PL 01/23/1985 - 6846City of Fridley
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIN6
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, 7985
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: DECEMBER 19, 1984
1.
F�
6: CONSIDERATI
Rezone from R-1 (one family dwelTings) to R-3 (general
multiple dwellings} Lot 2, Block 1 and Lot 7, Block 2,
except the Southerly 100 feet> all in Brookview Second
Addition, for a townhouse-type development, 9enerally
located on the North and South side of 67th Avenue N.E.
on Highway #65.
IC HEARIN6:
LIMINARY PLAT,
AN�� J. A. rtENKVELD: Be1ng a repiat of the property described
as Lot 2, Block l, and Lot 7, Block 2, except the
Southerly 100 feet, all in 6rookveiw Second Addition.
3. LOT SPLIT REQUEST. L.S. #85-01, BY J. WIENS & 6. BACKLUND
Split off the Soutn 40 feet of the North 166.40 feet of
of the West 210 feet of Lot 49, Auditor's Su6division No.
92 (5809 Arthur} and add to 5805 Arthur for side yard to
eliminate a variance.
4. DISCUSSION ON PaSSIBLE REVIS20NS IN THE SIGN ORDINANCE
5.
6.
7.
8.
DISCUSSION ON CURBSIDE RECYCLIN6 IN FRIDLEY
AUTH
1
RECEIVE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER
18, 19B4
OF JANIIARY
Motion on page 9 to City Council on Or9anizations
receiving 1984 CDBG Funds
Motion on page 10 recommend to Council that the City
be encouraged to expand the School Prevention Programming
9. RECEIVE CO
COMMI
10. . RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 15, 1985
li. OTHER BUSINESS:
A0.]OURNMENT:
7:30 P.M.
PAGES
1 - 12
]3 - ]9
20 - 31
32 - 36
37 - 52
53 - b7
WHITE
' GREEN
SALMON
PIhK
YELLOW
(at meeting)
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PIANNING COhAfISSION MEETING� DECEMBER 19, 1954
CALL TO �ItDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel called the December 19, I984 PLanning Co�mnission meeting
to order at 7:30 p. m.
ROLL G1LL:
Members Present: Ms. Schnabei, Mr. Oquist, I�h. Kondrick, Ph-. Minton, Mr.
Nielsen, aod Ms. Gabe1
Members Absent: Mr. Saba
Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator
John Flora, Public Works Director
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 28 1934 PLANNING CONAtISSION MINUTES:
MOTION $Y Mt, KOIdDRICK, SECONDED BY M[t, MINTON, TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 28,
1484 Pit1NNING CONAIISSION MINUTBS AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CNAIRWOM4N SCANABEL D£CLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT,
SP i'k84-25, MAT PROPERTIES, BY JAMES TRAPP: Per Sec[ion 205.15.1, 3E,
of the Fridley City Code, to allow the reopening oE a service s[ation
on the South 120 feet of Lo[ 18, Block S, Rice Creek Plaza South, the
same being 65D0 University Avenue N. E.
MOTION BY t�t. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. NIELSEN, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING
ON SP �184-25, BY Mt1T PROPERTIES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOM4N SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P. M.
Nh. Robinson stated the property in question is on the northwest corner
of University and Mississippi which is part of the downtown redevelopment
district. �
He stated the site in question is 14,400 square feet and is zoned C-3.
The lot was platted in 1957 as part of the Holly Shopping Center and the
service s[ation constructed in 1959. t�k. Robinson stated a special use
permit was granted to Phillip's Petroleum Company in 1972 and the station
operation was discontinued in 1981, therefore, the Legal nonconforming
use spatus including reduced setbacks was lost.
Mr. Robinson stated the Appeals Commission reviewed the variance requests
at their December 11, 1984 meeting. He pointed out several variances
were needed involving the setbacks from the street right-of-way, reduction
�
PLANNIN6 CO�AfISSION MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 2
of the lot area, parking lo[ setbacks, driveway setbacks and to reduce
the widths of the parking stalls.
Mr. Robinson stated the Appeals Commission tabled any action on the
variances pending further information after the HRA met. He stated
this intersection is being studied for proposed improvements and
widening and it was felt the re-establishment of this property as a
service s[ation would not be consistent with plans for the downtown area.
Mr. Robinson stated the IiR1a met on December 13 and reviewed a proposal
for this in[ersection which will be further studied.
Ms. Schnabei stated wha[ is decided by the HRA and what action is taken
by [he Appeals Commission on the variances would probably have an.effect
on the decision made regarding the special use permit.
Mr. Robinson presen[ed a drawing of the proposed improvement at this
intersection. He pointed out, with the proposed widening, there would
be virtually no space Left for a service station.
Ms. Schnabel asked if Heartland is interested in purchasing this property
whether or not the variances or special use permit is granted. I�h.
Robinson stated their intent would be to purchase the property and
remove the station in order to provide additional parking and increased
landscaping.
Mr. Minton asked if the HItA wou�d purchase the property through eminent
domain. Mr. Robinson stated 'ne believed Heartland would purchase it,
I�k. Min[on asked about the restrictive covenant. Mr. Robinson stated it
is really Heartland's covenant and they have the option to exercise it.
2�, Parta, attorney representing the petitioners, Mr. Trapp and Mr. Mischke,
stated the matter of the variances was tabled by the Appeals Commission,
as they wished to know what ac[ion the HRA would take regarding the pro-
posed plans for this intersection.
He stated i[ was his understanding that the development plan for the
northwest quadrant of that particular intersection was developed by the
HRA and the new owners of Holly Shopping Center. He stated it was de-
signed in a way the owners of the shopping center wanted it. He stated
it was also his understanding the entire plan was predicated on the
owners of the center acquiring this property so there would not be any
cost to the City. He stated he understood if the owners of Ho11y
Shopping Center did not acquire this property, new plans would have to
be prepared.
Mr, Parta stated the restrictive convenant presently on the property
indicates it can only be used for a gas service station and other pur-
poses related to a gas service station. He stated the covenant wasn't
created by these particular owners of the property and there is a legal
question whether that can be released by the current owr.ers. He stated
it is possibie, through title proceedings, the present owners could do it.
PLANNING COP4ffSSI0N MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 3
t�fr, Parta further stated if there was an objection by the people who
originally created that covenant, it is not cer[ain the restriction
could be released. _
Mr, Par[a stated the impression he initially had was the HRA had a plan
for the redevelopment of downtown Frid�ey and it appears it is more of
a plan for the owners of the shopping center.
Mr. Par[a stated the petitioners plan to use the building on this pro-
perty for Sparks Tune-Up. He stated because of the covenant, it may
be necessary to install a gasoline pump aLso. He stated his clients
prefer no[ to do this, but if it is required, they would comply.
Mr. Parta stated Ph. Tr�pp and hh. Mischke have entered into a purchase
agreement.with Philli?s to buy the property and would the❑ lease the
property. A� sCated they assumed Chere would be no problem because the
building originally was a service station.
Mr. Parta stated the City pointed out they would need a special use
permit for their operation and also some variances because [t�is pro-
perty is no longer grandfathered under the ordinance. I�. Parta
stated this property is totally surrounded by a public road and has an
existing building and there is no way you can do anything to make it
conform to the code. He stated if it was going to be used for any
purpose, variances would be required.
Mr. Parta stated the petitioners wanted to use this property the same
as the one being used across the street. He stated both of these par-
cels are identical and no variances or special use permits were required
for that parcel. Mr. Parta stated Logic tells him it is inconceivable
to allow the identical use across the street and prohibit it on the
other side of the street.
hh. Parta stated [hey are under a good deal of pressure from Phillips
to close and wi11 be doing so by the end of the year, He stated if
they can't get the special use permit and variances, it wouLd seem the
City would [a'�ce the property. He stated cities have the right to do
that, but i[ is not what they have here. He stated, in this situation,
you have some private developers who would like to redesign their
shopping center another way with cooperation by the City. He stated he
doesn't know if that is the only plan which could be used, but it suits
the Holly Shopping Center people quite weil.
I�fr, parta stated the County has no plans for this intersection, but wi11
develop them in 1985. He stated it is not known if they would require
right-of-way for upgrading the intersection, however, the feeling is pro-
perty would probably be [aken on the other side of University.
Mr. Parta stated he understands the HRA plans call for this improvement
in late 1986. He questioned what was to be done in the meantime if the
item was tabled and force people to go through a court process in order
to get a decision on the matter.
PLANNING COD4ffSSI0N MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 4
If the property is going to be taken, Mr. Parta stated that is easy to
deal with because then you know where you are at. He stated the HRe1
wasn't going to acquire the property, it was Heartland who wag interested
in it.
I�h, Par[a stated it wasn't the ].and owner that put in the street which
made this parcel small. He stated when the City put in the road around.
the property to the north and west, the driveways were designed so
they wouldn't cause a traffic problem.
Mr, Parta stated he understands the PLanning Commission may have a pro-
cedural problem to act on this special use permit when action hasn't been
taken on the variance request. He felt if the Commission made a re-
commendation for issuance of the special use permit, it could be contin-
gent on approval of the variances.
Mr, Parta stated he didn't believe tabliag this special use permit would
resolve anything because even if the HR°. took action on the plans for
the intersection, it could be several years before anything took place.
He felt the property couldn't sit idle for this period of time.
Ms, Gabel asked Mr. Flora about the County plans for this improvement.
Mr. Flora stated this spring a consultant looked at this intersection as
far as the traffic, and additional lanes were recommended. He stated
a proposal has been submitted to the County with a request for them to
initiate this improvement in their 1985 plans. He stated this would
require taking some of the proper[y associated with the Ho11y Shopping
Center and service station on the corner. fle stated the County would
have [o finalize the plans with the Minnesota Department of Transportation
and there may be some re-arranging of right-of-ways.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Parta if it is his clients intent to proceed with
purchasing this property regardless of what actions would be taken by
the Commissions. t�fr. Parta stated they have no choice as things may or
may not happen. He stated they have an excellent lease and tenant and
this is an ideal site for the use proposed.
I�fr. Trapp stated [hey would be leasing this property to Sparks and they
have two other operations at this time in the metropolitan area. He
stated they prefer not to put in a gas pump, but would do so in order to
comply with the covenant.
Ms. Schnahel stated the difference with this property and the property
to which I�. Parta referred to across the street is that the HItA owns
the parcel where Dr. Ryan's is located so it is under their control.
Mr, Parta stated decisions have to be made whether or not trhis property
is to be acquired and, in the meantime, it should be used. He stated
the property could be taken within 90 days and, in a sense, they are
looking for a temporary use also.
PIANNING COI�4QISSION MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 5
Mr, Parta stated when you have a request for a special use permit what
you want to take into consideration is if it would be detrimental to
surrounding property values and if i[ would cause any traffic-congestion.
Ms. Gabel stated she feLt it would be detrimental to grant a special use
permit for this property because of the traffic problems in this area,
Mr. Oquist stated he didn't feel a tune-up business would generate a
large volume of traffic.
I�h. Kondrick stated he felt the gas station went out of business at this
location because of the difficulty to access in and out of the station.
Mr. Robinson stated the traffic problem is really two-fold. It is close
to the loop-back and if the gas station remains, there wouLdn't be
sufficient space to widen the intersection. He stated this was not
consistent v!,ttr plans for the downtown area,
Ms. Schnabel asked if it is known when the HIU1 would be finalizing a
plan. Mr. Robinson stated he believed this would be taken up at the
next meet4ng of the HItA.
Ms. Schnabel stated if the special use permit and variances were granted
and then the HRA decides to acquire the property, she was not sure what
would }�appen to the business at tha[ point.
Ph. Parta sta[ed there are uniform relocation benefits. He stated the
crucial issue would be if they would [ake all or part of the property.
He stated, in this case, no one knows what is likeLy to happen.
Ms. Schnabel stated in normal circumstances, you wouldn't allow the busi-
ness to continue. Pff . Parta stated that is a decision the City would
have to make.
Mr. Minton asked the Length of the lease agreement with the proposed ten-
ants for this property. t�h. Trapp stated it was for five years with a
five year option. He stated the lease also addresses the condemnation
issue in the event this would occur.
Ph. Minton stated if a business moves in with a five year lease and dev-
elops a clientele and then [he property is acquired, would it mean the
City would•have to pay a lot more because of the value of the business
at this location. Mr. Robinson stated that is generally the case from
what he understands.
Ms, Gabel stated a statement was made that the petitioners down payment
was completely refundable and asked why this wasn't their choice. Mr,
Trapp stated his tenants like the site and would really Like to locate
on this parcel. He stated they offered other alternatives, but they
wanted this site.
PLANNING COMTffSSION MEETING DECEMSER 19 1984 PAGE 6
t�. FLora stated with the opening of Target's office building and
the medical center's plans to expand their space, there will be a
substantial increase in traffic at this intersection. He stated it
wi11 affect the safety going into the shopping center at this service
drive.
Ms. Gabel stated since Old Country Buffet opened in Holly Center,
there is constant and consistent traffic and she couldn't imagine
doing anything that would add to the burden of the traffic problem.
2�TION BY I9t, KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MS. CABEL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING ON SP ��84-25, M4T PROPERTIES, BY JAMES TRAPP,
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSID AT 8:43 P. M.
Ph. Oquist stated he was not concerned about the traffic as he f�lt
this type of business wouldn't generate a lot of traffic. He stated
he was not sure of t?�is type of business on this site since they are
working to upgrade the downtown area,'
Mr. Kondrick stated he would agree this would not be the type of business
he woudd lfke to see on this corner. He sCated, however, he didn't feel
the traffic would be a problem.
Ms. Gabel stated she does feel there is a traffic problem and a service
station would add to the problem. She stated she was also concerned
as she felt chis was not the type of business they wanted for the down-
town area.
Mr. Minton stated, considering the planning and use of the downtow❑ area,
this would be inconsistent. He didn't feel the traffic would be a problem.
MfiT_ION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MEt. KONDRICK, TO DENY SPECIAL USE PERMIT,
SP �P84-25, M�T PROPERTIES, BY JAPES TRAPP, PER SECTION 205.15.1, 3E, OF
THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO ALLOW THE REOPENING OF A SERVICE STATION ON THE
SOUTH 120 FEET OF LOT 18, BLOCK 5, RICE CREEK PLAZA SOUTH, THE SAME BEING
6500 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N. E.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMP.N SCHNABEL DECLARED THE M02ION
CARRIED UNP.NIMDUSLY.
2, LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L, 5. 4k84-12, BY WINFIELD DEVELOPERS, INC., iATTN:
RICK MARTENS): Sp1it off the Northerly 35 feet of Lot 4, Block l, Paco
Industrial Park, and add it to Lot 3, and Lot 2, except the Northerly 50
feet, the additional Land to be used for parking for 7200 University
Avenue N. E.
t�. Robinson stated this Lot split involves a piece of land in the Paco
Industrial Park on the west side of University, north of the Community
Park. He stated [he proposal is to split off approximately 35 x 269 feet
of Lot 4 and add it to Lot 3 and part of Lot 2, �o be used for additional
�LANNING COhAff SSION MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 7
parking for a 30,000 square foot NautiLus Fitness Center. Mr. Rob-
inson stated the land is needed to satisfy the parking requiremen[s.
Mr. Robinson stated it is recommended a park fee of $221.38 be paid;
the Lot split to be registered with the County; and the remainder of iLot 4
be combined with Lot 5 to Create a buildable lot.
t�fr. Rick Martens, owner of the property, stated they have a letter of
agreement and are finalizing plans with Nautilus Swim and Fitness to
be loca[ed on this site. He stated they are a company out of Colorado
Springs and based on the research he has done, he felt they were a
very well-organized and well-managed company. He stated the company is
aware of the licensing requirements and [hat they have to provide a
Letter of credit and surety bonds.
I�. Martens submit[ed a proposed drawing for this building which would
be two stories. He stated on the first floor would be a Lap swimming
poo1, whirlpool, saunas, offices and a day care facili[y. He stated
the second floor would contain a running track, aerobic workout area
and all the nau[ilus equipment.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Martens if he was in favor of combining Lot 4
with Lot 5. He stated he would prefer not to do it, bu[ would agree
to the stipulation.
MOTION BY I�fft. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR, OQUIST, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL
OF A REQUEST FOR A LOT SPLTT, L. S. 4184-12, BY WINFIELD DEVELOPERS,
INC. (RICK MARTENS) TO SPLIT OFF THE NORTHERLY 35 FEET OF LOT 4,
BLOCK 1, PACO INllUSTRIAL PARK, AND ADD TT TO LOT 3, AND LOT 2, EXCEPT
THE NORTHERLY 50 FEET, THE ADDITIONAL U1ND TO BE USED FOR PARKING FOR
7200 UNNERSITY AVENUE N. E., WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPUTATIONS:
1. YAYMENT OF PARK FEE OF $221.38.
2. REGISTER LOT SPLIT WITH THE COUNTY, UPON APPROVAL OR PRIOR
TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PIItMIT,
3, THE REPSAINDER OF LOT � BE COMBIIED WITH L6T 5 TO CREAT£ A BUILDABLE SITE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECIARID THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L. S. �k84-13, RANDY ANDERSON: Spiit off the South-
erly 36 feet of Lot 5, Block 5, Melody Manor, to make � zero lot line
between ea�h side of a double bungalow, the same being 7396-7398 Symphony
Street N. E.
t�h. Robinson stated this lot split is for property at 7396-7398 Symphony
S[reet for a 0 lot Line which is allowed in this particular zone (R+2). He
stated it is proposed to split this double bungalow in order to allow
each side to be sold separately.
2�. Robinson stated it is recommended a park fee of $750 be paid; the
lot split to be registered with the County; and a declaration of coven-
ants be submitted to the City and recorded with the Coun[y.
YLANNING COMMISSION MEEfING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 8
4.
Mr. Kondrick asked if any correspondence has been received from per-
sons who were notified of this lot split. Mr. Robinson stated he has
not received any comments either in favor or against the Lot split.
Mr, Anderson, the petitioner, stated he would have the declaration of
covenan[s drawn up by an attorney.
I�TION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY I$t. MINTON, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF
LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L. S. �k84-13, BY RANDY ANDERSON TO SPLIT OFF THE
S OUTHERLY 36 FEET OF LOT 5, BLOCK 5, MELODY MANOR, TO MAKE 0 FEET LOT
LINE BETWEEN EACH SIDE OF A DOUBLE BUNC�L047, THE SAME BEING 7396-7398
SYMPHONY STREET N, E„ WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPUI.ATIONS:
1. PAYMENT OF PARK FEE OF $750.
2. REGISTER LOT SPLIT WITH THE COUNTY,
3. RECORD WITH THE COUNTY AND SUBMIT TO THE CITY, A DECLARATION
OF COVENANTS FOR THE PROPERTIES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHA IItWOMAN SCHNABEL DECIIiRED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
I�k. F1ora, Public Works Director, stated in 1982, the State Legislature
passed a statute requiring surface water management of a11 land in the
metropolitan area, He stated the legislation formulated the Six Cities
Watershed Management Organization which, together with the Rice Creek
Watershed District, encompasses surface water management for a11 of the
City.
Mr. F1ora stated the intent of this legislation is to manage the sur-
face water quality and quantity of runoff. He stated recent develop-
ments in the City have been required to establish surface water detention
ponds and fiLEration systems and many of these ponds are or have become
the City's responsibility to maintain and operate.
Mr. Flora stated the City's storm water system is not complete, but that
which is in place is at least 20 years o1d and the required maintenance
of this system wi11 increase over the years. He stated the greatest re-
turn on the City's investment in the system would be through preventive
maintenance by inspection, cleaning, patching, repairing and sma11 scale
c onstruction to keep the facilities operating at An acceptable level.
Mr. Oquist asked the cost per year for maintenance of the storm water
system. Mr. Flora stated it is estimated the cost is between $170,000
to $200,000.
Mr. Flora stated staff is suggesting the establishment of a storm water
fund to handle expenditures connected with this system similar to the
Utility Fund for the water system. He stated fees would be charged to
categories of Land use based upon the intensity of storm water runoff,
with each contributing a fair share.
PLANNING COhPffSSION MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 9
I�k. Flora stated an analysis was made of the land uses to come up
with a residential equivalent fa�tor on which the charges would be
based, He stated, basically, for residential properties the fee would
be $1.75 per quarter or $7.00 per year. �
Ms. Schnabel asked where the funds were coming from now to maintain
the storm water system. Mr. Flora stated these come from the General
Ft.i nd ,
Ms. Schnabel questioned what would be different if monies from the
General Fund were not used. Mr. F1ora stated with a separate storm
water system fund, it would provide the means to maintain the system
without competing with other programs or projects funded from the
Generat Fund.
Fh. Kondrick asked Mr. FLora how much money he felt would be generated
by establishing this fee for the storm water system. Nh, Flora stated
it is estimated about $150,000 would be collected.
hfr, Kondrick stated in the final analysis, it would be a tax. hh. Flora
stated the only way to generate money is through a fee or tax. He
stated they have tried to make this fee equitable and those who gener-
ate more storm water will pay according!y.
Ms. Schnabel questioned the life expectancy of a storm sewer. Nk.
Flora stated it is about 60 to 80 years, but this doesn't mean money
wouldn't be spent on it, He sta[ed preventive maintenance must still
be done in order to save the City's original investment and, at some
point, you have to look at major reconstruction. Mr. Flora stated the
establishment of a storm water sys[em fund would identify specific
funds for a particular purpose so it can be assured the system wouLd be
maintained.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. F1ora ahen [his proposal woiild be implemented.
Mr. F1ora stated it is hoped approvai could be given in January so
billings would begin the secoad quaiEer, collectible with the third
quarter.
t�fr. Oquist stated it f.s the domino effect r_hat bo[hers him and possibly
every department providing a service would begin charging a fee without
raising taxes. Mr. Flora stated many cities are going in this direction
and some charge for snow removal, street Lighting, etc. He stated it
is hoped Fridley wouldn't find this eecessary.
Mr. Kondrick felt by establishing such a fee, it takes the pressure o£f
those responsible for spending the City's money wisely and gives them
a carte blanche. He stated the City is able to handle this expenditure
now using funds from the General Fund and didn't understand why they
had to have a fee.
I�k. Flora stated by having a fee, these funds are designated for a •
specific purpose. He stated the City envisions the requiremen[s for
storm water management to increase substantially in the coming years.
PLANNING COhAffSSION MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 10
hh. Flora stated it is hoped to hold the line on taxes and attempt
to uaintain the City's investment in the storm water system by
collecting fees from properties which are causing the problem.
t�. Flora stated he would like input and comments from the Planning
Commission for submission to the Council. He felt their concerns
should be addressed so the CounciL is aware of their opinions.
Mr. Minton stated while this is definiteJry a means of raising additional
revenue, he would raise the question if they need $150,000 more and if
this is the best way to raise it,
Ms. Schnabel stated her concern was the establishment of a precedent
by having a separate fee for specific City maintenance problems.
She felt this rt�y open the door to other fees being charged to property
owners for other City maintenance responsibilities. She questioned if
it is a concept being started because everyone is afraid to raise taxes
or doesn't want to take on the responsibility,
Mr. Kondrick stated he would question what happens to [he $150,000
in the General �nd which was being used for [he storm water system, if
a fee is imposed. He stated he felt the fee would take the respon-
sibility from those who are in charge of the City's funds and give them
a carte blanche. He stated he didn't know if taxes would be reduced
if the fee is imposed and another consideration is the fee could also
be raised.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. FLora what were the projected repairs and main-
tenance problems for the next LO years. Ah. filora stated open joint
pipes would be repaired and there would be increased ditch and ponding
maintenance.
The Commission thanked Ah. Flora for his presentation and for providing
further information and input.
5. RECENE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: NOVEMBER 8, 1984:
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECOHI)ED BY MR. KONDRIQC, TO RECEIVE THE NOVEM-
BER 8, 1984 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCANABEG DECIARED THE
M(7fI0N CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,
6. RECE NE PARK & RECREATION CO2R�fISSION MINUTES: NOVEMBER 20, 1954:
2�TION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDID BY t+Ht. NIELSEN, TO RECEIVE THE NOVEM-
BER 20, 1984 PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECIARED THE
NATION CARRIEA UNANIMOUSLY.
PLP.NNING C�MMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 pAGE 11
7. RECENE ENVIRONMEN'tAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES: NOVEMBER 20, 1984:
�OTION BY MR, NIELSEN, SECONDED BY 1�&i. MINTON, TO RECEIVE THE_NOVEM-
BER 20, 1984 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COI�IISSI�N MINUTES.
t�. Robinson stated the Environmental Quality Commission looked at
the satellite dish ordinance which will be coming to the Planning
Commission in the near future.
He stated the Commission talked about curbside recycling and a report
was sent to the Council which would be discussed at their conference
meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, ALL VOTING AYE, GHAIRWOM�N
SCHNABEL AEC7.ARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANI�USLY.
8. RECE NE APPEALS COP4ffSSI0N MINUTES: NOVEMBER 27, 1984:
hDTION BY bS, GABEL, SECONAED BY MEt, MINPON, TO RECENE THE NOVEMBER 27,
1984 APPEALS COt�4ffSSI0N MINVTES,
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECIARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIM(KJSLY,
9. RECENE ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: NOVEMBER 27. 1984:
2�&)TION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR, KONDRICK, TO RECEIVE THE NOVEMBER
27, 1984 ENERGY COAARSSION MINVPES.
itr, Robinson stated Mr. GYoody, Manager of the Minneapolis Weatherization
Program, talked to the Commission about the Neighborhood Energy Workshop
and Operation Insulation.
l�fr, Robinson stated there is the possibility of using this program in
tYidley as t�. Groody indicated he would be willing to expand his
staff [o include Fridley. He stated he would report on this possibility.
Mr. Robinson stated the State Legislature passed some laws that the
utility companies had to work on some of [he energy programs so Minne-
gasco is paying for this program.
I�fr. Robinson stated they had about 50 requests for the CO chemical badges
and they would be sent out tomorrow.
UHN A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, ALL VOTIN6 AYE, CHAIRWOMAN
SCiIDIABEL DECIARED THE MpTION CARRIED UNANIMUllSLY.
10. RECEIVE HUMP.N RESOURCES CONR4ISSION MINUTES: DECEMBER 6. 1984:
2�TION BY MEt, MINTON, SECONDID BY ME2. NIEISEN, TO RECENE THE DECEMBER 6,
1984 HUMAN RESOURCES COI�ASISSION MINUTES,
PIANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 19 1984 PAGE 12
Mr. Minton stated the Human Resources Commission is working on the
CDBG for the year, He also stated the Commission's reco�mnendations
regaTding [he Locke House/Banfill Tavern went to the Council and
they forwarded the information to the County,
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE M(YTION, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIItWOM9N
SCHNABEL DECLARED TkiE MOTION CARRIED UNANII�USLY,
11. RECE NE APPEALS COMhIISSION MINUTES: DECEMBER 11. 1984:
MCYfION BY t�S. C�1BEL, SECONDED BY MR. NIELSEN, TO RECENE THE DECEMBER
11, 1984 APPEALS COMPfISSION MINUTES,
Ms. Schnabel stated she really has a problem with the square footage
for the property at 6500 University Avenue.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON TRE ABOVE i�llTION, ALL VOTING AYE, CHr1II2WOMAN
SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
12. OTHER BUSINESS:
There was no other business to come before the Co�mnission at this meeting.
ADJOURNMENT :
Chairwoman Schnabel declared the December 19, 1984 PLanning Commission
meeting adjourned at L0:50 p. m.
Respectfully submitted,
���'Lr��G .c�,�•-��-,Ei
Carole Haddad
Recording Secretary
PUBLIC HEARIN6
BEFORE THE
PLANNIN� C6h1MI55I0N
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the
Planning Lommission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431
University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, January 23,1�85
in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of:
Consideration of a Rezoning Request, ZOA #84-05.
by Wallace Miller and J. A. Menkveld, to rezone
from R-1 (one family dwellings) to R-3 (general
multiple dwellings) Lot 2, Block 1, and Lot 7,
Block 2, except the southerly 100 feet, all in
Brookview Second Addition, generally located
north and south of 67th Avenue N.E. on Highway
N65, in the North Half of Section 13, T-30,
R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota.
Any and a�} persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity
at the above stated time and place.
VIRGI(:IF SCHIJABEL
CHAI Rk'OMF';
PLANP�IN6 COMMISSIOP�
Publish: January 7, 19II5
January �q� 1985
13
MAILING LIS7
P.S. k84-05, Townhouses of Brookview
ZOA �84-05, Rezone from R-1 to R-3
all on the same property
Wallace Miller
831 40th Avenue N.E.
Columbia Heights, Mn 55421
J. A. Menkveld
1299 Mississippi Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. 8 Mrs. Donald Boyer
999 Pandora Drive N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. B Mrs. Herman Heath
997 Pandora Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Donald Crispin
6820 Oakley Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. James Brubakken
6810 Oakley Street N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. 8 Mrs. Robert Anderson
6800 Oakley Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Floyd C. Bradley
6830 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Roger Patton
6820 Srookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Bryce Shirmion
6810 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridleyq.MN 55432
Mr. 6 Mrs. Richard H. Schoen
6800 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, tki 55432
Mr. 8 Mrs. Kenneth Strand
6801 Oakley Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Planning Commission 1/8/85
City Council 14
J. Dee 8 R. Ferguson
6811 Oakley Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Ms. Hazel V. Saba
6821 Oakley Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Andrew Percic
1020 68th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Ardell Marcus
1010 68th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Francis R. Nash
1000 68th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Vos
94Q 68th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432�
Michael Servetus Unitarian Society
7170 Riverview Terrace N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Raymond Gerrety
1051 67th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. b Mrs. Walter Leimgruber
102? Mississippi Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. 8 Mrs. Elton Bolduan
6554 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley> Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Steven Flattum
6566 8rookview Drive N.E.
Fridley> M� 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Peter Vagovich
6600 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
15
Mailing List, Page 2
P.S. �85-04 and ZOA #85-05 R-1 to R-3
Mr. & Mrs. Orvilte Jacobson
6b06 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. d Mrs. Robert M. Clause�
6799 Overton Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mr. Jeffrey Gustafson
6558 Oakley Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Lewis H. Doyle
6551 Oakley Drive N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Louis G. Wells
6553 Oakley Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
!- Ys �..�
GTY OF FFiIOLEY. SUBJECT ZONING ACTION ZOA fi' Y
s��+unnv�ws�rr oue. Ne. VACATION SAY N
i(i1OLEV. MN.6:aa3C [6121,677-3Y60 PLAT P5 �
' ORDINANCE NO PUBLISHED
1 S -, 6 �� �.-✓ ..�
PLANNING COMMISSION� APPROYEO DISAPPROVED DATE N0.
CITY COUNCIL: PUBLIC HEARING DATE 1ST READ 2ND READ
CITV COUNCIL: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DA7E NO
PARK FEE REQUIRED: AhqUNT PAID
STIPULATIONS:
FEE�RECEIPT NO /S?o
57REET LOCATION OF
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROP
PRESENT ZONING CLA55IFICATION EXISTING USE OF
ACREAGE OF PROPERTY DESCRIBE BRIEFLY TNE
OR TYPE OF USE AND IMPROVEMENT PROPOSE� /�✓�
PROPOSED ZONING CLASSIFICATION
,.,.� � - i ,� iC - �
Has the present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or
variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? __yes no.
What was requested and when?
The undersigned understands that: (a} A list of all residents and owners of proper-
ty within 350 feet must be attached to this application (rezoning), 300 feet, (plat-
ting), wjllbe aitached to'this bppltication. '(b) This application must be si9ned
by all owners of the property, or an explanatio� 9iven why this is not the case.
(c) Responsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulti�g from the failure to
• list the narres and addresss of all residents and property owenrs of prop�rty in
question, belongs to the undersigned.
A sketch of proposed property and structure must be draw� and attached, showing the
following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of the proposed structure on the lot.
3. Uimensions of property, proposed structure, and fron and side setbacks. 4. Street
names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existin9 buildings (within 35D f�
The undersi�ned hereby declares that all
this application are true and correc�
stated in
DATE SIGNATURE ��Q1,y_�C�QQ��,��r�=�
a%31- `� u pt °"` r� t. C fl �''�-v > r
ADDRF�,4„r, i�51 �� � ���`7 sSy3'� TELEPHONE NO 37/�13'�
{�/-�� ��
�
16
, ���0 1ti �1 !a• fyYq.O ��C '��.. '" �'.�F.�K~...�. . � � } f
r �.,' � � l
/,. i c L� 11 . � . F .•o � 1 id'�T �,t �' • i. r av.
3r : ` , 900� ,��� � � v., M .d . ��ri.\O 10$g � � ���
�rI
. „�,,.`' ►. "o�� �. ''��9°, -CREEK ',rA2�`�j � � ; � `� .
.� � v + �p+ " ��ti�h2�' � �s .� � 4,�� t* , t, " ,i�6't±- � � � �`-j'�
x �A v '�,. 4 � i 2_ /� ; : ,,r . �,�,a... � ZQA #84i 05;
aoQ y' � (,�_ �o ,
P�� m q3 .` 6titi o� . ( �� . ��. :� 6�7o P1i1'ler � �'
i
O � � y Jc' J ,q . �qt - � � iMO. • � � � I' �� , 686o Merikvel�l � ��
A. � � 928 �, qs �' '4 � `� . �
`� � 4 _ "tiy � + � �9 S 68,�g� � � �5� 6650 1 1 w
, + f;
m qoi 92t 4 � � ' �Q ; ' ���n bt � _� 'y � � , �,
_ . 4 ��� /p � � . 9i1 ��d`"�"" ��s,�r HY�+ � i"- r ,,
4�f ;
, o O: +> > i� o i
� , /d v, 65�1 68�0 : � '
, ,,!�t;s',>°y ,..,�y4o<� � .t �3 �� " �, 4 1 ' a '; : : i �
. . 400 �� %• . . R 496�r�,�'�a��°-� �y� 's_ '%L L' ql l . �530 -•!'/ ' r/ r .
. . � � O - � , 9L� 61 `t� �` ! • 7 •t - N b831 �830 ' � 'l ,
' ' � }
� : . a Ly � O 6 v . �
� 4.',;� .i , :. ,� a� 10 ur�tD� _ �`�'f�1�1�I '
�9 s e '^i j1t.t � 7 i� ' ^ .� 6810 �521 6�20 { �
. �� � :
�• a r� 99l t u e � �� -/ i .!+ � v � i �
�¢ Y y �! 13 t� 990e � `i,�.�{ ra.� r iuy + i,s� % j�' �
j � ,99i � � W 6��� . 6flfo ; (D
' ", 9- --i~.�., ��fI�`�r.r�}i, i:}�J y= '� i�! 1�/' �. J� i� �` /. i �'
'4 i�TM T jl' i 'i �/ i
9 ' "�� „ .�a !! i� ,a w 9b� 99�, ��80o Q �o� '. � 8 � �
, � . c
o• y� q53 .9b��i �� /� y /' � p • !' Z, 6 z ' � : 2 ;
. - ,�, �a. f ,f so yf so �sr � . . .
�.�_ . ' . , ' ° I � r.
' �:� '_'�LGv VvD r �»i s„ ��rfr�i �r�. �i.. � n" � r '�
. t . � . � –AVE. � ...,,. _ :. ....—T %� tf �. . ,L: �
i � ,� F ��� �IP . . • Q . .
� n.. -�.. � �, i or..
�`°�3p .�' p . .�,4 t � � , :; �o: .,l 3 � r
�y'� � t , _�as� � � �• i,1 Z7t c{� i �_
� 43` � • ' , , ti . , e � g� =k . ,(�t�
9 ! ��K a � ��l' t : ? : � =� ,1
— �„"o .�.. .,/r' • �'�ooOwiol� � { ;I b�_
'����' ��x �`� ,�,` '��i" ao'` T�\ ' _ �
' a'► �+r,: a.t . � ; ,. . i;: �� . � I
i �' � � :!v . siic 1,��?`�,J { � Y �.
. *�,r+ �f �.p, , f `' �� ^ �Q ' ,'
L • : • ,�: ��021 IOSI Z�
, . ,; ••`q�\� 4<` � �," '. - .•�•y{ ,.� ( '
135 ?4,�Q� _ `�+ ' � � �. . , ; � i
b .. . . ' e �' � � 'a: ' :6T.�1 ••AV. N E. � ; ' � �
...
. ' } � t � .. ,.,. 1
' , ,Y t •` �j --. �tow. --
, �_"' ` �'OS�' : :'� y. � I W'
� C:fr E f'.,iti� . i �3 ^' ' �C = , �-.'
- �>- (ti.�J :; ♦ � O - - �:- -
� � �� . ' :- '� �}' c: bcob p .��
(°aoi - �s ,. �', � :; :'+V i � } + N r ,
_ .. • .
, ' '� '� i� . e� ' '� �co0 --- -'•--
� m -�-
'�jw) w �
. �-., .O � � � ' . ��Yf ♦� _I ��
Q . w '' ; 7
�- ` , � _� , � . •f':.. ::�- , i.r �_
_ t ,'.-� � _ 2� - � -�- '--�_
- . '., , � a o � GS338 L j �
� ,,.<,,.. a° y �; a �
. � B�
.- . : , - • . t„��.
. . -. - . 59t�,, �zcxao� bs5n � 6 ` - , � ` --- - ..,.. _
. � • ar„ �Z� �y �'� W �SS �- -
1 � . ,. ., Q� , '1'1� --1Y'2 �v,v/ ,LAtaQ � . .
� . ;,� �T z ' 8F ...�'6s bss► f.� ; 7 ,
• �` .. 4;�T,�; �� ,� " - 6sza ---- - =--
ae �
3� • Z °
� . ' b3t5 " • - `.
G53�8Ci � G3�7 �n.•
� � • 653s L ,�,�{ .�1/� � ;/Pf
.. ',. �.. C3 z q :y+-�s � ;
,rr� �af�' ��sa�� ;u�d ?. ' 8 8 �
� � � �� 9A �9C'9 •�� � ;
� �W . �8! 8 H � z � r �� : ���
: ,` m '•L . ... �t� '
•, r,� . : I
9�s 953 ' iois ►ozi ' i
. �a 925 93► 935 �. 464 too 1 + ,
w , r :q,,. ., 'Y � '
� H '/ l�[. �
I . . � ._s_�.w�... _ !li �1PA....l�T ��.n �nJ�.'�ii��w w-.�.�. • i ��
�� : • r �,� i' ,. ,�3 � , i ' . �v �_ __ .... �... -. . �C �.. L�. ...r_ � ��i/i1
, -......, L�,,:. � F� • � ,• •� .� � �II �
� f� , , � 3 • • 108� �►1C�r � ��• � �
` �R � � s's t t�.' r �' , q` J Pn n� W ZOl4 1t84 �l5 � �
_ � �e is v t r� ��r. �, �' �. i��� . E N t,�:�. M. AVEi ii l�l er �`�•
Y �`+�' � ��y M• W �� = Ot�kveld
: n is ! t�% f♦ � �• I` t� � �• Q ` V p / I
� •.• F- , � 0�
(� � r � � � `� !d •� � � � �
1 .I�)J/I n .0l�/7 ��f,` \` ' � . 1 ' � '
� ,, „�. . �h �
-� ,� i t � � � A �., ic �s "' ��y 2D� • � �l � . .
(�/t,{�� j��.j� + � i � S .� � .s ., ir ti� I ,�,�r: ♦�Yi� `Orz,u z. �x� � �
� I:, XY/y�IF _. L' f • � •
� il iJ N�� S,{ i) y,f iJ .l • •
� � TM A t ; 7 rs . .. , � N • M � t�� � • •�• I., ��
�� . . • • • I r I �I
� �� t D v ,� � � / . � • • i
� . . : �` �, �: ... � STE �.-�r
� 'l T • . i7'.
, ,�, ,. , S 3,0 _ 2 ° �/ ; ' � , . , � � j" ,•� , �yj5► rA , � ..
d
; , . u�. � Qo. o- , . –� , �'y�.. ,•�}/,� . _� �, _ ::..::
� „ s 's i �,F. � ' P,B 'Q g w67 �' A R_ � � "• �.. 1� � �;:.: 1
iJ�3 p }� -- I / :.�.�. 1
; f K �i . .. „� U Ck - s � {•: : .
. ^� �,. � ._F�a� ��, ��! e � � � } � ��i W 1' . o ,•.•.�.•
r' z t:::•
'` �.' i%�E !j1 rd ��ow;•p � e tai ti_ ` a f', , � ::::::
cn s.t . r iia.�.•.•
y � �'�.,� w� -_ �•.•.•,•
,.�,. � � �.�
f: . � �U i A / A J :��.�' J
A�.�, `NBGD�Nf �S. _-..•r ��� � �,C � i� z .r : a .ti �.•.•: �
fl f. �� j� • .,i� �l 3 .l J �f6q Z.
zr � �. r�. , z � ic �-i � �-Q Q i i „ O+ + � u
y��� }y -� � • yyA T[ON ,s �..Ift � � u Q � ii s �
'T(/Y'1PIm� � A �! � e i �I! .!� ' / I � � � � 1 �
„ > e
S T REET m � r J B j- B � ��
� ) 1 � ;� _ � � MISS�SS�PPI
S f
� I / l /
9 � � ', � I I �_ i I � JV � 1 J
' d ,`� 1 i u p� ie tI � .'•':..
/ 9 i: � � �.'.'.
� •s + rs � � �' � �. NQ�BB � » r W ti3b. h
� z ,, ' ' � ��� c • "'
v�i i. p r z � _ I�--' � Q �-- . � �i-- •�'i M5x tJt ! Ov v' .•:•:•. i
�
' if I H � 3 `� � � � A0f � I B 1 :� � Ii ��9 '.t... >
w r d I . OL'_ �_ ( . _
.t r J. �
/j i � .
� > ,. � A�. =: i _ �, -Y o :.,.�.
�;, e � , �- � .
" , s , 7' �...�,. c
a � :: -. Q`� ' ' 39!
I+ s J s! t ' o �_. �
�
. � Q Ni
�J i e � �� C�,v
n� ��c > > - i �,C
a ' �'' ' ' /1 1 .
� \ �� �{'i' j� � f 1 , ' � � ' a 7
u �r , . � � MERWAC
�^ ,���' ` 'l r A D
o `�} � r �
� �nJ���! ` �, � � � 7
C r I
S�M� � �,,, � ; • � l �
� ��' � � t ° ��'' � .�•�, :� ':• �.•:�:�'
� �,;,t ' � • ' !�� . .
� � , �_.�• �•
, \ "'.•,• �.r .
'd 4:� � � �� ',� '. • li,�i;��
� y,} ✓ G.? �. f /- � _ _ [
> • � � , / � �--� / � ,
— – � -�----�,'.;;} _____ - — – ' –
� �,� / �,,_ � .
�.,�`' � W E$l�'� . , � .
� ��R� /_�O%a��.1��__ � ��
i71•� .�'r"
• �
•
i. �
; E
i � i.,� . � � :
',,}`'�} .
fu►`���• : �� i
'�
�� ` ������� .
: i . � • ' - 7������t
��'1���
�..��������� � A�1�� ����i
,,...
�,.,,,
�.....
,. . i
..+�' , Z
'a+�.♦
�,,,,.. t
,, .....
,.....
r
s
6 � �
�
,
,
„
\ �
�r
�i
ll
�
�
�
2
�
h
Q
h
:
r�
i�
:.¢
Y i �
g � i
¢ � a
C C
_ '
ZOA #8G-05 Miller & Menkveld
�
� �
ti u
� � i
� '
� i
�
i ' � s
�
Y
/ 1
� �
�, 1
I
f /
1
� 1
�
.:
�
�
1 '
\l
{
�
�-
iAi:�_"'[� :.. . �r..'3. . ..?..,. _ .._ .
1
� ,
�
19
PUBLIC HEARIN6
BEFORE THE
PLANNIN6 COtdMIS5I0N
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the
Planning Cortonission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431
University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, January 23, 1985
in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of:
Consideration of a Preliminary Plat> P.S. �84-�5,
Townhomes of Brookview, by Wallace Miller and
J. A. Menkveld, being a replat of Lot 2, Block 1,
and �ot 7, Block 2, exceptthe Southerly 100 feet,
all in Brookview Second Addition, to allow the
development of townhouse type homes, located in
the North Half of Section 13, T-30, City of
Fridley, Co�nty of Anoka, tdinnesota
6enerally located north and south of 67th Avenue
N.E. on Highway #65.
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity
at the above stated time and place.
VIRGIWIA SCHtJA5EL
CNAIRWDMAP�
PLANNING COMMISSION
Publish: January 7, 1985
January 14, 1985
20
Planning Commission 1/8/85
City Council
MAILING LIST
P.S. #84-05, Townhouses of Brookview
ZOA #84-05, Rezone from R-1 to R-3
all on the same property
Wallace Miller J. Dee b R. Ferguson
831 40th Avenue N.E. 6811 Oakley Street N.E.
Columbia Heights, Mn 55421 Fridley, Mn 55432
J. A. Menkveld
1299 Mississippi Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Donald Boyer
999 Pandora Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Herman Heath
99] Pandora Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Donald Crispin
6820 Oakley Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. James Brubakken
6810 Oakley 5treet N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Robert Anderson
6800 Oakley Street N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Floyd C. Bradley
6830 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Roger Patton
6820 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Bryce Shimnon
6810 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley�.MN 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Richard H. Schoen
6800 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, hb 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Strand
6801 Oakley Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
L_
Ms. Hazel V. Saba
6821 Oakley 5treet N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Andrew Percic
1020 68th Avenue N.E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Ardell Marcus
1010 68th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Francis R. Nash
1000 68th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Vos
990 68th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432�
Michael Servetus Unitarian Society
7170 Riverview Terrace N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Raymond Gerrety
1051 67th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Walter Leimgruber
1027 Mississippi Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Elton Bolduan
6554 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Steven Flattum
6566 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Peter Vagovich
6600 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
21
�
Mailing List> Page 2
P.S. #85-04 and ZOA #85-05 R-1 to R-3
Mr. & Mrs. Orville Jacobson
6606 Brookview Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Robert M. Clausen
6799 Overton Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mr. Jeffrey Gustafson
6558 Oakley Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Lewis H. Doyle
6551 Oakley Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Louis G. Wells
5553 Oakley Drive N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
�--
CITY OF Fp10LEV.
64�1 UNIVERS�TV AVE. NE.
FAIOLEY� MN.65a32 [67Z},67�-��
� S
/ �� �-�.-�
23
SUBJECT ZONIN6 ACTION ZOA 8
VACATION SAV k
PLAT QS 8 -os
� ORDINANCE NO PUBLISHED
�✓ -5 ,(��c,r;i Gs'
PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED DISAPPR�V�D � DATE N0.
CITY CAUNCIL: PUBLIC HEARING DATE 1ST READ 2ND READ
CITY COUNCIL: APPROVED DISAPPROYED DATE NO
PARK FEE REQUIRED:__ AMDUNT PAI�
STIPULATIONS:
�
.r 9�. U
STREET 40CATION OF PROPERTY
EE�(,�_RECEIPT NOLS3o �
Z
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY �s-1'oZ ,�%1 / ,�i�..�, :� %--...�/ l3u�"t 3+�
PRESENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY '�x cy.�- S, w '�
ACREAGE OF PROPERTY DESCRIBE BRIEFLY TNE PROPOSED �ZONI�N,G CLASSIFICATION
OR TYPE OF USE AND IMPROVEMENT PROPOSED �--n-�----- ti Lslt�;!=1=%
Has the present apQlicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or
variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? _ Yes no.
What was requested and when?
The undersigned understands that: (a) A list of all residents and owners of proper-
ty within 350 feet must be attached to this application (rezoning), 300 feet, (plat-
ting), wjll be attached to'this bppl5cation. '(b) This application must be signed
by all owners of the property, or an explanation given why this is not the case.
(t) Responsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to
list the names and addresss of all residents a�d property owenrs of prop�rty in
question, belongs to the undersigned.
A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drawn and atitached, showing the
following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of the proposed structure on the lot.
3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and fron and side setbacks. 4. Street
names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within �50�feet).
The undersicJned hereby declares that all
this application are true and correct.
/
OATE �� 3 � `� SIGNATUR
v
�3 /_ .fa .C�f �-.� �1 � c sf
�
s'i�i z/
resdreSentaG�,ions Stated in
ADDRESS�� , y59 »''"�� .4*- �'/'"`� �' y 3�'— TELEPHONE
�
��'% l- � � e D
s` 7 i - -fs"7 -7
.
�p
p
Effective January 17, 198u 24
198� POLICI STATf?�NT ON PARb F&6S
ON LAND SUBDIYISION /
n8ce I-3 -g�
In determining fair market value of public areas for land aubdivision for cash payment as
requirod Dy Ordlnance /633. the following values vlll be used:
Reaidential Subdiviaion
Reeldentisl Lot Split
Commercisl/Indu�trisl Subdiviaion or Lot Split
=1,500.00 per lot
= 750.D0 per lot
� 0.023 Per s4• ft.
This fee is to be Qaid at tre time of final plat or lot aplit approval. The City Councll
may defer collectioo to tbe tlme a building permit is requested for individual lotn
created by nuch subdivision/lot aplit.
The City retains the option to eccept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for
part or all of the portioa required to De dedicated.
PAAR FEE AGA£El�NT
The undersigned understands tt�at according to the City Pla'ting Ordinance, the folloxing
public park land dedication is required Lo plat residential, commercial or industrial
zoned property.
It is further understood that the public park land dedScation or cash payment equivalent
1s at the discretion of the City.
It is agreed that a cash payment of E� vill be pald according to the aDove stated
policy for the following subdivision/lot aplit.
S�A�'' p� Kn��
IL is agreed that the following land dedication is provided according to the above stated
policy for the folloxSng aubdivision/lot aplit:
Dedlcatioa:
Subdiviaion/Lot Split
The underaigned furtAer a�ees to notify all future
payment requiremeat, if it i� to be collected at
permit.
Date:
3/0/B/B
property oxnera or sssigns of the cash
the time of iaauance of a building
(Property Uraer Signature)
•Y�. � '_`r��•� d:. rF + ._ . ..
.. ti i � / 'T"-�` tr r s ' i.: h/ �� �� 1 .. n" �B9S kfy
- b, � �..... .+-�...� �*, .. �� qsl �P.S. #84 0� ' SE�
�� �� � ��� . � � ��` � � � ��V�~
.2 ' ,, �� ,. •. ` � z To�houSes . u► i
� /. . -: ' � � 1/� , �oti� � 3 v •�+�+" ob B'rook ie � �� �C`F 1
r }�,� .,, � � 98i �eo f � � r�'� . sse+ `' jti
�� �io R� �4�,�«� . ,r,!.,°' ��pCE, .t' ��v�,�
� C .r�r � . � � (1
�� F -�� ` �� ,,,.,.�;eT � '`o -. � �� �, „_ ..
10� . � .
` 2 a�-�-.�' �° CREEK ''�`p2� 3 * '" ; t' �68i�H AVF�
• �o�° r"; , .
(v �� ?3 �'4i � = s � ..* « I �• t i
� , �� 2' �3� � , �ss..tF ``�`�- � e o : � 6� �4 T6 I
� � •lo' ?� M► iKO � � '���/3 Y l�Go � 6F1Q ;
�' �y: 4 '�° t � � '�` ,'� } � , � ' p��/5 , 6�/%
.. � �o � - �e� '
: } � �eso � �
� 92� �f�y . ,� ��Q �'�,� � � t �� � _ � � �si1
�ij . � : �� � ��
44i .�o 0,,. ; 18 +l,� ,b-- ceti 6�to 69�� 6b; �
,� 6� L �. �'/�,1 �� 9 / 1 B � �.<_� • . .v
�ty � i . .
� � ��-Y������ ° � R �' � L ��� i 3C F t��� o (
' � � ,' j /7 • , O � Aa 'I ARS.�A
Y._ - . �. „ i� css
. ,� N
� `y'.1_L 't s V 7 � �. is=O ��2I �S2O F
j /1'✓ ,� � : /J !s ia �
s ��' �� SI .w }� ?J.M �el� � � ' � �O •
¢� � B� 99t � W L��� ��
� ; � - � �s � ,� ° rt � �� ,p r� �
�� - � -!� �"�aoo s� eoo ��� , E' 68� I
� Z 953 1�ti � �f �-' � O I? i �!2 « Z ' � ' F
�. Y � � � � ' , ;,�;68T L.
,nr w nv� ..ii•��� ~ �` � �
•-�—•—a�„� . -�E� �`-�r.�..._...— k.--„vN:f�•s; -r.ai d-t---., .. �.,. ,
..Z , � , ,,... ,... ,.. ,,... , 3 � �
�' f ''� � '°:
' . ��.,li�f• = i
� ! �{3� ;, � , � s � -- •
�x,,� , � ' � 3 ,
>. � _ �!o wo� �eio � i
. :' ;
� � � f�w Hw , � ,
�,6 r d ,,� ;+�, . � ieo, r .' di� �`6'"
I t :i � �' � a f
� � f;i �� J ti .- i • Y ckeF .-�+•'�
• ' ' • � Z �7' - 90
' ;.
� ;.. r t w:� tost 6
�7' f , ' r ` y•' • % —
•� � • • � �, � l6A-�.
35 � � �� .' t�p) ��; 6T.jf1 �AV. NE � ; �
.- 5 8,•; ..v b640
• 'r.. w w L /iFJ
, - y _ ... y. � ---�---�: 6a
, O • = W -
�i� � /hX� 3 � _ . � �
ri> >C ' S C %,_
� `�'"+` r�"ij . � � a � r .. 6t06 � --- � ---;- i 2 -
� - , ' � F :
�f1� ��► : �_� � v . Cv°� � 'i � 0 r )r.
` 0
f •� l/J m___ � Y� 42Q
k
� �OO % � � �.�f��r ; � L�r .'" " � ""� , 6 E� a-
w
� �M'u r"� Z ., a
w � �I ���"
M r
�,., esss� , iS.sl� A � �su e� � E+o� I 66C
, s � ''
�1�. (2ooe) 6550 �` - -----�----- lf/�
•-.� j�' • � .K�s 1. � �9 i (ioo; �a c
,� �; �Sy�p '/Lr�l • � -- y � � k �_
gF _�•bs �P cssi - - - I---- �'_ "`
t ^ �"°� +
��eJ �� 3�GS24 ( �
� �c � p t � �
�'8 G �4� -�•
I �� Li3i � `� �� ,,,�v -� � -Y.�►- � G�o' � .
.�
i �
H
�
).
�
z
z
�
�
Q
�
�• �
' �i
..;
`��
��.
� �
P:S. #84-05 Townhouses Of Brookview
�
� � �r
� � <
i c
� � � i
�1
�
��
� �
(� 'r
.
i � �
� �
�
�
�
�
�
, :3N ��..
i:!�S:.iC�'.'N s.. . cC = . : .... _ ... .
� ,
!
2
3i
I
I }i
` ' >
.;.
� iii
'ii'i�!L u�� �. �ti✓ ..ra� r � ��.. a ` rvrr� v✓ �� � S o I -
�
� ' � 8r �a . : � � �
: � � Q � ' � ��,; Q -
- _ '• `.�-- 27
', „ , � �/ 1 V ' �.,.P, S� � �84-05 � L
� .. �1 Y �.,7.5 :r...� ir
� �� Townhouses of Brookview �
� 1�a yw..a l..yr•q �
1 Q O.. � : J
} � y
� r � �
' LO/
^ ' S r �. � i � �r
' ;, ' p a .a; � a' �
„ , ° ^; ,ws :a. , ,
^ ' � �
• Q � �� I i
� ` ) :s
hy� � ' I t � .� . �•1�,1 � ,I'.
� �� 4 � •� � . , �
, � � � --.
o�, -_•- ,k r � � „°�� Z
E= ., , �,'�( `�_ � ° ,b�.
� � •:�
Q 'L° 1� O a � / �` / ' \� ( �� �,.•..1
, / �
v^ � � \, � -
� �o�
i .� ; . .� , , o; " � (
� � /� O I 1__ ...�e -I- 01 3 1
.. �" V �J Aa I� leF v
i—� .. -V.-�o
i = .� 'Al
4 ' `� %
� `
h
�
i ��
, � r
w �
� y
1` �_
-. M
�
N �-
�rOi O ��
� ��
m
�� � •
� °
O, �
r�. O
• ^ i �
�Y� � �
��� ��
� Vo
h
�
a
��� _
o_ _
�T—� j :�,
"e
\. _ _' J ,�.. v
1 - .
• '
•
O
�
�
4
\
�
N
V
-- 1
�� �
�� �
�� �
_ �:ai-
� ��
�,��
\ �b� 'y 0
� '
a-'� O
�+
\ FJt � �
�� __�� °
� A7 �i
� �•. � � I � '� I'. .
a
_ :�'
,.., ,... _.",
c �oi
��
I,
�
.
7� —7TS�
., ti�� ,.....�.,,o t
i
N0.
.�
.:�:.,...�.
..�,.
r --�-- - «----�--
...
:
t
Y
Z
� Lot Seven (71, Block T1+o (21, Broo1
South 100 feet thereof, accordSng t
65 in the office of the Registtar of 5
of Anoka, State o£ Minnesota.
P.S. #84-05 Townhouses of Brookview 28
---� --------------------------
�� i,....;...., .e�.�...-�,
�µ �� � NE.
-------�-����-1-- --� --------
� I i! ii�s!-OS�� � ��� _�� .
�� �� �s'toas
�,
t �
� "_"'ME___
�'.
� ,, - ��1 , , �
� �� ,. �
r. .`�� i;� ; 5 s' ��� 7 2�
r �
17- � P Pi�a�osc%'T�,..�e..a�
1
•1
q ( .,. ' :.� � «
�
BLOCK 1 VARIANCES
A �s•co3o'
B ss•�ozs�
C zs'toxo•
' D t5•toto'
E 25'to20'
F �s•co�o�
�r r,; Ca 35'to25'
�u r , .` , r, »-
� Q (�p'--� .�{�� �--F - ��1 H �5��030�
: Q l �� �
\\J 4 � �'��� � �� � /� � A , ' , .
h , -� � N :.,��:.
W --- —� ,a_. 15'to7' .
I� ry n.r..r a.s...:... a. j� N
� `I '�, ---- -----
�/ G:J ,, ,
o-... v •,-7 : L � • - ioo. oo - i
Q''ll .. . } _� �',l i �rceroioM
c I. e �. , r-Ax ' �_�^-4 �' �a_� � � f {
. �" ^,'_ �
jil . . �o �_.. �- ��„ __� �I�Q�' � BLOCK 2 VARIANCES
-rr--
�__
�c s:n.� �„�
1 `a./
\ .
V � r-/ �
r
.. %
:Q,,�q�sg : � ,
-- ' - ���
„�,.. �i,.._ .,, \
D�:w p \..\ Y
i
, -L
C� e ^�n�p +o
� 2
A.r...� s' �+s: w.�
. � �f �
: . .. .. . . i .. ; ��J
.
„�' i � -� A 75 t045
; t, i � : � B /5'to7'
� °-� yI = ; � C 15't010'
�t i � � <
� ' � a� �j
�`�� I O�
�
„
i�f.KI� /AIM� AY� nrif rM1'[�; K��,
M K/Wl rt Mf�Y1[o I� � i��IO[.t
II Iw[Yl 11IV✓ItIOII� IM1I I II I
�yJ ,tlq)!KO [YO MK�O ��O[w
I�( {/6 Y �Ilf I�1If iI IHMIfNlI.
/%i2
m 29
J. A. MENKVELO & ASSOCIATES INC.
1299 MISSISSIPPI STREET
FRTDLEY, MN 55432
Phone 571-4577
December 10, 1985
City of Fridley
6431 University Ave. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Townhomes of Brookview
This letter o�tlines our plans regarding grading, excavating, fil7ing, etc.
on the subject plat.
Presently the property has mature trees along the boulevard on Brookview
and 67th, and along the South and West lines of Block 2. The majority of
these trees will be retained. The lot wi11 be fully brushed.
2. The existing trees that are retained will be supplemented with plantings
of shrubs. The portion of the property not in landscape plantings, drives,
and patios will be sodded.
3. A large portion of 61ock 2 is covered with 1-1/2 to 2 feet of black dirt.
This black dirt will be stock piled and utilized on both 81ock 1 and 2.
4. Block 2 at present slopes from the property line to a low point at the
interior of the block. There will be some filling of this area to obtain
proper drainage.
5. Block 1 will have extra fill material which will be utilized on Block 2.
Sincerely,
J. A. MENKVELD & ASSOCIATES INC.
���, ��������
A. Menkveld
President
JAM/jh
Enclosure
:�
I�ej/ •
-���il�',;
+'(
�"
, �� --
�
� ,�, � � �;�
.� .
�� } ?��� .
A y `� M1�
' A. .. . �.' '�'._�F'
T ;� r
���.�> .;� -,� :
�� �'�� �ti �
�"sL.a �' �. '
i(�e�1�.�r
� _ '��' !
.� '.
L�►
_,,..
� �
,
��-� _���� =:Y
y
� �'� c*� � � i � � �'�
� ' �� �:5 � �,.�
� 1 ...iC�r . _ �,-_
� ��,,�.� 1
�j �_ ��
'�; F
0
i , - ,
.
• GITY CF FRIO1rcY,
� an�. uiwvews�r �wc. �.
FR�[�16r. MN.OSVL �61i1,671-�40
i-a3 -Bs
SUBJECT �OT SPLIT
RECORDED:
LS / S5' o I
32
ADDRESS: S80 9 i�• thc.,- St Nc' _ OJITE: .Io.� '�. f9<
PlJ1TD11NG COhM1S5101�: APPROYED _ DISAPPROYED OATE NO
CITY tOUNLII: APPRDVED DISJIPPROYED DATE _ NO
PARK FEE REQUIRED:
STIPULATIOHS:
�N7 PAID
�JN/7
�AME ..1,�'Co.CS LUiE.+is �«L/'�� �� RECEIPT NO 53 S'
PROPERTY OWNER(S), Ji¢C v�3 4/�t'✓1 C P'����'"�G"°`'� TELEPHONE NO .5—?� '�S3/
�-Gaitoa� /3if�i<a�N� �i'•�i�•���0�--.�ELEPHONE NO SJYro.tGy
ADDRESS
'T�i'v� ST��
7 a ✓ic ST�/i
PROPERTY IOLATION ON STREET -ffsa9 f�.crHV2 51�yE
ti....r�,
LEGAI DESLFIPTI�ON Of PROPERTY s`� '/U � of �6�c � /L c• %u ft ° f
� - . � �
7!� rc�, s�o� � 9 A.. _� c,_ c e�., 9�_ A.,� �E� �0�.1`�.
TOTAL AREA OF PROPER7Y �i'm � x/ �� '= 72 Uu -FZ ` PRESENT ZONING /� �
REASON �OR lOT SPLIT S�// p,-����� 1`� r�ei9�6�— 7`., y�� s.�e
�0�� (/�J /r Y� lJJ G�/ 1tC' 4 V�r/�roCC �
The undersigned'hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this
application are true and correct.
a�: �-a- es si
�
NOTICE: A sketch of the property and the proposed�lot split wi
tures shown should acco�any this application. '
(See reverst side for sdditional instructions)
any existing struc-
Effective January 17, 1984
7984 POLZCY STATFFJ�NT ON PARB FEES
ON LAND SUBDZ9ISION
Date
33
In determining fair market value of public areas for land subdivisioa for cash payment as
requtred by Ordinance #533, the folloWing values Will be used:
Residential Subdivision
E1,500.00 per lot
Residential Lot Split E 750.00 per lot
Commercial/Indnstrial Subdivision or Lot Split � 0.023 Per aq. ft.
This fee is to be paid at the time of final plat or lot split approval. The City Council
may defer collection to the time a buildiag permit is requested for Sndividual lots
created by such subdivisionJlot 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.
PARR FEE AGREEHENT
The undersigned understands that according to the City Pla'ting Ordinance, the folloving
public park land dedication is required to plat residential, commercial or industrial
zoned property.
It is further understood that Lhe public park land dedication or cash payment equivalent
is at the discretion of the City.
e�
It is agreed that a cash payment of $�_ xill be paid according to the above stated
policy for the folloxing aubdivision/lot aplit.
Zt is agreed that the following land dedication is provided according to the above stated
policy for the following subdivision/lot split:
Aedicatioa:
Subdivinion/Lot Split
The undersigned further agrees to notify all future property oxners or assigns of the cash
payment requirement, 1f it is to be collected at the time of iasuance of a building
permit.
Date:
(Property Ovaer Signature)
3ioieib
WtEit/�gskxcuND �s.'�.ol
--•� P'•Mi _.._ � �v.. Y/i/r V �... •.. .. •�. 5�f9� � � � 34
' .' Lot Split 85- � ` ' .. p F 9 .� l
- - D'' ,.u�. s!� s�� �� ,dC � 1 Nlc �
w 4i Ir +�� i
�.. A O�T! ll%, �: 9��
,.�...v • 51 z:..,,,,,- ; , $0. �
,.. ..� .� . ,�,.., ; �
DE S f.._ "' �� � ...., ,� 5� �..
,ar, •- � • ""- .�....� -
a..,, , .
LE £NTA � i �' � °~`�' � 4 ���
� � � I�s' 6 1� � Z� �� ����4.
,,z �(i� Q 22 �+ 24 25
i :� � n,b�
x,.
,: �. . s4ip , ,."..':" � P' � u,,. s � � d
� �7.=) (= �), .) ,�l'� ' i"� It15 13if �65 KW .. JKoi iGZ) K3) 1� i�
� "F'" ' ,�'i � � ` _ i - � ...—'``.�A 1.�4' '�ij :� ; � • , A U�— �
' � HM �' .. � • If p
►�r3 w�, M�r ;' a�a, - pe is3 �sN e� e �c�o i�ti ��},} :;;'� ic4o u
i .. . � ,:_.•� �R...
.. f..� n � ; �p �S ,..�, .�,:,... .,... t
E —•–�---- • '"�'!'� -.- .-_.`�.. ��9A -,.« : 1 y «�+ � �'• ��� �:
� 31 3 ' _ �� �
. : � S�, �„n, .k.� a. _ � �+, �w � �
i 5�7� , " �
,-
585138 h+q ��� �`` ,: , t '
y � � � �c
Sb37 dxv '' .�� �'1- % �i�ril, w-.. ,
, �N
� S. �2'�� f �, '. 4 � '�lr�i L I
S . � j i....�„
� � �
�9 •' � � ;
�, -. . . �
� : 1� ii,�-� _ ; • . � . . ;
'. .
� 'r�e �•�•l �J� t -. �. .
� i '\.0 � �tlr• • . ; �• L
� •• • ' ��lttD� •
� 5e�s. �� - ,4� ',:. 47� ... .` .�-�
45 " y
irioN . �
-�• _=� - - --
� - ,','
. _ � :
• �r ..
; _.
.
s
. ,_ . .
.. . , . '•
3 �,, `. .. .
� � �ti '• U+uU �•
. �
.
� 0 � '.� •� ( 1 ,.
.
, .; � , •,
, , ,
� , : ;� . ,
► : � ._ _ '
lj ' 30
� r�As.��i ��.� ,f�.Cor 49, Aa�Saii. .fv. 92
� 1 .! �/aA°26'So"� Z/o.00
_ T
�
-4`.'
e��1
�o�
�ti
Vi�
M �
�;e
�
,
--M-,
�
� oh
a � �
h �� 0
� ac 0
o ~�
� M
; -3---
�
.,� :I ,ao.00 j;
� 5 `� 41
M
. .. u ...: .�,
., , - - -,
, � L ...
� �
Jf s i: t ; iu s►
' / � ,, isz
�
� / , .� � :' !s^
./ r
�+ 4- -
' _ _ _ 0�.�4� : $�AB —
--- -s� y�� N0.
�
7
� !
� ��
�;
��.
� s . L.s :..c S:b
`; i �.80.00
1
Q � —I _ �,Cll J .
yi i
0 �
�
R E�
PA-,oy
Q o a
!o � 30 �
�;
�_ �
2
�� 41 bq4 �' �,
I
,✓sa'�•.s� •1r
/80. DO
f/C�7iil�ii.
'!" sb.� 35 —
ze ,
� ii� r� �',
,
�
w I
� (
'° \"1
� a
1 � � \I
,�Q `�
,�. ��
,;,, - - �
� N �
� �� � I
� ` \My
�` � � *'I
�� �;
u `N �
� �� .. �-�-�+��....� �
� C ��
� �ti
�a
� J
N�� �� o
R
�El, ,�. ;9 � st �
�A� ; .
/Bo. 00 //7. /4
, /✓BB 'ZO 49 "/✓ z/o .00 "� ^
/ �
�' Sov�li �%�t o�.Lof.19, A4r/. Su�. No. 92
N
1
�
�
�
CfiYOF
FRfDLEY
CIVIC CENTER • 6331 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY. MIhNESOTA 55432 • PHONE (612) 571-3350
January 9, 1985
Lyle B. Elmberg
5801 Arthur Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Dear Mr. Elmberg:
The Plannin9 Cortmissi�n will be holding an informal hearing on a Lot Split
request on Wednesday, January 23, 1985 in the Council Chamber at City Hall
at 6431 University Avenue N.E. at 7:30 p.m.
This request will allow an addition of 40 feet to the property at 5805
Arthur Street which will 6e purchased f�om the property at 5809 Arthur Street.
The purpose of the lot split is to eliminate the need for a variance.
If you would like to be heard on this request, you will be heard at the
above time and place.
VIRGINIA SCHNABEL
CHAIRWOMAN
PLANNING COMMISSION
37
!!@!0 T0: Planning Commission
l�MO FAON: James RoDinson, Planning Coordinator
1+�N0 DATE: January 77, 1985
RE: PossiDle Reviaion of Sign Ordinance
At present, Staff is researching the possiDility oP revising the City�s
Sign Ordinance. This action is consi8ered necessary due Lo some apparent
embiquity.
The primary concerna xe feel need adMessing are:
1. The atatus of a aign variance upon replacement of t4e atructure, change
ot tenant or owner/
2. The atatus oP legal non-conforming signs upon change of tenant or
ovner, particularly when part of an overall aign plan.
3. The restriction oP free atanding pylon aign aize to 80 square feet in
area per development.
All three of these items have recently been Lhe sub�ect of debate regarding
specific properties.
In response to these three issues ve are considering the folloxing
solultions respectivelp:
1. The tightening of sign variance duration to t6e immediate nign ane
tenant/owner.
2. Aemoval of a legal non-conforming atatus upon change of the message
displayed upon the sign, or tenant/ovner.
3• Revising the total square footage Por a free stanCing sign area allorred
per developoment to be more sensitive to Che xide range of development
types (i.e. multiple tenant center vs. singular operations) and total
area of the lot and/or structure and atreet Proatage.
Iasue I3 seems t6e most complez. Should a large multi-use business be
restricted to LEe same pylon size as a amall single business and if a
buainess is permited one sign per atreet Prontage should the total of all
aigas be 8U aquare feet or 80 aquare teet per aign4
We are auggesting that you consider these iasues and advise Staff of your
desire. Ye vill continue our research of other City�s aign codes and
prepare a comparative analysis for your reviev.
JLR/de
3/5/1g/2
Memo No. 85-03
214. SI(�S
(Ref. 318� 330, 344, 382, 438, 666, 672� 799)
(7fiis Cl�apter has been recodified as of March lr 1984 and includes all
mner�3nents to the Q�apter esacted by the City Council prior to said date)
(Secp7y3 Reading: February 15. 1984i
21�.01. PURI'06E �E
Rt�e purpose of this Q�apter is to protect and promote the public
health, safety and general Welfare of the City of Fridley through
the establishment of a comprehensive and impartial set of
�egulations governing the erection� disglay and use of si�s serving
as a visual media to persons upon public or private properties.
These regulations are intended to provide an opportunity for
effective �anmication, allow a reasonable fceedom of choice and
promote a concecn fos the visual amenities on those people
desicy�in9, disglaying, erecting oz utilizin9 sicyis While at the same
time assuring that the public health, safety and g�eral Welfare of
the City is preserved.
214.02. DEFINTTIQIS
�e followinq Words and tezms, Wherevez they occur in this Chapter,
are defined as follows and shall apply in its interpretation and
application:
1. Abandoned Si�.
A si� which no longer oorrectly advertises a bona fide business,
lessor, urnerr activity, use oz product available on the premises
Where the si� is displayed for a continuous period of more than
three i3) months.
2. Address Sic�.
A sign consisting of numbers or numbers and a street name,
identifyin9 the address of a building.
3. Advertising Si�.
A sicq� Which is used to advectise pcoducts, goods, uses ot services.
4. Alteration.
Any major change, excluding routine maintenance� of an existing
si�.
5. Area Identification Sic,p�.
A sig� which identifies the name af a neighborhood, a residential
subdivision, a multiple residential complex or a business or
industrial area.
6. Baruiers Nd Pesu�ants.
A tenporazy si� constructed of cloth, aarrvass, �.aper, plastic film
or lic�t fabric.
m
2ia.o2
DEFIIZITIONS
214-1
7. Besch Si�.
A sig� which is attached to a bench.
8. Billboard.
A sign advertising a business, product, service, use or
entertaimx�nt which is conducted, sold or offered somewhere other
tiwn on the pranises vhere the sicyi is located.
9, Qiangeable Sic�, Autamatic.
An electionically oontzolled sic�, including a time, temPecature or
date sicyi, or a message center or a readerboard, where different
message changes ate shown on the same panel.
10. �angeable Sicy�, Flanual.
A sicy� on vhich the message is chan9ed manually.
11. Ca�struction Si�.
A tenpozary sign etected at a construction site identifying the
pcoject. It may include the name of the architect, engineer,
contractor, financier or other information about the project.
12. District.
A zoning district as defined in Chapter 205, Zoning, of the City
Code.
13. Flashing Sicp,.
An illuminated sign which has intezmittent flashing lights,
revotving beaoons, zip flashers or exhibits a noticeable change in
color or light intensity.
19. Free Standing Sig�.
A si� which is securely attached to the ground and not attached to
any �rt of a building or structure.
15. Goverrmiental Sicy�.
A sic,y� which is erected by a gwernnental unit for the purpose of
directing or guiding traffic or prwiding public information.
16. Zllianinated Si�.
A sicyi which is illianinated by an artificial light source.
17. Information Si�.
A sicg� giving information oz directions to employees, visitors or
delivery vehicles and containing no advertising. An information
sigi may display the name, address or identifying symbol of the
business.
18. Znstitutional Sic�.
A sic� which identifies a p�lic or private institution including
churches, schools, hospitals and medical clinics.
19. Motion Sic�.
A sign Which revolves, rotates, has movin9 parts or gives the
illusion of motion.
39
214.02
214-2
20. Nonconfoiming Si�� Legal•
A sic� which lawfully existed prior to the adoption of this �aptec.
but does not oa�ly with all cequiranents of th is Chapter.
21. Pen�nent stc�.
I► sig� constructed of materials including plastic or metal that are
durable and easily mai-ntained, and which is intended to be used for
an indefinite period of time. Si�s peinted dizectly on stlucturesr
vood pr wood products are not authorized or included in this
deYinition.
22. Political Sign.
A tanporary si� advertising election issues or the candidacy of a
person rimning for public office.
23. Pbrtable Si�.
A tanporary sicy� desi�ed to be moved fran one location to another
and which is not permanently attached to the ground, a sign
structure or a buil din9•
24. Porta-�nel.
A portable sig�, moimted on wheels and used foc commeccial as Well
as civic pranotions.
25. Ftojecting Sic�.
A sign attached to a wall, that projects perpendicular from a
building oz stzucture.
26. Real Fstate Sicp�.
A tenpozaiy siqn etected for the purpose of selling, leasing or
pranoting real estate.
27. RQOf Sicy�.
A sic� which is ecected, constructed or attached above the coof line
of a building, except where the roof is an extended facade or
mansard.
2g, Ibmmage/Garage Sale Si�.
A tesnporary sicy� which advertises or directs the p�lic to the sale
of used merchandise, sold fran a private resic3ence.
29. 5hopping Center/l�Iultiple Use Building.
A building planned and developed foc multiple occupancy whethez as a
oamiercial or industrial use.
30. Sig�.
�, peinted p3riel, letteced board, series of letters or symbols or
othec display and any supporting structure used to advertise,
3irectr identify� inform or oonvey a messa9e to ariyone who views it.
31. Sign Area.
Rt�e area of a si�, including the border and the surface which bears
the advertisenent. In the case of inessages, figures or symbols
attached directly to arry part of a buildin9 or sic� structure, it is
40
214.02
214-3
that area Which is included in the si�allest geometric figure which
can be made to ciccunsccibe the messager figure or synbol.
32. Si� Area, Maximm.
�e�oaximun allaaable sign acea for a single faced free standing
sig� refers to that single facing. When a free standing siqn has
multiple faces, then the maximsn allowable si� acea doubles.
33. Sigi Structure.
Any structure which supports or is capable of supporting a sic�, but
not including a building to which a sicyi is attached.
34. Tenporary Si�.
Any si�, banner. pennant, valance or advertising display intended
to be disglayed for a limited period of time.
35. Wall Graphic.
A graphic design or decorative mural� not intended for
identification or advertising purposes, vhich is painted diiectly on
the exterior surface of a building.
36. Wall Si�.
A sic,p� which is attached to the wall of a building or structure.
37. Window Si�.
A sicyi attached to the inside of a vindow for
frcm outside the lwilding. 7his term 8oes not
located in a window.
214.03. GQ�tAI. PRWISIO6IS P'OR AI.I. DISIIti('15
the purpose of viewing
include nerchandise
�e follaaing provisions shall apply to Sections 214.04 through
214.07. Any sicp� shall be oonstructed in surh a manner and of such
material that it xill be safe and substantial. Nothing in this
Qiapter shall be interpreted as authorizing the erection or display
of any sic� not now pecmitted undec Qiaptec 205 of the City Code.
214.04. SI(�IS PRCEIBITID IN AI,L DIS'1RICL5
1, Any pernanent si�s, otr,er than goverranental signs, erected or
disglayed upon any right of way oc p�lic pzopetty.
2. Any sicp�s or wall graphics that contain wozds or pictures of
obsoene, pornoqrapiiic or imroral chazader.
3. luiy sicy�s painted direcYly on buildings.
�. )�ny si�s which by season of size, location, mavenent, content,
ooloring or manner of ill�snination may be confused With the liqht of
an emergency or road equignent vehicle, a traffic sign. signal or
devioe or which hides fcan vie� arry traffic sic�,, sic�al oz device.
5. Any projecting sicyis.
6. Any motion sicy�s.
7. Any flashing sicgs.
41
214.04
a i�..
..,� r
e�..�� r o-�
214-4
B, l�ny si�s located within a carner vision safety zone as def ined
in Chapter 205.
214.05. SIC�iS PERliI1'IID IIl PZ,L DIS'IItI(RS
j, �LeSS S1CjIS.
E�ch dWelling, business or buildin9 must have a minimwn of one (1)
eddress sicpi, that is a mini�snan of three and onrhalf (3-1J2) inches
hi$� and a maximmi of tWenty-fau (24) inches high. The sign must
be illuninated or reflective and visible from the public right of
�Y •
2. Bench Si�s.
, Displayed only at bus stops and cannot be arry largez than or extend
beyond any portion of the bench.
3. Flags.
Shall be disglayed as outlined in Title 36, Section 173-378 of the
United States Code, State Flag and Corporate Flag.
4. Goverranental Si�s.
5. Informatior�al Sic�s.
P�wided they meet the following cequirenents:
A. A maxim� size of four (4) square feet in area.
B. A minim�an distance of ten (10) feet fram any property line
oz dzive.+ay.
6. Institutional Si�s.
PrwiBed they meet the following requirenents:
A. A meucimun size of thizty-two (32) equare feet in area.
B. A minirmn distance of ten (10) feet from any propezty line
or driveway.
C. A hospital energency sign may be a maxim�an of 100 square
feet in area.
r �. a r�... h ��•. a� � � ►' w
i• C•ORStIUCt10R $1�15•
A. Multiple Develogn�ts. Construction signs may be erected
for the purpose of identifying a developnent of ten (10} os moze
dwellings, ten (10) or more mobile hames, three (3) or more
multiple dwellings, or a building consisting of three (3) or
more businesses or industries, with the following restrictions:
(1) Ore (1) sicp� per street frontage.
(2) A maximm size of fifty (50) square feet in area per
developtwnt.
(3) Located no closer than 100 feet to a building outside
the develogaent.
n�
;�•� a�
a �.�...
H
� �•. a�
42
214.06
214-5
43 .
214.06
(4) A minims� distance of ten (101 feet fzan any propertY 1
line or driveway.
(5) 7b be renaved upon canpletion of the construction.
& Other Develogrents.
- (1� Ore (1) si� per building.
(2) A maximan size of six (6� square feet in area.
(3) A minim�an distance af t� (10) feet from any property
line or driveway.
{4) Rb be renvved upon oanpletion of the construction.
2, Real Estate Sic�s.
A. Multiple Develognents. Real estate si�s may be erected for
the purpose of selling, leasin9 or promoting development of ten
(10) or more dwellings, ten (10) or more mobile hanes, three (3)
ot more multiple dwellings or a building consisting of three (3)
or more businesses or industties, with the folloWing
restrictions:
(11 One (1) sicyi pec street frontage.
(2) A maximnn size of fifty (50} square feet in area per
develogre�t.
(3) Located no closer than 100 feet to a building outside
of the developnent.
(4) Zb be renwed when the Project is ninety-five peccent
(958) sold or leased.
(5) A minimun distance of ten (10) feet fiom anY pioPe=tY
line or driveway.
B. Other Develognents.
(1) One (1) si� per building.
(2) A maximan size of six (6� square feet in area.
(3) 1ro be renoved r+ithin five (5} days folloNin9 the sale
or lease of the building. '
(4) A minim�nn distance of ten (10) feet from any pzoperty
line or driveway.
(5) 'Open House" si�s are alla.�ed only during the day of
the open house.
3. Political Sic�s.
l►. A maximm size of thirty-two (32) square feet in area.
g, Rb be renoved Within five (5) days £ollowing the election.
C. Fifteen dollars ($15.00) will be deposited with the City
prior to the erection of any sicp�s and cetained �mtil all of the
si�s are renwed. If all of the signs are not removed, the
deposit Will be used to defray the cost of removal. Any
additional cost Will be billed to the person posting the
original deposit.
214�i
p, Any sic�.larger than ihree (3) �re feet in area must be
placed a mirum�nn distance af ten (l0) feet f[om a stzeet curb
and ten (10) feet from arry driveway.
4. I3aimage/Gazage Sale Sic�s.
A, A maximsn size of three (3) equare feet in area.
� 8. Rb be cemaved within three I3) days following the sale.
5. Banners or Pennants.
A. Banners os pennants commemozating a special event not
connected with a business, aze permitted when installed not more
than twenty-five (25) days pcior to the event and renwed Within
five (5) days following the event.
H, Banners or pennants for business anniversaries ot gcand
openings aze allared only foc a maximm of ten (10) days.
214.07. SIGALS PII�IIZRm WI'ID A SPBCIAL ��T
l. Autanatic changeable si�s ace permitted in all districts except
residential districts, and then only after the issuance of a special
use petmit s�ject to the following minim.nn conditions:
A. Conforrtance to the sicyi requirenesits vithin that district.
B, The message shall not change more than once every f ifteen
(15) minutes except for a sign displaying time, temperature
and/or date.
2. Billboacds.
214.08. �uF'FCIFIC DI5IRICP R�UIRII�N15
In addition to those si�s pecmitted in all districts, the follaaing
si�s are permitted in each specific distziet and shall be zegulated
as to type, size, and setback according to the following
requicenerits.
214.09. TYPFS� SIZFS, ArID SEi8AL1LS POR RFSIDF�IPIAL DIS'lRICRS
1. Area Identification Sic�s.
A. One (1) sicy� per developnent.
g, A maximun size of twenty-four (24) square feet in area.
C. A minim�m distance of t� (10) feet frcen any property line
or driveway.
2. Fiall Sic�s.
A. One (1) sicy� per dwellirg tuiit.
B. A maximan size of three (3) equare feet in area.
44
214.09
. �•. a.
r
Y'i
. ;,.,
.,
� -
• �� r a ia
• �. n �
.
214-7
214.10. TYPFS� SIZES, At�ID SE�S POfft �t-1 DLStitIQS
1. Area Identif ication Si�s.
1�, pne (11 sic� per developnent.
-- B. A maximan size of tr+e�ty fau (24) squace feet in area.
C. A minim�n distance of ten (10) feet fran any property line
or dciveway.
2. Free Standing Si�s.
A. One (1) si� per street frontage.
B. A maxim�an size of forty-eight (4B) square feet in area per
develognent.
C. A maximiaci height of six (6) feet above the finished ground
giade.
D. A minimmi distance af ten (10� feet from any pzoperty line
or driveway.
3. Roof Sicyis.
A, Qie (1) siqn per develognent.
B, RYie use of a roof sicyi Will s�istitute for the free standing
sign along the street the roof sicy� is intended to be viewed.
4. h'indow Sic�s.
A maximum coverage of forty percent (408) of the window area,
excluding merchandise.
5. Wall Si�s.
Zhe total si� area shall not exceed fifteen (15) times the square
root of the Wall length on which the sicy� is to be placed.
6. Portable Sicy�s.
May be displayed after a permit is issued by the City. Permits are
limited to thcee (3) times per yeaz, pei bnsiness, and only foz
nonconsecutive ten (10) day periods.
214.11. TYPF.S, 5I2E5, ADID SEIfil�LRS P�UR C-1 � C-2 AIID C-3 DISR4tICf5
1. Area Identification Sicyis.
A. Ohe (1) sic� per develognent.
B. A maximan size of twenty-four (24) squaze feet in area.
C. A minimai distance of ten (10} feet from any property line
or driveway.
2, Ftee Standing Sic�ss.
A. Ore (1} si� per street frontage.
B. A maxim�an size of eighty (BO) squase feet in area per
develognent.
Qt-1
DI.SIItI(.T
C-1, C-2,
ArID C-3
DISIRICTS
45
21A.1�
214-8
46
214.12
C. A maximan height of twenty-five (25) feet above the fiuushed
gro�d grade.
D. A minimsn height of ten (10) feet from the bottmn of the
si� to the finished gro�d grade when Within twenty-five (25)
feet af a dtiveway or a oorner vision safety zaie.
_ g, A minimm distance of ten (10) feet fran any property line
ot driveway.
p. p, mininrm distance of fifty (50) feet from any residential
distrfct.
3. Roof Sic,�s.
A. Ore (1) sicy� pec development.
8. 7Y�e use of a roof si� Will substitute for the free standing
&i� along the street the roof si� is intesde8 to be viewed.
4. Window Si�s.
A maxim�n coverage of forty percent (409) of the window area,
excluding merchandise.
5. Wall Sicyis.
7tie total si� area shall not exceed fifteen (15) times the square
root of the wall length on which the sicy� is to be placed.
6. Poctable Sicy�s,
May be disglayed after a pezmit is issued by the City. Permits are
limited to thcee (3) times pec yeat, pez business and only for
nonconsecutive ten (10) day periods.
7. Bi1lGoards.
Shall be peimitted only in the C-3 District within this Section.
S�ecific requicenents are listed undez Section 214.12.7.
214.12. TYPFS, SIZFS APID SEIDACICS FOR M-1 A!ID l4-2 DIS'tRiC15 M}-1 APID t�2
DLSTRIG75
1. Area Identification Sic�s.
A. One (1) si� per develognent.
B. A maximan size of twenty-four {24) square feet in area.
C. A minim� distance of tes� (10} feet fram any property line
or driveway.
2. Free Standing Si�s.
A. Q'�e (1) sicy� per street frontage.
B. A maxim�an size of eighty (80) square feet in area per
developrtient.
C, A maximan height of tr+enty-five (25} feet above the finished
gro�d grade.
D. A minim�m hei�t of ten (10) feet from the bottom of the
sicy� to the finished 9roimd grade when within twenty-five (25)
feet of a drivetiray or a corner vision safety zone.
214-9
47
214.12
E. A minirtKm distance of t� (10) feet fran any pzoperty line i
or driveway.
F. A minimm c7istance of fifty (50) feet from any residential
district.
3. Poof Sigis.
- /►. Q�e (1) si� per develognent.
g, 7Y�e use af a roof si� will s�stitute for the free standing
sic� along the street the roaf si� is intended to be viewed-
4. Windaa Sicpis.
A maximum covetage of forty percent (408) of the Window area,
excluding merchandise.
5. Wall Si�s.
A. Allowed only on tvo (2) different walls per business.
B, �e total sicy� area shall not exceed fifteen i15) times the
square root of the Wall length on vhich the si9n is to be
placed.
6. Pbrtable Sicy�s.
May be displayed after a pezmit is issued by the City. Permits are
limited to three (3} times per year, per business and only for
nonconsecutive t� (10) day peziods.
7. Billboazds.
Shall be permitted in only C-3, M-1 and M-2 Districts. The
follaaing requicenests shall be considered as minimiaa standar�s when
issuing a special use pecmit to erect a billboard. RYie City Council
may in¢�ose additional requirenents.
A. Billboards shall be restricted to property adjoining the
right of ways of Interstate Hi9hway t694, Trunk Hi9hway 147,
Tcunk Aighway #65 and East River Road south of Intecstate
Highway #694.
B. The maximim height is tWenty-five (25) feet above the
finished gro�md grade, �ailess the si� is interded to be viewed
fcom a highway, then the tWenty-five (25� foot maximiun height
shall be computed from the centerline of the traveled highway,
but in no case shall the vertical distance between the bottan of
the sicy� and the gro�md be reduoed to less than ten i10) feet.
C. 4tie maximm si� area is three h�dred (300) square feet per
facing not to exceed tr+o (2) facings when erected on East River
Road south of Interstate Highway #694, m Tr�mk Highway {47 and
on RY�mlc Highway �65; and 750 square feet per facing not to
exceed tvo (2) facings When erected on Interstate Hi�way #694.
Double faced si9ns shall be attached back to back at a
horizontal angle not to exoeed forty-five (45) degrees.
D. 'fie minimsn distance between billboard signs is 1000 Eeet
vhen erected on the same side of the highway.
214-10
g, Tbe mininum setback fran the hi9hway right of w*ay is thirty
(30) feet.
F. Zt�e minimim distance is 500 feet from a billboard sign ta
the intersection of arry street or canp where traffic crosses or
merges at the same elevation. The distance is determined by
measuring fcom the intersection of the street and highway
' centerlines and the sicyi.
G. 7Yie minimim distance to a resi8ential arx7 p�lic district is
500 feet.
A, 7t�e sicy� structure shall be all metal and be eitheL painted
or treated to prevent deterioration. Iack of proper maintenance
shall be cause for cevocation of t2ie sicy� peimit.
I, TY�e minim�m distance to a railroad crossing is 350 feet a+hen
there are lights and a gate, and 500 feet from a railroad
ctossing Without lights ancVoi a 9ate•
J. Any lighting Will be shielded to not impair the vision of
any �rotoc vehicle opecatoz o� to create a nuisance on adjoining
ptoperty.
214.13. TYPFS� S22FS, APID SE1B11CR5 P�t P APID A1D DISIRICIS
Sicy� requirene�ts in Public and Planned Unit Development districts
will be controlled by the City Council when any development is
plarumd.
214.14. �OPPING (FNPFIiS Ai�ID MiILTIPLE tISE BUIIDII�4
1. Within 16Q days of the adoption of this Chapter, all owners of
shopping centers and multiple use buildings of three (3) or more
businesses or industries, if they have not alzeady done so, must
sutmit a arnpcehensive sicy� plan to the City Cauicil foz apprwal.
2. P11 future si�s erected within the shopping oenter or multiple
use building shall conform to the conditions of the sign plan and
may be subject to conditions other than those in the district
re9ulations in order to pianote �aiifosm sicp� appearance.
214.15. SIGN P�MTT i�Q[)II�2g3zi5
1. Sicyi Permit.
A, eefore a sic� may be displayed in the City, the sign erector
shall file an application with the City foc permission to
disgiay such sicy�.
8, A permit is required for all existing, new, relocatedr
modified or redesicy�ed sicy�s except those specifically exempt
�nder Section 214.15.1E.
C. RYie issuance of a permit may also be subject to additional
oonditions in ocder to prrnate a more reasonable oanbination of
si�s and to promote oonfornuty w+ith the character and uses of
adjoining property. The conditions aill be subject to the
I �i
214,15
. . u �.
� �•
SHOPPII�
�t71'F�iS PiAID
Iq7I1PIPl�E
USE BUII.DIK'�S
c, r•.
•» raia
214-11
discretion of the City. Objections to the conditions can be
appealed to the City Cau��il by the applicant.
D. Sicy�s erected by a nonprofit organization are not exelnpt
fcom obtainin9 a si� permit, but the City may waive the fee
requirenent.
g. No permit is required to dis�lay the following signs. This
shall not be construed as relievxng the erectoc of a sign, or
the owner of the property on which a sign is located from
conforming with the other prwisions of this Chapter:
(1) Arsy window sicy�s.
(2) !►ny addzess sigis.
(3) Any sicyis erected by a governmental imit.
(4) Arty bench sicp�s.
(5) Nry rtia;brial sicyis or tablets oontaining the names of
the building, its use and date of erection, When cut or
built into the rrall of a buildin9.
(6) Fury sicy�s which are oompletely within a building and
are not visible fran the exterior of the building.
(7) Any tenporazy sicyis as listed under Section 214.06.
(8) Any sic�s having an area of three (3) square feet or
less.
(9) Any advertising sic�s on littes receptacles having an
area of four (4) square feet or less per side and limited to
sixteen (16) square feet per receptacle, except that
apprwal of the design and location of the receptacle is
required by the City Council.
2. Permit Application.
A. ApQlication foc a sicyi peimit shall be made to the City on
forms supplied by the City.
B. If a sic� has not been erected within ninety (90) days after
the date of issuance af a permit, the permit shall become null
and void unless an extension is granted by the City.
C. The City may require other information as necessary to
insute that the sicg� is erected in canpliance with this Chaptez.
3. Permit Fees.
Sigi pecmit fees shall be as pcwided in Q�apter 11 of the Fridley
aty ooae.
r �• a •• •a ti- �» �• a i> w:
No pezson, firm or corpozation shall engage in the business of
erecting si�s wx3er this C�apter imless a license to do so has been
apprwea by the City Camcil. �e annual lioense fee and expiration
date shall be as prwided in Q�apter 11 of the Fridley City Code. A
license shall not be required of any person raho chooses to construct
and erect theic own sic� on their own property.
49
214.16
n
r•� �•
•�
• » r � �r
214-12
214.17. PJLISTII� SIQiS
1. Si� Maintenance.
]�, �e structure and surfaoes of all sicyis shall be maintained
in a safe and pcesentable corrdition at all times, including the .
replaosnPSit of defective parts� Paintin9� repainting, cleaning
afld other acts required to prevent the sign structuce and
surface fran beoaoin9 hazardous or �aslceript in appeazance.
g, W}�en any si� is renwed, the City shall be notified and the
entire sicy� and its structure shall be cenoved.
y, Legal tionconforming Sicy�s.
p,, Any sicyt located within the City on the date of the adoption
of this Chapter which does not conform With the provisions of
this C7�apter� is a'legal nonconforming" si� and is permitted,
prwided it also meets the folla+ing requicenents:
�1� 7t�e sic� was covered by a sign permit on the date of
the adoption of this Chaptez, if one was cequired under
apglicable law, or
(2) If no sign permit vas required for the sign in
question, the si� was in all respects in compliance with
applicable law on the date of the adoption of this Chapter.
B. A sic� shall i�nediately lose its 'legal nonconforming"
desigiation if:
(1) The sic� is alteied in any +aay Which makes the siqn
less in cc�pliance with the requirements of this Chapter
than it Was before the alterations except for routine
maintesance and change of inessages.
(2) 'fie sic� is relocated.
(3) 1l�e si� is replaced.
(4) The sicy� becort�es dilapidated or damaged and the wst of
brin9ing it into compliance is moze than 5U pe�cent (508) of
the value of said si�, at Which time all of the sign and
its structure must be renoved•
3. Abandoned Si�s.
Any sic� Which identifies a use that has discontinued operation f or
a period of more than three I3) months oc any sicy� which pertains to
a r;r�� eti,e�t, ur purpose Which no longer applies, shall be deemed
to have been abanc7oned• Pern�anent signs applicable to a business
tanporarily suspended because of a change of amership or managenent
shall not be deemed abandoned unless the property renains vacant for
a period of more than three (3) months• 1�n abandoned sign is
prot�ibited and shall be removed by the a+ner of the sign or the
property ownez.
r �
r. �
50
214.17
214-13
u4.ie. �c�a�uarr
y�e Citjr Manager or desi�ated agent shall be responsible for the
enfozcenent of this Chapter.
?14.19. VIO[,ATIQIS
1. Any sign that does not comply with the pcovisions of this
Chapter ot that is a hazazd to the health, safety and general
welfate af the p�lic is heceby declared to be in violation of this
Qiapter.
2. Notification of Violakion.
A, If the City determines that any sign regulated by this
Chapter is unsafe, a menace to the public; or has been
oonstcucted oc ecected rrithovt a permit first being gcanted to
the amer of the property upon which said sigi has been erected;
or is in violation of arry other prwision of this C��apter, then
the City shall issue a vritten notice of violation to the
propezty owner. If the o�+ner fails to zenwe the sign or bcing
it into arnpliance with the pravisions of this Chapter within
twenty (2p) calendar days following the date of said notice,
such sign(s) may be ranoved by the City. The cost of this
removal, including any City expenses, shall be a special
assessment against the property upon which the sign(s) was
located and shall be so noted in the Written notice to the
pzopezty amer.
B. ZYie City may cause arry si� or sign structure ahich is an
immediate p�blic hazard, to be removed summarily aftez a
ceasonable attempt has been made to have the pcoperty owner
renwe the sicpt.
C, When the City mails
sent to both the pecmit
are differant persans.
214.2U. PE�F�I�TY
the notice of violation, copies will be
holder and the property ownerr if they
I�ny violation of this Qiapter is a misde;�eanor a
penalties provided for such violations under
Chapter 901 of the Fridley City Code. Each
oontinues in exist�ce shall be deened a separa
signs are subject to any penalty for violati
requirenents Whece they are located, ever xhen n
fee os acquire a pernut.
214.21. APPEAiS
�d is subject to all
the provisions of
day the violation
te violation. All
�n of the district
�t required to pey a
7b prwide for a reasonable interpretation of the prwisions of this
Q�apter, a permit applicant w+ho wishes to appeal an interpretation
by the City may file a variance apRlication and request a hearing
before the Appeals Ca�ission. ZY�e Ca:vnission shall hear requests
for vaziances and make their reoaim�endation to the City Council in
the follawing cases:
51
214.21
>.3� :.�aoio-411
.. � . �
• „ ,.
: �f�':�iiC�
214-14
1. Appeals where it is allegeci that there is an eiroz in anY oLder.
�equicanent, decision or detecmination made by the City in the
enforoenent of this Chapter.
2. Requests foc variances fcan the literal pcovisions of thie
Q�apter in instances where the strict enforcement would cause an
tndue hardship. Hefore the Caronission shall grant a variance� it is
the responsibility of the apglicant to prwe:
1�. Rt�at there are exceptional or extraordinary circ�anstances
applicable to the propezty or to the intended use that do not
apply genezally to othez property in the same vicinity and
distcict.
B. '17�at the vaziance is necessary fos the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial ptopecty cight possessed by other
property in the same vicinity and district; but which is denied
to the property in question.
C. 11�at the strict application of the Chapter would constitute
an tauiecessary har3ship.
D. That the granting of the variance would not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare or
detrvrental to the property in the vicinity or district in Which
the propezty is located.
52
214.21
214-15
DIFiEGTORATE
PUBLIC WORKS
DATE �anuary 17, 1985
nson - vlanning
iUBJECT
Curbside Recycling
John
MEMO N0. 85-02
hi
53
M E MO R A N D UM
At the January 15th meet7ng of the Environmental Quality Corrmission, Norm Schiferl, the
Anoka County Solid Waste Abatement Coordinator, discussed the County's solid waste
abatement plan. The County's approach addresses both high and low tech solutions. On
the high tech end, the County is actively pursuing options for either a mass burn or
RDF (refuse derived fuel) facility. Low tech solutions may include support (seed money)
for municipal programs, such as composting or curbside recycling projects.
Although County monies for support of a Fridley curbside recycling program are not
definite, there is currently a proposal before the County Commissioners which would
provide between $50,000 and $ B0,000 for a County-wide grant program for municipal
solid waste abatement projects. 7he County's source of funding would be derived from
their 25 cents per yard tipping fee, estimated to equal 3350,000 per year. The
availability of these monies should be clarified within a month.
�4r. Schiferl also discussed the Metropolitan Council's Solid Waste Abatement Plan.
The Met Council is strongly in favor of curbside recycling and is proposing mandatory
recyC]ing for the region by the year 1990.
The Environmental Quality Commission is firmly in support of a curbside recycling
program for the City. After discussing the status of Fridley's efforts to implement
a program thus far, the members made a motion to the City Council to authorize staff
to put out a request for proposals this winter with the ultimate goal being a curbside
recycling program in place by June 1, 1985. The members further desire that the City
Council address the recycling issue at their January 28th Conference Meeting. The
Environmental Quality Commission members indicated that they would like to be in
attendance at this meeting.
Please inform me as to the Council's inclination as to this request.
JLR/de
�
�
�
� IZJ DL�EY
p�qECTORATE
�F
pue��c woRKs
TE 12i12i84
�� �.RMI. John flora,Qublic
IJECT •
RECVCLING IN FRIDLEY
MEMDAANDUM
Nasim Qureshi. City Mana
�
1 ��� 1
�� �o
�_ �
�
PW 239-84
�CTiQN� IM�O-
_�
Through the Envirorvnental Cortmittee. the League of Women Yoters and citizen input, there
has been considerable interest in initiating a curbside recycling program within the City
of Fridley. As you are aware. S.O.R.T. implemented a two year test program in three
different neighborhoods and obWined encouraging results.
A number of cities have initiated either a test or a full fledged program for curbside
recycling. Stnce a portion of the Fridley population has been involved in either the
curbside test or the S.O.R.T. Center. it would be appropriate to initiate a Citywide
program in order to reduce the dependence on expensive landfill operations.
Because of the large number of independent contractors currently picking up waste in the
City. it would be appropriate to contract with a single recycling hauler in order to
insure coverage. control the operation and obtain self sufficiency.
Staff is preparing a sumiwry report of recycling in the Metropolitan Area and would
request Council's direction on whether to proceed with a recycling plan, and if desired,
how it would be accomplished.
JGF:jmo
�
5� j
M E M 0 R A N D U M �
From: Jim Robinson b Susan Merriatc 20: Nasim Qureshi, City Manager Dated: 12/11/84
Subject: Curbside Recycling Program in Fridley
I. 09ERVZEY
The metropolitan area presently produces over two million tons of salid vaste
each year. Existing landfills are expected to be filled by 1986 or 7987. Designating
new aites has been a complex and precarious undertaking. Drastically rising landflll
coets, groundwater contamination, reclassification of other productive land uses and
the waste of energy are the major shorteomings of continuing the regions present solid
waste dSsposal practices. A goal nar under consideration by the Metropolitan Council
would divert all raw unprocessed solid xaste Prom landfills by 7990.
Recycling is seen as an integral part of a comprehensive solution to the solid
uaste problem. It has been calculated that up to one fourth of household refuse is
recyclable. The typical program includes the recycling of: 7) newspaper, 2) tin cans,
aluminum cans, foil and trays, 3) glass (clear, brown and green), 4) corrugated
cardboard and cereal boxes and 5) used automobile oil and batteries.
�� �
The state legislature this past year pasaed a lax inereasing the cost of dumping
trash at landfills by fifty cents per cubic yard of solid waste. Incorporated xithin
Lhis Landfill Abatemeat Fund is a subsequent fifty cents per household return available
to each city involved in abatement activities, payable by January 31, 1986 and each
January 31 thereafter. This translates to roughly E5,000.00 available for qualifying
landfill abatement pro�ects in Fridley. (1985 expenses would be reimbursable in 1986.)
An additional component of the Abatement Legislation enables the counties to
charge txenty-five cents per cubic yard of solid vaste d�ped. This fund is estimated
to amount to �345,600.00 Por Anoka County. The County is currently considering options
for the allocation of these funds, including remedial and post closure actions on
existing and closed landfills as rrell as solid vaste abatement activities xithin tAe
county. The latter may include grants to municipalities for projects such as curbside
recycling.
II. OTHER PROGRAMS
Several clties have become involved in recycling. Hinneapolis, St. Louis Park and
Ramsey County have full scale programs undervay. Hopkins and Richfield began
demonstration programs in September. The follouing is a short description of the
recycling procedures, City subsidy/grants and staff involvement in each city.
' `�'
,: .
56
Ninneapolis is divided into five (5) districts xith five different
contractors and 63 routes. Aecyclables are collected once a month. The
contractors are responsible for driving doxn every alley and atreet and picking up
on a given day. The recyclers and garDage collectors do not pick up on the same
day except on Lhree routes. Ninneapolis estimates a one in five household
participation rate. Mike Trdan, the Program Coordinator, suggested that the
following items are important Yo consider xhen writing specifications:
1.
2.
3•
4.
5.
defined in the
F.. , _, .
That the contractor has good equipment
That the contractor has maaagement experience
That the contractor employs a t1i11 time receptionist
That collections in each neighEorhood should take place
four days with a fifth day for missed collections
That a missed collection and what ahould be done
contract.
in
about it be
Minneapolis pays a subsidy of �72/ton to their contractors. The loads are
weighed at Minneapolis weight stations. The City received a grant of E40,000.00
from Hennepin County for their demonstration program, xith the stipulation that a
staff report be produced at the completion of the program. The current city-wide
program is funded by tAe City's General Fund together with a4,000.00 from the
FSnergency F�ployment Program,
� ��
lfinneapolis has one full-time and several part-time people xorking on the
recycling program. The City coordinates promotion and collection. According Lo
their specifications, the contractors Will be responsible for Lheir rnrn publicity,
hoxever, during the first two years Hinneapolis will be involved in putting out
the prlmary brochures and working on community organization.
� ';�,
��- e_ •
St. Louis Park retained U.S. Recyco to run the recycling program for Lhe
entire city txice a month after a one year test. Each household received three
polyethylene containers to be used for separation of recyclaDles: cans, paper and
glass. AlYhough SL. Louis Park concedes that the containers were expensive, (a1B
for a set of three), the City believes that the contalners have lead to higher
participation rates, which r+ere up as 61gh as 75 percent but have dropped to 40
percent due to aome problems vit6 inadequate service. U.S. Recyeo picks up the
City in one xeek With the recyclaDle materiala being placed in the same area and
the collection date t6e same as that for refuse.
57
$ubsidvlGrant
St. Louis Park presently pays II.S. Recyco a subsidy ot =2,�OO.QO a month.
Tbe City received grants totaling 556,000.00 to set up a demonstration program.
Their current city-xide program received a�152,000.00 federal grant on the basis
that it would create joDs. Other funds used for the program include �15,000.00
from CDBG plus a E5.00 user fee c6arge per household per year on the
vaterlsexer/refuse bill.
�taff Involvement
Initially ataff involvement equalled 5p percent of one person's time. This
time was spent on promotion through neusletters, newspapers and cable TY;
educational programs explaining the importance of recycling to the community; and
coordlnation by putting a program together. Nov only 20 percent of one person's
time is spent on monitoring and promoting recycling.
RAMSEY CQUNTY
Besvcliaa ProcedL�e
Ramsey County is aerviced by Recycling Unlimited. Recycling collection takes
place once a month and does not coincide xith refuse pick-up.
SuDs±dy/ •ran 4
In the past Ramsey County paid Recycling Unlimited a subsidy of E10lTon. Zn
the future the County xill be providing them xith a varehouse that xill be used in
lieu of payment. The County received E609,75Q.00 grant from the Waste Management
Board for this warehouse and processing equipment.
Staff Involveme�t
Ramsey County staffed Lvo people, one part-time and one full-t1me, to xork in
recyeling. One person works on educating the public on the isaue of recycling
through brochures and programming on cable TV. The other person is working on
providing the warehouse and equipment for Recycling Unlimited. Aecycling
Unlimited has been involved in the promotion of the program Sn Ramsey County.
They have put together brochures, newspaper ads and worked with block coordinators
throughout the County.
BOPRZNS
Hopkina has adopted a demonstration program very similar to St. Louis Park. They
recycle txice a month, use tdree containers and employ U.S. Aecyco. Hopkins received a
i5,000.00 grant from Hennepin County to run this demonstration program. Hopkins had
ataff irrvolvement to get the program going, but is no longer lnvolved.
AICHFIELD
Richfield also ceceived grant monles from Hennepin County for their demonstration
program, Yet Richfield 1s quite different. The City has recycling collection once a
month. Volunteer groups pick up paper city-xide and Aecycling Unlimited picks up
bottles and cans Prom one third of the City. Richfield staffs a part-time person Lo
coordinate and promote recycling.
m
III. LOCAL COIi'PEEi
Fridley�s present refuse colleetion aqstem consiats of nine independent haulers who
perform the pickup for ail residentiai properties. T6ere are no hauling districts. Haulers
schedule neighbor600ds at their convenience. In addition, although the City has an
ordinance which prohibits cans from being placed o� the boulevard, in reality the practive
of placing cana at curbside is common. Consequently, on any given day within a
neighborhood, trash containers are placed on the boulevard.
Fridley has had the advantage of tAe S.O.R.T. Recycliing Center since February 197g.
S.O.R.T. 1� a non-profit center xhich relies on volunteer groups to man the facility.
Recyclablea are dropped off at the center on Saturdays during establiahed hours of operaton.
In ltarch 1981, S.O.R.T. conducted a curbside recycling survey of 396 Fridley
households. The results indicated that close to 70 percent of those polled uould be
interested in a curbside program. In July of 1981 S.O.R.T, inititated a curbside program
uhlch soon evolved to inelude 514 house6olds. Participation rates vere estimated at 28
percent of these households. This program lasted for two years until it was phased out.
Scheduling problems wlth the hauler vere cited as the primary difficulty in continuing the
pro�ect.
IV. ISSOES AND CONCERNS
Prior to implementation of a Curbside Recycling Program, several key issues should
be addressed. Municipalitles which have projects in place provide a good deal of
insight into the pros and cons of curbside recycling. Issues include, 1) time frame
for start-up, 2) advertising for contractors/specifications, 3) monetary allocation, 4)
publicity, 5) monitoring the program.
Time Frame
It xould seem start-up should be made as easy as possible to get the program
off to a good start. A reasonable scenario rrould call for specifications to be
completed in FeDruary, bids from prospective contractors in March, an extensive
publicity program in April and project implementation in May. Hopefully with good
weather, people may be more apt to participate.
Advertis+na for C�ntractors/s�ecificat+ona
Major concerns related to aelecting a hauler inelude amount of subsidy,
services to be performed (hox and uhen material xill be picked up), contractors
equipment (amount, kind and condition), contractors responsibillties (complaints,
missed plekuQs, bad xeather contingencies), records of pick-up, insurance needed
by hauler, performanee atandards, bonding, indemnification, termination and
penalty clauses.
Nonetary Allocation
Until participation ratee reach a level rrhere the program is aelf-sufficient,
City suDsidy may be necessary. Available revenues may include Metropolitan
Council Landfill Abatement Fund - approzimately E5,000.00 per year. Possible
County contribution - amount unknown. CDBG funds, 1985 allocation -�17f,840.00.
59
Publicitq
Indications are that the level of Dacking by the CSty and the extensiveness
of the pre-program publicity are directly related to the degree of participation
and suceessPul implementation. The use of cable TV, local neWSpapers, the City
NeWSletter and flyers are possible activities. The extent of City involvement in
publicity �ill effect the overall costs of this program. The contractors
oontribution to this effort shouid contribute to the success of the project.
Monitor+_aa the Pro�ram
If the ultimate goal 1s self sufficiency of the operation, then probably the
participation rate would be the determining factor, for example 30 percent is
required for a reduction in subsidy and 40 percent for autonomy. The City may
6ave to take an active role in monitoring the collection rates in order to insure
proper reporting.
City StafP is prepared to proceed with whatever cour.se of action the Council deems
appropriate.
JR:jmo
6/t0/7
M
N
U
O
N
a
�
4l
m
S
�p
Z
�
�
% Ic�i
�
�
�
1+
U
OF
U
�
V
G
�
8
H Y
O G
8 oi
� ��
0 7 O
5 i .-1
� 6y
� m
~ O C „p
O A O C
OY � 00 a
�� o �p y N p�g o
MUU V M114
O
O
0
a
se�
�sg
e o
8 � O
c � o 0
\O O L O
N � O N
www-�
0
ti
0 06p
•- O L �
ypoq
a,�a o
,°, v a
G9 O �
O r�iY �q
����
Siu.� m
a~i � O 6 �
rl a~N O ]
�. � 0 8 u
Y L o O
o > oQ Q t
O 4 U 0. w
O
��i
1 V
�t \
O O
L � O r-1
c o �+
8 O9 a O
•04�
e O F
o u � q
O 2 % 6
Y
��{
i O
.i O
� �
8 = v�
� �
: � �
CG O ti S
Y�'V��< �
01 0 0 6p� o0
�C¢SPJ
a
ti
g•
� I � �
U
�
5
0 o a
o � ,
0 0 0
a ti
� o Z
d '
L O
� O O�m O
O O � V ti
Y � O O L
� � � O e
O C AN �C�
o8 � ti � � �
C4�UwAM
O
.�i
v $.�
+L+ s° a
$ e o i
� o � o
O L Y O
O \ U O
; N d ^
MM N..
� 'u
C 4
�0 O a0
.� o
C u L
ogo
O
g��
o L
O O O
C r�Y
� L �
O ` 6
M OC V
N U e
a
O' C
��
f+ \
O q
Q L O
L v1
C O u
�O �0 +�
t p
• e wm
o e ° �°.
o u o
�� o
� U % L
g
0
e
oi
�
i
6
e
s
�
Yp
L •
�p M u O
C tl�F
9
� � � �
.�'+ �-o.=i
C P u
�p o a �
{j �j Y
■
i .�i ti
n o
N O
s. > a
[o��a
O. M S � R
v
�
' °e'
ooi •°�p
0 0 0 .�
T AO O.y
O O M '� U
p pa F o
o@o �s
9Bt a0
H vl Y • l�
a� u pp
.�i u C C C C
; b B .µ-� 9 e
�. o� o.� a
O T > ti
0 o a. o g o
O O H L 0. O
C
U
S �
O
O
u e +�+
c v .+
i o �
\
o ° � o
�oo:
O 2 L M
Y
.,
�
�1
0
�
0
a
C
r
C
a
ci
O■
/
C
�a
6
8
S
O
H
h
a
_
�
M
�
�
_
M
o w
O u
O ;
+�► �i
�
00
.� .�
0
a o 0
.+oo
°as°x°
\ \
O I[� O
' N O
ww�
u
m
0
o v
> >
b��
'I titi
�A.{ 0�9p L{p
■ Y G
Y 10.-1
1-CI 6 Z
O
� a
� U
M \
� to
J
C O u
$ e a a+
� $
■ °c m �
r1 O !
O u O O
.1 C 6
�� �
S
0
C
O
C
G
S
�
Ge
C
s
M
o u
O p�
M U
a
00
o..
'� a°
�g8
J q O
��o
ecz
O N O
OON
ww..
0 0
o u
o °�
�a r.
S�
�
i a
w
a+ o
1 V m
:g�
GO U
Cc O O
O U L
O
L �
o �
Y
. � �
L t.-�i 4
a�+ Ci �
• p o
N fi 1 '�
a
O O O O Y
C t Ly 6.-1
O � O � Y
�Xoag�
•
$
�
� 6
ti �
2E
o m
�:
O C
o .�n
� Y
.°y
O
�1
5
G
¢
M
s
�
�
<
w
3
d
O
m
d
�
F
s
h
�
.�
�
m
m
d
0
!
Oy
M
g
�
�
�
�
�
P
�
.
�
�
P
S
c c°4 a�. °� c°4
.� .� .� .+
o u 9 0 0
A a. � e. a.
O O O O O
C G L 6 C
a
0 0 0 0 0
��.. � �
��G � �
V Y A Y Y
��op $ b��'
Y6U G. L
e
w
.�
0
r
O
ti
0
�
�
u
�
S ►� .
J M
�i O
�I L
O .� G
O o O
G ln •<
Y W
C G G •
p ✓ • �+ S
■ C e C •
C� C C p O S C
{.. +\+O � J` a\�Cp\O Y
tIl I N�� N N L O O N
S www w w�wv� M
• � •
C C C C C C C C
Il. U U U V U U U U
? q p O O 4 4 O q
K a� m o 0 0 0 0 0
(..) '1 .�I �1 r-1 n1 �I .�1 ry
N N Y Y Y Y Y L Y
{L Lo�i ✓ VQ �oi YQ Y YQ
O m�� 4i m m� m
a SoS b 888 0
M 6 b Y • O q O �
F e. s s o. L o. L G.
a
8
6 Z a=i a�f t t G � C
� s`� i ■�� i
■� o �
H ■ p a�
S ■ ■ ■ / ■ •
o. o�O ol
iu o 00 C•
� O�� O O O N O
y
e �
o a s o a eC •
4 �$� O O V.�r O
'� Jo°e a° sa,.6i g
� � % S � i C 4 �
8
0
� a°
.�l %
S p
OC 9
C •
Ny
.�
� � �
C R O
�
A
C
0
�
�
g
O
u\
N
w
C
U
a
O
Y
YD
0
8
a
d
a
�
o°
O
.°ti
g
�
�
°o
y
�
ti
a
J
• C
YC O
tiw
� op
� Si
Y p
� i
c n
up .p�
■ ■
op O
O �
C G
U Crf
a `a
O tl
ti r-1
J �!
Yo Ya
m m
8 8
■ r
4 Y
s a
Y Y
S ■
■ •
o° o°
O O
•
Y
O O �
J O �I
aaCS � o �
�o� � � � �
8 .1 vl C � .1
■ o 0
Y r-1 ■ • r-1
.iy oao+ o� yco w
S fvil fL fA 6 iJ C
�
�i
m
F
m
<
d
O
m
d
�
..
�
�
d
�
, �
61
YnrehouBe Rent
Yi0P05� BUDGh'T POR SOAT PICK-UY
Ez�eneee
�600/mo. z 12
� �200/yr
Utilities S�Imo. : 12 600/yr
2 haulers. 45 hrs/mo 6$8/hr �=360/mo z 2�;72Q/mo 8640/yr
(including marketing)
2 helpers (or 1 undi360/ a�2rogram) 40 hrs/mo. � 4•5�/�' 4320�n
Administrator i3o nrs/mo •�io/hr ror 4 months = 520o euoo/n
40 hrs/no for B months = 3200
Asst. Admin. 2o hrslkk � s6 x 4-1/3 ° SZ�iao for �+ sos.2080 �560/yr
10 hrs/mo for B montns ='60/mo tor 8 mos. 480
Pr�nting and paper costs
TOTAL
Income
Iti,�D prograa to paY for 1 full-time helper
CD9G grant
Sales of materials
Grants froa coanun�ty
C�ty grant (B00/mo.)
l, - ` .
,
,..Count-Y B'r'gnt
(possible Job Training grant for Aast.)
1500/yr
E 33.220
g 432o/yr
2000
7304
. S000
9600
5000
8 33.224
62
��L�+:� �Aii.-i H � � 63
i . EXHIBIT 'A' "
0
�
TERMS OF PAYMENT
:`
1, The City may make investigations as they deem necessary
� to determine ability o4 RU to perform work.
R
Q, RU will tend an in�oice to the Clty st the end of ea�h mer�tt� fo*
services of once a month pickup seruice for all reslder�t=_.
3. The City wi11 maKe parment of E80C� per montt� to Rli
within 20 days.
4, The City wi11 make e�ery e�f�rt tp achieve 30: pa�ti[ipe`.io��•
The City will maV,e parme�t of t60U per menth to RU wh,en the
3n; participation rate has been estaGlished rnd stablr:ed for
two cor�secuti�e mer�ths. 7
WASTEI.INE
... the shape of things in solid waste
30D Metro Square Building
WASTELINE REAPPEARS
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
S��ce the last issue of theWasreline was published more
than a year ago, the Metiopolitan Council has launched an
effort to reorient the region's management of its solid weste
away from landfills and toward alternatives like recycling
snd waste incineration. The Waste/�ne will appear regularly
to report on these efforts and the work of other groups,
wch as lowl governmental units and tAe private sector, to
devefop afternative waste management p�sctices. The
Wssre/ine will also cover other, related waste msnsgement
iuues of regional importance.
COUNCIL STEERS REGION AWAY FROM
LAND DISPOSAL �F TRASH
Legislature Will Be Asked For Melp
TM1e MetroDOliWn Council wants to eliminate the use of
landfilis for most solid waste produced in the Twin Cities
Area. In the years since the passage oi the Waste Manage�
WNAT IS MUNICIPAL WASTE7
v�.suo
Rubber
Cloth
Woo6
tt%
Sou�tt: Gnd Di;oou/ Abtement Oprionr Por Solid
W�sm Reduenon snd Recovery. Mttropotitan
Cpuncil, t961
612/291-6464
:.r,��,i�
��t e
n.,., �,=s
NoremDer 1984
laua No. 4
Editor: Joen Stainmann
ment Act in 1980. Council members have become
frustrated with the job oi approving sites for potentially
harmful landiills—often on farm land—and slow progress
toward alternative methods oi wazte management. During
198d the Council resolved to systematically steer the
region to a minimum use of landfills, as quickly as possible.
To support this goal, the Counci� is recommending a three-
part progrem tor solid waste management to the legislature.
First, it caVlstor a prohibit�on of land disposat of unprocessed
municfpal waste by 1990. Only by-products of waste reuse
proceues aM unuxable materials would be accepted at
Isndfills.
A�though the Council now has the authority to deny
cenifiwtes of need for new landtilis when it finds that
there are feasible alternatives, it needs firmer and more
precise direction irom the state legislature to make it clear
to the public and private groups involved in waste manage�
ment that burying unl�imited quantities of garbage in
Minnewta land is no longer acceptable.
The benefits of such a ban are numerous—remaining landtill
space would be conserved, many fewer new landfilis would
be needed in the future, buried wastes would be less likely
to contaminate the environment, landfilis would be less
offensive to nearby communities, and the economic
sdvanuges of reuse and recycling would be enjoyed.
The second part of the Council's legislative program on
waste management proposes that separation of compostable
yard refuse and recyclable materials from the landfill�bound
'waste strearri be requi�ed by 1988. Counties and cities
would use their authority to ensure that wastes like leaves,
grass clippings, glass bottles and newspapers are not mixed
with other trash.
7his requirement would assure governments and Drivate
groups that these readily useable materials will be available,
so that dependable reuse programs may be developed. And
a significant portion of the wastet going to landfills would
be immediately diverted.
The third part of the Council's recommendation to the
legislature calls for two means of financing waste recovery
projects. One proposaf is to broaden the Counc+l's authority
to sell bonds. It may now sell S15 million in bonds for new
landfills; this proposal would allow that money to be used
by local governmenu to finance waste reduction and
recovery programs.
64
Another funding p�oposal requesu an increax, by �DDro•
priation, of funds available to the Council to assist was[e
reuse and recovery, public education, techninl assisLna
�nd recycli� market development projects.
The Council is to receive a ponion of tht money co1{eeted
through a landfill surd�arpe imposed by the lagislature in
1964 for this purpose, but much oi that amount won't be
available until 1986—and these Drojects are needed now.
The funds appropriated to the Council to help get them off
the pround wouid be repaid as surcharye monies acamulsTe.
A Naw Plan for Managinp the Region's Trssh
The CAUncil is putting together a plan for solid waste
management in the region that reflects its remmmendations
to the legislature. The new plan, which reDlaces one
spproved in 1981, will articulate the policies guiding
disposal of trash generated by businesses and Aomes in Me
region that will Dhase out burial ot unprocesud solid warte
after 1990. The plan wili ezD�ain how everything but
"residuals"—like the ash remaining after waste is bumed—
is to be kept out of the ground, where 90 percent of the
region's trash now ends up.
Current law torbids the Council to suthorize the expansion
of landiills or development of new sites beyond what is
necessary after all other feasible options have been pursued.
The Council must set the sundards for counties to maxi-
mize efforts to keep trash out of landfills, through waste
reduction, recycling and incineration. The purpose oi the
new solid waste management policy plan is to introduce
these standards and suggest itrategies titiei, counties,
businesses and the public may use to meet them.
One of the po4icies i� the plan supports the Council gwl of
separat�on of compostable yard wastes and recyclables from
other trash by /988. It ralls for the establishment of a
network of integrated processinq and recycling services, to
make separation convenient and collection dependable for
area homes and businesses.
The plan wiR d+scuss ahernatives co landfips nnginq from
'low-tech' home�based activities to large�s�le trash inciner�
ation plants. and ezplain how these techniques an work
side by side. A mixture of inethods is the bert approach to
rocovering .esources from the different kinds of wastes that
now travel together to landiilis.
$ome unusable materials remain to be disposed of even
after this variety oi recovery methods has been exhausted,
but the volume of these is only a fraction of that now being
buried. These 'residuals' will probably rtill go to landfilis,
and in the future it will be up to the Council to decide
when the practice of land disposal is necessary and to see
that this "last resort" is not sbused.
The solid waste management polity plan is now being
rcviewed by the Council and its committees, and the
Council plans to complete a public hearing droh in late
Decem6er. A public hearing will be held 30 days later,
and comments on the plan will be heard then. The Council
will probably adopt the new plan in February.
Persons who have comments or questions about the plan
should call Paul Smith, Council environmental planner, at
291 bt06.
WHAT HAPPENS TO TRASH IN THE FUTURET
�snd disposal of trash in the Twin Cities Area will be at
bsdc drastiwlly to a minimal level over the �ext few year:
if the Metropolitan Council's recommendations on solid
wane are taken up by t�e Minnesota Legislature. And land-
fills operoting after 1990 would pose a smaller threat to the
anvironment than those that now worry polity makers.
There is evidence thet /3 of the region's 15 opereting or
dosed landfills ere contaminating the groundwater under�
neath tAem. The eight landfills currently operating in the
area accept about 5,400 tons of trash daily, and will be full
by the early 1990s if this level of dumping continues.
Eventually most of the 18 potential landfill sites identitied
6y the uven countie: and approved by Me Council would
be needed—end many ot these are now productive farmland.
The Metropolitan Council is ssking Me legislature to set up
• system that would reduce both the number of landfills
��d the amount of trash sent to them by at least three
querters. While it still isn't technica�ly possible to eliminate
pndtills attogether, the Council proposes to rcserve land
disposal space for only those waste materials that can't be
rcused, and stop burying mixed, unprocessed solid waste.
This means that only "residuals"—the materials remaining
after recovery and retycling of tras�—would be acceDted at
the landfills of the 1990s. Bewuse these contain few or no
organic substances, the range of potentlal contaminants
would be reduced. And new or expanded landf ills would be
technically superior to the wrrent qeneration oi landfills,
with liners betwee� the fill and the earth and systems to
tollect liquid that seeps down through the landfill.
The improved quality of the waste received and of their
design would make these fewer Iandfills better neighbors
to other types of land and increase the number of options
for their use after tliey are full.
The Council's recommendations to the legislature calt for
meatures to build a region�wide system of resource recovery
facilities to reD�ace landfilit. Specific deadlines, along with
expanded t�inancing tor facilities, are the spurs for develop�
ment oi this syrtem.
1990 i: the most importa�t deadli�e proposed to accelerate
landiill abatement efforts. This is the target date for a
prohi6ition on the burial of unp.ocezsed waste in landfills.
In the intervening years, the seven metroDOliUn counties
must step up their ettoru to plan and develop resource
recovery facilities, suth as garbageburning planu.
Large-scale energy rccovery and cocomposting plants will
get into operat�on more quickly and easily if the wunties
eooperate with each other to meet this deadline, sharin9
eosu and the supply of waste needed to keep facilities
running smoothly. Ramsey and WaShington Countiet, for
example, are already working together to plan a major
warte proceuing plant. Transfer rtations to relay trash to
proceuing planu could be placed to urve two or mo�e
counties.
The Council is proposing an intermediary deadline of
Jan, i, 1988, by which metropolitan counties and cities
would be expected to pass ordinances requiring that
recyclables and compostable yard wastes be separated from
other irash. This would give area cities and counties three
65
,
years to develop recyciable and yard waste collection
services, alreWy available in many communities.
Such a law would provide opportunities for private
entrepreneurs as well as obligations for local governments.
Solid waste collection services would no longer be confined
to pickup of mixed trash but ezpanded to include separoted
materials. New processing plants would be needed to
rcaive t�e recyclables, clean and prepare tt�em for nle,
•nd sAip them to industrial buyers.
V�rd westes not used by generators to tertilize home gardens
��d lawns would go to composting facilities, to be
efficiently managed by largerapacity equipment. A variety
of uses for the resulting compost producc—nururies,
public works construction projects—are pouible.
The solid waste management system the Council wanu the
Metropolitan Area to adopt would cost the individual
household more than the current landfill-based System—
estimates of yearly bills run as high az double the present
amount. But the avoided unpleasant—and often expensive
—tonsequences of landiills and the benefits of recovering
resources irom wastes may offset the increase in the modest
price we pay to dispose of one ton of trash per household
yearly.
TEAM TO HELP WASTE REUSE AND
RECOVERY EFFORTS GET STARTED
Last Juiy, Metropolitan Councit Chalr Sandra Gardebring
announced a new initiative in wlid waste management.
She set a timetable for action to deve�op new wsys ot
handling the area's trash—iYs an issue Gardebring insists
Me Counc�l work through i� the near tuture. "1 want the
Countil to be out in front as we identify a new direMion
in sotid waste management that will take us away from
Isndfills to an emphasis on other methods; '�he said.
fls a part of her initiative on solid waste, Gardebring put
together a team of Council steff people to provide technical
auistance and advice for resource recovery and recycling
efforts, and to sdminister grants snd loans to support them
—the solid waste assirtance team. The pu�pose oi the team
is to accelerate the development of projects and programs
to decrease the amount of waste going to metropolitan area
bndfill:.
The team will provide tecRnical and planni�g help to
counties, cities and other groups, using methods modified
to meet the needs oi tfie agency or organization.
Initially, the team will focus on efforts to divert recyclable
materials and yard wastes irom landfills through recycling
programs, mulching and composting. "Handson" technical
s:sistance will be given to groups requestin9 help at the
times and places that iYs needed. Assistance activities will
include evaluating alternative waste recovery meihods
under consideration by a group and developing strategies to
promote programs to policymakert and the general public.
The solid waste essistence team will also provide informa-
tion about various waste reuse and recovery techniques.
Mem6ers plart to get involved in abatement projects already
goinp on a�ound the region, and serve as a clearinghouse for
groups that want to know more about these programs.
Team members are now gathering materials on the technical
aspecu of alternatives to landfills and touring solid waste
facilities in the Twin Cities Area. Near the end of the year
tAe team will be prepared to provide assistance.
For more information about the solid waste assistance
team, mntact Katy Boone, team leader, at 291-6421.
Prinred on ncycled paper
:.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION NEETING JAN[TARY 8, 1985 PAGE 3
Mr. Oquist agreed xith Mr. Rezac that an attractive doxntoxn is an
essential item.
The commission a8reed that they would like to see the four corner landmark,
area directional signage, and Mississipyi Boulevard landscape and
sideralk improvements accomplished before the utility improvements
from IIniversity Avenue to Main Street.
Mr. Burch stated that the grant money has to be spent in 1985.
Dr. Vos stated that the four corner landmark, area directional signage,
and Mississippi Boulevard landscape and sidexalk improvements could all
fit together in some way.
Mr. 09uist asked about what has been done about removing the barriers
at city hall.
Mr. Burch stated that block grant money xas spent last year to put a
ramp in for city hall. A wider area was made so that a handicapped
van could be unloaded, bathrooms were re-done to accommodate the handi-
capped. The only thing left, xhich would be long range, xould be an
elevator. Parks were also made more hand3capped accessible.
�j,qj�j BY DR, VOS. SECOND�D BY MR. GABEL, THAT TAE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION SUPPORTSCOM.M[JNITY DEVEL(�Pt�NT PROJECTS: 15$6 TO HUM.AN SERVICES
GRANTS; CDRBSZDE RECYCLING PROGRAM✓SIIBSiDY; PLAZA CENTER PRQJECTS: a.
FOUR CORNER LANDMARK� b. AREA DIRECTIONAL SIGNpGE, c. MISSISSIPPI
SOIILEVARD LANDSCAPE AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRFERSON OQIIIST DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
2. INTRODDCTION OF NEW MEMBER GENE REZAC.
Mr. Oquist introduced new member, Gene Re2ac. Mr. Rezac is a partner
3n the firm, Tax Consultants; Inc., a high volume tax firm which did
7,000 tax returns last year.
3. QTHER BIISINESS:
Mr. Oquist requested copies of the 1984 work plan for the next Com-
munity Development Commission meeting.
ADJ�URNMENT:
Chairperson Oquist declared the January 8, 1985, Community Development
meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m.
Respectfully submitted�
;/��YGCiIup� J ��t�j�
Denise Bosch
Recording Secretary
COMNUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING, JAN[TARY 8, 1985 PAGE 2
b. Area Directional Signage
Mr. Burch stated that the type of signage (color, style, lettering,
etc,) has been determined.
The commission discussed the fact that because the area is changing
and expanding there is a deYinite need ior more signage.
c. Mississippi Boulevard Landscape and Sidewalk Improvements
Nr. Burch stated that this Rould include such items as making the
intersection wider� islands xith trees, landscaping of boulevard
from IInivers3ty to 5th 5treet.
d. IItility Improvements (underground power) from IIniversity pvenue
to 1!a3n Street.
Mr. Burch stated that this past year underground power reas put
in from University to Sth and this coming year the area from
University to N.ain street pould be installed.
3. Curbside Recycling Program/Subsidy (Economic Development - Jobs
Creation)
This program rould involve a monthly subsidy of approximately $800/
month and could be 11�nded as an economic development ijobs) program.
4. Development of Riverview Heights Park �Matching funds to possible
1985 LAWCON FSinds.)
Mr. Burch explained th� this item involved the expansion of the
park and putting in a boat landing. La=t year money Was used to
purchase two houses and relocate tpo families. The city could
develop the park xithout acquiring more property. The City Council
has supported the project in the past.
5. Any project benefiting designated low and moderate income census
tracts on attached map. (park project, street improvement, etc.)
Mr. Oquist asked about the status of the elderly housing projects.
Mr. Burch stated the proposed high rise project fe31 through.
Mr. Burch explained how the Moore Lake Project has been developing.
Mr. Rezac stated he favored the Curbside Recycling Program and that he
�liked the long term goal of making the Plaza Center more attractive and
inviting to commerCial, office, retail, banking, etc.
CITY OF FRIDLEY
COMN[JNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MEETING
JANtJARY 8, 1985
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Oquist called the January 8, 1985, �ommunity Development
Commission meeting to order at 7:37 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Yembers Absent:
Others Present:
LeRoy Oquist, Ken Vos� A1 Gabel, Gene Rezac
Lou1s Schmidt
Mark Burch, Asst. Public Works Director
APPROVAL OF aCTOBER 9 1984 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COM.A'.'ISSION MINDTES:
MOTI02' BY MR. GABEL, SECONDED BY DR. VOS, TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 9,
198�, COM,MUNITY DEVELOPMENT COM.�IISSZON MINIiTES AS NRITTEN.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1, DISCUSSION OF 1985 CONS:UNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSALS.
Yr. Burch explained that the city �cu ld like input Yrom various
commissions as to the prioritlzation or any new ideas for proposals
for the use of 1985 Community Development Block Grant money.
POTENTIAL CDGB PROJECTS
1. 15% to Auman Services Grants - 19,176 (108,664)
Mr. Oquist stated that the money from this grant is normally split
amount 5 or 6 agencies in the county rrho come and make proposals to
Human Resources.
Mr. Burch stated that this is a pretty standard project thethas been
supported in past years.
2. Plaza Center ProJects
a. Four Corner Landmark - Design Implementation
Mr. Burch stated that the city is looking for a design for a
landmark that would identify a downtown Fridley.
Hr. Burch stated that the coun^;1- has allocated money for a
design competition for schools that ofier architectural engineering
to design a landmark that xould incorporate all four corners of
the intersection of 2fiississippi and 47th.
�
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 11
2. NEW BUSINESS:
a. League of Minnesota Human Rights Cortnnissions
MOTZON BY MR. TREiTENFELS� SECONDED BY MS. KOCHER� TO RSCOMMEND THE
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION CCkVTINUE ITS MEMBERSHZP ZN THE LEAGUE OF
MINNESOTA HUMAN RSGNTS COMMISSIONS A.VD PAY DUES FOR THE PERIOD OF
J(ILY 1, 1984, TO JUNE 30, 2985.
UPQ'J A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTIIIG AYE� CHAZRPERSON MINTON DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. �
b. Election of Vice-Chairperson
Mr. Ftinton stated tt�at Ms. Niemi has indicated that she will be
resigning from the Commission, Since she was the vice-chairperson,
the Commission should re-elect a vice-chairperson to serve until
April 30, 1985.
Ms. Kocher nominated Mr. Treuenfels for vice-chairperson.
MOTION BY M6, KOCHER� SECONDED BY MR. SREUENFELS� TO ELECT MR. SREUENFELS
R1� SERVE AS VICE-CHASRPERSON OF TNE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION UNTIL
APRIL 30, I985.
UPON A[�OICE VOTE� ALL VOTIYG RYE, CHAIRpERSON MINTQN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY.
c. Next Meeting Date
Because one of the commissioners would not be able to attend the Feb. 7
meeting, the meeting date was changed to Thursday, Jan. 31, at 7:00 p.m.
ADJOUR��MENT:
MOTION BY MS, KOCHER� SECONDED BY MR. TREUENFELS� TO ADJOURN TXE MEETING. UPON
A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON MINTON DECLRRED THE JAN. 3� 2985,
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING AA70URNED RT 9:45 P.M.
Respectfully subm'tted,
�
aa
Recording Secretary
HUt4AN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 10
c. Consideration of Disaster Preparedness
Discussion continued until next meeting.
d. Consideration of Latch Key Programs in Fridley
Mr, Treuenfels stated the School Board has accepted a resolution to
establish a latch key program in School District 14 only. He stated
the Comnunity Education Advisory Council has decided the Correnunity
Education people should have control over the program.
e. Consideration af 1985 Work Plan
Mr. Treuenfels and Ms. Kocher submitted drafted goals and objectives
for the 1985 work plan. Mr. Hunt stated he would have these prepared
in work plan form for the next meeting.
Ms. Kocher stated that regarding the goal, "7raffic Safety for Pedestrians
and Bicylists Crossing Highway 65 and Highway 47", she would like to
invite Dean Saba to the next Commission meeting to discuss this item.
f. Other Old Business:
(1) School Prevention Programming
Mr. Treuenfels stated that at one of the last Planning Commission
meetings, Mr. Minton had made a motion that the Human Resources
Comnission would like to see the prevention programming expanded to
all the elementary schools within the city limits of Fridley, both
private and public, because of the importance of the programming.
The motion had died for lack of a second. He stated he would like
Mr. Minton to reintroduce a motion at the next Planning Commission meetin�
that the prevention programming be expanded at least to all the
public schools in Fridiey.
MOTION BY MR. TREUENFEIS, SECOtlDED BY MS. KOCHER, TO RECOMI?END TO
SPON.'',ORED
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON HINTON DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,
Mr. Hunt stated there was no reason why this programming could
not be expanded to all the schools in Frid]ey, both public and
` private. It was a human rights issue, a service, to the community,
It had absolutely nothing to do with church and state.
HUPIAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETIN6, JANUARY 3, 1985 PA6E 9
Anoka County Volunteer Alliance
Mr. Treuenfels stated he rated this organization fairly low overall.
The application was missing a lot of information. There was no budget.
He was not so sure a borchure of volunteer opportunities was realTy
needed.
Ms. Kocher stated she rated them low also. There was no way of knowing
how many Fridley residents would be served. She was not sure it met
an important comrnunity need, and there was no budget.
Mr. Minton stated his main concern was there was no organizational
structure. What they are doing could be done by another organization,
Secondly, he was concerned about duplication with VAC (Volunteer Action
Coalition} in Minneapolis which is supposed to be doing this kind of
thing for the entire west metropolitan area. He thought a local directory
wouTd probably be a good thing for volunteerism, but he did not know if
an umbrella organization should be doing it.
Anoka County Community Action Program, Inc.
Mr. Treuenfels stated he rated this organization fairly high. The budget
looked reasonable for what they are trying to do.The organization was
meeting a community need through the Frialey Senior Outreach Program,
but he was not sure about the overlapping of services.
Ms. Kocher stated they d9d not seem to be serving a large number of
Fridley residents, and she felt there was possibly an overlap of
services.
Mr. Minton stated he rated this organization second highest of the six
organizations. 7he budget was fine. He thought there was a good corivnunity
need for the Fridley Senior Outreach Program, but he did not see it as an
ongoing need that should be funded every year. Ne did not feel there
was any duplication of services. He did not see any alternative sources
of funding for this part{cular outreach service.
MOTION BY FlR, TREUENFEIS, SECOl7DED BY M5. KOCHER� TO RECO�fMEND TO CITY
COUNCIL� THAT THE FOLLCWIIhG ORGANIZATIONS RECEII�E 1984 CDBG FUNDS:
FAMILY LIFE MENTRL HEALTH CENTER
NORTH SUBURBRN FAHILY SERVICE CENTER
CSNTRAL CENTER FOR FAMILY RESOURCES
SORT (ELIMIt7RTED) -
ALEXANDRA HOUSE� INC.
ANOKA COUNTY VOLUNTEER ALLIANCE
ANOXA COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRRM� INC
-0-
S Z�960
5�000
3,200
-0-
6,229
517,289
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRZRPERSON MINT(kl DECLARED THE
MOTIpIV CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 8
North Suburban Family Service Center
Mr. Treuenfets stated there was not eno;�gh information given. There
was an overlap of services. Administrative costs were not clearly
shown. So, because of the lack of information, not because he did not
think it was a worthwhile organization, he gave this organization a
low rating,
Ms. Kocher stated the organization serviced 130 Fridtey residents so she
rated them high in that category. There was an overlap of services,
and they seemed to have other funding sources.
Mr. Minton stated the budget seemed reasonable and accurate. With
Fridley funding, they would be able to provide counseling sessions
for 95 Fridley residents. For $4,000, that seemed pretty good. As far
as need, there was not a desperate need for Fridley funding. He thought
they had a realistic view of what they could accomplish. Administrative
costs at 21� seemed to be fairly high.
Central Center for family Resources
t4r. Treuenfels stated this organization fiad done an excellent job in
filling out the application form. He rated this organization very high
in every category.
Ms. Kocher stated she rated this organization high also. They serve
500 Fridley residents. 7here was little overlap.
Mr. Minton stated he rated this organization higher than any of the other
organizations. The budget was accurate and reasonable. They seem to
make very good use of their money.
Alexandra House, Inc.
Mr. Treuenfels stated he rated this organization high overall. The
amount requested was reasonable. There are many Fridley residents
among their clientele. There seemed to be no overlap of services, and
the organization was meeting an important comnunity need.
Ms, Kocher stated she rated this organization high also. Those Fridley
residents who haye used the service certainly need the service. There
are alternative sources of funding available, but that was no reason for
Fridley not to fund them.
Mr. Minton stated this was not funding for a service but capital improve-
ment (a parking lot). He thought that was a very appropriate use for
�• £DBG funds. It would be his recomnendation that the total amount requested
be granted.
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETTNG, JANUARY 3 1985 PAGE 7
Family Li,°e Mental Health Center
North Suburban Family Service Center
Central Center for Family Resources
SORT Pick-Up, Inc.
Alexandra House, Inc.
Anoka County Volunteer Altiance
Anoka County Community Action
Program, Inc.
Total Amount Requested
Amount available for
distribution
$2,000
4,000
5,000
2,000
3,200
7,500
6,129
23.829
17,289
Mr. Minton stated another HUD requirement was that the project must
be either for an extension of a service or a new service. He had a
problem with this requirement with the request from the Family Life
Mental Health Center.
Mr. Minton stated he had a similar problem with SORT Pick- p, Inc. He
would recommend they eliminate SORT. The Environmental Quality Commission
has been discussing the curb-side pick-up recycling project in the City
of Fridley, and there are two organizations in contention for receiving
some funding through Metropolitan Council and possibly some funding from
other uses of CDB� funds. One is Recycling Unlimited from St. Paul and
the other is SORT Pick-Up, Inc. As long as this whoie question is being
discussed by the Environmental Quality Commission� he would like that
commission to decide which organization was to receive funds before the
Human Resources Cartmission recommended any funding.
Family Life Mental Health Center
Mr. Treuenfels stated he was not happy with the budget submitted by this
organization. He felt the amount requested was unreasonable in view of
the number of Fridley residents served. He was unhappy about the overlap
in services because there are other organizations in Anoka County providtng
mental health services. The one thing in their favor was they were the
only GAMC (general assistance medical coverage) provider. He ranked this
organization low on viability because they get 9]% of the budget from fees
and alternative sources of funding are available. He stated he gave this
organization a low rating.
Ms. Kocher stated this organization anly serves 30 Fridley people. She
rated them a little low because of overlapping services. There were also
alternative sources of funding available.
� Mr, Minton stated he rated them low on the eeasonableness of the budget,
because they have a pretty good fund balance. He did not think th�
were at all in need of CDBG furtding, and there were alternative sources
of funding available. The staff looked competent, He gave them a fairly
low rating, not because they did n�t look like a good organization, but
it didn't look as if they really needed this money.
HU�4AN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 6
2. OLD BUSINESS:
a. Progress Report on Locke House/Banfill Tavern Memorandum and Resolution
Mr. Minton stated that on Dec. 17, 1984, the City Council approved the
recommendation made by the Human Resources Commission and adopted
Resolution ��o. 137-1984, "A Resolution Requesting the County of Anoka
to Expedite the Renovation of the Banfill Tavern/Locke House". The
Commission members had received a copy of Mr. Qureshi's letter dated
Dec. 18, 1984, to A1 Kardiak, Anoka County Board of Cortmissioners,
the Banfill Tavern Recommendations dated Nov. 1, 1934, and the resolution.
Mr. Minton stated that when this comes up on the County Commissioners'
agenda, he and 1-2 other commission members would like to attend that
meeting. He stated he had asked Mr. Qureshi to let the Commissioners
know when this meeting is to take place.
b. Consideration of Grants to Human Service Organizations from 1984
CDBG Funds
Mr. Hunt stated he had another conversation with Joanne Wright, the
person at Anoka County, who handles CDBG funds. She stated one of the
elements of CDBG funds is they are to serve lower income people, so
generally 51% of the project grant must go to serve people of lower
income, or it must be something that employs peopie of lower income
in its execution. This obviously was not made very clear to the people
receiving proposals, and that should perhaps be made clearer for the
next funding period.
Mr. Hunt stated he felt this did affect the proposal received by SORT
for curb-side recycling, as he did not see any indication where this
proposal was directed toward services to lower income. This might also
be a problem for Anoka County Volunteer Alliance.
Mr. Hunt stated the Commission had asked him to check on whether grants
can be made to unincorporated entities. It seems they probably cannot.
He was told by Ms. Wright that the language talks about even the kind
of corporation an organization has to have for the various block grants,
not just human service block grants, although it doesn't say an organi-
zation has to absolutely be incorporated. What the City could do is enter
into a contract with an unincorporated entity for the purposes of doing
a particular project; and, in effect, the block grant would be given to
the City upon showing evidence that this project had been done through
another agency. So, this was not an insurmountable obstacle.
_. Mr. Minton stated the Commission had received funding requests from the
following organizations:
HU�4AN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 5
Mr. Clark stated there was another possibility that might make everyone,
especially the City, more comfortable and that was for the church to post
some kind of bond guaranteeing the work would be done.
Mr. Christenson
was suggesting,
of bond.
stated he was familiar with the type of bonding Mr, Clark
but it might be very difficult for a church to get this type
Mr. Minton stated he was acquainted with how t� state law was applied to
some non-profit organizations in the St, Paul area, and it has been fairly
strict. These organizations have had to undergo some hardships in order to
make buildings accessible. He did not see how these organizations would be
much different than a church, Based on his experience, he would be inclined
to apply the state law in the same way in this case,
Mr. Treuenfels stated he felt the code was there, and the code should be
enforced, Ne realized there was a hardship and that this was not entirely
the church's fault. What bothered him was that the State Building Code did
require an elevator from the beginning, and the church hoped the code would
change. but it didn't. It was possib7e he would go along with a one-year
extension only but was more inclined to say that the code should be enforced
without an extension.
Ms. Kocher stated she felt this has all happened in good faith and this was
an oversight. She could not see punishing a congregation by not opening the
addition because 3-4 people might not be able to get into it when the whole
congregation has put forth the effort to get the building as far as it is.
They are committed to making the building accessible and even more accessible
than the code demands,
Mr. Minton stated he would like to continue this until the next meeting so
the Commission members have an opportunity to think t�is over a little more
thoroughly.
Mr. Hunt stated he would appreciate it if Mr. Christenson could give them a
more firm estimate of the cost of the elevator when that information is
available,
Mr. Johnson stated that in preparing their recommendation, he would like the
Commission to keep in mind that this is not going to be easy to go back and
try to get the conyregation to commit for the extra money and then get some-
one to loan them the money to extend the commitment, He would ask that the
Comnission be very careful if they would deny the use of that building to
strictly adhere to the letter of the law. He was not.asking them to 6reak
the law, but they should look at what is the�reasonable limit to accepting
what the code says.
Mr. Minton thanked Mr. Christenson and Mr. Johnson for coming to the meeting.
The Commission members asked Mr. Clark to consult with the City Attorney and
get his opinion regarding this issue.
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 4
Mr. Christenson stated he knew of a similar situation with a church in
Bloomington, and the City of Bloomington granted that church an extension
of time in order to comply with the accessibility part of the code. So,
there was some precedence for it around the metropolitan area.
Mr. Treuenfels stated a lot of planning has gone into this project since
1978, and at that time the State Building Code probably already specified
an elevator rather than a lift. Did the Church in its planning ever consider
the possibility that the code would not change and make that a contingency
in their planning?
Mr. Christenson stated they really felt their architects made a mistake in
allowing the Church to go as far as they did regarding the lift versus the
elevator. That architectural firm really felt the code was going to change,
and did not purposely mislead the church in that thinking. The worst situation
the architectural firm felt was that if the code did not change this year,
the church could get permission to put the lift or ramp in making one level
accessible, and there would only be one level that was not accessible until the
code changed. Then the lift could be changed to increase its travel, making
the second level accessible. However, they never really did put money aside
to cover the cost of an elevator.
Mr. Johnson stated that approximately 2; years ago, part of the master plan
incorporated two lifts that would split the distance, but they did not address
the question of the appropriateness of a lift versus an elevator. As far as
they knew or the architects who were advising them, that was not an issue and
they were covered to take care of their needs. About 1-1; years ago, based
on the information they had available to them, they would redesign the building,
remove the second lift, go with one lift, with the assumption (which they felt
was the correct assumption) that it Niould be approved by the State. So, they
did look at this in their initial planning, but made some incorrect decisions
along the way. •
Mr. Minton asked the total cost of the project.
Mr. Christenson stated that right now the cost of the project was around
$700,000.
Mr. Christenson stated that, unfortunately, they made the decision on the
brick veneer when they thought they could have the lift. If they had known
they could not have the lift, he was sure they would not have gone with the
brick and would have had the elevator.
Mr. Minton asked if the church could raise the money and have the elevator
installed within one year.
�� Mr. Christenson stated he did not think anything could happen that fast
within the system the church has to operate. Two years might be possible,
but they really felt three years was adequate. If they get the 3-year
extension, he did not think they would have to come back for another
extension.
HUt1AN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETIN6, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 3
to deal with it. That did not happen; and, unfortunately, before they
realized there was no way they were going to be able to install a lift
(which had been budgeted for), they made a couple of other decisions that
increased the cost of the project. In going through the approval process
with the City, the City requested the church consider covering the new addi-
tion with a brick veneer as opposed ta what was originally p7anned which was
a tip-up concrete-type construction similar to a warehouse-type construction.
They realized the benefit of the brick veneer; and at that time, they made
the decision to spend the extra money to go with the brick veneer. The cost
of that exceeded their original budget by about $30,000. When they got
Mr. Clark's final notice from the City that the lift could not be installed,
that decision had already been made; and at that point, they could not come
up with the extra money over what they had budgeted for the mechanical lift
to pay for a basic elevator. They would have to put in a 4-position, 2-door
elevator, and the cost of the elevator plus the modification to the front of
the building will probably cost in the neighborhood of $30-50,000. At this
time, they jusi do not have that money.
Mr. Christenson stated they are anticipating final finishing of the addition
by April-May. They are asking the City for a 3-year extension which will
give them time to go back to the congregation, raise the money, contract for
it, and construct it. Because this wiil be a separate project and because
it will involve the construction of the add-on structure to the building, they
are probably looking at $50-70,000, He stated the architect is in the process
of developing some firmer costs.
Mr. Christenson stated they made the congregation aware of this 6-8 weeks ago.
and he felt the congregation, in unison, wanted this accessibility.
Mr. Clark stated the State Building Code allows a chair lift or a man lift to
rise 54 inches vertically, It can only be used in existing structures, not
in new buildings. The Nationa7 Elevator Code does allow a man lift or chair
lift to rise vertically 12 ft., but again only in existing buildings and it
cannot penetrate a floor.
Mr. Clark stated that one of the things the Church is asking for is that they
be allowed to occupy the new addition when it is completed with the understand-
ing that within a period of time (3 years), they will install an elevator to
make the entire facility accessible,
Mr. Minton stated he knew the laws on making new buildings accessible were
very strict. Did the City really have the authority to give this time
extension?
Mr. Clark stated he really did not know. He has consulted with the State
Building Code people, the Minnesota State Council for the Handicapped, the
—• elevator people, and somewhat in staff on the interpretation of the code.
They feel if the City is reasonable in the length of time, there shou7dn't
be any problem. Really, the City is getting more than is asked for through
the State Building Code, because the whole building will be accessible, not
just the new addition.
HUFIAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 3, 1985 PAGE 2
Mr. Hunt stated th�t since the Human Resources Cortmission has dealt quite
extensively with handicapped accessibility in the past; in fact, the Commission,
through a project committee, made a fairly extensive study of the accessi-
bility of various public and semi-public buildings in Fridley, Mr. Clark felt
the Human Resources Cortmission might be a good commission to come before with
this matter.
Mr. Gordon Christenson stated he was Chairman of the Building Cortanittee for
Redeemer Lutheran Church, He stated this has not happened from lack of planning,
but maybe has happened from too much planning over too long a period. They
started into the planning of this project in 1978 and finally about a year ago
received permission from the congregation to enter into a contract and go
ahead with the plans.
Mr. Christenson showed some slides of the building project in order to give
the Commission members a little better understanding of the project.
Mr. Christenson stated the plan was to update the facility by adding on a new
fellowship hall--a large area that would have multi-purpose uses, large
meetings, recreational activities, such as a gymnasium, etc. At the same time,
they are doing some remodeling of the administrative offices.
Mr. Christenson stated this whole thing has been extremely frustrating for
him, the rest of the Building Committee, and a lot of inembers of the church.
When they started this project, one of their major concerns was to provide
accessibility for the handicapped to the building. They really only have
one entrance to the building that is accessible to the handicapped, and that
is the frortt entrance. The problem is that once a ha�dicapped person gets to
that point, there is really onl�� one other level of the church that person can
access under the present conditions, and that is the sanctuary. So, as part of
their planning, they had planned for an actual addition onto the front of the
church which would solve a major part of the accessibility.
Mr. Christenson stated that, similar to many other types of construction, they
were trying to live within a budget. They had developed a budget for what
they wanted to do, still keeping in mind that accessibility was one of the
major items. Last year, they entered into a contract with a construction firm
in a cost plus fixed fee contract; in other words, they were virtually still
doing final design at the time the contract was signed and they went into
construction.
Mr. Christenson stated that in the process of planning, the architectural firm
that did the planning for the church was under the impression that the State
Building Code was going to be changed. They based this on the fact that it
was their feeling that the National Building Code has allowed a mechanical
lift in lieu of an elevator. Lifts are used most cortmonly in a building that
-- wants to provide accessibility but cannot put in an elevator because of cost.
Mr. Christenson stated the church went through the whole planning process
knowing the State Building Code basically did not allow the construction of
this lift, but felt it was going to be changed before the church would have
CITY OF FRIDLEY
HUMAN RESOURCES CONP1I55ION
MEETING
JANUARY 3,1985
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Minton called the January 3, 1985, Human Resources Commission meeting
to order at 7:00 p.m,
ROIL CALL:
Members Present: Bob Minton, Peter Treuenfels, Barbara Kocher
Members Absent: Arlie Niemi
Others Present: BiiT Hunt, Administrative Assistant
Gordon L. Christenson, Redeemer Lutheran Church
Nels Johnson, Redeemer Lutheran Church
Darrel Clark, Chief Building Official, City of Fridley
APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 6, 1984, HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOmION BY�MR, TREUENFELS� SECONDED BY MS. KOCXER� TO APPROVE SHE DEC. 6, 1984,
HUlfAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE� CHAIRPERSON MINTON DECLARED THE MOSION
CARRZED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. CONSIDERATION OF HANDICAPPED ACC
Mr. Hunt stated the Human Resources Commission is being asked for its advice
or+ the matter of the handicapped accessibility in the addition under con-
struction at Redeemer Lutheran Church. There was no formal process for
handling this type of matter, such as a lot split, variance. etc., and it
was his understanding they were not dealing with something the City Council
had any jurisdiction over;. it was a question of state law.
Mr. Clark stated he did not believe the City had the authority to waive the
requirements of the state building code. He did believe it was reasonable
for the City to grant an extension in time in order to comply with the code.
Because there kas no city statute that spells out what can be done or who
has to look at it (this being the first time this particular type of thing
has occurred), City Staff felt asking for advice from the Human Resources
Cormiission was the first logicai approach to take.
Mr. Clark stated there wasn't a process, but yet they wanted to make sure
people were aware of this in case something comes up at a later date. It
was possible someone might question why the church is not accessible to the
handicapped, and it wauld be in the City's best interest to have a good answer
to that question.
PARKS $ RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 18, 1984 PAGE 3
on Monday nights because of the City Council meetings. D�. Boudreau
stated he had talked to both Mr. Flora and Mr. Volkman about this.
If something comes up at the meeting regarding the parks, all the
Comnission has to do is let them know in advance, and Mr. Volkman can
attend the meeting. If it is something of major importance. then
Mr. Fiora can make arrangements to be at the meeting or have someone
attend in his place.
Mr. F1ora stated that if it is approprfate for the Comm9ssion to have
park maintenance as an agenda item, he could have someone at the meeting
to address that.
The Commission members concurred with the 1985 meeting dates.
4. 07HER BUSINESS:
a. Diann Valen
Dr. Boudreau stated that Diann Yalen, Naturalist, was no longer
employed by the City of Fridley as of Dec. 14. She had accepted a
position in Michigan. He stated that part-time people will fill
Ms. Valen's position and programming will continue as it has in the
pa�t.
Mr. Kondrick stated Ms. Valen was a very knowledgeable person, a very
patient and likable person, and she would be missed by the City of
Fridley.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MR, YOUNG� SECONDED BY MR. ALLEN� TO AA70URN THE MEETING. UPON A
VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE DEC. I8, I989�
PARKS & RECREATSON COMMISSION FtEETING ADJOURNED RT 8:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
�
ynne' a a
Recording Secretary
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 18, 1984 PAGE 2
3.
Mr. Flora stated there was no fear of any loss of park maintenance
support because all they have done is move six people across the hall.
They used to have three divisions in Puhlic Works, and now they have four
divisions--Streets, Water, Sewer, and na� Perks. Each division has its
own foreman, but all report to one supervising superintendent.
Mr. Flora stated that through this reorganization. they hope to get
some improvements in equipment and operation and personnel supervision.
They also look forward to making some improvements in the total operation
of the parks. Since they naw fiave control of all the resources of the
garage and people, they hope to be able to do some things a little better.
Ralph Volkman, Superintendent of the Public Works Dept., used to be in
the Parks Departement about 10 years ago, so he has a good knowledge
and experience in park operatio�. Ne felt that next year, they should
be able to see sane improvements, and that is their goal.
Mr. Kondrick stated he had had some concerns in the beginning about
this reorganization, but he now felt confident in the ability of the
City to make the adjustment and take care of the needs of the park areas.
He also fe7t the increased manpower was going to make a difference in
terms of how things were done.
Dr. Boudreau stated one important thing they have seen in the last month
and a half since they have switched over is that the nitpicking and
bickering back and forth between divisions has been reduced. This is
going to make the people work more as a team, that it is the C9tT
responsibility, and not just the Park's responsibility, or Water s
responsibility, or Sewer's responsibility, etc.
Dr. Boudreau stated that in the month and a half they have been getting
to know this new operation a little better. he has seen an overall more
efficient operation.
OLD BUSINESS:
Naming Park - Rice Creek School
Mr. Flora stated the street adjacent to the new park area is Creek
Park Lane. The name of the plat is Creek Ridge Plat.
MOTZON BY MR. YOUNG� SECONDED BY 1�2. ALLEIJ� TO RECOMMEND TO CZTY
COUNCIL THAT THE NEW PRRX BE NAMED CREEK RIDGE PARK.
UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED
TXE MOTION CARRIED UllANIMOUSLY.
b. Meeting Dates for 1985
Dr. Boudreau stated the Cormnission members had a list of tentative
meeting dates for 1985. These meeting dates were all on Mondays.
He stated Mr. Flara will not be able to attend the Comnission meetings
�,
CITY OF FRIDLEY
� PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
MEETING
DECEMBER 18, 1984
CAIL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Kondrick called the December 18, 1984, Parks & Recreation
Corimission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Dave Kondrick. Dick Young, Dan A11en
Members Absent: Mary Schreiner, Steve Nelson
Others Present: Charles Boudreau, Recreation Uirector
Jack Kirk, Recreation Supervisor
John Flora, Public Works Director
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 20. 1984, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOPION'BY MR. ALLEN� SECONDED BY MR. YDUNG� TO APPROVE TXE NOV. 20� 2984�
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSZON MINUTES AS WRITTEN,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRSED UNRNIb10USiY.
1. DIRECTOR'S REpORT:
Dr. Boudreau had no items to report at this time.
2. NEW BUSINESS:
a. Meet John Flora, Public Works Director
Mr. Kondrick introduced Mr. Flora to the Comnission members.
Mr. Flora stated that as the Commission had learned at the last
meeting; they are in the protess of doing some reorganizing and
restructuring within the City. As part of this reorganization, they
looked at and agreed to combine a71 the maintenance facilities and
activities under Public Works. By doing this, they will have all the
49'er Union members under one organization. They will have all the
people who report out of the garage under one supervisor, and they
wiil have all the maintenance and dispatch vehicles, procurement,
repair, and replacement all under one supervisor. So, there should
be a lot of economies of operatian from this, plus essentially they
have expanded the work force. Instead of six men in the parks, they
now have 44 men,
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 13, 1984 PAGE 6
ADJOURNMEN7:
Chairperson Comners declared the December 13, 1984, Housing & Redevelopment
Authority meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
� �
y e a a
Recording Secretary
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETI��G, DECEMBER 13, 1984 PAGE 5
Mr, Bill Walter, President of Heartland Realty Investors, Inc., stated that
in addition to the $350,000, they are expending another $40,000 with the
Champion Store and Snyders has agreed to expand and redo their entire store,
so the expenditure there was another $150,000.
Mr. Walter stated they have spent a lot of time on this proposed development.
They have been very impressed with working with City Staff. They like doing
business in the City of Fridley and feel they are a spokesman for a large
number of the businesses lecated in the center. They are very enthused
about having the center upgraded. Their idea, over a period of time, is to
have the center be a first class professional place to do business. They
would like to create that image so they can attract tenants that will be
good, aggressive retail merchants, and be good for the City of Fridley.
Mr, Qureshi stated that regarding the acquisition of the gas station, Heartland
Realty has sent option money to Phillips to acquire it. In the agreement,
it is Neartland's responsibility to acq��ire the gas station. There is another
party who is trying to get approval for a tune-up shop in that location. This
party has applied to the Appeals Commission for variances, but the Appeals
Comnission has tabled the issue at this time.
Mr. Prieditis stated it was his personal opinion that the area where the gas
station is should be opened up, not only in terms of the total development,
but also for the benefit of the shopping center.
Mr. Comners asked Mr. Qureshi what the plan was for the intersection.
Mr. Qureshi stated they now have five lanes on Mississippi St., but it was
the City's hope to expand that to seven lanes. The City will have to present
this proposal to the County and work with the County, as the road is under
the control of the County.
Mr. Comners asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to
address the HRA regarding this development agreement between the HRA and
Heartland Realty.
There were no commments from the audience.
MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE� SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC NEARZNG.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING CIASED RT 8:25 P.M.
9. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION NO
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
MOTION BY MR. PP.IEDITSS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAZRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTFON
NO. XRA 20-1989� "A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND RUTHORT2ING THE EXECi7TION OF
A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH HEARTLAND REALTY INVESTORS� ZNC.� RESPECTING
THE HCLLY SHOPPING CENTER".
UPON A VOSCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAZRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTZON
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 13, 1984 PAGE 4
8. CONTINUED: PUBLIC
hl
AGREEMENT
MOTION BY MR. PP.AZRIE� SECONDED BY MR, PRZEDITZS� 2b OPEN THE PUBLIC NEARING.
OPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHAZRPEESON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC
XEARING OPEN RT 8:03 P.M.
Mr. Comners stated a development agreement with Heartland Realty Investors, Inc.,
has been discussed at several earlier meetings, and at the last meeting, the
HRA indicated an approval in concept of what was going to take place. At this
time, he would like Mr. Qureshi to again explain in some detail the proposed
project.
Mr, Qureshi stated they are basically trying to develop the same kind of
aesthetic environment in the Holly Shopping Center that the HRA has been able
to do in the southeast quadrant. The southeast quadrant is essentially complete.
He stated City Staff has been working with the new owners of the Holly Shopping
Center, Heartland Realty Investors, Inc., to create this new environment.
Over many months of discussion and negotiation, they have been Y�orking to
evolve an agreement with both parties. The City worked with Heartland Realty
to try to get scme low interest money through NUD. This was unsuccessful due
to certain HOD requirements they could not meet.
Mr. Qureshi stated the new proposal is essent�ally to renovate the existing
shopping center with a new facade, new signage scheme, and new pylon.
Mr. Qureshi stated he was sure everyone was aware that the intersection at
Mississippi and Highway 47 had a lot of traffic. The City's concern is how
to get the traffic off and on the main thoroughfare (Highway 47) in order to
get the traffic to the businesses in the shopping center. So, the City has
been working with the County on how to improve this intersection and provide
some additional turning lanes to better faci7itate traffic movement.
Mr. Qureshi stated that along the shopping center, there is presently no
landscaping and vegetation, and it was the Gity's hope that they are going
to develop the same kind of environment as that on the southeast quadrant,
that they do some additional landscaping and also develop some access.
Because the City would 'ue taking some right of way along Mississippi St., it
would eliminate some parking spaces in the center. One approach in the pro-
prosed development is that the abandoned gas station be acquired by Heartland
Realty and, in turn, the HRA will acquire it from Heartland, take it down,
and replace some of the parking that will be lost due to the widening and
landscaping proposed in the development.
Mr. Qureshi stated that as part of the development, Heartland agrees to
expend up to $350,000 for improvement to the center, about �250,000 willbe within
their own buildings and property, and they are willing to accept up to $100,000
for any landscaping and public improvements next to their property.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 13, 1984 PAGE 3
The HRA members indicated they agreed with the concept.subiect to further
review and analysis before approval at the next meeting. Mr. Commers stated
the commissioners could review this in a little more detail at the next meeting.
They could even meet with City Staff or Mr. Jim Casserly, Miller-Schroeder,
if they had any further questions.
4. FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Mr. Inman stated the HRA members had tfie financial statement for Jan. 1-
Dec. 13, 1984, and a bill for city expenses in the amount of $3,462.11.
MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE� SECONDED BY MR, PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE THE FINANCIRL
SSATEMENT DATED JAN. I- DEC. 13, 1984�AND TO AUTNORIZE PAYMENT TO THL' CITY
OF 53,462.11.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRPERSQV COMAfERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRZED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. CHECK REGISTER:
Mr. Commers stated the HRA had actually approved the check register along
with the financial statement.
6. RECEIVE 1985 SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS:
The NRA raembers concurred with their ]985 meeting schedule,
7. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Memo from Legal Counsel Regarding the Relocation of Overhead Cable to
Underground Cable by 5torer Cable Communications
Mr. Newman stated his legal opinion did not agree with Storer's inter-
pretation of the franchise agreement, and he supported City Staff's
recommendation that the relocation had to be at Storer's expense. His
primary basis for his opinion was that at the last meeting, Mr. Wegemer
of Storer Cable had made reference to the franchise agreement; but, in
addition, there is an ordinance that authorizes the franchise agreement.
The ordinance is quite clear that any relocation of lines should be at
the expense of the franchisee.
Mr. Qureshi stated the City ha� supplied copies of Mr. Newman's legal
to Mr. Wegemer and the CATV Corrmission members on Nov. 15,
Mr. Cortmers stated that since this item had not been formally put on the
agenda, the HRA could wait to see if there was any response from Storer.
If Storer does respond to Mr. Newman's memo, they could put this on the
agenda `or consideration at their next meeting.
The HRA members received Mr. Newman's memo into the record.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETIt7G, DECEMBER 13, 1984 PAGE 2
Mr. Comners stated that in the third paragraph of the first page of the
lease agreement, it stated: "At the end of the three year lease period,
the parties shall have the option of exercising one year extensions upon
mutually agreeable tettns."
Mr. Commers stated the HRA was willing to enter into the lease and extend it
if there was no development going on, but he would not want it to be a manda-
tory type of thing,
Mr. Inman stated he would have no problem with changing that statement in
some way.
Mr. Prieditis suggested that the word "shall" be deleted and replaced with
the word "may".
The HRA members agreed on the following change: "At the end of the three
year lease period, the parties m� exerci5e a one year extension upon mutually
agreeable terms."
Mr. Inman stated tnere was an invitation in the agenda packet regarding the
liquor store`s grand opening on Fri., Dec. 14, and Sat., Dec. 15.
MOTION BY AfR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRZEDITIS, TO APPROVE THE LEASE OF
THE HARDGIARE BUILDING BETWEEN TH£ HRA AND TNE CITY OF FRZDLEY RS AMEn'DED AND
SUBJECT TO THE LZABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE.
UPON A VQICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTSON
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. DISCUSSION REGARDING REFINANCING OF BONDS:
Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA members had received information that sumnarized
this whole issue. He reviewed this information with the HRA.
Mr. Qureshi stated it was Staff's recommendation that the HRA proceed with
refunding. It did give the HRA additional flexibility and additional options.
If the HRA does wish to bond, there is certainly a sizeable savings over the
life of the bonds.
Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA could officially consider this at their next
meeting, but Staff would like the HRA to approve in concept the approach of
going with the refunding along with additional $1/2 miltion in bonding and
prepare the paperwork for the end of February sale. Staff would then bring
the final documentation for final approval at the January meeting.
Mr. Prieditis stated he would go along with Staff's recommendation. He could
see nothing but benefits witfi this.
Mr. Rasmussen stated he had no problem with the concept, but he had not had
time to review this information thoroughly,
CITY OF FRIDLEY
NOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MEETING
DECEMBER 13, 1984
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Commers called the December 13, 1984, Housing & Redevelopment
Authority meeting to order at 7:06 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Larry Commers, Elmars Prieditis, Duane Prairie, Walter Rasmussen
Members Absent: Carolyn Svendsen
Others Present: Nasim Qureshi, HRA Director
Sid Inman, City Finance Director
Dave Newman, City Attorney
Bill Haub, Moss & Barnett, i200 Pillsbury Center, Mpls.
Bill Walter, Heartland Realty Invest�rs, Inc.
Rolf Johnson, Merrill Lynch Realty, Robbinsdale
Jim Casserly, Miller-Schroeder
APPROUAL OF NOVEMBER 8, 1984, HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTNUTES:
MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY bfR. PRAIRIE, TD APPROVE THE NOV. 8, 1984,
NOUSIN6 6 REDEVET-0PMENT AUTXORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTII7G AYE� CHASRPERSON CONMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARI?IED UNANZMOUSLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Qureshi stated that for some reason the notice of public hearing had
been published stating that the public hearing was at 8:00 p.m, instead
of 7:00 p,m. He suggested the corranission mem6ers continue with the other
agenda items and return to this item at 8:00 p,m.
2. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF LEASE OF HARDWARE BUILDING (214 MISSISSIPPI ST.)
Mr. Comners stated that since the HRA was the owner of the property, what
was the status with respect to liability insurance for the HRA. Was the HRA
named on the poticy? The HRA was a separate corporation so the City should
be sure the HRA was named on the policy.
Mr. Inman stated he would check into it.
What's 5.3 lbs., every day,
� for every person in region?
BY Sandr� 5. Gartlebrim .
It's 5.3 pounds. E.ery day. Fa Mry
ungle womaq mm anC child in thc
Twin Citin Mettopoliun Area. �
Two million tons of il is geMrated e�ery
yeu in the MeVOpoliun Area. Truh,
prbage, solid wasu—whau�er yw c+ll
it, our onlY' N�w6ht has been m ihrow
it �w�y. We're fnally sutting to
mlizt [hert Sim01Y ii na mat "aray,•,
The places we OumO ��. Called uninry
qndfills, arc npidly fillinp uD.
S�in have been locaud fw mae
land�lls—bul no on<'s happy abwit
Mem, last of all the mnl awners whose
I�nd has been daignaled Dotential siccs.
They w�l it a waste of gooA (umland.
Md they point ro the almost inwiuble
problcm down Ne road of lan�ll
dnimge DolWtingaur undttg�ound
wat<r wOP��es. These negntires reprexnt
two of Ne hiEden cosn of lan�lls.
A GREAT OPPORTUNITY
But imtead of fretting any mwe abou[
fie horrendous Droblem o� what to do
with solitlwastt, [he Mevopoliun
Council has swung around to sedng it as
agmatoppar[uniry. - .
For starters, it's an opPorwniry for
this MetroDOliVn Ara to ht �irsc in th<
Ntion once �gz�n'. the firsc to smp
disposing o( nw garbage in IandLlis.
Wdre workin` (or a �er' law ihat says �
.�"' �t' "'�•
� �- '�
t' �
� ��
� 4M�5.6wi'erM '
that ey 1990 a�l vuh mmt be or«essed
in some waY �fat il can {o into a
landfill.
For Na[ law m work, most of us are
6oing ro h�ve lo cAange the way wc �
openu. A�d so will Me w�ol< garOagc
hauling business.0ur bywords arc
{oing fo be rcduce, rscyde, reuse,
neavalixe, Drxess and incinerate. '
Why do we ne<d a law? Gn't C�oC��
«cyde md reuu Ihings voluntatily?
The mtire <iry� of MinneaDolis has frtt -
pickaD of rrcycla6le m�ttrials on<e
� month. But how man)' uke ativanug<
of ilt The avrnge monthly D�rticipa[ion
nu is 70 to 25 p�rcent.
NOT SEEN�AS URGENT
Apparcndy most peaDle don't xe
recyciing as really and vuly neceivry, "
and urUinly nat as urgent. It will
proWbly uke � �iw ro make Uut point
stick.
People who haul away your vuh for a
living don't all like the new aDProach,
either. Nor do O�oO�e who own and
operale IanQ(ills. � keep ecp�aining Mat
wx're not [ry�ing lo Dut any af �<m
out of business.
Waste will sull need to bc hauled away.
It'll just havr m go [o a differmt D�ace:
to a Dlan� Nat tums vash into heat
or decvicitY, a that converts garbage
into cam0ost. Glass and meuls will
pe yorud oui and r<cyded Uefore [he
vash is procesud furNer.
Landfills will still be need<d—just not
u rtunY ot Nem. We'll still h�ve lo bury
�e ashes left from burning vash
(unless � uu an be fwnd for Ne ash,
Wu). But we'�� n�king two or Nree
Mw Iand�Ills by i00� insuad of a
dozen or mwc. -
Md wdrt ulking �bwt a totally new
aiti W dr where landfills bewm< Ihe
bs! lhin{ we do wi[h Vash, no[ the first.
We nted to rcmember Nat we ie all in
Ihis toge[her. If wc don'[ riu m Ihe
challenge, wc and our children will bc
facing Oallution o/ a+r drinking-waW
y�pplies and unimaBimA dunup
<tpenus a few short dewdes down ihe
road. Even though processing cosu
mae, in direct wsa, than Iandfiiling,
Ne rul puestion is whe� YW G�Y ��o�'
ar law.
But I'm wnfi0mt wc71 mec[ fie
challenga &�auu I'm w�fident that
whm Twio Ci[ians underst�nd what's
ihe ri�t Ming m do, theY � it.
When that happens, wc will wIY have
accomp�ished something fa our
p�vironment and fa outulves.
5qnething W point to with pride wh<n
(he rest of Ne wunVy uks, "How
� did you do ic?"
r�
; MEMO DATE: January 4, 1985
MEM� T0: Department Reads, Community Development Commission, and Planning
Commission _
l�MO FAOlS: Jim Aobinson, Planning Coordinator
REGARDING: 1985 Community Development Block Crant (CDBG) Proposala
It�a time once again Lo consider and propose projects for use of our 1985
CDBC funds. This year's allocation is E128,077 as compared with a127,8�0 for
196+� .
7g84 monies vere designated for Plaza Center Improvements (E107,263), Human
Services (=19,077), and Administration of 312 Funds (E1,500). The Plaza
Center funds are to be used for relocatioo of overhead poxerlines under
ground xith any r�aining funds being used to improve the Mississippi Street
boulevard adjacent to Target Northern Operations Center.
For 7985 Staff has prepared a li�t of possible pro�ects for your
consideration. These suggestions include 15X (Z19,176) to Human Services,
Plaza Center PuDlic Improvements, Curbside Recycling Subsidy and Riverview
Heights Park Development. The attached list highlights the possible optlons.
Of particular interest in Plaza Center is the implementation of the "Four
Corners Design Competition" winning concept. Curbside Recycling, if
implemented, would involve a monthly subsidy of approximately =800/month and
could be funded as an economic development (�oDs) program. Funding the
construction of Lhe Riverviex Helghts Park project Lhis year may also be
desirable, particularly if a LAWCON grant can be obtained to further finance
this pro�ect. CDGB monies could be used, as Sn the past, to provide the 50S
matching funds if LAWCON funds are received.
Aa the implementation atatus of the above mentioned proJects is uncertain to
varying degrees, it would be to our advantage to prioritize these options.
IL is possible Lo submit a proposal which xonld include all of the afore-
mentioned projects and later as our needs became more clear designate our
final choices. This course of action �ould give us flexibility and avoid the
need for a Public Hearing later in the process should xe decide Lo include
one of these items xhich xas not included in our initial choices.
At this time xe are asking for input from the various commissions and the
departmental heads, to be fonrarded to the Council. In reviexing this matter
it vould be desirable to adhere to Lhe folloxing schedule:
January 8, 7965 - Community Development Commission
January 2j, 7985 - Planning Commission
February 4, 1g85 - City Council
February 15, 7985 - SuDm1t a grant request to County.
Enclosed please flnd a past year�s CDBG Pro�eet Summary, 1985 Project
Proposals, a 1985 CDBG Aork Schedule and a map of eligible Fridley Census
Tracts.
�
POTENTZAL CDBG PA0.TECT5
i. 15� to Human Services Grants - 19,776 (108,664)
2. Plaza Center Projects
a. Four Corner Landmark - Design Implementation
b. Area Directional Signage
c. Mississippi Boulevard Landscape and Sidewalk Improvements
d. Utility Improvements (underground power) from University Avenue
to Main Street.
3• Curbside Recycling Program/Subsidy (Economic Development - Jobs Creation.
b. Development of Riverview Neights Park (Hatching funds to possible 1965
LANCON Funds.)
5. Any pro�ect benefiting designated low and moderate income census trac,ts
on attached map. (park project, street improvement, etc.) _
ANOKA COUNTY
19E3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
pORKSCHEDULE
Nov. 1 - Dec. !4
Dec. 14 - Jan. 1 S
7an.15 Feb.15
Feb. 15 - Mar. IS
Mar. iS - Apr. 8
Apr. 9
Apr. 12 - Apr. 19
Apr. 19
May 14
May 15
Initial discussions among local staff/elected officials
concerning new projects.
City/County discussions about new projects. (Time
to resolve eligibility, etc.)
My locai public hearings.
City develops and submits grant request to County.
County assists cities/towns to refine project
application requests(gathering local data,supporting
material, etc.)
County develops final grant request including all
city/town project cequests, HAP, goals, objectives,
and budget.
County Board Public Hearing.
Complete final grant writing and publishing.
' Publish.
County Board reviews final document.
Submit grant request.
��
��
��
��
�Z
��
��
W'\�
r/ X
r
� �i
� �
��
��
�((��
u1 s�
V
-�T�_
� ....�r._......
v :�"
-_ +,L:. ;:.i
` ° _ �' Y
� `� T�,:� ��2
� _ _-� � - _ �;
o_q, _ �
3 ,'�_ , �'.�I�
\\ _ 1 �i. j, iI I
� 4 - il l
�
� � �'
�A.
s
. t� �r�m��v �- � �
�a. �
_ •••• •. VMwO KHDOL
-' �"�"� ORfnCTB _ 0611KTL
�� ��
. __= �c '� I —
� ' 4._ •• �L �
� � __ � '�
� - -_ � i �-
; ---
IJ ��� -: _ "
�j� �
__ ., f�� �.� � "�. �1
� . !I �I�I:.�._ �__ - � .
\ p
i ` .�1_�' =i1
u
N 1 ✓� " 'i _S
V 4
�� : � �_�"� � '
w� _.r•�e � F; I
.,�,. � __ , — �,
s �' �', __- _T�°s
-- - � `i # =_i. :�
I = =�4-7: a`-
6 �- '� _-' ', i
� _ : ��� �`
�°
� -- _ - _
. . ,_ ,°
-�,-- -= _ _ .., �
1
�
/ ~ i�= ` '
��y,�� � �.j =
�
',j �,� --�
��:
;. ` �=
i 024� "�
�'�—_ ; , .
�:}�;\ . .i J
i.��v\i t �I �
r
� B `:.' �, � i -
� i��.��..._, . i
/��:-.,'='.�,''I ' — {�-
� _ .` sf�
U -
:� � r
, —
�,. : ;. 1 � � � �'�_
s;._� ---
- M�� . j' �
_ -` /�y/� �i
�l ' ' c.- �
� �)�� _
,, N �'�� `. T � _ �i
�
...1.
--�i �_ ....,�
/� .� .` (�:.:":.
���'�, ' r,��
� ' _�.�......L� .
�;r,.-- �' :- ry►
��q q � , ,-_"
;��-,_ !_. .�
1
- ��• _-==�`°'------ _--�
_ �•:: -- �_• - --
�=� =` = • "` __:: - -•-=-�-, � _
�: _ ' =e - .." — _
�-= = —'' _ :_: =_
' C S�� O ��Ll ' t�: �
C��'. . :. . . __
_ E tCCI i C�L ��
L . • Cti �
z�� _ �_:,e ==� = _ '____` -- —
- °--•'-._ _ � �__: _ -- -
q_• __ _-- , �-_•_: �,{ -- =- -_
--- - _= a —_ -_ __
� _— _" g c': ' Ea�. `- zo. '
_' - = F� "c �ti. _ E_ '
" �=: :-" F _: =
°=— `_c�c a" _ :r. ""o _'_c
"' a - � _ _ = c=. _ � �iTi:."s _ _'"
' L: ' CC�l C ��' .. 4 �
.�� C�'. L �i� �� �- � ��: � �� �
_ � � � � •
� Y�[ C _�
- � _ � � _ � _
_ _ _ S�
_ �.•• ` . . ' _
' _ � O:. � ��: c .�-.
_ E_� _ �
$TREET MAP—UTY OF w= '
�L��
FRIDLEY = =_
_ -- • _--�--- " ._ �=_—°
�
:
O
r �
!
CDBG 19E1
TOfLL
CIRG 1982
., /,
f
cnac no].ce a�.r�
Orl{SC�l 1n3��C 1Cainiet�rio` m�iroseetal G�Le
►ro]ect �ue FsDer 4ount Youtt 4eoe� 4�1N WDletad ef Ca�Gletlon Cawnea
Gec�r CSC1 lep. I 7t8 � 2l0.00o I U� ` r,�iain w� Oune 79. 19et I ADt. i9. 19�t I hoyercr icpul��e
' I 2l0.000 I 41 I I I I
Ibon I.J�e I 23o I tt1.23z I -a I[riGln 8u I�ot CapletW ho�•ot Cuwlea� R1tea to {et
11eunEr� Xour 221 10.000 70.U00 lnaka Wuut,
Iepulsltlon
�1��anEn Bou�e 221 Vl 10.000 �mk� Count.
��MD.
Center CSy
��aw.�uon tze v� jo.000 rriai.� au
Iwen.eix,nairav
Re[ro FS[/ Ce�+Nt7
Yotnerls�tiao 229 �/� Ti,23� �etloo fro�
I Nousie� Iletroflt Ca�unit�
I� Ye�t�e�is�tloe i2y l5.60o E3,70a �ecioo !m�
II�nE1aDM4
lcce�a3D111t� CSt) of
StuC) �/1 2,500 rr101q
To7Y, I ( I t06,132 � 206,63i I
CDBC 1983 I Ecoorm3c Dev. I I I Cit� of
I StuOy/Cencer CS[y 3ZB 15.000 -0- Ir3Ele7
• i Tr�tflc S[uEy I CSt) o!
' lbore IaYe 379 7.00D 7,000 trialey
� Dr�1o�6e 5[uE� � Clt� of
i Mortn !ru 3I9 7.DOU -0. frlElq
i
i
� SeKOr Ibusle� CSC) of
� xoii aer seuey 330 7,000 -a ►raaie�
NE11e hcSlltio I CSL) oC
B�rr1<r Rwoval 331 75,000 25,000 lrlQley
IB�rrier Pwoval CSt� of
Loan Pro�rac 331 50,D00 -O- ��SElq
� co..��oau x�e,e. aer or
� Lo�ns-AWe�Ipn[� 332 1T.663 -0- �riEle�
i
�
' x�..n se�vso..� cic� er
� helie ►undluS 333 17.631 77.631 ►riEl��
` Ri�er�lev 8eltEtsl � � CSt� et
` lep. Pn�ect � Vl 115,700 � RSGln
� C1t) of
(53,T50� rriaiy
Il�rketio6 IYterlal�
far PeCe�eloPent Cit) of
DisC�let � VL 11,SQ3 h'SQlq
TOSLL
JoDa 8i:1 -
I I 776,3t� � t76.3t� I
Lake C10�rl�l I�9�56� � -0- I Cit7 0(
►riGlq
leva
s� a rr.ti
i�Dro�seOL CSL� Of
Ml�et V� t9�56� fri6lq
20lu. � ' I ►9.56� i �9�56► !
i
202 f1n0a few
69�
V� Ca�D1ttW IqE2 Pe�inetl tAe �Ye
\a �pDro�b 2/VQ
VI Ca�D1eLW 19E2 �ppror�E rnS�lon
�fter /230 ns
OroDD�6 on 1/3�/!
�pproveE r�l�lon
�N [o�Dlet�O 1903 �fter @30 v�•
aoPae o� iiz�it
�vvro�•a rwlslon
•Cter �230 v�a
VI Ca�Pleted 1983 OroDD�a on 1/N/B
Sl�if[ of fun0a an
�N Ca�plcteE 1983 B/9/Bt for SD�
�tuEy
501 icuEy funCe -
�eifcea fr'm I2i9
Vl Co�pleteC 7983 on 8/9/B2
■/A
1/l
V�
t/A
V�
UA
v�
U1
Drop pro�eet to
�aa �aaaeionai
pro)ecte
Mo cl�an6e ic
Dro�ecc
DroD D�o,7ect to
•ea �aaltional
p�oJecte
Drop Dro]ect to
aEa .ealsional
proJecte
No eli�nge
So proJect
Drop Dro)ecc to
�Oa �dEltlonQ
proJecte
DroD DroJeet ta
.ea aaaicio�ui
DroJ�cte
No cn�rge
Sv PnJeet
Mi proJeet .eaea
� Mev yro)ec[ �OEeG
I
�
i
►»�ect � i0I PunCSrg ru
Gncelled � �[ �DVro�r[
�
Iler DroJeet �EOeE
►ro¢ct
_ j CCeG 19
7QfLL
3�ei,i,�
ic S�ivioe
N�t��tlOn o!
�unGs
ecac no�.ac a�.� pAG� �a•
Or1{SUl �n1aW �Oa1n1�C�rios �iros�oC�l dN
�Eer Yount yQyp� nc) IItr1�v CapletW of CaP]
�2B t09.000 1%,263 C1t7 of June tg, 190t
lrlAlq
��3 �9,210 19,M7 Cit� ot �/1
��SQlq
-O. 1.500 Clt� of U!
RSElq
ue,zio � in.e�o
er6*ouna Clec-
e�l 11.O.Y.
cn�ae
��n{e in
]�M
Pro]w[ l00�C
�
37
!lENO T0: Planning Commission
MEMO FROM: James Robinson, Planning Coordinator
MEMO DATE: January 17, 1985
RE: PossiDle Revision of Sign Ordinanee
At present, Staff is researching the possibility of revising the City's
Sign Ordinance. This action is considered aecessary due to some apparent
ambiquity.
The primary concerns xe Peel need addressing are:
1. The status of a sign variance upon replacement of the atructure, change
of tenant or oxner/
2. The atatus oP legal non-conforming signs upon change of tenant or
owner, particularly when part of an overall sign plan.
3• The restriction of free standing pylon sign sSze to 80 square feet in
area per development.
All three of these items have recently been the subject of debate regarding
specific properties.
In response to these three issues xe are considering the folloxing
solultions respectively:
1. The tightening of sign variance duratSon to the immediate sign antl
tenant/owner.
2. Aemoval oP a legal non-conforming status upon change of the message
displayed upon the sign, or tenant/oxner.
3• Revising the Lotal square footage far a free standing sign area alloxed
per developoment to De more sensitive to the wide range of development
types (i.e. multiple tenant center vs. singular operations) and total
area of the lot and/or structure and street frontage.
Issue #3 seems t4e most complex. Should a large multi-use business be
restrieted to the same pqlon size as a small single business and if a
business is permited one sign per street frontage should the total of all
signs be 80 square feet or 80 aquare feet per sign7
He are suggesting that you consider these issues and advise Staff of your
desire. Ne srill continue our researeh of other City's slgn codes and
prepare a comparative analysis for qour reviex.
JLR/de
3/5/19/2
Memo xo. 85-03
ua. sic�s
(Ref. 318, 330� 344� 382, 438, 666� 672� 799)
(This (hapter has been reoodified as of March 1, 1984 and includes all
m�s�3rents to the Qiapter enacted by the City Council prior to said date)
(Second Reading: February 15, 1984)
214.01. PURP06E
Rbe pu�pose of this Q�apter is to protect and promote the public
health, safety and general welfare of the City of Fridley through
the establishment of a comprehensive and impartial set of
regulations governing the erection, disglay and use of si�s servin9
as a visual media to persons upon public or private properties.
These regulations are intended to provide an opportunity for
effective conmumication, allow a reasonable freedom of choice and
promote a concern for the visual amenities on those people
desicg�ing, disglaying, erecting or utilizing sicy�s while at the same
time assuring that the public health, safety and general welfare of
the City is preserved.
214.02. DEFINTTIal3S
The following words and terms, whecever they occur in this Chapter,
are defined as follows and shall apply in its interpretation and
application:
1. Abandoned Sic�.
A si� which no longer correctly advertises a bona fide business,
lessor, ownec, activity, use or product available on the premises
where the sicp� is disglayed for a continuous period of more than
three (3) ironths.
2. Address Sicg�.
A sign consisting of numbers or numbers and a street name,
identifyin9 the address of a building.
3. Advertising Sic�.
A sic� which is used to advertise products, goods, uses or services.
4. Alteration.
Any major change, excluding routine maintenance, of an existing
si�.
5. Area Identification Sic�.
A sig� which identifies the name of a neighborhood, a residential
subdivision, a multiple residential complex or a business or
industrial area.
6. Banrers Md Pe�v�ants.
A temporazy sic� constructed of cloth, aanvass, paper, plastic f ilm
or light fabric.
. ..�.
.� � r
�
2ia.o2
214-1
7. Be�ch Si�.
A sicp� which is attached to a bench.
8. Billboard.
A sign advertising a business, pzoduct, service, use or
entectaim�t which is aorducted, sold or offeced somewhere other
than on the prenises where the sic� is located.
9. Q�an9eable Si�, Autanatic.
An electronically controlled sic,yi, including a time, tenperature or
date sic�r or a message center or a readerboard, where different
message changes are shown on tl�e same panel.
10. Qiangeable Sic�, Manual.
A sic,� on which the message is changed manually.
11. Construction Sic�.
A tesnporary sign erected at a construction site identifying the
project. It may include the name of the architect, engineer,
oontractor, financier or other information about the project.
12. District.
A zoning district as defined in Chapter 205, Zoning, of the City
Code.
13. Flashing Sic�.
An illuminated sign Which has intermittent flashing lights,
revolving beacons, zip flashers or exhibits a noticeable change in
color or li9ht intensity.
14. Free Standing Si�.
A sic� which is securely attached to the ground and not attached to
any �rt of a building or structure.
15. Goverr¢nental Sic�.
A sicy� which is erected by a governmental unit for the purpose of
directing or guiding traffic or prwiding public inforniation.
16. Illianinated Sicpi.
A sicy� which is illtaninated by an artificial light source.
17. information Sicy�.
A sicyr giving information or directions to employees, visitots or
delivery vehicles and containing no advertising. An information
sigi may display the name, address oz identifying symbol of the
business.
18. Institutional Sic�.
A sicy� which identifies a p�lic or private institution including
churches, schools, hospitals and medical clinics.
19. Motion Sicyt.
A sign whi�h revolves, rotates, has moving parts or gives the
illusion of motion.
�
zia.oz
214-2
20, Nonoonforminq Signr �1•
A sic� which lawfully existed prioL to the adoption of this Chaptet,
but does not canply with all requitenents of this Q�apter.
21. Pern�anent Sigi.
A sig� constructed of matetials including plastic or metal that are
durable and easily maintained, and which is intelxled to be used fot
an ir�definite period of time. Sicyis �inted directly on structures,
Wood or wood products are not authorized or included in this
detittition.
22. Political Sic�.
A temporary sign advertising election issues oz the candidacy of a
person rtmning for public office.
23. Portable Sign.
A temporary si� 3esic,y�ed to be moved fran one location to another
and which is not permanently attached to the ground� a sign
structure ot a building.
24. Porta-�xinel.
A portable sic,y�, mo�mted on wheels and used for commercial as well
as civic pranotions.
25. Projecting Sign.
A sign attached to a wall, that pzojects perpendicular from a
building oc structure.
26. Real Estate Sic�.
A tenporacy sign erected for the purpose of selling, leasin9 oi
pranoting real estate.
27. Roof Sic�.
A sicp� which is erected, constructed or attached above the coof line
of a building, except where the roof is an extended facade or
mansard.
28. Aa�m�age/Garage Sale Sicyi.
A tenporary sicy� which advertises oc directs the public to the sale
of used merchandise, sold fran a private residence.
29, 5hopping CenteL/Multiple Use Building.
A building planned and developed for �ltiple occupanc.y whethet as a
ornm�ercial or industrial use.
30. Sig►.
A painted panel, lettered board, series of letters or symbols or
othet display and any supporting structure used to advertise,
dicect, identify, inform or oorrvey a message to arsyone who views it.
31. Sic� Area.
She area of a sicgi, including the bordez and the surface which bears
the advertisanent. In the case of inessages, figures oc symbols
attached directly to arfy Fart of a builcling oc sic� structure, it is
40
214.02
214-3
that area which is included in the snallest geometric f igure which
can be made to cizcianscribe the message, figure or synibol.
32. Sign Psea, Maximan.
�e maximtan allowable sign area for a single faced free standing
sig� refers to that single facing. When a free standing sign has
muitiple faces, ther� the maximian allowable si� acea doubles.
33. Sicy� Structtue.
Any structure which supports or is cag�ble of supporting a sic�, but
not including a building to which a si� is attached.
34. manporary Si�.
Any si�, bannerr pennant, valance or advertising display intended
to be disglayed foc a limited period of time.
35. Wall Graphic.
A graphic design oz decorative mural, not intended foc
identification or advertisin9 purposes, which is painted dicectly on
the exterior surface of a buildin9.
36. Wall Sic�.
A si� which is attached to the wall of a building or structure.
37. Window Sic�.
A sicy� attached to the inside of a window for the purpose of viewing
frpn outside the bui2ding. Zttis term does not include merchandise
located in a windaw.
214.03. G�I, PfbWISICkLS F'Odt AI.L DISIRICIS
�e following provisions shall apply to Sections 214.04 thcough
214.07. Any sicy� shall be wnstructed in su� a maivier and of such
material that it will be safe and substantial. Nothing in this
Chapter shall be interpreted as authozizing the ecection or display
of any si� not naa permitted under Q�apter 205 ot the City Code.
214.04. SIC�1S P'R(HIBITID IN ALL DIS�tICIS
1. Any pernenent sic�s, other than goverrnnental signs, erected or
displayea upon any right of way or public pzoperty.
2. Any signs or wall graphics that contain words or pictures of
obsoene, pornographic or immral charactez.
3. Any signs painted ditectly on buildin9s.
4. Any si�s which by reason of size, location, mwenent, content,
ooloring or mannet of illianination may be confused with the light of
an aoergency or road equignent vehicle, a traffic sign, signal or
device oc which hides fran view ar►y traffic sicp�, sic�al or devioe.
5. Any projecting sicyis.
6. Any motion sicy�s.
7. Any flashing sicpis.
41
214.04
o- i�• .
•,� r
c+
-.� r »
214-4
� 8. P�ny si�s located within a corner vision safety zone as def ined
` in Qiaptez 205.
214.05. SIC�15 PF.RMITPID IN ALL DI-S'II2i�5
Z, address Sigis.
gac3i dwelling, business or building must have a minimum of one (1}
address sic�, that is a minim�nn of three and one-half (3-1/2) inches
hic� and a maxim�sn of tti+enh'-four (24) inches high. The sign must
be illuninated oc reflective and visible from the public right of
�Y •
2, Bench Sic�s.
, Disglayed only at bus stops and cannot be any largec than or extend
beyond any portion of t2�e besch.
3. Flags.
Shall be disglayed as outlined in Title 36, Section 173-378 of the
United States Code, State Flag and Corporate Flag.
4. Gwerrmental Si�s.
5. Infosmational Sic�s.
Prwided they meet the follaring requirenents:
A. A maximan size of fau (4) aquare feet in area.
B. A minim�an distance of ten (10) feet from any property line
or driveway.
6. Institutional Sicy�s.
Prwided they meet the following cequiranents:
A. A maximian size of thizty-two (32) square feet in area.
B. A minimun distance of ten (10) feet fran any propetty line
or drivc�ray.
C. A hospital er+ergency sign may be a maxim�an of 100 sguare
feet in area.
r �. a r�... n �r•. >� � � ►• �.
1. Construction Sicyis.
A. Multiple Developnents. Caistruction signs may be erected
for the purpose of identifying a development of ten (10) or more
dwellings, ten (10) or more mobile homes, three (3) or more
multiple dwellin9s, or a building consisting of three (3) or
aace businesses or industries, with the following restrictions:
(1) One (1) sis� per street frontage.
(2) A maximan size of fifty (50) square feet in area per
develognent.
(3) Located no closer than 100 feet to a building outside
the developaent.
n�
• �•. a�
a r�`�•�_�'
n
• a•, y�
42
214.06
214-5
(4) A mini�an distance of t� (10) feet from any property
line or driveway.
(5) To be tenoved upon oanpletion of the wnstruction.
B. Other Developrents.
- (1) One (1) sicyi per building.
(2) A maximan size of six (6} square feet in area.
(3) A miniman distance of ten (10) feet from any property
line or dziveway.
(4) Zb be zenoved upon campletion of the construction.
Z, Real Estate Sicyis.
A. Multiple Developnents. Real estate si�s may be erected for
the purpose of selling, leasing oc pranoting develognent of ten
(10) or more dwellings, ten (10) or more mo�bile hames, three (3)
or more multiple dwellings or a building consisting of three (3j
or more businesses or industries, with the following
restrictions:
(1) One (1) si�n pez street frontage.
(Zi A maximsn size of fifty (50) square feet in azea per
development.
(3) Located no closer than 100 feet to a building outside
of the develognent.
(4) To be renoved when the project is ninety-five percent
(958) sold or leased.
(5) A minimian distance of ten (10) feet from any property
line or driveway.
B. Other De�velog�nts.
(li One (1) sicyi per twilding.
(2) A maxinarn size af six (6) square feet in area.
(3) 7b be renwed within five (5) days following the sale
or lease of the building. '
(4) A minimian distance of t� (10) feet from any ptopezty
line or driveway.
(5) "Open House" si�s are allowed only during the day of
the open house.
3. Political Sicyis.
A. A maximtan size of thirty-two (32) square feet in area.
g, Rb be renared within five (5) days following the election.
C. Fifteen do2lazs (515.00) will be deposited with the City
piiot to the etection of any si�s and tetained �mtil all af the
si�s are renwed. If all of the signs aze not zemoved, the
deposit will be used to deftay the cost of removal. Any
additional cost will be billed to the person posting the
original deposit.
43 .
214.06
214-6
D. Any si�,larger than three (3) squaze feet in area must be
glaced a minuman distance of ten (10) feet from a stceet curb
and ten (10) feet fran any driveway.
4, I3m�ge/Garage Sale Sicyis.
!�. A maximm size of three i3) equare feet in area.
B. Zb be renoved witi�in three (3) days follaaing the sale.
5. Banners or Fpnnants.
A. Banners or pennants commemorating a special event not
connected with a business, aze pezmitted when installed not more
than twenty-five (25) days priot to the evesrt and renoved within
five (5) days follo+ving the event.
B, Banners or pennants for business anniversaries ot grand
openings are allaaed only for a maximmi of ten (10) days.
� a � •�•� o-i �: •;. �ti •�•.�►
1. Autanatic changeable sicy�s are permitted in all districts except
residential distcicts, and then only after the issuance of a special
use peLmit subject to the follaying minitrenn conditions:
A. Conformance to the sicyi requiren�ts within that distzict.
g, �e message shall not change more than once every fifteen
(15) minutes except for a sign displaying time, temperature
� and/or date.
2. Billboards.
214.d8. SPDCIFIC DIS'IItIGT RFJQUIRI]`tEN15
In addition to those sic�s permitted in all districts, the following
sic�s aze permitted in each specific district and shall be regulated
as to type, size, and setback according to the following
requirenents.
214.09. TYPFS, SIZFS, AtID SE18M1CS FOR RESIDFNPIAL DIS'IItICPS
1. Area Identification Sicy�s.
A. Q�e (1) si� per developnent.
B. A maxim�an size of twenty-four (24) square feet in area.
C. A minimun distance of ten (10) feet from any property line
or driveway.
2. Wall Sic�s.
H. Q�e (1) sic� per dwelling unit.
B, A maximian size of three (3) square feet in area.
44
214.09
� r• �.
r
y� 5• ?
. ;,.,
.,
� •
� ar r a i�
• a. �. � •�
�
214-7
214.10. TYPFS� SIZFS� At�ID SS�RS PttJ�t Q�1 DLSIItIC15
1. Atea Identification Sic,g�s.
A, One (1) si� per develognPnt.
- B. A maximIIn size of twenty four (24) square feet in area.
C. A minim� distance of t� (10) feet from any pcopecty line
or driveway.
2. Free Standing Si�s.
A. One (1) sicy� per street frontage.
B, A maximan size of forty-eight (48) squace feet in azea per
deve2o�t.
C. A maximian height of six (6) feet above the finished ground
grade.
D. A minim.m� distance of ten (10) feet fran any property line
or driveway.
3. Roof Sic�s,
A, O�e (1) sic� per develognent.
B, The use of a roof sign will substitute for the free standing
sic� along the street the roof sign is intended to be viewed.
4. Windaa Si�s.
A maximum coverage of forty percent (408) of the window area,
excluding merchandise.
5. Wall Si�s.
The total sign area shall not exceed fifteen (15) times the square
root of the wall length on which the sic� is to be placed.
6. Portable Si�s.
May be displayed aftec a permit is issued by the City. Permits are
limited to three (3) times pet year, pec business, and only for
nonconsecutive ten (10) day peziods.
214.11. TYPF.S, SI2F5, AND SEtBAf.RS PC)R C-1, C-2 AbID C-3 DIS'gtICIS
1. Area Identification Sic�s.
A. Aie (1) sic� per develognent.
B. A maximdan size of twenty-four (24) square feet in area.
C. A mini�raan distance of tai (10) feet fran any propecty line
or driveway.
2. Free Standing Signs.
A. Q�e (1) si� pez street frontage.
B. A maximinn size of eighty (80) square feet in azea per
c3evelognent.
••
� �•
C-1, C-2,
ADID C-3
DISIRICTS
45
214.11
214-8
46
214.12
C. A maximm height of twenty-five (25) feet above the finished
gro�d gzade.
D. A miniman height of ten (10) feet from the bottom of the
si9n to the firushed groimd grade when within twenty-five (25)
feet of a dciveway or a corner vision safety zone.
- E. A minimm distance of ts� (10) feet fcan any propezty line
or driveway.
g. A minurem distance of fifty (50) feet fran any residential
district.
3. Roof Sicy�s.
A. Qie (1) si� per developnent.
B, The use of a roof sic� will s�stitute for the free standing
si� along the street the roof si� is intended to be viewed.
4. Window Sicy�s.
A maximum covetage of forty percent (40B) of the window area,
excluding merchandise.
5. Wall Signs.
7tie total sicy� area shall not exceed fifteen (15) times the square
root of the wall length on which the sicyi is to be placed.
6. Portable Sic�s.
� May be displayed after a pecmit is issued by the City. Permits are
limited to thcee (3j times per yeat, per business and only for
nonconsecutive ten (10) day periods.
%. B111�OdZd.S.
Shall be peimitted only in the C-3 District within this Section.
S�aecific tequirenents are listed tmder Section 214.12.7.
214.12. TSCPFS, SIZFS AtID SEIDALXS PC3R [�i-I ADID M-2 DIS'IItICtS t4-1 AAID M-2
DISPRIGTS
1. Area Identification Sicp�s.
A. One (1) si� per developnent.
B. A maxisrxan size of twenty-four (24) square feet in area.
C. A minim�an distance of t� (10) feet fram any propezty line
or driveway.
2. Free Standing Sic�s.
A. Qie (1) sicyi per street frontage.
B. A maximum size of eighty (80) square feet in area per
develogrent.
C. A maximmi heiqht of twenty-five (25) feet above the finished
gro�d gzade.
D. A minimun height of ten (10) feet from the bottom of the
si� to the firushed groimd grade when within twenty-five (25)
feet of a driveway or a cornes vision safety zone.
214-9
47
214.12
E. A minimim distance of t� (10) feet fran any property line �
or driveway.
g, A miniman distance of fifty (50) feet from any residential
district.
3. Iaoof Sic�s.
A. Q�e (1) si� per develognent.
g, The use of a roof sic� will s�stitute for the free standing
sicy� along the street the roof sicg� is intended to be viewed.
4. Winduw Sicy�s,
A maximiun coverage of forty percent {408) of the window area,
excludin9 merchandise.
5. Wall Sicyts.
A. Allawed only on two (2) differ�t walls per business.
B. The total si� area shall not exceed fifteen (15) times the
square root of the wall length on which the sign is to be
placed.
6. Portable Sicyis.
May be displayed after a pesmit is issued by the City. Permits are
limited to three (3) times per yeaz, per business and only for
nonconsecutive ten (10) day periods.
7. Billboards.
Shall be permitted in only C-3, M-1 and M-2 Districts. The
following requirenents shall be considered as miniman standards when
issuing a special use permit to ezect a bil lboard. 'lYie City Council
may i�ose additional requirenents.
p, Billboards shall be restricted to property adjoinin9 the
right of ways of Interstate Highway #694, Trunk Highway #47,
Trunk Highway i65 and East River Road south of Interstate
Highway #694.
B. The maximum height is twenty-five (25) feet above the
finished groimd grade, imless the sic,g� is intended to be viewed
fran a highway, then the twenty-five (25) foot maximiun height
shall be canputed frcm the oenterline of the traveled highway,
but in no case shall the vertical distance between the bottan of
the sicyi and the gro�md be seduced to less than ten (10) feet.
C. 1l�e maximum sic� area is three hundred (300) square feet per
facing not to exceed two (2) facings when erected on East River
Road south of interstate Hic�way #694, on Trluilc Highway #47 and
on Trunk Highway #65; and 750 square feet per facing not to
exceed two (2) facings when erected on 7nterstate Highway #694.
Double faced signs shall be attached back to back at a
horizontal angle not to e�cceed forty-five (45) degrees.
D. Rl�e minimun distance between billboazd signs is 1000 feet
when erected on the same side of the highway.
214-10
� g, The minimim setback fran the highway ri�t of way is thirty
(30) feet.
F. Tlie minim� distance is 500 feet frwn a billboard sign to
the intersection of any street or ranp where ttaffic crosses or
mesges at the same elevation. The distance is determined by
measuring from the intersection of the street and highway
oenteclines and the si�.
G. 4lie minimun distance to a zesidential and public district is
500 feet.
H. Zi�e si� structure shall be all metal and be either painted
or treated to prevent deterioration. Iack of proper mainte�ance
shat2 be cause for revocation of the sic� permit.
I. 17�e miniman distance to a railroad crossing is 350 feet when
there are lights and a gate, and 500 feet from a zailzoad
crossing without lights and/or a gate.
J. Any lighting will be shielded to not impair the vision of
any motor vehicle operator or to create a nuisance on adjoining
property.
214.13. TYPFS, SIZES, ADID SE1BT�(RS F�t P AHI) AJD DLS't1tIC15
Sic� requirenents in Public and Planned Unit Development districts
will be controlled by the City Council when any development is
plaruied.
214.14. SBOPPING C�T1�RS ADID lULTIPLE USE BI7IIDItx'�S
1. Within 180 days of the adoption of this Chapter, all owners of
shopping centers and multiple use buildings of three (3) oc more
businesses or industries, if they have not already done so, must
sutmit a ooaiprehensive sicyi plan to the City Council for apprwal.
2. All future sicy�s erected within the shopping centec or multiple
use building shall conform to the conditions of the sign plan and
may be subject to conditions other than those in the district
regulations in or8er to prrnate �miform sicy� appearance.
214.15. SIGN PERMIT RHQUIRF]'�S1i5
1. S1C�7 P2ISRlt.
A. Before a sic� may be displayed in the City� the sign erector
shall file an application with the City for permission to
disgiay such si�.
B. A permit is required for all existing, new, relocated,
modified or redesicyied si�s except those specifically exempt
�nder Section 214.15.1E.
C. 7i�e issuance of a peLmit may also be subject to additional
conditions in order to pranote a more reasonable oanbination of
sic�s and to prcmote oonfornuty with the character and uses of
adjoining property. The conditions will be subject to the
/�
214.15
. . n �1.
� �•
SHOPPII�
(�dPERS APID
l47L�TIPL�E
USE BUII,DIN('�S
n �•.
'�• 1'� 17
214-ll
discretion of the City. Objections to the conditions can be
appealed to the City Cauicil by the applicant.
D. Sic�s erected by a nonprofit organization are not exempt
pccm obtaining a sic� permit, but the City may waive the fee
requirenent.
E. No permit is requiced to disglay the following signs. This
ehall not be construed as relieving the erector of a sign� or
the owner of the property on Which a sign is located from
oonforming with the other prwisions of this Chapter:
(1) Ar►y window sicp�s.
(2) Any address sic�►s.
(3) Any sic,yis erected by a governrental �uiit.
(4) Any bench si�s.
(5) Nry ma�orial sicyis or tablets containing the names of
the building, its use and date of erection, when cut oc
built into the wall af a building.
(6) Any sic�s which are oanpletely within a building and
are not visible frcm the exterioc of the building.
(7) Any tenporary signs as listed undez Section 214.06.
(8) Any sic�s having an area of three (3) square feet or
less.
(9) Any advertising sicy�s on litter receptacles having an
area of four (4) square feet or less per side and limited to
sixteen (16) square feet per receptacle, except that
apprwal of the design and location of the receptacle is
required by the City Council.
2. Pezmit Application.
A. Application for a sicy� permit shall be made to the City on
forms supplied by the City.
B. If a sic� has not been erected within ninety (90) days after
the date of issuance af a permit, the permit shall become null
and void unless an extension is gzanted by the City.
C. The City may require other information as necessary to
insure that the si� is erected in canpliance with this Chapter.
3. Permit Fees.
Sicy� pecmit fees shall be as prwided in Chapter 11 of the Fridley
City Cocie.
?14.16. SIGN �i2iX.Z�OttS' LI(a1SE RDQ[7�T15
No person, firm or corporation shall engage in the business of
erecting sicy�s �mder this Chapter imless a license to do so has bes�
apprweci by the City Camcil. �e annual license fee and expiration
date shall be as prwided in (l�apter ll of the Fridley City Code. A
license shall not be required of any person who chooses to construct
and erect their awn sicyi on their own property.
n�
r• a • -
•�
• o• r � ��+
,.
214.16
214-12
214.17. FJCISFI2� SIQZS
1. Sicy� Maintenance.
A. �e structure and surfaces of all sicyis shall be maintained
in a safe and ptesentable condition at all times, including the
repla�t aE defective parts� painting, repainting, cleaning
and othec acts required to prevent the sign structure and
surface fran becaning hazardous or �mlcenpt in appeazance.
B. When any sicy� is renwed, the City shall be notified and the
pntite sic� and its structure shall be renwed.
2, Legal Nonconforming Signs.
A. Any sic� located within the City on the date of the ac3option
of this C2�apter which cbes not confozm with the provisions of
this Chapter, is a"legal nonconfocming" sicg� and is permitted,
provided it also meets the following requirenents:
(1) 4he sicy� was oovered by a sign permit on the date of
the adoption of this Chapter, if one was required under
applicable law, or
(2) If no sign permit was required for the sign in
question, the sic� was in all tespects in compliance with
applicable law on the date of the adoption of this Chapter.
B. A sic� shall inanediately lose its "legal nonconforming"
desic�ation if:
(1) The si� is altered in any aay which makes the sign
less in ca�pliance with the requir�nents of this Chapter
than it was before the alterations except for coutine
maintenance and change of inessages.
(2) The sign is relocated.
(3) 24ie sicy� is replaced.
(4) 42�e sic� becomes dilapidated or damaged and t2�e cost of
bringing it into conpliance is more than 50 percent (508) of
the value of said sicy�, at which time all of the sign and
its structure must be renoved.
3. Abandoned Sicg�s.
}1ny sic� which identifies a use that has discontinued operation for
a period of more than ti�ree (3) months or any sic� which pertains to
a time, event, or purpose which no longer applies, shall be deemed
to have been abandoned. Pernanent signs applicable to a business
ta�orazily suspended because of a change of ownership oz managenent
ehall not be deened abarxloned unless the property zenains vacant for
a period of more than three (3) months. An abandoned sign is
prohibited and shall be removed by the owner of the sign or the
propetty �wner.
� �
r. �
50
Z14.17
214-13
214.18. FSII'+D%II'�
�he City Manager or desic�ated agent shall be responsible for the
enforoanent of this Chapter.
u4a9. vi�aris
1. Any sign that does not comply with the provisions of this
Chapter or that is a hazard to the health, safety and general
welfare of the public is her� declared to be in violation of this
Q�apter.
2. Notification of Violation.
A. If the City determines that any sign regulated by this
Chaptez is unsafe, a menace to the public; or has been
constructed or erected without a permit first being granted to
the owner of the property upon which said si� has beer erected;
or is in violation of artiy other prwision of this C�apter, then
the City shall issue a written notice of violation to the
property owner. If the owner fails to renwe the sign or bring
it into canpliance Witi� the prwisions of this Chapter within
twenty (2p) calendar days following the date of said notice,
such sign(s) may be cenoved by the City. The cost of this
removal, including any City expenses, shall be a special
assessment against the property upon which the sign{s) was
located and shall be so noted in the written notice to the
property owner.
B. 4Y�e City may cause any sicy� or sign stcucture which is an
immediate public hazard, to be cemoved summarily after a
reasonable attempt has been made to have the property owner
zenove the sicy�.
C. Wt�en the City mails the notice of violation, copies will be
sent to both tl�e permit holdec and the property owner, if they
are differ�t pezsons.
ua.zo. �.Tr
Any violation of this Chapter is a misdeneanor and is subject to all
penalties provided for such violations undec the pcovisions of
Chaptec 901 of the Ftidley City Code. Each day the violation
continues in exist�ce shall be deened a separate violation. All
signs are subject to any penalty for violation of the district
requirenesits where they are located, even when not r��ired to g�y a
fee or acquire a permit.
214.21. APPEAiS
7b prwide for a reasonable interpretation of the prwisions of this
�aptec, a petmit applicant who wishes to appeal an interpretation
by the City may file a variance application and zequest a hearing
before the Appeals Camnission. 7Y�e Carnnission shall hear requests
for variances and make their reoa�¢resxiation to the City Council in
the following cases:
51
214.21
F2�¢bR(�'�?Jr
VIOI.ATIO[1S
.�,,.
0
214-14
1. Appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order,
requir�nent, decision or detezmination made by the City in the
enforoenent of this Chapter.
2, Requests for variances frmn the literal provisions of thie
(}saptes in instances where the strict enfoccement would cause an
indue hazdship. Before the Carmussion shall grant a variance, it is
the responsibility of the apglicant to prove:
A. Rt�at there are exceptional or extraordinary circ�unstances
applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not
apply generally to other property in the same vicinity and
district.
B. 4Y�at the variance is necessary fot the preservation and
enjo1mient of a substantial property right possessed by other
property in the same vicinity and district; but which is denied
to the property in question.
C. Zhat the strict application of the Chapter would constitute
an uiutiecessary hatdship.
D. 'lt�at the granting of the variance would not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare or
detrimental to the property in the vicinity or district in which
the ptopezty is located.
52
214.21
214-15