The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 05/18/1983 - 6815PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: City of Fridley AGENDA WEDNESDAY, M�Y 18, 1983 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 4, 1983 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONIN6 REQUEST ZAA #83-03 BY L. ROBERT ERICKSON: Rezone the West Half of Lot 4, and all of Lots 5, 6 and 7, Lucia Lane Addition, from R-1 (single family dwelling areas) to R-3 (general multiple family dwellings) to allow the construction of a 14-unit condominium project, the same being 1133-1145 Mississippi Street N.E. 2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. H83-01, MARGARET A. SE6ER: Split ��` the southerly 104.02 feet of Lot l, B oc� k 2, Sprin9 L�ke Park Lakeside, the same being 7650 Lakeside Road N.E. (Original Lot - 1586 Osborne Road N.E.) 3. � RECEIVE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: APRIL 27, R. RECEIVE HUMAN RESOURCES COh{MISSION MINUTES: MAY 5, 1983 6. RECEIVE APPEALS COMISSIN MINUTES: MAY 10 1983 7. OTHER BUSINSS: ADJOURNMENT: 7:30 P.M. PAGES 1-6 7 - 12 13 - 18 19 - 30 WHITE SALMON YELLOW CITY OF fRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4, 1983 GALL TO DRDER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the May 4, 1983, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL: Menbers Present Menbers Absent Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Svanda, Mr. Goodspeed, Mr. Kondrick Mr. Saba Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Bill Deblon, Associate Planner Marie Karn, 1390 Onondaga St. N.E. Ed Karn, 1390 Onondaga St. N.E. Maxine Boone, 6564 Channel Rd. N.E. Bruce Bondow, 6616 Central Ave. N.E. John Mathern, Frank M. Langenfeld Construction, Inc. Box 483, Hastings,Mn. 55033 David Kramber, 2013 - 29th Ave. N.W. APPROVAL OF APRIL 20, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSIOP! MINUTES: MO.^ION BY MR. XONDRICR, SECONDED BY MS. GRBEL� TO APPROVE THE APRIL 20� 1983� PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CNAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED TH.E MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PU6LIC HEARING: REZONI�7G REQUEST, ZOA #�83-07, BY FRANK M. LANGENFELD COhlSTRUCTI�N, IMC.: Rezone L— at 3 a�t�ie �t ortTi HaTf o ot , an ots , 7, an 8, Block 1, Erco's First Addition, from C-2 (general business areas), to R-3 (general multiple family dwellin9 areas), all located in the North Nalf of Section 13, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, the same bein9 6516 Central Avenue N.E. and 6501 and 6517 Channel Road N.E. .YOTION BY FIIZ. OQ(JIST� SECONDBD BY F42. KONDRZCK� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON REZONZNG REQUEST, 20A #83-01� BY FRANX M. LANGENFELD CONSTRUCTION� INC. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXRIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TXE PUBLIC HEAAING OPEN AT 7:35 P,M. Mr. Deblon stated the proposed project is located just north of Mississippi St. between Channel Road and Old Central. The proposal is for a rezoning from C-2 to R-3 which allows multiple dwellings. The proposal is for three 4-plexes, each 4-plex approximately 2,000 sq. ft. in foundation area, two-story, with two units per story, Garages are included in the developnent. PLANNING COhMISSION MEETING MAY 4 1983 PAGE 2 Mr. Deblon stated Staff has looked at the possibility of a land subdivision in the future and the eventual se7ling off of each of the three buildings. With minor adjustments, the proposal will meet future subdivision requirements. Mr. Deblon stated this is actually a down-zoning from C-2. Whenever there are two districts of C-2 �r residential nature, there is a district separation requirement. He believed the applicant would be required to put up a fence or sorie type of screening to separate the zones. The applicant is agreeable to that. Mr. Deblon stated the floor plans of the buildings were included in the Planning Cormission's agenda. He stated these units are not as dense as far as units per square foot as the code allows. There is an abundance of green area. Mr. Deblon stated the Rice Creek Watershed Board will have to review this development for drainage and will have to approve it before any buildin� permits will be issued. Mr. Deblon stated that at this time, the City does not have a certificate of survey in the records. He felt that if this proposal is approved by the Planning Comnission, a certificate of survey should be required before the proposal goes on to City Council so the actual dimensions to the foot can be determined. Mr. Kondrick asked about the exterior of the buildings. Mr. John Mathern stated he is representing Frank M. Langenfeid Construction, Inc. He stated the building uses a combination of brick, rough-sawn cedar and masonite lapsiding. The units are 1,008-1,080 sq. ft. per unit with four uniCs per building. They are termed "energy-efficient" rental units. There are four single stall garages, so each tenant is offered one single stall garage, and there is suff9cient parking to meet the City's requirements. Mr. Ptathern stated there are a lot of green spaces. They like to offer people a nice place to rent as weli as provide some ponding basins for their own run-off from the parking lots and roofs. They have submitted their plans to the Rice Creek Watershed Board, and he believed the plans were being reviewed now. Mr. Kondrick asked about the average monthly rents. Mr. Mathern stated the rents will be in the range of $475-500 per month. These buildings are the 18th, 19th, and 20th 6uildings of this kind they have built in the last year, They have built in different suburban areas around the St. Paul area, The rent is exclusive of utilities. Each unit has its own gas furnacP and hot water heater, so each unit is separately metereu except for water and serrer, Ms. Gabel stated she felt the trash containers were too c7ose to Channel P,oad and felt it would be better if they could be located by the garages. Mr. Plathern agreed he would also like to see them put alongside the garages and stated they would work with the relocation of the trash containers. He stated the trash containers will be screened from view by rough-sawn cedar. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING h{AY 4 1983 PA6E 3 Ms. Schnabel stated that regarding the district separation between the duplexes and the new chiropractice clinic on the corner of Mississzppi St. and Old Central, what was the petitioner planning to do for screening? Mr. Mathern stated they would prefer to screen with greenery, but if the City requires fencing, they would accept that. Ms. Schnabel asked if any of the buildings already built have been turned into condominium developments. Mr, Mathern stated they have not, although with the use of the party wall, ceiling insulation, sound stops, and fire stops required for condominium con- version, if they or any future owners wanted to convert, it could be done as the buildings would probably meet most of the guidelines acceptable for condominium conversion. Ms. Schnabel asked if it was the owner's intention to own or sell off these buildings. Mr. Mathern stated tfiey would like to have a tiuilding on each lot and at this time, they plan to own the buildings. Ms. Schnabel stated that in terms of the future and the eventual selling off of the units, she was concerned with the floor plan for the lower units where the rear exit is through a bedroom, Does this present any problem in terms of security as wel] as the selling off as a condominium? Mr. Mathern stated when they originally designed the plan about 2%2 yrs. ago, they did �ot want the exit on the lower level out the back. They felt the one in the front was sufficient since all the windows in the bedrooms are fire-escape rated windows. However, some municipalities required rear exits or a separate exit door. Ne stated those doors are solid core doors, they are dead bolted so entrance cannot be gained through the rear door any easier than through the front door, The doors are also locked from the inside. Most tenants do not even use the doors. They are simQly there as another means of escape in case of fire. Mr, Oquist asked about the maintenance of the property. Mr, Mathern stated the building owner is responsible for the exterior maintenance, There is no extra charge for maintenance as it is taken into account in the rent. Mr, Deblon asked about handicapped accessibility. Mr. Mathern stated they are required by state law to have handicapped access to the front entry, and they do that by a lengthy gently sloped sidewalk leadina up to the entry. They also have a handicapped stall per unit in the parking lot. Mr. Oquist asked about exterior lighting. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 4 1983 PAGE 4 Mr. Mathern stated exterior lighting is provided on the buildings controlled by an electrtc eye so as to correspond with dusk and dawn, IL floods the parking lots from the bui]dings and covers front and rear entrances, This meets the s.tandards required. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against this proposal. Ms. Maxine Boone, 6564 Channel Rd, asked about the landscaping that would be required. Mr. Mathern stated the City requires them to submit a landscape plan which is a mixture of sod, trees, and shrubs a7ong the sidewalks, along the property line, and in front of the buildings. Mr. Deblon stated the final landscaping plan has not yet been approved, but it is part of the building permit process. Mr. David Kramber, 2073 - 29th Ave. N.W „ stated he owns the property where the chiropractic office building is located, He stated he had no objection to the development, 6ut he would like to see a fence for district separation, rather than greenery, He stated there is a dairy store on the corner of Old Central and Mississippi across the street, and people and children would be cutting across his property to get to it. Mr. Bruce Bondow, 6616 Central Ave., stated he owns the adjacent residential rental property immediately to the north on Old Central. In observing other C-2 areas and considering the potential parking problems and other prob7ems such as noise, smells, and clutter associated with C-2 areas, he felt this proposal and the rezonin9 to R-3 would alleviate a lot of those problems. He would like to speak in favor of the rezoning. He stated he wouid also like to comnend the developer for his plan. Ne thought it was a very attractive plan, and he would iike to recommend that the Plannin9 Comnission recoRrcnend approval of this plan to the City Council. MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HERRING ON ZOA N83-01 BY FRANK M. LANGENFELD CONSTRUCTION� INC. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECI,ARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:05 P.M. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDEb BY MR. OQUIST� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCZL APPROVAL OF REZONING REQUEST� ZOA N83-01� BY FRANX M. LANGENFELD CQNSTRUCTION, INC.� TO REZONE LO'P 3 AND TXE NORTH HALF OF 7AT 4�AND LOTS 6� 7� RND 8� BI,GC'X 1� ERCO'S FZRST ADDITZON� FROM C-2 (GENERAL HUSINESS AREAS), TO R-3 (GENERAL MULTZPLE FAMILY DWELLING AREAS), ALL LOCATED IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION I3� T-30, R-24� CITY OF FRIDLEY� THE SAME BEING 65I6 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. RND 6501 AND 65I7 CHANNEL ROAD N.E.� WITX THE FOLLOWZNG STIPULATIONS: 1. TXE PROPOSAL MEETS THE APPROVAL OF THE RICE CREEX WATERSHED BOARD. 2. R CEf2TIFICRTE OF S�RVEY BE REQUIRED. 3. FENCING BE REQUIRED FOR DISTRICT SEPAR.�iTION. 4. TXE RELOCATIDN OF TRASH CONTRINERS BE ADDRESSED IN THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, 5, A IO-FT. BIKEWAY/WALKWAY EASEMENT BE RElRINED AIANG MISSISSIPPI ST. PLANNING C�MMISSION MEETING MAY 4 1983 PA6E 5 Mr, Oquist stated this looked ]ike an attractive way to develop that property. The development seemed well thought out and the units are placed well on the property. Ms. Gabel stated the development seems consistent with the housing to the north and is a better use for that property than a commercial use. The commercial areas in Fridley are too spread out as it is. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED SHE MOTZON CARRZED UNIWIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated that at their May 16th meeting, the City Council will set the public hearing for June 6. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUE57 FOR A SPECIAI USE PERMIT, SP #83-02, BY MARIE C. KARN: Per Section 205.052, 2, A, of the Fridley City Code, to allow tfie construction of a second accessory building, a 24 ft, by 20 ft. storage building, located on Lot 5, Block 1, Walnut Addition, the same being 1390 Onondaga Street N,E. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY e�2, SVRNDA� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HERRING ON SP N$3-02 By MARIE C. KARN. UPON R VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLARED TNE PUBLIC NEARING OPEN AT 8;14 P,M. Mr, Deblon stated the property is located on the corner of Hayes and Onondaga. The proposal is to put up a second accessory building, 20' x 24'. The plan shows the building located about 4 ft, from the rear and side property lines. The code minimum setback is 3 ft. Ms. Marie Karn asked if it would be possible to move the bu9lding more into the center of the lot, rather than in the far corner. Ms. Schnabel stated that because of the code, if the Karn's moved the proposed structure over so it was more in a direct line with the house next door, the structure would have to be a minimum of 3 ft, and perhaps up to 5 ft, off the property line so that 15 ft. is maintained between the proposed structure and the neighbor's s�ructure. Ms. 5chnabel asked what the purpose was for the proposed structure. Ms. Karn stated it was for storage. They have a two-car attached garage, but need another building to house laMm equipment, snowblower, boat, etc, There is no driveway proposed at this time to the new building. HOTION BY AII2, OQUZST� SECONDED BY MR. ICONDRICK, SO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARZNG. ON SP N83-02 BY MARIE C. KARN. UPON A VOZCE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CIASED RT 8:28 P,M, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 4 1983 PAGE 6 MOTZON BY MH. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MI2. GOODSPEED, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECZAL USE PERNZT� SP �83-02. BY MAItIE C. KARN� PER SECTION 205.052, 2, A, OF TXE FRFDLEY CSTY CODE, TO ALLOW THE CONS7RUCTION OF A SECOND RCCESSORY BUILDING, R 24 FT. BY 20 FT, STORAGE BUILDING, LCORTED ON IAT 5� HLOCK 1, WALNUT ADDITZON� THE SAME BEING 1390 ONANDAGA STREET N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING RYE, CHAIRWOMRN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARXIED UNANIMIXJSLY, Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to City Council on May 16. 3, RECEIVE APRIL 12 1983 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN7 CONIMISSION MINUTES: MOTZON BY MR. OpUZST� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECESI�E THE ItPRIL I2, 1983, COMMUNITY DEVEZAPMENT COMMISSZON MINUTES. . UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLARED THE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEI4E APRIL 18, 1983, PARKS & RECREATION COMMI55ION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. XONDRSCX, S$CONDED BY MS, GABEL� TO RECEIVE TNE APRIL S8, 2983� PARXS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTSNG AYE� CHAIRWOMRN SCHNRBEl DECLARED THE MOSZON CARRIED UNRNIMOUSLY. 5. RECEIUE APRIL 26, 1983, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MO�,PON BY MS. GRBEL, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICX� TD RECENE THE APRSL 26, 1983, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOSE� ALL VOTIN6 RYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECI.FiRED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR, SVANDR� SECONDED &Y MR. KONbRICK� TO ADJOURN TNE MEETINC. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWQMAN SCHNA$EL DfiCLARED THE MAY 4� I983� PLANNING COMMISSZON MEETING ADJOIIRNED AT 9:00 P.M. Respectfully submit ed, yn aba Recording Secretary PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNINr, COMMISSION Hotice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing �f the Planning Comnission of the City of Fridley in the City Halt at b431 University Avenue Northeast on Nednesday, May 18, 1983 in the Council Chamber at 7;30 P.M, for the purpose of: Consideration of a Rezoning request, ZOA N83-03, by L. Robert Erickson, to Rezone the West Half of Lot 4, and all of Lots 5, 6 and 7, Luc�a Lane Addition, from R-1 (single family dwelling areas) to R-3 (general multiple family dwellings) to allow the construction of a 14-unit condominium complex, all in the North Half of Section 13, T-30, R-24, City of fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota Generally located between Highway N65 and Lucia Lane N.E. at 1133-1145 Mississi- ppi Street N.E. Any and e>> persons desiring to De heard shall be given an opportunity � at the above stated time and place. , Publish: May 4, 1983 hlay 11 , 1963 VIRGINIA SCHNABEL CHAIRWOMAN PLANNING CDMMISSION 7 MAILING LIST ZOA #83-03, L. Robert Erickson L Robert Erickson 85 3rd Avenue S.E. New Brighton, Mn 55112 S. T: Herschi and L.A. Ziebell 6451 Taylor NE. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Loren Johnson 6489 Taylor Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Delbert Harris 6542 Brookview Drive Fridley, 2IN 55432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Elton Bolduan 6554 Brookview Drive Fridley, MN 55432 Phyllis M. Kachina 6476 Dellwood Drive Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Neil Stuber 6452 Dellwood Drive Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Ernest Vanaugh 6449 Dellwood Drive Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Mrytle Ask 6440 Dellwood Drive Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Walter Leimgruber 1027 Mississippi St. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Eugene Lane 1132 Mississippi St. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. David Dayton 6435 Hwy. 65 Fridley, MN 55432 Planning Comnission 5/5/83 City Council Mr. & Mrs. Russell Burris 1027 Mississippi St. Fridley, MN 55432 Helen Vagovich 1200 Mississippi St. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Joe Randall 1210 Mississippi St. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Lekang 6517 Pierce St. Fridley, PL'V 55432 Mr. 5 Mrs. Henry Melcher 6500 Pierce St. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Richard Lynn 6516 Pierce St. Fridley, MN 55432 � Mr. & Mrs. Robert Bystram 6533 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Jackie Young 6549 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Mearl Crosser 6565 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ericksor 65$1 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Edward Lancello 6597 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Irene Haedtke 6540 Lucia Lane Fridley, M;� 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Wayne Hitchcock Mr. & Mrs. Terrance Daun 6532 Pierce St. 6546 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Vernon Erewers Paul Johnson 6548 Pierce St. 6546 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, NIN 55432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Robert Skyhawk 6580 Pierce St. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. E�nett Raaen 6501 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Clarence Timo 6517 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. fi Mrs. Dean Thomas 6550 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 June Johnson 6600 Lucia Lane Fridley, MIv' S5432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Darrel Goerdt 6610 Lucia Lane Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. S Mrs. Richard Tollefson Richard Schwalbach 6473 Taylor St. 6501 Pierce St. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. 6 Mrs. Alvin Berg 6533 Pierce St. Fridley, I+s1 55432 +.a � r ; wu�.us ;. rusttL nt�� '�irr oou�cY�; -.:; i� PAdK ffE REQl1iRED: STIPIA.ATI�15; ` . STREET LOCATIDN OF PROPERTII Lf6AL DESCRIPTION Of PROPEA PRESElIT ZONIN6 CI.ASSIfICAT] AGRfAGE OF PROPERTY� i OR 17PE flf ttSE AIlD It�ROYEM . . ' ._. �.Sr a _ _ ... _____�ll.�L: ttas the present apQlicant pr� variance or special use penrl What aas requesteE ann �h�ai` � �.�: 7rie undersigned w►derstanrfs � Ly withio 350 feet must De ai #ing), +�ast be aitach�d to"L# by all amers of the propert� (c)'Respo�nibi7ity for any'd� . list t�e names and addresss < queS#ion, belortgs to the w� ll s�Cetch�af P�P�� P�P�►'Li fa��o►+in�: 'l.;. North dirett� � 3, ��iaa�sia�s of proPe+GN• 7 na�s. '�. Location and ust' F ,� Tfie imdersi�r►ed fiereby 6ec3ai this application are true arn Mr� �� a-P3' '�' �� ; w, �oa�ss ��= �'`°r�'t�. S > �� ,� �; .. �.. � i rv . + ..F.sY.•S� 1 f . � � ` 9C/� ;':; ., . g �GitOM ,. �8 �'�- I SAY f �S f �7.j� ��.� �?,.;.. „rDISAP�I'lltfl� �14 �� f!� E ` 13"f � � �zsnvr�ovm.��r� �O� re "�rrnu�r � =�t``= �; . � - . _ ._... . - �: �° N0: � ,ND � ao ,ID !q 9/73 -- - � 1 !�_ ISTIN6 US€ OE PI�PER7Y �a-t�e�.,.i , DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PROPOSED ZONIN6 CLASSIfICATION - , . - • . •� s' � ` � • = r � 4us1�r sought to rezone, p1at, obtain a lot sp it or � Lhe subject sit,� or part of iY3 _^yrs�+w. . <_ ,. .:, ri:' (aj A�ist of alt residen#s and amers of proper- ici� to this applicaticm {rex�in9), 300 feet, (Ptat- �#�ppt5$atia�. '(bj This application must be signed �r � explanatioa given khy ifiis is not tfie case. !ct is ihe proceedinqs resul#ing from the failure to 811 residents and property �enrs of prop�rtY in �d�nc�l.::� .� r � -4, u�d structure must be drarm and attached. shorring the �. �. Location of ihe proposed str�ucture on the 7ot. �se� structure, aod fron and s�de setbacks. �. Street F ad�aGeAt existing buitdings (vri#�hi� 3'S� feei). _ �� ;�}�a# �ii1 the facts and respresentaiians stated in � J ��'''�� 4 y� � �� f�� L� 1_ /lI� . . . . . i��E ra G3L- ��c ,� 6. , � _ , �9iib�Sj ci�3(QE •f !. �`�� b �E��°� � N � O M �� W J M Q \ � 0 � � H� � 2 0 1"' Q � � � M �_ --_ _� vv� wa rst .wawawr� -- , �o ZOA #83-03 L. Robert Erickson 1MlIYlI31tlS� �_•_` � .� g i -_ Y' �€f ;ii � �� rti $� 4► � �_ ., � . r;j. �e , ` ,i , ;,' 4�� ae_Ti �y� ��. . � � #. y': �' �� `_ d A tkµ,i. � . � _ �_ � �.. 4�� k �.�'e�M � �¢e' i , ��, .� �; .,�_ t`d P F .,..8 . . ..�'� '�a�,.r*',v+e}'x7 �_ . _ ' �': � fsr _'�; : .9 ..: e'' s_ .��:LTv, , �:�;x � ,,= . . ,a! . �� % � tr�� _� �' �,�'�` � ¢ �:� � � ��-�� * � L` a h }'-c.F.,F� f � +�r � ti � � �"`;"`'i=a''`'e'"°� z:,� 't � ,�� e iv. �'� ' _. a #C f�l: ' x.�� '�aE.k��,�°'�S ? ;,d" s * �� r ; ' � S '-✓- r.�". ! flY '�# � �4 � 11 �. �,�� j, �f.� ��, � ! �.��-�i t�� 4� w � F ! �� / .�i , � ,' - �: i �� Y� �M �. ��. �� , � ZOA #83-03 L. ROBERT ERICKSON STAT E TQ U IJ 1L N l G N V�l AY N O. 6� zeo .._ ._._ � ;� �._ � ,-. ' •� , , ; i � ; ` Dropoced ' B Uf1if N - � -- e��td ing � � '� _? - i,V� 1 ��' -. �, �A-J fi� . <: . I -.ti -� � ,,,: veOOCSED ' ; �_ ` '� �: �� rv • � � �� N ' � I— _. ..— -- ----- i W O :� �No , - -35 �-- _ i � �� C��O - C d� p � YA .n � 12 �^ � i , = -- f' m N o ,,1 , ; i�n � ° � N�G'O � I ' C � � I � T� � 7I w- � a - � i `1 % I . y ,,. ' - I �Y`� � ` � ffGt IvE � y : _ - _ — -- 90 - - - ----- ��- � � I r, � � J I� � � , .: � �c, � ------ __ ----- i _ __. .. _.. _.. _ _.. . --- (.uCiA I.ANE • J f � • � � � 33 �c�rv af Fww�.�v. SVOJECT tAT SPLIT LS /�.3' O M�1 N1IMVQAMTY /M/s. Mt- � RA1[X��I, MN. 6ialt Mti1 i7�-�f0 �C�EDS 11DDrtESS: %!o �`O G�,�Es,a�e- •<al � �'��b�'j'��1M1TE; �'- � - �" � Pi�t01IN6 COlMISSION: APPkOYED _ OISAPPROYED MTE '� M� Ci1Y COUqCII: PARK FEE REQUIRED: STIP�ATIONS: � APPROYFO DISAPPI�OYED DATE �. AMpUNT PAIQ � RELEIPT HO 9a7v TELEPHONf NO �S� �� /� TELEDHONE NO AD'•1RE5S(ES)_ ��/ %3 ��-! . � (� . PROPERTY LOUTION ON STREET �� z.-� --,� �/PoC, ".EGAL DESCRIPTI01l Of �`L`o� / .f3�.� . IOTAL AREA OF PROPERiY z.'Q,f�07`° ' PRESENT ZONING_� RFASON FOR LOT 2 / ,ly�c • Y - The underslgneQ�hereby dedares that atl the facts anQ representations stated in this a�plicatioa are true and correct. 3. �//�.. � NOTICE: A sketcA of the property and the proposed lot split with any existing struc- tures sho►+n sfioulA accompany this appiiatiai. ' (See reverse stde tor sdQitioeal iestructions) a 1981 POLICY STATEI4CNT ON PARK FEES �q ON LAHD SUBD3VISION " Date In determininq fair market value of public areas for land subdivision for tash payment, as required by Ordinance 63.', the following values will be used: Residential subdivision �1,000.00 per lot Residential lot split � 500.00 per lot Comnercial/Industrial subdivision or lot splits � 0.015 per sq. ft. This fee is to be paid at the time of final plat or lot split approval. The City Council may deter collection to the time a building permit is requested for individual lots created by such subdivision/lot split. The City retains the option to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated. PARK FEE AGREEN;ENT The undersigned understands that according to the City Piatting Ordinance, the following public park land dedication is required to plat residential, commercial or industrial zoned property. It is further understooC that the public park land dedication or cash payment equivalent is at the discretion of the City. It is agreed that a cash payment of b will be paid according to the above stated policy for the following subdivision/lot split. It is agreed that the following land dedication is provided according to the above stated policy for the following subdivision/lot split: OediCation: Subdivision/lot split: The undersianed further dgrees to notify all future property owners or assigns of the cash payment requirement, if it is to be collected at the time of building permit. DR OOt34A/ 1067A SIGNATURE Property Owner -e�— ��=o� L . 5. #7�6- Split Lot ---�itrto-�-two ' �5°� i�2� , ; , � ♦ � �^L . � . � ,. . �IO J y , 9 I, KIOCK G,�ng zag 31'YdM ��c� - ,--. . ;.,o �;r � . �. , .: �.' 15�g is-86 __F, . L ✓ + '� •L ` . � .a3s - �,r L"^� `: �,sa � yd yo q°;.1 � �- G � 7�. - . �a d �,� �, � : f" 9 ` ° r E � � � 15g� �� F ,e�� 15Z�` _ - 9Y_ _ — . 'S ° -- z� .f � � �s�'- S��,� ��N E`~CORNEN ide SEC. i? �q� ,\� • '' 47' � � � � �,��.�- �� i� .. � %� . ` �'�'� �:�� s t-�+�+�— - �, � 7�5 /-. .. ; ` � - ° ? 'r= � �tlZ� � /" �.e; .. ,.: . ,� � ��,2 _ ��.,�� il� ��: (65� ��7� ��; m v= a : °�: � ��zy ��d � —__ .� ��Zt. lec a ��r.-irn � __ � - � �" � � � � 7�,/O_ • 0 ) ' �� 1 4, , . P.�:�it�rdLEY 5T. � �°O . •'� . c .r -�--^"- �i (j� �L� �f� !(� � . 1 `�'� � �`� `� ��. : A ,�. y 7Gt� ;� & �t ✓e��F .-,,, �� . Y � � � tiss�� .�..., � � '�u.� ..... - � . _.__ Iai.4o.. �, . .�°''.a.. , � - - �-- -- � -f�;ss� t�`J�: �i-' r° ; ti i � y.;�� ,::s� ��- r�zs- ..__ . _ 'P'f°._ ' 4��. ' i � , � ,� 3 „ --�t �� ', >i0� �., o �� d 79 •. , � , s ��. LL` - ti � �.1� I � �_ , ! - � � l- m ^��` ,, 2�� r� ��- �� l • 4� r '� L N , 0 9 n � � A9 ��Jtl:� Ly.r L I � �. L � � S I t /� ' 4 .a � -> _. ,� � , 75 - �.., ri G� ��?� . �. [" 7 s , ^+ i4 -15� � ,,Z� �- ` 'j `�`� 751SV �• - - �'` _._�z9! _ � ��5��1 �� j572 � �'j�`"�s�� ,: , , , . • _'� �sor - . _ , . ,;s / 5 - � ' ��r__ 3' ..J "µ �� :��'�7 r�'�� 5�� < 1� �f � �� r-�� ys. ` �6 6� ' �500` "; zs u �' r T %�0� :ht� V�. 1 `� � ;�� \ � a. �: 6 \ • _. � �f � lY7. . f '" !f �?71 '"T.. P s" U �AVC. ' _._ y��-.rr.; :—Ir.G - ' . �� 151y l5ay �s, . - , . �. 156H �.; � )�O$0 yg., 5° t,�0� !b 1bSa- �I �>;;:, � ,� � �,p0 Ib . �♦A � ,, 7�ti _� �(_ an.Y, �" o � vI � F ,,�,�, , ; �`/9;� � SS `I f 1 �r :! f. U ! �I F _ } ! � 1'� T . . � � ,� -- y�73 "�tz ��r�-L-� . �y�2 ;_ . �� . a. � .vc. . s. ^. � � :. ,�5 �` .. ,�� `� �� J' � �� 4 k ' '� 7y �'�►.�k59 r-�79`�>:"�;, w ;,. _ � �i>t ,�, �e . � � �¢''iHSy �— ` „> � „� t ,� ��3�� 7y36 w -, _. ;�- �I ra. •- ��'� ' Z , yyJ�� i �7y.�6 � � [I w�1 a ".� �; i�' V X �� i'-1 7�/b a ` �`r�''� �� '' �°. , — ; { �+t 4 c� m e � i ,..,: • a�.s_ ,�, 4 � I ',a g YYt9,..,,;, J �n 9/ io ,° , � . lt�l, l67l. 7yo0, . t333 7voo ��°�� II � �b�21 , ; � ,. i6 _. . s� .•'� _.- »� 0 ��3-0 � 7�7w Z'.9, L. S. �F7-5=�3> A�. SEGER Spiit Lot 1, Block 2, Spring Lake Park Lakeside into tvro building sites � � � � �m � a � � � v � Planning Commission Meeting - Ju�e 25 1975 Page 11 » Mr. Harris said he would like all the property owner in the block notified of this request. Mr. Clark said they had been, and would be otified again for the Public Hearing before Council. 5. LOT SPLIT RE UEST, L.S. �75-02, BY RICHARD JAN : 7o allow Lot 11, Block 1 Rice Creek Plaza South Addition to be split i to Parcels A& B, because of the error in fence location on Lot 10, the me being 191 and 201 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Mr. Richar� Janke and Mr. Virgil Mullin were present. Mr. Janke sa'd his mother owned the operty at 201 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. and when they built patio and retainin wall, along with the fence, there was an error made as to the ctual property li He said that rather than most the fence and other improvements to this propert , the owner of Lot 11, Mr. Virgil Mullins, 191 Rice Creek Terrace E., has agre�d to sell the property to his mother. Mr. Clark said that Mull the request, and if both par ies r this request. / Mr. Mullins said he was �n Mr. Harris asked if bp`th lots of the City code. Mr. Cla�k said t was present also, and he had also signed in agreement, the City saw no problem with reement with this request. ld still meet the setback and lot requirements would MOTION by Peterso , seconded by LiAdblad, that the Planning Commission zecomment to Council approval of the request for a Lot Sp1it, L.S. #75-02, by Richard Janke, to allow Lot 21, Block 1 Rice Creek Plaza South Addition, to be split into Parcels A and B, because of error in fence Zocat�on, the same being 191 and 20I Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Upon voice vot�,-a.Z1` voting ay�, the motion carried unanimously. 6. LOT SPLIT REQUES7, L.S(. �75-03, �Y ARTHUR SEGER: Split Lot 1, Block 2, Spring Lake Park Lakeside Add'*i�.r*_- cr?atP annthar building site, the same being � 7650 Lakeside Road N.E. Mr. Arthur Seger was not present. Mr. Harris said it looked tike the lots would be quite lar9e. Mr. Clark said they would be. He said the present lot has enough area and street frontage to make two building sites. Mr. Clark said there really should be a survey made of the property as soon as possible. There was some question as to the rear yard requirement for the existing house. According to the rough drawing, the house would be 26 feet from the new side lot ]ine of the property being split off, and the rear yard requirements was 25; of the lot depth, which would make this 30 feet. He said that this would create no problem because of the size of the property. The lot size of the property being split off could be reduced to 90 feet and would still meet the lot area requirements. Mr. Harris said that it could be reduced just by the 4 feet, and tfie lot would be 100' x 100'. Mr. Clark said the property South of these lots belonged to School District k13. Mr. Harris asked if there would be any easements necessary on this parcel. Mr. Clark said he was sure that there would be. i8 Planning Canmission Meetinq June 25 1475 Page 12 Mr. Harris said he would like to see this property surveyed and all the utility easements see before this went to Council. Mr. Clark said they have not always done it that way, but that was no reason it couldn't be done. They could stipulate that this all be done before it went on the Council agenda. HOTION by Peterson, seconded by Lindblad, that the Planning Commission recommend that the petitioner have Lot Z, Block 2,� Spring Lake Park Lakeside Addition surveyed and aI1 utility easements worked out with Northern States Power Company, Northwestern Be11 Telephone Company, Minnega5co, Cab1e Television and the City Engineez'ing Department before this appears on the Council agenda, and that both Iots meet the setback and area requirements of the City Code, and at that time the Planning Commission would recormnend to Council approval of the request for a Lot Split, L.S. #75-03, by Arthur Seger, to split Lot 1, Block 2, Spring Lake Park Lakeside Addztion, to create another building site, the same being 7650 Lakeside Road N.E. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Harris said he would like a copy of the completed lot split to be � included in the Planning Comnissio� agenda. Mr. Clark said he would see tf.�t this was done. 7, LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. #75-04, BY ROBER SCHROER: Split off the North 126.1 feet of the East 200 feet of Lot 3, Blo k 2, and the South 173.99 feet of the East 200 feet of Lot 2, Block 2, East anch Estates 2nd Addition, to create a building site, the same being 7810 niversity Avenue N.E. Mr. Robert Schroer was present. Mr. Clark presented a drawing th had been submitted by Mr. Schroer in 1972, and said that on the basis of t s drawing, we have previously granted lot splits for both Ca Homes and the To n Crier. The third parcel, which was this request, was for th Datsun Dealersh p. It does not disrupt tfie pattern thay may become evident at som future date, but it does cut off thestreet access to the Western portion of Lot East Ran h Estates 2nd Addition. He said Lots 2 and 4 were L shaped lot splits, o they still have access. He said he had talked to �Dave Harris, who has an int est in this also, and he told Mr. Harris that the staff would probably recommen pproval of the lot split, but we definitely would want a❑ easement to the rear p r ion of Lot 3 for street access. Mr. Narris indicated to Mr. Clark that he would be ill' 9 to grant this easement at this time, and that the City should dra�an up the 9reeme t, and he would sign it. Mr. Clark said that this would satisfy the acce�to f:ot � Mr. Clark said that Mr. Clark said that he wa the drawning, but we do b right of way. ;' oth parcels mee�t the zoning requirements for C-2 Zoning. not saying that �e road would go in as it was shown on e to protect street access for Lot 3, and insist on a HOTZON by Drigans, seconded by Lzndb2ad, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council approval of the request for a Lot Sp1it, L.S. k75-04, by Robert Schroer, to spSit off the North 126.1 feet of the East 200 feet of Lot 3, Block 2, and the South 273.99 feet of the East 200 feet of Lot 2, Block 2, East Ranch Estates 2nd Addition, to create a bui2ding site, the same being 7810 University Rvenue N.E., with the stipulation than an aqzeement be signed to provide an easement for street right of way on the West 3Q feet of the EasterZy 230 feet of Ints 3 and 4, together with the Southerly 33 feet of the East 200 feet of Lot 4, Block 2, East Ranch Bstates 2nd Addition. Upon a voice vote, aI1 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. � REGULAR COUNCIL IM1EETTNG Of JULY 7. 1975 Page 7 275 t8A of the adjoining property owner. .He explained that rather than remove the construction, the applicant is requesting a lot split and xould sell the piece of property to the adjo9ning property orrner. Mr. Mullins said rather than move the constructions, he agreed to sell the praperty to the adjoining property owner. Councilman Breider said he would have no objection to this if the split Kould meet the code. The City Manager said at the present time, they would be creating an edditional parcel, but this Nould be the only method of taking care ot the current problem. IhOTIDN by Councilman Breider to 9rant the lot split request as applied for by Mr. Richard Janke. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a Yoice vote. all votirtg aye, Mayo� Nee declared the motion carried There was no action necessary on this item at this time. The Public 4lorks Oirector ezplained that this piece of property is in the area where 41in Stephens had planned to install the Datsun Dealership. He commented that the request was recommended for approval by the planning Commission at their ,lune z8, 1975 meeting with several sttputations. Ne read the sug9ested stipulations to the Council and audience. . The Public Works Director explained the reasort for the lot split being requested is to allow the future construction of a roadr�ay to the rear �� of the lots abutting fhe frontage road.�He explained there would De an 's appropriate amount of tand, berming xould be installed and the proper pdrking requirements would be met. The Pub}9� Works Director said the representative af Win Stephens, Mr. Roland.Benjamin, rras.present to answer any of the Council questtions. The Pubtic Works Director commented with the proposed roadway, the boulevard shouid be shifted to make sure there will be a proper set back. He sa�d currently, there is no road in the rear portion of the property in question. Hr. Sobiech said it would be in or.der for the Cauncil to cancur with the recommendation of the Planning Commissio� and approve the iequest Nith the stipulation set by the Planning Commission. . Mayor Kee questioned when the area would be platted. The.Public Works _ Director said the City wouid have to wait for Mr. Schroer to produce �% the plat. Councilman 8reider asked Mr.-Schroer when the area would De platted, and Mr. Schroer ansHered that this would be after the • restaurant is in operation. Mr. Schroer said the parcels would meet the proper lot size and it is the proposal to bring the road in '� �next to the building. Mayor Nee asked if there was to be wasted land Hith this proposal. Mr. Sch'roer satid the street would be needed 4or the lots in back of the Town Crier and Capp Homes. Mayor Nee asked if this would be a praper solutio� to the problem, and Mr. Schroer said it had been suggested,by the City Council because of the depth of the • . IQts. MOTIDN by Councitman B�eider to concur with the recommendation of the Pianning Commission and grant the lot split request to Mr. Robert . , Schroer as requested for 7810 Universtiy Avenue N.E. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, atl yotin9 Mayor Nee dectared the motion carric*d unani.mausly. • • 19 � •.� c� : �: : � • :r • •.r � � . �: �� u : �- •:, . s• � � : � � •1 �'�� :1� • 51•.. 1: /. � •7 • 1 :il :ti •►' �� 1�'.• 1 L i1 •�'• Y'.I. :i/ 1 : 1 1?1 1 � :11 �� :� : 1'./. •' �:I' ' 11 :i M ��1: 1: 4;I:t' ?/ 1': �iE WUNCII. OF �fiE CITY OF FRIDLk.'Y DO£S ORLY�IN AS F�X,IOWS: 101.01 DEFINI'PDO[�1S �e foliowinq definitions shall apply in the intetpcetation and application of this C}�ipter and the following words and terms, wherever they occuz in this Q�apter, aze defined as follows: 1. Animsl. }�t�y 1� living creatuce �X�P,p� the hL�n race �¢�� y' }k,iX�l • 2. Anim31 Contcol Offioer. Any individual designated by the City to enforce the provisions of this Q�aptez, including all City police officers. 3. Aninal Sheltez. P,ny prenises desicp ated b� the City for the purpose of impounding and caring foz animals held under the authority of this Chapter. The facility may be oaned th* the City or may be a wntracted shelter servioe. 4. P,nim�l Tag. A tag prwided to individuals who are issued a permit to maintain an animal. 5. Cat. Fviy anim3l of the feline species. jti CruelGy or '!�rtL� �,r�a�,. art�sGion or neglec�� ereby ��n�,cessary or unj �s� t; fiable nain. .ff r�g or both shall be ca��7 or pgr!n�tted_ 7. Dog. My aninal. of the canine species. 8. Rennel. e�i] ]�ny glace where three or more dogs, three or more ca*= or a�v co�hination of threo or m�re doas a*+� c?ts aze kept on the same prenises. A.f Psh �' �f ��os or kittens �v h� kept for a ner�od of Gix f61 months before beina �{�;rU c■� i� � d��r-m�*Lati�� whe��r or not a ken*+Pl ex�sts. 9, Livestock. Eorses, cattle, 9oats, rabbitsr sheep and fowl. 10. Aermit. 7Rie authority to keep an animal �� t�ef ��i�� #¢�� within the City of Fridley. 11. Pet Shop. Any person, partnership ot oocporation engaged in the business of bceeding, buying, selling or boarding anim3ls of any species, 12. Veterinaty Hospital. l�kiy establis,hment maintained and opezated b� a licensed veteiinarian for the diac�sosis, �e and tseatmea�t of diseases and injuries of animals. 101.02. WII�D ANIlgfi.S AAID BIRAS It shall be imlawful for any person to himt, take, shoot, trap, kill, injure oz attenpt to injiue any wild animal within the City of Fridley by use of a firearm, bow and artow, trap, poison or any other means. This prohibition, , hawever, shall not prevent property owners oz their aqents from eradicating rodents on their property thhc�ah he use of trans no�so� or other such ,Ldtt�L�l`�m3nc' :02.03. LNF�t�O(R C10NIItCL 1. Lioense Requirenent. io petson shall engage in the keepin9, caising, feeding or caring for _ivestock within the City limits of fYidley without fizst hav u�g obtained a ,liaense to do so. �ui/1ry(��Ilt�C�/14��/Ya��i��/7�/X�#��if�t/�,�/�T��iXi¢� ��t��r(� (xef. e5) _. License Procedure. A, A license to keep livestock shall be 9ranted only after written application, signed by the applicant, and filed with the City. The application shall state the applicant's full name and address and contain a canplete c3escziption of the livestock to be kept as to kind and number and a�¢¢¢�t,i�X,i�/f site nlan of the prdnises showing the adjoining property, fence lines and livestock housing facilities. � B. The Camcil, in oonsidering whether a license should be granted, may oonsider tY�e nature of the livestock, the possible effect on adjoining , prcyperties, the fence lines, the housing facilities, the santitation oontrol and the effect on the general health, S f� et� and welfare of the City. 21 3. Liaense Fee. �e annual lioense fee and exQiration date for a livestock license shall be as provided in 4apter ll of this Code. 4. Manute Renaval. Pecsons who keep animals within the City shall not allaa any odors Which aze offensive to the people inhabiting the City sych that th� constit�te a -•-��- �-^ a^F`^� "(it=.T]FPT 71� e*+titled "Pub� ic Nuisance". of the Gitv �� ^Ocganic mattet shall not be allowed to accumulate foz moze than one (1) week at a time. However, o�ganic mattec shall be cenoved more often than one (1) ture per week if it is necessacy to eliminate any odors rt�,r �n�stitute a n i ' can 5. Housing- Proper housing in the form of barns, co�ps os hutches shall be ptovided in any area whete livestock ace permitted to roam. Such housing shall be adequately fenced to insure that the livestock rgnain on the ownet's pz�nises. When livestock are kept in an azea that abuts or adjoins a tesidential area on �rhidi dwellings are ezected, there shall be a strip of ]and at least thirty (30) feet wide between such abutting property and the area on which the livestock aze kept. 6. Inspection, Any authotized A�ima� Cnntrol Officer of the City shall, at any reasonable time, be permitted upon the pranises where livestock are kept £or the purpose of making inspection to determine compliance with this (iiapter. 101.04, DOG OONIIt(I� ' It shall be timlawful foz atry person giaht�n (�B1 ve?rs of a� oz old�r or for t2�e �r�ts oz guazdians of any person �dec eighteen (18) years of age who vwns, harbots oc keeps a dog to allaw such dog to sun at latge in the City. Rl�e age of the dog is izzelzvant iux3ec this Section. 101.05. ANIMAL NU7.SANCE Ebz the puzpose of this Chaptec, an �� Ff� ¢1�1! �iIDdl shall be deemed to constitute a nuisanoe when �v of t� followina conditions ex�Gt : 1, �e ��` ¢�i` �1ID31 is not conf ined to the o�wner's ot custodian's pcoperty by adequate fencing oz leashing. 2, �e ��l �}{X �;pjm31 is off the prenises of the cr�vner ot custodian and is not ix►der the oontrol of ti�e arner or custodian by a leash. Such leash shall aot e�coeed eight (8) feet in lengtii. Zhis provision is not applicable when g� �� an animal is in a motos vehicle. 3. 2he �� ¢1�R s'�],ID�1 �mits dazna9e to the person or pzoperty of anyone othe� than the amez, or creates a nuisance, as defi4ed i�rh;c cl,anrez or in Cha�r 11Q of t� City_�„�, upon the property of one othez than the owner. 22 4Y�is provision is not applicable when the dog o� cat is acting in defense of the owner, the owner's family or the owner's property. ��f�fJS�IY'�/�k�fYLb's�d�/rd� �'a'f�'�4�/��i�.�hir/x¢� �. A fenale ��}' '�?.�imdl is in heat, off the prenises of the owner, uil.ess confined vhile being transported to or fran the prenises of the owner. R�i.s prwision is applicable when a fenale �� 'p.� ,dt3],t➢31 is in heat and is on the pranises of the owner, but is not kept in a building or secure �closure where it cannot be in contact witl� other males of its kind, except foc planned breeding. 5. The g1� ��f '�-` �II]�il �rks. howls, cries or yelps so as to unnecessarily distuzb os annoy any person or persons in the vicinity thereof, ��` y6�S��}� �v�3'.�X �t�#�i'$ $¢}�X $t`➢�►�� $� 1�X�� i��R'�8 �r o h rw; e�rs a souna �hg �•� • ii aa [;PFlt1P(3 in Chw�� 11(1 Pn i 1 d"PUb1iC �i 'n�J O r 6. 2he dpS� ��` ��(�' s3IIi.ID31 chases vehicles or othezwise interferes with pedestrians, autanobiles, bicyles, motorcycles, motor bikes or sna+rmobiles on public streets, alleys, �`��yf�T¢, pI � G or hi�xrays. 7, whP�e�•��; red, the �� f�` �imal has not been vaccinated against rabies within the preceding two (2) years. �.!//`.[}fk/6s6►f��/�(XXlh6�/�(/Ri6¢�/td�/fafi`1L!6/i�fdX��£i'/6�/if1'bbd¢��{,��6rS/�P/b4S�Qi/E��B`d�f ��II�S/I�t,�45l�'��'�A/,44�fa�+'d/E�k�F�'/d'd�/1�HA�/�r4�fa'Y/.��/,4�b'/k�'d� H�#�� I��/�ce,dA��'�'��/�//�'a�/1��A�i1iS`�vit�/L�/�N'�/��'/�� 8. '1]uee (3) or more dogs, three i3) or more cats or any c�ina ion o hreP ,�3� �I II�TP�,�(lg$ and cats aze kept on the same pr�nises, unless a kennel license is obtained in the appropriate zore for tiiat use and the requirements of Section 101.15 aze canplied with. �.�ir��,v��i��ri�xr�s��x�v�n�,�i��ix�i��i�fi�t��x��,r 101.06. DOG RF�LS'1RATIDN 1. Permit. A. No person shall own, keep or harbor any dog ovez the age of six (6) months withi.n the City imless a permit therefor has been secured. Permit ceztificates shall be issued by the City upon proof of cabies vaccination within the pceceeding two (2) years. Issuance of new permits for the lic�se year shall oamence as set forth in (�apter 11 of this Code. In Aixil of each year, the City �y publish notioe in the official newspaper of the reed to pay such permit registration fee. 23 B. The applicant for perroit must sign and agree that he or she is preg�red to oomply with regulations established by the City. It shall be the duty of each person owning, keeping or harboring a doq to pay the permit fee established by the City on or before the first 8ay of the pezmit year, or upon establishin9 residenoe in the City. Upon Fayment of the persnit fee, the City shall execute a zeceipt in duplicate, the otiqinal of whicis shall be deliveted to the person who pays the fee and the duplicate retained in the City recocds. At a minim�an. tise receipt shall desccibe tYre dog as to bceecl, age, color, �wnez and arnez's addzess. C. No permit shall be required of any hunane societyr vetecinary hospital or laboratory. 2. Tag. A. In addition to the permit, a tag, the shape or oolor of which shall be cli.fferent for each registration year, shall be issued by the City. The uwrler shall affix the tag, by a pe�manent metal fastener, to the collar or harness of the zegistered dog in such a mannez so that the tag may be seen, The aaner shall see to it that the tag is constantly worn by the dog. In case any tag is lost, a duplicate may be issued by the City Upon cepcesentation of a seceipt showing the paymer�t of the petmit fee foz the current year. A chazge, as psovided by (�aptec 11 of this Code, shall be made for each duplicate tag. If at the ture of initial registcation a dog is due to be vaccinated within the rext six (6j month period, then a new vaccination shall be required before a permit is issued. B, it shall be iuilawful to munterfeit or attenpt to counterfeit a dog tag or take fran any dog a tag legally placed upon it by its owner with the i.ntent to place it upon another dog or to place such ta9 upon another animal. C. Do9 tags shall not be transferable and no refimds shall be made on a permit fee because of leaving the City or cieath of the dog. 101.07. RESK)CATDON 1. An animal permit may be �evoked if: A. The person holding the permit refuses or fails to comply with � �9visions of this Chapter, any other regulations promul9atea by the City or any state or local law gaverning cruelty to animals or the keeping of animals. B. An awner fails to provide the animal with p�yi�f�¢��►iY �� 1�d Y�X¢�i(M� nerpsc�rv fo0@� water, shelter� �6��¢¢�,i�yf �j�� }1� yb¢�fi�Kkl�' veterinary care and hurane care and treatxnent. C, p,n v,R�ec overdrives, oveiloads, overwocks, t9r � G, ill threats, tp[ments, nPgle.ly�, o; ��justif�ably�j �� m°�MS mutilateG. oz cru �1iv wr�rks a*+ animai y�g*+ ��f; fo labo , or othecwise abuses any animal. D, An o�wner causes or permits any dog fight, cock fight, bull fight ot oti�er oortii�at between ani�ls or betwe� animals and himians. 24 E. An owrer violates the tezms of this (�apter three (3) times within ore (1) Petmit year. 2, Any person Whose permit is revdced shall, witliin fifteen (15) days, renove sudt animal.(s) pecmazient].y from the City or hiananely dispose of the animal(s) cited in the violation as being ownedr kept ot harbored by such pecson and no part af the permit fee shall be refunded. In addition, the owner may be liable to court action �a'►dez this Code, State Statutes and local laws for any of the actions cited above. 3. If a pezmit is revoked, no new permit may be issued for a period of one (1} yeaz fzan date the permit is revoked. 101.08. II�IO�1S �e section of this Qupter requiring a permit and tag shall not apply to norr residents of the City who are keeping only domestic pets, provided that the anina.ls of such owners shall be kept in the City no longer than thirty (30) days and the anim3is are kept �der restraint. �/�d{�yf��'�yf�/�Y/1��$ t+��Y�fI��'XI�f�X�I�f��/�/t�te��/��`/i��¢�I�a�¢��Y��rs�l��'� t��f¢¢fnS��. B]� ot�r uravision5 of � Ch�Dter s►,all anpty to 101.09. FEFS �e annual permit fee and e�iration date shall be as provided in Chapter 11 of this Code. Neutered or spayed aninals shall qualify for a reduced permit fee as provided ir (9�apter 11 of this Code. '.O 1.10 . Il�FC)IJt�IDII� 1. Generally. A. The Animal Control Officer shall take up and impound any animals requiring permits or taqs found in the City without the tags; or any animals which aze in violation of any of the other provisions of this Qiapter, Arw�els shall be impounded in an animal. shelter and wnfined in a ° h�ynane manrier, Impounded animals shall be kept foz not less than five (5) days, utcluding S�mdays and Aolidays, tmless reclaimed ky their owners. S. If an animal is found at large and the owner or custodian can be identified, the Anurel Ca�tsol Offic�r may proceed aqainst the owner for violation of tY�is Chapter. C. The Animal Control Officer may enter upon any public or private p�enises by watrant or as otherwise pravided by law when such officer is in reasonable pursuit of his or hez duties. D. Upon taking and impounding any anima7. as p�ovided in this Qiapter, the Anisml Control Offioer shall imnediately notify the ownerr if known, and ' the City Police Department. The Animal Control Officer and Police Deg3rtrnent shall maintain a record of anim37.s so impounded. __ Claiming an Smpounded Anitoel. 25 A. In the instance of animals for which the owner does not have a required permit or tag, the Aniiml Cmtrol Offiaer shall not return such anim�l to the owner �mtil a pezmit ard tag have been purchased fcom the City or fran the Aninal Control Offieer. �e Aninel Control Offioer shall canit to the City the sian paid foz the permit and/oz tag i� �X ��t W�$ ►� 1�t`�f �f ��¢� �'�7�i`�$r��,i f`� #�X �t �f�k�` � ana furnish the City with all necessary infozmation pertaining to said purchase including a mpy of any peimit oertificate issued in wnnection thecewith. B, RY�e Aninel Control Officer shall be paid by the animal's ownec an impoimding fee 16X1� �R� i�� `� �� C`� 4�� X!'�� $� 1�F��i�X �$ ��'j{�pi ,{yf j� �f�, RY�e Aniiml Control Officer shall turn ovec to the City any impounding fees zeceived. Rhe City shall place such fees in the gex►eral f�md of the City. C. If a rabies vaccination is required and the owr►er cannot produc� proof that the aninal has had a rabies vacci.nation within the preceding two (2) yeazs, the Aninal Control Officer shall vaccinate such dog or other anim31 for rabies as a oondition of release to the owner. The animal's owne� shall pay to the Anima.l Control Offioer the wsk of the immasization. D. Rhe Animal Control Officer shall be paid by the animal's owner the oost of feed and caze for each day the animal is confined in the �5$�lyf¢I �n;mal �twl 3. Unclaimed Impoimded Aninels. Any animal which is not claimed within five (5J days after having been imp��mded, includinq S�days ot Holidays, may be sequested and claimed by a licensed educational or scientific institution under Minnesota Statutes Section 35.71. If not so reqnested and clauned, the animal may be sold for not less than the aono�u�t of the total char9es accrued against the animal in accozciance with the provisions of this Chapter. All sums received by the Aninal Contcol Offioer, ��gt �1e SX�t of feed a*+� �e a*+� anv �,�ccinations 9r '+�*nini =t'ons��s*Pred -o � a�'�t, sha11 be renitted to the City and placed into the general fiu�d of the City. Any ani�ml which is not clai�ed by the owner, a lioensed educational or scientific institution oz sold, shall be painlessly put to death and propesly disposed of by the Animal Control Offices. The time of sale or other disposition of the animal shall be at least 120 hours after notice has been given to the animal's owner by the Aninal Control Officer. 'Il�e provisions of notification to the owner do not apply when the owner cannot be reasonahly ascertained. 101.11. ANIMAI, BPt�.Sr Q[JAR1iN'PIP1E 1, Any pecson knowing of a hu�n being bit by a dog, cat, cacoon, skunk ot other species susceptible to rabies shall iimnediately notify the Animal Contcol Officez or Police Depart�nent. 5�enever such an anvrel has bitten any person, the v�net csx custodian of the animal, }f�S7i�yl� Id��yt r�fter � e so notified by the Animal Control Officer or the Police Department, shall immediately cause said animal to be quarantined at the City of Fridley oontract }C¢y3yi¢X �1�`�� "�"'�� }'°� ° or at a licensed veterinary hosgital or kennel for a period of fourteen (14) days after such pezson has been bitten. During the quatantine peciod, said animal shall be kept undez 26 observation to determine its condition and if it is found to be sick or diseased, the vperat� af the quazantine facility sha11 i�miediately repozt in writing to the Polioe Departnent and the Fridley Anim31 Control Officer, the oondition of the aninal. 7Y�e Ani�l Control Officer shall then take necessary steps to determine if the animal is suffering fran rabies. 2. Durin9 the quarantine period the animal shall not be removed from the desicp�ated quarantire fecility except by special written permission from the Minnesota Livestock Sanitary Board and the Fridley Animal Control Officer. 1he a�wnez of an animal shall be zesponsible foz the cost of quazantine. The quarantine required by this section shall not be necessary and the requirsnents shall be waived if the custodian � own�.*_ of the animal, imriediately upon t�� S� � 1'�Y7�� l�l�l� K� i�J�� notification th?t t� oLi+Pt a�i�� t� bitte� �a?e. presents to the Animal Contzol Officer oz Police Dep3rtment, the certificate of an authorized veterinarian that the animal was vaccinated for rabies on a date not less than two (2) years prior to the date of ¢yt�}5 �f¢X�¢¢ *!=e bitt�a. Such animal so exempt shall be quazantined on the prenises of the owner, tmc3er stiict control, for a period of fouzteen (14) days for the pucpose of obsecvation for symptans of disease. �he Anim31 Control Officer is authorized to conduct a mid-term and terminal ex�nination of the anim3l. 3. It shall be tmlawful foc any petson, othez than an Aninal Contsol Officer, to kill or destroy any animal famd r�ng at large in the City. No Animal Control Offioer or othez person shall ki11, or cause to be killed any animal suspected of being rabid, except after the animal has been placed in quarantine and the dia�osis of rabies made. 101.12. VICIOUS P,NII7ALS ,3o petson shaJ.l keep oz allva to be kept ��x�¢¢ in the City any animal of a vicious character, habit or disposition oz any animsl wild by nature. Any dog ' or other aninal shall be deaned to be vicious upon t2�e occurrence of two (2) bites within 365 calerciar days except those occurring in defense of the owner �,r the vaner�s prcyperty. Upon o�nviction foc the violation of this section, he Court may in addition to imposition of sent�ce, direct the Animal Control Offioer to take the anim31 in question into custody and forthwith dispose of .. ��1� 1� 1� 1� R��R�t� �� f��Xl� A�� I�l'�4�X�I� L01.13. �.IIT15 Any person oomplaining to t2�e Pblice Depart�nent that an animal is allegedly r�ning at large or othezrrise wnstituting a danger or nuisance shall icientify himself or herself upon request and shall make every reasonable att�npt to assist the authorities in identifying the animal and its owner or custodian. 101.14. t�iTLZLIl� Whenever the prevalence of hydrophobia renders such action necessary to protect the public health and safety, the Mayor shall issue a proclamation asdezing every person owning or keeping �f $� an anim�t s_ t�b,^a-,�ib„� to rabies co oonfine it securely on theic prgnises unless it is muzzled so that it cannot bite. No person shall violate the proclamation, and any urmuzzled dog running at large durin9 the time fixed in the proclamation shall be z� imrediately put to death by the Animal Control Qificer without notice to the aarer. 101.15. I�S 1. License Requireoent. No pecson SYldll IC@2Q OL IIId1Rtd17l 8 kennel in the City except upon obtaining a kennel lioense consistent with the zoning requiranents of this Code. 2. License Application. Application foz a kenrel lioense shall be made on foims prwided by the City. Such application shall oontain the following information: A. Location, m tl�e prenises, of the kennel. B, Location of struct�ues for housing tl�e dogs and/or cats. If the dogs and/or cats are to be kept primsrily within the hane ot othec kuilding of the zesidence of the applicant or of any other person, the application shall so state. C, 'lhe maximan n�ez of dogs, cats or any combination theteof, to be kept on the prenises. D. 4t�e distance af any dog runs or housing for dogs from any building structures suitable for Mmfan habitation, or a public place where food is bought� stoced or eaten. This distance shall be a minimun of 200 feet. E. 7Y�e prenises for any keepin9 of dogs shall be fenced and a sim�le plan showin9 the location of fencing shall be furnished. The fencing must be of such quality }� �`� a*?� desi� � th?t it will oontain the dogs and/or Cats. F. Method to be used in keeping the prenises in a sanitary condition. G. Method to be used in keeping the dogs andJor cats quiet. 8. An agceenent hy the applicant that the pc�nises may be inspected by the City at all reasorehle times. 4. Issuance of License. The City shall have discretion in determining whethez oc not to issue a lioense. In making sud� detetminationr the City shall take into consideration the adecg�acy of the housing, the runs for the animals, the method used for sanitation, the method used to keep the animals quiet, the facilities for containing the animals and with particularity any violations during the previous license peciod. 5. Resrel License Fee. �e annual lioense fee and expization date shall be as provided in Chapter 11 of this Code. � 6. License Revocation. If a lioense is gzanted and the applicant thereaftei fails to oanply with the statanerts made in t2�e application or any other mnditions reasoriahly imposed, or violates any other provisions of this Chapter, the licensee shall be notified by mail and given ten i10) days to remedy any defects or defaults. If eud� condition is not remedied in ten (10) days, a heazing shall be held after at least ten (10) days mailed notice to the licensee, and the licensee and all other intecested parties shall be heazd, If it shall appeas that said kennel is not being propezly maintained, the City may revoke the kennel lice�.se and the keeping of three (3) or more dogs, three i3) or more cats, or any combination of three (3) or more dogs and cats shall be immediately discontinued. 7,!//i�sX�fx1X/ab,�►sa`�.`! X�/�K�XX/f6�/,��f�Xlf��/1u�11X�,�r��Jxb/A6/b�J#t,�,iYI�I�fI�N�I��X�� /�(rb'/�� ,�r� �t!!lXXXbr41XK�/�k�Si�`Eg/k,6llsE/K#1bY/�'rV�/��I6z`Irs�U1�tSX:�I�ri�7XX�dr3� �,Ul�v�l�Xf�X/rh4�K�111/!I/ �l//i7Xds�/14��/��/��/��/X6/I��i6/b�/��'�fi1�fa�bY�rik/#�'+�Ytf/bNbb'/d�i 1Q�[e/1��• IJ . . . �. z� , !. nl- .�r.: - 101.16. ANZNIl►i. 00bfQt(L OFPI�t 1. Appoint�nent. The City may appoint such petson, persons or firm as the City may deem necessary and advisable as Ani�ral Control Officer. S1�ch appointees shall work under the supervision of the Fridley Police Depactment and shall be responsible for the enforoanent of this C2�apter. 2. Duties. Animal Contzol Officers are authorized to enforce the provisions of this Q�aptei and other related ordinances, Chapters and statutes pertaining to anina]. control, including the issuance of citations. 3. Unlawful Acts. It shall be unlawful for any unauthocized petson to break into an animal shelter. or attempt to d� so, or to take or set free any animal taken by the Animal Contxol Offioec in the �,%(y(¢¢ ^ o m n of this Chaptet, or in any way interfere with, hindez or molest sud� Offiaer in the dischatge of his or her duty iaxiez this Chapter. 101.17. cU�itD DOC�S 1. Businesses located within the City and maintaining a guard dog for security purposes shall post notice at the entrance to the prenises warning of the presence of said dog. 2. Hnsinesses maintai.ning a guard do9 shall file with the City a release authorizing the police or fire departinents to shoot said dog in an eme�gency situation, if necessary, in order to allow the police or fire fightecs to gain acinittance to the prenises in the performance of their duties. 101.18. SEETI�G EYE DOGS Whenever a blind person accompanied bp a"seeing eye" or guide dog presents himself/hetself foz acoam�dation oz service on any public wnveyance vehicle ac to any cafe, restaurant, store or other place of business open to the public, it shall be imlawful for the proprietor, manager or opezator of such vehicle or place of business to refuse ac�nission to the dog or service to the blind person. 101.19. Q31FT�TY 40 ANIl�WI� Minnesota Statutes 346.20 througt� 346.34 aze hereb�r adopted by reference and shall be in full force and effect in the City of Fridley as if set out heze in full. 101.20. RELF�TDON 'N dlSE[t LAW 2Yie prohibitions contained in this Chapter shall be in addition to any State oz Fedezal law zegacding the same or related subjects. 101.21. PII�LTIL Any violation of this Chapter is a misdaneanor and is subject to all penalties prwided for sud� violation tmder the prwisions of Chapte� 901 of this Code. PASSED APID ADOPPID BY RHE CITY Q7[JNCIL OF aiE CITY OF F�2IDLEY 'II3SS ._. �1' OF , 1983. WILL7AM J. NEE - NR�Y�R ATIFSP : 29 30 SIDNE�1' C. II�IAN - QTY CI,II2R Fiist Redding: Secotd Reading: Publish: ?/$/3/32 CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSIN6 & REDEUELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING APRIL 27, 1983 CALL TO OR�ER: Vice-Chairperson Prieditis called the April 27, 1983, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:43 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Elmars Prieditis, Carolyn Svendsen, Duane Prairie, Walter Rasmussen Mer.ibers Absent: Larry Comners Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Nasim Qureshi, City Manager 5id Inman, City Finance Director Dave Newman, City Attorney Bob Olr�stead, Fridley Lions Bob Cook, Fridley Lions Norm Reznicow, Fridley Lions Mike Murphy, Fridley Lions APPROVAL OF MARCH 10, 1983, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHOR:'.'t MINUTES: MO:'ZON BY MR. PRAIRIE� SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEIJ� TO RPPROVE THE MARCH 10� 2983, HOUSING 6 REDEVELOPMENT RUTHORITY MINUTES AS 4JRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHRZRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMDUSLY. APPROVAL OF MARCH 31 1983 SPECIAL HOl1SING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY P1IPlUTES: Mr. Prieditis recommended that the approval of these minutes be delayed until Mr. Commers could be present. 1. CENTER CITY DISTRICT A. Hardware Building Update 1. Status on Existing Lease Property (Memo #83-23 from Executive Director) Mr. Newman stated Clothing Liquidators, Inc., has been removed from the hardware building by an unlawful detainer, and the City has comnenced action against them for the unpaid rent. Mr. Carson has filed an answer which means the City has to go to trial to get the judgement. He suspected the case would come to trial within the next 3-4 months, and then there would be the problem of trying to HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 27, 1983 PAGE 2 collect the rent. It was his understanding that Mr. Carson does not have much in the way of assets, but they will take certain steps to find out what he does have. If he hasn't much, there isn't much the City can do but wait and hope that sometime within the next ten years, Mr. Carson acquires some real estate so the City can collect the rent. Mr, Rasmussen asked if the HRA had collected any money at all from Mr. Carson as nothing was indicated on the breakdown of "HRA Rent". Mr, Boardman stated they did not receive any rent, but did receive a deposit. Mr. Inman stated the breakdown refers only to rents and not to deposits. Staff was requested to report only the rents. They do not consider the first time deposits to be rent, but under the new process, they are going to consider the first and last months as a security deposit. Actual rent received was "none". Mr. Rasmussen asked about any liens against the property for improve- ments made by Mr. Carson. Mr. Boardman stated there is one lien and that is about $1,200. Mr. Newman stated the lien is Rart of the lawsuit filed against Mr, Carson. He thought the total amount due the HRA is around $11,000. Mr. Rasmussen asked what the legal work is costing the City. Mr. Newman stated the hourly rate is 550. He stated they have put about 3-4 hours %nto this particular project. They have a separate action they fiave filed for restitution of the property. Mr. Rasmussen stated he felt it was fair to find out exactly where they stand with this property. He did not like to spend a lot of �oney on something they probably can�ot co]]ect. Legal fees mount up. Mr. Nevrtnan stated that as far as collecting a judgement against Mr. Carson, theY can da that rather speedily. As far as a lot of lega� time, it is going to take some waiting to get into the courts. He did not think the total time for attorneys' fees was going to be significant, particularly when they are talking about a$11,000 sum owed the HRA and considering the fact that the judgement is valid for a minimum of ten years and is accruing interest as they wait. Mr. Prairie stated he thought the HRA should have a breakdown of all the transactions concerning Clothing Liquidators, Inc. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 27, 1983 PAGE 3 Mr. Inman stated there was a$1,291 deposit paid on Dec. 6, 1982. Mr. Carson owes four mooths' rent at $3,140/mo. for a total of 512,560. Mr. Prairie stated that a deposit is usually one month's rent. Mr. Newman stated that in looking at the lease, it was his recollec- tion that the HRA reduced that deposit because of certain repairs to the building which Mr. Carson has made. Mr. Newman stated he thought Mr. Carson made in excess of $3,000 in repairs to the property. Mr. Rasmussen stated he recalled that they were going to receive one month's rent and now that amount has been reduced to 31,291. Mr. Prieditis asked Mr. Newman how much he expected a case like this to cost in legal fees. Mr.Newman stated it depended upon how much Mr, Carson tries to contest the case. If Mr. Carson does not do much, he would think the legal work would take another 6-10 hours in drafting the necessary docu- ments and making the necessary court appearances. Mr. Rasmussen stated he felt the NRA should know exactly what the NRA has spent in this process. He felt the HRA has to have that i�forma- tion. He was not trying to deny good legal work, but to go ahead and spend a lot of money tryin9 to collect a"dead horse" was as bad as leasing the building to Mr. Carson in the first place. Mr. Prairie stated if they have been unable to collect the rent now, he felt the chances of collecting the rent in the future were very slim. Mr. Rasmussen stated he would like to see them send this to a collection agency Defore spending any more money in legal work. He did not mind spen6ing money for good legal work if there was some kind of recovery. Mr. Boardman stated the way it shou7d have been and the way they have set the process up now is to have the first month's rent and the last month's rent before letting a leasee move in, In the lease the HRA looked at, it was set up that because of the amount of expenditures, the deposit was reduced. Mr.Prieditis stated he would like Staff to get all the docu�entation together on the hardware building lease--past minutes, expenses, copies of agreements, what has been collected, etc. HOUSING & REDEVECOPMENT AlITHORI7V MEETING APRIL 27 1983 PAGE 4 Mr. Newman siated they do not intend to do anything on this for the next 30 days anyway so he did not have any problem with delaying this for 45 days until the HRA has had a better chance to review all the information. Mr. Boardman stated he would get that information together for the HRA. Mr. Newman stated that if the HRA does decide to go to a colTection agency, he would suggest that Staff get an opinion from the collec- tion agency on what the chances are of collectin9 with or without a judgement. 2. Lease Process Mr. Boardman stated that in the agenda is the Standard Lease Process the HRA asked Staff to establish. It is for the HRA's review. Also included are a couple of standard letters that would be sent out as a matter of the process for non-payment within a certain period of time. Mr. Boardman stated that also included in the agenda was a breakdown of the rents, the leasees, month7y rents, and the arrears. This inf�rmation was requested by the HRA. The leasee owing the most rent, of course,was Clothing Liquidators, Inc. Gary's, the garage just north of City Hall, is behind in rent. At this time, Gary has paid but is still behind in one month's rent at $225 plus interest. A letter has been sent to him, but no response has been received. He stated Gary's has been in operation in this location for many years, and did the HRA want to take an unlawful detainer to have the business removad? Mr, Rasmussen suggested Mr. Soardman talk to the owner of Gary's personally to see what the problem is before making any further decision. Mr. Prairie stated he would agree with Mr. Rasrt�ssen's suggestion. At least this leasee continues to pay rent, even though he is behind. Mr, Prairie stated that #2 under "New Leases" in the Standard Lease Process stated that: "There will be a staff review of required financial documentation (such as asset/liabi7ity report, bank/ financial credit reference checks, financial statements of existing businesses, etc.). This review shall include the HRA Executive Director, City Manaqer, Finance Director, and the HRA Attorney." He felt there wouid be some worth to include the HRA in that review. Mr. Boardman stated he had no problem with including the HRA in the review of the financial documentation. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING APRIL 27 1983 PAGE 5 MOTION BY M3. SVENASEN� SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE� TO AMEND 1i2. UNDER "NEW LEASES" TO INCLUDE "THE XRA" AFTER THE "FINANCE DIRECTOR". Mr, Rasmussen stated that if the fIRA agrees to �2, he thought they would be going through an exercise that is going to be quite costly. He thought a very simple report fran the Executive Director with normal credit references and a financial statement was all that was necessary for the HRA to review. He thought it was too expensive to include the legal review and other staff review. If, in review- ing the report from the Executive Director, there was something the HRA did not like, then they could turn down an obvious bad lease or they could include the attorney at that time. Mr, Boardman stated he would rewrite #2 and bring it 6ack to the HRA. MS. SVENDSEN WITXDREW THE ABOVE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE SECONDER, Ms. Svendsen asked if the HRA could get a report on the status of all leases and rent payments on a regular basis. Mr. Inman stated the HRA will be receiving that information on a monthly basis. Mr. Rasmussen stated he did not like the wording of #3 under "New Leases": "The signing of the lease must be approved by the HRA with a report from the Executive Director with written approval from the HRA attorney." If the city attorney is going to do the approving, why was the HRA needed? He felt that statement was a little top-heavy. Mr. Boardman stated the following process would be followed for new leases: (1) All leases would be executed on standard lease forms; (2) The Executive Director would provide a report to the HRA with all the financial documentation. He stated that if, at that time, the HRA felt it was necessary to go to the attorney for further review of the lease, they could do so. However, he would like to send the lease to the attorney as a standard process to make sure all the legal things are taken care of, The attorney is not necessarily approvinq but changing any wording that is necessary in the conkract itself. fihe approval will come from the HRA when they look at all the financial documentation. He felt it was very important to include the attorney, but it was up to the HRA whether they wanted the attorney involved in the beginning or the end of the process. Mr.Rasmussen stated he felt it would be better to involve the attorney afterwards as he felt the HRA could probably inte71i9ently weed out some of the leases that were obviously bad leases. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 27, 1983 PA6E 6 Mr. Boardman stated the HRA has to take into consideration the fact that all of the 7eases are temporary leases. All they are trying to do is occupy the buildings to keep some income caning in. They try to set up the ieases on a month-to-month basis so the HRA can take the property within 30 days if there is a project. Ideally, they would rather not own any property at all. Wfien the hardware building was purchased, the NRA felt they had a pretty good packa9e, and there was sane matching federa] monies to reduce the cost. The building was empty at the time, and some additional money was saved in retacation and moving costs. Mr. Rasmussen stated it seemed they just keep putting out money as though it is never going to end, and there is no master plan for any of it. There is a proposal on the agenda from some very responsi- file people from Fridley, and the HRA would really like to help them, but without a major plan, again they are getting into the same "flea market" kind of thing. He felt there should be a major plan that is going to encompass everything, rather than handling one crisis at a time. Mr. Prieditis stated this should probably be a subject for discussion when their agenda is not so lengthy. MOTZON BY MS. SVENDSEN� SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION ON THE STANDARD LEASE PROCESS UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING� BRSED ON THE PREVIDUS DISCUSSION. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED TNE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Inquiry by Lions C7ub on Hardware Building Property Mr. Bob Olmstead stated he was from the FridTey Lions Ciub and was standing in for John Gargary, who previously made some inquiries about the hardware property. Mr. Olmstead stated the fridley Lions Coub is a substantial ciub, and they are in their 30th year. They are interested in the hardware building, t{e stated they have gone through the club process, the 6oard, and the general membership, and that is why they are at this HRA meeting. Mr. Olmstead stated they have been informed by some city officials that to bring the hardware building up to code and to use it as a club/meeting place and assembly area, there would need to be some extensive repairs. The Lions Club would like to know if the HRA would be willing to lease the hardware building to them on a lona term lease or possibly even purchase the building. The reason they need a long-term lease (5 yr,) is because of the repairs needed to bring the building up to code. It has to be econanically feasible to them. A conservative estimate on bringing the building up to code is $40-50,000. If they did lease or purchase the building, they would make the building a credit to the community. The club intends HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING APRIL 27 1983 PAGE 7 to stay in Fridley and the club needs a home. Right now their club meetings are held in a retail restaurant. Mr. Olmstead stated the building would be used as a club meeting place. They have bingo two nights a week, Thurs, and Sat. evenings, with two c7ub meetings a month on the second and fourth Tuesdays. They would be interested in putting in a wall and getting some income by having a rental hall for cortmunity and private functions. Mr. Prairie asked how many vehicles were generated by the bingo. Dr. Reznicow stated there are approximately 95-100 people on Thurs. nights now, and about 160-165 people on Sat, nights. Maximum cars would probably be about 100. Parking would have to be arranged viith Mr. Levy. Mr. Prieditis stated that, as Mr. Rasmussen had stated earlier, the HRA is really going to have to seriously look at the future for the west side of University. He thought they should spend a whole meeting discussing wh�t would be a rea7istic development for that area. He liked the Lions Club proposal, but he did not want the HRA to mislead them or the public. Mr. Bob Cook stated that surprised him as he was under the impressio� that there was some kind of overall plan for this area. Mr. Rasmussen stated that even though the Lions Club is an outstand- ing organization, he would suggest they try to develop a major plan before they start piecemealing parcels away. That was why he was not in favor of 3easing the hardware store to Clothing Liquidators, Inc. Mr. Prairie stated that at one time, there was a plan for the whole area, divided up into phases. This area was Phase 3. There w:�re two developers who felt they needed all the acreage to make the project viable and it included tying the hardware building into the shopping center. However, after 3-4 years of not being able to get the area developed, the HRA should discuss if there are better uses for that area than was originally proposed. Mr. 8oardman stated it was going to take more than a discussion by the HRA to make those determinations. If the HRA really feels they would like to develop a plan for the area, it is going to take a market analysis on that property so they can determine what is and what isn't feasible. With that market analysis, there is the expense of drawing up the plan. It could cost around $20-40,000 and will �ake time. Before the HRA takes that kind of step, they should discuss it. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITV MEETING, APRIL 27, 1983 PAGE 8 Mr. Mike Murphy stated he is the incomin9 president of the Lions Club. He stated from what he understood, the HRA would first have to came ug with a comprehensive management plan which would take time. Then they would have to get a market analysis which could take another six months. It was also his understanding that there was no dev�ioper or any financial backi�g to develop at this time, and a couple of developments have already fallen through. It could be at least five years before anything happens and,in the meantime, the Lions Club could be paying rent and the building would not be sitting empty. He hoped the HRA would take this into consideration. Mr. Prieditis suggested the HRA set up a special meetin9 to discuss their ideas and plans for this area so they can respond to the Lions Club. The HRA set a special meeting for Wednesday, May 4, 1983: 8, Property Acquisition Update 1. Dr. Ryan Automotive (Resolution HRA 6-1983) Mr. Boardman stated the HRA's appraisal was $113,000 on the land with $19,746 for fixtures. That offer was made to Dr. Ryan. His a±torney responded recommending condemnation action. Through the quick-iake process (90 days), they have worked out an agreement with Dr. Ryan to take the property sooner than that. Mr. Boardman stated they have contract documents they have to meet with Columbia Park Properties. With this process, they will meet those contract documents. MOTZON BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION HRA 6-1983� "A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTNORZTY OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DIRECTING CONDEMNATION RND DETER- MINZNG THE NECESSZTY FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERSAIN PROPERTY BY PROCEEDSPGS IN EMINENT DbMAIN ON IATS 12� 13� AND 14, BIDCK 4� REE�S ADDITION TO FRIDLEY PARK, 6389 UNNEASSTY AVE. N.E." UPON A VDICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VZCE-CHAIRPERSON PRZEDITIS DECI.ARED THE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. Comnunity Credit (Resolution NRA 7-1983) MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRRIRIE� TO APPROVE RESOLUTION HRA 7-1983� "A RESOLUTZON OF THE HOi752NG & REDEVELOPMENT AUTXORITY OF THE CZTY OF FRZDLEY DIRECTING CONDEMNRTION AND DETER- MINING THE NECESSITY FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERSAIN PROPERTY BY PROCEEDINGS IN EMINENT DOMAIN ON THE LEASEHOLD INTEREST HELD 8Y COMMUNITY CREDIT CO.� 6339 UNIVERISTY AVE. N.E.". UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTSON CARRIED UNANSMDUSLY. HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING ARRIL 27, 1983 PAGE 9 Mr, Boardman stated they need to get a leasehold appraisal on Comnunity Credit. Car�unity Credit's objection is that the HRA is hurting their leasehold interest. He stated he has gotten a couple of quotes--one around $900 and one around $800. He would like authorization to proceed with the lowest quote. MOTION BY MR. RRSMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRRIRIE� TO &UTNORIZE 2HE EXECUTNE DIRECSOR TO PROCEED WITH THE LEASENOLD APPRAISAL WITH TXE LOWEST QUOT6. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VZCE-CHAIRPERSON PRZEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Svendsen stated it was her understanding that when the HRA bought Gus Doty's buildir,g, the HRA paid some additional monies over the appraised va7ue of the property to go for buying out leases to prevent this type of thing fran happening. Mr. Boardman stated they will first have to determine if there is any leasehold damage. If there is leasehold damage, they will have to determine if they should go back to 6us Doty with that leasehold damage based on the intent of the sale. 3. Awarding Bids on Sale & Removal of 332 - 64th Ave. N.E. (Resolution HRA 8-1983) MOTIDN BY MR. PRAIRIE� SECONDED BY 11F22. RASMUSSEN� TO APPROVE RESOLUTION HRA 8-1983, "A RESOIATZON OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTXORITY OF THE CZTY OF FRIDLEY APPROVING THE SRLE OF TXE RESIJ%'*ITZRL STRUCTURE AT 332 - 64TH AVE.�N.E. AND AWARDING THE BID TO SAFEWRY MOVERS". UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. II. 6ENERAL RESERVE SVSTEM OISCUSSION: Mr. Boardman stated Mark Haggerty and representatives from 0'Connor & Hannan and Piper, Jaffray were at the March lOth HRA meeting to make a presentation on the General Reserve System. The HRA gave the authorization to go ahead and prepare materials. He stated he, Mr. Qureshi, and Mr. Inman have been working with Piper, Jaffray and 0'Connor & Hannan for the last 3-� weeks to put a package together. They felt it was best to bring this back to the HRA to discuss Staff's feelings about the General Reserve System. Mr. Boardman stated he would review the purpose of the General Reserve System. Generally, under a normal industrial revenue bond, a company comes in and requests money for development. That money for development comes fror� indus- trial development 6onds (IDB). If they choose to sell those, industrial development bonds are classified as tax exempt bonds and the tax exempt bonds reduce the interest rate. HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 27, 1983 PAGE 10 Mr. Boardman first reviewed the present system of industrial revenue devel- opment bonds to show the similar"acharacteristics of the two systems. Under the present system, the City Council approved the bond sale after an in-depth review of the company's financial report. The ID bonds then go to the market as a tax exempt issue. As a part of that issue, the bond holders require (1) one year debt service to be deposited with the trustee as security on default. Interest that is generated from that debt service account goes to the property owner for bond payments or other property related costs. In the General Reserve System, the basic principal is the same as a normal IDB except the City/HRA is giving additional security to the bond holders by setting up two reserve pools of funds that could be used in case of any default. This addit�onal security is what atlows the bond holders to reduce the i�terest rate on a particular issue by as much as 2q or allow a rated bond on a project that may not normally be rated. The first reserve pool is made up of those funds that are held as (1) one year debt service funds under the normal IDB process. The only difference is that under the general reserve system, all of these funds from the IDB sales are pooled and are used as protection against all IDB's. This pool of funds are called the "Common IDB fund". If, for example, a company defaults on their IDB, the one year debt service for that company is drawn on first, then, if necessary all other funds in the pool can be drawn on. The more companies involved in the system. the better the security on one sin9le issue. The second reserve pool is called the 9eneral reserve fund. This funs is made up of money placed in reserve by the City/HRA from tax increment sources. This poai is called the secondary reserve because it backs up the common IDB fund. The fund is initielly established with a minimum amount and a maximum ceiling. As is aoparent with the system, the pool of funds is most important in the early stagas until the Conrran IDB fund is so strong that the secondary system is no longer a factor of security. The minimum reserve is 9enerally $200,000 to $250,000 with a maximum ceiling of five million. The minimum and maximum will be determined by the NRA in the final documents with input from the financial consultants. The general reserve fund is increased in several ways. Initially, the HRA will put in funds from TIF reserves or from a specific project to the mi�imum amount necessary to operate the fund. From that poini on, the HRA will increase the fund based on new project imcome and interest earnings from both the Comnon IDB fund and the General reserve fund. An example of this, if a company wants to develop in the tax increment district with the system and requires a $1,000,QOQ IDB issue, $100,000 or approximateiy 10w (1 year debt service) would yo to the Comnon 3DB fund. The HRA through Tax Increment wouid put in $150,000 or 15� of the IQR issue into the General Reserve fund. The $150>000 would come fram the TIf bonds that would be sold for assistance as needed. In t�is situation, we wi]1 say that the 7IF that is generated by this develop- ment is $500,000. This means that $150,000 is taken for the reserve fund, $350>000 is still available for other assistance as needed for development. The benefit to the company is an overall reduction of interest rated on the ID8 issue of approximately 2% (or approm mately $200,000 on a$1,000,000 issue). The benefit to the HRA is that the $150,000 in TIf funds that is put into the HRAeasttheSSystemUgrows.anWhenethe systemtgrows,ethetgeneralereserveefund the HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 27, 1983 PAGE 11 eventually reaches the maximum ceiling so that TIF funds are no longer needed to support the system. In fact, at that point the HRA will start drawing off any excess funds from the system for use with project development. The example that was shown was with eleven IDB's equallin9 $30,000,000 of issues with the upper ceiling of $3,000>000 already reached. The HRA could draw-off between $300,000 and $600,000 per year dependin9 on interest earnings from the cortmon IDB funds. These funds would 90 back in the r::=- for additional projects. This sytem could provide a long term source of assistance to *he City that could continue even after the use of tax increment districts or Industrial Development Bonds. An important issue to now consider is the security that is provided by the system. To do that we have to look at the default stream, or what are the steps and protection that is available if a company defaults on the IDB and TIf bonds. Under the current system with an I�B and TIF bonds sold on a specific development, if the IDB 9oes into default, the TIF sold on the development based on tax income would fall back on the HRA to carry until the IDB bond holders foreclose on the project and put the project back on the market as a taxed property. The IDB default stream is as follows: 1. Trustee begins forclosure on buildin9. 2. Trustee begins suit against personal security. 3. One year debt service is drawn off to make bond payments. 4. Building goes to Bond Holders for disposal. In the meantime, taxes are not being paid, so the County after four years, starts tax forfeit procedure. Bond payments fall on the HRA for that period of time until the building is leased or sold. The HRA is hi9hly restricted in its recourse. Under the Reserve System, the company is making monthly payments to the trustee for the City/HRA as owners of the property. The company is removed within 30-60 days in case of default on its lease payment. The City/HRA iinnediately begins efforts to re-lease or sell tfie building. In the meantime, the City(HRA begins a personal guarantee suite against the company. Because the reserve system in in place, the CitylHRA has several levels of security backing up the default. 1. First,the Individual I�B one year debt service can be drawn on. 2. Second, the remainder of comnon IDB fund can be drawn on. 3. Third, the existin9 general reserve funds can be drawn on up to the amount in the fund. 4. Forth, the building as security would go back to the hond holders. This sytem of security is so solid and 9ives the City such a quick recourse that it gives the HRA immediate protection on TIF bonds sold for that development. The City/HRA can i�itiate iRanediate action to release or sell instead of waiting for the County to foreclose for non-payment of taxes. HOUS7NG AND REDEYELOPNENT AUTHORITY MEETIN6 APRIL 27 1983 Pa9e 12 This is as simple as we can describe a very complex program and looked at it very carefully at staff level prior to presenting it to the HRA and the City. Mr. Inman and Mr. Qureshi are also here in case you have any questions of them about the system. Mr, Prieditis asked Mr. Inman that the system seems too good, are there any regatives to that program that he sees. Mr. Inman responded that the staff has looked at the system wtih 0'Conner 8 Fiannan; Piper, Jaffrey & Hopwood; and feels that the system is very sound and as far as he can see, has no negative aspects over the present system. Mr. Boardman stated the City Council discussed this on Monday, April 25, at their conference meeting and approved it informally. At their next meeting, they will be approving a resolution based on those discussions. He stated they are looking for approval from the HRA of the Reserve System process. He stated there is still a lot of work and legal documents to be done, but this would just authorize Staff to work with 0'Connor & Hannan. He stated Mr. Comners has approved of the concept of this system, but if the HRA would prefer to wait until their May 12th meeting to give this approval, that was all right. MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN� S£CONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO PASS RESOLUTION NRA 9-1983 APPROVING THE RESERVE SYSTEM PRPCESS AND TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TD WORK WITN O�CONNOR 6 HANNAN. Mr, Qureshi stated tfiere are some areas regarding the roles of the HRA and t6e City tbat will have to be discussed and negotiated between the HRA and the City Council. UPON A VDZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICS-CNAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, III. MOORE LAKE DISTRILT: A. Request for Assistance by 7om Brickner for Property Development at 6277 Central Ave. N,E. (Memo �i83-37 from Executive Director) Mr. Boardman suggested the HRA dissussion on this item be tabled until he had gotten more information from Mr. Brickner. B. Request for "Right of Developnent for '202' Application by St. Phillips Human Services, Inc. Mr. Boardman stated he has given St. Phillips the date of May 12th to come back to the HRA with more information. He stated it looked like the project will be 40 units rather than 60 units because of the number of units HUD is giving out. With tax increment monies, the amount of mortey the HRA has available is about E310-315,OOD. The estimates on HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETINGi APRIL 27, 1983 PAGE 13 the acquisition in the amount of property needed for the project are about $355,000. There is a shortfall in that level and also a shortfall in the actual amount needed--about $25,000 needed for soil correction. Mr. Boardman stated that Judy Lee of the Ebenezer Society asked him if the City Council was going to be giving any block grant monies like they did last time. He told her that at this time there is no commitment for block grant monies. Ms. Lee stated it was necessary for them to have a block grant commitment to even submit an application to HUD. He had suggested they approach the City Council and request block grant monies if block grant monies are available in 1984. That was a question he could not answer. Mr. Boardman stated more information will be coming to thP HRA at their May 12th meeting. One question the HRA has to consider is: With 40 units rather than 60, do they still want to proceed with the project? IV. FINANCIAL REPORT: A. Financial Report Mr. Inman stated the HRA had the Cash Flow information Mr. Commers had requested for the new figures on the plaza, the quarterly report, and the unaudited annual report. No action was needed. B. Check Register MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN� SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE� TO APPROVE THE CNECK REGISTER DATED 4/11/83 IN TXE AMDUNT OF $25�9II.28 AND CHECK REGISTrF. DRTED 4/12/83 IN TNE AMOUNT OF $32�500. UPON A VOZCE V02'E, RLL VOTSNG AYE, VICE-CHAIRPEP.SON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. V. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Authorization of Payment for Demolition of Fridley Garage Mr. Boardman stated the Fridley Garage has been demolished and the a�orN. has been completed satisfactorily. H& S Asphalt was the low quote on the project. He stated the bill was just received, and he vrould like authorization to �ay $3,750 to H& S Asphalt. He stated this check will show up on the next check register. MOTION BY MR, RASMUSSEN� SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN� TO RUTHORZZE PAYMENT OF A CtIECK IN TXE AMOTINT OF $3,750 TD H& S ASPHRLT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF TXE FRIDLEY GARAGE. UPON A I�OICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOSION CARRZED UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING APRIL 27 ]983 PAGE 14 ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MS. SVENDSEN� SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRSE� TO AATGYlRN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECZARED TNE APRIL 27, 1983, HWSING & REDEVEI,OPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING AATOURNED AT 20:30 P.M. R� ctfully subni ted, �I'-E' ,C�..� yn a a Recording Secretary CITY OF FRIDLEY HUMAN RESWRCES COMMISSION MEETING MAY 5, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Minton called the May 5, 1983, Human Resources Comnission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. RULL CALL: Menbers Present Members Absent: Others Present: Robert Minton, Peter Treuenfels, Mary van Dan, Barbara Kocher Brian 600dspeed Bill Hunt� Personnel Officer/Administrative Assistant to the City Manager APPROYAL OF APRIL 7 1983 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTIpN BY MR. TRE[/ENFELS� SECONDED BY MS. VAN DAN� TO APPROVE THE APRIL 7, 1983, HUMAN RESIXJRCES COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr. Treuenfels stated that on pa9e b, the motion under Item 2-a should be amended to read: "Motion by Mr, Treuenfels, seconded by Ms. Kocher, to elect Robert L. Minton as vice-chairperson of the Human Resources Comnission." UPON A VDSCB VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON MINTON DECLARED THE MINU2ES APPROVED AS lUIENDED. INTRODUCTION OF WILLIAM HUNT, NEW STAFF PERSON FOR THE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION: Mr. Minton introduced Mr. Hunt to the Comnission members. Mr. Nunt stated this was his first time as staff person to the Human Resources Cormission, but he has Deen meeting with the Charter Comnission for the last 1; years. He stated Kent Hill� the staff liaison after Mary Cayan, has left the City and taken a position with United Hospitals in St. Paul. He stated it may be that whoever is hired to fill Mr. Hill's position as Econanic Development Assistant may be the new staff person to the Human Resources Comnission. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON FOR THE YEAR 1983-1984: Mr, Minton stated that Mr. Goodspeed could not be at the meeting, but Mr. Goodspeed had stated he would be willing to continue as chairperson of the Crnmission if that was the desire of the Commission. Mr. Minton declared the naninations open for chairperson. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 5, 1983 PAGE 2 Mr. Treuenfels naninated Brian 600dspeed for chairperson of Lhe Human Resources Comnission. , 1tOR'SON BY lII2. TREUENFELS� SECONDED BY 11S. VAN DAN, TO CLOSE TXE NQMSNATIONS FOR CIIAIRPERSON. UP(I� A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VSCE-CXAIRPERSON MINTON DECLARED TXE MOSION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MS, VAN DAN� SECONDED BY 1�2, TREUENFELS, TO CAST A UNANIMOUS BRLIAT FOR BRIAN COODSPEED AS CNAIRPERSON OF THE XUMRN RESOURCES COMMISSION FOR THE YEAR I9B3-I984. UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VZCE-CHAIRPERSON MINTON DECLARED TNE MOTION CARRSED UNANZMOUSLY. Mr. Minton was elected vice-chairperson of the Comnission for the year 1983-1984 at the April 7, 1983, meeting. (See amended motion on page 6 of Apri] 7th minutes.) 1. OLD BUSINESS: a. Discussion of Changes in the Fund#ng Guidelines and Procedures Mr, Minton stated that on page 86 of the HUD guidelines under "Public Services" (e), the funding wouid have to be used for certain things "including, but not limited to those concerned with employment, crime prevention, child care. health, drug abuse, education, energy conserva- tion, welfare or recreational needs". As he understood it, only 10% of the CDBG funds can be used for public services. At the last meeting, Mr, Boardman had stated that the City Council has set aside approx. �17�000 for human service activities and, based on recomnendations, the City Council is looking at E70,000 for human service funding and $7,000 far public service funding. Mr. Minton stated that at the last meeting, the Comaission members had had a little difficulty with the definition of hunan services and public services. Mr. Boardman had described the human services as more of a social service-type activity (human needs) such as SACA and public services as more recreationat-type services and those services not covered under human services. Mr, Minton stated that, as requested by Mr. Treuenfels at the last meeting. he had brought his taxonany of services to the meeting. It is cailed UWASIS II (United Way of America Service Identification System, Second Addition), a Taxonomy of Social Goals and Numan Service Programs. Mr, Treuenfels stated the Carmission could use it as a reference guide. Hr. Minton stated he had reviewed the Canmission's old funding guide- lines, and they looked all right except for the fourth paragraph under Item II which stated: "Requests received will be prioritized by the Human Resources Commission based upon a 10 point scale with a high score Corresponding with a high priority ranking." He stated the ranking was all right, but in his professional career, he would avoid this type of weighting. One reason for this is they can never include all the factors sufficiently well, and, secondly, they try to avoid any pretention that the weights being given excludes judgement. Mr. Treuenfels asked what sane alternatives wauld be. Mr. Minton stated they could use something similar but just take off the weights, look at all the applications, and make a jud9ement on that basis. Ms. van Dan stated the Cortmission found they ran into problems with potential recipients of funds if they couldn't give the difference in points in comparing the recipients and found tfiat, in a sense, it was their best defense for why an organization was turned down or supported for funding. Mr. Treuenfels stated it was surprising to him that the overall judgement of the various organizations was fairly uniform among a11 the commissioners, even though they worked on the scoring sheets independently at hane. Ms. van Dan stated it was also used to eliminate their own personal self- interests. and it balanced out. Ms. van Dan stated that with the division the Carmission is facing in the distribution of funds to human services and public.services, there might be different factors they should be using or two separate evalua- tion tools--one for human services and one for public services. Mr. Treuenfels stated the Numan Resources Commission might not even be looking at the funding requests for pubiic services. Ms. van Dan stated she still had a problem with public services and human services. When an application canes in fran an organization, who is going to determine whether it is a human service or a public service? Mr. Hunt stated he thought the requests would go to the Planning Depart- ment as the CDBG monies are administered by the Planning Oepartment. On page 86 of the FA1D guidelines. it looked like the human services and pubiic services that the City Council is talking about are lumped together under "public services". The distinction between "human services" and "public services" was a City Council decision and not a demand of the HUD guidelines. Mr. Minton stated the Planning Depariment should determine whether a funding request is under h�anan services or pubiic services, and the Camnission will be a reactive body. hUt�N RESOURCES CONGIISSION MEETING MAY 5 1983 PAGE 4 Mr. Treuenfels stated he would also like the Commission to look over the "Guidelines for Funding Proposals" put out by Camwnity Education. At one time, Conmunity Education also gave out grants. These guidelines might be useful for the Camiission to use as a reference. Mr, Minton stated that regarding the point system� he could accept the 10-point scale system used by the Cortmission in the past as a decision- making tool that can be used as a justification and rationale for making decisions. Mr, Treuenfels stated he would 7ike to have Mr. Minton give some ideas of what he would like to see in the guidelines. He suggested the Comnission discuss the 9uidelines more in-depth at another meeting in the future. Ms. van Dan stated she thought that whatever system the Commission does develop will, of necessity, require an absolute fool-proof system. As money becomes tighter and tighter and the requests for funding increase, the challenges Nill be greater. Mr. Mi.nton stated that for now, the Cortmission will have to wait until the CDBG monies are received and the funding monies becane available. b. Discussion of No-FauTt Grievance Procedure Committee Mr, Treuenfels stated he has contacted four people who might be willing to serve on the No-Fault Grievance Procedure Comnittee. One has agreed to serve on the comnittee but has conenitments at this time. He would appreciate the other Comnission me�ers giving him any names of people willing to serve on the camiittee. He felt the committee should consist of 7-8 people. Mr, Treuenfeis stated there is a sample waiver form in the No-Fault Grievance Procedure manual. Ne thought the City Attorney should review it to see if it is appropriate for use in the No-Fau1,t Grievance Procedure. Mr. Hunt stated Ae wouid see that the waiver form was looked over by the legal intern and the Lity Attorney. c. Other Old Business: (1) Comnunity Program Award of E1,000 Mr. Hunt stated he would like to give a brief report of the award presentation in Washington D.C. 1� ` Mr. Hunt stated he had happened to be in Washington D.C. at the time of the award presentation and was able to attend. He stated • Barbara Terpstra, Co-chairperson of the IYDP Cortmittee, with the aid ' of the lions Club, was able to attend the Hearing on the "Decade of � Disabled Persons". He stated it was a very impressive session, and - the qualiLy of the people there was extremely impressive. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMiSSiON HEETING MAY 5 1983 PAGE 5 Mr. Hunt stated that after the Nearing, there was an Awards Reception which was also very nice. Fridley received the Camwnity Program Award for f1,000 which was the only award Frid7ey was eligible to receive. He stated people fran St. Cloud were Qresent, Fridley was represented, and tbere was a representative fran Congressman Gerry Sikorski's offite and two representatives fran Senator Bave 6urenberger's offite. Fridiey received a plaque and a check for E1,000. He stated the money will go for the seniors bus, and at this time, Ms. Terpstra has the plaque. Mr. Hunt stated he has submitted two articles on this to Minnesota Cities. which is a periodical for the League of Minnesota Cities. Mr. Hunt stated he has written a letter to Congressman Sikorski's aide giving the dates of the City Council meetings for the next 3-4 months. The plan is to have Congressman Sikorski be involved in a ceremony and presentation of the plaque to the City Council and the Mayor, They hope to get as many people as possible there who were involved in the project. They also hope to get sane good publicity on the ceremony. (2) Volunteerism Ms. van Dan stated that regarding the caiments made by Mr. Boardman about the invo]vement of the County in a volunteer system, she thought maybe the Comnission should wait until they see what is happening with the County and then coordinate their efforts with the County's. Mr. Hunt stated you get into a semantics issue when you deal with volunteers. Some people don't even like the term "volunteer" because sanetimes it has the connotation of "cheap labor". He stated the City might be interested in some kind of identification or recognition process for volunteers. The cnmmissioners are key volunteers, the Parks 8 Recreation Department has many volunteers, and the Sprinctbrook Nature Center has a volunteer core in addition to the Board. So, in that respett, there are a lot of volunteers doing work for the City. Mr. Hunt stated that the City of Edina has a very effective program ahere the City sponsors a yearly recognition and award presentation for all types of volunteers in the community. There are about six awards (Mayor's Awards). Naninations cane from outside city hall. There is a camiittee made up of inembers of various cortmunity organi- zations and one city staff person, and this committee makes the decision on who receives the awards. He stated the program seems to be we11 received. Just being invited means a person is being recognized as a volunteer in the community. HUFIAN RESOURCES COhPlISSION MEETING. M0.Y 5, 1983 PAGE 6 Mr. Minton stated #his sounded like it was more in line with what the Cortmisston could be doirg as opposed to exploring Lhe need for a community-wide volunteer program as set forth in their work ptan. Mr. Treuenfels stated there are certain needs that are more Dasic and fundamental than the need to be recognized. Ms. van Dan stated she had just attended a three-day seminar on Management Successes, and the word is "recognition"--employees want to be recognized for what Lhey do. Mr.. Minton stated the part in the work plan would demand more staff resources than this Caimission could handle. and there are other organizations that are involved in that kind of service. It is a very speciatized kind of service. 7he Comnission's role could be to enhance volunteerism in some way; and if the City can get involved in recognition or volunteerism for the canmunity in general� he thought it wou7d be a positive project for the Commission to get involved in and sanething they could do within their resources. Ms. van Dan stated vo]unteerism was her project and she agreed wholeheartedly with what Mr, Minton was saying, Having heard that Anoka County is working on sanething county-wide, it would be ridiculous for the Cortmission to go tfirough the whole process from step one. Mr. Hunt stated City Administration could also get some publicity on volunteer involvement. especially utilizing cable TV, Mr. Minton asked Mr. Hunt to get more information on Edina's volunteer recognition program and they cou7d discuss it at the next meeting. 2. NEW BUSINESS: a. Letter from The League of Minnesota Human Rights Comissions Mr. Treuenfels stated the State Department of Human Rights is in very bad shape. They can handle only about 30% of the cases that come before them. It is becoming clear that the legislature does not want to consider hunan rights enforcement a high enough priority to grant it adequate funds. Because of this, the League of Minnesota Human Rights Caonissions is asking laal comnissions to write to Governor Perpich expressing their concern a6out the Department of Numan Rights, its case load, and the importance of full funding to protect the rights of every Minnesotan. � Mr, Treuenfels stated that if the Commission members were in agreement, he would draft a letter and Dring it back to the next meeting for the Camiission's approval. HUttAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 5, 1983 PAGE_7 The Commissioners agreed to have Mr. Treuenfels draft a letter to 6overnor Perpich. b. Possib]e Ordinance Change in City Charter Mr. Treuenfels stated the Charter Camiission has been ]ooking at affirmative action and equal opportunity in the city administration. The question came up about grievance procedures in the case of any disciplinary action. Mr. Treuenfels stated tfie discussion came about because one of the changes to the Charter was about the tenure of office of the City Manager and whether he should serve comptetely at the pleasure of the City Cou�cil and whether he should be dismissable at any City Counci7 meeting, pro- vided 4 or 5 Council mert�ers agree. During the discussion, it was discovered that the grievance procedure really does not provide too much in the way of disciplinary procedure.The Charter Commission did not feel it was in their province to deal with matters like this. He had thought the Human Resources Camiission might want to take a look at it and cane up with sane kind of ordinance change in the grievance procedure, just dealing with the area of dismissal for all employees under the City Manager so they have sane kind of procedure they can go through before any employee is dismissed. �r. Hunt stated there are Standard Personnel Procedures for things that are approved by the City Manager and that does contain a grievance procedure. The City Manager is the final arbitrator of a grievance for non-union enployees. However, if the City Manager dismisses saneone and the empioyee is not satisfied, the employee can require the City Manager to present it to the City Council. There is no procedure for the employee, as an gnployee, to go directly to the City Council. But the City Manager is obligated to present the matter to the City Council if asked to do so by the employee. Mr. Hunt stated that what Mr. Treuenfels is referring to is that, for example, if the City Manager does dismiss saneone, at this time the City Manager can only recannend dismissal of employees. Any dismissal or suspension of employees according to City Charter has to be approved by the City Council. The Charter Carmission is recomnending that this requirement be taken out of the Charter and that the City Manager be given the authorization to hire and fire. Mr. Kocher stated she agreed that if the City Manager has the responsibility of the w�ole tity management, he should also have the authority to hire and fire. Mr, Minton stated it might be appropriate for the Canission to l�ok at the ordinance. HU�tAN RE50URCES COMMISSION MEETING NAY 5 1983 PAGE 8 c. Tenant/Landlord Problem Mr. Treuenfels stated he has received a suggestion for an assignment from a member of the City Counci]. The Counci] person was called Dy one of his constituents who is a tenant in an apartment house. Apparently, there was damage in the apartment. The tenant was forced to move while the damage was being fixed. and the landlord was taking a long time to fix the damage. The question asked was what could the tenant do in such a case? Mr, Treuenfe7s stated that apparentiy the City has only two choices. One is to let the matter slide and carry on as usual without any action or the City can deny the license of occupancy to the land]ord which means the other tenants woutd also 4ave no place to live. The sug9estion was made that the Human Resources Caimission might want to look into this. Mr. Minton stated fie had a 6ard time seeing this as being within the scope of the Human Resources Comnission. Ms, van Dan stated that actually problems 6etween tenants and landlords was one of the Human Resources Comnission's main topics of discussion a few years ago and was what led them to the No-Fault Grievance Procedure. Mr. Treuenfels agreed this was not within the scope of the Commission, but informally the Comnission has looked at certain things and not others as the make-up of the Comnission members has changed. Not every Comnission member has to be involved in all areas, It is a1T right for a Comnission member to not be involved in an area that is not his/her's chief concern. Mr, Minton stated he thought this was a matter that was governed by Lhe StaLe Legislature. He ►�rould reconmend the tenant ca7l the Attorney General's office to find out what the state laws are for this kind of thing. Then, if the tenant feels he/she has a case, he/she should take at to small claims court. Ms, van Dan agreed. She stated the fee was quite nominal, and, hopefully, the tenant would 6e reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses. She did not think the Cortmission should get into the area of recarcnending that the City hold back occupancy 7icenses. Ms. Kocher stated that in this case, they have only heard the tenant's side of the story, They have not heard the landlord's side of the story. Because they do not know alt the facts, this should go to court. Mr. Treuenfels stated the real issue is that at this time the City has only tWO Nays to go--doing nothing or revoking the license of occupancy. There may be other times, not necessarily with this tase, where neither of these two alternatives Hould be in the best interest of the landlord or the tena�t. Maybe it was possible to find a third alternative, HUttAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEE7ING MAY 5 1983 . PAGE 9 Mr. Treuenfels stated it has also been suggested that the name, "Human Resources Carmission"� because of its scope, may not be the best name to convey to the public at large what the Comnission does. He stated the Caimission might want to discuss this at sane future time. ADJOURNMENT: MD1'SON BY MR, TREUENFEIS� SECONDED BY 1�LS. KOCHER� TO ADJOURN TNE MEETING, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON MINTON DECLARED THE MAY 5, I983, flUMAN RESOURCES COMMZSSION MEETING AA70URNED AT 9:3� P.M. Respectfully submitted, ynrta aba Recording Secretary � Ci,ty os Fh.i.d�eN APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING - TUESDAY MAY 10, 1983 PAGE 1 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ga6e1 called the Appeals Comnission Meeting of May 10, 1983 to orcer at 7:3� p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Patricia Gabel, Alex Barna, Jim Ptemel, Jean Gerou, Donaid Setzold Others Present: Darrell Clark, City of Fridley Mark Haqgerty, 6441 University Avenue N.E. E.R, and Louise Owczarzak, 777- Rancher's Road Bruce A. Nede9aard, 111 - 45th Avenue N.E. Dick Harris, 6300 Riverview Terrace APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 26, 1483: MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, to approve the minutes as written. UPON A YOICE YOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CNAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. Kequest oy e. R. ana �ouise owczarzak, Road N.E.. Fridley, IM 55432). FRIDLEY LITY CODEs TO iING FROM THE MAXIMUM OF ED BY AN 8,775 SQUARE EAST RANCH ESTATES NCHER'S R4AD N.E. �neering, 1770 Rancher's MOTION 6y Mrs. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open the public hearing. UPON A YOICE VOTE, ALL Y07ING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING t?PEN AT 1:33 P.M. ` Chairperson Gabel read the Staff Report: ADMIIISYR�tIYE Sf1FP RSPORT 7T02 aod 7TT0 H�ncher�a Road A.E. . PI7BLIC PDRPOSB SBRY� BT RBQOIR�lBaT: 3�otion 205.13�, 3, � requirea a aazimum lot coverage for • one story t euilding of AO percent. PpDlic purpose aerved Dy t61a requirement ia to provide for adequate ' pulcing, open landscaped areas and to limit congestioa of industrial areas. , 3T►26D B�RDSHIP: 'Elo 8ngineering, Inc. ha� ezperieaced tremendoue grovth and must eltner �ove out of tLe City of Fridley to ne� Quartera or e:ercise its option on the 2A,300 equare foot building imnediately Lo it� aout� rhich is located on Lot q aa described Lerein. In order Lo sake the tran�itloa economica]ly fea�ible, tAe two buildinga ivat be connected vith an 8,775 aquare foot •ddition but tLat addition rould incresae LLe area coverar- to #5.45 percent coverage of the co�bined eQuare footage ot tbe lots. Appeals Comnission Meeting - May 10, 1983 Page 2 3. �DltIlIS'IAISIYH 3i�FF RHYIEY: Thi� requeat la to increaae the required lot coverage in an M-2 Dlstrict from AOf ��►5.45� in order to conatruct aa 8,7T5 aquare foot adGition. 7�e additioc xould aerve aa a link Detveen a 2�,300 �quare foot vacanc building and a 22,3�2 aquare foot Duildiag presently occupied by the applicant. Staff has beea vorking vith the applicant in order to keep tAem from relocatSng out o! Lhe City. Sbe applicant had planned to oove out of the City because theq needed sore �quare footage. Coon Rapida �ad made them offers to sove to tLe1r City. Staff ras able to keap Lhe applicant in Fridley through diacussion� witE them. The applicant pas taken an option on the property to the aouth rhich Eas been vacant for �ome time. The opLion Sa conditioned on being able to connect the txo buildings vhich would provide the apuare footage they aeed. StafP has reviewed the site plaa. AlthougL the plan ahovs +15.�5f lot coverage, the parking is adeQuate. If this requeat i� approved, tLe folloxing items may be considered: 1. She applicant vork vlth the City and ad�acent proerty owaers to insure adeQuate dralaage. 2. Ad4itional landscaping/screening be implemented. Mr. Clark said there was a third stipulation recomnended by the staff and that is if the variance is approved and Owczarzaks purchase the building, that the two parcels be combined together to be one tax statement. He also said that the distance between the two buildings is 1-1.5 feet wider than on the plans reviewed earlier and with the addition it would 6e just under 9,OOD sq. ft. He said tfie property is located just north and west of Bob's Produce i� a fairly new industrial area. Ms. Gabel asked if the 6uilding to the south is vacant. Mr. Haggerty said the owners went through a bankruptcy and techni- cally it is supposed Lo be vacant, that there is some residual occupancy. He also said the northerty wall and the southerly wall are not exactly parailel {66'8" a�d 66'.65") and the city staff put together Lhe drawings in the agenda packet. He said the ELO manufactures 'shells' for computer equipment for companies like Honeywell and their business has grown. He said they had lined up financing and land in Coon Rapids for 84,000 sq. ft. and then the building to the south became vacant. Mr. Haggerty said they will match the landscaping to the present buildinq and that parking is adequate and they will be adding six new employees. He said drainage on the southerly end of tMe new building will be off to 77th Avenue a�d drainage from the new roof will be onto Rancher's Road. He stated they will be working with Dick Harris, who owns the building behind ELO, on drainage. Ne also said they wilt meet atl setback requirements all around the building and it will be an attractive buslding. Mr. Barna asked a6out actual square footage and Mr. Clark said it will be just under 9,000 sq. ft. (8,991 or 8,998). Mr. Betzold asked if that would change the percentage and Mr. Clark said it would changefxom 45.45 to 45•.83°. Mr. Plemel then asked if the addition would be cement block, mansard roof, and if they� would tie that in? Mr. Haggerty said yes, that's the way it would be. Appeals Cortmission Meeting - May 10, 1983 Paae 3 Mr. Owczarzak said the 6uildings will 6e one color and the heights will be the same. Mr. Harris said he Bas talked with ELO a6out the drainage and that there is a little holding pond wit� the new cur6ing and he has not noticed any drainage pro6lem recently and there has not been any wash-outs with the south building and tBey will 6e working together on drainage wfien the new building goes in. He said he is in favor of t6e proposal and that he has been neighbors with ELO for a6out 6 years, tfiat they keep up tfieir building and property and they have been good neigfi6ors. Ne also said it was important to keep them in fridley. Ms. 6abe1 asked about tfie loading docks. Mr. Nedegaard (the con- tractor) said they will stay as they will back trucks in there and the trucks will be enclosed in the buildin9. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Betzold, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:47 P.M. Mr. Plemel felt this company has done a nice job in the past, that the addition will not be offensive and he was in favor of tfie variance. Mr. Barna said he was in favor of tfie variance also, that tBere is 4.5% additional lot coverage and the natural terrain of the property makes it that high. Mr. Betzold felt the public purpose would still 6e adequately served and he was in favor of the variance. Ms. Ga6e1 said the otfier requirements are being met and there is a definite hardsfiip -- expand or move -- and she would be in favor. MOTION 6y Mr. Betzold, seconded by Mr. Barna, that the Appeals Commission re- commend to the City Council, approval of the variance request to increase the lot coverage for a commercial building from the maximum of 40% to 45 b3" to allow two buildings to 6e joined by an 8�48 square foot addition locatec on Lots 3 and 4, B1ock 3, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, the same being 7102 and 7710 Rancher's Road N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432, with the following stipulations: 1) the appticant work with the City and adjacent property owners to insure adequate drainage; 2) additional landscaping/screening be implemented; and 3) that tfie two parcels be combined together to be one tax statement. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to adjourn. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING Of MAY 10, 1983, ADJOURNED AT 7:51 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Deb Niznik Recording Secretary � j � / CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 GALL TO ORDER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the May 16, 7983, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Sa6a, Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Nielson (for P1r. Svandaj Members Absent: Brian Goodspeed Otfiers Present: Bill Deblon, Associate Planner L. Robert Erickson, 85 � 3rd Ave. S.E., New Brighton Margaret A. Seger, 1401 - 73rd Ave. N.E. See attacfied list APPROVAL � OF � P�1AY � 4, � 1983, � PCANNiNG C��IISSLQN fi1iNtlTES: M01'SON BY MR. KONDRICX, SECONDED SY MR. OQUIST� TO APPROVE THE 1�fAY 4, Z383, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE� CHASRWOh1AN SCHNABEL DEC.LARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA 1�83-Q3; BY.L: ROBERT ERICKSON: Rezone t e West Na f of Lo , an af oi' fTots ��an� �, Lucia �e Addition, from R-1 (single family dwelling areasj to'R-3 (general multiple family dwellingsj io allow tF�e construction of a 14�uni't-condominium project, the same being 1133-1145 Mississi:ppi Street N.E: MOTION 8Y MR, SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO OPEN THE PUELSC HEAR2NG ON ZOA {�83-03 BY L. ROBERT ERICKSON. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN RT 7:36 P.M. Mr. Deblon stated the property is located on the corner of Mississippi St. and TH 65, west of Lucia Lane. The proposal is for a rezoning from R-1 to R-3. and would consist of a condominium development where the occupants form an association and own the land jointly. The proposal is for three t!vin homes ; combined with an eight-unit carriage-manor type home. Mr. Deblon stated the project has been moved over to the west away from Lucia lane with access onto Mississippi because of the developer's sensitivity to the existing single family residences. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 2 Ms. Gabe7 asked if the project met a71 the setback requirements. Mr. Deblon stated a variance from 35 feet to 25 feet would be needed on the north property line. Mr. Deblon stated the plan meets all the parking requirements, and there is the potential to make visitor parking. Mr. Deblon stated that condominiums can be dissolved and the properties sold individually in the future, so Staff fiad to take into consideration the possi- bility of the properties 6eing split wiifiout further variances. With the new zero lot line su6division regulation,some of tAe dou6le bungalow units could go zero lot line as a twin home. Tfiis has been a7lowed in Fridley in the past. This plan does meet most of t�e requiremenis for a possible subdivision in the future. Mr. Deblon made the following additional comments on the proposal, 1. A variance is required fran 35' to 25' on the north property line. 2. Fencing and landscaping is required for district separation. 3. Drainage plan is required (Rice Creek Watershed District has to approve this drainage plan). 4. Concrete curbing and 6lacktop per standard code requirements 5. Will need an additiona7 20 foot easemeni for bikeway/wa7kway >roadway. 6, Engineering Department fias a concern a6out the location of the access onto Mississippi St, in relationship to the access onto Highway 65, The distance is only 160 feet. With the County's plans for widening Mississippi for a right turn lane and the number of cars already existing on Mississippi, Engineerinq vtas very concerned that there could be congestion and some problems. Mr. Deblon stated there are some rather deep lots north of this property. He did not know if any of the owners of these lots had any plans for s!abdivisi�r�. He stated there is enough square footage to divide, but they would not be very optimum lots because of the traffic on Highway 65; however, the City has to consider any future access to these lots. It was a judgement call that might have to be determined as to whether these lots would ever be split. Ms, Schnabel asked where the garages were located and which way the bui7dings would face. ThP petitioner, Mr. Erickson stated the garages were located in the inner court. The rear elevation and backyards will face Lucia Lane. The rear elevation will have a deck and patio door on the upper level one-half flight up. Ms. Schnabel asked if Mr. Erickson had built any of these types of dwellings in the metropolitan area. Mr. Erickson stated he has bui7t in Coon Rapids, Eden Prairie, New Hope, and Brooklyn Park. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MA� 18 1983 PAGE 3 Ms. Schnabel asked that of the buildings he has built,were any of them rental units? Mr. Erickson stated that since 1980, he has bui7t only owner-occupied. All these units will be owner-occupied and wi77 be FHA/UA approved, Ms. Schnabel asked the approximate price of the units. Mr. Erickson stated the twin homes will run in the mid-60's with the double bungalows being just under that. Ms. Schnabel asked what type of screening Mr. Erickson would use between this property and the R-1 properties. Mr. Erickson stated he was thinking of wooden fencing; however, because the lot is so heavily wooded, it was hard to decide what to do for landscaping. He stated he would save every tree fie could. Mr. Saba asked why the rear of the double bungalows would face Lucia Lane. Mr. Erickson stated there were two reasons for this: (1) He wanted to keep the project centra7ized so everyone could use the same road for snow plowing and other maintenance; and (2) the biggest complaint from the neighborhood seemed to be to not put any more traffic on Lucia Lane. By facing the buildings in, this kept the traffic off Lucia Lane. Ms. Schnabel stated she was a little bit concerned about the plainness of the rear of the buildings facing Lucia Lane when all the rest of the homes on Lucia Lane are facing front. It seemed inconsistent with the neighborhood, yet she understood what Mr. Erickson was saying in terms of traffic. �r. Erickson stated this is not inconsistent in condo developments. A number of condo developments are done this way. Mr. Saba asked Mr. Erickson if he would consider turning the bui7dings around to face Lucia Lane. Mr, Erickson stated he would consider turning the buildings around; however, because of the heavily wooded area, he did noi think the buildings could be seen that well from Lucia Lane anyway. If the buildings were turned around, a 1ot of trees would be lost because of the dr�veways. Ms, Schnabel asked for questions and concerns from the people in the audience. Mr. Russell Burris, 1150 Mississippi St., stated he would like to submit to the Planning Commission a copy of his objections. He reviewed it for the Commission: 1. Spat zoning. 2, Traffic congestion - exit on Mississippi St, would be hazardous. 3, Good or poor construction and cost per unit rental or homeowner. 4. Sewer problems - Burris and Lane are on dead end sewer line. City has to backflush this from time to time to keep sewer line open. A separate sewer line to Lucia Lane is a must for which the homeowners would be assessed on their yaxes. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 18 1983 PAGE 4 5. 6. 7. 8. What would prevent an investor from buying a unit and renting it out? Garbage pickup - where wou7d cans be placed? 74 units probably would mean up to 28 cars. How many children? Back of condo faces Lucia Lane which would not enhance the neighborhood. That would also mean children playing in backyard and running out on Lucia Lane. Mr. Burris stated that a few years back, the City of Fridley hired a reputable zoning company, and paid good money for them to rezone Fridley. Said company conformed the original findings of R-1 and reco�nended this property remain R-1. Mr, Burris stated it has been the concensus of the homeowners surrounding this property that three nice residentia7 homes eould be built on the property. This would then solve the problem once and for all. The homeowners would like to see this area developed as it should, according to the regulations and requirements of the zoning commission. Ms. Schnabe7 read the following letter from June Johnson, 6600 Lucia Lane: "Inasmuch as I cannot attend your meeting tonight with reference to the property on Mississippi and Highway 65, I would like to express my thoughts on the matter. Lucia Lane has been zoned for single family homes for many years with the exception of the apartmenis on the north end of the Lane. I do not feel it to be proper to have a multiple dwelling of the size proposed for the corner property. I feel there would 6e too much disrup- tion of traffic because of the entryway on Mississippi, Traffic going in either direction will be hampered by the cars going into or out of the lot. I purchased this home with the be7ief that this would remain a single family area, and I wou7d like to have it remain so so that my property values wi71 not he affected. We have a lot of extra traffic from the apartments and the Knights of Columbus Hall at the north end." Mr. Clarence Timo, 6517 Lucia Lane, presented a written petition for denial and objection to the rezoning request. He stated his objections were essentially the same as those expressed by Mr. Burris. 1. Spot rezoning 2. Traffic prob7ems and hazards a. Traffic from KC Hall and apartments to the north already cause congestion. b. Highway 65 and Mississippi St. intersection already has a history of many serious (and some fatal) accidents. c. The driveway area within the comp7ex would be like a huge parking lot, with possibly not enough room to safely accomnodate up to 28 vehicles. Traffic movement within the area would pose dangers to residents and small children. d. Heavy traffic flow on a71 three sides of the proposed site would definite7y pose a safety hazard to children whose play areas would be adjacent to the traffic. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAV 18 1983 PAGE 5 3. Depreciation of home values a. Loss of beautiful trees b. Duplexes and multiple dwel7ings are not as carefully maintained in general as single femily homes. 4. Burden on homeowners a. Sewer and water mains are not equipped to handle such a large increase in popu7ation in such a small area. A sewer back-up problem a7ready exists, 5. Increased density would not be consistent with urban and city planning which is designed to protect the quality of residential life. 6. Residents bought homes viith the knowledge this property was zoned R-1, and they want the area to remain R-1. Ms. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated her concern was with off-street parking. Besides the 74 units with possibly two cars for each unit, there are also going to be guests. Sometimes it is easier to park on the street, and the only p7ace to park would be on Lucia Lane. With the apartments north on Lucia, there is ample parking, but still there are cars parking on the street. That had to be stopped with "no parking" signs in front of the homes. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was guest parking within the interior of the development. Mr. Deblon stated that according to the first draft plan, there is no guest parking, but sane areas have 5een discussed for guest parking. Ms, Irene Haedtke, 6540 Lucia Lane, stated she wou7d be very unhappy if she was "boxed" in by this development. There are 6eautiful trees on this lot, and in looking at the drawing of the deuelopment, she knew t6ere would not be one oak tree left on that lot. Single family homes would be fine, because some of the trees could be saved. For ecology reasons, she did not think the development was feasible. Mr. Eugene Lane, 1132 Mississippi St., stated he has lived in Fridley for 32 years. In the morning between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 and between 4:00 and 7:00 in the afternoon, the intersection at Mississippi and Highway 65 is very busy. Ii is not feasib7e to put that much additional new traffic onto Mississippi. Mr. Henry Melcher, 6500 Pierce St., stated he would like to reinforce what the residents have already said. At 7:00 a.m. he has trouble making a left hand turn onto Mississippi. At 3:00-5:00 p.m., the cars are backed up past Lucia Lane past his house to get through the Mississippi�Highway 65 intersection. Mr. Timo had talked about the great number of accidents at this intersection, and Mr. Melcher stated this could be reinforced by looking at the police reports. Mr. Melcfier stated he and his wife paced tFu'T area off, and ip t�i� deve7opment went into this area, there would virtaally not be any oa� trees-left on tF�e lot. He stated tfiis is also too fiigh a density to put into this area. PLANNING COMMISSI�N MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 6 Mr. Cory Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated his house would be facing the back end of the two double bungalows. He stated he has been delivering papers for six years, and he knows a little about what people leave in their back yards. He did not think they should have to look at these back yards and what might be left tfiere. If there is only one garage for each unit, wfiere are people going to store their lawn mowers, equipmeni, bicycles, and other things people usually store in a garage? Mr. Joe Randall, 1210 Mississippi St., stated his family was involved in an acci- dent at the intersection of Mississippi and Highway 65. He stated he rides the bus and has a difficult time crossing Hig�way 65 to catch the bus. It is a highly congested area. The oak trees are fantastic. He would like to see this area stay zoned residential as the zoning commission originally said, Ms. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated that in hearing the price range of the condo units, there is likely to be a lot of families with small children. She did not see any additional planning for play areas for ihese children. Mr. Dean Thomas, 6550 Lucia Lane, stated he also agreed with everything that has been said. He would be very unhappy to see this development. It is too many peop7e in too small an area, and they would lose the 6eautiful trees. Mr. Darrel Goerdt, 6610 Lucia Lane, stated earlier in the meeting Mr. Deblon had mentioned the deep lots and whether any of the owners of these lots would consider subdividing their lots in the future. He stated he bought his lot because it is a deep lot, and he would never consider subdividing it. Mr, Erickson stated that some of the remarks he had heard seem to imply that second class citizens will 6e going into this deve7opment. He disagreed 700%. There will be a homeowners" association which fias very rigid rules, so there will not be any trashy back yards. The maintenance is all hired out and none of the owners have any responsibility for the upkeep. Ms. Gabel stated she agreed with Mr. Erickson. It has been her experience that homeowners' associations do a very good job in maintaining a condo project. She also agreed with the comment that with the price range, these un9ts will probably be first family homes and starter homes, and there probab7y would be a ]ot of chi7dren. She thought the idea of a play area shou7d 6e considered in the project. Mr. Erickson stated he would be pay�ng a large park fee and he felt that was adequate. He thought the bulk of the buyers will be empty nesters, retired people. T�is is based on the flow of buyers that are turning up in the different condo projects around the metropolitan area--Apple Ualley, Eden Prairie, North Oaks, Coon Rapids. Ms. Joyce Swanson, 6601 Lucia Lane, stated this was all pure speculation, and they really do not know who will move into these units. This is an R-1 zoning, and there will be a density pro6lem, traffic probiems, and sewer and water problems, There will be no oak trees. There will be children. There wil7 he parking on Lucia Lane, and people will be walking through back yards. PLANNING COMMISSI�N MEETING, F1AY 18; 1983 PAGE 7 Ms. Bystram stated that at this point, she thought they had to be realistic and maybe there needs to be sane kind of balance. If this property was rezoned to R-3, was there any possibility of tfie developer reducing the number of units? She would like to see this as an option. Ms, Schnabe7 asked Mr. Erickson if he vrould consider reducing the number of units. Mr. Erickson stated he wou7d not. MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TD CIASE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZOA #83-03 BY L. ROBSRT ERICKSON. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOSING AYS, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:20 P.M. Mr. Saba stated that one of the main objections expressed by the citizens was the sewer problem. Was there really a sewer problem? Mr, Deblon stated that was a question thai would have to be answered by the Engineering Department. Engineering had not expressed any concern regarding this proposal. Routine maintenance is 6eing done continually on the sewer system. He stated he would check the record to see if there would be a problem as far as capacity and get this information 6ack to the Planning Commission or the City Council. Ms. Schnabel stated the sewer problem should definitely be checked with Engineering. Also, no matter what developroent eventually goes on this lot, something else that should be checked with Engineering is wfiat the County's intention is in terms of a rig6t turn lane. Ms. Gabel stated she �ad to speak against the rezoning. She felt it was a spot rezoning. The zoning is inconsistent with tfie neighborfiood and the planning done over the years. She was a7so concerned with the sewer, and they needed more information a6out it. The traffic problems are obvious, but the biggest problem sfie had with it was the spot rezoning. Mr. Oquist stated he agreed with Ms. Gabel, It was spot rezoning; however, some- t�ing �ill 6e done with this property, and he did not tfiink anyone wou7d be putting in single family homes. He was also concerned a6out tfie traffic. Mr. Kondrick stated it would be 9reat to be ab7e to leave that property vacant; however, they have to consider the overall good of the community. Housing is needed in the City. He liked the set-up of the homeowners' association. He also could not imagine anyone wanting to live in a single family home on this corner. He agreed that it was spot rezoning, but his main concern was the traffic. Mr. Saba stated he did not have as many objections with the spot rezoning, because he feit it would never be developed as R-1. He had a prob7em wit6 the densiiy, Ne would rather see the double bungalows facing Lucia Lane, and he would prefer to see two more double 6ungalows instead of tfie carriage-type hanes. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 18. 1983 PAGE 8 Mr. Oquist stated the other side of the issue is that the City needs to provide what is called "affordable housin9", and this is affordable housing. Ms. Schnabel stated she was concerned about the density. She felt it was more units than she would like to see go into this area. She, too,shared the concern about spot rezoning, 6ut also did not see single family homes ever going in there. Mr. Saba stated he liked the concept despite the objections. He could see a development like this going in there eventually, but with fewer units. Mr. Deblon stated he looked at the positioning of this development as creating a quieter environment for the homes on Lucia Lane. He stated the concerns expressed were very valid, but he thought this was a positive aspect of a deve7op- ment of this nature. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIRL OF REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #83-03, BY L. ROBERT ERICXSON, TO REZONE THE WEST HALF OF LOT 4, AND ALL OF LOTS 5, 6 AND 7� LUCIA LANE ADDITION, FROM R—I (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AREAS) TO R-3 (G�NERAL MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS) TD AL7AW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 14—UNIT CONDOMSNIUld PROJECT, THE SAME BEING II33—.ZI45 MISSISSIPPI STREET N.E. Mr. Oquist stated the sewer issue and the Couniy's p7ans for widening Mississippi and putting in a right turn 7ane should be resolved before this item goes to the City Council. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN 5CHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNRNIMWSLY. MOTION BY MS. GRBEL� SECONDED BY MR, SABA� TO RECEIVE SNTO THE RECORD THE LETTERS FROM RUSSBLL BURRIS AND JUNE JOHNSON AND THE PETITION FROM CLARENCE TIMO, AND TO PORWARD THESE ON WITH THE MSNUTES TO CITY COUNCIL, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTINC AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRZED UNRNIMDUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated that on June 6, the City Council would set the public hearing for June 20. 2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L,S, #83-01 MARGARET A SEGER• Split off the southerly ]04.02 Feet of Lot 1, Block 2, Spring Lake Park Lakeside, the same being 7650 Lakeside Road N.E. (Original Lot - 1586 Qsborne Road N.E.) Mr. Deblon stated this was an informal hearing as required by the subdivision ordinance for a lot split. Mr, Deblon stated this lot split was requested back in 1975. The request came before the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission recommended the PLANNING COr1F1ISSI0N MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 9 petitioner have the property surveyed and that all utility easements be worked out with NSP, Northwestern Bell, Minnegasco, Cable Television and the City Engineering Dept, before going on to City Council (page 12, Planning Coirnnission minutes, Jane 25, 1975}, Mr, Art Seger stated he was representing his mot6er, Margaret Seger, who had to leave the meeting earlier. Mr, Dehlon stated the lot is exceptiona7ly deep, over 208 feet. The new lot would become ]04 feet by 100 feet which wou7d more than exceed the requirements for a buildable lot. He stated Staff �ad the following concerns: 1. The petitioner get a survey after the decision of the Planning Commission. 2. There is a park fee requirement (applicant is aware of this) 3. There be a 6ikeway/walkway easement and street easemeni on the front 7ot a7ong Osborne (tte be7ieved it was a 17' street easement and a 15' bikeway/walkway easement total7ing 32 feet.) Mr. Deblon stated this lot split meets all the requirements thus far per the subdivision ordinance. He stated the sewer and water ]ines will be checked out before the request goes before the City Council. Other than that, Staff did not see any problems with the lot split. MOTION BY MR. OQUIS2, SECONDED 8Y MR, KONDRICB� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF LOT SPLST REQUE5T, L.W. #83-01, BY MARGARET A, 5EGER� TO SPLIT OFF THE SDUTHERLY 504.02 FEET OF LOT I� B,iOCK 2� SPRING LAKE PIi72K LAKESIDE, THE SAME BEING 7650 LA%ESIDE ROAD N.E. (ORIGINAL LOT - 1586 OSBORNE ROAD N,E,), WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1. STAFF CLARIFY THE AMOUNT OF EASEMENT NEEDED OFF OSBORNE RORD FOR STREET AND 87KEWAY/WALKWAY. 2. STAFF CHECK TO SEE IF ANY EASEMENTS WERE REQUIRED FROM THE UTILITY COMPANIES AND CABLE TV. 3. STRFF CLARIFY THE SEWER LINE. 4. THE RPPLICANT GET A SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY PRIOR Tp THE CITY COIJNCIL MEET7NG.� � UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to City Council on June 6. 3. REUIEW OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW GHAPTER 1�1 ENTITLED "ANIMAL MOTION BY MR, pQUIST, SECONDED BY MR, KONDRICK� TO CONTINUE REVIEW OF THE ANIMAL ORDINANCE UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. .UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED SHE MOTION CAI2RIED UNANIMOUSLY, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 10 MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECESVE THE MEMO DATED MAY 18, I983�� FROM JIM PHILLIPS� LEGAL INTSRN. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE APRIL 27 1983 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECEIUE THE APRIZ 27� I983, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY M2NUTES. The Commission members agreed they would like Mr. Boardman to come to a future meeting and explain the HRA's financing process and the Genera� Reserve System. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHASRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTSON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. RECEIVE MAY 5, ]983� HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: �MOTION BY MR.OQUIST� SECONDED 8Y MS. GA$EL� TO RECEIVE THE MAY 5� .2983� HUMAN RESODRCES COMMISSSON MINUTES, UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED SHE MOTIDN CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. RECEIUE MAY 10, 1983, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. GABEL� 5ECONDED BY MR, KONDRTCK� TO RECEIVE TXE MAY S0� I9S3� APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALZ VOTING AYE, CNAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DEC.LA.RED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED 8Y MR. SABA� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MAY l8� I983, PLANNZNG COMMISSION MEETING AA70URNED AT 10:20 P.M. Respectfu77y subm' ted, ce. Lynn aba Recor ing Secretary ��%,�ilv=�u�-y � OYti�Jo--.,�--• �/�� ' /� /l`�3 �� m � � %�� , �� . � ,�/�� -�-� N1 , � � � � .�,�.�, � �r�,�,_` ��w � V�� /-��- 'Vv�' � �° �� , � i�, �P�� -`-`-e�,��C� ��i�-C, �� . , ��=�-9 cw �1�� U ��,,,� � � / %��y1 � ��,��, � �� o - �ti� ��'� ,-, 6 s�'v / l,S'd � S! 7 �� w � ��-�,� �?2�.�� , � . � ��,`�s �,� �f/E. �, � � "�' ✓� L� O b / _ ��i � � �°�.� � /li f �_ 6SSD �-cc. �l-o-,..R- �,� _ � (�a ��. �'-�,-..-�_ �T �' _ � ��6 ��.-�-- � � / Zi �' �/-�-� —� %, � � ,��, �� e�� _ S �6 � � Z 5'� ti� A��i. � .3�1 / ��z�z U % ��l�l.� , �, �'� ��x 3z z6( c�s�3 �_ge� � /cS33 L vua ln � �-<�. �✓i �/�P� T�l �. . ��.