PL 09/11/1985 - 30638�,
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSI�ON MEETING, SEPTEMBER 11, 1985
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel called the September 11, 1985, Planning Commission meeting to
order at 7 36 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
M�r��rs Present: Ms. Schnabel, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Minton, Mr. Saba, Mr. Wellan,
Mr. Kondrick (arr. �:�0 p.m.)
Members Absent: Mr. Oquist
Others Presen�:: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator
Herbert � Judy Lennox, 1461 R�ce �reek Rd.
Doug Peterson,.4900 County Rd. 18, Ne� Hope
Lenard Vanasse, MarLen Development
Wi]liam Pink, MarLen Development
Ed Michaels, A& R Garrett
_ _ ... .. . ..... ...... ......
APPROIIAL � OF �A11611ST' 21; � 1985; � PEARINIRIG'CONiNIIS5�6N'N1iI�l�TES:
%� MOTION BY MR. MINTON� 5ECONDED BY R?R. SABA, TO APPROVE THE AUG. 21� I985� P7IANNIIVG
COMMI5SION MINUTE5.
The following change was made on page 3, paragraph .�;-first line: Change the word
"value" to "cost".
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MttNUTES
APPROVED AS AMENDED. .
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION�OF'A'SPECIAL�USE'P�RI�IIT; SP'#'85=10;�BY
. BE "E ' I;
er Sec�ion .1, C, 1, of the Fridley City Code, to allow the construc-
tion of � second accessory building, a 24 ft. 6� 30 ft, detached garage on
Lot 4, Block 2, Spring Valley, the same 6ei:ng 1461 Rice Cree(c Road N.E.
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA, 5ECOlIFDED BY MS. GABEL, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
5P #85-I0.
UPON A VO.ZCE VOTE� ALL VOTIAIG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLA.RED THE PUBLIC
HEARIlUG OPEN AT 7:39.
Mr. Robi.nson stated this property was located just north of Rice Creek Road,
east of Old Central. It was zoned single family as were most of the properties
in the immediate area. T�e req�est was for a second accessory struc�wre which
was over 240 sq, ft. The structure would be loc�ted in the rear yard.
.�
_-.-� PLANNING'COMMISSION'MEETiNG;�5EP7ENIBER'�1;�1985 " '.'..'....'........ ....PAGE 2
Mr, Herbert Lennox stated he did plan to use the structure as a garage for
cars, a boat, snowmobile and trailer, �tc. He did plan on putting a concrete
driveway to the structure.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Lennox if he planned to do any type of home occupation
in the proposed structure.
M�. Lennox stated he did not.
MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC XEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIIVG AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED AT 'J:45 P.M.
MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. WE:LLAdV � TO REC0I�IMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL-�OF SPECIAL U5E PERMIT, SP #85-10� BY.HERBERT LENNOX LI� PER 5ECTION
205.07.I � C� 1� OF 2'HE FRIDLEY CITF CODE TO �lilAfnT THE CON5TRUCTIOIV OF A
SECOND ACCESSORY BUILDING� A 24 FT. EY 30 FT. DETACAED GARAGE•ON LDT �4,
BLOCK 2, 5PRIAIG VALLEY, TAE SAML BEING 1461 RSCE C.REEK ROAD 1V , E. � WITH THE
STIPULATION THAT A bTARD SURFACE DRIVEWAy BE INSTALLED TO THE NEW STRUCTURE.
UPON A VOICE UOTE, ALL VOTINE's i�YE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL' DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
i� .
Ms. Schnabel stated tFiis �ould go to C�ty Counc�l on Oct..7.
. . ... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..:... ...... ...... ...... ....... .. ...
2. � ' PUBLIC' FIEARyNG:.'. '.CON�.%D�RA�I04V'OF'A'PR�L' �1Ff�AR�'PL'A'F; ' P:S; '�8��-64; ' OAI�"RI�ER
� 5: S :
e�ng a rep a o� o s and 41, Revised Auditor`s Subdivision No. 77, Anoka
County, Minnesota, except tfiat part repla�ted as Niemann Addition, tFie same
being 7560 East River Road.
MOZ70N BY MS. GABEL� SECOAIDED BY MR. GVELLAN, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC FIEARING ON
�.5. #85-04.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VO�'ING .AYE, CHAIRG�70MAN SCFIIITABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARZIUG OPEN AT 7:47 P.M.
Mr. Robinson stated the proposed plat �as just west of East R�iver Road and north
of existing 75th V�ay. It involved 8 lots and tFie land are-a was approx�.mately
3 acres, approximately 2.3 acres of that 6eing platted into new lots. The
zoning was single family as were all the properties in the fmmediate neighborhood.
Mr. Robtnson stated t�e proposal �as to spl�''t the parcels into 8 lots, 7 lots
r��l l be used for new homes and Lot 4�itfi an e.�ist-�'l�g house on �t wi 11 remai n.
All tk�e lots exceed t�.e required 1ot area of 9,000.s�q; ft. The smallest lot
r�as 9,525 sq, ft, and the lots ranged from that up to over 16,000 sq, ft. A11
tFie lots were 75 ft, or more at the set6ack which was req�ired 6� code. The
^ road right-of-way was 50 ft. wide and tFiis would provide a 36 ft, wide street,
.. . __.. .._ ..
�.r.1 PL�4NN�NG' COIN�IISSIORI- �IEETiN6; ' SEP�'�I�ER' 11; ' 1985 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PAGE � 3
with a 7 ft. wide green boulevard on each side of the street. The street was
approximately 510 ft, longo This was less than the maximum allowable street
length on a dead-end street which is 600 ft.; however, th� cul-de-sac was less
than full widtFi and it did have a 75 ft. dtameter. TF�� full width requirement
�r�s l0U f�.; hor�ever this requirement could 6e waived if conditions made it
difficult to make it 100 ft.
Mr. Robinson stated all tfie util%ties are avai.la6.le to the lots off Alden �ay.
The petitioner has shnwn on his plat the easement so the water line can be
looped off Alden Way to the existing lot on East River Road.
Mr. Robinson stated the park.fee-agreement for these 8 lots �as been signed--
$1,500/lot or a total of $12,000. Most of the mature trees on the �ite will
remain. Sa7es of the homes are slated for around $125,Q�D.,.with tFie except�on
of the home on Lot 4, wfiich �tas per�aps in the $7Q,Od0 range.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff �as recommendti'rg t�ie 1�ollowing stipulati�ons:
1. Road easement over tF�e soutFieast � corner of � 7�a1 A1 den Way to 6E
granted to tFie C1ty prior to fi''nal plat approva7.
2. Petitioner agree to as�essments for all street and utilities.
3. Boulevard on the sout� of new 76th Avenue to be maintained by
residents of Oafc River Estates Plat.
'~1 4. All structures except tfie existing house on Lot 4 to be removed
r�'°th t[�e devel opment.
5. Peti:tioner to provi.de 20Q �Ft. scale plat drar�ing for recording
purposes.
6. Rear yard variance on Lot 4 froro 40 ft,. to approxi.mately 23 ft.
contingent upon approval with final p1at.
7. Petitioner to provi.de a dou6le garage �'th �ard surface driver�ay
to existing hbuse on Lot 4 prtor to sale of sald real estate.
8. Petitioner to work out �n approved drainage plan with Engineering
staff.
Mr. Minton stated that regarding sti,pulation #3, he questioned h.ot� that v�as
going to be enforced.
Mr. Robinson stated Fie d�d not �nor�, but there r�ould pro6ably have to be some
wording in the purc(�ase agreement at tFie time o� the sale. Staffi could consult
with the City Attorney on how tF�is could be worded.
Ms. Gabel stated she felt i.t was more logical io deed that property to the
present tiomeowners sout� of 76tFi and 6ave them maintain it.
Mr. Wellan agreed. It seemed more appropriate �.'� the people to t�e south of
the proposed 76th Ave, were agreea6le to doi.ng i.t.
Mr. Doug Peterson stated tFiey had t�e same pro61 em r,vt''tfi what to do witfi the
,,--� eas.ement to the south. ,
PLANNING CO�MISSION�MEETING;'SEPTEN1BER'll;'1985'�'���� " � " " " �'��� � PAG��4
Mr. Doug Peterson stated he had considered putting a street through the middle
of the project which would have provided more lots, but the lots would have been
quite ugly. He stated he was open to suggesttons from the Planning Commission
and the people in t�e audienee. He.stated fie dfid pTan to save as many trees
as possible for s�ade and screening.
Ms. Schnabel stated t�at regardi.ng the-road easement and the property at
7501 Alden Way, was Mr. Peterson purchast''ng tFie corner of t�.at property� from
the owners?
Mr. Peterson stated he has t�lked to Mr. & Mrs.Lind� and they are trying to
put something together as an easement.
Mr. Doug Peter�on stated [1e, intends� to i^emo�e. a� l tfag 6u�1 dings Ur1�i;ck� are mostly
sheds on the property, except the hou�e on Lot 4.
Mr. Wellan stated fae r�as con�erned as to [wv� tL�at older existing house would
fit into a new neighborfwod wit� new fwuses.
Mr. Doug Peterson stated the house does not fit in not�, but it was in pretty
sound shape. It was not economi.cally feasible to either move it or tear it down.
The house is a 2 6edroom expansi.on 6ui.lt fin the 195Q�s witFi a finisf�ed basement.
Mr. Phil Lind, 7501 Alden Way, stated that Mr. Robinson had stated the road
""'� right-of-way was 50 ft. wide to provfde for a 36 ft, wide street. He questioned
the need for a 36 ft, wide street c�fie.n Alden Wa� is only a 30 ft. wide street.
He stated Alden Way has la-2� times tfie amount of traffic on it t�an the
proposed 76th Ave, ever will. By getting a variance and ma[cing 76th Ave, a
30 ft, street, he might have to lose that frontage on his proper�y whfch was
very important to him. He felt a proposal for a 30 ft.-�treet was we71 worth
consider��g for two reasons: (1� t�.e saf�ty standpoint. It is a busy corner
and it is -a 61ind corner tin on� directi�n; (2j Tf tFiej� toak the w�ole ea�ement
away and made that a�treet, he would �ave mounds of snow in [�i� driveway. As
it is, he and his neigh6or have two driveways bac[c to bac�, and it wou]d be a
real hardship with the additional snow.
Mr, Lind s�at�d he realized that A1den Way, �t the point where the proposed
76th Ave, would enter, was wider, but other than that. Alden Way was a 30 ft.
wide street, and parkjng was al]owed right now on both stdes.
Mr. Robinson stated the standard residential street is 36 ft.
Ms. Schnabel stated that on a 36 ft. street, normally there is parking on both
sides, but in this instance chances are there wouldn`t be and the cars wou7d
probably be only on the north side of the street w�.ere the houses would be, so
it was possible a narrower street would work.
Mr. Robinson stated the Engineering Dept, was in the process of designing the
street, and the possibility of a 30 ft. street could be brought to their
� attention.
�
PLANNING COINNIISSION��EETING, .SEPTE�BER'll;'1985 .................. .. ..'.PAGE 5
Mr. Lind stated he would like to see the proposed 76th Ave, come out and
turn to the south so it meets the curve at a 90° angle.
Ms. Schnabel thanked Mr. Lind for his concerns and comments and stated these
would be passed on to the Engineering Dept.
Mr. Ralph Petersen,116 Rickard Rd., stated he lived on the north side of the
prpposed replat. He stated he would like to raise �n issue concerning the
situation with the street and that was that from the existing Alden Way to
the existing ground level, there was probably a�ifference in elevation of
10 ft. in a relatively short distance. In order to regrade the property for
a new street at this point, that was going to cut into the corner of Mr, Lind's
property substantially.
Mr. Robinson stated that what Mr. Petersen said was true, there would be some
regrading of Mr. Peterse�'s yard to build the street,
Mr. Lind stated this was another concern of his.
Mr. Ralph Petersen stated there were some fair sized trees that would have to
be taken out in order to do the regrading. Probably a tree in Mr. Lind's front
yard would have to be taken down also, His primary concern was that he has
lived there for a number of years next to this 6�autifu7 property with only
one house on it. There are some 6eautiful trees, and fae feared that even though
�` the developer has good intenti�ons, from seeing tfie plat design, .he felt they
were going to lose more trees than was desired in tFifs lo�ati,on. The trees
range in age from 10-15 years to 60-80 years. so it was indeed a well matured
lot. There was a grove of pine trees, 20-25 years old. in ��e proposed cul-de-
sac that would have to be removed,
Mr. Ralph Petersen stated that being a resident of the area, if this property
is developed, he would like to see it de.veloped with an investment tbat would
maintain the integrity of the lot itse]f and the..surrounding neighborhood.
One suggestion might be a rep7at with fewer lots. There are 7 lots proposed
along the north side of the plat, and there are only 6 lots on the property
adjoining the back of the property, so the lots proposed are somewhat narrower
than the ones that exist in the neighborhood. -
Mr. Ralph Petersen stated he was not sure of.the setbacks in the rest of the
neighborhood, but his setback from the curb appeared to be about 50 ft,
Regarding the proposal to leave tne exlsting house on Lot 4, he would recommend
against it. He had some experience in carpentry, and he felt the house was
not in very good condition. It was relatively sma71 and the style of the house
did not fit in with the neighborhood. The house is not hooked up to city
water and sewer, and the septic system was just redone last year. This raised
the question: Who will take out the existing well and sept�:c tank?
Mr. Ralph Petersen stated he would li.ke to..see a concerted effort made in
maintaining the aesthetics of the property. Aesthetics frequerr�ly conflict
�� with economics, but he thought the value of tFiat property was very important.
PLANNING COM�ISSION��EETIN�; SEPTEMBER�11, 1985' � � '�� PAGE 6
Mr. Robert Duebek, 108 Rickard Rd., stated he was in concurrence with what
Mr. Petersen had said about the trees. He stated there are many birds and
�ildlife in the area which they love very muc�. Losing a lot of trees would
really ruin their enjo��nent of nature. He st�ted the trees were his main
concern,and be would suggest that a stipulati�n �e that the only trees removed
in the development be t�ose trees that are in t�e line of construction.
Ms. Schnabel stated that if the property was developed and the street w�s
constructed as proposed, regarding the maintenance of the i ft, green area
which would be on the south side of 76th, would the p�operty owners of the
property adjoining that 7 ft, boulevard be willing to maintain the property?
Mr. Creamer, 55 - 75th Way, stated he would be willi.ng to maintain it. He
stated that currently �e has to mai.ntaln it most of the time anyway. He stated
he has no back fence so there would be no problem, but it would be more of a
problem for the property owners whose back yards are fenced.
Mr. Bill Witkowski, 100 Rickard Rd., stated that the_homes in the area are
predominately single story ramblers. He asked if Mr. Doug Peterson was con-
sidering building homes with multiple levels.-
Mr. Doug P�terson stated that most of the homes would probably be 12 story
,°�
with split foyers.
Mr. Witkowski stated he fe]t a little uneasy with single family housing all
around and then have a bunch of two story houses in their back yards. He just
did not think it would look good with the houses in the area.
Ms. Schnabel stated that was a good p�int, but the Zoning Code does permit
two story homes to be built.
Mr. Ralph Petersen stated that ab�ut the mlddle of proposed Lot 5 and Lot 6,
there was an existing driveway that comes in from East River Road. That had
an elevation of almost 3�4 ft, at the boundary of Lots 5 and 6. There was a
cluster of trees on the north side. He stated that was probably the low spo�
in the area and in:the spring when it thaws, there was a fa��rly large pool of
water that couid extend all the way from the driveway to the north lot line.
In the process of digging and distributing dirt and regrading, that will, of
course,affect the trees, but what would happen to the low spot? He stated he
was concerned because his back yard was an extension of that low spot and he
did not want the water to go into his basement.
Mr. Robinson stated that one of the stipulations on th.e replat was that the
petitioner must work out an approved drainage plan with Engineering staff.
Mr. Jeffrey Bolz, 124 Rickard Rd., stated he lived 6ehind Lot 4. He stated
he felt that the lots were too long and not very wide for the value of homes
being proposed. He also felt the existing house on Lot 4 presented some
problems as far as setbacks.
Mr. Robinson stated the existing house on Lot 4 could present some problems as
far as front yard setbacks for the new homes.
PtANNING CO��ISSION��E�TING;_ SEPTENIBER 11; 1985. .... . PA�E 7
���,
Mr. Dennis Ot�em, 140 Ric�ard Rd., stated he agreed with everything that has
been said. He also felt that $125,000 �omes were not going to fi� into a
development with one old house.
Mr, Minton stated he thought the major concern expressed was the saving of
trees. Could Mr. Doug Peterson comment on that?
Mr. Doug Peterson stated it was a beautiful lot, and he would attempt to save
trees where�er passible. He stated they dig with a back hoe, as opposed to a
caterpillar, in order to save trees.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Peterson`s feelings about reducing the number of lots
f rom 8 to 7.
Mr. Doug Peterson stated he did not see where t�at would be possible. Origi-
nally, they started out with 11 lots. He stated these 8 lots all meet the
ci.ty's requirements, in fact, exceed all the city`s requirements. With special
assessments and land cost, the lots are getting close to $25T30,000. He stated
it was cost prohibitive to move the existing house.� His intention was to
upgrade the house. Granted, it would not be a$�=25,000 house, but they do feel
these new homes will raise the value in the area.
Mr. Peterson
� as presented.
plan.
��
stated he would like the Planning Commission to approve the replat
They have worked with City Staff to come up with the most feasible
MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAI,RWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
NEARING CIASED AT 9:18 P.P?.
Ms. Gabel stated she r�a17y felt the existing house on Lot 4 should be removed.
With the exception of that house and h�ving looked at a lot of plats over the
years, she felt this was a reasonable plat. She sympathized with the concerns
about keeping the trees and she would like to see the developer work at that.
As far as the design of the houses, that was something the Commission had no
control over. She felt the plat was reasonable, and she did think these new
homes would enhance the neigh6orhood.
Ms. Schnabel stated she felt leaving the house on Lot 4 wduld have a negative
imp�ct on the development. She also felt they should address Mr. Lind's concerns.
Mr. Robinson stated that since Mr. Lind has a direct concer�n it might be
advisable for Mr. Lind to meet with Mark Bu�ch, Asst. Public Works Director,
and work these things out.
Ms. Schnabel stated she was stiil not comfortable with stipulation #3 that
the boulevard on the south side of the new 76th Ave. 6e maintained by the
residents of Oak River Estates Plat.
� PLANNING COf�fWI5Si0N'�EETIti6;'SEPTENIBER�11;�1985 " " '�� ��'����' �� �� "PAGE 8
Mr. Robinson stated that if the property owners on the south were willing to
maintain the boulevard, perhaps the developer �ould be willing to install
gates for those property o�ners who have back yard fences.
Another property owner on 75th Way with property abutting the boulevard
stated he would be willing to maintain the boulevard. He stated he does have
a fence in his back yard.
Ms. Schnabel stated they realize it is difficult for people who have lived in
a neighborhood for a long ti.me to see a piece of property that is vacant go,
but they also know that land is very valua6le; t�at they �ave decreased amounts
of land �vailable in Fridley for development. It certainly appe��Aed that in
terms of a p7at, it was a reasnnable plat and that the developer has made
every effort to meet all code requirements. From that standpoint, t�e Planning
Commission could not reject the plat. She thought it could be a nice area for
the neighborhood. She felt confident that the homes would be of substantial
quality, and she could not find any real negatives, other than the existing
house on Lot 4. She felt strongly t�at the hous� skwuld be removed.
MOTION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF PRELIMIIVARY PLAT, P.S. #85-04, O.z1K RIVER E5TATE5, BY D�UG PETERSON,
BEING A REPIIAT OF LOTS .�0 AND 41, REVI5ED AUDITOR'S 5UJ3DIV.Z5ION NO. 77� ANOKA
COUNTY, MINNE50TA, EXCEPT 27iA2' PAR2' REPLA2'TED AS NIEMANN ADDITION, THE SAME
� BEIIVG 7560 EAST RIVER ROAD� WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPU%A2'IONS:
l. ROAD EA5EMEIVT OVER THE 50UTHEAST CORNER OF 7501 A�DEN WAY TO BE
GR�JNTED TO THE CITY PRIOR TO FINAL PLAT APPROVAL.
2. PETITIOAIER AGREE TO ASSES5MEN�'5 FOR ALL STREET AND UT.ZLITIE5.
3. IN ORDER TO HELP THE HOMEO�fi1E.R5 MAINTAIN THE BOULEVARD ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF THE PROPOSED 76TH AVE., THE pETI2"IONER WILL �ON5�'RUCT GATES
IN THE FENCE5 OF iOT5 SOUTH OF 76�'�i AVE. THAT ,A2�2E. .�LRE',�1Dy FENCEp�
4. ALL STRUCTURE5 INC,LUDING EXIS�'I1VG HOUSE OIIT L02' 4 TO BE REMOTIED WITH
THE DEVELOpMENT.
5. PETITIONER TO PROVIDE 200 FT. SCALE PLAT DRAWING FOR RECORDING
PURP05ES.
6. PETITIONER TO WORK OUT AN AppROVED DRAINAGE P.LAN WI�"H ENGI111EERING
STAFF.
7. PETITIONER WILL AZ'2'EMPT TO SALVAGE AS MANY TREES AS P05528LE IN
CONJUNCTION WI �'H OPINIODT5 'OF CITY STAFF.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOT,ZNG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECiARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel stated this would go to City Council on Oct. 21.
. . . ... .. ... .. ... .. ... ..... . . .
. .. ..
3. PUBLIC � bEARING� '.'.004VS�D�RAT�ON:-OF� A� PR��FMI�VARY' P�AT; ' P:S:.'#8��a5; ��IID6VE�T
��A IT�O �. . �•:' S5 :
eing a rep a o e Sout eas quarter, except the North 233 feet of the
Northeast quarter of Section 3, T-30, R-24. Generally-.located between
Hickory Street and Main Street, North of 81st Avenue N.E., �11 of which,
except the North 670.00 feet thereof, to be used as � site for a truck
transfer terminal facility.
. ...... .. .. ...... .. _
� PLANNING'COI�MISSiU4V'f�EETING;'SEPTEMBER'li;'�985............'........... PAGE 9
MOT,�CN BY IAR. MINTON� 5ECONDED BY MR. WELLAN� TO OP�N THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
P.S. #85-05.
UPON A VDICE VOTE, ALL VO�'ING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABE,T, DECLARED TSE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 9:41 P.M.
Mr�. Robinson stated this property was located to the north of 81st, bounded
by Main St. on the east and Hic[cory on the west. The property was zoned M-2,
h eavy industrial, and it was surrounded 6y heavy industri�al-zoned land.
Mr. Robinson stated the plat called for dividing tfie property�into three lots,
a large lo�t an the south of approximately 16.8 acres, and two additional lots
on the north of approximately 6.1 acres each.
Mr. Robinson stated that along with the public hearing, the City Council has
asked that the Planni.ng Commission discuss the nature of this proposal.
Mr. Vanasse of Mar�Len Development Corp . Cas expressed an �.'i�terest�in fiuildi.ng
a truck tr�nsfer ter.mi nal facfil�itywat tfi.is i ocation: T� truc�fing cornpany
would be A:::N.R, F�eight Systems_; wFiich rras presently located at 35G� and County
Road C, east of 35W. T�ey are moving due to limited space at the existing
facil ��ty.
Mr. Ro6f.nson stated there would b� approximately 48,000 sq, ft. of uninsulated
�`� war�house space witfi�offfces in the fror�t. The warehouse would be �bout 550
ft, long and included 100 bays for trucks. There wo�ld be about 140 employees
with an anticipated payroll of $5 milli�on. The project itself was estimated
to have a market value of $2.6 million and would involve $117,000 in tax dollars
per year.
Mr. Robinson stated the general descripti.on of the facility was an over-the-
road consumer drygoods truck transfer facility. Bett�een 20-30 ten-ton trucks
per day would drop off goods at t�e s�te, and then there would be approximately
60-70 lesser wei ght trucks that would transfer the goods to local businesses.
So, they are tal[cing a6out approximately 90 semi-tractor trailers per day in
and��ut of the site.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff would recommend the following stipulations:
1. Petitioners agree to drainage and road improvement assessment
of $292,000 m�nimum.
2. Petitioners �agree to work �t-i th staff to accompl �s[� an accepta6l e
facade plan.
3, petitioners agree to work with staff to accomplish an acceptable
landscape plan.
4. A park fee for an amount equal to .023 X total square footage of
plat to be paid upon approval.
5. Company agrees to not allow any truck traffic on East River Road.
Appropriate �xit signs will be installed directing �ruc[cs to
r-� University Avenue.
_. 6. Exterior ligFiting will not cast light 6eyond tFie fence p�rimeter.
,^�,
PLANNING'CO��ISSION'MEETING;'SEPTEMBER 11;�1985 " � " '�� �� PAGE 10
Mr. Robinson stated there were some soil correction problems on the site with
an estimated cost of $150,000.
Ms. Schnabel asked i.f this project had to be approved 6y the Rice Creek Water-
shed District because of t�e wetlands area and North Park 6eing adjacent.
Mr. Robinson stated it did not; however, the Cit�`s standards were exactly
equal to the Rice Creek Waters�.ed Di:strfi.ct`s standards.
Mr. Vanasse, the owner of Mar-Len Development, stated Mr. �ill Pink, the archi-
tect designing the project, and Mr. Ed Michaels, Regi�nal Manager for a;�N.R.
Garrett, were also at the meet?ng. He stated he would like Bill Pink to address
the architectural plan, and �e would like to speafc later a6out the stipulations.
Mr. Pink showed the Commiss,ion�rs the arcfiitectura7 plan. He stated he had
presented the plans to the City Counci.l to get their ini�ial reaction to the
project, and there was some concern on the part of the City Council about what
a truck terminal operation would do to the neighborhood. He stated this property
is zoned M-2 heavy industrial, and there is almost nothing happening in the
neighborhood at this point, so their impact was on adjacent u�improved land.
The City's concern was what would it do to future use. Again, 6eing industrial
zoning, they feel tFiis operation is in compli.ance r�itf� the ru7es and regulations.
The operation is a 24-hour operation, 6ut it is one of t�e cleanest truck opera-
tions i:n the Twin Cities. TFie 6uildi�ng uvas only 60 ft. �+ride and functions by
taking the products out of one trucC� and putt�ng t�iem �."nto anotfier truc[c �the main
reason why tFie 6uilding was so long and narrow.
Mr. Pink stated tt� site r�ill 6e enclosed 6y a screened fence and hermed with
ad�quate l andscapi ng wFiic� �fil l ma�e. the 6uil d�.'rg operation invi�i61 e to sur�-
rounding roads and properties. So, t�ere was some quest�on in tfieir mind over
the requirement for the building facade.
Mr. Pink stated the costs concerning improvement of 81st Ave, are a great concern.
7he City was to [�ave 6uilt a 9-ton road, and t�iey are requesting a 1Q-ton road.
At this time, the 9-ton doe�n'�t even �rorfc and it would Fiave to 6e repaired, so
they are wa�ting for the Cfty's rESponse a6out tFie road.
Mr. Pink stated some of the stipulations �rorded to Fiim were stronger than those
stated at the meeting 6y Mr. Robinson, and he would lfike to have tEwse resolved.
One stipulation was the landscaping and the otfier was the lighting. The stipu-
]ation given to him was that the lights be installed on 30 ft, poles, and the
stipulation stated at the meeting was "exterior ligfiting will not cast li.ght
beyond the fence perimeter". If tfie requirement was to cut-�the lighting off at
t�.e property line and eliminate the�30 ft, pole requirement, tFie� tfiere was no
problem, but limiting tFiem to 30 ft, poles was a nigFitmare.
Mr. Pink explained the drainage plan to the Commission�, st���ng that a large
ponding area was proposed for tt�e east end of the site.
Mr. Wellan expressed concern about the �nvironmental fmpact on the drainage
system from oil spills, etc.
PCANNiPJG'COMM�55ION MEET�tiG;'SEPTENIBER'll;'1985'......... . . PAGE 11
Mr. Pink stated this was addressed in their drainage pl�n. At the five control
points, there will be weirs �nd separators for run-off that comes from the
property. Those separators are in compliance with Rice Creek Watershed District
standards and are approved by the Fire Marshall, so ihe drainage shouid be very
we11 controll�d.
Mr. Wellan asked Mr. Vanasse if he would be able to control al] of hi.s t�uckers
to take University Ave. to 81st Ave.
Mr. Vanasse stated he �ranted to poi:nt out t�.at a ma,jority� of tfie truc�s are not
ten-ton trucks. The only te-n-�ton truc�s are the ones t�.at come from over-the-
road. All of the city trucfcs are ni.ne-ton trucks� and those trucks are the
majority. The only trucks they need to 6e coneerned a6out are the over-the-
road trucks, and they will come down University to 81st. These trucks do not
go anywhere but to the termfnal and tFien bac[c out on tfie road.
Mr. Robinson stated he wanted to make it clear.that the intention was not to
just deal with the n�ne and ten-ton difference, but that'�ll the trucks��use
81st and University unless there is a delivery to a compan� in tf�e area. The
City does not want truc� traffic on an�r of t�ie otfier roads.
Mr. Michaels stated that was their intent.
%~� Mr. Vanasse stated he would like to address a couple of stipulations. He stated
that in stipulation #1 thes^e �as a drainage and road improvement assessment of
$292,000 minimum. When the seller of the property, Midwegt Federal, offered to
sell the property, they stipulated t�at t�e City had a nine-ton graded road in
front of the property. In meetings witf� staff, it rn[as f�is understanding that
the petitioners would 6e responsi.file for tFie incremental dipference in the cost
of upgrading the road from ni.ne-ton to ten-ton to accommodate the over-the-road
trucks and line trucks that wil] come in from out of state. He had no idea that
$292,000 resembled that incremental difference. He stated they are certainly
will ing to pay their appropri�ate share, fiut. Fie dfid not t�.infc tf�ey were in any
position at this meeting to consider a$2�2,000 assessment against 76�17 acres.
He fel t this shoul d 6e up to tfie assessor, tFie city, and tfa..e l awyers to decide.
He stated he even questioned whether 81st Ave, was even a nine-ton road.
Ms. Schnabel suggested that they delete the dollar amount in.stipulation #1.
Mr. �anasse stated that stipulation #5 regarding the fact that the Company
agrees to not allow truck traffic on East Rfver Road seemed to �mply that
I�.N.R.Garrett would be responsib�e for policing that, and he did not think they
could agree to that either. They w�uld certainly make their best effort to instruct
their drivers not to drive in other areas,and would post appropriate signs.
Ms. Schnabel stated she was still a lftt�e concerned about what happens with
all the water, the underground waters, and d�^ainage off the asphalt, etc.
Ms. Gabel stated she wondered if the Par[cs & Recreation Commission s.houldn�t
be reviewing this proposal in terms of North Park. May6e they should h.ave an
�\ PLANNING�CONI�ISSION'�EETING;'SEPTENIBER�11,'1985 RAGE 12
environmental impact study done in terms of the number of trucks, air pollution,
noise pollution, traffic, and the impact on the general �nvironment. Maybe
Community Development Commission should also be looking at thts prbposal.
They are ]ooking at somet�ing that is totally new to this area, and they are
talktng about putting a minimum of 90 trucks out on University plus many
employees. In tal�ing about t�e water, her 6figgest concern was North Park
and the impact this facility mig�t have on North Par�. She was not comfortable
not knowing these impacts,
Mr. Vanasse stated all the water from their property wfll ev�ntual7y drain into
the existing drainage system and none of it will go onto par�land. A run-off
engineering plan has been done, and all the water is controlled and is exiting
either �hrough an existing storm se�er to t�e river or it g�es to the existing
drainage easement which also goes to the river. Th��e are po]lution control
basins wherever the water exits and also a volume control wei.r. None of their
�ater goes anywh�re except t�rough the system of pollution control and on to
the river. They do not have any impact as far as water any more than there is
right now. They �re, in fact, providing a control system that says the water
��11 not drain off t�e property any faster than it doe� now and will go tbrough
a catch basi� system t�at will purify it and control the rate it runs off.
Mr. Vanasse stated that tr�ffic wise, he has yet to
at the truc� ��rmin�l at anp�g�ven time, and he fis
��`' trucks are dfstri6uted over a 24-hour period. Most�
off-peak hours. They �ri11 not see peak-fiour traffic
trc�c[c termi.nals.
see more than two trucks
there every day. These
of t�e traffic is during
�oming in and out of
Mr. Ed Michaels stated that most of the over-the-road units come in between
9 p.m, and 6 a.m.
Mr. Kondrick stated he agreed witk� Ms. Gabel, but h1s greatest concern was
about the water. If he could be assured that the water drainage would be
controlled adequately, he would be comforta6le with that. But, �s he did not
know enough about it, he would like to see an environmental wor[csheet done.
Mr. Vanasse stated the water drainage will be controlled adequately, and they
have done an engineering study and engineering drainage plan that says that.
He stated the City should have a copy of the study and the plan.
Mr. Pink stated that by city code or Rice Creek Watershed District code or
anybody, the final requirement is that the water cannot leave the site any
faster than the existing condition, so the run-off will be controlled by a
control structure. Because of 6erms around tfie property, t[�ey essentially have
a dike, so he did not understand the Commission`� worry a6out run-off. If they
are concerned about underground flow, they would not be affecting the under-
ground flow because they are working on the surface.
Mr. Kondrick stated he wouid be satisfied with a stipulation that there.be
an approved drainage plan by the city.
Mr. Minton stated noise, air pollutton, and traffic were broader problems that
went beyond this particular project.
PLANNING �O�MISSION'MEETI�G;'SEPTEMBER'll;'1985.. .. ... .. . PAGE�13
Ms. Schnabel stated that because the project is in an industrial area, the
impact of noise, air pollution and traffic is not as great.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� 5ECONDED BY MR. 5ABA, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAIV SCFINABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED AT lI:Z2 P.M.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, 5ECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT, P.S. #85-05� MIDG�E5T ADDITION� BY LEONARD Gd.
VANA5SE� BEING A PLAT OF THE SOUTHEA5T QFTAR2'ER� EXCEP2' THE NORTH 233 FEET OF
THE NORTHEA5T QUARZ'ER OF 5ECTI0IV 3� T-30, R-24. GENER�LLY L'OC'AZ'ED BETWEEN
HICKORY 5TREET AND MAIN 5TRE'ET� NOR2'H OF �ZST AVEIdUE N.E., AX,.L OF WHICH�
EXCEPT THE NORTH 670.00 FEET �'HEREOF, TO BE US.�D AS A SI2'� FOR A TRUCK TRANSFER
TERMINAL FACILITY� WITH THE FOLLOWING S�7PULATIONS:
1. PETITIOlVERS AGREE �'O DRAINAGE AIVD ROAD IMPROVEMENT ASSES5MENT.
2. PETITIONE.R5 AGREE TO WORK WITH 5TAFF TO ACCOMP,LS5H ,A1V ACCEPTABLE
LANDSCAPE PLAN.
3. PETITIONE.RS AGREE �'O WORK WI�'H STAFF TD ACCOMPL25H AN ACCEPTAB7IE
FACADE PLAPI.
4. A PARK FEE FOR AN AMOUN2" EQUAL TO .023 X TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF
PLAT TO BE PAID UPON APPROVAL.
5. COMPANY AGREES TO NOT ALLO[niANY TRUCK TRAFFIC� EXCEP�" 20 CLIENTS,
%�� ON EAST RIVER ROAD. APPROPRIATE EXIT SIGN5 WILL BE IN5TALLED
DIRECTING TRUCK5 I'O UNIVE'R5IZ'Y AVENUE. (CITY ATTORIVEY TO DRAFT A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO BE RECORDED AT THE' COUNTY FOR THE ENFORCE—
MENT OF THIS RESTRICTION.}
6. EXTERIOR ZIGHTING WILL NOT CAST A LIGHT BEYOND THE FENCE PERIMETER.
7. THE.RE WILL BE AN APPROVED DRAINAGE PLAN BY �'HE CITY.
UPON A VOICE UOTE � SCHNABEL, ICONDRICK � SABA � WELLAIV � M.FNTON VOT.ING AYE � GABEL
V027NG NAY� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5—.Z.
Ms.. Schnabe] stated this item �uould go to City Council on Oct. 21.
4. �' RECEIIIE Al1GUST � 1; ' 1985 ' F{111�AN' RESOURCES' COINMISSION' h�INU7ES:
M02'.lON BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE' THE AUGU5Z'1, Z985�
Hi1N1AN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE TIOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOM.�11V SCHN.ABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNAIVIMOU5LY.
5. RECEIVE AUGUST 13;�1985;'APPEAL'S'CONINIISSION'MINUTES:
1�IO�IONBY MS. GABEL� 5ECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECEIVE' THE AUGUSZ' 13, Z985,
APPEAL5 COMMISSIOIV MS,NUTE5.
;�� UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAIV SCHNABEL DEC.i.ARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
�, .PCANNING CON�IISSION'MEETI�6;'SEPTENIBER'll;'1985.. ... . . . PAGE 14
. .. . ...... ... .. ... .
6. �.'RECEIVE AUGUST'2�;'1985;'ENVIRONMENTAL"QIJAL'ITY'COI�I�ISSION'�IINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. WELLAN� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO .RECENE THE AUG. �'7, 1985,
ENVIROAIMENTAL QUALITY COMMYSSION MIAIUTES.
UpON A VOICE VOT�e ALL T70TING A�.'E� �HAIRWDMAN SCHNAI3EL DEC.LARED TFIE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. �lel l an sta�ert t6.e�^e w��. some d�scusst'bn �egarding a"fsannel �` issue. The
s�tuation arose�6�ecause o�P a complaint filed from a 6it�:ng �n�ident. A
resident of Frid]ey has 3 dogs and 2 cats, and city ordinance indicates resi-
dents can have 2 dogs/cats. A kennel license i�s required to have more animals.
Because the resident lives in a residentlally zoned �rea, he cannot be issued
a kennel license. Mr. Wellan stated the Commission had made a motion recommend-
ing that Ordinance 101 stay as it is and that no variance be granted for the
number of anima]s allowed and that the Zoning Code not 6e amended to i.nclude
�ennel licenses in areas zoned other t�.an C-2 or C=3.
M01'ION BY A?R. WELLAN� S�CONDED BY. NIR. KONDR2�K� . TO. CONCUR Ir�TTIi THE EIWIRONMENTAL
QU�LI�'Y COMMISSION ANb .RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THA2' ORDIIVANCE 1l1Z STAND AS IT
IS, THAT NO VARZ'AIVCE . BE GRANTL•"D FOR THE 1VUMSER OF' ANrMALS ALLOW�D, AND THAT
TFiE ZONING CODE NOT BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE KENNEL LrCENSES I1�1 AR�'AS ZONED OTHER
TF7AN C-2 AAiD C-3.
��
UPO1V A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CI�AIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTIOIV
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
7. RECEIVE AUGUST 27, 1985, APPEACS COI�I�ISSION f�INUTES:
�OT.LON BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK� TO RECEITiE THE AUG. 27, Z985,
APPEALS COMM.I55ION MIAIUTE5.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VO�'ING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTlON
CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
8. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Parks & Recreati:on Budget
Mr. Kondrick stated tFiat one tFu'rg he G.ad found out w�s that tF�e money
ga�ned from park fees goes, and has for quite a fe�r years, i:nto the
general fund. He stated fie would fiave more information for the Commission �
at their next meeting.
Mr. Minton stated that l egal ly� on t�ie fiooks, ti�e money� r�ould have to he
kept separate.
�'`�,
. . _ . _.... .. .. .
PLRNNIN6 CUMMISSI01�'NiEE�I�IG; - SEPTENIBER-1 � ; ' i 985. . . . ' . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . PAG�' 15
ADJOURI�MENT:
MOTION BY MR. KONDRSCK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO ADJOURIV THE MEEIITNG. UPON A
VOSCE VOTE � ALL VOTING AYE � CHAIRWOMAN SCFINABEL DEGLARE,D �'HE SEP�'. Z 1� 1985 �
PLANNING COMMI55ION MEETING ADJDURNE'D AT 11:40 P.M.
Respectfully subm'tted,
e.;? .._ .... ....
��
ynr�"� a a
Recording Secretary
�
/'�
��, � 4 a
_ . _ . __ ._ _ - ._ —._ __.,_ __ __ _ _ ��`�-°°'�����—���.�1'c.•l _ _ . " __ _ � ____" �.__' _ __ __s__ _ _ _—__ ___`___.
�
- ---- . l� _/_��.� _ -_
_ _ _ _ __ __ _ . -- - -- - -- - -
____ _ _ - - - - -_ - -- _ _ _ .�--- - - ----- -
�- �`���=_----- - --__ - _ - - -_-�-�-_ _ ____ _ --�_ ---_ �_ _ � _ _ _ _____
� � �.,� � �, �?- �� /
°' - __Y_'� ^ ^ �.�.A
` _ __ • /
- -- ---. ._ -----� — ��
_.- -- - - -- y � n t ,
.,.. - .--.- . __ . _..
� (pP,J�G /1 /.1 ?n wi n�lfr n/./r /� r
- --- --- - - _�- �? - - --- - - - _ _ — -- ��� � 9���� - - - i _ .
_.__ __ _ ___ _.
-Z�'`�(1�(%lS_ ��(lp ��1�?-- -/�� ,�/G,�i¢�D--/��-� �,- -- --�
- � - - --
z- -- -- --
. _ .
,, ; � -
-_- _ _- - - ����-- �-�.� -- -�_� _��� �.__ � �
_.
_
��A�..� -�����___ 1�� � _���. _ _ ��_ ________ __ __ _�_
�I_ er�_xs _G� -- - � � _<.��..0 - - - -___ - I/- � _ _ �7..5 �-� _ wA !� Nc __ --� -----� Z-
-.
_ �� ----
-- � '?�-� ------ -.� �-��-- ---� - - -- ��- -- --- ______ _ _ _ --
�- - - -_ __ --_ --- -- -- ------- - -- - ------- -- - - _ _ -- -_ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _
-�
� ��� < v � _
; r� _
_ _ - � i, /��'-�
�_ � �
, _ __
_ _
' �� � . cw.� C�.a� _ _ 55 `� 5. �--{.� � _
_ Gi
,e.�_ � _ ___ ,� ���:�.�.�
, .
.�,��c•ru.c� _ �v�s— 7��`' Gc./ _ _ _ � _ _ _ _ . _ _
� / . 1 �
' (,� ��� �( � ` % s'a/ �%%',�'� �2
; c,,�
; ��'�� ��� . ���,:,�.�,, C1� � � �' �� _ �--- ___ _ - _
` /, , , _ %�
�'..�:�i �.�� _ 7.��.2 i��uti�'f ��. ,t�1 /�� ,�'�'z.��� , �%7� _ _ -� __
� - �- �z ��,�, _ _�'�o� G'� � � l,� ��� /���- _ _ � _ _ _ _ _
J ��� '
' _� �ofZ __ �zvc ��G�..�����,��,LI ___ _�—
�
� _ __
_ G-n- � ? 1�,. _ _ _ _ � 5— _ %S� Zt/�cy � � _ _ Z
__ _
-- _ .
� _ __ -
��-"`�-�-- i%� c�_ 7 7— 7�� (�J �
- �_.
_
_.
_
_ . _
� - -P�'l...� //v� _� .__ _ � _ _ `�
_ ,
__
-_ _
%/� _ _ ��=�' _ _ • �
� �,�;�.. _ _ �.� �..�... �- �
�� . _ __ _ .�
---
��✓vl:t��y�'�� � � '' '- �j
_
/1
_ _ _.