PL 06/09/1982 - 6777PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
City of Fridley
AGENDA
WEDNES�AY, JUNE 9, 19&2
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 19, 1982
1. PUBLIC H
I
USE P
ttoc-u/> 6i UCKHLU tiHKIf�IHN: F'EP JQCC10ft 20'J.�3�� 3� fi� �2�� t0
allow an auto auction on the North 24� feet of the Southeast
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Sectio� 3, the same being
8290 Main Street N.E.
7:30 P.M.
PAGES
1 - 10
a1 �_15 � ` 1
�;
'���IG�F,. �
� =�— 7
2. UACATION REQUEST, SAV #82-01 BY THE FRIDLEY NOUSING & REDEV- �1�
{ OPMENT AUTHORITY: Vacate 4th Street between Blocks 4 an--� ';�
���7 and the 12 foot alley in Block 4, Ree's Addition to Fridley `,.�;t��`�
Park. (Block 5 alley vacated Ordinance 20S) (balance of �' �'
streets and alleys from Mississippi to 64th Avenue vacated �t„i �
February 23, 1953 in Book 292, Page 219, Anoka County Records)
3. REVIEW MODI
��
�
E
CHHf'IEH ZII OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COD
,eP��Ve CD�c'�` 0" 2�'Yo ?a'i .�r�te�
�E?
�j����
• 19% 22
<:?!. �tD Y'-1/C7'/ . .. � '' � ` � .
' 'w �Ftc•=�-.
SEPARATE
(Keep for Reference}
RECEIVE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 6> 1982
6. RECEIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 11, 19�2
SALMON
PINK �
A. PAGE 4: RECOMMEND TQ GITY COUNCIL THAT A"TRUTH IN SALES OF
HOUSING" ORDINANCE BE DEVELOPED FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MODELED
' AFTER THE MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL TRUTH IN SALES HOUSING ORDINANCE. ,-- ��'�
7.;�RECEIVE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MAY 13, 1982 WHITE `��
8. RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 25, 1982 YELLOW
9. RECEIVE ENER6Y COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 25, 1982
ORCHID
A. PAGE 3: ENERGY COMMISSION UR6ES THE CITY COUNCIL TO t�1AKE
EVERY EFFORT POSSIBLE TO ENCOURAGE CITY MANAGEMENT TO GIVE
SOME HIGHER PRIORITY TO THE UTILIZATION OF THE COMPUTER FACILITY
SO THE CITY CAN START ANALYZING ITS ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND
GETTING SOME MEANINGFUL RESULTS.
10. OTHER BUSINESS: 1,
��un�14.
ADJOURNMENT:
.,� �P. .. `%
h!
�..
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 7982
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel called the May 19, 1982, Planning.Commission meeting to
order at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL•
Members Present: Ms. Schnabei, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svanda, Mr. Kondrick,
Ms, van Dan, Mr. Saba
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner
Gary Wellner, 6221 Sunrise Drive
Michael Larson, 6390 Starlite Blvd.
Joy & Scott Anderson, 7921 Riverview Terrace
Kenyon Blunt, 7th & Marquette, Mpls.
William Weber, BRW, Inc., 2829 Univ. Ave. S.E.
Curt Saunders, 320 - 7th St. S.E.
Mr. & Mrs, Rod Brannon, Solar Wash, Inc.
APPROVAL OF MAY 5, 1982, PLANNING COPIMISSION MINUTES:
MOi70N 3Y AIIt. SABA� SECONDED BY [iS. GABF.L� SO APPROVE THE MP_Y 5, Z982, PLANNSNG
COMMISSION MSNUTES AS WRTTTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRiIOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTTON
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,
�.
A PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT
r,�, noc-u �� UV 1 f J WCLLIVCK nwi � iv�v, �, w, u. uu � r Hivu �HKY kVt�LIYtK: tS21 Y1(j
a rep a o a par o oc s an , owe >>on, ying ou of
the North line of Sylvan Hil7s Plat 8, extended in a Westerly direction to
the West boundary of said Block 8, and lying Westerly of the Plat of Sylvan
Hi11s.Plat 8, together with the Easterly one-ha7f of vacated Elm Street,
and that part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 7, Lowell Addition to Fridley Park,
7ying Southerly of the Westerly extension of the North line of the p7at of
Sylvan Hills Plat 8, together with the Westerly half of vacated Elm Street,
to be developed as three R-1 lots (single family dwelling areas) and 5
R-2 lots (two family dwelling areas�, general7y located South of Mississippi
St. N.E., East of the Burlington Northern right-of-way.
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN,
Mr. Boardman stated the Planning Commission has now received the pre]iminary
plat, As was discussed at the ]ast Planning Commission meeting, Lots 1, ?,
and 8 wi11 be zoned R-1 (single family 7ots), and Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 19, ]982 PAGE 2
will be zoned R-2 {duplex or double lots), He stated Mr, Wellner was in
the audience to answer any questions on the proposed piat.
Ms. Schnabel stated she had more questions with the zoning part of it.
She asked if Staff had developed a new ordinance fpr twin hanes yet,
Mr. Boardman stated Staff was still working on it. He stated Staff had
actua7ly decided against going with a new zone. They are going to try to
allow zero lot line with a special use permit or through the platting or-
dinance, to stay within the same zones. What they could do was amend a
portion of R-2 and R-3 with a provision that would allow zero lot line with
specia] use permit approval. He stated he thought they would have a lot
of probtems in setting up a new zone specifically for zero lot 7ine. In
this situation, it would still be zoned R-2 and R-3, and at some point in
time, if the owner wanted to go through a lot spiit, they would have to
obtain a special use permit for zero lot'7ine.
Ms. Schnabel stated where she saw some problems in this whote concept was in
the area of maintenance--the exterior maintenance of a dwellinq as well as
yard tiaintenance. She felt a iitt7e uncomfortable with this who7e thing
uniess it was really defined as to what they are going to do.
Mr. Boardman stated they could all be required with a special use permit.
They could put covenants or restrictions on the lot splits that would be
placed on the deed.
Ms, van Dan stated she just could not visualize how, at some point in the
future, these lots could be split and owned by two separate individuals.
Mr. Boardman stated dupiexes are allowed by certain densities. By split-
ting the ownership of a duplex, they do not change the density, and that is
why Staff felt the best way to go was with zero lot line. Developers can
to to zero lot lines right now with duplexes, but they have to go through
about 5-6 variances.
Ms. 6abe1 stated Mr. Boardman had just given another argument in favor of
having a separate "Lwin home" Zane, Mr. Boardman had stated they could go
with zero lot line now, but they have to go through all kinds of variance
procedures. She fett that in the future, there are going to De a lot of
requests for this kind of concept in order for people to afford housing,
and it seemed to Mer that the City shoul,d 3ust write a zoning ordinance to
apply to it. Otherwise, every time there is a request for zero lot ]ine,
they are going to have to go through both a lot spiit and specia7 use permit
process. It was a lot of red tape for everyone.
Mr. Boardman stated zonin4 codes should control densities, not situations
within those densities. If they are going to allow zero 7ot 7ine, then it
should be ailowed in that kind of density, and it should be allowed for
existinq units in that type of density as well as for new developments. Then,
every time an existing unit is split, the owner has to go through a rezoning,
and the question comes back: Is this spot rezoning?
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19 1982 PAGE 3
Mr. Oquist asked what difference it made whether they had to come in for
a request for rezoning or a request for e special use permit?
Ms. Ga6e1 stated some kind of provision could be written into the code to
eliminate some of the red tape procedures. .
Mr. Boardman stated the only other thing is to eliminate the special use
permit and allow zero lot lines with lot splits within the platting ordinance.
Mr. Schnabel stated there may be cases where they will not want to permit
the zero lot line concept or the split, except on new development, because
they may be creating some other problems they haven't looked at yet.
Mr. Boardman stated if a petitioner meets all the conditions that are laid
out in whatever process is set up, he felt they would have a hard time
restricting a person from splitting a lot just because it was an existing
unit.
Ms. Schnabel .said some of these zoning questions may be a little premature,
but she would like these concerns in the record so the City Council can see
sane of the Planning Corrmission's concerns and also for future discussion
when the ordinance is rewritten and brought back to the Planning Commission.
Ms. Schnabel stated that she wondered if the City Council had understood
and if Mr, Larson and the neighbors had understood that these units would be
owner-occupied from the start or did they see it as something down the line?
Mr. Larson stated the original proposal Lhat was presented called for the
entire area to be zoned R-2. The nei9hborhood opposed that and reached a
canpromise that called for the front three lots to be R-1 and the five rear
lots to be R-2 with zero 7ot lines. He s�ated that was a provision of their
compromise, The reason for that was they felt it increased the likelihood
that, as the properties change hands over the years, there will be more
owner-occupied units than if the lots did not have zero lot lines.
i1r. Weliner stated he would like to speak against any stipulaticn forcina
zerc lct iine becasue that was not the intent of the compromise. In order
to construct, it necessitates them getting two difference mortgages on
the building which puts them in a different situation in terms of financing.
He felt that when they want to sell a unit aff, that is the time to consider
zero lot line. 7heir compromise and understanding with the Mayor and City
Council was that a provision would be provided for zero lot line, but they
would not be compelled to do it. The reason for the zero lot line was that
with the financing and with the housing situation and economy, it makes it
a more affordable unit.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 1482 PAGE 4
Mr. Soardman asked why Mr. Wellner would have to get two different mortgages.
Mr. Wellner stated that at the time of construction, the minute they go with
zero lot line, they have two separ�te units and, therefore, they would have
two different deeds, He stated it was still his i�ntent to hold some of these
units for rental. He may choose, and it may be to his advantage, to get two
different mortgages, and at that time he would app7y for zero 7ot line. But,
he did not want to be compe7led to do so at the time of construction. Again,
he stated that was not the intent of the agreement.
Mr. Oquist stated that was also his understanding from the discussions at
the last P7anning Commission meeting.
Mr, Larson stated Mr. Qureshi had assured the neighborhood there would be
some provisions or the pro'ect would not proceed, Those provisions were:
(1} tuck-under garages; (2� minimum square footage; and (3) zero 7ot lines.
As he recollected, it was not that the builder would have the option to apply
for zero lot line at some future date, but that from the conception of the
p7at and up�n its approval, there would be zero lot lines.
Mr. Oquist stated it did not make sense to say there had to be zero lot lines,
because then they might as we77 get the land resurveyed and have the lines
put in on the original p1at.
Ms. Schnabel stated since the City Council members were the ones that worked
with and created the agreement between Mr. Wel7ner and Mr. Doty and the
neighborhood, the Planning Commission was probably better off in not getting
into this so deep that new problems surface. She stated it was probably
better for the Planning Commission to just act on the pre7iminary plat, as
they have been instructed to do, knowing that this discussion wi11 go on to
City Council.
MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
P.S. A82-01 BY W. G. DOTY AND GARY WELLNER,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECIARED THE PUBLIC
XEARING CLOSED AT 7:58 P.M.
MOTION BY MR. XONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED P32ELIMINARY PLAT� P.S, �182-01� DOTY/WELLNER ADDITION�
BY W, G. DOTY AND GRRY WELLNER: BEING A REPLAT OF TXAT PART OF BLOCXS 8 AND
9� LOWELL RDDITION� LYSNG SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SYLVAN HILLS PLAT 8,
EXTENDED IN A WESTERLY DIRECTION TO THE BiEST BOUNDARY OF SASD BLOCX 8, AND
LYING WESTERI,Y OF TXE PLAT OF SYLVAN HILIS PLAT 8� TOGE2HElZ WITH THE EASSERLY
ONE-HALF OF VACATED ELM STREET� RND THAT PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2� BLOCK 7� LOWELL
ADDITZON TO FRIDLEY PRRX� ZYSNG SOUTHERLY OF THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE
NORTH LINE OF THE PLRT OF SYLVRN HILLS PLAT 8� TOGETHER WITH THE WESTERLY
HALF OF VACATED ELM STREES� TO BE DEVEIAPED AS THREE R-2 LOTS (SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING AREASI �iND FSVE R-2 IATS (TWO FAMILY DWELLING ARERS) GENERALLY
LOCATED SOUTH OF MZSSISSIPPI ST „ N.E., EAST OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN
RIGXT-OF-WAY.
PLANNING C4MMISSION MEETING, MAY 19 7982 PAGE 5
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTSNG AYE� CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANSMOUSLY. -
Ms. Schnabel stated P.S. #82-01 would go to City Gouncil on June 7.
2, PUBLIC HEARING REOUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP �82-05, BY
DY ANDERSON: Rer Section 205, 5 4, 2, to a ow the construction of a
4 ft. y 2 ft. detached garage in CRP-2 zoning (flaod plain) on Lots 71,
12, 13, and ]4, B7ock X, Riverview Heights, the same being 7921 Riverview
Terrace N.E,
MOTION BY MS. VAN DAN� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
SP �82-OS BY JOY ANDERSON.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 8:00 P.M.
Mr. Boardman stated this is in the flood plain and under flood plain regula-
tions, any structure built in the flood plain requires a specia7 use permit.
The existing dwelling is ]ocated on Buffa]o and Riverview Terrace. The
petitioner wants to put in a 24 ft. by 24 ft. garage )ocaied so the driveway
comes off Buffa7o St. This garage is allowed in a flood plain with the
specia] use permit requirement as an accessory structure. Accessory structures
do not have to meet the requirements for livable structures. The only things
required for accessory structures are that the structure is not for human
habitation, has both flood damage potential and is permanently anchored to
prevent flotation, and is f7ood proofed. He stated this garage meets all
requirements as far as setback requirements, and Staff has no opposition to
the proposal.
The petitioner, Joy Anderson, was in the audience.
Ms. Schnabel asked Ms. Anderson if the garage was intended for any use other
tharr a garage.
Ms. Anderson stated it was to be used only as a garage.
MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO CLD3E THE PUELIC HEARING ON
SP �/82-OS BY JOY ANDER50N.
UPON A VOSCE VOT&, ALL VOTING AYE, CXAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED AT 8;10 P.M.
MOTIDN BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY AIIi. SVANDA, TO RECQMMEND TO CITY COUNCZL
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERhfIT, SP N82-05, BY JOY ANDERSON: PER SECTION
205.1574, 2� TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 24 FT. BY 24 FT. DETACHED GARAGE
IN CRP-2 20NING (FLOOD PLAIN)� ON LOTS .21� Z2� I3� AND .Z4, BLOCK X� RNER-
VIEW HEIGHTS� THE SAME HEING 792I RIVERVIEW TERRACE N.E.
PLANNING COMMISSIDN MEETING, MAY 19, 1982 PAGE 6
� UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYS� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel stated SP #82-05 would go to City Counil on June 7.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGi REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMI7. SP #82-06. NORTH
tVHI lUIVHI � tSHIVK tSY � KtIVYUN tiLUN i: Y@Y' S2Ct1011 "L(J5, 101 � 3� I. to al low an dUtO-
matic te ler macfiine in an enclosed 6uilding, on Lot l, Block 1, Target
Addition, the same being 755 - 53rd Avenue N.E. {Target Parking lot),
MOTION BY �. SABA� SECONDED BY MR, SVANDA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HERRING ON
SP �82-06, NORTHWESTERN BANR BY KENYON BLUNT,
UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
XEARING OPEN AT 8:12 P,M. �
Mr. Boardman stated this proposal was for a bank teller machine to be
located in the Target parking lot. Because it is a lease operation, it
requ9res a special use permit. He asked Mr. Weber to further explain this
proposal request.
Mr, William Weber stated he is a planner for BRW, Inc., a 7oca1 planning and
architectura7 firm in Minneapolis. He stated that also at the meeting was
Mr. Kenyon Blunt, who is with Northwestern National Bank.
Mr. Weber stated this is an instant cash machine. It is a drive-up facility
and not a wa7k-up facility. He stated this is a lease agreement between
Target and Northwestern National Bank. Northwestern National Bank will install,
operate, and maintain the facility, and Target wiil lease the site on a long-
term basis. He stated it is a predesigned, prefabricated metal building,
very secure and very maintenance free, with a teller machine mounted inside
the building. It is partially heated, but there is no human habitation. The
building is about 10 x 12 with a canopy over the drive. The driveway is about
72 ft. wide.
Mr, Weber stated that in Fridley, there are about 6,000 Northwestern Nationai
Bank customers, so it is a fairly high conceniration. They anticipate about
5,000 transaciions per month or about 160 per day. Most of the transactions
wi71 be between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
Mr. Weber showed the Tocation of the machine which is near the Target gas
station off 53rd Ave. He stated they have been very careful in siting the
automatic teller machine within the parking lot in order to minimize the
number of possib]e traffic prob7ems. He stated that in this part of the
Target parking lot, there is not much parking, Target has 7,389 parking
spaces rww, Northwestern Natianal Bank wiil be removing only 8 of those
spaces, leaving 1,3$1. The city code requires only 738 parking spaces, so
Target has a surplus of 651 parking spaces. He stated there is also very
7ittie auto movement in this part of the parking ]�t,
PLANNING COMMISSION'MEE7ING, MAV'19; 1982 PAGE 7
Mr. Weber stated the site will be very well 7andscaped. All the landscaping
will 6e maintained by a nursery contracted by Northwestern National Bank,
A1] the trees wi7] be 3" in diameter, the ornamental trees will be 2" in
diameter, and the foundation plantings will be the 3 gal, size.
Mr, Weber stated the bui]ding will have two different signs, and they have
applied for permits. Both signs will be approximately 2 ft, by 12 ft,--one
will be located across the face of the building and the other one will be
]ocated between the posts of the canopy. They will have a total of 48 sq. ft.
of signage,
Ms. Schnabe] asked if there would be any pedestrian use.
Mr. Weber stated the bank does not encourage pedestrian use, but it would be
possib]e.
Mr. Blunt stated the on7y walk-up use they have is for those who have big
trucks that are too high for the clearance, He stated the c7earance will be
posted on the canopy.
Mr, Saba asked how many teller machines like this Northwestern Bank had in
the metropolitan area.
Mr. Blunt stated they on7y have two of this fashion in the Twin Cities. In
the total five-state area, they have seven. They have a total of 83
automated teller machines, and most of them are located in banks or grocery
stores,
Mr. Saba stated he would be concerned about vandalism and also asked about
the maintenance.
Mr. Blunt stated the building itse7f is very secure and not easily vandalized.
If there is any vandalism to the building, they have a provision in the lease
with Target that says any type of vandalism must be cleaned up with 24 hrs.
He also stated that the building and area would be maintained daily,
Ms. Schnabel asked about security.
Mr. 61unt stated their buildings are wired to policy or a private security.
One of the reasons they went to a drive-up facility here was for securit,y
purposes. Eighty-three percent of the banking transactions are done by women,
so the security of a drive-up is the reason they chose this particular
configuratfion.
Ms. Schnabel asked about the lighting at night.
Mr, Blunt stated there would be floodlights on each side of the building
and down over the canopy,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 1982 PAGE 8
Ms. Gabel asked how ]ong the 7ease was with Target.
Mr. Blunt stated it was a five-year �ease with renewable options each year
after that. .
Ms. Gabel asked if they could accommodate any other bank, other than North-
western Bank customers, at this facility.
Mr, Blunt stated in their instant cash network, they have a71 the affiliates
of Northwestern National Bank in the five-state area that can use this
machine. They also have credit unions and some savings and loans signed up,
so it is not entirely a bank product.
Ms. 5chnabe7 stated she was concerned about the direction of traffic flow
and how they were going to designate which way the traffic approached the
teller machine,
Mr. Blunt stated it would be no problem for them to put in entrance and
exit signs.
Mr. Svanda stated he was concerned about the actual location of the buiiding.
A tot of times during the year, those two entrances and exits to Target are
pretty congested, and they would really be forcing more traffic to try to get
into and out of the parking lot right at the worst part of congestion, He
felt it would be better if the building was moved back closer to the gas
station to a77ow more mobility for the traffic using the facility,
Ms. Gabel stated she shared that same concern, as the traffic does stack up
at that entrance and exit.
Mr. Weber stated they would have no problem with moving the teller machine
closer to the Target gas station if the Planning Commission asked'.them to
do so.
Ms. Schnabel also agreed the location of the facility needed to be changed
a little bit.
Mr. Rod 6rannon, owner of the So7ar Car Wash, stated he would also agree with
the moving of the facility to help prevent further traffic congestion at that
entrance and exit point, He stated that because of the huge sea of blacktop,
any landscaping done by Northwestern National Bank was going to be an improve-
ment in that parking iot.
MOTSON BY MR. SABR, SECONDED BY M$. GABEL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARSNG ON
SP �82-06� NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK BY KENYON BLUNT.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL bECLARED THE PUBLIC
N&ARING CIASED AT 8:45 P.M,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 1982 PAGE 4
MOTION BY !�, SVANDA, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECOMMEND TO CSTY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERNIT� SP 1182-06, NORTHWESTERN NATIONRL BANX�BY
KENYON BLUNT: PER 5ECTION 205.501, 3, I� TD ALLOW AN AUTOMATIC TELLER
MACHINE IN AN ENCTASED BUILDZNG, ON LOT I� BLOCK j� TARGET ADDITION, 2'HE
SAME BESNG 755 - 53RD AVENUE N.E. (TARGET PARRSNG LOT)� WITH TXE STIPULATION
THAT THE LOCATION OF THE AUTOMRTIC TELLER MACHINE BE MOVED TWO PARKING STALIS
NORTH DF THE PROPOSED LGCATION,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRR'OFfAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TNE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabe] stated SP #82-06 wou]d go to City Council on June 7.
4. RECEIVE MAY 4, 1982, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
MpTION 8Y hII2. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DRN, TO RECEIVE TXE MAY 4i 1982�
PARKS & RECRERTIDN COMMISSION MINUTES.
Mr, Kondrick stated that, regarding the request by Mr, Terry Merriman that
the City or County mow an area at Locke Park, a meeting was held on May 13
with Mr. Merriman, Mr. 7orkildson, Dr. Boudreau, some of the neighbors, and
Parks & Recreation Commission members. The matter was resolved at that
meeting. Mr. Kondrick stated the County will mow on a regular basis an area
where it was stated by the neigh6ors the children play most of the time. The
rest of the area will be ]eft as is to provide a buffer between the neighbors
and the walkway,
Ms. Schnabel stated the Carrnission was to be commended for getting this
problem resolved.
Ms. Gabel stated that a couple of ineetings ago, she had asked Mr. Kondrick
to find out how the Parks & Recreation Department handles the process when
people cannot afford to participate in city programming.
Mr. Kondrick stated there is a form that has to be filled out, A few basic
questions are asked, but these questions are not mandatory. He stated the
Parks & Recreation Department only has on record four peop]e who have signed
up saying they are unable to pay for city programming, but they do volunteer
to pay something. He s3ated the City also advertises that if people cannot
afford the programming, it can be worked out.
Ms. Gahel stated the recent su�ner Parks & Recreation program brochure did
not have any statement 7ike that, and it bothered her. It should szy in
there that recreation is provided for everyone and thet inability to Qay
does not preclude anyone from participation, She was very concerned about
the number of people and children who are not participating in city programming
because of inabi7ity to pay. She would like to see the City take steps to
ensure that a statement is put, not on7y in the recreational brochures, but
also in the City newsletters.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 19, 1982 PAGE 10
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRiED UNANIMOUSLY. - -
5. RECEIVE MAY 11, 1982, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:•
MOTION BY MS, GABEL� SECONDED BY h42. SABA, TO RECEIVE THE MAY TI� 1982�
APPEALS COMMISSION MSNUTE5.
UPOAT A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTTNG AYB� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOSION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6, OTHER BUSINESS:
Ms. Schnabel stated that at one time, the Comnission members had recerved a
memo from Virgil Herrick regarding specia7 use permits, She stated that
since some of the Planning Corrmission members were fairly new, it would be
a good idea to p�t this on the next agenda for the Commission members to
review and discuss.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MR, OQUISS, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RA70URN TXE MEETING. UPON A i�DICE
VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MRY 19� 1982� PLANNING
COMMISSSDN MEETSNG ADJOURNED AT 9:29 P.M.
Res ectfully su mitted,
,�
y. e Saba
Recording Secretary
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE �
PLANNINr, COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that there will be a publir Hearing of the
Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431
University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, June 9, 1982
in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of:
Consideration of a Special Use Permit,
SP #82-07, by Gerald Hartman, per Section
205.131, 3,A (2), to allow an auto auction
on the North 240 feet of the Southeast
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of
Section 3, the same being 8290 Main Street
N. E.
Any and a11 persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity
at the above stated time and place.
VIRGINIA SCHNABEL
CHAIRWOMAN
PLANNING COMMISSION
Publish: May 26, 1982
June 2, 1982
11
� _ ClYY OP FRIDLEY. ..:. �� -
643'I I.JtVIVERSi7Y AV6. NE
� FAIOLEV, MN. 65430 [6'19,G7'1-3450
SUBJECT
SPECIAL USE PERMIT
� 12
SP #�a-rJ?,
p r � - � � DAT % � `/��
ADDRESS D � %O `��T/c�
PLANNING COIN9I55ION: P.H. DATE �J /�y APPROVED DISFPPRO ,
DATE NO
CI'fY COUttGIL: P.N. REQ'D DATE � ND
CITI( COUNCIL
STIPULATI(3N5:
APPROVE6 , DISAPPROUED; DATE
NO
NAM �,���-��' �1d�---- FEE �20�. � RECEIPT NO��?
STREET LOCA7ION OF PROPERTY � `oZ °1f� %%�f�t•��
LEGAL D�SCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ' / �y0 � � `'£ /f`'"% �I £ �Y �, �� 3
`''r���ENT ZQIdING CLASSIfICATTON r��` _ EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY
AC�EAGE OF PROPERTY � Li.�1,ti. DESCRIBE BRIEfLY 7HE PROPOSED TYPE OF U�SE AND
IyFROVEMEfJT ��..� .1'aci,•�-^� ,_p2 D•�� � '3 ! 1 3 "� �'
tias the present applicant previausly sought to rezone, plat, obtain a iot split or
variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? _Jyes no.
What was requested and when?
The undersigned understands that: {a) A list of all residents and owners of property
within 3fl0 feet must be atiached to this appiication. (b) This application must be
signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation given why this is not the
case. (c) Resporisibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure
to list the names and addresses of all residents and property owners of property in
question, be7ongs to the undersigned.
A sketch of proposed property and Structure must be drawn and attached, showing the
foilowing: 1. North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure en the lot.
3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks.
4. Street names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 300
feetj.
The undersigned hereby declares that ail the fa�s�nd
this applicaLion are true and ccrrect. j �
DATE � � t� oa- 5 T
ADDRcSS �� �� O��Lt.r.N �//
rtat,ions stated in
TELEPHONE NO �O�J
. _ -n^�-.
Planning Commission May 25, 1982 _ 13
City Counci
Mailing List �
SP #82-07 Gerald Hartman
Auto Auction 8290 Main 5treet N.E.
Gerald Hartman
8290 Main Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
D. 0. Harris & R. A. Schroer-
Amcarco
6279 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Bryant Franklin Corp.
7921 Beech Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Donald Kasbohm
7121 Fleetwood Drive
Edina, Mn 55435
Bryant Investment Co.
3140 Chowen Avenue South
Minneapolis, Mn 55416
North Park
City of Fridley
c/0 Chuck Bourdreau
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432 (deliver - don't mail)
�
N
ma+ ��ne�
t
�
b
:
�
�
�
�
�
�
0..�
..%
T
......
�ii\
.n_
� 1�
¢ - SP #82-07 Auto Auction
= 8290 Main Street
- �LOCATI 0 N
in�ii� �
�
_ �
( �
�.�o�u ce
— iicrZi nM m
w[uat�
i '
.�� ,.� w.
�.,
.
>
f
1. V�� s
.�� ��3_' .....n.
;,��i� ��W °
STREET MA.P•CITY OF
FRIDLEY
O �33� s,eas
:�
IT� OT f/�� 30� /6f
/ � G//ht�/I
j c.� .f �.;ir.� 15
- f Pi.�ri �j% l � �
r '�
' ,e _
� �_� �---
� t
� �
I
� ��I
���
� � �
! - --
��
��
�,
��
i
1
I
I
1
�
�
L_ _ �.
�� �
SP #82-07 Auto Aucti n
� �-- 8290 Main St.
d r�
�
. �
i = � i
S— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ` .
� V+�e; l�
A+.Y ,Casti.l,. . .
♦e �07 ���.n '�}��,C��1 i ,'i`
��i i - i ,
� �
'
I I �
S
' i
��. � �
i
� ' � �
f ; is "sd�..�.rf � �s.wrs ._ ._ — — — — — — — — � � 1
�� -_"-_ �i,l__ __��
. ,
,,. ,�
� --. ----
,..; � - �
.. i .::__ �•
iR
I�
/.�wr I
risir/ i .� i
f
�
i
� I
1
i�
.
_ _ J
_ _ _ _ _ _ _— .' _.—_ '
_ . _...sez�.._... .�. .._.
— - . ......_,_�irrr _ .—, . - --'._';�"_
u�-�r�... - E. //� COR!
SEC. 3
i
� ;� r�-�
� Rw. r,
R�Y.P-i•90 .
��f-�'
- Rir7!'!f Aii. FU-/f
v� r-�-r f- AI/f-N{J-� q
,� I-I� �MJM+O li't?'�f�
. i if'er s.,.•a _ aw.,r-�"� .Iir.i.' ,t�-.
�CiTY o� F�ir�LEV, SU9JECT ZUNIN6 ACTION
643'I IJNIVER5ITY AVE. NE. V%�CATI�N
� FPIDI@Y� MN, 65h3C [6921,G79-3450 PLAT
ORDINANCE NO
AGDRESS � 3 � � ��h�`�' ��'`'��
�
ZOA #
SAV #�
PS �f_ "
PUBLISHED
DATE
PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED �DISAPPROVED DATE �9/8y NO
CITY COUNCIL: PUBLIC HEARIIJG DATE 1ST REA� 2ND READ
C1TY COUfyCIL: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE NO
PARK FEE REQUIRED: ^ AMOUNT PAID
STIPULATIONS:
NAME �RIC�E� �OIJS�NG �a'F�pP�TT_
STREET LOCATION OF PROPERTY
LE6AL DESCRIPi'ION OF PROPER
FEE FJp�� � RECEIPT NO
PRESENT ZONING CLASSIfICATION Vlq EXISTING 11SE OF PROPERTY v�q
ACREA6E OF PROPERTY_�^ DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PROPOSED ZONING CLASSIFICATION
OR TYPE OF USE AND IMPROVEMENT PROPOSED
Has the }iresent applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or
variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? ____,yes no.
ldhat v:as requested and when?
The undersigned understands that: (a) A list of all residents and owners of proper-
ty within 350 feet must be attached to this application. (b) This application must
be signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation given wfiY this is not
the case. (c) Responsibility for any defect in the pr•oceedings resulting from the
failure to list the names and addresses of all residents and property owners of pro-
perty in question, be7angs to the undersigned,
A sketch of proposed property and structure must 6e drawn and attached, shor+ing the
folloaaing: i. North direction. 2, Location of proposed structure on the lot.
3, Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks,
4. Street names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 350
feet},
The undersigned hereby.declares that all t cts and representations stated in
this application are true and correct.
OATE s/2W SIGNATU Ti�r/
� APPLICAiVT �
ADDRESS �3f VN�ue�s'�'Fa �ut �iE . TELEPHONE NO � !
�
ete
n
N
Loca+ i on
��
[
�
�
$''
6� �
�t -
..✓ .' �
.: r
.�!
w '1�4�DnLJ�
II 4 �''�
1 !1f'���
� �4 ~ �
.
� i �' .�
, �~ _ 1 �a
�
I 'IiN01i� CQ
�7 ' NEMZtM OC.
• mf
' wc.row
�
.,
SAV #82-01 F.ridley HRA
���
�1��
i�
������ ���
�; .���,�I�.,� �
- ��� ,,� �- ��, ,
� �'.:
�\ ����'n� q_
�:��cY . . « �
t' i��-: =��i ��,.�-� �
ri�
� t' � ��������>' ' ��.... .
�au J �'e �.t � :
��n ���--�
fA1,y11�11 � Y ���
STREET MAP-CITY OF
FRIDLEY
0 $337 e,eas
�xn�
1
��..,.. _ _ - -
� •
,, : , : . , ,
�
�_ ,_. ,,
" � �s
y � J SAV �82-01 Fridley HRA
, - . . , , . ,
, � ,, + .
. .. .
� -.. . . � :
..,r-. _
� -
� ~� ` " � � "'° 410 �,4zc
'40�2�2,2,1,2tb�21� �� _'� ^; r r c f'.��4��� � t � �i�¢.t � !
.; ::
"O�T� ° �, . . ;-_: N, ,..�:-.,� , � -�
, / ._, , �. � sr � � n
1► : -�.:y. . rr [_._s ; t �'.
o , . y ; � d ♦ m t s � � � _ ��: '�
f ,.' .. , o t r„ � '
5 ' ' .
* -. � -- -..
�. ' :i � s
NII'L b460 --- - -= . :, s ' � � .
� �. : � _-..�.... -
; . _.
At 1 " � ; , . �� i , n � s �,�. � : �"
f=
n
PI, ' t�so -x- = � • K - ,.�
: ._, I , . � . , y
� u �� � � I
;
64IO . �,"" , /I� • k , �_'
P Qvp ;... : .
G�J � zz, �� .. .� . ?. � �, a, „� N. . Ai�c�
`....7\� �rsi` Qi rssa '►i.r- ..-�..' , � /!V � /1 // � ' . -
...�� il � /L.11
T�_�LI E-- �M•�+,l�. ANE �.. . ��� (p9�i `
,�. _.. �_ 3 sa n� Iav . N.E. � �
'..... y Jr I
r.ia' iIN ' M __- 1 . .� . ;.
�, � --�- ; �, b� ::�;:: 6. } � : � �
, ,� �
.?F. ` � • e / 9 � ''�} ' d � �, /
. ��'~ � :�• ! ! 3 'i • � A��
�'a� ' ,a. - � � .; `
?�� "'-�-'1 ,f. }` w .. .. � ��., � 4 � ��; �� j � r .0
�s°.. � :•�;:: ° ' � i
�` �3/ • � .. ,r a �� Is � "°
'",r y, z4/ �y t^.. ZGS f7S °`�,•" , • s �:�'' ! � � �
,.::: ' � Sf� .. . n,r� . ' 7 %'•'�` - a � .,:
�;„ � � Yp
• �: t h :•�iY.' � a).M� �
` <•s� �I�f��Y -=�_. ORIVE :: � - -- --..
� ..'
, ' -�z�. ,,�y_ ,�„ • ,;�,. . aoi
� ,Z`.:•` � � A� dabbtt�ia Co�rp�ry' Pd . YP P!
. 2 `
� . s � � i' G"'ro'� �- �"vi v!�' :y d!5 43
`_ 3d 24� as� 266 �'-� _�� �,�«.a-.s• � �. �. fi,
3 �� � _
7 Z7B tr ` � r �f . ..a.. .. .
�,2�i �� .a•' M M ! { ` .�Si. Xl�el�4./1 'i �� , . 1 . • .
t 1 , �• �+
yf y i: : x9� /� `�: \ ' j -:.,.r., �� �
�. 2+1 2+f ,s: n I �f ;`�.t = � F1�D�_ OR�i..v.wAi.�.i'..I }�1� 8��bti�
• 51� 26i 2T1 2E1 �'x ,�;""� a^---�'M �ni "i+°ii " kL7
� � •.�� -�%
^ w.. ""' +��• I' r nr'. a5= ;� t [
'_ �4n.Y r- 'L— . : �� � � .!{.. .{..�. _ �
.:�, .��. ;. • � ••:`.: � ; ' ' Le end � b��c
.f� 250 ��'��� 270 " o y� �
209 ` • '' � =�80 -`•� ' � a Proposed Vacation 'a�' '�'�
� Y60 _ i
- ,. . � �;" '�� � Previous Vacation '.�4�1 bZ4�
' w � 6zG0
� rs� � ' .= r : � .
� p Z31 (�2:
' ,1;_. �� y � 6
rf� i S�£ 6240 625o d � a� �
.,:.a� � 6230 ! ..� � -...�,- eb22i
a
�j � 2\0 �2� oRl�i� S j "` : , "� ,� :
� 6 , _�, �� -� ;b2�5 NO. 59 `� ', '�
., q41 13� 6�b1 i� ., (� �4 o ebzn 6,
i' b ' ' ,
'',v (�'�3� � � �t / : � � � 4 � � . �,�,� < : `� � Qr
,. - ,��\ b! • 1 � pf� �'' .�. s. 6zof �
I. ✓� � n. �i �T �� O � � n R p�li'
I' .n� .� .' i.130 6L40 �� l � Q� a u �, I � �or _ �,
FF
)ATE
DIAECTOAATE
OP
PUBLIC WORKS
June i, 1982
MEMO ND. 82-36
������u uvarwuan - ri r i
;UBJECT John Flora
Modification to Chapter 211 of the
Fridley City Code (Platting Ordinance)
19
M EMO R A N DUM
TIONItNFO.
Please find attached the modifications to the Platting Ordinance as being proposed
to allow zero lot line development. Modifications to the platting ordinance require
a review by the Planning Commission with a Public Hearing before the City Council.
The Planning Commission will be reviewing these modifications on June 9, 1982 with
the Public Nearing set for the City Council on July 12, 1982.
JLBlde
.•.��.�•.::.
Arr orr�� ar�nn�c � 2u aF ��r� c� �
II7TPI47,ID `PIA7TIPG' B3C ADDING NE%T SH(,'PION 211.045 11�
A[+ff3�DIt� �D SHCPION 211.045 EY KAi�G IT 211.046
7Y�e City Coiuscil of tl�e City of Fridley does ordain as follows:
Sections 211.045 and 211.046 are hereby amended to read:
211.045 ZgtO IAT LIIJ�
20
i�
,Ui..
��y�� �
1. The City may approve subdivisions for the development of zero lot line,
conmion wall residential structures. The minimum lot areas and widths
shal l be as-fat,i�i � , �' �, ,, > '- �l � � � i 5
` , �
;".,' ,' �� Zonin9 District Lot Aran �Lot Width ,
t
��
I�3
5,000 Sq Ft
3,0�0 Sq Ft
37.5'
25.0 �
2. All other zoning requiranents in the respective districts except for the
setbacks along the common wall, zero lot line(s) must be met.
3.
c . 4.
� 4` ^�qYM
Separate meters must be provided to each dwelling unit for water,
electcicity and natural gas and the canutan g3rty wall(s) fire rating shall
be one hour. c'i` 4�
� G= ? .I�
The owner of the property to be subdivided shall execute and record �.Ylt •
theic expense a"Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions" aJ
provided by the City. The said document shall be used to protect the
rights of the individual owners sharing the single structure to
maintenance, repair and construction in case of damage to the original !
structure. The declarations, covenants, conditions and restrictions shall ���
pzovide pratection to the property owners and the city on the following '
subjects: n, .
(a) Building and Use Restrictions v,,i��^
(b) FartY L�ia118
(c} Relationships among owners of adjoining living units and
arbitration of disputes.
The City shall be a beneficiary to these declarations, covenants,
condit3ons and restrictions.
.
Page RWo
Ordinance No.
� -.. : �� :�r� i: �;:t�� �i wi71
Whenever svch subdivision of land (including any "lot sp11t") is to be made
imder 211.043, 2ll.044 oc 211.045 hereof, such subdivision can be made without
further platting with approval of the Council if the Council shall find that
such subdivision facilitates and does not hindet the transfet and conveyance
of the landf does not hinder the making of asseSSmPnts and keeping of records
connected therewith; that it does not result in the creation of any parcel
(wi�in or without the subdivision) of a size in area or fronta9e which is
less than is required for purposes of construction of a building on such
parcel �dei the zoning laws and building regulations of the City; and that
the subdivision to be made is not made for the purpose of avoiding such
conditions and cestrictions with respect to the land as might be imposed upon
a platting. (Ref. 207i
PASSED ADID ADOPTID BY THE CITSt ODIJNCIL OF Tf3E CITY OF FRIDLEY 7HIS .,.,,�� DAY
OF . 1982 .
ATPFbT:
SIDNEY C. INNIF�N - CITY Q�21C
� 3/3/4
Public Hearing: July 12, 1982
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Publish.......:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
21
parcal ot land in tha aubdtvision Is a ao0arale "LOt" ts containetl In such "Auditors Subdfriafon'.
211.0/3. Flots � �
When the IanOS of the subCivislon ue leas than 27,000 square Teef In �rea, the aubdlvision contains not mo/a
tAan two (2) separate pareels, eaoh pareel of which contains a1 least 9,000 square feet and each paroel withln tha
subdivfaion un be tlescribetl slmply as a iroctional part (feet, etc.) of t�e larper parcel which comprises the
subdivisio� as a whole. FurlAer, In auch case the lands of the subdivision shatl themseives ba eimpte fractlon��
or puantity parta ot a full povemmentai SuDdivision as tletinetl by Minnesota Statutes, SeclfO� �50B.�T: or one or
moro "Lots" as containeC in a plat made In conformiry with the laws ol Minnesota and tbe code of t�e City ot
Fridley, or u contained in �n "AUOitor's SuDdtvision", or one or more 'Trocts" as confained in an "Autlitor's
Subtlivision", oroneormore"Tracts" ascontainetl in a"Repisteretl Land Survey", or other similar subdivieions
providetl try law. A parcel ol lnnd which is not capabfe of description in a simple manner, as may be obiained Dy
the vae oT one or more slreipht lines (as distinpuishetl from � complez descrlption which Involvea the uae ot
anples and tleprees as fountl in descriptfona commonly known as "metes antl DounOs") dces not meet the
requirementa of tnia ezception.
Eacn parcel ot Iand ir a subdlvtsion wNch cannot be describad as "Lota" or'Tracts" (or pans thereo`r) sAa11 pn
termed as "Plota" ontl t�e whoie tbereof as "Subtlivision Plota". (Ref. 168) �
211.001, Lot Splll
iNhen Ihe IanOS of the suDdfvislon contain 27,000 square leet In area or more, but not in excess of one (1� �cro;
intl ihe subdlvision coniains seDa2te parcels (each parcel of which neverlheless contains at least 9,000 aqusro
�eetJ, enC such subdivision Isn6s sre tfiemselves containetl in and ore a paA oT a plat already epproved by Ihe
:Ity, or i1 not approved are of a plat recorded amonq the County records prior to and wifhout tAe necessNy ot
�pproval�by tne City, or of a repistereC land suney recordeA amonp the County records ns p�ovided Gy law and
�he suDtliviaion is in leCt s"bt 8p111" wilh respect to one o1 the nme.
t1t.D45. Approvd ot Coundl
Nneneve� suc� suDtlivision ot land (includinp any "iot split") is to De matle under 211.043 0� 2ti.04d hereot,
;uc� SuDdlvision can pe matle without fuHher Olattinp wi4� apD+ova1 of t�e Countil i1 t�e Countif shait fintl tAet
SuCh suDtlivision faCili�8te5 end doe5 e01 hintler IDe iransler anG COnveyanCe Of Ihe �antl; doe5 n0� hintlef tAE
makinp of assessments and keepinp of recortls connecled Iherewit�; Ihat it tloes nol result in the creation of
any parcel (wit�in or withoul the subtlivision) 01 a size in area or 1roMage w�ich is less than is require0 to�
purposes ot construction ot a buildinp on suc� Darcel under Ihe zoninp laws and DuilQinp regulations ot the
Cily; antl lh2t ihe SubOlviSiOn t0 bE made i6 n01 madE tOt ihE purD05¢ OI evoitlinp Euth Contlition5 antl
restriclions with resped to 1�e land as mipM be impose0 upon a D�attinp. (flef. 2Q7)
211.05. Plat Approval PmeWun
Before preparinp a tinat Olat oi a subdivision, a subCivider shall Aave prepared a preliminary plat thereof, shell
rave submittetl same lopether with sll repuired acoompanyinp mateAal to tRe Alanninp Commiseion, en0 ahall
have secured t�e tentative aDProvai ot tAs Commission. 8etore any conveyance ot any loi or parcel ot lantl in a
aubtlivision tAe subdivi0er s�all Aave prepared a final plat thereaf topelher with a1t required accompanylny
materials, snal� have submittetl same to t�e Councif ior apDroval antl the plal shall have been approve0 by said
Council resolution Ibereof and by my othe� ayeneies an6 offictata wAOSe approv�lls �equired by law, Includinp
tt�e CouMy Plattinp authorities �nd ahati Aave been du(y �ecwded. (Aef 75)
TAe principal ateps to be faken i� or6er in the plat approval procedure are summarized as lollows:
411.051. SkNM
Prior to t�e preparatio� oi a Dreliminary plat, the subdivitler s�all aubmft a sketch of lhe intendetl layout of the
subaivision, a desoriDlion of the proposed tleve�opment and such other yeneral Intormation as may Da
requested for the purpose to t�e Manaper. Within ten (7Q) days atter receivinq a111he In(ormation needed�the
Manaper sha11 determine wAethe� or not t�e fntenOed layoul and Cevelopment ot the subOivision would conform
satisiaclorily to the requirements ot thia cotle and ahall so advise th! aubdivider, pivinp him whetevsr
av9qeslions and informstion may be neede0 ior his puldance in t�e preparetlon ot a preliminary piat. (Ref. 75)-
22
z».�i
�–
Plots
�
Lot
Sont
�
Approvd OI
Counoil "
Plat Appror�f
Proeadun
Sketeh
. �
Y' -?
— ---- ---_. _. _. . _ . _ _ _ . . _� _. _
---�– .. _______._.____.-----.. . ___...'-
_ '-- ��
CITY OF FRIDLEY �
HUMAN RESOURCES COh�IISSION
MEETING
MAY 6, 1982
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson van Dan called the May 6, ]982. Human Resources Commission meeting
to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROI,L CALL:
Mem6ers Present; Mary van Dan, Jayne Noble, Peter Treuenfels
M�nbers Absent: Brian Goodspeed, Lynn Boer'gerhoff
Others Present: Mary Cayan,Human Resources Assistant
Scott Wheeler, Planning Tniern
.APPROVAL OF APRIL 1, 1982t HUMAN RESOURCES C�1IS5I0N MINUTES:
MOTION BY PII2. TRE[IENFEIS� SSCOND&D BY MB. NOBLE, TO APPROVE TXE APRIL 1� S9&2,
HUMAN RSSOURCES COMMZSSION MINUTES RS WRITTfiN.
UPON A VOICS VOTIs', ALL VOTING AY&� CliAIRPERSON VAN DAN DECLARED TFIE MOTION
CARRIfiD UNANIMOUSLY.
1. ACCESSI$ILITY SURVEY UPDA7E:
Mr. Wheeler handed out a copy of a memo he had written to Mary Cayan dated
May 6. He also handed out a copy oi the "Handicap Accessibi]ity Survey, a copy
of the cover letter from Mayor Nee, and a copy of the cover letter fran
Bob Minton, Chairperson of the Accessibility Project Caimittee.
Mr. Wheeler stated the survey was writte� by Julee Quarve-Peterson and amended
by the cammittee. He stated 128 surveys were maited out that day. The survey
encompasses parking, exterior access, entry doors, interior circulation, elevation
changes, and restrooms. They have put a one-week return date on the survey, and
hope to get a 30� retum.
Mr. Wheeler stated the project cammittee will be meeting on May 79, and at that
time, they will decide how to proceed with the fol7ow-up process.
Mr. Wheeler stated the project canmittee has decided to produce a pocket-size
handbook listing accessible buildings in the City. They are hoping to get donations
from civic organizations to help produce that handbook.
HUMAN RESOURCES CONE�tISSION MEETING, MAY 6. 1982` PAGE 2
Z. INTERNATIONAL YEAR Of DISABLED PERSONS - QUESTIONNAIRE UPDATE:
Ms. Cayan stated they have 9otten the questionnaire print-outs and have given
them to Dr. Liu of the State Oivision of Yocational Rehab for his review. She
stated Mr. 8oergerhoff will be back from vacation next week, and she and
Mr. Boergerfioff wi7i meet with Dr. Liu to go aver the�:prinY-ouYs. She stated
the report is almost co�leted, and once they get the actual num6ers and
statistics, it shou7d be compieted by the end of June.
3. DAYCARE AYAILABILITY REPORT - JAYNE NOBLE:
Ms. Noble stated she met with Mary Boynton, the Director of the Anoka-Ramsey-
Mercy Daycare Center {ARMS). Ms. Boynton has been with the daycare since 1974.
Ms. Noble stated "ARM3" was started in March ]974 in the Anoka-Ramsey Jr. College
to serve the professors, the students, and the hospital. In June 1974, it was
moved to Mercy Hospital. 7he daycare center is now open to anyone in the
coircnunity, in nrder to maintain a full class. :
Ms. Noble stated the hospital provides the food and the space, and the daycare
center is bilted monthTy by the hospital for the food. 7here is some government
subsidy as far as food, but those are the oniy gavernment funds the daycare center
receives. The daycare center 9s administered entirely by the hospital. The
daycare employees are hired through the hospital and are on the same pay scaie
as hospital empioyees. 7here are two emp7oyees who have teaching degrees. The
daycare center receives some help from students at Anoka-Ramsey, who are doing it
for credit and for work experience. The daycare center gets no help from the
Ladies Auxiliary.
Ms. Noble stated the daycare center accepts children stating at 6 weeks of age
up to 6 yrs. of age. The tuition is as fol]ows:
6 wks - t6 mo. - $fi5/week
16 mo. - 2 1/2 yrs.- $55/weer
2 7J2 yrs, - b yrs.- $45/week
Ms. Noble stated she had asked if daycare was included as a benefit to the
�nployees. Ms. BoynLon had said it was not, so employees do pay for the daycare
services. Ms. Noble stated they enptored tf�e possibility of this type of thing
ever being a benefit, and Ms. 8oynton had said it was sanething that was feasible,
Ms. Nob1e stated sfie had told Ms. Boynton that the purpose of the Human Resources
Cottmission tooking into daycare availability was because they had thought they
might,at some poiot 1n time, approach the businesses in Fridley to see if any
businesses vrouTd offer daycare faci�ities. Ms. Baynton had stated she thought
the timing was bad for businesses. The daycare center ds not a money-making
proposition. State regulations prohibit it from being a money-making business.
Ms. Boynton had stated that Mercy liospital fias put out $15,000 for equipment,
and every year the daycare center is subsidized by Mercy Hospital,
NUM�t RESOURCES GOfdMI5SI0N MEETING "MAY 6 1982 PAGE 3
Ms. Nob1e stated that Ms. Soynton had said this daycare facility is the only on-
site daycare facility in the Midwest. Both Honeywall and 3M provide daycare
facilities, but they are not on-site. Ms. Boynton had said that Channe7 4 TV
did a series on �their daycare center, and other hospitals (inc7uding Unity) have
looked at it Decause it is such a neat concept.
Ms, Noble stated she had asked if there was any kind of sliding fee scale, and
was told there was none.
Ms, van Dan stated the Comnission should file tM s information for reference to
be brought 6ack at a time when they feel there is a potential use for it.
Mr. Treuenfels stated it is definitely a project they should keep in mind, but
this does not seem to be the best time.
4. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Artfcle on "financial Conditionc A
Ms. Cayan stated she had made copies of this article for the Cammission
to review and to use as a possible source of information in helping the
Commission in reviewing the requests for funding.
Ms. van Dan stated she thought the Co�nission may have to 6ecome a lot
more knowledgeable and sophisticated in the criteria they.use in their
funding guideline�, because of the growing demand for limited resources.
b, Meetinc�Date Change
Because of a conf7ict next month, the Cortxnission members agreed to change
tMe next meeting fran Thurs., June 3, to Thurs., June 70, at 7:30 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MS. NOBI,E, SECONDBD BY MR. TREUBNFELS� TO AA70URN T88 MEETING. UPON
A VOICfi VOTS, ALL VOTINC RYE'� CHAIRPERSON VAN DAN DECLARED THE MAY 6� 1982�
,HUNAN RESOURCfiS COMMISSION FIESTIIVG ADJOURNED AT 8s30 P.M.
t
Respectfully submitted,
ne aa
Recording Secretary
CI7Y OF FRIDLEY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MEETING
MAY 11, 1982
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Oquist called the May 11, 1982, Community Development Comnission
meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Members Absent
Others Present:
LeRoy Oquist, Kenneth Vos, Sharon Gustafson
Connie Modig, A7 Gabe7
Mary Cayan, Human Resources Assistant
Bob Lines, City of Minneapolis, Inspection Dept.
APPROVAL OF APRIL 13, 1982, COMMUNITV DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. GUSTAFSON� SECONDED BY DR, VOS� TO APPROVE THE APRIL 23� 2982�
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
1, TRUTH IN SALES QF HOUSING - BOB LINES, CITY Of MINNEAPOLIS, INSPECTI4N DEPT,:
Mr. Oquist stated the Commission had invited Mr. Lines to come and speak to the
Commission about "Truth in Sales of Housing", The Commission was interested in
the possibility of adopting a similar ordinance in Frid7ey.
Mr. Lines stated he Hrould give the Comnission the background and history of
the Truth in Sales of Housing Ordinance in Minneapo7is. He stated initially
the City C�uncil was (and still is} interested in code compliance to keep the
housing stock up to condition of repair and maintenance. They tried several
times to pass mandatory code compliance, but each time it failed, primarily
because of the excessive costs of bringing older homes up to code, especially
for the elderly. But, he stated, he thought mandatory code compliance might be
the best way for younger cities and towns, such as Fridley, in order to keep
the housing stock from deterioration.
Mr. Lines stated that finally Tan Johnson (presently a Hennepin County attorney)
and some real estate people got together and came up with the general idea of
an inspection of the same type as code compliance, but with a report based on
the inspection to disclose only (without any requirements to fix) the problems
that are evident, not necessarily violations of code, but things that give
COMMUNITY DEVEtOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING; 1�AY 11; 1982 PAGE 2
first time home buyers a little better knowledge of what they are buying.
Consumer protection was the general theme. The Truth in Sales of Housing
Ordinance was passed in March 1975 with an effective date of Sept. or Oct, 1975.
Mr. Lines stated he got assigned to the coordination of the program in June 7975.
He was one of the peop]e instrumental in putting together the forms and the
tests to give those people who would be doing the inspections. He utiTized much
of the Inspection Dept, staff in putting these things together.
Mr. Lines stated the 7ruth in Sa1es of Housing Board was appointed by the City
Council. The Board consists of ]0 members and are the policy makers, subject to
City Council. 7he Director of the Department of Inspections is a mandated member
of the Board; the rest are citizens. He stated the Board worked on and approved
the Truth in Sa7es of Housing form that is now used,
Mr. Lines stated the effective date of the ordinance was postponed until Dec. 1,
1975. so that is when it started. Prior to that, they had given a test to 79
private professional people, and 23 passed the test. He stated the reason they
went with private evaluators was because Minneapotis has �rdinances that state
that if city inspectors get involved and become aware of a problem in any building,
either rental or single family home, they are required to issue orders. The City
gf Minneapolis Ticenses these peop3� like they do plumbers, carpenters, etc.,
and this certifies their competence. The City charges the evaluators an annual
certification fee of $50.
Mr. L9nes stated the City does not have access to the eva7uations done by the
private evaluators. A copy comes to his office to be fi7ed, and a fi7ing fee of
$10 per evatuation is charged. The seller is responsible for this fee.
Mr, Lines stated the ordinance has been amended a number of times. The ordinance
as it was first passed spoke of only twa things: (1) major structural difficulties;
and {Z) hazards to health and safety. It was quickly changed to go beyond those
things and now includes a myriad of things that are neither major or hazards.
The City Council has added homestead status and zon9ng,
Mr, Lines stated the seller must have an evaluation done prior to the showing
of the house. Those people interested in buying the house are provided with a
copy of the evaluation report prior to the signing of the purchase agreement,
Mr. Lines stated the City does not have the authority to set a fee that the
private evaluators can charge. The private evaluators set their own fees in
canpetition with each other.
Mr. Oquist asked Mr.�ines if any other cities Sn the metropolitan area have a
similar 7ruth in Sales of Housing ordinance.
MM. Lines stated that St. Paul has passed a Truth in Housing ordinance. St, Paul
issued their own test to private peopie, Many of the Minneapolis people took
the test and are certified in both Minneapolis and St. Paul. He believed
South St. Paul has also passed a similar ordinance.
COMMUNI_TY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 11, 1982 PAGE 3
Mr. Dquist asked if there was any reason why Fridley cou3dn't use Minneapolis`
or St. Pau1's private evaluatars without the necessity of giving a test and
having them certified in the City of Fridiey.
Mr. Lines stated he could see no reason why Fridley couldn't use evaluators
from Minneapolis, St. Paul, or any other municipality in which they were certi-
fied. He stated a City Council has the authority to do whatever they wish.
Mr. Oquist asked how a seller gets a list of the private evaluators.
Mr. Lines stated many people obtain names from real estate companies. Many people
who se11 their own homes call the City. The Truth in Sales of Housing Board has
decreed that the City shal7 give out three names, alphabetica7, in�rotation.
The City is also free to send the seller the whole 7ist of names.
Ms. Gustafson asked Mr. Lines if he felt this inspection was doing what the
City Council intended it to do or was it more a negotiating tool used by the
real estate people?
Mr, Lines stated that when he was assigned the coordination of the program in
June ]475, he was less than enthusiastic. He has since changed his mind completely
and feels the inspections do exactly whai the City Council intended them to do.
He did not think it was used as a real estate tool, The rea] estate salespeop]e
do not particularly like it,because it calls specific attention to things they
would rather not have to talk about.
Mr. Lines stated the first year, they kept very close track, and there were 60
conplaints about inspections out of around 8,000 sales. He stated this is a
fantastically low percentage.0ut of that 60, probably 35-40 were really valid
complaints. He stated that pattern is not any greater, and is probably less now,
than it was the first year,
Mr, Lines stated that early in the program, they realized they needed someone,
a priva';e individual, not a governmental employee, to check on the Truth in
Sales o' Housing evaluators. The City Council passed and put under contract
with the City a competent person for one year. When the contract came up for
renewal, the city attorney said the courts would look at it and say that, with
consecutive contracts with the City, that person was, in fact, a.city employee,
and that the City should hire a"review evaluator". Eventual7y, the City of
Minneapolis did hire a full-time "review evaluaior". He stated it is very
important and necessary to have a person who is knowledgeable in a71 areas of
housing, construction, and mechanical systems to go out a�d, not only c�eck on
complaints, but also spot-check routinety.
Mr. Lines stated Fridley could not afford a full-time employee, because Fridley
would not have the high amount of sa7es that Minneapolis had, but they would
need someone to do the reviewing.
COMMUNITY DEVELODMENT COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 11, 1982 PAGE 4
Ms. Cayan stated two important questions tha± areJgoing to be asked are: How
much staff .time would be involved, and how much would the program cost?
Mr. Lines stated the cost wasn't really perttnent in this case, because there
is no net outflow of do7lars from the city budget, There is a n�n-refundable
fiting fee of $10 per every evaluation, so with approximate]y 8,000 sa7es per
year in Minneapolis, they have an annual income of $80,000. It would gtve a
pretty decent income, depending on how many saies Fridiey has, but they could
set a fee to reflect the cost factor.
Mr. Lines stated that, as far as staff, he coordinates the program in Minneapolis
and he has one employee under him. He does not have any authority over the
evaivators.
�
Mr, Lines stated malpractice insurance is a requirement on the part of the
private evaluators. The evaluators reflect this expense in their charge. He
stated they have a set of guidelines for the evaluators which specifies what
the evaluators are expected to do.
Mr. Lines stated the City Council has chosen not to include condaniniums, even
though condaniniums are, in effect, single family homes. In t979, the City
Counci7 passed a condo conversion ordinance, which included a requirement for
Truth in Sa]es of Housing inspection on condo conversions only for the first sale,
Mr, Lines stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission members
had in the future and would even be wiTting to come back and speak again to the
Casmission if needed.
Mr. Oquist thanked Mr. Lines for coming to the meeting and sharing this information.
Ms. Gustafson stated she felt it was very important to keep the housing stock
up in Fridley, and she would iike to see Truth in Sa7es of Housing in fridley.
Mr. Oquist stated he would also really like to see an ordinance like this in
Fridley. It was someihing Fridley real7y needed. He stated he thought the
Canmission shou7d make a motion to C9ty Council requesting a Truth in Sales of
Housing ordinance be put together based on the input rece9ved from Mr. Bob Lines.
MOTION BY DR. VOSL S&CONDED 8Y MS. GUSTAFSON,�TO-REGOMMBND-TO��CITY�COUNCIL THAT
� A�"TRUTH�IN'SALES'OF--HOUSING��ORDINANGE"��BE��DEI7ELOPED�FQR��THE-CZTY'OR��FRIDLEY
��MODEI,E'D'AFTER�THE'MINNEAPOISS'AND�ST,�PAIIL�TRUTH�IN'SALES�OF'HOUS7NG-ORDINANCES.
Dr. Yos steted that most of the hard staff work has a7ready been done by the
Cities of Minneapolis and St. Pau1, 7he City of Fridley could also utilize the
evaluators for those cities, so tfiere was no expense in putting togeCher a test
and testing private individuals. He stated he would also be interested in finding
out what the average sa]es were in Fridley.
UPON A VOZCfi VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTSON CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY,
COMMUNI7Y DEVELOPMEN7 CONIMISSIOM MEETING, F1AW 17, 7982 PAGE 5
2. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON FOR 1982-83:
Chairperson Oquist declared the naninations open for chairperson.
Dr. Vos renominated LeROy Oquist for chairperson
Hearing no other nominations, Chairperson Oquist declared the nominations closed.
MOTION BY DR, VOS� SECONDED BY MS. GUSTAFSON� TO CAST A UNANIMOUS BALLOT FOR
LEROY OQUIST FOR CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR I982-83.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE�
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
O�IIST DECLARED 2HE MOTION
Chairperson Oquist declared the nominations'open for vice-chairperson.
Ms. Gustafson renominated Kenneth Vos for vice-chairperson.
Hearing no other nominations, Chairperson Oquist declared the nominations closed.
MOTION BY MS. GUSTAFSON, S&CONDED BY MR, OQUIST� TO CAST A UNANIMOUS BAL7AT FOR
KENNETX VOS FOR VICE-CHAZRP&RSQN OF TXE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR
1982-83.
iJPON A VOSCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNRNIMOUSLY.
3. NEI6HBORHOOD PROJECT COMNIITTEE - DEVELOPMENT OF SCOPE AND TIMETABLE:
Mr, Oquist stated this item shou7d be continued until the next meeting when they
will hopefully have a full commission to discuss it.
MOSZON BY DR. VOS, SECONDED BY MS. GUSTAFSON� TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION ON THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PROJSCT COMMITTEE UNTIL TXE NEXT MEETING,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE,
UNANIMOIISLY.
OQIIIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
4. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION UPDATE - STAFF:
emo from ary Cayan to t e ommum y eve opment Commission dated 5/4/82)
Ms. Cayan stated a11 future shelter development activities have been terminated
due to funding problems. As a result of this, the Gomnission will not have to
formulate recommendations on additional shelter sites in Fridley,
Ms. Cayan stated that to update the Corrmission on the April 27 pub]ic hearing,
according to the person she ta7ked to at the MTC, it was almost a unanimous vote
of the persons in attendance that beginning June 5, MTC routes l0 and 28 wil7 be
canbined into one bus line, to be designated Route 10. At the same time, the
portion of existing Route 16 serving Blaine and Goon Rapids north of the Northtown
Center will become a seQarate route, designated Route 24.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 11, 1982 PAGE 6
(Ms. Gustafson left the meeting at 8:45 p.m.)
DISCUSSION OF TOWN MEETING:
Mr, Oquist stated he rea77y thought they needed to get something passed on to
City Council in order to initiate the town meeting. Based on what New Brighton
has done, there is a project correnittee that reports to the New Brighton City
Counci7, but the town meeting is a City Council-initiated item.
Ms. Cayan stated the next City Council conference meeting is May 24. If the
Commission would like to attend this meeting and discuss the town meeting idea
with the City Counci7, they would need ta request sane time at that meeting.
She thought it would be wise to meet and discuss this with the City Counci7.
Mr. Oquist stated they should discuss this with the City Council at that
conference meeting. He stated he would be able to attend that meeting, but
would like at least one other comnission member to attend also. He asked Ms. Cayan
to contact Ms. Gustafson to see if she could attend this meeting.
6. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. "The American Dream - Under Revision" - Meeting sponsored by the
Blaine Area Chamber of Commerce on April 22
Dr. Vos stated he had attended this meeting. Ne stated there were
about 75 peop]e in attendance, He stated it was essentia7ly a pep
talk for builders and local politicians that they can get housing,
they just have to build smaller homes and take off garages. He stated
this is something the Co�nunity Deveiopment Commission has discussed
many times. Besides a7ternative construction methods, Dr. Vos stated
creative ways of financing was also discussed.
AQJOURNMENT:
Chairperson Oquist declared the May 17, 7982, Corrmunity Development Commission
meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully sub itted,
yie5aa
Recording Secretary
CALL TO ORDER:
CITY OF fRIDLEY
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MEETING
MAY 13, 1982
Chairperson Cottmers ca7led the May l3, 1982, Housing & Redevelopment Authority
meeting to order at 7:33 p.m.
ROLL CALt:
Members Present: larry Commers, Russe7 Houck, Carolyn Svendsen,
Elmars Prieditis, Duane Prairie
Members Absent: None ,
Others Present: Jerro7d Boardman, City Planner
Mark Haggerty, Smith, Juster, Feikema
Ron Berg, Miller Securities
Richard J. Larsen, Larsen/Rova Architects
Marlin Hutchison, Barthel Construction
James Vassar, Vassar & Associates, Inc.
Judy Schollen, Lennies, 6381 University Ave. N,E.
Ted Burandt, 6211 Riverview Terrace
APPROVAL OF APRIL 8, 1982, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTION BY h42, PRAIRIE� SECONDED BY MR. HOUCK� TO APPROVE THE APRII. 8� 1982�
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTNUTES AS FIRITTEN. �
UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL POTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECI�ARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
I. CENTER CITY PROJECT:
A. Update on Property Acquisition - Columbia Park Properties
(Memo #82-33 from Executive Director)
1. Letter to Art & Dorothy Smith dated April 28, 1982, regarding
Purchase Price Approva7
Mr. Boardman stated that, for the record, he needed approval of
the $85,�00 purchase price for Art & Dorotfiy Smith's property,
He stated he had given the HRA members a copy of a letter from
Mr. Herrick advising Mr. Boardman that the additional $5,000
requested by Art & Dorothy Smith for the property was more than
adequate compensation in the sense that, if they went into
HOUSING & REDEVEt4PMENT AUTRQRITV MEETING, MAY 13, 1982 AAGE 2
2.
condemnation, they would spend at least $5,000 or more on the
purchase of the property. He stated Art & Dorothy Smith have
settled on the purchase price of $85,000 and are in the process
of building a new home in Blaine.
MOTION BY MR. HOUCK, SECONDED 8Y MR. PRIEDITIS� TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE PRICE OFFER OF $85�000 FOR THE ACQUISSTSON OF
RRT 6 DOROTHY SMITH'S PROPERTY.
UPON A VDICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,
Approval of Letter of Understanding dated April 16, 1982
Mr, Boardman stated that at the�last meeting, the HRA made a
motion approving the contract for private redevelopment by and
between the HRA and Columbia Park Properties, subject to the
negotiation of a satisfactory letter of indemnification by the
City Attorney and the attorney for Columbia Park Properties.
Mr. Boardman stated the approval for this letter was done by a
telephone poll of the HRA members. Mr. Commers was out of town,
but four out of four of the other HRA members agreed to this
letter and it was submitted for approval to Columbia Park Properties.
Mr. Boardman stated he was under the understanding that everything
in the letter was what was discussed and agreed upon by the HRA.
73rd Avenue Partnership
Mr. Boardman asked Mr. Mark Haggerty to bring the HRA up to date on
this project.
Mr. Haggerty stated that with him was Ron Berg, of Mil7er Securities,
who was the primary individual who has been working on underwriting
this particuiar project.
Mr. Haggerty stated that as of Friday, May 7, he had received firm
construction numbers from Hagmann Construction (also the construction
f3rm for Columbia Park Properties), and they were going to build the
two buildings together. BWBR Architects (architects for Columbia Park
Properties) had drawn up the plans the HRA had in their agenda, and it
appeared they would also be the architects for the office bui7ding.
Mr. Haggerty stated the thing that went wrong was that on Friday, two
senior partners in his law firm which had agreed to be the master tenant
in the off9ce building, decided to pull out of the project.
Mr. Haggerty stated he is now trying to get up to 50% occupancy, at
which time the two senior partners have agreed to go along with ieasing
the building. He stated that at that point, they could issue bonds and
begin construction. Right now they only have 10-75% rented.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 13, 1982 PAGE 3
C
Mr. Haggerty stated that because of this situation, he could not, in
good conscience,ask the City to issue the bids for moving the road
or doing the parking lot at this time.
Mr. Berg stated they had scheduled to sell bonds on Ju7y ] internally
themse7ves, based on a77 previous discusslon, and they had hoped to
be under construction by Aug. ]. He stated that as far as Miller
Securities' offer to underwriie the bonds, that offer remains open if
a master lease tenant can be found.
Mr. Corrrners asked Mr. Haggerty to keep Mr. Boardman advised of any new
�evelopments.
Mr. Haggerty stated he appreciated what the HRA has done, and he was
very sorry to have to make this report.
Mr. Commers asked what bearing this new situation had on the street
project.
Mr. Boardman stated they are continuing the bids on the street project
and have set up the parking lot as an alternative bid. They are going
to keep 64th Ave. in as a regular bid, because by state law, they can
legally delete up to 25% of the project, and 64th Ave. is not up to
25%. So, if by the end of July, Mr. Haggerty cannot put the office
building project together, the City can make a decision as to whether
to go ahead with the street project or hold off on the street project
until an office building project can be put together. He stated it
might be worth the City's while to go ahead with 64th Ave. now, because
the bids may come in much cheaper than doing it later.
NSP Proposal for Action on 64th Ave, Project
(Memo #82-34 from Executive Director)
Mr. Boardman stated he would like to delay this item as it was based
on the removal of 64th Ave.
MOTSON BY 1�42, HOUCK� SECONDED BY .�II2. PRAZRSE� TO SABLE THE CONSIDERATION
OF MEMO /f82-34 FROM TXE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING THE NSP PROP0.SAL
FOR POWER LINE MODSFSCATIONS,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRZED UNANSMOUSLY.
D. Request by Mayor to Remove Existing Hardware Sign
(Memo #82-35 from Executive Director}
Mr. Boardman stated that Mayor Nee has requested that the HRA take the
necessary action to rertrove the Fridley Hardware sign as it is a non-
conforming sign to the City's present code. The Mayor felt now was a
g ood opportunity to have it removed.
HOUSING & REDEVECOPMENT AllTH�RITV MEETI��G, MAY 13, 7982 PAGE 4
Mr. Boardman stated he has talked to Charles Peugh of Signcrafter to
determine whether the City could actualTy sell the sign for profit.
Mr. Peugh had stated it was very unusual, if not 9mpossible, to se77
the sign to a sign canpany for profit. Mr, Boardman had asked
Mr. Peugh to look at it and make an estimate on what it would cost
for the removal. The estimated cost is $582, Mr. Boardman stated
that if there were no objections, he would get telephone quotes from
three other companies before going with the lowest bid.
MOTION BY MR. HOUCK� SECONDED BY MR. PRI&DIT25� TO AUTHORIZE THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TD GET MORE BIDS AND THEN CARRY OUT THE REMOVAL OF
THE FRIDLEY HARbWARE SIGN AS REQUESTED BY TXE MAYOR.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. `
E. Submission of Proposal by Barthel Construction & Update of Activity -
Extension of Right of Development for Six Months
Mr. Hutchison stated that Mr. Dick Larsen, their architect, has prepared
a preliminary drawing of an elevation of the shopping center.
Mr. Larsen showed the new preliminary drawing and reviewed the old site
plan.
Mr, Hutchison stated they want this center to harmonize with the entire
project, They are very flexib7e with materials and colors, but they do
want to indicate a quality. They know the City is ]ooking for a
quality development.
Mr, Hutchison stated they are making progress with a supermarket and a
drugstore. They have to have those two major tenants before they can
interest anyone else into the center. They are working with Mortenson,
their contractor, in getting rough estimates of cost and trying to
estab7ish what.their needs are going to be.
Mr. Commers asked if they had any further contact with their bond people.
Mr. Hutchison stated
some other projects,
project.
they are in contact with their bond people on
and they are still optimistic they can do this
Mr. Boardman asked about the timetable with leases.
Mr. Hutchison stated he did not know that timetable, but, hopefully,
they would have more information for the HRA by the HRA's June meeting.
Mr, Boardman stated the HRA was now look9ng at a six month right of
development, At the end of that six months, the HRA would like to be
HOUSING & REDEVELCPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 13, 1982 PAGE 5
in a position to sign construction/development documents. There is
the possibi7ity for extension, but the developer has to show a reason
for that extension in that they are making adequate progress.
MOTION BY MR, PRIEDZTSS� SECONDED BY MR, HIXICK� TO GRANT DEVELOPMENT
RIGHSS FOR SIX MQNTHS TO BARTHEL CONSTUCSION COMPANY AND VASSAR AND
ASSOCIATES, INC.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTSON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
F, Correspondence - Phillips Petroleum Co, on Sale of Property at
6500 University Ave. N.E.
Mr, Commers stated this was a letter dated April 6, 1982, from Phillips
Petroleum Company's rea7 estate representative in which they were
asking for $125,000 for the station at 6500 Univ. Ave. N.E.
Mr. Boardman stated this letter was for the HRA's information, He was
not necessarily requesting an action on it from the HRA. At this point
in time, he did not think the HRA should make an offer on that building.
He stated he would continue to watch it closely.
Mr. Comners stated that one thing that has to be kept in mind is that
if Phillips enters into a new lease with that building, the City would
have to deal with that in any future acquisition. He asked Mr. Boardman
to respond to Phillips Petroleum Co. telling them the HRA is giving
the matter sane consideration.
Mr. Prieditis stated he felt they shoultl just tell Phillips Petroleum
that the HRA is not interested in the building at t(�at price.
Mr, Cortmners agreed. He stated they should probably tell Phillips
Petroleum that this area is low on their priority list right now, and
the offer is just too high.
The NRA members concurred that Mr. Boardman write a letter to
Phillips Petroleum stating that the City appreciates their offer, but
the price is too high.
G. Competition Proposal (Memo #82-36 from Execut9ve DirectorJ
Mr. Qoardman stated they haveinterviewed approximately l2 firms to
do the Center City Design, and they have narrowed it down to the
following four firms:
1. Sanders & Associates
2. Barton-Aschman Assoc., Inc.
3. Inter Design
4. Herb Baldwin
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMEMT AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 13; 1982 PAGE 6
Mr. Prairie asked Mr. Boardman what criteria was used to arrive at
these four fittns,
Mr. Boardman stated they ]ooked at the different types of projects
these firms have done which were similar to the Center City project.
They also looked at the design techniques the firms used in each of
the design areas.
Mr, Boardman stated they are now 7ooking at design canpetition. The
firms wil] prepare a17 their material by June 77, and that materia7
will be presented to the HRA in a preseniation form at the HRA's July
meeting, The material will include illustrative site plans with a
scale of 1 inch = 30 feet and an iilustrative model with a scale of
1/16 inch = 1 foot.
Mr. Boardman stated he was looking for approval of the canpetition
and the authorization to go ahead with the competition.
MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITSS, SECONDED BY .�, H077CK, TO APPROVE TXE
COMPETITZON AND TO AUTHROIZE MR. BOARDMAN TO PROCEED WITH THE COMPETITIDN
AS OUTLINED IN TXE "SCOPE OF WORK, CENSER CITY SZTE DESIGN COMPETITION,
CITY OF FRIDLEY". �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CXAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,
II, MOORE LAKE PROJEC7
A. FeMling, Fehiing, & Nybo (Mema �82-37 from Executive Director)
Mr. Boardman stated Ms. Nybo was out of town, and he had hoped she
would make it back in time for this meeting. From his meeting with
Ms. Nybo's attorney that day, the attorney had said Ms. Nybo was
interested in doing the project. The attorney was not speaking for
Ms. Nybo, but was reacting to the contract documents the City had
given Ms. Nybo. Mr. Boardman stated that last week, Ms. Nybo had
indicated to him that she would probably be in a position to sign
contract documenis and that, if the HRA would accept that idea, she
would like to go ahead with the acquisition and she vrould have a
letter of credit that would back the HRA if she cou7d not go ahead
with the project.
Mr. Commers stated that according to the last minutes, the HRA made
a motion that this was to be the final 30-day extension on right of
development, and that if the executed f9roancing commitment was not
presented at this meeting, the development rights would terminate,
He stated neither the HRA or Mr. Boardman have had any contact with
her, other than Mr. Boardman's brief contact with her attorney that
day. He stated Ms. Nybo is not at the meeting and there has been no
request for an additional extension; therefore, Ms. Nybo's development
rights are terminated.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMEN7 AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 13; 7982 PAGE 7
MOTZON BY l�2, HOUCK, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN� TO TERNINATE THE RSGHT
OF DEVELOPhlENT GIYEN TO CXERYL NYBO FOR AN OFFICE BUILDING IN TXE
MOORE LAXE PROJECT AREA.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXASRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Corrmers asked Mr. Boardman to send a letter to Ms, Nybo informing
of this action.
B. St. Phillips Church Proposal - Right of Development for Submission of
202 Project Application to HUD
(Memo #82-38 from Executive Director)
Mr. Soardman stated he has been meeting with Judy Lee, the consultant
from Ebenezer Society for 5t. Phillips. He has given her sample
information of the things she needs for their submission of an applica-
tion to NUD. He stated St. Phillips is planning on coming before the
HRA with site plans and will be requesting a right of development at the
next HRA meeting. He stated he will also be meeting again with Ms. Lee
on Wednesday, May 19, to work out some of the costs.
Mr. Boardman stated the City Council has authorized $120,000 CDBG
funds for assistance in the acquisition of property. He stated he
thought the City Counci7 has indicated a support of this project. He
stated there wil] have to be a rezoning, and that issue can take
place any time after they get a commitment from HUD.
Mr. Commers stated that one thing that would be helpful for the HRA
is that whenever the City Council discusses one of the HRA projects, _
the HRA receive a copy of that portion of the City Council minutes
pertaining to that project.
Mr. Boardman stated he has drafted a right of developroent letter. It
has not yet been approved by Mr. Herrick. He stated thai at this time,
this was for the HRA's information so they are aware of what is going
on and what he has given to St. Pfiillips. He stated no action is
r�ded at this meeting.
Ms, Svendsen stated that in Mark Burch's letter of May 4, 1982, he
strted that Harold E, Finney Contracting Co, would be placing clean
fill (which would include no concrete, rubble, �r building debris)
on the property owned 6y Max Saliterman. She asked Mr. Boardman to
check into this as concrete has been dumped there along with the fill.
C. Moore Lake Restoration - Information
Mr. Boardman stated this was just information for tfie HRA of what
Hickok & Associates has done with the Moore Lake Restoration Project.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETIN6, MAY 13, i982 PAGE 8
III. NORTH AREA PROJECT
A. Guidelines for Proposals (Memo #82-34 from Executive Director)
Mr. Boardman stated they have limited amount o�' funds for deve]opment
in the North Area. Since they lose 40� of their tax increment right
off the top with fiscal disparities, they are sitting with very
limited amount of funds to do soil correction, He stated he is
looking at the possibility of trying to keep about 20� of the funds in
reserve. That reserve wi71 assist them in keeping their capitalized
interest costs down. With a reduction of capitalized interest costs,
they are going to have some deve7opment that is not going to be
reqaesting HRA assistance and; therefore, some monies are going to
be generated through development. He stated he has drawn up some
guidelines for the HRA's review, ,
Mr. Commers asked if Mr. Boardman knew of any legislation that has
been passed that removes tax increment financing from the ]oss in
fiscal disparities,
Mr, Boardman stated the City Counci] can make that determination, In
this case, because this area was a large area of ind�stria7/commercial
development, the City Council made the determination that it would fal]
within the fiscal disparities. Legislation in the tax increment wi17
also lose 40%. He stated that was determined at the time the North Area
Redevelopment District was established.
Mr, Commers stated the City Council never consulted with the HRA on
that. He asked Mr. Boardman to get the HRA copies of t�e City Council
minutes where this was discussed,
Mr. Commers stated he really did not know why the HRA needed these
guidelines. He felt that when anyone comes before the HRA, the HRA
should make a determination at that time as to whether they would help
in that development.
The HRA members were in agreement that these guidelines were not really
needed and that each project should be 7ooked at 9ndividually,
Mr. Boardman stated that if the HRA felt they did not need any formal
guidelines, he wou]d ask the HRA to be very cautious when they get
into different projects. Maybe the guideline should be that the HRA
understands they shou7d try to maintain a reserve in the area because
there are going to be some drainage expenses.
HOUSING & REDEVEtOPMENT AU7HORITY �EETING, MAY 13; 7982 PAGE 9
Mr. Prairie stated it would be very helpful if Mr. Boardman wou]d
provide as much information as possible on each specific project as
it comes before the HRA.
IV. FINANCIAL
A, Memo from Mark Burch to Jerry Boardman and HRA on Demo7ition Question
of the Structures at 6471 University Ave. N.E.
Mr. Boardman stated that at the last meeting, there was a question by
Ms. Svendsen as to whether the contractor had comp7eted the demolition
at the contract price or if there was a reduced price, He stated this
memo from Mark Burch confirmed that all the demo7ition of structures
was compieted in its entirety and there were no reductions in the
contract amount. .
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MR, HOUCK� SECONDED HY MS. SVENASEN� TD ADJIXIRN THE MEETING. UPQN A
��° VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MAY 13� 1982�
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9;50 P.M.
Respectfully sub itted,
L e 5aba
Recording Secretary
City of Fridley
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING - MAY 25. 1962 PAGE 1
CALL 1�Q QIiD�R�
Chairwomnn Gabel called the ?Iay 25� 1982, Appeala Commisaion meting to order
at 7i30 P.a.
ROId. CALLt
Mem6era Present� Patricia Gabel. Alex Barna, Jim Plemel� Jean G�rou
Membera Abaent� I.eslie Cole�n
Othera Preaent� %nt Hill, Cit�y of FridZey
Mrs. Cleveland. 1641 61st Avanua N,S.� Frldley, MN
Mr. Don Pertinen
lfr, and Mra. Donald Nielsen, lly-?1� Way N,S.. Fridley. ?4d
APPROVS APFEAIS COMMISSION MIN0IES OF MAY 11 1982i
?SOTION bq Mr, Barna, seconded by Ms, Gerou� to approve the May 11. 1982, Appeals
Commission minutes as mrltten. UPON A VOICE YO'i�s. ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GAH6L
DECLARED Tf�d MOTION CARR]ED UNANIMQUSLY.
1,
MOTZON by Ms, Gerou, seconded bg Mr, Barna, to open the public hearing, UPON A VOICS
V01E, ALL YOTING AYB, CEiAIRWOMAt3 GA�L DECLARED THE PUHLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7t28 P,M,
ADMINZSTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
1641 - 61st Avenue N.E. '
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY I�OUIRFS�NT;
Section 205.D53, 48, requires a minimum side yard of 10 feet adjoining
living areas.
Pvblic purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a minimum of
20 feet betr�een living area in adjncent structures and 15 feet between
garages and living areas in adjace�t structures to reduce exposure tc
conflagration of fize. Zt is also to allow for aesthetically pleasing
open areas around residential structures.
APP5AIS COl4!ISSION ?SCsTItiG - iIAY 25. 1962 PAGE 2
B. STATED HARDSHIp=
"The recessed area behfnd the existing garaqe is the best Iocation for
a family rooan addition from a design point of viaw. An addition to the
rear of the main bo8y of the house �aould greatiy reduce the existi ng
rear yard, because of the existing 34 foot deep house on this 120 foot
deep lot. The addition would also have to be a full tao story walkout
because o£ the existing grade,"
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
The existing attached garage is pulled ahead of the back line of the
house leaving an approximate 12 foot by 20 foot zecess. The proposal is
to convert this recess to living area an8 add a deck onto the back of
this additi�x, This would result in living area being 5 feet fran the
side lot line.
The adjacent structure is built with the same design, only reversed,
which results in the gazages and recesses of both structures adjoininq
the common lot line, If both properties were to convert their recesses
into living area, there would be a distance of 10 feet between living
areas.
if the Boazd appz wes this request we have no su9geste8 stipulations,
however socne thought oould be given to not installinq any windows in the
east wall.
Mra, Cleveland of lbkl 61st Averrue N.B,. Fridley� xaa present;
Mr. HS11 presentsd Commission membera with an aerial photograph and buiZding
blueprinta. Mra. Cleveland explainad tLat they yranted to put a family room o»
bahind the garage� the dinette xall rrould be moved four Seet ao it vould be in
line with the famf�y room� the garage rooP xould be angled and a porch and deck
Would be addad to.the rear of ths lmnae. The Cleveland'a chose adding on to the
rear oY the house STl6t8Ad of the alde� to lceep Lhe property aesthetically pleaaing,
In oxder to eamp],p �rith the code requirement of 8� of aquare footage 2n vindowa
s window Will be put in one-half flight up Yron the famil,y room in the stairwap
facing eaat. 1he porch in bnek xill be a scraened� one season porch. !lra. C1eveland
presented to the Co�nSssion members lettera from three neighbora all of xhom
indi�ted they hxd no problem with Lhe proposed addition.
1+�TION by Nr. Pleme2, seconded by Ma, Gerau. to recaive the letters Prom t,he
neighbora into the record. UPOii A YQ%CE VpTB. ALL VOTING AY&, CHAIRWOMAN GA�L
DECI:ARED THTs MOT7AN CARRIEI} UHANIl40QSLY.
Ghairwoman Gabel aalca+� 11' the eaat xall �rould be a fire rrall and Mr, Hill indicated
t!u t vould be a tode requirement. Chairxoman Gabel asked if tLe siding woul.d be
the same and v2�n coaa#svetion i+ou2d begin, ?1ra. Cleveland aaid the aiding would
be the same and that construetioa xould begin in mid-June or September depending
on xhen the bids tirere received.
APPEAIS COMliISSIOA I+g;ETIlIG MAY 25 1982 PAGP 3
MOTZON by !L. Gerou� seoonded by 2(r. Plemel. to cloee the public hearirig. �PON A.
VOICS Y07E. ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GAffiL DECLARID Tf� PUBLIC �ARING CL]S8D
�T 7t50 P.M.
Mr, plemel questioned the hardship axd Mrs. C1eveLnd resPcnded that it vas a
Lok of iiv5ng area. CkuirWOman Gabsl added tt�at ahe had seen the 1lvirig ares
and it xaa, indeed, quite amall. Mr. Barna noted that sven xith the additicn
the houee would not be outeised Yor that particular srsa.
M�TION by Mr. Barna. aeconded by Ms. Gerou. to approtre the variance requeet to
reduce the side yard setbsck on the living aide ot a dwelling fron the zequired
10 feet to 5 feet, Lo a11ox the conatruction oi a Yanily room behind the eaist�ng
garage on Lot 27� Block 3r �'��ale Addition, the same being 1b41 blat Avenue
N.E, rrith the atipulations that the xindoW in the xall adjacettt to the neighboring
garage be eliminated by utilising other energy efficient Windox device• in the
north xall of the structure� a fire wall be installed in the adjoining r+all
and • fire door exit be installed in the garage. UPON A VOICE W18, ALL NNO'PIZ1G
AYfi. CHAIRWOMAN GA�3L DECLARE9 THE 1i0T7DN CARR� UbiAN7ilDIISLY.
�
1lOTION bq Ma. Gerou, seconded bq Mr. Plenel, to open the public hesring, IIPON A
VOICE YOTE, ALL VOTING AYS. CHAIRWOMAN GABEL IIECIARID THE PUBLIC HEARING OPSN AT
?s59 P.li. �
AIkSINISTRATIVE.. STAFF REP�?ZT
115 - 71i Way N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED SX REOUIREMENT:
Section 205.154, 4, allows uncovered porches and steps to buildinq
entrances to extend not moze than 10 feet into a required front yard.
Public purpose served by this requitement is to allow for aesthetic
consideration to reduce the building "line of sight" encroachment inm
the neighboz's front yard.
$, STATED HARDSHIP: -
"Need a front door and need abwe grade deck to use door."
C. ADM247ISTRATIVE S2AFF REVIEWe
Tne existing dwelling Was built in 1956 with a 35 foot £ront yard
setback, In 1976, the City i.mProved 71� Way an8 9 feet of this
property was taken for street riqht of way, leaving the existing house
27.9 feet fran the front property line.
APPSAIS COMMISSION M�ETIIdG - MAY 25. 1962 PAGE 4
The proposal is to build a 12 foot deck and fzont step off Lhe front of
the dwellinq which would leave a 15 foot frortt yard.
T'he adjacent structures to the east and west are over 200 feet from
this addition so this deck should not encmach into their "line of sight".
There is an apparent problem over the westerly 10'ieet of Lot 32,
Auditor's Subdivision #77. The City approved the lot split (L.S.i�73-07)
in June, 1973. For some reason the transfer of the 10 feet of land was
never recorded at the County, Thereioze we have tcld Mr. Nielsen that
the staff report would be recommending to the Board that his petition
be aoa�tin�ed until proper recording has been accomplished. Mr. t7ielson
does have an attarney working on this at this time,
Mr. snd t+ra. Nie3aeiroi 115-71� iJ+4Y N.S�. FridlsY� Minnesota, wexv present.
12r. Hill provided the Coromission me�nbera xiLl; :n :erial photograph, Pursnant
to the StJ�ff Report, t�r, Hill indicated thaE it waa hia underatanding that the '
property recotding �aas not yet completed, Mr, Nielsen confirmed ?Sr, $i12'a
atatement, but felt the recording should be completed R*ith3i� tha next few daya.
Chairs+omaa Gabel lndicated that tbe Nielsen's request could be heard in t,he
in�erim� however no decis3on �rould te mnde until tbe legal description of Ehe
property is correct. Mr. Nielsen said they would like to put a dsok on the Yront
of the house vith one small siep up and put a door in the front of the house.
The door would be put in place of the tzro large front xindovs current�y in
existsnce. 12�ey xould like to place an open trellis roof over the deck Sor '
svn contro2 into the house, There are txo exits now� one from t1� bnek of the
house and the other on the car port side oP the dwe2ling. Chairrroman Gabel
asked if artip alternatives to a frant deck had been explored and iY a contraotor
had been consultsd, Mr, Nielsen indicated that he had done the preltminary
plans himself. Ma, Gerou aslaed if they had considered an arming and Hra. Nielaen
said she didn't lilaa them, Mr. Nielsea aaid they really needed the deck part,
Por the enLrance� but the overhang Por sun contaol could be optional, ChaizKroman
�abel astaad if there existed in Fridley many Yront deoks and Mr, $ill responded
that there xera very few the majoritq of decks eure side or back.
MU2ZON by Ms. Gerou, seconded by Mr, Plemel, to olose the public hearing, UPON A
VOICE Y01is', ALI. YOTII+IG AYE. CHAIRWOMAN GA�L DECIARID THE PUBLIC HEARffiG CIASID AT
8a28 P.M.
MOTION by Mr, Barna� seconded by Ms, Gerou. to tabls the i,equeat until euch time
that the property dispute ia settled and better p2ans on the proposed oonstructioa
could ba presented, UPON A VOICE YO�, AIS. VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GA�L DECIAR6D
THE MOTIflN CARRIED IINANIMDUSLY.
Oi'HER xISTNESS�
Discussion of guida3iaes for variance requesta xill be discuased at the next
meeting,
ADJOURNMENT� •
190TION by Ma. Gerou, seconded bq Hr, Harna� to adjourn, UPON A VOICE WTE, ALL VOTING
AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GA�L DECIARED '1Y� APPEAIS COMMZSSIAN N,'EETING OF MAY 25� 1QB2.
ADJOURNID 6T Bt�►D P,Ii.
PaL Von Moach� Racording Secretary
CI7Y OF FRIDLEY
ENERGY COh�tISSION
MEETING
MAY 25, 1982
r
CALL TQ OROER:
Chairperson Saba ca7led the May 25, 1982, fnergy Commission meeting to order at
7:34 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Dean Saba, Bill Wharton, Bill Jordan, Todd Tessmer
Members Absent: Jerry Chichosz
Others Present: Bill Deblon� AsSOCiate Planner
APPROVAL OF MARCH 23, 1982, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTZON BY XR. WHARTON� 5ECONDED 8Y MR. SABA, TO RPPROVE TXE MARCN 23� 1982�
ENERGY COMMISSION MZNUTBS AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTfii ALL VOTINC� AYE� CXAZRPERSON SAEA DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANYMOUSLY.
1. IP�TRODUCTION OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBERS; BILL JORDAN AND TODD TESSMER
Mr. Saba introduced Mr. Jordan and Mr. Tessmer and welcomed them to the Energy
Commission. -
Mr. Jordan stated he is a department head at Dunwoody in charge of plumbing,
pipe fitting, sheet metal. refrigeration, and Environmental 5ystems, which deals
specifical]y with energy. He stated he attended Dunwoody in 1967 and attended
the University of Minnesota for 7 yaars in energy related fields.
Mr. Tessmer stated he has lived in Fridley all his life. He stated he is very
interested in politics and he wanted to see how city government worked. He stated
he is a good friend of Councilman Ed Namernik, who told him about the opening on
the Energy Gommission. He stated he is a full time student at the University of
Minnesota, College of Liberal Arts.
Mr. Saba stated he hoped they could all work together and make same progress.
He stated the Energy Commission put together a workplan for 1982. He reviewed
the workplan in order to give Mr. Jordan and Mr. Tessmer an idea of what direction
tfie Commission was going and what they hoped to accomplish in the coming year.
Mr. Deblon stated all the Energy Commission members had received an Energy
Gonxnission Handbook at the meeting. He stated 3taff felt it would be an excellent
abbreviated introduction to city government. He stated so many new commissioners
ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 25, 1982 PAGE 2
Y
go a full term without having a lot of important information. He stated the
handbook is organized into four major sections: 6eneral Information, Specific
Information, Current Materials, and Past Commission Minutes.
Mr. Saba stated he thought it was not necessary for the new Commission members
to receive the Planning Cort�nissian and City Counci] minutes, at ieast for some
time, as it was too confusing. Then, at sane future point in time, if they
would like to begin receiving these minutes, they could request 5taff to send
them the minutes.
Mr. Wharton stated he thought the Energy Commission Handbook was a very good
idea. However, he wou7d recommend that all future materials mailed or given to
the Energy Commission members be 3-hole punched. He would also recamnend that
the tabs have some type of numbering system so that, in referring to certain
sections, they would all have the same common denominator, He would also
recommend that a77 future materials to 6e placed in the Handbo�k be labe7ed
with the numbering system so they can be placed under the appropriate tab.
Mr, Deblon stated that when a Commission member has completed his/her term,
the Handbook should be passed on to the incoming commission member.
2, CONTINUED: ENERGY ACCOUNTING SVSTEM AND UPDATE ON ENERGY AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Mr, Saba stated the Commission fias asked Mr. Deblon to put toget�er an itemized
list of all the City's bills for electricity, gas, and oil, so the Commission can
get some kind of idea �f where they are at, energy-wise, with the City's buildings--
City garage, Civic Center, Fire Depi., pumphouses, and the municipal liquor store.
Mr. Saba stated a maxi-audit was done for each of these buildings by TKDA, Inc.
So, the Commission is trying to keep track of what is happening with the energy
audit recommendations made in the maxi audits by TKDA,not necessarily in terms of
dollars, but in terms of eTectrical energy, natural gas, and oi1. Hopefully,
the City is reducing its dependence on energy, He stated this goes hand-in-hand
with the workp7an in trying to have the City be an examp7e for the rest of the
cor.imuni ty.
Mr. Saba stated that in their agenda packet, they had the latest utility bi71s
and how these bills canpare to the two previous years. Right now, they do not
have anything they can really sink their teeth into as far as a big reduction in
energy use, but they should start seeing sane dramatic improvements through 1982,
Mr, Saba stated that, for soma time, the Commission has been trying to get the
City to plot this information out on the computer so they can see sane trends.
He stated there is a computer program already available that will work, not only
for the City, but the Commission thinks it will work for the co�nunity, too. He
stated the Commission has received several excuses as to why computer time has
not been made available for ihis data. He asked Mr. Deblon if he had any new
information as to when the computer wouid be available.
Mr, Deblon stated at the present time, the City's computer system is going through a
transition period. Additional terminals are being instal7ed and the capacity of the
computer is being expanded. Starting new programs on the computer would be difficult
at this time. Mr. Deblon said he would continue to pursue this service.
ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 25, 7982 PAGE 3
Mr. Saba stated the Comnission should continue to urge the City to get this
energy data computerized.
Mr. Deblon stated he did meet with Bob Nordahl,Operations Analyst, and Mr,Nordahl
had given him an update on the things the City has done as a result of the mini-
audits. He stated he would send copies of the"Summary of Mini-Audit Conservation
Opportunities" to the new Comnission members. Mr, Deblon stated the following
things have been done by the City.
1. To modify the heating, venting, air conditioning control to set back
thermostat whicfi contro7s baseboard radiation to 55° when zones are
unoccupied - canpleted Feb, ]982
2. Caulk and weatherstrip the doors - completed May 1982
3. In print room, operate the vent fan near the b7ueprint machine only
when copying - This is being done.
4. Clean al] iniet and outlet screens for air handling systems - done
in May 1982, routine maintenance
5. Take advantage of solar gain through cleaning of glass - completed
6. Increase baseboard efficiency by cleaning all convectors with a strong
vacuum cleaner - comp7eted in summer 1981, will repeat in 1982.
7. Establish an energy accounting system.- Energy Comnission is working on it.
Mr. Deblon handed out copies of the maxi-audits to each Commission member.
Mr. Saba suggested that the Camnission take some time at their next meeting to
take a brief tour of the Civic Center,
Mr. Saba stated that if they could keep a list of things that have been done and
tie those things into any kind of chart they come up with, they would have a
point of reference back to what was done, how much energy was being used, if any,
and be able to make some comparisons.
Mr. Wharton stated this all sounds nice, but he believed �ne of the Commission's
prime objectives was to set up some kind of process whereby they can have some
checks and balances. To have all these utility bills together and a lot of
historical data on file is one thing, but to not be able to analyze this data
in a meaningful manner makes any kind of work the Cort�ission does look ridiculous.
TO-MAKfi '
�F
�'CZTY�CAN'STRRT ANALYZZNG'ITS'ENSRGY
'�HESULTS.
ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 25, 1982 PAGE 4
Mr. Wharton stated the Energy Cormiission members are vo�unteers who are supposed
to be here to work with the ciiy government to try to help them operate the City,
If the City would give the Energy Commission something to do and show some
cooperation, the Commission could be very effective. If not, the Commission
should be disbanded.
Mr. Saba stated the City has put off the computer program thing for at least one
year. Ever since the City Staff first mentioned they had a program avai)ab7e,
the Commission has been urging the City to authorize someone to put this infarmation
on the computer, and they have not done it.
Mr. Wharton stated the Comnission has gone on for a year presuming there is a
program that can be utilized. If the City does not want the Energy Commission to
use the computer, then the Commission should be told that.
UPON A VOSCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON SABA DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
3. STOP SIGN POLICY
Mr. Saba stated the Commission has been iaoking at ways to modify the use of more
stap signs in the City through reduced speed 7imits or the possibility of puttinq
in yield signs in place of stop signs, He stated they looked into the possibility
of reducing speed limits in certain areas to 25 m.p.h., but were advised that
it is against the law to change speed limits.
Mr. Deblon stated it is iliegai to reduce speed limits to iess than 30 m.p.h,
unless a study is done by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. He suggested
the Comnission might want to set up some kind of guide]ines regarding stop signs.
Mr. 5aba stated he thought one thing the Comnission could do is ask City Council,
through Planning Commission, to not insiall any more stop signs unless the Energy
Coirrnission is allowed to 7ook at the location, the reasons, etc., and give a
recommendation. Tt wouid also give the City Councii a mechanism for denial.
Mr. Saba asked Mr, Qeblon to see if the Public Works Department has a list of
criteria they use in deciding whether a stop sign is or is not justified. If the
Public Works Department does not have any criteria, this Commission should probably
develop sane criteria for stop sign authorization.
Mr. Saba stated this discussion should be continued at the next meeting.
4. El.ECTION OF CNAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON FOR 7982-83:
Mr. Wharton stated he felt that since this was the first meeting for the two
new Commission members, the election should be postponed until the next meeting.
MOTION BY MR. WHARTON� SECONDED BY MR. TESSlYER� TO POSTPONE TSE ELECTZON OF TXE
CHAIRPEXSON AND VICE-CHRIRPERSON UNTIL THE JUNE ME8TIN6.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE� CHAIRPERSON SABA DECLRI2ED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
ENERGY COh�1ISSI0N MEETING MAY 25 1982 PAGE 5
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MR. WNARTON� SECONDED BY MR. TESSMER� TO ADJOURN TXE MEETING. UPON A
VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHATRPERSON SABA DECT�ARED TXE MAY 25� 19B2� ENERGY
COMMISSION MEETTNG RDJOilRNED AT 9:�7 P,M,
Respectfully su nitted,
, �
yn e Saba
Recording Secretary
{
CITY aF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1982
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel called the June 9, 1982, Planning Commission meeting to
order at 7:35 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Kondrick, Ms. van �an,
Mr. Saba
Members Absent: Mr. Svanda
Qthers Present: Bill De61on, Associate Planner
Steven Hardel; 336 - 64th Ave. N.E.
Patty Hardel, 332 - 64th Ave. N.E.
W. G. Doty, 175 Logan Parkway N.E.
Gary We7lner, 6221 Sunrise Dr.
Thomas F. Ryan, 6389 University Ave. N.E.
Harvey Peterson, 151 Glen Creek Rd.
Barbara Hughes,548 Rice Creek Terrace
Francis van Dan, 6342 Baker St. N.E.
APPROVAL OF MAY 19 �982, PLANNING COMMISSION MiNl1TE5:
MOSION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR, SABA, TO APPROVE THE MAY 19� Z982� PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES.
Ms. Schnabel stated that on page 7, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, "polic,y"
should be changed to "police".
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MINUTES
APPROVED AS AMENDED.
]. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERP1IT SP #82-07, BY
GE ALD HARTMAN: Per Section 05. 3, 3, , , to a ow an auto auction
on t—fie North 240 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Ouarter of
Section 3, the same being 8290 Main Street N.E.
MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MR, KONDRICK, TO OPEN TXE PUBLZC HEARZNG ON
SP I%82-07 BY GERALD HARTMAN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 7:37 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 2
The petitioner was not in the audience.
Mr. Deblon stated he had an aeria] photo show?ng the location of the building.
He stated the operation is a drive-through type auction. It is a public
auction where anyone can bring in an automobile to be auctioned off, He stated
Staff has some problems they would like to see addressed.
Mr. Deblon stated the major problem was parking. The activity is currently
going on, and the City has determined it should require a special use permit.
Although the zoning is M-2, the operation is hedging toward a retail operation,
but technically it could be called a wholesale-type of sales.He stated they run
into problems when a retail-type operation is in an industrial development,
where enough parking is provided for warehousing or manufacturing at a lesser
rate than would be provided for retail or who7esale. He stated Staff would like
to see all off-street parking needs met according to the code (hard surface
with concrete curbing around the area).
Mr. Deblon stated the Fire Department has expressed some concerns, many of which
have been reso7ved, The Fire Department has a fairly extensive list of concerns.
Mr. Kondrick asked if cars were stored at this facility.
Mr. Doty stated he is familiar with the building and the tenant. He sffiated
there are 40 bays in the building, with a total of 80,000 sq. ft. Six bays are
presently being rented to the automobile-related industry--auto restoration,
transmission repair shop, auto vinyl repair shop, etc. He stated Mr. Hartman
does not do any auto repair, but he does store cars pending the auction. He
stated the auction is held on Saturday morning. People can bring their cars in
during the week, and those cars are stored inside the building until Saturday.
After the auction, the cars are removed.
Ms. Gabel asked how much parking there actually is now and how much parking ►
would be required for this operation in the appropriate zoning. •
Mr. Deblon stated a retail-type operation requires one stall per every 250 ft.
of space. He did not have an analysis of how many parking spaces would be
needed to keep the parking off-street, There is a lot of on-street parking at
the time of the auction,
Mr. Doty stated Mr. Hartman is actually using 17,D00 sq, ft. He stated that
when Mr. Hartman started this operation, he did not know he was required to get
a special use permit. It first came to the attention of City Ha71 when the
Fire Department inspected regarding fire hazards.
Mr. Doty stated that because he is familiar with the building, he would like to
suggest a couple of things. As far as requiring curbing, a parking lot, and all
those kinds af things, he felt those were properly the province of the building
owner. Rs far as the parking problem, this area is not a heavily traveled area,
and the auction is held on Saturday morning. He stated the Planning Commission
should be aware that this building produced around $33,000 in taxes last year
and is being hit now with a tax increase of $11,000. Even 100q occupied, that
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 3
building is losing money. He stated he empathized with Mr. Hartman who is a
small business person, and in speaking for the small business people who are
trying to survive in today's economy, he hoped the Planning Commission wou7d
take these things into consideration in making their decision.
Ms. Barbara Hughes stated she is a member of the Springbrook Nature Center
Foundation Board of Directors, and she was representing the Springbrook Nature
Center Foundation at this meeting. She stated she had a resolution dated
June l, 1982, she would like to present to the Planning Commission. Ms. Hughes
read the following resolution into the record:
SPRINGBROOK NATURE CENTER FOUNDATION
RESOLVED:
For reasons of protecting a valuable natural resource, of protecting
the investment the community has made in its largest park, and to
preserve natural wildlife habitat and areas citizens may use for
personal enjoyment, education and growth, and to preserve the unique
educational facility and to prevent degradation of all these assets,
the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation Board of Directors does urge
the City of Fridley to examine the need for a special use permit for
activities on adjoining property with great care, and to do everything
in its power to prevent the intrusion of noise, unwanted sounds, the
sounds of business activity and especially of outdoor loudspeakers, and
to assure that the water quality in the nature center creek and ponds
is not degraded by run-off from adjoining property and is of the
highest quality, and that the City use its powers to assure that the
visual impact of activities taking place on adjoining property is held
to a minimum and that junk car storage lots not be permitted in
property abutting the nature center, and that all the required planting,
screenings, and buffering techniques appropriate between zoning cate-
gories of different types be used to the fullest extent,
June 1, 1982
Ms. Hughes stated the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation is not directly
opposing the granting of this special use permit. They have a great many con-
cerns about the impact on the activities that would take place on a Saturday
morning when there are a great many people in the nature center, that those
people not be disturbed by loud car noise and that there not be loudspeakers.
She stated there are some trails very close to this property. Those trails
that are in the prairie have direct visual access to this building, and part of
their concern is that the people on the trails could have a miserable experience.
She stated they have as many as 2,000 people going through the nature center
on one weekend. There are a lot of people who come who want the area to be
quiet and expect it to be quiet.
Ms. Hughes stated, again, they are not saying the special use permit should
not be or cannot be issued, but they wanted these kinds of considerations
included in it so there was some enforcement should this operation violate those
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. JUNE 9, 1982
PAGE 4
considerations. She stated it has been her feeling that special use permits
are very often used as a way to avoid rezoning. That did not seem to be the
case here, and she was glad to see that, but it may clearly be a case of an
inappropriate use in that particular zoning, which she would think would be
grounds to deny the request.
Ms. Hughes stated they understood this was projected as an �ncrease in business.
Although the business has been in operation, the auctions have only been held
once a month, but they understood Mr. Hartman was intending to have auctions
every Saturday, which concerned the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation.
Ms. Hughes stated that because the auction has been held inside the building,
they have not been unduly impacted at this time, but if they see an increase in
the size of the operation or in the frequency of operation, the chances of
these kinds of things happening, particularly the noise, would be what they would
consider an adverse impact. At this time, they have not seen a lot of adverse
impacts, but they would like the City to be very cognizant of what the potential
is there and to protect it. After all, it is a city park. She stated she was
sure the Parks & Recreation Commission would have simi]ar concerns.
Ms. Hughes stated she has been at City Councii meetings when they have dealt
with the car salvage yards and has seen the efforts the owners of those facilities
have to go to to meet the many stipulations on plantings, paving, water run-off,
water quality, etc. Those same kinds of things are appropriate things to apply
to this type of operation.
Ms. Hughes stated the water plan for that whole area dumps into the nature
center's waterways in a number of different places. It is their understandinq
at this time that the run-off from this particular site is not getting into the
nature center ponds or waterways very easily, but it may in heavier rains. She
stated the concern of where the water from that parking ]ot is going is a concern
the City should address.
Mr. Deblon stated there was the residential zoning near this building and the
proposal for an apartment complex in that area. He had genuine concern about
the acti�ities they allow in these areas and the impact on the quality of life
in residential areas.
MOTION BY MS, GABEL� SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN� TO RECESVE INTO THE RECORD THE
RESOLUTION DATED JUNE 2� I982� FROM THE SPRINGBROOK AATURE CENTER FOUNDATION.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED SHE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY.
Mr. Kondrick stated he felt the Parks & Recreation Commiss�on �ould agree �ith
the concerns presented by Ms. Hughes. He stated water is a pro6lem no� in the
nature center, let a7one what it could become in the future witfi a lot of cars
in this area, Noise and noise abatement is going to be critical. He felt the
City should consider the suggestions made by Ms. Hughes to protect the nature
center property from any unnecessary noises at all times, not just on Saturdays.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 5
Ms. van Dan stated she would also be concerned about the visual pollution. As
Ms. Hughes had pointed out, the view from the park does involve the building
and its activities. Another concern was the residentia7 area and the apartment
building that might be going up, and she wondered if this was an appropriate
activity to be taking place so close to residential.
Ms. Schnabel stated they have to remember this is M-2 zoning and there are other
businesses in this bui7ding that are compatible with M-2 zoning. But, Staff
also has a question of whether this auction operation is compatible in M-2.
Ms, van Dan stated she just wanted to be sure that if the business was conducted,
it did not project any noise or visua7 impact to the nature center. The operation
can be contained in the building.
Ms, Schnabel stated she had several questions she would ]ike answered:
1. What is the zoning on the other auto salvage areas, and do these
places have special use permits? If so, what are the conditions of those
special use permits?
2. Have there been any complaints from the public about the auction
business or any other business in that building?
3. What happens to the cars if they are not sold after the auction?
4. What is the current water run-off situation in this area and what
impact does this business have on it?
Ms. Gabel stated she would like the Planning Commission members to have a copy
of the stipulations that are given to auto salvage operations.
Ms. Schnabel stated they need the petitioner here to answer these kinds of
questions, and she would recommend the Planning Commission continue this item
until the petitioner can be present.
MOTION BY h42. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO CONTINUE SPECIAL USE PERMIT�
SP �82-07� BY GERALD HARTMAN� UNTIL THE PETITIONER CRN BE PRE"SENT.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRYJOMAN�SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2, VACATION REQUEST, SAV #82-01, BY THE FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AtTY RITY: acate t treet e ween oc s an , a�e i�foo�
a e-TT y in Block 4, Ree's Addition to FridTey Park. (Block 5 alley vacated
Ordinance 208) (balance of streets and alleys from P�1ississippi St. to
64th Avenue vacated February 23, 1953, in Book 292, Page 219, Anoka County
Records)
Mr. Deblon stated this request is by the Fridley Nousing & Redevelppment
Authority (HRA) to vacate both 4th St. and the alley. The street is not in
existence, but the alley is existing. The reason for the vacation is to make
way for the development of a medical clinic by Columbia Park Properties,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 6
Mr. Deblon stated he had an aerial photo to present to the Commission in order
to give them an idea of the development in the area. He stated the clinic
development was planned for late July.
Ms. Patty Hardel stated their garage address is 336 - 64th Ave. 5he stated
their main objection was that the alley is their main access to their driveway
to get to their garage which is how they get into their house, She stated they
did not receive any notification of this action until last Saturday.
Mr, Harvey Peterson stated he was speaking for Tom Ryan. He stated he felt
this action was premature. If the al]ey was vacated, it wou7d severely damage
Mr. Ryan's business. The vacation of the alley was an unnecessary action because
if the HRA acquires the property, they will then own the alley anyway.
Mr. Doty stated the vacation action was premature. By this action, the HRA
was taking away access to part of his property which is severa7 hundred feet of
frontage on 4th St. He siated the HRA needs the 4th St, property and the east
portion of his property for the development of the medical clinic, He stated
the HRA and he commenced negotiations that morning. He stated he did not oppose
this development, but he thought the cart was before the horse. This should be
done two weeks from no�, but not at this meeting. Mr. Doty stated the contract
has not yet been signed with Columbia Park Properties and until that contract is
signed, he would have to oppose this vacation.
Mr.Deblon stated he thought Staff was concerned about the timing a vacation
takes. He believed it took about three months to complete the vacation of a
street or alley.
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN� TO RECOMMEND THE FOLIAWING:
(1) TO TABLE THE VACRTION OF THE 22 FT. ALLEY IN BIACK 4� REE'S ADDITION
TO FRIDLEY PARK (SRV �82-01)� UNTIL THE HRA XAS COMPLETED NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE OWNERS OF THE SHOPPING CENTER AND DR. RYAN�S AUTOM03'IVE
CLINSC; AND,
(2) TO TABLE THE�VACATION OF 4th STREET BETWEEN BLOCKS 4 AND 5� REE'S
ADDITION TO FRIDLEY PARK (SAV H82-01)� UNTIL THE HRA HAS COMPLETED
NEGOTIATIONS WITH COLUMBIA PARK PROPERTIES AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY
OWNERS.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED SHE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION BY MR. OQUISS� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO REQUEST A LEGAL OPZNION ON
WHETHER OR NOT VACATION REQUESTS SlICH AS THIS ARE NECESSARY WHEN THE HRA INTENRS
TO PURCHASE THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND WSLL BECOME OWNERS OF THE SU.RROUNDING
LAND OF THESE ALLEYS AND STREETS. .
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Deblon stated the City would notify the affected property owners when this
request again comes before the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 7
3. REVIEW MODIFICATION TO CHAPTER 211 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE: PLATTING
ORDINANCE
Mr. Oquist stated this was brought before the Community Development Commission
the previous evening. Mr. Boardman reviewed the ordinance with them, and the
Community �evelopment Canmission made the recommendation to approve the concept
of zero ]ot ]ines.
Mr. Deblon stated the Planning Commission members were aware of the numerous
requests the City is getting for doubie bungalows to be split with single
ownership side by side. He stated they also had a problem with new construction
versus existing construction. He stated Mr. Doty and Mr. We]lner have land
which was recently zoned R-2 which is now up for subdivision approval for zero
lot line-type deve7opment.
Mr. Deblon stated this ordinance amending Chapter 211 sets up some standards
whereby the City Council can approve subdivisions--in R-2, the lot area is 5,000
sq. ft. with a lot width of 37.5 ft; and in R-3, the lot area is 3,000 sq. ft.
with a lot width of 25.0 ft. In proceeding with the subdivisions with Mr, Doty's
land, they encountered some other probiems with irregular shaped lots. He stated
they are still searching for a mechanism to split the land as equally as possible
in order to end up with a more acceptable shaped lot if the origina7 lot is
10,000 sq, ft,
Mrl Oeblon stated that also included with the ordinance is a"Declaration of
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions"
Mr. Deblon stated they would like the Planning Commission to approve the concept
of zero lot line and possib7y approve the amendment to Chapter 211 with
recommendations.
Ms, Schnabel stated she would like to know when the "Declaration of Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions" had to be filed and where the document is filed.
She stated this information should be included with the ordinance.
Ms. Schanbel stated she did not have any problems with the "Declaration of
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions", except for the sexist language which
should be changed.
Ms. Gabei and Ms. van Dan stated the "Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions" was a very reassuring document.
Ms. Schnabel stated she had problems with the lot area in R-2 and R-3 under
Item #1 of the ordinance. She felt the whole section needed to be rewritten to
avoid the kinds of problems Mr. Doty and Mr. Wellner are getttng into with
strange lot sizes. It looked like the 3,000 sq. ft. lot area in R-3 was
written for a 3-plex and 4-plexes were not taken into consider�tion.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 8
Ms. Schnabei recommended that #1 under 211.045 Zera Lot Lines be changed as
follows:
217,045 ZERO LOT LINES
l. The City may approve subdivisions for the development of zero
lot line, common W3�� residential structures. These lots shall be
divided equally as is reasonably possible within the restrictions
of the existi� c�uidelines of the zoning ordinance.
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF SHE MODIFICATION TO CHAPTER 211 OF THE FRIDLEY CiTY CODE, PLATTING
ORDZNANCE, AS RMENDED ABOVE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTSNG AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANTMOUSLY.
4. RECEIVE MEMO FROM VIRGIL NERRICK: PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTATlTIUE REOUIREMENTS
Ms. Schnabel stated she would encourage the Planning Commission members to
study this memo as parts of it were pertinent at times to their discussions.
MOTION BY MR, SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE THE MEMO FROM VIRGIZ HERRICK
DATED AUG. 2� 1979.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. .
5. RECEIUE MAY 6, 1982, HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. VAN DAN� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE MAY 6� 1982� HUMAN
RESOURCES COMMISSION MZNUTES.
Ms, van Dan stated the Accessibility Project Committee has met at least twice
since these minutes were written, As of a week ago, they had attained almost
a 30% return of the surveys. She would anticipate an even hiqher return than
30% because there seems to be a pretty good response. She stated Julee Quarve-
Peterson has been having contact with the Fridley Sun, and there have been
excellent articles on the National Year for the Disabled. There has also been
a program on cable TV.
Ms, van Dan stated she has been informed that on Monday night, the City Council
decided the City would provide no funding to any funding requesis. The
Commission now has the sad task of writing to SACA, Central Center for Family
Resources, Alexandra House, and some of the others infornting them of this action.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEE7ING, JUNE 9, ]982 PAGE 9
Mr. Francis van Dan stated that because of the pressing human needs and the
unavailability of funds, it might be feasible for the Human Resources Commission
to suggest that these organizations apply to private foundations, such as the
McKnight Foundation and the Dayton Corp. He asked if the Pianning Commission
would be wi7ling to endorse such applications to give them more weight and also
recommend that the City Council endorse them?
Ms. Schnabel stated it was a good point, She would 9uess that most of these
organizations have tapped every available resource there is, but the Human
Resources Commission could discuss this suggestion. If the Human Resources
Commission decides they would like to see the City endorse applications, then
the Human Resources Commission shouTd pass a resolution �o go through Planning
Commission to City Council.
UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLRRED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. RECEIVE MAY 11, 1982 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR, OQUIST� SECONDED BY MR, SABA� TO RECEIVE THE MAY 11� I982� �
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSZON MINUTES.
Mr. Oquist stated the Commission had an interesting presentation on Truth in
Sales of Housing by Bob Lines from the City of Minneapolis. Mr. Oquist stated
the Commission has been asked to get an opposite viewpoint on Truth in Sa)es
of Housing, and they hope to have someone do that at their July meeting.
Because of that, the Corrunission will withdraw their motion to City Council
recormnending that a Truth in Sales of Housing ordinance be developed for the
City of Fridley.
Mr, Doty stated there are some negative aspects to Truth in Sales of Housing.
He stated the Truth in Sales of Housing ordinance requiras that before a house
can be sold, the owner must have the house checked for those things that are
hazardous, not up to code, and comnents. The ordinance requires these things
be displayed before a property is offered for sale through a broker. He stated
he is not opposed to the concept, but he felt the disadvantage was that the
checklist was disarming to potential buyers. People look at the list and
assume that anything that isn't on the check7ist is al7 right. That is not the
case. There is nothing that guarantees that if something is not on the list,
it is all right. He stated they are having lawsuit after lawsuit because of
this. He stated it would be his recorranendation that instead of Truth in Sa7es
of Housing, the Community Development Commission consider a compliance certi-
ficate which is used by the City of New Hope.
Mr. Oquist stated they would take that suggestion into consideration.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. .
PLANNING COMMTSSION MEETING, JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 10
7. RECEIVE MAY 13, 1982, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTIDN BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECEIVE THE MAY I3� 1982�
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CNAIRWOMRN SCHNABEL DECZARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. RECEIVE MAY 25, 1982, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MS, VAN DAN, TO RECEIKE THE MAY 25� 1982�
APPEAIS COMMISSIOtV MINUTES.
UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLA72ED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. RECEIUE MAY 25, 1982, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR, SABA� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECEIVE THE MAY 25� 1982�
ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES.
Mr. Saba stated the Commission is still trying to establish an energy accounting
system, and part of that requires some time on the computer so they can get a
good idea where the City is spending money and saving money, Right now, they
have been attempting to do this manually, and Mr. Deblon has been doing a lot
of work in that respect, but it is essential to have computer time. He stated
he would call the Planning Commission's attention to the motion made by the
Energy Comnission on page 3 urging the City Council to encourage city management
to give some priority to the use of computer time for the energy accounting
system.
MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN� TO CONCUR WZTH THE ENERGY COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION TO URGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT POS52BLE TO ENCOURAGE
CSTY MANAGEMENT TO GIVE SOME HIGHER PRIORITY TO TXE UTILIZATION OF THE COMPUTER
FACILITY SO TNE CITY CAN START ANALYZING ITS ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND GETTING SOME
MEANINGFUL RESULTS.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
10. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Commission field Trips
Ms. Schnabel stated she would like to qet some reaction from the
Planning Commission members as to whether they felt it would be
worthwhile to take some time as a commission with some staff inembers
and visit some other communities to see how other communities actual7y
handie some of the things the Pianning Commissian is facing in Fridley;
for example, the zero lot line issue.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 9, 1982 PAGE 11
Ms. Schnabel stated she was bringing this up because she has a friend
on the Coon Rapids P7anning Commission, and they do it at 7east once
a year, She stated she felt it would be very worthwhile for the Planning
Commission to do this, and it would give them a better visual perspective
on some of the things they have coming before them as a commission.
Ms. Gabel stated she thought it was a good idea. It would give them a
feel of what is going on in other communities and how other communities
handle different situations.
The other Commissioners agreed it was a good idea.
Ms. Schnabel stated she would talk to Mr. Boardman about it and work on
arranging some kind of tour.
b. Election of Planning Commission Vice-Cha9rperson
Ms. Schnabel stated the Planning Corranission should elect a new vice-
chairperson at their next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY hIIt. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A
VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE JUNE 9� 1982�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED RT II:IO P.M.
Res ectfully submitted,
, .�
Ly e Sa a
Re ording Secretary
SPRINGBROOK NATURE CENTER FOUVDATION
RESQLV�D:
For reasons of protecting a valuable natural resource,
of protecting the investtnent the community has nade in
its largest park, and to preserve natural wildlife
habitat and areas citizens may use for personal enjoyment,
education and growth, and to preserve the unique educational
facility and to prevent degradation of all these assets,
the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation Board of Directors
does urge the City of Fridley to examine the need for a
special use permit for activities on adjoining prc�erty with
great care, and to do everything in its power to prevent
the intrusio❑ of noise, unwanted sounds, the sounds of
business activity and especially o£ outdoor loudspeakers,
and to assure that the wa� qu�lity '�n the nature cente� ek
a� .f,��.�•.o�
and ponds is not degraded nd is of the highe t qual ty,
and that the City use its powers to assure that the visual
impact of activities taking place on adjoining property is
held to a minimum and that junk. car storage Lots not be permitted
in pco?erty abutting the nature center, and that all the required
planting, screenings and buffering techniques appropriate between
zoning categories of different types be used to the fu2lest
extent.
June � 1982
TME CITV OF
1-�� ��
�IFtEGTORATE
OP
PUBLIC WORKS
DATE June 1, 1982
FROM D.P.W. Jerrold Boardman - Planninc�
SUBJECT
Modification to Chapter 211 of the
Fridley City Code (Qlatting Ordinance)
MEMO N0. 82-36
TO
John flora
19
MEMOR�ANDUM I
ACTIONI INFO•
Please find attached the modifications to the Platting Ordinance as being proposed
to allow zero lot line development. Modifications to the platting ordinance require
a review by ihe Planning Co�nission with a Public Hearing before the City Council.
The Planning Cortmission will be reviewing these modifications on June 9, 1982 with
the Public Hearing set for the City Council on July 12, 1982.
JLB/de
� " ' 20
;�
@
• �n � �� • �: ; �
l!N OFmII� l�N�DII� �P'iPR 211 �'� FR'IDI� CPPY �E
FNfITLID `PIATTIPG' BY ADDING NEW S&CTION 211.045 A�
1�?�IIiG Qa SDL`rION 211.045 SY � IT 211.046
The City Camcil of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows:
Sections 211.045 and 211.046 are hereby amended to read:
211.045 ZERD IDT LII�S
1. The City may approve subdivisions for the development of zero lot line,
conanon wall tesidential structures. The minimum lot areas and widths
shall be as follows:
Zoniny District
I�2
1�-3
I,ot Area
5,OD0 Sq Ft
3,000 Sq Ft
Lot Width
37.5'
25.0
2. All other zoning requir�nents in the respective districts except for the
setbacks along the co�an wall, zero lot line(s) must be met.
3. Separate meters must be provided to each dwelling unit for water,
electricity and natural gas and the con¢�an g3rty wall(s) fire rating shall
be one hour.
4. The awner of t]�e property to be subdivided shall execute and record at
their expense a�eclaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions" as
provided by the City. The said document shall be used to ptotect the
rights of the individual owners sharing the single structure to
maintenance, regsir and construction in case of damage to the original
structure. The declarations, covenants, conditions and restrictions shall
provide pcotectian to the property otimers and the city on the following
subjects:
(a) Building and IIse Restrictions
ib) partY W'�138
(c) Relationships among owners of adjoining living units and
arbitration of disputes.
The City shall be a beneficiary to these declarations, covenants,
conditions and restrictions.
Page T�+o
Ordir�ance No. ___,._
� . ••a .• •.i «
Whenever such subdivision of land (including any "lot split") is to be ma�e
imder 211.043. 211.044 or 211.045 hereof, such subdivision can be made without
further plattin9 with approval of the Coimcil if the Council shall find thai:
such subdivision facilitates and does not hi.nder the transfer and conveyance
of the land; does not hinder the making of assessm�ts and keeping of records
connected thezewith; that it cbes not result in the creation of any parcel
(within or without the subdivision) of a size in area or frontage which is
less than is cequired foc purposes of construction of a building on such
parcel imder itlae zoning laws and building regulations of the City; and that
the subdivision to he made is not made for the putpose of avoiding such
conditions and restrictions with respect to the land as might be imposed upon
a glatting. (Ref. 2Q7)
PASSED AbID ADOPTID SY THE CITY COONCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY 7HIS __r_�._� DAY
OF r 1982 .
WILLIAM J. NEE - M�.YDR
ATPI�'Pz
smr�sr c, nu�ri — czTSr cr�ztc
� 3/3/4
Public Hearing: July 12, 1982
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Publish.......:
zi
parcel of Iend In the eub0iviafon is a eeparate "LoY' as w�tainad in auch "A�ditor's Subdivfalon".
211.W3. Plols
When the lands of the subOivision are less than 27,000 square feet In area, the subd(vision contains not more
than two (2) separate parcels, each parcel ot which conteins at least 5,000 spuare feet and eac� parcel within the
aubdivision can be tlescribed simply as a fractional part (feet, etc.) oi the larper parcel which comprlses the
subdivision as a whole. Furlher, in suc� case ihe lantls of the subdivision sAall themselves be simple frecTional
or Quantity parts of a fu�l qovernmental subtlivision as Oetined by 4Ainnesots Statutes, SecliOn 508.47,•or one oi
more "Lots" as containetl in a plat made in conformity with the lews ot Minnesota antl t6e cotle ot the Clty of
Fridley, or as contained in an "Auditor's Subdivision", or one or more "Tracts" es contained fn an "AUCitor'a
Subdivision", orone or more "Trects" as contained in a"Repistered Lantl Suney", or other similar subdivisiona
providetl Dy law. A parcel ot land whtch is not capable ot Oescription in a simple manner, as may be oDtained by
the use ot one or more straipht lines (as distinpuishe0 (rom a complex description which involves the uae of
anples and de9rees aa (ounC in descriptlons commonly known as "mefes and bountls") tloes not meet t�e
requirements of tnis ezception.
Each parcel of �and Ir a suDdlvlsion which cannot be describe0 as "Lots" or "Tracts" (or parts thereo�) s�all De
termed as "Plots" and the whole thereot as "Subdivision Plots". (ReL 168) � �
211.044. LO1 SpIH
VJhen ihe lands o} the subdtvislon contain 27,OOD square fcet in srea or more, but not in excess of one (1� acro;
antl the subdivision contains seyarate parcels (each parcet ot which nevertheless contains at least 9,000 aquere
�eeq, and such subdivision IanOs are tAemsePves containeE in and are a part of a plat already approve0 by the
Jity, or if not approved are o� a plat recorded amonQ ?he Counry recor05 prior to and wifbout f�e necessfly of
�pproval�by t�e Clty, or of e registered lantl suney recorded amonp the County records as provitled by law antl
`he subtlivision is in tact e"lot split" with respect to one of the same.
t1t.045. Approval of Councll
Nhenever sucA subdivision of fand (incluCinp any °�ot sptiY'� is to be made under 21f.0<3 or 277.Oaa hereot,
,uch subtlivision can be madewit�out IurlherDlatting with apA�ovai ot ihe Council if ine Council shall tind ihat
such subdivision facilitates and tloes not hin0er tne trensfer an� conveyance of the IanO; does nol hinde� t�e
makinp of assessments antl keeD�ng ol records connecle0 therewith; t�at i1 does not reSUlt in the creation of
any parcel (within or without the subdivision) of a size in area or trontage whic� is less inan is reQuiretl for
purpdses ol construclion of a buildinp on sucA parcel under the zoninp laws anC builtling regulations of i�e
City; antl t�at t�e suDdlvision to be matle is not made for tne purpose of avoitlinp sucn con0itions antl
restrictions with respect to the Iand as might be imposed upon a plattinp. (Ref. 207)
211.05. Plat Approvd ProeWun
Before Dreparinq a finai Dlat of a suDdivision, a subdiviQe� s�all have prepared a prefiminary ptat Mereof, shatl
have submittetl same lopether with atl requlred accompanyiny mate�ial to the Planninp Commission, anC aMall
have secure0 t�e tenlative approval of I�e Commission. Betore any conveyance ot any lot o� parcel of Iand fn a
subdivision the subdivider shall have preDared a final Dlat thereof together with all require0 accompanylnp
materials, ahall Aave submittetl same to the Council tor approval and the plat shall have been approved by said
Councll resotution thereot and by any other agencies an6 otficiala whose approval fs required by law, IncludlnQ
tAe County Plattinp auUONties acut shalf have been duky recortleC. (Ref 75)
The princfpal ateps to be faken in order in the plat approval procedure are summartzed as followa:
211.051. SkNeh
Prior to tAe preparetion of a Dreliminary piat, t�e subdividar shall submit a sketch o1 the intended layout of t�e
subdivision, a description of the proposed development antl such ot�er peneral inlormation aa may be
requested for Ihe purpose to the Manaper. Within len (10) days after receivinp ail ihe inlormation neeCed,� the
Manaper sheti determine wAether or not the Intended layout antl Oevelopment ot the subdivision would conform
satistactorily to the requiraments ot this code and shall so a0vise th6 subdivider, givinp him whatever
suggestions and inlormation may be needed for his guidance in the preparation of a preliminary plat. (Ref. 75�-
zz
s,,.os,
�'
Plots
4ot
Split
�
Approval OI
Councll
Plat Appmv�i
Procedur�
Sk�teh
. �
pt•.�
--__---- ---. _ . . _. . _ .. .
. . . ._- -.. . __. . _
� -- - --- -- - _ .. _. __._--..
- --..._. _ -----�-�w"'''}