PL 08/30/1989 - 7100K'
P'LANNIN� COffiyIISSION �IEETIRG AGENDA
ilED1qESDAY-�, ,AIIf�IIST 30, 1989
7:30 P.1�.
Barbara Dacy
Planning Coordinator
A
F
City of Fridley
A G E N D A
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30, 1989 7:30 P.M.
LOCATION: FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER, 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.
CALL TO ORDER•
ROLL CALL:
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: August 16, 1989
CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED LANDSCAPING REOUIREMENTS ...... 1- 1H
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE - ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES CHAPTER. 2- 2B
RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES
OF JULY 10 . 1989 (Tabled 8/ 16/89) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3G
DUMPSTER ORDINANCE UPDATE , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 4 _ 4P
ADJOURN•
4 CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989
----------------------------------------------------------------
CALL TO ORDER•
Vice-Chairperson Kondrick called the Auqust 16, 1989, Planning
Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL•
Members Present: Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba, Sue Sherek, Alex
Barna, Paul Dahlberg
Members Absent: Donald Betzold
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Nancy Jorgenson, Councilmember at Large
James & Beverly Wolfe, 1265 Hathaway Lane
Neal Thompson, 1264 Hathaway Lane
Karen Allard, 615-54th Avenue NE
Laurie Wolfe, 960 Hathaway Lane
Orville & Jeannine Sachs, 1281 Hathaway Lane
Shelley Garber, 5800 Tennison Drive
John & Juli Evers, 5801 Tennison Drive
Helen Steinke, 1071 Hathaway Lane
Cherle Pederson, �.030 Hathaway Lane
Mary Eggert, 1090 Hathaway Lane
David Matlock, 1080 Hathaway Lane
Douglas & Nancy Strong, 5721 Regis Drive
Carol Eppel, 5721 Regis Drive
. Jim & Juel Bagaason, 1191 Hathaway Lane
Norman & Alice Abel, 1050 Hathaway Lane
Janice Driggins, 1280 Hathaway Lane
John & Michelle Ward, 5691 Regis Drive
James B. Legatt, 5701 Regis Drive
Keith Poppenhagen, 7510 Hwy. 65 ;
Bohaban Mehrychenk, 2704 W. River Pkwy., Mpls.
Father John Magramm, 1201 Hathaway Lane
Sister Vera Saba, 1201 Hathaway Lane
Mother Victoria, 1201 Hathaway Lane
Bernice Playle, 4509 Brookdale Drive,
Brooklyn Park, I�IId
APPROVAL OF JULY 12, 1989, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to approve the July
12, 1989, Planning Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 2
1. TABLED• CONSZDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #89-08. BY
KEITH' S AtJTO BODY : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Per Section 205.17.O1.C.9 (0 of the Fridley City Code, to allow
a repair garage on that part of the East 46 acres of the West
1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, T-30, R-24, Anoka
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a
point on the West line of said East 46 acre tract distant
623.5 feet South of the Northwest corner of said East 46 acre
tract 161.63 feet; thence East parallel with the North line
of said East 46 acre tract 538.98 feet, more or less, to the
Westerly right-of-way line of State Highway No. 65; thence
Northerly along said Westerly right-of-way line 161.63 feet,
more or less, to the intersection of a line drawn from the
point of beginninq and parallel with the North line of said
East 46 acre tract; thence West parallel with the said North
line 538.73 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning, the
same being 7570 Highway 65 N.E.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to open discussion on
special use permit #89-08.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND DISCUSSION OPENED AT
7:33 P.M.
Ms. Dacy reported this request was last considered on May 17, 1989.
The site is located West of and adjacent to Highway 65, south of
Osborne Road. The property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial. To the
north and west is M-1 zoninq. Lampert Lumber is located
immediately to the north, to the south is R-4 (mobile home park),
and to the east across Highway 65 is a mixture of C-3, Commercial,
and M-1 zoning. On the property are two buildings constructed in
the early 1960's. The petitioner, Keith's Auto Body, is currently
occupying the western most building on the lot.
As was discussed at the meeting of May 17, the site and buildings
need improvements to comply with M-1, Light Industrial standards.
The site would have to be paved between the two buildings,
installation of required curb around paved areas, and creation of
a landscaped area in front of the property to meet the 20 foot
setback. The owner, Mr. Michael Thompson, talked about the
property and title problems with the site. The Commission
discussed establishing a timetable for completion of improvements.
Staff recommended nine stipulations and a timetable. The
commission adjusted some of the completion dates. The nine
stipulations remain the same but some of the dates were changed in
#1, 2, 3 and 4 to Auqust 1, 1991. The most important stipulation
the Planning Commission wanted completed was the installation of
sewer. The site is now served by a septic system. The item was
tabled so the building and fire inspectors could inspect the
buildings and determine whether or not they met code and/or whether
or not they would be considered condemnable property. The
R
t
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 3
inspection confirmed that the buildings are in good structural
condition. There are some things the owners need to comply with,
but not enough to justify condemnation. Staff has talked with Mr.
Thompson, and he would be agreeable to go along with the timetable
as recommended. Staff recommends approval of this special use
permit with stipulations, as recommended by the Planninq
Commission.
Mr. Saba felt it was difficult to take action without the owner
present. However, the owner aqreed to the stipulations and has
indicated his willingness to comply with the recommendations.
Mr. Dahlberg asked if the issues regardinq ownership had been
resolved.
Ms. Dacy stated these issues were not resolved, but the owner is
willing to continue with the process and to do what the Planning
Commission has recommended and agrees with the dates.
Ms. Sherek felt that in stipulation #3 the dates should be 60 to
90 days rather than August 1, 1991, to haul away the junk. She
felt that 1991 was too long and felt the abandoned property on the
site should be hauled away. She recommended a date of October 15
or November 1, 1989. The last sentence should read "This work
shall be completed no later than November 1, 1989.'�
Mr. Kondrick indicated the owner is not present to address this
change of date.
Ms. Sherek indicated that the owner could address this when it is
before the City Council.
Ms. Sherek stated that the date should be changed in stipulation
#8 to November 15, 1989, at which time, staff can make sure the
work has been done.
Mr. Poppenhagen stated that some of the materials the commission
considered "junk" he considered valuable to his business.
Mr. Barna stated these materials should be stored inside or behind
a fence.
Ms. Sherek stated that materials cannot be visible over the fence.
Ms. Dacy stated this was covered in stipulation #3.
Mr. Barna questioned #7 regarding the letter of credit. Should
this be provided at this time because the holdinq tank must be
installed by January l, 1990.
Ms . Dacy stated the intent is not to require until ownership is
established. Prior to extension of the City sewer system, staff
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 4
would require it at that time but not later than January 1, 1991.
OTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Dahlberg to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECL�FiRED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:45 P.M.
Mr. Saba had no problem with the special use permit as long as
there is compliance with the stipulations.
Mr. Barna agreed, as long as there is no hazard to others.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to recommend to City
Council approval of special use permit, SP #89-08, with the
following stipulations:
1. All parking areas shall be paved and line with six inch
poured concrete curb by August 1, 1991. A five foot
setback on the north and south property lines shall also
be created in compliance with the setback requirements.
2. A 20-foot planting island shall be created along the
front property line in compliance with the parking
setback requirement by August 1, 1991. The island shall
be curbed and planted as proposed in the proposed
landscape plan included in the packet.
3. All piles of debris, car parts, pallets and other
materials shall be removed from the south side of the
buildings and either stored within the building, removed
off the site or contained within a six foot opaque fenced
area at the southwest corner of the site. All noxious
weeds shall be removed and the lawn area maintained in
a neat fashion. All semi truck trailers which are
inoperable or used for storage shall be removed from the
site. This work shall be completed no later than
November l, 1989.
4. The building shall be improved to meet the Uniform
Building Code requirements by January 1, 1991.
, 5. The property shall be serviced with sanitary sewer by
January 1, 1991. In the interim, the property owner
shall remove the septic system and install a holding tank
by January 1, 1990. The tank shall be pumped on a
regular basis and a copy of the pnmping contract shall
be submitted to the City.
6. A letter of credit in the amount of the outside site
improvements including poured concrete curbinq and
landscaping shall be submitted prior to initiation of
1
'' PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 5
construction.
7. A letter of credit in the amount of the construction cost
for connection to the sanitary sewer shall be submitted
prior to construction.
8. The special use permit shall be reviewed by City staff
on November 15, 1989, and thereafter on an annual basis.
9. There shall be no sales of automobiles on the property.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Kondrick indicated this item would be brought before the City
Council at their meeting of August 28.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP
�89-11. BY ORTHODOX CHURCH OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST
INC.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Per Section 205.07.O1.C.2 of the Fridley City Code, to allow
churches in a residential district, on Lot 3, Block 1,
Parkview Oaks First Addition, the same being 1201 Hathaway
Lane N.E.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Saba, to waive the reading of
the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN
AT 7:50 P.M.
Ms. McPherson reported the property is located on Lot 3, Block 1,
at the intersection of Hathaway Lane and Regis Drive in an R-1,
Single Family district. A church is allowed in an R-1 district
with a special use permit. The proposed site plan shows the
existing house with alterations for an addition to the rear and a
change in design at the front entrance. The code states that there
are some building lot standards that need to be met by a church in
an R-1 district. The lot area must be 15,000 sq. ft. This lot has
approximately 9,900 sq. feet. The petitioner has applied for a
variance for the lot area requirement. In addition, they must have
a 15 foot setback on the side; again a variance has been requested
to reduce the setback to 10 feet.
The petitioner is proposing some chanqes to the existing house,
including an 18 ft. X 18 ft. addition to the house over an open
deck to allow room for a worship area. Also, an addition over the
front walk as shown on the site elevation is beinq proposed by the
petitioner at this time.
Regarding the lot coverage requirements, staff has looked at the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 6
other churches that currently exist in the city. Most of the
churches in the city far exceed the minimum lot area requirement.
Many of the churches reside in an R-1 district; however, most are
located at the edge of an R-1 district and near a major
intersection.
Ms. Dacy reported that the City Attorney is researching the ability
of municipalities to regulate churches. Given this application is
different from previous applications in that it is in a single
family home and the church is small in size, the City Attorney
wishes to review the minutes and make a written recommendation
after his research and submit his recommendation at the first
meeting of the Planning Commission in September. He would prefer
that the Planning Commission conduct the public hearing so he is
aware of what the other concerns are from other owners.
Mr. Kondrick asked if there were legal complications that he is
looking to unravel before making a recommendation.
Ms. Dacy stated this is correct.
Father Magramm stated the Orthodox Church of the Resurrection of
Christ is a traditional Christian church with a continuous history
reaching back to the Apostles. It is considered here in the United
States to be the fourth major religion after the Protestants,
Catholics, and Jews. There are 13 such Orthodox churches in the
Twin City area. There was an article in the St. Paul Pioneer Press
and Dispatch in the religious section last Saturday about some of
the Orthodox churches and his church was mentioned also. Father
Magramm stated that they want to use the house in Fridley is as a
monastic house, the aim of which is a quiet life. He stated that
they have been for the past 8 years at the other end of Hathaway
Lane. They have enjoyed the quiet of the neiqhborhood and that
particular street. He stated he anticipates some church members
would come to the house, altogether about 12 people, 8 or 9 besides
themselves. These people would join as they have been doing. They
have had the property at 1201 Hathaway Lane since January; about
8 months. There would be no more traffic and no more parked cars
in the future than have been noticed up to now. The church also
uses the worship space at 601 15th Avenue in Dinkytown. Any lar�ge
qatherings besides the regular Sunday services would take place in
that facility. The church has asked for this permit so that it
would not violate any legal code in converting a room in the house
into a chapel and so that anything that they did would be done with
the neighborhood's knowledge. They passed around, hand delivered,
to the neighborhood, or at least to those who were on the list that
were receiving notification of the permit, a pamphlet about the
church and a sheet to acquaint neighborhood with who they are and
what are projects are going to be and mainly to stress that they
are not asking to use the facility to build a biq church, a new
church, but to use it as a monastic house chapel. The sisters that
have been living there are looking for a quiet life and they would
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 7
be the first to protest any type of activity that would be
disruptive either to the neighborhood or to them. He did have the
sheet that was hand delivered to the neiqhborhood. There are
others at the meetinq to whom they did not deliver this because
they kept this to the list that they had. He is open to discussion
and willing to answer any questions that anyone might have. He
wants to stress that the purpose of the monastic house chapel is
a quiet life, the ability to have prayer meetings for the monastic
community rather than a church that would have soc3al activities.
Ms. Laurie Wolfe asked how many members are in the church right
now.
Father Magramm stated about 20 members in the church in Dinkytown.
The house will be used as a monastic house chapel for those at one
end of the Hathaway Lane.
Ms. Wolfe stated it appears the Code says a church and Father is
saying this is a monastic house. Which is it?
Father Magramm stated he thought the City had only one word which
is a church. The church described it as a monastic house chapel.
Ms. Janice Driggins asked, if it were a monastic house and not a
church, is a special use permit necessary.
Mr. Kondrick replied that this apparently is a question for which
the Planning Commission needs to wait for an opinion from the City
Attorney.
Ms. Driggins stated that, to her understanding, the property has
a garage built over a water main. As a realtor, she had problems
several years ago on a closing and could not get a title because
of the water main issue. In view of that, would that be taken into
consideration for granting permits for building onto that house.
Mr. Kondrick
information to
and will sure
Kondrick thank
check on it.
stated he thought it would, but this is new
the commission. This information will be considered
Ly have an impact on the final dis`cussion. Mr.
:d her for that information, and directed staff to
Mr. Douglas Stronq presented a petition siqned by 45 people in the
neighborhood. The petition stated that this property is a
relatively small home in a quiet residential neighborhood. The
property is a single lot, with no room for expansion. There is no
off-street parking. The location of the property at the end of a
T intersection and at the base of a steep hill causes tremendous
on-street parking problems. Mr. Strong stated that the following
property owners hereby wished to register their extreme opposition
to the granting of the special use permit by the City of Fridley
for this property. The petition is to safeguard the neighborhood
�
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 8
because a variance or a special use permit is granted to the legal
description and not to the individuals living in the house. The
people living in the house may be totally above board, but once
they move out, the special use permit carries over to the new
owners. One of the neighbors' concerns is that once it is done,
it is very difficult to undo. As the Commission can see by the
site plan, the lot is very small. Another chart that Mr. Strong
was very interested in seeinq was the churches in Fridley that have
been looked at so far. The square footage of the lots is larger
than this lot. Mr. Strong asked the Planning Commission if they
had driven by the site. If so, members are aware of the steep
hill. He has checked with the Engineering Department, and this
hill has over a 9� grade which makes it an undesirable hill for
parking, especially in the winter. Mr. Strong has lived in his
current residence for 15 years and sees that the Public Works
Department has to hit that hill first thing when the first snowfall
hits, so that the people that do live up there can get up the
street. It is not conducive to parking. The neighbors are hearing
that there will not be parking problems here. An addition to the
building is being done to accommodate a volume of people. While
the church is saying 12 people maximum, there is nd place in the
special use permit that the Commission can set a maximum number of
people that can be there. The fire code may enter into this and
require additional exits, and sprinkling of the building may enter
into it. Also, to leave this structure looking like a single
family residence will not happen with the proposed changes to the
structure, particularly to the front of the house. That will make
it look like a church. There is a realtor here tonight, and that
person would know better than Mr. Strong what happens to the values
of the homes next to a church. It is a church. Whether you want
to call is a fancy name or not, if it's a special use permit for
a church, it's a church. Mr. Strong asked if he was wrong.
Mr. Barna stated that in that instance, yes. Yf a special use
permit is issued forever for that property, but a special use
permit can be limited to the occupant. A variance is forever, that
goes with the description of the property. But a special use
permit is reviewable or renewable. If this church were to move out
of the residence as owners, the special use permit can be limited
to their residence or their use of the property.
Mr. Rondrick stated that, as with many special use permits, there
are oftentimes certain stipulations that the petitioner must comply
with. Time limits are given, and even no time limits. If those
stipulations are violated, the permit can be revoked. So those
things are in the background here too. He suggested a motion to
accept the petition and the names as part of the minutes so the
City Council and City Attorney can review.
MOTION by Mr. Barna� seconded by Ms. Sherek, to accept the petition
� as part of the minutes.
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 9
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Strong stated with regard to the water main and construction
to the building, his experience with Fridley's water system in the
neighbozhood is that there have been a number of urater main breaks .
Assuming that they are cast iron mains, these mains are conducive
to water main breaks. This particular main is a 6-inch water main
that runs all the way through in a loop system. With construction
of the addition near the main, vibration and what not in that area
could lead to a leak. With a garaqe over the water main, there is
potential for severe problems there. Mr. Strong knew the
individuals who sold this house, and knew they had great
difficulties once they discovered the water main was there. They
did go through the City. They did get a permit. It was issued.
Nobody caught this until almost 20 years later when they went to
sell it and it was surveyed. There was an error along the way, but
Mr. Strong didn't think they need to add to the problem allowing
additional construction on there that could affect that. Another
concern is that even if there will not be additional parking, he
knows there will -be at times additional parking. With the T
intersection today, if anyone in the neighborhood has guests cars
parked on either side of the street, it become difficult to
maneuver when the streets are at all slippery. Unfortunately,
people also have a tendency to come down Regis Drive which is also
at a grade, not at 9�, something less than that, but they have a
tendency to come quickly down there. The alternate is to make a
sharp turn or go right up the driveway because it is an extension
of the street. It becomes a hazardous situation. Mr. Strong has
barely missed cars because the view is blocked. There are some
hazards there and the neighbors don't need to add to this by adding
the potential for additional parking. He knows the intention is
good and there is nothing the neighborhood has against the
residence being used as it is today, as a single family residence.
He believes they are good neighbors. It is the use of the property
that the neighbors had a problem with. It is not designed for a
church. A neighborhood is quiet and we would like to keep it that
way. Mr. Strong stated his daughter commented that she could hear
church music on Sunday morning, which may be desireable some of the
time, but not when you wish to sleep.
Mr. Kondrick asked, suppose the number of cars were limited and
that church services would not be held except with Father and a few
others, how would Mr. Strong feel about tYtat?
Mr. Strong stated he would still have a question of the use of the
property as a church and there is still the factor of values of
houses when that takes place. A neighbor is in the process of
putting his house up for sale due to a move out of etate. It does
have an affect on the property values. Another thing that the
neighbors are missing is whether the property is now on the tax
roles.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 10
Ms. Dacy stated the church has applied for a tax exempt status.
Taxes for 1989 are paid, but next year would be tax exempt.
Mr. Strong stated that the neighborhood would be losing the tax
base of that property. Maybe if the church special use permit is
not granted, it might not be that desireable. The taxes are based
on mill rate with the school. These residents will not be having
children in the schools and this structure will not add tax dollars
to support that. Each of these that does apply and does get it
means that the rest of us pick up that share. Another concern is
that a neighbor who is close to this property is also considering
selling their house if the permit is granted. It is a quiet
residential neighborhood and it is not desiqned for a church. A
home for the Father and Sisters is no problem. They are good
neighbors from a residential standpoint. But as a church, the lot
is not conducive, the traffic pattern is not conducive for that
situation. It is be very easy to say there won't be any problems
now, but no one has any experience with that right now and what is
going to happen. The church has a substantial increase proposed
in size which to Mr. Strong would generate additional people, or
at least the ability to accommodate additional people. It may not
be there now, but with the addition the possibility is there. Once
it is done, it's done. You can review special use permits, but Mr.
Strong would be very surprised that once it is granted, unless it
was abused greatly, it would not be lifted. Abuse would be very
difficult to show. The people on that petition are looking to the
Planning Commission to review and to not grant the special use
permit at this time.
Mr. Kondrick asked, if there were no more than 3
and he realizes that could mean 20 people, and
parking, how would Mr. Strong feels about it.
or 4 cars there,
with off street
Mr. Strong stated he would be opposed to any use as a church even
if the cars are limited and modification to make the house look
like a church was denied.
Mr. Barna presented a hypothetical situation of a salesperson for
a home-based company who held regular meetings at their home which
could include as many as 20 to 25 people each week, would Mr.
Strong still object? Such use does not require a special use
permit.
Mr. Strong stated he would, if traffic becomes a problem, the City
would hear about it from the residents. Regardless of whether you
hear from the citizens or not, the neighbors are looking at a
safety factor. �
Mr. Barna stated the Planning Commission can put restrictions on
with a special use permit, but a home-based business cannot be
restricted. There are restrictions on employing others in your
` PLANNING CO1�Il�IISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 11
home. The special use permit gives the City a handle on it so
ataff can restrict the parking on the site, and can even put on
architectural restrictions which cannot be done on a normal home.
That is the idea of a special use permit being required for a
church. A question is that the City Attorney is not sure if staff
can legally put on those restrictions. The idea is to qet as much
as you can and stay within the law. Mr. Barna agreed that he would
not want to see a big "church" structure put on that lot, but
whether or not the Commission can restrict a monastic chapel or
chapel uses is the question. The Jehovah�s Witness hold Bible
meetings and/or prayer meetings in their homes and there are no
restriction on that.
Several persons stated that in that situation the persons are still
paying taxes on their property and maintain a main church building.
Mr. Strong stated that the tax exempt status is still a question.
A public hearing is to get public opinion which is what the
neighbors are here to do. The Planning Commission also needs to
look at the best use of the property. The decision must be made
whether this is a legitimate use of the property.
Mr. Kondrick stated that residents' input is valued. This exchange
brings out ideas and viewpoints that are very important.
Father Magramm stated he had two comments. He is quite a distance
from Mr. Strong's house. There is another church in the area that
could make noise. Also, the tax exemption has nothing to do with
the permit.
Ms. Shelley Garber thought it would be lovely to have these people
as neighbors. The parking would not affect her because she
doesn't live on the street. The tax exemption is a problem. She
wanted to know what a monastic house is. Has the house where the
Brothers live been changed into a church? Who lives at the house?
Father Magramm stated they pay taxes at the other house. The
Brothers have a house chapel there which is small.
Mr. Kondrick asked Father Magramm to provide a definition of a
monastic house.
Father Magramm states a monastic house is a place where monks or
nuns live, similar to a rectory or convent.
Ms. Garber asked if any were employed.
Father Magramm stated yes. The sisters do volunteer work at
nursing homes and hospitals.
Ms . Garber stated that other churches in the community are also tax
exempt and have services for the community which benefit the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 12
community. She wanted to know from the sisters, if they were there
and did have a monastic house, how would they contribute to the
neighborhood?
Mother Victoria stated that she had not yet moved permanently to
the house on Hathaway Lane, but hoped to do so soon. For 10 years
she has been living in a similar monastic house in California. The
main purpose is the monastic life. The first purpose is a prayer
life. They contribute to the community in non-specific ways. They
are not dedicated to one type of work. They have a house full of
people that live monastic life and do what comes. In California,
it turned out to be a lot of work with old people, helping with
transportation, filling out Social Security forms, living with them
for a few weeks while recuperating, this is work that developed
with the needs as seen. It is not as if the Sisters have a
charter.
Ms. Garber asked if Mother Victoria had had a chance to evaluate
the needs here.
Mother Victoria stated she had personally been here a very short
time and had met very few neighbors. So that is something she had
not yet had time to do, but hopes to do so in the future.
Mr. David Matlock stated he had recently moved into the
neighborhood and has a 4-year-old son. One of the things that
attracted him to neighborhood was that it was very quiet and
secluded. He had heard the comments about the off street parking,
and agreed that the driveway could not hold more than 4-6 cars.
That T intersection is very nasty which he found out last winter
when he almost broadsided a car cominq down the hill on glare ice.
Mr. Matlock was afraid that if there was a lot of off street
parking with cars on both sides of the street, it would make the
lanes very narrow. Because there are so many kids, any increase
in traffic could be hazardous to the kids. In addition, it was
stated that there is a chapel in the house at 991 Hathaway Lane and
asked if that needed a variance. Was that house modified? If not,
why modify the house at 1201 Hathaway Lane?
Father Magramm stated they use a room in the basement, and they did
not modify the house. They want to modify the house for their
church furniture and icons. The front would be a type of
extension.
Mr. Matlock stated it does change the look of the house
dramatically from a single family dwelling to an obvious church.
If the Brothers and Sisters are going to lead a monastic life, why
is this necessary? ,
Father Magramm stated they want to have a certain look.
Mr. Matlock asked if they had plans to modify the home at 991
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 13
Hathaway Lane.
Father Magramm stated they did not have plans to modify the other
home.
Mr. Matlock stated he did not have a problem with these people as
neighbors. He had noticed an increase in traffic since last
summer. He had had people stop and ask directions to the church.
He wanted to voice his opposition to this and felt the change will
stand out dramatically. This is a single family home and, if the
church wants a place for nuns to live, Mr. Matlock did not see why
it needed to be modified for use as a church.
Ms. Wolfe asked if they would be notified of the issues that the
City Attorney is considering, such as whether it is a church or
monastic home.
Mr. Kondrick stated this will come back to the Planning Commission
again before going to the City Council. The Planning Commission
will have another meeting and make a recommendation prior to this
item going to the City Council.
Mr. James Wolfe stated there seems to be a contradiction between
monastic residence and applying for a tax exempt church status.
Which is it going to be?
Mr. Kondrick stated that is crux of the problem, and that is the
area that the City Attorney is researching.
Mr. Wolfe stated he was not sure the parking will be the way it now
is. The hill is very dangerous at that intersection in the winter.
There is no stop sign. Drivers have to get a little run to get up
hill and slow down for that corner because it is blind, and take
off again. There are a lot of cars in the winter that go past that
hill probably faster than they should trying to get home. He is
not convinced that the traffic will stay the way it is. He does
not care for the change architecturally in the front of the house.
Ms. Juli Evers stated the church's backyard meets her backyard.
When she first heard about the request, she was quite concerned.
She has four young children and was concerned about what the church
might be telling the children. Ms. Evers was relieved to know it
was a Christian organization. She moved into an established
neighborhood so she would know her neighbors. She was opposed to
a church. They were invited to an open house and were the only
ones who went. They were there 1 1/2 hours and had their questions
answered. If she could pick neighbors, they would be at the top
of the list. They are quiet, she has not noticed that they have
been there for 8 months. As far as the tax purposes, she thought
that if the neighbors are concerned about taxes, they should look
also at larger churches that are not being taxed. This is minute
in comparison. She belongs to a church and appreciates the status
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 14
they have, and was sure these people would also. Parking, if it
could be restricted to only so many in the driveway and no street
parking, it would be okay. However, she has garage sales on her
street on Fridays that line the street which also makes traffic
patterns which can be just as often as church services. Ms. Evers
has no objection to them being there. She was not sure that she
would aqree to the structural change in front. She had done a
complete turn around since she was notified.
Ms. Driggins stated she would like to comment on the traffic. She
asked if the members would be physically looking at that area to
see what the neighbors are looking at.
The Commission members stated they had driven past the
intersection.
Ms. Driggins stated she has been a victim of being blind sided and
near missed many other times in that area. She asked to have
square footage of the lot clarified.
Ms. McPherson stated the lot is 9,600 square feet.
Ms. Driggins stated that the minimum for a church is 15,000 square
feet so without any furthe� additions on that property it is
already overbuilt, so to speak, for the land.
Mr. Dahlberg stated not as a residential property, but as a church
yes . •
Ms. Driggins asked then if the addition has any impact.
Mr. Dahlberg stated not with respect to building setbacks and lot
coverage.
Mr. Kondrick stated the setbacks from the side may need to be
changed to allow a special use, but the Commission is not
considering that at this time.
Ms. Carol Eppel stated she had no problem with the house as it
presently is. She thought the size of the property and taxes were
an area the neighbors should deal with. She thought the neighbors
are fortunate that this has comes up. Any neighbor could paint
their house any color they want and she couldn't complain. She
stated that, since this is a small residential area, she would not
like front of house changed to look like a church. She did not
move to the area to live next to a church. She did not oppose the
activities that are there now. She wanted to know, if a special
use permit was qranted and activities became a problem, could
restrictions be put.on? If the permit was granted and if something
came up, do the neighbors no longer have any rights to say this is
something that is an disruption to the neighborhood?
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 15
Mr. Rondrick stated a special use permit can have as many
stipulations as necessary to protect the welfare and look of the
community including restricting the number of cars, etc. There are
certain setbacks that would need to be changed with a variance.
If they did not comply, the City has the right to ask them to stop.
If they didn't do that, the City can deny the special use permit
so they can no longer function in that way.
Ms. Garber asked if a monastic house is tax exempt.
Father Magramm stated the house has been paying taxes all along.
Mr. Matlock asked, if on street parking was restricted, can the
church then pave the front yard for off street parking.
Mr. Kondrick stated no.
Mr. Barna stated that the only way the church could possibly gain
additional parking on this lot would be to move the garage to the
rear of the lot, to within code, but if there is a pipe there,
there could be problems at that point. The church is pretty well
limited to what they have unless they were going to move the
garage. This would be very expensive to increase the parking.
Mr. Saba stated that one thing that could be done is to put up no
parking signs on either side of the street.
Ms . Sherek stated this would af fect everyone' s parking in the area .
Mr. Saba stated, if that is a hazard, it may be something that
should be looked at anyway.
Mr. James Legatt asked, if the City restricts the parking and
parking was a problem there, the church would move the parking and
then it would be a concern of his. It would also be a problem that
people do come down Regis Drive fast. If there was a restriction
on parking, then it would probably affect all of the neighbors on
Regis Drive.
Mr. Kondrick stated this is just discussion of ideas and has not
happened yet. These expressions will be forwarded on to those tho
make the final decisions later on.
Ms. Alice Ebel stated she understood that the larger gatherings are
held in Dinkytown, except on Sundays. Would the meetings then be
held in the house? How many would be attending?
Father Maqramm stated that if he stated "except", he�did not mean
to. The members meet in Dinkytown on Sundays at 601 13th Avenue
which is a large complex ,owned by the University Lutheran Church
of Hope. The church has used this facility for the main church
gatherings. He stressed that the major gatherings would not be at
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989
the residence.
Ms. Ebel asked who would using the monastic chapel?
PAGE 16
Father Magramm stated there are 20 in the conqreqation.
Unfortunately, not everyone comes to church every Sunday. Take
that number minus four, and the number that attend reqular services
in Dinkytown, that means there would be about 8 people that might
come.
Ms. Cherle Pedersen asked if the Brothers already had a home on
the end of Hathaway with a chapel, and now you need another home
with another chapel. Why did the church need two homes for one
chapel for eight people?
Father Magramm stated the chapel at the other end of Hathaway is
in the basement, is very small and is used for storage. The church
wants a chapel at 1201 Hathaway so it can be on the upper level.
Ms. Pedersen asked, if you are going to have a chapel at 1201
Hathaway, then would you go back to paying taxes for the other
home.
Father Magramm stated they have always paid taxes on the first home
and will continue to do so.
Ms. Pedersen asked if they then will move conqregation to this
facility.
Father Magramm stated they are not moving the congregation to this
home. They are moving pictures, icons, and the Sisters into 1201
Hathaway. The difference is to move a chapel to a living room
space. The house at 1201 Hathaway is larger home than the other
one. The other chapel is a small room in the basement.
Ms. Pedersen asked why physically change that house for only eight
people.
Father Magramm stated that was the purpose of the open house. They
wanted the neighbors to come so they could answer questions.
Anyone is welcome to come at any time to see what they are doing.
The chapel is very small there. It is as living room space and
they want to expand it to have enough room to put the painted
panels that they have on the walls.
Ms. Pedersen stated that churches are set up to increase
congregations. When this is done to a home fot increasing
congreqations, it is not conducive to the neiqhborhood quietness.
�
Father Magramm stated he understood that concern. He again
stressed that any large qatherings that are held for dinners,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 17
Christmas, etc., would all be held in Dinkytown. If the neighbors
had not seen problems up until now, they wouldn't in the future.
Father knows that churches want to qrow, but this church is not
planning to grow at Hathaway Lane. Any qrowth will be at
Dinkytown. Hathaway Lane is where they want to have a prayer life
and a chapel in the home. The Sisters will live in one home and
the Brothers in the other.
Ms. Pedersen stated she nearly had an accident at that intersection
and with additional traffic and cars parked at that part there
would no way to stop accidents on that corner. Residents know to
watch that corner, but others are not going to know and that will
create a problem.
Ms. Jule Bagaason stated she lived next door to the parcel. They
have lived there 1 1/2 years and chose the home for privacy. They
had lived in apartments and duplexes and bought the house for
privacy. They do not have privacy with additional people and an
addition that will look directly into the backyard. There is a
huge cross nailed on front of the house which has caused some
problems with traffic on that corner from those who drive by, stop
and back up to take another look. Changing the look of the home
will only complicate the problems at that intersection. Ms.
Bagaason feels as if she is losing what they have worked for and
would want to be compensated.
Ms. Eppel stated they were not given notice of this request. When
something like this comes up, she would like the City to notify the
neighbors of the change. She would like to recommend that all
those who have signed the petition be notified on further
happenings.
Mr. Matlock asked if the addition they were planning over the
existing deck, to enclose deck for chapel, why not put a chapel on
back of other house.
Father Magramm stated that the structure at 1201 Hathaway is the
structure that they want for a bit more room and because they have
chosen not to do so on that property. Expansion at that property
would not be feasible.
Councilmember Jorgenson asked if the property that you are planning
to modify would be used for weddings, funerals, baptisms?
Father Magramm stated the addition is to expand 18 feet. In the
past four years, they have had one wedding and one funeral. The
funeral was held in the funeral home and the weddinq was held in
Dinkytown. �
Councilmember Jorgenson asked if they planned to have baptisms,
weddings, etc., at this location.
0
� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 18
Father Magramm stated they may have a baptism.
they would have a wedding or a funeral.
He did not think
Ms. Jorgenson asked if it was correct that the a special use penait
was to bring in icons for chapel.
Father Magramm stated they want to expand for icons.
Mr. Strong asked to clarify that the Dinkytown chapel will be used
for special events.
Mr. Dahlberg stated the Dinkytown facility will be used every
Sunday for worship.
Ms. Strong stated they had conflict with their open house. Taxes
are not a problem. The property was not going to affect her
property that much. �She had no problem with the beliefs and way
of their life. Ms. Strong did not buy property to live near a
church. She did not want not live across the street from any
church. Nor did she want to live across from a residence that
looks like a church.
Mr. Ned Thompson asked if the special use pernait would allow the
City to put on more restrictions on the property than the present
building code would allow.
Mr. Kondrick stated yes.
Mr. Barna stated there are things you could do a house that they
would not be allowed to do. You can put an entrance on the front
of your house or a deck on the back as long as you don't exceed the
lot coverage or eliminate 25� of your backyard or 25 feet from the
back lot line. The restrictions here are with the special use
pernait, but on the residence we don't have those. You would have
more flexibility through the building code than through the special
use permit.
Mr. Thompson stated that, if a special use permit could restrict
the front of the house, this could then be better for the
neighborhood.
Ms. Karen Allard asked how many will be living in the house.
Father Magramm stated no more than 5 persons.
Ms. Bagaason stated that, if she wanted to live next to a church,
she would have bought a home next to a church. She feels it is no
longer her choice. She stated that they did not want�to live next
door to a church.
Ms. Sherek asked Father Magramm, in looking at the plans, was
there going to be a structure to the entry for the chapel which is
0
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 19
going to at the back?
Father Magramm stated there was a back door and a front door.
Ms. Sherek asked if there was a reason why the entry could not be
placed at the back of the property where the deck is now. One
objection is to the structure that the church is putting on the
front of the house. Was there a reason why an entrance could not
be placed at the back? People could walk alonq the driveway and
enter the chapel at the back. That could answer the question of
not creating a distraction, not making it look to the neighborhood
, as if they are living adjacent to a church. If the primary purpose
is to be a monastic residence, and the chapel is to serve the
Sisters living in the house and others in the neighborhood,
certainly both could be satisfied.
Father Magramm stated he could see this as a possibility but he did
not know if this would be practically feasible.
Ms. Bagaason stated the people next door would still have to look
at it.
Ms. Sherek stated they would not if it were hidden from view by the
garage.
Mr. Wolfe stated that it would not be hidden by the garage.
Mr. Barna stated that the garage is less than 10 feet from the rear
of the house.
Mr. Kondrick stated this is a possibility that can be explored.
Ms . Eppel stated that some of the things that she is hearing is
that the neighbors to the sides of the parcel are objecting to the
lack of their own privacy. Having the entrance in the back would
not satisfy this objection. Could the front of house be left alone
like a residential structure?
Mr. Barna stated there is the option of screening.
Ms. Garber asked why do they not use the living room. A living
room can be decorated any way a person wants. If you want your
articles and icons, why not you get a permit to expand your living
room.
Father Magramm stated they thought it was the proper thing to do,
to notify the neighborhood and qo through the City. The church
could have done that as Ms. Garber suggested, but the church
decided to go through the City.
Ms. Driggins asked if this then gets back to the original question
of whether the special use permit is necessary. Would they have
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 20
the option to do the changes.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that he thought, if the City Attorney renders
a decision that a special use permit is not required, then
potentially that is the case.
TION by Paul Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to close the
public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:15
P.M.
Mr. Kondrick stated the information presented would be reviewed and
an opinion rendered by the City Attorney. At that time, all of the
neighbors would be re-advised the next meeting. Before the
Planning Commission would be re-discussing this, he would presume
that the church would be discussing ideas presented during the
meeting.
Father Magramm stated he was glad to have met their neighbors
tonight and appreciate the neighbors' recommendations. They will
do whatever they could to make everyone happy and comfortable.
They did not plan to give out any more information. Anyone who
wished to see the chapel and house was welcome to do so at any
time. They will answer the neighbors' questions. Father Magramm
stated the neighbors should feel free to be their friends.
Mr. Dahlberg asked for informal discussion. It would be useful if
the Planning Commission could bring up other issues that the City
Attorney could use as he rendered an opinion. In summary, there
are several issues that need to be addressed relative to parking
and traffic; use of this facility as a church, home, monastic
residence, or combination; and the tax exempt status. He felt that
the tax exempt status was not an issue here. Any home owned by a
church facility for its pastor is tax exempt or can be, so he did
not feel this was an issue. Mr. Dahlberg thought that there was
several things that should be addressed relative to not only use
of the facility but also relative to its appropriateness in the
neighborhood. Mr. Dahlberg heard and agreed that this home should
not have a character architecturally that is different from the
rest of the neighborhood. He would be hard pressed to vote for any
kind of a project where that type of entrance was used. The
architectural design must be very sensitive to the neighborhood.
He thought it would be in the best interests of all concerned to
remember that this still needs to be resolved. Mr. Dahlberq hoped
that the Planning Commission and the neighborhood cnuld all look
at this objectively, and he thought that the use of this facility
as a residence can remain that irrespective of potentially not
allowing the addition. Mr. Dahlberg thought a church was a good
neighbor and could remain so if this should not be allowed as a
worship facility.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 21
Mr. Saba thought the Planninq Commission should also take a look
at what could be there. In his neighborhood, a house was sold and
turned into rental property. The people that live there party
every weekend and there are 15-20 cars on both sides of the street.
A church can improve a neiqhborhood and there are benefits. Mr.
Saba agreed regarding the front of the building. The architecture
should be compatible with the neighborhood, and he would oppose a
structure that would make it different from the other homes in the
neighborhood. There may be a more compatible feature that would
be okay.
Mr. Barna stated that basically anyone can build a front porch on
the front of the house not to exceed 10 feet into the front yard
without designated design. Anyone could expand their house as long
as they did not exceed the side yard, rear yard, lot coverage
without a special use permit, with a building permit. That is all
that is needed for the front porch and for the covering of the
deck. With a special use permit, the design can be restricted.
If the Planning Commission did not issue a special use permit, the
architectural design cannot be restricted. A cross on the front
of the house cannot be restricted. There are controls under a
special use permit, but these expansions would likely be allowed
for an R-1 house.
Ms. Sherek stated there are conce:
parking and traffic. If indeed t]
services averaged 8 to 12, she dic
going to be significant. Parking in
When looking at the house last week,
street it was hazardous to have ca
that the impact of having 3 or 4 m
significant change. One concern i
front yard that attracts attention o
that as a hazard. If the house is
chapel, then she didn't see that a:
if it became a primary church, then
�ns being expressed regarding
e number of people attending
not believe the traffic was
the neiqhborhood is a problem.
she found that all along that
�s parked. She did not think
�re cars on Sunday would be a
� that anything placed in the
- stops traffic. She would see
really like a convent with a
a serious problem. However,
it becomes a problem.
Mr. Kondrick asked when this item would be coming again before the
commission.
Ms. Dacy stated the tentative date for the Planning Commission
meeting on September 13th. All those who have signed the sheet at
the meeting and those who signed the petition will be notified.
Mr. Rondrick thanked all for coming to the meeting. Al1 are
welcome to come back to the September meeting to re-discuss the
issue. �
Mr. Barna stated that the related variance for this property is
scheduled for the Appeals Commission on August 22. This item would
be tabled at that meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 22
�OTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to re-open the
public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN
AT 9:30 P.M.
OM TION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to table consideration
of Special Use Permit, #89-11, until review by the City Attorney
and for further discussion on September 13, 1989.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Saba to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING
CI,OSED AT 9:33 P.M.
3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Ms. Dacy stated staff prepared a potential outline for the Land Use
chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Analyzing what is in the
Comprehensive Plan now, essentially outside of the goals and
objectives, there are three to four pages left. The
recommendations are summarized on page 3A of the aqenda. There are
issues that are larger in scope and issues for 90's, which will be
expanded and could be discussed in the overview section. When
staff is done with the plan, staff will re-write the Overview
section. The intent was to get comments on the outline for the
Land Use chapter if there is anything the Commission wants to see
done in this chapter.
Mr. Barna asked if staff intended to make up a large map which
gave a listing of major parks, major businesses, and more or less
gave the utilization for the entire city and a zoning map
designating zoning areas.
Ms. Dacy stated staff would be doing the land use plan through the
land use process once staff gets a confirmation as to what land
uses should be where. Staff will identify any inconsistencies
between the land uses on the land use map and zoning map. Then,
as staff proceeded, rezoning would occur to make both maps
consistent. .
Mr. Dahlberg asked if the outline on 3b and 3c were the same as the
present land use plan.
Ms. Dacy stated this was completely different. The existinq
�
6
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 23
Comprehensive Plan stated what the existing land use inventory was,
it had a map identifying major commercial centers, had an existing
land use map, and a few pages on goals and objectives. Under II,
the Existing Land Use Inventory was being significantly expanded.
The City would be talking about apartment densities, townhouse
densities which would help in making future decisions.
Mr. Dahlberg requested a change in wording under II. D. to read
"Public/Semi-Public".
Mr. Barna asked, regarding II. H. Inventory Blighted Areas, how
would staff determine what is a"blighted" area?
Ms. Dacy stated staff will use the State's definition of
substandard. �
Mr. Dahlberg suggested having definitions incorporated into the
introductory statements.
Mr. Dahlberg requested additional information about VI. Visual and
Aesthetic Policies.
Ms. McPherson stated the City Attorney has recommended the City
adopt the Urban Design Standards.
Mr. Saba thought Fridley already had these.
Ms. Dacy stated the standards were being re-done.
Mr. Dahlberg asked if what was done was not adopted.
Ms. McPherson stated the only standards were those that had been
generated by the City Manager's office. There are some problems
with the language and procedural questions so they were being
reviewed.
Mr. Dahlberg thought the standards seemed excessive. Design
standards can be defined and incorporated without being excessive.
The City can run into difficulty if the standards are too specific.
Ms. Dacy stated these design standards would be for commercial and
industrial zones, and the City is lookinq at an ordinance in order
to enforce these standards.
O ON by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to accept the Land
Use Chapter as outlined with the changes in wording as noted.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER.SON RONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Dahlberg asked if the plan was on schedule.
6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 24
Ms. Dacy stated staff and the Planning Commission were pretty much
on schedule. Through the end of the year staff will be presenting
outlines identifying what needs to be changed. The first draft is
expected to be printed at the first of the year.
4. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALI,OW CHURCHES IN
�n�'R�IAL AND INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
Ms. Dacy state both commercial and industrial districts are being
looked at in consideration of this ordinance. In looking at the
existing churches, staff found that St. Williams is located in a
commercial zone. Staff came up with the recommendation for a
commercial district that a free standing church could be allowed.
If it was part of a multi-tenant building, staff would consider a
special use permit with several standards°attached and included in
the ordinance.
Mr. Barna stated the�Code presently allowed in an M-1 district a
certain area for recreational facilities for support of the M-1 use
of that particular property. By that definition, how can staff say
that a church would not be included. What is a church?
Ms. Dacy stated that staff had to go by the definition in the
ordinance. What staff told Steiner Development was that if the
word assembly was included in the M-1 language staff may have had
an interpretation issue.
Mr. Barna stated that a church could be considered a service.
Ms. Dacy stated that a church did not fit into the code definition
of service. There was no room for any interpretation for a church.
Mr. Saba indicated that the definition of a service has changed
over the years.
Mr. Barna stated that any business that did not produce a product
was a service.
Ms. Dacy indicated that in some cases the interpretation may be
taken that these are office uses. If the office uses are in an
M-1 area; they are related to the facility, and typically these
uses are not in commercial zones also.
Mr. Barna stated that, if the Planning Commission opens up the
ordinance, all sorts of things could come up.
Ms. Dacy stated that, if the Planning Commission looked at the list
of standards and most have standards, one could be trying to make
something work that should not be.
Mr. Barna felt churches could be allowed in commercial districts.
but he was not in favor of altering the M-1 and M-2 to allow uses
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 25
over and above what is out there.
Mr. Dahlberg felt that, if this was allowed, there would be so many
restrictions and stipulations, that it may not make any sense. Zn
terms of location, hours of operation, not beinq able to do certain
things on the premises at certain times, if there was a way you
could cover every situation or occurrence, then it may be
acceptable, but does it make sense to have those stipulations.
Mr. Kondrick agreed.
Ms. Dacy stated there are some of the opinion that there are not
enough negatives to not allow an ordinance amendment.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that John Uban is a consultant who works for
communities. Does his recommendation reflect only his clients'
wishes.
Ms. Shezek stated there didn't seem to be a lot of strong arguments
against this particular church. But in other circumstances, it
could be much different. What the Planning Commission could see
is what the Planning Commission saw tonight. There are enough other
places for churches to go. If the purpose of an industrial zone
is to locate together so roads, etc. are together, the City
shouldn't take another use and put it there because there is room.
Mr. Saba agreed. Once the City starts allowing other uses in
industrial zones, the City takes it away from industry.
Mr. Dahlberg stated, that by the same token, you take it away f,rom
other districts.
Mr. Saba stated people are really upset with the amount of industry
there is in the City and the City is lucky to have it zoned and
located as it is. There are different levels for industry.
Commercial is less objectionable.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that commercial is higher traffic at different
hours and is not as predictable as industry. He felt it didn't
make sense to have churches in commercial areas. It didn't make
sense to put churches in residential districts. He thought it
made more sense to put them in industrial rather than commercial.
Ms. Sherek felt the character was more similar to commercial.
Ms. Dacy stated the only similarity staff came up with was the
assembly. What was the difference between that and .a church? A
church could have a daily service. Are we hurting available land,
the tax base, and industrial growth. The City could say there are
hazards in industrial areas.
Mr. Dahlberg suqgested creating a new district.
�
,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 26
Ms. Dacy suggested an institutional district.
Mr. Barna stated an industrial district could then be restricted
to only manufacturing.
Ms. Sherek stated that is what our industrial area was originally
meant to be. Our society is moving away from industrial.
Mr. Saba stated that heavy manufacturinq is moving out of this
country. Services and light industrial is what is now being done
in this country.
Ms. Dacy asked�where would institutional districts be located, at
the edge of neighborhoods. The City may also just come full
circle.
Ms. Sherek stated that the kind of churches we are seeing are not
the "main line" community churches. These new churches want a
existing facility for small congregations.
Ms. Dacy requested a motion, if the Planning Commission agrees or
disagrees. Staff would then take the amendment back to the City
Council, discuss it and see if they want a public hearing.
Mr. Barna requested this be tabled until the comprehensive plan is
more complete so it can be included in the plan.
Mr. Dahlberg agreed since this is not an issue right now.
Ms. Dacy stated there was no pressinq need at this time. Staff
will try to follow up and get direction.
Mr. Saba stated he did not want to drop as much as postpone as part
of the comprehensive plan.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to delay action on
this until it can be included in the Comprehensive Plan.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Mr. Saba left the meeting at 10:25 p.m.)
5. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REDUCING THE REQUIRED
REAR YARD SETBACK ON CORNER LOTS FROM 25 FEET TO 10 FEET
Ms. McPherson stated this is in response to several rear yard
variances within three months. The reason staff is proposing this
is that often times when looking at a survey on existing houses,
there will be three or four interpretations on which is the side,
front and rear yard. It makes determination of the rear yard
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 27
difficult if not impossible. Staff looked at other cities (chart
on 5B) and the only language would be an addition to the rear yard
definition in R-1 which states on 3A there is to be an addition
that the rear yard on corner lot would be 10 feet.
Ms. Dacy stated that language would be added that, on a corner lot,
a rear yard will be 10 feet. A definition of a corner lot is in
the definitions.
Mr. Barna stated the zoning definition is confusing.
Ms. Dacy stated that what would happen in the case where a house
is situated with the front on the long side of the lot, the long
side becomes the front and the opposite the rear. There is still
a definition needed to define the front. It comes down to two
front and two sides.
Ms. McPherson stated the setbacks between living structures would
be 20 feet. There could be a living space 10 feet from the
property line and an attached accessory structure 5 feet from the
lot line. There is the issue of detached accessory buildings which
is 3 feet from the rear lot line.
Mr. Dahlberg asked if 2 detached buildings could be within 6 feet
of each other?
Ms. McPherson stated yes.
Ms. Dacy stated the other option is why change it. Staff could
keep the language as is and continue to handle it through
variances.
Mr. Dahlberg asked if a person could state the front yard or does
this cause difficulty.
Ms. McPherson stated it did. There was one variance where both
corner sides had a 35 foot setback. There was also a variance
request for a garage and there were 3-5 interpretations that staff
could determine through the address file. That can be a problem.
If a house is fronting the long side, the code states the short
side is the front.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that sometimes the maximum is reached and
nothing more can be done. Why did the City have to bend? Why
couldn't the City just say we don't think you need it?
Mr. Barna stated the code cannot cover everything. Codes are
qeneral. �
Ms. Dacy felt the issue is whether the ordinance was frivolous or
was there a need. Staff was of the opinion that it was worth while
to pursue. The City could continue to process variances and look
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 28
at it on a case by case basis.
Mr. Dahlberg asked if there was a way to change the language so
that there still are front and side yards on a corner lot and make
it easy to determine even though the house orientation may be
inappropriate.
Ms. Dacy stated the rear yard setback is which is the side yard
dimension. Both streets are front yards and both interiors are
side yards.
�iOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to concur with the
Appeals Commission action for front and rear setback requirements
on corner lots.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED TIiE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MEETING OF JULY 10, 1989
This item was tabled for the next meeting.
7. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEAIS COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY
18, 1989
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to receive the July
18, 1989, Appeals Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF
AUGUST 1. 1989
OM TION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Barna, to receive the
August 1, 1989, Appeals Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK
DECLARED TIiE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. OTHER BUSINESS:
Senior Housing Memorandum
Central Avenue Corridor Memorandwn
Ms. Dacy stated these were infornaation items and referred to the
respective memorandums included with the agenda. �
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Barna, to adjourn the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 16, 1989 PAGE 29
meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICK
DECLARED THE AUGUST 16, 1989, PLANNING COI�II�IISSION MEETING ADJOURNED
AT 10:40 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Lavonn Cooper
Recording Secretary
�
�
unroF
F���
PLANNING DNISI�N
MEMOR,ANDUM
DATE: Auqust 25, 1989
TO: Planninq Commission Members
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT: Proposed Landscape Ordinance Amendment to the
Fridley Zoning Code
�
Attached is the proposed landscape ordinance amendment to the
Fridley Zoning Code. This is a staff-initiated amendment, and
currently not on the Planning Commission's work plan. The
landscape ordinance will standardize and specify those requirements
needed for landscaping parcels in commercial and industrial
districts. Please review and have comments and suggestions for
staff at the August 30, 1989 Planning Commission meeting.
I+II�I/ dn
M-89-516
�
lA
LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA
,� Y
�' ,�� � I f / � I / � � � ���
1 / � �
•• . .••�
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
A.
i) `' �
� ,,��y
`� �`'1
�.
.
/,� ��
Ir.
I-
�� �
1�� �� �j
�
A primary purpose of this title is to elimi te such problems
as:
Excessive uniformity, dissimilarity, ' appropriateness or poor
quality of design in the exterior a earance of structures and
the lack of property attentio to site development and
landscaping in the city.
Standards set forth in this rdinance will promote harmonious
development in the cit , increase the desirability of
residences, encourage i estment or occupation in the city,
optimize use and value of land and improvements, increase the
stability and valu of property, add to the conditions
affecting the pea , health and welfare of the city, and
establish a prope relationship between the taxable value of
property and co of municipal services.
The mai
c atib7
All uses
' '— the
�
LANDSC P
A . 1.1�
1.
2.
certain standards is essential to ensure
elationships between a .
llowed as either permitted or uses
1B
sh 11 conform to
lowing provisions and performance standards. �
ING .
> °'
' um Requirements �
For commercial districts, a minimum of twenty-fiv (25)
percent of the land area shall be landscaped with a,
approved ground cover, shrubbery and trees.
For industrial districts, a minimum of twenty-five (25)
percent of the land area within industrial lots which are
located around the perimeter of �.industrial areas a$d
'ewable r m eria roadway corridors shall b
andscaped wi , �
and trees. minimum fifteen (15) percent of the land
area within industrial lots located in the interior of
industrial areas shall be landscaped.
3. Fo R-3, R-4 districts, exposed ground area
rrounding the princip uilding and accessory building
which are not driv ys, sidewalks or patios shall be
landscaped with ass, shrubs, trees or other ornamental
landscape ma ial.
4�- ° �
�� - P
` _ '� v�� °
� �
C
� � il1 � � . / /
r
1 1� /
. •.
1 '
Landscape Ordinanc
Page 2
, 9 The fo�.l,
'a
�l j �
� /�
�
. '�±
D'1
i . ,�
1
i , � ,.
� �. ,
i
.�,
� +
.
i� �
�
8
� �
,� � 0�' Z�
��� S�, ?�
�
� . ' 1
1.
/ ,
Overstory Deciduous
Ornamental Trees
Coniferous Trees
Ma�-S��-r-u�Pl ant ing
����
� ,J r
shall be
2 1/2 inch di
1 1/2 inch di
8 feet tall
1,
,, .. �
��� ,
��
In or er ping w ich is appropriate ir�,
scale w' 'ldin the minimum
�ta ards apply to all districts except R-1 an -2: /
a.
��
.i"
,
�
' �'e (i) tre
for every fifty (50) feet of site perimeter
--�.#�.��c�,�x �� y a�� A minimum of thirt���}-d,
perce� of th�s-r�ea�.iLed� be conif us.
Jl''��ornamental tresc�can be substituted for every
�8-: Er� v�story deciduous shade tree. In no case,
ornamental trees shall exceed fifty (50) percent of
the required number of trees.
��-�� � � ` '
_ � ��
ior g �
7s
All parking areas containing over 10
stalls shall include unpaved, landscaped islands that are
reasonably distributed throughout the arkin area to
break up the expanses of paved areas.
. aarxi�rq—areas less znan one nunarea
s es a serve as pri _ - .
two hur
stalls.
islands shall be provided eve�'
or more of uninterrupted parking
0
��'� �
�' �S
�
3. All landscaped ' shall contain a minimum of one
hundred eigh (180) are feet and shall be provided �
with deciduous s ade trees, ornamental or evergreen
trees, plus ground cover, mulch, and/or shrubbery, in
�-�' addition to the min�mum landscape requirements of this
ord' . nterior parking landscape area trees shal�
e provided at the rate of one tree for each f' fteen (15 )
�surface parking spaces provided or a fract thereof.
Parking area landscaping shall be contained n planti�
�beds bordered by a raised concrete curb.
�, a � e i
�7" wv'
Landscape Ordinance
Page 3
C. Credit for Large Trees
The total number of required overstory trees may be reduced
by one-half (1/2) tree for each new deciduous tree measuring
four and one-half (4 1/2) inches or more in diameter, or each
new coniferous tree measuring twelve (12) feet or more in
height. In no event, however, shall the reduction be greater
than twenty-five (25) percent of the total number of trees
required.
D. Credit for Existing Trees �1 ,/1,��(/„
�' G y ,��i X.yl.�
The total number of required new overstory trees may be
reduced by the retention of existing overstory trees provided
that the following conditions are satisfied:
E.
1. Such trees fulfill the minimum requirement of (paragraph
) as to size and species. . unit��velopment
ctor a
exis
's ri u on in the lot. ,_
2. Proper precautions to protect trees during development
shall be indicated on qrading plans submitted for plan
review. These precautions shall be included in the
�
landscape surety.
Ya
A landscape y credit shall be giv a site plan which
contains exterior s ures ntains, decorative walks,
additional ponds beyond required for storm drainage
purposes, courtyar , and decorat accent lighting for the
building. T ommunity Development Di r will recommend
a credi given on a case-by-case basis, depen ' a unon the
nat e and scope of such a facility proposed for
: and
o round cover shall be pla
manner as o present a finished app�earance
complete coveraqe within twelve (12)
planting, with proper erosion control
establishment period. Exception to this
areas containing natural vegetation
maintained free of foreign and noxious m�
.
� C���
-- . ___----
� ` `- �, ._ A `/� 4
, �—.-___ ��_ � I aV
�
a
and reasonably
months after
during plant
is undisturbed
which can be
ID
��
�
Landscape Ordinance
Page 4
G.
H.
, 1
� �� �
�\ :
�
K.
L.
Slopes and Berms
1.
2.
Final slope grades steeper than 3:1 will not be permitted
without special approval or treatment such as terracing
or retaining walls.
Earth berm screening parking lots and other open areas
shall not have slopes exceeding 3:1. A minimum two foot
berm is required.
Placement of Plant Materials and Utilities
1. All required screening or buffering shall be located on
the lot occupied by the use, building, facility or
structures to be screened. No screening or buffering
shall be located on any public right-of-wayo ^''
�� ���+t � \I�� �� °�- v 1 d ortion of any street or
¢��� •� vlV 6'lu.►�i.� � • rt1'L�''r''l' ��'
2.
materials snall �
to all utilities.
Maintenance
oca
er Plant
reasonable access
1. The property owner shalY be responsible for replacement
of any dead trees, shrubs, ground covers and sodding.
If any plant materials are not maintained or replaced,
the city shall maintain or replace said plant materials
and assess the property for the costs thereaf_�
Sizing of Plant Material and Methods of Install ' n' \
�
1. All deciduous and coniferous trees sha be s and
planted in accordance with National Nurseryman Standards.
Irrig
1. Underground irrigation shall be required in all
industrial and commercial districtsa
Performance
1. The owner s�
surety bond,
satisfactory
installation
elements and
shall remain
The first yea
IE
�••,, �.,o v v ,�..,�� � "�-��l:�-�aY� �
'� ' o
provide the city with cas , corpo ate
roved letter of credit or other su ety
the city to guarantee the property
t vigorous qrowth of all landscape
•eening required herein. Said surety
�fect for two (2) full qrowing seasons.
e amount of surety will be equal to one
<
Landscape Ordinance
Page 5
hundred ten (110) percent of the estim ed costs of plant
material, install ion, and tree pres ation. The second
year said surety wi be equal to twen -five (25) percent of
the estimated costs plant materi , installation and tree
preservation.
a. A growing seas n sha include the period May 1
through October 1.
b. The two year gi
installed after
year. �
c. Lots provide with an i
hundred (1 0) percent
landscapi g need only
growing eason.
SCREENING AND BUFFERING
period for plant materials
shall commence the following
.'gation system covering one
o the area improved with
ro ' de a surety for one a(1)
�`
A. Screening and buffe ing sh 11 be satisfied through the use of
screening fences, wal s, rt� benas, and/or planting screens.
If the topography, exi nq vegetation, permanent structures
or other features crea a barrier which meets the screening
requirements, they ma b substituted.
B.
��
i
�°�
� �
,�
% ;
�►, ' ' `, �,.
�� ,
Screening Fence or Wall
1. A fence or wa may e u ed for screening when plant
materials are pro ' d al g the outside of the fence or
wall for aesthetic p a1.
2. A �cree�
attracti
or
s�l.'�ructure . Such scr
round opaqueness of
sufficient height to
eicht (8) _feet in he9
all shall be constructed of
ished materials, compatible with
.onstruction of the principal
is shall provide a minimum year
ight 80) �er�ent and be of
�ieve screening but not to exceed
t. � ,
3: Screen fences and wal s whi h are ' disr �i ll�e
r pa ' d.---�" � p� ,6 tvZ �
� • � �
�Eart erms
k
1�' An earth berm shall e allowed for screening when used
in combination with lant material. A minimum of twenty-
five (25) percent of the required screen must be provided
with plant material.
1F
i
�
�
Landscape Ordinance
Page 6
2. Earth berms shall be of
screeninq but shall not E
D. Planting Screens
fficient height to achieve
ed 3:1 slope.
1. A planting screen shall onsist of healthy, fully hardy
plant materials and s all be designed to provide a
minimum year round opa eness of eighty (80) percent at
, the time of maturity. The plant material shall be of
sufficient height to a hieve the required screening.
2. Composition of plant aterial for screening shall be
composed of the minim standards:
a. not less than thi y-three (33) percent coniferous.
b. not less than tw nty-five (25) percent deciduous.
c.
d.
not more than th�rty-three (33) percent shrubs
note more than� forty-five (45) percent of one
�. Planting screens sh 11 be maintained in a neat and
healthful conditionq Plants which have died shall be
� promptly replaced� ��� ���2i�� �'�
�-o.
PARKING AND
�
Any off-stre t parking area containing mor tha
parking spaces, ny part of which is wi n t izty 30)
feet of any adjoi ' g residential ne or across the
street from any reside tial zone and any driveway to a
parking area containing 1 st six (6) spaces within
fifteen (15) feet of an a' �. 'ng residential zone shall
be completely screene o a hei of at least three and
one-half (3 1/2) et above the king grade. Such
screening shal e accomplished throug the use of earth
berming an r plant mater�ials (as outli d in Section
�• � �
v ADDITIONAL SCREENING �
�
A. Double fronted res�
collector or arteri�
(15) foot easement
Screening shall be �
(3 1/2) feet above
accomplished by a c�
A minimum of twenty-
be provided with p]„�
ti buildings and lots adjacent to
a eets shall be screened. A fifteen
� for landscaping will be provided.
� ed to a height of three-and one-half
ja ent roadway. Screeninq shall be
.nat'on of earth berming and planting.
ive (25 percent r quired screen must
�t materi .
,
� �
�
.
1G
1H
Landscape Ordinance
Page 7
B. The liqht from automobile e dlights and other
be screened whenever it y be directed
residential windows. �
sources shall
onto a jacent
C. In R-3 and R-4 distri s, 1 waste material, debris, refuse,
garbage, fuel or ma er als not currently in use for
construction shall be st ed indoors or totally screened from
the eye level view f m pu��� reet and adjacent
properties._ _ _,A.��
. In all districts, al me anical equipment�, utility meters,
storage, and service eas and similar features shall be
completely screened fr the eye level view from adjacent
properties and public t ets, or designed to be compatible
with the architectural tre e of the principal structure.
E. In commercial and in strial
handling equipment sh 11 b�
structure, within an att che
the principal structure, o
view from public stree
commercial properties. I a
they shall be constructe of �
principal structure an be ;
doors. Design shall b appr�
F. The ground level vie of al
roof top equipment sha
contiguous properties and a
compatible with the arch' eci
� �� structure . �
All external loading and se�
shall be completely screened
contiguous residential or co
�reets, except at access po
C�.�r�����`�[��
istricts, all trash and trash
stored within the principal
structure accessible from within
totally screened from eye level
and adjacent residential or
cessory structures are proposed,
� e same building material as the
re ily served through swinqing
�ve bv the Fire Chief.
mechanical utilities including
be completely screened from
acent streets, or design to be
�ral treatment of the principal
areas accessory to buitaings
a the ground level view from
:ial properties and adjacent
A. Existing uses shall comply with the screening requirements
listed in this section at the time alterations are made on the
buildinq or premises. Compliance by existing uses shall not
be required if the city determines either that because of the
unique character of the existing use compliance is not needed
to promote the welfare of the city or that compliance is not
reasonably possible because of the existing development.
B. The obligation to establish new screening uses shall be joint
when businesses abut multi-family uses and districts. �
�� ��%l�t/�. c � -�, ,
� PLANNING DNISION 2
�
� MEMORANDUM
cinroF
Fr�n��r
DATE: Auqust 25, 1989
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Revision; Environmental
Resources Chapter
Attached is the proposed outline for the Environmental Resources
chapter. The purpose of this section of the Comprehensive Plan is
to inventory various natural features in the community. Staff has
added an air quality section to the inventory of natural resources.
This item was not mentioned in the existing chapter. We also
propose to expand the historical site discussion in the chapter.
Also proposed is an analysis of the natural features with the
vacant commercial, industrial and residential parcels. After
conclusion of our inventory, we will then prepare recommended goals
and objectives.
Planning Commission should provide any comments or changes.
BD/dn `
M-89-520
�
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
I. Introduction
II. Inventory of Natural Features
A. Woodlands and Vegetation
1. Oak/Oak Savannah
2. Riverine Woodlands/Flood Plain Woodlands
3. Urban Forest
B. Waterbodies - Water Courses
1. Lakes
2. Rivers, Streams, Creeks
3. Other (Harris Pond)
C. Geology
1. Regional
2. Local Subsurface
3. Local Surface �
4. Aquifers �
D. Wetlands �
t� Q�
1. Location �
�
2. Characteristics
3. Regulatory Agencies
a. Minnesota IINR
b. Army Corp of Engineers
c. US Fish and Wildlife Service
d. Watershed Districts
E. Air Quality
1. PCA Standards
2A
Environmental Resources Outline
Page 2
F. Historic Sites
l. Locke House/Banfill Tavern
2. Hayes Annex
3. Moore Lake Dunes
III. Inventory Vacant Parcels for Natural Resources; Unique
Features
A. Residential
B. Commercial
C. Industrial
IV. Threats to Natural Resources
A. Vegetation
1. Oak Wilt
2. Dutch Elm
3. Purple Loosestrife
8. Waterbodies
1. Storm Water Runoff
2. Pollution
a. Industrial Waste
b. Commercial Chemicals
(1) Fertilization
(2) Herbicides °
(3) Pesticides
C. Air Quality
1. Traffic Impact �
2. Industrial
V. Goals and Objectives
`�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PARRB AND RECREATION COMMI88ION MBETING� JIILY 10, 1989
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Kondrick called the July 10, 1989, Parks and Recreation
Commission meeting to order at 7:12 p.m.
ROLL CALL•
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
David Kondrick, Mary Schreiner, Dick Young,
John Gargaro, Tim Solberg (arr. 7:25 p.m.)
None
R�ck DeGardner, Program Supervisor
Marcia Etlicher, 6870 - 7th Street N.E.
Kurt Schrupp, 6171 Kerry Lane N.E.
APPROVAL OF JUNE 5, 1989 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Gargaro, seconded by Mr. Young, to approve the June
5, 1989, Parks and Recreation Commission minutes as written.
IIPON A oOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION by Mr. Gargaro, seconded by Ms. Schreiner, to move the
"Redeemer Lutheran Church Parking Request" under "Old Business" to
the first item on the agenda.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
1. REDEEMER LUTHERAN CHURCH PARKING REOUEST - EDGEWATER GARDENS:
Mr. DeGardner stated Mr. Kirk is on vacation, but Mr. Kirk had
written a memo to the Commission members regarding his feelings and
recommendation on the sale or lease of park land to Redeemer
Lutheran Church for a parking lot expansion. In the last paragraph
of his memo, Mr. Kirk stated: "...based on the best interest of
our park system and the people of Edgewater Gardens Park
neighborhood area, I have to recommend that the City not enter into
a lease or sell arrangement for any of the park land to Redeemer
Lutheran Church for parking purposes."
�
3A
� PARRS AND RFCREATION COMMI88ION MEETINa - PAQE 2
MOTION by Ms. Schreiner, seconded by Mr. Young, to receive the memo
from Jack Kirk to the Parks and Recreation Commission re:
Edgewater Gardens Park.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERBON RONDRICR DECLARED
TH$ MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOOSLY.
Mr. Rondrick stated he had discussed this with Mr. Kirk about one
week aqo. He stated he felt very much the same way as Mr. Kirk in
that he, too, did not want to give up any park land. Mr. Kondrick
� stated his main concern is setting a precedent, and that perhaps
Redeemer Lutheran Church could handle the parking situation by
adding another church service.
Ms. Schreiner stated she feels open space is necessary. As Mr.
Kirk stated in his memo, there is more to a park than developed or
built-up areas or playground equipment and that open space, trees,
grass, and plantings are all important. Even though there is no
playground or other park equipment in this area, the open space is
attractive and adds something to the Church as well as to the
neighborhood.
Ms. Schreiner stated that when this request was first presented to
the Commission, she had thought something might be worked out, but
after visiting and walking the site, �he did not feel comfortable
with giving up any park land and she is in aqreement with Mr.
Kirk's recommendation.
Ms. Schreiner stated Mr. Kirk's memo also indicated that many of
the people involved believe the parking problem is more pronounced
in the wintertime because of snow storage. Maybe Redeemer will
have to consider adding more services.
Mr. Gargaro stated he would like to see if there is any possibility
that the park land could be utilized as park land and as parking
lot area. He stated Ms. McPherson had discussed alternate forms
of parking lot support--concrete pads that allow the growth of
vegetation and will support the weight of automobiles. He stated
he is not quite as adamant against the selling or leasing of park
land because there might be some technology out there that could
or should be pursued that would benefit both the Church and the
City. "
Mr. Young stated that, as the Commissioners remembered, he visited
Redeemer Lutheran Church on three Sunday mornings, includinq Easter
Sunday, to observe the parking situation. On every occasion, there
were a number of empty parking stalls in the parking lot.
Mr. Young stated another thing he would like to bring up is the
fact that Redeemer does own the vacant lot across Mississippi
3B
PARRS AND RECREATION COMMISBION MEETING - PAGE 3
Street, and they have not given any indication that they will use
that lot for parking. It was his understanding that the lot was
purchased for a parking lot. He would encourage Redeemer to pursue
rezoning that property and using it for overflow parkinq. He felt
strongly that when there is a piece of property that can be
developed as a parking lot, it should be pursued.
Mr. Young stated that regarding the question of safety for those
people crossing Mississippi Street from the vacant lot, maybe the
Fridley Police Department could be asked to have an officer at the
crossinq to direct traffic. He stated Epiphany Catholic Church in
Coon Rapids has a Coon Rapids police officer directing traffic on
Sunday mornings, and Emmanuel Christian Center in Spring Lake Park
has a Fridley police officer directing traffic onto Osborne Road.
Another suggestion would be flashing lights that could be activated
on Sundays.
Mr. Young stated he is also concerned about relocating the skating
rink. When the Conunission members looked at the site, Mr. Vollanan,
Superintendent of Public Works, indicated that an excessive amount
of grading is necessary to move the skating rink to the north end
of the park. The north end is the only area in the park that has
nice grass, and it is a fact that grass will never grow where there
is a rink during the winter.
Mr. Young stated Ms. McPherson had talked about some kind of
parking lot surface that could accommodate parking automobiles and
still remain as a grassy area; however, she did say she was not
familiar with the technology.
Ms. Etlicher stated she could certainly understand the Commission
members not wanting to give up park land; however, she would like
to respond to some of the comments made by the Commission members.
As she had stated at an earlier meeting, churches benefit the
community as well as park land, and the park land can be used for
serving people, both as park land and as parking for their church.
Ms. Etlicher stated Redeemer tried to purchase the Edgewater
Gardens park land from the County 10 years ago for additional land
for parking and were told that the County could not sell the land
to a private party or a church; it could only be sold to a city.
So, the Church was trying to get additional land long before the
City purchased the property from Anoka County.
Ms. Etlicher stated that regarding the vacant lot across the
street, it was owned by a member of Redeemer. Since the Church was
not able to purchase the property from the County; the Church
purchased the lot because they thought it was the only option
available to them at that time. She stated it is possible the lot
can be rezoned, but it is right next to two sinqle family homes.
One home's living room and kitchen face the lot. Parking cars on
s
PARRS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1dEBTINC3 - PAGB 4
this lot is certainly not the most ideal situation for the
neighborhood, particular for the one home.
(Mr. Solberg arrived at 7:25 p.m.)
Ms. Etlicher stated that as far as moving the skating rink to the
north end of the park, it was never their intent that it would be
at the City's expense. She stated if the park land is leased or
sol,d to Redeemer, Redeemer would pay for the cost of grading and
relocatinq the skating rink.
Mr. Solberg stated that after visiting the site and because of the
results of the survey and the size of the park itself, he had to
agree with Mr. Kirk's recommendation to not lease or sell any park
land to Redeemer Lutheran Church.
MOTION by Ms. Schreiner, seconded by Mr. Young, to recommend to the
City Council, through the Planning Con�mission, that the City not
lease or sell any portion of Edgewater Gardens Park to Redeemer
Lutheran Church for parking purposes.
IIPON A VOIC$ VOTE, RONDRICR, BCHREINER, YOIING, BOLBERG VOTING AY$,
GARGARO VOTING NAY, CSAIRPERBON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4-1.
2. STAFF REPORT•
a. Bummer Proqram Report
Mr. DeGardner stated the summer program is well under
way. The playground program has almost 300 children
participating. He stated they offered an evening
playground program at some of the playground locations,
but very few registrations led to cancellation of the
evening sessions.
Mr. DeGardner stated the Jaycees donated a new puppet
wagon and PA system for the puppet wagon. The puppet
shows and movies are being very well attended. Burger
King is sponsoring the movies and providing orange drink.
Mr. DeGardner stated the Northwest Tennis Association
offered a grant to Fridley if they would run a teen
tennis program with the north metro area. Fridley
offered the program and 16 teens, aged 13-16, siqned up.
He stated the tennis teams play area communities in
organized tennis matches. Fridley will be hosting the
tennis carnival on Aug. 3 at Commons Park. He stated the
emphasis of the program is to have fun.
�
�
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMIBSION MEETINd - PAG$ 5
TKr. DeGardner stated a Tennis Camp is startinq this week.
Mr. DeGardner stated the T-ball program is well underway.
He sta.ted last year they started an evenir►g program which
went so well they had to add an additional session. This
year, they ended up with two full sessions and an almost
full third session. There are 100 children in the
evening program and 85 in the day program.
Mr. DeGardner stated Moore Lake swimminq beach is open
and is being heavily utilized, especially during the hot
weather.
Mr. Young stated he had received a complaint about the
change in ages of the playground program and the park
location for the Tiny Tot playground program. The
mother's complaint was that the Tiny Tot program (4 year
olds - formerly 4-5 year olds) has moved to Commons Park
only. The mother works and she cannot let her child walk
to Commons and cross Mississippi Street. Also, last year
the program was divided into 4-5 year olds and 6-11 year
olds. Her daughter (now 6) was looking forward to being
with the older children, and the ages were changed to 7-
il year olds.
Mr. Young stated this mother had indicated that there
were other people in her neighborhood who did not sign
their children up with the playground proqram for the
same reasons.
Mr. DeGardner stated the changes to the playground
program were discussed thoroughly last year. The
playground leaders had a very difficult time instructing
the 4 year olds for 3 hours. Ms. Heiman, the Program
Specialist for the playground program, also has an
education background, and she agreed that although there
are some 4 year olds that are mature enough to handle
that length of time, there are a lot of 4 years olds who
cannot. So, it was decided that rather than eliminate
the 4 year olds, a program would be held for them at one
central location.
Mr. DeGardner stated because this was a transition year
to the new age guidelines, some exceptions were made for
children who were eligible under last year's age
guidelines.
Mr. DeGardner stated it was also felt the 6-11 year old
group was difficult to work with because of the wide
range in ages, so that was the reason for the change to
7-11 year olds.
3D
3E
J� PARRS AND RECRBATION CO1rII+II88ION MEETINa - PAG$ 6
Mr. DeGardner stated Fridley State Bank will be providing
the buses for the T-ball and FYSA baseball participants
to attend the Twins baseball game on July 27.
b. 49�er Daps Report
Mr. DeGardner stated 49'er Days went extremely well.
Mr. Gargaro stated they averaged 2,000-3,000 people
Friday and Saturday nights during the first annual "Taste
of Fridley". It was the largest attendance 49'er Days
has ever had. There were 7-8 vendors selling food
products. On Saturday, the Dairy Queen made the world's
largest milkshake, and it was featured on KSTP
television. All proceeds went to the Children's Miracle
Network. Concerts were held in the Showmobile. He
stated the Plaza is the perfect place for all the 49'er
Days activities.
Mr. DeGardner stated 62 children signed up for the
Fridley's 40th birthday party.
c. Hockep Rink Location
Mr. DeGardner stated that since the hockey rink cannot
be placed at either Totino Grace or by the Satellite Fire
Station, preparations are being made for the hockey rink
to be installed at Moore Lake on the north side of the
tennis courts.
2. NEW BUSINESS•
a. Reqion SAA 8oftball Request
Mr. DeGardner stated Totino Grace is requesting the use
of the Community Park ballfields for their 1990 Region
5AA Softball Tournament on May 24, 25, 29, 30, 1990.
OTION by Mr. Gargaro, seconded by Ms. Schreiner, to
approve the softball tournament request from Totino Grace
for the use of the Community Park ballfields on May 24,
25, 29, 30, 1990.
IIPON A VOICB VOTg, ALL VOTINa AYE, CHAIRPERBON RONDRICR
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMODBLY.
b. Tarqet Softball Tournament Request
a
PARRS AND RECREATION COMMI88ION 1�SEETINQ - PAGB 7
Mr. DeGardner stated Target is requesting the use of the
Community Park ballfields for a tournament on Sept. 9-
10, 1989, at a facility fee of $1,000.
OM TION by Mr. Gargaro, seconded by Ms. Schreiner, to
approve the request by Target for the use of the
Community park ballfields on Sept. 9-10, 1989.
Mr. Young stated he thought the Commission had a policy
that the fields cannot be used on two consecutive
weekends and not more than two tournaments a month due
to excessive wear on the fields. There is a tournament
scheduled for Labor Day weekend.
Mr. DeGardner stated one tournament was scheduled in
June, one ip July, one in August, and one tournament on
Labor Day weekend. If the Commission goes with the
guideline of no more than two tournaments in one month,
this request would fall under that guideline. But, if
they do not want tournaments on two consecutive weekends,
then this tournament cannot be held. He stated the
Community Park ballfields have not been as heavily used
on the weekends as they have in the past, and the fields
are in better shape.
Mr. Kondrick stated this is certainly a good policy, but
they should be somewhat flexible, depending upon the
fields' condition.
Mr. Young stated he was in favor of approving the
tournament request, because of the fact that this will
be towards the end of the softball season, and the
growing season is coming to an end. However, if it had
been for the middle of July, he would not be in favor of
tournaments on two consecutive weekends.
Mr. Gargaro asked staff to provide the Commission members
with a copy of the policy for the next meeting.
IIPON A VOICE VOTg, l�LL VOTING AYE, CSAIRPERBON RONDRICR
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY.
4. OTHER BUSINESS:
Ms. Schreiner stated that she likes to take her granddaughter
to Commons Park playground, but there are no portable bathroom
facilities at the park. She stated there are always a lot of
children at the Commons playground.
Mr. DeGardner stated it is City policy to provide portable
bathroom facilities only at park program locations. He stated
3F
a
PARRS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MBETINQ — PAG$ 8
staff would investigate this to see if there was enouqh demand
to provide the facilities.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Gargaro, seconded by Mr. Solberg, to adjourn the
meeting. IIpon a voice vote, all votinq ape, Chairperson lcondrfck
declared the Julp lo, 1989, Parks and Recreation Commission meetinq
adjourned at s:i6 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lynne Saba
Recording Secretary
�
�
�
cmr oF
F���
PLANNING DNISION
MEMOR,ANDUM
DATE: Auqust 25, 1989
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT: Dumpster Ordinance Update
The information regarding the dumpster ordinance was presented to
the City Council on August 14, 1989 for an informal discussion.
We surveyed all of the existing commercial, industrial and multiple
family establishments in the City. The survey is attached. The
City Council directed staff to begin the evaluation process to
analyze the cost of screening the City's dumpsters at municipal
locations. Further, they wanted to discuss this item at an
upcoming City Council conference session.
BD/dn
M-89-514
4
0
•. �� _
z
Nz
Nz
°z�UU
�
G
��
z
aH
H H
W W
Ei
�O
z
�
�
'�o
'w
Iz
w
o�
U
N
C7
z
H
0
N
H
z
�
��W
N
�Q
o°a
��
z
� �
Gl
�
�
m
0
��
��
a� �
ob
O •�
3 �
b �
b�
•� o
N 3a
W
� �
3a 41
H N
z° z° z° z �+
C'1 M M C'1 e`1
a a a a a
. . . . .
W W W W W
z z z z z
� � d d �
� N N � �
� � � � �
� � � � �
� � � � �
1 1 1 I 1
0 0 0 0 �
In N �-�I O In
lti tn tL1 ILi lA
H �
� �
o O
c �
a� a�
°o °o
3 3
'd 'd
b b
-.� •�
Ul N
d �
� �
H H
.
� 3
0
,� w
�o
a� �
°o �s
3 �
'C3 O
bw
.'.,
N �
�
G� A
i�-i •N
,C •�
E >
..
� 3
0
�w
�o
a� �
°o ��
3 �
'd O
bw
.r.,
� a�
r-I
dA
�1 •N
,C •�
Ei >
z�� z � z° a� z z°
M M N1 M �--I M N1 M M
a a a u a u u a u
N
�1-► b�
W � •
�d •rl • W
. . . y.� . � W . . .
W W W U W !� • W W x
. . . . bz .
z z z�sz �� �z z �
� d G�l U � 't? d .� � � � �
41 0l � -•� � r1 ia N O� � �
� M � 3a d i� � � v� a� � �
c�i� v�i t�» �� 3� Sa O� � b
.� � .[ �d v, o � ,� �s .c � �+
+� +� +� +� �+ 1-� U cn ia +� +�
�c r r y� a�i o �m m � � � o�i
I 1 I � I 'O � � � t 1 r-1 U
� o o � �o � � � bo
r c� �o s� �n -� � +� >r �n o +� o
M d' d' � ln .L+ C1 4) !d 1D d' � f'7
�n �n � z c� u�n > a � � H�
1 I
ri
1
4A
c
�
O t9
EH
GW
O Cx
UU
�
O
��
z
a' H
H H
HW
� O
z
�
�
0
W
z
w
w
a
U
�
C7
z
H
N
z
w
°� y
�
��
o�
N��
�
m
a�a z
'Ci
.. � y ..
a� a� d a� ..
' � � � � � �
O 3 O � O 3
� w � U O
O O U �
d � � � � �+�
'tf Lr 'C3 -� O ''d b�
°o �s °o a b °o �s
3 � 3 � A 3 �
bw � o b �w�
.N Gl UJ '� tA Gi N d�
rl dl � r-i
G�! A �� C�l b+ d A'�
�� .�� �w �-��
H> E-� •� E+ O Ei ✓�
N N N N
� � � �
I u a u a
w �.
z �o a° b b
� � a", a c°a
� b a a", a�i
� am a a
� a�i w a�i � +�
mc�i a�°n ow w
�o �o �o �
� itf W �C � �o �
�
O
�
w
�
�-�i 3
-A w
N O
��
��
� �
� �
�a
A�
b �
.� A
�O
�
� �
.� A�
ti+ o
-�
� W
o a�
W b
� �
� d
� 3
��
�+ o
b �
-� 3
�w
OCI O
�
N
.. y ..
I
N� �
�N !T N
� �d �
� � C
d 01
'Cf -� �d N
°o a °o �
3 � 3 �
�w �w
bo bo
N � IA �
� � � �
E -� H •�-�+
N
z° z z z z° z° �
v u a� a a a
. . .
w w w
� b • z z z
.
cn a a • w a� a� a,
z • � � a
�� > b �» > > >
a► -.+ b�-+ 3 �+ b � � a
b +� s +� � o � � � �
C �n a� m � �� c� o� a►
b� �b � aa� � � �
� �n a�i o+ � �"i i � r �
�,' l� Vi t� rl a1 01 N N rl
N
d
�
M
I
a
w
z
a�
�
a�
�
�
o�
�
i
�
N
M
4B
e
�
z
�z
Hz
x�UU
�
C]
�az
H
� �
ax
ww
F
�o
z
�
�
0
W
z
w
w
a
U
�
C9
z
H
z
O
N
z
�
��w
�
�a
a°o
oa
�°�
z
H �
�
o�a z
�
�
�
�
O
r-1
U
a
a�
�
a
0
�A
�
�
�a
b�
� �
ni b
s+ a�
H�
� •�
N �
� fa
� �
O N f�+
�+ o -�
� oa
°� a�i �
°o 00
3 3 'd
b N �l
b� ��
N b+ N -�
a�i b �+ a,
� a� � �
,� a� o �
N� wa+
U1 N N
O O d O O O O O Gl d O
z z �+ z z z z z � � z
�--I r-I �-1 N e-�1 N N N N N N1
! I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1
U ;� � � � U U U U U U
.
� .
�I 'd -� 'd � � .0 � C 'd � C �
�s m� a a, �+ �n a� a, �� d a�
o mo o> a� �a� b> �c> aa> > >
a-�a ,ca aro-� � 3a m� � � a
G�l � d ?�� v1a -�`� �� 3� �� � �
> b> A•� +� d R d U•.� f� •.� w•� -� -�
-� �1 -r1 A m U U •r1 U N rtf m tA W V1 N N N
a H x o s� � s� w� � s� u s� +� o s� s� - s�
x a� b a� a, •� a� a, a� a� ar � a�
m � m b -� N � b � ro -� � -� a � -� -� u° -�
b ob s�� ao �o �a �c � bc ma �c
�w �w w� ou •�u �� �� � N� .�� ��
bo c� �do Uo �� Go o b o .�Go �o
xo ��n �do� Co U�r Co �c� •� �o i�c� pGc�
�� O N !� � -rl r� G! �cf b r� � ch � �� d �cf • o0
Eoo Zao p4r �� E+r �Cr �r W �r f�� E�r
a
�
�
�
4C
�
�
z
Hz
Nz
°z�0
UU
�
G
��
x
H
'aH
H H
WW
� O
z
�
�
c
w
z
w
w
a
U
�
�
z
H
z
0
N
z
�
��
�
��
o�
��w
HW
��
aa z
d
�
�
N
0
�
U
a
�
b
0
O
3
b�
-� �
N �
I�i � �
�i E-i �
d
�
a
�
�
�
�
�
oD
� �
w 3
w
GJ O
r-1
� �
N b�
•,� •,�
D �+
I
N
� O O O O O O O O O O
� z z z z z z z z z z
N N N r-1 N N N N N N e'�1
I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I
U U u � � � � � � � x
� Q� N
> > � ni � La C7 �
� �, � a a° a° � � �a�i � � �a�i
-� -� v �n w v� �> � ro�, a�i +�►
mN o� � oa�i a�i a�i �� ci� �3 -� �
i� � s.°+ > a�i +� o�+ � o o� � c'�i a� � �
0l -� �O •� E �0 C � R � -•� � N +� W t�
.cc a,a �b ro�o a� +�� oa� m�
b� �� � oa �a s°.�a � � bP° �� .-v� �
W o � O • 3�1 O -�i 1n ln O C. �"1 'd i f-1 O
'� r+ +� o� U U tn G! 0� � tn +� O b tn O i� d�
O 01 Rf C1 • -rl O � 00 O 00 � N l� 01 1� 10
c9 n 3 � H � ao cn r U r � cv a4 � c� x in
�
�
i
4D
�
,
�
z
o�
I�cw
ix�
0
'UU
�
O
�az
H
a�
ae
ww
H
�O
z
�
�
c
w
z
w
�
U
�
�
z
H
z
N
W
��
��
O�
N7�
z
N �a]a z
!z° z°
M N
a u
d
U
c
�
w
x
�
.,�
�
�
-�
b
.L:
U
b
a,
�
�
�
�
�
�
a�
�
N
i
U
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
z z z z z z z z z z z
�
i N N a c'1 c'1 N N I I I
a u � * a a a a � a�
�
d
G� CY d d +� •
G�1 0�! Cl � C�l U x +�
� � � � �� � �� � d d d �
G� d r-1 � Gl � � � � �+ '�
a� � � > a � � � c� � a a � +� ro �n
N +� +� � w+� � c� a� a� a� a� cn o�c
+� -� -.a � -.� -� � +� > > > > a
N� N N N tA N N � UI � � � � �' ?i
� .�i> �> � �> rl> U� � � � � -N � �
r b-� �-�+ r �-� �•� r �n �n sr � T1 O b+
' � 'J�i A 'J.ri In �i 'rir7 � `JRi � ( l� l� � � ,�ro, � '�'
s� b � N b � � � � � o
N O o► -n �n in -.�1 � b in in O
�-+ +� �r C c+ o� w o a o -� m �o o in rn r �n r
�o o�o � oo �n o b r !� o r in � ao �c � in
�n � �n aa �n r� ��o a �n w�o � a� �r r� r, M �
�I
�
i
4E
n
�
� �
�z
�z
°z�UU
�
La
�z
aH
H H
WW
Ea
�O
z
�
�
0
w
x
w
w
a
U
�
C9
z
H
z
0
N
�
�
��
�
��
O�
��w
z
��c�a z
�
�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
z z z z z z z x z z z z z z z z
� � � �
t'7 r-I t`7 f7 M N'1 e-i �--I N N N
� � i a a � � i i i � a a � �
U � U U U U � U � ;� �
� # * *
� � d � � �
� d � � d � �
> > +� i > a� a �
a � � �n � a�i � b � a, u b� �++�
�, � � -� �. �n a� >, �n b a� �+ � a� � a�
�► o +� a +� �o � +� �o o > b a+ -� a� -� a�
� a-� a-� +� •� a a�� N s� b s�
N N -rl N 7r t/� N 9r �d -•� C7 � ��
s.+ a� � tA f.� b s� �d d'� C7 .-+ v� •� v�
' a� � a� m a� 3 � 01 3 � �+ U a s�
> � > •� > .c +> > � i� r, � ?� o G C7 �
•� O -r1 N -r1 bi I� -.� � O t� Rf U -�1 -� -r1
', � A � m � -� � .� A a a, +� b u �
�� o � � � x i � x o � '� a m a�,� b�
0 o N �n � N N .�-i � o rn � a .�C �� b o
�O d� ln �-i O N e�i C1 N N O '� O O 4) l� 00
� 01 10 t0 l� � 10 tC l� 1C ri ,'� tA 'A4 W l� U�
4F
�
a.
z
Nz
�z
°z�
°u�
O
��
x
H
� �
ax
EW
� O
z
�
�
0
W
z
w
w
a
U
�
C7
z
H
0
N
z
�
��
�
a�
oa
� �
W
z
H �
N
�
aa z
. '
�
•. •� •. •. •. •. •. ' •. •� �
� � � � � � � � �
� 0 � 0 � 0 0 � �
� � � .� � � � � �
a�i a�i a�i a�i a�i a�i d a�i a�i
°o °o °o °o °o °o °o °o °o
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
'd Ul '� N 'Cf �A 'd N 'tJ N '� Ul 'd N '� W 'd tA
dGl Gld d� 41d GlG1 a1� dG1 �d �d
'd � '� ++ 'd ++ 'd +� 'd +� 'd +� 'd +� '� +� '� +�
-rl R! •rl f� •� td -rl !O -•� f0 •.�1 f� •rl f� -�i fd •�i !�
N tT N� tA b+ N� (A �+ N CT tA b+ N b� N�+
d N � N 41 tA d N d N G1 U! � N d U! d N
Gl 'd d'd d'� 01 '� a1 '� Cl 't3 d'� d'� C� '�
�+ � i� a1 �� 1� � �+ d Sa � S� � 3� a1 �+ Cl
� � � � � � � d � d � � � d � d � �
H R E-� � E-� � Ei � E-� � E-� � H� H� E-� �
N fA N
z z° z° a� � �
�'1 M f�f C1 C� f'1
a a a a a a
N N N N N N
� QI 0� d Gl Gl
� � � � � �
M c'1 C1 Cf f'� N
a a a a a a
d �
y d � O
U U � 'C! 'd N
b b � � �d '.1
a a � a� a� x° a° � +� +� � o
-.� -.� G � � s� s.� a�i a�, a°�i a°�i x
a w � > > > > � +�+ .i � �
.u�i -N o ,� � a a cn v� cn �n b
-� -� rn � � � +� � � N � �ar
tA N � � Lf1 fd Rf c�f c"1 C1 c'1 �
� � � I 1 W W I I I . I �
0 0 0 � o � o
l� l� 1C �-I �-i d' In 01 01 C� M '�
M e-1 01 �°1 Ill O� Q1 N N �V N id
e-1 e�i 1L1 �-I rl lIl 1n Ui Ill lL1 ILl M
4G
�
�:
' o c�
E1 N
GW
z
U�
�
G
��
z
r-1 H
H H
E� W
�O
z
�
�
0
w
z
w
w
a
u
�
c�
z
H
O
N
z
�
N
�
ao
O�
��
z
H �
y
o�a z
.. .. .. .. ..
� � � � �
v�i ai m m m
� � �° �° °
C � � � �
! �! d � � �
O O O O O
3 3 3 3 3
b� b� b� b� b�
tA b� .N t3� N b� rA tr+ tA b�
� � � d � � � � � �
� � � � � � � � � d
E� HQ H� H� E-��
I � � � � � z z
..
�
�
�
m
0
�
U
Q
a!
'�
O
3
b �
m b+
� N
� �
Ei �
z° � z z°
N N N N N N N N N M N
I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1
a a a a a � � � a u �
ia
a�
��
� a�
a� a�
U 3�+
�
��
� �
� -� �
� +� i� +� i� d G 9 Gl N�
41 a! G! d G� .0 41 Rf +� � � � �
� Gl d1 G1 d � p+ � G! � 'd '�
f� ir N � 3�1 �� k� � G1 'd Gf ��
+� +� � +� +� O Ol O i� !� i-i � H rt
� � N � N x a V� y � � � d
!�-i � � � � O .� �--�I � • � I � � �
�, �, �, �, �, � � a-� a•� � o a�
i � � i � c� �� E� N _� �' �a
�n �n a� .� � � � o o i -� +� .0
O �0 d' N O i-1 H r-1 r-1 O In �i O i�i �
0 0� v+ o� o� � o a� �+ �r � o �n o�
!L1 d' d' d' d' W CO a' In �Q'i Ift N '�I', N '�', lI'1
�
m
i
4H
e
�.
z
Hz
�z
°z�
U�
Q
�az
H
I �y
ax
WW
� O
z
�
�
c
w
z
w
w
a
u
�
�
z
H
z
O
N
Z
�
� �
aw
ao
oa
N ��
x
H �1
� C
c� z
�
�
�
W
0
�
U
�
a�
b
O
3
'd N
b�
�t�A b�
a°�i �
� d
Ei �
�
.,�
�
.�
3
x
U
.,�
�
CO
� � •.
� � �
�1 � �
O O tll
+� � O
� � �
a� m c
b � a�
� � b
O O 3
�, �, b m
A .L2 � �
'd '� •rl f0
� � � � m �
G�IU �U d'd
Ud Ud .[d
cn w cn w E-� �
o a�i o 0 0 o aNi o o aNi aNi a�i o
z� z z z z�+ z z �+ a+ � z
e-� e-I �--1 r-1 �--I r-I e-i � e-1 � �--1 N �--I
I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I 1
U� U� � V� U� t!� ,'�" '�', '�.� '�. �; U U
d
U
N � � W
� � � i� � � � ' N � '� �
a�i ni a�, a�i a�i a�i �n b� +� a b •
N �, � � � i� �o a i� o w �
� � � � � � cv b c� a o -�
cn �n cn �n v� �n � tr o� a� o N G
b b b � b �s 3 -� �� o� �� a �
R R � R � f� .� .� x � c'� +� r� a t� o u
N N N N N N1 �� � r-1 l� � t� O O
I I 1 1 I I �x V �� �� ,..�0 \ �
�0 1G O � � d' -ri In }� � O 'd O 'd
�c � c� o �n � W� 3 G o �� � o in -�+
n n n n n n a� o°a u� �� wrn •�-� w
a
4I
r
�
x
E1 H
CW
z c�
U�
G
� H
� �
HW
� O
z
�
�
0
w
z
w
�
U
�
t7
z
H
N
H
z
�
��
�
��
O�
��
w
z
N �
N
a�a z
G
�
'�
O
O
3
�
.,�
�
U
O
r-i
A
�
�
��
U �
1
d
.. N
a� � .. ..
� � o� a�
i�1 N e� ^�! ^�
t�A � � O O
� A � U V
� � O d d
� O 3 'd 'd
O 3a�ia�iayi 3 3
3 �3 +� �d � •
'd '� b� �m C� d � � d
'� �'d d'� N b� tA b+
� Ea �H � � d � �
O • • .0 � .0 �
W rl N E-� � E+ �
I� z° z° z° z° z z° a� �
I u u � u ��� a a
b
a
w
d
� �
.
� }� � N
'd Ea tc1 �'C3 a! �n �n �n �n �
� o a`� °� o 0 1O `° 1° �° � �
o a o>. N a �+ ����+ N
U .0 �d Cl >�d Rf �d id t� �+
O� �n 3 'd � d 3 3 3 3 O
U O ,C O .� � J[ �C � 1 G
O!-� O b� � ia U tT !T b+ tT b
C� -� i� -� -.i -� -� -� •� �c �
�� ax �� �x x x x �+ �
.�. r-I N(� -.� !L) -ri e-I r-i c'1 rl N G)
U O N Cti i�l CO .'+� O O O C1 c'1. �
O�D Il! 1L1 �1-� lL1 -rl l[1 i-�I e-1 O N fQ
G�� a4� cnr �� r r � .-� h
N N
a� � z
� � �
a a a
a�
� a�
a�i � a�
� > �
� � �
� G �
� � b
U I �
u�1 � U
� � i
N N O
� � �
�-1 N rl
� � �
�
4J
�
1
r
O C7
�z
�z
°z�
UN
G
�z
aH
H H
WW
E-�
� O
z
�
�
c
w
z
w
w
a
U
�
C7
z
H
z
0
N
E�
z
�
��
�
��
oa
��
z
N
a�a z
..
d
�
�
m
O
�
U
Q
�
b
O
O
3 �
b�
m �+
ab
�1 Gl
H �
�
�
�
tll
O
�
U
R
a,
O
O
3
'�
a�
'd
-ri
N
O3
E�
d
�. f�
-� � O
•��
U � U
U N d
'd 'Cf i�+ � 'd 'd
�, �, � U ?+ 3
b+ �+ � � ti+ �
� w A � N -�
� � v-� aO.1 N
N N V� N Ol
N N -r1 � N 3.t
x x � U x C�-�
aNi o o aNi o 0 o aNi o a�i o
� z z � z z z � z �+ z
C1 �--I rl r-1 e-i �-�1 �-i e-I r-1 f"1 N
� � � � � � � � � � �
a � � � � � � � � a u
m �
� a�i °' �n a�i � � a�, �n -� a�i �
� � '� 1O a � s � �O a�i a �
a b b-•ro b b ab ob vaib m �
o s� s� � 3 �+ s� 3 G •� 3 G .�e w
�J Cf U� A�".. c�1 �"1 N �1 .0 U N ld �
o � � a�i ~-�' x� �� �� a � �� o �
x I � U N x � i � 1 � I �� � 1 U �
� �o �o ar+ -�o mo a►.� a�rn �� +� +�
ao b o �t7 o q o A o, r� � a a rn �O e� a� S�
�-Ni O� �� ��-1� f�A� U� O� t�� x� p�4' D4
�
�
�
�
4K
�
�
z
o�
�z
EH
Hz
cw
o�
uu
0
�
��
z
H
aH
ax
ww
H
�o
z
�
�
c
w
z
w
�
U
�
�
z
H
z
O
N
z
�
N
aw
��
o�
��w
z
H
�
o�a z
�
�
�
N
�
�
0
z
�� � z° z z° z z° z z z°
r-I th e� ei e� e� r-1 rl e� e�
',� U � � U U U U U �
�
�
-rl
� b
d �
� •rl
O �
x A �
� � � a, a a�
� > � � � �s -� �
A�r1 �A �> � % � O� C�l O�
O�o 3 U� �
�?� f�A'3 N� d� U b+� 1� w�
�3 a�m °q1� a� �+ a �'� + ��
O .0 U Gi RC +� �t +� 'd -� � � Rf +�
� �+ -� ia � � G � 3a � A � b � C
b••+ a-� a� a, +� a, ca +� b a� A�+ a,
a�x w �u cnu cn �u �� _�u
�� �o �>o �+� w � ��n m � ��
.-� in q�o i� a� v� � a, o in d�o m� -�+ �o
�� N� m�a E+ o �0 3� � pr, N Q a�"�
�r E� tAt� � Wr Ga r �Cr (90 v�r
�
N
�
I
bL
h
�
� �
EN
H "',�.
°z�UU
O�
��
z
aH
H H
WW
E�
�O
z
�
�
0
w
z
w
w
a
U
�
C7
z
H
z
N
z
�
�
�
�a
c
o�
��
z
N��
o�o z
�.
�
a
�
1
z z° z z z° z°
r-1 �i r-I
u a a u u u
z z° z z
M M M C1
a a a a
x z°
� �
U U
�
�
1"'�
�
N
i� Cl
N C a
+� � ar c
'� �� � ��
� b b b +� � � a �s
'� �n �n �n �n o � o o a� a� � b�' �> � c
o �o �o �o �o � a � a � a � � -� � � b '� �, �
�,� ��� ob �b �b s� s� N o a�� a�
� b b b aa b� roa o o c+�a wb � i
�+ 3 w 3 3 3 �-� ao •� d•� d s� �3
�7 ,[ �.0 .� .� �l 3 3 PG 3 a� a� o� a� o ?� +� ••� o
b+ O b+ b+ b+ � r+ r-+ � 23 �t3 b ��c �� i� a
a�ix 3�C x x �-� �-� �-�+ ?� ?� � �� UU ��
�+ a� -� x a x -� x a a a � ,c �
Ts a� .N o� rr n 3� b Ts x o C�n i� o
-.�i OD -.�i rl 'd' e�i 1�1 r-1 �-i e-1 'i.�" r-1 O O O rl tA -rl O '.3' N
�1 N M t�f d� Q) sM O tn ��0 r-1 1n o� O�C N O r1
w� ��o �o �o �rn uo� v�rn o� o� rn a�n ��n �n�
4M
�
a_
Hz
Hz
z�
°vN
O �
�Z
H
ax
HW
I � O
z
�
�
O
w
z
w
a
u
�
�
z
H
z
O
N
H
z
�
�yW
�
4Q
O�
��
z
H�
�
c�a z
0
z z z z
C1 M C�1 M
a u U U
N
� � N �
E3 i. r-1 .�.
t� � RC U �
�G b w�
�b � � G
41� �U OU �A
� �� �� �
�o�o �� vxl� tn
I
d'
�i
� � 1
N �
� � a
� o 0
� �
O V
� � d
� b b
o �
0
O 3 3
3 b
� aNi
�ar b
.d N N CT
Ol �
� � � �
w H H�
N N N
z z z z z�+ � z�
�
e-I N1 W N r-i rl rl rl �-�I
u ac * a v� v� N��
a
� � � � � �
� � � � d � � �
b � � � t� � N �
� ��� � � � � � � �
� S�I � i� N N N N N N
vi � \ .� � � �-�i � � .-�i
W �� f� •� N N N N N
� O� � D 1 1 I 1 1
cn �� � � o o � � ao
�o x-� o � o rn o`", rn coi
� cn w � �o �o in in �n �n
4N
w
�
._ •- �; a�
� � N �
O � ,-�1 �
EH � d d �
d �
b
O
UU � � 3 3
3
3
pN �N ,�y bN 'd
d
� H '� � b 'a'l ,d � -�
�N ��� �NtT �� �
d � d b � b �
H W �1 41 �I � .r � �
� O H� H� H� H
(
z
�
�
c
W
z
w
a
U
N
C7
z
H
z
0
N
N
a�
�
�
�
�
N
a�
�
e�
�
�
d d
� �
N �
O �
� �
U V
G �
d
b 'd
O �
3 3
b �
d
'� :d
N �
� �
H E+
3
a
O
�
w
d
�
��
-� �
> �
O�
� �
��
O O
.,
�
..
� � z � � z z x
r-i ei rl r1 r-1 rl e-1 M
� � � � � � � �
tn ts u� v� t!� t» tn U
��
f'1
�
a
�
�
�
1
z° z z
N N N
a a oc
H �
�
� a�i a a�'i c�'i �
a�
>
� c�n � �.�, � � a�'i � a� a�i � '� +� �
i� +� � C U d G! �v b+ C�i G�! �
a � \ N N N y > � +"� � � .� �+ s� �
'� a � � �+ N b v�i v�i v�i
O � � �-�i � ,� d � �
� Q N N N N N 00 N t") t") O) -� f� N N N
W� 1 I I 1 1 � � � � U�
H W O �p I 1 �� � - I 1 I
� � � d� O .� O
d' O l� l� In e-1 t� CO e� N �r" rl N C1
f� $� tl'1 �j � � l� O tn 01 C1 O tn C! 1f1 I!'1 It'f
t� tn tn � N tn tn x�o O �o t� tD
40
r
�,,
�
Hz
Hz
z�
UU
N
O �
�az
aH
ww
� �o
z
�
�
O
w
z
w
a
U
�
�
z
H
O
N
�
m
a
O
d
�
H
..
�
�
O
O
w
i-1
�
�
d
.�
�+
0
� � � G1
� � � �
3 y y o
� � � '�
� � U
U V
� d � �
� o 0 0
0 0 0
d � 3 3
� d � � � �
U "� � b i� .d
� •rA � •N � N
,�-�i a�i a�ib d� �
�� �a�i �a°�i �
�� H� H� H
1
�
�
1
„ -�
� �
�. � y � y N
z z z z z z '°'' '' � � z z
N C1 f'1 M N1 C1 C1 !°'1 f'1 �"� N N
p4 U U U U U U PG PG � � �
N
� �
� � �
W � i� G� � � p
� cn � o� `� � � u a� a� � � � � � a
� cn � � -a � a � � � � � � � o �+ a�
� N �
� O � �,Q+ N � a ti+ � '� y -'�"�'I 3 -� � C 4� O 3
oa b �� �s�w a�im -�� � �a�i � .� �
c b-� N a a� •� a+� +� -r+ >�+ b� m�+� a b
-� .� � a� -� a� a a� �, m � �
cn o N 3 m �-�i � n o� m � N �n N � +� N +� �o b ro � N
w� i s�-.� a� � 3 d 3 d a�ia v�i� cn � 30 ��
o�
� � ii � � U m -.a o .-�a -� 3� -� S-�i � .� � � o >� d� �
Il1 -.-I �-�I -ri -rl l� 00 l� Li ld Cr' .'3 d' N rl O e-1 r-�1 If1 d�
al `�i 1C 1� N pG �i C] N �" 'J U�►7 f� �0 N It1 N e-I W lL1 W In
4P