Loading...
PL 09/15/1982 - 6782City of Fridley A G E N D A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1982 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: PA6E5 APPROVE PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MINUTES: AUGUST 18, 1982 1- 5 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING RE UEST ZOA l{82-05 BY CUB FOODS: 6- 34 Rezone from M-2 heavy industrial areas, to C-2S general shopping areas), Tract B, Registered Land 5urvey No. 78, . to allow the construction of a new retail shopping area, the same being 45� 73rd Avenue N.E. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #82-09, 35 - 39 BY ROBERT 9CHROER: Per Section 205.101, 3, 0, to allow an overhead roof on a wood frame, approximate 30' by 50' on the east end of an existing building, for a display area for fresh produce, located on Lot 1, Block 1, East Ranch Estates, the same being 762� University Avenue N.E. ( On September 21, 1982, the Appeals Comnission will be hearing a variance request on this same property to reduce the front yard setback from 80' to 50'). 3. LOT SPLIT RE UEST: L.S. #82-06 THE KUNZ OIL COMPANY: 40 - 44 Split off Parcel B lying southerly of a line parallel with and distant 197.0 feet north of jas measured at a right angle to� the 5outh line of said Lot 18}, from Parcel A, both in Lot 18, Auditor's Subdivision No. 77, the same being 7355 and 7365 East River Road. 4. RECEIV€ HOUSING & REDEVELUPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: AUGUST 12, 1982 WHITE 5- RECEIVE NOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: AU6UST 27, 1982: WHITE 6. RECEIVE APPEALS COhH�1ISSIUN MINUTES: AUGUST 24, 1982 YELLOW and MEMO FROM JOHN FLORA ON DOTY - WELLNER REQUEST FOR 6299 UNIVERSITY 7. OTHER BUSINESS: A6JOURNMENT: CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 18, 1982 CALL TO ORDER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the August 18, 1982, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. 5chnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr.Svanda, Mr, Kondrick, Mr. Saba Members Absent: Ms. van Dan Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Gerald Paschke, 7260 University Ave. N.E. APPROVAL OF AUGUST 4, 1982, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTZON BY MR, OQUIST� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO APPROVE SHE AUGUST 4� 2982� PLANNING COMMSSSION MINUTES. The following changes were made to the minutes: Page 2, paragraph 8, second line: Change "propoer" to "Pr_oPos�er". Page 3, paragraph 2 under Item 2, second line: Change "mo- dy o"body" UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AY&� ClfAIRWOMAN SCXNABE'L DECLARED THE MINUTSS APPROVED AS AMENDED. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING RE UEST ZOA #82-04 BY G. W. PASCHKE: Rezone from M-1 light in ustria areas to C-2 genera business areas), Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, University Industrial Park, to be part of a new shopping area on University Avenue, the same being 7941 and 7981 Rancfiers Road N.E. MOTION BY MR. SABA� SEC WDED BY .�II2. SVANDA� TQ OPEN TNE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZOA #82-04 BY G. W. PRSCXKE. UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHRIRWANAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HERRING OPEN AT 7:38 P.M. Mr. Boardman stated Lots 4 and 5 are the lots in question. Lots 6, 7, and 8 are presently zoned C-2. The proposal being submitt�d is actually for two cor.imercial buildings; therefore, Mr, Paschke is requesting that tots 4 and 5 be rezoned to C-2 to make one contiguous parcel for the development of the buildings. PLANNING COMM75SION MEE7IN6, AUGUST 78, 1982 PAGE 2 Mr. Boardman stated tAere are several things to consider, which are not necessarily a consideration of the rezoning; however, when they consider development on Lots 4 and 7, across Rancher's Road in Block 4, there is a 100 ft. setback requirement on industrial whPn it is across from a commercial district. In this situation where there is only a 152 ft.-deep 1ot,�;there will probably be variance requests for setbacks. He stated variances were granted with the plat on Lot 7 and another �ot up in the corner. When the plat was approved, the variance on the setback Mas reduced to 35 ft. because it was zoned cortmercial. Mr, Boardman stated the drainage is pretty well being hand]ed. The drainage right now is all flowing to the back lots where there is a holding pond that was estab7ished for the entire development. MOTZON BY l�i. SABA� SECONDED BY NR. OQUIST� TO CLUSE TXE PUBLIC NEARING ON 20A N81-00 8Y G. W. PASCHKE, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CXAIRWANAN DECLARED TXS PUBLIC HERRING CLOSED AT 7:Sd P.M. Mr. Oquist stated this request to have all the lots on the south end zoned commer- cial see�ned reasonable. When it was platted, they did allow the variance to the property across the�,street to allow for a 35 ft. setback. Ms. Schnabei stated she also thought the initial planning was appropriate for this area. XOTION BY 1�9i. OpUSST� SECONDED BY MR, KONDRICK, TO RECOXMEND TO CITY CWNCIL APPROVAL OF RE20NING REQUEST N82-04 BY G. W. PASCXKE TO REZONE FROM M-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRZAL AREAS) TO C-2 (GENERAL Bf1SINESS AREAS)� IATS 4 AND 5� BIL)CK 3� UNIVERSITY INDUSTRZAL PARK� TO BE PART OF A NEW SNOPPING AR£A ON UNIVERSITY AVENUE� THE SAME BEING 7942 AND 7982 RANCHERS ROAD N,E. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE NOTION CAP.RIED UNAN2190US.LY. Mr. Boardman stated this request would go to City Council on Sept. 13. 2. RECEIVE AUGUST 3i 1982L PARKS b RECREATIOM COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR, KONDRICK� SECONDED 8Y 1�i. SAEA� TO RECEIVE TXE AUGUST 3� 1982, PARKS 6 RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECIARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNRNZMOUSLY. S Mr. Kondrick stated the Parks & Recreation CommissioR made a motion on page 4 to the City Council regarding fee schedules, recommending that "9roups from schools within the city 7imits of Fridley (School Dist. 11. 13, T4. and 16) or schools with Fridley students attending that educational center (Grades K-72) and groups associated with these schools would all be considered resident groups. PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETIN6, AUGUST 18, 1482 PAGE 3 R11 other school groups would be considered non-residents. Resident groups to be charged $1,0� per person and given top priority on tfie use of Springbrook Nature Center and non-resident groups to be charged $1.50 per person and given second priority." . Ms. Gabel stated she fiad a real problem with one governmental agency paying another governmental agency. She realized the City and the schoois are in a financial bind, but she did not see how one governmenta7 agency charging another governmental a9ency solved anything. She recognized the problem, but she did not like this solution to that problem. Mr. Oquist stated he understood what Ms. Gabel was saying, but he did not have a problem with it. He stated they see that in industry all the time, where one division funds another division to do work,even though the money is all coming out of the same corporate hat. - Ms. Gabel stated the difference is that private industry is not coming out of the taxpayer's pocket. Mr. Svanda asked if there was a break for people or children who could not afford to pay the user's fee. Mr, Kondrick stated no one would be denied because of inability to pay. Ms. Gabel stated sometimes children are left at the school when the rest of the children go on a field trip because they do not pay. If the Ciiy starts charging these fees, they are setting it up for these kinds of situations. Ms, Schnabel asked if this fee was just a method of collecting revenue for programming and it was not necessary to collect the fee because of the amount of time Mr. St. Clair is spending tfiat keeps him away from other parts of his jo6 or because he cannot hand7e the present vo7ume? Mr. Kondrick stated that was correct. Mr. Kondrick stated it is just like anything else, l•lhenever you play or partici- pate in any type of organized programming, you have to pay for it. He did not know why this type of progrartming should be excluded. Ms. Schnabel stated the problem is that those programs are voluntary; whereas, a school field trip may be a scheduled thiag in the school and the child would have to go. Ms. Gabel stated that if there is such a demand for this type of programming, why not charge people outside the Fridley school di�tricts and not the school districts �ithin Fridley as the taxpayers are already paying for itZ Mr. Oquist stated he stilt did not see what was wrong with one function like that helping to pay for itself. From a business standpoint, it was a good idea. He stated the dollars collected can be used for all kinds of things in the park, and it is not money that is going to be flushed down the drain. PLANNING COMMISSTON MEETIN6, AU6UST 18, 1482 PAGE 4 Mr. Boardman sYated they have to understand that there wil7 be some cuts. There are some very serious financial difficulties because of state cutbacks. Fee schedules are going to have to be raised for anything that is a special aciivity. . Ms. Schnabel stated that, at this point, she was not convinaed there was a problem financialty. Mr. St. Clair's salary is beirtg paid, ii has been budgeted fo•, and he is doing his job, and she did not see the need for an extra fee at this time, Maybe a need will be demonstrated in the future, but she did not see that need yeL. Mr. Saba stated he had no prob7em with the fee concept, but his problem was with any children who might be excluded fran a field trip because of inability to pay the $1. He stated maybe there should be some kind of cor�nunication frari the Parks & Recreation Department to the school system stating that no child would be denied programming if they could not afford the $1. Then, no cfiild would be required to stay at school in another c7ass because he/she c�uld not afford to go on the field trip to the nature center. MOTZQY BY ARZ. .YONDRICX, SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST� TO CONCUR WSTH TNE MOTSON MADE BY THE PARKS 6 RECREATION COMMISSION ON AUGUST 3� 2982� AND TO RECOMMEND TO CZTY COUNCIi THAT RESSDENT GROUPS 8E CHARGED 51IPERSON AND BE GNEN TOP PRZORITY OF THE USE OF SHE SPRZNGBRODK NRTURE CENTER� AND TXAT NON-RESIDENT GROUPS BE CHAftGED 51.50/PERSON AND BE GIVEN SECOND PRIORITY OF THE USE OF THE NATURE CENTEIL. Mr. Saba stated he would like to see a statement in the motion indicating that there be some communication between the City and the schools that no child would be-excluded because of inability to pay. MOTZON BY MR. XONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. OQUZST, TO AMEND THE RBOVE MOTZON TD INCLUDE A STATEMENT TIIAT TXE PLANNZNG COAfMISSIDN WOULD RIS O RECOMMEND THR2 THE CSTY COIIMUNICATE TO THE SCHOOL SYSTBM THAT NO CHZLD IS TO BE EXCLUDED PROGRAMMING BECAUSE OF ZNABILITY TO PAY. UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOTiNG AYE� CHRIRWOMRN SCHNABEL DECLARED 2XE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr, Kondrick stated there was some discussion on the part of the Parks & Recreation Commission regarding the City's funding the Northeast Chamber Ensemble and the City 8and. He stated the Cortmission will be meeting with the president of the City Band and the manager of the Northeast Chamber Ensemble at their next meeting in order to get some answers to some of the Cormnissioners' questions. Mr. Saba suggested they discuss the possibility of the band and chamber ensemb]e members raising money through industry, rather than''seeking city funding. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST ]8, 1982 PAGE 5 Mr. Kondrick stated the Parks & Recreation Comnission made a motion on page 7 recomtnending the City Council sell 3 feet of Terrace Park land to John & Darlene Zurawski in arder for them to build an addition on their home. He stated this would not affect the intended use of the park� and he would recommend the Planning Coamission concur with that motion. � MOTION BY MR. XONDRICK� SECONDED BY 1�II2. SABA� TO CONC[IR WZTH TKE MOTION MADE BY THE PARKS 6 RECREATION COMMISSION AND TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL-TXAT THE CITY SELL TO JOHN 6 DARLSNE ZURAWSKI A STRIP OF LAND NOT MORE THAN 3 FT. WIDE AND I55 FT. IANG ADJOINING THE PROPERTY OF TERRACE PARK FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN ADDS- TION TO THEIR XOME AT 6767 - 7TH ST. N.E. UPON A VOSCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED UNANZMOUSLY. 3. RECEIVE AUGUST 5, 19823 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY FR2, OQUIST� SECONDED 8Y A92. KONDRZCK� TD RECESVE THE AUGUST 5, I982� HUMRN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE V02E, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY .�, KONDRICX� SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RDJDURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE� CBAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE AUGUST 18� 1982� PLANNZNG COMMI55ZON MEETING AA70URNED AT 8:50 P.M. Respectfully subm't� y aba Recording Secretary . PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNIN6 COMAIISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Publi� Hearing of the Planning Comnissian of the City of Fridtey in the Lity Ha11 at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, September 15, 1982 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.N. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Rezoning Request,.ZOA M82-05, by Cub Foods, to rezone fram M-2 (heavy industrial areas) to C-25 (general sfiopping areas), Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 78, located in the S�uth Half of Section 11, T-30, R-24� City of Fridley, County of a�oka, Minnesota. Generally 7ocated at 450 73rd Avenue N.E. 0 Any and a11 persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Publish: September 1, 1982 September 8, 1982 VIRGINIA SLNNABEL CHAIRWOMAN PLANNING COMMISSION , . ,. . � ; . . <.*,�� x, � � : rs. �,��- .-.��..,..,,. � � z x CITY OF Fq10L.QY� ���E� — ZONING ACTION s.a, u�w.+c�ws�TV wve..a.. VACATION sa�n�er. wr. cse3t �s� a�+-ssao , PLAT % ZOA q �s-o S SAV � PS t� � : `< ` ` - ORDINI�NCE NO PUBLISHED ADDRESS L� S O %� /t./ lio-� n�i DATE PLANNIN6 COPMI55ION: APPROYED DISAPPROVED DATE N0. CITY COUNCIL: PUBLIC HEARING DATE 7ST READ 2ND READ CITY COU�ICiL: . APPROVED DISAPPROYED DkiE NO PAf�IC FEE REQUIRED: AI�UNT PAID STIPULATIONS: NAME C U� � OU DS FEE �3DO. �� RECEIPT NO��f�[_ STREEt LOCATION OF PROPERTY �73R�' $((N+verzs�y �� FrST LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PR4PERTY �'RAC� IS REC�. s.�1�/o S/i,¢vcav Ne 78filec of il�iar a� Ti� oF .o�vaKA G�oes.vfy /rJ/ � - s PRESENT ZONIN,G CLASSIRiCATION m'�- EXISTING USE OF PROPERT V AcA...t � ACREAGE OF PROPERTY aP+c�e 29,g� DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PROPOSED 20NIN6 CLASSIFICATION OR TYPE OF USE AND IMP�V,EME � PROPOSED C• Z� S Mi0 i�P! lv G xr / C�ti.�r�',�2. Fox La o� � ft �'.�,F3 P<vs .voorrr�a�/,e� ,E'ET.o iY Has the present applicant previously sought to �ezone, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of itT __�yes_�no. What was requested and whenl The undersigned understands that: (a) A list of all residents and owners of proper- ty within 350 feei musL he attached to this application (rezoning), 300 feet, (plat- ting}, must be attached to'this 8ppt5eation. '(b) 7his application must be signed by all owners of the property, or an exp7anation cjiven why this is not the case. (c) Responsib9)ity for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to - list the names and addresss of all residents and property owenrs of prop�rty in question, belongs to the undersigned. A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drawn and attached, showing the following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of the proposed structure on tfie lot. 3. Dimensions of p�operty, proposed structure, and fron and side setbacks. 4. Street names. 5. Loc@tion and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 350 feet). , The undersigned hereby declares that all the facts and respresentations stated in� this application are true and corrett. DATE ✓l,eT ISf,JqBY SIGNATURE����f �_� � AODRESS /2i G!/A�F,lL Sf: s�isc.tv,oT�P� I%%/Ni✓TELEPHONE NO �f3g-7�D� 'S.SQ�Y Planning Comnission August 31, 1982 MAILING LIST $ ibA #82-05 CUB F�ODS Dave Torkildson Mr. & Mrs. Richard Almstead, Jr. Mr. & Mrs. Philiip Knutson Moka County Park Dept. 7311 Tempo Terrace N.E. 7301 Symphgny St. N.E. 550 N.W. 8unker Lake Blvd. Fridley, Mn 55432 Fridley, Mn 55432 Anoka, Mn 55303 Charles M. Hoaley Cub Foods 127 Water Street Stillwater, Mn 55Q82 Mr. & Mrs. Robert Miller 3334 Fremont North Minneapolis, Mn 55412 Downtown Minute Car Wash 7300 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn�55432 Carter-Day Company 500 73rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Soo Line Railroad Co. 1508 Soo Line Bld�. Minneapolis, Mn 55440 The Chicago & Northwestern Transportation Co. Tax Dept. 400 West Madison Street Chicago, I1 60606 Minnesota Transfer Railway 2071 University Avenue St. Paul, Fh� 55104 S & H Comapny 6279 Hniversity Avenue N.E. Fri�ley, Mn 55432 Winfield Development, Inc. 5780 Lincoln Drive Edina, Mn 55436 Mr. & Mrs. James Freberg 7331 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. James Warhol 7321 7empo Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Garvey Benson 7301 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Clifford Fabianke 7330 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 James 0. Bergerson 7320 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr, & Mrs. �art�es Holmen 7310 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. David Thiele 7300 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Clifford Boltman 73D1 Lyric Lane N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Robert T. Wienert 7311 Lyric Lane N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Bruce Smith 7331 Lyric Lane N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Morgan 7330 Lyric Lane N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Karna Lundquist 7320 Lyric Lane N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Earl Noble 7310 Lyric Lane N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Allan Quam 399 73rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Bradley Ertl 7321 Symphony N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 Donald Lee Johnson 7331 Symphony St. N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Larry Pors 733b Symphony St. N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ronald Mattson 7324 Symphony Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Edward Czarnecki 7312 Symphony St N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. James Sandquist 7300 Symphany St. N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ronald Pillard 7301 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Michael Chies 7315 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Earland Thor 7325 University Ave. N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Edward Chies 7651 Central Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Gassner 7310 Concerto Curve N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 David Windmeier 7300 Concerto Curve N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 E MAILING LIST PAGE 2 ZOA �82-05 Cub Foods Mr. & Mrs. David Lissner 7301 Melody Drive N.E. Fridley> Mn 55432 Mary J. Swanson 7311 Melody,Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ernest Roberg 7327 Melody Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Elaine M. Starkey 7330 Melody Orive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Jack Green 7329 Melody Drive N.E. � Fridley> Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gerald Dahl 7310 Mebody Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Delmer Hedlund 7300 Melody Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Roger Johnson, Mgr. Holiday Village North 5700 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 (by request) ■i � „� � �ar��. �� "' �-t ssoo ��= � , .Z•,' , �� �� � _ -_ 1 , r w. � . i � . _ _; �, � i! , ��� M2 ;: g . �_ J !►�1�1 co�weacE oR. s. ! i ' - . .. � . . .. �. . . -_ = • . - . ; � " �� .-• �� . A . _ PLA7� � L E � ' •�� 1 �.; � r ZOA #82-05 Cub Foods �� $QQ �� ! !t 1 ``�/ R-1 t �� -� R-!� �� � , ,�'I��. � #'o �_2-� M-2 � -- - a�.._... ». ! ' M[ rl�rcwr� �f�rtr(11 � �' ' ' �. ' ' � .� . ' �' � aM ri 39 3•.� � �� !•.7 e� � �. an . � � 0 ���.K y n�8 4� 8 p � � o ��� �P�' �,9 �, ' C' �. ;'�' C , �Q _� � G � Q • O Q y 'G c � 0 4 e c,� .�� «.. s `�y �.aaes �.w� � � ' � ° � � C T ' 1TN .��s d � O u G c�1, Li ' p'_ t�cn wni Cwu�c • � / ��/ /._ r ��� �� � � ZOA #82-05 Cub Foods � �'�� : : . . �� � � � A l Ali • • . 11 • i u �, . � ; � I � � . . / ; . .. I : . 11 �run m.iYc+ron� � �t I ' . � I� - i � 1 _ _ � IW:iiO ...e�.eor��- 1` � G � f-- *'�` r� \f � .k .`� �` � r' '� �`�+ v �� • , �`! A •� ,�D. w ` � � �� �.r� 11 �, L � �- A -'-�°..� � ���� � �` _, ZOA #82-05 Cub Foods PLANT SC.fiEDUL� O pP��.�[,� pF WAl.Fl7 .xl►.�ITER. •t�'Cp� O g_�'TVJIG� :�i.'1MA�a �j� Ri� r�1 IAAr6`iZ1�tL.. l.Gidl�iT 2� b�iD �r� � � �po�viThE 4' b� b \/ Q � O � ,� SITE DATA Q NOTES 51TE N�CA : �s+��c. 'r5o��3 �,,f - n.z ,►c�. * su�Lnwy �.: ++�w tiur�c�T w���e s�. 1e�TJ�lV tita� r�l,oiovZ�. ToThL 12�,Sib'�i'. �PIrRu.'ta► A►�TI'�: �aL1YE�IG�.T RET/Jl. °STBR�s IrO4 STI�11/�i � 9 �G C.►,Arl �iS7�hlaf� • s.�� c.Mw RFf3ClW1r-i�NT YL °tPJU�h �lzr4�� TOT/V� (u��w�r� y 7.21rGMA 12 � � � � � � V W � i � • � � W �� �f Wb aP� W W � � e C p�2 O aXx a W m J � W y N � N J � J i� �� � � � Y � r � � � � � � Z � �] Z Z� �W K� �L D�,_ r_ '"°'R'�"`" Z � L � � � 13 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR A CUB SHOPPING CENTER Fridley, Mirr�esota Prepared for Cub Foods Prepared by Barton-Asdiman Assoc�ates, Inc. August 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES 1. INTRODUCSION 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION/PROPOSAL 3. EXISTING CHARACTERiSTICS 4. S. 6. Area Roadway System Existing Traffic Volumes Lane Availability/Traffic Control Area Land Use SITE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS Directions of Approach Site-Generated Traffic Site Traffic Assignment 7otai Traffic Assignment ROADWAY/ACCESS ANALYSIS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ii i� PaRe ii iii iii 1 2 4 4 S 7 7 S 8 !0 12 12 15 !8 � i. 2. 3. 4. 5. LIST OF F1GUEtES Proposed Site Development 1980 Average Daily Traffic Volumes Directions of Approach PM Peak Hour Site Traffic PM Peak Hour Total Traffic LIST OF TABLES 15 PaRe 3 6 9 13 14 I. Traffic Counts — Cub, Brooklyn Park I1 2. Estimated Site-Generated Traffic — Weekday 11 iii 1. INTRODUCTION 16 The purpose oi this report is to present the findings and conclusions of a site traffic impact analysis for a development site located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of University Avenue NE and 73rd Avenue NE in Fridley, Minnesota. The development proposal under consideration involves the provision of a retail- commercial center totaling 132,578 square feet oi building area. The development proposal anticipates the following land uses and building sizes: ' Cub Supermarket - 64,578 SF Clothing Store - 43,000 SF Drug Store - 15,000 SF Retail Shops - lO,OQU SF Also considered in this transportation analysis is the provision of a 5,000 square foot restaurant on a parcel adjacent to the shopping area site. The study cepor2 whicit follows wiil analyze the impact of the site-generated traffic upon the adjacent public roadway system in order to determine if improvements to the pubGc roadways are deemed necessary. The proposed site plan will be analyzed with respect to access to the site. 1 Z i� S1TE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION/PROPOSAL The p�opostd development is located in the southeast quadrant of the signalized intersection of University and 73rd Avenues NE. The site development proposal is conceptually ilJustrated on Figure 1. The site is bounded on the north by 73rd Avenue NE and on the west by the frontage road adjacent to University Avenue NE. The east side of the site is adjacent to some office and indusirial devefopment while the south side of the site is bounded by 71st Avenue NE, a local street which extends approximately two blocks east of the frontage road. Ail access to the site is Qroposed to be taken f�om the University Avenue frontage road and from llst Avenue NE. The site plan shows two access tocations to the development from that frontage road and three from 71st Avenuc NE. These � access locations are spaced equidistant along the frontage road. The parking supQiy for the site development is proposed to total approximatefy 875 spaces, which provides an overall ratio of 6.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet of buUding area. The parking supply of 875 spaces does not inc]ude parking for a restaurant which is considered to be located in ovtlot A within this traffic impact study analysis. 2 � Figure 1 Proposed Site Development � EXLSTING CHARACTERLSTICS 19 This section of the report will Qrovide a discussion of ezisting traffic and roadway conditions within the vicinity of the site. Items discussed will include existing traffic volumes, roadway characteristics, traffic control, and general land use within the immediate site vicinity. Area Roadway System The major roadway within the site vicinity is University Avenue which is a four- lane divided arterial highway. Access to University Avenue, State Highway 47, is controiled. University Avenue has a series of signalized intersections along its length which provide for access to/from University while allowing for east-west travel across the University Avenue corridor. Utuversity Avenue is a major north- south travel route through the City of �'ridley providing access to suburbs north of Fridley, to Interstate 694 south of the site, and to the City of Minneapolis. Another primazy facility with respect to the proposed site is 73rd Avenue NE. This roadway provides a conneciion between University Avenue and Trunk Highway 65. The roadway fs a two-lane facility and has a 40 mi]e per hour speed limit. West of University, 73rd Avenue terminates approximately three blocks from University. At the signalized intersection of 73rd with University Avenue, 73rd Avenue contains three lanes on both approaches. These lanes are designated as a 4 20 left-turn lane, a through lane, and a right-turn lane. Each leg of 73rd Avenue has two exit lanes. The third roadway of prime importance to the site is the frontage road which abuts the west side of the site. The frontage road is a two-lane roadway with a 30 mile per hour speed limit. Access to the irontage road can be gained from 73rd Avenue on the north side of the site and from 69th Avenue which is apQroximately one-half mile south of 73rd Avenue NE. At the intersection of the frontage road with 73rd Avenue NE, the south leg of the frontage road contains two approach lanes (northbound) and a southbound exit lane. Existing Trafiic Voluma The existing traffic volume data for the roadways adjacent to the site was obtained from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The existing average daily traffic (ADT) on the area system is shown on Figure 2. The average daily twaway traffic volume on University Avenue is 28,500 south of 73rd Avenue and 27,OOD north of University Avenue. The daily volume on 73rd Avenue east of University Avenue is estimated to be 6,D00 vehides per day, while the segment west of University Avenue is estimated to be 4,500 vehicles on a typical day. These volumes were estimated from a l980 intersect'son count conducted by MnDOT. There is no data avaiiaDle regarding traffic volumes for the frontage road along University Avenue. tiowever, given tfie undevelaped properties between 69th and 73rd Avenues t3E, the volumes are expected to be low, probably less than 1,000 vehicles per day. The oNy traffic generator served by the frontage road at the present time is the Columbia lce Arena which does not on a normal day produce or attract many trips. S � e �o 0 ¢ � w N m W � � � z .., � a � � !A N � 21 ,o,� Osbome Road � asoo* 11 e000�' 73rd Avenue NE � ti � g = N �"' eaoo saoo 6 � > � < �; � � V F- II � Mississippi St 8400 Source: Mimesota D O T � Estimated Fig�re 2 1980 Average Daily Traffic Volumes 22 l.ane Availabiliq/7raffic Control The availability of traffic lanes on the three primary access roadways, University Avenue, 73rd Avenue, and the University Avenue frontage road, is important in determining the service levels on those roadways. Of particular importance aze the available lanes at the signalized intersection of University and 73rd Avenue. University Avenue at the signalized intersection with 73rd Avenue contains two tfi�ough lanes, a left-turn lane, and a right-turn Jane on each appraach. 7fie 73rd Avenue approaches at University each have a left-turn lane, through lane, and a right-turn lane. At the 73rd Avenue intersection with the frontage road, 73rd Avenue has two approach lanes on each leg. The frontage road Aas two approach lartes (left turn and through/right-turn lane) on the south Jeg. The north leg is combined with Symphony Street and contains one lane in each direction. The frontage road approaches are controlled by stop 5igru while 73rd Avenue is � uncontrolled. Tfiese aze the only traific control devices within the immediate site vicinity which will have an effect upon site t�affic. Area Land Use The land uses within the immediate site vicinity are varied. Immediately south of the site is the Columbia lce Arena, while on tbe east side of the site are some office and industrial uses. tJorth oi 73rd Avenue, the land use is single-family residential, while on the west side of University there are offica and some commercial uses. There are some unde�eloped properties within the site vicinity. 7 I i 23 I 4. 51'CE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS This section of the report will provide a discussion of the traffic characteristics of the site development. Included in this discussion will be the estimated directional distribution oi potential site patrons, an estimate of site-generated traffic, and an assignment of site traffic to the roadway and proposed access system. The final segment of this chapter will provide an estimate of the total afternoon peak hour traffic on the area roadway system immediately adjacent to the site. ' Directiont of Approach � The directions from which patrons will approach/depart a site is dependent upon numerous variables. Some of these variables include the location of the dwelling � units of the gopulace within an assumed trade area, the availability of effective ; roadway approach routes to/from the site, the time it takes to travel to the site, and the relative ease of travel on the site approach routes. Considering the variables and the traffic volumes on the area roa6ways, an estimate of the patron , directions of approach has been calcutated. These approach directions, shown as I percentages, are illustrated on Figure 3. Given the character and availability of the roadways in the site vicinity, it is not surprising that much of the site traffic will eventuaIly utilize Universiiy Avenue to approach or depart the site vicinity. 8 4 � 24 Figure 3 Directions of Approach I i Sltc�lJlC�dtCd T�fIC 25 � The volume of traffic generated by the proposed development is a function of � numerous variables inciuding, but not limited to, the size of the development, the 1 location of the development, and the type and mix of retail tenants within the i development. The site proposal calls for the construction of a Cub Supermarket ! totaling 64,578 square feet plus a dothing store, drug store, and other retail tenants totaling 68,000 square feet oi building area. Additionally, this traffic analysis wili include a 5,000 square foot restaurant on outlot A which is immediately adjacent to 73rd Avenue and the frontage road. Cub Supermarkets have, in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, seemed to generate more business than a typical supermarket. In order to gain data on the � vehicular generation of a Cub Supermazket, and as a part of this study, traffic counu were conducted at a similar Cub store located in 8rooklyn Park. The counts � were conducted on Monday, August 9, and on Saturday, August 14. The results of the counts are shown on Table 1. i Utilizing those counts and historic data for developments of this type, estimates of site-generated trafiic have been prepared. The estimates for the PM peak hour and on a daily basis are wntained on Table 2. The PM peak hour normally occurs from 4:�0 to 5:00 PM on a weekday a�d is chosen for analysis as it is during this time period when traffic volumes on the adjacent street system normally reach a daily peak. i �o � i TABLE 1 TRAFFIC COUNTS — CUB BROOKLYN PARK Time Period Traffic Volume Monday, August 9 r � Noon - 1:00 PM 1:00 - 2:00 PM � 2:00 - 3:00 PM 3:00 - k:00 PM � 4:00 - 5:00 PM 5:00 - 6:00 PM 6:00 - 7:00 PM 7:00 - 8:D0 PM i i Saturday, A ugust 14 l0:00 - 11:00 AM 11:00 AM - Noon Noon - 1:00 PM 1:OQ - 2:�Q PM 2:00 - 3:00 PM 3:00 - 4:00 PM 4:00 - 5:00 PM 5:00 - 6:00 PM In 275 240 254 V 269 2S9 297 337 2,256 � 344 322 321 305 363 319 299 2,639 Out 280 271 255 3� 246 256 262 2,175 305 320 313 33 316 322 3�6 325 2,54� � TABLE 2 ESTIMATED 51TE-GENERATED TRAFFIC — WEEKDAY Land Use Size Estimated Site Traffic (sq. ft.) PM Peak Hour Daily ln Out In Out Cub Supermarket 6k,S78 Retail/CommerciaS 68,000 Restaurant 5,00� Totals 300 180 60 540 11 280 4,000 190 2,000 SO 250 520 6,250 4�000 2,000 250 6,250 �� �- � Site Traffic Assi�,mment 27 � Utilizing the previously calculated directions of approach and the estimated site- Igenerated traffic, an assignment of the PM peak hour site traffic to the roadways � and access system can be accomplished. The site traffic assignment for the PM peak hour is shown on Figure 4. Tota1 Traffic Assignment The combination of the acisting traffic plus the site-generated traffic provides the , information upon which a determination of roadway needs can be accomplished. The total (site plus non-site) traffic auignment for the PM peak hour is shown on i ? Figure 5. These volumes illustrate what can be expected on a design day for the .� site traffic and are used to test the ability of the roadways to accommodate the � volumes -- -_ 12 13 � 24S !� yo a Figure 4 P M Peak Hour Site Traffic 1 14 ��7 Figure 5 P M Peak Hour Total Traffic �� � ROAD�AY/ACCE55 ANALYSIS The most applicabie method of testing the effectiveness of a roadway or, more importantly, an intersection, is to calculate the capacity of that intersection and when related to the volume provides a service level. Capacityl is defined as "the maximum number of vehicles which has a reasonable expectation of passing over a given section of a lane or a roadway in one direction (or in both directions) during a gi�en time period under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions:' Capacity is referenced as an hourly volume. "Level of service2 is a term which, b�oadly interpreted, denotes any one of an infinite number of differing combinations of _ operating conditions that may occur on a given lane or roadway when it is accommodating various traffic volumes:' There are six levels of service, denoted A through F. They are similar to a report card where A is the best and F is the worst. Level of service is merely the volume of a roadway, or approach, or lane, divided by the capacity of the segment. Level of service D is an acceptable operating condition in a metropofitan area. 1}iighway Research Board Special Report 87, Highway Capacity Manuai, 1965. Zlbid. 15 30 i� a 31 In order to cietermine the effect of the site traffic upon the signalized intersection of 73rd Avenue with University Avenue NE, a capacity analysis of the intersection was performed. The analysis utilized the estimated volumes that w�re shown on Figure 5. The capacity analysis when related to the expected volumes indicates that the intersection will operate at a level of service D. There may be some periods of delay on the east leg of 73rd Avenue, but they are not considered to be critical. The recent improvements to the 73rd Avenue approaches wil] accommo- date the future volumes. i � The intersection of the irontage road with 73rd Avenue NE will find some vehicles experiencing delay while attempting to negotiate a left turn from the frontage road to 73rd Avenue NE. This delay will not be intolerable, but during peak times traffic will find it easie� to proceed south on the frontage road to the University and 69th Avenue NE signal, even those desiring to proceed north on University Avenue. The volumes at the intersection oi the frontage road with 73rd Avenue NE may increase to a level that a traffic signal may be required. This situation should be monitored very ciosely following the opening of the development. Ail other roadway segments, the frontage road, 73rd Avenue to the east and west, will operate effectively fol]owing the opening of the development. it may be advantageous to considering moving the frontage road connection with 73rd Avenue farther to the east. Should a signal ever be warranted, this would provide more desirable spacing between University Avenue and the frontage road intersections with 73rd Avenue. The spacing, at present, is about 400 feet and could accommodate a future signal, but a higher spacing woutd be desirable. l ( 16 I� • 32 The access to the site wili be adequate to accommodate the development. The northerly access along the frontage road could be located ta better provide a right angle with the frontage road and to increase the sight d'utance. Ail other access locations will not provide any detrimental effect to public roadway traffic. 17 a 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following provides a listing of the conclusions and recommendations of the traffic analysis impact study. A. The site is well-located with respect to availability of regional access facilities. B. The estimated directions of approach for site patrons is quite well-balanced from three directions. C. The site-generated traffic estimates wiil not create any intolerable traffic conditions on the adjacent public roadway system. D. The intersection of University and 73rd Avenues NE will continue to operate at level of service D during the PM peak hour, which is an acceptable level of service. E. There will be some delay to site tratfic during peak periods in negotiating a left turn from tfie frontage road to 73rd Avenue NE. F. The traffic vo3umes at the 73rd Avenue-frontage road intersection should be monitored closely following opening of the development in order to determine if traffic signal warrants are met. I l° W P aRR..+tCq C�1 �'+�O ��l I8 33 � � 34 fG. It may be advantageous to consider a detachment of the frontage road � iarther east to create more desirable spacing from University Avenue. This would be for purposes of accommodating a potential signal at the frontage � toad-73rd Avenue intersection. The realignment could be accomplished between outlot A and the main part of the site. � li. The frontage road south of J3rd Avenue will be ab]e to accommodate the expected volumes without any changes. 1. The proposed access to the site will be effective. The northerly access along the frontage road may have to be shifted some to provide better sight distance and a right angle intersection. 19 35 PUBLIC HEARING SEFORE THE PLANNING C�MMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Publir Hearing of the Planning Comnission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday. September 15, 1982 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M, for the purpose of: Consideration of a request for a Special Use Permit> SP H82-09, by Robert Schroer, per Section 205.101, 3,0, to a11ow an � overhead roof on a wood frame, approximately 30' by 5Q' on the east end of an existing building,for a display area for fresh produce, located on Lot 1, Block 1, East Ranch Estates, the same being 7620 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota. Any and e>> persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. YIRGINIA SCHNABEL CHAIRWOMAN PLANNING COMMISSION Publish: September 1, 1982 September 8, 1982 � � .�.,�., _. �� .. �, k=.*��"_�.,��r� -,.s� .,..��;r �.,. » 3��� =��r,� �--: _ _ . * ;., „� , ,... „ .� - � < < �. . � ` ` :� � 36 . �. _ . _, �. - , r H :.; , . , _. ,. � _ � . �((('''�����''�7 StlBJECT - •' • � CtTY =• JL£Y� f,.. ' SPECIAL USE PERMI7 � saa- rv ave, we. � d y ca�o. asea= w�w s�t•aaso =' " SP � " , p� jDDRES ���op�1y ",,'���� �%�i' AATE °�/SY ":NING .`N��ISSION: P.H. DATE � APPROYED DISAPPROVED � DATE NU I: :: -OUM1CIL: P.N. ltEQ'D . �UATf • NO , ��+i COUNCIL: APPROVED� DISAPPROVED DATE NO STIPULATI�NS: � NAME STREET IOCATION Of P LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 6aQ FEE '��bo. °= 7��r. ni 1�r� - _ _ IN RECEIPT NO_ %a(os �� PRESENT ZOt4ING CLASSIFICATION G�z�EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY .��5' ACREAGE OF PROPERTY DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PROPOSEO TYPE OF USE �ND IMPROVEMEN7 /fU6 6 A �dvf ��0 l�/�d0 �l1�}h� ��aed 3 D,�.SU� OA1 Jy��f �ND � � �XJ�i/:V� %3G0�'T S�Lt i DeJOtAy �opt�EJ� ���ii.w`a Nas the present applicant previousty sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject si#e or part of it? �es no. What was requested and when? ��d�^� /9 7/ ' � The undersigned understands that: (a} A list of all residents and owners of property within 30D feet must be attached to this application. (b) This apptication must be signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. (c) Responsibility for ar�y defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list the names and addresses of all residents and property owners of property in question, belongs to the undersigned. A sketch of proposed property and structure must'be drawn aad attached, showing the foll,owing: 1. 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�300 feei). The undersigned hereby declares that ait the facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. . DATE 7�j�L SIGNATURE ADDRESS %G.Zo Gf.1//dt�2J�,7y �J��. � � TELEPHONE ►VO_.S�J/'G6�Cj _ --�-� � MAILING LIST SP �l82-Q9, ROBERT SCHROER Robert Schroer 762D University Avenue N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 Win Stephan's Datsun North 7810 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Fridley Development, Inc. c/o T. E. Troy 5601 Green Valley Drive Minneapolis> Mn 55437 Town Crier 7730 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 554�2 Capp Model Home & Officdes Evans Products Co. 7710 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Kennedy Transmission 7700 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 P & K Properties 7000 57th Avenue North Minneapolis, Mn 55428 Continental Oil Co. 7600 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Cub Inc. Drawer A 5tillwater, Mn 55082 37 Planning Comnission August 31, 1982 t� !i ��� � � ��� �+ . n U 5P #82-09 Robert Schroer ...�.�� g . _ _ . . ._' _ __' .___ ' _'.. . _ l-N rI . r- a � � � a� s a � � ro � y � �� � � � � � y I � � .O � � �.i�ri �;���;: � :}.a��� � '��"� ��;g6.` =�Da$�� v � �� — - �. �, .., j . 1�,-,= 1�� ' ^�� T '1p�.., - '_�J►-J-- ;. :r.:�.� ,. � �\ � ,�r en � , � y �� � :�: � � = � �� � � , ` �fa \ �� � � '� � �9�.i� ' i •�/ � '� � d a � � � y i • ✓o % IGK!//ti � .i � .'F �' �4!�! � � ''1�. � �. � ':�e `,Fy..�� : 1�1� 'A'_ f d"` ' ;� , , 1 , , 'i r,.: �-.._a ;�:� � , /J- t :+Y, + � f > � t, � - � -J � s' Y� / i A Q ..�. .�� ;} � i.'. y .:O l �< A_ b� � } � �/ _ 'Q ' � ' � •.�� . ."� • 1 • �s, , , � � ' V :,. .. a � � ,�; � ;; � �, , ' � � ' fli , _`: Q � - ;, � 1�.' 0 , � � �� , _� � � ' � �i � - � ��.. � ` I� y' ',.. .. �, i,� � 1 Z' o � �% �' �'� _ '� 'a�.�..y---% ' �. , ��a , .-__'' . ' ,. �, ���►•G. ao�k. ,--; .� _ . � '_, _• ''_' �>, � - ; W ` '��f� . �-1` .� �� ,�? :� '� • L ,*� . �` .' ..�; i • ' � � , . ����',, � � -�.�:. b , _�.: �. �.�� ;, � .� . �e .. ._� � b i ,�...� A' �,� 0 �T �.�..� •� A y: � , : �� .� . .-� , � ., A/�� �,�` � . I �`. '� �.S r �i;, . _���!'`l�!�'!1 . �_ ( r p _ �.' r 4 -.- s 4l.,, �:` � �. 5Y_.� . ;1� _ � ..j� G - -=a� -.. , -T':: - - .' .�.. �lif� ' . . ��i S� , `v :.;vj ' • . i �t. A` .. ,�. . r � ta. N� �. N O 39 #82-09 ert Schroer . /' , l /�_._, r 1�. GITY OF FRfOLEY, � $UBJECT �,OT SPLIT 6A3'1 LJNIVC�731TY AVE. NE. � � � FRIOLEV. MN. g$43E lFi7Z1,571-3450 RECORDED� ADDRESS: y 3 5 PLANNING COMMISSION: CITY COUNCIL: PARK FEE REQUIRED: STIPULATIONS: 40 �s e Pa -o� lj' ,� 7.3 G� ,�,a,o%— � �_ DATE • APPROVED ! DISAPPROVED DATE NO APPRDYEO_ DISAPPROYEO` DATE NO_ AMOUNT PAID NAME The Kunz Oil Cmipany FEE_�i00.00 _ RECEIPT N6 0��.2 PROPERTY OWNER(S) Tne Kimz oil Ccmpany � TELEPHONE NO 920-9373 TELEPHONE NO ADDRES$(ES)_ 5200 Fden Circle, Edina, Minr�esota 55436 PROPERTY LOCATION ON STREET �st side of East River Road LEGA4 DESCRIPTION OF PRUPERTY Lot 16 Revised Auditor's subdivision No. 7 TOTAL AREA OF PROPER7Y 1.86 acres ' PRESENT ZONING �-� REASON FOR LOT SPLIT APPlicant desires to divide said Lot 18 into twv parcels, desig- nated as Paroels A and B, respectively, on the attached survey prepared by Suburban Inc. and dated July 20, 1982, so that .;�Y ,,., .�.��.. r-` s r................... The undersigned hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. DATE• August 17, 1982 NOTICE: A sketch of the property and the proposed lot split with any existin9 struc- tures shown should accompany this application. � (See reverse side for additional instructions) u _. ►, � - - — - - A� I � ���siEl ,�'��y�§ o a�,P7�� ti �S�gjsp� a lf6FE� � - N � O M ; 1.: W J ' � O � W° C y� . � � � � � � 2 l.S. #82-06 Ku�z Oil Co O O -�- 6 v O � ��) ��� �� � 41 � b 0 � Z � o � � a . �c ^ O� � �b ¢ � � a � � � � I ^l Y� O d � � \ O � V i j aaN �C� I � � ti `� `� b � W ,---r--___ � � t^ W f �J � O�� V� � � Z � L.S. #82-06 Kunz Oil Co. Nor/h lrne o,rLot IP, Revised qudi}or�s Subdr✓isio� No.77. EAS7 � —190.35 — �,. � �� 9:' R•• , : � -- � M +n � �O° � � �`U �n o . �� to : a � Q PARCEL A AREA � 0.86 AC. 199. 5I WES]' PARCft 8 ARfA � l.00 AC. t StoR�' � ga�cu gui�oiNG V 0 . pe O Q 0 O`f V � � L � �� � �" S vi; L °�N O Mo � � O I �� s o$ c `� , � . _-24✓.3?— _�- wfsT ; C�5o�lh lrne or (0(!8, ({tvised /�udifor's Subdrvisio� 42 I� S � � � 1' � ; �� N �� � �L b � Sco�l H�wo�o o.uMrl��v-���a) Mi�a1�v W, w�VC1���=—Cn I����-��l)) .II��NwL�N O.OR�� .rw� „. w �un� �w. r+oo+. � .�.a�v�r w woo++ .w���c�i�. •c��e�on � ac..weco�w .cow.we ...�c��u..n. �w. .J�MC� �.��MOwaON •�Cw.�1�C N • •c�Rna o��ow�w.io w�cw�wo . �ow.,.W .�RUC[ D.OI�V�iiwO �C.1T(V[N w���0e� O>^O• �tnVCw r� wvrr .mw�n .<.e��H+�w r+or.c. �. v�r.wn uoc� • uuaw .o�r�c� n. a..�.r+.n w�c�wi� w.cu�Hiwe...+ •e�oa�� n w c sL�o�� -w�c �we. eowc.�w. ec .�.��.cN � es. .�•c• .�nucc . ucw .c��z.�ii� w ..oe �o..� o suw.� . wowaw Mc�. w . .. e ,.. � .,. M �. ....o:� " GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY, MOOTY.S� BENNETT ♦ GAqTNfRSMIpINCLU0IHG �ROIESSIONhLA550UATIOHS LAW OFFICES 300 RO/1NONE BU�LDING MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 65402 iELEPNONE 10121 �13-2800 �ELECO�'1ER (612) 333-0066 TW% p106962i]0 1650 UNITE� BANK TOWER 3300 NORTM CENTRAL AVENUE PMOENiX,ARIZONA 85012 TELEPHONE1602129]-BLBi REPLY TO Minneapolis OFFICE DIRECT o�»� 343-2638 August 17, 1982 Mr. William Deblon Associate Planner City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Re: The Kunz Oil Company's request for the division of Lot 18, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No. 77. Dear Mr. Deblon: 43 nD � wO��ov• [ � o ` ... o�ca. e " u�r.o wo�cw+ ..s.c�w Pursuant to our telephone conversation of Monday, August 16, 1982, enclosed herewith please find The Kunz Oil Company's application for the sub- division of the above-captioned lot, together with The Kunz Oil Company's check in the amount of $100.00 made payable to the City of Fridley and tendered as the subdivision application fee. It is my understanding that the subject request for subdivision approval will be reviewed by the various City departments and that the subject request will be placed upon the Planning Commission's meeting agenda for September 15. 1982. If you have any questions, I would appreciate your contacting me and, in addition, I would appre- ciate your providing me with a copy of any staff report which is prepared with respect to the subject application. Mr. William Deblon Page 2 August 17, 1982 Thank you for your cooperation. truly yours, S. JSC:cf Enclosure 44 CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING . AUGUST 12, 1982 -- CALL TQ ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the August 12, 1982, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Corrmers, E]mars Prieditis, Carolyn Svendsen, Duane Prairie Members Absent: Walter Rasmussen Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Nasim Qureshi, City Manager Sid Inman, City Finance Director Dennis Schneider, City Council Ed Hamernik, City Councii Mark Haggerty, 6447 University Ave. N.E. Mark G. Sopko, BWBR Arc6itects, St. Paul Len & Judy Schollen, 6381 University Ave. N.E. Bill Ekstrum, 6441 University Ave. N.E. W. G. Doty, 6379 University Ave. N.E. Lawrence Manipley, 5901 Brooklyn Blvd. Ted Burandt, 6211 Riverview Terrace Cheryl Nybo, 1612 Berne Circle Roland Stinski, 3647 McKinley St. N.E. David Fuerstenberg, 1601 - 66� Ave. N.E. Margery & Robert Fehling, 5809 Tennison Drive. Brian Seckinger APPROVAL OF JUNE 17, 1982 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTNORITY MINUTES: �MOTZON BY MR. PRIEDITIS� SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE� TO APPROVE THE JUNE 17� 2982� HpUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MZNUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A�VOICE YOTfi, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECZARED THE MOTIDN CARRSED UNRNZMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF JULY 15, 1982, HOUSING & REDEYELOPMENT pUTHORITY FIINUTES: MOTIDN BY hIIt. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRZS� TO APPROVE THE TULY 15� I982, HAUSTNG & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. L NOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 12, 1982 PA6E 2 APPROVAL Of JULY 21 1982 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SPECdAL MINUTES: Mr-, Comners stated they vrould continue the approval of these minutes until the next meeting when Mr. Rasmussen would be present. � � " CENTER CI7Y PROJECT: A. Shopping Center - Phase III (Letter dated Aug. 6, 1982, from Executive Director to Barthel Construction) Mr. Boardman stated he has not received any response from Marlin Hutchinson of Barthel Construction regarding a status report on the retail center. He stated he has had information that Barthe7 was having financial difficulty, and he wanted a report for this meeting. Mr. Boardman stated he became somewhat concerned when he received a telephone call from Mr. Hutchinson about a month ago when 5uper Valu decided they would not go into the Center City area. Mr. Hutchinson had stated they could not put the package together and were withdrawing, Three days iater Mr. Nutchinson called again and said they had acted hastily and were stilt trying to put the project together. Mr. Boardman stated when he did not receive any other information after a month, he sent this letter to Mr. Hutchinson but has received no answer. Mr. Boardman stated he had reminded Mr. Hutchinson of No. 2 of the Right of Development Agreement that, "Each party must keep the other informed of potential problems and deiays. If, in the opinion of the HRA, Barthel Construction is not proceeding in a timely and posiiive fashion, the HRA may withdraw this selection." Mr, Corraners asked if there was any action Staff would like the HRA to take. Mr. Boardman stated it has aTways been the concern of the HRA to not get involved in too much, especially with the right of development they have given on the other side of University which could commit $1.9 million in acquisition costs. In light of the fact that Barthel has not been responding and based on the information he has received that Barthel is having financial difficulty, he did not feel Barthel was going to be able to perform on their right of development. He felt the HRA should diecuss this possibility and consider the withdrawal of the right of deve]opment. Ne felt that in light of the financial situation, it is going to be very difficult to do any retail in this area. Since work is going on in the Center City area east of University, they may want to delay any activity on the other side for 2-]� years before promoting that area. Mr. Commers stated that if Staff fee7s the HRA should be looking at other areas, rather than develop the shopping center area, he would like HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 12 1982 PAGE 3 Staff to put together a 5-year p]an and also set out the priorities in that pian for the HRA's consideration, Each of the development areas, all proaerty the HRA presently owns, and a71 financial information should be_included in that plan. • Mr. Prairie stated Staff may want to inform the businesses in that area so they know that developnent may not be happening, Mr. Boardman stated he has kept in touch with Fred Levy's attorney and has tried to keep the business people updated on any progress, although he has not had very good information to give them in ihe past. He felt that if the HRA does determine that the right of development should be withdrawn, then he would send out letters informing the business people of the HRA's action and that the HRA is rethinking their redevelopment priorities. Mr. Schneider suggested that it might be possible to send out some type of newsletter on a regular basis just to keep the 6usiness people informed of what is going on--good, bad, or indifferent. Mr. Boardman stated that was a good idea, Mr. Cormners stated he thought they should send a letter to Barthel inform- ing them that their right of development expires on October 15; and if they do not respond, the HRA will terminate that right of development. Mr. Prieditis agreed. He stated it bothered him that Barthe] has not responded in any way. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SSCONDED BY FfR. PRIEDITIS� TO REQUEST TNE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ADVISE BARTNEL CONSTRUCTION THAT UNLESS THEY RESPOND AND GIVE THE HRA A STATUS REPORT ON THE RETAIL CENTER IN PHASE III OF THE CENTER CITY PROJECT� IT IS THS INTENTIDN OF TXE NRA TO WITNDRAW TNEZR RIGHT OF DEVELOPMENT BY SEPTEMBER I5� 2982, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. B. Office Building Project (Letter dated Aug. 6 from Mark Haggerty, Memo #82-57 from Executive Director, and background information) Mr. Boardman stated the HRA members had also received a commitment letter on the financing of the project from Mi7ler Securities. Mr. Boardman stated he would bring the HRA members up to date on the office building project. From the HRA's March meeting through the May meeting, Mr. Haggerty was trying to pui a package together for a 30,000 sq, ft. and then a 36,000 sq. ft. office building. When it came back to the HRA on May 13, Mr. Haggerty was not able to put the package together because of some difficulty in getting the proper signatures on paper. At HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITV MEETING, AUGUST 12 1982 PAGE 4 that time, the HRA told Mr. Haggerty that if he could get-the package together, he should come back. Mr. Haggerty is now back before the = HRA. Mr. Haggerty has gone in with Mr. Gus Doty to do a 36,U00 sq, ft. - office building. With Mr. Doty, all of the proper signatures have been �_ obtained and the financing has been committed. f Mr. Boardman stated there are a couple of issues that are different than was talked about before, One of those issues is the acquisition of property--Mr. Haggerty's building which was talked about before, but now, with Mr. Doty involved, Mr. Doty also has some property he would like to have acquired. The property is located just south of the bank, just north of the Rice Creek building. Mr. Boardman stated that because of the situation, in order to put the project together, Mr. Haggerty and Mr. Doty need to se71 those properties. At this time, they are requesting the HRA to purchase those properties so they can put front-end money into the project. He stated Mr. Haggerty and Mr. Doty were at the meeting to answer questions. Mr. Boardman stated there are several issues that have been discussed before. He referred to Mr. Haggerty's letter dated Aug. 6. Item #3: "The fridley HRA would commence construction of the plaza imnediately to the west of the proposed building site in the spring of 1983." Mr. Boardman stated it was discussed before, but no comnitments were made, that in order for an office building to be built in that location, most people have indicated they would not do an office building unless a plaza was developed. One of the things they are trying to accomplish is an overall development. With the c]inic going in, and if they put an office package together, they have a horseshoe kind of area that is right for the development of a plaza. He thought one of the things they looked at with the presentation of the development of a theme was a potential for staging and that staging was based on development, trying to complete portions of the area and show other developers they are serious about development in this area. Mr. Boardman stated another issue that was discussed was that the HRA would develop the parking and then parking would 6e leased back to the developer on a 50-year lease with the option that the developer, after 31 years, could purchase the property for $100,000.00. Mr. Boardman stated that in Item �5, Mr. Hag�erty is proposing to hire BWBR to do the building and Hagmann Construction, who are also doing the construction of the clinic, in an attempt to maintain a character in the area. Mr. Boardman stated that in Item q6, the contract says the City will pay for relocating 64th Ave. That is already an agreed statement with Columbia Park Properties. J HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPHENT AUTHQRITY MEETING, AUGUST 12, 1982 PAGE 5 Mr, Comners stated that in previous HRA minutes, there was sane dis- cussion about drainage and site preparation prob7ems. What estimates do they have on what that is going to cost the City if they.are required to do the site preparation and drainage? Mr. Boardman stated that in talking to the city engineers, they do not have that kind of problem. The only thing they have to ensure with the parking lot development is that they drain out to the street so whatever they do within the plaza area itself will not create a drainage problem in the p7aza. Mr. Innan stated the engineering estimates for the project are $109,000 for the parking lot, $56,000 for the street, and $15,000 for the sewer and water. Mr. Boardman stated Item #7 in Mr. Haggerty's letter refers to the acquisition of the land under the building. Mr. Haggerty is agreeing to pay $40,000 for the cost of that building at $2/sq, ft. They are looking at the HRA deferring the initiai payments on that property until Dec, 31, 1986, at which time the interest will correnence. That interest would be at 11%. On the first day of Jan. for ten subsequent years, the actual payments in ten increment payments would be $4,000/yr, plus interest. Mr. Boardman stated that in Item #8, Mr. Haggerty is agreeing to a mini- mum real estate tax of $2/sq. ft. Mr. Boardman referred to Item #9 of Mr. Haggerty's letter: "The HRA would grant to the partnership a zero lot 7ine on one of the walls of the building in order to allow the partnership to expand or in the alternative would give us some form of development rights to develop another office building in the Center City area." Mr. Boardman stated the HRA does not necessarily grant the zero lot line, but Mr. Haggerty is saying they want the bui]ding next to the property line for potential future expansion. Mr. Boardman stated he questioned the ability of future expansion on that building and whether that should be put in the contract documents. He would have to discuss this with Mr. Haggerty. Mr. Boardman stated he and Mr. Haggerty have discussed that when the City does the parking lot, they would also do the landscaping around the building and separate that portion of assessment and assess it back to the building proper. He stated he did not have any real problem with that. � Mr. Boardman stated another consideration talked about was that Mr. Haggerty did agree to pay a certain amount of maintenance toward the plaza. That was worth looking into to help defray some of the maintenance costs in plaza. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 12 7982 PAGE 6 Mr. Commers asked for Staff's recomnendation, - Mr. Boardman stated they have the opportunity right now of getting the Center City under way. They hav,e started with the clinic, and if they �' can get the office building developed, he thought it would show people � they are serious in this development. He stated the project has good _ potential, all the papers look in order, they have a financial canmit- ment from Miller Securities, Mr. Doty and Mr. Haggerty are in a position to sign contract documents and are looking at getting the project started and under way in the fall, Mr. Haggerty stated that if the project is approved, they are looking at breaking ground on October 15, with closing on the bond documents on October 1, and a comp7etion date of June 75, 1983. Mr. Boardman stated there are several pluses for the HRA. They have the ability to sell bonds yet this year and invest those bonds. If the building is started in October, a substantial amount of that bnilding would be up before 3an. 2, 1983, which wil] start generating tax increment in 1984. Based on those conditions and all the other conditions discussed to date, it was his recomnendati�n that the HRA follow through and commit to the office building. Mr. Prieditis asked what the HRA was investing in this project in propor- tion to the project's value and how did it compare to previous situations and the normal average? He felt it seemed like they were investing a lot of money and agreeing to a lot of conditions. And, maybe a developer coming in later on would want the same kind of conditions. Mr. Boardman stated he felt it depended on whether they are talking a6out the development of the plaza as a condition. He felt the plaza develop- ment should be handled as a separate issue. He stated they have to look at buying land and land costs through purchasing as investments in the project. Mr. Commers asked Mr, Inman to review the financial information to help give the HRA some i�sight into the feasibility of this project. Mr. Inman reviewed the cash flow projections with the HRA. He stated that from a financial perspective, if they take the position that this project is financing the acquisition of other properties and assume they are going to sell those properties, it is a substantially good deal for their financial picture. Mr. Naggerty stated he would agree that buyi'ng the Doty property was not as if the City would be throwing money away. He felt the property was worth it. They would also be making an investment by purchasing the Madsen building. He stated the real point is that it is very difficult to development an office building on this site, Tenants refuse to commit before the building is in the ground, so they are taking a risk. He stated they are willing to take that risk. He stated they are asking for a lot, but he felt the City's financial return on their investment was very good. � _ _. ___ _ .. ... .. ._._ ___. __ . ._ .. __ _ HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T�EETiN�,'A�JGL�ST t2, 7982 PA6E 7 Mr. Commers stated he thought it looked like the City was not making anything for a long time. The City is running the risk of carrying those properties for a possible lengthy period of time without a p7an for development of tf�ose properties. Mr. Doty stated the office building project was a sizeable commitment by the City and would require the ultimate purchase of the Madsen build- inq. They are just talking about the purchase now as opposed to later. He stated he felt the purchase of his property was no risk at all, Mr. Qureshi stated he would speak on why siaff has been working so vigorously to put this package together. He stated at the groundbreaking ceremony for the clinic on July 16, there was some discussion among the City Council and HRA members. Questions were raised about what was happen- ing with Mr. Doty's property and there were some concerns that maybe Staff was trying to stop development in that section. Staff gave some rationale on why that property should be considered for a different use, at least to keep the options open and encourage development in tf�e Center City project. In the discussion, it was suggested that Mr. Haggerty and Mr. Doty should get together and put a package together. He stated they did contact Mr. Haggerty and Mr, Doty, Mr. Qureshi stated it has always been Staff's position to promote this a�ea as the core of the Center City area. The idea was to try to develop the core, and then they came up with the idea of the plaza. The clinic is now a rea3ity, the HRA will be considering a contract with an architect to work on plans for the plaza, and the office buiTding is under consider- ation now. Sizeable commitments have been made by the HRA for the reloca- tion of 64th Ave., and other commitments have been made to the clinic, The office building would complete all the development in this area, and they would have a sizeable chunk of the Center City area completed. Staff feels if that is all completed, they will have something physical to show other developers that this is the kind of development the City would like to encourage. Mr. Qureshi stated that regarding Mr. Doty's property , the City has a number of choices to consider. They can keep the property open for a while to see how the clinic develops. If the clinic doesn't deveie� any furtherm they have a property that couid develop into another mini-office. Mr. Qureshi stated the City has been working on the west side of University for almost two years trying to get a project going, and they have nothing to show for it. They have given corcmitments for a right of development to two developers, and now it looks like this second �vill also fall through. Mr. Haggerty is taking a risk. The HRA is taking some risk, but this is a solid proposal. Staff feels it is a good proposal, and feeis rtare comfortable with this package than any other project considered before. HOUSING 8 REDEUELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETINf, AUGUST 12 1982 PAGE 8 Mr. Qureshi stated Mr. Haggerty was requesting 5150,OD0 for the purchase of his property. Staff's recomnendation was $115,614 plus relncation = of E19,386. Mr. Doty is requesting 3.32/sq. ft. Staff's recomnendation was $3.00/sq. ft. . �- . � Mr. Prairie stated that at the HRA's July 21 meeting, the suggestion was made that they hoped Mr, Haggerty and Mr. Doty could get together on an office project. He felt this project would help the whole area, which is what the HRA has been working taward. and he thought the office building was a feasible project. Mr. Commers stated he did not personally believe it was appropriate for the HRA at this time to acquire additional properties without a plan for development. He thought the office building standing by itself was a very appropriate project� and if it could be done without the acquisition of vacant property, he would be in a position to support it. But, with that condition and some of the other terms that would have to be negoti- ated, he could not support this project. Mr. Doty stated that nothing less than $3.32/sq, ft. for his property has been negotiated, and that is a firm price. The property is worth $100,000, and he would not sell it for less. His participation in this project is conditioned on the purchase of his property by the NRA for $100,000. He felt $100.000 was a very fair price, and he had every intention of walking out on the project if he is offerred anything 1ess. Mr, Naggerty stated he understood the problem with the zero lot line, but he would like to have some type of right to develop another office building in the area. They would certainly be willing to take a time limit on that if the HRA wanted that. He stated his law firm does want a place to stay while the new building was being constructed, and sane type of rent to the HRA would be reasonable. Mr. Hamernik referred to Item �13 in Mr, Haggerty's letter stating: "the Fridley HRA would commence construction of the plaza immediately to the west of the proposed building site in the spring of 1983. In addition, the Fridley HRA would landscape around the proposed office building with a mini-plaza.....and vauid assess the cost of the building's landscaping over a period of 10 years at the City's or HRA's regular interest rate." Mr. Hamernik stated he questioned whether the HRA really wanted to obli- gate themselves to an expenditure if there is some question on what the cash flow is going to be. He had the feeling that some of the obli- gations incurred on the other project are caUsing some implications or problems that are difficult to deal with. He would like to see the HRA enter into an agreement with as few stipulations as possible that are outside the existing property. Mr. Haggerty stated a71 they are talking about with the mini-plaza is just sane grass with some trees--they just wani to have something. HQUSING & REDEVEIOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 12 1982 PAGE 9 Mr, Comners that on page 2 of the Addendum, it provides that the HRA will agree to install at no cost to the redeveloper a plaza which shal] adjoin the redeveloper's office building with the City of Fr_idley City Hall and that said plaza will include landscaping amenities, He stated that sane limitations have to be placed on the development of this plaza, In answer to Mr. Hamernik's question, that is an it�n that is outside their present commitments. Mr. Qureshi stated that if the HRA wants to develop this property, they are going to have to take some bold steps, Do they want to develop it next year or five years from now? If they want to develop it next year, it is imperative they move with the whole package. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRSE� SECONDED BY MR, PRIEIDITIS, TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL FOR A 3-STORY� 36�493 SQ. FT. OFFZCE BUILIIING IN THE FRIDLEY CENTER CITY PROJECT� NOTING THAT l�II2. HAGGERTY STRTED THE FiINI-PIAZA COULD BE AS ISTTLE AS JUST GRASS� AND TXAT STAFF WORIC WITN MR. NAGGERTY IN MAKING SOME ADJUSTMENTS� PARTICULARLY WSTH THE ZERO LOT LINE QUESTION. UPON R VOICE VOTE� COMMERS AND SVENDSEN VOTING NAY� PRASRIE AND PRIEDITIS VOTING RYE� CNAZRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE�MOTION FAILED 8Y A TIE VOTE. Mr. Commers stated to the meeting and for that property. he appreciated Mr, Haggerty and Mr. Doty for coming stated he hoped some other proposal could be made Mr. Doty asked the HRA if they foresaw the possibility of acquiring his property for any reason at this time. He stated his application for variances to develop a building on his property was tabled at the Appeals Comnission because someone heard that the HRA might want to acquire his property. He would like some ctarification that the HRA has no intention of using his property; and, therefore, he can proceed with his develop- ment plans. Mr. Commers stated the answer was obvious. At this time, there were no other proposals before the HRA that would cause them to want to acquire Mr. Doty's property. Mr. Boardman stated the reason the Appeals Commission tabled Mr. Doty's variance request was because Staff knew the question of the acquisition of Mr. Doty's property was going to be before the HRA at this meeting. The Appeals Commission decided to wait to see what action the HRA took on this acquisition, There was no sense in continuing on with the variances if the HRA voted to purchase the property. The HRA has now determined not to purchase Mr. Doty's property; therefore, there is no reason why it shouldn't continue on through the Appea7s Canmission to the City Council. HOUSING & REDEUELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 12, ]982 PAGE 10 Mr. Doty stated he just wanted to make certain this did not happen - again, and he thanked Mr. Comners for his answer. -- € Mr. Qureshi stated Staff has a policy that when anything is happening F� in the Center City area, the HRA should have the opportunity to give -_ input. If the HRA has no input, then the item goes through the regular process. As a regular rule, they will be bringing tfiese kinds of things to the HRA f�r the HRA's review. Mr. Commers stated he appreciated the HRA being advised when these kinds of things do arise. C. Design Contract for Center City (Memo �82-58 from Executive Director & Contract documents) Mr. Boardman stated the "Standard form of Agreement between Owner and Architect" received in the agenda has been modified, and the HRA members now had a new copy. Ne stated the type of project they are loaking at with the architect is a redesign or some modified design of the schematic design phase and the design development phase. They are not interested at this time in getting into an actual construction document and bidding, negotiation, and construction phase, so anything tfiat deals with the last three phases wi71 not be included as a part of this architect's document. Mr. Boardman stated that if the HRA did approve this contract, he would like to have a working meeting between the architect and the HRA. That meeting should be held as soon as possibTe. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS� SECONDED BY MS, SVENDSEN� TD APPROVE THE "STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTXORITY AND THE INTERDESIGN� SNC." AND PROCEED WSTH INTERDESIGN ON THE CENTER CITY DESIGN THEME. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANTMWSLY. � � D. Discussion on Consultant for Commerciat Relocation (Memo #82-59 from Executive Director} Mr. Boardman stated there are seven businesses they will be involved in relocating over the next nine months. He stated single family relocations were simple enough that Staff could_handle them, but there were a]ot of things involved in commercial relocation, including unit appraisals and getting out and actually searching for riew locations. It would involve a lot of staff time, and he felt they should go with a professional in corrnnercia7 relocation. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHQRITY MEE7ING. AU&UST 12, 1982 PAGE 11 Mr. Boardman stated VonKlug & Assoc. are probably the most knowledgeable professionals i� the Minneapolis area. He stated �i71 VonKlug of VonKlug & Assoc. has offered two proposals: (1) A general-�roposal that has to be followed with HUD monies when HUD monies are included. Fee: $14,500; (2} A more basic method for relocation. Flat fee of $9,000 for seven businesses. In addition, they would have to get unit appraisals or persona] property appraisals. Mr. Boardman stated businesses usually prefer proposal �2. He stated he has some questions that need to be answered, and he would like the option to choose which proposal was the most appropriate. MOTION BY MS. SVENDSEN� SECONDED BY 1�2, PRIEDITIS� TO RPPROVE RND AUTXORIZE TXE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO GO FORWARD WITH NEGOTIATIONS AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH VONKLUG 6 ASSOC, TO OBTASN THEIR SERVICES ON COMMERCSAL RELC)CATION. Mr. 8oardman stated Len Schol]en, who owns Lennies, has found a bui7ding where he would like to relocate. If the City can relocate them into a building they have already found that is already set up as a laundromat, it may reduce the costs of relocation. He stated they may want to start some relocaiion in lieu of rent, but he will have to look at each situa- tion on an individual basis. Mr. Commers stated that if any of the tenants come forward with this kind of proposal, they should look into it as soon as possible in order to accommodate those tenants. UPON A�VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRP&RSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. E. 362 and 378 - 64th Ave. N.E. 1. Approval of Sale of Structures to Badger Movers Mr. Boardman stated he had sent a notice out for bids to have the structures removed. The high bid was from Badger Movers. • They wi71 pay the HRA $4,250 to move both the houses. They are ready to start work next week with authorization from the HRA. These houses were owned by Arthur Smith and Art Singer. Mr. Caroners stated the HRA received a very nice letter from Mr. Singer complimenting Mr. Boardman for working with him and getting him relocated in another home. . M02IDN BY MR. PRRZRIE� SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS� TO APPROVE TNE BID OF $4�250 WITH BADGER MOVERS TO REMVOE SHE TWO S2RUCTURES AT 362 AND 378 - 64th AVE. N.E. UPON A VOICS VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOOSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETIN6, AUGUST 12, 1982 PAGE 12 2. Approval of Bid on Removal of Basement and Backfill Mr. Boardman stated that once the houses. are removed, they need to remove the basement foundations and backfill. That wi71 also take out al] the driveway, all concrete, and retaining walls on the site. He stated they went out for bids,and Ted Renollet was the low bidder - of $1.295 to do this work for both structures. He woul� recanmend - the HRA approve this bid. . € � MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIS� SECONDED BY HS. SVENDSEN� TO APPRDVE TXE `__ BID FROM T&D RENOLLET OF 51�295 FOR THE BRCKFILLING AND REMOVAL OF BRSEMENT FQUNDATIONS AT 362 AND 378 - 6ITH AVE. N,E. UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECIARED THE M0270N CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, F. 332 & 336 - 64th Ave. N.E. (Letters from G. Stanley Rischard and response letters from Executive Director) Mr. Boardman stated on June 28 he had received a letter fran Mr, Stanley Rischard, the attorney who has been retained by the property owners of 332 and 336 - 64th Ave. N.E. In that letter. Mr. Rischard is requesting the HRA to proceed with condemnation. Mr. Boardman stated he had contacted Mr. Rischard after receiving this letter and they had set up a meeting to discuss a possible negotiation purcEwse price on those properties. At that meeting, a$200,000 price for the purchase of the garage with an $85,000 purchase price for the purchase of the house were presented, and no reasonable negotiated price was reached. At this point, Mr. Boardman stated he was looking for authorization from thP HRA to proceed with condemnation. MOTION BY /�2. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRZE, TO AUTXORIZE STAFF TO FILE A PETZTSON WITH ANOXA COUNTY DISTRZCT COURT WZTH REGARD TO THE CONDEMNATION OF TNE PROPERTZES AT 332 AND 336 64TH AVENUE N.E., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOkS: 332 64th Avenae N.E.: Lots 2, 2, 3, and North 71� feet of Lot 4, Block 4, Ree's Addition to Fridley Park, except the East 54 feet: and 336 64th Avenue N.E.: East 54 feet of Lats 1, ?, 3, and East 54 feet of North 74 feet of Lot 4, Block 4, Ree�s Addition to Fridley Park. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. II. MOORE LAKE PROJECT: A, Cheryl Nyho Office Project (Memo #82-60 from Executive Director) Mr. Boardman stated he would give a little background information on Lhis project. He stated the HRA had approved contract documents with Ms. Nybo based on 50% lease-up. He stated Ms. Nybo has discussed this project with him several times and financing is coming down where it looks like the project could go relatively soon; however� there are some questions. First of all, Ms. Nybo has approached the HRA to see what happens if they enter into a contract with Mr. Burandt which would tie the property down, it would then give them time to wait for favorable interest rates before moving into the project. He stated that in HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 12, 1982 PAGE 13 looking at that, the HRA could do two things: (L) If Ms. Nybo enters into a contract, the HRA wou]d be out of the purchase of the property. The HRA could agree to assist tfie development in tfie same amount of dollars they had agreed to assis,t in the acquisition of the property; (2} The HRA could do the �cterior improvements, sucfi as blacktop, curbing, landscaping for the project up to the same value they have approved on the purchase price. Mr. Roland Stinski, 3647 McKinley St. N.E., stated he was the spokes- person for Fehling & Nybo. He stated that after talking to Mr. Boardman and Ms. Nybo, he wouTd tike to make a recommendation to the NRA. The proposal would be for the HRA to acquire both properties which would be no cash outlay to the HRA, enter into a contract with Mr. Burandt to purchase his property, give him a down payment, take the property on a year's contract for deed with a ba]loon payment inside of one year, the HRA picking up that balloon payment at the end of one year; also to acquire the office building that is there which would still be no cost to the HRA, in that there is a mortgage being placed on the property now to pay off Mr. Burandt. The mortgage would be carried by the partnership of Fehling & Nybo until such time as she got a building permit, financing and 50% rental in order to build. Then the HRA could step in and bu.y both properties at an agreeable price and sell them back to Ms. Nybo at a reduced figure. Mr. Lawrence Manipley, 5901 Brooklyn Blvd., stated he was the attorney for Ted Burandt. Ne stated there would be no contract for deed with Ms. Nybo. Any agreement would have to be a straight cash transaction with no terms. 7hey have an existing disagreement which is not part of this project, but that is the reason why there would be no balloon pay- ment, no contract for deed, only a straight cash transaction. Mr. Manip]ey stated there were so many contingencies involved in this particular matter, it seemed best that the HRA not even review it at this point in time. Let the people involved put the deal together and then the HRA can see whether the nurnbers work, if there are any numbers. Mr. Commers stated he thought it would be best for both sides to meet and work out an agreement. The HRA is interested in doing a project and looking at it, but first the two parties have to meet and try to negotiate the terms. He stated this matter should be tabled indefinitely. MOTION BY M2. PRAZRIE� SECONDED &Y MR. PRIEDITIS� TO TABI.F FORTHER DIS- CUSSION ON THE CXERYL NYBO OFFICE PROJECT INDEFINITELY. UPON A VOSCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRSRPERSbN COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION GItRRd'ED UNANIMOUSLY, NOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETIN6, AUGUST 12, 1982 PAGE 14 B. Central Avenue Project (Memo #82-61 fran Executive Director) = Mr. Boardman stated Dick Mochinski, represented by Dennis Ewing and Dick Reiersgord, owns some property on Old Central and Rice Creek € Road. Right now a large majority of the property is zoned commercial, F Mr. Mochinski originally wanted to develop the property as industrial property. Back in 1981, when Mr.Mochinski came to Staff with that proposal, Staff suggested that since Mr.Mochinski also did home real estate projects, maybe he should take a look at an overall townhouse/ quad-type of development. Mr, Mochinski did look at it, was very interested in it, and submitted a proposal to the HRA in Feb. 1982. The HRA at that time felt the proposal he submitted was a little weak � as far as access. Mr. Boardman stated he has met with Mr. Ewing and Mr. Reiersgord off and on for a period of 6-9 months. At the lasi meeting, they gave him the figures. He has done a run on those figures, and the project looks 7ike a very weak project. This would be a project phased over three years, 1983-85, for a total of approx. 90 units. He stated he has not been able to contact Mr, Ewing and Mr. Reiersgord since Ehlers & Assoc. did the bond run, and he would prefer to table this project at this time. MOTION BY lgi. FRAIRIE� SECONDED BY MR. PRZEDITIS� TO TAHLE THE CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT AT THIS TIME. UPON A VDICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. III. FINANGIAL: A. Check Register MOTION BY MR, PRAIRIE� SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN� TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER AS PRESENTED. UPQN A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. B. Financial Report Mr. Sid Inman reviewed the financial report with the HRA members. IV. 07HER BUSINESS: A. Request from Dave Fuerstenberg of Dave's Sport Shop to Lease the Hardware Building Mr. Boardman stated that Mr, fuerstenberg is interested in leasing the hardware building; however, Mr. Fuerstenberg would 7ike an extended HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING AUGUST 12 1982 PAGE 15 lease. The question is: Does the HRA want to lease the hardware building and what kind of time commitment would they put on a lease arrangement without tying their hands to any great extent? �" Mr, Fuerstenberg stated he is in need of more roan. He stated the NRA is talking about relocating the businesses on University Ave., and maybe one of those businesses could be relocated in Moon Plaza in his present location. He would like as long a lease as possible as a move is quite expensive. He would like a 3-5 year lease. At that time, hopefully, the new shopping center would be in. - Mr, boardma� stated he was very concerned about the HRA getting into a long-term lease. The HRA would not want to pay any relocation costs, and that vrould have to be a c�ndition of a lease. He stated the site is quite narrow, and there is only enough room for one row of parking. If the HRA did enter i�to a lease, any impravements would fiave to be the responsibitity of the tenant, as he did not think the HRA would want to get into those kinds of expenditures. Mr. Canmers stated they would have to put limitations on a lease, and with those 7imitati�ns, he did not think a lease was very feasible. They would not be in any p�sition to pay relocation costs. An 18-monih lease was about the longest they could consider. The tenant would also have to be sure the building was up to code. Mr, Commers suggested that Mr, fuerstenberg get together with Staff and discuss this further, Mr. Boardman stated he was willing to discuss some arrangements with Mr. Fuerstenberg as long as Mr. Fuerstenberg understood the limitations and was willing to work within those limitations. Mr. Fuerstenberg agreed to meet with Mr. Boardman to discuss this further. B. Information Items Mr. Boardman stated the following items were strictly for the HRA's information: 1. HRA Annual Report to State 2. HRA Audit Report - Dec. 31� 1981 3. Clinic Bond Sale information 4. Minutes of City Council - July 26, 1982 5. Newspaper articles , ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR, PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN� TD RDJIXTRN THE MEETING, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED TXE�AUGUST 12, 1982� HOUSING fi REDEVEZAFMENT AUTHORITY MEETZNG AATOURNED AT 21:30 P.M. Respectfully submit ed, � Lvnn Saba. Recordina Sarret�N�. � CITY Of FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 27, 1482 CpLI TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the August 27� 1982, Housing & Redevelopment Auth�rity special meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. ROLL CALl: Members Present: Mer,ibers Absent: Larry Commers, Elmars Prieditis, Caro)yn Svendsen, Duane Prairie, Walter Rasmussen None Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Mark Haggerty, Sriith, Juster, Feikema Law Firm Tom Berg, MiT1er Securities Dennis Schneider, City Council Bob Barrtette. City Counci] CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED 36.493 50. FT: Mr. Commers asked Mr. Boardman to review the differences and changes in this proposal as compared to the last office building proposa] from Mr. Haggerty. Mr. Boardman stated there were approximately three changes, one of which was the most complex. Mr. Boardman stated he had underlined the major changes in Mr. Haggerty's letter of August 20. ]982. Mr. Boardman stated what is being proposed is that instead of purchasing the property at 63rd & Univeristy (Mr. Gus Doty's property}, they are requesting that the HRA put up $90,000 up-front money as an investMent into the project, That money would go to pay for the issuance of the bond up to $90,000. In return for that $90,000, the HRA will get an option on Mr. Doty's property. That option will run until Feb. 1, 1986, one month past the option on the ciinic, If at that tine, the NRA exercises its option on the property, they will pay an additional $)0.000 plus taxes, and the HRA will own the property. If the MRA doesn't exercise the option on the property, Mr. Haggerty will pay the HRA its $90,000 investment back with interest at a 10% interest rate. Mr. Boardman stated the partnership would be wi7ling to pay $560 per month to rent from the Fridley HRA the building the HRA would acquire from Mr. Haggerty (the Madsen bultding just north of City Hall). Before the arrangement was they would remain in the building rent-free. The $560 per month is what is now being HOUSING & REDEVELOPMEN_T_AUTHORITY SPECIA! MEETING AUGUST 27 1482 - PAGE 2 netted from that property. Mr, Haggerty and the 1aw firm would be responsiDle as the master leasers of that bui]ding for all the maintenance and taxes while renting the property, and the HRA would get the $5b0 per month net rent. Mr. Boardman stated #4 in Mr. Haggerty's letter was changed to read; "The �ridley HRA would comnence construction of a plaza to be apnroved by the Fridley HRA and located irrmediate]y to the west of the proposed building site�ing 1�9$3." He stated they did not want to tie it down to a value because the HRA hasn't yet determined what they are looking at as far as a plaza, Mr. Boardman stated one additional c6ange was outlined in �11 of Mr. Haggerty's ]etter: "The development partnership would be willing to put up a 570,000 non- refundable good faith deposit which would be retained b the Fridle�if ths partnership did not comnence t e eve onment on or efore Dec. . 8. In t on �rior Mr. Boardman stated he had br�ught some bond runs to the meeting for the HRA's review. . Mr. Cortmers asked what tfie option price works out to be on Mr. Doty's property. Mr. Boardman stated the option price is $100,000--the $90,000 NRA investment plus the $l0,OD0, which comes out at a3.32/sq. ft. He stated the HRA had to understand that the option runs to 1486. Leon Madsen from the City felt the present value on that property was justifab]e up to $3/sq. ft. Looking at that over a four year period, they have at least another 4% per year increase in values, and that is a conservative estimate in increased values. So, over a four year period, they are looking at an investment over $10,000. Mr. Boardman stated they did time the length of the option on Mr. Doty's proeprty to be one month after the option on the clinic runs out. He stated he felt very cor�fortable with that because they do have the option to use that property if they need it in negotiations for additional parking. Mr. Boardman stated the contract documents have been prepared. They have been partially prepared by Mr. Herrick and partially prepared by Mr, Haggerty and hir�self. He stated he was now looking for sone approval from the HRA of the contract documents based on legal review and approval Mr. Boardman asked Mr. Haggerty about the financing, Mr, Haggerty stated Mr. Serg from Miller Securities was at the meeting, He stated Miller Securities has given them a signed letter on the terms and conditions Miller Securities would be wil]ing to underwrite the project. With the proposal as it has been presented to the HRA, they would be able to obtain the financing. Mr, Berg stated they have been working on this project since early spring a�d they have given Mr. Haggerty several letters on the terms and conditions with which they would agree to buy the bonds and market the bonds. He stated he had not read the contract documents, but they are willing to do a firm underwriting. HOUSING 8 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING, AUGllST 27s 1962 - PAGE 3 MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN� SECONDED BY MR, pRIEDITIS� TD APPROVE THE ^CONTRACT FOR PRNATS REDEI�ELOPMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE HOUSING 6 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF T9S CITY OF FRIDLEY AND FRIDLEY PLAZA PARTNERSHIP�" SUBJECT TO FINAL REVIEW BY LSGAL COUNSEL. . UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL 'I�OTING AYE� CHAZRPERSON COMMERS DECLFIRED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY. Mr. Boardman stated he has another document, Resolution No. HRA 5-1982 which is a resolution requesting the City Council to authorize bond sa7es for the Center � City Redevelopment Tax increment District Phase II. If the HRA approves the resolution at this meeting, it would go before the City Council on Sept. 13, with a possible bond sale on Oct. 4. That is pretty much in line with when Mr. Haggerty is talking about selling his bonds for the office building. If on Oct. 4, Mr. Haggerty has not so7d his bonds, then the City can delay at the City Council level., but they would prefer to be in the position to se71 those bonds on Oct.4 and get in on the good interest rate. MOTION BY MR, RASMUSSEN� SECONDED BY MR, PRIEDITIS� TO ADOPT RESOLUTSON N0. 5-1982, "A RESOLUTION OF TXE NOUSZNG & REDEVELOPNENT AUTHORZTY OF TXE CZTY OF FRZDLEY TO REpUEST THE FRIDLEY CITY COf1NCIL TO AUTNORIZE BOND SALES FOR THE CENTER CITY REDEVPIAPMENT TAX INCRSMENT DISTRSCT PHASE II.^ UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CNAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, . ADJOURP�MENT• Chairperson Commers declared the August 27, 7982. Housing & Redevelopment Authority 5pecial Meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Respectfully sub itted, y Saba Recording Secretary CITY OF FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETIN6, AUGUST 24, 1982 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson 6a6e1 called the August 24, ]982, Appeals Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. r-ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia Gabel, Jean Gerou, Jim Ptemel � MEMBERS kBSENT: Alex Barna, Leslie Coleman OTHERS PRESENT: Darrell Clark, City of Fridley Chris 2elevarov, 160 Mississippi Ptace, Richard Narris, 6200 Riverview Terrace Mary Ellen Luchow, 161 - 64� Way N.E. Walter Luchow, 161 - 64� Way N.E. Nels Johnson, 6456 Riverview Terrace Kathy Morbrid, 6461 Riverview Terrace Richard Morbrid, 6461 Riverview Terrace David Kramber 2013 - 29th Avenue N.W., New Brighton Gail Estling, 6440 Riverview Terrace lohn Estling, 6440 Riverview Terrace Betty Ann Mech, 13i5 - 66th Ave�ue N.E. Gus Ooty, 6379 University Avenue N.E. A. Oscar Carlson 8 Keith Boulais, 655 Fairview Avenue, St. Paut Jerry Pasc�ke, 7280 University Avenue N.E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 20, 1982: Chairperson Ga6e1 had some additions and correct9ons to the minutes on Qage 5, and tfiat the reasons for the motion on agenda item no. 2 should be included: That the majority of homes ir tfie immediate area are built on larger lots; that the house to the East Aas an attached deck that is built very close to the 1ot line; the plan does not provide for a garage and there is concern about parking and sto- rage in a home without a 6asement; the house plan is not compatible with other homes in t6e area and there was neighborhood objection to the plan. Ms. Gabel also noted tfiat it was explained to the neighbors, after that eation, that even if the property is not built on now there is no guarantee for the future; that cities all over are changing their codes to meet the new needs of our economy and smaller lots will smaller struciures are becoming a via6le means of providing house. She also stated that on page 1, the motion for approval for a9enda item no. 3 did not state all the reasons for such approval: The plan for the house is designed to fit well on the lot; the plan is compatible with other homes in jhe neighborhood; the petitioner is willing to tie a specific house plan to the variance and the neighbors approve. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, to apprave tfie minutes of July 2Q, 9T 82; Appeals Comnission, as written and corrected. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNAN2MOU5LY. , � �peals Comnission Pleeting - August 24 1482 Paqe 2 1. p MOTION by Mrs. YOICE YOTE, All AT 7:40 P.M. ) Gerou, seconded 6y Mr. Plemel, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEI DECALRED THE PUBLIC NEARING OPENEd Chairperson 6abe1 read the Administrative Staff Rep,ort: IiaMIIiI.SIRP:PIVE 5lAF'F REPQI�T 5471 Rivecviev T�rrace 19.E. :��t SII:�CIOI `Dl:l/D� : D�.Q�: +r�%Lt7ii * Sectian 205.073, l►2, requires a miniman lot acea of 15,000 square feet plus 1,d00 equare feet per dwelling unit over 4 in nwn6er. Public purpose served by this requirement is to avoid the condition of wecccowding of a resiclential neighbochood and to ailow sufficient area for off-street parking anci avoi83�g en excess bucden on the existin9 water and seuer secvioes. Sectiosi 205.073, 4A, requires a miniman front yard setback of 35 feet. Public pucpose served b,� this r�uirement is to provide desired front yard space to be used for gceen areas � access az►d to add to the attcactability of a m�ltip2e zone. Section 205.U73, 9B, #3, requirea a minimm� side yard of 35 feet where s side yacd abuts the street side of a corner lot. Public purpose served by this ts3uirgnent is to maintain adequate side yard setbacks and aesthetic open areas arounci multiple dwellings. 5ection 205.073, 4C� cequires a rear yard depth of not less than 25 percent oi the lot depth, with not less than 25 feet pecmitted or mose than 40 feet cequired. Public purpose served by this rs�uirenent is to maiptain adequate open space atound rtultiple dwellings fot aesthetic and fire fighting. Section 205.073, 4B, #1, requires a side yard of not less than 15 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide for adequate open areas (green divider aceas) arovnd multfple dwellingss to maintain clear access for fire fighting; and to reduce conflagration of fire. CI7Y OF FRIDLEY PLANNTNG COMMI�SIOP� MEETING, SEPTEMBER 15, 1982 CALL TO OR�ER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the September 15, 19a2, Pla�ning Commission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CHLL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr, Kondrick, Ms, van Dan, Mr. Saba Members Absent: Mr. Svanda Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Kent Hill, Administrative Assistant Bob Barnette, City Council Ed Hamernik, City Council Ruth Qunn, Fridley Sun Charies Hooley, President, Cu6 Foods Don Pollard, Director of Real Estate, Cub Foods Shelley Johnson, Barton-Aschman Robert 5chroer, 7620 University Ave. N.E. John Crouch, representing Kunz Qil Company See attached lists APPROVAL OF AUGUST 18 1982, PIANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTZON BY P?S. VAN DAN� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO APPROVE THE AUGUST Z8, 1982, PLANNING COMMISSZON MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTZON C7�tRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #82-05, BY CUB FOODS: Rezone from t�-���avy in�ustria areas, to -2S genera s opping areasj, Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 78, to allove the construction of a new retail shopping area, the same being 450 - 73rd Avenue N.E, MOTIDN BY MR, OQUIST� SECONDED BY MR. 5ABA� TO OPEN THE PUBLZC HEARING ON REZONZNG REQUEST� ZOA #82-05� BY CUB FOOD5, UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARSNG OPEN AT 7:35 P,M. Mr. Boardman stated this proposal is to rezone this parce7 from heavy industrial (M-2y ta general shopping (G 2S). The general shoppinq zone allows the type of uses that generate large traffic and traffic parking areas. The proposal submitted PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEP7EMQER 15 7982 PAGE 2 initially was for the rezoning of the entire M-2 area, approximate�y 27 acres. There has been some modification to that, and Cub Foods has reduced the request to reaone on7y the property facing the University Ave. service drive. The property in back wilt remain industrial (M-2) He stated he would now turn the meeting cver to representatives from Cub Foods who would give their presentation. Mr. Charles Nooley stated he was the President of Cub foods. He introduced Mr. Don Po7lard, Director of Real Estate for Cub foods, and stated Mr. Po]lard wouid present their proposed plan, Mr, Pollard stated this is a 27-acre site. After rezoning approximately 17.2 acres, Cub Foods would take up approximate7y half of that land, 7hey would also have a 40,000 sq, ft, drugstore, IQ,000 sq, ft. of small shops, and a restaurant. He stated they have landscaped the area. They have a parking ratio for the entire site of 7,2b cars per 1,Q00 sq, ft. They have honored the City's setback off 73rd Ave, of 100 ft, which runs the entire distance of 73rd. Ms. Schnabei asked if Cub Foods had any tenants in mind far the other portions of the shopping area. Mr, Poilard stated they have tenants in mind, but have no contracts with them at this point. Mr. Kondrick asked what the setback was between the service road and the bui7ding. Mr. Pollard stated the setback was about 400 ft. Ms. Schnabel asked what the distance would be from 73rd Ave, to the Cub store itself. Mr. P011drd Stated there was over 600 ft. from 73rd to the Cub store. Mr. Pollard stated traiter storage would be between the buildings so they would be screened entirely from 73rd. Mr. Saba asked about the haurs of delivery. Mr. Pollard stated the delivery hours are 6 a.m. - 5 p.m.; however, there would ae some evening detiveries because the operation would be open 24 hrs. a day. Ms. van Dan asked from what direction would the trucks be entering Cub Foods, and what route would Cu6 Foods recomnend they enter the operation? Mr. Pol]ard introduced Mr. She7ley Johnson from Barton-Aschman, who had done the traffic study for Cub foods. Mr. Johnson stated most of the trucks will probabty come from the sQUth from 694, After the first time deliveries are made, drivers can be instructed on how they should approach the store. From a traffic perspective, the trucks coutd Y PLANNIN6 COMMISSIQN MEETING, SEPTEMBER ]5, ]982 PAGE 3 use either the intersection at b9th & University or the intersection at 13rd & University, Both intersections have sufficient capacity to accommodate the volume of truck traffic generated by the store, so the truckers could use which� ever intersection was easier for them to negotiate, Ms, Gabel asked how close the first entrance was into Cub Foods from 73rd Ave. and was it a two-way entrance? Mr. Pollard stated the distance was approximate7y 22D ft, and it was a two-way entrance. Ms. 5chnabel stated that in their agenda material, some comment was made in the traffic study about possibly changing the road configuration by repositioning the restaurant and perhaps going out behind the restaurant, Mr. Johnson stated that in the"Traffic Impact Analysis" done by Barton-Aschman Association for Cub foods, they did point out that there is a potentiat way to solve a probtem that may arise in the future. The vehicles that enter and exit this site may in the future create enough volume to possibly warrant a traffic signa7 on 73rd. They do not know enough about the numbers and what is going to happen further to the south to say for sure that there may be a need for a s�gnal. So, what they have said is that an option should be kept available to the development and the City that says if a signai shou7d ever have to go in there, it can exist 400 ft. from the 73rd & University signal, However, if the roadway was further detached to the east and brought up on the back side of the property, that would put approximately another 300 ft, of space between signals, which was more desirable from a traffic signai standpoint, What they are saying is that this is a tittle better design if a signal is ever necessary. Mr. NOO1ey stated he would tike to show some slides to more familiarize the Planning Commission and those in the audience with what the Cub Store wou7d look like if they were located in this area. Mr. Hooley stated they are very proud of the cleanliness they maintain in and around the store. Ne stated all the garbage and refuse created in the store goes directly into compactors and containers outside. At1 trucks back up to the dock, and all handling of refuse or product occurs within the store. Maintenance continues 24 hrs. a day, both inside the store and outside the store. fridley1�yTheiretaxhbaseepertyearwwouadcbeaaround $4r500,000for the Mr. Richard Almstead, 7311 Tempo Terrace, asked what the estimated traffic flow would be into the area on a 24-hr. basis, 7 days a week. Mr. Johnson stated on an average day, the development,as they analyzed it, wili generate approximately1S0�000daeh�heysuse�a�d theapeak��o�r�uof the daydto�gn day". A"design day Y day which determine whether or not the roadways are adequate. But, on a design people in l PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 75, 1982 PAGE 4 is that day that wi11 occur approximataly 20-25 days a year, there will be approximately 12,Q00 vehic7es, 6,000 in and 6,000 out. Ne stated they must remember that of these numbers, some of the traffic is a7ready out on the road- ways and is not a77 new traffic. Mr. Almstead asked if Cub Foods had any kind of solution for the homeowners on the north side of 73rd on hwo they can compensate for the increased traffic f1ow, the noise at 2 a.m. 5unday morning or Saturday evening, and the access to Locke Park from 73rd. Mr. Hooley stated he had done some research on the traffic and pedestrian prob7em. He had checked back into the records for Super Ualu for five years, and a pedestrian has never been struck by a semi-trailer. Mr. PoT7ard stated the property is present7y zoned M-2. Cub Foods could come in and build a warehouse for all the Cub Foods t4 handle all of their trucks under the present zoning. Also, other manufaciurers and distributors could come in, acquire the property, and with the raiT spur ihat exits right now to the back side of the property, they could run ten times as many trucks out of there and could hire employees that work around the clock, Ne stated one thing with a Cub store is that all their traffic 1s split up. There are only so many cash registers, so on7y so many people are leaving the store at one time. Mr. Hooley stated they have 11 Cub stores right now, and they have never had a compiaint about either noise or traffic. He stated that in this plan, they have allowad a parking area behind the store for trailer parking so that would not be a probtem. Mr. Allan Quam, 394 - 73rd Ave., stated they felt that in Cub's zeal to expand and increase its fncQme, Cub Foods has demonstrated a total lack of sensitivity and regard for their neighborhood. He stated Cub had obv�ously done splendid market researCh, a traffic study, and untold planning sessions and hours; yet, no one involved in the community had been approached by Cub ta see how the people felt db0ut Cub mOVing into their neighborhood. It cou7d have saved Cub a lot of time and money. He stated the people were at the meeting to demonstrate to Cub F4ods that they do not want Cub on that site; and if Cub persists, the people cen only assume that Cub Foods does not ear�e about the neighborhood. Mr. Quam stated that two City Council members suggested two ways for the neighbor- hood to demonstrate their feelings--a good turnout, and a petition. He stated He�statedthenwould394keatosreaddsomeaofrthetpoints fromCthattletterpetition, �, This is a residential area. A shopping area would be an eyesore to our neighborhood, reenway and not located 2. Existing business is buffered by a g directly on 73rd Ave. 3. We feel this would most certainly lower the value of our property. PLANNING CQMMISSION MEETING, SEP7EMBER 15 1982 PA6E 5 4. 73rd Ave. is a thoroughfare. The traffic 7eve7 has already reached the saturation point. Any increase in traffic wou7d make access to and from the Melody Manor addition very difficult and dangerous. Melody Manor residents have only two intersections through which to enter or exit 73rd Ave.; both of which are currently hazardous at peak hours. (Mr. Quam stated the people on Rice Creek Blvd, seem to be very con- cerned, 6ecause of the problem they have now in getting in and out. He stated that in using the figure of 6,200 cars per day, assuming 8Q% enter the service road 6etween the hours of 8-t0 p.m., that means a car on that road every 70 seconds.) 5. Residences wou7d be subjected to considerable and undasirable debris, noise and disturbances. 6. This property abuts Locke Park and is located near other parks, schoo7s, and churches. Increased traffic in this area gives us great cause for concern regarding the safety of our children in Nralking or riding bikes to or from these locations. Mr. Quam stated they are respectfully requesting that the integrity of this neighborhood be preserved with the deniat of this request for rezoning. MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST, TO RECEZVE THE PSTITION REQUESTING TNE DENIAL OF REZONING REQUEST #ZDA �82-OS BY CUB FOODS. UPDN A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTSNG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTZON CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY, Ms. Schnabel stated this petition would go with the Planning Commission's recommendation and minutes to City Council. Mr. Bill Boatman, 531 Rice Creek Blvd., stated the reason they got a traffic Signdl dt 69th & UnlVersity was because they signed a petition, and the neighbors agreed to pay for it to help protect their chitdren. Now that stop light that WdS paid for by the ne�ghborhood is going to be used by Gub Foods. Mr. frank Waks, 7574 - 4th St. N.E. stated that the people in Melody Manor know toabuckstheetpaffic lhghts;ethey�areego�ng9to�travel,th�oughtMelodyaManortto���9 get to Northtown. Mr. Waks asked if Cub foods had ever considered iooking at the piece of property on the corner of Mississippi St. and University which is owned by the City. Mr. Boardman stated the City has approached Cub Foods about this piece of haspadviseddCubbthatdthissis notdaasuitabbetlocatSoneforaauCubrstoreg b�ard PIANNING CQMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 75 7982 PAGE 6 Mr. Poliard stated the City Staff has shown them all the real estate avai7able in the City of Fridley, to his knowledge. Mr. Hooley stated they have toured all the locations in fridley, and they fe7t that 8.8 acres was not quite adequate for their store. They felt the location on 73rd and University was the most desirabie location. MR. Stan Kowalski, 7450 Tempo Terrace, stated that if Cub foods moves to this location, Schooi Dist. 16 is ]osing a tax shelter. Mr, David Thiele, 7300 Tempo Terrace, stated that the majority of the people present at the meeting shop at Cub Foods. Ne stated they were not against Cub Foods, but are against Cub Foods in this location. Ms, A]ice Rassier, 7540 Tempo Terrace, stated she was concerned about Fridley itseif with the buildings that are sitting empty right now and all the ]ittte restaurants and shopping centers Fridley a7ready has. She was concerned about adding another shopping center, being so close to Northtown, because she thought the neighborhond is looking cr.umby. Ms. Judy Quam, 399 - 73rd Ave., asked what Cub foods wou7d do as far as noise abatement. Mr. Noo7ey stated they would be doing a lot of landscaping. He stated Cub has ll stores. They have residences al7 around those stores; and to his knowledge, they have never had any comptaint about excessive noise or excessive traffic. Mr. Dan Nagen, 7390 Lyric Lane, asked what Cub intended to do with their old stOre. Was it going to turn into another empty building? Mr. Hooley stated they do not have any plans for the old Cub store at this time. He stated that type of StOPe with the vast open area inside and the parking area is not hard to rent. Mr. Nagen stated they are alt concerned about the traffic noise. Mr. Shelley Johnson stated that in talking about the number of vehicles coming into and out of this development, they must remember that not all the vehicles will be on 73rd, not all of the vehicles wi17 be on 73rd east of the frontage road, not all the vehicles are going to be on 73rd west of the frontage road, and not atl the vehicles are going to be on the frontage road south of t�oximately The traffic will be divided. According to what they have estimated, app 28-29% of the traffic departing this site will utilize 73rd to the east of the frontage road, approximately 35% coming from the north on University will utilize 73rd west of the frontage road, and approximately 36-37°! coming from the south on University will probably utilize 69th and use the frontage road qast Columbia Arena. Mr. Bob W�enert, 7311 Lyric Lane, stated he was the one who took the petition to the people who live on Rice Creek Blvd, and informed them of this rezoning request. He stated there is a portion of Rice Creek gQXamately 3,OOOrmorelvehicaescgo�ngthere is only one road in and out. Proposing app in and out of that area is ridiculous. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEP7EMBER 75, ]982 PAGE 7 Ms. Karen Dove, 7305 Jackson St., stated they have a lot of traffic on Jackson 5treet because of Unity Hospital, The quality of tife in their neigfiborfiood is such that people do a lot of wa]king and bike riding, especially in tfie earip evening, Early evening is also the time when peop7e do a lot of grocery shopping, and they are concerned about someone getting hit by this increased traffic. This kind of development is not the kind of thing they want to encourage. Mr, Ron Mattson, 7324 Symphony St., stated that if the rezoning request is denied, someone could come in and build a large distribution center on this site. Did Cub foods intend to 6uild a large distribution center on this site? Mr. Nooley stated they could do that, but that was not their intention. Ms. Elizabeth Youngmark, 730 Talmadge Way, stated she was in favor of the new Cub foods store. She stated Cub foods was expanding io benefit the people and to make it easier for them to shop. Ms. Schnabel stated it seemed to be the concensus of the people present that they do like Gub Foods and shop there. They would like to encourage Cub to remain in Fridley, but they do not want the store in this location. Mr, Chartes Smith, 7301 Jackson St., asked if the City knew what the volume of traffic was in terms of semi-trailers at the Target Warehouse per day and how that would compare to the Cub foods operation. He stated that would be interesting to think about in terms of traffic and employees. He stated he thought this proposed Cub foods development was a real �hange-about from the type of thing the Planning Commission and City had in mind when they zoned that area south of 73rd to M-2. The Carter-Oay and Target Warehouse operations are probably more in 7ine with what the City was thinking about. The question was asked from the audience that if this rezoning request was denied, would Cub Foods move out of Fridley? Mr. Ho01ey stdted that if this rezoning request is denied by both the Planning COt?�t1155i0n dnd City Council, they have two alternative sites that are not in the City of fridley. M0270N BY MS. GABELi SBCONDED BY MR. KONDRZCK� TO CLCl5E THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZOA N82-OS BY CUB FOODS. UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYEr CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL FECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CL05ED AT 9:Z3 P•m• the entrances t0 p�r. Kondrick stated that a lot more traffic will be 9fl�ng by ark across the Locke Park, so the traffic volume wds of concern to him. Ne also thought there was going to be moCe traffic on 64th because of the new co�nunity p StY'eet. He did not think the traffic signal at 69th would be able to handle that rks and recreation point of view, he was not in favor of this development in traffic plus the additional traffic generated by the Cub Foods development. rom a pa this location. PLANNING COMMISSIDN MEETING, SEPTEMBER 15, 1982 PAGE $ Ms. Gabel stated that the traffic study showed that at peak hours, the traffic conditions are at "0° condition now, and she did not find that acceptabie. If the conditions are at "D" now, the levet will increase with the development. She stated that in addition to the "D" traffic conditions, she also saw this as a spot rezOning whiCh she has always been opposed to in the City. She stated the City hds a Comprehensive Plan, and she did not believe this development fit into that plan at all. In the Comprehensive P1an, the City has a commitment to the Center City area and they need to see that developed. By a7lowing this develop- ment, they would be jeopardizing their Center City project, and she did not think it was in the Gity's 6est interest to do that. Mr. Saba stated he agreed with Ms. Gabe]. He was also concerned about the traffic. He stated he thought Cub Foods was a great operation, and he would like to see them tocate somewhere in Fridley, but this particular location was just not suitabie in terms of the residential area. Ms. van Dan stated she was speaking as a representative of the Numan Resources Commission. She had grave concerns, because she did not feel t0is development was in the best interest of the residents. She did feel it was important they have high tax return industries in the community, but she also felt they should consider the wishes of the neighborhood. She had great concerns about the traffic paitern, and she was coneerned about how this development would affect the utili- zation of the new community park and the bike trail. Mr. Oquist stated he was concerned about strip or spot zoning and the traffic. He was not sure the traffic study took into consideration the traffic that will be generated by the new cor�nunity park. He stated that is going to increase the traffic flow at 69th and 73rd and will create a real problem. Mr. Soardman stated there are some concerns from Staff's Roint of view. This is and has always been zoned industrial. They are concerned about creating 73rd as a major focal point compared to University and Mississippi. University and Mississippi has had substantial city financial commitment. The NRA is involved in trying to develop the Center City as a commercial retail focal point for the City. Staff feels there could be some potential problems by shifting that focal point to 73rd. Ms. Schnabel stated she would concur with that. It bothered her that they would be taking the focus of the business community from a commitment that was already made to Mississippi and University and shifting it north to 73rd and University. She would be afraid of the long range affecis on the Center City aeea which the City has made a commitment to. MOTION BY MR. OQUIST�.3ECDNDED HY MR. KONDRZCK, TQ RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL ➢ENZAL OF REZONING REQUESTr ZDA #82-05� BY CUS FOODSTRACTEBONREGI5TERED LAND Y ZNI1iI5TRIAL AREAS) 20 C-2S iGE1VERAL 5HOPPING AREAS), SURVEY ND. 78� TD ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTIDN OF A ZVEW RfiTAIL SHOPPING RREA� THE SAME BEING 450 - 73RD AVENUE N.E.� BASED ON THE RfiASONS DISCUSSED ABOVE. PLANNING COMMISSION MEE7ING, SEPTEMBER 15, 1982 PAGE 9 UPON A VDZCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTIQN � CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to the City Council on October 25. She thanked everyone in the audience for coming to the meeting. Chairwoman Schnabel declared a ten-minute recess at 9:27 p.m, 2. PUBI.IC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, 5P #82_-D9, b,� �b�T 5��6€��. �er`�ection �65�:'f�'I; ,3'-b; to a11"ow an over�ea� roof on a woo�frame, approximately 30' 6y 50' on the east end of an existing building, for a display area for fresh produce, located on Lot 1, 81ock 1, East Ranch Estates, the same being 7620 University Avenue N.E. MOTSON BY MR, SABA� SECONDED BY MS, GABEL� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #82-09 BY ROBERT SCHROER. UPON A VOSCE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLSC HEARZNG OPEN AT 9:39 P.M, Mr. Boardman sCated right now this is classified as a tent area, and Mr. Schroer did qet a temporary special use permit for the outside tent for the produce. This was done by the City Council on September 73 to allow Mr. Schroer to go ahead with his produce sale. In the process, Mr. Schroer is submitting an appli- cation for a permanent location for the special use of an outside display area. Mr. Boardman stated a letter was sent to Mr. Schroer on July 14, 1982, identify- ing items that are in non-compliance with City Code. These issues are ones of concern for the special use permit. Mr. Schroer stated the use of this display area would be strictly seasonal-- May 1- Oct. 1. One of the reasons for doing this is because people like the outdoor market, and he may even open it up to some farmers. MOTSON BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #82-09 BY ROBERT SCkROER, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARSNG CLOSED AT ZD:DO P,M. Mr. Oquist stated he did not see anything wrong with this request. Mr. Boardman stated there are a lot of traffic problems and confusion in that area, and they are trying to eliminate that confusion and have a more orderly flow of traffic in that area, There are some things in the property itself that can be done to assist with those traffic problems. Ms. Schnabel suggested that Mr. 5chroer and Mr. Boardman sit down and work out these problems. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 15, 1982 PAGE 10 MOTION BY MR. XONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TD.RECO.MMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PEKMIT REQUEST, SP #82-09, SY ROBERT SCHROER: PER SECTION 205.ZOI, 3� O, TO ALLOW AN QVERHEAD ROOF ON A WOOD FRAME, APPROXIMATELY 30' BY�50' ON THE EAST END OF AN EXSSTSNG BUILDING FOR A DISPLAY AREA FOR FRESN PRODUCE, LOCATED�ON LOT 2� BLOCX 1� EAST RANCH ESTATES� THE 5AME BEING 7620 UNIVERSITY RVENUE N.E. UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CKAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECI,ARED THE MOTION CARRZED UNRNIMOU5LY. 3, LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. #82-Ob, BY THE KUNZ OIL COMPANY: Split off Parce 8 ying souC er y of a-11ne paral5�e�with and distant 197.0 feet north of, as measured at a right angle to, the South line of said Lot 18), from Parcel A, both in Lot 18, Auditor's Subdivision No. 77, the same being 7355 and 7365 East River Road. Mr. Boardman stated the proposal is to split off Parcel B from Parcel A. One of the stipulations would be a park fee. A park fee is required as part of a lot split. The park fee would be $635.40. Staff would also recommend two other stipulations: (1) a 45 ft. easement off East River Road for road right-of-way on Parcel A and B to allow for future expansion of East River Road; and (2) a 10 ft. drainage easement on the north side of Parcel A. Mr. John Crouch stated he was representing Kunz Oi1 Company, He stated it seemed to him that it should be the County that insists upon the easement and noi the City. The County has the power of eminent domain, and the County has the obligation under the law to pay for private property when they take it. He stated their request to divide this parcel of land, 1,86 acres, clearly undeveloped, clearly not producing the real estate tax revenue it can for the school district, the city, and the county, was a very simple request. He frankly thought the City had no right or power to take 45 ft. of this property at this time, but that w�s for the City's legal staff to advise them. He knew that under the statutes and the case law, the City could take the park dedication fee and the utility easement around the perimeter of the property, and he would not object to those stipulations. But, in talking about the 45 ft., let the County condemn it and then the County can pay for that land. He thought to take 45 ft, of this property was unlawful, and he would not agree with that stipulation. MOTSON BY MR, OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RE'COMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF LOT SPLST REQUEST� L.S. #82-06�. BY THE KUNZ OIL COMPANY, TO SPLIT OFF PARCEL B (LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 197.0 PEET NORTH OF, AS MEASURED RT A RIGHT ANGLE TO� THE SOUTH LZNE OF 5AID LOT S8)� FROM PARCEL A, BOTH TN LOT 1B� AUDITOR�S SUBDIVISION NO. 77� THE SAME BEING 7355 AND 7365 EA5T RIVER XOAD� WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION5: I. THERE BE A PARK DEDICATZON FEE OF 5635.40 � 2. A ZD FT.�DRAINAGE EASEMENT BE RETAINED ON THE NORTH SSDF. OF PARCEL A UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE� CHAiRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTSON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 15, 19$2 PAGE 11 4. RECEIVE AUGUST 12, 1982 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITV MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY M5. GAEEL, TO RECEIVE THE AUGUST 12, 1952, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES. UPON A�VOSCE VOTE� ALL VOTTNG AYE, CHAZRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOSION CRRRIED UNANSMDUSLY, . 5. RECEIVE AUGUS7 27 1982, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AU7NORITY SPEC. MTG; MINUTES: MOTIDN BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN, TO RECEIVE THE AUGUST 27, 1982, 5PECIAL HOUSSNG & REDEVEIAPMENT AUTHORSTY MINIITES. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. � 6. RECEIUE AUGUST 24, 1982, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES; MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TD RECEIVE SHE AUGUST 24, I982, APPEALS COMMTSSION MINUTES. UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MS. VAN DAN� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICX, TO RECEIVE A MEMO DATED AUGUST�3I� Z982, FRQM JOXN FLORA TO GUS DOTY RE'GARDING THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY GUS DQTY. � UPON A VOICB VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT; MOTION HY MR. SABA� SECONDED HY MS, GABEL� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE��ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLRRED THE 5EPTEMBER I5, I982� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:12 P.M, Respectfully submitted, �� Ly Sa a Recording Secretary �����' �2�'� ���'~� ��2��� ��c�r�� �e��. �S' i� �' v �� s� �/{ i iI. � ,A/ I,� �, , - �.. � ��� ��, -► ♦ i � � / r ` - / / c��'�� � �, / r • / / / , // � �� ���3l9P� �/�77/�l e� S . 0�1�.�.�`-7"'�� . ��� . , ������ � ,� �za� � �� C��� �� _� ► 0 �� o / d�.a.c.ri °�3a� �� ��� i i.�'UjL�LI JOS G;`_M;u=2 �,�10 �- �-- . 73� d �i� � ' °"�-„ , �-�1-?�� �_�'1,� �"` ,3�� ���' / �e�'D %3�0 �� Z� �3vb �� r � � V ' -v � � o��_ T�_N't f_'� `1�E�{...AG� 39`9 ?�:3� ��� 7s�a ��7� 7� �.i n �8� �"13 �D ,C�.,�, � .�.,�� C��-,�t� C'x. �� �. �3/� s%��'��%� ��J� ���� 5l5 � Gu�.e.e �.r-, �,,.� . si �. , e� � � - � G� ru:_r� . G I /1 ' �, � . C �Y�i� : %dj�a�0�n.a-�- . � � ���� �„� .;,i �� � 1, � ., ,, . / , / . , � i � . , ���'r /�� I � � �� ; , .. , , �, , , - io: ;� %s� ���. � 6Z/�' �Gf�rac.�jj'- �is� � cu.r� ��,� � � 1� , �� - � k Lr �, / i << '� f/ ll .� �i r/ ... _.. �� �l � � � � iU % �'� r� %=r�-�. ,%�'!� �yr � c �.�- ����, ����. , � ,< « %�� C� � �3�0 (11��. �s��- 7-.�.�� ` 737g �Y�/rf� �� ( D C.�yVI+{... C.-4Ne. /V 9„� � � 2 �l �syNP��„� �v r� 7 � a Y��'�.�-r� .���t.6- ��� � ��.�,� °�°,� ��� 737� �. �. � � �al ���.�� � 3 �� �:��� ��� �v��, ��- Q� ��-a-�' ���y� �� �� �� �,;�.� t�'.►�'� , 1 �� � � ; . '�. � . � . , 1� � � ,. / � 1� � ./ � � � , � , . .' ��..'. �,o�- .���- '� ��, �i , , r`, A ��� ��, /� ,. , ,L I� � ?-�r � � � �� - � ���.�..6�'-� �- � � a �� ��� ��3 �� ,�"�� y��-u. 7 3 �/ �-�-�� �c��-�-e-e— �.��� �a�� y�s� 7 `� 4 Fs ��aS 't� �a+� ��� ���� I � ��� '�, 3 3 i -�.- "R' �- 733 / ��• i s� 7 0��,,,w � `y/, £ _ bb �1 � �,Z�o ✓L c� � SL �'< G, ��.��;�.�'/�d �, �6/a o ��.��d,�v� � -��- .� �f-32$ � �`�' ��� 1��� / 6'�.-� ,�,�, ��5 �.� nl.�� .SG}�. ��� �������� ��� 7�6 �����"� � n �i 73,�7 �.� . � �3 y�' C�x-� 733u �iy�� ��' .. 7�3a ��� �.�. �. 3 �,���� � ��� � ��� �f �3 � /�� �C3� �� ��09 �� ��. ��. , `�33� p�� �-�� . � � , . , � \�� • +a � _� �, .. � i- �� � � /, / , � ��� � r I � , � . ��..��1�.:.� �/v i � � �pQ !�/iELS"En/ 1 ��.,� Ka �.S�Q�,� ����.'t'e"`�— � �j,��� ��clC � � �. � C .� �% � , 73 3 d 7"�, ��, 7 3 �� ���i'l,(�-n��.� ��� 'Z � a o �',� � %3 q9 7� �� 73a � '�c � �l �� 3. �1.�'w . CL �Pd6 '�'�3 b �,O.ucCRto �,c,2Uf �4�1 � C.�,e�i /�1/Z� o ��id %ilm�z�,�o /��— �3d'm ?l'�° %3 vac,��i �d /�/� �� ¢ 1 � �,,, c �uhr 7�59 �° �� 7s� �'�Yu.vo`� 7� ���� �� �`��,.� C��, 4� .�-�1.�� ��� rrr���� �� , ,�.� 1� �a(wtc�c� (,' 5R� ��c�. �v� 1=� � -e 1Io�� I�a��l S�reei" I�,�l � � I S�� -�� ,4-�,��N� �oTV � �. tir� ��� ��� �� �� ►� - - - ����u _ �• � � ,.< ,, , ,f �• 1� ^ 1 (' 1 1�� t;ts 0 �3 � n �,�.�� �c� �� s6o��,C� �,�...� h��- � 1!!f._� II, ' l,l �J��i �� �� + , �, � ������� G�� ���' �� . C%� %� '�� ��� ,g�.y ,s, i r�z � ����� _,� � �� �� -�-Q � ���� ���-- . o��.�����.e� . r.u��� � t,�.� ,2 / ' ,/� , r / ,, ,r . /� �� ,/ f � 1 ,�r Jfi • •�n.:L..r . /I�.�.., _ � �--- ���, �.�J�.. 75 vS'-L�Sa� S %�-� Jr��"� _ / � � d�, ,� � e�. s�`�i � T.,� s� ���/ �. ��s �U� ��� ��'o � ,�- � /6/�°d rK�l� T sro��o�L��v 9��0 �.� �., �,.�:.� .�.�u.re.�, , w,�.. /v/D /L%f.r � � j a �� � � 7f�� � t/� / q 7�'=��-'�� .�o �-�- /`77 C��'//tics� C'r-- :5�"/"lc.,- ��� a������� �� �. i�,8�3 S�-. G-:r�c �. Y2.a, � 7�I'dS"�'��f�Jio�r�n%�//� ���/e� /03a 93�G�•Q N-w. Cvo�v /�i-a/�ds ��33 5��,�� �� ���� L�k�s �v 37.�����G/��, ,�_ �-� � �L4ls� ��lb �w� (���,�.�� 6,sy n� duP�r <a,rr�,o.� r�i�-� sr� �ra ��6 ��"�.._ �,�P _ ,,//�'��o. s��7 �� ���/�1�1 �� . /6� � � - z z.� �s� ,� .�ea.�.,�-� �Y1�.,, oC�s ���� ��.�..��. ��,�.�.�� ��.� � �,�-� � �� �(i� 11 Po ; �����.� � � P� ������� -��t )��.�.- �'���i a � �, � ca �c%t�cn�e� %3�1f pCYr,� p��Ln. Nf �, o� �[ay., 534,�L 735d �t�,"�o ��t.� �/l.�.c�Qcti/ /�1 �'' S543L << << � �, ,, �. � , �37/ �3 �i � � � �i�� 7�/� ��� '�.r� � ?3ra �1ij.� -b✓f�!�� 7 � 5 v % �.��� �f z5 1�e.������2�(,c� .�5 �.�2 ,��s �'3� .5s y,� � s s�32, 5-��3z S� � 3� �..<<,/ �,�-� �� �--v/ �� � �.� z- �i� � ��-� �'s �-i:� �- 7 �� � G* ��� � � � w S�� � 5��3 Z �1 � So 7�k�e zen�Ac� �5��<l3`�— ��/�% C'�o�UcParv C u�c�.�� ���3 Z 7� 9� �.�-_�r� ���� s'-�`�`-3 2 ���/ ;�c� �/�� ��.�'��_ ���/ ��G��� � ��� �..' ���/ a��� y��_ �-��.3 �._ ��z�o ,�ELd b�Y,�? �, � S�!-3 z- -j/�o �� - �� .��� �; y� z, ''iS il ��ca C"�.� � 1•;d . S�i3 t-. � 3 � ( �.�.., c�. � 5 K 3 �,�,y.�:.�, � S�`13 �-- �3 �� � �l � Ss�f3z %3�8� � � _,� �1.�', S`� � -r�� �35�8' � ���C� -� � 7 �'��G� s.�� �/�' a ���� s��,h���, s���� � ���X>-�� � � � G�1. ,����y� �� � � � � '� �. � � ��, � QN.,� �/.� �-r' ,(� , � ,�i ���'r. � � , �� . '- : � , �, � %� . � �� : � �. :+ • . . . 73�� � r�t�� i� 2�cf � r 73�o C� �-�- y — 7�20 �ev,ce�� C�,�e IJ � 2 ���-����-�� �r2 ��io �.-�� �°� � � � �� i y � ���, /'J� , ��ao �1.�, 73a i '�� �_„� �� . 4 ( O '[ 3 � L `7 �,s� S�„ '�1 �� �3�� �� �� ��- ,��a o �� %� d� 4 '13�ko C�,� � c�.,-e� 7330 �`�=�-� �t� �1��//1�''�� ` ° _ , � ��� � �� 73 6a �`�9 P 7y�� 7�Z' �'� 76lS '7� /S 7�ad �60� �✓.��'��` ��.. �, . � -y�.� .1�� ,�-� � �� � � � `��� �� °�J �: r L' . ��-�� �_ ��� ' p:5 �r��!� �n- 72 � � �� . �.� ���. � / l�— �-f, �� � � � CITY OF FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 24, 1982 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ga6e1 catied t6e August 24, 7982, Appeals Comnission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. �ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia Gabel, Jean Gerou, Jim Plemel � MEMBERS ABSENT: Alex Barna, Leslie Coleman OTHERS PRESENT: Darrell Clark, City of Fridley Chris Zelevarov, 160 Mississippi Place, Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace Mary Ellen Luchow, 161 - 64� Way N.E. Walter Luchow, 161 - 64� Way N.E. Ne1s Johnson, 6456 Riverview Terrace KatBy hbrbrid, 6461 Riverview Terrace Richard Morbrid, 6461 Riverview Terrace David Kramber 2013 - 29th Avenue N.W., New Brighton Gail Estling, 6440 Riverview Terrace John Estling, 6440 Riverview Terrace Betty Ann Mech, 1315 - 66th Avenue N.E. Gus Doty, 6379 University Avenue N.E. A. Oscar Carlson & Keith Boulais, 655 Fairview Avenue, St. Paul Jerry Paschke, 7280 University Avenue N.E. APPROYAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 20, 1982: Chairperson Ga6e1 had some additions and corrections to the minutes on page 5, and tfiat the reasons for the motion on agenda item no. 2 should be included: That the majority of homes in the immediate area are built on larger lots; that the house to the East has an attached deck that is built very close to the lot line; the plan does not provide for a garage and there is concern about parking a�d sto- rage in a home without a 6asement; the house plan is �ot compatible with other homes in tfie area and there was neighborhood o6jection to the plan. Ms. Gabel also noted tfiat it was explained to the neighbors, after that motion, that even if the property is not built on now there is no guarantee for the future; that cities all over are changing their codes to meet the new needs of our economy and smaller lots will smaller structures are becoming a viable means of providing house. She also stated that on page 7, the motion for approval for agenda item no. 3 did not state all the reasons for such approval: The plan for the house is designed to fit well on the lot; the plan is compatible with other homes in �he neighborhood; the petitioner is willing to tie a specific house plan to the variance and the neighbors a pprove . MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, to approve the minutes of July 20, 9�82, Appeals Co�mnission, as written and corrected. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON fABEI DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLV. Apveals Cormn{ss{on Meeting - August 24, 1982 Paae 2 1. e MOTION by Mrs. YOICE VOTE, ALL AT 7:40 P.M. VAR s [e�evarov PURSUANT ss�ss 205 OF THE FRIDLEY FROM [_1 T-kTV��tl�TE4Ti�E12�CE N.E. ace N. . ri ey. N 32) 6erou, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to open the pubtic hearing. UPON A YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON 6ABEL DECALRED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Chairperson Gabe1 read the Administrative Staff Report: 1�1]MII�IIS'iRATIVE S'PAPF RF.FO�tT 6471 Rivervier Tecrace p.E. • ��: • ���• �� ti�• s� • �� � �• ; i> * Section 205.073, �12, requires a minimaa lot area of 15,000 equare feet plus 1,000 equare feet per dwellirg unit wer 4 in nunber. Publfc purpose served by this requirement is to avoid the condition of overc�owding of a residential neighborYwoa and to allow sufficient area for off-street parking and avoiding an excess bucden on the existing water and sewer servioes. Sectia� 205.073, 4A, r�uires a minimim fcont yard setback of 35 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide desired front yard sp3ce to be used for green areas on access and to add to the attcactability of a miltiple zone. Section 205.073, 4B, #3, requires a minim� side yard of 35 feet where a side yard abuts the street side of a corner lot. Public purpose served by this cequiranent is to maintain adequate side yard setbacks anc3 aest2�etic open areas around rtultiple dwellings. Section 205.073, 4C, requires a rear yard depth of not less than 25 percent of the lot depth, with not less than 25 feet permitted ot moie than 40 feet required. Public purpose served by this r�uirenent is to mai,ptain adeqnate open space around miltiple dwellings foc aesthetic and fite fighting. Section 205.073, 4B, #1, reqnires a side yard of not less than 15 feet. Public purpose served bY this requirement ie to provide for adequate open areas {green divider areas) around multiple dwellingsj to roaintain clear access for fire fighting; and to ceduce conflagration of fire. Appeals Commission Meeting - Auaust 24 1982 Page 3 F7���: r�� i;j;,.o:r�3! •Additional units necessacy to make this a feasible project. Land patterne ace the result of road and other residential development. In ac3dition, power line to the so�th foroes building to be Bhifted to the fr�t of the lot.' C. �DP4INIS'PRATIVE SII�E'F REVIiW: Staff has met With the petitioner several times. The hearing notice was �urposely saorded to give the Board the option of aaving the building up to 5 feet in either the north-sootl� or east-west directions. We recommend that the Boa rd consider appraving the requested variance so that if built, the building be located as far north (25 feet fran the north line) and as fac vest (30 feet fran ptoperty line) as possible. This gives the maximum open space between the structure and the hane to the eouth and-between the structure and the existing storm sewer alag the east line. If the variances are apprwed, the petitionec has agreed to grant an easement for the existing storm sewer and he will attach a driveway easement to the existing four-plex he presently ame adjacent to and east of this site for access to this proposed 4�lez. Also, the praQerty is properly zoned and there are existing 4-plexes to the north and east of this property. The lots to the west anci south are existing single faunily dwellings. * Petitioner has reduoed his request to 4 unite. Mr. 2elevarov was present as was his 6uitder and draftsman. Ne stated that his plans are to 6uild 4 townfiouses which would look like houses instead of apartments. The Comnission reviewed an aerial pfiotograph and the plans. Ms. Gabe1 asked about the driveway and parking. Mr. Zelevarov said the driveway will be joined with his other 4-plex and there will 6e parking underneath the building in the double garages. He said each unit will have a double garage. Ms. Gabel asked about the building ratio to land and Mr. Clark said it met the requirements. Ms. Gable asked about square footage per unit and what size is the other building. He stated the units would be 900 square feet and the other building was 40 by 40 feet, but he wasn't sure. He stated they woutd 6e 2-6edroom units, three levels, finished basement Ms. Gabel asked Mr. Zelevarov if he invest•igated other possibilities for that lot. He said thet he could 6uild 6 units but they will be too small and it would not look good; that 4 units wauld look nice with parking off tfie street. Ms. Gabel asked if had garages at his other building and he does not but he said he would be changing the parking when tfie new units are built. Ms. Gabel asked if he is willing to move these units as far north and west as possi6le and Mr. Zetevarov said yes. Mr. Plemel asked if changi�g these units from 6 to 4 rrould remove any of these variances and Mr. Clark said there would still 6e 5 variances. Ms. Gabel asked what happened that the lot is such a weird configuration and Mr. Clark stated that originally the street was going run to the east and then it was moved. Ms. �yabei asked when Mr. 2elevarnv wanted to start building and he said as soon as possible, this week or next, he would 7ike them finished 6efore it starts snowing Mr. Luchow, 161-64� Nay N.E., questioned the variance of putting 4 units on that 1ot, felt the tot is too small, that he Ras more square footage for his house (he said he realized that flis house was built years ago when they had larger lots) and felt this is quite a variance. �peals Comoission Meetiny - August 24, 1982 Paae 4 Nr. Johnson, 6456 Riverview Terrace, agreed wit6 Mr. Luchow, and stated that they all recognize Nr. Zelevarov's right to build a multiple dwelling on that lot but noted that tfie other 4-unit building across the street were built within code guide- lines and positioned to fit the lots. His ot6er concern was the high density of cars parked in the street around that intersection; he felt this was a very high traffic area and that emergency vehicles �rould have a hard time getting through and that also tfie population density vss Rigfi in that area 6ecause of the multiple buildings. He also stated Be was concerned a6out the property value of single-family homes. Ms.=Sue Koprowski, 6472 Riverview Terraca felt the area was already too crowded, that the lot was much too small for those units and that cars have difficulty now parking and getting stuck in the wintertime and generally felt it was all ready a mess. Mr. Mor6rid, 6461 Riverview Terrace, agreed with everyone and wanted to know if there vrould 6e a privacy fence put up which would separate his house (he lives on the south side). Ms. 6abe1 said that could be somethi�g that could be stipulated. Mr. Clark said the code requires a privacy fence. Mr. Morbrid wanted to know if the lot had been surveyed and Mr. Clark said it had been done. Mr. Luchow asked if there would be a problem wit6 drainage and Mr. Clark said a storm sewer would run between the two 6uildings and there are two manholes in the nort6west corner of the lot and this could 6e utilized as a catch 6asin. Mr. Johnson felt that that double garages would not help with the existing parking problem. Mr. Fragale, 6480 Riverview Terrace, said the proposed parking more than meets the cade. Russ Soderstrom , 6438 Riverview Terrace, could not say too much about the parking problems because he does not live directly �n that street but he thinks the proposed building wi11 be attractive and enhance the neigh6orhood and that part of the tity. Mr. Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, thought the size of the lot was better suited for a duplex or tri-plex and didn't think the code intended a 4-plex for the 1ot. Mr. Fragale stated he lived across the street from the proposed building and there are 4-plexes all along Mississippi Place and the parking for this proposed buitding wi11 be under the building, tfiat this building will be the best looking 4-plex in the area, there is more than adequate space for parking and felt it would enha�ce the area. Ms. Gabet asked if there is anything else that could be done with this 1ot as it was a lot of variances and a lot of building for the lot. Mr. Zelevarov stated he could put 11 units up on 6oth lots. MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to close the public hearing. UPON A YOICE VOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:15 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, to table this matter until the petitioner contacts the city with different ideas or plans for this lot. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. (Mr. Plemel felt there were a lot of pros and cons but that they were pushing too hard on tfiis 1ot and would be against it because it required 5 variances in order to do something; Ms. Ga6e7 felt there was too much buildirtg for the lot and this also asked for too many variances). ApDeals Comoission heeting - August 24, 1982 Paae 5 a 2. TABLED: YARIANCE REQUEST PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY 5 FEET Of THE WEST HALF OF 'RiE TY AVENUE N.E. FRI�LEY, (Request by Gus Doty 6319 Univers .E. and Gary We ner 6 21 Sunrise Drive ��.E.) ON MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded 6y Mr. Plemel, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE YOTE, A!L YOTING AYE, CHA:RPERSON GABEL DECtARED 7HE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:25 P.M. Chairperson Gabe1 read the Administrative 5taff Report: ADMII�7ISPRATNE STAFF RF.POdtT 6299 �ive[Bity Avenue N.E. ]1. H�LIC PQRIi�SE &�V� BY R�QIR@ffXp= Section 205.103, 4A, �2, requires a minimum front yard setback of 80 feet foc pecmitted buildings ard uses. Public purpose seroed by this requireroent is to provide for adequate parking and open landscaped areas as vell as to avoid congestion and to prwide adequate site clearanaes in canmercial areas. Section 205.103, 4B, requires a minimun side yatd setback of 15 feet for the main building, Public purpose secyed by this requirenent is to provide foc adequate open areas (green divider areas) around commercial structures, maintain clear acoess for fire fightirg and to reduce wnflagration of fire. Section 205.104, 1P, /2, requires that the parking aisle be a minimum af 25 feet� unless othenaise approved b� the Zoning Ac3ni.nistrator. Public purpose served by this requirenent is to provide adequate area for vehicular movenent into and out of a parking area. Sectian 205.104, 1D, requires that parking stalls be not less than 200 eqnare feet in acea, With a minimam width of 10 feet, in addition to whatever area is required for satisfactory movement into and ont of such stall. � Public purpose served by this requirenent is to provide adequate area for vehicle Farking. . Y� 3� : 'r�.'1�' 'The existing Code requirements on setbacks piace unreasonable restrictions on this land. 7b meet the C-2S requirements Would make this property unbuildable.• AoPeals tomnission Meeting - August 24, 1982 Paqe 6 C. aaMIIiISIItATIVE b'1�FF REVIHi: �is �rcel is located on the southeast corner of 63rd Avenue and the Dniversity Avenue service drive and is lxated within the B.R.A. Center City Ptoject. 11 samewhat similar proposal was made in September, 1978 and variances rere apprwed by the City Council in Novenber, 1978. Since that time a lot has happened vith regards to planning and developnent rithin the C�nter City Project. �e setback varianoes approved in 1978 were reduction of the setback frao 63rd Avenue fran 80 feet to 35 feet and side yard setback (south) ceduction fran 15 feet to 5 feet. The proposal fran Mlc. Doty to date is a two story with basement which appears to be possible future rental space which would increase the cequired parking wer the amount available on the eite. Mr, Doty has also proposed to place the stair towers on the outside of the structure which would necessitate an additional variance for the setback off fran Universitv Avenue. 'fierefore, the staff recrnmiends that the Board deny the proposal as su6mitted. Mr. Doty presented different plans to the Commission and stated that he has it down to 2 variances; he went,back to the 10 feet and 30 feet that had been granted in 1978. He stated Staff informed him that he needed 35 parking sta11 and he has 28. He also stated that he is working out an agreement with Mr. Herrick (who owns property next door) regarding the entrance and parking and that this would meet all the requirements and provide additional green area. He also stated that he wanted a basement in this building but Staff felt that represented potential future rental area anJ more people. Ms. Gabe1 asked about square footage and he stated it was 9600 square feet total. Mr. Clark asked if he was going to build 2 full stories above grade. Mr. Doty said yes; there would be a walk-in on the first level. Ms. 6abe1 asked a6out tenants so far and Mr. Doty said that he has an insurance agency, a loan company and himself. Mr. Doty said he has had several discussions with Staff regarding the entrance and explained his plans for the entrance. Ms. Gabel stated that the agreement with Mr. Herrick would have to be in writing. Mr. Doty said that drainage is a factor with these changed plans; that Staff wants it to drain towards 63rd. Mr. Plemel stated that Dave Harris called him with concerns about parking in the front and Mr. Doty said he was aware that Dave wants all green in the front. Ms. Gabel asked when he wanted to start and Mr. Doty said he wanted to have it do�e by the first of the year. Mr. Plemel asked about water retention on the roof of the building; Mr. Doty said there are insurance problems with that and they are not planning for retention on tfie roof and the drainage will properly be towards 63rd. Mr. Clark stated that a stipulation would have to be included regarding putting in a sidewalk as part of tfie building. Mr. Doty had no obj�ction to that. Mr. Clark said there would also have to be an easement an the corner given to the City for a larger radius at the curb and Mr. Doty had no objection to that. There was no one else present for this agenda item. �peals Coranission Meetin9 - Auaust 24 1982 Paae 7 MOTIDN by Mrs. 6erou, seconded 6y Mr. P1eme1, to close the public hearing. UPDN A VOICE VOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARIN6 CLOSED AT 8:50 P.M. Ms. 6abe1 questioned that the public hearing notice stated the sideyard setback on the corner from 80 feet to 35 feet and Mr. Clark said he did not think they could approve tt for less than 35 feet but they dould recomnend to the Council ta issue a new notice for the 30 feet. Mr. Doty stated he had no problem with 3S or 35 feet or Yhe 5 and 10 feet. �r. Plemel felt the petitioner is really trying to do some- thing with this lot, as it is un6uildable with the way the code sits, and this is certainly a reasonable alternative and a nice building and would agree with the 2 variances. Mrs. Gerou concurred with Mr. Plemel. Ms. Gabel felt this was certainly reasonable since they started with 5 variances and went down to two; she felt the hardship is definitely there. MOTION by Mr.Plemel, seconded by Mrs. 6er�u, t�at the Appeals Commission recommend to the City Council, through the Planning Commission, approval of the request to reduce the sideyard setback on a corner lat from the required 80 feet to 35 feet, and to reduce the side yard set6ack on the south side of the building from 15 feet to 10 feet, to allow the co�struction of a commercial office building on the North 100 feet of the South 259 feet of the North 1507.5 feet of the West Half of the West Half of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 74, T-30, R-24; being a part of Lc�ts 2 and 3 of Auditor's Subdivision No. 59, the same being 6299 Universtty Ivenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432, with the stiputation that a sidewalk be �ut in as part of the building; that a street easement be granted to the City on 1.he corner of the lot; and that the parking agreement with the owner to the south be put in writing. UPON A YOICE YOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE h]OTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, that the Appeals Commission recommend to the City Councit, to re-n�6lish the notice in this matter to reduce the sideyard setback on a corner 1ot fAdl9Rfi€ required 80 feet to 30 feet, that the Commission is in concurrence with that and recomnends approval of that variance. UPON A VOICE VOTE. ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded 6y Mr. Plemei, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE. ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:OD P.M. Chairperson Gabel read the 5taff Report: ti i+aM.n�s-�ve srneF xee�a n�-5s s� s��t a.�. 7760 Elm Street N.E. •�: • �r�• �, - ya• �� • �� � r s �. Section 205.134, 4C, requires a rear yard depth of not less thnn 25 feet. Appeals Comnission Meeting - Auyust 24, 1982 Paae 8 Public p�rpose ae space areas around fighting purposes. . � �� •.•.�:i�• rved by thie requireinent is to pcwide adequate open industrial structnres for aeSthetic and fire 'euildings are already oonnected rith roof and walls.• G. 11DMIt1IS1RATiVE SD1PF R6VISt: T760 Elm Street is presently 7.5 feet fcc�m the rear lot line (Council apprwal Dec�er 15, 1975) and 7753 Heech Street is 8 feet from the rear lot line (Council approval November 12, 1973?. 7760 Elm Street also has a variance for a zero side yard ard 7753 Beech has variances on lot coverage, parking stall size and parking setback fcom the building. These ts+o buildings were joined together after both buildings were canbined undec one ownership. Now it is the petitioners request to r�split the ownerships at the *west (survey is wrong but is being corrected) line of the vacated aliey. To accamplish this, he has requested this rear yard variance and a lot split. The lot split has De�� reconme�dcd fot approval by the Planning Camnission. �e City staff l�as no abjection to the total package provided ii ie stipulated that= (1) All existing openings in the common Wall are closed off with 12 inch wncrete block= (2) No expansion of either building occurs along the rear lines; and (3) The petitioner vork with the staff on irtpcwing the outside development. Ms. Ga6e1 stated that this matter has gone 6efore the Planning Commission and they have recommended a tot split. Mr. Carlson and Boulais were present as was Mr. Paske. and Mr. Harris. Nr. Carlson said they are asking for zero and Mr. Boulais stated the addition was made for the past owner and the building is too large for their operation and they were under the impression if they bougfit this building it could be split. Ms. Gabel asked if they were going to rent or sell the other building and he stated they would do either one. Mr. Paske stated that he is still the fee- owner of this property and did not understand how this could be done without the permission of tRe fee-owner and he is opposed to this and has never been asked about this. Mr. Clark stated if Mr. Paske is the fee owner he is directly involved in this. Mr. Pasked stated there are several legal prob}ems involved in this that are not resolved. Mr. Clark asked if the legal probiems would change with the lot split and Mr. Paske said it v�ould make them worse, that there is a mortgage of record and that increasing or decreasing has nothing to do with the legal on it and there are other legai things tfiat have to 6e done and there is a subsequent action pending. He stated that Attorney Guzy is working on this right now. Ms. Gabel stated that since Mr. Paske does not want this to happen and since jhey do not where they are legally, she would assume that they cannot do anything 3t this time. Mr. Boulais stated they did not come across anything in the contract that would prohibit this. Mr. Paske said he has probtems witfi the mortgage company and they have a mortgage of record and the minute you do anything they would consider it Due Unsale. Mr. Plemel felt the legal probleeis shauld be solved before the Com- mission takes any action, ___ -- --___ ____ �. ._ ._--. .�__�_�._.. .___._._._...� Avpeals Comnission Meeting - AuQUSt 24 1982 Paae 9 MOTION 6y Mr. Plemel� seconded 6y Mrs. Gerou, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL YOTIN6 AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:20 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs. 6erou, to table this matter until the petitioner requests it 6e brought 6ack to the Appeals Comnission. UPON A YOICE VOTE, ALL • YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE.MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (The reasons for this 6eing that there are too many leg�l roblems involved here which prevents the Appeats Comnission from taking any action�. 4. 4A� RIANCE REQUEST PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205_OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE. TO 12) MOTION 6y Mrs. Gerou, seconded by Mr. P1eme1, to open the public hearing. UPON A - YOICE YOTE, ALL YDTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARIN6 OPEN AT 9:25 P.M. Chairperson Gabel read the Staff Report: I��LSlRATIVE SfAPF REFOAT 1299 Miaeiasippi Street H.B. � �,: • � •r�� ti�• >� ; s�.Ur, �.,u.� . Section 205.102, 1, requires a lot area of not less than 20,000 equare feet foc one main building, how+ever, if the lot width for a lot is a minimmi of 160 feet, the lot area requirement of 20,000 is waived and no miniman Iot area is requireL. Public purpose served by this requirement is to avoid the condition of overcrowding of a oon¢nercial neighborhood. . Y� N : � •n.,,. �. This property is properly zoned for nse and plotted but would not be able to build under this oondition.• C. ADMINISPRA7*IVE Sl'AFF REVIpA: This lot Was platted an8 zoned prior to the hrea an8 frontage requirgnents of the Zoning Code. Since this proposed buildirg and use need no other variances, We see ra obvious reasm for denial of the request. We tqwevec do recommend that the petitioner be required to dedicate a 15 foot easement along the south (Mississippi Street) for futuce street widening and bikeway/walkway construction. : / Appeals Comaission Aeeting - August 24, 1982 Paae 10 Mr. Clark showed the Comoission the proposed plans and Mr. Kramber explained that he wished to build an office building for his chiropractic practice and wants to rent the 6asement. He stated all the setbacks and greenery will be to code and he will only need 10 parking spots. Ms. Ga6e1 asked about the other lots in the area that are for sale. Ar. 6ram6er said they are being sold. Ms. Gabel asked if they are the same size and he stated yes and Mr. Plemel asked if this was all commercial and Mr. Clark stated they are C-2. Mr. Kramber said it will be a very nice looking 6uitding, tfie 6asement will have plenty of windows, 28 by 44 square feet. He said he does not have a renter for the 6asement yet. He stated the buiiding wi11 6e compati6le witfi the other 6uildings in the area, stucco with cedar trim, it will fit rigfit into the neigh6orhood. His mother has talked to the people at Sandee's and they have no o6jections to these plans as these lots have been vacant for so long. He stated the 6uitding will be "house height" and he has no problems with the City witF the landscaping. Mrs. Mech, 1315-66th Street N.E., asked about parking. Mr, Kramber explained that parking is no problem and getting in and out will be no problem and he pointed out that the lots are unbuildable without a variance. Ms. 6abe1 asked when he would start construction. Mr. Kramber said in October, that he is trying to get out of a lease right now, he will close on the land on September 15tB and wants to be in by Christmas. Ms. Gabel asked if he understood the sidewalk easement asked if tfiat would cause him any problems. Mr. Ctark the county would possi6ly want the 15 feet and to make off that. and he stated he did and said it wouldn't and that sure the shrubbery is planted MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to close the public hearing. UPON A YOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARIN6 CLOSED AT 9:40 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, that the Appeals Commission recommend to the City Council, through the Planning Comnission, approval of the request to reduce the required lot size from 20,000 square feet to 13,800 square feet or the lot width from 760 square feet to 83 square feet to allow the construction of a 44 foot 6y 28 foot office building, located oo Lot 5, Slock 1, Erco's Addition, the same 6eing 1299 Mississippe Street, N.E.. Fridley, Minnesota, 55432, with the stipulation that a 15 foot easement shall be dedicated along the south (Mississippi Street) for future street widening and bike-way/walkway construction. (The Commission felt tfiis was a reasona6le request as you cannot build on these lots without a varia�ce and they would like to see something happening in this area). 5. YARIANCE REQUEST PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO N.E.) MOTION 6y Mr. Plemel� seconded 6y Mrs. Gerou, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECALRED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:42 P.M. Chairperson Gabet read the Staff Report: Appeals Commission Neetina - August 24. 1982 Paae 11 ITM7NIb'�tAT1VE STATP R� I315 66tb Avenue 11.6. .� : :n:�a:�- �r:;��� :i ; �� qr, ;.�.:�11 Section 205.153, Y, cequires that in areas vith setbacks greater than }he minim.nn, the average of the settincke for buildings within 100 feet on either side shnll prevail, vith a deviation allowred of eiz feet more or leas. Public purpose served by structures do not greatly the existing house sites. . v a� : •..� •�r t2�is requirement is to insure that any new i�ede the front yard •line of sight" for •Oniy side that faces south to build a sun porch and 9reen house•' C. A�MII�iIS"1RATIVE SfAPF R�ISi: 66th Avenue is a 66 foot right of Way with a 12 foot boulevard. Therefoce, the proposed sun porch Will not appear to be abnocmally close to the street, hawever the neighbor'B tause and others are set bnck in line With the p�esent houae. If the Appeals Camnission does apprwe this variance, the staff has no suggested stipulations. Mrs. Betty Mech was present. Ms. Gabel stated that the hardship was pretty vague. Mrs. Mech showed the Comnission her plans. She stated that it will not look like a greenouse, it will look like a sunporch, with glass panes and heavy beams and that visually it won't make much of an impact; that she is tired of the way it looks now and wants to enlarge it. Ms. Gabel asked about the roof 1ine. Mrs. Mech said it will come off the roof at a slight slope and the doors wi11 be 7 feet high, with a Mooden catwalk about 18" wide around the whole thing for washing the windows and it will be heated and be used all year round. Ms. Cabel asked what it would look like from the outside. She said it will be glass and beams. Mr. Plemel asked who would be doing the work. Mrs. Mech said they will hire a contractor. Ms. Gabel stated the plans look nice and asked a6out drainage and running water. Mrs. Mech said they will have running water and have a drain go to the outside. She also said her neighbor to the south, Ed Simko, called and said he had no ob'ections. Ms. Gabel asked how soon she would do this and Mrs. Mech said that wou�d depend on whether or not they put in a well first and they may have to wait until next year. MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to close bhe public hearing. UPON A YOICE YOTE, ALL YOTIN6 AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:55 P.M. �eals Comeission Aeeting - August 24, 1982 Paae 12 Mr. Plemel noted there Mere no neighbortrood objections to this and was agreeable to the variance and Ms. 6abe1 thought Mrs. Mech will do a good job wSth this. MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded 6y Mr. Plemel, to reduce the front yard setback from the required construction of a 35 foot 6y 12 foot sunport and Block 1, Dennis Addttion, tBe same 6eing 1�15 - Minnesota, 55432. UPON A vOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING THE MOTSON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: approve the variance request to 45 feet to 39 feet to allow the greenhouse located on Lot 8, 66tR Avenue N.E., Fridley, AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, to YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE APPEALS 1982, ADJOURNED AT 10:05 P.M. Respectfully su6mitted, Deb Niznik, Recording Secretary adjourn. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL COMMISSION MEETING OF AU6U5T 24, r I DATE o• DIF3ECTOAATE [=7� PuB�ic woAKs August 31, 1982 SUBJECT Variance Request - Gus Doty TO MEMC q A N D UM _ Gus Doty had requested two variances at the Appeals Cortmission in order to con- struct a 9600 square foot office building on the corner of 63rd and University East Service Drive. The Appeals Comnission recortmended approval with some stipulations at their August 24. 1982 meeting. At the August 27, 1982 Special HRA Meeting 'this property was designated as an HRA option. I discussed this item with Mr. Doty on August 31, 1982 and he requested that his variance request be withdrawn. Accordingly, we will not schedule this as a City Council Agenda item. JGF/mc