PL 02/27/1985 - 30630r�
� .,.
. - � • ' a...:, ;,. ,-
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 27, 1985
CACL.TO ORDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel call�d the February 27, 1985, Planning Commissfon meeting
to order at 7:33 p.m.
RUCt CALL:
Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Mr. Oquisi, Ms. Gabe], Mr. Nielsen, Mr. Minton,
Mr. Sielaff (for Mr. Saba)
Members Absent: Mr. Kondrick
Others Present: Jtm Robinson, Planning Coordinator
Gail Wellner,.8457 Riverview Lane N., Brooklyn Park
�ames Nicklow, Shorewood Inn
Patri:ci.a Novic�i, Mi10 Archltects, Crystal, Mn.
Lowell Ainas, Milo Architects, Crystal, Mn.
J. A. Menkveld, 1299 Mississippi St.
�rad Dunham, 6150 Trinity Dr. N.E. �
J. R. Ferguson, 6811 Oa[cley St. N.E.
n James Brubakken, 6810 Oakley St.N.E.
�, Richard Kemper, i857 Alden Way N.E.
Robert Hughes, 548 Rice Creek Terrace N.E.
Lewis & VZVian Hedlund, 5230 Russell Ave. N., Brooklyn Center
APPROVAC � OF JANl1ARY � 23; 1985, PLANNING' COM�IISSION' �1INl�TES:
MOTION by P4r. Minton, seconded by Mr. Nielsen, to approve the Jan. 23, 1985,
PTanning Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1.�'VACATION'REQUEST�'�SAV'#85=�1;'G'&�G'BUILDERS'Bli'GARI"�WEL'LNER: To Vacate
y oo sec �.on o a oo u t 1tp an ralnage easement on
Lot 8��Block 1, Doty/Wellner Addition, because of a placement of the
dwelling at 115 Satellite Lane N.E.
Mr. Robinson stated this property was located north of Satellite Lane and
' east of Starlite Blvd. The house in question was located on Lot 8, Block 1,
of the Doty/Wellner Addition. There was a small portfon of easement that
needed to be vac�ted in order for the house to be sold free and clear.
There was a water line running through the propert,y, but fortunat�ly there
there were no other utilities located in that area affected by th� vacation,
All the utility companies have been notified and all �ave responded saying
� they have no objection to the vacation.
T�.e petitioner, Ms. Gail Wellner, stated the rea�on the vacation �as needed
was becHUSe of a surveying error.,
-�- ..... . �.. ..... _ .. ...... ....._....... ...... ...... ......
�"� �pLANNING�COf�I�ISSI06V �1��'IN�; `��Rl1AR�.��' � .`F98�" `' �� ��.,.•���•�.•;.;..��:�;..;��Q�E'2
�� � �� T p1�t'�"�^a'l�t" EE'V •l^l��R��! F l�! ��! ! ! ! !��! !�
, . �
r"�
�^,
l�OTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Minton, to recommend to City Council
approval of vacation request, SAV #85-01,�G & G Builders by Gary Wellner,.
to vacate a 3 foot by 12 foot section of a 10 foot utility and drainage
easement on Lot 8, B]ock 1, Doty/W�llner Addition, because of placement of
the dwelling at 115 Satellite Lane N.E.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CkIAIRWOMA'N SCkLNA6EL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Robinson stated a public hearing was set for the March 18�h City Counci]
meeting. •
2. LOT SPCIT REQl1EST: L,S.�#8�-02, BY �T: ANTFIONY UILLAGE�SFIOPPING�CENTER:
p 1t o two parce s, one par o o� an , o par o o s 17
and 18 (see file for legal � to be sold to Shorewood Inn_-for par�f�ing and
bui 7 ding expanslon, t he same being 6i61 Highwav #65 N.E.
Mr. Robtnson stated the location of this property was just east of Highway
65 and north of Moore Lake. The property was zoned C-3. The proposal called
for the splitting of two lots from a parcel owned by Max Saliterman. The two
parcels are each approximately one acre in size.
Mr. Robinson stated Mr. Max Saliterman was requesting the lot split,T�rr� acre
will be sold to the �ners of the Shorewood Inn, to be used for additional parking
and expansion of their facility. The remaining easterly"parcel is to be held
for future use. �
Mr. Robinson stated Staff had the following concerns: .
1. In terms of the actual survey, there seemed to be some discrepancies
as to the location of the utility lines within the proposed ease-
ments. The City needs a verifying survey done in order to locate
t6e utility easements.
2. The City was requesting a joint driveway easement between Sears
Surplus and Shorewood Inn so the City can close off the present
service drfve which creates a traffic problem because there is no
stacking space for entrance onto Highway 65. This was a dangerous
intersection, and has been a long standing concern of the City's.
They feel this would greatly improve the traffic situation.
3. Par[c fee.
4. That.the lot split be recorded �t�the County as soon as possibl,e.
Ms. Schnabel stated she could understand the�City wanting to close off the
portion of the service drive, but she was concerned about t�e two property
owners agreeing to share in the cost of improvements and maint�nance of tl�e
joint driveway.
Mr. Robinson stated there were some other concerns on the site plan regarding
layout of parking lot, irrigation, ]andscapir�g; etc., but these concerns will
be addressed by Staff with the building permit.
�, �P'LANNI�G'CO�MISSION'MEETING;�FE�RUARY�27, 1985 PAGE 3
The petitioner, Mr. Saliterman, was not in the audience.
Repr.esentatives for the Shorewood Lnn were in the audience. �
Mr. Lowell Ainas sta�ed he was w1t� Milo Architects & Engineers, consultants
for the Shorew�od Inn. He stated the lot beinq acquired at the present time
would take care of the parking requirements and thei� present expansion plans.
They had absolutely no obj,ection to the servic� drive change as proposed by
City Staff with the closing of the service drive at the end of their parking
lot. He st�ted t�e exact loc�tion of utility lines would be worked out. The
other concerns Mr. Robinson had mentioned would also be worked out with the
City.
Mr. Ainas stated that as far as sharing in the cost of the joint drYVeway,.
some kind of agreement would have to be worked out between the two property
owners. He personally did not feel it was somet�ing that had ta be determined
at this time. If the Planning Commission wanted to recommend approval of the
lot split subject to an arrangement being worked out with the City and the
property owners within a certain timeframe, that would be acceptable to them.
Ms. Schnabel asked how soon Shorewood was planning their remodeling and
addition to the parking area.
�
� Mr. Ainas stated they would begin as soon as they received all the approvals
from the City. They estimate a total of four months for the project.
�OTION by Mr. Minton, seconded by Mr. Nielsen, to recommend to City Council
approval of lot split request, L. S. #85-02, by St. Anthony S�opping Center,
to split off two parcels, one part.of Lots 16 and 17, the other part of Lots
17 and 18 (see file for legal) to be sold to Shorewood Inn for parking and
building expansion, the same being 6161 Highway #65 N.E., with the fol]owing
stipulations:
1. Verifying survey be conducted for location of utility lines
2. The two property owners work with City Staff to establish
a joint driveway.
3. The lot split be recorded at the County prior to the issuance
of the building permit.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel stated this item would �o to City Council on March 18.
3. COT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S, #85=03, BY ROBERT�S: GILSTAD: S lit�off'ihe
aser y ee , exce� e or� er y eet o par o d , u itor's
Subdivision No. 25 (see file for legal) to be used �s a parking lot for the
apartments on Lynde Drive (Moore Lake Apartment Complex).
�
;�
�
PLANNING�COMMISSION'�EETING;�FEBRUAR��27;'1985' �� � PAGE 4
Mr. Robinson stated the parcel in question was located north of Lynde Drive
and south of Hackmann right off Highway 65. The property was zoned commercial
and abutted by single family on the north and Moore Lake Apartments on the
south. _The split was intended for an addition to the apartment compa-ex which
would provide more parKing. Earlier that day, Mrs. Gilstad had called and
asked that this item be tabled as they have not yet reached an agreement on
t�e purchase price.
MOTION by Mr. Minton, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to table lot split request,
t�#85-03, by Robert Gilstad, until the next Planning Commission meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. LOT SPLIT RE UESTe t. S. #85=04; BY J: A. MENKVELD � ASSOC:,�I�C.: Split
ot , B oc 2, Broo vlew 2n 1t1on except t e ou ft, t ereof
into three lots, 2- 70 foot lots and 1- 75 foot lot to be used for single
family residences, the same being 1040-1050-1060 67th Avenue N.E.
Mr. Robinson stated this property was located south of 67th Ave. and west of
Brookview Drive. At the last Planning Commission meeting, this was p�rt of
an overall concept for a townhouse development, but that request was withdrawn.
Mr. Menkveld was asking that this property now be split into single family
lots which was consistent with the R-1 zoning in that neighborhood.
Mr. Robinson stated the parce] in question was split prior to this. The old
lot line which was approved by the City Council ran down the approximate
center of the prop�rty; however, this split was never recorded at the County.
At this time, Mr. Menkveld was desiring to split the parcel into one 75 ft.
lot on the corner of Brookview and 67th and two 70 ft, lots to the �est. The
total square footage of each of the lots was greater than required (9,000
s�, ft.). The easter]y lot was 10,103 sq, ft., and the two westerly lots
were each 9,380 sq, ft. Variances associated with the lot split involved
the two westerly lots--f�om a lot width of 75 ft, to 70 ft. These variances
would be heard at the next Appeals Commission meeting so there was the oppor-
tunity for a public hearing.
Mr. Robinson stated
aware that he would
City was requesting
is now one lot.
that at this time, they would like to make the petitioner
be assessed for any street or utility improvements. The
two park fees since three lots are being created from what
The petitioner, Mr. Menkveld, stated he felt this proposal would appease some
of the problems presented by the neighbors at the last public h�aring on the
townhouse development. He felt the lot split was very appropr�ate to all the
city regulations. He had no probiem with this going to the Appeals Commission
for a pubiic hearing.
� Mr. Ferguson, 6811 Oakley St., stated he appreciated what Mr. Menkveld was
doing by building single family homes, and they were very satisfied with the
proposal.
. . _ .. .. ...
�"�, . PLANNi�JG' COMI�ISSION'MEETII�G; ' �EBRI�ARI�' 27; `1985 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . PAGE 5
Mr. Brubakken, 6810 Oakley St., stated he had no objection to the lot split.
Mr. Dick Kemper and Mr. Robert Hughes, members of the �oard of Trustees for
the Michael Servetus Unitarian Church, stated they felt the usage for single
family homes seemed very appropriate for thfs location, and they had no
objection to the lot split.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recommending the following stipulations:
1. The petitioner agree to pay for any street and utility �mprovements.
2. The pe�tisner pay two park fees at $1,500 ($750 eachj.
3. The lot split be contingent upon approval of the variances.
4. The �ot split be recorded at the County prior to the issuance
of any huilding permit.
MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Minton, to recommend to Ci.ty Council
approval of lot split request, L. S. #85-04, by J. A. Menkveld & Assoc.,
Inc., to split Lot 7, Block 2, Brookv�.ew 2nd Addition (except the South
100 ft, thereof into three lots, 2- 70 foot iots and 1- 75 foot lot to be
^ used for single family residences, the same being 1040-1050-1060 67th Ave. N.E.
_ with the following stipulations:
1. The petitioner agree to pay for any street and utility improvements.
2. The petittoner pay two par� fees at a total of $�,500 (�750 each).
3. The lot split be contingent upon approval o�P the variances.
4. The lcat spl�Ct � be- r-ecorded at _the County -prior to th� i�ssuance
of any building permits.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel stated the variances would go to the Appeals Commission on
March 26, and then everything would go to the City Coancil on April 15.
5. RECEIVE JANUARY 10, 1985, HOUSING'b'REDEIIEL`OP�I�NT�AI�THORITY'N1INU'TES:
"I�JOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Nielsen, to receive the Jan. 10, 1985,
oA using & Redevelopment Authority minutes.
UpON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TNE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. RECEIVE JANUARY�15;�1985;'ENVIRON�IENTAL'�QUAL'ITY'COMIWISSION'f�INUTES:
M�TION by Mr. Nielsen, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive tf�e Jan. 15, 1985,
n Environmental Quality Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TNE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
�,
�
P'LANNI�G'CO��ISSION'MEETING; FEBRUARY'27;'1985 ... .. ..... . PArE 6
7. REC�IVE JA�UARY'22;�1985;'ENERG�'CO�MISSION��INUTfS:
�MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Minton, to receive the Jan. 22, 1985,
n�ergy Commission minutes.
l�r. Sielaff stated the Commission members had attended a Minneapolis N�igh-
borhood Energy Workshop. The Commission members had very impressed with the
pwogram and would be interested in pursuing it for the City of Fridlev some
time in the future. Right now, they are seeking ga^�nt funds from th.e
Department of Energy and Economic Development (p.E.E,D.� to be �sed for
rental reha6flftation for low artd moderate i.ncome s�:ngle family�, duplexes,
fourplexes, and multi-famfly rental units to 6ring tfiem up to 1985 energy
standards. The Commission had passed a motion at their last meeting direct-
ing Staff to put togeth�r a resolution to the City Council that would authorize
Staff to submit an application for grant funds.
Mr. Robinson stated the Planning Commission members had a copy of a resolution
Staff had prepared for presentation to t�e City Council on March 4. The
resolution called for Staff to work with the Minnesota Dept. of Energy and
Economic Development in procuring a$15,000 grant for use to staff a person
who would coordinate the programs with the MHFA and the Minnegasco House
Doctor approa�h. Th�y feel that if they are going to ge� into an energy
program, they should start with something that is manageable with the present
staff and that wou]d be successful. T�ey felt low and moderate income was a
good place to start.
Ms. Schnabel stated that if the rehab
un�ts are for making a profit for the
rehabilitate a unit, she was a little
responsible for the rehab.
was for rental units, generally rental
owner. While the need may be there to
concerned that the landlord should be
Mr. Robinson stated this would be a 50/50 grant so the property owner must
share in the cost. Also the rehab was only for apartments or rental units
in neighborhoods that are predominately low and moderate income.
Mr. Sielaff stated the Energy Commission members had the same concern as
Ms, Schnabel, but, as Mr. Robinson E�ad stated, it was a 50/50 match on the
rehab program. With tk�e House Doctor program, they will be getting monies
from Minnegasco, but they did not feel it was rigbt to fund t�e whole thing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
�IOTION by Mr. 5iel�ff, seconded by Mr. Nielsen, to concur with the Energy
o�sion to recommend that the City Council approve the resnlution to
proceed with the D.E.E.D, grant to support an energy conservation program,
Mr. Minton expressed concern about the project committee the Energy Commission
� was forming to establish and implement an energy conservation program. Before
the Energy Commission started implementing this program, they should make sure
a project committee reporting to a commission would satisfy the State's
requirements.
�
^
n ��
�� �
/'� PLANNING�COMMISSION'MEETING; FEBRUAR� 27; 1985� PAGE 7
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. RECEIVE JANUAR�'29;'1985;'APPEAL'S'CO��ISSION'MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Minton, to receive the Jan. 29, 1985,
pA peaTs Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCNNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. RECEIVE'FEBRUARY 4, 1985;�PARKS�&�RECRE4TION'COINP'IISSION'�INUTES:
"�OTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Nielsen, to receive the Feb. 4, 1985,
�aTcr-s—& Recreation Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
l0: RECEIVE FEBRUAR� 12, 1985; APPEALS�COMN1ISSION�MINUTES:
�MOTION by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Minton, to receive t�e Feb. 12, 1985,
,--� ppea s Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to adjourn the meeting. Upon a
vo e vote, all voting aye, Chairwoman Schnabel declared the Feb. 27, 1985,
Pianning �ommission meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m.
Respectfuily submitted,
yn� aa
Recording Secretary
�