The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 05/06/1981 - 6757� �� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ..- " City of Fridley AGENDA WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 1981 CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: APRIL 22, 1981 1. TABLED: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL US 3, D, of the Frid�ey City Code, to allow the construction a duplex in R-1 zoning (single family dwelling areas) on Lot 3, Block 1, Leigh Terrace, the same being 31 Osborne Way N.E. 2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. #81-04_,_ BY_JOYN R. DOYLE:.Split o f the East 8 feet o Lot 12, and split off the West 10 feet of Lot 14, and all to Lot 13, all in Fridley Park Addition, to make a buidable lot after 32 feet of Lot 12 taken by Anoka County> the same being 6301 East River Road N.E. 3. PUBLIC 4. 5. OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT: ITY 7:30 P.M. PAGES 1 - 14 15 - 17 18 - 22 23 - 26 PINK CITY OF fRIDLEY PLANWING COMP4ISSIOtJ MEETItdG, APRIL 22, 1981 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Harris declared the April 22, 1981, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mr. Harris, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svanda, Mr. Wharton, Ms. van Dan, Ms. Hughes {arr. 7:48 p.m.) Members Absent: Mr. Oquist Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Robert Friedly, 4061 - 88th Lane, Blaine Kenneth �orgenson, 8101 Ruih Circle N.E. John Doyle, 6305 East River Road Jean Ann Hegner, 450 Hugo St. Camilla Schultz, 371 Hugo St. Karen & 4Aitchell Cook, 420 Hugo St. Richard Lund, 18036 Palm St., Cedar G, A. Hale, 5234 Taylor St. N.E, J.udy & Aaron Engebretson, 5216 Taylor St. N.E, tidilliam Kuether, 5268 Taylor St. N.E. Peter & tJorma Filipovic, 31 Talmadge Way Diann fJorfolk, 36 Talmadge Way Les 4Jatkins, 40 Osborne Way Robert J. Galush, Twin City Federal Harold & Harriet Overvig, 30 Asborne blay Jan Dean, 65 - 75th Way N.E. Nancy ��cKay, 7449 Talmadge Lane APPROVAL OF APRIL 8, 1931, PLANNI�G COMMISSION MINIJTES: MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MS. VAN DRN, TO APPROVE TNE APRIL 8�.�1981, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRiTTEN. UPON A VOICS VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRHAN HARRIS DECLARED THE M02'SON CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY. � 7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #_81-03, BY ROBERT FRIEDLY: Per Secti n 205.� 0, 3, 0, of t e fri Tey City Co�e, to aT ow�umper boat operation on a 98 ft. by 125 ft. site in Skywood Shopping Center, located on parts of Lots 4 and 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 53, the same being 5255 Central Aven ue N.E. MOTION BY MR. SVANDA� 5ECONDED BY MR. WHARTON� TO OPEN TFIE PUBLIC HEARING ON �. SP �IB1-03 BY ROBERT FRIEDLY. � � . � UPON A�VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE, CNAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE�PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT�7:37 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 2 Mr. Boardman stated this was the property between the existing miniature golf operativn and Twin City Federal. The proposal is classified as a special use permit because this type of thing is a lease operation within the shopping center property itself"and is similar to other leasing operations within shopping centers. The proposal is for a seasonai-type of operation where there will be a large area of water with innertube-type boats with sma71 2 H.P. motors. Mr. Boardman stated two concerns Staff has concerning this type of operation are noise and appearance. It was stressed to the petitioner that because this is a seasonal type of operation, it would have to look good all year around, and that is very difficult to do. Mr. Boardman stated Mr. Friedly is in the audience to answer questions. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Friedly if he wished to make a statement concerning his proposal. Mr. Friedly stated he wou7d be willing to do any landscaping that is required by the City. He stated Mr. Boardman had indicated the need for trees, and Mr. Friedly is willing to make the area attractive during the months of operation and during the months it is closed. Mr. Svanda stated his biggest concern would be the noise impact on the surrounding neighbo�s. He asked Mr. Friedly if he knew what the noise levels would be. Mr. Friedly stated that 1 meter away, it is 58 decibels, i0 meters away, it is less than 40 decibels, and 150 feet away, the motors cannot be heard, only the participants having fun. He anticipated there will be 12 boats, not all operating at the same time. Ms. Gabel asked about the hours of operation. Mr. Friedly stated he would probably open about June 1, and the hours of operation would be approximately 1z:00 noon unti] about 17-]2:00 midnight. Mr. Harris asked about the depth of the pool. tAr. Friedly stated the depth of the pool is 30 inches. He stated there is little opportunity for accidents. The person is strapped into the boat as a safety precaution. He stated this type of thing has been in operation for five years, and there have been no accidents. He has checked into the insurance requirements and will have the proper insurance coverage. Mr. Harris asked how large an area there would be for the whole package. Mr. Friedly stated it is approximately 84 feet wide and 125 feet long. He recently purchased the miniature golf course and intends to convert the golf coarse into something more aesthetically attractive. His intention is to make the area a family fun center. P4ANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PA6E 3 Mr. Harris asked how many parking stalls there would Be. Mr. Friedly stated he feels the parking area allocated for the golf course is under-utilized. The prime hours of operation are when most of the shopping center is ctosed. He is in the process of negotiating a lease agreement with Mr. Mortenson who owns the shopping center, and the iease agreement is contingent upon the City's approval. He stated parking has not been addressed, but he could make sure that it is addressed. Mr. Harris stated that parking is one of the City's concerns. Mr.. Friedly stated that the City of Coon Rapids recently approved a similar package and they estimated 10 parking spaces needed for a single operation. (Ms. Hughes arrived at 7:48 p.m.) Mr. Wharton asked about fencing. Mr. Friedly stated he intended to fence the property, and would be happy to put up a six foot fence if the City required that. Mr. Boardman stated Staff is concerned about the type of traffic there is in the shopping center and the type of attraction this operation will have for kids. Another concern would be with landscaping, not only with the poo7 area, but also with trying to bring the shopping center up to overall standards, which they have not been able to do in the past with other special use permits within shopping centers. Mr. Friedly stated that in the other two operations he has observed, this has attracted adults and families, as well as children. Children running through the parking lot on bicycles has not been a problem from what he has observed. Mr. Boardman stated Staff is also concerned about how long this operation would last if it was approved and built. They look at these things as temporary operations, although the owners of the business and the people making the proposals look at them as sometfiing that will work over a period of time. He stated Staff looks at the miniature golf course operations as being similar in naiure to this bumper boat operation, and all three golf course operations in Fridley have not lasted very long. He believed that after a short period of time, the City would have an operation that is not a functional operation and is not maintained. Mr. Friedly stated he does not intend to invest large sums of money to let this go by the wayside. Mr. Richard Lund stated that the Coon Rapids Planning Commission recently approved a bumper boat operation. It was well received by the Planning Commission and the City. He stated that an operation such as Lil7iputt in Coon Rapids draws families from the entire north area. As such, there is quite an investment in that area. If this bumper boat operation was approved and a miniature golf course was put in with it> they would have a package very similar to what they have in Coon Rapids. .._,- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 4 Ms. Judy Engebretson, 5216 7ayior St., stated she lives above the area proposed for this operation. She stated their main concern is the noise. All their homes were built witfi the idea of taking advantage of the view, with living rooms and bedrooms facing the back. She is already concerned with the noise they receive from the freeway, Central Ave., from the comnercia7 area below them, and from cars racing up and down 52nd Ave., and now they may have to take some additional noise. She did not know that when they built their home 17 years ago they would be over- looking a carnival-type atmosphere. She stated.this area could possibly also become a hang-out for kids. I�s. Engebretson stated she did not think the bank would appreciate this kind of operation next door, She did not think this kind of operation would be in improve- ment to this area that already needs a facelift. Since it is a seasonal operation, there is the question of safety when it closes in the fall, because children can climb chain link fences. Ms. Engebretson stated she is also concerned with traffic. Because of the traffic situation on 52nd Ave. with no traffic signal, the State has recommended that the people in her.neighborhood go through the shopping center and use the 53rd inter- section to take advantage of the traffic signal. On the weekend, the parking 7ot is becoming so full that it is overflowing onto the driving lane through the center, and she did not see where Mr. Friedly was going to get tfie parking spaces for his operation. Mr. George YaTe, 5234 Taylor St., stated his property is in direct view of the proposed area. He was concerned about noise, because they have had a problem in the past. He was concerned about the concept of using a shopping center for an amusement center. Is it a shopping center or is it an amusement center? He would appreciate the Planning Comnission keeping this in mind when maki:ng their decision. Mr. Robert Galush, Twin City Federal, stated there were several things about this proposal that disturbed him: (1) The traffic danger to chiidren coming around this area where they have a drive-up window. TCF is planning on expanding that drive-up from a single lane to 3-4 lanes and this is on the north side of the building. (2) In the purchase agreement, they have an agreement that pertains to the fact that TCF has 20 parking spaces in the shopping center in addition to the parking they now have on their own iand. (3) Ne is concerned about how it is going to detract from the general appearance of the "main street" of Fridley. (4) Where are the kids going to go to use restroom facilities? They wil7 probably use the bank's restroom facilities and drinking fountains. (5) The noise factor. It is going to " be difficult to try to speak into a microphone in the drive-up 7ane with 50 decibels of noise going on right next door. Mr. Galush stated this type of operation just did not project the kind of image they would expect from a shopping center area. He felt it was a nice thing for kids and families, but this is not the place for it. Mr. Bud Kuether, 5268 Taylor St. N.E., stated he would like to reiterate everything Ms. Engebretson had said. He was also advised by the State to use 53rd Ave. inter- section to get onto Central Ave., because traffic is really bad between 3:00-6:00 p.m. Traffic is extremely bad on Friday and 5aturday because of traffic to the bank, the flea market on Saturday, and the only safe way is to use the 53rd Ave. intersection. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 5 MOTION BY MS. GRBEL, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HFARING ON SP #81-03 BY ROBERT FRIEDLY. . UPON R VOICE VOTE,�ALL VOTING AYE� CHASRMAN HARRIS�DECLARED THE PUBLZC HEARING CLOSSD AT 8:20 P,M, Ms. van Dan stated she was really concerned about the noise to the residents. Ms. Gabel agreed that the noise was a big concern of hers also. She would also be concerned about the area becoming a hang-out. Mr. Friedly stated he would be willing to put in restroom faci7ities if the City required it. Mr. Wharton stated he could not understand why they were so concerned about the noise level of this operation when they see the baseba7l fieids in residential areas of the City with bright lights and noise going on unti7 10:00 at night. To him, noise was not a big factor. He would be more concerned about restroom facilities. Ms. Hughes stated she would agree with that if some hours of operation were attached to the special use permit, such as 10:00 p.m. She had some concern about the direct sound lines that arould go from this area to the neighborhood's bedroom windows. 7hey are forcing people to air condition their homes when they create further noise problems. In terms of energy, that was something she would object to. Ms. van Dan stated she was also concerned about the parking. It is a pretty full parking lot, even during the day. She has also used the 53rd intersection, rather than go onto Central Ave. at 52nd Ave. MOTION BY MS. G�BEL� SECONDED BY MS. HUGHES� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE DENIAL OF SHE REQUEST�FOH A.SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP��82-03� BY ROBERT FRIEDLY, PER SECTION 205.101� 3, O� OF THE FR7DLEY CITY COD�, TO ALLOW A BUMPER BpAT OPERATION ON A 98 FT. BY 125 FT�.�SITE IN SKndOOD SHOPPING CENTER, LOCATED ON PRRTS OF � LOTS 4 AND 5, RUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION'NO. 53, THE SAME BEING 5255 CENTRAL RVE. N.E., FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: � � 1. THE ALREADY EXISTING NOTSE LEVEIS . . 2. TH6 TRAFFIC SITUATION AND THE POTENTIAL..PROBLEMS WITH PARKING 3. THE SRFETY OF THE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO WOULD USE THE AREA � UPON A VOICE VOTE, HARRIS, GABEL� HUGHES� AND VRN DRN VOTING AYE, WHARTON AND SVANDR VOTING NAY, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTZON CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4-2. Mr. Harris stated the reason he voted nay was because he did not think this was an appropriate use as an accessory use to the shopping center as he has opposed all similar accessory uses to all shopping centers that have been put in in the past. Mr. Harris stated that SP #81-03 was recommended to City Council for denial and would go to City Council on May 4. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 19II1 PAGE 6 2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #81-04, BY KENNETH D. JORGENSON: Per Section LIf5-65T,�o� £�fridley City Code, to allow the construction of a second accessory building, a 24' by 30' detached garage, on Lot 10, Block 5, Bourdeaux's Spring Brook Addition, the same being 8101 Ruth Circle N.E. MOTION BY MR. SVANDA, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP �81-04 BY KENNTH JORGENSON. � _ � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:37 P.M. � Mr. Boardman stated Mr. �orgenson's proposal is to build a detached garage with access off Ruth Street. Mr. Jorgenson presently has an attached garage. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Jorgenson if he would iike to make a statement. Mr. Jorgenson stated that because of the need for more storage and housing cars, he plans on building a 24' x 30' garage. His present garage is 20' x 22' and later on he plans to convert the attached garage to living space. Mr. Harris stated his only concern would be that at the time..of the conversion of the attached garage, the driveway to that garage be removed. MOTION BY MR, WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. HUGHSS, TO CLOSE THE PU&LIC HEARING ON SP�H82-04 BY KENNTH JORGENSON. . � UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:45 P.M. � � MOTION BY MR. WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TXE REQUEST FOR R SPECIAL USE PERMZT� SP NB,I-04,BY KENNTH JORGENSON, PER SECTIDN 205.OSI� 2� A, OF TNE FRIDLEY CITY CODE� TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND ACCESSORY BUXLDING� A 24' BY 30' DETACHED GARAGE� ON LOT I0� BLOCK 5� BOURDEAUX`S SPRING BROOK ADDITION� THE SAME BEING 820I 22UTH CIRCLE N.E., WITH ND STIPULATIONS. MOTION�BY MS. VAN DAN, SECONDED BY FIS. GABEL, 3'O AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO INCLUDE THE STIPULATION THAT WHEN THE PRESENT GARAGE IS CONVERTED TO FAMILY LIVING SPACE, THE DRIVEWAY BE REMOVED. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING APE� CHRIRMAN HAR122S DECLARED THE AMENDED MAIN MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRMAN HARRIS DECLi1RED THE MAIN MOTIDN AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Harris stated this would go to City Council on May 4. .a--- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 7 3. PUBLIC NFARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL U5E PERMIT, SP #81-05, BY EIGH I VrTESTMEfJTS, ING.: Per Section 2�5.0— 5�, 3, � of t e fri ey City Co e, to a ow t e construction of a duplex in R-1 zoning (single family dweYling areas), on Lot 4, Block 2, Leigh Terrace, the same being 20 Osborne Way N.E. MOTION BY MS. NUGHES, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDAi TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON � SP N8Z-OS.BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS� INC. �- . UpbN A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRN�N H1iRRIS DECLARSD TXE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:50 P.M. Mr. Boardman stated the proposal was for a duplex to be built on the corner of East River Road and Osborne way. He stated this meets all the requirements for lot size and setbacks. He stated the petitioner is in the audience. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Doyle if he wished to make a statement. Mr. Doyle stated that on two separate occasions on this particular lot, they have had single family homes sold and on both occasions when it came to obtaining financing, the lending agents declined to provide financing because the lot is on heavily traveled streets. In order to get the lot developed and done in a manner consistent with what the neighbors would like to see in this area, they are proposing a duplex design that from the outside has the appearance of a single family home. They would like to get a buyer who would be able to begin with a small family and would eventually utilize the whole home. The upstairs floor plan is identical to the home next door. All they have done is taken that same floor plan and duplicated it downstairs and provided an entry way, a small laundry, and an entry way area. In addition to that, they have supplied two single car attached garages to provide the garage and parking faciiities necessary. Mr. Boardman stated that he just realized that a three-car garage is required for R-2. Mr. Les Watkins, 40 Osborne Way, stated that due to the fact that this lot is on East River Road and traffic is heavy and the fact that they are unable to get a single family dwelling on this lot; he would like to see the Planning Commission approve this duplex, rather than see some other kind of usage of this lot later on. Mr. Harold Overvig, 30 Qsborne Way, stated he lives next door to the lot. Ne would like to see something on this lot; and if they cannot have a single family home, he would not object to a duplex, provided Mr. Doyle gets a family or a couple to buy the property and live in it and rent aut the second apartment. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Doyle if he planned on fencing or having a barrier along East River Road. Mr. Doyle stated he probably would have to because of the noise level on East River Road. The problem is interfacing the fence with the bike easement. r.r� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 8 Ms. Diann Norfolk, 36 Talmadge Way, stated they bought their home in August 1980, believing that the area was all privately owned homes. She stated that Mr. Doyte has stated he plans to get a family to buy the duplex and eventually take over the entire home. She stated that would be fine, but supposing the other side of the duplex is empty for six months or more, then there are more reasons for vandalism and wild parties. She recently moved from a duplex and knows the numerous problems with transient people and the poor upkeep of the dwe7ling. There is nat the feeling of a total community once there are transient neighbors. She did not think this duplex was what they needed in their neighborhood. Mr. Doyle stated he felt that if they get a buyer who is the owner-occupant,the owner is going to have as much pride in the property as the rest of the people in the neighborhood. He also plans to make the duplex affordable. MOTION BY MS. NUGHES, SECONDED BX hII2. WHARTON, TD CLOSE TH& PUBLIC HEARING ON SP��81-OS BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS� INC. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS�DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CIASED RT 9:15.P.M. � � Ms. Hughes stated that this plan as drawn seems to be very appropriate for this neighborhood and gives the apperance of a single family dwell.ing. She stated she . liked the arrangement in trying to control noise by having the garage on the street side. She did not see any disadvantages to the proposal at all. MOTION BY MS. HUGHES� SECONDED BY�MS. VAN DAN� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE�PERMIT� SP �81-05� BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS, INC.: PER S�CTION 205,051� 3� D� OF SHE FRIDLEY CITY CODE,�TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DUPLEX IN R-1 ZONING (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AREAS)� ON LOT 4� BLOCK 2� LEIGH TERRACE� THE SAME� BEING�20 OSBORNE WAY N,E., RCCORDING TO BUILDING PLAN� EXHIBIT A, WZTH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: � 2. THAT IT MEETS THE 10,000 SQ. FT. REQUIREMENT FOR DUPLEXES ' 2. THAT UTILITY� DRAZNAGE� RND SIKEWAY EASEMENTS ARE PRESERVED 3. THAT THE THIRD GIIRRGE FS PROVIDED. . UPON A VOICE VOTE� HRRRIS� SVANDA� HUGHES� VAN DAN� AND WHARTON VOTING AYE� GABEL VOTING NAY� CHAIRMRN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-2. Ms. Gabel stated she has no probiem with this plan, but she voted nay because of her opposition to spot rezoning. 4. PUBLIC HEARING; REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #81-06, BY LEIGH INVEST- ENTS, INC.: Per Sect�on 05.05 , 3, , of t e Fri e7 y City C-� o e, to a5 o'i w t e construction of a duplex in R-1 zoning (single family dwelling areas) on Lot 3, Block 1, Leigh Terrace, the same being 31 Osborne Way N.E. MOTION BY�MR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY MS. GflBEL, TO.OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP N8S-06 BY LEIGH�INVESTMENTS, INC. . UPON.A VQICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE��CHRIRFI�AN�HARRIS DECLARED�THE PUBLZC HEARING OPEN AT 9:15 P.M.� � � �� . . . � � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 9 Mr. Boardman stated this lot was across the street from SP #81-05. This lot is not 10,000 sq, ft, which is required and would require a variance if the special use permit is approved. The proposal is also for a duplex which is set up with a double garage. It would also require an additional third stall. It will meet the setback limitations. Mr. Coyle stated that this is the same idea as SP #81-05 but with a different plan. The house is specially designed for this lot. He stated they were trying to accom- plish the same thing with this dwelling and they were doing it for the same reasons as the previous proposal. He stated he would like to address the issue of the lot size requirement. He believed that when the lot was platted, the City had taken _ into account the St. Paul blaterworks property as green area in the back and that it was considered the same as a 10,000 sq. ft. lot. Mr. Boardman stated he would check the records regarding this. Mr. Les Watkins, 40 Osborne Way, stated he was in favor of this proposal for the same reasons he had stated for the previous proposal (SP #81-05). Ms. Jan Dean, 65 - 75th Way N.E., stated that on this particular corner, there is a bus stop and the area is essentially level. It is an interesting piece of land, and now Mr. Doyle wants to put a two-story duplex in there. She thought this was going back to spot rezoning, She did not have any real objections to the duplex going in across the street, but she did have problems with this proposal as she did not like to see another spot rezoning when there is going to be so many variances. After checking the City records, Mr. Boardman stated that the plat was approved by the Planning Commission in 1975 with the condition that they get written easement from St. Paul 4laterworks. There was a letter of agreement from the Water Dept. of St. Paul dated April 15, 1976, that would allow the use of the St. Paul Waterworks property as a portion of lot size with conditions. The City Council approved the plat on Hay 17, 1976, and because of the agreement, it brings this lot to over the required 10,000 sq. footage. MOTION BY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY P1S. GRBEL, TO CLOSE THE PUELIC HEARING ON SP N81-06 BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS� INC. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE� CHAIRMAN HARRI5 DECLARED THE pUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:42 P.M. � Ms. Hughes stated this plan may be the only way this lot can be used, but it did not have the advantages of the other lot as far as the buffering of noise from East River Road and as far as screening East River Road from the ]iving rooms. She stated that at this point, she could not approve this request as she was not sure this was the structure they wanted to see and she was not convinced this was the right use for that property. MOTION BY MS. NUGNES TO CONTINUE THL REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP {18Z-06� BY LETGII INVESTMENTS� INC.� AND RSK THE�PETITIONER TO�COME BRCK�FdITH� A BETTER DESIGN FOR THE LOT. . �! PLAN�ING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 10 MOTSON DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. � MOTION BY MR. WHARTON� SECONDED�BY MR. SVRNDA, TO RECOMMEND TO CSTY COUNCIL APPROVRL OF A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT� SP j182-06�� BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS� INC., PER SECTION 205.052, 3� D,�OF THE FRIDLEY�CITY CODE� TO RLIAW THE CONSTRUC- TION OF A DUPLEX IN R-1 ZONING (SINGLE FAMILY L7P7ELLING RREAS), ON LOT 3� BTACK 1, LEIGH TERRACE, THE SAME BEING 31 OSBORNE WRY N.E., WITH NO STZPULATIONS. Ms. Gabel stated she felt the third car garage stipulation should be added to the motion, 6ecause of the traffic problems on East River Road, If there was any parking in the street, there could be even more problems. Ms. van Dan stated she was concerned about trying to squeeze a lot of building onto a small piece of property. Ms. Gabel stated she objected because this was,again, spot rezoning. The house is an atrocity, and the neighbors seem more opposed to this structure. UPON A VOICE VQTE, SVANDA AND WHARTON VOTING AYE, GABEL� HUGHES� AND VAN DAN VOTING NAY, AND HRRRIS ABSTAINING, CHAIRMAN XARRIS DECLARED�THE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3-2. �� MOTION BY MS. VAN DAN� SECONDED BY MS. HUGHES, TO TABLE THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL � USE PERMFT��SP �j81-06� BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS� INC., PER SECTION 205.051, 3� D� OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO RLLOW TXE CONSTRUCTION OF A DUPLEX IN R-1 ZONING (SINGLE FRMILY DWELLING AREAS), ON IAT 3� BIACK 2, LEIGH TERRACE, THE SAME BEING 31 OSBORNE WAY N.E., AND TO REQUEST THE PETISIONER TO RECONSIDER THE DESIGN OF TNE DUPLEX. UPON A VOICE VOTE� HARRIS, VAN DAN, HUGHES, AND WNARTON VOTING AYE� GABEL RND SVANDA VOTING NAY, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION.CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4-2. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #81-03, BY JOHN R. DOYLE: Rezone from R- single fami y dwelling areas to R-3 genera mu tip e family dwellings), Lot 78 and 79, Block 2, Riverview Heights, so that a17 the property under one ownership are the same zoning, to allow the construction of two (2) 4-unit dwellings, being addressed as 391-93-95-97 Hugo and 401-03-05-07 Hugo Street N.E. MOTION BY MS. HUGHES� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING�ON . ZOR jj81-03 BY JOHN R. DOYLE. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRMAN XARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:55 P.M. Mr. Boardman stated that he and Mr. Doyle have discussed the potential for develop- ment for this area. They discussed several possibilities. Mr. Doyle is proposing two 4-unit dwellings. Mr. Boardman stated it was his recommendation that the parking be put between the two structures. This would buffer the noise and traffic situation from the single family homes. He stated Mr. Doyle has applied for a varaance on lot size. The City will be requesting bikeway easement within the property area itself. PLANNING COMP4ISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, i981 PAGE 11 Mr. Narris asked Mr. Doyle if he would }ike to make a statement. Mr. Doyle stated that three years ago, he looked at putting a 10-unit building on this site and had all the documentation for approval for the permits. Unfor- tunately, that was about the time financin� tightened up and the situation has worsened since. At this point in time, if you are tooking for any financing for over 5 units or under 25 units, the lenders are just not�interested. So,that put him in the situation of looking at alternatives. Mr. Doyle stated that one alternative was to put a single fami7y home on the single family lot and some type of apartment on the R-3 zoned lots that are left. In order to meet the financing requirements, it would probably entail going into some kind of condominium-type of arrangement. That really did not appeal to them very much because it dumps a lot more driveways onto Hugo St., and traffic is a big concern in this neighborhood. Mr. Ooyle stated another alternative was to do a double side-hy-side with a single family home. The density would be about the same, but•it would be dumping more driveways onto the street and there would be more ground coverage in terms of buildings. Mr. Ooyle stated they have tried to put something together that is aesthetically pleasing, but will allow them to obtain financing. At this point in time, they have an owner-occupant buyer on both of the bui7dings. Mr-Frank Hegner, 450 Hugo St., stated fie bought his home with the understanding that there would be a single family home on the R-1 lot. He cannot see two 4- plexes in there. With apartments in there, their property va7ues will go down. He would rather see two homes go in and leave apartments where they are supposed to be in another neighborhood. Mr. Hegner stated that Hugo St.is very narrow and a car cannot get through if two cars are parked on both sides of the street. The driveway coming out from the four-plexes would be right across from his driveway. Ms. Karen Cook, 420 Hugo St., stated she felt there would be a lot of problems with traffic and safety. In six houses on the street, there are already 13 children. People visiting the apartments would have to park on the street, and the children are constantly crossing the street to qo to the park or the Fridley Food Market. Another concern is the poor upkeep of apartment buildings. Ms. Camilla Schultz, 371 Hugo St.,stated they are between East River Road and the railroad tracks, and they have enough noise. Mr. Boardman stated separate ownerships, each property. that because Mr. Doyle wants to split the four-plexes into he has applied to the Appeals Commission for variances on Ms. Gabel stated that the Appeals Commission took a look at the overall impact of the fact that Mr. Uoyle can, in.fact, build 7 units on the existing R-3 7ots, and it was the Appeals Comnission's overall feeling that it was better to split it PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 12 into two buildings, rather than have one large mass of building sitting there. They felt that would be better for the neighborhood. Mr. Harris asked about storage. Mr. Doyle stated there would be storage within the buildings. He stated it is the buyer's intention to build some garages over what is•now the parking area. Mr. Hegner stated he was concerned about camping trailers, boats, etc. Where are these going to be kept? MOTION BY MR. WHARTON, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARTNG ON ZOA ji81-03 BY JOHN R. DOYLE. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHRIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLZC HEARING CLOSED AT 20:45 P.M. � Ms. Hughes stated that in looking at the total package•and what has been requested, one item that disturbs her is the variance from 15,000 sq. ft. davn to a 10,000 sq. ft. zoning requirement. That is one-third of the lot. Since they are dealing with rezoning, she would find it very difficult to separate the rezoning from the lot split just because of thai factor. She would be inclined to decline the rezoning, and she thought it would be useful to see what kind of proposal Mr. Doyle could design for 7 units for the existing R-3. Ms. Hughes stated she would be more inc7ined to see a lot split to make a 75' single family lot and then possibly a four-plex on the other part. Mr. Narris stated he also did not like this plan. He thought asking for two four- piexes was asking for too much. It was trying to put too much on too small a piece of property in this particular location. The units are quite small, there is not really any storage, no garages, and 16 parking stalls is the bare minimum. He agreed with Ms. Hughes that 25 ft, could be taken from the R-3 property and added to the R-1 to make a 75' single family lot and then a four-plex on the rest. That would roake five units. MOTION SY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF REZONING REQUEST, ZOA �}81-03� BY JOHN R. DOYLE, TO REZONE FROM R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AREAS) TO R-3 (GENERAL MULTIPLE FAMTLY DWELLINGS)� LOT 78 AND 79� BLOCK 2� RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS, SD THAT ALL THE PROPERTY UNDER ONE OWNERSHIP IlRE TXE SAME ZONING� TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO (2) 9-UNIT DWELLINGS� SEING ADDRESSED AS 390-93-95-97 HUGO AND 401-03-05-07 HUGO STREET N.E.� FOR THE FOLIAWING REASONS.: � . 2. 7NADEQUATE ZAT SIZES � � 2. THE TRAFFIC PROBLEM IS INAPPROPRIATE TO THE NESGHBORHOQD AND STREET � CONDITIONS � � . UPON A VOZCE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY. � . � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 13 Mr. Harris stated ZOA #81-03 is recommended to City Council for denial and will go to City Council on June 8. 6. LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. #81-03, BY JOHN R. DOYLE: Split off the East 50 feet of Lots 80, 81, 82, and 83 and add it to Lots 78 and 79, Block A, Riverview Heights, for a building site for a 4-unit dwelling, the same being 391-93-95-9J Hugo Street N.E. Withdrawn at petitioner's request. (Mr. Wharton left the meeting at 71:06 p.m.) 7. RECEIVE APRIL 14, 1981, APPEALS COMMISSIOh MINUTES: MOTTON BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY MS. HUGHES� TO 1?ECEIVE THE APRIL 14� 298I, RPPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTIDN CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. RECEIVE APRIL 2, 1981, HUMAN RESOURCES COMh4ISSI0N MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. VRN DAN� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO RECEIVE THE APRIL 2, 1981� HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES. Ms. van Dan stated the Human Resources Commission is in the process of redefining their goals. One of their old goals is "Social/Economic Development - Corrections", The Conenission questioned whether the Human Resources Commission should be addressing law enforcenent issues and crime prevention. Does the Planning Commission feel this is the responsibi7ity of the Numan Resources Comnission? Mr. Boardman stated he did not feel that it should be the responsibility of the Human Resoures Commission to address those types of issues. Mr: Harris agreed with Mr. Boardman and that the Human Resources Commission is not the appropriate commission if they do not feel comfortable with it. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTTNG RYE� CHAIRhRN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION GARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. � 9. RECEIVE APRIL 9, 1981, HDUSING & REDEVELOP�tENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. HUGHES�. SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN�.�TO RECEIVE THE APRIL 9� 5981, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AU2HORITY MINUTES. UPON A VDICC VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHRIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. iR--- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 22, 1981 PAGE 14 ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MS. VRN DAN, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HISRRZS DECLARED TXE APRZL 22, 2981, pLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURIJED�AT 11:30 P.M. � Respectfully submitted, � � � � Lyn e Saba Recording Secretary PLam[ �r. � . _ . .�_. �� t. � �5 �'�—� �`��j!�� SP ¢t8�1-06 Leigh Investment °°", """°' � �' Du�lex in R-1 31 Osborne Way N.F� ,\{ �� ,.. ! , �� ' F; � e +: �,c�+ 5r»�w",�`<'.� P`=c , '� . �� 4 1 �r.. �.��.c ,; i.- ` . 7� �' � . Sramc i�rr w.nx '� l. s .-.,- , . ,: ��,"� , � i ) r i `� ' ! t _ ,, , — � �, , /� °� �� i 'G � �� , � � - / \ � , #'� � I�� . � . �� ''� �� i �'�t� � � � , _. > 7 a y �I fi ' �r � � � a = — � � [� ` �;. - � 1j • bG 3 I� I I I j �� 3 _ a �� _ �� „� `�� I � - „ 4 A � { g �� '�'�,� -s , `�` � 1 -z � F C �� K� v � �>> t "� `_ f � �i "q _' a ? � z ' �1 i �+�� ...,,�� _ � .. � tl 1 � } ( �l., I �i i'' it .�.. .!I = �i tl __ y,�, �'`y. ':i_ �� „ � � � '� " � 1� Ii �' �� f if i�\;� � � �ir�� °.� � a,� � �. � - ��;o , �.� „ � � ii�' \l. ,.� �_ � i . -=i� .... �� ,......r.. 5 � f ! ! �.� /� .. � ) ��li� _...� �� A C^. lI , , o -� �"�'��rlL��3, ^' � _ y� , � � ��'�, c._ ' . � , , �� +�� ui� -s � l � � -0� t � / �° ii i'_ .I� ! IL . E��i� �. L.-_ i �.j ,�a I .. 7 �� e �� f i u=. 3 ��_— ir ; °:��i� ' � � ,' _ �� = 3 % �� b r f � � ..a u 5 � '...s 51 � _ J•j�: < � f �� s I."e l M_ _ £e II�S� ° x � �" � ,�f ��G� F � r ��,( r' -� � � _ � '�f J . _ ,. -,- r�,. .._ _ < � '�\ F �` F�° ,i �� „ c � �� .^`: ....� ss g � �� •. i ' � ��1 `\ h -� � 1 i , . � 'c .� _( u.. , w_uwa� , ncicerc � s�T�i��'F E:��a9�-CtTI� t�€= ��4"�� '?° i'. � � s �,. �s.� c O s�j.� f �..:14) � . � _..:,.-��.� �..... ._. . _.�.,..�. � L� .... .�_...._.�s.. . �.,.. ..a: . ,` , '` ,, 16 ; \ -�,: ~ `-=> ;f� #81-0'� ',Leigh In'vestments - ;r '. \ ` Dut lex in h-1 31 Osborne Way N.E. �`� '� � r- 2 �• � '�� i ' � .�i, � � �t , � ,. {' 1 , S� � ;.`� G � .. �1 p ( '�: A v . . . . _ ._._- _. .�,� � . �. � .. E, �' � , � .�. S ' � . � ` ~ \ t5C �, `, � _ !; , � 9 ,"' � � ,, } � . . �� 1 � j �, ..'.' d�,✓ t��l � i�� 1.,Y`�> � 1` . � ```�`ri �i � �\\\ O � t 1 \\\ ) : + \\ , ' . . -� �' � , r� �] � �9 1 - � ��. � � �� _ � � l�� ♦ -... ,Y, .� .�^': �i��-� � �� ,.. � � . �� r� .. �/ �t C �E� � , A l,�" / �� - . � � '� �. � > � � � � ; �'� �o �� =,�� ' �� `,'1 � 1 �y ''. � r _ `�" 1 \ ` r' t ` . _, • � �\ 1 'l / � i.. � x . J� - \ -� 1� ey, `�� 4 gI-'` � C -f �/ � j .a:; �� / —' \ l�.,��„"�-�l.. `.I / �•.3 \ . C.� ' 48�.s � ��1 r�� / r• / . y O �SFF . � , J o;,°,s,. 's `s � ... �� ` � /(� � `� `�,i .� ♦ i � i �+�` c / ' � � { �,: V �+'f* � � �+��hi�'�Py,�:L�" �' � ` /( � ��•{� / / 4 { ,w 1 W / L,` �' \ ,� 4r� `A �� \ .P" �` � 1 .= i `� ` ' �/ `.,,}�� J 1 f3 f� �l��. \\�: � f+,�� -`e 1�. C`� { 5 .�` �, . 4 ..�/ \ � 's , z r // ��•e� -� ,, � ,,� `�` \ ' \ w�i'� 'r ., r /,��T "�� /"•-,•�OA \'1Z � � � � �,.��.�''yY . � r�.i� \\\ '�} �'s � � � ' y..✓"� , ` e . } ✓"' 1 � J � � .' . .,..> .a �'. � l ...-' .w """�� j . 9S .� �n_ l �.�_\ � �1�- } — .. _. _.. _ . .1 � C � • � C�.L ` � ' �� ``lj f �� ` GI\ ( . . � � 4 � ..� L . � � \� � t � / • .i ... � � '? . , � � F l i�, � � t f' . ' � . � F 1 . P Ii. � � � 1 \ - _ . _ . . ..'i .�:;� i� �x ^ � � ; 1 "� P., Ps. "9t ,� \ � , . � '"l'�� s "^eA s��l� ';� t � �` . � � !�i'�C�' 1p a f. t a - � C ' ��a !- �`� , {/t � � � 1� � \ , 1 1 � � * t , \ P 1 � �1 ��' ~{•��: ` � f i ' t . �1 \ 6' / [ .. � " �° � 1,, s � 9`� i ` ^ ,"""``` ��y � � �� t' '' ��' t � � 1 F� �%.\ il *�� / �y-�t _ : �� \ � �� r' � � �� \` : i � ,.. .. b.+ r �� (�'.> �r� 4. � � �"' - � _ r v � :i ' ,; � ;,'+ � � ' � � r c ) \ � � '� .� t, ,: .. > , � � � � � � � ;° � .� : � �. 1 � . � �\ -, � _ � � � � � � T� ' p � � � ,,. i � ,1 . �' , � u a 2 ' a �U � "�'� � �� ' � � f `�� y �, ; p'' ;,.� s� � �� :. � '`� �� t �� ;:. < � ��,,- � j ,, � , . , �. � .. '� 3 1''.., t , - . , � ` ^_ � i �1 �� ,\ �^ . �,< , r � __ /.� , � � i�- � �� ,� � �! .� %• ��1 '. A� 9, . "_ . �.�.v�' � 1 I j � � �Y %`a� > 3 �,'Y �1 I � \ ,l , '. .�;/ � �'� r, - ' `/ -� ��` �t a� '1 � „._ .s:� Y•�_ \ � % t} �, i"�, � Y 1 � 4 i �JJ R:�i � � t � � L .. � . t �`I �_ � y.�" y � �- i t , � i . �� C�� '�� _J � J �. � � '.�a..^y � '�_ � .. A' �J '/' ,` t fI �' y .. ' ' . . . ; � (� � . �' 1V i f q ' `Y I � � �l � �e P.e ^ v�*•� � � -�-'`�� ` �� I . !. � 7.� � �� 1 � . ��%� ; � .... . (± .._� ._, i.. � . , . " f . � - �•.�� -� ` �� , ' �� ` � . � . . � � � � �� _ ' . .� __' � ..� � � /"✓��: `'� �'� !� + � 4 � " - � . . . , . , . ;� � . � ' . � 1 � �� . � �� . __ . . • � � � ` .. � 1 l�' r ` ' i ��_{. t)i , _. _ E � t ` � i !� _. � , � � � � . � � . / . . . � i 1 � �� _ � -� . - .. ..� � ' l � �i . � ., �� _ . . .. . ... .. . . .. . I-. I ..� � . ' 1. . 1 ; "17 � �� .I �1-06 � ,�„,��;� :�.;-�,�� "� � � � � � � � � i�u,�l�;:��n�l;-�l 31 �� °rn b;<:!i �i�E. �� ._ ;.`j 'cr'> '�", r. � . _ F ' .. � . . , - � . . :. . , .: , � .. . . _, . ., . .. ' . , . : . .. . . . . �. , s. , . . .. . �, . .' �c ' . . �,o�'- v \� ' . . . . . , , _ . �. i. i - . � _ . _- �i �_ � , t . ' . _ .. � �.. � ' ...,i' t _ -.��.: . . .. .. . � . " , � .`.i � .. a _ . . , ;.'.- ' ° '._-. �.. ...... . _ .;-.: ...'t.. .:' . ..." _ . ..� ; =. T �. , �?� �� ,' . .. .. � ('. ` ' � �, 4 _ b � f . �y � ��. � _ . 1 �r Y. ' 1 - � 1 \ 1 , 3 �'~ . . , tJ . t � �\i � . . ' y � .Y e. �� : �t � :\ ". . � : �} r � �� '.✓ ' tl i .awx+ 11�� .�� p . . � " `r. � . �. � � � . F < A � . ; ./ ; °�:;.� � p .�:� l. � . . I � ' � � , :�i� . �r : \ �L �. ` �c ; t � � ��i r = � ` - 7 { .. � ^a `, i i _ -- �� . �,., i � - > } ` � � ; \�- _ �-�i � � 1 'c ^ .\ ; - - ` � '", . . .yl t Y J1 ',r . � 4 � :l�l � `` ; ,;., h}� ' � K�,, ,- < �. 1i � - < � ,� ; , � .. - , ,. . . _ ' � .. _. � _ ,. � �' . . .. ^�i'S ...i rd 4+ � . _ . .. ..� . . ��C.-�i� �� U�.._ . . � / 4 � ' � � ia _._ __.__...__. ________�_____ u. _....�,..s� .,., � ....w,a7...,_�.�,,.... ,.��...�.��.ti._. rr P.,�'1 v f i �: .1 CJi 9Y� i' :r��) ��:_.�•��. ,. , . «�.aY .. ... . �; , i_or sr�l�r t�s �r <�'/�a`/----- - ��^ M1.YIUflltf'Y.`f9PJ IfY /'�!!- Pt' .! . _ , ..;��. << ,_ � _,� ,_:�� . �r.cc��ao� n: ---__.___ _ _.— ----- —_ . �._t _..� ,, _ _ __ _._ � � ' AD'�';CSS. ,� >/� `� �! � �� i /C��`�°~-»_____ DA7L:_��i%L.� � ----_ _ : _.___ . -- ---.__ �--_ __ 1 '- PLA��I'il!dG COI�i;1I;S?Ofd CITY CUUNCIL: PRf;Y. �L[ R[QUIRED: STIPI!LFlTIONS: r^-,PPROUE� UIS(1PPF;OVED DATE r /.� <,`'1 Af�PRUVED DTSAPPROVE� DA PROFERTY 0!�,'�JE�(S) -�3'C� aoo��ss{ts � A'40UilT PIt I F�0_. r�o � � FEE ��`,Z; !�C� RECEIPT id�J �.�— ,j,�� ' 7ELEP'ri^vi`;[ ii0��- a'� `_>'� � �{ � Cc'_ t. c � �>; ,��.. PRi1PERTY LOCATIChi ON �TRr t. F T�LEPHUP;E Pd0 3` l��f�x�r�C`- G.f' . . � LEGAL DE�Ci2I�'TIOI�I OF PROPEi7'(_� � ST ��L �-. o'ti �� l—c'—t----(`-h� �?z ! t� D.}'7�—�� t�.t F.`�"'` 1�_ ,._ ns.__�-_�� .! A�--�-? c_c c'r. 1% .�t=� i7 6 cy-�"� f? ;i ' . __-' - ..I . � , TO7AL AREF� OF Pf:OPEI<7Y �°z��/ i�=�7-_ PRESL;dT ZOfdIIJG��!�___ j R[ASOi�i fCR LOT SPLT.T �✓r��r A_% t/!�..�-'�r9_t?t-G L�7-'__�-(=_7—r,t _ Ft- . � � [� �a�_ �.��-1!.1�!.J_�-�'�'_�C� Z-�-- 4�'T l=-'�_- v'3'-(_----�ti/O k'�!�._.._ _1_..C? f?�7_��-- � The undersiqre� hereby decl..res thai: all tlie Pacts and rep�°esentatiais sta�ed in tfiis appl'ication ure true and correct. nq7(:;��nrLt.� _i_�? .------ STGfIAI`II`'`.��;�t-7_- �--`-- �- '�� ==�=----- J %� PiOTIG[:: li skeic?i �n` i:he pre�•r�ri.y ;�n��? {� c�os�.ri lot spl�it tvith a�iy er.isting str�,c- - --� l�.in�� ;Lo;;�� ;hr,uld <<<<.;up:ti�Y �liiis apE�li��,itiuri. � �il'C i't`Vi'I'S�' SICIC fl�l' r:��1 ll:tCl2,� �IlSi.i'Iat:Ll011S% a L.S, �t81-�4 John Doyle 19f�1 POLICY S�i�P,lEt��Et;T Otd P/1fiK FtE. �� 6301 Ezst River Road 0��! LP,f;U SUi)UNISION � Uate In deterinininq fair marke� value of public ai°eas for land subd�ivision for cash payn�cnt, as rcquired hy Ordinancc f3', the following valu2s will be used: Residential sc,bdivision b1,000.U0 per lot Residential lot split � 500.00 per lot Commercial/Industrial subdivision or lot splits $ 0.015 per sq. ft. This fee is to be paid at the time of final plat or lot split approval. The City Council ma� defer collection to the time a �uilding permit is requested for individual lots creaCed by such subdivision/lot split, The City retains fihe option to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all of the porticn required to 6e dedicated. PARK fEE AGREEh�ENT 7he urdersigned understands that according to the City Platting Ordinance, the follo�ving public par; land dedication is required to piat residential, con�rr,ercial or industrial zoned property. It is further understood that the public park land dec;ication or cash payment equivalent is at the discretion of the City. It is agreed that a cash payment of $��_t;�;-�;,��}.��Tl be paid zccording to the above stated pclicy for the follo�;�inq s;>;yF::u��.�,��ot split. �� /I €`�.u°sr'�:a cp� �� /?_ : r`-�1,� �� a� �:� � �...�� ei�+ �,„.�!�, —�a ,� „•F < , t--- -� __ p� 0.1� 6�',� � .�f�;G:`° %�/A . 6 F=`.�'^�<�u-t� s f-�rk?��' It is aqreed that the following land dedication is provided according to the above stated policy for the folloa;ing subdivision/lot split: Dedication: Subdivision/lot split: The undersia�;cd further aqrees to entify all fuCure property a.,n�rs or assigns of the cash p„ym�nt r^quire�nent, ir it is to bc ccl�ected ut 'the tiir,e of building permit.. DF�TE OOS�1P„` 1 iib7A S1i?;rliU't:------------_ -� � _.___ I r o;�er ty (,.:ner��--- � � �' f'"� c�` e'�� I. Li..6:�t ` / ' i f ^ N ``... �-. � 1. _� �y , mn� pno�os ��, . . .j'. �a ,,..., � �: � �'. „��±�, r.,.. � � , �; �� r u•':'• , ��:, � . J `�i' ` � �� ` �. � , ,. r _ .' } r Y• ... y .'J��' �' �`�� -.� �'.J �} �` t • �C'� il t `� �� ` �� a � � � �r �' � � ,,6- ° � I � � �q 8 t �' ' I' .. � � / � F � � . �� ' � �� i ",�'�� I `; � o� �� i� � � � n:� '� 7 ..� � c�l � ?� -,> ��.i � .v!� ?'- f � ''`�' [ - � - � > i � , �� _ ,� = r �:`„ �� . � ��s x��'i r i , ��,�, �I � r �_ ' - ' � r � s „� i i.,l,,l 1 i� '✓� � , �.z��«` �L i �`f,.- ' .'.. £ ' - 1 i�X�t � i— Ij a� �3 I p a -�. � � E��..� � 1 �n.�ld ' ( !� // ' r , � ri' °-� a �� * ,K,Q i� �� a j i pf ,�� ` { � � �- ', = -� r � �, t �.. , � f � s� ._� ..: - i �� 'I � h � ' � �i � 'J �! � � •� I I; II ti� i� �� ;�;: e ;,t �� :��:' r �F: _ �A� ; �F = th� \,, �) N j N�l i� \\ 1 _ � �� U\c �� I' � �A; , i F � ��vm � . �7 `" `1!ll �'�� ' 1 �, 1, � � t n.,�.. � � ..� _ f r � ., l ' t, , C' �. ,. ( � U CD f�� ..�p i: L.S. IIF31-04, John Uoyle 6301 East River- f:oad SPRiM14 texF VanK � F I y f a,. ' :; � g �'��;` ,� .�� 4 I •i ..,i ;ti m �`�� .. � � t ¢ 1 R i 3 � y . n_ b ,. -.:_ � � :, � i\ $, �4 � : .r.,,� an :1 P �� r � . i t �;� : , ..o .��' --_.� � � 4 '- e .� ` _� �� : ., , �� , ` as � ..an.. �s CO�Vk91A y � HEILHIS �'F'Fi��' E=.�i:.�'C1i`1 f3� �°�b��':�� 0 3i:'3 [: ;3S �� r _. ., ..__ ___.- _... � � � � u�--...�...r....... � .� .�..�.s . .. � ... ^ ..v 4 t ,,. �� k _ . , ,,:,, � . ;' ; ' J J . r . _ .� . '.A u �:` � � ` ...'... i , � ' ' ...' 1 ;� � '� ��; �� 5 vU�: � ' � � -�� { �9'�� a'1;� T— / � � , c � � „� � <, lr'i � o r F :v i� � i L y -- . ' ,, � } �_ _r� � °"' '` J 1 = 1 -- � � \ � f ( :'. . ; t ', . � J �� ! _la 1 — D%' J t _�� r� �i � a t �l „ i !` s a . '_ y� �. _ t 5 .,,<� � � V . £ ' ,` ''.. .,"''�� a : _ .,-- � �+ �i � ..� : ( aL.� � ' � � } �L ? .�' 0 � ° ' 1i �1 `� _ 'i�, o r,� ( .�J� � � 0 � �i .. ` ,�j � t R I .. � -� �� 2' � :, � l�, /� p d � `�� y >. . s �1 � r� , � _ ; ` ✓ �� , „�u�^ �; +. { � �y �i.3 a,4`Fi �iJ,� t , jR �3 �!',. ' � '�i "'� �:�a a3 � � !3 . � �. r y,. er �f/+ / `�� J V _,'� .J � ��?� r� �_°'m� � � � �,{ �� ,. � ( � -"�✓e�"..�5'_" � � �_ ° °ia �3 la � ... . . �a-...�.. -. . .w+m. . .... . q `...._ . ` !.. ^.. ' t —'-� r�YJ '� l..' �.. , _ . � . , x �. �ti�.._../- � . - f.� � /R'.� — '._ ..wa. , .�..a._. . ., � � ---' „�ti,� _ L.S. �f81-04, John Q�yle � '� � ` _ 6301 [3st River Koad ' a _ �. e_ , 'n — � ,t . - � s � : .._� •1 is�-r_i -'. . !� • ,� ' i+ - 4 a -.. �. _ f 'l °. '�A . i : . ,� i . s � p � 1 . . J R�� < `-!3. � a _,._ �. _ . .i__s � � t r�-j � rt h�`� '� . � �J , . C� � '� �� , u ¢�i � � � � - � ° � � �' � �' l �� 1 #.n � v ,� I �� a � � � .. �� . i �s� t } '� � i _ � . i d .i�/ !1 � �� iS r_.. _ _ i a } , ,,)- �'��r-'— �,� ' � � -.- � � �S� t �. J tt ' �� _ F il .� � j ' ..� � _�� i � � � - �in.. _ ... � � L � t i � � � g ! �" % ,'� � _ C � fI � I� � � i\ �+ . '� /� ��I L ��. �y�. �' � `}yY . ;. � � , i , I ��, � E j( � i / _� ' % � .: i ._._ E . I .� � P . C. / . � W°1�1 � e . .: � i i � � �i Y 1 � r .. , . � - { � . � � � � .�` _:.�.. .. �' : . .,� I 4 � 4„ �...� \ e �i . t. � } � �.�! ' e � . n z. �° � t� .i L�,.i' G�;q'� t r -.-.- l � ` �` � ��. i � i" k '�-,� , � a ', � ;�ib . f �s`��c� .�`,, r�p . 'r . ��_. 5�2r; , t°. .. w�, F. �' . . .,, i . 3 ' f S . � _. .. . � t v�. + { �/•}]1 j j. t i �"h �. , '3� {I- ltt 1 \�5< k .. ,- i �.. ^ j � i +�._ ! : Y aJJ �1 �� .�^"A] �, �s � � � � ' � �� i �ti� nYS � �j�� k.'��`� ��.� i �j� �...r,...�• ,,,.+, y � � i i �, / 1.3 ? �.� r � f i f ! <e . � �_._.__ I � � . �, c� � '� • . .� ��17J� � ,y'_ C s ��T %� � j {�� t � l � s:_� � Ni � a� r�� ' ' ��. ?..�-�:r"'�,r�� v ��'� ..� �:�j .�.P,.,. ..n:,.. ,-,. ,�...,�.:....�.,. �_...,� !� 1 � e`�'�I � .. � , '%' . '� ;� �f y ; � � y ti � ��`- i� is�� ,�,�t, :,� r ; i'` ,6"'`,�, � - � � � k � �� (q � � , ` � "� � /��J � �� r ,.1 ;�:iy� ��:{{� � � , � ,�+� �1� ti . .. J t'�_ Y' �,�.% � ,✓' '7 Li`J(JM ✓ i �(i ` I � -�1 t I \ . S � f 1 _..e�.. � ��'L. � '-t �-.� ;.,m � � i �� '. 5 �.� � �., ' ' i � ; ,� �.Ea M 6J� � � - � d� G�� +--� , � s . , ' r � ={ � � y � } � ' , � . � r� € '' � ' - � � � 3 i F N r ' � i.�'iN'� /.> /v �� I� _ ° .�.,. -...! I ' I j s� • �i, f.e----' ,� � , j i } � � , � e; I ' t/�;t �; s ; 'rtr � �r�' { �' /l� ��\�\\\\ .j } � , � � y' �'�I� � ~ �_`� . � , . `�t °' � i + � ' \ e� � �� .� �i� irjo �—/- /?�'"ir•`-�i f ._' oa �j _ u '.y ��\\ � .� r �'J k�� .`�_ �.�'`i t V ��a w � _..... . �r7:/�_1+�y ��10#,,i �rl-"t+ �lJ i �\\.l4 ��. �\._�s.:..r. ,...ux! r�� Ay.\1_ ^ .__€._.�� x �� i � � ei t � � t ( � ' S^ E g �� !1' � � �� .� �e�-aJ � ._. �j..� � 6 � ) ..�.�as✓ : y €� 3� '!" � �' ( ; �a �r � � �y �V P.� { - S '� j � � y°ji�� i � �4j i�o� . J . �_., � ,r�,� -;� .:' r R -�I / I � )i7 y �1j ) '1�C.j 'r� �+I 1 �I. ` � , . �� r t �-t ��r�Z1/ � r � 3 � �� i��w / � � �y,� - � 6�i� �� i`�� Q�z �� ?i �.c;l�°(�� ; 623'v� Y �_ 1 , � � ` .• I 1 � t-! '-y � ' j � , ,� ^z I w i ' � i t — --- y� j '��U� i,ss�i../�� i I �1 )4 � I � � � -� � � ` �� % v�1 6 I -� ..,`J�,_c ,� t^ . , � � a� �� 1� i Fi + r,t =°_ ' � �`•� �� . � „� � �, � � , �` � � . `� �; t — — ` , :< ? �: � � .< � � .. va�o � " \ �+ .iS t, / rt f� j i' � ' � \i � �r � i - CS�:a ; 1 � . ( l7LG , ! � � 5� } .,.._ s .z. �'_.. � r,. : . I " , Fx-i A� , � �'� � ( I 1 e \ < � �`� 4�� il ��,�, i V��'I 4 ��r , ) � �t � � K�` I ;� �G i � � � A � �� i �; n �" 0 � ; / � � � � � ' i " i i � .. � + � • � � � _. 10 , E i � GI D __ � �i'�.-� f •/ O _ � �� J �/ef 1 � � t � �. � �'� f � �� .,_ . ,.,' , S 1�.I `�fll ', �� i.'� � � �� L �;; • � 2 � - � i is 3 I� t � [ ! � � i;' .�', J � f,., + .. ; r ��, rmi=.., � � 4 , , ; , �� , , , �; x .��- :� ''- ___ �,_A ..,.: : ;..: _ � , ,, � � �� l � . � �'� , +�; �� , ;::--;.. �. � , ' � ! ; ` ,, : , \ � �.' z , 5 e i , . . �� , I'i `�� 1 �i `� � �� k I i � - , , � ; s �� ' �. .. ..:. � .� � � _ � i , .,'� �� , � , , � • ; �� t�. , ., r � .., , - : _ . . . ._ � . � - �.r, __ � r 4 � � _ , ; . , i ) :J �::,.;{�S5 f .:. - � F. -:. � - �.._. "',.. . .. . .� ..__ __ . ._. ..... �. n ,� r. , I� :_...._... . .. _. _..._. . ._ � o . . . . ... . . I � :; �' . ' , : � « - I't . � .. / / . � � ` ,� � ' � _ ' ' . 22 � .. ,,_ __ c �; � , ' � � � L.5 1iF31-0'4 John �oy,l�. r�'� .i � . . . . f , �, _ 63U1 East Itiver Roacf�� ;; �� '�-_ � i , .; .. � y� ; :- ` <> 1 1 �LLVI n 1 \ �. � C � Cl I✓ l� ' ' � 1.�. . ' � ' � l J �.. . \ � �i ~ } I q f s i [ � l I be ' . ... ....�u .. �. `� , in i , I � � .. , � � � ., � / t_ - � _�_.., _`..+_...,�. ___ ""_'__ _s � ' � I -'' ' .:, ,-,..- � ! . � • .., ,-. ' i. _. ._ .. ...._ � �__� -.r._�. ..`___ .__-�-q . ! _.. _.-.- —�.`- a . ..- E�� i. . . �__ .._ __.__ _ . a__. . _._ ._ 1 M`s O c _ _.- _" ...":!-_.-:I.�' . t P. � �n {.� �.i `, R ' 'p '' L.i % N `li . . �� i i?a J � ' ' I � l�. �4. � � , o a � q �' � . ��. � . � ` ; �S .� —L-_ '_.__ ___._-_ I t-� � ;a .: >! �. — ��; � � -j � . ; a.a G n � "` ( 1' �� . n t a } � � � "� � � ii � � � 1 ` . � I �, C`3. ° T�, . c ` < <J; � ;'r r- - ` �,i�� q Fr � = � �' �, � �I 1� ^ "cy `� ; � < � � '> j � � -�� _ _- E , e . . � , _ �f'-;r __ � , i �� I a � . : C� ` � "t � ; :,,, _: I .;3 � cez � ,:,, � � '( C,5 � i . , � �� .� a� � . .� ' , i �' � � n � �� f � ( �, l �� " " �[,i l; 1 f . _ '"__ '.`. \ t;.b �>�'. o V'. �.i,�;'' :t'.. '" 1�� i� � 0 .. � . �- . �� .. o- ` � � � - _ ,� � _ ,� _._'" __ ':J i rc+7 c �-.�I I 1 .—_' ____ —_' t� 4 i.. � ri I �� l ' � � � � `' S � 1, i U �4� IL y V, 1 ( ', I , , i • "I �..� __.,. ,i � -i �1 . f I _. � ._.._.�_. _—...._ :.._�_..__..— u� - ;i , C . , u ° n �'_c: \�� --}_I . r 1 ` /// � �� r'� / �i // � �� < `'>> , , _. ��. � —.._ . ��, � ) . � � �� IY—__"_'__�.�._.�— '— (� —_._.... .. .. - � '.I 1 / , l . .`� __�..` ., .' n_ .. _. , , � . . i� � � `� o E :`) Y' ,I •�i .' � �_ _ _ PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COPIMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing before the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 Wniversity Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, May 6, 1981 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a proposed conversion condominium licensing ordinance. Copies of this proposed.ordinance are available at City Hall. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at the above stated time and place. RICFiARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNIN6 COMMISSION Publish: April 29, 1981 � a3 __ oa�triF,t;r,e r�o. AN ORDINI;P�CE ESTAYE_ISHIfdG ChIF�PTER �217� 0� FRIDLEY CITY CCDE ENTITLED °CCfdUEI�SIOP! Cfli�;GG7�litlIUf�i" I_ICEPiSIP�G 217.01 Purpose 7he Council of the City of Fridley deems that it.is in the interest and promotion of the.healtli, safety and ;eneral �•;elfare of the residents of the City of Fridley that the o�,��ner(s) of a multiple dwelling intending ta convert to condominium units, reyister the intent with the City before such a convzrsion is initiated. 217.02 Definitions For the purposes of this chapter, except v�here the context indicates otherwise, the following oaords mean: a. Condominium: A multiple dtiveiliny in which portions are desig- nated for separate o�.anership and the remainder of t�rhich is designated for common ownership solely hy the o�.�ners of these portions. A muitiple dwelTing is not a condominium unless the undivided interests in thz co.imon elements are vested in the unit owners. b. Conversion Condominium: F multiple dwelling arhid� has 6een converted from rental units to ownership units in accordance with the Uniforir Condominiurr Act (CH. 58?_ - 1980 sessicn). c. Dwelling Unit: A single unit providing complete independent living facilities for one or more persons inciudiny pet,manent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. d. Niultiple Dwelling: Any 6uilding or structure containing therein two or more dwelling units a:hether used solely or exclusively for residential purposes or othertaise. e. O�vner: The person or body having an interest in a multip]e dwelling as a fee owdner or subordinate interest with the right to exercise iontrol and manageinent of the premises. 211.03. Reyistration At least 60 days prior to the conversiun notice given to tiie. tenants, the ou��ncr of a multiple da�e�lii�ng in tne Cit,� oi Fridley sha71 file with the City a certificate of r2gistration on a form provid�� by the City. F1t that i;imz, the o�.dner� shall also f�ile tl�ere�,d'itifi an appli�at�irni for l�icc�nse fra:i the City nnd pay �he licci75e f:;e. � � 23 -� PURPOSE �EFINTTIONS REGISTRATION Payt "L -- ORDiNi1PlCE PJO. �-- 217.64 Certificate of Registration, I_ir.cnse, and f=ees ll cerlrficate of reyistratio;� shall be rey��i�r�ed of any owner of a �r�ultiple d�relling located ar�ithiri t;he City of F�ridle,Y who intends to convert such a bu9lding to condor�iniur�;. 1�he 'lir'ense fee shal�l be provir+ed in Chapter 11 ofi this cr,de. This section do^s not exer�pt the o+mer of the annual rnultiple d�:elling license as set forth in Chapter 720 of tne Fridluy City Code. 217.05 Appiication Certificate of registration and application for a conversion condominium license shall contain the following information: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Description of ground area Gy street number and legal description. Size of the building. P+umber oi staries znd height in feet/meters. Total floor area of the building. Floor plans of proposed modifications. Plumber of darelling units in the condominium. Total area provided on premises for off street parking. A certification by the oa;ner that the building is not in violation nf the provisions as set forth in Chapter 220 of the Fridley City Coae. 9. The name and address of the individual to which any notice or order respecting the premises may be served or given during the conversion. 217.06 Cor+d�tion of Deniai The City may adcpt an ordinance to deny a conversion condominium license if there exists within the City a signific4nt short�ge of suitable rental ds�rellings available to lo�•i and moderate income individuals or- families or� to establish or maintain the City's eligibility for any feder<�l or state procra��i provid�ng d�irect or indirect financial assistance for housing to the CitY. The adnption of this ordinance shall eomply erith the provisions as set fuz-ti� by MI.S. 5}� q, }_}0€i of tf�e Unifor�n Condoir�inium Aci: (Ch. 582-1480 session) 24 CERTIPICFIIF OF REGISfRATION LICri!$E, APlD FE[S APPLICFlTIOP! CaPdDITItiN OF DENIAL 1'aye 3 -- ORDIh1Ai1CL PlO, 25 PASS�O I1ND t100I'7ED DY TII� CITY COUPJCIL 0(= Tf�IE CITY Uf� FRIULEY 7HIS ___ Dl1Y OF _ _ > 19�?I. hitiYOh - WiLLIAh1 J. NFE � AT7EST: GITY CLEPK - SIUP�EY C. INi�1N�d Public N2aring: First Reading: Second Reading: Puhlic Hearing: 0014A/091�1,4 CITY OF FRIDLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COI�MISSION MEETING APRIL 14, 1981 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Oquist called the April 14, 1981, Community Development Comnission meetinq to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: LeRoy Oquist, A1 Gabel, Kenneth Vos, Sharon Gustafson Connie Modig Bill Deblon, Associate PTanner Jerrold Boar.dman, City Planner Kent Hill, Economic Development Ass�stant APPROVAL OF MARCH 10, 1981 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIOfJ MINUTES: MOTIDN BY MR�. GRBEL� SECONDED BY MS. GUSTAFSON� TO APPROVE THE COMMUNITY�DEVELOP- MENT COMMISSIDN MINUTES OF MRRCH 10� I982� AS WRITTEN. UPON.A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DSCLARED TNE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. � • 1. INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS GUIDELINES: F Mr. -0quist stated that at their last meeting, the Commission had made a motion asking the City Council to give the Commission more specific direction or guide- lines on what the City Council wanted to see as far as a policy on industrial revenue bonds and to give the Comrnission some clarification on what they think of the existing industrial revenue bonding policy. Mr. Deblon stated he has not received any response from City Council regarding that motion. MOTZON BY MR. GABEL� SECONDfiD BY MS. GUSTAFSONy TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION ON THE �INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS GUIDELINES UNTIL DIRECTION IS RECfiIVED FROM CITY�COUNCIL. UPON A VOICE VOSE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHASRPERSON OQITIST DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY. . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIOP! MEETING, APRIC 14, 19$1 PAGE 2 2. PURPOSE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: Mr. Oquist stated that at the last meeting, the Commission members requested Mr. Boardman to come to this meeting. Some of the questions Ms. Gustafson wished to ask Mr. Boardman were: blhere do Community Oevelopment Block Grant (CDBG) funds go and how much money has the City received? Who are the decision makers regarding CDBG funds? Who holds the public hearings on CDBG funds, and where are the public hearings held? t�r. Oquist stated they had also wanted Mr. Boardman to participate in the discussion of the purpose of this Comm9ssion. Mr. Boardman stated that Anoka County has been declared by HUD as an urban county. An "urban county" means that they no longer have to compete for CDBG funds 6ut are a guaranteed funding agency as long as the population remains above 200,000. After the 1980 census, the County dropped below Z00,000 so at this point in time, they have one year of funding. That funding came to the County in Sept. 1980. The package had to be put together very quickly, because application was due May 1, 1981. So, the County's first process was to notify the city councils that Anoka County is an urban county, and that the County needed al] the communities in Anoka County to join in and make a commitment to the.County. . Mr. Boardman stated the County set up a task force made up of one member from each community in the County. He was appointed by City Council to sit on that task force. Weekly meetings were held for a month and a half to see what the process was, how quickiy they couid go through that process, and whether they could or could not get the application completed. He believed there was $2 million available to the County during the first go-around, and they anticipate that every community will get some of that money. • Mr, Boardman stated the task force divided the County into five districts. This district was fridley, Coon Rapids, and Blaine. They used a HUD formula based on poverty levels, housing stock, and other kinds of percentages to divide the funds among the five districts. Fridley, Coon Rapids, and Blaine got $840,000: fridley received $280,000. From there, there was a request that all the cities had to put in their proposa7s for each of those groups. Each city had about four weeks to put together a proposal and submit it. Mr. Boardman stated that one of tfie processes required under the HUD block grant program is a public hearing process. In order to establish a public hearing process they felt was an equitable process between the communities, the County Board established a steering committee for each of the five districts. The steering committee for each district was made up of two representatives from each community. He stated the steering committees held their public hearings in January and February. Mr, Boardman stated that because of the situation and the quick process they had to go through, Staff selected two projeets and submitted those two projects to the City Council, City Council approved that recommendation, the City Cauncil recommended directly to the steering committee, the steering committee reviewed the recommenda- tion, and made their recommendation to the County Board. COMMUNITY -DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 14, 1981 PAGE 3 Mr. Boardman stated the steering committees will remain in the process as long as there is the potential for community development block grant funds. He stated that from here on, he thought they needed some kind of process of establishing projects at the city level so that those projects could be submitted to the City Council for approval. Mr. Boardman stated they have been pushing for some special legislation at the federal level to classify Anoka County as an "entitlement county" even this year so it is entitled to "x" amount of dollars and will not have to compete with other counties. Mr. Boardman stated that the County submits the applications for the cities. The Couniy is ultimately responsible for the finances and for the projects to be completed. He stated the County has set aside $250,000 for�entitlement funds to go for housing rehab in the County. That will be operated by the CAP Agency. Mr. Oquist stated maybe this Comnission should be discussing the kinds of projects the City should be looking at. Mr. Boardman stated it might be worthwhile for the Community Development Commission to look at additionai funding programs. Mr. Oquist stated that regarding the purpose of the Commission, they have discussed before that the commission is kind of like a mini-Planning Commission. Even the goals and objectives include Planning Comnission kinds of things and are so global. Mr. Boardman stated that is why he would like to see them narrow their scope and tay out some very precise direction for the Commission. Ne stated "housing" is something the Commission might want to look at, and maybe the City needs a comnission that takes an in-depth look at housing and housing situations. The Housing & Redevelopment Authority is project-oriented and does not look at specific housing needs. The HRA is more like a city council and is not a policy-making body. Mr. Boardman stated one of the functions he could possibly see for the Comnunity Development Cor�nission is being more of a study group to understand housing, what kind of problems the City has with existing housing, and those types of things, and make policy recommendations based on housing. Another thing could be historic sites. Mr. Boardman stated that if the Commission decided to get into housing, Staff wouid give them all the inforroation on where the City is, where they want to go on housing, and why the City wants to go that direction. Mr. Oquist asked if the Comnission could make any recommendations on housing for the Moore take Redevelopment Area. Mr. Boardman stated the Comnission could propose recommendations to the City Council. Mr. Oquist asked if housing was something the Commissiorr could base its livelihood on for a period of time. They coutd spend six months coming up with suggestions, and then what would the Comnission do after that? ITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 14. 1981 PAGE 4 Mr. Boardman stated that housing is always going to be a changing issue. There is always going to be issues that deal with housing. He did not know if the Commission wanted to get into the nitty-gritty of looking for projects. That might not be realistic for this commission. He was looking more for input from the com�nissions based on overa]] housing direction--a recommendation of housing policy. Mr. Kent Hi11 stated one way to more understand what the City Council wants is to meet with the City Council yearly or every six months to get a feel for what the City Council's direction is. He has come from other cities, and he has never seen commissions and a City Council work apart from one another like they do in Fridley. He is seeing a diversity here in that the City Council is doing one thing and the cor�nissions are off doing something else, Mr. Oquist stated that has been a big prablem, even with the Planning Commission. Oftentimes, he feels there is no need for any of the comnissions. Mr. Boardman stated that if the Commission is asking for direction, he would say they need more direction in the development of specific policies as to housing and those types of issues and community development block grants. He stated that for the Commission to go on the way they have been is a real waste of their time. Ms. Gustafsbn stated her biggest complaint is that the Commission is not aware of what is going on in the City. They know nothing, and even have to ask Mr. Boardman to come to the meeting in order to learn the status of the community deveTopment block grant funds. If ihe Commission doesn't know ihese things, how do the citizens of Fridley know what is going on? Mr. Boardman stated the only way to notify the public is through the newspaper, and they try to do that as much as they can. ; Dr. Vos stated it seemed as though the Commission should receive some'kind of synopsis or status report on key things that are going on in the city. He stated there are minutes and there is information. Minutes do not always give you the information you want. Minutes contain what is discussed at the moment and motions that are made at the moment, but there are trends that come through. Ne has been on the Commission for four years, and the trends that seem to come through in this Coiranission deal with housing. There seems like there should be some way of getting that information without just reading the minutes. Mr. Hill stated the Coimitission cou]d request the City Council agenda to review on a weekly basis. That would keep them up to date on what the City Council is doing. They could also ask the City Council to provide the Commission with the information sheet Dr. Vos is talking about. Mr. Oquist stated what he heard Dr. Vos saying is that he would like a monthly status report on major projects in the City. COMi�UNITY �EVELOPMENT COMi�ISSIOPd MCETING, APRIL 14, 1981 PAGE 5 Mr. Hili atated that some of the other communities he has worked with over the last 10-15 years have gotten involved in what is called "government by objective". The City Council sits down on a yearly basis to set goals, they highlight these goals to the different commissions, and give each commission distinctive guide- lines for the commission to follow during the year with status reports on a quarterly basis. Mr. Oquist stated that the Commission needs to start looking at their goals and objectives and possib1y cut them down and resubmit them to City Council for approval. Mr. Boardman stated the Commission could set up a personal internal direction for the Corr�nission and submit that direction to City Council. That would not require an ordinance change. Mr. Boardman stated the Comnission might also want to look at the process of citizen participation. If they get into community development block grants, there has to be a citizen participation plan and an implementation plan. The Commission might want to look into how they could get citizen participation and how they could disburse that information. Would it be a waste of time and money? In the past, it has been a waste of time and money, because most peop7e don't want that information unless it affects them directly. If it does affect them directly, they are notified by the City anyway. Mr. Oquist stated they have talked about recommendations dealing with housing. That is already part of their goals and objectives. They could make specific recomnendations regarding housing, but that does not mean the Commission is going to be involved with housing. Because of time or some other reason, Staff could go directly to City Council and bypass the Cortenission anyway. •Unless City Council is willing to pass some kind of resolution stating they wil'I not rule on anything pertaining to housing until the Corimiunity Development Commission has'reviewed it, the Commission will be in the same situation they are in today, and this whole discussion is useless. Because of this, Mr. Oquist stated he could see the Commission floundering even in the future. Mr. Boardman stated that before the Canmission goes to City Councit, they have to have some specifics pretty well laid out on what tfiey would want to be involved in. Mr. Hill stated the Commission might want to suggest to the City Council that there be an open line of communication from the Planning Co�renission to the City Council. There is no reason to have a comnission unless there is some direct communication from the decision-making body. Mr. Oquist stated the Comnission members should look at the goals and objectives s0 that at their next meeting, they can reaily start narrowing their objectives and try to come up with some specific things they would like to be invoTved in. MOTION BY MS. GUSTRFSON� SECONDED BY MR. GABEL� TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION ON THE � � PURPOSfi OF THE COMMUNTTY DfiVE7APMENT COMMISSION UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. S� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMt4ISSI0N MEETING, APRIL 14, 198T PAGE 6 3. DISCUSSION QF BASEMENT APARTMENTS (Memo from John Flora to City Manager , . , � , , .. , ,,.,, �---- Mr. Boardman stated the City Council would like to have the ability to deny or approve special use permits for basement apartments. They have requested that the Community Development Commission come up with some specific recommendations on the criteria by which they can deny or approve a special use permit for a "basement" or "mother-in-law" apartment. Mr. Deblon stated Mr. Flora's memo contains some items as minimum requirements that should be obtained to establish a second apartment in an R-7 zone, Attached to Mr. Flora's memo is a survey of surrounding communities on their procedures for handling second apartments in R-1 zones. Mr. Boardman stated they want to make sure the house is owner-occupied. Their main concern is the upkeep.: That can be contro7led by having the special use permit expire at the time of sale. If the new owner applies for a specia7 use permit and meets the requirement to live in the unit, then another specia7 use permit would probably be granted. Mr. Oquist stated one requirement listed is a 7ot size of 10,000 sq. ft. Since the minimum lot size for a single family home is 9,000 sq, ft., he felt that requirement should be decreased to 9,000 sq. ft. Ms. Gustafson stated she agreed that the lot size should be decreased. The Commission members concurred that "basement" and "mother-in-law" apartments should be changed to "Two families in a single-family unit". MOTION BY MR. GABEL� SECONDED BY�DR. VOS, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY CDUNCIL THE FOLLCJWING CRITERIA AS TX& MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS IN ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL�USE. PERMIT FOR "TWO FAMILIES.IN A SINGLE—FAMILY UNIT" IN AN R—L ZONE: � 2. MINIMUM IAT SIZE OF 9�000 SQ. FT. � �� - �2, FLOOR AREA FOR SECOND APARTMENT NOT LESS THAN 650 SQ. FT.� 3. OFF—STREET PARKING (GARAGE) FOR AT LEAST 4 VEHICLES �. 4. CANNOT BE PERMANENTLY SEALED OFF (I.E.� COMMON ENTRY WAY� ONE ADDRESS,� � ONE WATER ME1'ER� ONE GAS METER, AND ONE�ELECTkIC METER% 5. SPECIAL USE PERMIT EXPIRES AT SALE � . 6. ONE APARTMENT IS O:dNER—OCCUPIED 7. SPECIAY� USE PERMIT ON FILE AT COUNTY WITH TITLE � 8. CONFORMS WITH STATE BUILDING CODE � � � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED�THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. . . . � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETINf, APRIL 14, 1981 PAGE 7 4. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSOfd AND VICE—CHAIRPERSON (1981-1982): MOTION BY MR. GABEL TO POSTPONE THE ELECTION OF OFFICERS UNTIL THE MAY MEETING WNEN THERE IS A�FULL COMAPISSZON. � MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. � Chairperson Oquist declared the nominations open for Chairperson of the Community Development Commission. Dr. Vos nominated LeRoy Oquist for Chairperson, Hearing no other nominations, Chairperson Oquist declared the nominations for chairperson closed. MOTION BY MR. GABEL� SECONDED BY DR. VOS� TO CAST A UNANIMOUS BALLOT FOR LE&OY OQUIST FOR CHRZRPERSON OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. . UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLISRED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairperson Oquist declared the nominations open for Vice-Chairperson of the . Community Development Commission. Mr. Gabel nominated Conn�e Modig for Vice-Chairperson. Ms. Gustafson nominated Ken Vos for Vice-Chairperson. Hearing no other nominations, Chairperson Oquist declared the nominations for Vice-Chairperson c7osed. � After conducting a secret ballot, Chairperson Oquist declared Dr. Ken'Vos Vice- Ghairperson of the Community Development Commission. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MS. GUSTRFSON, SECOND6D BY MR. GABEL� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A� VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE APRIL 14�.1982� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:57 P.M. Respectfully submitted, t�c.� �� Ly Saba Recording Secretary , �. � ` INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF DISABLED PERSONS ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING April 21, 1981 Ms. Mary van Dan, liaison from the City of Fridley to the International Year of Disabled Persons, called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Ms. van Dan explained that a disability covers a broad range of physical and mental problems. Currently there are approximately 24,000 disabled persons in Anoka County. Ms. van Dan stated her background has led to her interest in the International Year of Disabled Persons. She is currently the chairperson of the Human Resources Commission and has worked with persons with disabilities for many years as a nurse. Ms. van Dan explained the purpose of this meeting was to hear what the needs of the people in attendance are and to set goals, and to develop projects to meet those needs. She also hoped to have a chairperson for this group elected from the people in attendance. PROCLAMATION Ms. van Dan explained that Mayor Nee has officially proclaimed 1981 as International Year of Disabled Persons. A PROCLAMATION BY THE MAYOR OF FRIDLEY WHEREAS, the United Nations has proclaimed 1981 the International Year of Disabled Persons, with a world wide theme of "The fullest possible participation of disabled persons in the life of their societies" and WHEREAS, there are 35 million disabled Americans who represent one of the most under-recognized national resources, whose will, spirit and hearts are not iinpaired, despite their limitations. WHEREAS, through partnership of disabled and non-disabled persons, of our private sector and our government; and of our national, state and community organizations, we can expand the opportunities for disabled Americans to make a fuiler contribution to our national life; I pledge the cooperation of the City of Fridley to this program. page 2 � � NOW, THEREFORE, in keeping with the goals of the International Year, I, William J. Nee, Mayor of the City of Fridley, do hereby proclaim 1981 tfie International Year of Disabled Persons in Fridley. PRESENTATION BY CHERYL ENGSTROM Ms. van Dan welcomed Ms. Engstrom. She stated that Ms. Engstrom is the Information Specialist for International Year Minnesota (IYM) and works for the State Council for the handicapped. Ms. Engstrom stated that for anyone who cares about the disabled, this is the year to show it. She explained that economically we have very hard struggles ahead. With ail the pending budget cuts we must make the best use of available resources. Ms. Engstrom stated Minnesota has been chosen as one of seven flagship states in the United States and that this is an honor. It means we are serving as a model for other states and have a great deal of communication with the U.S. Council for IY�P. Ms. Engstrom explained the major functions of the State Council for the handicapped: 1. To serve as an information and referral service to citizens and agencies. 2. To head up special projects like IYDP. Currently forty different organizations are working on a state level. This coalition has set up a different topic focus for each manth of IYDP. 3. To give technical assistance to individuals and organizations on accessibility issues. The Council has an accessibility specialist to conduct surveys on 6uildings. The purpose of the survey is to make the building accessible at the lowest possible cost. 4. To print and distribute Internationa7 Year Minnesota, a newsletter which focuses on the selected monthly topics. The newsletter has a national, state, and local� column describin9 various IYDP activities. Ms. Engstrom described some of the activites happening in Minnesota for International Year. For example, the Minnesota Chapter.of People to People is working with schools in foreign countries and sharing information with them. Other communities throughout the state are putting together job fairs where eiriployers take applications and job hunting skflls are taught. Other important projects include those cancerning transportation. Metro Mobility is planning expansions, but these may be eliminated due to a lack of funding. page 3 d � Ms'. Engstrom stated that many correnunities are following the IYM monthly focus plan and Fridley may want to do this also. She explained that.the focus of June is Recreation and Sports; July is Housing and Residential Options, and August is Access to Buildings and Programs. BRAINSTORMING SESSION Ms. van Dan opened the discussion to those in attendance. Severai major concerns were expressed at this time. First was the dif- ficulty that a disabled person has in finding employment. Ms. Engstrom � suggested several activities the Fridley IYDP organization might encourage to counteract this problem. We may want to develop a brochure to be sponsored by a civie organization that would be sent to all area employers. We may also wish to contact employers of the handicapped to obtain testi- mony about the effectiveness of those workers. Concern was expressed about the problems a disabled person often has in dealing with his/her family and vice-versa. Ms. Engstrom stated September is "Family Month" and this may be a good time to develop support groups and to promote better family relationships for disabled persons. An example of an activity is planning a day long picnic and recreational event with counselors available for discussions. The major concern expressed by those in attendance is the lack of adequate transportation facilities within the City. The intersection at University and Mississippi Streets constitutes a major barrier to the Holly Shopping Center for Village Green residents. It is also very difficult to use the bus system to reach doctors' offices and other shopping locations. Ms. Engstrom suggested we do a comprehensive study of the current trans- portation system in Fridley. This would include locating disabled persons in Fridley and working out efficient transportation routes to suggest to Metro Mobility. Means of locating disabled persons include surveys in local newspapers, and contacting organizations and individuals that deal with disabled persons. MR. BILL HART Ms. van Dan introduced Mr. Hart of the Fridley Shriners Club. Mr. Hart explained that his organization takes care of disabled children from six months of age to eighteen years of age. The Shriners have eighteen hospitals located throughout the United States, including a sixty-bed hospital in this area located on East River Road. Mr. Hart stated during the past few years the local hospital has only had a 50;5 useage rate. The Shriners are currently attempting to locate disabled children in need of inedical assistance. page 4 COON RAPIDS IYDP Ms. van Dan introduced Ms. Mary Cayan. Ms. Cayan is the City staff person to the Human Resources Commission and is working with the set-up of a Fridley IYDP committee. Ms. Cayan explained that the City of Coon Rapids has a IYDP committee that has been active for about five months. The committee meets at 4:00 p.m. on the first Monday of each month at the Coon Rapids City Hall. This com- mittee is following the monthly focus plan that Ms. Engstrom described earlier. A different chairperson is selected for each month to organize focus activities for the month. Some activities are being organized on a county-wide Tevel and the Fridley IYDP has been invited to partic�pate in these activities. One such activity is a job fair which is planned for October. ELECTION OF CNAIRPFRSONS AND GOAL SETTING Mr. Lynn Boergerhoff of the Fridley Human Resources Commission and Ms. Barbara Terpstra agreed to co-chair the fridley International Year of Disabled Persons Committee. Two major goals were set for the immediate future; 1) to analyze the current transportation system in Fridley, and 2). to locate disabled persons living and/or working in Fridley. ADJOURNMENT After setting a meeting time of 1:00 p.m., Monday, May il, 1481 at Village Green, the Fridley IYDP committee adjourned at 9:35 p.m. t � A Name Lynn Boergerhoff Lucile Taylor Cheri Engstrom Kenneth L. Kravik Barbara Terpstra Clara Nordell Marion Anderson Edna Maznio Elvira Jones Elois Campbell Mary Keulyes Alice M. Van Vleet Myrtle Rapp Kathryn 0'Shaunesy �oseph R. Campbell Alice Anderson 8rian Goodspeed Mary Cayan Bill Hart PERSONS IN ATTENDANCE Address 7374 Van Buren St. N.E. 460 Mississippi St. N.E. 460 Mississippi St. �111 460 Mississippi St. #101 460 Mississippi St. 460 Mississippi St. #315 " " #510 " " #304 " " #309 ° " #514 " " #412 " " #305 " " #304 ° " #107 Affiliation Council for HC HRC City of Fridley Shriners Club Teleahone No 786-7167 571-7380 296-6785 571-7095 571-9014 571-6670 571-6661 571-3896 571-7688 571-6786 571-7026 574-1869 571-5951 571-7785 571-6786 571-7163 571-4822 571-3450 o�J�- � �J��, �� - �U�� , �� -, ��, � �,,� � � �rr`s /�, 2-'�/`�.�� 2/� .-��r Q CJ��t" � •�"-� ��, , �� 7 �-- 7s��'� �. � �S- 7 S �'f G.>a� 4��. S"S - '7 � h�-�% /1��. 6 s . �-S � y�.�� C. CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 6, 1981 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Harris called the May 6, 1981, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mr. Harris, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svanda, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Hughes, Ms. van Dan, Mr. Wharton Members Absent: None Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner John Doyle, 6305 East River Road Ray Price, 77 - 75th Way N.E. James Fisher, 45 - 75th Way N.E. Robert Varhol, 55 - 75th Way N.E. Jan Dean, 65 - 75th Way N.E, APPROVAL OF APRIL 22, 1981, PLANNING COMMISSION �INUTES: MOTION BY MS. VAN DAN, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO APPROVE THE APRIL 22� I482, PLANNING COMMI5SION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. TABLED: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #81-06, BY L�I� I EST E�S; I.: Per Section �ST, �, , o t e ri ey i ty Co e, to a ow the construction of a duplex in R-1 zoning (single family dwelling areas) on Lot 3, Block 1, Leigh Terrace, the same being 31 Osborne Way N.E. MOTION BY hIl2. OQUIST� SECONDED BY �4Z. SVANDA� TO REMOVE THE REQUEST FOR R SpEC2AL USE PERMIT� SP ll81-06� BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS� INC., FROM THE TABLE. UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRNAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRI&D UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST� TO.REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #81-06 BY LEIGHS�INVfiSTMENTS� INC. UPON R VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CFIAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED.THE PUBLIC HEARING REOPENED AT 7:40 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 6, 1981 PAGE 2 Mr. Boardman stated that at the last meeting, the Planning Commission tabled this request and requested the petitioner to come back with a redesign of the structure. He stated Mr. Doyle, the petitioner, was in the audience to answer questions. He stated this new design meets the 3-stall requirement. Mr. Doyle stated that the new plan was redesigned to provide the 3-stall require- ment. Actually, there is a stall and one-half on one side and two stalls on the other side. He again explained that the reason for requesting this special use permit is because on two separate occasions, they have had single family homes sold on that corner lot, and both times the lenders were reluctant to pro- vide financing. The lenders did not feel that corner was the proper location for a single family home. He stated he is planning on doing some fencing along East River Road to provide a buffer to this property. Mr. Harris asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak to this item. Mr. Robert Varhol, 55 - 75th Way N.E., stated Mr. Doyle has two houses in that area already, If he puts in another house, it will create a fire hazard as the houses are too close together, He has one house that has been there for two years and hasn't been sold yet. Ms. Jan Dean, 65 - 75th Way N.E., stated it seemed strange that financing was impossible to get for a single family dwelling because of the noxious fumes and heavy traffic on East River Road, and instead of one family being subjected to those conditions, it seemed preferable to put two families in there. She stated when Mr. Doyle purchased this property, he knew East River Road was there with its various problems. The lot is very small and did not meet the minimum code requirements for what is needed to build a duplex. At the last Planning Commission meeting, there was some discussion about the fact that the St. Paul Waterworks property in the back cou7d be considered part of this property and would meet the lot requirements. She showed the Planning Commission pictures she had taken of the lot. Mr. Ray Price, 77 - 75th Way N.E., stated he was against the duplex. He stated there is already a little white house with a garage larger than the house, a large brown house, and now Mr. Doyle wants to squeeze in a duplex for two families. Mr. �im Fisher, 45 - 75th Way N.E., stated he lives right across the street from this lot. After Mr. Doyle puts in a fence, there is going to be only about 10 ft. from the front door to the fence. The big brown house has no yard. He thought it would be a blight to the neighborhood to try to jam another building into this small area. Any people visiting that duplex would have to park in front of their homes as there would not be any room to park on the lot. Mr. Doyle stated he is before the Planning Commission with a special use permit request. The lot is a buildable lot. He did not know what bearing the other houses has on this project. He is trying to work with the neighborhood to build PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 6, 1981 PAGE 3 something that is going to look nice in the neighborhood, but he is having trouble getting a nice looking sinqle family home sold and financed on that lot. He is better able to build rental property, because the lending agents' rules are different on rental property. Mr. Price stated that if Mr. Doyle was looking for the best thing for the neighbor- hood, then he would not build a duplex, because the neighborhood does not want it. A single family home would be fine. Ms. Dean stated she felt the issue of the other houses was germane to the issue, because they live there. At the last meeting, Mr. Doyle had stated he would try to get an owner occupant in that duplex. She would challenge the members of the Planning Corronission to consider whether they would want to be the owner occupant of a duplex in this location. She stated there are three lanes of traffic on �sborne Way. There would not be any place for parking so close to the intersection, and the traffic light stands right on the property. Mr. Oquist stated he was looking at the other side of the issu�. He understands the problem with having affordable housing and what young people are paying today to buy a home. Affordable housing is just not available anymore. Cities have to provide some kind of affordable housing for people,yet everybody is opposed to having it across the street from them. Ms. Hughes stated there are two considerations here, and they covered them in their last meeting: (1) the relationship to the St. Paul Waterworks property that gives the petitioner a buildable lot and could be revoked; and (2} what is the difference between rezoning and a special use permit in terms of the burden of proof? Mr. Harris stated that with a rezoning, it is encumbent upon the petitioner to show cause why the property should be rezoned. With a special use permit, which this request is, it is encumbent upon the City to show cause why the special use permit should be denied. So, if this request is denied, the Planning Commission must give substantial reasons for that denial. Ms. Hughes stated she would like to remind the Planning Commission members and the audience that they are dealing with a special use permit to a]]ow a two-family dwelling unit in a single family dwelling area. If the permit is granted, it amounts to about the same as a rezoning. Ms. Hughes asked Mr. Doyle if he had considered having two lots instead of three lots. It would require moving some houses, but would give the large brown house more yard area and would provide a larger lot to get the building farther back from East River Road. Mr. Doyle stated he has considered that, but in looking at the economics of it, it is just too hard to just take down houses. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 6, 1981 PAGE 4 Mr. Boardman stated again that because of a special agreement with the Water Department of St. Paul that would allow the use of the St. Paul Waterworks property as a portion of lot size, this lot meets the lot requirements for a duplex. The City Council approved the plat on May 17, 1976. He stated that even if the special use permit was revoked, the lot was still buildable because of the approval of the plat. MOTION BY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #82-06 BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS, INC. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:28 P.M. Ms. Hughes stated that because this lot is so small and is located off East River Road, it seems to create a lot of problems in terms of noise and vehicle exhaust emissions which would concern her about having anyone live there. It also seems out of character with the rest of the neighborhood which is single family. Since there are going to be some bikeway easements along East River Road, it seems the smart thing to do is deny the special use permit, and maybe the time will come when a single family home can be built on the 1ot. The special use permit seems to be a way around rezoning at this time and that did not appeal to her. Ms. Gabel stated she agreed totally with Ms. Hughes. The neighborhood is all single family and this is not compatible or desirable. Ms. van Dan stated she also agreed with Ms. Hughes. There is a lot of traffic in that area. She was also concerned about a two-story building obstructing the view of southbound traffic on East River Road. If fence or bushes were put in along the lot, she would also be concerned about the eastbound traffic on Osborne Way seeing the southbound traffic coming down East River Road. MOTION BY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, 5P �8I-06� BY LEIGH INVESTMENTS� INC.: PER SECTION 205.052, 3, D, OF THE FRTDLEY CITY CODE, TO RLLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF�A DUPLEX IN R-1 ZONING (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ARERSJ ON ZAT 3� BLOCK I� LEIGH TERRACE� THE SAME BEING 3I QSBORNE WAY N.E.� FOR THE FOLLOWING REA50NS: .I. THE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ON TXE LOT FROM NOISE AND VEHICLE POLLUTION. 2. THE DANGERS OF TRAFFIC FROM A DRIVEWAY AND MULTIPLE CARS AT THAT LOCRTION. 3. IT IS OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. Ms. Hughes stated it was very obvious that the noise levels along East River Road could be very high at certain times during the day. It is an extremely busy road and when the bridge across the river is built in Coon Rapids, particularly if there is access onto East River Road, that would make East River Road as busy as University Avenue. UPON R VOICE VOTE, HARRIS� VAN DAN� GABEL� HUGHES, AND WHARTON VOTING AYE� SVANDA AND OQUIST VOTING NAY, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-2. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 6 1981 PAGE 5 Mr. Harris stated that SP #81-06 would go to City Council on May 18. 2. LOT SPLIT RE UEST: L.S. #81-04, BY JOHN R. DOYLE: Split off the East 8 feet of ot 2,��it off t e est feet of Lot 14, and add to Lot 13, all in Fridley Park Addition, to make a buildable lot after 32 feet of Lot 12 is taken by Anoka County, the same being 6301 East River Road N.E. Mr. Boardman stated the reason for the lot split request is primarily hecause of a court case that is going on right now in Anoka County. The property is located on East River Road south of Mississippi. Anoka County is presently acquiring property for expansion of East River Road. The County is planning on taking 32 ft. from Lot 12. The County is contending that what is 6eing left is actually a buildable lot. The only way to make that determination and make that a buildable lot is through a lot split process. Mr. Doyle is before the Planning Commission and the City Council to see if the lot split will be granted. If the lot split is granted, then it is a buildable lot. The existing house is located on Lots 13 and 14. Mr. Boardman stated that by adding the 9 feet, then with the lot split the present lot would have a 57 ft. width and a 732 ft. depth and is 7,524 sq. ft. By code with the lot split, it is a buildable lot. The remaining lot has a 71 ft. frontage and 9,372 sq. ft. Mr. Boardman stated the question before the Planning Comnission and City Council is: Will the Planning Commission and City Council approve a lot split request? This area was platted before 1955 where a lot cannot be less than 50 ft., but can be less than 60 ft. would would require 7,50� sq, ft. Mr. Harris stated that if Mr. Doyle cannot get financing to build a singte family home on the lot on Osborne Way and East River Road, how did he think he could do it on this lot? Mr. Doyle stated he did not know. The lot does meet the requirements. What might be favorable on a lot that size is to be excused from having a garage in order to make the home affordable. Mr. Harris stated that from a comnunity standpoint and what would be best for the City would be for the County to acquire the whole 80 ft. lot, so there is adequate open space between the highway surface and the residential area. Acquiring pieces of property here and there has been done all the way up East River Road, causing road surfaces to be too close to dwellings and driveways and accesses too close to East River Road. Mr. Boardman stated he felt if this lot split request is denied, there should be something in the record that states if the County does acquire this property, this property be tied together in some way with Lot 13 so the 48 ft. would not go tax forfeit. If anyone tries to sell Lot 12 off from Lot 13, they would then require a lot split. He is very concerned about having a 48 ft. lot that may eventually go tax forfeit. PLANNING COPAMISSION MEETING. MAY 6, 1981 Mr. Harris stated he is not in favor of having a structure between the existing structure and East River Road, which is a major highway, and he did think+the boulevards should be wider in there. Three to five feet isn't even enough for snow storage. Ne stated they should not subject any more residents to being that close to East River Road. Ms. Hughes stated the Planning Comnission's options are: (1) to give the lot split and presumably legally �eet all the lot requirements of the plat, but it would give them an undesirable lot; (2) if they do deny the 7ot split request, what is going to happen is the County will take the 32 ft. and then Mr. Doyle will have a 48 ft. lot. That 48 ft. could be tacked onto the 80 ft. lot, making a 128 ft. lot, which is a big lot. From the standpoint of the City, that did not look like a very good deal. from the standpoint of the petitioner, at this point she felt there was no overwhelming reason for him to have the lot split. So, on that basis, she thought maybe the best thing for the City would be to oppose the lot split. Mr. Harris stated not so long ago, the Planning Commission was discussing 7,500 sq. ft. lots versus 9,000 sq. ft. lots. 7he City has taken the position that they should stay with 9,000 sq. ft, lots. Gommunity Development has concurred with that, and in his discussions with the City Council, the majority of the Council has agreed the City should stay with 9,000 sq. ft. lots. Now, to accommodate the County, the City is going to create a 7,500 sq. ft. lot. He felt that was being very inconsistent. Ms. Hughes stated 7,500 sq. ft. lots work in some places, but they do not work on corners, and the theory is to have larger corner lots. Mr. Harris stated the 57 ft, lot is inconsistent with the rest of the neighborhood, which, for the most part, are residences built on 80 ft, lots. He felt it would be poor planning to put a residence on a smaller lot than is normal for the area only 172 ft. from a major highway, which basically is what they are being asked to concur with. He stated this was not a viable building site. Mr. Doyle asked if the Planning Commission would be willing to give an east/west lot split. Mr. Harris stated he could never consider an east/west lot split from the stand- point that it would be an absolute disaster as far as a hazard to safety. As City policy, they have tried to eliminate direct driveways onto East River Road, wherever possible. He believed it was also County policy to deny those kinds of requests, and in several instances along East River Road, the County has denied direct access onto East River Road. Mr. Oquist stated that in thinking about an east/west lot split, it may work out better to have an east/west lot split but have the driveway from the back lot come out on 63rd with a driveway easement. Ms. Hughes stated the east/west split as Mr. Oquist has proposed would have more appeal to her. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 6, 1981 PAGE 7 Mr. Harris stated the problem with the east/west lot split is it would still be creating two lots that are not in character with the neighborhood. MOTION BY M5. HUGHES� SECONDED BY MR. WHARTON� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF IAT SPLIT REQUEST, IS #81-04, BY JOHN R. DOYLE. Ms. Gabel and Mr. Svanda stated they basically agreed with all that Mr. Harris has said about the 57 ft. lot being inconsistent with the neighborhood and that it is not a viable building site. Mr. Oquist stated he also agreed wiih Mr. Harris. He agreed it did not make much sense to put a single family home on that size lot to be a buffer from East River Road. But, do they have strong enough reasons to deny the lot split request? Mr. Harris stated he thought there was more to it than just the letter of the law, because there are peop1e involved, there is the health, safety, and general welfare of the community involved in granting such a lot split. Just because the letter of the law says they should approve the lot split, he did not think that was a viable enough reason to approve it. People have to live there. WSTH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE SECONDER� MS.�HUGHES�WITHDREW THE MOTION. MOTION BY MS. HUGHES� SECONDED BY M5. GABEL� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL AENIAL OF LOT SPLIT REQUEST, LS #81-04� BY JOHN R. DOYLE� TO SPLIT OFF THE EAST 8 FEET OF LOT I2� AND SPLIT OFF THE WEST 9 FEET OF LOT 14� AND ADD TO LOT 13� ALL IN FRIDLEY PARK ADDITION� TO MAKE A BUILDABLE LOT AFTER 32 FEET OF LOT 12 IS TAKEN BY ANOKR COUNTY� THE SAME BEINC 630I EAST RZVER ROAD N.E.� FOR THE FOLLOWING R&ASONS: 1. IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGXBORHOOD. 2. IT IS A CORNER LOT WHICH IS REALLY TOO SMALL AND TOO CLOSE TO A BUSY HIGHWAY. 3. THE TRAFFIC PROBLEM THAR' COULD BE GENERATED SY DRIVEWAYS SO CLOSE TO EAST RIVER ROAD. 4. THE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FROM NOISE AND VEHICLE POLLUTION. Ms. van Dan stated she agreed with the motion for all the reasons mentioned and the danger because of accidents that have occurred on East River Road in the past. UPON A VOICh' VOTE'� HAf2122S�� VRN DAN� GABEL� SVRNDA, OQUIST� AND HUGHES VOTING AYE� WHRRTON VOTING NRY, CHAIRMRN HARRIS�DECLAREA THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 6-2. Mr. Wharton stated he had voted against the motion because he believed when a person comes in requesting a lot split and if the lot split meets all the planning of the City's platting, there is no reason to deny that lot split. Mr. Harris stated LS #81-04 would go to City Council on May 18. Mr. Doyle asked the Commission to make a policy decision on whether they would allow an east/west lot split with access onto East River Road. RLANNING COMMISSION MEETING; MAY 6, 1981 PAGE 8 MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY NOT ALIAW ACCESS DIRECTLY ONTD EAST RIVER ROAD OR ANY OTHER LOT CONFIGURATION WITH THIS LOT AS IT HAS BEEN THE POLICY OF THE CITY TO ELIMINATE ACCESS ONTD EAST RIVER ROAD� WHEREVER POSSIBLE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIfiD 3. PUBLIC HEARING: CQNSIDERATION OF A PROP�SED CONVERSION CONDOMINIUM L . MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED CONVERSION CONDOMINIUM LICENSING ORDINANCE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:50 P.M. Mr. Boardman stated the only reason this is back on the Planning Commission agenda is because when the Planning Commission took action on this ordinance and recommended approval to the City Council, they did not have a public hearing at that time. What is needed now is for the Planning Commission to take action on the ordinance with a public hearing. MOTION BY �2. WHARTON� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED CONVERSION CONDOMINIUM LICENSING ORDINANCE. UPON A VOICfi VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:55 P.M. MOTION BY MR. OQUIST� SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN, TO RECOMME'ND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVRL OF A PROPOSED..CONVERSION CONDOMZNIUM LICENSING ORDINANCE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE APRIL 14, 1987, COMMUNITV DEVELOPI�ENT COMMISSION MINUTES: MQTION BY MR. OQUIST� 5ECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE THE APRIL 14� 198I, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTE5. Mr. Oquist stated they are still discussing the purpose of their commission. Mr. Oquist stated that on page 6, because of a request by the City Council, the Co�nunity Development Commission members discussed and recommended some criteria as the minimum requirements in establishing a special use permit for two families in a single family unit in an R-1 zone. He stated the Community Development Corrmission would like the Planning Commission to concur with this recomnendation. Mr. Oquist stated there are some things that cannot be enforced, but it has always been his opinion that if you have an ordinance, at least you can enforce it, but if you don't have an ordinance, there is nothing to enforce and there is no pro- tection for the City. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY b, 1981 PAGE 9 The following changes were made to the criteria recommended by the Co�ronunity Development Commission in their motion on page 6: "....to recommend to City Council the following criteria as the minimum requirements for establishing a special use permit for existin sin le fdmil dwellin units to allow two families in a single family we ing unit in an - zone: 1. Minimum lot size of 9,000 sq. ft. 2. Floor area for either famil unit not less than 650 sq. ft. 3. Off-street parkrng; inc u in ara e, for at least 4 vehicles 4. Cannot be permanently sea e o i.e., common entry way, one address, one water meter, one gas meter, and one electric meter) 5. Special use permit expires at sale ' 6. One apartment is owner-occupied 7. Conditions of special use perrnit on file at County with title 8. Confo— rms witFi State Building Code. MOTION BY MR. OQUIST� SECONDED BY MS. HUGXES, TO CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION� RS AMENDED ABOVE� ON THE CRITERIA AS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS IN ESTABLISXING A SPECIAL USfi PERMIT FQR EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY UNITS 2'0 ALIAW 24J0 FAMILIES IN A SINGLE FAMILY UNIT IN AN R-1 ZONE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. UPON A VOICE S�OTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRMAN HARRTS DECLARED TH8 MOTION TO RECEIVE THE MINUTES CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. OTNER BUSINESS: A. Bike Trail in Locke Park Ms. Hughes stated she wanted to alert the Planning Commission that the County's plan for a bike trail through Locke Park and along Rice Creek is creating a lot of fervor among the citizenry.. The County was about to award bids for an asphalt bike trail through the creek bed and through some marshes which would require some digging and fil7ing, and the citizens east of Old Central were very upset about what was going to be done and began to ask some questions. There are a number of actions the citizens have taken by going to the Rice Creek Watershed District Board and the County Board. She stated they are doing a fine job in trying to get an agreeable compromise. She stat�d the Parks & Recreation Comnission did not know there was going to.be an 8-ft. wide asphalt path with 2 ft. of grass on either side, plus another 8 ft. of hiking trail and about 7 bridges across the Creek between Locke Park and New Brighton. She stated the City does not have much say on this, other than what goes in Locke Park and not much of that either, so she felt the citizenry are doing a great deal of good and are digging up facts. She stated the Planning Commission may be seeing some petitions in the near future. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 6, 1981 PAGE 10 B. IYDP (International Year of Disabled Persons) MOTION BY MS. VAN DAN� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE INTO THE RECORD THE MINUTES OF THE IYDP ORGANIZATIDNAL MEETING ON APRIL 2I� 1981, Ms. van Dan stated she thought this was going to be a very viable project committee, and the committee is already proposing some excellent projects. She stated the next meeting will be on May 11, at which time the committee will develop a survey form which, hopefully, will be included in the City's sumner newsletter. The survey will be to try and locate the disabled people in the City of Fridley and determine what their needs are. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN XARRI5 DECI.ARED THE MOSION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO AA70URN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMRN HARRIS DECLARED THE MAY 6� 1981� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:20 P.M. Respectfully su mitted, L eSaa Recording Secretary