The URL can be used to link to this page

AF-ZOA - 41841CITY of FRIDLEY 6431 Uaivessity Ave. N. E., Min�neapolis 21, Miaa. P H O N E: __� ,�O - 3yS0 STOP WORK REMARKS: PE�ALiy Fo�. R�moJ�N� T��S TH� /�J' � �.. � �r f �C . c d 7�"��.► � �� t S .r c � e � G s �t � � /r �' / � /�• � -• ► � �s7` s 7� -c O r�' �� c •-t i N � /. 2 •M.. .,v�. � � ��,� � �-�� — r�/4�T3 ADDRESS INSPECTOR DATE �v, x f . SCHAFER'S SPECIALTIES MPLS. �� REGULAR COUNCII. MSETING 0� AUGU5T 20, 1973 MEETING DATES MO�TDAY IN PAGE 18 MOTION by Councxlman Nee that threa mee4ings be set in September for Sep mb la, 17, and 24. Seconded by Councilman IItter. Upon a voice vote, al otin aye, Mayor iaebl declared the motion carried uaanimoualy. APPROVAT. OF LETTER SCHEDULING MLETING WTTH JOHN BOLADID CHA METROPOLIT. COUNCIL: Aiscussiou took place and the meeting with Mr. John Bol was scheduled for September 17, I973. OF THE CITY TO MOTTON by Councilman Utter to send C� Natxonal League of Cxti.ea Convention through the 6th, 1973 for a maximum � Couacilman Nee. Upon a voace vote , motion carried unan�usly. COt711IJNICATI0N5 • OF CITIES i�a6an Bzeider and Mayor Liebl to the �an Jvan, Puerto Rieo, December 2 of $4a0 per person. Seconded bq voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the Ok' NEW HOTION by Council Qtter to receive the com�uaicatioa from Northern States Power Company, da d, August 8, 1973. Secoaded by Couacilman Starwalt. UpoA a voice vo , all votiag aye, Mayor Lieb1 declared the motion carried unaninnously. MOTIO y Councilman Utter to receive the com��nication from the Ben More Dri fam�.liea expressing their appreciation for the inetallatlon of the s eet light at 62nd and Ben More Drive. Seconded by Councilmaa Nee. IIpon voice vote, all votin$ aye� Mayor I,iebl declared the motioa carried unaaimously. JOHN DOYLB: Mr. Doyle's Attoruey, Jeff Carsoa, was present and thay were proposiag that an amendmeat to the City zouing ordinance be mada to a,llow seal estate uses ia &—I by by a epacial uee pezmit. Quite a bat of discusaioa followed with some of the residents making their opiniona felt as aimilar to whaC had been in the past, the fact that Mrs. Gerber commented thaC the neigh'bora ara not aecessarily agaiast the use, but they are against the rezoning and thay would like the person wha is running the businesa to at least live there. TE�ey were aot pleased with the proposal no�r, any more than they were the last time it wae brought before the Council. M.ayor Liebl su�ed up the comments of the people who were at the rezoning meetwg hearings, the neighbors were opposed to the rezoning, but not the use. There was no opposition to the individual livi.ng there and doing business. MOTTON by Councilman Nee to refer this matter to the Plann�.ng Caamiesion for review. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upoa s voice vote, all votuig aye, Mapor Liebl declared the motion carried unan3mously. , � Mayor and Councilmen Cit�► of Fridley 6431 Universi.ty Ave. NE Mpls., MN 55�32 Si.rs: 0 Ref: Property at 6305 Fast River Roaa 6305 E. River Roa.d Minneapo]_is, MN 55�32 Au�ust 13, 1973 � i In the spring of i972 �. rez�ning to CR-1 wa,s requested on the above property and at the objection of the neighbors was �enied. Tk:e in- tended , use .of the groperty wa.s for a local small �teal, Fstate office. � . At the final hearin� on the subject a hand poll �ras ta.ken by the Mayor of Fri3ley and the people felt tha � they z•rere afrai�: of re- zoning, however, they sta.ted by a showing of hands tha� they did �ot ob ject to �rh�,t I had pr�; e:~ed � to do with the groperty. Therefore I resi:ect�'u11y request that you chan,e ar,.d amend the city onl.inance an R-1 propertf to allow the city council to entertain . � and issue a specia]. use perriit aTlo:•rir;� a Rea1 Estat� office in a Resid�ntial nei�hborhoc�d at the discretion of the city cot:ncil. If I may be of fuxther servic�, pleas� feel fxee to call me. S cerely V� • John R. Doyle �/ ✓ {� / � f V P.S. Would it be possible.to get permission to operatP as a Real Estate Office during the time that it es to process this application and zoning amendments-? �.. 0 ��, Plannirr� Commission Meeting - August 22, 1973 Page 13 .` � Mr. David Harris said he was erned about the first stipulation. He sGid hE: kne e intent of this stipulation, but he didn't want it m' onstrued that he was responsible in determining the dra' ge an� storm sewers for this area. Vice Chairman Harris id it was shown in the minutes that the City had to dete 'ne this beforE development. They just want this brou�t the Council's attention. 3. / REQUEST BY JOHN DOYLE (6305 EAST RIVER ROAD) ' Mr. Clar.k said that on the previous Monday night (August 20, 1973) Mr. Doyle had appeared before the City Council asking that a real estate office be allowed in an R-1 District with a Special Use Permit. The Council has referred this to the Planning Commission. Last year Mr. Doyle requested a change in zoning from R-1 to CR-l. This was denied by Council and the people in the area were very opposed to this rezoning but indicated they had no objection to Mr. Doyle continuing his business without rezoning. Mr. Doyle has requested that he be allowed to continue as he is during the time it would take to change the zoning ordinance to allow a real estate office in an R-1 District with a Special Use Permit. Mr. Drigans s�:id he thought the Planning Commission should have copiec o�' thE: City Council minutes before they could consi�er this request. Mr. Clark s�aid a real estate office woul.d be allowed in an R-1 area if the home was used as a residence and only people who lived in the home worked for the real estate company. This is what our home occupation code states. Mr. Doyle does not use this home for a residence, only for his business, and has outside help employed. The staff feels that if this is allowed under a Special Use Permit, we are going to be asked for a lot of similar uses. �Mr. Drigans asked if Mr. Doyle was continuing to operate at this time. Mr. Clark sGid Clarence Belisle had s.topped there and hE: said he was not operating as yet. Mr. Harris asked how this would fit in with the comprehensive plan. Mr. Clark said the recommendation was for a townhouse devel- opment in this area, no commercial. Vice Chairman Harris said to put this on the agenda for their next meeting. F APPEALS SECRETARY Mr. Drigans said tha 1 30th meeting with the City Council there had been discussior. of pro ' h various committees. He sai� that at the August 14, 1973 meeting of the of Appeals 560-3450 l�l�� O �y'CGLLQ � � ANOKA COUNTY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE September 11, 1973 FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55421 John Doyle 6305 East River Roac' N.E. Fri�ley, Minnesota 55432 Re: Real Estate Office at 6305 East River Road Dear Mr. Doyle: This is to confirm our September llth telephone con- versati.on wherein we discussed your request to change the zoning ordinance .i.n order that you may request something othe:r than rezoning. It is my understanding that your attorney was to meet with our City Attorney to research the possible ways to dispose of this item. I have placed this itE:m on the September 12th agenda, therefore, I urge that you try to prepare something for the Planning Commission to study for further action. DC/de cc: Virgil Herrick, • City Attorney Sincerely, DARREL CLARK Community Development Administrator � m , � . � . � J f _.Q__-1 � Planninq Commission �eeting - September 12, 1973 Page 4 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIVEBATION OF A REQUEST FOR USE PERMI`�', SP #73-QS, BY dOHI� JOHNSTON: To p an�. truck rental c�n Lots 9 and 11 of Auditor' No. 94, V�ith exceptions, per Fridley City de B, 3, E. PECIA� mit trailer Subdivision 45.1Q1. Section Mr. Clark said the petitioner has bee asked twice for a letter withdrawing this request, which w have not received. He did call on the phone and say he wa withdrawing this petition �P��,`e hP ; � m��r? n�; -frr�m �hi.s �� ' z� so �as no .need �Dr �ne Special Use Per.mit. �. Dvayir+ TiTiL�TDyT�� l��rxCTLT;'T?2� (lTT (lF' 7� RF!f1iTFCT F(1R A �PF('TAT. � .,, x USE F�r^ru'�iIT� SP•r"r73-09� B" OPEN RO'�-3D INDUSTRIES: TC pC�:Ctit a sales and service bu' dinq for recreational vehicles on part of_ Lots 11 and 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 155, being parcels 2210 an�. 240 , per Fridl�y City Ccde 45.101, r,. Th° same being �500 Ce ral Avenue N.E. Mr. Fitzpatrick sked cahat this request was for. Mr. Clark s��:� i� �f:�� Lt� se� �:�� s�rtTice rQc?-e� �� c�.�l ��e�.��l�s ��a�� i^:�ne�agcs, o±�, Tr2 f,�l-�Air aA� ��ihan thal� heLtC�rht ithi G�?'CnET'�v ��'OTit Ts�Y"<?At there wa.s a venant that would prevent anyone from building any buildir,g t t V�culd obstruct. the vieE•r of Embers from I. 694. Th? s was a pri te restriction put on by Embers at iYie time the property was purc�ased by 1'axget. �i�ne petitioner is Lrying to geL tne covena less restrictive, but rather than have the Planning �c��_n_mi sican. keep continui.na this item, has sent a letter withdrawinq the etition at this time, and if the legal problem can be taken �ca of, wii� reapply at a later ciate. 4. REQUEST BY JOHN DO�'LE, 6305 East River Roa�i �___ -- -----. Mr, .Tr,hn i�ny i F wa� nYP_SP_1l'� Nlr. Clark said this item was beiore the Cauncil on August 20, n'� ,a �F .3 1-,� »�yl `n lhn Dl ann n LmTt}��i C�T?� AS 1� , 3 a�u ;aa� r��rr�u u C�u �.... i..� � �a .�,,.. 1t i;i`. �::�Tl o� S �i.�G°�:1�:r anr3 tjla Ci tt� 7�ttoT"I72t•' c7n� i ur. �� .� �.u�... , � � 1 1 Mr. Qureshi were supposed to get together al.ternate routes that ��uld be taxen }i:o dis�ose of �;r. Dayle's request. Mr. Doyle's attorney is doing some researcn butr�ei�he�:� atLOrne� has any thin� in wri�ing tnis evening. �Mr. Nasim Qureshi said Mr. Doyle's attorney has discussed a number of proposals and one of them was to allow this use as a "temporary use unzii a varid��e caii i�e o��air�eu. �i�. ner�icn has �aid that this use �hould not be alloVaed under a variance and it �houid be rezoned. Mr. Doyle's attorney has said there have been ra�PG a]l�wina.this use wi.th a variance. Mr. Qureshi said he was sure the Planning Commission was familiar with the history of this case. A1JOUt a year aCJO l�ir. IJVY1� aSiteCi ivi i�GVii:iii� vi �liiS r.i^vN° ��- j, �� .� t th:a t t 3 r_3� ;��- �.a�_� ��Q�3 �� :��th th� p J�.nni�g �g�nm.� ssi_an and �he Louncil. �l �nni �� nr�nZcsi nr Mggt i n� -��tA?rl�er � 2 i Z�%� p�� 5 Chairman Fitzpatrick said it states in Mr. Doyle's letter �f �,ugu�t 13, i97s zn�t aiL'nougn Lh� rieighb�� p�Liti�nea againsL the rezoning, at an intormal po11 at the City �ouncil level there wasn't objection from the neighbors of his continuing his real estate h�ici necc Gri tr��tt r�Znni n�. Mr, Fitzratrick S�ZC� �'?e 6:��:'? �� at the Council meeting, but there was a 1ot of objection to this �, • � �. �.... .. • �,,-. ,.. � � w .. n, .� • �,....,., , • , , ��Y i,lLi..S.LiiGj..�7 it�llli 411C SL�i�ili,iJi.�'.s Qi.. Li1C rtu121ii1t� i..lJiiiliiljj1i.321 SCVCL. 1'ii • Everett Utter, Councilman-At-Large, said it was so stated in the Council minutes that the neighbors didn't object to Mr. Doyle ��]i��-i,,,�i�� h� G Y117G11'jPS� � f th2 x�a}"n��'ty w��1't rezon�d. Mr. Doyle said he just found out the day before this meeting that his item was on the agenda tonight, and it was too short of a iiv�ii:c ivi lii� a4�vii.�� wiiv iiaCa' NicJZGuS CviiiIiii�ii�8ii'�S. I�8 WdS requesting that this item be continued until the meeting of October 3rd meetinq so his attornev had time to prepare a presentation. Mr. Utter said Mr. Doyle was at the Council meeting when this request was referred to the Flanning Commission sc this �ras not a surprise to him. Mr. Utter said because Mr� Doyle does not live in this home, he didn't see any way that this could be allowed with a Special Use Permit in an R-1 area. Chai�izan Fitzpatrick asked if Mr. Utter was objecting to the Planning Commission hearing this item at all. Mr, Utter sa?d ?n � way he w�s. He said Mr. Doyle has ��ked for rezcning, which :�as �eer� denied. He is askirg for an ordinarce change so that this can be allowed in an R-1 area with a Special Use Permit. This would be opening a pandora's box because it would �iP �1 1 qy,�i nc� C i2-1 Ylll$l Y1PS$P$ i n t.hP resic�erlt.-i al aTe�s thr.otlghout the City. We have land zoned commerical in Fridley, and I want the commercia� business to be in these areas. Mr. Harris said he was opposed to letting this business operate under a variance. I think this is p�rverting the law. I think this 't � L '1 _7 � L � '_ '1 '1 i I i 1 � 1. .. . llld.LL�:C $iiC�U1u rJe. 5�LL1CU 1J►1�:� uiiu ivt dlt. LCI. S iiv� 1:1�111.11Z1.LC �v keep dragging the neighbors in here to protect their rights. I'm opposed to tryinq to skirt the zoning ordinance. . 111. i1QJiJii� 5c1iU ii Lti15 Nivl✓c.i.1i.y vv'a� yviiai{ �v uc �.viicu �D-i� then the entire area should be zoned CR-1, so we don't have spot rezoning. He said that according to the comprehensive plan, this is a changing area, so if any rezoning were to be done, the neigh- 1-. L. l .,7 1. � �4- L. .-. v� .�7 �+ v� .. �- �- � r /� . uvi S Siivuiu y c � vy c �iic.�. aiiu i cZviic �.i72 �ii �iie ?aL 3. Chairman Fitzpatr.ick said this was considered a changing area because of the various requests that have come in for this area. Mr. Claxk said th� guiue line of th� eomprehensive plan was for high density housing, which will still keep the area in resi- dent�al use, not cQmmercial. Planning Commission Meeting - September 12, 1973 Page 6 . Mr. Harris said he was noi aginst home occupations, but this does not fall into that category because Mr. Doyle does not live in the home. Mr. Clark said the Council wants input from the Planning (`pmm�gg�nn ThA U1 ann�nr-r rnmmi cg�nn ran � t ni ��a anv �nrn�f iin�hi 1 - y � -- 1 r �- we hear from NIr. Doyle's attorney and the City Attorney. Mr. Harris said he feels we have the machinery in which to operate. This propery is zoned R-1 and I don't see how we can recommend a variance when we have zoning laws. Mr. Clark said the P�anning Commi�sion isn`t being asJceci for a variance or if this should have a zoning change so it can be allow�d ir� an R-1 area. Th2 Council wants to know if you can recor,►�«end any other way to handle �his request. Mr. Fitzpatrick said he didn't think the Planning Commission iia°.,.0 u;2� .'ii.i^vi�i'.'�aa.a �.'i^vii �.^� ��...�^. � u�0:: ..a. � a+.iis.S ��ma � IIo t�...c..�Cnrr� Nf� � Tif i..n.�r . wr�at the Caun�i� wanted wher� they recomu�nende� this to the Plannin� Commzssion. Mr. Utter said it was just recommended to the Planning Commission. `I'he Council couidn`t come to any decision, and I .. � � . a .. i �... t-. .. � i.. .. n i n.. +.. ica.t_.t.Y uvi�i t, occ atvw t.iac s iuiiiaiiay -�.vaiui.i�oivia vuii �.i�ii�i . ii� v�°a�-v he agree3 with Mr. Harris that this was R-1 zoning and we are waiting for a decision by tr,e attornev`s to find some way to sneak around this zoning. I�ir . Doyle said �riat if �Yie at�o� neys d� f ind a soluti�n for this, he ielt the Council and the Planning Commission were makina an arbitrary decision by not wai�ing until his attorney could prepare his findings on this matter. He said his attorney was an expert on municipal law and he didn't want them to not be even be willing to listen to wnat he has to say. Mr. Harris said that as Mr. Doyle's attorney was preparing a S�i.ct�i.ctiiciL� iic 4v'4iL�Eu }i.v Nic.S°ii� �ilu� .'..` EvL'uiu .^.i:� j�' ..�'.° ��ul� ±� the petitioner to continue this item as he nas requested. MOTION by Harris, seconded by Blair, that the Planning /� .. ., `, a fi 1 i o o n, o � t h r i .7 � h n T7 n r i 7 a ti?!1 � F? c t R i is P�" .........�....�.��... ...... �...... ��y..� ..y .,7�.,, Road N.E., untiZ October 3, 1973, to allow his attorney sufficient time to prepare his case. UPON a voice vote, a.Z1 voting, aye, the motion carr.ied unanimously. Mr. Clark said Mr. Doyle's attorney would have to convince our City Attorney that this use could be allowed. Mr. Lindblad said he felt that this is how some things, that a_ren'-� alw��ys �n �1-�� best in��rest of the City, happen. Some requests just go on and on, and the people get disgusted and quit caming ta the meetings, and without opposition the petition wins approval. He saici he thought this was unrair to the peopl.e who live in th�.� area. 0 Planning Commission Meeting - September 12, 1973 Page 7 Mr. Doyle said at this time of his rezoning request, the Council said there was a comprehensive plan being prepared. It there any action on this? Mr. Harris said the Council was waiting at the time to see what the guidelines would be for this area. The comprehensive plan said this area would lend itself to high density housing. mL... L.r.r�a� � rt� r�yUr �noc T�'FY' yP7��P a1141 �,-��ert�= T�2.a.s� reques.t i11C �.viiiNicatcaioi`v� t+ uv.,.. L .s still ha� t� �om� fram the property owner. Mr. Doyle said he would like to have this request in limbo until the area is changed to a different use. He said the property along East River Road is a heavily traveled area. It's between this heavily traveled road and the railroad tracks. He didn't think this was condusive to an R-1 area. Chairmar. Fi}zpatrick sa?d th?s grop�rty was zoned R-1 when �g_r . ��y�� .r_ chas�� the pr�p�rtt� . - Mrs. Gerald Gerber, 6275 East River Road, said she raised fiv� �rii.3dren in thi� area �n� �hQ thinks there is dangers na matter where you live. You just have to teach your children of the dangers. She said she likes the area the way it is. If this • l _' _ ' � areas went to hiqh density housing, .�asL xiver icoaci, Li�e tai��au tracks and the river would all still be there. Mr. Clark said when the comprehensive plan said this area cauld be u�e� for h�.gn �An�ity hausinr-�, this was in the future, and was a guideline so that with this use there could be controlled access to East River Road. ur,-� r..,YAr ra„i � P_ �'� ti 3r� wav N. F., said .she saw no reason fnr aL�r�h�n �sF?W j.� �h��area at the present time - She likes the caay it is also. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that no one from the City is requesting a change. Th?s request would always have to come from the praperty o�arers. TY:e comrrehensive p1.ar� is just a guideline for any future development. , L_ r,.......�: � ,a� . Nii . C.��:: 5�1� fir?l S Ye�7�P�� W�1.L i)� Uil 1.11C I..VU11i:1.L uyciauu ;��;;� n,��n��iT ,,; �ht ;�;Pntemh��- � 7th. There �aill be a report on how Li., • �-.> ' t-.,�; ,�„-� �n.•,,r,i Ar7 n��.i ant� thAV Wi ]_ 1 �]� C�1SCL1SS111C1 Ltti� Niv�ci �y :LS �.+�--�+,y ...-r'--�--- 1 whether to allow Mr. Doyle to continue on the small scale he is operating now on a very L��it�i�razy i�a�i�, uuiiily �iE ��m� `h�*� Se7P w;i� rP li�tPning to the attorneys to.determine if there is an alternate route by which this use can be allowed. Chairman Fitzpatrick said this would be on the Council agenda S�ptemher 17th as Mr= Clazk mentioned, and on our ac�enda October Zrr7 � S 1 MEMO T0: MEMO FROM : SUBJECT: OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA September 14, 1973 Honorable Mayor & City Council Nasim M. Qureshi Status Report on the Request by Mr. John Doyle to use 6305 East River Road as a Rea1 Estate Office In the early part of 1972 Mr. Doyle requested this property be rezoned to CR-1 to a11ow it to be used as an office building. Denial was recommended by the Planning Commission on May 3, 1972 and the Council concurred on June 19, I972. There was a large petition against this request at that time as the City Council is fully aware. On �ugust 20, 1973 the Council received a letter from Mr. Doyle requesting a procedure by which he would be allowed to conduct his real estate business at this location. He also requested that he be allowed to operate the real estate business during the time it takes the City to pr�cess his request. This item was then refexred to the Planning Commi.ssion and discussed at their meeting of August 22, 1973. They continued it to their meeting of September 12, 1973. The City did write a letter to Mr. Doyle requesting that someone rapresenting his interests be present at the Planning Conanission meeting of September 12, 1973. His attorney was supposed to supply some legal precedent established previously to help the City to come up with an altexnative method of processing th is request. He did have one telephone conversation with Mr. Virgil Herrick, but was unable to attend the meeting of September 12, 1973 coith the Planning Commission due to a previous commitment. 2'h.is item has been tabled again by the Planning C�mmission to the meeting of October 3, 1973 at the request of the petitioner. We have received calls from the neighbors in the area asking whethex Mr. D�y1e has pexmission to conduct his business n�w. At the present tima he works in the building with a part t3.ma gentleman and a lady answering the phone. He does have a sma,ll sign on the .top of which it says "Home Office". As it is evident, resolution of this item wi11 take a considerable amount of time. The Counci.l did refer the request to the Planning Gommission, but did not give a direction to the Aci�ninistration whether they are giving�permission to the petitioner to conduct his real estate business at this addxess while the request is being processed thru the City. I would like a clear direction from the Council t�hether they want the City to let the gentleman operate until a decision is reached or te1l him that he should cease operations until approved by the City. NASIM M. QURESHI Acting City Manager NMQ /mh �ATTACH: Rezoning Request ZOA ��72-04, denied by Planning Commission 5/3/72 , Petition ��b-1972, for xezoning 5/4/72 Petition �k7-1972, against rezoning 5/4/72 Rezoning Request ZOA ��73-04, denied by Council 6/19/72 Letter from J�hn Doyle 8/13/73 Council Appeaxance 8/20/73 Planning Commission Minutes 8/22/73 Y f `/ , �r � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1973 CALL TO ORDER: Acting Chairman Harris 8:05 P.M. / ROLL CALL: d the meeting to order at 1 Member resent: Harris, Lindblad, Drigans, Blair Mem rs Absent: Fitzpatrick ers Present: Darrel Clark, Community Development Adm. Jerrold Boardman, Planning Assistant l. CONTINUED: JOHN DOYLE REQUEST FOR A REAL ESTATE OFFICE: 6305 EAST RIVER ROAD i -- - Mr. John Doyle and Mr. Jeffrey Carson, an attorney representing Mr. Doyle, were present. Mr. Carson said he was representing Mr. Doyle and he would loke to present this request in a form of a memorandum which states: "On or about May 3, 1972, John Doyle (d/b/a/ Leigh Investments, Inc.) presented an application to the Planning Commission for a rezoning of his pr_operty on 63rd Way and East River Road, Fridley, Minnesota, to CR-1 class. This culminated in a denial at the regular Council meeting of June 19, 1972. The feeling was at that time, however, that people livinc� in the area were not opposed to the requested use, but were opposed to the rezoning. This was so indicated in the minutes of both the Commission and the Council. At the time of the beforementioned hearings, a comprehensive plan was being developed for a number of areas within �'ridley, the area in question being one of these. Since that decision of June 19, 1972, the City Council has adopted, for the area in question, a proposed zoning of "high density". This, to a large extent is due to the fact that the area is in a transitional stage and it is apparent that the R-1 zoning classification will not be a�- propr�.ate. �rom my discussions with some of the neighbors immed- iately surrounding Mr. Doyle's property, it is apparent_that they realize a change is imminent and are anxious for a decision to be made with respect to their property. It was also my impression that these people were not unilaterally opposed to Mr. Doyle's use of his property as a real estate business. The area in question is shown on the attached map. Also, for your information, I have attached a list of those neighbors we were able to ascertain to be within 300 feet of the designated property. With this background in mind, we chose n�ot to reapply for a zoning change. This, in part, was brought about by.the Board's Planning Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 2 strong recommendation that rezoning would not be viewed favorably at this time. This left us the special use or variance alternatives. Minnesota Statutues 462.357, Subd. 6, seems to eliminate the variance: "...The Court of Appeals and Adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance for in the zone where the effected persons' land is located." On the other hand, the leading case of Zyllka vs. Citv of Crystal 167 N.W. 2nd 45; 283 Minn 196 (1969) suggests that a special use might be in order. There the Minnesota Court indicated that a special use permit was properly within the discretion of the govern- ing body. They went on to say that where an ordinance does not specify standards, as is usually the case when final authority to determine whether a permit shall be granted is retained by the Council, an arbitrary denial may be found by a reviewing court : when the use is compatible with the basic use authorized �ithin the particular zone and does not endanger the public health or safety or the general welfare of the area affected or the community as a whole. This view is confirmed by Section 45.191 of the Ordinances of the City of Fridley where it is set out that a reasonable degree of discretion in determining suitability of certain uses is given the City Fathers. Generally, when passing on a special use permit, the governing body looks to the following; health, safety and welfare of the commun�ty �ncluding tra�fic hazards, land valuations, compatibility of uses and th.e �verall character of the area as it is, and as it is to be. The comprehansive plan has indicated that East River Road which is adjacent to the property in question is a major source of traffic congestion and danger. Also, the entire area in question was proposed as a high density use rather than R-l. It is apparent that Mr. Doyle's proposed use of his property for a small, local real estate office, will not add to the traffic hazard already existing in the area. Likewise the health, safety, and general welfare of the community will not be affected. The operatiori as he proposes to use it, would certainly be compatible with the existing homes in the area. It is uncertain at this time what effect, if any, there would be on Iand values. I expect that in the long range, after a serious rezoning is contemplated for the entire area, the net effect of land values will be to increase. For these reasons we are_ making application of a special use permit under section 45.5, Subsection 4, of the Ordinances of the City of Fridley, a copy of which you have before-you. Tt is my belief that Subsection 4, entitled "Other Uses", may be interpreted to mean, other uses similar to those specifically set out in your ordinance as permitted uses by special use permit. With this in mind, and the realization that ihe area is in a state of flux, I am asking both the Planning Commission and the City Council to use the reasonable degree of discretion permitted them by State law and to make a determination that a special use permit be granted to Mr. Doyle," 0 Planninq Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 3 Mr. Clark said the CounciZ sent this down ta the Planning Comm�ssion to see if they could determine how this request could be handled within the confines of our present ordinances. At the present time, we cannot accept the application of a special use permit. It will be up to the Council and the City Attorney to determine from any recommendaion mad� by the Planning Commis- sion whether or not we can accept this application. Mr. Harris said the recommendations made in the Comprehensive klan are just guidelines. Just because this is considered a chang= ing area, it does not mean that rezoning is imminent. If the fee owners of the property want it to stay R-1, it will stay R-1. Mr. Clark asked Mr. Carson if he would explain how he interpreted Subsection 4 and why he felt Mr. Doyle could apply for a special �se permit under this subsection. b2r. Carson said this subsection is headed "Other Uses" and says "For other uses, other than dwelling units, permitted uses and uses requiring a special use permit," �ndicating or suggesting that other uses other than those listed for a special use permit could be allowed, otherwise, why this Section on other uses. T am not presenting this as an argument, only as a rationale to allow my client to apply tor a special use perm�t, Act�ng Chairman Harris said �liat under Section 45.052, Paragraph 2, under "Uses Excluded" it states "Any use.not specificaZly per- mitt.ed in the preceeding paragraphs of th�s section." He asked Mr. Carson how he interpreted this statement. Mr. Carson said he interpreted this as :zot excluding what tney proposed under "�ther Uses". In other words; other uses are permitted, similar to those that are permitted. In the new code, Section 45.19, it states that the purpose of a special use permit is to provide the City of �xidley a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suit- ability o� certain types of uses etc. That's what we're asking_is that the City of Fridley exercise that reasonable degree of dis- cretion to allow this request to be handled as a special use. Mr. Clark said he didn't want to give his interpretation of Subsection 4 but he would like to give the Planning Commission some- thing for thought. It depends upon how you pause when you read this paxagraph. I believe that this subsection means that when you are considering a special use permit for the reasons enumerated �n this section, that then the requirement for setbacks, buildings, parking,• landscaping, screening and exterior materials shall be at least comparable to similar uses in other districts. In other words, for other uses, other than dwelling units,�permitted uses and uses requiring a special use permit, the requirements change, and they have to go to the section of the code where these things are allowed without a special use, and�use those requirements. Mr. Carson said that refers to other sections of the Zoning Code and that is what he has done also. Mr. Clark said that in other sections of the cade, it does have the statement that other retail or wholesale sale or service uses which are similar in character to those enumerated above, will not be dangerous or otrerwise detri- Planning Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 4 mental to persons residing or working in the vicinity thereof, or to t.ie public welfare, and will not impair the use, enjoy- ment or value of any property, but not including any uses ex- cluded hereid�after. In other words, in the C-1 section of the code, for instance, if it says a creamery�can be allowed with a special use permit, then an ice cream making plant could be allowed because this is similar in nature. This is not.what Subsection 4 says. Mr. Clark said that if the Planning Commission was favorable to this request, they could recommend to the Council that this be allowed under a special use as the ordinance reads if tiiey agree with Mr. Carson's interpretation, or else recommend that the code be changed to allow a real estate office in the uses enumerated under the Special Use section. Mr. Carson said he believed the Council felt that changing the code was the least desirable recommendation. Mr. Drigans said he questioned the statement in the second paragrph of the memorandum where it states that in your discussion with the neighbors, it is appaxent that they realize a change is imminent and are anxious for a decision to be made with respect to theix �roperty. He asked Mr. Carson if he could elaborate on that statement. � Mr. Carson said the neighbors are under the impression that. rezoning is imminent. They have expressed frustration because. they would like to know what is going to happen in this area. He said he thought his was up to the Council to decide. Mr. Drigans said he tllought tnis was up to the fee owners of the property. Mr. Clark said that according to the ordinance the City .can start the rezoning process, but the property owners can come back to the City if they feel they are being hurt financially by the change. He said that the City institutes a zoning change very seldom. Mr. Harris said his feelings were that according to the 5th amendment to the Constitution that people have the right to life, liberty and prop�rty, t:irough due process. He said he wasn't an attorney, but I think if rezoning was iniated by the City where I live, and it was zoned R-1 and I wanted to continue to live there, I think we'd all be up seeing the judge in Anoka County. Mr. Carson said he thought Mr. Harris was right, but on this particular area, they have the railroad on one side, and improvement of East Riyer Road to handle more traffic flow, and they are hold- ing up the improvernent of some of the streets in the area until they determine whether this area is going to retain its character. Mr. Harris said a comprehensive street plan was developed about five years ago. The City is going through the City section, by section, until all the streets are improved as to curbs, gutters, sewers and storm sewers. As this area was paved in 1956, it has a low priority in relation to areas that have no improvement. Planning Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 5 Mr. Drigans said that Mr. Doyle came in a year ago for re- zoning so he could operate a real estate office, and this was denied. I would like to know the status of this business at the present time. Mr. Clark said he was there about three weeks ago, and there was a woman there to answer the phone and it was not being used as a residence. Mr. Doyle said he had to start using this house because he had to move from his former office in July. He wrute a letter to the Council dated August 13, 1973 requesting that he be able to use this residence for his business while they studied how this could be allowed in an R-1 area. Mr. Carson said the Council gave Mr. Doyle ttiis permission, while they were exploring if this cou�d be allowed with a variance or urider a special use. Mr. Blair asked Asr. Doyle if he was going to make any ir.►prove- ments to this propE:rty. Mr. Doyle said the improvements he iz�ter��s to make would re�?uire no permits. He intends to paint, make some repairs•and do some landscaping. Mr. Doyle said he knew that if he lived in the home, his real estate business would be a legal home occupation. But the house is too small for his family and he would be forced to greatly expand the dw�lling. This would constitute a large investment and would be very burdensome. Mr. John Othoudt, 20 63rd Way N.E., said he can see how the City is growing. With the completion of the railroad development, I look for more industry to come into this area, because of the access to both the railaroad and to East River Road. Mrs. Gerald Gerber, 6275 East River Road, said she liked her home and it took a long time to get it the way it now is. She said she knew it was not the most desirable location but she was used to it and she likes the area. She said if any rezoning was going to occur, it should be for the entire area and not just one street. She said she always felt this area would stay R-1, even with the railroad so close and never thought she would have a busi- ness next door. She said as far as Mr. Doyle's proposal was con- cerned, she would rather have a neighbor-businss than a business- business next door. Mr.. Loren Wolle, 33 63rd Way N.E., said he would be next door to this business. He said this was a secluded neighborhood. They are off by themselves, and that's the way he likes it. He said he had nothing personal against Mr. Doyle, but he didn't want a business next door. He asked if this area has been set aside for rezoning by the comprehensive plan. Acting Chairman Harris said this is one of the areas studied in the comprehens�ve plan but the comprehensive plan is not a hard and fast fact. The people in the area are the ones to say what will go into the area. Mr. Clark said that before the City could rezone this area, they would have to prove that this was-for the Planning Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 6 betterment of the whole City before they could ask for condemnation proceedings. Mr. Boardman said studies were made of areas that seemed to be changing areas. Guidelines were set up, but spot rezoning was not good in any area. Mr. Doyle said he would like the opportunity to use this property and he will upgrade and enhance this property. I would like to use this property under a special use until we know what is going to happen in this area. Mr. Harris asked that if this special use was granted, and Mr. Doyl� moved out of this property, if another real estate company could come in and use the property for the same use, under the same special use? Mr. Carson said he thought they would have to re-apply. Mr. Clark said that if it was the same small type of operation, he thought the special use would still be in effect. Mr. Wolle said if this special use could continue after Mr. �o�_le left the property, he would definitely be against it. He thought�it should revert back to R-1, with no special use. Mr. Drigans said that on.Mr. Doyle's application for a special use permit, he was asking for parking for 10 cars and a 48 square foot lighted sign allowed under CR-1 zoning in the sign ordinance. He thought this sign should not be on this application. We have a separate sign oxdinance. Mr. Doyle said a more practical request would probably be to have parking for only five cars. I have the room to provide more spaces, but my concern is not to have the street full of cars because of this request. I would.like to have the sign to announce my presence in the area, a lighted sign that is 48 square feet, according to the CR-1 regulations, out along East River Road. Mr. Lindblad asked Mr. Doyle why he want to utilize this property for an office when there are commercial areas, like Holly Center for instance, where you could have a�real estate o�fice w�thout all these problems. Mr. Doyle said that different real estate companies, such as Calhoun, Edina, Bell and one or two others, have had offices in Moon Plaza and they have all left in about a year. You do not get the traffic�needed for a real estate office in that location. What 2 want to do is expose my business to traffic. I have done my own traffic count, and there are about 600 vehicles an.hour go�ng past th�s property I have on East River Road. He said his land covers a large area, almost 3/4 of an acre. It has a lot o� trees on the property and does provide privacy for the neighbors. Th�s, coupled with the fact that analyzing this from my point of view, that if this area isn't changing now, it will be changing. Mr. Drigans asked him why he didn't try to rent some of these oil stations that have gone out of business? Mr. Doyle said they are difficult-to heat, would require a lot of refurbishing and would have high rent. - Planning Commiss�on �eet��g - October 3, 1973 Page 7 Mr. Ron Steckman, 58 Rice Creek Way, said he �as here as an interested citizen.. He said he is a salesman that operates from his home and he was in favor of Mr. Doyle's real estate office being allocaed. He thinks Mr. Doyle will be upgrading the property. He said if he wanted to put up a sign with his name on it on his own property, he wouldn't want the Council to tell him he couldn't. Mrs. Gerber said she didn't think a 4'x8' sign was going to upgrade the neighborhood. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Steckman i£ he had his business in his own home. Mr. Steckman said he did. Mr. Harris said that was the difference. Mr. Doyle does not live in this home. Mr. James Langenfeld, 79 63Z Way N.�., said he could see more problems for the City if Mr. Doyle was allowed to operate a real estate office in an R-1 area. Mr. Drigans said we can get problems if we deny this, also. There are a lot of home businesses that don't quite meet the ordinance requirements. Mr.•Langenfeld said that Mr. Doyle seems like an intelligent business man so he thought it was strange that he found himself in this predicament. Mr. Doyle said his request was similar to requests made in other communities. There, rezoning to CR-1, was allowed because it had the least impact on a residential area. Mr. Clark said he didn't think the City could handle this request without a change in the ordinance. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Doyle if he had had any meetings with the neighbors on this request. Mr. Doyle said he had and he still felt the neighbors were not opposed to his request to have a real estate office. There were concerned about what changes would be made in this area. He said they talked about having a meeting with someone who could tell them what plans were being considered, as long as the City felt this was a changing area. Mr. Wolle said that was why he was opposed to this request. Once you.let something commercial into the area, it could snowball, and the area would change. Acting Chairman Harris said that although this was not a Public Hearing, he would like to close the discussion so the members of the Planning Commiss�on could discuss•this request. Mr. Blair said he was in favor of this request being handled under a special use, with stipulations. He said he has seen this property and he believed it would meet the CR-l�requirements for buffer zones, it is large enough, and on the North side there is screening. He said he thought the parking should be limited to five cars. He said the only other stipulations he could think of at this time is that there be no storage of materials on this lot, or improvements ta the other lots. I think the sign ordinance will take care of the sign. 0 Planning Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 8 Mr. Clark said the size of the sign could be restricted as a stipulation also. Mr. Boardman said that in reading the ordinanre, the sign would be governed by the zone that it is in. If he wants a sign that is larger than what is allowed in an R-1 district, he would have to go to the Board of Appeals for a variance. He said he didn't see how a special use on a structure can follow thr�ugh on the sign. Mr. Lindblad said he was opposed to this request. He said more of the neighbors were against this request than were for it. He said Mr. Doyle was not living in the house and we would be spot rezoning with a different name. �You've got parking, traffic and a sign. You`ve got a business. I have to consider if I would want this in my neighborhood or not, and I wouldn't. I feel one neighborhood is as good as another, so the neighbors have to be considered in this request. Mr. Blair said he felt �he neighbors weren`t objecting to the use of the property, just the rezoning. Mr. Lindblad said if anymore requests come from this area, for use different from R-1, then he thinks the area should be rezoned, but it was up to the residents of this area. Mr. Drigans said Mr. Doyle was in business to make money and to do this he would have to be successful. Anoka is a good area �ox xea� estate, so �� he �s successful, his business will grow and expand. He bought this house, not to live in, and to operate a�us�nes�. I h�ve to agree with Mr. Lindblad, in that you can call �t What you want, but he is requesting to operate a business in an R^1 area. I feel if we recoznmend a special use, we're telling not only real estate people and other sales people, that they have a right to speculate and buy a small house so they can open up some type of small business. I think it is obvious that people in this area wouldn't object to having a neiqhbor in the real estate business, but I consider this a business, and n�t a neighbor. Mr. Blair said what do we do about illegal home occupations. He said he knew there were people emp�oying outside help for their home businesses. He said Mr. Doyle was honest in his request, and we are turning him down. Mr. Clark said if these illeqal home occupations were brought to the attention of the City, the City could investigate�and regulate them. Mr. Clark said the special use permit was designed because some of the lots in Fridley border on commercial, even if they are zoned R-l. When a request is made, we look at the pros and Planning Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 9 cons of the request. The question here is whether you want real estate offices to be considered in R-1 zoning. Mr. Clark said that he could not interpret the present ordinance so that real estate offices can be under a speciaT use permit in R-l. If you want to consider this use under a special use, then I think lawyers offices should be considered also, because if you think real estate offices can be considered under a special use, then lawyers offices are the only thing left out that are considered in CR-1. Mr. Clark said there are three things the Planning Commission can recommend to Council. You can deny the request, you can recommend that the ordin�:nce be changed to allow real estate offices in an R-1 area, or interpret the code the way Mr. Carson does, and say that this is allowed under our present zoning ordinance. Mr. Harris said Mr. Doyle's request has precipated this, what we recommend will not affect Mr. Doyle directly. We would not be.recommending that a special use.be granted to Mr. Doyle. That would still have to be a separate Public Hearing. We have to consider whether we want to recommend that real estate offices can be under special use or if it can be allowed under Subsection 4. Mr. Lindblad said we have these uses under our present CR-1 zoning. Mr. Clark said that one thing to consider was that a special use permit is mare restrictive than CR-1 zoning. Mr. Harris said a special use permit is like a contract between the City and the app�_icant. � Mr. Drigans said if we put too many restrictions on this request, we might be infringing on Mr. Doyle's right to do business. Mr. Clark said if Mr. Doyle agrees to the restrictions, then he is content with the stipulations. Mr. Drigans said we do have a zone for real estate offices. � When Mr. Doyle asked for rezoning, it was denied, because the people didn't want a real estate office in their neighborhood. Mr. Carson said that what you are saying is that the zoning code is the zoning code. We think this is a changing area and the zoning classification could chanr,e. This use will not be in- compatible with the area. You are granted discretion in inter- preting the code. � Mr. Blair said he �hinks there are other R-1 lots in Fridley that border on CR-1 uses in that ther� are buffer zones and they meet the required screeni.ng requirements. Mr. Drigans said if therE: are lots like these, then I would have to conclude that there are other business other than real estate th«t could go on these lots. � Planning Comm��ssion Meeting - Octcber 3, 1973 Page 10 Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark how many lots there were like this in Fridley. Mr. Clark said that any lots that are on a main arterial street would be in about the same situation. Mr. Lindblad said the purpose of the various Boards and the Council was to study each individual case and try to determine what was the best decision. As to this request, I have to take into consideration the objection of the neighbors. They bought . in an R-1 ar.ea and have stated they want the area to stay R-1. Mr. Clark said this is the reason for a special use. The neighbors did object to rezoning, but with a special use, the property will remain R-1. Acting Chairman Harris asked if the other members of the Planning Commission felt this request could be handled under Subsection 4. Mr. Blair said he felt that this'could be handled this way, witr; special restrictions as to the buffer zones, etc. Mr. Drigans said his interpretation of the code is that we have a special section for real estate businesses. We can make a case for any type of office or similar occupations ot selling, in Subsection 4. If that be the case, then I think we should recommend to Council a.consideration of changing the code to grant special uses to those lots that the Council feels are buffer areas between two zones and not limit it�to real estate office but for additional uses. Mr. Lindblad said he still feels that each request is an iridividual case. I think the us� are defined quite well for � each zoning district. Mr. Harris asked if we should define what should be allowed with a special use permit as to other uses. Mr. Drigans said that if we do, some one.will come in with a request that is not specifi- cally mentioned. Mr. Harris said he believes, like Mr. Lindblad, that if we were to follow the Zor.ing Codes to the letter, it would not be necessary to have a Board or a Council to decide these things. He said that in areas that are zoned commercial or industrial, we don't have to be so strict on what goes into�these areas. When �ou get to R-3 and R-2, you're starting to talk about where people live and by the time you get to R-1 zoning, you are taking about a man's home and I believe a man's home is his c«stle. If the neighbors are willing to give up their rights of privacy, then I could go along with this request. He said he feels that there should be a change in the code, to expand the uses allowed with a special use permit in Section F, of the R-1 Zoning Code. I think Subsection 4 is ambiguous and should be changed. I think the 'other uses' should be struck from this paragraph so that someone won't use this paragrph to construe other uses, to other uses than the ones listed. � Planning Commission Meeting - October 3, 1973 Page 11 Mr. Clark said.if you ar.e going to add otr.er uses to Section F, under special use, you should include lawyers, real estate, medical and dental. . Mr. Clark said that if Mr. Doyle was worriEd about the time element in changing the code, that this would take no longer than meeting the requirements of applying for a special use permit. MOTION by Drigins, seconded by Blair, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council to consider amendinq the Zoning Code to a11ow real estate offices and Zawyers office to be added ta a use allowed witY.. a SpeciaZ Use Permit in R-1, Section 45.051, Paragraph 3, F, to R-2, 5ection 45.061, Paragraph 3, F, and to R-3, Section 45.071, Paragraph 3, H, and to add to the same three 2oning Districts the statement: All uses which are simiZar in character to those enumerated above, wi11 not be dangerous or otherwise detrimental to persons residing in the area thereof, or. to the public welfare, and wi11 not impair the use, enjoyment ' or vaZue of any property, but not including any uses excluded hereinafter. Upon a voice .vote, a11 votinq aye, the motion carried unanimously. Motion by Blair to amend the motion, seconded by LindbZad, that the Planning Commission also recommend to Council that Subsection 4, entitled OTHER USES in the Zoning Distxicts of R-1, R-2, and R-3, is ambiguous and very vague. This should be rewritten so that it is definite that it pertains to uses which are specifically stated as allowed under a special. use permit. Upon a voice vote on the amended motion, a21 voting aye, the amended motior. passed unanimously. 2. COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN Mr. Jerrold Boardman, Planning Assistant, made thE: presentation. Mr. Boardman said the main reason for developing a park plan was that previous to this, all we have had is inventories of what we had on the plan�and no directi.on per se, as to where property is needed and what type of facilit�• was needed. This comprehensive park plan is a guideline to direct the Parks & Recreation Commission and also the Council in setting up prioritie�, as to which areas need parks and where they should try to acquire land for this use.� At present we have 430 acres of park property and 100 acres of school property that could be used for recreational purposes. The goals that recreation should accomplish are: (1) physical health, (2) mental health, (3) the social adjustment of the individ- ual, and (4) intellectual and aesthetic expression. The way to accomplish these qoals are through the objections of the parks and recreation plan. Thes� objectives are an imple- 154 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF OCTOBER 15, 1973 NEW BUSINESS: DERATION 0� FIRST READINf OF ORDINAN AM PAGE 9 CODE - HOUSE MOVE� Mayor Liebl asked if the proposed ordinance was the City Attnrney' proposal for the amendment to the ordinance. The City Attorney said yes, he ould advise the Council to proceed with the first reading. MOTION by Councilman lltter to adopt the first reading of e ordinance amending the license fees for house movers. Seconded by Council n Breider. Upon a roll call vote, Utter, Nee, Breider, Starwalt, and Liebl v ing aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carrisd unanimously. and the fi t reading adopted. Councilman Starwalt said he believed there sho be some additional input in the matter. Mayor Liebl ad5ised the adminis ation to notify the house movers and have them attend the meeting when the cond reading is on the agenda. The City Engineer said he would notify the m ers. Councilman Utter said he believed th ermit fee should be at least $10. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF FIN PIAT P. S. #73-07, INNSBRUCK NORTH T( MOTION by Counc�lman Star alt to approve the Final Plat as request�d by Darrel A. Farr Development Cor oration for Innsbruck North Townhouse 3rd Addition. Seconded by Councilm Utter. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried nanimously. RECEIVING THE Mj,i'NUTES OF TNE PLA�JNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1973: The City E ineer advised the Council there were no items in the minutes which would nee Council action. MOTIO by Councilman Utter to receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Mee ng of September 26, 1973. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vo e, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried unanimously. � ��_��A` RECEIVING THE h1INUTES Of THE PLANNING COMMISSIflN MEETI�dG OF OCTOBER 3, 1973: ��' JOHN DOYLE REQUEST fOR A REAL ESTATE OFFICE: �6305 EAST RIVER ROAD Mayor Liebl read aloud the motion of recommendation from the Planning Commission minutes. Mayor Liebl•referred to a recent matter in Crystal for a similar special use and said he had gone there and checked out the action on the matter. He said he thought the special use permit may be the correct method of allowing the use when the•ordinance does not specifically state standards of use. He read aloud the statement by Mr. Doyle's Attorney from the minutes of the meeting. This case concerned Ayllka vs. the City of Crystal, and the Section 45.191 of the Gity of Fridley Code, this view of establishing the discretion of the governing body as authority confirms this view. . . Mayor Liebl said Mr. Doyle had been in contact withe the pQOple of the area to obtain their, input to the situation, he had tried to handle the matter properly. Councilman Utter said the applicant is doing something improper, "� he is operating a business establishment in an R-1 area with no special use permit and he does not live in the home. Councilman Nee agreed that the proposal would effect everyone in R-1, R-2, and R-3 districts in the City, if the zoning ordinance in the City were changed. He said it would be possible to establish a business anywhere in the City of Fridley with a special use permit, but he felt there would be no problem with looking at what the City Attorney may recommend. Ne said he could see many probleins if this were allowed. Ne suggested looking at the ordinance and making some judgement at that time. Councilman Utter said he couti se.e a lawyers office in the midst of Innsbruck North and an insurance agency in the River area. Councilman Nee said the ordinance would have to be defined specifically. PUBLIC HEARING.MEETING OF OCTOBER 15, 1913 PAGE 10 155 The City Attorney said he thought this was using poor principles by making an example of only real e,state and attorney's offices, anybody who had a profession could make application for such a permit. Ne pointed out to the Council when this would happen, the burden would be on the City. He stated the Zyllka case in Crystal would be a clear example of this type of burden, and it was determined the City did not make specific findings that this wou7d be detrimental to the neighborhood. He referred to another example of a case in Bloomington where it was determined there were not sp2cific facts to support the findings. The City Attorney did not belived it would be a good step to adopt a general policy. He recalled to the Council's attention the current case of the . City of Fridley on a special use permit, the Metro 500 case. He mentioned another case, the Five Sand Apartments and said this had been settled by the land owner, or he felt the City would have lost this case. He said he was not aware of the proper solution for Mr. Doyle, and he would work on such an amendment to the ordinance, but he would not recominend it. Councilman Starwalt questioned f•1r. Doyle about the possibility of having one of his employees live in the house. Mr. Doyle said the home is not big enough as it is a very modest home. Mayor Liebl questioried if the people would want to live in Fridley. Mr. Doyle said he could not ask people with large families to live in a small house. He stated he could not get his family and business into the facility, and everyone else that works for him has a family. . Mr. Carson, Attorney for Mr. Doyle, addressed the Council and requested some time to research the possibility of having one of the employees occupy the home, and in the meantime, would they have the Council's permission to operate as they are, Mayor Liebl asked if this would be possible. The City Attorney said it would not be legal, anyone might sign a complaint against this use. Councilman Utter said he did not know why the applicant has to be allowed 30 days.when he has been avoiding the question for six months already. - MOTION by Councilman Nee to table the consideration for the request by Mr. John Doyle untii the next meeting, October 29, i973, for the purpose of allowing the applicant time to determine if it would be feasible for one of his emplcyees occupying the home. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Lieb) declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTIOPd by Councilman Utter to receive the m�nutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 3, 1973. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried unanimously. �ESTIMATES: Gibbs A tising 8468 Westwoo ad N. E. Minneapolis, Minn a 55432 Estimate dated June 7, 73 Es�imate dated July 18, 19 Estimate dated Sept. 15, 1973 for artwork at fridley Liquor Stcre Mr. Carl Nev,�quist Builders Exchange Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 $450.00 466.00 312.00 For services rendered as prosecutor (dated 10/3/73) Progressive Contractors, Inc. 6ox 3b8 Osseo, Minnesota 55369 FINAL Estimate No. 1 for Street Improvement Pr�ject S7. 1972-1A, according to the contract $ 1,228.00 1,100.00 81,645.76 CITY OF FRIDLEY PETITIUN COVER SHEET Petition No. ` 14-1973 Date Received OCtObet^ 30, 1973 �. _ _ -� abject _ qpproval of proposed property use by John R. Doyle � 6305 East - �-�----� River Road to operate a Real Estate office on the same proper�y. Petition Checked By Percent Signing Referred to City Council Disposition Date 6 � G � . a �� < . �; ' �` ; �� " .' '. . . .- . . - -�. .r-�-.-�.'.� .�a � J �.. .: '!.!_ - pE`rzxzota i ....t. ..._. .� .,. . ;J r ._. _ . .. . . . _ -- t _.. i W�� ths u.nde�sign�d aitizens ox Fr.i.dley�� MN, have a since�e intsrest iz� tta0 gxoxth �nd d�v�lop�asnt of that portion of Fri.dley ou�Zined on ths a.tt.ached m�.p. As such, s�a have r��t w�th Mr. John R. Doyl� of b3fl� Ea�t Rivez� R9ad and, aftex ex��ning Niac. Doyle� proposed use of the abQVe propexty, support hi� application made before �.i�� Ci.ty Council of Frid2ey� reque�ting that he be permitted tr, opera.t� a Real Eata.te o�fia� on the �ame propQrty. �. 6, 7. 8. 9•%_ .r,��r,;��u' �G , .�t-c�r�,�,.�t-: , -; , �i�.� ,,{;��,� � �� - � u,� � _� _ 21. �/; � 12 . � . � �_3 �`�`'" ✓'%K-� �-r �31 -�C..- - . ��• � l� -�hC� t3 j 1 14. 3�3 -C� `3 r� �% 1,�:%� V 15.3 3 -�� 3 r i6. g ..� = 17. �� --� 18.% `�- � �� ....� - j �; , , ,%� �---`� ; �� 1 r�^. � � ..._ � �Q: J, �! . "°�� I �9 / .� -/tl, �'. � .� 3 �.� �r . ..L �� 20._.�[� � 3, ��,._.�.1�-�. � , � T�e fo13.oW.fng are coneerns of th� citiz�ns that ralate to the above approe�l: i. �arki.ng iot: 1. I,ot size su�'fi�ient ior five cars. 2. Asp2ka,lt Surfacin� : . � 3. B uaiper Ct�cbs. . 4. Shart P�ivacy si�r�b axo,,anst th� paxking a�ea. . 5• Sp�,�� su_f'�icie�� o �uxx� ��r� ��rc��n� to ��iv� e�r.tt of th� �ot. �' 2. H�g�s to �h� sau�tx to b� ir�m,n��n � ne�t ax�i�x°ly nan�er to e�hance the 2ooks of �the camrnz�i�y and p�avid� pr�v�cy. �.3� Sg�eia?iz�d u�e is to ap;�3y �nly to John R. Doyle ar ane of his im;ned'_l�te ----_______._----- ---__._� far��ly and s1x311 ta�ttina.teif this b�.<�in�as va�a.te� �,h� �-----___.___, ____.__-------�._ �_�___ __. pro�e�:ty. During �� `' .s�'°'��-�I �"iF�=�i�:�� f,ane o�' �.h� ro as�d ro prt is tca be sr�I .d �+. Du�In7 �� — . P -�-' -- -�___�� - Y _ r i�l_use p�riod� zoning �� o x��,�� cansis��nt xith s�,�crounding -----------_---_._ Td �'�.�!"S�O?"S . ----- 5. l�aintain all fences belor�:ging to th� p�ap�� in a� 1,c,�s V ox better t�,an ' pr.eseni �t� Ve ��° xs�ir. � t ; , — , : t . , J � ,,'� .,,�. ,� ` 'i-;''�� ^; � .•�0� ,, '; .�� Z�� r72-04: LEIGH (Lee) Z�'VEST. INC. .;,,;.�-* ;'"�� '��°� �'`f ' �;=�; � T.. 12-17 & W. 5 f t. of Lot 18, B1. 16 <,:' ,c(�c`'�d i r, `S'`'� _-,. ;'S � .�`- -Fri.dley Park. -- - - - --- -fr - - - - - - -� �� '�.� � y� \ Rezone om R-1 to CR-1 -� - - -+. - � �� en. Office & Ltd B ,� 1 ., �� . -• - =--: • �� O � _ ' „ '•,..V -;��; "":.�'• ,` i € ;' ,__.: . • 13S . ) ; r----- ", . .;�.!.:�=' . • � ` j � � '�• 'ra ^ ti � � :o j(�� - ---- .; �.i''��.;^' �• �. .' _�'ir r` ci " •%= ----- 7 ii. -- �il.�,� a t,�,:,L�•r_"�y �L��<, �\�•. � � ^� � P- � i;� , :< \ .. `-,, �- '� i' y � -� � /1 � (— :, ._.._.. ,;--"'�✓+ � > .: ii ^ � `� � . ;� f--- i,-- — -- i �: � _ 1 � ! � ' � L. • �� - ; . • ��E.�' ..-> r`:i f 'y � � � n , i �� G _,--,, � ,, y� •�,,, .3'-� . �. � .� `-'' - � Li � L- .� �' rt CI;: -'f /3 � J . " • �.�'�� !� �.- �".�; �}{� �- .f ,} 1• ,� � %� �-� /4 ! � 1 3'��i c " i \ .t _ 1� �F, yi ,� `� /--'%�' r= ` '' ~ �-` ��/� ' � �_ '`. t '��,3- c.�+` �,,�es T�, • �'B � + �. _ i5 a �J �S � � .i �i�-d f //�� f }` ` �;; �,�z i?��:�f� .� M`� ^ �� c � :! i� �� ri• � '`� S �'ii? E= � �iK� 60 �7 J��.7 '� : . . ` r, Lr ti'.' c' ? 4"s`?- ;'-'..�'"- . --v_ - ` . -- it : - ' (� � � t�'� (� ��' k gg � / � : �, � `.'`•`S. \ °° `r ' .1C�� t `� �� h - „� Y-.�.�.. � .....e•:� �w� __ � j�, � _i--• � 3 Y1� ' � �. � i '� � � '' � _ �' ` ' 7 �° ,�0�<.�SS� .�,r'°�. � �,�• isi'v � .•� � � _ � ,. � . '* :�,�.qo"'�...» � 1 ..y '�"�� ¢� '�I� 7�; �= �` � i � E� ( ~�� j �' � � � t � *'- ��;--- �� n �t,..t.,. i.� ��f.�`'�Is � �: `a' � " � � i �� _ �,.,r`;,•- �,. � �;' , �-, � •L�: < l. L � � S r :3 �Z�. / � ! �:.d.,: ��_�� e,�:" ,, c,�• r � ; �_ . � ' � �:: ,� :s +�y7.i v sb�` . q I:`'7 i I . ' 4 t �A;.. . �i�S.�° ..f ci 3 M � �1i `�.`�1° ,� 1A z��o. - � ! ��/,,. � f � .�,�,�...� s _ , � ,� _ . ��' �'." ` f e. � . --' . : `_-t'"' ' � .! _ :. > ' ' � ' � f �'-� �� .✓..- N,'..Ea R � � �., Bs,.,� �� ","�;1 �''.�.`4 -:a �= i'�'v.�-=' fo...-_.,....i ,c';�� + . , �. ' � 6 " 5 ` �s ��,1,...... -�f�� '3 �} i�i L,�� ,i9 �zo °Zi� �23 ;2�! �'S°t?.T � `'9� ; �j t � z= .� ;� %.�;-.� ��. I _ � � . � �� ; , 7> "': • r;� ,l"" 3' �`:1 �y' �t—t � � I 1 � t 4 i - � ; i r: V I: 7� � ?.o f � ° c�= �o-� Jf.S � .c� � ., � t . � a � . w �J.� • 71 / r`j,.; �o-�. F 7: :� ay,w,�y'�~'�-' ��..._�sis I+�•�,se.++_�.d.a..+: z. :au_ � C�. 1': � f.��-•�` �/'� .�`%� , ' , ��/ .'� i �'(� ��, Iti�_�T !t � � 1�� - j '�' *�,, 5 a, ! � 3 7`• ?. :� i<:.�� ► �� ; �'�;,� �� _ �`�%:;�' � ' :� �I �;;� I ` ` K ::: ' � � so ,. _ . - .. S:> j Il.� ` � ! �"' � � �,a,� � g f /� 4 _ z2 . �.-�3 � j,� i � � I i }t ; v I�� C � . A �� _��.�: ' �p^!t� ' •I � � ,~ � f �� {p� , / �� ` . . v'<s; �z �-_-• s.sr° I • _ � --- / o �9 �8 ! 7 6 � S �-A ' � �. -:_��_�- --j- : ��I ,�1' , ,,- �;�; � �! '1 : ° , i3 z� / � �i: 1 ��;• t � �- �� ' �y ":,, ,�i �? �� .,. ` ' : I i t ; � ;, � ' f Zj � i , F 4' �� : �� /s ;":, /6 �� /� �? 1� � � ' � � _ _ � � � � � .�-,..�.._e,.t. . � �; � t� �� r �, , � � /3 :: r 1 ° ': r ; �:, -�- �_ _,._ : � =;..r.aG..az,....�= :' : 4 �. . .; `j � . � ,y -�+� s�• ` � 'i �r� -i `� � ��' � r ! ;;+ � �� ;� \ s B2 �.�J � 7�y I 7„e`. � � i 7s � �'z99`i.�! �c. I; � � ;�.-� � � i � �� .� � ��'�a �� . �s�sn•r �stl �t �— � y2� �.Z j3 /, l3 /S !7' �9 .z•�.Z�oj 22 � :.� ; r'i't c : -ti 1 _,: � ( � �� , ,_ � � � \ � � �; o .�- >s j % 7s �.i �s �s I ��i f :; ; �,_,,�� r ,;,:] t = �.-' � `� ' �.° V - _ n�_— yj-- - -�- c� � � � �%.'��f �,ri,�ii�>,."�.:�,_...-..�.� �-_f i �1f - � �'Q- - � -•� 7 ; 6 � � ?, \ ! `, 3 :r � H; t / t=� 4 !e J C- � �FE� - - !: � i � � � ti, � �r i � J'! _•► J': 1' . f � \i ��'_�..�i3 ., \ � �!� I'J a�• b I . ��. . 'v .,e. �� `„<! J:s ��.,....��5 `^ �.J �=i:t' � . <i E�� , i +:�.;' °. , "'r1 - ` ;-. { : \� ; �i; 3 o } !s r � w F ._.._�__..._.. ; '' 1� � � � I r . � ' � � � I�� I !� • � � I \ �,�:1 i F/I.�Yo �9 �3 47 ;� �s }s !3 'z i � f�� i_ �'�`�. � �' (�'3�_] ;�,-' �, , _'� � . � � �,�l.....t�� r � .' _ I � _ �` � �+ U. ' �L-�.=i.ieil'lf.�f�.;e/rl.!rir._.cn �� ¢.?�� 1' .t..o.��.,-� r�.�;a�..>..n,-�.,. � �. j �!,�!''-_• :9 CF ,: - .S Au� Sv6- : la- .?3� ., � •:_ � / ` ( �.� ,.1 i � ' „�_...-.{ � ` . `' ; , y . i�. �"}i; � ti� f'�' �. ~`;�:,�.Z:/..9�J�`i/.,r'/G!/T�!<3':!°, i��i2,c ,�; ! � ;�,i � s �� .l c �..! E... � i �i _ _ � i � � ; : . � { � � ; Q ' f �i'y� c :., ♦ � .. ;J '-. '�' af � t�...s...+a...��. -.�:�-a�,-.�1..-+....+...`-..-.. ..�...�,.�..+a. . <`,....e...l9 . ` l/� _ +''t; �> i�• `� � i�a`e i�r. � .7T � � ' ,�j • i��•.•-��'i(a"--" t1%. `i f �c�° �1 r't!; �� f�C �� i�rG �rL t t f' b y' �" ' � L�•� �� r r iv t• � f ��`� ..,.. --<.... � _ �.._. t� ^�f 1 � . ! .! i _ i � • e,. . ! q,", ,- ; °y+..'..i"'� "' ""-"'^..}•;f� ^'+ � . �s� '� �-� • .:..�+ ✓ : C�3 ' : � ! I i : ' i i j t:��=l '` -=�-- �� _,.=s� .,s. `'�.� �s-�;I : ' ! � � � f `�.:� � � f . : . • � i� � :.!"� , � ;Jt � ` � . 9 , 8 � ? � 5 . 9 ' 3 � 2 � l l � � r � -� �--� � � ' 3 t . 3 : Za,; y t �,-; `� � � ! .�__..._.,,...,.,_��. �„� t .�. ' � � : t _ � � :•':� r5 a„• � `�o:J: ! .�..�..._... .� ...� . � � . 'r �: y ! v�. at: � --- - -- - r A — �' � .,_ >> . _ i I . � f�`% `� 1' �� - �-'= , ' � • : ,l � . - . � `� v ? � i � ' : � � • �� il � z %. !: �J: �i/� � �" _.G: l : � r . - 7M.1 � �i: i i�`; � �L�• .� E� `� - ?� � 3 ' i � � �� c' . �� '. '. r: : �3 ..� _ �j � � 6 , t" .sc � � �.. ,�� !� ,-- w S��' � �w e �` 9 ;. . /� : ,« . rr �� s. n � /� � � � �_ � .r .; -�.__' r-; ; <.: . r.•� ,� – "'+- ---- �� . ! � ... .r. ; _ ,, . �-.... . �, . __ Q �� .sa ° , ` ., _ .� _ 5 ;_ �..1�--� __„_ 1; . t . ; . � t � y' � . i ' i � i -' ,.,.. ,.___.�. , � ; : �" f - � � s. � � ' r l �,___ — !Y ,1...�;.`_' ` '�.Z:�3 ?./9�;5}/� t7 ✓L' J.4 :/.�� ?_/ � � �.i � ''` ? .`• j . � �. � . � . i i j I . ! : � � ' t- � �/: ' . e � . , � l � � � `� � , =( - - - � y �°� # :._��,.,.___�.__....�f .._..°W._r��, ? � - � �t .- f, �--1-`�__ �- . � � J �J.7 � •) 7 r �a`. . xf =' r�` 1 1... ,� ' � J�� F , � Sf� I:�' � � t - � �� 4 � p� � ; �;;;r y P ,J �� .�.� .�6-.;\ [� ]'�!'`.� ' �•r+�r� �f < r.:• �.�`�: "^ `� ..i.. �:t —�.:li_�__ i _. ."_ '��, �j—_�._.._1. �� !Sr �_ � �e , ` � t�y�-..4.......�" � � ^ j �� ,Y-�T-f�i,:`}' �J``� �f �w !.. . � � . ;� . _ _ L.� i I 1 � .� � F f � Cf� ♦ r . _ ! s . ,_ > � "+ �I, s , M I , ` r-�- � t _ it' � �'� ,`T ` • � •• �! ,ti ` � ` �> �' j� 'r i/�_!.2 1!/ /Di 9 � �, � � i 6, � s- � f ,1J,z.{ �y --�` [� '--1- --.--� � : ; � ��_ „� �;: - � : �f ; � .. j ;. {. ; : , � . �-, '-�-;; { � � ; �� + ir 1 %; }' `'. j +.; s �:� A �� 1i -s( � r., l t a:� , ` - :! �.....__'..,_..! _____—! �, !_.._ � ' .1 �.._._ ' -.r._....t, ; :�• s.. __J . - _.. — - -- ---�t^ , �� —y--- � T '`-• , ..� ., ; ""- ' °" - �- - -- ' : �' . � /t � t: a � _i • `" •� 1 c1_ ^ � ( - ....! � _, � ' � , ,. `''� ' . ,r. !r. t} f ,_• . _ti�`�`��M1 r ' 'I�i T��! .✓.� ;-,-....�� .�_�-.,...ti:��{ .� '�'J�a � �� ..-,.1�.�. �4 "�i +. ' ��. ��•_, �.. �1.��..�... � 1 � 1 I �i� 1.�� . t'F ..�:i '! . .. ��..... � .. � �_ 168 ` REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 29, 1973 PAGE 3 were licensed in the City of Fridley with the invitation to to attend the present meeting because of the possibility of amending th mounts in the ordinance. Mayor Liebl asked if there was anyone present wh would like to make any remark about the suggested change in the fees, Ther as no response. MOTION by Councilman Utter to amend the oposed ordinance to change the $5 permit fee to $10 per permit. Seconded by C ncilman Nee. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the moti carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Utter to aive the Second Reading of the Ordinance, adopt the Ordinance and order pu ication. Seconded by Councilman Nee. Upon a roll call vote, Liebl, Utter ee, and Breider voting aye, Mayor liebl declared the motion carried unani sly. . ORDIPJANCE �554 EZONING REQUEST ZOA #73-10 BRYAN7-FRANKLIN CORPORAT�ION FROM C-1 AI�C 2 TO M- , THE SAME BEING 290 73RD ENTIE .l�E.: --` • MOTION Councilman Breider to waive the Second Reading of the Ordinance, adopt the ond Reading of the Ordinance and-order publication. Seconded by Councilman Ne . Upon a roll call vote, Liebl Utter, Nee, Breider voting aye, Mayor Liebl clared the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A REAL ESTATE OFFICE, 6305 EAST RIVER ROAD BY JOHN DOYLE TABLED OCTOBER 15, 1973 • AND � �� RECEIVING PETITION #14-1973, SUBMITTED BY PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE VICINITY OF �..�� 6305 EAST RIVER ROAD c � Mayor Liebl called on Mr. Jeffery Carson, Attorney representing Mr. Doyle, to present his situation to the Council. Mr. Carson addressed the Council and stated they had appeared before that body on October 15, 1973, when it was the indication of the Council that a Special Use Permit would be denied. Mr. Carson continued stating the Council had given the applicant to the present meeting to come up with a satisfactory solution to comply , wiih the home occupancy ordinance. He indicated Mr. Doyle had anticipated having ,' his son occupy the home, but had been told by members of the Council that this would not satisfy the home occupancy ordinance. He stressed, it was the opinion of the Councilmen that the applicant had to move himself and his family into the home to satisfy this requirement. He said at this point, Mr. Doyle gave up his intention to have his son occupy this home, as he thought only absolute home occupancy would be allowed. Mr. Carson informed the Council of the actions of the past a�eek stating Mr. Doyle had put the home up for rent and applied for R-2 rezoning in the area. Mr. Carson said the next step would be to go to the Planning Commission with the • proposal outlined, but last week Mr. Doyle had met with the people of the neighborhood and they were concerned with the R-2 rezoning of the area. He said the people favored Mr. Doyle's use of the business as he is at the present time over the possibility of rezoning for duplexes or double bungalows. • Mr. Carson said the area property owners had drafted a petition to present to the , Councii whjch indicates the people would prefer the use of the property .as a real estate business, however, it would be accomplished through a special use rather than rezoning. Ftr. Loren Wolle, 33 63rd Way, presented the draft to the Council. Mayor Liebl t�ead the petition aloud to the Council and audience, Mayor Liebl indicated that ten people had signed the petition and he read the names of those people aloud. Mayor Liebl said the people who had signed the petition were all abutting property owners. Mayor Liebl read the stipulations as drafted by the property owners aloud to ihe Council and audience. They are as follows: l. Parking iot: a) Lot size sufficient for five cars. � � bj Asphalt surfacing. c) Bumper curbs. T , � 1G9 � REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 29, 1973 PAGE 4 * «; d) Short privacy shrub around the parking area. e) Space sufficient to turn cars around to drive out of the lot. 2. Hedges to the south to be trimmed in a neat orderly manner to enhance the looks of the community and provide privacy. 3. Specialized use is to apply only to John R. Doyle or one of his immediate family and shall terminate if this business vacates the property. During this special use period, none of the proposed property is to be sold. 4. During special use period, zoning is to remain consistant with surrounding neighbors, 5. Maintain all fences belonging to the property in at least better than present state of repair. - MOTION by Councilman Utter to receive the petition from the abutting property owners, Petition #14-1973. Seconded by Councilman Nee. Upon a voice �vote, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Liebl asked the City Attorney for his counsel on this proposal. He said the stipulation of only allowing this type of use by Mr. Doyle would indicate the Council was not setting a precedent. Mayor Liebl said the man may be forced to develop the land at this time.if he cannot operate in the mapner requested. He again asked the City Attorney for direction in the matter. The City Attorney said if the Council is interested i��ermitting use of the property as it is suggested, the only way this could be done is through home occupancy. He said it would be up to Mr. Doyle to indicate his interest of having his son occupy the property, and work for the Company. He indicated if the conditions are met, he can qualify for the home occupancy under our zoning ordinance. He said there could be an agreement between the City Council, City staff and Mr, Doy7e that he would be in compliance. He said he would have to advise the Council and � Mr. Doyle that if some neighbor would not agree to the conditions as agreed between the City and Mr. Doyle, the person could ask for a court determination and a judge would made the judgement. The City Attorney said if this would be satisfactory to the Council and Mr. Doyle, it could be considered, ___ The City Attorney said he would like to raise a question that had nat been incorporated in the petition and this would be the need for the variance in the requirement for the sign to be two square feet in area within residential areas. He said he would assume there would be a desire for this sign ordinance to be waived. He said the requirement is very small and the Council could grant a variance and he would be able to operate as a real estate business. Councilman Breider questioned the area being in a transitional state and thought this was in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan. He said someday in the future, it may be zoned to some other zone and use. The City Attorney indicated he had mentioned this type of zoning to the Council the previous meeting of the Council.. He thought this may be a consideration and there may be a need for transitional zoning. The City Attorney recalled he had never read anything on this type of zoning and did not know of a cor�nunity that did use it. He suggested it may be good for the community and it should go to the Planning Gofimission for their consideration and recommendations. • Councilman Breider pointed out the area was undergoing a change in complexio.n and tt was the feeling of the people that this change not take place at the present time. He said he thought there should be someway to handle this type of situation in a flexible manner in the meantime. Councilman Breider stated, under the present zoning code, this could not be done. He added the problems•are with only one case now, but next year there may be more requests. Councilman Utter said the reason the people had come up with the agreement is because they feared the area would be rezoned. He stressed, they do not want the area rezoned, they want it R-1 a5 it is now. Councilman Utter said the people had heard if the Planning Commission had turned this down the applicant could take the matter to court. He indicated there were some of the neighbors who would not sign the agreement because of the first paragraph of the petition. He said as long as Mr. Doyle has � gone to some steps to have someone live in the house, perhaps some agreement could be , 17� , REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 29, 1973 PAGE 5 reached. Councilman Utter said the people would accept this more than the agreement, he had worked with them to come to some agreement. Cpuncilman Utter said he thought Mr. Doyle would want to comply because he would want to operate in.agreement with the area people. Councilman Nee questioned Nirs. Gerber on her views of the situation. Mrs. Gerber said they had been fighting for a long time. She stated she did not realize Mr. Doyle had a son old enought to occupy the home. Mrs. Gerber said she would prefer neighbors to a business in the area. She continued saying she believed the people of the area are being pressured. She pointed out they had been told he would operate his business there or build double bungalows or duplexes. Mrs. Gerber said she did not $�ink any of the proposals were desirable in that area. She referred to the Comprehensive Plan and said she did not know of any people who would want the area changed at the present time. Mayor �.iebl said he would like to find out which of the neighbors are opposed to the use of the home as a business. He said as far as he knew, not one neiahbor opposed to Mr. Doyle operating the business on the property. Mayor �iebl thought the people were opposed to the rezoning of the property. He again questioned Mrs. Gerber asking if she was opposed to Mr. Doyle using the property for the operation of his business. Mrs. Gerber answered she would have the choice of the business, double bungalows, or duplexes. P4ayor Liebl said this was not correct, they would still have some choice�in the usage. • Mrs. Gerber pointed out to the Council that there is already one half block of double bungalows in the area and if there is more in this area, there would be a complete portion of the one half block with double homes, back to back. She suggested this would devalue their property and this would be very undesirable. Mayor Liebl asked if there was anyone present who wanted to speak. Mr. John Othoudt, 20 63rd Way N. E., said he would not be opposed to the operation i of the real estate office in the location, but he would oppose the requested . rezoning. He indicated, he thought they should wait and see what would be coming into the area in the future. Mayor Liebl said Mr. Othoudt would definitly oppose rezoning, but would not be opposed to the business for a limited amount of time. Mr. Othoudt said he would not oppose the limited use, and would oppose any rezoning. ' Mr. Lewis Doyle, 25 63rd Way N. E., addressed the Council and stated he did not see any reason w�iy he could not opperate his business from that location. Mr. Ed Ellis, 70 63rd Way N, E., addressed the Council and stated all of the discussion was concering something that would be illegal. He said the City Attorney said this would be illegal and the only way this could be done is if Mr. Doyle's son would occupy the home. He said if this is not done, what is the plan? He asked if they would be considering the Special Use Permit, and added, this would go against the advice of the City Attorney. The City Attorney said the only way this could be done is if Mr. Doyle's son would live in the house. He said Mr. Ellis is asking if Mr. Doyle's son would be moving into the house. He asked if there would be any objection to specifying a limited amount of size in the future. Councilman Breider said�under the home occupancy ordinance,�the requirements for parking and specified items are much more restrictive than the petitiorr drawn �? up by the people. ` Councilman Nee questioned the City Attorney asking if it would be possible to table the matter and suspend the ordinance for a period of one year, depending orr the action of the Planning Commission. The City Attorney said this is similar to what he had been trying to say. He would suggest an agreement between the Council and Mr. Doyle that would indicate compliance and this would comply with the ordinance. Councilman Nee asked Mr. Doyle if it would be possible for his son to live in the house. i REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 29, 1973 171 •E PAGE 6 '�. . Mr. Doyle said he would like to answer Councilman Nee's question. He indicated he had'discussed the possibility of his son living in the home with his son and this had been done some time ago. After this time, he had talked with the Councilmen and they had said he would have to occupy the home. He said he had been toid his son iiving in the home would not comply w9th the ]etter of the code. At his time Mr. Doyle dropped the issue with his son and it had been a long time since the matter had been discussed with him. 61r. Doyle said since his son would be deeply involved in the plan, he could not commit him without first getting his feelings. Councilman Nee said Councilman Utter and Mayor Liebl had each expressed one half of the dilemma and he happened to agree with both of their points. Councilrnan Nee said if there is a force for change in this area, it was coming from Mr. Doy]e, and he did not think this is where it should come from. He expressed the concern for the neighbors and said whether or not this would be able to work would be the question in his mind. He thought any change should come from a broader base. He illustrated as an example of total neighborhood planning as what is happening in Hyde Park and this is so cu�rent the entire results cannot be determined at the present time. Councilman Nee said the present property owners should receive the benefit from such a transi.tion if there is a benefit to be made. He said the Hyde Park area had not been totaly planned as it may have been. Councilman Nee continued saying be believed the people should have the leadership of the Planning Department and the Council, and this would be to see if the neighborhood would want to do something. Councilman Nee said he did not believe pressure from Mr. Doyle should bs the precipitating factor. Councilman Nee said Mr. Doyle should not have the right to submit change unless the neighborhood planned this also. He pointed out that just because there is a petition, this does not mean the request would become a reality. Councilman Nee stressed the thought that the Planning Department should look at the area. He said if it would be legal, he would like to table the matter for a year and suspend the enforcement of the ordinance. He said if it would not be legal, he could not live with the constant violation of the law. The City Attorney said the important question at the present time would be who is going to live in the location to execute a legal use of the R-1 zoning. Councilman Nee said he would like some indication from the people that had signed the petition if they were willing to allow the use of the location without the stipulation that the parking lot be asphalt. He indicated this may be too much of an expense if the use of the property were to be only one year. He questioned if it would be reasonable io enforce this point when he may not be there more than a year. Mr. Wolle said it would be important to see that something is done with the hedges and other areas to make the location look presentable. He said natural fencing that is on.the property should be kept up. He stated he would not want the conditions to go down hill. He indicated it may be senseless to require the man to put in the asphalt lot when he may only be there for one year. Mrs'. Gerber said she would not want to impose a hardship on Mr, Doyle. She stressed the area should be studied and the people should be involved in the study. Councilman Nee said he thought it may make sense to float the present issue and take a look at the study of the overall area. Councilman Nee said he would not want the people to think the area should be rezoned, and he thought it should not be.. He seid he thought the Planning Commission should have a chance to study the area. - Mrs. Gerber questioned if the man would want his parking situation to remain as it is at the present time. Mr. Doyle said he would be able to get a7ong. He said some area for parking in the front of the building would be more desirable. Mrs. Gerber asked what could be done on a te�nporary basis that all could agree on. Mr. Doyle agreed the asphalt would be expensive and sa9d crushed rock could be used. Mrs. Gerber asked if this could be used as a base for the asphalt if everything goes well. Mr. Doyle said yes, this is done quite often. Mrs. Gerber said she could go along with this. Councilman Nee said if Mr. Doyle were to tell theCouncil that his son was to occupy the home, there would be�no issue before the Council, he questioned the need for a motion. �1G ` REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 29, 1973 PAGE 7 . � The City Attorney said if it would be the consensus of the Council, and by Councilman Nee, the Acting City Manager could send Mr. Doyle a letter summarizing the consensus of the Council and their concerns which have appeared within the discussion at the present meeting. This would put the intentions and concerns of the Council and the people in writing, there would be something on record. Mayor Liebl asked if this would include the a�aving the requirement on sign limitation. The City Attorney agreed, but indicated no sign size had been discussed at the present time. He suggested some indication of the proposed size so the staff would have an idea what the Council had agreed to. He said Mr. Doyle should state that this would be under the conditions that his son would live in the home. Ne said if this was done at the , present time, the applicant would not have to come back to the Council for further discussion. Mr. Carson said he had asked Mr. Doyle what size sign would be installed and Mr. Doyle answered he would prefer a four by six foot sign. Mayor Lieb] said the appljcant would want the people to know there is a real estate business there. The City Attorney suggested either a three by five, or a four by four sign, this would allow for about the same square footage. Councilman�Utter suggested a three , by four foot sign. MOTION by Councilman Nee to authorize the Acting City Manager to summarize the discussion at the present Council meeting in letter form to be submitted to Mr. Doyle, and advise Mr. Doyle that if his son is in residence, the Council would • � • waive the sign ordinance to allow the construction of a sign comparable to the square footage on the DeGardner sign (The DeGardner sign was measured by the inspection department, and this sign is three by four or twelve square feet). , Seconded by Councilman Utter. The City Engineer said he would write such a notice to Mr. Doy7e. He questioned if the stipulations from the petition should be those indicated in the communication to Mr. Doyle. He said he felt this is what the neighbors want as they had signed the , peiition. He questioned if all the other stipuTations such as the bumper curbing i should be included in the stipulations. He indicated the crushed rock would be ., stabilized base. UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried unanimously. - MOTION by Councilman Nee to direct the Planning Department to begin the p7anning process in the neighborhood and provide the people with some concepts for direction. Mayor Liebl said this would include the entire area from south of Mississippi to ' 61st. SECONDED by� Councilman Utter. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried unanimously. ' �:1?N�IDERATION OF DESIGNWARE INDUSTRIES, INC., REQUEST TO DISCUSS THE FIRE HY[ Mayor Liebl as the City Engineer what the problem was. The City Engineer said this would concern e of the stipulations in the permit. He said there are two firms involved in the ter and this would be Designware and the Fridley Bus • I � Company. He explained tha e firms representatives were not available for the , present meeting and had reques this be discussed at tiie November 12, 1973 meeting of the Council. ' MOTION by Councilman Breider to table the ideration of the Fire Hydrant Stipulation of Designware until the November 12, 1973 meet� f the Fridley City Council. Seconded by Councilman Utter. Upon a voice vote, a oting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVING THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTO 7, 1973: A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #73-10, BY TRYGVE OLSEN: PER — — . _.. _.._ ,. .,,._..,,,.r.�.� �� n crrnnin N. E.