PRE CONSTRUCTION DOCv. /1(7
5. District Separation
When an R-3 property is adjacent to any R-1 or
R-2 District there shall be either a 15 foot
planting strip, fence, or wall provided on R-3
property. This must be substantial enough to create
a physical separation of the property and considered
acceptable by the Building Board.
45.079. Existing Facilities Existing
Facilities
1. Site Improvements
All existing property occupied by buildings at the
date of adoption of this ordinance in this district
will conform to the following sections of this
ordinance by January 1, 1973:
Section 45.075 - 1 General Provisions For All Parking
Areas in R-3 District
A. Drainage and Surface
Section 45.076 Landscaping
Section 45.077 Exterior Materials
2. Exterior Maintenance of Buildings
2. Exterior Development Permit
In order to make the necessary alterations to conform
to the above standards, an exterior development
permit shall be applied for by the applicant and
approved by the Building Inspection Department. A
Building Board approval is not necessary for this
permit.
38
, Building Standards -Design Control Meeting of March 18, 1971 Page 3
The lower level of the finished module will be an animal shelter and the
upper level will be a manufacturing area. Mr. Oulman and Mr. Davidson
were informed that the animal shelter would have to be approved by the
Health Inspector.
The Board also mentioned that a means of egress should be provided at 69th
so that future traffic problems would be taken care of. They also mentioned
that they would appreciate cooperation in the use of the creek area with the
City and private organizations.
MOTION by Tonco to recommend approval of a building permit for the addition
to the existing building subject to the following stipulations:
1. That the plans for the animal shelter be approved by the Health
Inspector.
2. That a means of egress be provided at 69th to solve any future traffic
problems.
Seconded by White. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried
unanimously.
4. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX TO BE LOCATED
ON THE SOUTH , OF LOT 4, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION #108, THE SAME BEING 1619 -
73RD AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, (REQUEST BY SID BADER, 3005 OTTAWA AVENUE
1 SOUTH, ST. LOUIS PARR, MINNESOTA 55416.)
Mr. Zollie Baratz was present to present the request.
Mr. Baratz stated that this will be a 24 unit apartment complex. They also
have a 24 car garage. The building will be stucco and face brick. Both
buildings will have a mansard roof. There will be a fenced -in refuse area
by the back door with two dumpsters.
Mr. Baratz was informed that more brick would be required to meet the 50
percent brick requirement in the Code. This was agreed to by Mr. Baratz
and he assured the Board new plans would be submitted showing this increase
in brick area.
In going through the plans, the Board asked Mr. Baratz where the boiler
room, laundry room, and storage facilities would be located as they were not
shown on the plans. Mr. Baratz said he was not certain but in a previous
building they had carried the stairway down one more flight and put these
facilities below the other two floors. The Board stated that complete plans
showing these facilities and where they would be located were necessary
before a building permit could be issued.
The Board then questioned how the party walls would be constructed. Mr.
Baratz said they would be two separate 2 x 4 walls with 1" between each
wall plus sheetrock. The total width of the walls will be 9k inches.
Buildtaul Standards -Des Control Control Meeting of March 18, 1971 Page 4
NOTION by Lindblad to recommend approval of a building permit subject to
C the following stipulations®
1. That a complete set of plans be submitted showing the boiler room,
laundry room, and storage facilities.
2. That plans be submitted showing additional brick added to the building
to meet the requirement of 50 percent brick.
3. Speoify species of shrubbery shown on the plans.
Seconded by Tonco. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried
unanimously.
5. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT PHASE III OF GEORGETO
LOCATED AT 5640 56601 5680, 5720, AND 5740 EAST RIVER ROAD,
MINNESOTA. (REOUEST BY MAURICE FILISTER, 5750 EAST RIVER ROAD
Mr. Maurice Filister and Mr. Bill Meyer were present to present the
request.
it was stated that these plans had been brought before the Board previously
for approval of a change in the building locations which had been granted.
Mr. Muhich also informed Mr. Filister that there wasn't any curbing on
East River Road West Service Road and that he should be aware that there
will be an improvement and he would be assessed for it as was stated in the
Council minutes of the March 1, 1971 meeting.
The Board mentioned that concrete curbing around all blacktop areas was
required and this was not shown on the present plan. Mr. Filister then
proceeded to draw on the plans in red all areas that would have concrete
curbing. The Board then asked Mr. Filister what he was going to have between
the double parking area to prevent the cars from backing into each other.
Mr. Filister stated that he had not decided what he wanted in there as yet.
He also said he would not put in anything that either LLL City Engineer or
the Building Inspector did not approve of.
The Board asked Mr. Filister if he couldn't decide now as that was why they
were meeting to get all these things ironed out. Mr. Filister said that he
couldn't decide now because he would have to check on prices, etc. first.
The Board then asked him if he would know in a couple of weeks so that they
could look at it at the next Board meeting or else they could even hold a
special meeting if he could decide sooner.
Mr. Filister continued to say that he did not know when he would decide on
such a minor detail but that he would not put in anything that either the
City Engineer or the Building Inspector did not approve of.
The Board then stated that they did not feel they could recommend approval
of a permit with incomplete plans.
3
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING 0$ APRIL 5, 1971
PAGE 12
_The City Engineer reported that D--dtronics have requested a delay on their plans
so no action is necessary at this time.
4. CONSIDERATION OF A P.MQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN APARTP7aff CWMILtEX . TO BE LOCATED
ON THE SOUTH ]i OF LOT 4, FJJDITOR'S SUBDIVISION ;)103, T143 SASE BEING 1619
73RD AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY SID BIAMER,E 3005 OTTAWA
AVENUE SOUTH, ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55416):
The City Engineer said haat the'Building Board recommended approval of the plans
with the stipulation that they wanted additional bric,%, which the petitioner
agreed to. He then shored the Council an elevation of the building, and added
that they have agreed to put in shrubbery. It would be about 50% brick and the
rest stucco. Councilman Liebl said that there is an attractive apartment building
in the area now.
MOTION by Councilman Harris to approve the building permit for Sid Bader subject
to the Board's stipulations. Seconded by Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried unanimously.
S. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT PHASE III OF GEORGETOWN APARTMENTS
LOCATED AT 5640, 5680, 5720, AND 5740 EAST RIVED. ROAD, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA.
(REQUEST BY MAUR,ICE FILISTER, 5750 EAST RIVER ROOD, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA,
55432) :
The City Engineer said that this.request is to construct Phase III of the
Georgetown Apartment complex. The Building Board recommended approval of the
plans. Originally he showed curbing all around and a divider strip on the
plans. Mr. Pilaster was present and did not w, -ant to show any curbing in the center
of the parking lot and removed it. The City Engineer's rec s -,nidation is, if he
is going to remove the divider strip from the parking lot, he should provide
islands of trees or shrubbery to break up the large expanse of parking area.
With this addition of units the existing roadway will naed upgrading and will need
curbing. The Council has already ordered these improvzments and Mr. Filister
should understand that there will be assessments coming. He expressed some concern
that this complex would have a potential of high maintanance because of the
different colors on the fronts. There is some problem in regard to utilities, but
he concurs with the recommendation of the City that there would have to be a lift
station and loops.
Councilman Harris asked why he took out the center divider. The City Engineer said
that it shows on the originol plans, but he changed them. He said that he dial not
need the additional parking. He felt that there should be some landscaping to
break up the large expanse:.of parking. There would be curbing mound the trees or
shrubs. Councilman Harris said that he agreed that scmiathing should be put in.
Councilman Liebl questioned the wisdom of putting in islands as it would cause
problems with snow plowing in the winter, and it would harder to maintain. The
City Engineer said that thore-would still be fairly large open spaces. Councilman
Liebl asked where the snow would go. The City Engineer. said against the building
in the space beyond the sidmialk. Councilman Licbl pointed out that on the original
proposal by Holiday Village llorth, thea had iclands, then came in later to request
permission to take thein out. The City EngineAex said that. after that, they
changed their minds. Councilmaai Liebl felt that they would still be hard to
maintain. The City Engineer pointed out that there would have to be walkways
anyhow through the parking lot.
d
2T I EST NT •':
4 I Y
3005 OTTAWA AVENUE SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS, -MINNESOTA 55416
April 130 1971
Mr. Nasim Qureshi, Engineer
Fridley City Hall
6431 University Avenue Northeast
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55421
Dear Mr. Qureshi:
Per our discussion of last week, please be advised that I spoke
to the new owner of the property located at 1641 Seventy -Third
Avenue Northeast last night, April 12, 19719 a Mr. A. T. Strehlow.
I notified him of our re -zoning and the 24 unit building we intend
to build shortly. I told him the former owner of his property
had requested that the driveway be on the West side of the lot,
and the shrubs and berms be on the East side, adjacent to his
property. He thought this sounded logical to him.
We are proceeding with final prints in accordance with our meeting
with you and the building inspector of one week ago.
Thank you for your cooperation, I remain.
cc: Jim Cooperman
Leonard Juster
Very truly yours,
BAR -E "C'ONSTRUCTION CO1tPANY
.ref ,.--�-----
r�Sid Bader
Ctrry tII�U/f�ppr OF FFiCyi�DAL`(�ZY ..
V"V I Yia9�VERSIT i A los rj.F,
f
t'Y I1� • � '.M . � a
"The protective surface on exterior walls of a building above ground level shall be maintained in good repair so
as to provide a sufficient covering and protection of the structural surface underneath against its deterioration.
Without limiting the generality of this section, a protective surface of a building shall be deemed to be out of
which the protective
repair if , fl more than 25or chalked away of the area for {b)any plane or wall more than 25%0 of the pointing of any brick or sace is tonetIs wallll blistered,
stloose
cracked, flaked, scaled
or has fallen out."
205.078. Screening
1. General Requirements
A. All screening must be approved by the Building Board.
B. All screening within 30 feet of all driveways and street intersections shall not be over 36 Inches in height
above the curb or center line of the street.
C. All screening shall be maintained adequately for the purpose it was originally intended for on the
approved plans.
2. Parking Facilities
Parking between the building and street must be screened from the street by a hedge, solid fence or closely
grown planting strip, at least 36 inches in height.
3. Loading Facilities
Loading in the side yard must be screened from view from the public street by a planted strip or a 6 foot fence
of substantial construction approved by the Building Board.
4. Garbage Storage
rs must be in either the rear or side yard and must be screened from public
Garbage receptacles or incinerato
view by a 6 foot approved fence.
District Separation
be ei
planting
ot
ip
ence
When an R-3 property is adjacent
must be substantial enough t y R-1 or R-2 Distrit thereshall
a phys caloseparation ofrthefproperty
wall provided on R-3 property.
and considered acceptable by the Building Board.
205.079. Existing Facilities
1. Site Improvements
All existing property occupied by buildings at the date of adoption of this ordinance in this district will conform
to the following sections of this ordinance by January 1, 1974:
Section 205.075 — 1 General Provisions For All Parking Areas in R-3 District
A. Drainage and Surface
Section 205.076. Landscaping
Section 205.077 Exterior Materials
2. Exterior Maintenance of Buildings
Section 205.078 Screening
2. Exterior Development Permit
205.079
Screening
Existing
Facilities
205-22