PL 11/18/1987 - 30674'"�
CITY OF FRTDLEY
PLAl�TN]NG COPM'LZSSION N��I'ING, NOVIl�ZBER 18, 1987
('AT T, TO 012DER:
Chai�person Billings ca11�7, the November 18, 1987, Planning Cca�cnission ireeting
to order at 7:30 p.m.
}.20LL C�fI1,:
Members Present: Steve Billings, Sue Sherek, Dean Saba., Richard Svanda.,
Alex Barna (for Mr. Betzold), Mary Schreine� (for ��. Kondrick)
M�nbers Absent: None
Others Present: Jim Rabinson, Planning Coordinator
Jock Robertson, Conant�nity Developm�n.t Director
Lisa Giancola., 109 Hartnran Ci�cle
I�eon riartin, 111 - 83rd Ave. N.E.
Richard Briakner, 1233 - 12th Ave. N.ia.
Te�ance Mickley, 231 Rioe Creek Te�ace
Ver.non Bo]lesen, 240 Rice Creek Terrac:e
(See attached. list)
�, APPROVAL OF OCI'OBER 21, 1987, PLANNI�iTG CO1�M4ISSION MINUTES:
MC7I'ION by P�. Saba, seconded by D�.s . Sherek, to approve the Oct. 21, 1987 ,
Planx�ing Conm�Li.ssion minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CFI�IRPERSON BILLINGS DEC�,A,RID THE r�PION
CARR�D UNANIMOUSLY.
l. PUBI�.IC I�ARING: CON5IDERP,TION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP # 87-20 ,
BY LISA G7ADTCOLA:
Per Section 205.09.O1.C.3 of the F'ridley City Code to allaw day care on
Lot l, Block l, Sprinc�rook Apartments at Northtawn, the same being
165 - 83rd. Avenue N.E.
AZOTION by Mr. Svanda., seconded by A7s. Sherek, to waive the formal reading
of the public hearing notice and open the �ublic hearing.
UPON A. VOICE VOTE, AI�L VOTIl�TG AYE, �P�RSON BTLLINGS D��ARFD TI�
MOTION �Ft1Z� LTNANIMOUSLY, AND TI� PUBLIC HEARTNG OPEN AT 7: 32 P.A'i .
Mr. Robinson sta.ted the petition was for a special use perniit for a day-
care facility in an R-3 zone. The propPxty was loca.ted. north of 83rd Ave.
and west of Uni.v. This p�erty was recently rezoned by the Belgard�e
Development group tor a 358-unit apartment co�lex (Sp�ingbrook Apart-
ments) presnetly under constru.ction. The first Phase was to open in about
� a m�nth.
PL�NNING C.ONll�lISSION .N�.EI'ING, NOVE�NID�ER 18, 1987 PAGE 2
;�
Mr. Rabinson stated the petitioner, Lisa Giancola, was a daycare provider
in the community presently and. has ma�3.e arrangements with the developer to
operate a daycare facility within the apa.r�nt coanplex. The actual
location of the daycare facilit�r was on the north end o£ the development
and was actually an expansion of the Cabana facility which was originally
in the plans.
Mr. Robinson sta.ted the dayca.�e facility would have 3,347 sq. ft. of space
with enough space for 62 chi.ldren. The usable floor a�ea defined by the
HLUnari Services Depart�nent was ap�irox. 2,200 sq. ft.
Nir. Robinson stated the city code reguires they provide one parking stall
for evezy 100 sg. ft. of usable flo�r area, so they need 22 stalls. This is
really the only issue Staff sees at this point, and the,petitioner, along
with the developer, have made ae'range�e.nts to reserve specific stalls for
the da.ycare facility. With the apartznent complex, there was a surplus of
12 stalls so they are approximztely 10 stalls short with the daycare addition.
Hawever, they have defined space which is now green space in the plan that
could be parking space if needed. 'I�.ey do not feel at this time they need.
to make that parking available; hawever, that wou].d be deferr�. parking whic,h
is pernu.ssible by city cod.e. The designated spaces wi]1 be inanediately adja-
ce�t to the daycare facility which would include 6 sta].ls in front of the
entrance for drap-off and would i.nclude one handicap sta11. There will be
�,� a maximum of 9 employees at the facility at any one time, even though there
are 18 total emplo�rees . Sta.ff was requestir�g 9 sta.11s be designa.ted for
employees across the driveway.
Mr. Robinson stated the facade would be consistent with the master plan for
the overall development, and it a�eared to be an attractive facility.
P�Lr. R�inson stat�c7. Staff was ��unending the follawing stipulations:
1. Provide pa,rking lot signage designating the six stall bank of parking,
;�;ately adjacent to daycare facility, as resezved fo� da.ycare
users on Monda� th�cxugh F�iday 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 �.m.
2. Provide parking lot signa.ge designati.ng ni.ne sta.11s, directly west
and acr�ss the driveway £�coan the daycare facility, as reserved for
daycare employees only Monday through Frida.y 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
3. Provide pla.yground area. and �,; �nent details pri.or to building pennit
for staff approval.
4. Building facade mate�ials for daycare to be consistent with approved
plans for entir.e oomplex.
5. Parking situation £or da.ycare and apartn�ent complex to be reviewed
aftex one year of operation to deter:mine pa.rking sufficiency.
�`- Nir. Barna asked if this da.ycare facility was intendec7. just for the use of
the tenants or if Ms. Giancola anticipatecl clients �'r�n outside the coa�lex.
�
;'1
PL�NNING C(aMNlISSION A'�'�TI1�TG, NOVII+'i�ER 18 , 19 87 PAGE 3
AZs. Giancola. stated they hope to draw mainly frcan the people within the
apartment eomplex on a first-c�me, £i�st-serve basis, but other than that,
they will draw froan outside the cc�plex to keep the daycare facility full.
That was the reason they were �equesting the sPecial use permi.t. Obviously,
they cannot depend solely on the apartment c:omplex to keep the facility full.
Ms. Schreiner asked if there was a signa.ge plan.
r9s. Giancola statecl they did not have a signage plan at this time.
Mr. Saba asked if the daycare chi.ldren would be able to get into the swinuning
pool area.
NLr. Robinson stated. the dayca�e pla.�rground area would be fenced with a 5 ft.
chain link fence, so the pc�ol would not be accessible to these r.hildren.
Nir. Barna sta.ted that the area. dixectly to the south was a pc�nding area.
The daycare pl.ayground area. will be attxactive to other children fran
within the apar-t�nt complex who wa,ll y��obably walk through the ponding
azea to get to it. Some days that poridinc� area.will have 4-6 inches of
wate�. V�lhose responsibility was it to make su�e the child:�en did not do
that?
Nir. Leon Marti.n stated he was the Project Manager for Springbrook Apar�t-
�` m�nts. The pond always had water in it, but the slope was veYy, very gradual.
There was no outside access to the dayca.re's playgrc�imd area, and the
other children within the co�lex will riot be allo�aed to use the daycare
playground. There will be two other playground areas for the children
within the complex.
MOTION b.y Mr. Saba, seconded b�r Ms. 5herek, to close the �ublic hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, Cf�RPERSON BILLIlVGS D�7C'T'�ARF� �
PUBLIC �'ARTNG CLOSID AT %:45 P.M.
M�. Robinson stated that if the clients for the da.ycare faci].ity were
coming from inside the apa�ttm�nt cxanplex, there would be no need for a
SpeCial use permit. Signage was also a concern to the City. They
want to make sure the signa.ge is aampatible with the develo�nent. He
�ould reco�nend the Commissian add the f_ollawi.ng sti�ulation if this
5pecial u5e pern�it is approved: "Signage glan to�be submitted for re�iew
prior to the City Council review."
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seoonded by Ms. Schreiner, to reco�rid to City Council
approval of Special Use Permit, SP #87-20, by Lisa Giancola, per Section
205.09.O1.C.3 of the Fridley City Code to allow a day care on Lot 1,
Block 1, Spr:i.nc�rook Apartments at Northt�awn, the same being 165 - 83rd
Avenue N.E., with the following stipulatiaris':
�--�
�
i''~a
l"'`
PLANNING CONIl�iISSION MEET]NG, NOV.E�+�lBER 18, 1987 PAGE 4
l. Provide parking lot signa.ge designa.ting the six stall bank
of par•king, i�ecli.ately adj ac�n.t to daycare facility, as
reseYVed for daycare users on Monday through Frida.y 6:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m.
2. Provide parking lot signage designa.ting ni.ne stalls di�ectly
west and across the d�iveway from the daycare facility, as
reserved for da.ycare em�lo�rees only Monday through Friday
6:00 a.m. t�o 6:00 p.m.
3. Provide pla�rground axea a�.d. equipment details prior to build-
ing pern�u.t for sta£f approyal.
4. Buildang facade materials for da�care to be wnsistent with
approved plans £or entire �lex.
5. Parking situa.ti� for da�cat�e and apart�nent co�lex to 1�
reviewed aft�r one year of operatian to determi.ne �king
sufficiency.
6. Signage plan to be submitted. �'or revietiv prior to City Council
review.
� � � • � • � • � � w n r• � �t• �• : � � � �� • � ��� i
• • • • • ��1� I: A11U � `l _
Mr. Robinson stated this item would go to Cit�,r Co�cil on Dec. 7.
2. �LJ�i� i�12II�TG: �CAN��SII�'ZO].V OF � PR�r.TroirnmRY PLAT, P.S. #87-07,
TaF:ATT�:R OAKS, BY CKIVF.Ft ,
Being a replat of Lot 16, exc�pt the East 33 feet, Auditor's Subdivision
No. 92, and Outlot A, Acorn Hills Addition, and that part of Lot 14,
Auditor's Subdivision No. 92, which lies East of th� West 165 feet
thereof, except the East 30 feet of said Lot l4, a11 generally located
at 5980 Stinson Boulevard N.E.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded.by D�.s. Schreiner, to waive the fo�al
�eading of the public hea�ing noti.ce and open the public heaxing.
UPON A VOICE V0�1'E, AC.�L. VOTIl�TG AYE, CHAIREERSON BILLINGS D�]CLARID THE
M(7I'ION CARRI� UNAl�TIl�lDUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7: 47 p.M .
1�. Bi]lings statec7. item 3 of the ager�3.a was for a vaca.tion for the same
property. Since the vaca.tion did not r+equi:re a public hearing, he would
�ecomm�er�. they talk about the Prel i mi narv plat and the vaca.tion at the
Sc'1Ii12 �].IT� .
Mr. Robi.nson stated both itesns were related to a petition for the approval
of a 12-lot preliminary plat by Brickner Builders, represented by
Richard Brickner. The property was lcxated west of Stinson Boulevard and
north of Gardena. It was approxima.tely 3a acres in size. The zoning was
a11 single family so the develo�ent was cx�npatible with the surrounding
�
PLANNING COMD2ISSION MEETINGr NOV.E��Z 18, 1987 PAGE 5
area. The largest tract was cx�med by Irene Mitchell, and thexe was a
single family house on that �roperty. The street vaca.ti.on would involve
an obsolescent piec;e of dedi.cated-right-o£�aay intended for a McKinley
Street ext�ension at one time in the pa.st, but which is no longer connected.
'It�o other parcels to the west are avn�. by the Jordan's and the Moe's.
In addition to that, there is the option for two other parceLs of propexty
to be combined with the plat, and those are �wned by the Ettel's and the
Costello's.
Mr. Robinson stated the 12-lot �lat that was being proposed does meet all
the codes. All the lots are in excess af 9,000 sq. ft. and a�e at least
75 ft. in width. The pro�xty is heavily wood.ed with gently rolling terrain
and will be c�i.te desirable fc�r single fami.ly hoanes..
Mr. Robinson sta.ted. the pmposal was to extend a 50 ft. right-of�aay with
36 ft. of paved surface to the west which will termixiate in a cul-de-sac.
The road ali.giurents and design also meet the c�de and engineering specifi-
ca.tions .
Nir. Rabinson stat�ed another option being pur�ued with the land�aners involved
the two other properties to the 5outh oWned by the Ettel.`s and the Costell,o's.
They have asked the developer to ta.lk to these pa�ties to see if they had
any interest in developing their pzope�-ties, sinc;e this was the final oppor-
tuni.ty to be connected, to the city street. These are c�ui.te laz1ge lots .
�' The Costello's have .6 aczes of s lus to be devel
u�g ��' o�ed. and the
Ettel's have.3 acres of su�lus �ro�rty to be develo�ed.. By including
these properties and then turn9.ng the road to the south with a cul-de-sac,
they would be able to increase the develo�nent to 15 lots. This was not
necessaxily a goal of the city, but they are t�rinQ to look at all the
options betore they close off any o�oz-ttmities to develop those praperties.
Mr.Rabinson stated ap�arently the B�ir�cner's and the Costello's have rea.ched
a tenta,tive agreement an the acx,��ti.sition. The Ettel's, h�ver, are uncertai.n
as to whether they would like to develop at this time.
Nir. Robinson sta.ted th� City met with all three.parties on Monday to discuss
the financial ��easibility of the Et�e�.'s being i�.cluded in the cievelo�ment
and perhaps even retai.ni.ng one of the additional platted l.ots to go wi.th
the exi.sting house to �.inta.in. a larger lot.
Mx. Rcabinson stated one of the advanta.ges for the Ettel's to participate
was they would then be able to link up to the city street; whereas they
now have a private d.�iveway easement with an unimproved. driveway. They
would also have to r�rove an existing garage and replace that garage on the
house site and connect a hard surfa� driveway to the garage. He did not
know if a resolution had been made on thi.s issue in time for the Planning
Con¢ni.ssion meeting.
Mr. Rabinson sta.ted that as far as sti�ulations, Sta.ff would reco�nend
�� a park fee of $1,500 per lot and. that the necessary easements be granted
with the plat.
�
PLANNING �MMISSION MEF,TING, NOV.Ei�'iBE12 18 , 19 87
�=N .
M:r. Barna sta.ted that Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8 were in the situation that the
City has had fxequently in the Heather Hills axea where the lots end up,
after front yard and reax yard setbacks, with no plac� to put a house
without variances. They ha.ve a de�th on Lots 5 and 6 at the perpe.ndicul.ar
].i.ne of 79 ft. and on Lots 6 and 7 at that center poi.nt of about 60+ ft,
Mr. Robinson sta.t,ed Lot 6 was questionable, and p�obably a rear ya�l variance
would 1� required.; hc�aever, a house could be put on that lot to meet c�de.
Houses could 1� designed to fit a11 of the lots. It was �rema.ture for the
developer to have designs at this �oint. He stated the develo�er was veYy
expe.rienc�d and realized what the city oxdinances are and what kind of
houses he can put on these lots.
Mr. Barna sta.ted he would rather see a develoFunent looked at closely before
it gets laid out in conc�ete and material as to what variances might c�ne
up in the future, instea.d of crea.ting a situation where the peo�le have no
c hoice but to con� in for variances.
Mr. Robinson stated he did not know how they could speculate on this prior
to having the house plans.
Mr. Barna sta.ted he just wanted to have his concerns regarding vaxiances
on record; and if the developer comes in for variaa�c�s, pazticularly on
�„� Lot 6, it is going to be corLSidered a"self-creat�7." Prob]�m.
Mr. Brickner sta.ted they are willing to comply with ci.ty code. As long as
the lots meet cod.e, they will build houses to �eet that c�de.
Nir. Billings stated I�. Baxna represented the Appeals Conuni.ssion. Mr. Barna
was looking ahead. to the possibilit� that not only might the buildex be
looki.ng for something within t-he next few months or 1-2 years, but even
5-10 years later when there is a change i.n awnership wit,h new owners want-
ing to do different things to the property. He was just tzyy.ing ta look
ahead and see what future probleins might exi.st.
Ms. Schreiner stated she shared NLr.Barna's concerns. She asked Mr. Brickner
what type of hoane he was _ rec:flm�nding for both lots 6 and 7 which were
somewhat limi.ted in area.
P�ir. Brickner sta.ted a 35 ft. depth on h�ne was more than adequate. They
always design the hames to fit the lots.
Nlr. James Tiller sta.t�d he was an attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. Costello.
Since McKinley St. does abut the Costello's �zopert�, they strongly object
to any vacation unless their pro�rty i.s i.nclud�7. in the plat.
Mr. Tiller sta.ted.he would Like to give a little more detailed history of
this area.. The surrounding area. has been developing gradually over time,
and at a11 times prior to this, Cit�r Sta.ff has assur�7. the Costello's that
%�, the rear portion of their property would not be landlocked. After the City
approved the McKinley cul-de-sac on Amber Oaks to the north, the City then
��
PLAI�TING CAMNLTSSION MEETING, ' NOV.E�F1� 18 , 19 87
��H
switchecl their planning �hasis to an east/west street between Benjami.n
and McKinley. After a time, that access on Berijami.n was cut off, but at
all tures, until now, the Costello's were assu.red their praperty would not
be landlocked. McKinley Stz�eet has been their protection beca.use it is a
dedica.ted. street and has been there for 30 or mo�e years. It abuts their
prope�i and has provi.ded them with scxne protecti.on ar�d assurance .
D�r. Tiller stated. that until the final confa.guration o:�. the plat was arrived
at, it was prem3tuxe to vacate McIt.i.nley Stxeet. Mr. Brickner had no right
to expect that the stxeet be vacated soley for his benefit without taking
into considerati.ari the adjac�nt ��+opext� o�wners. That �articular city ea.se-
ment was the last chance for the �ity and for Mr. Cflstello to protect his
property �'�n being landlocked. Si.x-tenths of an acre for this type of
property was valuable, even more valuable to the city itself due to increased
valuation and improved aesthetics. He believed Mr. Costello was anxious to
be reasonable in including his proy�exty in the plat. He thought the plat
was vezy workable with NLr. Costello's p�oy�erty. 'I'he Costello's have no
problem with the vaca.tion if they a.�e included in th� �lat.
.Mr. Mahlon AZoe sta.ted the.plat shaws McKinley St. easement along both
P�. Jordan's and hi.s lots, but actually it was on7.y behind his lot. He
sta.ted that at the ti.me th�,y built their h�e, they gave that easement as
a safeguard to the city, tivxilcing McKinle�r St. would eventually go through.
'� Mr. �illings asked Mr. Ettel if the alternate proposal referred to by Gtaff
t� inc.lude his property and Nir. Costello's �roperty was something Mr. Ettel
thought might b�� �aorkable.
Mr. Ettel stated it was pas�ible. The problem was they ha.ue not lived.
in this house ve�r long, and they have a h? c� .*,�z-tgage . If they wer� �to
participa.te, it would mean selling their lot for not a.high fee; and,
according to the develaper, they wou].d be responsible for the removal of the
garage. They would have to-build a new garage, bui.ld a driveway for access,
and this all would just be too costly for them right naw. One of the things
that had been considered was £or the develo� to buy the whole parcel--the
house and the lot the garage was on, but the develo�er is not interested
at this time.
Mr. Ettel stated he was not o�posed to the development as pra�osed by
1�. Brickn.er, and he would participate if the ntunb�rs can be wor.ked out.
Mr. Harvey Wager, 5940 Stinson B1vd. sta.ted his only concern was he wanted
the buil,der to be aware that they have a stornn drai.n along the line where the
Mitchell/Ettel/Wagex prope�t�r con� togethex. Maybe a stipulation could be
included that sai.d the sto�n drain pipe would rema.in inta.ct.
Mr. Billi.rigs.stated as on� of the noxmal stipulations, a drainage plan
for the pla.t has to be ap�roved by City Staff and the Rice Creek 6aatershed
District that says the draina.ge will not adversely affect either the neva
� development or the adjoining prc�erties.
,'1
PLANNING COT��iISSION A'�TIlQG-, NOVII�IBER 18, 1987 PAGE 8
Mr. R�binson sta.ted this plat was in the Rice Creek Watershed District
and beca.use of its size, the drai.nage plan must be approved by the Rice
Creek Watershed Distri.ct Prior to the final plat being approved. The
developer is aware of that.
Nir'. R�binson sta.ted, ap�arently Mr. Ettel has not been given any
financial figures yet fo� his review. The City has only fulfill� the
public hearing notice ��; �nent for the 12-lot plat. If the other
properties are included. in the plat for full partici�a.ti.on, the City will
have to have a renotification and Y�ave another public heari.ng.
Mr. Brickner stated when.they pro�osed the 12-lot pla.t, they had made offers
to the Costello's and Ettel's. DZr. Costello had accepted, but Mr. Ettel
had not. On Monday ni.ght they had a meeting, and at that meeting, Mr. Ettel
had said it was possible scarething could be worked. out so he could be a part
ot the project but he could not make that decision.before this Planni.ng
Commission meeting.
Ni0TI0N by Mr. :Barna, sec;onded. by P�.s. 5chreiner, to close the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, P;LL VC7I'IN� AYE, CHAIRPII2SON BILLINGS D�'�R� TI�
PUBLIC I3EARING QASID AT 8:25 P.M.
�,,, Mr. Svanda suggested the Planning �ommission table any decision on the plat
and the vacation since a resolution has not been reached. on the two addi-
tional parcels and what this whole plat might eventually look like. By
tabLing this item, it would provide additional o�porL�unities for all the
parties concerned tA tY�r to reach an agreement; and, at a future time, if
that agreement cannot be rea.ched., then the Planning C�mmi.ssion can reconsider
the plat as it is being piroposecl with 12 lots.
N1�. Saba sta.ted he would agree with that. The negotiations were still in
progress.
Mr. Billings stated he was vezy Qoncernec7. with approving any kind of plat
that, in fact, would leave a large pa.rcel of pro�erty with no access to it,
particularly in a situation wher,e the Ettel property was property that was
non-conformi.ng right now in that it is a house behind a house. It would
ce�tai.nly seem to be in the l�st inte�est of the city to tty to come up
with something that was more equitable. The option plans certainly appeared
to him t�o be far s�e�.or to the 12-lot plan proposed at thi.s meeting. He
would stxongly support tabling this and would encourage the developer to
get together with the Costello's and Ettel's and try to rea.c.h agree�nts.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, sec:onded by A2r. Barna, to table Prel�minary Plat,
P.S. #87-07, Heather Oaks, by B�ickner Builders, and Vaca.tion, SAV #87-11,
by Brickner Builders, Inc., until the Dec. 2, 1987, n�eting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CH�iRPER.SON BILLINGS D�T�A�?� THE MOTION
�"ti GARR�D UNANIMOUSLY.
,�"`'�
PLANNIl�IG C�lISSION N�.CING, NOiTII�ER 18, 1987 PAGE 9
3. CONSIDERATION OF A VACATION, SAV #87-11, BY BRICK�IER BUIId�ERS, INC.:
To vacate that part of McKu�.iey Street as dedicated in the Plat of
Acorn Hill Addition and together with the Northerly e�tension of said
McKinley Street to the �tu line of the Plat of Amber Oaks, generally
located at 5980 Stinson Boulevard N.E.
Tabled until Dec. 2, 1987, Pl��nninc� Conuni.ssion meeting.
4. CONSIDERATION OF A LOT SPLIT, L.S. �i�87-09, BY TERRAN'�� �GKLEY:
To split off ths nor�heaste�l�-b.89 feet of Lot 6, Block 1, Rice-Creek
Plaza South Addition. Sai� 6.$9'feet to rema.in wi.�.h Lot 5, Block 1,
Rice Creek Plaza South Addition.- The rema�nd.er of said Lot 6 to be -
combined to create one b�ildable �ot,• �he same_being -24 � Rice� Creen -ler-r. PTE.
Mr. Robinson sta.ted the lot sp],i.t involved a portian of vacant Property
loca.ted north of Rice Creek Terrace, south of Rice Creek, and west of
Highway 47. The �roposal was to split what was the gla.tted Lot 6 of the
Rice Creek Plaza South Addi.tion whic:h, subsequent to the plat, was split
dawn the middle and app�:oxi.unately ea.ch �ialf was combined with the adj acent
lots. The lots were quite large, and there was a house on Lot 5 and a
house on Lot 7.
Ni�. Robinson sta.ted.the peti.tioner who lives an Lot 7 has sold his house
v-, and wishes to build on Lot 6, so he was asking to �ecombine that lot.
Inasmuch. as the house on Lot 5 had be�n built within 5 ft. of the lot line,
it was necessazy to split off 5 ft. of Lot 6 which was the northeasterly
6.89 ft. of Lot 6 in order to h�.ve a 10 ft. setback to meet code. A certi-
fica.te of survey had been submi.tted.
Mr. Rc�binson sta.ted the new lot would be inore than a�le in size, 12,000
sq. ft. in area. Sta.tf did not see any prablem wi:th the split. The house
to the west was set ba.ck 4.9 ft. and was 1/10 of a foot short of ineeting
code, and the City Council could recognize that with the lot split.
Mr. R�i.nson sta.ted Staff was �eca�nding the follvwing stipulations:
l. A park fee of $750 to be paid �rior to building permi.t for ne�a lot.
2. Petitioner to provide as-built stornn sewer legal descriptions and
agrees to provide subsequent easement for same.
Mr. Gerald Sadowski, 250 Rice Creek B1�vd., stated he livecl directly across
the Creek from Mr. Mickley's property. V�en he bought his property last
year, it had appeared there was adequate room for this type of development.
The la.ck of a structure at that loca.tion has a major aesthetic i�act
on the piece of property which he purGhased. Before he bought the property,
he look� at Ni�. Mickley's �roperty, obsezved the drainage, looked at the
pla.t map, and was satisfied he had �icked a site that would seem difficult
^ to put in anything that would have an impact on his property. He did feel
� this new constructian would have a major aesthetic impact on his property.
He thought the drainage bazrier ��sentecl a severe barrier to any developer
of the property.
'��1
PLANNING CON�dISSION N�ErING, NOVENID�ER 18, 1987 PAGE 10
Mr. Mickley statec7. he lived on Lot 7 directly behind Mr. Sadowski. He
sta.ted that Lot 7 and the �xopos� Lot 6 have steep d.rop-offs in the back
part of the lot. Neither of the lots lend themselves to any landscaping
theme, and so he has left tha.t property ��etty much wild. He really had
no intention of doing anything different, although Mr. Saclo�aski really had
no pr.otection against that.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Svanda, to �econ¢r�nd to City Council
approval of Lot Split, L.S. #87-09, by Texrance Mickley, to �plit off th�
northeasterly F.89 feet of Lot 6, Block 1, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition.
Said 6.89 feet to re�sin with �ot 5-, Eloek I, Rice:Creek-P1aza..Sou�h Add.
The remai.nder of said. Lot 6 to be combined to cxeate.or�e buildable lot,
�he same be�ng�2.14 Rtice Cree�. Terrace N.� _, with �he fall:�wzz�.g stipulata.ons :
--- - - � — - - - -- T t — - -- ---
1. A park £�e of $750 to be pais�. �r%r to building pe�mi.t
for new lot. •
2. Petitioner to pxovi.de as built storm sewer legal descrip-
tions and agrees to provic� �ubseguent easement for same.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLINGS ,D�'.ARF.h`'j'�
MOTION CARR�D UNATT�lOUSLY.
MMe�'. Robinson stated because it was necessary for Mr. Mickley to move
;�"`�, quickly in order to start const�u�tion thf.s fall, thi.s would go to the
City Council on Nov. 23 be£ore the minutes were app�ovved, at the next
Plaruiing Co�ni-SSion �eting.
5. CONSIDELi�1TION OF A LOT SPLIT, L.S. #87-10, BY V.ERI�TON. BQLI,ESEN;
To split off that y�art of Lot 6, Blocic 3, Rice Creek Plaza South
Addition, lying southwestexl:y of a line drawn para11e1 with and 5 feet
northeasterly of, as m�asured at right angles to, the mast southwesterly
line of said Lot 6, the same being 250 Rice Creek Terrace N.E.
M.�'- Robinson stat�l the reason fgr the lot split a�lication was }�cause
th.e swi�ni.ng pool overlaps the lot line, so the neighbo� on Lot 6 has
agreed to sell 5 ft. to. the petiticanex in order to clean up thi.s situation.
The survey presented by Suburban Engineering indicat�l exactly that.
Origina,lly, they were both 95 ft. lots. With the subdivision, Lot 6
will be reduc�d to 90 ft.; hvwever, it would still be 10,800 sq. ft.
after the split, far in excess of what the code requires. Staff has no
problem with the lot split and rec�nd.ed approval.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded.by Mr. Barna, t:o recomnend to City Council
approval of Lot S�lit, L.S. #87-10, by Vernon Bollesen, to.split off that
part of Lot 6, Block 3, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition, ly.ing south-
weste�ly of a line drawn parallel with and 5 feet northeasterly of, as
mea.su�ed at right angles to, the �st southwesterly line of said Lot 6,
the same being 250 Ri.ce Creek Terrace N.E.
� UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRpERSON BILLINGS DF�7C�,ARID Tf�
MOri'ION CARR�D UNANIl�iOUSLY.
PLANNING COMMISSION N�rING, NOV.ET�iflER 18, 1987 PAGE 11
�
6. REVIEW OF EAST RIVER ROAD RIQ3T-0E-V;TAY AC¢JISITIONS :
Mr. Robinson sta.ted that at the meeting, the Conun.i.ssioners had receiv� a
meacio addressed to the Planning eonm�ission and City Co�cil regarding the
impact of East River Road a�;�;sitions b�r Anoka County. He stated there
are two projects scheduled for con5truction.this spring: the Osborne/
F,a.st River Road intersection anc3 the Rice Creek Bridge project. Along
with that, there are agp�roximately 12 acquisitions which will result in
substandard situations.
Mr. Robinson stated there were three major issue.s associated with these
aaqui.sitions :
l. The disposition of houses to be aogui�ed.
There are three houses which are definitely being acquired. Of the
three, 45 - 75th Way has alrea.dy been aaquired. 'Itao othex houses,
12 Ta]madge Way and 21 Ta]�a.dge Way will be purclzased p�ior to the
end of the yeax. The house at 12 Talmadge Way was the most severely
impacted by the raa.d wideniaig and was intended for re�noval.
There was a proposal frc�n Mr. R+�bert Brick, �ecutive Director for
the Association for Retarded Citizens (ARC) of Anoka County, to use
both the 45 - 75th Wa_y house and the 21 Talmadge lr7ay house for a group
� hoane for mentally retarded adults . Therewould 1� f�r.' adults living in
each house. This was an allawable single family use in the City of
Fridley which does not require any k'ind of special use permit. Hawever,
the Coimty has said that in or�ler for ARC to acgui.re these houses,
it would be necessa�r for the City to act as their intermed.iary. The
City would aoquire these houses from the County, and then lease or_sell
them to ARC.
Mr. Robinson stated it seemed like an excellent o�portunity to create
sc¢ne housing for a needy organization; h�aever, having been in one house
and having �viewed the other house from the outside, it was apparent
that the quality o£ life woulld be sevexely reducedrdue to the proxz-
mity to the paveanent and the necessazy major retrofitting of the
garages. _
Mr. Rabinson stated it was Staff's reco�nendation that all three'houses
1� re�ved and that the City Cot;�cil should recommend to the County
that those houses should be removed.
2. The use of substandard vacant lots which will be crea.ted, ei.ther
through direct acquisition of an exi_sting vacant lot or the rem�val of
a house as mentioned in item #l.
Asstmning all three of the houses were removed, there would then be
three vacant substandard lots. In addition, the�e was a lot nav
� vacant at 20 Osborne Rd. whic:h will also be fairly severely isrg�acted.
Its width has gone froan 80 ft. to 61 ft. In addition, the lot area
has gone from 9,600 sq. ft. to 7,500 sq. ft.; 9,000 sq. ft. is requirecl.
��
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEi�ZBER 18 , 1987 PAGE 12
Dir. Robinson sta.ted the opti.ons for the County were to keeg those
lots and maintain tYiem or have an auction and sell them. They
cannot outright sell the lots to an interested party without an
auction unless it is to anottler form of government such as the city.
If those lots wexe to be auction�, the Ci.ty would recon¢rend the
lots be auctioned as unbuildabl.e lots and that the adjacent property
owners l� notified that s�re portion of those lots can be sold as
additional sideyard for adjacent ir�terested pro�erty c�mers. In
either case, it would be very beneficial for landscaping to be
pla.ced along those pro�erties in order to buffer th� neighborhood.
f�n the ever increasing txaffic on East River Road.
3. Structural and lot area varian.ces associated with the ar.c�isition.
Variances wi11 be created. on �ive separate praperties. The chart in
the staff report shaaed a lenc,�thy list of these variances.
Mr. Billings stated that for the mament he would like the Ca�mtiission to
tota.11y disregaxd the disposition of property aspect, whether it rema.i�n
vacant, is sold off, goes to ARC, �ahatever. They have to fi.rst dete'r?ni na
whether or not these particu.lar pieces of property are suitable for habi-
ta.tion by anyone. He did not want the subject of the proposal by ARC to
sway the Con4nission's decision. Even -though ARC was certainly a worth-
while organization, he felt they had to loak beyond that and decide whether
r it was good for the City of Fridley to eves�. have houses that close to the
roadway.
Nir. Barna stated the one th,ing he had to look at was that the City of Fridley
was already divided north and south by Highway 65 and Highway 47, which
makes it quite difficult for Police, Fire, and citizens to get from one
side of town to the other. The County, in the name of public safety and
access, was sl�aly but surely chipping away at East River Road, starting
at 694 and worki.ng north, and starting at the new Highway 610 and working
south. The people living west of East River Road. are getting totally
paranoid. Twenty years ago, it was proposed that East River Road.l� turned
into a parkway and be two lanes, a�t 35 m.p.h., and naw they are ending up
with the txa£fic co�ing off the Tiighway 610 iriterchange at 65 m.p.h. in
a 45 m.p.h. speed zone. The accident rate has bee.n increasing on East
Ri.ver Rc�ad, so the Cotu�.ty has decided they have tA wide� the road and put
in dividers . He sta.ted the whole Cit�r of Fridley is goi.ng to suf fer, not
just those people who live along F�a.st River Road. The City of Fridley is
going to end up with three strips of cleveloped g�o�e�ty separated by three
freeways with limited access for residents in the northwest corner to get
to the southeast o�rner. It was a miserable situa.tion now.
Mr. Robinson reviewed the propeities regarding the project, level of
aoc,�ii.sition, future disposition, and variances need�l.
P�ir. Robinson stated he would l.ike the P1anrLi.ng Commission to pass on
�.. three recommPazdations to the City Council:
�
r'�
PLANNING CQr�IISSION A!�ETING, NOVII��ER 18, 1987 PAGE 13
1. The dispasition of the houses which are being acquired.
2. The vacant lots
3. Whether the Con¢nission wanted. the. City to proceed with mass
variances on houses or lots that a.re being impacted .
Mr. Barna.ask� if these properties would be easier to handle if t,he
propexty was deeded to the HRA� His reason for su�gesti.ng it was because
the HRA has more leeway on what they can do with properties than either
the City or the County.
Mr. Rabinson sta.ted that was certainly a possibility, but what would the
HRA do with the propert�r? Snmebod�rr has to maintain the P���-Y, too.
Ms . Sherek stated she had a conc,ern about the Cit�r of Fridley a�u.i.ring
or holding that p�operty and then �ermitti.ng its use by anyone who might
be covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act. There axe speci.al protections
that cover vulnerable adults under the law. She would be vezy concernec7.,
not only with the qua.lity� of li�e, but also with the Vulnerable Adults Act.
If the City is holcling that �n�per�.y and permitted its use by people who
axe protected under the Vulnerable Adults Act by leasing it to ARC, there
could be a liabi]ity to the City..
r7r. Billings stated his major concern was not �aith who was going to live
in those houses in the future, but whether anybody should be living in
those houses. He agxeed. with P�.s. �hee�k.
Ms . Shexek -asked if ther.e was any �ssibilit�r of the City ac�qui.ring the
p�operty and then handling the auctioning of the property so that the
City could publish it as be�ng non-buildable property sui.table for addi-
tions to adjacent lots. If she c�aned the p�ope�ty that faces the cul-de-sac
opposite that propertp, it would be nice to have a bigger yard, but then
her property would go r.�ight back to East River Road. D7aybe the City could
provide the initial landsca.ping materials and installation with the agree-
ment that the citizens would then maintain the landscaping since it was
now on their prope�ty.
Mr. Robinson stat�d the most i�diate conc:erns were the ARC request and
the vacant lot at 20 Osborne Road c�ich would require disposition within
the next month or so. The vari.ances could wait and be handled in the
appropriate fashion.
Ms.
map
the.
ma.p.
tha
had
Sherek agreed that ARC.needed to be responded to. She sta.ted with the
now in hand that they did not have before this meeting, she would like
oppor.turu.ty to go and look at the addresses and co�are them wi�kh the
In just dxiving by the properties, it was her personal impression
t if the Count� was going to widen East River Road, all those houses
. ..
r--�, Ms . Shexek sta.ted.. she felt t�he Planning Commission should rec�nd to
the City Council that the Plann�ng Commission does not feel these houses
are appropriate for occupancy by anyone--ARC clients or anyone else. Then,
�
PIANNING COMMISSION A�!'Il�TG, NOVFI�ER 18, 1987 PAGE 14
the Co�nission should table thi� item for two weeks to give the Corrnnission
m�ers an opport�i.ty to look at the properties.
Mr. Rcabertson asked. the Comnissioners i£ they would like to make som� state-
irent about ARC and the Conan.ission's �ece�tivity to helping ARC find an
appmpriate location for ARC housing.
Mr. :Barna stated that of the three houses they have been�talking.about
that they feel need to be removed, any one of those houses in a different
location would be suitable for ARC housing.
Ms. 5herek sta.ted she thou.ght if the HIzA purchased. the pr��erties, it would
not ha.ve to go th�ough a piablic auction to dis,�ose of the pn�perties, so
they would not end up with the ��:roblem of peaple buying pro�erty they think
is buildable and finding out it is not.
r7r. Billings stated the thi.ng to keep in mind was they do not knaw wha.t
value the County will put on these lots to sell them to the I�2A. Secondly,
they do not knaw if any buyer would even come along and decide to buy
them. rnIl�.y would any adj oining p�o� aaner want to buy the p�operty in
order to increase the size of his/her lot and then have to pa.y higher taxes
and maintain it, when the City.will do it for nothing? It became a p'roblem
of how to dispose of the properties.
� Mr. Biliings sta.ted it was his �ersonal opinion that no variances should
be granted on the follawing lots:
12 Talmadge Way
21 Talmadge Way
45 - 75th Way
20 Osborne Way
31 Osborne Way
These lots should become vaeant, �nbuildable lots. He even questioned
whether the house on 101 - 76th Way should be left.
Ms. Sc.hreiner stated she agreed with N.[r. Bil]angs.
Mr. Ba.rna also ag�eed.. He st.a.ted. none of those five lots would be
bui.ldable lots, and the two houses that ARC was interested in would be
suitable s�tructurall�r if removed and placed in a different location.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Schreiner, to reconBnend to City Council
that the City Coimcil enco�age Anoka County to acx�ire the five follawing
parcels in their entirety; that adequat�e disposition be made to remove
all exi.sting structures; that none of the five lots be oonsidered
bui.ldable or habitable lots in the future;and that an adequate plan be
developed for use of these lots in the future:
�-., 12 Talmadge Way 20 Osborne Way
21 Talmadge Way 31 Osborne P7ay
45 - 75th Way
/�
PLANI�T.�TG CONIl+�lSSSION N.�ErING, NOV.E�ER 18, 1987 PAGE 15
UPOl�i A VOICE VCY]'E, ALL VOTIl�TG AYE, CHAZRPERSON BILLIl�TGS DECIARF� THE
MO'I'ION �ARR� UNANIl�ZOIJSLY.
7.' CANSIDERATION QF 1988 N.�rING LIATES:
MC7I'ION by Mr. Svanda, seconded by Mr. �iba, to approve the 1988 nleeting
dates with the d�letion of the meeting on Nov. 23, 1988.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VdI'ING AYE, Q�,IRPERSON BZLLINGS D�7Ci'�ARF.D Tj�E
P�lOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. RECEIVE OC�'OSER l, 1987, HCA7AN RESOURGES C:O1�MIISSION bZIlVU'I'ES:
MOTION by Ms. Sherel�., seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive th�e Oct. 1, 1987,
Htunan Rssources Conanission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VO'1'ING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLII�T6S D�7CLARID THE
MC7.�ION CARRIID iJI�NIMOtJSLY.
. . �� • ' • : a�• : • : � � - a�� � • � i� � � • - � r�
� MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by AZr. Svanda, to receive the Oct. 8, ]987,
Hous g& Redevelo��ent Authority minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, AT�L VOTING AYE, Q�IIRPERSON BILLINGS DEX'Z,ARF�D TI�
MC7I'ION CARRIED UNANIl�'lOUSLY.
10. RECEIVE OCI.'OSII2 14, 1987, QUALITY CC�MUSSION M:Il�IUTES:
M(Yt'ION by Nlr. Svanda, s�conded b� Mr. Saba, to receive the Oct. 14, 1987,
E�.vTi.r.onmental Quality Coa�¢tLi.ssion min�tes .
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIl�TG AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLINGS D�CLARED TI�
MOTION CARR�D UNANIMOUSLY.
11. RECEIVE NOVII�IDER 2, 1987, P�1RKS & RECREATION CCI�JMISSZON MIN[l'I�S:
MOTION by Ms. Sch�einer, seconded by Mr. Sherek, to receive the Nov. 2, 1987,
Parks & Recreation Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOT7NG AYE, CHAIRPERSON BII�LIl�TGS D�.Art�n THE
MOTION CP,RRIID UNANIMOiJSLY.
Ms. Schreiner stated that at a recent Parks & Recreata.on CoImti.ssion
meeting, they had talked about the problem the City has with the
ducks and gee�e. They are very concerned about the disease and also
^ the traffic haza�d. the ducks have becoa� on both Moore �ke and
Ha�cis Lake. This was a very sensitive issue because people love to
feed the ducks.
Ms. Sch�einer stated the Conuni.ssion had. discussed the possibility of
asking the Plaiu�.ing Ca�u.ssion to reco�rm�end to the City Council that
an amendment be ma.de to the city orclinance regarding the feeding of
ducks and geese.
��1
PLANNING CQMMISSION N�TING, NOVEMB�F�2 18 , 19 87
PAGE 16
Ms. Schrei.ner stated that the Pa:Cks Depa_rtment has p�chased �rro
artificial swan decoys which will be txied. E�idently, ducks are
frightened of swans and will not land on a lake where there is a swan.
These swans have been u�ed in p�ivate ponds and at golf courses where
ducks have bec�me a problem. Of course,.they wonder how long it will
be before the ducks become used to the artificial swans or the problem
of people taking the swans out of the lake.
Niz'. Barna stated he d.id not think this was a problem the City should
t�ey to solve. If there was a�ea.l problem, they should conta.ct the
Uni.versity of Minnesota. . or the Deparkment of Natural Resources . He
stated that there are two new falcons residing in North Park and a
Bald Eagle �esiding along the ri.ver. The Bald Eagl�e has greatly reduced
the goose and duck population along the river.
� �. �1a�:�,iu���,w
MO'I'ION by Ms . Sah.reiner, s�c�nded. by Ms . Sherek, to adjourn t1� meeting.
Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, Qiair�xson Billinc�s declared the
November 18, 1987, Pla�g Cc¢ra�nission meeti.ng adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
� Respectfu].ly s ' tt.ed,
��
Lynne Saba
Recording Secretary
�
�;
� �
�
��' �?�1'�,G�FF2t�_L.t��S1� j e`�_�__ ( �c.� �',�'(L I" �—GC,%
.,,�1 _ . _ �/i �_�i, a
,L��o�, — /����.�-'�
�� �� �
/ ------rl - r� �`
¢fCu �h o�JS
�SJr `
�o�,..�---._,�%
�3� p �v� N �
/� 9 ���i�..�a� �ic P �
0 °1 � a. r��r�,n � _a_ ��__ -
3�2�—��z� /`%�
l� 3 3 �r � �,� . .�I� �
__ �y- `-�'— _ .. — �'-
,-- <��,.1.�. ��r� /l�' � %��i��...d �,,�.._��e _ � �
,� � ���,_ -- . �� N� �� �c� � - � -
--,�— --- -- -- —
�/� � � �� .���,��s � � � �� � -_ � , ��;� �
. ,
� c� �����
�� � � �
� xa �e., Poc� vi� 2� ��, ,�e�. �s2,�' �v,e.. �. St-. L.ou.i s P��' k
/� �-� � �.�,e.- /��_c.o-1-�. � o o � � " /_��-,(/
� /
d/� � �°� � � �G�.�l. ��
�m �s T/LL ��
�� ,
TR �7 ����
� �/.�- rJ u w .S �< i
Y�,� � r�,��.� ��..�
c.�..�-c�e
�1 �
�9 9 s �, � K , �� � / s°7 ,v �-
���c2y�-y �� �2�v�,es ��� ��s���
o� (3� �-- < < c� � l� ��
59�i3 ���� +� �
�i�'% �� P ��c. �' �� ��