PL 02/26/1986 - 30646,-�� CITY OF FRIDLEY -
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 2�6 , 1986
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Gabel called the February 27, 1986, Planning Commission meeting to
order at 7:33 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Pat Gabel, LeRoy Oquist, Wayne Wellan, �ob Minton, Dean Saba,
Donald Betzold
Members Absent: Dave Kondric�
Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Coo�°dinator
Fred & Doris Jones, 5905 Westbrook Rd. 55422
Richard Malecek, 7136 East River Road
Tom Blomberg, 1661 Camelot Lane
Paul Dahlberg, 6664 East River Road
Kelly Doran, 2626 East 82nd St.
� APPROVAL OF JANUARY 22, 1986, PLANNING CO1rM�ISSION MIfVUTES:
� MOTION BY MR. WELLAN� SECONDED BY MR. �ABA� TO APPROVE THE JAN. 22� 1986� PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES A5 WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTI0111 CAR.RIED
UNANIMOU5LY.
1. PUBLIC
■����nu� �v�•�rn�v1GJ 11YL.:
Vantage Company s A ition, by Vantage Companies, Inc., 6eing a replat of
the southerly 452.64 feet of all that part of_the.south�►est quarter of
the northwest quarter of Section 2, T-30, R-24, Anoka County, Mlinnesota,
lying westerly of State Trunk Highway 47, to be used as�-a shopping center,
the same being 8100 University Avenue N.E.
MO�TION BY MR. MIIVTON� 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO OPEN THE PI7BLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED TNE PUBLIC
HEARIIVG OPEN �T 7; 34 P. M.
Mr. Robinson stated the property was located north of 81st and 9��st of
University Ave. The petitioner was looking at p7atting 12.6 acres. Present
zoning was M-2, heavy industrial; however, the petitioner has petitioned for
rezoning from M-2 to C-3 and C-2. It was originally planned to be rezoned to
all C-3, but with the submission of the plat, one lot when subjected to the
� City's setback requirements, would have a quite small setback, so the zoning
on that lot was changed to C-2 to maintain a buildable usable lot.
,,� PLANNING COMP�ISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 26, 1986 PAGE 2
Mr. Robinson stated �he entire project would be a phased praject. The first
phase �as t�e construction of the approx. 100,000 sq, ft. Wholesale Club.
The second phase would be 77,000 sq, ft, of additional retail, and additional
phases if the project is successful and tenants are required.
�r. Robinson stated Staff �as recommending the following stipulations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Plat to be recorded prior to rezoning being recorded.
Additional right�of-�ay to be provided consistent with
street improvements
Drive�ay onto 81st Ave. to be widened to three lanes.
Driveway onto the service road to be temporary; permanent
driveway to be located north of curve with Phase II construction.
Park fee consistent with area of lots on final plat to be paid
prior to recording.
Ms. Gabel asked if there was any information on the informa7 Environmental
Assessment Worksheet being required by the City.
Mr. Robinson stated they have �'ritten to the Environmental Quality Board,
and the response received from thP EQB was that they did not see any negative
impact. Their�primary concern was storm water run-off. Inasmuch as this
is being taken care of with the same criteria as the Rice Creek Watershed
n District, there shouldn't be any problems. He stated John Flora, Public Works
- Director,W�s�coming to.the��neeting later to talk about water quality in t�gs
area.
Mr. Ro6inson stated they also sent a letter to the DNR, but have not yet
received any response.
Mr. Kelly Doran, Vantage Companies, stated they agree to the stlpulations
as presented by Staff. They did want to clarify a little further one issue
regarding stipulation #2. What the City was desiri�g�was an additional
7 ft. along the frontage road and 20 ft, along 81st�Ave. They would like
these footages defined in the stipulation.
Ms. Gabel stated that in previous discussions, there has been talk about
16 ft, of peat in some places. If 16 ft, of peat is dug out of here which
holds a considerable amount of water, was the capacity of the pond able to
utilize the water that was being retained by the soil previously?
Mr. Doran stated they have hired the eng��eering firm, BRW, which has done a
considerable amount of work in the metropolitan area. They will provide as
part of the stipulations for rezoning a drainage plan that is consistent with
city code; that drainage plan will call for no more run-off post-development
� than there was pre-development.
� PLANNING COM�IISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 26, 1986 PAGE 3
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA� 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO CL05E THE PIIBLIC SEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIIdG AYE� CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECL�IRED THE PUBLIC
HEARING CLO5ED AT 7:49 P,M.
1�iO�AI BY 1�2. OQUIST� SECONDED BY MR. MINTON, TO RECQMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT� P.5. #86-01� BY VANTAGE COMPANIES� INC.:
VANTAGE COMPANp�S ADDITION� BY VANTAGE COMPANIE5� INC.� BEING A REPLAT OF
THE SOUTXERLY 452.64 FEET OF ALL THAT 1�ART OF THE SOUTHG�'E5T �UARTER OF THE
NORTIiWE5T QUARTER OF 5ECTSON 2� T-30� R-24� ANOKA COUNTY� MINNE50TA� LYING
WE5TERLY OF STATE TRUNIC HIGHWAY 47 � TO BE U5ED A5 ,Bl 5HOPPTNG CENTER � THE
SAME BEING 8100 UNIVERI5TY AVENUE N.E.� WITH THE FOLLOWIN6 5T�'PULATION5:
1. PLAT TO BE RECORDED PRIOR TO .REZONING BEING RECORDED. '
2. ADDITIONAL RIGHT—OF—WAY TO BE PROVIDED CONSISTENT W.TTH 5T.REET
IMPROVEMENT5--THAT RZ'GHT OF WAY TO BE 7 FT. ALONG 2'HE FRONTAGE
RDAD AND ZQ FT. .7.TANG 81ST AVE.
3. DRIVEWAY ONTO BlST AVENUE TO BE TnTIDEATED TO TFIREE �AflTES.
4. DRITTEWAY ONTO THE SERVICE ROAD TO BE TEMPORARYp PERM�INENT
DRI57EWAY TO BE LOCATED NORTH OF CURVE W.�TH PHASE II CONSTRUCTION.
5. PARK FEE CONSISTEN2' WITH AREA OF LOTS ON FINAL PI�1T TO EE PAID
PRIOR TO .RECORDIIVG.
� UPON A VO.ICE VOTE � ALL VOTING AYE �' CIiAIRPER50PT GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Gabe7 stated this item would go to City Counci7 on Marcl� 17.
2. COPdSIDERATION OF A tOT �PLIT, L.S: #86-01; BY THONJAS BLOMBERG:
Split off the south one half of Lot 4, Block 32, Hyde Park, together with
the east one half of the adjacent vacated alley and add to Lot 5, Block 32,
Hyde Park, to create a single family residence, and split off the north
one half of Lot 4, Block 32, Hyde Park, together witfi the east one half of
the adjacent vacated alley and add to Lot 3, Block 32, Hyde Park, to create
a single family residence, the same being 5738 - 7th Street N.E.
Mr. Robinson stated this property was located west of 7th St, and north of
57th Place, and involved three 44 ft, lots. The property was zoned R-1 as
�a� most of the surrounding area. The proposal was to take the three lots
and create two 66 ft, lots.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recommending the following stipulations:
1. Exis�ing house to be removed prior to issuance of a building
permit.
2. Park fee of $750 to be paid prior to issuance of a building
permit.
3. Lot split �o be recorded prior to issuance of a bui7ding permit.
4, llariances for lot area from 9,000 sq, ft, to 8,905 sq. ft, and
�"� lot width from 75 ft, to 66 ft, to be approved with lot split.
,,� PLANNING CON�'IISSION_�EETING, FEBRUARY 26, 1986 PAGE 4
, -
Mr. Robinson stated that in this neighborhood, in general, there were quite
a few 65 ft, lots.
Mr. Oquist stated that in looking at the footprint, it appeared that the
proposed structure would meet all the setbacks, so the only variances
required were those outlined in the stipulations.
NJr. Robinson stated that was correct. BY code these variances may be approved
with the lot split.
MOT�ION� BY MR. 5ABA� SECONDED BY MR. WELLAN, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF LOT 5PLIT REQUEST, L.5. #86-01, BY THOMA5 BLOMBERG� TO 5PLIT OFF
THE SOJTH ONE HALF OF LOT 4� BLOCK 32 � HYDE PARIC� TOGE2'�IER WI�'H TFIE EAST
ONE HALF OF THE ADJACENT VACATED AL'LEy AND ADD TO LOT 5� B.LOCK 32� HYDE PARK�
TO CREATE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDEIITCE � AND SPLIT OFF THE NORTH 011TE HALF OF
LOT 4, BLOCK 32, HYDE PARIC, TO�ETHER WI2'H THE EAS_m pNE HAL.►' OF THE ADJACENT
j7ACATED ALI,Ey AN,D ,�1DD TO LOT 3� BLOCK 32 � HYDE PARK� _`�'G CREATE A 5INGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE� THE SA1�E BEI�11G 5738 7Z'di STREET 1V.E. , WITH THF FOLLOWING
STIPUL�ITIONS:
I. EJIISTg'NG HOU5E TO BE REMOVED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMST.
Z. PARIC FEE OF �750.00 TO BE PASD PRIOR TO I5SUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
3. LOT SPLIT TO BE RECORDED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDIIVG PERMIT.
4. vFlRTANCES FOR LO'1' AREA FROM 9�000 SQ. FT. TO 8�905 SQ. FT. AND
LOT WID22'H FROM 75 FT. 7'O 66 FT. TO BE APPROVED WTTH 7AT SPLIT.
�'`, ,
UPOIUA VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPER50N GABEL DEC?1ARED THE MOTIOIU
CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
Ms. Gabel stated this item would go to City Council on March 17.
3. CONSIDERATZON OF A tOT SPCIT, t:S: #86=02, BY RICHARD I�IA�ECEK;
Split off the west 90 feet of t at part of ot 28, �vised Auditor's Sub-
division No. 77 lying easterly of the following described line: beginning
at a point on the south line of said Lot 28 distant 315.64 feet west of the
southeast corner thereof; (said southeast corner being on the centerline of
East River Road)thence north at right angles to said south line to its inter-
section with the north line of said Lot 28 and there terminating, the same
being 7136 East River Road N.E.
Mr. Robinson stated this was tfie exception property of tfie Riverirtood School
Plat. The property was located north of 71st and west of East River Road.
It was zoned R-1 as was the surrounding area. The proposal was to split off
the westerly 90 ft, creating a new lot in excess of 10,000 sq. ft. The new
lot would meet all code requirements, and would have access onto the new
Riverwood Drive.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recommending the fol�lowing stipulations:
�
,,..1 PLANNING COI�MISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1986 PAGE 5
i'�1,
1. Provide City,,with a 25 ft, bikeway/walkway easement along
East River Road.
2. New house front yard setback to follow curve of street.
3. Spli� to be recorded prior to issuance of building permit.
4. Park fee of $750 to be paid prior to building permit.
5. Private utility easement to be provided across northerly
15 ft, of new lot.
6. Petitioner agrees to fair share of street and utility assess-
ments for ne� lot.
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA� SECONDED BY M12. OQUIST� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF LOT 5PLIT� L.5. #86=02� BY RICHARD MALECEK� TO 5PLI�' OFF THE WE5T
90 FEET OF THAT PART OF LOT 28� .REVI5ED AUDITOR'S 5UBDIVISION N0. 77 LYING
EASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DE5CRTBED LINE: BEGINNlNG AT A POINT 0111 THE SOUTH
LIP7E OF 5AID LOT28 DI5TANT 315.64 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEA5T CORNER THEREOF;
[SAID SOUTHEAST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF EAST RIVER ROAD) THENCE
NORTH AT RIGHT ANGLE5 TO 5AID 50UTH LINE TO ITS INTE.R5ECTTON 6�ITH THE NORTH
LINE OF SAID LOT28 AND TSERE TERMINATING� THE SAME BEIIVG 7136 EAST RIVER ROAD�
6TITX THE FOLLOWING 5TIpU71ATIONS:
.Z. PROVIDE CITY WITN A 25 FT. BII{EWAY/WALKWAY EA5EMENT AZONG
EAST RIVER ROAD.
2. NEW HOUSE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO FOLLOW CURVE OF STREET.
3. 5PLIT TO BE RECORDED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUIZDING PERMIT.
4. PARK FEE OF $750 TO BE PAID PRIOR TO BUILD.ING PERMIT.
5. PRIVATE UTSLITY EASEMENT TO BE PROVIDED ACROSS NORTHERLY
I5 FT. OF NEW LOT.
6. PETITIONER AGREES TO FAIR SHARE OF 5TREET �JND UTiLITY AS5E5S-
MENTS FOR NEW LOT.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTSNG AYE� CHAI.RPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTIOIV
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Gabel stated this item would go to City Council on March 17.
4. DISCUSSION ON NORTH PARIC STUIZNI DRAIIVAGE ISSl1ES - JOtIN � FCORA:
Ms. Gabel stated that because of developments proposed in the north area,
the Planning Commission has been concerned about what happens with the water
flo� after development. It seemed that when there was a significant amount
of deve7opment, strange things happened to the water flow in Stonybrook Creek
and other creeks in the a�ea, and they did not understand why.
Mr. Flora stated that prior to 1982, there was only one organization responsi-
ble for managing surface water in the City, and that was the Rice Creek Water-
shed District. The City has always been attempting to standardize the system
within the City so that when they talk to developers and look at improving
properties, they are consistent within the City. So, they really haven't
looked at anything different from the Rice Creek Watershed Distri��°areas and
,� the other areas in the City. T� have always administered storm water and
surface water in the same way. Pi�incipally, they have taken the approach
that in developing property, the run-off �rom that property after development
,� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETI�JG, FEBRUARY 26, 1986 � PAGE 6
should be no different tha� it �ou7d before the deve7opment occurred. That
means, no greater water running off and no less quality. Basically, that
meant that when something was developed, water ran off much faster and had to
be detained for a certain period of time so the normal flow would be slo�ed
down. They also require that all contaminants be kept on the property.
So, for most developments, other than residential homes, the City requ�res
them to take into account the increase and any affect on storm �ater.
Mr. Flora stated that usually requires that t�e developer have some type of
retention pond--some place where the wa�er can be held for a period of time,
so the water is not proceeding any faster to the next door neighbor tha�
it would have bef�r� d�v�l�pment. A weir basically filters off materia7s
that are accumulated on the hard surface (papers, floatables, etc.), so that
when water leaves the property, it is essentially the same quality as it was
before development.
Mr. F7ora sta�ed part of the problem today in Fridley is that most of the
City has been developed. He stated that above 79th, there are still quite a
few empty lots, and they are focusing on that area as it was being developed.
Those areas are a]so now under the control of what is called the Six Cities
Watershed Management Organization. In 1982, the Legislature passed what they
called a 509 Statute which said that all the seven counties in the metropolitan
area will have a storm water surface water management organization. This
�' was eventually narrowed down to the Cities of Fridley, Blaine, Coon Rapids,
= Spring Lake Park, Columbia Heights, and Hilltop, which, through a joint powers
agreement, established the Six Cities Watershed Managemen� Organization. It
has no� been three years since that organization was established.
Mr. Flora stated they are almost to the point where they have a Water Manage-
�ent Plan prepared to be submitted to the Water Resources Board, DNR, Metro-
politan Council, and other cities for review and, hopefully, adoption. Once
that plan has been adopted, then each city will begin implementing policies
and procedures in conformance to the plan. In essence what that plan will say
was that each city will do its own thing with water as long as it does not hurt
the cities when it crosses a boundary line. If it does, then the cities have
to get together and work out a mutual solution. All the cities are basically
adopting the same principle--that water should not leave a site in any greater
or worse condition than it was before development. Hopefully, their plan will
be processed and submitted with the next few months.
Mr. Flora stated that in the area north of 79th, the biggest open area, of
course, was the Springbrook Nature Center. He stated Coon Rapids has a big
industrial park development, Evergreen Park, just north of the nature center.
Coon Rapids is very interested in putting a lot of industry into that area.
But, by doing that, they want to maximize the property and they don't want to
put a lot of land into ponds. By the same token, the nature center has a marshy
swampy area which they would like to make into a deep water pond that will
attract water fowl and maintain fish and wildlife throughout the year.
�
,� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 26, 19�6 � � PAGE 7
Mr. Flora stated there is also a problem with erosion in Stonybrook Creek,
and the City would like to do something with Stonybrook. Part of the water
management plan they are proposing is how can they satisfy the desires of the
nature center, t�e City's desires to improve the area north of 79th, and
deal witfi storm water?
Mr. Flora stated they have come up with a plan which they think will work
that �ill allow a certain portion of the nature center to flood and become
a permanent "lake" and a place that can take the surge of rainfall. They
will be doing this in cooperation with Coon Rapids. The concept is that
Fridley is going to provide the site, and Coon Rapids is going to provide the
funding to do the project. Frldley is going to allow a certain amount of water
from Coon Rapids to run through this system, cross the border and come into
the nature center.
Mr. Flora stated the real question right now is "what is water quality"? He
stated that right now they do not know the answer to that question as �hey
have no �ay of identifying or measuring what is in the water. At some point
in time as they learn more, they will come up with an answer to that question.
Ms. Gabel asked what the impact was on the surrounding creeks and Springbrook
Nature Center from all this impending development.
'� Mr. Flora stated there was no impact, waterwise. As the
° coroing in, for everything north of 81st Ave. for sure thegeareere�uirin
Environmental Assessment Worksheets because of the proximity to the nature
center.so they can look at what affect the development mig�t have on surround-
ing properties, environment, the nature ce�ter, traffic, water systems, etc.
So far, they have not had any negative results in that process. So, they have
not impacted the nature center. As far as water, they feel they will be doing
the nature center a service because they are providing them with an environ-
ment they would like to have by providing water that cannot currently be sus-
tained there. As far as the ground water table, they are essential7y helping
it because they will be allowing the water to be detained so it has some time
to get into the ground. With all new development, where possible, they will
try to have detention ponds put in.
Mr. Flora stated that when they get the Water Management Plan drafted, he
will provide the Planning Commission with a copy.
�Mr. Oquist left the meeting at 9:30 p.m.)
Ms� Gabel �hanked Mr, Flor-a fo�,all,-the.information �e had given them. She
stated the possible impact from these impending developments in the north area
had been a major concern to her. This was a very sensitive piece of property,
and she had not been comfortable making decisions on development in this area
because she did not know the answers. She felt Mr. Flora had done a good job
.of answering their questions about water retention.
^
_ Mr. Flora stated that as far as he �as concerned, he felt they were handling
the water adequately. They were certainly doing things a lot better than ten
years ago because of better technology. He could not address water quality,
fiecause �e did not know that much about water quality at this time.
;—� PLANNING COP�h1ISSI0N MEETI�G, � FEBRUARY 26, 1986 PAGE 8
Mr. Saba stated he felt Mr. Flora had done a good job in telling them how
to handle the water flow in this area. What the Commission had been concerned
about was that each project was being handled individually, and there did not
seem to be a master plan showing an overall impact of drainage and water flow.
He felt �hat Mr. Flora had presented to t�em seemed to address that situation.
Mr. Flora stated both the Six Cities Watershed Management Organization and
tfie Rice Creek �atershed District are in the process of preparing plans that
sfiould be coropleted by Dec. 31. Then, next year, they should have a plan for
t�e entire City of.Fridley that addresses surface water.
Mr. Saba stated he hoped as a result of this they would have some kind of
continual monitoring of water quality. Whether they can define water quality
or not, they can at least look at the water as it is today, what kind of con-
taminants are in that water, and �here it seems to be coming from, so they
have some kind of monitoring system.
Mr. Flora stated one of the things he wants to do is establi�h a g�ound zero
and go from there,
Mr. Saba stated he would like to see the Environmental Quality Commission or
some body at some point in time look at the types of contaminants that are
r..,, going into the Fridley water system. A lot of communities are looking at
6 lawn service companies and how those contaminants affect the water system, as
well as other household wastes. Maybe the City of Fridley should be addressing
these situations. There could be some very serious contaminants going into the
storm water systems.
Ms. Gabe7 stated this was something the Environmental Quality Commission might�
�tant to consider for their work plan.
5. ANALYSIS OF PAST HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING:
Mr. Robinson stated he had tried to outline all tFie past fwroan services
funding from 1981 - 1985. This was for the Commission's information.
6. REVISION TO 1986 CDBG ALLOCATIONS:
Mr. Robinson stated in the agenda was the 1986 Corrnnunity Development Block
Grant funding which was approved by the City Council on Feb. 3, 1986.
Mr. Robinson stated also included in the agenda was a letter he had written
to Ms, JoAnn Wright, Community Development Coordinator, Anoka County, asking
her to provide the City of Fridley with a breakdown of the other par�icipating
cities' contributions to human service activities, the percent of their total
fund going to human services, and the total County.percentage of human services
allocation. The reason for this was that the City has decided to place greater
emphasis on human services funding and has proposed increased human services
^� funding which hopefully will not push the county-wide human services fund over
the 15% cap.
PLANNING COMMISSIO_N �EETING, FEBRUARY 26, 1986 PAGE 9
Ms. Gabel stated she was much more comfortable with the revised 1986 CDBG
funding budget.
7. LIABILITY INSURANCE:
Mr. Robinson stated that included in the agenda �as a memo from Mr. Hunt,
Asst, to t6e City Manager, which informed all merabers of city commissions
tFiat they were covered under both the general liability and the public officials
lia�ility policies carried by the City up to a limit of $600,000 per incid�ht.
8. RECEIVE FEB. 4, 1986, ENERGY PROJECT CO�MITTEE MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA� 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO .RECEIVE THE FEB. 4� 1986�
ENERGY PROJECT COMMITTEE MIIITUTE5.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL IIOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MO�T�ON BY MR. SABA� 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
THE' REVISION OF TNE ENERGY STANDARD 5ECTION OF THE ENERGY HOU5ING CODE TO
INCLUDE MINNESOTA 5TATU2'E5 DEALING WITH INSUZ�ATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
UPON A 1lOICE VOTE, ALL UOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOi►ION
!� CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. RECEIUE FEB. 6, 1986, HUMAN RESOURCES COMN7ISSION N�INt1TES:
M02'ION BY MR. MINTON� 5ECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECEIVE TNE FEB. 6� 1986,
KUM�1N RESOURCES COMMIS5TON MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE T70TE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSORI GABEL DECLARED Z'HE MOTION
CARR.ZED UNAN.Ily0U5EY.
Mr. Minton stated that on page 4 of the minutes, the Cor�nnission had made a
motion that the City Council establish the following criteria for student
employment in a summer jobs program ( atterned after the State Summer Jobs
Prograro� for the City of Fridley: (1� first priority be granted to previous
satisfac�ory employees; (2) remaining priorities be gra�ted according to
State Law income guidelines with the stipu7ation that any job not filled
6y a satisfactory candidate within a 10 day app7ication time period can be
filled by any other qualified person.
Mr. Flora stated he had responded to this to Mr. Hunt. At the same time, the
City Council talked about it unofficially at their last meeting. He stated
�hat they have done in the past is rehire previous satisfactory producing
employees. They would also focus on Fridley residents. They figure if
Fridley money is being used, then Fridle
Then, they would normall Y people should benefit from it.
y go through the County CETA or JEPA programs; then
� anyone else available to work.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING;�FEBRUARY�26,�1986 � ��� � PAGE 10
Mr.'Flbra stated there was a question raised by the Human Resources
Cormnission as to whether or not the City should be following the State
Swmner Jofis Program po7icy �hich establishes such criteria as unemployed
heads of household, mem6er of household in which all family members are
unemployed, person u�fio earns so muc�. money, etc. He stated he had no problem
�citE� following that policy except he felt they w�uld prefer to still hire a
returning employee who has done well and focus on the Fridley resident. Based
an that, they would then follow the state job hiring criteria.
Mr. Minton stated they saw this summer jobs program as an opportunity to do
some things that should be done in the work world, especially in a public
organization like the City, and that was to give some advantage to the
disadvantaged. He felt the Commission would have no pro6lem with giving
priority to Fridley residents within criteria #2, and then go beyond that if
necessary.
Mlr. Flora stated he thought he would prefer criteria that �tould give priority
first to previous employees, then Fridley employees, then follow the state
lor� income guidelines.
I�r. Saba and Mr. Wellan stated they would be in favor of that.
Mr. Minton stated he did not think the Numan Resources Commission would go
^ aaong with that, because it would be diluting the program too much and there
° r�ould virtually be no lotu income in the program, at least not any more than
t6ere-is right now.
Mr. Flora stated they always hire through the CETA and JEPA programs, but
iast year they had jobs that were not filled, so they really have not found
enough low income people to satisfy their demand.
MOTION BY MR. MINTON�TO ENDDR5E THE MOTION MADE BY THE HUMAN RE50URCES
CO1�IrSSION TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIZ THAT THE FDLLOWING CRITERIA BE
ESTABLI5HED FOR STUDENT EMPLOYMENT IN:�A SUMMER JOB5 PROGI�IM FOR THE CSTY OF
FRIDLEY WITH.AN AMENDMENT TO CRITERIA #2 IN ACCORDING WITH DI5CUSSION WITH
CITY STAFF:
Z. FIR5T PRZORITY BE GRANTED TO PREVIOU5 SATI5FAC�'ORY EMPLOYEES
2. REMAINI111G PRIORITIE5 BE GRANTED ACCORDIAIG TO 5TATE LOW INCOME
GUIDELINES WITH FIRST P,REFERENCE BEGING GIVEN TO .Z1PPL.ICANT5 WHO
L217E IN FRIDLEY.
MOTION DIE�D FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Mr. Betzold wondered if they would be shutting people out by saying
"previous satisfactory employees". Was this a good policy the City should
continue? From an experience factor, it was good; but from a policy factor,
he did not know if it was a good thing or not.
l`� Mr. Robinson asked i� the motion would be more acceptable if it ranked previous
- emp1oyees first, low income-Fr3dley residents second, other Fri.dley residents
third and lastly other low income applicants,
� PLANNING COMMISSION �EETING; FEBRUAR� 26, 1986 PAGE 11
MOTION BY MR. MINTON� 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO ENDORSE THE MOTION MADE
BY THE HUIHAN RE50URCE5 COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ESTABLISH CRITERIA FOR STUDENT EMPLOYMENT IN A SUMMER JOBS PROGRAM FOR
THE CITY OF FRIDLEY� BUT THAT THE CRITERIA BE AMENDED A5 FOLLOW5:
1. FIRST PRIORITY BE GRANTED TO PREVIOUS SATISFACTORY EMPLOYEES.
2. REMAINING PRIORITIES BE GRANTED ACCORDING �'O STATE LOW INCOME GUIDELINES
WTTH FIRS�' PREFERE(110E BEING GIVEN TO APPLICANTS WHO LIVE IN FRIDLEY.
3. OTHER FRIDLEY RE5IDENT5
4. OTHER LOW INCOME APPLICANTS
Mr. Saba questioned how much legalism was involved here and how much cost
was goi.ng to be incurred on the City of Fridley to follow t�is criteria.
Mr. Wellan stated he felt that when a program was already working u�ell as
the City's was, why change it? He was against more government intervention.
If there was a dis�rimination problem, he could see it; but there did not
seem to 6e any pro6lems.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� GABEL, MINTON� BETZOLD VOTING AYE� SABA AND frtiELLA1V VOTING
NAY, CFIAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED WlTH A VOTE OF 3-2.
ADJOURNMENT:
�� MOTION BY MR. MINTON� SECONDED.BY MR. SABA, TO ADJOURN THE MEET,ZNG. 'UPO1V A VOICE
� VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPER50N GABEL DECLARED THE FEB. 26� 1986� PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING ADJDURNED AT 10:30 P.M.
Respectfully sub itted,
y Sa a �
Recording Secretary
/"�
:._ � __.a�....n _
-- _ .�..��
��n! �.�yVVl�a G
��
._ _ __ �_ �
� ___. _�_v,._
� �_ _. � ���_ _._
�
�
/� ' 4
� ,Q� / � .___..._.._._ _ . "_ __ � � � S
/ / / i
_ i
�!�.��i ,/�
, � /� -
()� �
��
�