PL 01/07/1987 - 6906City of Fridley
A G E N D A
H,ANNING O�MMISSION I�EETING WEDT7ESA�Y, JANUARY 7, 1987 7:30 P. M.
Lowtion: Cotmcil Q�amlzt (upper lEVel)
cat •r • TO ORDER •
ROLL CAI,L•
APPRWE PIADL�IING �MMISSION MINUTES: DECENBER 10, 1986
NNSIDERATION OF 1987 CAMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
ALLOCATIONS . . . • . • . • • • . • • • . • . • . • . • . •
PAGFS
. .1 - 1N
Q�NSIDERP.TIOP7 OF AN ORDINANCE RE�DIFYING QIAPTER 205 OF
7FIE ERIILEY CITY OJDE AS IT RELATFS 40 MEDICAL AND DENTAL
Q,INIC PARKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2B
Q�NSIDERATIOD! OF AN ORDINANCE REODDIFYING QiAPTER 205 OF
'IHE fRII%,EY CITY ODDE AS IT REI�ARFS '1D �IURQIES . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3B
UPLI�,TE GN 'IIIF: UNIVERSITY AVEN[)E WRF2ILOR H2Q7ECP (REFER 70
S�1FF ADDENDUM 7.D gIE SZt7DY DII.IVERID 12/8/86) ......... 4 - 4J
RECEIVING `IIiE' Mii�)g5 OF �SiE FNEE�Y NMMISSION MEETING OF
DECENBIIt 2 � 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LII.AC
RE(EIVING �IE MINUTES OF TfiE HUMAN RFSOURCES OOMMISSION
MEETING OF DE(EN�ER 4, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SI�IMON (At Meeting)
RECEIVING 7.HE MINUTES OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AU�30RITY MEETING OF DECEN�ER 11, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . iVHTTE
RE(EIVING �iE MINU7S�5 OF 7fiE APPEALS Q�FB�fISSION MEETING OF
DECEP�IIt 16. .1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YF•LI+Ota
RECENSNG TfiE MINUTES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
NI�4�IISSION MEETING OF DE(F,i+�ER 16, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . .
RE�IVING �iF,' MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ENERGY CAMMISSION
I+�ETING OF DEt�:NBER 29. 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CIIIiIIt BUSINFSS:
� � • •� ��
-.�ji �a
LIL�C iAt Meeting)
CITY DF FRIDLEY
Pt.ANNING COMMISSI01� �10E7I;IG, DECEIIRER 10, 19Rfi
CAl_L TO ORDEF'.:
Chairperson Ril'�in9s called the December 10, 1986, Planning Corimission meetino
to order at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Menbers Present: Steve Qillin9s, Dean Saba, Sue Sherek, Donald Getzold,
Rici�ard Svanda
tienbers Ab�eni:: Dave Kondri cl:
Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning C,00rdinator
Charles CooY., f,00n Rapids
�ohn ttelson, Professional Ventures
John C,rossman, Professional Ventures
Gidrn Bertrur�, Professional Ventures
David ?titchell, representing Vantage Properties, Inc.
Matthe�•r iJichol, Vantage Properties
Dave Rooney, Madison Pizza (RocY,y Ricoco)
JacY, Maxwell, 2931 Partridge Rd., Roseville
(See attacfied list)
APPROVAL OF tlOUFt1RFR 19, 1986, PLAHtiINf, COP•1P1ISSI0�I MIPIUTFS:
MO."'IDP: HY P1R. BET'I,OLD, SECOPJDED BY PfS. SHF.REK� TO AF'PPOVF. TIfE XOV. 29� 2986�
PIe]NNZf7G COMII7SSIOP7 t1INUTES AS WRIPTEN.
UPON A NOIC.E VO'.PE, ALL LTOTINC� RYE� Cf1RIRPEP,SON B_TLLINCS PF,CT�IP,F.II TNF. MOTZOtI
CRF?RZED UNlIN2PfOUSLY.
1, {TAE3LED NOVE:PIBER 19, 1936) - PURLIC HEARIFiG; C�fISIDERATIQ�J OF A PRF.LIhfINAP,Y
PL�T,�.S.`�-Ab-06, U L KS, IiY CtIARI_ES CQ(1K: Beinq a rep at of that part
o Lof t ZZ, E'�:k 3, ttoore Lake Ni s, Anoka County, Minnesota, lyin9 southerly
of a line desci^ibed as follo4rs: Begin�ing at a point on the northeasterly
line of I.ot 21, Block 3, Moore Lake 1lills, distant 35.00 feet northwesterly
from tlie northeast corner; thence southwesterly to a point on the southwesterly
line of said Lat 22, distant 42.0(l feet northwesterly from the sou�hYiest corner
of said Lot 22 and tf�ere terminating. Except that part there-of lying nnrth-
easterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the nnrth line
of said Lot ?2, distant 5.0� feet westerly from the northeast corner; thence
southerly to a point on the south line of said lot, distant 6Q.�0 fee± westerly
from the southeast corner. Subject to easements, if any, and that part of
Lot 21 and 22, 131ock 3, Pioore Lake Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying easterly,
southeasterly, and nortf�easterly of a line descrihed as follows: Beninning at
a point on the northeasterly line of said Lot 21, distant 212.00 feet south-
easterly of the most northerly corner of said Lot 21, thence southa�esterly, at
a right angle tn said northeasterly line, to its intersection with line A, here-
after described, thence southwesterly, along said line A to its intersection
with a line dascribed as beginning at a point, on the north line of said Lot 22,
PLAF�t�ItIG C(!"*1ISSION P1EETIWG, DECETI[3ER 1D, 79�36 PRGE 2
distant 5.Q0 feet v+esterly of tf�e northeast corner, thence southerly to a
point on the soutfi line of said Lot 22, distant 60.00 feet westerly of *,he
southeast corner, thence southerly, along last descrihed 7ine, to the south
line of said Lot 22 and there terminating. Line P, is described as beginning
at a point on tF�e northeaster7y northeast corner, thence southwesterly to a
point on .*.he southwesterly line of said Lot 22, said point distant 42.00
feet nortl�t�+ester7y from the southwest corner of said Lot 22, and there
terminating. Su6ject to easerients, if any, and the east 6D0.00 feet of the
south ?OQ.00 feet of the nortfi Fi82.5 feet of the northwes± quartnr of t.he
northeast quarter of Section 24, Township 30, Range 24, located in Anoka
County, Minnesota, generally iocated south of flillcrest Drive and north of
Gardena Avenue.
PURL3C HEARItaG OPEN.
MOTZON BY 6fR. SABA, SECOP7DED Bf MR. BETZOLD, TO RF.,`tOVT•. P,9. N86-06 FROM THF.
TABLE,
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL S'OTING AYE, CHAIRPF,ItSON BILLINGS DECLARED THB MOTFON
CAF[RIED UNRNZMOUSLY.
Ftr. Rohinson stated this property t�ias located south of tioore Lake Hills an�i
north of Gardena Ave. The property involved 3,25 acres which included a
vacant woodland and the rear of Lot 21 and Lot 22. The prelininary plat
included seven 7ots which were centered around a proposed cul-de-sac, which
�tould be a6out 325 feet long. The lots all Meet code as far as lo*_ area and
lot width.
Mr. Robinson stated the drainage plan had been submitted to the P.ice Creek
Watershe�l District Goard and City Staff for reviev!. At the last meetinry,
the key issues with the plat was that the Arainage p]an did not provide for
an overflow pipe. There was no storr� sevaer in the immediate area. 5ince the
iast meetinq, Staff has worked with Suburban Enaineerin9 and reached the
conclusion that although the drainage plan was adequate for the plat itself,
it did not mitigate the adverse effects it could eventually have on the
surrounding properties. Therefore, City Staff has reconmended that an over-
flow pipe be installed yiith the plan from Nilicrest ��est to Gardena Lane to
an existing catch basin. The estimated cost was $33,0��1. Fortunately, the
pipe would not have to go in the street. There �ras quite a bit of ho�ilevard
and green area adjacent to the road where the PVC pipe could he placeA without
tearing up the street.
Mr. Robinson stated that at the last meeting, the Planning Commission asked
Staff to look into the assessments and market values of the existing pronerties
in the area. He stated Leon 'tadsen, Ci±y Assessor, had written a r�emo (par�e ]L
of the agenda) dated �Jov. 19, 1986. �1r. tladsen stated in the memo tha*: "Plo
special consideration has 6een given to the existence of the vacant area now
pr�posed for p7atting. If t6e platting goes through, there will continue to
be no ef.fect on value, of tfiese properties, except to the extent that land areas
are reduced to accomnodate the developmen*.. The reason for not considering the
PLAN�JING CO'1!1ISSIOfd P1EETIMf,, IIECFttBER 10, 19II6 PAGE 3
open land in the value process �vas because of the uncertain disposition of
the parcel. I� hadn't been dedicated for any public purpose."
Mr, Robinsori stated the uncertain disposition of the parcel was perhaps a
liability as much as an asset to the area.
h1r. Robinsoru stated that also at the request of the Coemission, on [lec. 1,
he arranged for and conducted an analysis of the area with Siah St. Clair,
City Platuralist, and a wildlife expert froM the DMR, Lloyd Knutson. They
walked the area vrith Connie Hodig. 11r. I:nutson conmented on the wildlife
aspects, f�e agreed that it was a qood �iildlife habitat in its present con-
dition anci also agreed there would be a deterioration of habitat with the
develo�erit, as there would be with any developr�ent. They tali:ed ahout �1ays
to nitigate the prohler�.
�1r. Robinson stated that athatever stipulations the Comnission placed on the
developer wei°e going to be diFficult to carry tf�rauqh to suhsequent owners
of the Qropei-ty. One thing that could be considered was a covenant or dPed
that vwuld be placed on appropriate lota wF�ere the wildlife was ontimum right
now. It would hasically call for a management-type plan and was sor�ething
the City would f�ave to 6e involved in. Tfie 6ity has not heen involved in
anything like this before.
Mr, Robins�n stated Staff was recomnendinq the followin� stipulations:
1. Developer to implement a drainage plan v�hich meets Public llorks
specif�ications {conpleted)
2. Developer agrees to pay assessr�ents for all public improvements
necess�itated by the plat.
3. Al1 proposed viaterlines to be 6-inch diar�eter.
4. Provide. easement for storm drainage system.
5. Sanitary :sevier lift station to meet Public 1!orks requirements.
6. Provide a plan and necessary easements for private utility services.
7. Provide a 20-foot huilding setback easement along the north line of
proposed t.ot 5.
8. Developer agrees to preserve trees to the greatest extent possible.
9. Park fees of §1,500 per lot to be paid with each of the seven building
permits.
10. Retaining wall in cul-de-sac right-of-Yray to he a minimun of 1� feet
from cu•b; materials and design to be approved by City Staff.
Mr. Cook st��ted Staff was recorahending the storm sewer syster� with this
project. He was uncomfortable with stipulation N2 which stated: "�eveloper
agrees to pe�y assessments for all public improvements necessitated by the
plat." He �:tated he did not feel fie should pay the entire bill for a storm
sewer system wV�en he was the only developer at this tirne.
11r. 6illings stated that, of course, the City Council would make the final
decision regarding the storr� sewer syster�. At the last meetin9, Cou�cilman
Schneider f�ad stated if tf�ere was any storm sewer system, it should not be
assessed to the tteighbors,
PLA�JIJIWG C0�41ISSIDN PiEETING, DECEM6ER 70 1936 PIIGE 4
Mr. Bai7ey Ti71er, 1535 f;ardena Ave.. stated he was concerned about whether
or not any water tests had been done on the land. Hov+ high was the water
table? f!e stated years ago, tfie water ta61e was as high as 5 ft. from thP
surface. He stated those tests should be made before any development starts.
He stated he felt the nicest thin9 the City could do with this land was
leave it the way it was with the riildlife, and let the water run where it may.
Ms. Co mie Flodig, 1330 Hillcrest Drive, stated she was with the naturalist
and the D�JR wildlife expert when they wal{;ed the land. Her lot was Lot 24
which was adjacent to the proposed developraent. Tf�ey had sor�e discussion about
various erays to handle the pro6lem sfie had with the development. She was not
against the deve7opment, per se, 6ut sfie would lil;e to see the wildlife main-
tained as much as possib]e and left as natural as it can be. She agreed with
i1r. Y,nutson of the DtlR that they couldn't build seven homes and no* affect the
wilcllife. f�er suggestion was that instead of i�aving a covenant against all
seven lots, maybe sonetlting could be done only on Lot 5 where the pond was
predoninately right now, leaving the water much the same as it is novr, except
where the house could be constructed. In other words, take a portion o° Lot 5
and maintain it as a separate park-like area,
'1r. Robinson stated there was some logic to Hs. T1odig's su99estion. Lot 5
cou7d certainly afford to be reduced in buildable area as it tivas over 1/2 acre.
Also, the area was irmediately adjacent to the wetlands which was probably the
most valuable and habitahle area for wildlife. A considerat,ion such as this
might be sor�ething fairly easy to rianage.
P1r. Cook stated he had sone conversation ahout this possibility, and he had
offered 100-125 ft. of the project including some of the land as a park.
Mr. Robinso� stated Staff eias not proposing a park for a numher of reasons:
(1) It vras the City's policy to not maintain sr�all parks; (2) There vias
liability to the City; and (3) 4Jhen there is a small outlot area, it tend6
to become a dumping ground.
Mr. Robinson stated they fe7t it would be maintained better if the property
was retained 6y tF�e oo-mer of l.ot 5 and the nei9hbors couid help by being
watchdogs in naintaining ihe arildlife corridor in the area.
Mr, Cook stated he could agree to sor�ethino like this. They �aould have to
look at the site and deterraine what was reasonable.
Mr. Rillings stated the park dedication fee on Lot 5 might be somethincl
Mr. Cook might want to negotiate with the City Council.
MOTION BY MF.. BETZOLD� SECOt7DED BY MR. SABA� TO CIASE THF. PUBLIC HF,ARI"'G.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOT.FNG AYE� CHAFRPF,RSOII BZLLING5 DECLAP.FD TI?P•. PUBLIC
HEARSNG CLOSED AT 8:10 P.1f,
�1r. Robinson recommended that an eleventh stipulation be added: "A deed
restriction to preserve the wildlife habitat nn a portion of Lot 5 he
recorded with the plat."
PLANNIIIG COtT1ISSI0N NEETIP�G, DECEi16ER 10, 1986 PAGF. 5
Mr. Robirison stated he should point out that on the assessraent issue, althouc�h
there is some developr�ent pending on the Gardena School property, he did not
believe they should make the assumption that the development would be approved,
and woulcl also have to pay sor�e assessment for the storm sewer. It was a
possibility that the total cost,would be P1r, Cook's responsibility.
�4r, Setzold stated the issue of the natural ha6itat in the area was raised
not only at this neeting but at the last Planning Comrnission meeting as well.
He found it troublesome that a 6ulldozer could come in and disturh nesting
areas of the a+ildlife, but it was also disturbing to think that over the last
30 years with all the developraent goi�g on in the City of Fridley, 9Q% of
those peoale are presently living in houses that used to 6e some aninal's home.
The small consolation was that the City of Fridley has made a very stron�I
corenitMent to preserving some nature centers. There was one about one-half
mile fror� this particular area. tiay6e sorae of these animals will gn to that
nature area. ?laybe sor�e will eventually return if the western area of Lot 5
is preserved, but it could be a 7ong time.
MOT707T BY MR. BFTZOLD, SFC017DF,P BY MR. �'ABA, TO RF,COMMF,ND TO Clmy CODNCIL
APPROVAL C7F PRELIffZt7ARY PL11T� P.S. $86-06� VALLEY OAKS� BY CF7ARLF,S CDOY.�
WITX THE F'OLIA4.�ING STZPi�LATZONS: ,
1. DEVELOPER TO IMPLF.lfENT A DRAINAGE PLAN Wf17CH MF.E:'S P?BLIC WOP.KS
S'PECIFICATIONS.
2. UEVEZAPF.R AGRE£:S TO PAY ASSESSPfENSS FOR ALL PUBLIC SAfPPO"FMENTS
NECF.S57PATED BY THE PLAT.
3. ALL PROPOSED WRTF,RLIIJES ^_'O SE 6—ZPICH DIAl�1F•TF.R.
4. PROVIDE EASEAfENT FOR S:'ORM DRAINAGE SYSTEl1.
5. SANI2ARY SE47ER LIFT .STA:'IOtJ TO AfF.Em PUBLIC WORKS ItF.QUIRFMF.flTS.
6. PROVID£. A PLflf7 AND NF,CESSIlRY F,ASEFiE17T5 FOR PRIL'ATE UTILITY
SERVZCES.
7. PROVIDE A 20—FOQT BUILDING SETBACK EASF.IdF,?IT ALOPIG THE NORTH LIt)E
O.° PROPOSED IAT 5.
8. D,.°VF.IAPER RGREES TO PRl,$ERVE :'REES '"O THF. GREATEST EY.TECIT POSSIBLE.
9. PARK FIES OF $1�500 PT.R LOS TO BE PAID FIITH ERCN OF THP ST.PEN
BiTZL➢It7G PF.FtMITS.
20. Ri?TAINING GIALL IN CUL—DE-5AC RIGNT—OF—WAY '"O BF A F1INI.MUM OF
20 FEET FROPf CURB; MATERIAIS AND DESIGN TO BE APPROVF,D BY
CT.TY STAFF.
12. A DEED RESTRICTION TO PRESERVE THE WILDLIFE HABITA2 ON A PORTI077
O2' IAT 5 BE RECORDED 477TN TNE FLAT,
Mr. Svanda stated he questioned stipulation #9 regardin9 the park fees of
$1,500 per lot. He felt this could be discussed with the City Council as
part of I.ot: 5 would be set aside for a wildlife habitat area.
UPON A VDICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRPERSON BILLINGS DEC.LAP.FD TPF. MOTION
CARRIED UNANSMOUSLI'.
�4r. Robinson stated there would be a public hearing on this item hefore the
City Council on Jan. 5, 19II7.
PLAPlNIPIG COMMISSIOfI PIEETING, DECEt1fSER 10, 19II6 PAr,E 6
2. (TARLED �JOVENQER 19, 1986} - COfISIDERATION OF A VACATION REQIIFS7, SAU #R6-06,
BY CHARL[S COOK: Vacate easements for pu6lic utilities described as folloa�s:
t e south 5 feet of Lot 22, 61ock 3, tloore Lake Hills,and the south .5 feet
and tfie east 10 feet af Lot 21, Block 3, tloore Lake Nills, general7y located
south of Hillcrest Orive and north of Gardena Ave.
3.
MO^ION HY FfR. SliBA� SECONDED BY MS, SFZEREK� TO REPfOVF. THF TTEM FROr1 TNF.
TABLE,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE� CNAIRPF.RSON BILLZNGS DF,CI,AI'.ED THE MO"_'I07:
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
�tr. P,ohinson stated tiiat in conjunction VlTtll ti1P plat, the developer was pro-
posing to vacate the utility easement on the southern end of Lots 21 and 22
property and the eastern portion of Lot 21 which the developer was
purchasinq a portion of.
Mr. Robinson stated the City did send notices to the utility cor�panies.
NSP does have a power pole in that area; but the developer plans to place the
power line underground.
Hr. Rohinson stated the only stipulation, as related to the pTat, was *.ha*. a
plan be provided for the private utility services.
:fOL"ION Bl' MS. Sf1EREf:� SEC0IJDED BY P1R. BEPZOLD� TO RZ;COAIMF,NP '_"O CTTY CDi'PJCIL
APPROVAL OP VACATIOfI RR(7Z7FSm� SAV Ii86-06 � RY CXARLES CODY. TO VACATF. F.ASF,F."ENTS
FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES DESCRIBF,D AS FOLTAGTS: TXE SOUTH 5 FEF.".' OF LOT 22� B7,OCY.
3� MO'JRF, LAKE HILZS� AND TIIE SO�H 5 FEF,T ANP THE F.AST 10 FFT'.T OF IA=" 21. �
BLOCX 3� A100RE LAKE HZLLS� GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF HZLLCREST DRIVE AD/D
NORTH OF GRRDENR AVE.� WITH THE STIPULRTZOtT TNA".' R PLAN BF, PROVZPFD FOE
PRIVATE UmILITY S$RVZCF.S.
UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTIP76 AYE, CfIAIRPERS011 BILLINC,S DECLARF,D TNE MOTION
CRRRZED UNANIPfOUSLY.
St�urvu �auuiiiur�, �r JUH�9 lJtLJUfi: tSElllq d repiat or �ot 4, niocY i, n r� rt
Additinn to the City of Fridley, Anoka County, �linnesota, and the south
30Q feet of the north 75Q feet of tfie TJortheast (luarter of the Northwest
Quarter except tfie east 720 feet tf�ereof, all in Section 12, T-30, R-24,
Anoka County, Plinnesota, subject to road easements of record, to allo�i for
the development of four separate parcels of iand, 9enerally located south of
Osborne P,oad and east of Viron Road.
MOTION BY MR. SVANDA� S£CONDED BY AfS. SHEREY.� TO WAIS�E TXF, FORNAL READII7G 0*'
THE PURLIC HEARZNG NOTICE AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HF,ARIN6,
UPON A VOICE VOTF., RLL VOiING AYE, CHAIRPF,RSON BILLIIIGS DECLARF.D THE MOTIO77
CARRIED RND THE PIIBLIC HF.ARZNG OPEN AT 8:25 P.M.
PLANNItlG CQtit11S5IQtl t1EETING, DECEttftER 10. 1936
Mr. Robinson stated this property was located east of Highway 65 an�t south
of Osborne Rd, inmediately east of Viron Road. The property presently had
two zonim�s, most of the northerly portion was recently rezoned from C-3
to C-2, and tf�e southerly portion e+as presently G 3. Item �4 of the a9enda
was a request to rezone the southerly portion from C-3 to C-2.
Mr. Robin�;on stated that earlier this fall, the Plannin� Commission anA Ciky
Council pf•ocessed a plat for A& R Addition. Along with the nlat beinq
requested at this r�eeting, the City was requesting that additional street
easements be granted tn tfie City. They are suggesting that the easterly 30 ft.
of proposE,d Lot 4 be granted as street easement. In addition, the easterly
25 ft, of Lot 1 and Lot 3, A E R Addition, not part of this plat, he granted
as a street easement which would be recorded against that plat. They feel
these are all necessary because of the size of the proposed Lot 4 and Lot 3.
I4r. Robinson stated another stipulation would be that Lot 3 of the previous
plat be conbined with Lot 4. The reason for that aras that Lot 4 which was
part of A& R Addition did not have its own street access �ahich was required,
Staff rtas suggesting tfiat a street easerlent on the east be granted. In
addition, they are asking for future private drive��ay easements to he recorded
with those three lots. The plans for the area thus far included a Rocky
Rococo Piz;a. The other two are unprogrartrned at this time, but there was tall:
of two otht�r fast food restaurants.
f4r. Rohinson stated they feel that because of the nature of the development,
there woulcl be sor�e chance of positive benefits to connect the parl:inn lots
with privat.e drivetiyays. Perhaps in future development proposals, they will
asl: for private driveway easements.
Mr. Robinson stateA tlie stipulations would read as follovls:
1. Final plat approval contingent upon Rice Creel;lJatershed and staff approval
of storm drainage plan.
2, Proposed Lot 4, A& R SeconA Addition,to 6e added to existinn Lot 3,
A Y� R A�idition,to create one tax parcel; form to be signed prior to
recording plat.
3. A street easement on the easterly 3(1 feet of Lot 4, A G R Second
Addition,to be incorporated onto plat.
4. A streei: easement on the easterly 25 feet of Lot l and Lot 3, A f: P,
Additiori, to be filed aclainst plat prior to recording of A& R Second
Add i ti ori.
5. Properties abuttin� proposed easterly street easements suhiect to fair
share of assessnents for future street and utility improvements.
6. All development within the proposed plat to incorQorate integrated
lighting an�l landscaping elements as outlined by Staff.
7. ParY, fee of $5,215 payable witli plat approval or pro-rated with each
huilding permit if Council approves.
F. A private driveway easement may be required across thP west of Lots 1,
2, and 3. Dependent upon staff review of future develooment suhmittals.
PLA?lNII�G COMHISSI�IJ t1EETIW6, DECEH6ER 10, 1986 Pftf,E 9
about 2-3 lights per parcel, which he did not fee7 would be a hardship.
Staff �va�� willing to look at alternatives as long as they add to the quality
of the dE�velopment. They were also proposing to include this same stipula-
tion witfi the rest of the development on this block.
Mr.Billings stated there have been instances in Bloomington and other southern
cities wfiere P1cDonalds, for instance, has actually changed its buildinq design
to meet �.he requirements of the cities.
Mr. John Grossman stated he was an associate of �1r. Nelson's. They are rather
a large r.orm�ercial property owner in 6loomington. In Rloominqton, wherever
the City has required certain liqhtinq, the City has furnished the subsidies
to provicle that lightinc�. If the City wanted to create an image with lighting,
they shoiald continue it all the way down to Viking Chevrolet. He stated perhaps
another <ilternative, if it was critical to the City frcxn the standpoing of
attracting business, would be to palce the lights at the City's expense on the
otlier side of Viron Road because obviously a retail identity was 9oing to be
very ir�portant to the individual businesses movin� into this area.
Mr. t�elson asked if the City was stipulating that the li�hting in the parkina
lots be *_he same as that on the street. ,
Mr. Robinson stated tfiat would 6e the logical assumption, althou�h he had not
made tf�a*_ a stipulation. They are trying to create an image from the street.
They would like the businesses to taf:e into consideration tF�at the parl:ing lot
lighting should be compatible with the ligfiting on tF�e street.
l4r. Ne]son stated Hadison Pizza (Rocl:y Rococo) was putting together an attrac-
tive package for this lot. His concern would be that maybe the devPloper or
user next door to Rocky Rococo wouldn't have the same package, and shouldn't
that developer or user be required to do the same type of package?
t1r. Dave Rooney, "1adison Pizza, stated he felt what they were all tryinq to
accomplish with the li9hting was that all the lighting, includinq the parcel
next to them be compatible, and that they all stand out as a good conmercial
developm��nt inviting business. They want their buildinq to stand out so it
does att�act attention. Their lighting package was specifically hased on candle-
pov+er--one candle foot per square foot of To± area, plus some building spot-
lighting and landscape spotlighting.
Ptr. Rooney stated his concern was if the lighting on Viron Road would have
any affe��t on the lighting in the area, and woutd it really get lost in what
they are trying to accomplish with their ovrn lighting scheme? In terms of
tfie type of lighting proposed by Staff on the boulevard, he had seen that type
of lighting before, and he did not necessarily see that as a benefit to either
Rocky Ro�oco or the adjacent development, but more a benefit to the appearance
of the road.
P1r. Rooney stated if they are trying to accomplish a lighting and a real o�at-
standing cormercial development area, that could be accomplished through their
relationship with the develper to the south and their own plans through
illumination and landscaping.
PUIP�NI�IG COtiMISSION MEETItJG, �ECEDIQER 10, 1986 PAGF 10
P1r, Bil7ings stated he felt the intent of the City was to try to encourage a
continuity with everything that was happening on that corner so that every-
thing looked like it belonged together.
Mr. Robinson stated they were not trying to desi9n a total program for all
the businesses, just a uniformity in the lighting along the boulevard. Md,
he thought the suggestion was good that the remainder of lighting on the
properties be at least compatible witfi tf�e color and design of the houlevard
lighting without specifically staying with the same lights.
Mr. Rooney stated the City was recormending a dark 6ronze li9hting, and their
building and color schemes were beige and cream colors. Their li�lhtin� coordi-
nated viith those colors. They would be concerned if they cnuld not stay with
the sar�e colors as tfieir buiiding colors. They would be happy to meet the
City on the tyne of lighting, strength of lighting, and height, but they did
not vrant the City to dictate the colors they would have to use.
Mr. P�elson stated he would have the same concern for other potential users
of tlie properties, Perhaps it could be'resolved tha` the interior li��htin��,
otlier than alonn the boulevard, be discussed in detail vrith the p7anning staff
at the time of develonment. '
Ms. Shrrek stated perfw ps thev could also phrase that requirement by requiring
that tfie lighting either blend with the buildinc� or with the existing lightina.
t4r, tlelson stated another vray of blending the properties o-ias throuqh tha use
of landscapina, and ttie ]andscaping will he reviewed by city staff.
MOTIDN BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MR. SVAP7DA� TO CLOSE THE PRgLSC HF•ARIP7G.
UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAZRPF.RSON BILLINGS DECLARED THE PiIBLIC
HEARING CIASED RT 8:55 P.M.
Mr. Saba stated the concerns raised by Mr. Nelson and P1r. Rooney were certainly
valid. He would agree with the concern regardina the private driveway ease-
ment in stipulation #II. He viould like to see that stipulation (IP�PtP.(�.
41s. Sherek stated if thebusiness people feel it is to their advantage to reach
an agreenent on a driveway easement, they will do it, an�i she did not think
the City should have a right to force one property owner to grant an easemen±
to another property owner if one property owner doesn't want it.
Mr. Saba stated he also liked the statement made hv Ms. Sherek that �nternal
lighting be compatible with ihe building or with existing lighting.
MOTION BY MR. SVANDR� SECONDED BY MS. SHEREK� TO RECOMMEND TO CZTY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF PRELIl4ZNARY PLAT� P.S. H86-07� A 6 R SECOND ADDITION� BY
JOHN NELSON� BEING A REPLAT OF LOT 4� BLOCK I� A& R ADDITION TO THE CITY
OF FRIDLEY� ANOKR COUNTY� MINNESOTA� AND THE SOUTH 300 FEET OF TNE NORTH
PLANPII�I6 CO�ttIISSION �IEETIflG DECEr1Q[R'10 1986 ` ' PAGF 11
750 FEET OF TNE NORTXEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER EXCEPT TXE EAST
720 FEET THEREOF� ALL IIJ SECTION 12, T-30� R-24� ANOKA CnUNTY� MINNF,SOTR,
SUBJECT TO ROAD EASMENTS OF RECORD� TO ALLOF/ FOR THF. DF.VE7.OPMI7VT OF FOUR
SEPARATE PARCELS OF LAND, GENERALLY IACRTED SOUTH OF OSBORNE ROAD RPID EA,ST
OF VIRON RORD, WITX THE FOLLOGJING STIPULATIONS:
1. FZNRL PLAT APPROVAL CONTZNGENT UPON RICE CP.F,EK WATERSHF,D AND STAFF
.APPROVAL OF 5TORM DRAINAGE PLdIN,
2. .PROPOSED LOT 4, A 6 R SECOND RDDITION� TO BE RDDF.D TO EXISTING
.LbT 3� A& R RDDITION� TO CRF.RTF, OC]E TAX PJIRCF.L; FORM TO BE
.>ZGNED PRIOR TO RECORDING PLAT.
3• .9 STRFET EASEFtENT ON TXE EASTF.RLY 30 FEET OF ZAT 4� A 6 R
:iECOND ADDZTIDN TO BE INCORPORATED ONTO PLAT.
4. .� STREET EASEMF,NT ON TXE EASTERLY 25 FF.ET OF IAT 1 RND LOP 3
�� 6 R ADDS_TZON TO BE FILED AGAINST pLAT PRIOE :"O RECOP.DIMG
OF A 6 R SECOND ADDITION.
5. 1'ROPERTIES ABUTTING PROPOSED ERSTF,RLY STREF.T EASF,IfENTS Si�BJ7'C.?'
i0 FAIP. SXARE OF ASSF,SSMENTS FOR FUTURE STREET AND PTILITY
IMPAOVEMENPS.
� 6. 11LL DES�ELOpPfENT WZmfI71J TI/E PROPOSF.D pLAT TO INCORPOP.ATF, INTF,GRATF.D
C'URBSIDF. LIGHTING AND LANDSCRPSNG E7.ElfENTS AS 0IITLINED BY STAFF.
1:^�DIVIDCAL PARF;ING RND BUILDING LIGHTI7dG TO BE r,nripATIRLF, WITH
E'ITH�R THE CDRBSIPF. LIGHTING OR THE�ARCHISECTURRL CHARACTEA.
7. FAI?I: FEF, OF 55�215 PAYABLE WImH PLAT APpROVAL OR PRO-RATF.P 47I.".'X
EAC.(f BPILDS.NG PFPI�IIT IF COI2JCIL AppROPES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING Al'E, CHRIRPERSON BILLINGS DECLAP,FD TIIF, l40TIOIJ
CARRIED UNr1NIMOUSLY.
4. PURLIC HEARItlG: COPlSID[R/ITIOI� OF A RFZOf�I!!f RFQUEST ZOA #86-06 RY
JOHIJ �lfL50�l: Rezone fron C-3, General Shoppinn Center, tn G-2, General
Business, r�n the south 300 feet of the north 750 feet of the Northeast
Quarter of the ��orthwest Quarter, except the east 720 feet thereof, all
in Section 12, T-30, R-24, Anoka County, �iinneso`a, suhject to road easer�ents
of record, generally located south of Osborne Road and east of Viron Road.
MOTION BY 11R, BF.TZOLD� SECONDED BY MS. SHEP.F.K� TO FIAIVF THE FORMRL RF,ADIt7G
OF THE PUBI.ZC hEAR2NG NOTICE AND TO OPEC7 THF, PUBLIC HEARING,
UPON R VOI('E VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CIf117RPF,RSON RILLIN(;S DECLAI?ED THE
MO'"SON CARI?IED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARIl7G OPEN A'!' 9:05 P.M.
Mr. Robinson stated that in conjunction with the plat, the petitioner ptas
requestinq,on Staff's advice>that the prooerty v!hich t•ras recently 7��in City
Mobi}e Homes be rezoned from C-3 to C-2. This would then allow for all future
platted prcperties to be one consistent zoning. This �1as more of a house-
keepinq neasure. He stated that usually it was the City's policy that a plan
6e subnitted witfi tf�e rezoning request, and tf�e rezoninq was continc�ent upon
tFtat plan. Since tfiis was, in fact a down-zoning and more of a housPkeenina
type of thing, tfiey did not feel a plan was necessary at tF�is tima,
-..�, �,c�tMBER 10, 1986
MOTION BY A1R� BETZOLD P—'- A--�`
. SECONDED BY MS,
C
NEARINCt,oZCE vOrE, AL� VOTIN 'SXF,REX, TO Zqgg TyF pUBLIC HE
CLOSED AT 9:09 G RYE. CXAIRPEP,SOI! BI �ING.
P•M• LLINGS
M`��' 81' MR, DF,CLARED
BETZOLD TH£ pIrBLSC
A1'PROVAL O . SECONDED
C�2. GENERAL SXOPPI� REQUEST. ZOA J}86-06�A� T� R��'0�7F.ND
FEET OF THE NO G CENTER. TO C_2 . BY JOHN NEZ.SON � CI� COt7�7CIL
EXCEPT T RTH 75� FEET • GENER,zjL R ' T� REZONF,
fIE EAST 7z p �'`� THE NORT USITIESS, ON mpF FRO.+f
MIl7NESOT FEE H�'fLST nU�mpR .SOUTH ,3pn
A. SUBJE T TyEREOFr �1LL IN SF•CTION �F TOF
OSI30RNT �p� CT 1YJ ROAD EASEMENTS ' NOR:'HGlEST �UAI?mFR
AND EAST OF VIRON g OF RECORD 12� T_3 ' R-24, ANOXA COI/Nmy
5• COtlSIDf:RATIOq OF OAD, . GF.NER,�LLY IqCAmF,D
A CQT sot�mx oF
Sptit th� South 60 f SPCIT, L.S: �/d6-09
of all tliat aet of the Nortfi o' 6y VAIJTAGE COt1PAfJIFS
Sertion 2 Part of the Soutfiwest 4�5.23 feet of the S > I�!C.
' T-30, R-24, lyin� �resteQjarter of the outh 877.87 fPet
Y of tf�e State�7runk5l{�Quarter of
•°�r. Robirtson stated tf�is
on the nort����est corner, Pr�Pert � �hway 47.
Y was located on IIlst anA llniversit
tax �arCe�' jh�s was donePj�sently, three
b�tween the Cit �o�,lunction pronerties were Y Ave.
construction ofYrhe �ho�esalend vanta e w�t� a develo conhine�l i��o one
Club, 9 Companies �mPnt agrPPment issued
Mr, �n cohjunction
Robinson stated W�th the
tYpe of deVe�o the de�elopment
buildinn ��d rP�nt �•rit(� The !lholesale �ju��� calls for
Conpa�Tes r etail center of a on the a sh°�p�n� center
The Hholesajeently requested nprox. 60,000 S south and then a conti
facilitate ��ub couTd that the pronerty�hef5'�t0 the north. 9uous
this request be accomplished b ��t so that a Vantage
'�t Was necessary tothe end sale o�
of the yPar, In order to
Mr, Robinson stated tAe process this ]ot
with what has actuall �e`�a� descri SP7it.
from ����; �;onertson ay lieen resoTvPdPt�on in thP a9enda was hot
associated �yptp nd Darrel recently, He referred accurate
the iot ��ark which poqntPd put the t° the
SPlit. memo
�'�r• Rohinsoh stated that because o Particular problem
rated, the Buildin� Inspector f the fact
current developnent would Sa "� that an that the b
04�nershio, bP tnpossi6le jfy COnt� uildinq was not ffre-
With two there 9�ous develonr�Pnt to the
between the WholesajeWners, there W�77 w�s to b
order to accom �1ub and haVe to be some e a tr�nsfer ;n
63 feet P��sh that, the deve)oeW �onstruction SPParate open ssace
would he�j Parcel A and combined withpr �S propos.ing�toas ieast 55 feet. In
�S 9a1 in terms of the Paxcel ,, Would create�a off the southerly
e �
protof S9 to spl_it �ntegr ty Boristi� �ode. In additio� to situat�ihe ayat
order aintain
number the � 9 ParCe� 1�ne between �that eveloper
Pu7ations bein9 proposedebaeveToPment and B: In
Y Staff; a9reement; there.are a
PUlP1NIN(; COP111ISSIOtl PIEETII�G, DECETI6ER 10 1986 PAGE 13
1. Futur•e construction to the north of The 4lholesale Club to be located
five feet north of new property line.
2. Exisi.ing and future building to be connected by a covered pedestrian
walkway;_the intervening 65 foot space to be utilized for a pedestrian
plaza ti�iitF� extensive landscaping.
3. A paved access road of 20 foot ninimum width with appropriate radii
bp provided around the entire perimeter of the bui7ding complex
(includinq future buildings} to provide fire access.
4. All subsequent buildings and pedestrian walkways to be contiguous so
as to create an integrated shopping center.
5. The facades and canopies of subsequent huildinns and parl:ing areas
to be of equal or better visual quality and materials as specified
in development agreement.
G. Landsraping around subsequent buildings and parking areas to 6e of
equal or better visual quality and materials as specified in the
development agreement.
7. Future� development submittals wfiich do not meet thP a6ove referenced
stipulations, as determined by Staff, shall be suhject to Plannin�
Cormission and City Council approval.
8. Vanta�3e must covenant to retain management control of bpth the Wholesale
Club Yr all other future developm�nt prio,r to recording lot sp7it, to be
reviewed with City Attorney prior to the Council mtg of Oecember 22, 1986.
9. Vantage Companies must covena�t to build covered walY.way and nlaza
(referenced in M2 above) as part of Phase II construction.
10, Vantage Conpanies must receive from buyer an easement aclreement to
constr�ct, operate a�d maintain the covered walkway and plaza (referenced
in #2 sbove) prior to recording lot split.
il. Cross easements for parking and access betvieen The YJholesale Club parcel
and Phase II parcels to he recorded with lot split.
12. Stipul+itions to be incorporated into a development agreement amendment
and fi'led at the County in conjunction with the lot split.
Mr. Matthear Nichol stated he questioned stipulation #8. He stated he antici-
pated that Vantage Companies as part of The 1lholesale Club would he involved
in the management of the common area of the facilit.y. They also anticipate
heing involved in the management of phase II, if and when that is developed,
and are working on that now.
�tr. Nichol stated that in stipulation !�9 regardinr� the covered vralk�oay and
plaza being part of pliase II, he would like to further explore with Ci±y
Staff exactly what would be involved in that stipulation.
Mr. Robinson stated that in stipulation #7, they tried to build in some
general sti��ulations that if they cannot agree on some things, these can he
worked out with the Planning Comnission and City Council.
Mr, Aavid t17tche1l stated that what Vantage Companies intended to do was get
The Wholesale Ciub parcel of phase I to be in a position where it complies
fully with the zoning requirements as a free-standing piece of nroperty. One
question he had was the issue of whether phase II could be contiguous wi*h
phase I. They are still looking into this issue and, hopefully, that can he
resolved before tf�e City Council meeting.
PLANNING C0�41ISSI0�� �1EETIMG, DECEt1DER 10, 1986 PA6F 14
Mr. �1itchell stated they rrill be supplyinq City Staff witfi copies of the
easements between phase I and phase II prior to the City Councii meeting.
Mr. Nichol stated that, a9ain referring to stipulation #8, any management
agreement covering mainCenance of a cor�on area would always have a cancellation
clause for non-conformance. He could not tell the Commission that there
would be an a6solute guarantee that for the next five years Vantane
Cornpanies would be tf�e manaqement company for the property, because anyone
they enter into a contract with would not enter into a long term contract
without some cance77ation c7ause whereby tf�ey have the right to replace
Vantage Companies if they have just cause,
Mr, Robinson stated City Staff will work with hoth the City Attorney and
Va�ttage Coripanies' attorneys on some refining of stipulation #8 before
the City Council meeting.
MdfION BY ASR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO RECOl1MEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPP.OVAL OF LOT SPLiT REQUEST, L.S. N86-0?, BY VANPAGE COMPANIF,S, Ir7C.,
TO SPLIT THE SOCJTX 60 FEET OF TXE NORTH�425,23 FF.ET OF TXF. SOUTX 877.87
FEET OF RLL TNAT PART OF THE SOUTHWF,ST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST �UARTER OF
SECTInI/ 2, T-30, R-24, LYING WESTERLY OF TIfF. STASE TRUNK NIGfh7AY 47,G77TH
THF. FOLLOWING STIPULATION,S:
1. FUTURE CONSTRUCTION TO THE NORTH OF THE WHOLF.SALl CLi�R TO BE
IACATED fi2VE FEET NORTH OF NF,W PROPF.IZTY LTNE,
2. EXISTING AND FU_TURE BUILDIPIG TO BE COPlNECTED BY A COVER£D
PEDESTRIXIN WALKWAY; THF. INTERVENING 65 FOOT SPACE TO BE l�2'ZLIZED .
FOR A PEDESTRZAL PLRZA [7ZTN EXTENSZt�E I.ANDSCAPZNG.
3. A PAVED ACCESS P,ORD OF 20 FOOT MINZPIDM WSDTH FIITII APPROPP,ZRTF, i
RADII BE PROVIDED AROUND THE ENTZRE PF.RIMF.TER OF 2'HF, BI�ILn2NG
COAfPLEX (INCLUDING FUTURE BUILDINGSJ TO PROVIDE FIRE ACC£.SS.
4, ALL STJgSEQUF.NT BUILDII7GS AND PEDESTRIAL WALKWAYS TO BE CONTIGt70t7S I
SO AS TO CREATE AN INTEGRATED SHOPPING CENTF,R. �
5. THF. FACRDES AI']D CANOPIES OF SUBSE4UENT Bi!ILDZNGS P17D PAP.HIITG �
ARF,AS TO BE OF EQUAL OR BETTER VISUAL QLTALZTY AND MATEASALS AS
SPECIFIED IN DEVEIAPMENT AGRF.EMF.NT. �,
6. LANDSCRPING AROUND SUBSEQITENT BUZLDINGS AND PARKING RRF.AS TO BE
OF EQUAL OP. BETTER VZSUAL QUALZTY AND MATERIALS AS SPRCIFIF,D
IN THE DEVELOPMENT RGREEMENT.
7. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SUBIQITTALS WHICH DO NOT PfFET THE RBOVE
REFERENCED STIPULATIONS, AS DETERMINfiD BY SPAFF, SHALL RE SUBJECT
TO PLANNZNG COMMISSION AND CZTY COUNCIL APPROVAL.
g, VANTAGE MUST CO4/ENRNT TO�RET§IN MANRGEMENT COn'TRQL OF BOTH THF�' WXOLESALE
, CLUB AND ALL OTHER FUTURE�DEVELOPMENT pR.SOR TO REP,�RDING LOT.SPLZT, TO BE
REVIEWED WITH CITY ATTORNEY pR70R TO-THE COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMSER 32, 1
9. VANTAGE COMPANIES MUST COVENANT TO BIIZLP COVERED WALKF7RY AND
PLAZA (REFERENCED IN $2 ABOVE) AS PART OF PHASE II CONSTRI7CTION,
10. VANTAGE COMPANZES MITST RECEIVE FROM AUYER RN EASEPfF,NT AGREEFIEN_T
TO CONSTRUCT� OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE COVERED WRLKWAY AtTD PLA2A
(REFER&NCED IN #2 ABOVE) PRSOR TO RECORDIt7G LOT SPLIT,
PLAN�JI�IG COPI�1ISSION PIEETIt�G, IIECEtiQER 1a 1986 PAGF 15
11. CROSS EASE[fEt7TS FOR PARKZNG AND ACCESS BETWEEN THE WHOLF,SALF
^LUB PRRCEL AND PXASE SI PRRCLLS TO BE RECORIIED WITH LC1T SPLI?'.
12. .STIPULATIONS TQ BE INCORPORATED .R7T0 A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMETIT
.�1t4ENDMENT AND FILED AT THE C.OUNTY IN COIJ,7UPICTION WI:PH '!'HE L07'
>PLIT.
UPON A V07CE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BILLZNGS DECI,ARED THE MOTION
CARRZED Uh�ANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Robinson stated this would go to City Coimcil on Dec. 22, 1986.
(Mr. Svanda left the meeting at 9:27 p.m,)
6. COfJSIDERaTIO�J OF A t10DIFIED REDEVELOPP1ENT PLAPJ FOR REDFVElOPP1ENT PROJ
hir. Rohinson stated that whenever they create a new development proposal,
they are required by state statute to medify the redevelopment plan. A
puhlic hear•ing was required at City Council on Dec. 22, 1986. On Honday,
Qec. 8, he had taken this to the County 6oard for their concurrence.
Pir. Ro6inson stateA a notion was needed by the Planninq Commission approving the
modified redevelopment plan for P,edeve.lopment Project No. 1.
MOTION BY M,S. SNEREK� SECONDF,D BY MR. BETZOLD, TO RF,CODfFfEND TO CSTY COUNCIL
APPROVRL OF MODIFIED REDEVELOPM£.CTT PLAN FOR REDEVF.IAPMEN:" PROJF,CT N0. Z
(CPNTER C7T3 REDEVELOPMENT AREA) AND TAX INCREMF.NT FINFNCING PLANS FOR TIUC
ZNCREMENT FCNANCSNG DIS".'RICT NQS. Z THROiTGH 8.
UPON A VOICE; VOTE, ALL VOTING RYF., CHAIP.PERSON BILLINGS DF,CLARF,n THF, P+OTION
CARRIED UNA[�'IMOUSLY.
7. CONSIDEP,IITIGP� OF AP� ORDINAt�CE CHANGE TO UPDATE THE 11EDICAI_ CLINIC PARKING
crnninnnnc nnin Tur ruiinru vnertur nrnntnr��rn�rr.
Mr. Robinson stated this was precipitated hy a variance request by
Wayne Dahl, VAR #86-24. The corrmission members had received in their
agenda a cop;,� of a memo from Daryl f4orey, Pianning Assistant, regarding
this. Mr. Morey had reviewed the parking situation for the other two clinics
in fridley and had conducted surveys of four neighboring cities regarding
their parkinq criteria.
Mr. Robinson stated that as far as clinic parking, Staff was proposing that
the City Code read: "At least �ne (1) off-�treet parking space shall be
provided for each 150 sq. ft, of huilding floor area for all medical and
dental clinics." As far as requirements for church parking, Staff rras
recomnending that the City Code read: "At least one (1) off-street parkinn
space shall be provided for every three fixed sPats or for every five feet of
pew length in the main assembly hall. Additional seating may be requiti•ed
for additional church activities such as day care and classroom facilities anrl
recreational �jctivities."
pLANNING COt+ItiISSION �9EETIN6, DECEr1[3ER 10, 7986 PAGE 16
Mr. Robinson stated that if the Comnission members were in agreement, they
could continue discussion on this until tf�e next meeting when he wauld come
back with an actual written ordinance for the C�mmission's consideration.
The Planning Cor!mission mem6ers agreed to have Staff bring a aaritten ordinance
back to the next meeting.
8. RECEIVE tJ0VE618ER 13 1986 HOUSING & REDEUELOPMENT AUTHORITY PlINUTES•
MOSION BY MR. SABA,SECOPIDED BY 11S. SXEREK, TO RECEZVE THE NOV. 13, 2986�
HOUSING & REDEVELOPFfENT RUTHORITY MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CXAIRPERSON BILLZNGS DF:GLARED THF, MOTION
C]{RRIED UNANZAtOUSLY.
9. RECEIV[ T�OVEME3ER 18, 19£i6, Et�VIRON�1[�ITAL QUALITY C0�41ISSI(1P1 HINUTES:
MOTI0IJ BY MS. SHF,REK� SECONDED BY MR. SRBA� TO RECEZVE THE NOV. 18� 2986�
ENVIROflMF.NTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MIPTUTES.
UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON 87LLING5 DECLARED THF, MOTIOtl
CARRIED UNAlJ2MOUSLY.
10. RECEIVF t�OVEHF3ER 25, 1986, APPEALS COPU1ISSI0�I MIMUTFS:
140TZON BY MR. BETZOLP,SF,COtJDED BY Ff5. SNEREK� TO RF.CEZVF, THP NOV. 25, 19B6,
APPEALS COMMZSSZON MINUTES.
UPON A VOSCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRZRPERSOPT BILLINGS DECLRRED THE MOSIOF
CARRSEP IrNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MO.^ION BY MR.BETZOLD, SECbNDED BY MS. SHERF.K� TO ADJDURN THF, MEETING. T�POCJ A
VOFCE S�OTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRPERSON BILLINGS D$CLARED TXE ➢EC. .20� Z986�
PWiNNIl7G COMIfISSION AfEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:05 P.M.
R espectfully submitt d,
LynrSe,/ aba `--��
Recording 5ecretary
�� � `
,
� � f�.�
_ _ , ��
`-�._�-,�._
,� �
� p�^-�' _.�t�, ��'�,�-
�� /7 ' . '�,-�
� / 6L�' i
L t/� / i`^�(. :. f�i t: ��i��
. �� ��
rr
.c-s —' � e �-�.--
� �;�, �..;�' ��;
� rj`( I%
' � c�-i �: 1 7'.;'r./�,°t '�1 f
�
f/�� �--W'—y `1��`?.�;�,-
/' /.
�/l, �b
�
%� 1.�. '(i � Mi�
7�j 1'�
,(ti rn%'_ ���.✓ �, �� G L.GL,.,
�
1�p� I �fy (�r
' V(. J'i,/�f ,� l��I v/�.� n
, , , _ �'
� , ����<�' .. � i � �� -C��
J � .
�
1 �, 7 �i �� ________ _
��L'_���� __._ _
I ✓� � � � ��-�-��`��� i
�
/ 3 � � /�✓������' f2.�
/`�/S- ,� ..��'� e� �' .
� 3 ys- ,��� ��� �l � .
/�=-�5 �� �,�� %��{. 7%<.
�.�,.�.������ C� ����,
, � �--� c
;��1 r��na�2E�c�� � ��c� c�-�z�- �>
'� n /; � > �
/ `� �-y-y -�^�
��/ �� f`-�-�'�!-j/�L'�`�° �iZ^�/ r": �e`!/�E�i`--� ��'�C.
�-?h.c�,a�a.iv�� G�.Lo.,4�,1J--L.�� ..
� � / `` �/
i�Y.-�.�-+!.1���"� L�i.L� '' ":��-<-+
..i ,�
--1 ��. ��-Jd�-st�..i' �Lti��-li.��
. � J ,, ��`n �.
n-��, , -�1, �:��
� �% ���
���(�LC.t%c.� � ��"�'
_
_
CITYOF
FIZIDLEY
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
l�EhD 7p: :Planning Camnission Members
ME[�D FROM: �fim imbinson, Planning Coocdiratoz�,
MEMD IYiTE:
RY�',Ai2DII� :
�fanuaLy 2, 1987
�: � .
At this time, staff is seeking input fran
designation cf 1987-1989 QBG funding. I
1985 monies also needs to be zeallocated.
to be sutrnitted to the County t� F�bruacy
Planning Commission and Council i.nput is a
Planning Crnunission - Januaiy 7, 1987
City Cb�a�cil - Januaiy 26, 1987
the Planning Commission as to the
n addition, sane $71,500 of unspent
Designation for 1987 CLSG fimds is
13, 1987. �e proposed agenda for
s follows:
Fridley's 1987 CLBG allocation is $109,848. Acoording to the County, these
monies are secured. FUnding for 1988 and 1989 is estimated at $109,848 for
each yeaz. �ese monies are not yet secured.
in 1985 the �City allocated $71,500 for burying the NSF power lines on
Mississippi S*.xeet west of University Avenue. 4his construction is tied to
the intersect.ion work which was delayed until 1988 construction season.
ilmcls desic�ated in 1985 are supposed to be spent 6� December 31, 1986. At
this time it appears that the City will be rolling this fund into the 1987
funding cycle which will raise our total available monies for 1987 to
$181,348.
In order tn fucilitate a more long range budgeting prooess we are attempting
to inoorg�ratc� a three year cycle into the review process at this time.
Please review the attached three year preliminary budget proposal for
discussion at the Januazy 7, 1987 Planning Camnission meeting. Also attached
are G[BG ftaiding allocations from the year 1983.
JI.I;/dm
M-Sb-337
1
'!11
lA
�� i � a �• i� •«� •�•s.•
1987 CTBG $109.848
Plus 1985 Stuplus 71,500
4bta1 Availahle $181,348
Monies Availahle July 1987 throuc� Deoenber 31, 1988
I=��:---- =---_.�_____--�» V- _____=___=____-___-_== I
I Prelirninary Revised �
i Project Amo�t Amo�t Comments �
I— ------------ -------- -------------- I
I Spzingbrcbk $ 20,000 Handicapped trail �
I Nature Center replaoement; added to I
I Restorakion 1995 allocation of 1
� $18,544 �
I Locke Hou:se $ 10,000 Historic renovation �
I Restoration by No. Su6� Ctr. for I
� Arts; added to 1986 �
� allocation of $8,000 I
I �
I Mississippi St. $ 74,483 For 1988 mnstruction; I
I Pnweclire Burying previously f�mded with I
i 1985 CUBG ftmds. I
I
I Seniors Pzogran $ 5,000 Payroll e�cpense I
I Staff F�rson �
I �
i Conunercial Rehal� $ 30,000 Upgrading existing I
i La3ns - Redev. busiresses �
i
I Hunan Serv.ices $ 32,954 308 of $109,848 �
I �
I Anoka �unty $ 8,911 Cotu�ty-wide snall I
I Busiress Assist. business resouroe ctr. I
I t3etwork ----------- �
I $181,346 �
I i
M[,F:F. M�:
1B
a� i v o-•• i� • r �•,� •�. •
$109,848
Monies Avai.lahle July 1988 �rough Deoanbez 31, 1989
-== =� �—»;_'�— _�_�=---_________=
�— -- __�_---- �
I Prel9mizr�ry Revised ►
I Pzoject Amouv�t Amoi.mt coi[cnents I
� �,_���---�_�_� �_���__--_—__ --- {
1 Riverview Hqts. $ 61,000 Purchase and relocationl
( Aaquisiti.on expenses Farcels 4, 5 I
I and b I
Cogmnercie:l Rehal�.
La�ns - F:edevelog
Hunan Services
$ 23,460
$ 16,477
Upgrade existing
6usinesses
158 of $109,848
Annka County $ 8.911 Coimty-wide snall
Business,Assist. business resource ctr.
Network ----
$109,848
1C
•:• «.:
.. � . � . � �� .. ••. •.
$109,848
lbnies Availahle July 1989 through Decenber 31, 1990
I =—=__��_»_—_ =_� -------------------
- - __= I
I Peeliminary Revisea�-----------_—_= I
I Project Amo�mt Amo�mt Camnents �
I— ------------ -------- I
I Riverview Hgts. $ 67,000 Purchase and relocation�
1 Aa;uisition expenses Farcel 8 �
I �
I Riverview Hgts. $ 16,371 Construction of Fark �
I Park Develognent amenities; g3rking, �
� trails, pirnic area �
� and boat laimch I
Commerci�sl Rehab.
La�ns - l�edevelop
Hunan Se�vioes
$ 10,000
$ 16,477
$109,8A8
Upgradinq existing
busiresses
158 of $109,848
SPRINGBROOK NATURE CENTER i'
?' �
,��
C1NOF
FRIDLEY
CIViC CEfiTER � G3?1 UNI�'ERSITI' A�'E. N.E. FRIDLEl'. �1INNESOTA SS43? • PHONf: i612) 57�-}45U
Septenbes 10, 1986
JoAnn Wright
Conmimity DevNlognent Coordinator
Anoka County 1:ourthouse
Moka, !N 55:303
RE: Deferred 2986 C[BG Buciget Restoration
Dear JaArui:
On Septeriber �3, 398b the Fridley City Council unanimously approved the
August 20, 19t36 Plannin9 Cortenission recommendation to allocate the entire
amount of rest.osed funds oz 518,544 foz tlie iestozation of Springb:ook Natuze
Cente�. As you are �mdoubtedly a+are the �tuce center was devastateo by a
tornaoo on July 18, 2986.
Specific LLses include but are not lisnited to:
1. Rebuildina the Fark's handicap accessihle trail aysten.
2, Qrtting ard cleaning of do.rned tsees.
3. Reforestatian
A certified �p� of the Council motion vill be availahle in approximately one
week. Please rotify me if you need a cop�.
Zf you have ary questions please feel free to cornact me.
Sinoerel� •
� 1
d.�c�\�,`t.1yv�
� Janes I,. Aobinson
`-' Planning Coordtinatoz
JLF�/��
C-86-417
LOCKE HOUSE RESTORATION
lE
North Sub�k�n
�t¢r for
Apache Ploza. 37th & Silver Lake Road, ST. Anthony, Mlnnesota�55421 bi2-781-7381
. . March 10, 1986 ,,.:;;;;
t
_.;;,r ,
'. _
Jim Robinson
Planning Co-ordinator
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue, N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Jim:
I am enc:losing a brief brochure which explains the purpose
and pro�;rams of the North Suburban Center for the Arts,
(NSCA).
For over a year we have, with encouragement and help from [he
City of Fridley, been nego[iating with Anoka County for an
agreement that would allov NSCA to participate in the
restoration of the Banfill Tavern/Locke House and to become
occupants on completion of the work.
Such an 3greement was reached and signed by Doth parties on
Januarp 31, 1986. This is consistent vith the Human
Resources and Planning Commissions recommendation that it be
used by ii non-profit community service organization.
As you kriow, the Banfill Tavern/Locke House is a significant
historic building. It is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places in Washington, D. C. Its significance is
based upo�n both historical and archiCectural considerations.
Because rehabilitation of the build3ng will be based on
the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Historic
Rehabilitation, NSCA is working closely with the well known
architect, Foster W. Dunwiddie. Mr. Dunviddie was also the
architect for the rehabilitation of the Godfrey House and the
John Stevens House, the oldest houses in Minneapolis. The
Banfill/L��cke House is a contemporarp of these homes. Its
restorati��n vill allow it to be preserved as part of
Minnesota's heritage.
. ,_...r,
The Banfiil/Locke $ouse vill be a highly visible fscility
when reha6ilitated vill be an enhancement for the entire
area. It will receive a great deal of positive publicity
ell partit.ipants will benefit greatly.
and
and
LOCKE NOUSE RESTORA710N
1F
It woulcl be NSCA's intention, when the house has been
restored, to use it as an Art Center that would be open to
the pub7.ic. We would have exhibition space and rooms for
teachin�; classes. In addition we would offer it as use for
meetings. and other business and community needs.
The part of our agreement with Anoka County with which we
must be concerned in the immediate future is that we are
obligated to raise $50,000 by January 31, 1987 if the
restoration is to proceed on schedule.
We are, because of the need, and because of the benefit it
would be to Fridley, asking to be considered for a HUD 1986
Community Development Block Grant.
NSCA does serve our local artists, and artists are well known
for their limited incomes. We also serve Senior Citizens
and everp year put on "The Elders Show," a gallery exhibition
of paint:ing, drawing and other art work done by Senior
Citizens, We hold classes for children, Senior Citizens, low
income aiid all income groups.
It is our sincere feeling that a grant of �10,000 to NSCA
from the Community Development Block Grant Program would go a
long way to ensure the restoration of What will undoubtedly
become a place of national in[erest and a source of community
pride.
Thank you so much for your consideration of our request.
Sincerely,
`�" ��,,' (.6'`P�LG�i�
�
Harry K, Rosenbaum
Member Board of Directors NSCA
Chairman, Fund Raising Drive
HUMAN E V
-' /9�(� Func�inq —1G
�/
`SEMO T0: RIC:I: PRIBYL, FI:7A110E DIRECTOR ),,/ /j]]// �
FROK: M'I1,LIAM C. HWT, ASSISTA,�T TO THE CITY MA.^IA6ER,�'l/�,�IF(
e V i
SUS3ECT: PAY-OUT OF 1986 CDB(; FU1*DS FOR HUMf�.\ SER�'ICE ORGANIZATIONS
DATE: NOVE?�ER 21, 1986
In accordance with action by the Fridley CitV Council on 3uly 7, 1986, with
regard to the expenditure of 1986 CDSG funds for human service orRanizations,
I request that checks be made out as follows:
1. $2,874.00 [o "tvorth Suburban Counseling Center"
C/o Terri lfelynchenko, Director
425 Coon Rapids Blvd, Suite 200
Coon Rapids, *L�1 55433
2. $5,000.00 to "Southern Anoka Co�unity Assistance"
C/o Rosemary Byrnes, ExecuCive Director
627 - 38th Avenue, N.E.
Columbia Heigh[s, tti^1 55421
3. $3,000.00 to "Central Centet for Family Resources"
C/o Lee Carison, Administrative Director
1301 - 81st Avenue, 27.E.
Spring Lake Park, 1�C� 55432
4. $6,840.OQ to '�Anoka Coun[y Community Action Program, Inc.'�
CJo•SCephen Klein, Dir. of Planning and Coaun. ProgramminR
8Q08 h.E. Highway 65
Spring Lake Park, ?C7 55432
5. $2,874,00 to "Family Life Mental Health Center, Inc."
C/0 Mary Lucille Mickman, R.N., Clinic Manager
403 3ackson Street
Anoka, "1� 55303
6. $3,000.00 to "Alexandra House, Inc."
C/o Pa[ricia Prinzevalle, Director
P. Q. Box 194
Circle Pines, M2: 55014
7. $1,000.00 to "North Suburban Cons�er Advocates for the Handicapped, Inc."
C/o Jesse Ellingworth, President
200 Charles Street, N.E.
Fridley, t�L�1 55432
8, $2,000.00 to "Church of St. William"
C/0 Ruth Smith, Pastotal Associate
6120 - Sth Street, N.E.
Fridley, 2LV 55432
9. $2,000.00 to "North Suburban Center for the Arts"
C/o Paul Vick, Executive Director
Apache Plaza
37 th and Silver Lake Road
St. Anthony, 2�Lti 55421
FiUMAN SERVICES
1H
MEMO TO RICK PRIBYL ON PAY-OUT OF 1986 CDBG FUNDS
NOVE*1BER 21, 1986
Page 2.
An additionail $3,000.00 vas allocated to the Fridley Senior Center, but I
am making nn reco�endation about that until the matter is clarified. In
any event, r.he funds were to be given in calendar year 1967. I presume
that the Human Resources Commission will consider the matter and make a
recommendati.on to the City Council if there is to be any change.
I would a�pceciate your causing che checks to be made out at your earliest
convenience and given to me for [ransmittal to the various aRencies.
Thank you for your assistance.
Cc: Julie Burt, Assistant Finance Officer
John Rober[scn, Community Development Director
V3ames Robinson, Planning Coordinator
Ric 4�'iersma, Staff Person to the Fridley Human Resources Coimnission
Q�� Cpy+,
�.
`•..�.o.
ANOKA COUNTY BUSINESS
ASSISTANC� NE'f`afIFORK
�/ cX � ?c.� c.,: • �,1i"',
�,F„ .,
COUNTY OF ANOKA
OJlirr of fhe Countu Board of Cammissioners
COURTHOUSE ANOKA,MINNESOTA55303 612-421-4760
November 14, 1986
Mr. Nasim Qureshi, Manoger
City of Fridley, City Hall
6431 University Avenue N.E,
Fridley, MN 55432
Re: AnoN;a County Business Assistance Network Proposal
Dear Mr. (�ureshi:
I am writing to announce an opportunity for Anoka County to offer a unique
economic devefopment service. Roger Jensen, Director of the Anoka County
Economic 7evelopment ParTnership (ACEDP) has presented a requesi to The
Anoka County Board for $75,000.00 of CDBG funds in 1487 and again in 1988 to
finance a r�ew business assistonce program. 8riefly, the program would provide
for a ceniral clearinghouse staffed by a knowledgeable odminisTrator to provide
ossistance or referral to businesses in ihe County. The idea was developed os
The resulT of joinT efforis of local governments, private industry and
educational institutions in Anoka County. The attached outline provides a more
complete description.
The benefi t wailable is a means for your current local businesses or those
considerin5 relocation to your community to access ihe many public and private
programs available fo support business development. While the value to larger,
more developed communities is obvious, ihere is great gain for the smaller
communities which do noT provide economic development staff, but ore seeking
b�siness growih. A centralized program of business assistance is an efficienT
way to provide these services at a minimal cost. It is also a very positive
service for government to provide to private indusiry.
The Community Development Committee of the Anoko County 8oard will meet
on Decemb�r ° to again consider this request. 1 am asking that you review the
attached information including fhe CDBG cosf to your community should the
County Board choose to fund ihis program. The cost of $75�Q00.00 would be
AHirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
r
ANOKA COUNTY BUSINESS ASSISTANCE NE7WORK
Page Twc�.
taken from the 1987 and 1988 CDBG Programs before disiribution of the funds
to communities. While the ACEDP has requested iwo years' funding, any such
decision is of co�rse dependent on the amount of CDBG funds avoiloble to
A�oka County in The future.
Please coiitact me before December 9 with your questions, commenSs or
concerns. Thank you for your consideraTion.
Sincerely� `
���, .� �i�, ��_ t� ��t-� �'��=
Albert A. Kordiak
Chairman, Anoka County Board
of Commissioners
� i
`� C�+�
Paul McCarron
Anoka County Commissioner
AAK/PM:s.v
Enclosures
1J
�
O�y
F
� Y
��.
a�
Q 4
a
�
O�
.�
�
mm��,�
mm m
.
n��Nll
� � � �
N M V1
�� �
�v �
� �` �
�� �
��
3 3
� y
.� .�
��
��
7 �
N W
�a
; m
� �
�� �
q u
.-�1 �1 fu
� C W
� �S O
'� y?, J.��
O �+ V
y s �'
�
�
a �.'1 b
J-� JJ .-�I
ss
�� �
� '� '� a
#
P�C � *
ri N
�U U
w�
�m
ui m
��
e
� V
N N
em
mm
�m
� vi
N N
m m
6l m
f��l N
v r�
.
�
N N
m m
� .��i
N IN/}
.�i r'1
� �
-:1 �
�. w
� �
��
r o�
�O m
ss
N N
m C9
1'f
d
�
� `w'
�YJ
�n�v5o
��
RIYERVIEW HEIGHTS ACQU1SITfON
m 1K
�i � � � m
. . .
N �f
� � �
: �
� O� �
N vs N
�Q
�-v
m
m
m
�;
N
m
�
�
N
m
m
O�
�
N
.e
N
M
�
4�i
�
�
N
1
�
1�
�
�
�
�
m �
m �
m c�
m �
m
�; �.�
N
m
m
f�t
�
N
�
m
m
O�
m
N
'�T
K
�
Y
7
N
L
1�.1
a
u
�
N
N
N
J.1
�
O
m
h �
� rl
N V
w � �°
�
��
�
a
C
��q
�O
��
4
N L
Q� �0
��
10 4
��
wo
d
q N
y V
N
U N
o �a
�7
w
.� �
w
Y
� U
L
o��
y •n
.��
Y
N
�
' Z�
� r �I '�
�
�
�ui
, �`�.���`��� � o��
�x• •;� a
IGi7 ...
:::::C.I: :==
._...... ...
• ���u, .xe
•xe::-�� uz
.�
� ...
.
i
�
\ �
GFELLOw _ _.i
•c .
�9� �
� '�
ac �
g � .
r .. �
+ ' lr
• ' �+
�t f! ➢ �i 1 ' � • F I • I �f f�r..ci� =�
�
R
?'� 711 . � r� C"��TC'�
'••-� � . . _ �; . /
,� ;^ �•; �• � ,�� �h.�!' fi.�ir � � w tL `;��
v � �� � � ,
a
I� ; r �I •
M' � i e S'4.
: � pl
� ' �
, � � ' � ' ' O� �
, „ • �� �
� ; Q�P
. � ;� .
, . .. �.
.. � �
,.r G , �
� ,.
` � e I•
� �r
.• �.pf ' •
. ����P�l +, , �;.
�f� ,• � =_ � • �P� .
.� � ,.,.
. , •
� ► � , �'
:� - ' • F.
' P
: `; "•. ;� �
- ' .,,P �
� ti ��
. 0 .;.• s
.
.
, • y r
• � .
O'
\ • `Fy �
-�\, � N� �
. � .
q}
� Existing Park Property � r ` �L
� <
� Priority 1
�\ � �
� Priority 2
0o LINE OG ECT�O
o�o� Priority 3 `� �'2990 TO SE. CO NEF)
_ �`�� :
� Previously Acquired �: ,-•�� � �
��
�� • �c
� •
_ .�
NOR7N
RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS AC�UI5ITION ..
�
�
e
n
t
's
u
3
��
���SM��i��sf
�Ow� Y�OU010�y
IKBY�I��I�'��I��B ��
��.aV" I Goio�olo�o fio
il O a�� 2% C e�.� G e n. i�.
_
P
�I !�� a�
� t�� ��
I---�-- --- --- --
� ��i
I __
�
i
I�a
��
� U �.
I �
iq
i---
O
1 �
m
n
� �
�
��
��
��
$
T
�
_�
oa
u e.
G
_�
�
�Q
n
N
��
��
_3_�I
�s a
ug
���
�
—g—
n
a
N
n
I ���
II�
��
I��5o
PZ
_�_
g�
�:
4
Q
_S_
n
n
n
��
a�
�a
��
_�
� �l
ui
0
_�
0
�
��
�
n
M O
��
��
�i
a s �
°� � S �
s�. s?.
a$� ;�� ��
0 0 0 0 0
o: ZS. c: $ i X '
��
V �
� � �
��
�� �� �g
Ni V� Vs
p1 Q1 N
1 1
j j ..
T T �
e
a
/1 M
A
O r r
N C .^.
N M A
A n A
�° �� �g
�� °� ��
�� �� s�
, , � �
--------- — —s-- �—I--�
Y � ga � I
�� � �� � � �
� rP ��
-�--a --a - -�---a --
E 9y� ���pppp qqqy
Y y Y y `� �� Y y
��—�� —�� — ��--���--
� � � �
a'? ag
U6 t�v
8 �
ti N
—�--�
8
�
¢
--�
�a
��
�
--�
�
a
�
e
�
�
�
�
�
n
ti
-----�
� � � �
�� a�
U6� Ve.
IIl N
T--_—�
1 `
T �
s
�
N ¢
i
-��---- �� - �---��
�S p e �a
a7 ���Y, � �l��
;� �"� ' 5�
,a�' ��s � �oa
_�_�___'�_ _ ���_��
�
1
� O
� �
I .
N
I :
.
e
s
__
N
:
�
,
E �� �
� 7
�� � y Ys� �''
V fl 9 � P� 4T
�
,�aa�» s ��
���� I � � ��
� 'Y
U�
—n— —
�
P'
P
r-1 <
� �
I e
I---- - - --
� �' o � od'
a? a g �g
tJd V a U�.
OT~ I ('P� O
H � �
: 1 � n
�°. '
__ ' _
n r o
�i o °
e a ^
—g— — � --
� 1
$ N 4
.�
� �
_ 1
V
f�. B S b
Y � 9 ,
� �� n�
a � � $�
����' i���<�
�
M
I�
.� .. '. ) ) ) ! 1 i i 1 � � J l �
��,C
< < < i � � � < < c < <
--------�i•,----------s------------------------------
, .����el �>� «��..s s�� �l�y �� e�
1�'�"ai�' 88'� �'°" ��r � ��
O 9� D.8' L y yw�a "'i •
y m I ��EV �U O 1y M
� � Y �(1 I u O�
'y iuL d Q �
� 8 3
i�m88�w�� �.°.L �tga $� ��.. ��� `dao ��
--�---- --�-..'_ -- ---
� "- --- --- ---
---- - ---- -
.°:
� � o
�.a'�E
�.�8u�
--�----�-- ---- -- ---
� -- --- --- ---
� p
� �, 3 3 2 �i` � � � �`
.
1 "
--j---- -- ---- -- ---
�oi' lifi'�L.2 '!St' 1li� Bi' bS 1SS Mi' —---- —
��� I L�� �'u': �'� Ag B`� i.8 L'� E,�
un. � ur: "" t7� t7i.
_ ur 'u:. 'u� uC
--�---- -- "--- — ---
-- °— --- --- ----
P Y � �
� O
N ; n N
Y �
! N
-'-� 6 _'_' o_ "_'_ __ __- �
__ ___ " _ ___ _�'_ _ ____ _
N� O N � 0 p � O p � ry <
N N �'r'1 � '1 S � 9 R � � ^� m
�C � ° .� � � � n ' : � m �
-- ---- -- -�--- -� --- -- --- � � $
--- --- ---- - ---- �
� � o �^; o Q . o o a
"1 � �: � m X N � n
ti S r 01 h ^ N /1 � � .
N '� I� M r�
� ^
Y
�
m � � O eil O N
� N I N N �p � � � II � .
� � I __ _ + �
�` � g� fr � g€ �' �� 98 � I
�� ��� = �� �` i �� ��� �
�a � i °� �..
--',�s.�__��a_�__ ��' �� � �� s�� mr�'`
— -- ----------------
�
�°" � � a
� � ' � � � �
i � ( i � i l l l l l i. li I . �
70
1 hJ
� , �
I
�
i
,
I
�
�
I
O
I�
�
_ ___ �
—�� ----
�% T
Y �
� PLANNING DlV[S[ON
� MEMORANDUM
ciNOF
FRI DLEY
!!�2lJ �: Jim Aobinson. Planning Coordinatioi
!@� F7�Gll: DflLyl lioreyr Pla[ttiiIlg Assistaat�
!l�J� II1118: January 2, 1987
RBGARDING: Re�aodification of the City (bde Pertaining to Qwrches and Clinic
Rarkirg.
I have recently completed a review of the parking requirements for both
chucches, and.medical and dental clinics. As part of the review pzocess, I
surve�ed several adjacent cities regarding their garking requirements for
rhucches and clinics. As a result of m� reviea, I have ceoonanended ordinance
changes pertaining to d�urcties and clinic parking (see attachments).
After Planning Camnission reviEw of theses two ordir►3nces they will go to the
City Coimcil, ,along with the ordinance pertainin9 to dunpster enclosures, for
pu4lic hearing on Febru3ry 9, 1987.
t�87-2
2A
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIALEY CITY CODE CHAPTER
ZOS, ENTITLED •ZONING" BY AMENDING SECTIONS 205.13.5,
205.14.5, 205.15.5, AND 205.16.5 AND BY RENUHSERING THE
NEXT CONSECUTIVE NUMBERS OR LETTIILS
TAe City Council o£ the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows:
205.13. C-1 IACAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REGUTATIONS
5. PARKING 12EQUIREMENTS
C. Parking Ratio.
(1) At least one (1) off-street parking space shall be provided for
each 150 square feet of building floor area in the C-1 District
except:
(d) At least one (
for each 150 square
and dental clinics.
205.14. C-2 GENF.RAL BUSINESS DISIRICT REGUI,ATIONS
5. PARKING REQUIREMENTS
C. Parking Ratio.
(1) At least one (1) off-street parking space shall be provided for
each 150 square feet of building floor area in the C-2 District
except:
At least one (1) off-street parking space shall be provid
each 150 square feet of buildine floor area for all medic
205.15. C-3 GENERAL SHOPPING CENTER DISIRICT
5. PARKING REQUIREMENTS
C. Parki�ig Ratio.
(1) At least one (1) off-street parking space sha11 be provided for
each 150 square feet of building floor axea in the C-3 District
excepr:
(e) At least one (1) off-street parkinR space shall be provided
f'or each 150 square feet of buildinR floor area for a11 medical
>nd dental clinics.
� � PLANNING DIVISION 3
� � MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
FRIDLEY
ME�t) �: Jim Ii�binson. F'laruiing Coordinator
!@D FS2f�M: Dflryl Moteyr Plarviing Assistafft fjj�,\
MF2fJ IY��: January 2, 1981
RL�ARDING: Iteoodificatian of the Qty Cbde E�rtaining to Qiurches and Clinic
P�rkirxy
I have recently wmpleted a review of the parking requirements for both
churches, and medical and dental clinics. As part of t2�e review process, I
surve�ed several adjaoent cities regarding their parking requirements for
churci�es and clinics. As a result of my review, I have reoamnended ordinance
changes pertaining to churd�es and clinic parking (see attadunents).
After Planning Caimiission review of theses two ordirt3nces they will go to the
City Coimcil, along with the ordinance pertaining to dimpster enclosures, for
puhlic hearing on Februacy 9, 1987.
lF-87-2
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE F1tIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER
205, ENTITLED 'ZONING" BY AMfiNDING SECTIONS 205.07.1,
205.OB.1, AND 205.09.1 AND BY RENUMBERING THE NE%T
CONSECUTIVE NUMBERS
The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows:
205.07. R-1 ONE-FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS
1. USES PERMITTED
C. Uses Permitted With A Special Use Permit.
(2) Churches //and private schools//.
(a) Suildin� and site requirements and performance standards
shall be equal to or Rreater than those outlined in the CR-1
section of the Code (205.16.3, 205.16.4, 205.16.6 and 205.16.7).
(b) A parking requirement of at least one (1) off-street parking
space shall be provided for every three (3) fixed seats or for
every five (5) feet of pew 1en�th in the main assembly hall.
Additional narkine mav he renuired for additinnal church
are. classroom and recreational
vities.
(3) Private Schools.
205.08. R-2 TGTO-FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT REGUTATSONS
1. USES PERMITTED
C. Uses Yermitted With A Special Use Permit.
(2) Churches //and private schools//.
(a) BuildinA and site requirements and performance standards
shall be equal to or Rreater than those outlined in Che CR-1
section of the Code (205.16.3, 205.16.4, 205.16.b and 205.16.7).
�
Additional parkin
activities, such
activities.
(3) Private Schools.
irement of at 1
ew lenRth in the
be reauired for
xea seacs or tor
n assembly hall.
ditional church
3A
Page 2 - Ordinance No.
205.09. R-3 GENERAL MULTIPLE DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS
1. USES PERMITTED
C. Uses Permitted With A Special Use Permit.
(1) Ghurches //and private schools//.
shall be equal to ox Rreater than those out
section of the Code (205.16,3, 205.16.4, 205.L
every five (5) feet of pew lenRth in the main assembly hall.
Additional parkin� may be required for additional church
activities, such as day care, classroom and recreational
activities.
Private Schools.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS _ DAY OF
, 1987
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
3B
� PLANNING DIVISION
� MEMORANDUM
cmro� _
FRIDLEY
NEt2) �: University Avenue �chnical Act�isory Conenittee
Fridley Planning Convnission
MEND fItOM: Larry Cotmners, Q�ainnan, Housing & Redevelopnent Authority
Virginia Schr�bel, Manbec. Housing & Redevelopnent Authority
4�aitwoman, University Avenue �lcfinical Adwisory Comnittee
t�END II9TE: January 2, 1987
RFY'�ARDING: University Avenue Final Rep�rt Staff Addend�an
In Nwenber of 1�86, the consul ting f irm, Barton-Aschman and Asspciates,
sulmitted a finai—repoct and swnmary for the University Avenue Corridor
Study. 7ris report is a mmprehensive v�erview of the glanning process and
the Technical Advisory Committee's findings and recommendations for
improvanents. A master plan and budget estimate for improvenents is also
included in this repor� Zb refine this plan, Community Developnent staff
has preFered an addendun to the final report. This addendum does sevesal
things including:
1. Sumnarizes a City Degsrtment's evaluation of the recommendations to
elimir�te futential oonflicts.
2. Suggests priority schenes for phasing of the imprwenents.
3. Yncludes a budget which reflects the recommendations for phasing and
mainter�nce of the imptwenents.
On Decanbez 11, 1986 the Fzidley Housing 6 Redevelopnent Authority approved
the staff's recommendations and an initial $1.4 million in funding for
imglenentation of the project. �e minutes of this discussion are attached
for your review. 4he improvenents intended to be fimded b,� the $1.4 million
initial allocation include:
1. �e oomplete reforestation as outlined b� the oonsultants.
2. A lic�ting schene which includes the University Avenue intersection
lighting and 000rdinated oonunercial frontage road lighting.
3. Intersection improvenents for the 11 intersections in the study
imprwanents include the typical imprwenents as noted on Figure 15 in
the addendua.
�e HRA also directed the staff to study the acquisition of marginal
p�operties at the south e.nd of the Coccidor.
4A
University Avenue T.A.G
January 2, 1987
Page 2
Presently, our staff is preparinq the final report incorporating ref inements
and phasing within the appraved budget Prior to oomgleting this next effort
we feel it is most important that the 7�chnical Advisory Cananittee be given a
fi.nal opport�ity to ccmm�ent on the master glan and revisions Please review
the attached staff addendum as to the technical aspects, priorities and
budget schane. 23�te that Fart C, Budget, which includes capital inv estments
and annual maintenance b� oomponent has been revised to reflect the HRA's
intent to fLmd initial improvenents totalling roughly 1.4 million dollars.
Our staff wi11 be oontacting you individually after tl�e first of the year to
obtain your input related to tl�ese oonclusiona
Once the finishing touc}�es have been put on the study, we will be moving into
the working drawing stage. Our intent is to be ready to go out for bids on
the first �ase of the project in early spring.
In closing, we would like to say that we sincerely appreciate your
involvanent in this study to this point and look foraard to working with you
on the final revisions and implenentation stage in the near future.
LC/VS/cLn
C-86-569
w��ERS�n A�l� ��� R� December 16, 1986
...._ ......... . ... . .. .. . .
i�-r(�
a ciTiz� cor�ru�s:
— UJKEPT OOtm I T I aN
— 1�J51(iiiLY FENCE SOLI7H (F 69iH
-�at o i faES r�oR� cF 69n�
- v i suru. u�ac cF a�
— (.ApC CF PEOESTRIAN FACILITIES
B. KEEPING FRICIEY C(MPETITIVE:
W�AT?
— Sl.BtJRBAN SHIF7 TO ffFICE DEVELCPMENT
— DEVFI0PER5 L�SIRE FCR ATTRACTIUE ENTRANC.E AND SlRROUdDIN6S
— PRIVATE INJESTMENT S= PROPERTY TAX S
f1. R,ANT I NG AND SCI2EEN I NG 614K
B. ItaTEHSEC7ioN It�wawe�x7s 1,C�i3K
C. S�r Lio-irlr�c
� �
..,
�,667K
5,2�C 1 5�iC � 16C1C
W/0 FENCE � INiERSECTION FLANTING
1.�►c � 5oac � �
aki a a aRa �
� � �m i�
ir�r�sECrtay
8 F��� I
$1.994K '51.431K f1.Q591C
L_J
:
EXCERPT FROM DECEMBER 11, 1986, HOUSING.& REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINU7E5 - PAGE 1
5. CONSIDERATION OF GIVING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO A BUDGET AND AN IMPLEMENTATION
Mr. Robertson stated the interest and impetus for this project actually
began about a year ago with some businesspeople with establishments along
the north end of the University Avenue corridor. There had been some
repeated requests and interest for making improvements along the corridor.
Last spring, the HRA evaluated various consultants and picked Barton-Aschman
with the understandi�g there would be an advisory committee set up consisting
of technical people from the state, county, and city and citizens from
Fridley representing businesses and residents along the corridor.
Mr, Robertson stated the committee went through a planning process which
was summarized in the draft report, Recommendations derived from that
planning process were informally presented to the HRA and City Council in
October. Based on the HRA and City Council comments in October, the
consultant put together a draft final report incorporating the suggestions.
Mr. Robertson stated that the draft final report did not include
recommendations for priorities in implementing the various components of
the plan, sequence of implementation and implications for maintenance costs.
The draft report did intlude cost sheets and estimates based on the capital
improvements involved; it would have been a very theoretical exercise to
try to estimate maintenance costs until the HRA and City Louncil indicated
a direction for priorities and implementation.
Mr. Robertson stated that since this draft report was received, Staff had
done several things: (1) had tried to troubleshoot all the recommendations
in this report to try to debug any potential technical, legal and safety
questions that might not have been covered by the process; (2) anticipating
that the HRA mi9ht ask Staff for recommendations, Staff had put together
some suggested implementation sequences or phases; (3) had proposed some
priorities; and (4) had estimated a budget which reflected these
recommendations.
Mr. Robertson referred to the one-page summary University Avenue Corridor
Plan" handed out at the meeting. He stated that when people on the Technical
Advisory Committee were asked what some of the problems were that needed to
be addressed, they responded with the following: unkept condition, un-
sightly fence south of 69th Avenue, rural ditches north of 69th Avenue,
visual lack of order, and lack of pedestrian facilities.
Mr. Robertson stated Staff wished to emphasize that the overall objective
was keeping Fridley competitive with what was going on in the metropolitan
area and throughout the nation. We are now experiencing a shift from being
a manufacturing suburb to more of an office-type suburb. Fridley is
4C
4D
EXCERPT FR011 DEC. 11, 198fi, HOUSING & REDEVELOPflE��T. AUTHQRITY NINUTES - PAfE 2
in competition with other conmunities in the metropolitan area and with
this type of development, developers are looking for an ettractive community
entrance and surroundings. The City has a long range financial interest
in attracting private investment dollars which translate ultimately into
property tax dollars and an expanding tax base. The�City should look at
this as a city investment in terms of creating a pleasant community to
attract private development dollars whi�h will help keep tax rates low.
t1r, Robertson stated there were actually seven different components of tfie
University Avenue Corridor Plan tliat [iarton-Aschnan addressed in the draft
report, hut these components could be summarized into three basic elements:
A, Planting and scree�ing (includin9 reforestation, trees, grass,
and doing something about the deterioration of tlie fence)
ti. Intersection improvements (there were 8 major intersections and
3 ninor intersections — including brick paving, curbs, sidewalks,
overhead 'and lighted siyns; street furniture, etc.)
C. Street ligF�tinq
Mr. Robertson stated these 3 elements were tisted at the bottom of the
one-page summary. To the right of each of the elerients were the
recomaendations for priorities in terris of decreasing amounts of the
inplementation budqet. If they were to decide on the full package, it would
cost $�,667,00�, the next column was 51,99a,�f1�, the third column was
�1,431,000, and tf�e last column was 51,069,000.
Mr. Prairie asl:ed Yihat improver�ents were included in the priority colunn
totallin9 $1,431,000.
P1r. Robertson stated tfiat for planting and screening, it would include ttie
turf and the trees, but would leave out the fence. For intersection ir�prove-
ments, it would be just the intersection treatMent wi*.h the curb, qutter,
side�aalk and bricks. There would not be any nonumentation that the consultant
was recormending at tlie entrance on the north an�l the south, specia� rronu-
mentation at the City Center, or street furniture. For street lighting, it
would be lighting for the commercial firontage roads plus the intersecz
tions, both in tlie north/south and east/a!est directions, but not the entire corridor.
Mr. Robertson stated 6arton-Aschman had outlined two alternatives for street
lightinq--either median lighting or•frontage road lighting. Of the
two, the Technical Advisory Cormittee liked the idea of the frontane road
lightirtg because it opened up the corridor visually at ninht and provided
more visual access at ni9ht to the adjace�t husinesses. The $990,00� ficlure
for street lighting was Staff's estimate for a compromise between those two
alternatives...to provide lightinc�,rather than down the r�edian, alonn the
4E
E;;CERPT FROPt DEC. 11, 19II6, HOUSI��G & REDEVELOP�tEFlT AUTHORITY HIlJUTES - PAGE 3
shoulder continuously on the traveled way, northbound and southhouncl lanes.
In addition, smaller standards would be placed aloncl commercial frontage
roads.
Ms. Sclm abel stated that regarding "entrance walls", she had read in the
Addendum that Staff wanted tfie opportunity to restudy that concept. She
thought th-it was a good thing to do. She had liked tf�e idea when it was
first preaented, and sFte still felt tfiere were some nice parts about it,
but she had heen gettinn sone feedbac4, from people �aho felt it miqht
present a visual berrier instead of a welcome.
t1r. Robertson sho�•+ed sone slides of plantinq plans, lightinq, intersection
details, nonumentation, and some things done in o`.her cnrrwnities.
Mr. Rohertson stated that aiith the alternatives they had before them, he
would lil;e the HRA to give Staff sone direction on how they wishPd the Staff
to rroceed--how much and what amount of time? tlid the NP,A like these elements?
Councilperson Schnei�ler stated he agreed that the corridor needed imnrovement,
He liked and supported the concept of doing some improver�ent along the corridor,
but he had a little trouhle with a�2,6G7,000 proposal.
Mr. Prairie agreed, and that was why he was inclined to look more at the
$1,431,f1�() figure. That amount of money over a 3-yaar period could mal:e thP
corridor look pretty 9ood, and they could increase the araunt at any time.
Ms. Schnabel stated they had to keep in mind that University Avenue was not
the only street in Fridley that needed upgradin�. If they spend money here,
they sliouTd not forget there are other roadways that a)so need improvement
and to be cautious about tl�e kinds of thin9s they want to do.
Councilperson FitzpatricY, agreed that University Avenue was not the only
street in town, but he stated the problem on llniversity was very real anrl
long-standing. He vrould like to see somethinq done along the corridor. He
liked the dollar amount 11r. Prairie had suggested, because it would seem
they would get the optimum in each of the components.
Hayor I�ee stated he did not think the fence or the ditches were that big of
a proh7en. 7he real problem that hothered hir� was the junk cars at the
entrance to the city. He stated the HRA had the povier to do soc?Pthinq about
that by finding a public use for property that had a marginal use.
Mr. Qureshi aqreed that people coming into Anoka County anA Fridley on
Highwa "' --a u��hway 65 get a very bad ima9e of Fridley, especially with
the used car lot an ot very attractive businesses. It would be very helpful
to have an attractive entrance into the city. tie stated the IiRA could
address the concern raised by Playor "�ee. The HRA did have the po�rer to desi�-
nate these areas as economic development or redevelopnent areas and take
positive steps to acquire properties and develop plans for these properties.
�IF
E�CERPT FRO"1 DEC. 11 19II6 HOUSI��G & REDEVELOPHEt1T AUTNORITV MINUTES - PAfE 4
Mr. Qureshi stated that at this tine, Staff was requesting some direction
from the IiRA as to what areas they felt had the greatest importance.
Ms. Schnabel stated that because this opened up a new door that she had not
thought of before.in that the IIRA had the power to make some improvenents
in the 57th and University Ave, area, she would like to see the fIRA explore
that avenue in more detail. She personally favored the planting and screen-
in9 element and personally favored the high figure in that element.
She thougf�t they got a lot for their money in terms of refores+.ation, turf
re-establisfiment, and a good maintenance program on behalf of tfie city.
Ms. Scfinabel stated that in terms of the intersection improvenents, she coul�i
see at tliis point getting some kind of modification. In the City f,enter part,
there �ras maybe a need and a good argument for doin� some more worl� on the
University/tiississippi intersection. She was willin� to sacrifice the gate-
way part for the time being on 57th and 85th 6ecause tfiose two areas are
un4;nowns right now, as far as developmentis concerned.
�1s. Schnahel stated she would like�to see the City talk about pickin� up some
of the costs on lighting. She saw it partly as the City's ohlic�ation and
partly as the flighway Department's obligation to provide liclhtin� on llniversity
Ave. itself. She r�ould like the City to think about making an expenditure in
that area. Ptaybe, with these suggestions, Staff could come up with a modified
dollar pacl;age.
Ms. 5chnabel stated to suranarize rrhat she had just said, shP would take the
5614,000 figure for planting and screening, the �a500,000 fi�ure on intersec-
tion improvenents, and put a hold on street li9hting until tliey liad a clear
idea where they were at, and tfien she would add to that a plan or pr.o9ran to
acquire properties on the southern end of University.
Ptr. Qureshi stated his rationale was that tfiey already have some plan±inns
along the highw.ay. It does need sone maintenance and upgrading, hut if tliey
did the reforestation, it was not going to make a drastic chan�e fron �ahat
they have now because it takes time for plants and trees to gro�i. If t4�ey
adopt a plan all the way along, every tir�e a new deve7ooment comes, it mi9ht
be possible that a sizeable portion of the fundin� could come from nevt
development. He felt the best and most cost-effective approach woulri he to
do the intersection improvenents for safety reasons and visual impact and
movement of traffic. Second would be lighting in tfie public areas and alon9
the cor.mercial properties. Maybe something could be worked out with the
property owners, too, for the cost of that lighting.
Ms. Scfinabel stated this rias a piecemeal approach, and she was not sure it
was what the members of the Technical Advisory Cormittee wanted.
Mr. Prairie stated he would still recommend the HP.A go with the $1,431,000
cost figure (3rd column) on the University Avenue Corridor Plan. It was
approximately one-half the maximum cost, and it could always be increased.
He also thought they should work hard at cleaning up the properties they
don't think make the City l�ok very good.
4G
E;;CERPT FROf1 DEC. 11 19II6 HOl15It�G & R EDEVELOPt1E��T AIiTH�RITY 11INUTES - PAGE 5
Mr. tleyer Stated he agreed with �1r. Prairie.
Ms. Schnabel stated she �iould also agree witli Hr. Prairie. She stated she
would like to see 5taff put to9ether some type of tinetable, keepin9 in mind
the HRA would like to look at the possibility of the acquisition of
properties on the south end of University.
MOTION, by Prairie, seconded by Meyer, to adopt the third column plan on the
one-page staff sumnary.
University Avenue N..E. Master Plan
Page 6
�a i� u • i •� � • •r• a�
Capital Investment
a. Reforestation - Phase I 209,836
Phase II 146,102
Phase III 75,130
431,068
b. Turf
R0-2stablish.
Money Tractor 30,000
Phase I 16,533
Phase II 21,976
Phase III 21,982
90 , 49�
c. Intersection
Hardware (red
brick, cux� and
gutter, side�aalk
crosswalks) Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
d. Lighting-
intengection &
frontage - materials
and labor. Average
$2,700/unit approx.
179/unit =
200,000
137,500
87,500
425,000
483,300
Maintenance
$15K/yr after Phase III
$20K/yr after Phase III
$lOK/yr after Phase III
$30K/yr after Phase I
(pa.��r and maintenance)
:�171
a
�
�
I G�
-r-�
�
a
a
tYP, GO(yG. GUR� 6 GU'
1' YP. P�D P/, r'I li(� 8R i
6�s ---- .
5 NEt7E/:
N
0
ys so ,00
�----
laAu [
�
12 /S�6
4
.5`fREEf 51VNS
utiu�U4��nnqnr
� __--,
�
A
r�
0
�
:_a
Figure 15
Typical Intersectior
85T" kV�NUE
giST �VENU�
OSBORNE RD.
73 R1DA-V ENU�
69 T" A�V � N U�
I�Is5�551PP1
bl ss kV�nUE
5��� ,�W E NU�
�3'� kV�NU�
P��SE �
GORNER oIVLY
��N'(RY ELEI'I�hi�
4J
g�st {�PRDV�f1�N'(5 TO
85 T� IMPROVEI'I�IY75
PN��S� I
OSBORNE 70 81 st
IHGIUDINv IN7�RSEGTIONS
73 RD IN?ERSEGiIOry
'f0 OSBORNE IMPRo�^EMEN1�
PN��S� _ III
L __ _--- —,
�IISS. inPRovEMEr11S TD
73 RP II'1PRDYEMEh7S
P I+� IC
n�ss. inTeres�t�on
TO bl st IMPP.oVEM6tyT5
(oR pFt�R niss. cons�.)
571N 'fo bl st
inc�u�iNU i�jtiRS�c-�r�ons
�P�+A-5� IlI
ss � InTERSEGTion t'o
' — 57'�++ It'►PRoVEMElY75
;P � Figure 16
�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING
DECEMBER 2, 1986
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Saba called the December 2, 1986, Energy Commission meeting
to order at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Dean Saba, Bruce Bondow, Glen Douglas, Bradley Sielaff
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Myra Gibson, Planning Assistant
APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 28, 1986, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Bondow, seconded by Mr. Douglas, to approve the October 28,
1986, Energy Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SABA DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. APPROVE 1987 TENTATIVE MEETING DATES
Ms. Gibson referred to the 1987 tentative meeting dates included with the
agenda. The dates as listed are the fourth Tuesday of the month.
Mr. Saba indicated that he may have conflicts with some of the meeting dates
but did not feel it would create problems.
MOTION by Mr. Douglas, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to approve the 1987
Tentative Meeting Dates as presented.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SABA DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. UPDATE ON MINNECASCO HOUSE DOCTORS
Ms. Gibson indicated that the House Doctors have now been completed and
that a total of 89 House Doctors had heen done.
Ms. Gibson stated she would follow-up with Minnegasco and compare participants'
consumption rates. After the data is collected, a report will be
put together.
Mr. Saba asked if Ms. Gibson had received positive feedback.
Ms. Gibson indicated that the last 10 people to receive a House Doctor had
called to let her know they thought the House Doctor was very good and
expressed their thanks.
ENERGY COhII�fISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 2
3. UPDATE ON D.E.E.D. REPORT
Ms. Gibson noted the report had been finished with the exception of the
exhibits. The budget has been completed and copies were distributed to
members. The report Will be submitted as soon as the exhibits are put
together. A copy of the report will be made for the DEED library and for
City files so the information will be available for use again.
Ms. Gibson noted that the budget showed expenditures of $67,000 on the two
programs including funds received from Minriegasco a:.d NSP.
Mr. Sielaff suggested that the report be presented to the City Council.
Mr. Bondow thought it would be good for the Council to have the information.
Mr. Saba suggested listing the houses worked on by each ward so that the
Council members would know how many homes in their wards had been helped
by the program.
Mr. Sielaff also suggested that an Energy Commission member also be
present at the City Council meeting to provide additional information
and/or answer questions.
Ms. Gibson agreed that it was a good idea to present the information to
the Council. Ms. Gibson indicated that two D.E.E.D. grants are also
coming up for which she would like to apply. These grants would need to
go through the Planning Commission and then to the City Council. She
recommended that the report and grant proposals be presented at the same
time, if possible.
4. UPDATE ON D.E.E.D. GRANTS
Ms. Gibson indicated that 3 grants are available. The first is due on
January 1�, 1957 and is for up to $15,000 for one year. The guidelines
are the same as before. This may require a different committee structure.
An alternative would be to waive the committee and use the Planning
Commission.
The second grant application is a two cycle grant, which is due in March, 1987.
The maximum amount for the first cycle is $30,000 and $15,000 for the second
cycle.
Ms. Gibson would like to use the'DEED srant for salaries and promotion of the
energy and recycling programs.
Mr. Sielaff asked what was being considered for the next proposal.
Ms. Gibson indicated that at this time=the grant would be a preliminary round
for further development of the rental cod�.compliance, and that the recycling
assistance will be just that. �ture grants will £o31ow up on the information I
gathered from this grant cycle.
ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 3
Ms. Gibson thought the
rental property. With
before the City Council
ideas.
two-year grant would help fund inspections for
the funding, the Energy Code could be brought
for approval. Ms. Gibson requested additional
Mr. Sielaff suggested audits of school buildings.
Mr. Saba indicated this has been done.
Ms. Gibson noted that restrictions with the D.E.E.D. grants are basically
for salaries and contracted services. It is somewhat restrictive on what
can be spent.
Mr. Bondow suggested an educational segment as part of the rental
code. He preferred to contact NSP or Minnegasco for audits.
Mr. Saba suggested inclUding energy information as part of the newsletter,
such as the amount of energy lost when a window is opened.
Ms. Gibson stated that the City has a code, and the City could have the
landlord do an audit. The cost varies according to the number of square
feet. Money has gone to agencies for solar funds,and loans are available
to landlords for building improvements. We could do inspections and then
actually do follow-up correspondence and enforcement with administrative
funds.
Mr. Sielaff asked the difference between an inspection and an audit.
Ms. Gibson stated that an inspection determines that there is a prob]em. In an
inspection, the inspector can inforn the person of the proble�s and recommend
improvements to meet code. An audit is much more specific and rev�als
the improvements that must be�made. There is a section in the code where.a
State engineer in energy looks at a house and determines paybacks as well.
Mr. Bondow added that an audit is independent of an inspection. He asked
if the City has access to audits.
Mr. Sielaff asked if the landlord has the option of an audit to see if
they meet code.
Ms. Gibson stated they have the option. If the work recommended by the
inspector is done within a reasonable period of time, an audit may not be
done. However, items such as furnace or boiler retrofits would require an
audit. An inspection is done by the City to see if a building meets code.
An audit is required if the landlord wishes to apply for an improvement loan.
Mr. Sielaff thought the problem appeared Lo be that the City does not have
an inspector that is also an auditor. He wondered why they were two
different functions and if the City should inspect or just have an auditor
look at the buildings.
Ms. Gibson stated that this is an option available to the City. She
stated that the building inspector and fire department are most likely aware
of which buildings do not meet code.
ENERGY COFQfISSION MEETINC, DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 4
Mr. Sielaff felt it appeared as if the value of an audit was to get a loan.
Ms. Gibson stated that an audit also provides an unbiased opinion for work
which may or may not need to be done.
Mr. Sielaff asked, if the City went with audits, would the City pay for
the audits.
Ms. Gibson indicaLed that the landlord would pay for the audits.
Mr. Sielaff asked what incentive is there for landlords to pay for their
own audits.
Ms. Gibson stated that a landlord can be fined up to $500 per day if the
City inspector finds the building does not meet code. This can be very
expensive. However, the landlord can have an audit done at a cost of
$500 -$750 and bring the building up to code.
Mr. Sielaff asked if the City has the power to enforce.
Ms. Gibson indicated that the intent is to inspect. Landlords will be
notified that the City will inspect and that the landlords can have an
audit done by a number of auditors, a list of which will be provided.
This must be done within a certain time. After that time, the City will
go out and inspect all buildings to see what needs to be done or what has
been done.
Mr. Sielaff asked if the City would get a copy of the audit.
Mr. Bondow felt people would be reluctant to have an audit if the results
were to go to the City inspector.
Ms. Gibson stated that an audit can prove that a building meets code and
that nothing needs to be done. The plan at this time is to send out a
letter setting up a meeting to discuss the issue with landlords and keep
them informed. Within the State code, the State is to help the city
determine whether a building meets code or not and there are some stiff
fines. There are many ways to approach the problem. . We may also
want to incorporate some other kind of energy conservation or education.
Mr. �aba suggested a one-page publicity about energy.
Ms. Gibson stated she had done an energy and recycling update. This could
include information on radon contamination. Printing expenses can come
out of the D.E.E.D. grant.
Mr. Sielaff asked how Rould the funding be distributed.
Ms. Gibson recommended that half the funding be used for energy and half
for recycling.
Mr. Sielaff felt it would be advantageous to get information to the landlords.
ENERGY CQMMISSION MEETING, ➢ECEPiBER 2, 1986 PAGE 5
Ms. Gibson indicated the grant includes administrative duties, and she
felt the funds from the two-year grant could be used up easily.
Ms. Gibson indicated that Richfield did audits for single family homes
for a cost of $10 and the City administered the program.
Mr. Sielaff asked how many audits were done as part of the N.E.W.'s.
Ms. Gibson thought 60 audits had been done out of 100.
Mr. Douglas asked what ideas were included on recycling.
Ms. Gibson indicated that her salary for recycling is not covered from
funds now received. Part of the recycling funds would be used to offset
her salary expense.
Mr. Saba wondered if anything more could be done with recycling. He felt
that the people who now recycle are the same people who will always recycle.
Ms. Gibson indicated that the thing that keeps coming up is that recycling
will be made mandatory. The goal is to keep 16 percent out of the waste
stream and that is why we are trying to get people to recycle.
Mr. Saba asked if this included bagged leaves that now go to the landfill.
Leaves are basically compost and should not be considered part of the waste
stream.
Ms. Gibson stated that leaves do not form compost when in plastic bags.
Mr. Sielaff asked when the contract is up with ihe recycler.
Ms. Gibson stated the contract expired in September 1987. She also noted
that the hauler may not want to renew the contract. Some people want to
recycle items that are not recycleable including hazardous waste materials,
such as used motor oil.
Ms. Gibson noted that the next meeting is January 27 and the first grant is
due January 12. A special meeting will be held to review the first proposal
and a motion will be needed to bring the proposal before the Planning
Commission. Ms. Gibson agreed to send a draft proposal to members before
the special meeting.
5. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Mr. Saba asked Mr. Sielaff if he had gotten information from the PCA
regarding radon contamination.
Mr. Siela£f spoke to the person involved with indoor air quality. They
are now working on guidelines. A problem appears to be in mobile homes
and studies are now being done. A study will be done in the Moose Lake
area in mid-December. Mr. Sielaff inentioned the CO monitor and he would
like to use the monitor for the study. He also mentioned the monitor
may not work unless used with a blower door. The monitor must be used
under the right conditions.
ENERGY COMMISSION MEETINC, DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 6
Mr. Saba asked if they had found any areas is the Cities they were
concerned about.
Mr. Sielaff indicated there is not much information available on radon.
The PCA is studying the literature and are trying to come up with some
guidelines. For measuring contamination, they have badges. Mr. Sielaff
stated he would keep in touch and will provide the commission with the
guidelines when they are available.
Mr. Bondow referred to the article in the October 1986 Energy and
Housing Report regarding radon contamination.
Ms. Gibson asked why radon contamination would be more prevalent in
mobile homes.
Mr. Sielaff was not sure that radon was more prevalent in mobile homes,
but that is where the PCA is doing Lheir study.
Ms. Gibson stated she would talk with the inspector regarding radon
contamination. She also had sent for information. M'hen the information
arrives, Ms. Gibson will make up packets and send out to the members.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Bondow, seconded by Mr. Douglas, to adjourn the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SABA BECLARED THE DECEMBER 2,
1986, ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
���%i/1(J . � �/��/
Lavonn Cooper ��
Recording Secretary
a
CITY Of FRIDLEY
HOUSING & REDEVELOPt1FMT AUTHORITY FIEETIP�G, D[CFt1BER 11, 1986
CALL TO ORDFR:
Vice-Chairperson Schnabel called the Dec. 11, 1986, Housing & Redevelopr�ent
Authority meeting to order at 7:20 p,m.
ROLL CALL:
Menbers Present: Virginia Scfinabel, Duane Prairie, John P1eyer
�4enbers Absent: Larry Commers, l�alter Rasnussen
Otiiers Present: Jock Robertson, HRA Executive Director
FJasim Quresi�i, City Ptanager
Dave P!eti•mian, F?RA Attorney
Rick Pri6y1, Finance Director
Julie Qurt, Asst. Finance Officer
Joi�n Flora, Pu61ic IJorks Director
Sanantha Orduno, �ianagenent Assistant
Mayor Bill Mee
Councilperson Dennis Schneider
Councilperson Ed Fitzpatrick
Councilperson-elect �Jancy Jorgenson
Bob Levy, 100 S. 5th St.
Richard Qiamonri, 1(l� S. 5th St.
Harry Yaffe, 2300 Archers Lane, �tinnetonka
Sherrill Kuretich, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren
�une Lundgren and
Louis Lundgren, The Lundgren Associates
APPROVAL OF PIOVEP16ER 13, 1986, HOUSINf & REDEI�FLOP�IFP�T AUTHORITY ItINUTES:
MO'_"ZON BY ?fR. PRAIRIF.� SF.CONDED BY FfP.. ASF.YER, TD APPP,OVE THE NOV. I3� 1986,
XDUSING & REDES�ELOPF7FNT AUTHORITY MINUTES RS WRITTEN.
UPOM A VOICF. i'OTF.� ALL VOTIl7G AYE� GICF,-CHAIRPF,RS07! SCHNABEI DECLAFtED THP
MOPIOf! CRRRIED UNANIl�10USLY.
1. COWSIDFRATIOW OF A RESOLUTION APPP,OI'IPIf, TNF A�7EPJ�MEPrT TO THE M�DIFIFD
Mr. Robertson stated this was a housel;eepin� action required due to the
construction of the University Associates apartment huilding in this
district. It was necessary to modify the redevelopment plan and the tax
increment financing plans for tax increment districts 2-8 to include the
increased project costs.
HOUSIt�G & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MFETING DFCFh1RER 11 1986 PAGF 2
MO'"ION AY MR. MEYER� SECOIJDED BY MR. PRAIRIE� TO APPROVE RESOLUTIOPi NO.
NRA- Zj 11PPROVZNG TXE AMEDIDMENT TO THE P10DIFIF,D RF.DEVELOPM£,NT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMF,NT FROJECT NO. 1 AND AMENDIl1G TNF, TRX INCREMF.NT FINANCIflG PLANu
FOR TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS NOS. 2-8.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYF.� VICE-CHAIRPERSON SCHNABEL DECLARF:D THF.
AfOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Robertson stated that along with this development, the HRA v+as required
to set a public haring date for the developnent agreement for Jan. F3, 19fi7,
the HRA's re9ularly scf�eduled meeting,
MOTION BY lfR. PRAIRZE� SECONDED BY �fR. MEYER� TO SF,T TXF, Pi7BLIC HF,ARZNG DATF
FOR THC DEVF,LOPFfF,N2 AGREEMENT FOR JAN. 8� 1987� RS 7:00 P.M,
UPON I� VOICE VOSF., ALL VOSING RYE� VICE-CHAZRPF.P.SON SCHNABE7, DECLARED ^'l!E
MOTZON CARRIED UNRIlIA10USLY,
P1r. '�e�man stated that regarding tfie University Associates apartnent projer.t,
it vras his recollection fron tfle last neeting tFiat t�iere were sor�e final items
the HRII urished for Staff to continue to negotiate witfi the developer. It was
tlie developer's intention to close on tfie property later this month, even
though the HRA will not have formally executed tfie developr�ent agreement until
the public hearing in January. He stated he �iould like to have the opportunity
to review the latest changes to make sure the Staff has the I1RA's concimrence
an�i so tlie developer has the HRA's assurance hefore they close on the property
later this month.
Mr. Nevrtnan stated tfiat as tfie Hi2A recalled, it fias heen proposed to �10 a
second mortga9e of $i350,000 at ti% interest. There wnuld not he any in±erest for
the first tfiree years; and altliougfi in±erest would hegin to run in th? fourth
year, interest payments 4iould not actually beqin until the sixth year and would
run years 6-15. Ilhat they are doing durinq that period is they are nal:inn all
the interest that accrues currently, takinn years �4-5 interest an�1 diviriinn
that into ten interest installments, so they would be making 1/10 installment
on the prior interest, plus they arould amortize the principle so that at the
end of 15 years, the installments �vill have reduced the principle fror� �£35n,00�
to $475,000. Tfien in the 15th year, tfiere is a halloon pa�ent,--that is
interest for that year plus remaining principle and tfie balance ��hirh is $425,000.
Mr. Ne��rnan stated it o-ias the Hf:A's concern that interest for years 4 and 5 be
�aid as installments over the balance of tf�e mortgage. In the revision, thev
are requiring tf�e developer to post a letter of credit in an amount equal t�
the interest. That letter of credit can be carried until the project is
conpleted (1990).
�1r. Ne��rtnan stated that in the packet received at the meeting, there were two
guarantees that have been reviewed with the developer. One guarantee to he
signed by each of tiie general partners would personally cluarantee the payrient
of the tax increr�ent in the event the project itself doesn't pay the taxes.
That will also continue until the project is completed, when the facilities are
up and on line.
HOUSIIJf & P�EDEUELOP�IE��T AUTHORITY �1EETING, DECf11RFR 11, 1986 PAGF 3
Mr. Neerman stated the second guarantee was a personal guarantee of the payment
of mortgaqe payments. That guarantee rrilT continue until the mortgage has
been paid in full. It will also provide that in the event the net �•iorth of
this developr�ent collectively is less than $10 nillion, the NRA then has the
ri�ht to require additional securities in order to secure an interest in that
second mortgage.
F7r. Ne��rtnan stated otf�er changes in the agreenent ��iere technical language changes.
�ir. Plet.�aan s*ated he felt comfortable �vitf� t4ese changes. He had tried to
tal;e �he I!RA's comments and concerns from tfie last meeting and cone to some
concensus of what tfiey were loof•,ing for. He stated fie wanted to get the HR14's
conceptual agreenent with ±he document with tfie changes. This was the dncumen?
that would he presented to the I!RA at their January meeting.
1s. Sflerrill Y.ureticF� stated i1r. ?dewr�an had done a qood iob of summarizing
the changes to the document, She added that there �vas 9oing to be a substantial
larger letter of credit posted to the City as required by the City to assure the
conpletion of the site improvenents. That letter of credit would remain in
place until the project was completed. She though*, that letter of credit was
sonewhere around �700-II�J0,000.
�4s. Schnahel stated it was the concersus of tfie f,orxnissioners present that
the changes outlined by 11r, tJevrtnan r^flected the concerns expressed hy the
Coemissioners at their last meeting.
2. TAf3LED: COflSIDfRATI�PI OF APPROVIt;G ACTIOfI T� DRAb! QN LOU LIINDGRE'!'S S2n^,000
Mr. Qureshi stated Staff's position was
meeting, essentia7ly tf�at tF�ere was an
HRA requested the letter of credit was
ahout the development.
the sar�e as tf�at presente�l at the last
agreement and one of tf�e reasons why the
it shoV�ed that the develorer was serious
"1r. Qureshi stated there o�as nori no longer a valid agreement with the develoner,
and in the agreement they had, it provided tfiat if the developer did not perform
by a certain date, the HP.A could draw on his letter of credit. That time has
long come and gone.
P1r. Qureshi stated the argument could be made that !1r. Lundgren is still
exploring other possihilities of puttinq the package together. Ilowever, if
the developer comes up witf� a package acceptable to the HRA and thev h�ve no*.
made a cormitr�ent to anyone else, the HRA could still review that �ackage anri
enter into another agreement with hin.
t1r, Qureshi stated it was Staff's recorraendation to draw on the letter of
credit.
Fir. Qureshi stated �1r. Lundgren and his legal representative were in the
audience.
HOUSII�G E REDEVELOPt1FNT AUTHORITY PIEETI�JG; DECf_M[3ER 11, 1986 PAGF 4
�4s. Kuretich stated they now think they can make some progress on workino
out the finances for tf�is project. She certainly understood Staff's concern
and the fiRA's concern. This letter of credit would remain in place un±il
June 1987; and up until that point, the letter of credit can be draivn upon at
any tine. She stated that if the letter of credit was draw upon at this tir�e,
Mr. Lw�dgren would be called upon by the hank to irmiediately reimhurse the
bank for the amount of that letter of credit. That was likely to mal;e movina
forward with this project totally impossi6le because i± 4iould be tab.ing funds
ner.essary to proceed v�ith the project and applying it to a paymen± to the HRA.
Pis. Kuretich stated they have begun �rorkin� with a local mort4age lender,
f4eritor 'tortgage Corporation - Central, formerly the old Northland Mortgage
Con�any.liousing Development Division. These people are very sophisticated
mortgage brol:ers, and they feel it will he much easier to worl: with a local
lender. They are meeting with tteritor Hortgage on Tuesday morning to look at
this project in terms of doing botfi the mar4:et rate rental and the elderly
housing in one phase instead of two. They tfiink that might make the project
considerably nore viable.
Ms. Kuretich stated Pleritor �tortgage [�as received the projections from
Mr. Lundgren with respect to tf�e project and are analyzing these numhers now.
Hopefully, by the January meeting, Pieritor �rill be able to provide sor,ie type
of letter to the HRA indicating whether or not the project is feasible.
Although it will be difficult because of the holidays, they will attenpt between
now and the January meeting to have some prelininary meetinqs o-iith the local
HUD offir.e. They are still looking at the pnssibility of FH{1 insurance for
the project. They are moving forward to explore feasible alternative methods
of financing this project. They are asking the HRA's indulnence and that, the
HRA not draw on �•1r. Lundgren's letter of credit at this tine.
h1r. Heyer asked Mr. Lundgren to review the expenditures he has already r�ade
on this project in terms of real costs.
Mr. Lundgren stated he has invested in excess of $500,000 on this project, not
countinq tF�e letter of credit, so r�ith the letter of credit, it was over
$700,000 in total. He would not be able to proceed with the project if the
HRA cashes the letter of credit. He felt thay do have special resources in
order to proceed v+ith the project in an expeditious fashion, and he believed
that by the January meeting, they could have not only a letter fron �1eritor
describing tfie feasibility of tfie project, 6ut also a tine*able for what has
to be done. The project has completed specifications and Yror�:ing drawinqs
so the processing with a local lending office as opposed to the one tfiey had
before should be much more rapid, not only because of the convenience of the
location,but because the work has essentially all been done.
Pts. Sclinabel stated that with the addition of doing elderly housing at the
onset, was �1r. Lundgren's position of obtaining mortgage money enhanced over
what it has been previously?
HOUSING R REDEVEL�P�tE�JT AUTHOP,ITY NEETI'�G, DECEMBER 11, 1986 P^.�F 5
Ms. Kuretich stated doing this as a single phase made it much more difficult
for the project cash flow and, in fact, was impossible unless they can use
tax increment financing. VJhen the Tax Reform Act aias passed, they betieved
anci still believe it is impossible to do the first pfiase of this project
without tax exempt money because tfiere are not enough units for the loti income
units to he subsidized by the market rate (if it was only one phase). Ry doing
the two phases together, they 6elieve tfiey can nake the project's cash flow
by using tax exempt fionds after all. Also, tfiere will 6e cost savings
involved in terms of internal per unit e�cpenses, thereby increasing the money
available to pay the debt service for the financing on the project.
Ms. Kuretich stated she felt the biggest impact was the fact that they had
more market rate units to support the units that would have to he set aside
to meet the rent restrictions under the tax reform. She wanted to emphasize
tliat they were not talking about a reduced quality in the project.
f•ts. Schnabel asked how many units there would be in each of the builrlings.
Mr. Lundgren stated this was still subject somewhat to HUD's review, hut
there should be 165 elderly units and 124 market rate units. However, that
nur�6er miqht vary.
It was the concensus of the HRA members present to not exercise their option
and to not take any action on t1r. Lundgren's letter of credit at this r�eetinq,
and that the item remain on the table.
"1s. Schnabel stated she would ask that this �tem be placed on the January
agenda so tfle HRA can make another determination at that tir�e.
3, COPJSIDf_RATION OF ENTERING IIITO A t1ASTER LFASE FOR THE RICF PLAZh SH�PPIPI� CFNTER:
P1r. Robertson stated that as a result of a lonn discussion on both the pros and
cons of acquiring this property at the last HRA mts., a letter was received from
Richard Diamond dated t�ov. 28, 1986. This letter outlined the concept of a
master lease. Staff would like to keep the NRA reactions to this
concept and some direction as to how to proceed.
Mr. �dewr�ian stated the letter from Mr. Diamond was on page 3 of the HRA agenda.
He had not really had much of a chance to discuss this with Pir. Levy and
Mr. Diamond, other than briefly on the telephone. After the last meetinq,
Mr. Diamond and he had talked about whether there tvas another way that the
issue of the acquisition of the Rice P7aza Center could be resolved. The
issue of a master lease had been briefly discussed with P1r. Levy last sprinc�,
and he had raised the subject with Mr. Diamond. P1r. Diamond had talked to his
clients, and this letter was their original proposal.
Mr. Neomian stated tlie approach that has been taken is to try tn find a vehicla
that would be beneficial to both parties. Obvioiasly, the HRA would lil:P to
develop the property,and he be7ieved that the HRA, from a policy standpoint,
felt very uncomfortable buying property when they do not have an in-hand
development. 4lith the roaster lease concept, if the IiRA did decide to acquire
HOUSI�IG & REDEVELOPFIEIJT AUTHORITY PIEETIRG, DECFPIRER 11, 1936 P(!GE 6
the property, as leases expired, they would have the option of not rPnPwing
those leases; thereby avoiding the cost of relocation expenses.
Mr, ReHmian stated that the owner's greatest concern was
he did not want the value of liis pronerty to be reduced because ir. is in a
redevelopment district. Tfie property owner was also concerned tha+. not only
was he unable to obtain tenants, but he did know whether he should be makinq
any capital improvements. Because of the threat of possible cnndemnation,
he vaas unable to obtain the quality of tenants he desired. That affected
his incones and also the value of his property.
Mr. Ne�mian stated that under the master lease approach, the HRA rmuld have an
option to purchase tlie property within a specified time period, and as
Mr. Diamond had said in his letter, they would like it to not be any longer
than three years. During that three year period, Rice Plaza would continue
to maintain, operate, and lease the property, the t{RA would havP the right to
exercise its option to purchase the property, and at the end of the three-
year period, tlie HRA would eitlier purchase the property or opt to take the
property out of the redevelopr,ient district.
Mr. ��erman stated that in the proposal, if Rice Plaza cannot lease the pronerty
within 6(1 days and there was a vacancy, the NRA could step in and be9in making
the rent payments. In a discussion he had indicated to Mr. Diamond that he
felt it was necessary to have some economic incentive for Rice Plaza to make
its 6est efforts to keep the spaces rented so the HRA could look to Rice Plaza
to rent the property and collect the rents. Some verbage would fiave to be put
into an agreement to provide for that economic set-up. They have to discuss
further with Staff the possibility that instead of subsidizing 10�% of lost
rent, that the HRA subsidize some percentage of that. This has not been
discussed yet in any detail. They had wanted to bring the concept of the master
lease to the IIRA first before proceeding any further. Another c�nr,ern of
Staff's was that if they had a floor purchase price and the market values
dropped 2-3 years from now unrelated to the threat of condemnation, would the
HRA still be committecl to this pre-determined purchase price?
"1s. Sclinabel stated sfie wouid also be concerned about the purchase price. If
they are going to be obligated to pay narl;et rents (if vacancies occur and
are not filled within 60 days) plus 50k of real estate tax, or other cost,s,
what happens to the purchase price? She felt some of these considerations had
to be reflected in the negotiations to arrive at a purchase nrice. She a9reed
with P1r. �Jewman's concern that an incentive had to be built into any aqreement
to ensure the property continues to be rented, so the property does not
deteriorate or stand empty during that three year period.
Dir, Qureshi stated tfie key questions aiith the master lease concept a�ere:
What was the purchase price? What kind of carryin� costs would the IiRA have2
Mr. Prairie stated he thought they should pursue the master lease concept.
It did seer� to be a compromise. He would like to see the tine period lonner
than t4iree years. Other than that, the concept seemed like somethinq they
should pursue.
HOUSItlG & P.EIIFNEI.OPFIEWT AUTHORITY FiFEi"IfJG, DF('FfiRER 11 1�86 P�f,� 7
t1r. Meyer statecl tliat in light of this pro�osal, he a�as still trying to decide
whether the VIRA �•iould he as well off or better off tlian if they lust cleanly
purchaseri the property. Tfiere �as a poten±ial esca7ation of some kind if they
did not purchase tfie property 6y tfie end of the year. When vacancies occur,
whether the I{RA owns tfie property and tfie vacancies occur, or whe*.her Rice
Plaza was leasing tFie property saf�en the vacancies occurred, either way the
HRA would he out definite dollars. At the end of 1-2 yPars, Q5Y of t,hP rroperty
could �e vacant, tlhat does the HRA really gain with this proposal? Shouldn't
they just make a clean 6reak one e�ay or tfie otf�er?
�•1r. Qureshi outlined some positive aspects of the naster lease concept:
1. The biggest advanta9e would he tfiat if the tenants leave by
their own volition, tfie Iif:A would have no relocation costs.
2. Once the lease ro�as over, the tenants I:now they h�ve to nake
other arranger�ents. Dependinn on the leasinq schedule, they
would fiave tine to plan ahead.
3. It was a compromise situation between thP HRA and the property
owner.
4. The HRA was still r�ot liable for managing the property.
t4r. Quresfii statecl the negative aspect was: (dha± was tlie carrying cost?
That was what they would have to negotiate.
'ir. Qureshi stated that if the nunbers o-rere reasonahle, this master lease
arrangement would give the HRA reasonable flexihility and would also give
the owner a little r�ore room to manewer tha❑ he has now.
Mr. Meyer stated he had sor�e major concerns ahout the master lease concen*,
but he was not opposed to having Staff pursue sone type of proposal for tlie
HWt to revieai.
F1r. Prairie stated the concept gave the HRA the flexihility for a nur�ber of
years, and it probably helped the property owner a little bit hy helpinn
offset some of the rent. It was telling the property owner that the HRA was still
interested in the property, fie felt the master lease concept had possihilities.
"1r. Richard �iamond stated that after last nonth's HRA neeting, they were
a little frustrated about exactly where they �•lere goin� on this particular
project. One of the tfiings they vianted to looF, into was the possibility of
going forward with some kind of creative approach. !ahen the concept of the
master lease came up again, they took it upon tliemselves, in consultation
with �1r. t�eY�nan, to put sornethi,ng into Ymiting. He stated they have not
really had a chance to consider all the details of this concept.
�1r. Diamond stated that until this meeting, they had been assumin9 there was
not necessarily a vtable development proposal that existed for this property.
What they had heard at this r�eeting during agenda iter� #2 was sonewhat
encouragin9, because they were familiar with the peopie f1r. Lundgren was nrn!
HOUSIWG & PEIIFVELOG�IEN7 AUTHORITY t1ECTItlG, DECft1RFR 11, 1986 _____ PACC 8
dealinn �iith. They believe the people !?r. Lundnren is dealing with no�v are
appropriate people for the financing of this project, and t}iey are encouraged
that t1r. Lundgren seemed to he taking a step in the rigfit direction. If
that was the case, and t1r. Lundgren did proceed witli the project in an orderly
fashion, they 6elieved the I{P.A �vould 6e in a position where they t•rill want
to buy the property in less tir�e tfian the tfiree �ears they are talking about.
P1r. Diamond stated tliey also a�ant to he clear in tal4;in� ahout specific
prices and specific terms. The concept of the naster lease, as they conceive
it at this point, basically had two alternative eler�ents:
1. The IIRA wants to be in the position of sayin9 in advancP novi
that tfiey will, in fact,take that poperty at some time in the
future. The issue was to decide noai the terMS anci conditions
of how that was going to fiappen.
2, The HP,A wants the option of saying tfiey I;noi�� they are going to
have to make a decision some tine in tfie future and they Fvould
rather have an option and leave themselves some more flexibility
in the future.
Mr. Diamond stated that if the second alterna*ive was sonethin9 seriously
considered by the HRA, then, from the owner's pPrspective, what does the
owiier do if tfie option is not exercised at the end of "x" number of years?
Tfiree years was not a magic period, 6ut the questi�n was: llhat does the
owner do? IJhat they have proposed at this point, basically for discussion
purposes, oias to consider taking tfiat property out of the redevelopment
district so the owner tfien does not have any threat or reduction of value
that comes as a result of being in the district. Thafi has really hr.en the
problem for the las* six years with this property.
!•tr. Diamond stated one thing that has to he stated and stated very stronnly
was that froei the o�aner's point of viea�, they cannot realis*.ically cnnceive
of the Qossibility of this particular project depreciatin9 in value. If
they are tal{:ing about setting tfie purchase price now for the future, they
believe that price arould proba6ly be a higher price. That was not to say it
would not he a fair price. The ques*ion of whether there would be a ceilinq
price had been raised, and that was certainly an issue that could he
negotiated. Certainly the possibility of adopting sone kind of fornula that
would serve everyone`s needs was ne�otiable. lie was sure they could address
those I:inds of things to make everyone fairly satisfied.
�9r. Diamond stated that, obviously, if this property vias going to ultimately
be acquired, they feel the cleanest o�ay of doing it was to acquire it now
at what has to be a lower price than it is ever 9oin9 to be in the future.
The second cleanest way was to enter into a master lease type of aqreement.
Mr. Diamond stated rigfit now for informational purposes, there was on� vacant
space in the Rice Plaza Center. There were people v+fio have recantly
HOUSING & P.EDEVELOPME��T AUTHORITY �i[ETI�lG, DECF�1fiER ll 1986 PA6E 9
expressed an interes*_ in that space. Most of the leases nor� do not run out
for 3-h years. They were short terr� leases, hut in terms of what miqht
happen on that property in the next year or two, tF�e advantages of waitinr�
1-2 years were proba6ly not great from a factual perspective.
Mr. Diar�ond stated what was attractive to them in dealing witfi thP master
lease type of agreement was it put sone predictability in*_o the whole
process sometime in tfie future.
fir. Diamond statecl he vianted to re-emphasi2e the fact that the easiest, safest,
cleanest, and he 6elieved, the least expensive, arranger�ent for hoth parties
involved was to take tfie property novr in 1986.
Ms. Schnabel stated that in view of the fact tha*. two of the HRI�. memhers
were not at the meeting, the chance of enterin� into a pur,chase a�reement
before tf�e end of 19s36 vras very minimal, as she o-tas sure both "ir. Levy anr!
tir. Diamond could understand. On thafi 6asis, she would ask Staff to see if
swie conclusions could be agreed upon with �+r. Diar�ond and Mr. Levy in
terms of the master lease plan and ;f�en bring something back to the HRA for
their revievr at the next meetin�.
f1r, IJevm�an stated he fe7t they shou]d be able to put together an outline viith
soMe specifics by the next meeting.
Mr. (�ureshi stated that if �ir. Lundgren comes back to the next meetinq �iith
a definite project, there vias no question but that Staff woulri reconmend *.ha*,
the HRA buy the property. f3ut right noei, tfiey have no use for the pronert��,
and they absolutely do not viant to acquire property unless it is usable.
He stated he felt they sFtould give tfiis another 60 days in order to see if
Mr. Lundgren has gotten his pacf;age together. He thouctf�t the Fehruary r�eetinn
was more realistic.
Mr. Diamond agreed a�ith flr. Ne��an that they could put somethinn toqether
by the next meeting so th?y could at least have an outline of where they were
9oing.
4. COIISIDERATIO�� OF A RES�LUTIOM APPROVIWG Ati A�1ENQED
Mr, R,obertson stated this was a minor housekeeping item. In Auoust,, the HRA
approved a resolution authorizing the execution of a contract for private
redevelopment with lJinfield Uevelopment, Inc. The name aias now bein�
changed from tlinfield Development, Inc., to Fridley Rusiness Plaza Limited
Partnership, so the only action needed by the HRA was to approve the amende�l
development agreement with the name change.
MOTION B� AfR. MEYER� SECONDED BY ."fP.. PRRIRZE, TO RPpROVE RF.SOLUTIOP� NO.
HR71-_�. 1986� RESOLUTZOIl OF THE BOARD OF COlf"fISSZOP7ER5 OF THE FRIDLEY HRA
APPROYING AN AMF,NDED DEVELAPMF.II_T AGREEMENT BE°_'DIEEN TNE NRR 11NP THF FP.IDLEY
BUSINESS PLRZA LIMIPED PARTNERSNIP.
}iOUSItiG & REDEVELOPt1Ei�T AUTHORITY F1E[TItBG, DECEt1RER 11 , 1986 PAGE 10
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� NICE—CHAIRPERSON SCHNABF.L DECLARF,D THE
b10TIOTJ CARRIED UP711NIMOUSLY.
Vice-Chairperson Schnahel declared a ten-minute recess at 8:5� p.m. The
meeting was reconvened at 9:00 p.m.
5. CONSIDERATION OF GIVING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO A BUDGET AND AN IMPLEMENTAT
Mr. Robertson stated the interest and impetus for tfiis project actually
began about a year ago with some businesspeople with establishments along
the north end of the University Rvenue corridor. There had been some
repeated requests and interest for making improvements along the corridor.
Last spring, the HRA evaluated various consultants and picked Barton-Aschman
with the understanding there would be an advisory committee set up consisting
of technical people from the state, county, and city and citizens from
Fridley representing businesses and residents along the corridor.
Mr. Robertson stated the committee went through a planning process which
was summarized in the draft report. Recommendations derived from that
planning process were informally presented to the HRA and City Council in
October. Based on the HRA and City Council comments in October, the
consultant put together a draft final report incorporating the suggestions.
Mr. Robertson stated that the draft final report did not include
recommendations for priorities in implementing the various components of
the plan, sequence of implementation and implications for maintenance costs.
The draft report did include cost sheets and estimates based on the capital
improvements involved; it would have been a very theoretical exercise to
try to estimate maintenance costs until the HRA and City Council indicated
a direction for priorities and implementation.
Mr. Robertson stated that since this draft report was received, Staff had
done several things: (1) had tried to troubleshoot all the recommendations
in this report to try to debug any potential technical, legal and safety
questions that might not have been covered by the process; (2) anticipating
that the NRA might ask Staff for recommendations, Staff had put together
some suggested implementation sequences or phases; (3) had proposed some
priorities; and (4) had estimated a budget which reflected these
recommendations.
Mr. Robertson referred to the one-page summary University Avenue Corridor
��
Plan" handec' out at the meeting. (See Exhi6it A). He stated that when
people on the Technical Advisory Co�nittee were asked what some of th2
problems were that needed to be addressed, they responded with the following:
unkept condition, unsightly fence south of 69th Avenue, rural ditches north
of 69th Avenue, visual lack of order, and lack of pedestrian facilities.
Mr. Robertson stated Staff wished to emphasize that the overall objective
was keeping Fridley competitive with what was going on in the metropolitan
area and throughout the nation. We are now experiencing a shift from being
a manufacturing suburb to more of an office-type suburb. Fridley is
f!OiISIMG � P,EDEVEI.nP�iFtlT AUTHORITY �1EETIIJG, DECE�lEIER 11, 19£6 P!!.GF 11
in competition with other conmunities in the metropolitan araa and with
this type of development, developers are looking for an attractive community
entrance and surroundings. The City has a long range financial interest
in attracting private investment dollars which translate ultimately into
property tax dollars artd an expanding tax base. The�City should look at
this as a city investment in terms of creating a pleasant community to
attract private devetopment doliars which wili help keep tax rates low.
tir. Robertson stated there vrere actually seven different components of the
University Avenue Corridor Plan tl�at [3arton-Aschnan addressed in the draft
report, but tfiese components could be summarized into three basic elements:
A, Planting and screening (including reforestation, trees, grass,
and doing something about the deterioration of tfie fence)
f�. Intersection ir�provements (there were 8 major intersections and
3 minor intersections — including brick paving, curbs, sidewalks,
overhead and lighted si9�s, street furniture, etc.)
C. Street lightinq
Mr. Robertson stated these 3 elements were listed at the 6ottom of the
one-page summary. To tne right of eacn of the elements were the
recommendations for priorities in terris of decreasing amounts of the
inplenentation budget. If they were to decide on the full package, it aould
cost $�,667,000, the next column was �1,99n,nq!1, thA tF.ird column was
$1,431,OQ0, and the last column was f1,069,000.
Mr. Prairie asl�ed Yrhat improver�ents viere included in the priority column
totallinry $1,431,000.
P1r. Robertson stated tfiat for planting and screening, it would include the
turf and the trees, but would leave out the fenca. For intersection ir�prove-
ments, it wou]d be just the intersection treatr�ent with the curb, gutter,
sirie�ralk and bricks. There would not be any monumentation that the consultant
was recommending at tl�e entrance on the north an�i the south, speciai nonu-
mentation at the City Center, or street furniture. For street li9hting, i±
wouid be lighting for the commerciai frontage roads plus the intersec-
tions, both in tfie north/south and east/v!est directions, but not the entire corridor.
Mr, Robertson stated 6arton-Aschman had outlined two alternatives for street
li9hting--either median ligfiting or frontage road lighting. Of the
two, the 7echnical Advisory Corxnittee liked the idea of the front,aqe road
lighting because it opened up the corridor visually at nic�ht and provided
more visual access at ni9ht to the adjacent husinesses. The 5990,0�� fiqure
for street lighting aaas Staff's estimate for a compromise 6etween those two
alternatives...to nrovide lightin�,rather than do�an the r�edian, alor.� the
HOUSI"G P+ RF.f]EVELOP(lEid7 AUTNORITY �1FETI�!f,, f1FCF41RER 1}, 1986 PI1GF_1?
shoulder continuously on the traveled way, northbamd and southbouncl lanes.
In addition, smaller standards would be placed along commercial frontage
roads.
Ms. Schnabel stated that regarding "entrance walls", she had read i� the
Addendum that Staff wanted tfle opportunity to restudy that concept. She
thought that was a good tf�ing to do. She had liked tfie idea when it was
first presented, and she still felt there were some nice parts about it,
but she had been gettinn some feedback from people who felt it might
present a visual berrier instead of a welcome.
.ir. Robertson showed sone slides of plantinq Qlans, lightinq, intersection
details, nonumentation, and some things done in o.*.her comr�unities.
P4r. Rohertson stated that Viith the alternatives they had hefore them, he
would li4:e the HRA to 9tive Staff sone direction on hoH! they wished the Staff
to �roceed--how much and wf�at amount of time? 11ic1 the HP,A lil:e these e'emen*s?
Councilperson Schne�i�ler stated he agreed that the corridor needed improvement.
He liked and sunportecl the concept of doing some improver�ent alonq the corridor,
but he had a little trou6le with a."a2,667,000 pro�osal.
Mr. Prairie a9reed, and that was why he was inclined to look more at the
$1,431,0�0 figure. That amount of money over a 3-year period could mal;e the
corridor look pretty good, and they could increase the amount at any time.
Ms. Schnabel stated they fiad to keep in nind that Universiiy Avenue was not
the only street in Fridley tllat needed upgradinci. If they spend money here,
they should not for9et there are other roadways that also need improvement
and to be cautious a6out the kinds of things they want to do.
Councilperson Fitzpatrick agreed that Ilniversity Avenue was not the only
street in town, but he stated the oroblem on University was ver�� real an�!
long-standing. He would like to see somethinq done along the corridor. He
liked the dnllar amount t1r. Prairie had suggested, because it would seem
they would get the optimum in each of the components.
Mayor I�ee stated he did not thinl: the fence or the ditches were that big of
a problen. The real prohlem tf�at bothered hir� was the junk cars at the
entrance to the city. He stated the HRA had the povier to Ao somethin9 about
that by finding a puhlic use for property that had a marginal use.
Mr. Qureshi aqreed that people coming into Anoka County and fridley on
Highway 47 and Hiqhway 65 get a very bad ima9e of Fridley, especially with
the used car lot and not very attractive businesses. It would be very helpful
to have an attractive entrance into the city. fle stated the 11RA could
address the concern raised by hlayor "�ee. The HRA did have the power to desi�-
nate these areas as economic development or redevelopnent areas and take
positive steps to acquire properties and develop plans for these properties.
f�OL'SItIG & R[�EVELOph1EflT AUTHORITY 11[[TI'!G, DECE'1Gf:R 11, 19�3b PP.G� 13
Mr. Qureshi stated that at this time, Staff a�as requesting some direction
from the IIRA as to what areas they felt had tf�e greatest importance.
Ms. Schnabel stated that because this opened up a new door that she had not
thought of before,in that the IIRA had the power to make some improvenents
in the 57th and llniversity Ave. area, she would like to see the IIRA explore
that avenue in more detail. She personally favored the planting ancf screen-
in� element and personally favored the high figure in that element.
She tfiougfit they got a lot for their money in terms of reforestation, turf
re-establishment, and a good maintenance program on behalf of the city.
Fts. Schnabel stated that in terms of the intersection improver�ents, she coulcl
see at this point getting some kind of moriification. In the City f,enter part,
there Vras maybe a need and a good argument for doinq some nore worL• on the
'Jniversity/tiississippi intersection. She was willing to sacrifice the gate-
w�y part for the tine being on 57tf� and 85th 6ecause tf��se two arPas are
unl;nowns right now, as far as development,is concerned.
�1s. Schnabel stated she would like to see the City talk about pickin� up some
of the costs on lightin9. She saw it partly as the City's ohli�ation and
partly as the Highway Department's obligation to provide lighting on llniversity
Ave. itself. She aiould like the City to think about making an expenditure in
that area. P1aybe, with these suggestions, Staff could come up with a modified
dollar paci:age,
Ms. Schnabel stated to surimarize what she had just said, she Niould take the
�614,000 figure for planting and screening, the �500,000 fiqure on intersec-
tion improvements, and put a hold on street li9hting until they had a clear
idea where they were at, and then she would add to that a plan or pr.ogran to
acquire properties on the southern end of University.
Pir. Qureshi stated his rationale was that they already have some plan*,ings
along the liighway. It does need sone maintenance and upgrading, hut if they
did the reforestation, it was not going to make a drastic change fron ���hat
they have now because it takes time for plants and trees to grou�. If ttiey
adopt a plan all the way along, every tir�e a new develooment comes, it might
be possibte that a sizeable portion of the fundinq could come from nevi
development. He felt the best and most cost-effective approach Y+oul� he to
do the intersection improvements for safety reasons and visual impact anci
movement of traffic. Second would be lighting in the public areas and along
the commercial properties. P1aybe something could be worked out with the
property owners, too, for the cost of that lighting.
Ms. Schnabel stated this �ras a piecemeal approach, and she was not sure it
was what the members of the Technical Advisory Cormittee wanted.
Mr. Prairie stated he would sti17 recommend the NP.A go with the $1,431,000
cost figure (3rd column) on the University Avenue Corridor Plan. It was
approximately one-half the maxinum cost, and it could always be increased.
He also thought they should work hard at cleaning up the pro�erties they
don't think make the City look very good,
HOUSIfIG � P,EDEVELOPt!EPlT AUTHORITY F�E[TIMG, DECE(1GER 11, 19°6 PP.GF 1R
Mr. Heyer Stated he agreed with Mr. Prairie.
Ms. Schnabel stated she �-iould also agree witfi Mr. Prairie. She stated she
would like to see Staff put togetfier some type of timetable, keeping in mind
the IiRA would like to look at the possibility of the acquisition of
properties on the south end of University.
MOTION, by Prairie, seconded by Meyer, to adopt the third column plan on the
one-page staff summary, uPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VnT7T7G AYE� VICE-CXAIP,PF.RSON
SCIINABPL DECLARED THF. MOTION CARRIF.D UNANIh!OUSLY.
6, I�PDATE Ofl LAKE POIWTE CORP�RATF CEfITER:
Hr. Robertson stated cons*ruction vias shut domn for tfie winter. The earth-
riork contractor f�as notified the City fie ��rants to arbitrate certain thinns
on the fixed price contract, and the City has not yet been no*ifie�i of that
hearing date. There was a neY� alignment of Lake Pointe Drive, and the plat
had not yet been filed.
tir, tlee�an stated llood6ridge is attempting to exercise their right to nlace a
nartgage on the property. The problem the City ha�1 wi±h tha* was the �1 million
in escroVr that has not been released fror� escro�i vet. In accor�lance with the
llnreemen* made a couple of r�onths ago, 19r, i�teir has instructed the escrov�
agent to release the "letes and Eounds �eed for the Phase I Parcel to be
released for filing. Ap�arently, for a couple of reasons, the County has
rejected that for recordinc�.
tir. PJe�tman stated he wanted to discuss wi*.h Mr. �ureshi and t1r. Rober�son
sone of ±he options they can seriously consider in tvorhinq tvith I�loodbridqe
to get the Pletes and Rounds Deed in a recordable forr� so it can be recorded.
lJf�en that happens, the $1 nillion will be released to tfie HRA in cpr�plete
payeien* for the land,
�1r. Netitman stated the original agreement entered into with ldoodbridge last
December s�ated that lloodbridge would be entitled to all the land on
Jan. 1, 1937. Once tiie HRA has the $1 roillion in f�and, that will, in fact,
occur. Probably at tf�at point, it vras Staff's feeling they should just wait
and see athere lJoodbrid9e goes froM there. He felt it was their prirnary
concern at this tir�e to get the $1 million in hand.
"1r. Oureshi stated that Lake Pointe [lrive will be constructed so as to connect
4Jest Moore Lake Drive and Ni9ho-ray fi5. This road riqh*-of-taay has rPduce�i the
area originally identified for lloodbridge Eiuilding A. Because of this
encroachnent, IJoodbridge has requested the City provide the Highwav 65 *.urn-
back property in order to provide additional space for construction and lan:l-
scaping. If this vacation takes place, it v�ould add 33,000 sq. ft. of lanrl
which a�ould hecome part of the develoor�ent. The City Council will be ron-
sidering this vacati�n at a public hearing at their next meetinn.
HOUSI�VG & P,FDEVFLOP�tENT AUTHORITY t1EETIN,, DECEMBER 11 1986 PAGF 15
t1r, Qures6i stated the City vlas trying to cooperate the best way they can
in minimizinG t1r, lJeir's concerns.
7. COI1SIbFRlITI01� OF AUTNORIZI�lG THE CITY TO PROCEED
Mr. Quresfii stated this item �ras for tfie HRA's inforriation.
"1r. Quresf�i stated that associated vlith the intersection improvement at
tiighway 65/1•lest 11oore Lai.e Drive/�1d Central, there was a7so the redesiqn of
tfta Hathaway/Hackr�ann/Hillwind/Old Central intersection. The HRA purchased
the corner residential lot in tf�e area in order to provide for this inier-
section improvement. In addition, it aopPared to be necessary to relocate
the gara�e access at 5755 Old Cen±ral hecause of i*s proximity to the neYr
in*ersection to provide access off Hatfiaway Lane. The garage doors would
have to 6e chanqed from front to rear and a nev� driveway cons*.ructed fror�
the rear of the property. This driveway would have to cross a part of
5760 Hathaway Lane. The person who orms 57E0 Hathaway Lane has indicated a
desire to sell the property, a triangular piece a6out 24 ft, ion� by 28 ft.
de?p,
8. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A CONCEF'I41AL PLAN FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENT
E�{P?II�IDI'ISJRES
Mr. Qureshi stated that infornation regarding the $3,400,000 in available funds
frcm the 1985 $11,550,000 G.O. Tax Increment Horri sale had been brought to the
HRA's attention at the May 8, 1986 HRA meeting, At that time, conceptual
a�rwal was given by the HRA to speirl the available $3.4 million for several
Proposed projects within Redevelognent Project No. 1.
At the Septeciber 23, 1986 meeting of the HRA, staff advised the HRA members of
the approxucately $6,8 million in projected increment within RedeveloFxnent
Project No. 1 which wi11 have been generated by the year 1993. It had been the
cancrosus of both the HRA and the City Council that the HRA continue to collect
increnent generated within Project Area No,l. Staff was requested to prepare a
tiureline of proposed projects and expe�itures which could be fnnded with the
$6.8 milli� in available increi�t, Mr, Qureshi stated that staff has prepared
a Conceptual Plan which addressess the projects, expenditures and the timeframe
for the expenditures. This Conceptual Plan is included herein as F�chibit B.
On the werhead projector, Mr. Qureshi displayed 2 graphs, explaining that
incranent generated fran increased values of develop�n�t projects is used in the
follaving ways:
1. 7b retire bo�ls the HRA has sold, as increrent is pledged first to gay off
such bonds.
2. Pdditional bonds may be sold to fund other developa�ent projects within the
Project Area.
3. To furr] projects directly, using available iner�ent which is not committed
to the r�ayn�t of bonds.
HOUSIPlG & REUEVELOPt1ENT AUTHORITY PIEETING, DECE�I6ER 11, 1986 PAC,F. 16
Mr. Qureshi noted that last December, the HRA requested the City to sell
$11,550,OOD in G.O. Tax Incra�t Bonds. All but 53.4 million fran this bond
issue vras carmitted to specific projects within the Project Area: funds for the
sourhwest quadrant develoPmait am utility and road improvements for the Lake
Pointe Develo�nent. The $3.4 million was committed for "general project
activities" within the Project Area.
Noting that state statute required these ct�mitted funds to be spent within 3
years fmn the date of the bond sale, Mr. Qureshi stated that by 1988 the funds
frcan the bond sale will be spent according to the 9uidelines the HRA apprwed in
May. He further explained that there xere also restricticros placed on the 56.8
in available increnent generated fran all the City's tax incranent districts.
According to state law, any incr�mt which exceeds the amoimt necessary to pay
the costs authorized by the tax incYenent financing plan nust be used to retire
bonds or be returned to the coimty far dispersal to the taxing jurisdictions.
Consequently, it is necessaxy for the HRA to cansider the proposed pxojects and
expenditures in the Conceptual Plan as all of the proposed projects are
consistent with the Redevelognent Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area and
each of the tax increment districts and also meets state requizements for
sperr3ing available incranent.
The Conceptual Plan was placed on the averhead projector an3�Ms. Qureshi
explained that the 56.8 million in available incremsnt could fund various
projects within the Pro7�t area wer a 7 yeai Period, be4innin9 � 1967.
Mr, Qoreshi stated tt�at in the past, the HRA has used available increirent in two
ways:
1. Direct develaFn�nt assistance
z, Public i�rc�vements
The Caiceptual Plan divided the proposed project expenditures into these two
categories ani a.itlined Projects in Center City. Moore Lake and the North Area.
Mr. Qureshi explained that what was needed of the HRA was approval of this
overall Oonceptual Plan for future project ix�roveznent expenditures. The Plan
addresses Project e�enditures consistent with the statutory requirements
regulating use of increnent. With the approval of the Plan, the specifics of
each project and its cost can be detezmined by the HRA as the project becomes a
reality.
Mr, Qureshi noted that the $6.8 millian firn,re was conservative, as staff had
used pcisting develoFarent arr3 had not ca�sidered the values of developments to
be carLStructed within the next 7 years: a1so, no allawances had been made for
inflation.
NYYPION BY MR. MEYER. SflCOI�AII7 BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE TI-]E CbA10EPISJAL PL�AN FI�R
�,�,I� p�ap�ID B,qpRpVII�Trg A�ID DEVE2,pH�STP ASSISTANCE IN THE CENTER CITY
ARFA� ML)ORE I,FiKE ARFA ADID THE NDR'PH P.RFA.
UPON A VOIC� �/C1PE. ALL VOPING AYE. VICE-CHAIRPII2SON S(�`1ABEL DEQ,P.RID THE NK7I'ION
CARRIID UI�DIII�Y7USZY.
,
HOUSINf, & REDEVELOPi1[NT AUTHORITY HEETINGLDECEMRER 11, 1986 PAGE �7
9.
NG It�TO h JOIIIT POVlERS AGREEf1EpT FOR THF
�1r, Qureshi stated he would recorr�end tfiat the FIP,A apnrove the improver�en!s
of tlie intersection of Nississippi and University by the Hiqhviay DPpt, and
recorriend that the City Council enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with
the Hi9haray Dept. for this cost. �
HO"_'ZOt! HY MP,, tfEYER� SF.CONDED BY MR. PRAiRIF„ TO APPROVE THF. IMPROS�EIlF:N'_" OF
THE INTERSECTION OF MISSiSSIPP7 ST. AND UNNERSZTY A[�E. YIITH THE ANOXA COUNTY
XZGXk'AY DEPARTMENT AND TO RECOFIMEND THAT THE CZTY COUNCIL ENTER Z7]_^'O A JOZt/T
POflERS ACREEMENT WITN THE RNOKA COUNTY NZGNWAY DEPAR_TMF.N? FOR TNZS I.NPP.OVEMENT,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VO2ZNG AYE� VICE-.:XRIRPF.RSO1! SCNf7RI3EL DECLARED 2NE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1�. PRFSF�I7A7IOfJ OF THE 1985 FIWAraCIAL STATR}FNT:
Item continued until tfie next meeting.
11. CQIJSIDERATION
rrn�nr�s—r-
IN1?tEt�7 OF AUnITOR FOR FISCAL YEAR 19A6 {GFORGF 11
�ir, priby] stated he would recw!r�end the HRA again appoint 6eorge H. Hansen f,o.
as the IIRA's Auditor for fiscal Year 1986.
t40TION BY AfR. PA.AIRIE� SECONDF,D BY MR. MEYER� 21� APpOINT CF.ORCS ."f. XIaNSF.N CO.
AS THF; IfRA'S AUDITOR FOR PISCAL YERR 1986.
UPON A VOICE VOPE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE—CHAIRpF,RSON SCNNABEL DECLI1RF.n THF.
MOTZON CARRZED UNANIMOUSLY.
72. CLAI�iS:
MOTION BY MR. MEYER� SECOND$D BY MR. PRAIRIE� TO APPROVF, TNE CNECK REGISTER
DATED DECEA7BER S1� 1986� AS PRESENTED BY STRFF.
UPON A VOICE VOTF.� AI.L VOTING AYE� DICE—CXRIRPERSON SCHNABEL DECLARED TXE
!.`OTIOiI CARRZED UNAt7IMOUSLY.
An.�ouRnr^Frrr:
Yice-Chairperson Schnabei declared tRe December 11, 1986, meeting adjourned
at 11:20 p.m,
Respectfully submitted,
Lynne�aba� ,��y�
Recordin� Secretary
�
�\.�i������
`�
�
Cc.,u��G� — ,���- l �, i �1��
�
�u f� y y�� �
�� .
� ' �/ .
I
Ca�r���� C�, __
ioo s, s :v�' � ��02�
� �o S �`�-
��?�1�
Z,�oo � �� G-�/
� � �'���`��
��
�"v�u�5
_s�.s—;����
5���-
���sc s� 3y3
�n� S53�r
r5"7� �� S� � £'. �� d�s�� �.
� ��,E,w.l�.�,�.. �-.
{I�o,�1,(c�,�, „`" J
�f � �CeuR r�� r� SS�o (
u� f��
EXHfB{T A
����TM A�� ��� �� December 11, 1986
A CITlZEN CANCERNS:
— I�IKEPT 00� I T I ON
— I�ISI0i1LY FENCE SOUiH ff 69iH
� • •• � .•
— VISUAL LAQC ff QiDER
— LAaC CF PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
B. ICEEPING FRILLEY CQ'IPETITIVE:
— Sl,6URBAN SHIFT TO CFFICE DEV0.0PMFM
— DEV0.0PERS �SIRE F�Z ATTRACTIVE ENTRANCE AND SU2ROLNDINGS
— PRIVATE 1MIESIMENT $= PROPERTY TAX S
WiAT?
A. R1w7 i r� ar� ScR�N i t� 614K
B. irrr�ts�criot� Ir�wawe�rrrs 1,�3K
C. STREET L I C�iT I NG
��. �■
..,
� .
.
Sp�C �:�21C � 16C1C
W/0 FENCE ( INTERSECTION PLANTING
1.0� � sooic � soa<
sRi a a a�te �
awic � �c � �K
I tJiERSEC'TI ON
8 F��� I
51.9941C �51.431K St.Qi91C
L_�
.y
�
�
�D
m
O
a
�
0
°o
0
.r
0
o° °o
_ o �
0
� �
N
O O
o s
�, -
o �
e �
0
0
0
N
O
$
0
°o
N
O
0
�
0
0
0
N
O
0
0
g
0
0
0
0
N
0
0
0
�
N
0
0
0
0
ifl
.1
lo
0
.r
.�
0
°o'
°o
N
rl
lO
0
0
�
a
lo
0
0
0
N
r
O
� � O O
� M � O
r�i O� m 0 � �
F � � � �
m g o 0 0 0 0
°; ; o 0 0 0 0
.�,� . , o 0
0 o N in
� m N � � N 01
� � • p �
'�-' O
� � IO
m • � o
� o
� . m o �
�■ • _ '^ �
m
X �
W o . o 0 0 0
° � ° � °o o ° °o 0
° ' o 0 0 0 0 �
� o 0
� � O O O g N �f1 O
m � .�y a m 1� �O r-1 �O m
Vl ..� C r1 �
pp O
� ' w � y -•C��y �•C�pI � MN�(
. • C Q1 {9 C � tj, .
� 3N �N rF
. . -+ W
. . �� � � �
: : �� ��� "' .,
a � �
y �� N
• • ��� u u Cy � N� • C
.� �
• . V C �SV +Gi C> � �" p,
►� �p �' 'p
� • • ;[�A�i O\ C�S� � a{{�
Y �
� � J � i L� �'�� MW•a CdC� WW p�� i L C
� � • N V
p uaqou ��U 4� '�" �aa� +F1�+i �V'Z"
� � � �.� �
� � � �� � b � � � ��� � ���� � ��m �oz
a ~�
N ��a � QQ� � �mm � � � �
�� � � � .:
� N
a
.;
q
�. _
.�
� "�
� y
Q�i
�
0
rl
�
N
'i
�
n
�
a
.
.
.
�
.
.
m
O+
�
m
m
a
.�
� �
�
.
.
o •
o �
o •
o •
0
v •
�' �
.
. .
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
•
Q •
F7 •
� �
a�,uj �
�.7 �
� � �
�� �
�
8 O
p O P
� � �
O � �
,°n .r r
p o
°o °o °o g o °o
. . . . . g
I� O 1D ��f1 N O
�
� �
°o°o �
°o 0 0° �o 0 0 0 0
�°n °o 0 0 o u°+ � N
r o �o �n in N� r
� � �
m
e
1� 4 �
fa
w � � � �
�o��a
d � � � u �
� � � M � � M
� oQ Y W Y oy �
N +i i Q '^� � C� �]
m \ 4 � rA
D � Y Yt � �-1 +Oi iC
� � � � � � � �� N
CITY OF FRIDLEY
APPEALS C0141ISSION PIEETI'�G, QECE�IBER 16, 1486
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Retzold called the �ecer�her 16, 19f;6, Apneals Corunission meetin� ±o
order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
°lenhers Present: Donald Cetzold, Alex Barna, Oiane Savage
�lanbers AI>sent: Jerry Sherei:
Otliers Present: Darrel f,larY., City of Fridley
Dennis Yanir, 3158 Arthur St. PLE., f1pls.
lJayne F. Schrner, 531!l - 7th St. t!. E.
Daniel Elsen, 1314 Ne��ton Ave. N., "1pls.
Ddna Elsen, 1314 Wewton Ave. Wo., T1pls.
APPROVAL f1F �JOV�iBER ?5, 1986, APPEIILS CQ�47ISSIf1"; HIfdUTES:
A70"'ION BY lfR. BAPJVA� SF.CONDF.D BY' Pf.S. SRI�AGF,� _TO APPROVF,' TXP. NOP, 25� Z986�
APPEALS COffAfISSIOPJ l4INITTES AS 4)RIT'"YN.
UPON A VOZCF. VOL"F„ ALL VOT217G AYE, CHAIRPF.RSON BE220LD DF.CLARF.P m11F. MOTION
CARRIED UNRNIMOUSLY.
�
BEIt�ft,''i3] Fl�IR�10�JT STPEFT FRIDLEY 11�� 554�
h10.TSON BY MS. SAVAGF,, SF•COl7DF•D BY MR. BARNA� TO OPF,P7 THF. PT7BLZC HEARSNG.
UPOP! A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZI7G AYF. � CtIRIRPFP.S077 BETZOLD DF.CLAP.F,D THP PUBLZC
HERRING OPEN AT 7:32 P.F1.
Chairperson Cetzold read the �dministrative Staff Report:
AD�iI1JISTRATIUE STAFF REPORT
537 Fairmont Street PI.F.
VAR �`86-34
A. PUBLIC, PURPOSE SFRVE� P�Y REQUIRE�ifPlT:
Section 205.07.3, A, 2, requires tf�a± a lot in a plat recorded hefore
Decenber 29, 1955, shall have a minimum lot area of 7,500 sq. ft.
e
APPEALS Cn�it±ISSION FIFETI�IG, DFCE�I6FR 16 1986 PA�r ?
Public purpose served by tl�is requirement 9s to avoid the congestion of
overcrowding a residentia7 neigh6orhood, to avoiA an excess burden on
the existinq e!ater and sewer services, and to avoid reduction of
surrounding prooerty values.
Section 205.07.3, U, 7, requires a front yard setbacl: of not less than
35 feet.
Puhlic purpose served by this requirenent is to allow for off-street
parking riithout encroaching on the pnblic rig�it-of-t•�ay, and also for
aesthetic cortsideration to reduce the building "line of siqht" encroach-
ment into the neigfi6or's front yard.
[3. STA7ED HARDSHIP:
from HUD Resident,�al Appraisal Report dated 7/22/8E: "SuFiect is a
very narginal property whicf� vtill continue to be a pro6lem if its
deficiencies are not corrected. Very small house, general condition is
poor, room sizes and layout are poor,"
C, ADHIflISTRATIVE STAFF REI�IEI�l:
This is a 50 6y 110 ft. 6uilding site taith hor�es on both sides. This
lot has a sr�all house and a de±ached garage in t!ie rear yard. It
presently is classified as a legal nonconfor?ning use because the lot, is
less than 7,500 sq. ft. and tfie house is only 26 feet back from tF�e
front ]ot line. Tfie petitioner is proposing to make a 27 by 17 ft.
addition, as well as upgrade tf�e existing structure. If the Roarci
approves this request, the Staff suc�gests that a stipulation be r�ade to
hard surface tfie driveway.
Mr. Clark stated the driveway was already hard-surfaced. However, one stipulation
the Staff would like to add was that if tfie variance was granted, not only the
addition, but also the existing house must be brnught up to Coday's buildina code
standards. lie stated that vias the lav+ and oiould need to he done anye�ay.
"tr. Clark stated the plot plan vlas in the agenda. He stated the CoMmissioners
had a picture of the house and some preliminary house plans.
Ms. Dana Elsen, tfie petitioner, stated sf�e had r�ore finalizeA house plans shor�inq
tfie elevations on ail sides. She shoa�ed the plans to the f,nrmissioners.
Mr. Betzold stated one of the stipulations mentioned hy Staff was that the whole
house be brought up to code. 1•las that the petitioner's intention?
Ms. Elsen stated it a�as.
Pir. Clark pointed out that nost of the lo±s in the area were the same size as the
petitioner's lot.
APPEALS COIIHISSIOP� HFETI���, DEGE�tfi[R 16, 1986 PAGF 3
11r. Barna stated all the older homes in the area were at about the same front
yard setback.
t1r. Clark stated he believed that was correct,
MO'_"701J BY F7R. BARNA� SECONDED BY 115. SAVRGT:, TO CIASE THE PUBLIC ]IEAP,ING.
UPON R VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE, CIIAIRPF.RSON BET20LD DECLARF.D THE PUELIC
HEl1RING CZASED AT 7:50 P.M.
Pir.Barna stated he has lived in this neigfi6orf�ood since 197Q. H? oamed and
recentiy sold a house similar to tfiis one just two blocks north. Ne had also
built an addition onto this house. Re stated the proposed addition was a very
nice addition. The plans were well laid out, and he thought the addition vlould
increase the value of tfie house.
P1s. Savage stated she agreed with Pir. Sarna. The exis*in9 house was certainly
inadequate for anyone to live in now, and it looked inadequate for the neic�h-
borhood. The addition would certainly upgrade the house and she �muld be in
favor of granting the variance.
Nr, Betzold stated it was also an incentive to otFiers in the neighborhood to
keep inprovinq the neigh6orhood. By building onto the back of the house, it
was not r�oving the house any Closer to the street.
h1r. Barna stated one of the reasons the City H!ants larqer lots was so there
was room for recreation with the house. This area was quite profuse in par{:s--
1-2 blocks from the hlississippi River, about 3/10 mile from Rivervie�� Park,
and about 3/4 nile from Springbrool: tlature Center. There was plenty of
recreational area so the suhstandard lot would not affect the intent of the
city code.
F70^_'ZON BY AfR. BARNA, SECONDED EY E1S. SAVAG�� ^_'O IIPPROPE VARZANC£: RE9UEST,
r1AR k86-34� BY DANA ELSEN� PURSUAl7T TO CHAPTER 205.07.3, A� 2, OF T!rF FRInLEY
CSSY CODE TO RED(ICE THE MINIMUM LOT ARF,A FROM 7�500 SQ. FT. TO THE PRESENS
5,SD0 SQ. FT.; AND� PURSUAPIT TO CHApTER 2C5,07.3, D, 1� OF TfiF. FRIDLEY CITY
CODF. TO REDUCE THF, FRONT YARD SETBACY. OF THE EXZSTII7G XOUSE FRO(? 35 F.RET TO
26 FEET� TD ALLOG.' _^'HE CONS^'RUC_TION OF A 16 FT. BY 27 1/3 F4'. liPDITI071 TD THE
HOi?SE, LOCAT6D ON LO:'S 17 RND Z8, BIACY. I� RIVERVZF.Y7 IiESGHTS� THF, .SAMF AF.If7G
537 FAIRMONT STP.EET� FRIDLEY, Mt7, 55432, WZTH 2HF, STIPULATION TXAT TKF
EXIST�l7G XOUSE BF. BROUGN.T i7P TO TODAY'S BUILDING CODE STANDARDS.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHRZP,PERSON BETZOLD DECLRFED THE Fin?ZQP!
CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPEALS CO�tHISSIOtJ flF�TL'�f,, DECQI6ER 16, 79F36' PAGE 4
2.
.MO"_'ZOP7 BY A1S. SAVAGE� SECOtiDF.D BY A1R. BAR77A� 'C'O OPF.N TFIE PUBLIC HEAI'7NG.
UI'ON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHAIRPERSOP7 BETZOLD DECLARF,D TXE PiTBLZC
HP.AP,ZNG OPE2T AT 7:53 P.DS.
Chairperson Betzold read the Administrative Staff Report:
ADIIINISTRATI1lE 57AFF REPORT
5480 - 7th Street
VAR #86-35
A. pU[3LIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREP1E�aT:
Section 205.14.3, R, requires a minimum tot area of 20,00� sq. ft.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to avoid the condition of
overcrowding, and to avoid an excess burden on the existinc� t�ater and
se��er services.
Section 205.14.3, C, 1, requires that permitted huildin�s and uses shall
not be closer to the front lot line than 35 feet.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide desired front
yard space to be used for green areas and to add to the attractability
of a corrcnercial zone.
ft. ST{1TED HARDSHIP:
"The building was constructed before the present zoninq codes tha*
regulate higher lot areas and setbacks."
C, ADIIINISTRATIVE STAFF RCVIEW:
This lot is located along 7th Street just south of Interstate Hi9h�iay
5o4. The north property line abuts what was once 55th Avenue. The
south property line abuts an R-3 residential district. The property to
the west is vacant and to the east, across 7th Street, is a sin�la-family
hoe�e. A Naegele billboard sits in the northwest corner of the site.
There is also a detached garage on the site adjacent to the main buildin�.
APPEALS C0�1t1ISSI0N MEETIfJG DECEFI6ER 16 1986 PAGf 5
This site is currently zoned C-2, general business, and consists of
approximately 15,000 sq. ft. of lot area. C-2 zoning requires a
minimum lot area of 20,000 sq. ft, The building has not been occupied
since htarch 1985. Therefore, it ca� be considered nonconforminc� in
terms of lot area, under the current zoning, since the buildinc� has
been abandoned for over a year.
The right-of-way for 7th Street fans out as it approaches Interstate
Highway 694. It forms the east prooerty line of the site as it anqles
in a northwesterly direction to witfiin approximately 11 feet of the
eJCisttin� main structure. The Zoning Code requires a front yard sethack
of 35 feet,
If this variance is approved, tf�e staff recorn*�ends the follo��rinn
stipulations in order to bring the site up to code:
1. Building facade to be ir�proved with sidin9 or stucco;
2. Pave and curb parking lot as per requirements of the Code;
3. Install landscapinq as per plan to include seedinn of the lot;
4, �lo outside st�rage allot-red;
5. Only wall signage allowed;
6. If garage is to 6e used for business, then connect to main structure;
7. Provide a�5,000 performance bond or letter-of-credit prior to
occupancy.
P4r. C1arY, stated the lot to the west, owned by Ptr, Nedegaard, a contractor,
was approximately the same size as the lot in question (actiially a little
larger becuase it had the benefit of havina one-half the right-of-V�ay of the
vacated 6th St. That lot �ras also vacant.
Mr. Clark stated one of the disadvantages of the lot to the west was it really
did not have access to water and se�ter. The closest water and sewer was off
7th St. In order to get sewer and o-rater, that property owner arould prohahly
have to get an easement across the. petitioner's lot. He stated the lot to the
west should be taken into cons;deration when the Commission is makinn its
decision on whether or not to grant tfie variance.
t4r. Wayne Schroer, the petitioner, stated he was one of the owners of Snrayer
Supply, Inc. Sprayer Supply, Inc., ��as presently located in Oakville, ldisc.
They manufacture lawn care and turf product sprayers, pressure washer cleaners,
some farm equipment, etc. He stated he was planning to rent this propPrty
from PJaegele to use as a sr�all retail outlet to distri6ute their products.
The north end of the building o�ould be used for office and shoerroom, an�i the
south end of the building would be used for storage of parts. Parts would he
shipped from this location to customers in h1innesota. Ne stated tfiat, at most,
there would be 1-2 cars a day at this facili±y. One salesman would check in
once a day, and there would be one part-time enployee working in shippinn an�
answering phones.
APPEALS COPit}ISSION 11EETING, DECECt[3ER 16, 7986 PAGF fi
Mr. Barna asked what Ftr. Schroer's intention was for the two-car garage on
the property.
P1r. Schroer stated it would be used for cold storage like metal products.
There would be no chemicals on the property,
Mr. Clark stated that regarding stipulation #6, to have the garac�e attached
to the main structure, f�e did not knov� if that stipulation �aas really
necessary. Staff's r�ain concern was to have tf�e garage upgraded. This
stipulation could be discussed further before tfie City Council meetinq.
Mr. Qetzold asked about Mr, Schroer's timetable.
Atr. ScF�roer stated, if all goes well, they wou7d like to get into the buildin�
as soon as possible after the first of January and start shippin9 out to their
customers.
Mr. Qetzold stated that, with the normal process, tf�is item would not get to
the City Council meeting until January 26, 1987.
Mr. Schroer stated this could cause a hardsfiip for them 6ecause they do have
people hired to do the improveriettts inside tFie 6uilding so they can start
shipping to their customers.
Hr. Dennis Kmit, 3158 Artfiur St, N.E., stated he owned the apartnent buildinn
(5h60 - 7th St. N.E.) directly south of the property. He was concerned about
hoa� this new coronercial business would impact his property or could potentially
impact his property. People drive by the apartment buildings and curb appeal
had a lot to do witfi whether or not people choose to rent in his building.
�1r, Kriit stated he vrould be concerned that this nevi business would have
sufficient parking. He would not vrant people parking on his property. As
far as the signage and aesthetics, he would be concerned that signage and
the general aesthetics of the property could potentially impact his ahility
to keep tenants happy and to continue to rent to nevi tenants.
t4r. Kmit stated he had heen hoping for some time that sonething would f?anpen
with this lot and with the 1ot to the west. The lot to the west was an eyesore.
It fias become a dumping ground. Large pieces of concrete have been dumped in
there, and it was very dangerous for both adults and children. He stated he
realized this was not the appropriate place or time to taik about the vacant
lot to the west, but he planned to bring it up at the City Council meetinc�.
Mr, Betzold stated that P1r, Schroer ��ould be required to put in the appropriate
parking and signage as required by city code.
Mr. Clark stated he really did not think this business was a determent to this part
of Fridley. He was concerned that if the variance was granted for the lot
area, it would set a precedent and they would probably get a request for the
lot to the west. Then, instead of one small business in this area, there would
APPEALS COt1t1ISSI(1N t1[ETI�d6, DECEPtBER 16; 1986 PAGF 7
be two small businesses. Once money was spent on this site, the lot became
that much more valuahle and made it harder to ever 6uy out the business,
tear the building dovm, and com6ine the parce7s into one larger commercial
site. On the other hand, if tfie Conmission and City Council deny this
variance request, that property miclht sit vacant for a mucf� lonqer ±ime in
this unkempt condition. These were tf�ings the Cormission would have to
consider in their decision.
Mr. Barna stated the City Council has to look at whether tliey want these two
C-2 zoned lots left in this area, or should the City Council look at possibly
rezoning these two lots to R-3? Does the City Council want to retain a
corimercial area in tfie midst of wfiat F�as now developed into a large residential
area, especially with the new development, Lake Pointe Corporate Center, to
the northeast?
P1r. Clark stated this prohably would not make a very good residential propPrty
because of its proximity to I-694 and the fact tfiat IJaegele had a larqe
billboard on the property,
hir, 6etzold stated one question he had for the petitioner was v�ould the
petitioner be willinq to f�ve another co�nercial husiness with approximately
the sar�e size building next door to his 6uilding?
Mr. Scfiroer stated he would Fiave no probler� witf� it. He stated he lived
dot•m the street from tf�is property. He had been looking at the property
for sor�e time and thought his 6usiness would be a good use for the property
and would improve the looks of the property.
17r. Km'rt stated a renter definitely had different considerations than an
owner. A renter could vrall: away from the property. If he were the owner
of that property, he would certainly 6e reluctant to ir�prove it. That
property was never rea7ly going to amount to anytf�ing as it was. There was
no douht in his mind that the value of the property would be substantially
increased if the present building was torn dovrn, the property was rezoned,
and a 4-plex was constructed on the property.
Mr. Kmit stated ha felt this site was not the most desirable biisiness locatinn,
and mavbe this propert.y has outlived its usefulness as co!miarcial propPrtv.
Mr. Clark stated that if the tero parcels were combined, a 13-unit apartment
building could be built. Each lot was large enough to construct tY�o 4-D�P_XP.S.
The biggest problem was the FJaegele billboard. The value of the siqn was
probably worth more to Tiaegele than the building. In order to combine the
lots, the billboard 4iould have to come down, and he did not know if Naeqele
would be receptive to that idea. He stated maybe the two property owners,
!Jaegele and Mr. Nedegaard,could 6e asked to get together to discuss some of
the options discussed at this meeting before this goes to City Council,
APPEALS COtiP9ISSI0N MEETING, DECEMBER 16. 1986
MO^ION BY .MR. B71RNR� SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGF,� _TO CIASF. TXE PUBLIC HF,AP,I1?G.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DF,CLRRF.D THE
PUflLIC HF.ARZNG CIASED AT 8:40 P.M.
Mr. Barna stated he was prepared to reconmend approval of the variance
request, He would also recor,u�end that the City Council look into whether
it was 6etter to a71ow tfie improvement of a spot zoned area or 7ook at
forcing a zoning cfiange and possi6ly look at the wfiole strip of properties
along I-694 that are 6elow standards for one reason or another.
��1s. Savage stated she wou7d be �n favor of granting the variance, but she
agreed with Pir. Barna that the City Council should l004: at this area care-
fully and see if this is real7y w!iat they want to see happen with this
property.
�1r. Betzold s�ated he was not quite sure he wanted to recommend to the City
Council, based on their discussion, that this variance should be granted.
This location might have heen ideal for a grocery store alon� Highivay 100
and that was why it was zoned C-2. That was not necessarily what the
property should be zoned today. As discussed, if this variance was approved,
they would have to do the same thing with the lot to the west. He did not
know if they v+ere doing the properties any justice by having two f,-2 lots
which are strictly out of the way. At tf�e very least, he would like this
to definitely go to the Planning Cormission before going to the City Council,
so the Planning Commission will have a chance to give input on what they feel
should be done vritf� these properties. He stated the proposal by the
petitioner was certainly a good one, but he was not sure this would be doinq
anv justice to the long range planning for the City.
Ms. Savage stated she felt it was the Corimission's function to approve or
deny the request within the framework they had to work with. She did not
see why there was a problem viitfi approving this variance request o�ithin that
frame�aork. That did not necessarily mean there should be little pocl:ets of
spot-zoned areas in residential areas, but the proposal before them would
improve the property under its present zoninc� and was a better situation than
they have novi.
f9r. Barna agreed with Ms. Savage. He stated he realized it would put a
burden on the petitioner time-wise, but he also felt this should go to the
Planning Commission before the City Council in order to get the Planning
Corrmission's input and recommendations.
MOTZON BY MR. BRf2NA� SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL�
THROUGH PLANNIP7G COMMISSION, VARIANCE REQUEST� VAR �86-35� BY SPRAYER SUPPLY�
INC,� PURSUANT TO CHAPTF,R 205.14.3� A� OF THE FRZPLEY CZTY CODF, TO REDUCE
THE MINIAfUM IAT AREA FROM 20�000 SQ. FT. TO ApPROY.2MATELY 25�000 SQ. FT.;
AND� PURSUANT TO CHRPTER 205.14.3� C� I� OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDIiCF,
THE FRON^_' YARD SETBACK FROM 35 FT. TO APPROXIMATELY 11 FF,ET TO ALIAF.' THE
OCCUPASIDP7 OF AN EX.ISTING SITE, ON LO2S 1� 2, APID 3, BIACK 9, HAF1IL20N'.S
ADDITION TO MECHANICSVILLE, THE SRME BEING 5480 - 7TH STREET N.E., FRIDLEY,
MN,� 5542I� WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:
APPEALS COtiMI5SI0N P1FETIIVG, DECEM[3ER 16, 1986 PAGE 9
Z�. BUSLDING FACADE TO BE IMPROVED WITH SIDING OR STUCCO;
2. PAVE RND CURB PARKING ZAT RS PF,R REQUSREPfF.PITS OF THE CODE�
3. INSTRLL LANDSCRPIN6 AS PER PLAN TO INCLVDE SEEDIN6 OF THP: LOm;
4, NO OUTSIDE STORAGE ALIAWED;
5, ONLY WALL SIG74fiGE ALLOYJED;
6, IF GARAGE IS TO BE USED FOR BUSZNFSS� THEN CONNECT TO MAIPi STRUCTURE;
7. PROVIDF. A$5�000 PF.RFORNANCE BOND OR LF,TTER—OF—CREDIT PRIOR TO
OCCUPANCY.
THE APPERIS COMAtISSZON WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND _THAS� BEFORF iHE VRRIANCES WERE
GRRNTEDi THAT TXE PLANi17NG COPIMISSION AND CITY COUATCIL LDOK AT THE POSSI—
BZLZTY OF REZONING THE AREA.
UPON A VOZCE VOTE, BARNA AND SAVAGE VOTING AYE', BETZOLP VOTING NAY,
CffAIRP6RSON BETZOLD DECLARF,D THE FIOTSON CARRIED BY R VOTE OF Z—Z.
Mr. Betzold stated this would go to tfie Planning Commission on Jan. 7,
and then to the City Council on Jan, 26, 19F37.
ADJOUR�Ih1ENT:
MO.^709 BY A1R. BARNA, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE� TO AATOURN THE MF,ETING. UPO1J A
VOICE i�OTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPSRSON BETZOLD DF,CLRRED THE DF.C. I6� Z986�
APPEALS COMbfZSS7011 MEETITIG AATOURNED A: 9: �0 P.M.
Respectfully sub�itted,
ti r-L � �l/� l,-C' ,
Lyn Saba
Recordin9 Secretary
CITY OF FRIDLEY
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION
MEETING
DECEMBER 16, 1986
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Svanda called the December 16, 1986, Environmental Quality
Commission meeting to order at 7:31 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Richard Svanda, Maynard Nielson, Dale Thompson
Members Absent: Wayne Wellan
Others Present: Myra Gibson, Planning Assistant
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 18, 1986, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Thompson, seconded by Mr. Nielson, to approve the November 18,
1986, Environmental Quality Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SVANDA DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. UPDATE ON CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM
Ms. Gibson stated she had received a bill from Super Cycle but it did not
indicate tonnage. Super Cycle has been contacted and the bill is being
revised.
Mr. Thompson asked if complaints have been received.
Ms. Gibson said she had received some complaints but felt fewer are now
being received. Complaints received while Beermann Services were picking
up were intercepted by the switchboard and callers were referred directly
to Beermann. Ms. Gibson is not sure how many complaints were actually
received. Ms. Gibson is now receiving all calls.
Ms. Gibson reported that Super Cycle collects on Saturday in Richfield and
will do missed pick ups in Fridley on Saturday mornings.
Mr. Svanda indicated there is a possibility that a container deposit
proposal will be brought before the legislature again this year. It is
his understanding that Super Cycle did not support container deposit
because they felt it would take away from their business.
2. UPDATE ON S.O.R.T. DROP-OFF RECYCLING CENTER
Ms. Gibson indicated that nothing further has been done since the last
meeting. The concrete for the building has been poured but the building
has not been constructed. Ms. Gibson will contact Universal Can to see
vhat is happening. Hopefully, the site will be open at the first of the
year. All work to be done by the City has been completed.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COPIIfISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 16, 1986 PAGE 2
Mr. Svanda asked if anything had changed regarding the compost site.
Ms. Gibson indicated there xere no changes. The site is expected to open
in the spring.
3. UPDATE ON GRANTS
Ms. Gibson stated that she was applying for a D.E.E.D. grant which is due
January 12, 1987. Primarily, the items Fridley is eligible for are mainly
administrative services and salaries. If the grant were approved, the
funds could be used for the services of Super Cycle and the funds from
Anoka County and the Met Council could be used to upgrade the S.O.R.T.
site. There is a fine line on what is eligible.
Mr. Svanda thought the Met Council was going to stop funding tonnage
rebates. They feel they have not seen the results they had hoped to.
Mr. Svanda suggested that City staff and City Council members write to
the Met Council and area legislators to support the continuation of the
program.
Mr. Thompson felt the funding should be kept going until recycling is
mandatory.
Mr. Svanda felt Fridley would not be in recycling if it had not been for
the funding.
Ms. Gibson indicated that Fridley was one of the first cities to apply
for grants only for energy. The City did not know"recycling could be
included at the time of the first grant.
Ms. Gibson indicated attaihli 2'cycle grant would be available in
March. The lst cycle is for $30,000. The guidelines are basically the
same and the funding for both grants are from the EXXON overcharge money
received bY D.E.E.D. The money from this grant would be used to enforce
the code relating to rental property and recycling. The 2nd cycle will be
for $15,000.
Mr. Nielson stated he had received a letter from the Cities of Columbia
Heights and Minneapolis saying they would come to inspect rental property
but they have not yet done so.
Ms. Gibson indicated that three cities have passed a resolution regarding
rental property and Fridley is one of the three. However, the code has not
been enforced, nor approved by the City Council.
Mr. Svanda indicated the City must spend the money it is given.
Ms. Gibson felt the City could spent the $15,000. At this time Ms. Gibson
feels the $15,000 couid easily be spent between energy and recycling. With a
total grant of $60,000 over two years the City would have enough funds to
develop a good program, Ms. Gibson stated she was now working on the lst
grant application.
Mr. Thompson asked the contract term for Super Cycle.
Ms. Gibson thought the contract was for two years with a review after the
first year.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 16, 1986 PAGE 3
Mr. Svanda asked if Super Cycle was planning to do publicity.
Ms. Gibson stated the City is doing most of the publicity although Super
Cycle has also done some.
Mr. Nielson felt the curbside program would be more successful if they
could pick up used batteries and used oil.
Mr. Svanda indicated that a company is looking at developing a collection
system for old batteries.
4. DISCUSSION AND DISTRIBUTION OF RADON INFORMATION MATERIALS
Ms. Gibson indicated that the Energy Commission would like to include some
information on radon contamination in a newsletter. The costs of printing
and preparation should be covered by the grant, if approved. Ms. Gibson
distributed information on radon contamination including copies of the
Energy and Housing Report, Radon Related Legislation, Minnesota Homeowners
Guide to Radon, and an Indoor Air Qua2ity Research Study from the Office
of Energy Conservation.
This item will be discussed further at the next meeting after members have
had time to review the information.
5. DISCUSSION ON MPCA RULES FOR TREATMENT AND STORAGE OF HAZqRDOUS WASTE
Ms. Gibson indicated she had received from the MPCA the Rules for
Treatment and Storage of Hazardous Waste.
Mr. Svanda indicated that these were new requirements so the state can
comply with changes made by the EPA. When the EPA changes their rules,
the state reviews their authorizations, and Mr. Svanda in@icated the
information received was basically an update to reflect those changes.
6. OTHER SUSINESS
a. Mr. Svanda indicated that in the last newsletter the article regarding
collection of hazardous waste sounded as if the MPCA would collect
and dispose of hazardous materials, which is not the case.
Ms. Gibson stated that the information as printed was not clear.
Mr. Svanda indicated that the program coming up is looking at covering
the cost of disposal. The cities would cover part of the out of pocket
expenses such as printing and publicity. Mr. Svanda indicated that a
decision for approval of this program would likely be made in May. He
noted that Universal Can has shown interest in the program.
b. Ms. Gibson indicated that Columbia Heights has developed a brochure
on their recycling program which is a drop-off site. That City also
provides a gift for recycling after a certain amount had been recycled.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 16, 1986 PAGE 4
Mr. Svanda indicated he had heard of a city that had a drawing for
recycling participants and thought the prize was $1,000.
Mr. Nielson asked which residents had received the information in
Columbia Heights.
Ms. Cibson was not sure and stated she would check to see who had
received the brochure.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTIoN by Mr. Nielson, seconded by Mr. Thompson, to adjourn the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SVANDA DECLARED THE DECEMBER 16,
1986, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:38 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
� ut-?�;;✓ l'/t-i/�,(.t/
Lavonn Cooper
Recording Secretary
F.,:. e.:.:
S
�' �
CALL TO OROER:
CITV OF FRIDLEY
NU�1Atd RESOURCES COF8IISSION
MEETING
DECEh1GER 4, 1986
�j
Chairperson Sherek called the December 4, 148F, Numan Resources Cor�nission meetinn
to order at 7;35 p.m.
R01_L CALL:
Meribers Present: Sue Sherek, Dick Storla, Paul 4lestby
Menbers Absent:
Others Present:
Claudia Dodge
Ric 4liersma, Planning Assistant
APPROVAL OF OCT06ER 2 19II6 NUt1A�d RFSOURCES C(R1�tISSIOPJ MII9UTES:
MOTION BY 11R. STORLR� SF,C.ONAF.D AY MR. Fl£STBY� TO APPROYf.' THF, OCT. 2� 1986�
HUifAN RESOURCES COMMISSIO.N MINUTES AS WRITTEN. �
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL S'OSING AYE� CHAIRPERSOIl SHEREK DEC.LARED TFIE FfOTION
CARRIF.D UNANIMOUSLY.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
_MOTION BY HR, .STORLA, SECONDED BY NR. WFSTBY� TO APPROVE THE AGENDR AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CXAIRPF.RSON SNF.REK DECLARF'D TNE MOTIOP�
CARRZED UNANIMOUSLY.
. . . .._ _._ .. _ .
1, APPROVAL Of 1987 TENTATIVE t1EETIi1G DA?ES:
MOTION BY MR. WESTBY, SECONDED BY 7fR. STORLR, TO APPROVR THF. Z987 TF.NTA_TIVE'
MEF.TING DATES WITX THE OMISSION OF THE JULY 2� 1987� MEETZNG DATE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON SHEREK DECLARPD THE MO^SON
CARRIF,D UNANLMOUSLY.
2. OLD BUSINESS:
a. Consideration of 1986-1987 Workplan
?�s. Sfierek stated the Cormissioners had received the workplan timeline.
She reviewed tfie timeline as outlined by staff.
Ns. Sherek stated the Numan Service Needs was an onqoinq item. From time
to time, they should invite members of the comnunity to inform the
Conmission of various human service needs in the cortmunity. If any of
tfie Cormissioners had any iter.0 of concern, he/she should brin� those
�
HUHAN RESOURCES COM�IISSIOP� MEETIWG, DECEP1f3ER 4� 1986 PAGE 2
items to the Cormnission's attention, and tfiey would try to find somaone
who could address those concerns.
Ms. Sherek stated the other part of the Human Service tJeeds goal was to
receive updates from Clau�lia Dodge about the Community Options residence.
Ms. Sherek stated the other ongoing item for the Cormission was the fJo-
Fault Grievance Cormittee. She stated the No-Fault 6rievance Committee
is seeing probably ahout 2-3 times tf�e number of no-fault grievances
coming to the Corenittee now as tfiere were approxinately one year ago.
The Committee was seeing a6out 2-3 cases a month. She did not think
that reflected the increase in grievances; she thougf�t it reflected an
increase in awareness on the part of people in tf�e City to refer people
to the No-Fault Grievance Committee. She thought it also reflected an
increased awareness on the part of the State that the lor.al No-Fault
Grievance Comnittee was a way to get sone of tfiese complaints worked out
and handled on a timely basis. The problem she has seen was that the State
was not timely in notifying the t�o-Fault Grievance f,omnittee when people
go on to file formal comolaints. She was novr being notified of formal
complaints that were filed in February 1986. So, all this time, they
could f�ave been working witfi an employer, thereby jeopardizing the
petitioner's greivance complaint situation. She stated it was not a good
situation, and sfie has talked to the State about it. The State has indi-
cated it will try, but the State is also approximately seven months behind
in intake of grievances which was another reason the No-Fault Grievance
Committee was not beneficial.
11s, Sherek stated she would call the State about whether they plan to
have any more P�o-Fault Grievance Procedure training.
Ms. Sherek stated tfie next item on the timeline was Oct/Nov. 1986 for
looking at summer employment guidelines and development reconmendations
for the sunmier of 1987. The tirneline for this should be changed to
Jan. 1987. At the January meeting, she would like Staff to gather all
the information from last year when this was discussed, includinc� minutes
from the Planning Cormission and City Council.
T1s. Sherek stated the Police/Community Relations goal had essentially
been covered. They had a speaker from the Police Department in October
who discussed domestic violence in the City of Fridley.
iis. Sherek stated the last item for 198E was ascertaininq thP views rf
the f,ity Council on 1987 CDf3G funding. She aras not even aware if there
would be any 1987 CDBG funds. Information on whether or not there will
be 1987 funding should be available for the next meeting. If there are
1987 CDBG funds, the Cortmission mer�bers would like some input from the
City Council on any requests or suggestions the City Counci7 has as far
as how the Commission should handle the CDP,G fundin9 situation. Honefully,
the City Council could supply that information for the Comriission by their
January meeting.
_ _ _ _,._..
,�:� � .,.�. �,.�- � _ .�
�
- - HUt1AN RESOI�RCES COM�IISSION PIEETIPlf, DECFTI6ER 4 1986 PAGE 3
Ms, Sherek stated an item scheduled for Jan./Feb. 1987 included
evaluating hazards and natural waterways th4t exist and what risks are
posed to citizens, particularly children. Probably for the February
meeting, the Commission should have some input fror� the Public Safety
Dept. or the Public VJorks Dept, on pro6lems during tfie winter.
h1s. Sherek stated the other part of Public Safety scheduied for �1ar./
April 1987 was to review other metro area swir,ming pool ordinances
because of an issue raised at the Plannin9 Commission on the inconsistency
in the private swimming pool ordinance as it relates to puhlic safety.
She stated that besides the metro area st•�imning pool ori(inances, they should
also see the State guidelines.
Ms. Sherek stated the timeline for Data Utilization sFiould probably he
moved to August 1987. Recomnendations regarding Ilata lJtilization by
City Staff could 6e moved to Sept. 1987.
Ms. Sherek stated the next item in the Mar./April 1�t37 timeline was to
review the sumner employment guidelines and forward them on to City Staff.
�9s. Sherek stated tfiat June was slated in the timeline to draw conclusions
with respect to Human Service Needs. SF�e felt that shoutd be nostponed
until fall 1987 after they fiave heard from a few organizations. They
sFwuld start scfieduling one speaker a month. -
Ms. Sherek asF.ed Staff to ariend tfie workplan adding the timeline, the
workplan to be brought 6ack to the next Cor.mission meeting for f,ommission
approval.
policies and Procedures for No-Fault Grievance Comnittee
P1s. Sherek stated she and Keith Dawson, another member of the No-Fault
Grievance Comnitiee had liked the outline form and the more frienAly
tone of the sample policies and procedures from the City of Roseville as
opposed to those from the City of Bloomington. She stated she thought
there also should be a numbering system for the forms. Unless no one
else had any suggestions, she would suggest numberinq these forms,
beginning with P�F-01, P�f-02, etc. All administration guidelines or forms
did not need to be numbered.
Ms. Sherek stated she did not think these policies and procedures needed
to be encumbered with excessive paperwork, and she indicated which forms
she felt were needed and which forms she felt were not needed and could
be deleted.
Ms. Sherek stated that v�hen this packet of information is put together,
it should be made available to each No-Fault f,rievance Corrmittee member
and each Human Resources Comnissioner. This packet of information shoi�td
include all forms and administrative guidelines.
,�_ , :P „■�
r _ /
.
1AN RESOURCES COMP1ISSION PIEETING, DECEMBER 4, 1986 PAGF 4 �
ADJOURNP•1ENT:
__� '
MOTSON BY A1R. STORLA� SECONDED BY MR. WF.SPBY� '_^O ADJOURN THF, MF,F.TING. UPOlI A
VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYF., CHAIRPERSON SHEREK DECLARF.D THE DEC. 4� I986�
HUl(AN RF,SOITRCES COMMISSIOt! MEETING ADJOURNED Am 8:55 P.M.
Respectfully subnitted,
��
yn Sa a
Recording Secretary
:,�
,��
CITY aF FRIDLEY
ENERGY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
DECEMBER 29, 1986 -
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Saba called the special meeting of the Energy Commission to order
at 7:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Dean Saba, Bruce Bondow, Bradley Sielaff
Members Absent: Glen Douglas
Others Present: Myra Gibson, Planning Assistant
APPLICATION FOR ENERGY COUNCIL GRANT
Ms. Gi6son distributed copies of the Community Energy Council Grant rules,
the form for Application for Community Energy Council Grant, and the draft
of the City of Fridley's Application for Community Energy Council Grant. The
purpose of the special meeting is to revieu the City's grant application.
The application was reviewed and discussion followed on the following:
1.4 Name of Community Energy Councils and Dates Established
Ms. Gibson indicated that rather than set up a special committee she had
listed the Energy Commission and the Environmental Quality Commission as
the Community Energy Councils.
1.6 Project Abstract
Ms. Gibson indicated the abstract is a short summary of the project and
the areas were set minimally in order to be able to accomplish the tasks.
The areas to be accomplished are listed in priority order.
Mr. Sielaff asked, since two commissions were involved, would one commission
oversee the other and if this would create a problem.
Ms. Gibson did not think a problem would arise since she works with each
group and the areas that each group works with are separated in the project.
Mr. Saba asked if the Anoka Coimty and Met Council money for recycling was
being used for recycling?
Ms. Gibson stated ChaC it was, but the funding was not enough to do
what was needed, including publicity.
Mr. Sielaff asked if the commission needed to have a percentage for each
priority indicatino the amount of funds to be allocated for each.
Mr. Saba felt that this should be included. He wondered what the actual
costs would be to accomplish these tasks.
ENERGY COhQfI5SI0N SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 29, 1986 PAGE 2
Ms. Gibson felt that perhaps the priorities were not in order as they
should be accomplished. Perhaps program coordination and promotion should
be the first priority under the Energy Code Compliance. She didn't think
a large sum would be spent on inspections but felt coordination would be
more costly.
Mr. Saba felt the first priority should include a random inspection of 10�
of the rental property, perhaps those buildings that are 20 years and older.
This would provide practical information and would show whether or not there
is a problem. A general sample audit of existing property would require
some inspector training. Mr. Saba suggested the following for priority A:
1. Evaluate energy compliance of existing rental property through sample
audit.
a. Auditor and inspector training
b. Auditor services
2. Program coordination and promotion.
3. General follow up inspection.
In this manner, it is possible to figure out the cost of an audit, the
training and the inspection.
Ms. Gibson felt one problem would be actually getting in to do an audit.
She felt there would still have to a plan developed so we know what will
be done first.
Mr. Sielaff felt that would depend on �hat one wants to do. He felt it
necessary to get information first because this is needed to do the
coordination.
Ms. Gibson indicated the City inspector and fire department have been
doing inspections and the information they have,could be used.
Mr. Saba thought this information should be a part of the data base, but
that more detailed information should be obtained.
Ms. Gibson asked who would be able to do the audit.
Mr. Saba thought this would have to be part of the program coordination.
The City may have to pay for the sample audits. Perhaps the first step
should be to develop a plan to do a random sample and then coordinate the
program and do promotion.
Mr. Saba felt the City should be able to tell the State how much will be
spent in each area and the City should know what they are getting into.
Mr. Sielaff felt the first priority should receive more funding than the
second or third priorities.
Ms. Gibson suggested assigning SSR to priority A, 35� to B, and 10% to C.
Mr. Saba indicated that estimates are still needed. The audit needs to
look at insulation, doors, windows, and a ten-year payback.
ENERGY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 29, 1986 PAGE 3
`� 2.2 Project Objectives
Ms. Gibson reviewed the objectives and stated that the sample audit would
be incorporated into the objectives. _
Mr. Bondow suggested adding that this will be a statistical sample to
generate information pertinent to the rental stock in the City of Fridley.
Ms. Gibson suggested adding some type of evaluation of the buildings that
were done.
Mr. Sielaff asked if the City was involved in a compost site.
Ms. Gibson indicated the site had been approved, it would be located behind
the S.O.R.T. site, and it will be monitored by Universal Can.
2.3 Workplan
i
Ms. Gibson indicated that the same points would be added to the work plan.
Mr. Sielaff felt there should be a planning component. Planning and
administration for each topic.
Mr. Saba indicated the housing code needs to be accepted.
Ms. Gibson indicated that a resolution to accept the code is a part of the
application.
2.4 Coordination
Mr. Sielaff felt the emphasis in A should be on collecting data.
Mr. Saba requested the inclUSion of a statement about sample audit and
compliance.
3.0 Budget
Ms. Gibson stated that in this budget she would not be doing inspections.
She would probably be doing the first attempts and someone else would be
doing follow ups.
3.1 Efforts to Secure Additional Funds
Ms. Gibson indicated that she will have an exhibit of rthe agreement from Anoka
County and the Met Council for funds given us. We have SRC's commitment
for energy audits.
Mr. Sielaff asked about NSY being mentioned in the paragraph.
Ms. Gibson indicated that at this time NSP and Minnegasco have not been
contacted. They do not wish to be contacted unless we have something
formulated in writing.
�
ENERGY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 29, 1986 PAGE 4
S.0 Evaluation
Ms. Gibson indicated this was incomplete. Since the City is not dealing
with NSP or Minnegasco, we will not have a computer readoui. Follow ups
can be done to see what work has been completed. There is no history of
usage.
I�h. Saba asked if a spread sheet could be made.
Ms. Gibson stated she would need to do audits in order to provide a
comparison betxeen the first inspection and the actual work done.
Mr. Saba thought the objectives would be met through participation and
upgrading or through the levy of fines for non-compliance.
Resolution of Application and Authorization to ExecUte Agreement and
Certifications for D.E.E.D. Grant
Ms. Gibson stated that the Commission needed to approve the resolution
before it could go to the City Council.
Mr. Saba felt the Energy Commission and the Environmental Quality Commission
members should attend the Council meeting. He thought it important that
both commissions be represented.
Ms. Gibson stated she would call members to let them know about what time
this item would be before the Council.
Mr. Sielaff felt the title should read the Fridley Residential Energy
Conservation and Recycling Project.
Mr. Bondow asked why energy conservation and recycling were combined.
Ms. Gibson stated that both are eligible under the grant and this would
allow the City to do work in both areas.
Mr. Saba asked why the two commissions were not combined into a special
project committee and asked for clarification of the term Community Energy
Council.
Ms. Gibson indicated that a special committee was not required as long as
specific areas be represented. The term Community Energy Council is that
used by D.E.E.D. and they have requested that title. For clarification
with D.E.E.D., a similar term is being used.
For clarification, Mr. Bondow suggested that paragraph 7, line 2, have
deleted the words °combination of the.° "Thi� then would not appear
as if the two groups would be combined into one.
Mr. Saba felt it important to coordinate efforts with the Environmental
Quality Commission, but still keep the issues separate.
Mr. Bondow asked if other municipalities had been reluctant to adopt the
state code.
�
�'
� ENERGY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 29, 1986 PAGE 5
,-a..
{ Ms. Gibson stated they are reluctant because they do not have funds for a
staff position. This is the reason why Fridley's City Council did not
pass the code. Ms. Gibson stated that with the grant they may only be
able to do a plan. The objective is to help people bring their property
up to code, but also have enough leverage to enforce compliance when necessary.
MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Bondow, to adopt the Resolution of
Application and Authorization to Execute Agreement and Certifications for
D.E.E.D. Grant and the City of Fridley Application for Community Energy Council
Grant as amended.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SABA DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOUHNMENT
MOTION by Mr. Bondow, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to adjourn the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SABA DECLARED THE DECEMBER 29,
i986, ENERGY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:25 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
����-��' �,uJ
Lavonn Cooper
Recording Secretary
—�