
Rob Taylor, 5275 Edina Ind. Blvd.
Darretl Anderson, 75 S. 5th St., Minneapolis
Gerald Paschke, 5920 N. Kirkwood Lane
Dr. Brandjord, Skyline Veterinary Flospital
APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 17, 1980, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTZON BY hIIi. TREUENFELS� SECONDEU BY MS. HUGHES� TO APPROVE�TtiE DSCEhIBER I7, 1980,
PLANNING COTlMISSION MINUTES RS WRITTEN.
UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINC RYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIh10USLY.
APPROVAL OF AGENLlA:
MOTZON BY MR. WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNA2EL, TO AMEND THE AGENDA.SN ORDER
TNAT "RF.VISION TO PLAT L, OF THE DARRELL FRRR INNSBRUCK NUP.TH PROJECT" BECOME
ITEM �ll.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL � VOTZNG AYL', CIIAIRI�fAN HARRIS DECLARED TFIE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 7, 1981' PAGE 2
1. REVISiON TO PLAi 5 OF THE DARRELL FARR INNSBRUCK NGRTH PRO�EC7:
Mr. Boardman stated that when Mr. Farr went through with the original Plat 5,
he had approval for Plat 5. Plat 5 inc7uded a11 of the area which is now
classified as Plats 5 and fi. Plat 6 isU�e second phase of what was generally
called Innsbruck 5th Addition. The origiria] Plat 5 had some garage spaces.
They have now eliminated T5 garage spaces which had been set up before.
According to the P3atting Ordinance for amendments, all that is required is
that "each proposed change shall be submitted before Planning Comnission for
a report thereon". Tt requires public hearing before City Council.
Mr. Boardman stated that Mr. Ray Cunningham of the Darrell Farr �evelopment
Corporation was in the audience and would answer any questions the Planning
Co�nission might have.
Ms. Schnabel asked that other than the elimination of the garage section, was
that the on}y modification that would be made? Would the units remain the same?
Mn. Cunningham stated that was carrect, �nd the units wo��ld remain the same.
The reason they eliminated garages was because the firs* 30 un9ts did not call
for the extra garage spaces. Rather than plat them, they decided to eliminate
the garage spaces. The area will remain open natural space.
Mr. Harris stated that as he remembered in the original plat, there was supposed
to be some information and upgrading of certain services (as-builts, etc.) furni.shed
to the City, These had not been done. Tt vias also his understan�ing at the
time of the original plat, that sewer and.water were to be built to city speci-
fications. Had that been done?
tti�, Boardman stated the City has approved al] the services. What they had bear.
missing was the as-builts: They did have a meeting tfiat day and �id receive
some draa�ings. At this time, the City has no problems with this.
MOTION BY MS. HUGHES, SEC.ONDED BY 1�2. WHRRTON, TO REFER TXE REVSSION TO PLFiT 6
O1' THE DARRcLL FARR INNSBRUCK NORTH PROJECT ON TO CITY COUNCIL WITH NO FURTHER
QUESTZONS. �
UP�N F� VRI'CE VOTE, 1SLL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMRA' HARRIS DL'CIAREU TNE ISO�'ION CRRRIF.D
UNANIMOITSLY. � .
2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATIDN OF A REQL'ES? fOR P. SPECIAL USE PER�tit;i,
SP #80-12, BY NFFILIAPc�VETERINARY SER+JiCEc' ?er Section 205. 0, 3, p,
to a ow a Veterinary Emergency Clinic in hiuon Plaza Shopping Center, the
sar.ie being 62G1 University Avenue N.E.
.MPTI�N BY MR. OQUIST, SErO�VDED BY MS. SCYNABEL, TO��OPE.N TAE PUBLIC HEARING ON
uP��r80-12 BY AFFILIISTED VETERIN?!RY SERVSC6. -
UPON A VOICE ti0'lE, JiLL VOTING AYn^, CtiRItLNAN XRRRIS DFCLISRED THE PUBLIC HER?27NG
OPEN AT i:49 P.,ii. �
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 7 1981 PAGE 3
Mr. Boardman stated the location for the Veterinary Emergency Clinic is the
Moon Plaza Building on the University Service Road. He stated he had received
the drawing frnm the group of doctors proposing the praject, and he showed
this drawing to the Planning Commission. He stated this would be an emergency
shelter and would be occupied only at night and on weekends. The dogs will not
be kept at the clinic.
Mr. Boardman stated that the present Zoning Code states that any veterinary
or animal storage location is required to have a concrete ceiling. The Planning
Commission has recommended that this requirement be eliminated, but it is still
a requirement at this time. In this situation, if the Planning Commission
recommends approval ofthe special use permit, the petitioners will have to go
for a variance. Mr. Boardman stated the doctors were in the audience and would
be willing to answer questions.
Dr. Ed Clausroan stated he is the President of the Affiliated Veteninary Service.
He stated this is a new concept in the Fridley area, and he would be glad to
outline what�they are proQosinq to do. He stated the Affiliated Veterinary
Service would like a spec9al use permit to locate their business in Moon Plaza
Shopping Center: They are interested in leasing the area available on the
southerly portion of the shopping center to offer emergency veterinary service
to the people of Fridley and surrounding co�nunities. This service would consist
of after-hour emergency veterinary care to pets in the area that need life-
supporting treatment. The facility will operate only between the hours of
6:00 p.m. to 8c00 a.m. Monday through Friday, and from 12:00 noon on Saturday
to 8:00 a.m. Monday morning. Most of the animals (80%+} will be treated immediately
and sent home with their owners. If needed, tfiey will be taken to the regular
veterinarian the next day. Pets requiring observation during the night will be
released before 8:00 a.m. the following mortting, The premises wi17 be completely
vacated during the day. =
Dr. Clausman stated that professional services of this type will offer the
following advantages to the people of Fridley:
1. Emergency veterinary service would not only be available to the
people of Fridley, but would be close at hand.
2. Their professional services would be available also to help the
Fridley Police Department with any after-hours stray or injured
animals.
Having their facility operated during the night would act as a
deterrent to crime or an early detection of fire.
Dr. Clausman stated their projected volun�e would be from 3-8 clients per night,
which is a very low volume and would not afifect traffic. Basically, they are
set up because there are a certain number of emergencies with pets at night.
The veterinary profession has found that if they can establish an emergency
center with a veterinarian on duty, people can go there and get better and
faster service than they can by calling their regular veterinarian during the
night.
.,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 7, 1981' PAGE 4
Dr. Clausman stated they would have two people on duty during-the night--the
veterinarian and the veterinarian technician,
Dr. Clausmarr stated they started one emergency clinic about two years ago in
St, Louis Park, and it has been very successful. The reason for starting
another clinic is because of the distance people would drive to get treatment
for a pet. He stated there would be no noise, because the animals are sick.,
and there would be no odor problem. They do not have any odor problems at the
clinic in St. Louis Park.
Mr: Wharton asked if there would be any hazardous gases stored for anesfihetic
purposes.
br. Clausman stated they would not. They may have oxygen. The main purpose
of the clinic is to stabilize the animal and get it to its regular veterinarian
in the morning, so it is only a life-supporting kind of thing. They would have
the minimum-amount of emergency type drugs.
Mr. Wharton asked if the animals woutd be left unattended at any time.
ar. Clausman stated the definitely would not. The clinic is responsible to
20-25 veterinarian hospitals that use it, and the concept is that the veterinarian
be there'at all times.
Ms. Schnabet asked how an individual would know about this clinic.
Dr. Clausman stated that they are listed in the yellow pages of the telephone
book, but most people are referred by the regular veterinarians who use the
clinic. They have also picked up some publicity because of public interest.
They have been on television a coupte of times and have hand-outs. As they
are around longer, more and more peopte w911 know about it.
Ms. Hughes asked ho�v sanitation would 6e handled.
Dr. Clausman stated that any clean-up or disposal of animal waste would be
done through the regular sanitation channels.
� Mr. Boardman stated that City Staff was not concerned and did not feei the
waste would be of any volume or any extent thai it could not be disposed of
through the regular garbage pick-up. Since the operation is stricily during
the night and on the weekend, Staff did not feel there would be a noise problem.
Dr. Brandjord of the 5kyline Veterinary Hospital stated their debris is picked
up two times a week. When they initially opened up, it was only once a wezk.
They have never had any problems with odors. There are no contagious diseases
they are dealing with that are going to be concentrated, Any animal that
comes into the hospital is already walking around the streets.
Mr. Harris stated there probably should ba some sound-proofing board put on
the common wail.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE 5
MOTZON BY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST� TO CL0.SE TNE PUBLIC HEARING ON
SP �80-I2 BY AFFILIRTED VETERINARY SERVICE.' � � �
UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CXAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
CIASED AT�8:17 P.M. -
MOTION BY MS. HUGNES, SECONDED BY MR. TREUENFELS, TO RECOMMEND�TO CITY COUNCIL
RPPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMZT, SP �I80-12, BY RFFILIATED
VETERINARY SERVZCE; .PER SECTION 205.101, 3, p, TO ALLOW A VETERINARY EMERGENCY
CLINIC IN MOON�PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, THE SAME BEING 6201 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.,
WZTH THE FOLLOWING STZPULATIONS: � � .
1. THAT THE CLINZC BE USED FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES ONLY WITXIN THE
HOURS SPECIFIED--6:00 P.M. TO 8:00 A.M. MONDRY TXROUGH FRIDAY� AND
22:00 NOON SATURDAY TO 8:00 A.M. MONDAY� AND AT ANY TIME DURING
OFFICIAL HOLIDAYS. �
2. TNAT SOUND PROOFING BE kEQUIRED ON PNE INTERIOR WALL FOR THE REAR
-.. TREATMENT ROOM UP TO THE EXISTING RESTROOM FACILITY.
�3. TXRT.THE OWNERS BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SANITRTION AT R MINSMUM OF
� TWO TZMES A WEEK.
Mr. Wharton stated he took..exception to the sound proofing. Sound control is
done by two different methods--by adding mass to the wall (and he did not feel
that was prudent at this stage) or by putting a sound absorbent material on the
wall (and he did not think that would be sanitary in that particular area of
the structure},
MOTION BY MR. WHRRTON��SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL� TO AMEND TX& MOPION.TO DELfiTE
STIPULATION #2 REQUIRING SOUND PROOFING. .
� UPON A VOICE VOTE� WHARTON, TREUENFF.LS, SCHNABEL, OQUIST, AND HUGHES POTING
, AYE, NARRIS VOTING NAY, THE MOTIDN TO RMEND CARRIED 5-L �
UPON R VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAZRMAN HARRIS�DECLARED THE MOTION TO
RECOMh.'END APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCZL OF SP �I80-12��WITH STIPULATIONS CARRIED
(INRNIMOUSLY.
Mr. Boardman stated this would go to City Council on January 19; however, they
would probably delay this until the variance caught up and then handle both
requests at the same time.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #80-05, BY
WINFIELD DEVELOPMENT, INC.: �o rezone Lot 2, except t e Nort er y 0
feet, an lots 3, , 5, and 6 inclusive, Block 1, Paco Industrial Park,
from C-2 (general business areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas) to allow
the construction of a 98,000 square foot building to be used for office
and office warehouse, light manufacturing and service, the same being
7151-5257 Commerce Circle East.
- ,...,�
_... ._
_
PLANNTNG COMMISSION MEETIN6, JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE 6
MOTION BY MR�. TREUENFLFS� SECONDF,D BY MR. WH1}RTON� TO OPEN TXE pUBLIC�HEARING �
ON ZOA #80-OS BY WINFIELD DEVELOPMENTS,INC. _
�UPON A VOICE�VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE.PUBLIC HEARING
OPEN AT 8:32 P.M. � � . �
Mr. Boardman stated that page 18 of the agenda showed the layout of the
Paco Industrial Park located on University Avenue south of 73rd. Wheh the p7at
was first approved and zoned, the properties to the west, Lots 10-13, were
zoned heavy industrial, the properties located in the center were zoned light
industrial, and the properties along University Avenue were zoned commercial,
C-2. The corner property, Lot 1, Block 1, is currently being developed as an
office structure.
Mr. Boardman stated the proposal from Winfield Deve7opments,Inc., more closely
fit into a light industrial type of development. It is an office/warehouse
type of f.acility, possibly looking at showroom with storage space, one-story
type of facility, with truck loading areas. Staff felt this would probably be
more closely related to the M-1 district and suggested that Winfield �evelopment,
Inc., have'this rezoned to an M-1 district.
Mr. Boardman stated the buiiding frontage vaould be facing University Avenue.
The loading area would be'a7�ng Commerce Circle. Within the preposal, th�re
wi11 be berming w.ith retaining walls for screening protection. It will be
landscaped along the street side of the screening. The landscaping will be
the same as Mr. Paschke has done with his office building to maintain the same
type of treatment all along the front.
Mr. Boardman stated water is being piped into the storm sewer system. All the
water has approval through the Rice Creek Watershed District and is 6eing stored
in the community park area.
Mr. Harris asked if the petitioner would like to speak on this item.
Mr. Rob Tay}or stated he was with Winfield Developments,Inc. He stated they
felt this was an exciting site for an office/warehouse type of facility. It
is Y.heir intention to establish, recognizing two things--the park to the south
� of their property and the office building ta the north. It is their intention
to take the end units of the building and establish office faci7ities facing
north and south at ttiose points. On numerous occasions, they have discussed the
pros and cons of commercial development. It is their understanding that the
physical shape and configuratiorr of their proposed building dees comply with
the City's commercial rules and regulations; however, they wanted the flexi-
bility to allow light industria7 uses into the;development, rather than run
the risk of losing a potential tenant.
Mr. 7aylor stated they did an extensive study of the area, they worked with
the City, they got information from local real estate agent, and with the
concerns the City Planning Department had with a long coinmercial development,
they came ta the conclusior that this kind of development best fit the site.
.,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 7, 1981` PAGE 7
Mr. �aylor stated they would be doing extensive landscaping along both
University and Commerce Circle. They will be lowering the dock leVel of
the loading areas 48 inches. They also will be taking up the retaining walls,
holding back the berms an additional four feet, which will adequately screen
the area from Commerce Circle. They are making provision for the ten foot
bicycle path easement. He stated their architect, Mr. Darrell Anderson,
was present to answer any technical questiors the Commission might have.
Ms. Schnabel asked if Winfield Developments,Inc., owned the land, if they had
financing secured, and if they had commitments for potential tenants.
Mr. Taylor stated they have an option on the property from the deveioper of
the industrial park, based on rezoning and a few other contingencies. At this
time, they have not secured financing. At this time, they do not have any
commitments for future tenants. Some of the tenants will be from expanding
existing businesses that are already their tenants. They have three buildings
under construction at this time southwest of Minneapolis, and they do not have
any tenants for them. It is not unusual for them to start construction on a
building wiihout tenants lined up. Basically, that is the way they operate,
build a building, finance it, and then lease it out.
Mr. Paschke stated that when they planned the whole park, the City felt this
should be commercral property. He stated he went atong with that and designed
Paco Industrial Park with the intertion that this would all be commercial develop-
ment. He stated he did not agree with the proposal to change it to M-1 zoning.
If 4linfield Developments,Inc., was looking in Fridley for property, there was a
lot of property just north of this property that was already zoned for light
industrial.
Mr. Paschke sta�ed his rr�ain objection was that the 800 ft. long building was
like putting a screen a]onq University Avenue which was aimost two blocks long.
He still felt that Lots 4, 5, and 6 were possibly a decent area for M-1 zoning,
but he still felt l.ots 2 and 3 should remain commercially-zoned property. He
thought it was very unfair after he had gone in with the intention that it wou,t�
all be commercial, and then to rezone it to M-1.
Mr. Harris asked if the petitioner had ary alternative plans to what was being
proposed.
Mr. Taylor stated their architect, Mr. Anderson, had gone over several different
schemes and configurations, and because of the shallow depth and the cost of land,
they felt the proposed plan was the best tyoe of development because it did not
increase their site coverage, but did provide exposure onto University. They
felt it would have a very positive affect on the community. It is a large
building, but they have built large b�ildings before. They feel they can use
the size as an asset in terms of tenants.
Mr. Rick Martin stated they sincere1y feel they can provide a nicer building
under industrial zoning. They have a lot more aesthetic coni:rol under
industrial, as tenan�s usually take better care of their space.
�
PLANNING C0�4MISSION M�ETIN6, JANUARY 7, 1981' PAGE 8
Mr. Paschke stated he had two main objections'to the rezoning--the size of the
building and the length of the building. He would not object to that same
build-ing going on Lots 4, 5, and 6.
MOTION BY MS�. HUGfiES� SEGOVDED BY MS. SCHNABEL� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
ZOA �80-OS�BY WINFIELD DEVELOPME'NTS, INC.
UPON�R VOICE VOTE� ALI. VOTING .�YE, CHAIRMAN HAKRIS DECLARED THF PUBLIC�HEARING
CLO5EA AT 9:32 P.M. � � _ � �
Ms. Hughes stated it seemed that whole area is light industrial kind of usage.
If she looked at the ciiy as a whole and what they are iooking at in redevelop-
ment of Center City, she did not like the idea of a commercial strip there,
and she did not like the idea af encouraging commercial development in this spot.
She did not like the l.oading dock arrangement that is proposed on the property.
One problem she could see was how it would look €rom the new community park.
She thought the view from the park was not going to be the best. Was tAere good
ratiodalec for having strip comnercial development along there? Wou7dn't it
detract from the Center City-type projects?
Ms. 5chnabel stated she had a very hard time understanding the philosophy of
reviewing an entire p1at one year ago and just six months ago approving a plat
which included commercial a;ong University Avenue. Now, they are being asked to
rezone that strip. She had heard that there are enough commitments to make
P1r. Paschke's office building worthHrhile as a commercial endeavor versus an M-1
district. She is rjot convipced that there.is a stronger reed for M-1 than ihere
is for existing commercial. Beyond this, it botiiered her that the petit�oner
has said they do not have financing secured, and that they-have an option on the
property�. If they give approval to the rezoning, and for some reasun, the plans
fall through, the City will be sitting with that property rezoned to M-1. She
was not convinced the Planning Commission shouid go back on rezoning thay had
done just six months agos and she was not convinced there has been established
a need for more M-1 than commarcfa7.
_ h1r. Oquist stated he felt the sanie way as Ms. Schnabel. They d5d a�prove this
a� p]at just six months ago as commercial.
� Mr. Harris stated that as he remembered and he had gone on record stating that
he fe7t commercial would be a natural extension of the industrial park, commercial
no� being wa}k-in freight, but of�ice-type business; as opposed to retail trade.
As recently as two months ago, at the Gity Gounc9l meeting regarding industria7
revenue bonding on I�ir. Paschke's office structure, he went on record stating
they felt the office structure tvas a natural extension of the industrial park
and that it would benefit the industrial park, as well as benefit the whole
city of Fridley. He did not think they had ever intended it to be retail trade,
walk-in freight, or strip commercial, bat should be some type of office,
Mr. Boardman stated it has always been th�� plan of the Planning Department to
restrict strip commercial. If it was the intent of the Planning Commission and
the intent of the City Council to have this office, then the City would have
PLANNING COMf4ISSI0N MEETING, JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE 9
zoned it an office zone, He stated he did not think they wanted retail tra�e
in that area, such as a McDonalds, Burger Chef, Perkins, etc., which they could
have with a commercial zone.
Mr. Harris stated his main objection was an 800 ft, long building.
Mr. Wharton stated he could not understand why the Commission was hung up on
zoning the property from one zone to another. They should be happy to rezone
it from one zone to another as long as the petitioner was willing to pay a
$250 fee for it. They were not wearing out property lines.
MOPION-BY.MS. SCNNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. TREUENFELS, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
DENIAL OF REZONING REQUEST� ZOA #80-05� BY WINFIELD DEVEIAPMENTS� INC. �
Ms. Schnabel stated the reason for this motion was because of her concern that
the petitioner has nat secured any financing, a need has not been demonstrated
for this type of building, and no specific tenants have been.lined up. She
would.like to see these kinds of things tied down before the Planning Comnission
approved any rezoning, and she was concerned about rezoning so soon after the
plat was rezoned, which she felt was, in effect, spot rezoning.
Ms. Hughes stated she could not see any real detriment to the proposed project.
This is as viable a proposal as they often get on any rezoning, special use
permits, and dozens of other things. There is the question of being stuck with
a rezoned property, except that she agreed with Mr. Boardman that this was the
most appropriate use for this property,unless it w3s zoned CR-1 or CR-2 limited
to just office space, and that would take a rezoning also. She stated she would
vote against this motion.
Mr. Oquist stated he also agreed with Mr. Soardman, that M-1 seemed the most
reasonable use for this parcel of property.
Mr. Harris stated his biggest problem was the 800 ft. long building. He thought
if the building had a break in it, he would feel more comfortable with it.
(Mr. Wharton left the meeting at 10:10 p.m.)
UPON R VOICE VOTE� HARRIS AND SCliNABEL VOTING�AYE� TREUENFEZS, OQUIST� AND
HUGHES VOTING NAY, CXAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION FAILED 3-2. .
MOTION BY MS. HUGHES,�SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
RPPROVAL OF REZONING REQUEST, ZOA��r80-O5� BY WINFIELD DEVEZAPMENTS, INC.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, HUGHES AND OQUS5T VOTING AYS, fiARRIS, TREUENFELS, AND
SCHNABEL VOTING NAY� CHAIRMRN HARR15 DECLARED THE��MOTION FRILED 3-2.
Mr. Harris asked if there was some way this 6uilding could have some division
in it so that it was not one solid front, that the area towards the north be
left as a C-type zoning and that tt�e southern 2-4 lots be left as M-1 type
zoning witfi a physical separation of some feet of green area between the two
buildings.
Mr. Taylor stated they were willing to work with their architect to redraw the
site plan.
•,
-�
PLANNING COtdMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 7, 1981' PAGE 10
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST� SEC4NDED BY MR. TREUENFELS,� TO CONTINliE DISCUSSION�ON �
.RF.ZONING REQUEST, ZOA n80.-D5, BX WINFIELD DEVEZOPI4ENTS, SNC.: TO��REZONE LOT 2�
EXCEPT THE NORTttERLY�50 FEET, fiND LOTS 3, 4,.5 pND 6 TNCLU57VE, BLOCK 1, PACO
ZNDUSTRIAL PARK, FROM C-2.(G$NERAL BUSINESS AREES) TO M.-1 (I,IGHT INDU5TRIAL
�ARERSJ 'l0 ALLOW�TNE CONSTFUCTION OF A 98,000 SQURRE FOOT BUILDING TO BE USED
FOR OFE'ICE�AND AFFICE.WARF7i0USE, LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND SERVICE, THL•' SAME BEING�
7152-7251 COMMERCE CIRCLE:�E'AST,:flND rn REQUEST CITY COUNCIl TO SET A PUBLIC
HEARING FOR ZOA #80-OS FOR FEBRUARY 9, 198L . � . .
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAZRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED
UNANZMOUSLY. � � �
4. CONTINUEQ: CONSrDERATION OF A PROPOSED NOTSE ORDINANCE
MOTION BY MS. F7UCHES� SECONDED IIY MR. OQUIST, TO CONTSNUE THE CONSTDERATION.OF
A PROPOSED NOZSE ORDINANCE�UNTIL.THE NEXT MEETING. �
UPON,A�-VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DrCLARED THE MOTION�CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. ' � � � . � � � � .
5: CONTINUED: PU
:R 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CIT`
MOTZON BY MR, OQUIS'l, SEC6.�DEU BY M.S. SCHNABEL, TO CONTINUE THE AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY.CITY CODE. � �
UPeN.A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTSA'G A_°E� CHRIRh1AN HARRIS DECLARED THF, MOTION�CARRIED
UNAIVIMOUSLY. � � • - . .
6. RECEIVE DECEMBER 9, 19�i0, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COPIMISSIOi� MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR, OQUIST� SEC��NDnD�3Y MR. TREUENFELS� TO RF,CEIVE THE DEC. 3� 1980,
COMMUN7TY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MZNUTES.
Mr. Oquist restated the concern expresseci by t�ls. Gustafson and the other
commission members aboui the purpose of the commission.
Mr. 8oardman stated he has discussed this issue with his staff. Mary Cayan,
staff rrtember to the Human kesources Commission and the Energy Commiss9on, is
. sending out a letter to each commission discussing-what has been accomplished
in 1980 and, for the new year, laying out some possible goals for the commission
to accomplish. He stated he did not like a commission relying only on staff
to bring items before them. It �ometimes becomes a burden for staff to search
for items to �ring before Lhe comnissions. Staff has too heavy a workload to
act as coordinator for tfie commissions. H� stated he did not feel it was
Staff's jo6 to be the coordinator of a cemr:�ission. Staff's job is to provide
and supply information to the commission and hel� the cormnission accomplish
whatever tasks that commission is trying to do. Staff needs direction from
the commission for goa7s, etc.
.,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIN6, JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE 11
Mr. Boardman stated the Community Development Gommission may want to respond to
some of the things he just stated.
Mr. Boardman also stated that the question of whether the Community Development
Commission has a role or a function should be considered by both the Community
Development Commission and the Planning Comnission.
Mr. Harris suggested that the Community Development Commission talk about their
role at their next meeting.
Mr. Boardroan stated there was a definite need to redefine the goals of the
Community Development Commission.
UPON A VOICE VOTS, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN NARRIS.DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANZMOUSLY. �
7. RECEIVE DECEMBER 14 1980, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSIOPy.MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS.� NUGAES� SECONDED BY MR. TREUENFBLS� TO RECEIVE THE DEC. 20, 1980,-
PARKS &�RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTE5. .
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLAHED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.. � � - �
8. RECEIVE DEC. 11, 1980, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTIDN BY F1R. TREUENFEIS� SECONDED BY MS. SCI�NABEL� TO RECEIVE TIiE DEC. 11, 1980,
HOUSING�6 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES. � .
UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARSD THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. _ � . . -
9. RECEIVE DECEMBER 16, 1980, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST� SECONDED BY PSR. TREUENFEIS� TO RECEIVE THE DEC. 26� :.980,
ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: . � �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL V6TING AYB, CXAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION C�IRRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. � -
lU. RECEIVE DECEMBER T6 1980 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTSON BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY N,S. SCHNABEL, TD RECEI[�E THE DEC. 16, 2980,
ENVSRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MIIGUTES. � �
Regarding the permit applicaiion for proposed dredging of the Mississippi River,
Mr. Harris stated that Rimanco, Inc., should take a look at the river sand they
will be dredging for fill as this material just does not compact well.
Mr. Soardman stated that if Mr. Harris has a concern with the compaction of
the fill, he may want to pass this recommendation on to the State Highway
Department.
,,
PLAPlNI1vG COMMISSION t4EETII�G, JRNURRY 7, 1981 PAGE 12
UPON A VOICE UOTE, ALL V02'ING AYE� CHAIRMAN JIARFIS DEGLARF,D THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. � � � � � � �
11. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Proposed Rmendments to Local Comprehensive Plans
Mr. Boardman stated Metropolitan Council is having a public hearing
on the amendment pracess. They have gone through a whole series of
ineetings and are making some revisions to their amendment process
to the comprehensive plan. That meeting will be on Jan. 22 at 2:00 p.m.
at MetropoTii.an Council. At this point in time, the City is pretty
much supporting the position taken by the League of Municipalities.
That position isthat the city has some choice as to what goes to
Metropolitan Council, an� that the process be in conjunction with
hearing pr�cesses that are already or primarily set up Ntith the cities.
B: Letter from Metropoiitan Council re: Choos_in�Sewage,_Solid, and_
es
Mr. Harris stated there is goiny to be � meeting regarding this
at.Coon Rapids City Na17 on Jan. 24; at 7:30 p.m. He felt it was
very important that the City of Pridley be re�,resen±ed at this meeting.
170TION BY 195.���SCHNRBEL, SECONDED BY MR. �TREUENFF,L5, TO REC�71�fiD TO
CITY C'OUNCIL THAT A�.REPkESEN1^1lTIVE FRQM�THE�CITY OF FRIDLEY BE
APPOZNSED 4'O AZ'TEND iHIS MES'!'ING. � �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYF,, CXAII;.MAIa HARRSS DECLARED THE
MO4'IO,Y CARRIED UN.'�NIMOUSbY, ' � �
ADJOUR�MENT:
MOTION BY MR. TREUENFELS, SECONDSn BY MS. SCH.NABEL, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
UPON A VOICE VOi'E, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRhiRN HARHIS DECLARED TXE JANUARY 7, 1981,
PLr1NNING COMb12S5ION d1EETING� AATOURNEB AT 11:59 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
�
Ly i e Saba
Recording Secrefiary
PUBLIC IIFARING
[3EfURE THF.
PLANNING COMMISSION'
' 13
NOTICE is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Conunission
of the City of fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on
4lednesday, January 21, 1981 in the Council Chamber at 7'.30 P.M. for the purpose
of :
Consideration of a request by W. G. Doty and Gary
A. Wel7man (ZOA �80-06) to rezone the following
- described parcels from M-1 {light industrial areas)
to R-3 (general multiple fami7y dvaellingsj:
1'hat part of Blocks 8 and 9, Lowell Addition, lying
South of the North line of Sylvan Hills Plat 8
extended in a 4lesterly direction to the West boundary
-� of said alock 8 and lying Westerly of the plat of
Sylvan Hills Plat 8, to9ether �aitf� the Easterly
one-half of vacated Elm Street, and
That part of lots 1 and 2, Block 7, Lowell Addition
to Fridley Park, ly�ing Southerly of the blesterly
extension of the North line of the plat of Sylvan
Hills Plat 8, together with the Westerly half of
vacated Elm 5treet,
All lying in the South half of Sectibn 15, T-30,
R-24, City of Fridley> County of Anoka, Minnesota.
Generally located South of Mississippi Street N.E.
East of the Burlington Northern right-of-way.
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at
this m2eting.
RICNARD H. NARRIS
CHAIRMAN
PLANNIN6 COMMISSION
Publish: �anaary 7, 1981
January 14, 1981 '
<
.�; .,
.
r CITY OF FRIDLEY DIINNESOTA 1�
PI,ANNING A D ZO�ING FOiL�1
NUMBE2 t% �%` �O OG
APPLICANT'S SIGNA'I'URE /� �
_ ���
0
Address 6379 University Ave. N.E.
Telephone Number 571-6k41
PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE
Address 6379 Universitv Ave. N.E.
TYPE OF REQUEST
� Rezoning
Special Use Permit
Approval of Premin-
inary $ Final Plat
Streets or Alley
Vacations
Other
Telephone Number 57i-6441 Fee�S� Receipt No. ����i _
Street Location o£ Property Stariite & Sat�}ite Ln
Legal Description of Property ( a ttached )
Present Zoning Classification M-1 Existing Use of Property Liqht Indus.
Acreage of Property 2.3 Describe briefly the proposed zoning classiiicati_cn
or type of use and improvement proposed R-3 ,.Mu 1 t i p 1 e Res i dent i 81
Has the present app2icant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or
variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes x no.
{Vhat 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 tahy this is not the case. (c) Responsibility for any defect in the proceedir.gs
resulting from the failure to list the names and addresses of a11 residents and
property owners of property in question, belongs to the undersigned.
A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drai.m and attached, shotaing the
following: J.. .North Direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on the lot.
3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks,
4. Street Names. S. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 300 feet).
The wtdersigned hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this
application are true and correct.
DATE
Date Piled
STGNATUR&
(APPLICA\T)
Date af I[earina T
P1lnning Cammission Approved
(dates) Denied_
City Council Approved
(dates) Denied
, �
- i
�
f
k
e
� �
V
ry� That part of Slocks 8 and 9, Lo�aell Addition, lying South of the North line of',, ��j I
�Sylvan Hills Plat 8 extended in a Westerly direction to the West boundary of y !
said Biock 8 and lying lJesterly ot` the plat of Sylvan HilFs Plat 3, together. with �
the Easte,rly one-half of vacated Elm Street, according to the map or piat thereof
on fi}e and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said
Anoka County.
__ �, _
That part of Lots 1 and 2, Biock 7, Lowell Addition to Pridley P�rk, lying Southerly
of the Westerly extension of the North line of the plat of Sylvan Hills plat 8,
according to the map or plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the
'Register'pf Deeds in and for said Anoka County, together with the Westerly half of
vacated Elm Street:
� .
I
��
� . €
�
� �
i
f
MAILING LIST
ZOA #80-06, W. G. Doty and Gary A. Wellman '
W. G. Doty and Gary A. Wellman
6379 llniversity Auenue N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Dennis, Michael and Mary Lowry
6473 Ashton Avenue N.E.
Fridley,,Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Lloyd Pound
6461 Ashton Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Edward 5haffer
6457 Ashton_Avenue N.E.
Fridley,.Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Nicholas Zroka
6435 Ashton Avenue N.E.
Fridley; Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Leonard Larson
G425 Ashton Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Anna Marie Huston
165-14th Avenue N.E.
Minneapolis, Mn 55413
Mr. & Mrs. �erald Severt
100 Satellite Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. Ralph Messer
114 Satellite Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Alf Lee
130 Satellite Lane N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Robert Strom
144 Satellite Lane N.E.
Fridley, hin 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Harold Lovrien
160 Satellite Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Planning Commission Januarv 6, 19II1 _
City Councii _
16
Mr. Alvin J. Ricks
161 Sylvan Lane N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & �4rs. William Zorbey
745 Sylvan Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. Paul Scherven
131 Sylvan Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Raydon Hong
115 Sylvan Lane N.E.
Fridley> Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Charles Reed
101 Sylvan Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Emmett Rice
100 Sylvan Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55932
Mr. & Mrs. 7homas Hartfield
120 5ylvan Nills N.E.
Fridley, �in 55432
Mr. & Mrs. 4lilliam Resheta.r
140 Sy}van Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & h4rs. Bill Kleinschrnidt
160 Sylvan Lane P�.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & hirs. Merle Longerbone
180 Sylvan Lane N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Edstrom Realty
64 East 2nd Street
Winona, Ptinnesota 55987
Erick LaVine
2831 Aldrich Avenue South
Minneapolis, hin 55408
Mr. Nick Dennis, Jr. RA� Manufacturing Co.
174 Satellite l.ane N.E. ?00 Plississi��pi Street N.E.
Fridley, h1n5 5432 Fridley, Mn 55�32
(Carlson-LeVine, Inc
Cpp11 pJ.01Df
n
�.
�o�a �;�r —
�
C
�s
�
g
�
g
S
Duw
__�
Y
�
S I
!
� ��
����
- ,,,
...._ � _ ;, i ,J ir_ _
--� .,
,� r,a. ,.. p„y..=..� .
6
�7
.� ����, �
I, '�' � Jini '�- a
�I ,� , .,
G. �.��,�i..,;,°t;.. � .
� � ;� ������y.. �
'��. 1 V
/��'I � � ��1ro m
�''�71 �
i
��Til_ � �MONI C0.
U��� � NEN�1 �IM C0.
- wrtuais
�
�
,�
� : .�.
$qtlN4 LIME IYIR
iu��� .o_
�n���
.
L�
.�.� �
�
}
17
f O.,e�.;�l�� ���,x,-� .
���,. i� � ' "�'��C,44.� ,...,,o �..
�..ss �,�n�lk�� ;�__-�� .
� COLUY&� � L NEIGHTS
STREET MA.P-CITY OF
fRIDLEY
0 $333 6,668
t
? H;s is ,� cc�rnAr�nrioN c�F eFCOFOS f,s
TNEY APPEAR IN 7HE ANOKA COUtJTY
CFHCES AFfFCTING TH� ARF, SHn`.ti 13
. THI� fJi2i.�'•�h`1� !S 70 BE (!��J nNLY F.
I P.FfEREt�'C[ PURPOSES %+hU ��+E COUN-
�TY �S h'07 RESPO�JSlBLE FOR AN'( dN-
C�UkA�lES kIERE!tJ CONTAfNED.
�---
�����
I -. E.V4 COR�IER
� ---,-- .;—� `; SEC.t ST.
� � m�+i}3SF�S1;''�?f s'_
� {�J} . '� ::,iz __�_�.�.-,.,,_F._ �=. __T�
—.°'.-"'�1'�_?'_. _.'.�, -- - -- `=�- `-'".a-_..�.,.•�..��__ `D
W N�
3 Z� I
�r^^'—'
�
�
�
�- � �
.co� Q
' 4 �
1 I � �
; �
; '�
_� �,
,.f� ' �
ti
I �
i —
i �� ^ti
CI�
� 4�'y
� �
o'
��
V
'v.� ry � •. ��:�
� � �
*y c: . �
'1 +��i 4
�. 1i'i
��`��"�
��f�'���
� ���
��.A� 8
s�-r��u�r�
p� �1 { Is V �� •
l�A�1 E
- �
�����
:LANE
n
• ., � .. ; � ..
�
, ,. ,,
3' `�
^ � �
,--_
. -. °
�
�� CI'fY OP PRIDI.I:Y h1INNESUT'A
PLANNING A ZONI G FORM
NUh16CR i��!y�'+��{ �'
�
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE � �� ���.__
Address (,» p 11n i ve rs i rv AvP N F '
Telephone Numher 571-6441
PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE
19
TYPE OF R�QUEST'
Rezoning
Special Use Permit
Approval of Premin-
inary $ Final Plat
� Streets or Alley
� Vacations
Address 6379 University Ave. N.E.
Other
Telephone;Number__ 57j-64�F1 ,.,_
' FeeL�S Receipt No.�
Street Location of Property $tarl i te � Satefl i te ln
Legal ➢escription o£ Property { ottoched )
Present Zoning.Classification M-1 Existing Use of Property 1��ht 1nd1,�_
Aereage of Property 2,3 Describe briefly the proposed zoning classificatinr
or type of use and improvement proposed R-3 .� mu i t i p 1 v re 5 i den t i s i
� � �.�.-: � ,���� ��-,�z�-��-
, , .
Has the present applicant previousiy sought to rezone, p1aY., ohtain a lot split ar
variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it?__�es x no.
What was requested and when?
The undersigned understands that: (a) a lis± of all residents and o�uners of property
within 300 feet (350 feet for rezoning) must be attached to this application.
(b} 'l�is application must he signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation
given why this is not the case. (c) Responsibility for any defect im the proceedings
resulting from the failure to list the names and addresses of all residents ar.d
property owners of property in questio�i, belongs to the undersigned.
A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drawn and attached, showing the
fo]Iowing: 1. North Direction. 2. Location of pxoposed structure on the lot.
3. llimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks.
4. Street Names. S. Location and use of adjacent existing Uuildings (ivithin 300 fcztj,
The undersigned hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this
application are true and correct.
DATE
Date Filed
SIGNATURE
(AYPLICANT)
Date oF
Planning Commission Approved City Council Approved
(dates) Denicd (datcs) Denied
te <s �s� <�'
:'l.�Y n
3 ^ � I
3
,.____-------
� H!S IS A COh���«T�Q�! OF RECOkDS A 2O
THE'f APPEAR lN 7HE ANOKA COUN7,
CfFICES AFFECTiNG THc �•°EA SNO'.Y��•
?Hf� ORAG�,�11�lG IS TO BF I IJEJ ONLY fOR
P.EFERENCE PURPOS�S ANt� TN� COUN-
7Y IS NOT RtSFONSItiL� FOP. AN'( !N-
AC��n.4CfE5 FlERE1N CONiAINED.
�
E.V4 C�RNfR
-. �EC ��
--�----•---� ` .t��.���+�{D " ST.
�� � �,�JII—JJ�.�Ji+ �
� � ��fI2 : . �r -.t e ....� � _
�,,,_:�-«_.y'-- --, �-'^^'- �f"
ya �� �/�_'lWi.//r�1wNf -4c �
����:. Y098�7 G 39 3 2!' ry .
.4Y': '�. Z�.
W?.. .zv , �i�'
! yN� tl I �j ._.'., �/ ; �—' � .
I > � . !3J/�y '���� �.� : �
i
!'
.Q
.
. . . ; �: ,3 �]i2p'— 3�0 � ��j�'P��
i
�� � ��' � � �
� � � ��''
: ryI ,� � s ° �, 28 ,
�f ° - '
� is z�
: _ tr �� , ::, �
r--- -_- 1 � r�
�.dQCAT�. e � _'_(�� �_ S�L�'��� �
� �� ;;,., � l� � _z : Nl LL � �
, �., , T 8
i '° ; zo a z3 t7 L A
, I ; '� ,`` zis � . .` r
, �9.=v eS�i ELLI I E, L��1JE
� ' . ! ~ � o- . ,. --
� ;..r./ .:�� �'r_ �. << � a� } � .
/ Y � � I . �
� , _ _._ . . . � 4' )
.l�� { � - ^ I �
� � r M . . .e � �r):! P; � � :' $ � ��� �
I � � 4( j �
- J o+' .
, � � N ,> �: ,4 ; r! � :
; � ;� , � ,� �_
�;� ! i �
��� ;1 �`. � ��-�a, �� �� ��.-� ,,- � .,
'. �� a � � �{;j7 i S 1 � YQ7Y� � �N��
° �1 � �'� " `', � .r ^_.---�Ps
� �� �� � � � . � .
.I � W ..� e .Y{�, / �
� U � 1 1 1 . � 9 � �
.!i c Cl 4� ' +�
v . i t �,
a u .:� ; —=`--- --�--- ,? -,:, �
�, . �6�r
. .. li � i . ' ,� ° � „ . _. .
Q
�
/ J
,
� �,i',
t�, � ,
�
��: I
,,,
't�
;l, j I
�I '
,�
�r, i
�,'! • �
"'G 1
^ r� . �
i .7 f7� t � .__
21
� ) �.v r� ��,e T o �_ ��/�� �.rfs o. ra -�'r,�cc' r , r�s ��� �
6�T /n� La c.vf c� .�{B�iTio,� ''�'i� �ioc�.y �A2K � C��
��/E�(�G [>.eY !!i�'[ v� J�S LAiO C. v r /,�GJ S/t!/A� i�it1,S'
��'7- 3� �ou� Kll�ncc�rtJ 9-S `S�%E'L,L/ %� �5'yC�J
L�///U G GcJ c°Sr o: Tiy �C' �ds�''T�f � r` Y PiY 'T�.,c:.s� v,v ±
oF ,�/f� GU�s�,- �✓.vE- v r- �S7`�92� i T� �� u.c �'.4�� ,
. . .. . � . . ... �+TiC-.S CJ � �//t/ �`a '��7 re' ��S � L�/L/c- r/� .. �-!i � .. 1J �-�
_ _ _,,�«���. s�, �S'y.� ��� �/� �s �.��- 3. _ _ ;:
„
22
oaotNr�ricE r�a.
AI� OftDltJn�+C[ RELA7I��iG T(3 t�0?SE, PftOVif)IhJG FOR TNE.PREVENTION �
/1hlD ELII•litff�TlOf! QE E'CCSSIVE At1D UNhI[:CESSARY fa01SE, nr�o
11�P05)f!G A PEidAL�(Y FG;t VIOLATION �
SEC7ION 12A.01.' DEFiNfT10t�S
1. Air CircuTation Device means a mechanism designed and used for the
coo-tro—iled flaai of a�r used in ventilation, cooling, or conditioning,
including, but not lirnited to, central and window air cOnditionirig units.
2. City Official A noise control officer, police efficer, or any other duly
appoin--�t�d rePresentative of the City as designed by the City hianager.
3. Exhaust System means a combination of compor�ents aihich provides for
enc ose ot�� of exhausL gas from engine parts to the atmosphere.
4. Person means any human being, any municipality or other governmental or
political subdivision, or any other public agency, any public or private
corp.oration, any partnership, firm, association or oti7er prganization,
any receiver trustee, assignee, agent-or other legal representative of
any of the foregoing, or any other legaT entity, but does not include
the t�1innesota Pollution Control Agency. .
5. Sound. Sound is an oscillaiion in pressure, stress, partic3e
isp acement, particle velocity, etc., in an elastic or partiatly
elastic medium, or the superposition of such propagated alterations.
6. Noise. Noise means any sound not occurring in the natural environment,
�ncfuding, but not limited to, sounds emar.ating from aircraft and
high�vays, and industrial, commerciai and residential seurces.
7. Decibel. Decibel is a unit of sound pressure level, abUreviated d6.
II. Sound Pressure Level (SPL). Sound Pressure Level is 20 times tlie
�%garitlim to the base 0 of the ratio of the pressure of a sound, p, to
ihe reference pressure, pr. For the purposes of these regulations,
the reference pressure shail be 20 microne�rtons per square meter
(20 u N/m2). In equation form, Sound Pressure Lerel in units of
decibels is expressed as. '
SPL (d6) = 20 log �Op�pr
9. Sound Re�eivinn Onit means a unit of property or a building containing a
person, us�ness,.activity, animal life, or property which is affected
by naise or noisc pollution.
10. d[3A. daA is a unit of sound level. dDA is the wei9hted pound pressure
level by the use of the A meteri+i9 characteristic and weightiizg as
speeified in nNSI Specification for Seund Level Pieter�s, SLA-1971, which
is hcreby incorporated hy referi:nce. • for the p�mpose of those
reyulatiocis, dGA is used as a measure of tiva�an response to soimd.
r--
�..._m
• ' p�igc 2 -- ORDIiJAt;r N0. �
11. L1� L�p is the sound le•del, expressed in dE311,
p'creent of the time for a onc t�our survey,
procedures approved by the Executive Director of
Control Agency.
23
which is exceeded ten
as rneasured iay test
the 1linnesota Pollution
12, L50 L,p is the sound level, expi�essed in d6A, orhich is exceeded
fifty percent of the time for a one hour survey, as measured by test
procedures approved by the fxecutive Uirector of the I4innesota Pollution
Control Agency.
SECTION 124.02. RECEIVING LA4D USE STANDAROS
1. The sound level requirements of this section shall apply at the property
or zoning lines of the sound receiving unit. Measurements may be made
at any locaticn on the property for evaluation purposes and to aid in
the enforcement of other sections of this Chapter.
2. The sound levels as stated below shall be the hiyhest sound levels
permitted in each of the zoning districts as �.iefined in Chapter 205 of
the Fridaey Zoning Code.
Day Night
7oning Districts L50 L10 l5Q L10
. (7 a.r�. - 10 p.m.) (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.j
R-1, R-2,.R-3 60 65 50 55
C-1, C-15, C-2; C-25 65 70 65 70
M_1, M-2 75 80 75 80
3. Sound levels resulting from cumulative travel of motor vehicles on state
and county highrrays and railroads are exempt from these Receiving Land
Use Standards but not other sections of this ordinance relating to motor
vehicles and railroads. This does not exempt individual motor vehicles
from any znd all federal, state, or local regulations. It is the intent
of the City to reduce high��ray noise in the various land areas
surrounding hiqhways to or below the requirements of this section when
and wherever possible.
S[CTION 124.03. SOURCE Eh1ISSI0N STA�DARDS
1. htotor Vehicle h'oise Limits.
A, hillfFLERS. Every motor vehicle shall at all times be equipped with a
mu f er in good t,�orkirg order which blends the exhaust noise i�to
the overall vehicle noise and is in constant operation to prevent
excessivc or unusual noise, and no person shall use a muffler
cutout, bypass, or similar device tipon a motor vehicle on a street
or hight,�ay. Thc exhau5t system shall not emit or produce a sharp
popping or crackling sound. Every motor vehicle shalt at all times
be equipped with such parts and equipment so arranged anQ kept in
such sCate of repair as to prevent carbon monoxide gas from entering
the interior of ttie vchicle.
•��,�,,
.1�,""
' v�ye a -- orz�tNnc�cF r�o. _
�I;i n...�.. ,.� .I.,1�� �. -�.� !!i7' ..'��:� .i'�� (11' f+��r.� ��i�Y ��)�(` (iY� IIR^ nfl Pfif
G�.V4ti{' 'rClr�C, <<: dIl f�i,U� 1. IUI' i.�tJ1. . u 1 L'n �I)� �lVul�l l j' 7! I I.(I l.tll. S4JCl.1- . .
fication, as required t,y the Commissioner of Public Safety.
[i. Thr. Minn�s�ta Pn}�ution Control Agency Motor Vehicle Noise Limits -
1';77 (E,;�;�!{R 4,i;04)� arr. hcreby adop�cd� by refercnr_e. �
2. Construction Equipn�ent. f;ont loaders, graders, cranes, pumps, saws,
generators and other construction equipment must not be operated at a
construction site if they produce an L10 noise level of (85 d¢A} or more
rneasured at a distance of 50 feet.
SECTION 124.04. CENTRAL AIR COflDITiONI�dG EQUIPMENT
No person may install or place any central air conditioning plant or
equipment in any location o-iithout the prior approval of (city official).
4lindow air conditioni,�g units are exempt from the provisions of this
subdivision, except that the noise produced by such windo�r units, as well as
by all existing air circulation devices, shall be a�tenuated by means deemed
appropriate by the (city off�cial), including, but not limited to, relocation
of such units or devices, if this noise resulCs in or contributes to a
.violation of Section 124.02 of this ordinance.
SECTIOEd 124.05. OPERATIOhAL LIt4ITS
1. Recreational Vehicles. No person shall drive or operate any minibike,
sno4;n:obi e,l or other similar recreational vehicle, not licensed for
, . travel on public streets, at any time other than 4etween 7:00 a.m. and
10:00 p.m.
2. Outdoor Power Implements. No person shall operate any outdoor power
Zmp ement, inc uding but not limited io pov+er lawn mowers, snotiablewers,
power hedge clippers, or such other implements designed primarily for
outdoor use, at any time other than between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and
� 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m, on weekends and
holidays.
3. Construction Rctivities. Construction work hours shall be subject to
ections 8. and 8.T� of the City Code.
4. Refuse Haulinq. Refuse hauling hours shall be subject to Section 113.10
o t �e City Code.
SECTION 124.06. PUSIIC NUISANCE NOISES PRONIBITED
1. General, 1t shail be unlatvful for any person to make, continue, or
cause to be made or continued any loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise or
any noise which either a��noys, disturbs, injuries, or endangers the
corfort, repose, health, peace, oc safety of eChers within the limits of
the City. The follot��ing acts, among others, are dectared to be nuisance
noises in violation of this Article but said enurocration shal? not be
deemed to be exclusivc.
24
✓
✓
_ _�,., .,
�' •� , r���e n-- oant��nr�r.r r�o.
25
,,
, i . .�,. , .. , ' . , . , . . . . .r d.:'1 .. .'h �'�'. . .
�i. . . . . . . .
Sl���li.ifl�;� .�.:YIt.0 ���1. iil�f �i.l�:.�-�IiiiVp. Ii1�.i,G��Cji.l1:� O7' GLtICi
vehicle on any sCreet or public placc of the citiy, except as a
dan9er viarnin9, the creation by nir,ans of any such signaling
device of any unrea,c�nably loud nr harsh sound, and the
sounding of any such device for an unnecessary and
unreasonable period of time. The use of any siynaling device
exr,ept one o�erated by hand or electricity; the use of any
horn, o-lhistle or oiher device operated by engine exhaust and
the use of any sucti signaling device when traffic is for any
reaSOn h�ld up.
B. 2adios, Phonoqraphs, etc. The using, operating or.permitting
to�—�played, useo or operated any radio receiving set,
musical instrument, phonograph, or other machine or device for
the producing or reproducing of sound in such manner as to
disturb the peace, quiet and confort of the neighboring
inhabitants or• at any time with louder vo:ume than necessary
for cgnvenieni: hearing for the person or persons who are in .
the .room, vehicle or chamber in tivhich such machine or device
is operated ar�d who are voluiitary listeners thereGo.
C. Noisy Parties or Gatherinqs. The congregation or gathering of
. peop e from wnc�TT no�se emanates in a sufficient volume or of
such nature so as to disturb the peace, quiet, or repose of
� otfier pe;-sons.,
D. Loud Speakers, Amplifiers for Advertising. The using,
operating or permictinG to ue p ayed, used, or operated of_any
radio receiving set, riusical instrument, phonegraph,
loudspeal:er, sound amplifier; or other machine or device for
the producing or reproducing of sound for the purpose of
• commercial advertising or attracting the attention of the of
the public to any building or structure �ahich disturbs the
peace, quiet and comfort of t�ie neighboring inhabitants.
-i.� : ._ ._ p7
E. Animals. (No person shall keep; any animal that disturbs the
- comfort or repose of persons in the viclnity by its frequenty
or continued noise.
F. Exhausts. The distharge into the open air of the exhaust of
any steam engine, stationary intcrnal combustion enqine or
motor boaC, except throuqh a muffler or other device which
will effectively prevent toud or explosive noises therefrom_
Minnesota Statute i34.871 and the Department af Natural
Resources regulation reyuiring mufflers for snowmobiles, 6 ,
MCAR 1.0057 (E) (1), are adopted by reference and incorporated
in this ordinance as fully as if set out in full.
.. . . 26
'�' C. �!i`�f���.14r. V.�171��r r�r Ir.;i.l ���ln 11�l� fi� dtY�/ r1�1�0'!I')i11��'-�� fll!)f.(lY'f.i�('�C OP
. .. ' ' . . ' . .� ' : �': . � �' � . '. . ! .:.t: , ' .j!, 1.1; f:l'��:•iti:
iuu�l anr� unn�.cr;cary gratin��, yrinding, rattling or oCher noise.
H. Loadin7; Unlnarlina, �ncninn Bn�r�s.. The r.rr.ation of a loud and
. �....r�'. . 'i'i . �i ..., . �� '.i.�'1 ijl..(ii^.'i qC Uf;i:;'::il!if3 O.Y U�;.�)dC.i'ill�i
O� G(�;/ W:_(:1CIC. � � . �
I. Recreational liotor Uehicles. The operat.ion of any self-propelled
vehic e or any vehicie propelled or drawn by a self-propelled
vehicle uSed for recreational purposes, including but not limited to
Snx;;robiles, Lrail bike or oti�er all -terrain vehicles in marked
prohibited areas. Minnesota Statute 84.90 is hereby adopted by
reference and incorporated in this ordinance as fully as if set out
ip full. .
J. Motor Vehicles. The operation of a motor vehicle in violation of
Minnesota Statute 169.64 regulating motor vehicle mufflers.
K. Noises Near Schools, Courts, Churches, or Hospitals. The creation
of any excessive noise on any sLreet a �acent to any school,
institution, or which distrubs or unduly annoys patients in the
hospi�a] provided that conspicuous signs are displayed in such
streets indicating that the same is a school, hospital, church, or
court street.
SECTION 124.07. EXCEPTION FOR EMERGENCY WORK
Operations and acts performed exclusively for emergency work not exceeding a
period of 24 hours to perserve tf�e safety, welfare, or public health of the
citizens of the City or for emergency �vork necessary to restore a public
service or to eliminate a public hazard shall be exempt from the provisions
of this ordinance. Persons havinq performed emergency work under this
section shall inform the City the need to inititate such work or if during
. non-business hours of the City offices than upon resumption of business hours
of the City. Any person responsible for such emergency �vork shall take all
reasonable actions to minimize tlie amount of noise pollution or vibration.
SECTION 124.08. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE NOISE CONTROL OFFICER
1. Tlie noise control program established by this ordinance shall be
administered by a City Official appointed by the City hlanager.
2. Testinq Procedures. The City Official shall adopt guidelires
estab ishing the test procedures and instrumentation to be used in
enforcing the provisions of Seetion 124.�2 and 124.03 imposing noise
standards. A copy of such guidelines sha71 be kept on file in City Hall
and shall be available to the public for reference during office hours.
d
�
T°"
27
� 4 � , . . �..�.. . �. (�`,�. � �. .'�' i .. ..11 �.�� ^i�rtt �t•;.c.:,,1;.�,1�
; .. , : , . �; . � ,. �.. :,;i, ; -.. ; i �; itE.c.:�� �ary ui
us,erful in enforcin9 �ti�is ordinance and r�duC�ng noise in the city. He
shall nial:e such invcstigations and inspections in accordance with law as
i`('(,V�IfClf lf�-�.,�iirli77•ir, l..I.��j�n.n�-. �...C;llrn��'�71�5. � ' �
�. t;r,i•.�; i:-p-act `.`-�:'�_��=��'��-.. ihr. City Gf'ricial m�y require any person
applyin9 to tFie �iLy for a cr�ange in zoning classification or a permit
or license for aay structure, operation, process, installation or
a1l;eration or project that may be considered as a potential noise source
to submit a noise impact statement on a form prescribed by him. He
shall evaluate each such state�uent and make appropriate recommendations
to the City Council through the PTanning Commission to take the action
to approve the license or permit applied for.
5. Other Powers and Outies. The City Official shall exercise such other
po�vers and perform such other duties as are reasonable and necessary to
enforce this ordinance.
SECTIOPd 124.09. VARTA;4CE5
The Appeals CommissSon shall have authority, consistent
grant variances from the requirenents of Section 124,02.
subject to Section 6.141 of the City Code.
SECTION 124:10. ENFORCEMENT
uzith this section to
Variances shall be
Enforcement of this.ordinance shall be subject to Chapter 901 of the City
Code.
2. Civil Action. The provisions of this ordinance may be enforced through
in� ticun on, mandamus, or other appropriate civil remedy.
3. Criminal Penalty. The violation of any provision of this ordinance
except Sectio— n�4.03 Subdivision 1, is a misdemeanor as defined by
Minnesota State Statue. The ��ioiation of Section 124.03, Subdivision l,
is a petty misdemeanor as defined hy Minnesota State Statue.
SECTIOt� 124.11. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this ordinance or the applicatton of any provision
particular situation is held to be invalid by a court of competent juris-
diction, the remaining portions of the ordinance a�id the application of
ordinance to any otl}er situation shall ❑ot be invalidated. .
to a
the
'},�"�
' � � � ° � �:�, � � �
� ��`� ��DERAI. EMERGENCY iVIANAGEM�NT AGENCY
, -�� b"Jashinyton D.C. 2D472
�
CERTIFIED MAIL '
RETURN FECEiPT REQUESTED �
Honorable William Nee
Mayor
City of Fridley
City Ha11
6431 University Avenue
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Dear Mayor Nee:
���C 1 ��
E�''�' 1 �
��
: 1 29
You are advised that tha City of Fridley's eligibility in the NaCional
Flood Insurance Program �NFIP) may be suspended on March 2,'1980 unless �'
_._ _
the required flood plain management measures of Section 44 CFR:60.3 (d)
are,enacted by your communiCy.
Our letter of September 2, 198U indicated the actions your communiCy
could take to maintain its eligibility in the NFIP. That letter also
advised you that the flood insurance rate study establishing base flaod
elevations has been completed and that your community's Flood Tnsurance
Rate Map would become effecCive on ASarch 2, 198L
We hope tUat your community has initiated its adoption process to meet
the above requirements. If you are encoun:ering difficulties in
enacting the required measures, we.urge you to call the Regional
Director, Insurance and Aiitigation Division of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency in Chicago, Illinois at (312} 353-0757.
Please consider this Letter as your formal notice. Failure to adopt and
submit the required flood plain management measures in a legally
enforceable instrument Co the Regional Director before the establistied
deadline will result in your community's suspension from the NFIP in ,
accordance with Section 59.24 oi the Program regulations.
Sincerely,
Gloria M. Jimenez .
Federal Insurance Administrator
�� !
Richard IJ. Krimm ..
Assistant Administrator
Offi.ce of Natural Hazards
Reduction
I
I�IIWITHCSEQTI0�J�205A157TOF$OUR�PRESElTDCODEFIT
205:30 UVtRLAY DISTRICTS
205.3Q1 Purpose and Intient �,
It is thc; purpose and intent of this section to estab?ish special
Controls for the protection of life and property or to prevent and
miligate damage to uniuue and valuable resources within the City. An
overlay district shall overlay all r�ther zoning district5 v�ithin
prescribed boundaries and shall place on tt�ose zones, special
conJitions in addition to the zoning reaulations of the zunes affected.
205.302 Classification
q}� overlay districts shall be classified as an 0 district with special
numerical suffix which ���ill differentiate between districts.
205.303 Procedure for Establishment of an Overlay District
An overlay district-�s a zoning district to the extent that the land so
approved vrou}d be designated on the zoning map as an �verlay district
through specific regulation changes necessary to protect the health and
general welfare of'the public within the desig}�ated district. An
overlay districi; when designated, shall be classified Uy numerical
order as it is est�blished.
205.31 0-1 DISTRICT REGULATIONS - CREEK AND RIVER PRESERVATION DISTRfCT
205.3101 Purpose and Intent
�
7he purpose of this district is to:
1. Reyulate and ensure orderly tlevelopment of Fridley's flood
pluin lands.
2, Preserve and protect the natural state of creeks and r9vers in
Fridley.
3, Protect surface and ground wate�� quality a�d auantity.
A, htinimize the losses due to.periodic flouding and eliminate obstruc-
tions of flood flow ti�at evould cause hazards to �1{E and p�'operty.
205.3102 Lands Subject to-this Distriet '
1. The establishment of boundaries
The 6pUtlddl'l�S af the Creck and Rivi:r Pr�servation Dis�rict are hereby
establishecf as shuwii on the ofi'icial Tcni»g hlap of the City of
j=ridlCy. This boundar,y is madc up of t�Y�o protcction �oncs (CRP-1
"floudway", and CRP-2 "f�ood fringc") �thich cont��in all lands ivithin
tihe jueisdiction of the City which are subject to periodic flooding by
the rc�gioi�al floud and which lie below
_�..
30
205.3102
OVERLAY
pISTR1CT5
PURPOSE
AND INTENT
CLAS$1FICATION
pROCEDURE FOP.
ESTf�BL T SHh1E1ST
OF AN OVERLAY
DTSTRICT
0-1 DISTRICT
REGULATIOPdS -
CREEK AND
RIVER
PRESERVA7ION
DTSTRICT
PURPOSE AND
INTENT
LANtiS SUBJECT
TO THIS
DISTRICT
the rc9ulatiory f1oGd nrotection elevaLion on the official creek and river
profile (hcreinafter e�l�lz�d 1;t�e�pr�oi�ile) contained wit.hin��tf,e�Flood
Insurtinte Study for the City of ;ridley. Tf�e Officiral Zuning h^ap toyether
. with all materials attached t.herct� i> herel>y adopted by rcference and
declared to bc a part of this ordinancr. The attacheci material shall in-
ctude the flood I�surar,ce �tudy for the CiCy of Fridley prepared by the
Federa"f Instirance Administration duted September 2, 19II0 anJ the Flood
6oundary and Floodrray P1aps and Floud Insurance Rate Maps therein.
2. Location of boundaries
ihe elevations as shown on tF�e Profile and-other available technical data
contained in the Flood Tnsurance Study sha}1 be the yoverning factor in
locatin9 creek arid river protection houndaries.
205.3103 Definitions
For the purpose of this district the following definitions shall apply:
1. ACCESSORY BUILDIhG: A subordinate building or use which is
locateC cr the same lot on which the main building or use is si*_uated
and which is reasonably necessary and incidental to the condUCt of the
primary use of such huildii�g or main use.
?. CHAMidEI.: A aatural or artifictal depression of perceptible
extent., ivith def�inite beos and banks to confii�e and condi�cti, either
continuously or periodically, the water in respective creeks.
3. CO'•'.f',ISSIOAl: M1ieans Fridley Planning Carmission
4. COh1N1SST0IJER: Means the Commission of the Department of Natural
Retources of the State of NiM esota.
5. COUPiiIL: P;eans the Fridley City Council.
6. CRP-1: (floodnay) Creek and River Protection Zone i. This Zone
is synonomous with thz term "flood�vay".
T. C.RP-2: (flood fringe) Creek and River Protection Zone 2. The
7.one is synonomoi�s with the term "flood friage".
8. EQUAL DEGREE OF E?;CRO/�C�iPiENT: A methed of d°termining the
location of fleodway boundaries so that flood plain land on botf� sides
of a stream are capable of conveying a proportionate share of flood
flo�as.
9. FLOOq OR FLOODI�JG: f4 temporary rise in flow or stage that results
in i�lundation of the areas adjace��t. to the cl�annel.
10. FLOOD �RIPlGE: That 4�or°tion of the fload plain outside of the
flaod�eay. Flood it•in9�. is synononious with the ter�ui "1`lcodtiaay fringe"
usecf iG� the Plood Instn°ance Study for the City of Fi�i:�l��y. .
-?-
.,
�i
2�5.3103
Q-1 DISTRIGT
REGUI/1TIOPJS -
CREfK ANU
RIVER
PRtSERVATION
D I STR,I CT
PURPOSF AND
INTENT
LANDS SUl3JECT
TO 7FII5
DTSTRICT
DEfINITI0N5
11. F100D PLAIN: The areas adjoir�ing a ��atercourse which have been or
hereaftcr may be covereJ by regicinal filood.
12. FLOOD I'ROF1L[: A graph or a longitudinal plot�of water surface
elevations o.f a flood event along a creek or a river.
13. FLOQD PRQOFING: A combination of provisions, chanr�es or adjustments
to properties and sCructures sut�ject to flooding primarily for the re-
duction or eliminatlon'of flood damage.
14. FLOODI•lAY: The channel of the ti�tatercourse and those portions of the ,
adjoining flood plains Vthich are reasonably repuired to carry and
discharge the regional flood.
15. OBSTRUC�ION': Any storaga of material or equipment, dam, wall, wharf,
embankment, levee, road, dike, pile, abutment, projection, excavation,
channel rectification, culvert, building, wire, fence, stocl:pile, refuse,
fill, deposit, clearing of trees or vegetation, structure`or matter in,
along, across or projectiny, in who7e or in part, into any flood plain.
16. PRESERVATIQN DiSTRICT: River and Creek Preservation District. The
District boundaries shall be contiguous with the regional flood boundaries
indentified as a part of the Flood Insurance Study for the City of Fridley.
17. PROFILE: Dfficial Greek aad River profile.
18. REGULAT6R1` FLCDD PROTECTTOP! ELEUATIOiJ: An elevation no low�r than
one (1) foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increase
in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the flood plain that r•esults
from designation of a flood�aay.
19. RE6IONAl FLOOD: A flood ���hid� is repre�sentative of large floads
known to have occur'rred generally in f4innesota and resonably
characteristic of vA�at can be expected to �ccur on an average frequency in
the magnitude of the 100-year recurrence interval. Regional flood is
synonomous with the term "base fiood" use in the Flood Insurance Study.
20. STRUCTURE: Anything that is b!iilt or constructed, an edifice or
building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially b�iilt up or
coirposed of peris joitied together in scme definite manner, whetiier of a
Lemporary or permanent character.
205.31Q4 District Uses, Permits ancf Standards
1. District Use
7he intent of this section is to provide a sunplemenair•y overla,y
clistrict which is made up of th�o protection zones. CkP-1, CRP-2,
within any of the ezist.ing oriyinal zoning districts. Development of
this district will follo�� the repuirenents of the o+'iginal zoning
district in ad6ition to ti�e requirements of this section.
_3_
5L
205.3iO4
0-1 DISTRIC7
R[GULATTONS -
CREEK FlNU
RIVER
PRESFRV�TI�N
�1STRICT
DEFJNITIONS
DISTRIC'T
USES, PERMI7S
AND STANDRRDS
r
�„"°.
2. Permitted Uses in CRP-1 Zon2 (floodi•ray)
p, No structure or any portion thercof sha11 be,,constructed or placed
rrithin protection zone CE?P-1 of the Preservatior� District. Nor shall
there be any grading, filling or excavatin9 of land or any land use
established on any property within this zone with the following
exceptions:
(1) Any use having a low flood dama9e potentia.l including recreational
uses, parking lots, residential yards, loading areas, storage yards,
water control structures and other open space uses.
(2} Structures accessory to the above use may be permitted if:
a. Structures are not for human habitation.
b. Structures have a low flood damage potential.
205.3104 33
0-1 DISTRICT
REGULA71-0NS -
CREEK AND
RIVEft
PRESERVATIOH
DISTRTCT
DISTRICT
USES, PERMITS
AND STANDARDS
c. Structures are firmly anchored to prevent floatation.
d. �ccessory.buildings are flood proofed in accordance with the 5tate
Building Code:
B. All structures grading, filling, and excavating permitted in this
section, �aith the exception of public uses, re4uire a Special Use
Per�r�it.
G. Any removal of existing trees over 3 inches in diameter shall
reauire City approval.
Q. No structure (temporary or permanent), fill (including fill for
roads and le�ess), deposit, obstruction, storage of materials, or
' equipment, or other uses may be allov�ed as a Special Use which,
acting alone or in combination with existing or reasonably
anticipated future uses, adversely affects the capacity of the
floodway ar increases flood heights.
3,. public Utilities, Railroads, Roads, and Bridges
A, Public Utilities. All public utilities and facilities, such as
gas, electrical, sewer, and water supply systems to be located in the
flood plain shall be fluod-proofed in accordance with the State
Building Code or elevated to ahove the Regulatory Flood Protection
Elevation.
6. Public Transportation Facilitic�s. Railroad tracks, roads, and
bridges to be locat€d +�ithin the Floodway Disl:rict sltiall comply with
the sections of t.1�is prdinance. Elevation to,ti�e Regulatoi-y Flood
Protection Elevation shall be provided where failure or interruption
of these trahsportation faci7ities would result in ddnger to the
public hcalth or safety nr �L�hcre such facilities are essential to the
orderly functioning of the ar•ea. Piin�r or auxiliai')� �'oac!s or
railtro�lds may be const��uct.ed at a lo�ti�er elevation �•nc�:re failure or
interruption of tr•anspo��tation scrvices would not endii�ger tf�e publie
health or safety.
_q_
4, Permittecl Uses i� CRP-[ lone (flood fringe)
No builcliiay or str��cture or any portion thcreof, sh711 be placed vrithin
protection zoae CNP-2 of thc hresnrvati<>n Uistrict,.unless a Special Use
Permit is granted. iJor shall there be ar�y grading, filling or extavating
of land or any land use estr,blished on any property within the Preserva-
tivn District unless a Special tlse Per+nit is 9ranted. A Special Use
permit shall be within the CRP-2 zone in accorclance with
the following regulations.
A. No Special Use Permit shall be authorized which would result in
incompatible la�id uses or i�ihich would be detrimental to the
protection of surface and ground water supplies.
B. Na Special Use Permit shall bc authorized for structures which
will increase the financial burdens imposed on the commu�iity and
its individuals through increasing floods arid overflaer of water
onto land areas adjacent to the creeks and rivers,
C. No Special Use Permit sha11 be issued unless the proposai is in
keepin9 with land use plaris and planning objectives for the City of
'Frid]ey dnd vrhi�h will not increase o�� cause d-anger to life or
property: _
D. No Speciat Use Permit shall be issued in those cases which are
inconsistent with the objectives and encourage land use that is in
comp�tiible with the preservation of the natural land forms and
vegetation.
E. Ivo Special Use Fermit shall be issued fcr zny fill unless sho�an
to have some bei:eficial purpose to the prcperty aiid the amount
thereof must not exceed that necessary tp achieve the intended
purpose, as deniunstrated by a plan subnritted by the oamer showing
the uses to �ahic,� the filled land wi71 be put, the kind of fill,
and the final dimensions of the proposed fill or other materials.
Such fili shall Le protected against e��osion by rip-rap, vegetative
cover, or bulki�eading �if deem�d necessai'v.
F. No Special Use Permit shall be issued for garbage or waste
disposal sites or syster.�s.
G. No Special Use Permit shall be issued unless the applicant, in
support of his application, submitc engineerinn data, site plans
and other plans arrd information as the City may reauire, in order
to determine the regulato��y flood proCection elevation in
unnumbered A zones, and the effec.ts of such develo�me�t on the bed,
bank, channel, floodt�ay or flood plain in the Preservation
District. 7he ap;�licant shall subm�t faur c.opies of the
application a�ld tt�e infot7uation.
H. No 5pecial Use Perrnit shall be issued unless the proposed use
or obstruction has h�e« re�viewed b,y all governmental bodies having
jurisdiciion over such use or ot�struct?on, if said rrvaew is
required by statutes, or•clinances, rules or eequlat:ions appiicable
t.o such govcrnuti��r�tial i�ui'ies and tio 5uef� i�sc or obsLruction, but in
all cases thr. f.ity of fridley 4vi11 make ihe final dct:ermination.
..5..
205.3104 34
0-1 DJSTRIC'f
REGUI_I1TInNS -
CREFK AND
RIVER
PRESERVATION
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
USES, PERMITS
AND�STANDARDS
�
, _�"`
205.3105 /ldditional Restrictions
�n adclition to the reUUirr.ments set aut in Section 2C�5.3104 of thi5
section, a��y Special Use Perrnit �s�i��'� {0rovis�onsruction in
the CRP-2 zone shall meet the folloeiing �
1. Structures: Structures for habitatian cunstructed on fill shall
�e constructed so the basement flocr, or first floor, if there is
no basement, if above tt�e reyulatory flood protection elevation with
the fill at that elevation at least fifteen (15) feet beyond the limits
of any structure or building erected theron. 4Jhere existing stre�ts or
utilities are at elevations v�hich make cornpliance with the foregoing
sentence impractical, or in other special circumstances, the Planning
Corrmission may authorize other techniaues of elevating the first floor
(including basenents) above the Regulatory Fload Protection Elevation
under the Special Use Permit, that conform u+ith the flood proofing
reouirements of the State 3uilding Code.
2. Other Uses: Accessory land uses, such as accessory buitdings,
yards and parking lots may be at elevations lower than the regulatory
floocl protection e1E��ation ifi a Special Use Permit is first granted
pursuant to this oistrict. Accessory structures musi: comply with
section 205.3104'2A (2) a-d of this district.
3. Storage: Any storage or processing of maCerials that in tim2 of
flooding may be buoyant, flammaUle, explosive or could be injurious to
human, animal or:nlant lrfe, is prohibited.
4, f�on-Residential Structur�s: Commercial, manufacturing, and
industrial structures sha11 ordinanarily be elevated o» fill 5o that
tt�eir first floor (Including Casement) is above the Regulatory Flood
ProtecCion Elevaiion but may in special circumstances be fleod proofed
in accordance with the State �uilding Code. 'Structures that are not
elevated Co above the Fegulatory Flood Protection Elevation shall be
{lood proofed to FP-1 or FP-2 classification as defined by the State
Building Code. Structures flood proofed to FP-3 or FP-4 classification
shall not be permitted.
,. Standards for Flood Fringe Uses:
p, Residential Uses. Residences that do not have vehicular access
at or above an elevatioa not more than tato feet belotiv the
Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation shall not be permitted unless
granted a variance by the ApPeals Commission. In granting a
variance the �tpPeals Cooi�nission shall specify limitations on the
period of use or occupancy oi' the residence.
G, Con;mer•cial Uses. Accessory lancl uses, such as yards, railroad
tracks, and parking lots may Ce at elevations lower than the
Regulatory Flood Protec:tion Elevation. F!owever, d permit fo�' such
facilities to be used by the 6�ipl�.Y�'�'s or the general public shall
not bc 9ranted in 1he aLsence oi a floud warnin9 system tf�at
provides �dr_ai�ate Liine for evacuaCion if the area would inuntlate to
a dc:pth qreatcr than tedo ftict or be subject to flood velocities
greatier tlian four feet per second upon occurrence of tihe regional
flood.
-6-
205.31Q5
o-i orsrn�cr
RE6ULATIOPJS -
CRE[K AtJD
R34'ER
PRESERVATION
DISTRICT
AQ�ITJOCtAL
RESTRlCTIONS
35
�"
G, Manufacturing and Industrial lJsrs. t�leasures shall Ue taken to
miniinize interfi�rence with nurrn��l plant operatirns especially alc�ng
streams having protracted itoou duratiors;, Certain;:accessory land
u5es such as yards anci p�rki�i�_� lot,s roay l,c at lo�:+er eievations suUject
to requirements set out in subdivisivn 5(l3) a�ove. '.In corisiderin9
permit applications, due consideration shall be given to ner,ds of an
industry whose busiriess roquires tk�at it be located�in fiood plain
areas.
205.3106 Administration
1, The City shall administer and enforce these district regulations
and shall maintain a record of the elevation of tt�e first floor
(including basement} of all new structures or additions to ex�isting
structu��es in th'e flood plain districts. The City shall also maintain
a record of the elevations to which structures or additions to
structures are flood proofed.
2, Special Use Permit: A Speciai Use Permit shall L�e applied for and
obtained prior tU the construction, erection, addition or alteration of
any obstruction whol.ly, or partly i+i ti�e Preservation District.
3, qpplicatibn for �Permit: �
A. Application for Special Use Permits under this district shall
be made by the owner or oerners of the land, in du�licate to the
City, on forms furnished by the City and shall be accompanied
initially by the follo�eing information, data, and plans as is
deemed necessary by tne zoning ddministrator for detiermining
compliance wiLh this district, and for determining i;he effects of
the proposed activity in the Preservation Dis.trict and the
buildability of the particular site for the proposed improvement,
use or obstruction.
6. The Planning Commission may attach such conditions to the
granting of t,he Special Use Permit as it deems necessary to fulfill
the purposes of the Ordinance. Such consitions may includes but
are not limited to, the follo�vii�g:
(1) Modification of waste disposal and water supply
facilities.
(2) Limitations on period of use, occupancy, and operation.
(3) Imposition of operational Controls, sureties, and deed
restrittlons.
(4) Reauirements for construction of channel modificaiions,
dikc�s, levess, and other protective meas�res.
(5) Flood proofinq measures, in accorda+lce witl� the State
C�uilding Code. The applicant. shall submit a plan or document
certified by a registered professional engineer or architect
that the flonci p�•uofinn me�sures are�consisLent with the
Re�utat.ory Floi�d P�•ut�ctiun Clevatinn and associated flood
facLors for thc pai°ticulai' area.
-7-
36
o-t �isratr,r
aECU�_n1l�ris � -
CRF�K Ar.D
RIUCR
PRES[RVATIOtI
DISTRTC7
IIDQITIOPlAI.
RESTRICTIOMS
ADf�Ih! I STRA7 ]ON
ADMINIS7RATIOfJ
C. Plans (surface view) includi�g a survey by a MinnesoLa re9:stered
land surveyor, showing elevations or contours of the ground, pertinent
o6struction elevaEions, size, location, a�id special arrangement of all
proposed and existiny obstructions or+ the site, :ii� relation to existing
an proposed obstructions to thc channel location, location and
elevation of streets, rrater supply and sanitary facilities, photographs
showing existing land uses and vegetation upstream and d�wnstream, and
soil types.
D. Specifications for building construction and material,
flood-proofing, filling, dredging, grading, channel improvement,
storage of materials, water supply (includiny vaittidrawal and
discharge of ground and surfuce water) and sanitary facilities.
4. Issuance of Permit: The City shal7 issue the Special Use Permit upon
approval of the application therefore by the City Council.
The applicant shall be required to submit certification by a registered
professional engineer, registered architect, or registered land surveyor
that the finished fill and building elevations were accomplished in
compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. Flood-proofing
measures shall be certifed by a reqistered professional engineer or
registered architect.
5. Application f�or Variance: Application for variance under this
districi shall be'made by the owner or oevners of the land, in duplicate
to the City on forms furnished by the City. Variances �o the Creek and
River Pi�2servaCion �istrict must enly be �or reasons of exceptional
circumstances when the strict enforcement of these regulations would
cause undue hardship and strict corforrnity with the standards <<�ould be
unreasonable, impractical and not feasibie under the circurnstances.
Yariances granted under this District must be consistent with the general
�urpose of these standards. Although variances may be used to �nodify
permissible methods of flood protection, no variance sl�all �ravide for a
lesser degr2e of flood protection than stated irr this district.
��
6. State and Federal Permits: Prior,�processing an application for
specia} use permit or variance, the City shall determine that ihe
applicant has obtained ail necessary State and Federal permits.
205.3107 Po«ers, Di�ties, and Tecr�nical
Assistance
}. Powers and Duties
'fhe Planning Commission shaU hear all revuests for S�ecial Use Permits
under this district (as set by Secl;ion 205.053 of Che City Zoning
Dr�inance). They will also hear all variances pertaining tio this
d�strict. The City shall suhmit to tl�e Comraissioner a copy of any
application for a v�riance or Special Use Permit �:here a hearinc� is to
be held to consider such application. The Commissioner shall receive
at least (l0) days notice of the hearine�. Such n�t.ice siiall specify
the Y.iaie, place ai�d subject ntatte�' oT the hearing and sl�all be
aCCOmpanied by such suppurting ii7formation as is necessary to indicate
tl�e nat:ure an�i effect of the hrroposed use. A copy of all decisions
grar�t.ing a v„riancc or Special Use Perinit tp the provisions of the
Cr��c•I; and I;i��er Prescr•vation Oistrict sh�ill be forwarried to tl�e
Conmiissioncr within ten (lU) days of sucli action.
37
205.310�
0-1 DISTRICT
REGULATIOf�S
CRECK ANU
RIVER
PRCSERVATION
DISTRICT
ADMINIS7RATION
P��dERS AND
DUTIES
AND
7ECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
'l. 'fc:chnical Assistance
The Planning f,ommission may Lransmit the informatian received by it to the
appropriate WaCershed District or the Cornini55ionG" for teGhniC81 assis-
tancc to evaluate the proposed project in relation to flood heights and
velocities, for deterinination of Lhe regulatory flood protection elevation
v�ithin unnumbered A znnes, and to dctennine the seriuusness of fload
damage to the use, the adeauacy of the plans for protection, compliance
with all sections of this district, and compliance with Statewide Standards
and Criteria for i�lanagement of Flood Plain F�reas uf Minnesota {Minnesota
Reyulations A�R II5-93), and other technical matters. •
.
205.31U8 Existing Non-Conforming Uses
An obstrucCion or structure, or the use af a structure or premises,
which was laa.fiul before adoption of this ardinance, but which is not in
conformity with the provisions of this district, may be continued,
subject to the following conditions:
1. No such use shall be expanded, changed, enlarged, or altered in a
way which increases its nonconf ormity.
•2. No structural alteration nr addition to any nonconforming
structure over the'life of the structure shall exceed 50 percent of
its assessed vaiue at the time of its becom�ing a nonconform9hg use,
unless the entire structure is permanentiy changed to a conforming
use or unless tha alteration or addiiion would subsiat�tially reduce
potentiai flo�d damaoes for the entire structure.
3. Any alteratian or addition to a nonconforming use whicb would
result in substantially increasing the flood damage pctential of that
use shall be f7ood proofed in accordance with the State 6uilding Code.
4. If such use of such obstruction or structure, or the use of such
premises is discontinued for tarelve consecutive months, any subseauent
use of tl�e obstruction, structure, on premises shall comply, in all
respects, tivith the provisions of ihis district, including, but not
limited to, i:he obtainirg of all required permits and variances,
5. If any non-conforming olstruction or structure is destroyed or
damaged Uy any means, including f7oods, to the extent that the cost of
repair�ing or restorirg such descritction or damage would be 50 percent
or more of its assessed value, then it shall not be reconstructed
except in full compliance, in all respects, Evith Lhe provisions of this
district, inc1uding, but not limited to, the obtaining of all required
permits and variances.
6. The preservation district requlatiuns shall in no 4�ray prohihit
routine maintenance of existing properties. Rouiine maintenance is
considcred to be the �vork properCy owners could do pr?vious to the
adoption of this district ivithout first obtaining a building permit
-9-
r
2os:sia� 38
0-1 DISTRIf.T
REGIJI_A710t�S �-
Cftf_EK nND
RIVER
PR[SE2UATION
DIS7RICT
EXISTING NON-
CONFORMING
USES
2Q5,3109 Subdivisions
1. No land shall be subdivitled which is held unsuitable by the City of
(ridley for reason of flooding, inadeauate drainage, water suQply or
sewage treatment facilities.
2; A11 lots within the flood plain di;tricts shall eonCain a building
site at or above the Regulatoi�y Fiood Protection Elevation.
39
205.3110
0-1 DISTRICT
REGULATIONS -
CRE[K AND
R3VER
PRESERVA7ION
DISTRICT
3. A71 subdivisions shall have water an;1 sewage disposal facilities SUEDIVtSIONS
that comply witli the provisions of this Ordinance and have road access
both to the subdivision and to the individual L�uilding sites no lotver
than two feet bel`oti�� the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation.
4. 3n the General Flood Plain District, applicants shall,provide the
information required in Section 205.3106 of this Ordinance. The City
shall evaluate the subdivision in accordance with proeedures established
in Section 205.3106_;and 205.3107 of this Ordinance.
205.3110. Mobile,Homes and Mobile Home Parks
1. New mobile home parks and expansions to existing mabile home parks
shrll be subjecf`to the provisions placed on subdivisions by Section
'l_C5.3109 of this Ordinance.
2. Nobile homes in existing mobi1e home parks that are located in flood
plain disiricts are nonconforming uses and may be replaced only if in
conrnliance with the fiollo�+ing conditions:
R, The mobile home lies in the Flood Fringe District.
B. Tl�e mobtle home is anchored with tiedowns that comply with
reauirements of Min�esota Regulations MoN 450.
C. The mobile home owner or renter is notified ihat the moLile home
site lies in the flood plain and may be subject to flooding.
D. The mobile home park ptivner develops a flood emergency plan
consistent with the time available after a flood warning. The plan
shall be filed witti and approved L�y the City.
3. Individual mobile homes not located in mobile home parks may be.
permitted if allot+ed by other applicable ordinances and if they coinply
wiih the provisions of Section 205.3104, 4G of ihis Or-dinance.
-10-
{�r0B1LE HOMES
AND Pi06ILE
HOh1E PARKS
�
205.?111. PuL�lic Nuisance: Penalty
1. Any p�rson who violates any pravisions of this rlistrict, or• fails
to com�ly viitf� any of its ter�ns or renuircieents shall 1>e g�ilty of a
misdeanieanor punishable by a fine of not more Lhan �300 or imprisoned
for not more than 90 days, or both, and in addition shall pay all
costs of prosecutiun and expenses iiivolvc-d in the case. Eact� day such
violation continues shall be considered a separate offence.
2. Every obstruction or use placed or maintained in the Preservation
Uistrict in violation of this ordinance is he•reby declared to be a public.
nuisance and creation thereof may be enjoined a�d the mainte�ance thereof
abated by apQropriate judicial action.
3. Nothing herein conCained shall prevent the City from taking such
other lawful action as is necessary to prevent, rernedy or remove any
violation.
205.3112 Amendments
1. �'The Preservation�District elevations on the Profile may be changed
by amendment to this disi:rict, and such change, when made, shall be
shown on the Profile. If future conditions make it necessary to
re-evaluate the:district boundaries because of increased or flooding
poter.tial which �aould affect the health, safety and general v+elfare of
the citizens, the elevat�ion Gvill be corrected by tS�e Council by
amendment to this district.
2. Ali amendn�ents shall be subnitted to the appropriate Watershed
Cistricts and the Commissioner, and shall bz.approved by the Com-
missioner prior to adoption by the Council.. ;
205.3113 Interpretation
In interpreting and applying the provisions of this disi:rict, they
shall be held to be the minimi�m requir•ements for the promotion of the
pu�?lic hea7th, safety, ard general tivelfat-e. It is not the intention of
this Preservation District t� interfere tit�ith, abrogate or annul any
covenant or other agreement betti4een parties, nor the provisions of any
ordinance of the City; provided, hoiaever, where this Preservation
District imposes a greater restriction upen the use or improvement of
any premises than those imposed or required by other statutes,
ordinances, rules, regulations or permits of the City, State, or
appropriaie Watershed District, or by covenants or a9reements, the .
provisions of this Preservation District shall guvern.
_)�_
205.3113 ��
0-1 DISTRICT
RCC�ULAT 3UPIS
CRCEK AiVD
f2IV[R
PRESERVATION
DISTRICT
MJSD�AMEANOR:
PU6l.IC
NUISANCE:
AMENDMENTS
INTFRPRETAT.tON
CITY OF FRIULEY
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MEETING � �
JANUARY 8, 1981
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Commers called the January 8, 1981, Housing & Redeve]opment Authority
meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Larry Commers, Russell Houck, Elmars Prieditis
Members Absent
Other� Present:
Carolyn Svendsen, Duane Prairie
Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 11, 1980, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMEN7 AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTION�BY MR.�HOUCK, SfiCONDED BY MR. PRZEDITIS, TO RPPROVE THE DEC. 12� 1980,
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRZTTEN. � �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER50N COMMERS DECL1lRED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Commers stated that in last month's minutes, it was stated that the HRA
would be receiving monthly profit and loss statements.
Mr. Boardman stated that besides a monthly profit and loss statement, they will
be providing the HRA with a monthly budget report. They are presently two
months behind on the budget reports. At the February meeting, they should be
able to give the HRA the budget reports through January.
1. CENTER CITY PROJECT
A. Appraiser Information
Mr. Commers stated the HRA has received a report re7ative to 5-6
appraisers, together with some background information, qualifications,
etc.
Mr. Boardman stated the only action needed by the HRA is to receive
this information. At this time, the City is not in a position to
move ahead on appraisals. He thounht they were probably looking at
February or sometime when Jerry Remmen has more conclusive evidence
that he is ready to move ahead. However, Mr. Boardman did want to get
ahold of some of these appraisers.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 8, 1981 PAGE 2
Mr. Boardman stated he had contacted Don Nennessey of the Minneapolis
HRA. Mr. Hennessey has been with the Minneapolis HRA for some time
and is theFead of the Real Estate Department. Mr. Hennessey gave him
a list of appraisers that the Minneapolis HRA uses and the types of
things Mr.. Hennessey felt these appraisers were excellent for.
Mr. Boardman stated he had also contacted the St. Louis Park HRA
Director, and he had given Mr. Boardman a list of appraisers, of
which Patchin Appraisals, Inc., was the top recommendation.
Mr. Boardman stated he contacted a17 five of the top appraisers in
Group I. He got responses from all of them except Bob Hillstrom.
He stated he had also contacted sane of the agencies who work with
these appraisers, and all of the agencies were satisfied with these
people.
Mr. Boardman stated he did not know how the HRA wanted to handle
appraisals. He thought when the do go out for appraisais, they could
do either one of two things: (1� They can select one of these people
and hire them as a consultant; or (2) They can request prices from 3-5
of them and select one Lhat way.
Mrr Commers declared ihe packet of information on appraisers received
into the record.
Mr. Commers stated he would 7ike Mr. Boardman to check with the
Columbia Heights HRA to see if they have used any appraisers,
6. Update on Developer Proqress
Mr. Commers stated the HRA has a copy of a letter from Jerry Remmen of
Contract Development Corporation dated Jan. 5, 1981, in which
Mr. Re�nen indicates they are now going ahead with the leasing efforts,
but there has been some delay because of the ho7idays. At the same
time, they are in the process of trying to confirm some of their
financing.
Mr. Boardman stated he is in contact with Mr. Remmen on a weekly basis.
Mr. Commers declared the letter from Mr. Remmen dated Jan. 5, 1981,
received into the record.
C. Receive Letter from Standard Oil Dated December 16, 1980
Mr. Commers stated this was a letter from Timothy Hearshman,
Attorney - Real Estate, of Standard Oil, indicating they would be
willing to accept the City's offer_of $82,000 cash for the Standard
Oii site with closing contemplated for March i5, 1481.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING. JANUARY 8, 1981 PAGE 3
Mr. Boardman stated the next step is the purchase agreement. The
HRA has given him �e authority to execute that agreement, and he
will be moving ahead with this.
Mr. Commers stated that if any further approva] is needed by the HRA,
he asked that the purchase agreement be ready for the HRA's February
meeting. They can review it and give final approval to have it
executed and presented to Standard Oil at that time.
Mr. Boardman stated that was fine with fiim.
2. CABLE TV:
Mr. Boardman stated he had shown some slides and boards at the last HRA meeting
that were also presented to U�e Rotary Club. These slides and boards would also
be used for the cable TV program. He stated Staff was ready to setect a date
if the HRA was ready. He would like to see a date selected in mid-February.
Mr. Commers suggested that Mr. Boardman and Ms. Svendsen get together in order
to try to select a date before the HRp's February meeiing. This should then
be put on the agenda, and maybe the HRA can spend 15-20 minutes going over what
they would like to do for the program.
Mr. Boardman stated he would contact Ms. Svendsen.
3. OTNER BUSINESS:
A. H.R.A. Investments - Memo from Sid Inman dated Jan. 7, 1981
� Mr. Commers stated the HRA has received a memo from Mr. Inman relating
to their proposed tax increment funds that have been invested.
Mr. Snman explained the principal amount of $82,968.44 and the interest
the HRA has earned since Oct. 23, 1980, on that amount which totals
$1,476.02.
Mr. Commers stated that Mr. Inman has recommended that the HRA stay
with short term investments for the next couple of weeks to see what
happens with the market.
Mr. Commers stated he noticed in Mr. Inman's discussion at the
Dec. 11, 1980, HRA meeting, Mr. Inman had talked about comingling the
HRA money with the City's money and had made the statement that it was
to the HRA's advantage to do this. Assuming it is to the HRA's
advantage to do this, Mr. Commers stated he would like some clarifi-
cation that there is no legal problem in doing this, because the HRA
and the City are, in fact, separate entities. He felt they should ask
the City Counsel to write a letter to the HRA stating there is no
problem.
�
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING JANUARY 8 1981 RAGE 4
Mr. Boardman stated he would check on'this with Mr. Herrick, the City
Attorney.
Mr. Commers stated the HRA really appreciated the kind of report and
the format provided by Mr. Inman. It is very helpfuT to the HRA.
Mr. Correners declared the memo from Mr. Inman dated Jan. 7, 1981, on
HRA Investments received into the record.
B. Check Register
Mr. Boardman stated the check of $29,000 listed on the check register
has already been deposited, based on a previous resolution.
Mr. Commers declared the check register as presented accepted by the
HRA. _
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairperson Commers declared the January 8, 1981, Housing & Redevelopment
Authority meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m:
Respectfully sub�ted,
��J,r'Y�x.f � �-st
Lyn Saba `
Recording Secretary
City of Fridlex
APPEALS COHASISSION MEETING -�ANUARY 13 1981 Pa e�l
CAIS.�TO ORDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel called the Appeals Cotmaission meeting of January 13, 1981
to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Virginia Schnabel, Dick Kemper, Alex Barna, Jim Plemel,
Patricia Gabel
Others�Present: Darrell Clark, Chief Building Official
APPROVE APPEALS COMMTSSION MINUTES• NOVEMHER 25 1980
MDTION by Mr, Plemel, seconded by Mr. Kemper, to approve the Appeals C�ission
minutes of November 25, 1980 as written. WON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE,
CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARF.D TFiF MOTION CARRIED UNRNIMOUSLY.
l.
�DUCE-THE SIDE YARp SETBACK FOR AN A
FEET TO. 1.S FEET, TO ALLOhT AN S' BY
K.'ATF:D nN Tl1T dQ nrmr�mn�c c.ro..,.,-r.-
STREET N.E, fRequest by
� Minnesota 55432).
FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO
RAGE FROM 2'HE � REQLiIRED
ION TO AN EXISTiNG GARAGE
� THE SAME BEING 5805
, 5805 Arthur Stxeet N.E.
Mr. Gordon Backlund, 5805 Arthuz Street N.E., and Mr. Jacob Wiens, 5809 Arthur
Street N.E., was gresent.
MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr, Kemper, to open the public hearing. UPON
A VOICE VpTE, AI,I, ppTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
OPEN AT ?;35 P.M.
Chairwoman 5chnabel read the Staff Report:
AUP�tItIIG't'!<A1'IViS 51T.I'I' kli)'(jRi
SIIOS�Arthur SLrcet N,1R,
n. r>ur+�,1c a�r�r2.rosr sLUV�:�� n�r ai>�uitei::u�a�r:
uccl•ion 205.053, �D. ;Iq, req�iires Yh� Sicl�, v,ir.d adioi.p,i�a_an at-f-,rh��a
�c arlrye t:o be nc�t- leGS than 5£cet_.
Public purYose scrved bf tl�is requirement is to flro��idc snace be;,,�een
individual st:r.uctures .i:o redq�� ���lfl<�_ r�tion �f�firc tQ e�r.ov}�1g��es� t� t1,�
x'ear yard far emerqencics, and to lvni.t the,condition nf. r.r.oiadinq in a
resi.dmit.ial nciqhbnrl:ood, . �' � . �
R��7
AkPEI�I,S C�MMISSION M�'ETTNG — Januar�l3., 1981 Pa�e 2__
i3. 6'Pi1Ti;0 FIARDSii,T.P:
.. °. Thc var:i.anre re:ctuest: i�o f'o;_,.:�_!..'=Y":l^�'��`!.;t1SAL_itt'_� C)'j tn hn �,�l;Tt.uq�_
the nnr.ith S.icic or t:r.o nrQ�;�?�lt r� � F, � ,: rl, '+ iq�_.yna;rt+ i�n n__ '�t�cn n,��
. -:.(..�'..i11 __��:.:�_J..lY..
L'wo ezrs,and bont i.n:;i.de a qz;r�+qe, I havc� t�,aft my car;hr.�^,ken into while i.t was _
in the drivesi.iy. 7 also misl� ;:o kr.•n the nei.yha�rhoo3 as neat a:; possible by
having tlle cars and boat out of: si�?'it," �
C. RC14I2:ISTRFT.N_r, STF.i�'P rZL'VIE67: - � � �
7`he Iot to the nortYi of ��e pc•titioner.s ic 1?1 f.eet in width. The structures
on this adjar_ent ].ot are located L-o th� north. St appea.r.. then that the
petit:ioner might pn::chase tiie 3.5 fect from the neighbor and if that was dor.e,
then no vax-iance �,�ould he necess3ry _
The ot'�er alternati;�e wbu.ld be to place a�all detached structure in the rear
y�xd for i,he. boat.
If .Ehe'noard app•�ovcs this r.e:niest, tt.e north wall of ihe new addition must be
construc;ted tn a f�.r.e r.esi.st.�n e. of.�c�� h�tt•- �n�e �i-i�z_tj�ovc�rl_�� ,__a-,n .,f t�,_
addition would iiave to be �:omeUiiag lc�> lhan 13 inches so that the structure
would be co,tfinr:i t.� t_}If= t�y,et:S.t.io�te.r;�..ro>>erF.y. � �
The Coamnission members 7ooked at an aerial view and photograph of the property,
Chaircaoman Schnahel stated that she did not think a good alternative was the
detached structure and :?x. Backlund said it would have to be built up a bit
and thexe would be a drainage problem with a detached structure. Mrs. Gabel
asked how much distance there is between the two structures and Mr. Wiens said
he thought it oras about 70 feet. Mr. Clark stated that Mr. Wiens has enough
land to sell � an 80 foot buildable site. Ct�airwoman Schnable askzd Mr. Wiens
about selling additional land. Mr. Wiens stated that he would rather Mr. Backlw:3
buil@ up to the lot line than sell any additional la�d. He said he thought about
selling at one time but cfianged his mind. Chairwoman Schnabel stated that, if
the approval is granted, it would have to be a fire wall with no windows or doors
and the overhang contained within the property. Mr. Backlund stated that there
is not a large overhang on the house and the siding of the addition would be the
same as the house siding. MOTION by Mr. Pl�mel, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to
close the public hearing. UPGN A VOICE VOTE, AliL VOTING AYE, CHAIRtvUMAN SCfiPtABEL
AECIARED THE PDBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:49 P.bi.
N;OTION by Mr, Kemper, seconded by Mr, Barna, to approve the variance request to
reduce the side yard setback for an attached garage from the required 5 feet to
1.5 feet, to allow an 8' by 20' addition to an existinq garage, located on
Lot 99, Auditor's Subdivisi.on No. 92, the same being 5£305 Arthur Street N.E.,
Fridley, Minnesota 55432, witlx the stipulation that the north wall be constructed
to a fire resistance oi one iiour with nn windaws or doors and the overhang to be
containe3 within the property,. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIAIG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN �
SCHNABEL DECLAf2LD THE I:OTION C1IRRIED UNANIN,OUSLY.
_.,@,��.
APPEALS COMMZSSION MEETING - Januarv 13 1981 � Page. 3
Z.
10 FEET TO 5 FEET
55432).
T� CkIPiPTEK LU7� UY'. '1'tib..;cn�.uucz i.iaa �.�
F. LIVING SIDE-OF THE HOUSE�FROM� THE
�A 24 FOOT BY 28�FOOT ADDITION TO AN
LGCK 1, OAK CRt�.EK ADDITION, THE SAME
t by Patricic Doty, 116 Logan Parkway
Gi�]
N.E.,
Mr. Patzick Doty, 116 Logan Pazkway N.E. and MY. Don Hal:l, 70 Logan Parkway N.E „
was present.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel to open the public heaiing. UPON A
�ipICE upTE, ALL VOTING�AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE P�LIC HEARING OPEN
AT 8:01 P.A1.
qiairwoinan Schnabel xead the Staff Report:
hllI1It7ISTL'A1'1VIi S'I'API•' [t1P012'P
11G Lo9an Par];way i7.E.
A. PUI;LIC PqP,PUSEi ;fil!VY:D �IIY It(i;�UIR.7:E1171T:
Section 205.053, �F3, r��uire; a side �ard of not less than, 10 feet that
adjoins livii� ax'ca.
Public puzpose served by this requirement is to maintai.n a minimum of 20 feet-
between living areas in adjacent structures anQ 15 £eet between yara9es and
livirx� areas in adjacenL- structur.es to r.educe exposure to conLlagraY.i.on of fire,
It is also to allo4r for ae,thetically pleasi.nq open areas arouad residential
shxuctures. � � � � ' �
B. � STATEU FW2DSHTP: . � � . �
" We need the variance to line up the addit.ion with the existis�g structure.
if we moved the addition over, our door tvonld lead into thc �COrage rocr,n rather
tha�i L-he f3nily room. If the addition e:as 10 feet firom tlie lot line, it would
make the bedroom addition 7 tn S f.eet wide. We don't want to c�ver any er.istinq
bed.*.oam windows,"
C. 74Di�tINTSTi271T7VE ST1FF SL:UiEN: . �
The sotrtlz portior. o£ tlie }?rer�osed addition:.ill he dpproximately S feet away
frrnn tlte detached gara9c on tlic <.ciioinii�q J.ot addressecl as 100 Logan Farkway.
The t3ui2�4ir.g Code.requi.res a mi.nim�:m of F, feet. If th� Lk�ard should rrcor,enend
aP,s-oval of this reqiiest, thc s�.�Pf ]ias ��o .r.econvnended �t3pul.at5.oiis to oifcr.
�-: ,
APPEAL; COMMISSTON�.1�IEETING - Januazy 13, 1981 Page 4
The Commission �nnmhers looked at an aerial view and a photograph of the property.
Chaixwoman Schn�bel sL-ated she was not sure exactly what the hardship was and
t4r. Doty stated that theg are expecting azxother, child in the family and need m�re
fami:ly room, anoth.er bet'.zoom and would like tU put in another bath. Chairwoman
Schnabel expressed concer.n over any angling of the addition which would bring it
closer to the garage next door. Mr. Clark said he r.ieasured between the garages
and there*aould be 8 fest between the. two structures. C?�airwom Schnabel asked
about frre siYuati.ona an�l b1r. C1ark said there are no problems as far as the
building code is concerned and there arc no openings on the side of tha neighbors
garage. Chaixwoican SchnabEl a:;ked I�Lr. Doty if he has talked to his neighbors
and if he would be 3oing'the work himself, 2�!r. Doty said he has spoken to his
neighhors, told them of the dimensions, and there is not a problem. He further
said Iie will be doing the'work'himself. Mr. Hall, a neighbor from across the
street, said he does not have any objections to what Mr. Doty is doing but he has
objections to what neighbors along side of him may be doing. Mr. Clark said thzy
haven'£ heard angthinq from those neighbors and Chainaoman Schnabel iniormed him
that if his neighbors fle�ide to do something he will have a chance to object at
that meeting. Mr. Barna f,elt that a possi.bility exists for Mr. Doty to do what he
wants without having a variance and still leaving hini with his bedroom windows.
He further stated thac he was uncomfortable with the Iiving area that close to
the garage and the one bedroom so far away from the other bedx'ooms. Chairworuan
Schnabel said that tl-.ey cannot base a decisipn on that, they are just dealing with
iootage, Mr, Doty said the garage is strictly sealed off. MOTION hy t�1rs. Gabel,
secondad by.Mr. Barna to close�the public hearing. UPON A VOICE �TOTE, ALL VOTIYG
AYE� CHAIR4lTOMAN SCHNABEL DEC7�4RED THE PUBLIC�HEARING CLOSE'D AT 8:32 P.M.
S30TION by Mrs. GaUel, seconded by 24r. P1e.�nel, to approve the variance rec?uest to
reduce thE side yar.d on'the living side o£ the house from the required 10 feet to
5 feet to a11aw a 24 foot by 28 foot addi.tion fo an existii.g house l�ca.ted on
Lot 24, Block 1, Oak Creek Addition, the same being 216 Logan Parkway N.E., Fridley,
Minnesota 55432, with the stipulation that there be a fire r�ail on the east side,
a lire door, aad no win8ows o� the east side of the house. UPUN A VOICE 40TE,
AT•T• VOiING AYE, CHP.IRYiG;7AN SCHNABEL. DECLAREI) THE M(YPION CARP.ZED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJ'C7tTRNhiEt7T:
M4TION ry Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to adjourn. tJPON A VOICE VOTE, pT•T•
VOISNG AYF., Cc3ATFWOMAN SCHNAT3F.L� DECI.ARID THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETIUG Or^ �
JAS�IL�FT2Y 13, 1982 AATQUP..PIEll AT 8:43 P,N'. �
Raspecttully submitted,
�� %/cG,�p..t�C'-a.'J
L'eb Ni2nik
Recordi.ng Secretary
��
City of Fridley
Planninq Gof�nlission
ZOA #8Q=06
The undersigned neighbors of the property being considered for rezoning
by W.G. Doty and Gary A. Wellner (generally south of Mississippi Street
and east of the Burlington Northern right of way) appeal to the
Planning Commission to reject consideration of rezoning this property
from M-1 to either R-3 or R-2.
We �ppose multiplefamily housing in this instance and prefer to leave
the property zoned M-1 because:
(1) FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION;
i2)
i��)
Any incremental profits
developers under R-3 or
offset by the reduction
our homes. With the nu
Satellite Lane and the
adjoining railroad, any
housing would impose an
exposure.
which might have accrued to the
R-2 we feel would be directly
in the future resale values on
merous apartment units on
unusual liabi7ity of our
addiiionat mu7tiple family
unreasonable further financial
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY;
Our neighborhood is comprised of sinqle-fami#y homes
which benefit from the pride involved in owner-occupied
residences. The high probability of the proposed zoning
creating rental units subject to the typical negatives
generated by renter (rather tharr owner3) would be highly
incompatible with our current neighborhood.
TRAFEIC;
Satel9ite Lane is already a prab1em because it is narrow
and along with Starlite Blvd. is overburdened with traffic.
Seven duplexes (R-2) is equivalent to 14 living units.
If you assume 1 1J2 cars per living unit, the incremental
21 vehicles creates at least 10 vehicles more than would
be realized by seven single-family homes for example.
With many children in our neighborhaod, we fear the
consequences of the additional traffic.
These three major considerations are sufficient, in our opinion, to
reject the rezoning request from M-1 to either R-3 or R-2 and we respect-
fully request the denial.
Fe6ruary 2nd, 1981
He110 Neighbor:
We need your help to stop the vacant property near our homes from
being rezoned to multiple family housing.
Our concerns are
(1) The effect on the future resale value
of our homes;
(2) Traffic, with seven double bungalows meaning
10 cars over what single family homes would
add; and
(3j Neighborhood compatability, we have enough
apartme�ts.
You can show your support by attending the Planning Commission hearing:
Wednesday, February 4th
7:30 PM
City of Fridley
Council Chambers (City Hall)
At the first hearing, eighteen neighbors showed up to speak against
the rezoning. We need at least that many and perhaps more to attend
this second and hopefully last meeting.
If you have any questions call Michael Larson at 571-4956 or 370-8654 (days)
or Judy Kidder at 574-0637.
We sure would appreciate your suppart.
Michael & Mar,ijane Larson
Judy &�Bil� Kidder
Jerry &:Linda Severt
Ralph & Donna Messer
Charlie & Barb Aspenson
Sincerely,
�/�"'�i/��`%���
6390 Starlite Blvd
6360 Starlite Blvd
100 Satellite Lane
114 Satellite Lane
6370 Starlite B1Gd
ZOA #80-06
Neighbors requesting the rejection of rezoning to R-2 or R-3 are:
name address phone
t 3 � i '
-�'%�wil �%
1�/.:; r'
i �; r
I
�.vh con�at�
.__. _..L � ;cc.i�
.
, �
� ; - � . .,.
____.__—� -----___.^.,.,F35S15��; �f—�--- Si.
; ".iz ,
'lll .- a .f—'i`';:-:—''-'=^-_ -i ,� i'
'—' ) "a �`:v
1.�_}
{ �'_� F' W t �� �.;
e!J I s�� i ti.:' r
ry��'yj :ya;�r�,�
cr��j'1�t'J �"I
;rl.
� - SatallJte �z,,,�
. Afn"'tw�,�3
� s ry.,
. , -,., � ��.
� ,, - ., �....
� ,
... . f� j _ tr a ..
. `
i
L. 'yyy ,"% � /I I �
,+ f'��� . I .
. SYLVAN � LA�Jt
� � �mmr, �{ .. ^ ;
�{ � , ,, ;;
> ��� :,r^ , �T . \ .'v
t J H . --ij � S I`
� �
`� � a • f � � � r h i . p�' l �I
: .-
) � i: 4 .� ,�� \ ,,
�h5. .. . . ` I. .a I �:�5. K.'� .
r -
�.� . r �
,, » �a � � a �
�i ' '- --^--"--- :, Gy' � i,
� p f . � �i d �{ � ' iti h%\ � i:5 ^�' .e�'" �nd� � 'k'y
O � ` --,-�-;�. ,r .��. '•'`1 Y0 ;: - ^• ; o� I
,` ' � ,�� ��� � , '� �' �"T '
:i rt : r; ��.t W - e=-- - \ �.
r ,
...I ��.
� �l,.�r .
� �� M
��zv:s� rr
. � � � < -s. ,
` jR� �:, r,;r— � :: �j �• � z s �
d�ry� . . �1LY � `. `� ' t �II\Z.� + .. . ���
»R, . IJ ay � !
� , ; �-` ��,r� c�,
��'�' L, . �` i �, ., ,: �"-
. . .��l���i �L�J.���{�'.�
v j� . . L � . .. V � ' '"'�^�`�
�r z_� 1
. �8��i�'
� �'�' ��`� z_ �
�.f . ,vd��,s� : �zt^1 ;
k \•
� �.�
; ?��;
�( ;
`� ',r
�j./�I
�',
�
'i
� f
)
i .,
, �� �z
, _ Pz
� �� .��
��` � �.� � �q �:v ��
4'i . '1 � � s_� cJ
� -T+�
� ��'•�% -�. .,
- iz
oz
_� 1
L•
9n %��
, �/�ei Z 6 b s J� t 8 6 oI �•
. ♦ " _ ' ' ' _ _ _ _
���Gma�
h11 /.r�r uw �
�; w' _... _..
' ,T iriY.i,,.rf..r.�,T•r/n .
. Q/. F e'r.J`i^ -.:'� _'
•15 �--�-}c�{�SlSS{b'`ti��:
�r���'_'�..--=�
ii3Nii0� b/1`3 .
d •t . .
;� ' � '� `' J.dM
� �
� � �
�
r. . � � �� �% �
. � �
.. � yiy`A O. i . � . S/ � ` �
�r
. Z' � °•`� � . . � ,t/ .
i
\r° �� .. �. � � . t!� � :
�`' 1 •�
�.�.��: ,,
� ,, o;
w ,�
{y �.�6
{�/ � ' � . ,. I
" a
i, � � I
Ir 9 '
� i _._ � s i
i�ai -- y
I . ia� . _ -,. £ :�.
,ri °' . =:a � � �
s„ z � ���
. y.�? c _. _._ . _ . .
—.3'-- ` -.�.. �1
'""': �.��? . . �
I
�
,
<
�
� �
,
Hello Neighbor:
February 2nd, 1981
We need your help to stop the vacant property near our homes from
being rezoned to multiple family housing.
Our concerns are
(1) The effect on the future resale value
of our homes;
(2} Traffic, with seven double bungalows meaning
10 cars over what single family homes would
add; and
(3) Neighborhood compatability, we have enough
apartments.
You can show your support by attending the Planning Commission hearing:
Wednesday, February 4th
7:30 PM
City of Fridley
Council Chambers (City Hall)
At the first hearing, eighteen neighbors showed up to speak against
the rezoning. We need at least that many and perhaps more to attend
this second and hopefully last meeting.
If you have any questions call Michael Larson at 571-4956 or 370-8654 {days)
or Judy Kidder at 574-0637.
We sure would appreciate your support.
Michael & Marijane Larson
�udy & Bill Kidder
Jerry & Linda Severt
Ralph & Donna Messer
Charlie & Barb Aspenson
Sincerely,
r�����
6390 Starlite Blvd
6360 Starlite Blvd
100 Satellite Lane
114 Satellite Lane
6370 Starlite Blvd
��
z
J
'
.S
i C
I %
y .%,l
� �
F.V4 COil�IER
—...'--°•--.,�—.',' (_`—_ jEC.l�i
�
�� ., ! . . �' "'�t�r�tt`�� l�'r', ^ p°-
_ _ _,
_. �. . _ I:Ii.7��i..:Jli i_ _ . " �J �.
:i� . , .,_... .. .
..;'!' 'r'�..'— _..__:.�..._'_.� '.�.V.,;� . .{._
� __ � .•
: � � � v ° 7 c J 9 J / � , `
i �
j; .. � � - _..
� i �� � �r . �t jl.� ... � � o! �'i
��� ; �) S �.� 1
I , ,
� � �,
/ i I .: � : � . 5a . _ I r.i; � � r 1 `� �e t �.-0.� 1
I `. �I' `: � . �.' i ! , ..: i � i .,- A
I � -� � � .. - . _ �
,�. i �
� .y . �'.J � I I � _.� .
! �: 1', � � � � � � �
'�, •:' __�.. _-�---
,�
� ,.,
' . �i 4--' � ��.. r.
i. 4. "..
i� :
� ii �,;
�> ('`
.:t ', I
r,. ` '
irr ,_ t : j
�.�- �
.!�r ;
-- .;, _-��
���� 3 /
/.�ti�-.. 1i� �
1'l;:ii; __. � • `
�•i ' � i
I
A
A
� �r"'f
�
I .
�, i
y
N
52Telfi{e Lh,e
Ar2vt��„{s
LUTE I�q�yE
,
�
� .'�' n E ;i - . . � � :. .
i' 1
�� , �
-.__..z_.._...... aQ , � :�
. ✓ . � `' ,'i , .
i�
�–.._::_.. � , �� ,
-, , �
� ,; i
, �' ..
,;'.. .
; ; •3 � �YLVAI� � IANr
� - r -- - ,
---_'..__ � ' •� '
y I.
-�'!
i
n.'
° City of fridley
���
Planning Commission
� ZOA #80-06
The undersigned neighbors of the property being considered for rezoning
by W.G. Doty and Gary A. Wellner (generally south of Mississippi Street
and east of the Burlington Northern right of way) appeal to the
Planning Commission to reject consideration of rezoning this property
from M-1 to either R-3 or R-2:
We oppose multiplefamily housing in this instance and prefer to leave
the property zoned M-1 because:
(1) FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION;
Any incremental profits which might have accrued to the
developers under R-3 or R-2 we feel would be directly
offset by the reduction in the future resale values on
our homes. With the numerous apartment units on
Satellite Lane and the unusual liability of our
adjoining railroad, any additional multiple family
housing would impose an unreasonable further financial
exposure.
(2) NEIGHSORHOOD COMPATISILITY;
Our neighborhood is comprised of single-family homes
which benefit from the pride involved in owner-occupied
residences. The hi9h probability of the proposed zoning
creating rental units subject to the typical negatives
generated by renter (rather than owners) would be highly
incompatible.with our current neighborhood.
(�) TRAFFIC;
Satellite Lane is already a problem because it is narrow
and along with Starlite Blvd. is overburdened with traffic.
Seven duplexes (R-2) is equivalent to 14 living units.
If you assume 1 1/2 cars per living unit, the incremental
21 vehicles creates at least 10 vehicles more than would
be realized by seven single-family homes for example.
With many children in our neighborhood, we fear the
consequences of the additional traffic.
These three major considerations are sufficient, in our opinion, to
reject the rezoning request from M-1 to either R-3 or R-2 and we respect-
fully request the denial.
P�
r�
��
�
CALL TO ORDER:
� �
r y.
+r.-r;�. :+.^^"��*.� Y
= CITY OF FRIDLEY'�`
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING-, JANUARY 21, 1981
Chairman Harris called the January 21, 1981, Planning Commission meeting to
order at 7:31 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present
Mert�ers Absent
Mr. Harris, Ms. 5chnabel, Ms. Modig (for Mr. Oquist),
Ms. Hughes, Mr. Wharton
Mr. Treuenfels, Mr. Svanda
Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
Bill Deblon, Associate Planner
Rick Martin, 5275 Edina Ind. Blvd.
Rob Taylor, 5275 Edina Ind. Blvd.
Darrell Anderson, 15 S. 5th St., Minneapolis
W. G. Doty, 175 Logan Parkway N.E.
Gary Wellner, 6221 Sunrise Drive N.E.
See attached list
APPROVAL OF JANUARY 7, 1981, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. SCXNABEL, SECONDED BY MS. MODIG� TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 7, 1982,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE5.
Mr. Harris indicated that on page 8, second paragraph from the bottom, the
words, "walk-in freight", shoutd be deleted.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MINUTES
RPPROVSD AS AMENDSD.
1. CONTINUED: DISCUSSION ON REZONING REQUEST ZOA #80-05, BY WINFIELD
b�€LOPFfEN�S,—lIf C—.—�o rezone ot 2, except t e Nort erly 5— fe�et, and
ots 3, , 5 an inclusive, Block 7, Paco Industrial Park, from C-2
(general business areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas) to allow the
construction of a 98,000 square foot building to be used for office and
office warehouse, light manufacturing and service, the same being
7151-7251 Coimnerce Circle East.
Public Hearing closed.
MOTION BY MS. SCHNRBEL� SfiCONDED BY MS. HUGHES� TO Rb'OPEN 2HE PUBLIC
HEARING ON ZOA fj80-OS BY WINFIELD DEVEIAPMENTS� INC.
UPCJN A VOICE VOTfi� ALL VOTING AYE, CHRIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING REOPENED AT 7:35 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. JANUARY 21, 1
Mr. Boardman stated he had met with Winfield Developments, Inc. Ne stated
they have drawn up a new development as suggested by the Planning Commission
at their last meeting. They have split the building, They are proposing that
the building on the north remain commercial zoning, and the building on the
south go to M-1 industrial. There are 40 feet between the entrances of the
two buildings, and 50 feet between the part of the building that go in.
Mr. Boardman stated that Mr. Gerald Paschke, one of the neighbors who objected
to the development, has written a]etter to Mr. Harris, Chairman of the
Planning Commission. One of the conditions Mr. Paschke would like to see is
that the property on the north end, Lots 2 and 3, remain co�nnercial, and the
three lots to the south, Lots 4, 5, and 6, be zoned industrial for development.
Mr. Boardman stated that Mr. Anderson, architect for Winfield Developments,
Inc., was in the audience and would answer any questions.
Mr. Darrell Anderson stated he thought one of the primary reasons the proposal
was objectionab}e was the overall length of the project. They have now come
back and ha��e demonstrated they can split the building. They have lost some
square fo6tage. They now have 94,000 sq. ft. Their intention is still to have
the similarly 1ow profile structure.
Mr. Anderson stated there was soMe concern at the last meeting about the docks
facing south towards the new community park. They haue redone the building so
the docks face to the north.
Mr. Anderson stated another concern at the last meeting was the height of the
structure and what is going to be seen. He stated that, in traveling past
the structure, people are really only going to see the foliage and the walls,
and only about four foot maximum height of the structure is going to show behind
the walls.
Ms. Schnabel asked if Winfield Developments, Inc., was still requesting the
entire strip to be rezoned to M-1, or in view of the fact that they had changed
one building to office and the other building to light industrial, were they
splitting the zoning into two sections?
Mr. Taylor stated they have had discussions with the City Attorney and are,
hopefully, going to receive an opinion from the City 9ttorney which would
allow the office/warehouse type of use that is contemplated in both bui}dings
to be allowed in a commercial district. With that in mind, they can delete
the rezoning of the northern building and retain it as commercial. That would
preclude manufacturing type uses, but it would allow the office/warehouse.
So, in essence, they are changing their zoning.
Mr. Harris stated he had received the letter from Mr. Paschke dated Jan. 16, 1981,
in which Mr. Paschke had stated he was unable to attend this Planning Corrmission
meeting. Mr. Paschke had stated the Paco Industrial Park opened less than two
years ago, and he felt that, given reasonable time, future development will be
satisfactory to all. Mr. Paschke stated he felt the best plan would be for
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE 3
Lots 2 and 3 to remain commercial and Lots 4, 5, and 6 would make a good
industrial site which, if done properly, would not distract from the Park to
the south, the office building to the north, or the rest of the industrial
prQperty to the west. Mr. Paschke had stated rezoning the entire property
from commercial to industrial and constructing two buildings would not be
acceptable to him. In his opinion, there should be a comrriercia7 buffer between
the office building and the industrial area. He also felt the property does
not meet any of the requirements for zoning (hard�hip or need).
MOTION BY MS. XUGXb'S, SECONDED BY hII2. WHARTON, TO RECEIVE INTO THE RECORD THE
LETTER FROM GERALD W. PASCHKE DATED JAN. 16, 1481.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOSION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION BY MR. WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. HUGHES, TD CZASE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
ZOA N80-OS BY WINFIELD DEVELOPMENTS� INC.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DBCLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. �
Ms. Schnabel stated that at thelast meeting, she had stated she was opposed to
the rezoning. Since then, she has spent some time doing some background work.
She felt the Planning Commission was under a false impression at the last
meeting. She had checked to see when the property was actual7y platted and
zoned, and it was approved by the City Council in Feb. 1979. At the last
meeting, they were led to believe it was only six months ago, when it actually
has been almost two years ago. She had also checked the Planning Commission
and City Council minutes, and the basic concerns for the entire area at the
time the platting occurred were with: (1) the setback requirements, basically
along 73rd Ave. What was going to happen with the buildings built on 73rd
because of the difference in zoning across the street? and (2) the drainage
problem.
Ms. Schnabel stated there was not alot of discussion in the Planning Commission
or City Council minutes in terms of concern over this strip of land a7ong
University being commercial and M-1 and M-2.
Ms. Schnabel stated she still has the concerns she expressed at the last
Planning Commission meeting as to what happens if this land is rezoned and
these developers are unable to either secure financing or proceed as proposed.
She would like the Planning Commission to consider a stipulation, if they do
approve the rezoning, that should this proposal fal] through for any reason,
the rezoning would revert back to the original zoning.
Ms. Hughes stated she liked the split in zoning. She has had some further
thoughts about the need for office space in the Twin Cities and northern
suburbs. She had done some looking at trends, and she has changed her mind
a little bit in terms of the kind of need and desirability of that kind of
space. She stated she was not so concerned about all of the lots remaining
corronercial. She would just as soon give a straight rezoning and was comfortable
leaving it that zoning for whatever developer comes along.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE 4
Ms. Modig stated she did not like spot zoning, although this proposal seemed
like a good use for that land. She stated that if this development falls
through for any reason, she would feel more comfortable having the rezoning
revert back to commercial.
A�TION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. WHARTON, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNC2L
APPROVAL OF REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #80-05, BY WINFIELD DSVELOPMENTS�INC.� AS
PROPOSED ON THE JANUARY 21, I481, SITING DOCUMEN2'S, EXHI&ITS A AND &: TO
REZONE ONLY LOTS 4� 5, AND 6 INCLUSIVfi, BLOCK 1, PACO INDUSTRIAL PARK� FROM
C-2 (GENERAL BUSINESS ARERSJ TO M^1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREASf TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 94,000 SQUARIi FOOT BUILDING � Bfi USED FOR OFFICE RND
OFFZCE WAREHOUSE, LIGHT MANUFACTURING� AND SERVICE, TNE SRME BEING 725I-725S
COMMERCE CIRLE SAST, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE DEVELOPER WORIC WITH CITY
STAFF IN COMING UP WITH A FRIR PORTION OF ROADWAY COSTS FOR�THE CZTY ROAD
GOING INTO THE CITY PARK FACILITY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD AISO RECOMMEND
THAT SHOULD THE DEVELOPER FAIL TO DEVELOP THE�PROPO5ED SECTION AS SHOWN ON
EXfIIBITS A AND B, THE REZONING REVERT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL C-2 ZONING.
UPON A VOICfi VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE� CHAIRMAN NARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Harris stated ZOA #80-05 was recommend for approval to City Council,and
the public hearing will be held on Feb. 9, 1981.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #80-06, BY W. G. DOTY AND
G Y ELLNER: Rezone the fol owing described parce s from M-1 (light
in ustria areas) to R-3 (general multiple family dwellings): That part
of Blocks 8 and 9, Lowell Addition to Fridley Park, lying South of the
North line of Sylvan Hills Plat 8, together with the Easterly one-half of
vacated Elm Street, and that part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 7, Lowell Addition
to Fridley Park,lying Southerly of the Wester7y half of vacated street,
located South of Mississippi Street, N.E., and East of the Burlington
Northern right-of-way.
MOTION BY 1NR. WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. HUGXSS, TO OPEN THE PUHLIC H&ARING ON
ZOA #80-06 BY W.G. DbTY AND GARY R. WELLNER.
UPON A VOICE V02'E� RLL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DEC7.ARED THE PUBLIC XEARING
OPEN AT 8:23 P,M.
Mr. Boardman stated this property was located in Sylvan Hills which is a
residential area. The property is presently zoned industrial. The property
to the north is zoned M-2, built on by RAO Manufacturing which presently has
an industrial structure. The property due east is presently zoned R-3,
multiple family structures are located there. The property to the south is
all single family homes, and the property to the west is industrial (the rail-
road tracks).
PLpNNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE 5
Mr. Boardman stated that Mr. Doty and Mr. Wel7ner, the petitioners, are in
the audience. They would like to have this property rezoned to residential;
however, at this time, they do not have any plans as to what kind of residentia]
will be developed. Mr. Doty stated he wanted to maintain some flexibi7ity,
and the most flexible zoning is R-3.
Mr. Doty stated there is multiple residentia7 adjacent to this property.
He and Mr. Wellner are looking for a down zoning from light industrial (M-l)
to R-3. He stated he would be wil7ing to answer questions and would be
interested in hearing any objections.
Mr. Boardman stated they have an unusual situation here where an industrial
piece of property is locked against a residential area. There is no ot�er
access to the property unless the property was purchased by RAO Manufacturing
and utilized this property for development. Right now, the only access to
this piece of property is through the residential area; therefore, it is
something that should be considered in the discussion tonight.
Mr. Harris asked how large the parcel of land was.
Mr. Doty stated it was 88,000 sq. ft. This area would comfortably take a
34-unit building with garages. As suggested by Mr. Boardman, R-3 gives them
some flexibility, and they would rather go R-3 than industrial. He stated he
has no plans at this time. He has sane thoughts, but wil7 go with whatever
is financially feasible. If the large multiple complex is not feasible
becaase of financing, they would have the flexibility to go into quad-homes--
that kind of thing.
Mr. Harris asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak to this item.
Mr. Robert Lee, 130 Satellite Lane, stated he was involved with this, 6ecause,
being in real estate, he had worked with this piece of land for about ten years.
He stated would like to tell the Planning Commission some of the problems with
this land. Mr. Lee stated the land was owned by Erick LeVine (Carlson-Levine,
Inc.), who developed the whole area of Sylvan Hills. Mr. Lee stated he sold
most of the tand in Sylvan Hills, and one of the questions asked by the new
owhers was what was,going to be done with the land, He told them he did not
know, because it was zoned industrial. At the time, he thought that some-
time in the future, the land might have one-story rental units for storage,
which would not disturb the residential area, or single family homes.
Mr. Lee stated that Satellite Lane is a very narrow street; it is only about
60 feet wide and is one of the narrowest streets in the area. Traffic is very
bad on that corner.
Mr. Lee stated this particular land is also high--about 8 feet higher than the
street. Because of the sewage lift station, because of the sewer in the
street, and because of the multiple family units already on Satellite Lane,
people are concerned because there is already too much traffic on the street.
and they are concerned that the sewer can't handle that many:more units.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE 6
Mr. Lee stated there have been so many accidents on that street that the City
posted "no parking" signs on the street. So, there is no off-street parking.
They just can't put that many more families on that street. But, this is
Mr. Doty's and Mr. Wellner's land, and they should have the right to do some-
thing with it.
Mr. Michael Larson, 6390 Starlite Blvd., stated that the mailiqg list shown on
page 16 of the agenda excludes everyone on Starlite Blvd., of which he is one.
His home is the only home in Fridley that abuts the property, and he was not
notified on the hearing on the rezoning or on the easement that adjoins his
property. Ne stated the neighbors are concerned about traffic. Secondly,
considering the number of rental units already on Satellite Lane, they feel
that is rro re than enough for their area. He would never agree to another
apartment building on that site. Duplexes might be o.k. if they were owner-
occupied, but most of the neighbors are opposed to any rental housing on the
site. He would also like to mention that there is quite a bit of pedestrian
traffic on the easement, and that is a concern that has to be considered.
Mr. Doty stated he was a little bit puzzled, because these people bought their
properties knowing this property was zoned M-l. He and Mr. Wel7ner are looking
for a down zoning from M-1.
Mr. Wellner, 6221 Sunrise Dr. N.E., stated he was the original purchaser of the
property. He bought the land as M-1 with the intent to develop it light
industrial. He and Mr. Doty are now in partnership. They decided that because
most of the area is residential, they should go to the best use possible in
residential, which would be multiple housing. They feel this is considering
the people who live adjacent to the property. As far as �atellite Lane, they
now have a piece of property located on the corner which can go out Starlite
Blvd. As implied, the traffic does not have to go up Satellite Lane. It may
exit another way going out 61st and out to University. As Mr. Doty had stated,
these people should have been aware that this property was zoned M-1, and he
and Mr. Doty would be within their rights to put in light industrial. But,
they are considering the neighbors when they are asking for the down zonin9 to
R-3.
Ms. Judy Kidder, 6360 Starlite Blvd., stated they addressed the Planning
Commission three years ago concerning this land. It is a family neighborhood,
and there are ]ots of sma17 children. Because of the narrow street, there are
children playing in that area. There is plenty of traffic with the multiple
family units already there. There is a continual change in occupancy in a
multiple dwelling. This is a family-centered area, and it would rea7ly change
the character of the neighborhood to continue to pull ihat multiple family
dweliing situation into a fami7y section. She stated they boughi their house
four years ago, and they were not aware that this property was zoned M-1.
She did not think a lot of people knew that.
Ms. Paulette Reid, 101 Sylvan Lane, stated that the site in question was not
visi6le from her house, and she liked that. She stated it was not feasible
to do a lot of industrial things with ihe land and maybe that is the reason
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE 7
for the down zoning on the land now. She stated a lot of people were not
notified about this rezoning, but they are here and that personifies the
closeness they have in this neighborhood.
Mr. Dennis Johnson, 6336 Starlite Blvd., stated he definite7y objected to the
traffic already going up Satellite Lane. Children have to cross the street to
get to the park.
Mr. Jerry Severt, 100 Satellite Lane, stated he moved into his house in June.
He knew there were apartment buildings there, and that was fine. But he would
like to mention that he did not feel that the street could handle any more
apartments. He lives right on the corner and knows the traffic situation.
Ms. Caroline Johnson,6336 Starlite Blvd., stated there is no curb on the
street and they have had people drive up on their yard. They do not need any
more traffic.
Mr. Wellner stated he also lives in Sylvan Hills. He stated the sewer has also
backed up at his house, but it is not because of the apartments or the sewage
station. It is a much bigger prodlem. He also is somewhat concerned, and that
is why he felt R-3 was better than light industrial for that land.
Mr. Michael Larson stated he would not object to RAO Manufacturing purchasing
the land, because they have always maintained their business very well.
Ms. Judy Kidder, 6360 Starlite Blvd., stated they are also concerned about the
upkeep and appearance of apartments or multiples. They are concerned about the
appearance of the neighborhood.
Mr. Lee stated the apartment buildings across the street on Satel7ite Lane
have always maintained a very nice front, and there is no prob7em with that.
Mr. Doty stated the land is presently zoned M-1 which would allow for the
construction of a 37,000 sq. ft. facility. He had talked to some of the
neighbors, and had talked at some length with the City Planning Department
about the inherent problems. It was their thought that the mu7tiple residential
was a compromise between the single family the neighborhood would like to have
and the light industrial which it was possible to 6ui7d with the present zoning.
Ms. Schnabel stated the people should be aware that the current zoning, M-1,
allows for other things besides light industrial; for example, a cleaning
plant or laupdry, warehousing, retail sales building, offices, etc. She could
understand them not wanting a large density of traffic through the area, yet
some of these other uses might produce the same effect if developed under M-1.
It seems the property is too expensive io be developed as single family resi-
dential. It comes down to working out a compromise between light industrial
and the apartments. She did not think it was realistic to deny the rezoning
request and leave the property empty. There is an enormous demand for vacant
land in Fridley.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARV 21, 1981 PAGE 8
Mr. Larson stated his concern was that if the rezoning was passed for R-3,
it was like a blank check and they would have no right later on to deny what
goes in on that property. He asked if the consideration of the rezoning
request could be deferred until Mr. Doty and Mr. Wellner could bring in a
specific plan of what they would like to do. The main concern here is that they
are losing some element of control, whatever it might be, by taking one step
back on the rezoning.
Mr. Wellner stated that it was a nice suggestion, but there are dollars and
cents involved. The neighbors are asking he and Mr. �oty to put out additional
money to put together a plan, because they were not able to do that at this
point. Among other reasons, they do not know what monies are going to be
available.
MOTION BY MS. HUCHES, SECONDSD BY MR. WHARTON, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC KEARING ON
ZOA #80-06 EY W. G. DOTY AND GARY A. WELLNSR.
UPON A VOICE VOTfi, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
CIASED AT 9:43 P.M.
Ms. Hughes stated she has a lot of sympathy for these people's argument.
Ms. Modig stated she also has a lot of sympathy with the problem, but she would
be more comfortable with the rezoning if the petitioners had some type of plans.
MOTION BY hIR. WHARTON, SfiCONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
DENIAL OF RE80NING REQUEST ZOR #80-06 BY W. G. DOTY AND GARY A. WELLNER.
Ms. Schnabel stated she felt the neighbors had a l�t of valid arguments. She
was not convinced they would be any happier with something under M-T, but
they also did not seem to be happy with R-3. There did not seem to be any
alternatives, other than R-1, and she had not heard the petitioners expressing
the opinion that they would wish to change the rezoning to R-1. For that
reason, she would go along with denial.
Ms. Hughes stated that, rather than deny the rezoning request, she would
rather have a motion to continue the item and ask the petitioners to come
back with some plans. Denial leaves the problem of M-1, and she was convinced
that M-1 was not a good use for that site.
Chairman Harris declared a 10-minute recess at 9:55 p.m.
MOTION BY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY MS. MODIG, TO CONTINUE REZONING REQUEST,
ZOR #BO-06, BY W. G. IIOTY AND GARY A. WELLNER: REZONE THE FOZIAWING DESCRIBED
PRRCELS FROM M-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREAS) TO R-3 (GENERAL Mt7LTIPLE FAMILY
DWELLINGS): THAT PART OF BLOCKS 8 AND 9, LOWELL ADDITION TO FRIDLEY PARK,
LYING SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SYLVAN HILIS PLRT 8� TOGETHER WITH THE EASTERLY
ONE-HALF OF VACATED ELM STREET, AND THAT PART OF LOTS I AND 2, BLOCK 7� LOWELL
ADDITION TO FRIDLEY PRRK, LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE WESTERLY HALF OF VACATED
STREET� LOCATED SOUTH OF MISSISSIPPI STREfiT N.E.� AND EA5T OF THE BURLINGTON
NORTHERN RIGHT-OF-WAY� AND TO REQUE5T THAT THE PETITIONERS COME BACK WITH PLANS�
DRRWINGS, ELEVATIONS, WHATEVER IS POSSIBLE, TD TRY TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS TO GO ON
THAT PROpERTY.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21 1981 PAGE 9
UPON A VOICE VOTEr RI+L VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRZED
Mr. Harris stated Rezoning Request ZOA #80-06 was continued until the
Feb. 4 Planning Commission meeting.
3. VACATION REQUEST, SAV #80-14, BY W. G. DOTY AND GARY A. WELLNER: Vacate
t at part of Minnesota Street, as aid out in Lawel A dition to Fridley
Park; or Mercury Drive, as laid out in Sylvan Hi17s Plat 3, now known as
Satellite Lane, lying West of the Northerly extension of the West line of
Starlite Blvd., also being the East line of Lot 1, Block A, Sylvan Hills
Pl at 3.
MOTION BY MR. WHARTON, S&CONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO CONTSNUE VRCATION REQUEST,
SAV N80-14, BY W. C. DOTY AND GARY A. WELLNER. �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOi1SLY.
Mr. Harris stated this would also be continued until the Feb. 4 meeting.
MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL,�SECONDED BY MS. MODIG,�-TO MOVE�ITEM #6, "SPECIAL
CONSIDERTTION OF SECTION 205.157, CREEK AND RIVER PRESERVATION DI5TRICT'; TO
ITEM 4 ON THE AGENDA.
UPON A VOSCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTSON CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. SPECIAL CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 205.157, CREEK AND RIVER PRESERVATION DISTRICT:
Mr. Boardman stated it had been their intent to get this section accomplished
with the Zoning Code, but due to the timetable, they have to pull the flood
Plain Ordinance out of the Zoning Code and recodify it based on input received
from the Federal Government. If this is not adopted by Mar. 2, 1981, all of
the houses in the flood plain will lose their eligibility for subsidized flood
plain insurance.
Mr. Harris asked how this ordinance was different from the one they had reviewed
in the Zoning Code.
Mr. Deblon stated there were a few different definitions and language changes.
Mr. Boardman stated that, basically, there were reference changes and just minor
changes. They are not changing any requirements. They stil7 have the flood
fringe that is buildable as long as it is built within the regulations.
There is one change, and that is the Moore Lake Area. He stated the Flood
Insurance Plan designated Moore Lake area as a flood plain area.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE 10
Mr. Deblon stated they were looking for a management concept for the Moore Lake
area, but it is still unresolved as far as the Watershed District. This would
allow them to build in the flood plain of Moore Lake. The Watershed District's
policy is that there is no encroachment of building in any flood plain, so they
are working with the Watershed District on this item.
Mr. Boardman stated he needed approval of this document and submission to
City Council.
Mr. Harris stated that if there were no substantial changes and it really
doesn't affect any ldnd, other than the Moore Lake area, he did not see any
problem with it.
MOTION BY MR, WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. HUGHES, TO APPROVE AND SEND TO CITY
.�OUtVD�I,THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED: "SECTION 205.157, CREEK AND RIVER PRESERVATSON
DISTRICT".
Ms. Schnabel stated that on page 6, Item #1, Structures, under 205.3105 Additional
Restrictions, should be rewritten as the wording was not clear.
Ms. Schnabel stated that on page 6 and page 8, it stated that first the Appeals
Commission would be handling all variances, and on page 8 it stated that the
Planning Commission would hear all variances. This should be rewritten.
Mr. Boardman stated these will be rewritten to follow the Ciiy's process.
Ms. Schnabel stated that on page 7, Item #3-A under Application for Permit,
the word "following" should be deleted.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE DOCUMENS APPROVED
AS AM&'NDED.
Mr. Boardman stated he appreciated the fast action on this by the Planning
Comnission. If the Planning Comroission members had any further questions, they
could give him a call as he would still have time to make modifications before
it goes to City Council.
5. RECEIVE JANUARY 8, 1981, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTION BY 11R, WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. MODIG, TO RECEIVE THE JAN. 8, 1985,
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTSON CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
6. RECEIVE JANUARY 13, 1981, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, 5ECONDED BY M5. HUGHES� TO RECEIYE THE ,7AN. 13� 1382�
APPERLS GOMMISSION MINUTES. .
UPON A VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN XARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE 11
7. CON7INUED: CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE
Mr. Boardman stated that the Commission members were given copies of the
revised Noise Ordinance. These are revised from comments made at staff level.
Mr. Deblon reviewed the Proposed Noise Ordinance with the Commission.
(Mr. Wharton left the rreeting at 11:05 p.m.)
On page 3, 124.06, Item 1, the Comnission reco�nended that "comfort, repose,
health, peace, or safety" be changed to "hea7th, safety, and general welfare".
On page 5, Item H, the Commission recommended the deletion of the words,
"Opening Boxes".
MOTION BY MS. HUGHSS, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO CONTINUE THE CONSIDERATION
OF A PROPOSED NOZSE ORDINANCE.
UPON A VOICE POTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
8. CONTINUED: PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE F
MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MS. MODIG, TO CONTINUE AMENDME'NT TO CHAPTER
205 OF THS FRIDLEY CITY CODE.
UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTSON CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, Sh'CONDED BY MS. HUGHES, TO AA70URN THE MEETING. UPON A
VOICE VQTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE JANUARY 2Z, 198Z,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT Z1:35 P.M.
Respectfully subiitted,
� �
Lyn Sa a
Reeording Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1981
NAME
Michael J. Larson
Marijane Tessman
Linda J. 5evert
Jerald Severt
Tom Hartfiel
Mary Hartfiel
Paulette Reid
Judy Kidder
Bill Kidder
Mary Auger
Dennis A. Johnson
Caroline R. Johnson
Mrs. Jerome Christenson
Doris E. Knutson
Nerris E. Knutson
Walter Shupien
Barbara Aspenson
Charles Aspenson
Jim Benson
Robert Lee
ADDRESS
6390 Starlite 81vd.
6390 Starlite Blvd.
100 Satellite Lane
100 Satellite Lane
120 Sylvan Lane
120 Sylvan Lane
101 Sylvan Lane
6360 Starlite Slvd.
6360 Starlite Blvd.
6348 Starlite Blvd.
6336 Starlite Blvd.
6336 Starlite Blvd.
6260 Starlite Blvd.
6300 Starlite Blvd.
6300 Starlite Blvd.
6299 7rinity Dr.
6370 Starlite Blvd.
6370 Starlite Blvd.
2940 Minnehaha, Minnetonka
130 Satellite Lane
� ��� /Y���
�.' G7/-c:Q'—n�o� �� /,1 y"� /
��
��
1y1(�l �/� �. J. L/fir2J c�,r-�
1��J �� ��.�
,�� � .1. S�v�,t.Y
S�/1.9L� 5'EI//- 2%
T � /��,rrf; �,�
► �;� �:" �
� � ..
i �
�� II, ��� ',
�,.
r � �,
s� ��
�
�39oS-��i�e-� C��
�39�.S�F���e,� ��-
/ �-o .�irf-T� LL . r� Cs�,C/P_
/ �O S97�LL/T� �
�a o
.� o
\U�
�a3 �Od
S'l�!/a �J ��n �
��� � �
������ _
.��-a.�-.� ,�
� 3 G o .�Q�fa ��
�.� �� �.�a'�� ,u��z-Q
6s��.����� �
,, ,, i.
�, i�
� � ,, � i
/ /i - /
�fo . >_ r� t�
�� /
� � /
/�,� � // , "
�
.
G�,�
�.s�-�
,,
. �
0
/ '. ��/ .!
//
i
i �` I
�
�a�� �.�....a ` ,
��'O �i.�irl6�/
�� .
• j�
.
i7���
�Z��-��' �ti•
63�6 �(�����u�l.
�i ,�
e'3�/�'�
/✓�.