Loading...
SAV76-02 SWANSTROMS COURT ADD. CITY OF FRIDLEY MINNESOTA 49 PLANNING AND ZONING FORM ( NUMBER TYPE OF REQUEST APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE /fro, _ Rezoning ! I Address ��/ �3- C �/ �' — _ Special Use Permit Telephone Number 7�- �` Approval of Premin- inary & Final Plat 1 Streets or. Alle PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE y Vacations Address � � J Other i Telephone Number \,6 ;71 lr �� a-- Fee # Receipt No. Street Location of Property of 5&O No 9�� . Legal Description of Property pp i Present Zoning Classification.4 f _ Existing Use of Property Acreage of Property Describe briefly the proposed zoning classification !. or type of use and improvement proposed ? i Has the present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot slit or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it?_ yes no. What was requested and when? 1 The undersigned understands that: (a) a list of all residents and owners of property within 300 feet (350 feet for rezoning) must be attached to this application. (b) This application must be signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. (c) Responsibility ,for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list the names and addresses of all residents and property owners of property in question, belongs to the undersigned. A sketch of proposed property and structure must be drawn and attached, showing the following: 1. North Direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on the lot. a 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setbacks. 4. Street Names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 300 feet) . The undersigned hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are truce and correct. -- > BATE �`-/3-7�c SIGNATURE (APPLICANT ' Date Filed Date of hearing _ Planning Commission Approved City Council Approved (dates) Denied_-��_� (dates) Denied 48 CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N. E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 TELEPHONE ( 612)571 -3450 April 16, 1976 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This is to inform you that the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley will be holding an informal hearing on a request to vacate that portion of unimproved Johnson Street, that lies North of 53rd Avenue and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanson's Court Addition, the same being 1391 53rd Avenue N.E. This hearing will be held on April 21 , 1976, in the Council Chambers at the above address. The meeting starts at 7:30, and this item should be on the agenda by 8:30 P.M. RICHARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION 000\.uTlpN 19 i Q � U m Z '� l NO ro o 70 � Q Sl_4S S S-\SLS uj ZAWC3 Nhi®Hbdw .LA. > zcFs �\F9 oo@S a 4L ` 4,a : . 0 • •� \ v :Y.. Cyt g eg 1p LL d w 0 ;n cj 1 r p �' tt.. r Q 1 b w t4 q;A Is uUji 1 V W 9 ,g - Ct i Z _ �4 00 Lo JL Planning Commission— MAILING LIST Council SAV #76-02, Mrs. Ray Presteman 1391 53rd Avenue N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Ray Presteman 1311 53rd Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Albers 1390 S1ywood Lane N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Robert Oulicky 5332 Matterhorn Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Richard Larson 5316 Matterhorn Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 Mr. & Mrs. Albert Villella 5300 Matterhorn Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55421 COD )13 TL �6 oCLMI-L-, Ct- i-L40-A Q, uto d RETAIN EASTERLY 20 feet for drainage and utility easement xsp NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY 4501 68TH AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55429 April 19, 1976 Mr Darrel Clark Community Development Administrator City of Fridley 6431 University Ave N E Fridley, Mn 55432 Dear Mr Clark I received the City of Fridley's notice of a public hearing of the City Council to consider the request for a vacation, SAV 076-02, by Mrs Ray Presteman of unimproved Johnson Street North of 53rd Avenue N E and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition, all lying in the south half of Section 24, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota - generally located on the east side of 1391 - 53rd Avenue Northeast. Northern States Power Company has no objection to this vacation provided we are granted a permanent easement for the retention of our existing facilities or are reimbursed for rerouting them. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely , Ji John L Ranck Municipal Services Representative North Division JLR/rp Northwestern Bell 6540 Shingle Creek Parkway Minneapolis , Minnesota 55430 April 21 , 1976 Community Development Administration City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Attention: Mr. Darryl Clark Gentlemen: Re: Vacation Request SAV #76-02 This letter is in regard to the vacation request of Johnson Street North- east that lies north of 53rd Avenue and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition. We have no objection to the vacation of the street; however, we would like the easterly 10 feet of the street easement from 53rd Avenue Northeast north to that portion already vacated to become a utility easement. At present there is a joint use pole line in this area that is occupied by Northern States Power, CATV and Northwestern Bell Telephone Company. Yours truly, nDrict Engineer 1 Minnegasco April 26, 1976 Minnesota Gas Company 733 marquette avenue, minneapolis, minnesota 55402 Mr. William J. Nee Mayor City of Fridley 6431 University Avnnue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 RE: Proposed Vacation Johnson Street Dear Mayor Nee: Please be advised Minnesota Gas Company has no facilities in the portion of unimproved Johnson Street described in your notice of April 21, 1976. We do no object to the vacation. Thanks for your interest and consideration. Sincerely, c � Vw� t 'J. H. Anderson `Chief Design Engineer JHA:bb 2 Alb A yJ/j 3 , E.f .tet yy , ; ass d x /PS .ZLJ e�9'#i',S .... •O .._WKf..... 'm Y R AsI9f It !! 'V �& 6 IPA _ 7 h z p k srir ; .Np a>0 .4f f iKiV4f' L ;SEL � �• «. � � ,�. ,� �,,.�..� ._� .l �'�"Gh�'TS ti ,��, Po>� C6.xd.;ls:�Snrrs' � 8 _•3�" s ♦i/�n'� - • '���{f 7 a $ irrII �� r:rrwrr �+ti s rs- n 1P 6 c Naf fry- G Q.in! 9 ;rr J R IAL'?II 'F ti 4 Wy 0. 694 �`' _ _ ., -°vw•- ��, .�vt � d5 $ F' S' ' rte" �s p7n�}i'+``_.+^_��\ � ,�8� fir.{. 1 O a1'P � .a•✓1�y1' � \ o�. �/f� SAV #76-02 Mrs. Ray Prestema.n � —� vacate unimproved Johnson j -aPVdOO COURT --mot• r � �ztv T �® �.� _ Iva 'tY,7. s - rp f SKYWOODAw ICf LANE � 4O- �.° b N pro PANB%lf0RWCl ""b MOW �ti��� 4 'Ohl .0 `L � M i n•��. Z KN'{zs '3733a� AT fENUE at.s, ne s, ac W1.11 y aar717=71 �i 8 wsv a v` ::• °a x � v in.u /x u a w d ,�A y If"f e' A ,� 3Bk i Planning Commission Meeting - April 21 , 1976 Page 4 MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Shea, that the,-Planning Commission close the Public Hearing on a request for a Special Use Permit, SP #76-05, by Arlyne R. Johnson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the Public Hearing closed at 8:16 P.M. MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council approval of the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #76-05, by Arlyne R. Johnson, per Fridley City Code, Section 205.051, 2, A, to allow the construction of a second accessory building, a 20' x 22' detached garage, on Lot 5, and the East 1/2 of Lot 4, Block 5, City View Addition, the same being 420 57th Place N.E. Mr. Harris asked Mr. Satterlee to be sure the petitioner was aware that it was a code requirement to have a hard surface driveway. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motiomi unanimously. V #76-02, MRS. RAY To vacate that 2. VACATION REQUEST: 6 part of unimproved eet that lies North of 53rd Avenue and. adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition, the same being 1391 53rd Avenue N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Ray Presteman ,were present. Chairman Harris said this request would be handled as an informal public hearing. Mr. Boardman said that a portion of unimproved Johnson Street was vacated in 1970. At that time, this portion of Johnson Street was not vacated because the petitioner wanted to maintain that area for an f access. They have changed their minds and want it vacated now. There will have to be an easement retained for drainage and utilities on the East 20' of the vacated street. Mrs. Albert Villella, 5300 Matterhorn Drive N.E. , said that their f house was on the other side of this unimproved Johnson Street, and she wondered how this vacation would affect her property. Mr. Harris said this road easement for Johnson Street was 33' which was half of an easement for a street, so it would all go back to Swanstrom's Court Addition, so this wouldn 't affect Mrs. Villella's property at all . Mrs. Villella said that if the petitioner was going to construct something on this 33' , then it would affect her property very much. Mr. Presteman said that they were going to construct a new attached garage on their property, which would- be built 2 feet from their present. property line, so the vacated street would be used just as part of the required setback. They didn't intend to Use any part of the vacated street for any structure. Mrs. Presteman said this unimproved street has been used as a dumping ground by all the surrounding neighbors. She said there has been concrete chunks, tree branches, etc. , dumped here, and she was the-only one in the past ten years who has made any effort to clean up this area. Mrs. Villella said that they had just purchased their home last spring, and they had tried to clean up the area closest to their property. 1 Planning Commission Meeting - April 21 , 1976 Page 3 who didn't live in the City should be on this Committee for informationa purposes only, and that the Chamber of Commerce representative shouldn' vote because they had a vested interest. Mr. Peterson said he took exeption to this because this Commit ee was being formed to give input on Chang s that should probably be mad in .the sign ordinance, and the people who were really involved in th's ordinance should be full members of this 'Committee. Mrs. Wahlberg asked if a member of the Appeals Commission was still being considered as a mem er of this Committee. Mr. Bergman asked Mrs. Wahlberg to discuss this ith the Appeals Commission , and then she should call Mr. Schneider and to 1 him which member would agree to be on the Committee. He said that hey felt there should be a limit of seven people on this Committee to make it a workable group. UPON a voice vote, all vo ing aye, the motion carried unanimously. 1 . PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #76-05, BY ARLYNE R. JOHNSON: Per Fridley City Code, Section 205.051 , 2, o allow the construction of second accessory building, a 20' x 22' detached garage, on Lot 5, anj the East 1/2 of Lot 4, Block 5, City View Addition, the same b ing 420 57th Place N.E. Mr. Barry Satterlee, The Sussel Company, was .present to represent the petitioner. MOTION by Peterson, econded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission open the Public Hearing n the request for a Special Use Permit, SP # 76-05, by Arlyne R. John on. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman. Harris declared the Pub1 'c Hearing open at 8:11 P.M. Mr. Boardman said th petitioner had a single attached garage. He said this property had d uble access; one access from 57th Place N.E. and the other access on 7th Avenue N.E. He said this garage would be -20 x 22' and would meet all the code requirements . The staff had no , objections to this speci 1 use permit being granted. Mr. Barry Satterlee presented pictures of the bite,, a drawing of how the garage would be located on the lot, and a statement signed by the two adjacent proper owners. Chairman Harris rea the statement from the two adjacent property owners which stated: "W the undersigned have no objection to a double garage being constructe at 420 57th Place and the present single garage attached to the dwelling remaining open and being used as a garage. " He said it was signed by Warren Sunderland of 410 57th Place N.E. and Carl Paulson of 430 57th Place N.E. MOTION by Langenfel , seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commission receive the signed stat ment.from the adjacent property owners. Upon a voice vote, all voting ye, the motion carried unanimously. tdr. Satterlee said hat Miss Johnson lived alone and for security reasons would like to c ntinue to use the single attached garage for her personal car. She was oing to use the second garage to store a boat and a second car. 3C Plannina Commission Meeting - April 21 , 1976 Pane 5 Mrs. Presteman asked the Planning Commission if they knew how much this vacated street would add to their real estate taxes. Mr. Harris said he didn't think it would raise Sittaand although bheyxes too much uwouldthis own would be considered as one building site, all the property, 20' of it would have a drainage and utility easement on it. Mrs. Presteman said that if the City Council approved this vacation, they would like to construct their garage before the vacation process was completed. She said that no part of the easement wouldd be2b used for the construction of the garage because the garage om their present property line. Mr. Harris said the Planning Commission could not make a determination on this, it would have to be done by the City Council . Mrs. Villella asked how close this garage would be to her property. Mr. Harris said it would be 35 from her property line. She said she had no objection to this. f econded by Peterson, that the Planning MOTION by Wahlberg, scommission ,1 recommend to Council approval of the vacation request, SAV #eetOtha�ylies sio ' Ray Presteman, to vacate that part of unimproved Johnson , swanstrom`s North of 53rd Avenue N.E. and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, 3 ue th Court Addition, the same being 1391 53rd Aveeasemant ontheEasteplya20on that the City retain a drainage and utility feet. upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 3. DISCUSSION ON SECOND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 1976 Chairman Harris had asked Mr. Bergman to delay the discussion of this item until the completion of the public hearing items. Mr. Bergman said he was bringing this to the attention of the Planning Commission for any treatment that the Planning Commission deemed necessary. He said the Community Development Commission had discussed this because of a request for a Special Use Permit on a second accessory . building that was larger than the existing house, which they felt was in conflict with the primary use of a residential district. Mr. Bergman said it was the unanimous consensus of this Commission, after in-depth•discussions, that the present ordinance was as good as anything that we could come up with. The concerns •sere 'that the City should not prohibit what a person could do on their own property, and to be too restrictive was a violation of individual rights. The 25% lot cover- age maximum, they felt was a reasonably valid control over �the abuse of second accessory building size. It was felt that we shouldn't get too concerned with what kind of private business or hobby a person might want to conduct on their own property. Mr. Bergman said they felt it would be difficult to validly deny an accessory building, with the burden of proof resting on the City, and it would be difficult to inspect or control . as to the present owner, or if the property changed owners. Mr. Peterson said he agreed with this completely. n i Planning Commission Meeting - April 21 , 1976 Page 6 Mr. Harris said that he agreed with this in principle,-but he was concerned with the use of some of the accessory buildings. He said that there seemed to be more and more businesses that were 'being operated out of garages, and he thought this was bringing commercialism into what should be completely residential neighborhoods. Mr. Boardman said the home occupation section= of our code does not allow any business to be conducted from an acce sory building, it all had to be confined to the residence itself. Mr. H ris felt that there were flagrant violations to that section of the co e. He said that he felt there were many body shops being operated in garages, and this was unfair to someone , who was operating a body shop i the proper zoning and paying out for overhead, when someone else was op rating a body shop illegally in their garage, with no overhead. Mr. Langenfeld offered as a suggestion the guidelines laid out by insurance companies on what was a comm rcial use in a residential area and what wasn't. He said he felt thi would be quite helpful to the Planning Commission in making a dete ination of what was a home occupation and what was a commercial venture. Mr. Boardman said he felt tha would be a help, but he would prefer not to have the zoning ordinance orked on in a piecemeal way. He said that the Planning Commission wou d be reviewing the entire zoning code, and he thought that the concern that they had should be part of their recommended changes to the cod at that time. He said they could also consider business licenses fo home businesses at the time they reviewed the new maintenance code. Chairman Harris declar d a recess at 9:10 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 9:25 P.M. 4. GOALS & OBJECTIVES Mr. Boardman said e had set up five goal areas. They were Housing, Human Development, Ac ss, Security and Community Vitality. He said the Housing Goal had been completed. Mr. Boardman sai that under the Human Development Goal they would cover Parks & Recre tion,and every thing that deals with human resources : library, fine arts the humanities, the schools and education, etc. Under the Access Goal we will handle anything that has to do with the movement of people and ser ices, and the maintenance of those accesses. The Security Goal will handle individual public health and general welfare. 'In the Vitality Goal th y would handle anything that concerns the corl,iunity's growth. Mr. Boardma said they would consider the Human Development Goal at this meeting. r. Boardman read five goal statements under this goal . The first goal statement was to Provide adequate park facilities and recreational o portunities to ensure the health and well being of the residents and provide for a quality living environment. " He then read four other g 1 statements and then reviewed the Program Objectives for ' the first go 1 statement which were based on the goals and objectives from the Parks & Recreation Commission. (Official Publication) OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the City Council of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Monday, May 10, 1976, in the Council Chamber at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a request for a Vacation, SAV #76-02, by Mrs. Ray Presteman, of unimproved Johnson Street North of 53rd Av- enue N.E.and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2,Swanstrom's Court Addi- tion,all lying in the South Half of Section 24, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Min- nesota. Generally located on the East side of 1391 53rd Avenue North- east. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at this meeting. WILLIAM J.NEE Mayor (April 21&28,1976)—SB8 OFFICIAL NOTICE - CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the City Council of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Nort:ieast on Monday, May 10, 1976, in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a request for a Vacation, SAV #76-02, by Mrs. Ray Presteman, of unimproved Johnson Street North of 53rd Avenue N.E. and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition, all lying in the South Half of Section 24, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota Generally located on the East side of 1391 53rd Avenue Northeast. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at this meeting. WILLIAM J. NEE MAYOR Publish: April 21 , 1976 April 28, 1976 s ii it PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 10, 1976 PAGE 3 Discussion centered on the alignment of certain streets, the matter of access to some other intersections, and some street easements. The Public Works Director said one reason for the street alignnent was to improve the intersection alignment of existing Osborne Road and the Mayor asked if the County would agree to that. The Public Works Director said yes, and there were letters that this was aareeable;and,there will be certain improvements to this area between 1977 and 1979. Mayor Nee inquired if the intersection will be changed whether or not this plat is adopted, and the Public Works Director said yes. They would like to net into the left-turn lanes, medians for left-turns, etc. Councilman Starw alt asked as to what is likely to happen to traffic on Talmadge and 75th Way if the signalization is changed, and the Public 1,1orks Director stated that as of right now the people have no other alternative. They must conic on East River Road, but by planning for this roadway to realign Osborne and provide for signalization the people will have easier access to East River Road, and a safer access to East River Road. The Public Works Director remarked further and illustrated traffic patterns in the area and how both intersections could be protected. The City Manager stated this plan was considered approved about four years ago. Mayor Nee asked whether we are incurring a large public cost by virtue of the convenience of the plat, or are we going to do it anyway? Councilman Fitzpatrick stated that the petitioner came in with a cul-de-sac plan; and, that the original proposal was a cul-de-sac from the West. The Public Works Director stated the City would work with the petitioner. He came in with a cul-de-sac, and did not get into the over-all street planning. The Mayor said that the minutes stated "... if it didn't come in this way.. ." and Councilman Fitzpatrick said he didn't understand that point either. The Public Works Director replied there were several alternatives of trying to save a house and a garage, and there was a shift in the alignment of five to ten feet in the area; but now, the alignment fits into the scheme. Mayor Nee said that what occurs to him is that if we are having a high public cost to realign the intersection of Osborne to save lots 3 and 4; he would rather nive the variance to lots 3 and 4, if you are goinq to realign Osborne anyway. The Public Works Director said that with this alignment there is no difference in any public cost associated with the improvement, and there will be an upgrading from East River Road to University, particularly at the intersections where there are turn lanes and other improvements such as signals. The plan is to try to utilize the controlled intersections from these lots. Mayor Nee inquired as to what the impact would be on the Northeast quadrant, and the Public Works Director replied that it would be the taking of a triangle, approximately 40 feet of which now is just open space. The existing structure is further to the East and still would be 25 to 30 feet away. Councilman Hlmernik said the alignment of Osborne would be five feet to the South. It is in addition to what is recommended here. The Public Works Director said that when the plan was first drafted there was a shift of dimensions, and what. the Planning Commission had was not the alignment that had been proposed in either one of them. It was a matter of gettinq the dimensions properly set. Mayor Nee asked if that is reflected on the plat now, and the Public Works Director said that this one is the correct one. Councilman Hamernik asked about the anticipated time schedule, and the Public Works Director replied that it has been programmed for 1978 and 1979. Mayor flee asked if there were any further comments by any one, and there was no response. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick that the public hearing be closed. Seconded by Councilman Haere.rnik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the i motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION REQUEST AND CONSIDERATIO[ ST READING OF AN ORDINANCE FOR VACATION REQUEST, STREETS AND ALLEY VACATION AVr76- '., 8Y MRS. RAY PRESTEMON. GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF 1391 53RD AVrMfMORTHMSM 47 t PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 10, 1976 PAGE q MOTION by ,Councilman Starwalt to open the public hearing and to waive the reading of the notice. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. The Public Works Director stated this was a request to vacate a portion of Johnson Street North of 53rd Avenue Northeast and basically abutting 1391 53rd Avenue Northeast. The request was made to allow the construction of an attached garage from approximately two to three feet off from the existing East property line of 1391 53rd Avenue. There was either the need to go through a variance or request the additional property which all would be attached to 1391 53rd Avenue Northeast. Several years ago the Northerly half of Johnson Street was vacated, and at that time the petitioner was asked to agree with the vacation request and declined at that time; but now they want to proceed with it, and this was heard before the Planninq Commission at their April 21 meeting. The Planning Com-flission recommended approval of the vacation with the stipulation that the City retain a drainage and utility easements on the Easterly 20 feet of the proposed vacation. The Public Works Director said Mrs. Prestemon was present. Councilman Starwalt asked as to what is the nature of this right-of-way East of the i property, and the Public Works Director replied that at the present time there are telephone facilities and a water main. Mrs. Prestemon stated that a Standard Oil Pipe line goes through the front of the property, East and West, going right dorm, following 53rd., Councilman Starwalt asked if this would create a problem with drainage getting into garages, and if there was a limit to which they could not go below. The Public Works Director said this was the reason they wanted the easement. The drainage would depend on how it was graded, and at this point it is only for the extension of the attached garage in having it closer to the East line. The City Attorney said he didn't know whether it is torrenced property or abstract property, but that the petitioner should see an attorney about the matter after the vacation. Mr. Tom Albertson said he originally requested the vacation that is now part of his property, back about four years ago on Skywood Lane. Councilman Fitzpatrick asked if he was on Lot One. Mr. Albertson said that was correct. He received the original vacation of Johnson about four years ago. Basically, the only stipulations known to him at that time was that 20 feet was for the utilities and easements and he could not build any type of permanent structure on it. If he did so, and something went wrong, he would take all loss. As far as drainage and everything, it is a natural drainage to the Western boundary of Innsbruck. So far there hasn't been any problem of drainage. So far as enough footage to do additional construction, that 20 feet is immaterial. It would be very senseless to build any permanent structure. So, Mr. Albertson had no problem at that time of securing his property at all, and for Mrs. Prestemon's sake 'he hopes we will say yes; give Mrs. Prestemon the okay so they can go through and finish building on the garage. Councilman Starwalt said he had indicated to one of the parties that as a general rule we never act on a request such as this on the evening of the hearing except in rare cases and then with reasonable justification. Mayor Nee asked if there was a problem, and Mr. Toni Albertson said they would like to get started as soon as they could The Public Works Director said that normally it would be brought on next week, and that if it would not be out of order there would be no problem of approving it at the first reading. Councilman Hamernik asked the Public Works Director if he was satisfied there were no drainage problems in the area, and the reply was that there were no drainage problems; that with the easements they could handle any, problem. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to suspend the rules and consider this the first ; reading of the Ordinance for the vacation of the unimproved Johnson Street as contained in the agenda. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. i 54 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 17, 1976 PAGE 3 The vote was then taken on the original motion to adopt the ordinance. Upon a Voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared Ordinance No. 611 adopted and publication ordered. CONSIDERATION OF SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 612 FOR VACATION REQUEST, STREETS AND ALLEY VACATION SAV #76-02, BY MRS. RAY PRESTEMON. GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF 1391 53RD AVENUE N.E.: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to waive the reading and approve the Ordinance on second reading and order the publication. Seconded by Councilwoman. Kukowski. Upon a voice . vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared Ordinance No. 612 adopted unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE MIENDING THE CITY CHARTER, OF THE CITY F FRb IDLEY AND RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 20, 1976: Discussion ensured as to whether this was the first reading of the ordinance, and the City Attorney suggested that it would be better to act on the whole thing on the first reading; that that would be the best solution. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to accept the heading of the item as a first readine and to receive the minutes of the Charter Commission, meeting of April 20, 1976. Secondej by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor' Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 5.02, EXPENDITURES BY PETITIONERS: MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to approve the proposal of the Charter Commission with reference to the amendment of Section 5.02. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 5.03, FURTHER REGULATIONS: MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to concur in the chances in this section. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 5.05, FORM OF PETITION AND OF SIGNATURE PAPERS: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to concur with Section 5.05. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 5.06, FILING OF PETITIONS AND ACTION THEREQN: MOTION by Councilman Hamernik to concur with this Section. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 5.08, INITIATIVE BALLOTS: MOTION by Councilman Hamernik to concur. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Mayor Nee stated that this is the matter that he is uneasy about as it returns the matter to the City Council. Mayor Nee asked if anyone was present from the Charter Commission. There was no response. Upon a voice vote, Councilmen Starwalt, Fitzpatrick, Hamernik, and Councilwoman Kukowski voted aye. Mayor Nee voted nay. Mayor Nee declared the motion failed by a four-to-one vote. (On the final adoptine motion only those sections concurred with unanimously were adopted.) ,SECTION 5.13, THE RECALL: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 5.14, RECALL PETITIONS: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to concur. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 5.19, INSTRUCTIONS TO PETITIONERS: MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to concur. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a i voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. ry C� i I REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 17, 1976 PAGE 4 SECTION 6.04, SUBORDINATE OFFICERS: MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to concur. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 6.05, PURCHASES AND CONTRACTS: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 6.06, CONTRACTS, HOW LET: MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to concur. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 7.04, PREPARATION OF ANNUAL BUDGET: MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to concur. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 7.05, PASSAGE OF THE BUDGET: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to concur. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 7.09, LEVY AND COLLECTION OF TAXES: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 7.14, ACCOUNTS AND REPORTS: MOTION by Councilman Hamernik to concur with Section 7.14 with superfluous words removed. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 10.05, RATES AND CHARGES_: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Y SECTION_ 10.06, PROVISION OF FRA_NCHISES_: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to concur. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. SECTION 10.09, PUBLIC HEARINGS: MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to concur. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney said that he had a question regarding Section 5.08; that it was not handled the way the Charter Commission proposes. Councilman Starwalt replied that the Council failed to pass Section 5.08, and the Mayor said that if we fail to adopt it unanimously they have the authority to put it on the ballot. The City Attorney said there is another problem. It is conceivable that you may have two proposals on the same subject that are being voted on by the same electors. It is conceivable that you may have a proposal to enact an ordinance which has been passed and is inconsistent with some other ordinance or statute and which may present a probl em. MOTION by Councilman. Starwalt to adopt the ordinance on its first reading but only those which had a unanimous vote. (All of the proposed changes except those relating to Section 5.08.) Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING, CHAPTER 206 OF THE FRIDLEY CCTV CODE PERTAINING TO THE BUILDING CODE AND PERMIT FEES: The Public Works Director stated Section 206.01 is what we are trying to update, by . I (Official Publication) ORDINANCE NO.612 AN ORDINANCE UNDER SEC- TION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND Al, LEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DO ORDAIN AS FOL- LOWS: SECTION 1. For the vacation of a street described as follows: All that part of the street right of way known as Johnson Street that lies East and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition, and between the Eas- terly extension of the North and South lines of said Lot 18. All lying in the South Half of Section 24, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Min- nesota, except that the City of Fridley reserves a drainage and utility easement over the Eas- terly 20 feet and the Northerly 40 feet of the above described par- cel, W and is hereby vacated SECTION 2.The said vacation has beeh made in conformance with Min- nesota Statutes and pursuant to See- tion 12.07 of the City Charter and Ap- pendix C of the City Code shall be so amended. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 17TH DAY OF MAY,1976. WILLIAM J.NEE Attest: Mayor MARVIN C.BRUNSELL City Clerk Public Hearing:May 10,1976 First Reading: May 10,1976 Second Reading:May 17,1976 Publish:May 26,1976 (May 26,1976)—SB8 O V ORDINANCE NO. 612 AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 . For the vacation of a street described as follows : All that part of the street right of way known as Johnson Street that lies East and adjacent to Lot 18, Block 2, Swanstrom's Court Addition,. and between the Easterly extension of the North and South lines of said Lot 18. All lying in the South Half of Section 24, T-30, i R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota, except that the City of Fridley reserves a drainage and utility easement over the Easterly 20 feet and the Northerly 40 feet of the above describea parcel , be and is hereby vacated. SECTION 2. The said vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code shall be so amended. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 17th DAY OF MAY, 1976. MAYOR - WILLIAM J . NEE Attest: CITY CLERK - MA IN C. BRUNSELL Public Hearing: May 10, 1976 First Reading: May 10, 1976 Second Reading: May 17, 1976 Publish. . . . . .. : May 26, 1976