Loading...
SP85-03 25 l r CITY OF FRIOLEY, SUBJECT O 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. NE. SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP FRIDLEY. MN. 65431' (61--).571-3450 ADDRESS 5-ID L DATE PLANNING COMMISSI N: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE NO. CITY COUNCIL: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE NO STIPULATIONS: NAME Aid ( FEE 160 RECEIPT NO r (�TLJ STREET LOC AT ON OF PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY LOL ) l i PRESENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION AJ EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY 4 aewutl .e,,,, ACREAG OF PROPERTY DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE SPECIAL USE APPLIED FOR: A :y Section of the Code: Has the present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes no. What was requested and when? "�c�,.-k lek The undersigned understands that: (a) A list of all residents and owners of proper- ty within 200 feet will 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 .refect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list the names and addresss of all residents and property owenrs of propprty 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 the proposed structure on the lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and fron and side setbacks. 4. Street names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 350 feet) . The undersigned hereby declares that all the facts and respresentations stated in this application are true and correct. DATE SIGNATURE ADDRESS 7-S:%? TELEPHONE NO 7��/ 7,1 �v#`�1'�r' syr w`'tsb3y'➢.r �* k i' � s� k�� fir✓-nE' �. 'i� .�w3# �X ��w. .z$ r � + ts,. � X �jr' � a ��?+k �"st�{b��.� '_ a 4. .,,�• `',� of ^� + '00 x'•61 + .� p",ff.*s, m ' } 1.s ay yoS.�'.. '��8 s, 4 t d •,y y '. fY�CZ'�j " .+rd.+ .:' x ' f� g`byytK �; s� - Pit f W11I.- .F 2cw xIN � > � w.�-,-�c � -!Sri ���� '�'� ��� - ' f•�e� 1 ''a $ � *x k �5` i xa yY Lx td l Y � f`r bF�f R V.. F° t K �+ 2.=�/h'7 E •tt ��,t",F .. . "�u71. �'k er hh`vz+• �� �.. y �Y�"P,�.. i% z' t���� d y ..H � .. � *� -'.n�;,t' .� �' .'•• �3 �'_-k � .�.' �:y ,��r��� Y t�,.� -_ a,,,,z� `",+t...�. t r H n � v- Ag�+ E '} .J �'{ - ff Pry�• � \.': ✓ y, '.. X �}*��}i.,.a.4°w ,�y:, °b. .x. _ ,vs, y '� ; �` .41nyTAl $ _ sa zs�- s -� e ti: �� �i •t +•..�"Y� � �: S d!*�trt a�� E�s.J4 „• a +a �, x�za,,,�e.t x � f r?'��.x rs���,���J ,#r � + ' r.;¢a" .r + X 'ti w ,c .�1" �'+ :. A 4r '� � x:t s.,�� ��'^'g• �ra il 17T •Fz sf4 z,���+_.'k`''°„'rr+c 5'' .P� a # 7 •. ,:�.�u.��i.::�-.a2rL.e�..- .:fie-�✓e,a..-�" xe .,. ,,., _3�.xi'+Lae�,��ry-rl�.,r=x c.?�,. _ 24 L PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, May 8, 1985 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #85-03, Fridley Convalescent Home, by Betty J. Wall , per Section 205.07.1 , C, 6, of the Fridley City Code, to allow parking lot expansion on Lot 1 , Block 1 , Maple Manor Addition, the same being 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. VIRGINIA SCHNABEL CHAIRWOMAN PLANNING COMMISSION Publish: April 22, 1985 April 29, 1985 ' ---JL I------__ � - i_ b _ iT--J —• cdo ANN I £0-M dS T�1 '3*N auPI OLJkl 06SL 7590 Lyric Lane P .E. CITY ' : [ _ ' • L2 ' ' P KIK �' AR *Poo 2 ti HOSPITAL AD01 I �•� ,� ` ►� �I t5 76TH. AVE. ., rl�t K �� 2 r ,�.•� 0 op0' ' °e°0 °0 a 0000000000^° .^ 0000000000 � � ,• o S 4 •,J• 0 0 0 0�0�0^0^00°0°0°0°0°0°0 �' �• �I - -•;�"°'S,00B°°°�'o 0'0'0`0 0 0 0 0 0 0 / s' �. i0 f •f. e_•+ ci..�o°000°o°°°o°o°o°o°o°o° \ i � 7J - -�►- eco 00000000000 1, \�• 4 ;s i fo^ 00o0n00000e .` + •;a, � 000 ^e^o^oo'0000000 \V• ^ J •<•\> \Y P ,I .i I S�:'. i I 's I .•� ��•'^'..�0 0^^ 0^ 0 0 0 0 0 e o j 75 THAAVE. N E. •��'�p'- ° 'i°o°eso�ogo. /�� 1 y - °n.'_^^^moo°0 0°0 0°0°0 f�y � � ^ <' W j, 2 ��_•. -- o\ ^oe^00000000 W •` 0 000000000000'0°o°0n°e°o°o°o °o°o 21 1 '= o- - ^^ nco"n'°n°no°°o^0°0 11e^ `� l� .' I•ti � �� '�°^ 0 ^ono.,^o°o°o°o°o°e°o \rr\ \ ` -- � •; t C ^ - ,,0000°�^�00^ �-o ^ .<< •s i \�, 0 13 .�• `_ s ° -u- _f i • � 1 ^� ^^^° °0° o n°o�c o^�, �.. ^\ �4 ~�� j I � 7 1♦ f ��.; � - •�^neo o^ ^on000°o°o°o .6IA • '` _ 's l �,� ��. - _ ! 11 1 •- n^•fK 0^0^ oo°o°o°o°o°o°o°o o°o°o . �/ 00000000000 • � \y JJJ v j. , j i. ,I .� 0^^^0 a n 0 0 0 0 0 0 n^n 0^no°n°n°o°o°or MADSEN20,1 _ °n °° Zvolyelicyllrr t <r-.t. o�Ono�e?opOnc 1. LAv/d1 I t_—��• '_J �� ,,nL� r.7 � ZS� � � �1' .i ,S --� P O E J J T3 RO AVEwIE N E r— »2 47s 4tt 001, 100 00"rz EGISTERE� a0 00Z/ /A J00 ;o V Y 9a Q 40 . b 01 00 ;00Y0 o 60 00" 0.1 � ? _ _ 0TA JI �. . S• . 1 t 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. 1 #85 u L Y STATE At0- NtGNY+1Alf - $- ----�r� - ,�,.-- ----� - N'1 a st M^ • Ls ♦ N MAPLE i1 I LI►/'/+� 3 M•� NOR .: 111 ' ` rte 41 w,~ " aco 7b�7 7K a 741 Tf ii 7O Y a -�90 4 5 xs` ' 1 .i,... 1 1. _ 1 • �j� 11 •, iro 1 • i 7.561 103 �i I► 9 4 3 11 » 751 ,sbo .0 • S.i J X544 75A� 754 5� p- TSE g 73 4/ .... ,7s4 c '7 r , ,%w1N �• �' E •, .. .• 0j ..4 1b 755) WAO 3•,w ' !� . �"'' e A t5 ?�s4:7 . 1S S 12 ��'� 535 0 �4ab 7496 7094 7498 /3 i .7 1b�1 �' ,'•Q' �, 11 .Mj2 -14Th � 33 3f; 3s 3� j' 1,. -7soS ? ,.�a,� • 14 r•� `'��0 27. 1yo Nt `• Afi'� �b� ` ' s..Oe "O� t I O W � v ©RIVE . r ,j= , . zss is ME1,�0 »i� 14� '-` P5 T � �pq - *A1 Z3 - -- j-�~' ''� 1�6� 6� ,� _3 �. _ 7�t I� • i, � .ti' 71 . 1A3 24 t� �� �. ".. X440 -1441 7448 7450 �� / • 11S.'L P-3 �9 113 1, t 3 S 7,1 R Z 74 /!o ,�10 P7 � Z * CONCERTO y/'ff- . .•s+ V D'Ar r01440 te+: 7147 T411 Q ,j i ..- ►'�00 yl 7431 7143 14zo 7411 +�v ' ,.,. 3q` 739673 -!n_ ` 7A 015 Vat + , Web, ,�.3e>';-1 ,d ,�''" ''' pFtY �` LANE � �`91 !A , V v ZIP s 10 Sit t Zp Al, �► •� t + 7 X42 �.• w�► 1511 - K §131C O � r i .� • !� ��S� :� � ' 737 O ` � -lox R01 8 8888 n i in v < Lii C.)N ' U h!Y ac C) lu., , t � lu N � I � I _ y I � W J Z 1 W b LL rb \ 1 � � 1 \ 1 i 8 zap I I' 1 ,1 ,I z � 1S MOS IQ VN f ` Planning Commission April 17 , 1985 26 City Council MAILING LIST SP #85-03, Fridley Convalescent Home 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. North Suburban Hospital District Mr. & Mr.s Lloyd Larson Unity Hospital 7549 Lyric Lane N.E. 550 Osborne Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Attn: John Haines Mr. & Mrs. Urbin Mayer 7445 Lyric Lane N.E. Highland Park Development Co. Fridley, MN 55432 540 Greenhaven Road Anoka, MN 55303 Mr. & Mrs. William Schocinski 7539 Lyric Lane N.E. R. J. Rupper, C. A. Lowe Fridley, MN 55432 and Culer E. LaSalle 620 Osborne Road N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Mark Kennedy Fridley, MN 55432 7534 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 PDQ Stores of HN, Inc. 3310 University Avenue Mr. & Mrs. Lowell Erickson Madison, WI 53705 7536 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Bruce Barsness 7589 Lyric Lane N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Westeren Fridley, MN 55432 7530 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Nielsen 7583 Lyric Lane N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Howard Rassier Fridley, MN 55432 7540 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. William Orr 7577 Lyric Lane N.E. Mr. & Mrs. John Podeszwa Fridley, MN 55432 7542 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Jerome Ruhn 7573 Lyric Lane N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Ted Quien Jr. Fridley, MN 55432 7544 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Ms. Janice Carroll 7567 Lyric Lane N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Noel Hanssen Fridley, MN 55432 7546 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Dwight Beglau 7563 Lyric Lane N.E. Mr. & Mrs. James Klingle Fridley, MN 55432 7548 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs . Harley Thureen 7559 Lyric Lane N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Tim Breider Fridiley, MN 55432 7550 Tempo Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mr. Denis Christianson 7553 Lyric Lane N.E. F.M.C. & Associates Fridley, MN 55432 7675 Madison Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 27 SP #85-03, Fridley Convalescent Home 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. Page 2 Mr. & Mrs. Philip Burns 7600 Jackson Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Vernon Buchli 7618 Jackson Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. R. J. Zembal 7634 Jackson Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Brian Kocher 7650 Jackson Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gilbert Flaig 7580 Jackson Street N.E(; Fridley, MN 55432 Betty J. Wall Fridley Convalescent Home 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 (Official Publication) PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Plan- ning Commission of the City o[ Fridley in the City Hall at 6931 Uni- versity Avenue Northeast on Wednes- Chamber at 7.30 P.M.1985 [orthe the purpose of: consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #85-03, Fridley Con- valescent Home, by Betty J. Wall,per Section 205.07.1,C,6,of the Fridley City Code, to allow parking lot expansion on Lot 1, N.E. Block 1, Maple Manor Addition, E same being 7590 Lyric Lane Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. VIRGINIA SCHNABEL Chairwoman Planning Commission (April 22&29,1985)-FRID 1OY CITY OF FRIDLEY PET 1 TI uN COVER SHEET Peti . ion No. 9-1985 Date Received May 29, 1985 Object Opposed to the Fridley Convalescent Home proposal for a parkins► lot with access onto Lyric Lane. Petition Checked By Date Percent Signing Referred to City Council Disposition 1OZ 5- 15- � D rl"O.Q . -753 3 j.�� Act,, -7 S y ` ��9 S y/YsIV 3 L U vv?, J I v� 75, sXs P5 &641- "75-13 75- 77 - �}�� IOAA . �. fit/•1�� �-�Lv anu1 Qit.� a,-L QO/!ry '"7 50 i ' ? �- /6- �I Ff 73S an„ 7F6- /a i 7 5--/� iv 5- i�-S'S I,la. � .�.��•c�u-kms- i'3 �'� o� I 73� P - 7 ��- l/6 j � r jf� �j /6 6LA, 4 4DWyk Z? 76 733 l _ I 011 , Doi w r a? 043-2 6S-9L .s C �'- gz �-��� 7�Y I�� L • eeoto locc 741 y :�� --2 q y am. 7 f <L" ; —1 SO `Z6 2 4 -71 mac ✓ Ka . y I I! f 1000 CITY OF FRIDLEY PETITION COVER SHEET Petition No. 10-1985 Date Received May 29, 1985 Object Access for new employee parking lot for the Fridley Convalescent Home off of Lyric Lane Petition Checked By Date Percent Signing Referred to City Council Disposition -loss 71ANLAdh A, Fridley Convalescent Horne Division of Health Central 7590 LYRIC LANE N.E. . FRIDLEY. MINNESOTA 55432 . AREA CODE 612. 786-7700 May 20, 1985 We, the undersigned, are Residents of Fridley Convalescent Home. Since many of us are making this our permanent home and in many cases we have been residents of this area for many years, we feel we have as much right in determining issues of our neighborhood as other residents alonb Lyric Lane. Access to the new parking lot through our backyard is totally unai .ept- able to us. It would take away part of our backyard patio area which is the only private outdoor area we have. This is our summer recreation area, noon picnic site, family night, sunning and visiting area. Safety of the employees, the people who take care of us, is also a prime concern. w The potential for accidents is very real with this driveway. Cost is another factor that we, with limited incomes, are concerned about. We definately prefer access off of Lyric Lane to our new employee park- ing lot. Residents of Fridley Convalescent Home c s�'�•t C -G' J ti v c.avc.acn }5 f -1O Fi F Fridley Convalescent Home Division of Health, Central 7590 LYRIC LANE N.E. . FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 . AREA CODE 612 . 786-7700 Mav 20, 1985 We, the undersigned, are Residents of Fridley Convalescent Home. Since many of us are making this our permanent home and in many cases we have been residents of this area for many years, we feel we have as much right in determining issues of our neighborhood as other residents along Lyric Lane. Access to the new parking lot through our backyard is totally unaccept- able to us. It would take away part of our backyard patio area which is the only private outdoor area we have. This is our summer recreation area, noon picnic site, family night, sunning and visiting area. Safety of the employees, the people who take care of us, is also a prime concern. The potential for accidents is veru real with this driveway. Cost is another factor that we, with limited incomes, are concerned about. We definitely prefer access off of Lyric Lane to our new employee park- ing lot. Rtrsi !�nts of Fridley Convalescent Home - '7 4� / i r - ' .� l ��Y ISL f�i✓�I. /L CY Z' I r ;,y-kA ��. ��,�(����✓� . c -�"�' i � �/[/i ✓�J 1. "WE, THF. UNDERSIGNED, ARE BOTTT RFSIDENTS or F9ITIT,FY, MI*TNFSATA ANP 1000 EMPLOYEES OF FRIDLEY CONVALESCFNT FOMr. WE ARE DESPERATELY IN NFT." OF ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR E'SPT,wrrs, VOLUM-F.F.RS ANP FAMIT,IFS ANn FpIEWPS OF OTIR RESIDENTS. SINCE WF. rErT, '^HF. PrnPOSAL FOR THF nRTAFFWAV T,OrATFn THROUGH THF REAR OF OUR PROPrPTv, BF.TTINn THF. 1,11TRSINC TTnMF, HAS rRrAT POTENTIAL FOR ACCIDENTS, IS MUCTT MORE COS-T,v -0 CONFTRrrf"" ANI) MAIN-ATN (ESPECIALLY IN THE WINTER WITH SNOW PLOWING) , AND TARrS ANAv PART nr THE ONLY PRIVATE OUTDOOR ARrA 011r RF.SIDF.N'*S HASTE, 19F S-PnNGT,Y Rrrom.SFNP THE DRIVEWAY TO THE PARKING LOT Pr LOCATED 014 LYRIC LA14F.." NAME AnDPESE Ts- �sy )J( Jai �' � ��„'1-♦ i J `�G � `l� i I +5�/" `�" j�. ,Jl7 �'�� � v,�Lc u'cl_- c'c J/ �t>�ccLt �t ) FLLdL.� nen 5 s-Q3-D c } C 5�.�. Nuc ,Mh ssy3� 66�)` 6A o",\U lA e►(z Fr,Al , Ir o l'j 4v =i,It i L 2 f. S3-V3 z- �I Q1 Pcnte� (361 74/,2C�� .�� ��is. ti- ru- ryvA �J cfll� t CITY OF FRIDLEY PET1TIUN COVER SHEET Petirio„ No, 10-1985 Date Received May 29, 1985 Object Access for new employee parkins lot for the Fridley Convalescent Home off of Lyric Lane Petition Checked By Date Percent Signing Referred to City Council Disposition ' n faraa�p-/� aiaarwn'" Fridley Convalescent Home Division of Health Central 7590 LYRIC LANE N.E. . FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 . AREA CODE 612 . 786-7700 ~ May 20, 1985 a! We, the undersigned, are Residents of Fridley Convalescent Home. Since many of us are making this our permanent home and in many cases we have been residents of this area for many years, we feel we have as much right in determining issues of our neighborhood as other residents along Lyric Lane. Access to the new parking lot through our backyard is totally unac .ept- , able to us. It would take away part of our backyard patio area which is the only private outdoor area we have. This is our summer recreation area, noon picnic site, family night, sunning and visiting area. Safety of the employees, the people who take care of us, is also a prime concern. The potential for accidents is very real with this driveway. Cost is another factor that we, with limited incomes, are concerned about. We definately prefer access off of Lyric Lane to our new employee park- ing lot. Residents of Fridley Convalescent Home at W A01W 02 6 _..ohlao 5,+ / ?+ �z �=IL/d X— ' ' C Fridley Convalescent Home Division of Health Central V 7590 LYRIC LANE N.E. . FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 . AREA CODE 612 e 786-7700 May 20, 1985 We, the undersigned, are Residents of Fridley Convalescent Home. Since many of us are making this our permanent home and in many cases we have been residents of this area for many years, we feel we have as much right in determining issues of our neighborhood as other residents along Lyric Lane. Access to the new parking lot through our backyard is totally unaccept- able to us. It would take away part of our backyard patio area which is the only private outdoor area we have. This is our summer recreation area, noon picnic site, family night, sunning and visiting area. Safety of the employees, the people who take care of us, is also a prime concern. The potential for accidents is very real with this driveway. Cost is another factor that we, with limited incomes, are concerned about. We definately prefer access off of Lyric Lane to our new employee park- ing lot. Residents of Fridley Convalescent Home -A r, I ? %-rte% �7r r a- J 'LSC (J✓`� "WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE BOT1i RESIDENTS Or FQInT,FY, MINNESOTA AND EMPLOYEES OF FRIDLEY CONVALESCFNT NOME. WE ARE DESPERATELY IN NFFn OF ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR EMPLOVFF.S , VOLUNTEERS AND FAMIT,IFS ANn FpIENnS OF OUR RESIDENTS. SINCE WE FEEI, THF PPnPOSAL FOR THF nRIITFWA" T,OCATrn THROUGH THE REAR OF OUR PROPFRTV, BFIIINn THE MT7RSINr HOMF, HAS rRFAT POTENTIAL FOR ACCIDENTS , IS MUCI1 MORE COSTLY '"0 CONSTRTir- ANT) MAINTAIN (ESPECIALLY IN THE WINTER WITH SNOW PLOWING) v AND TAKrS AWAY PART nF THE ONLY PRIVATE OUTDOOR AREA OITR RF.SIDFN'rS H2VTF, TIE SmPONGLY RrrommrNn THE DRIVEWAY TO THE PARKING LOT PF LOCATED ON LYRIC LANE.- NAME ADDPESS �( aXc o 7 0 - u � .� 17 ?c 7'z" L b-(a If- `7 3 clI L y�, L a e" tic cc,v u � 6(-61 6A Cti'bA CI(t �c �e y, l ,) 5��73 2 i L CL lfc (CA ryvA - li mqra r FridleyConvalescent Home Division of Health Central 7590 LYRIC LANE N.E. . FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 . AREA CODE 612 . 786-7700 May 30, 1985 Dear Fridley Council Member: Fridley Convalescent Home has asked for a special use permit for an employee parking lot to be located on the east side of our property. Due to the expan- sion of Unity Hospital and the increase in medical services at the nursing home, additional parking space is desperately needed. Our present lot will be used for visitors, volunteers, physicians, etc. We now have thrity nine parking spaces which is not adequate for employees let alone visitors, etc. We have worked very hard to create a "home like" atmosphere here and encourage family participation not only with visiting but being a part of our total plan of care and many family events. This is often very difficult, if not impossible, for many of our family members. With the average age of our residents being 84 years, many family members are elderly themselves and having to park several blocks away, especially with our Minnesota winters, is not only inconvenient but dan gerous. At the two Planning Commission meetings we attended to present our proposal, there were three neighbors present in opposition while FCH had family members of our residents (we have 48 families living in Fridley) , employees (we have 51 employees living in Fridley) , the President of our Resident Council represent- ing the residents of our facility, Board members, Unity Hospital administration and legal council all in favor of our proposal with access from Lyric Lane. The Planning Commission agxeed to our need for additional parking but felt the access should be through the iforth sidefof our property. Due to the extreme cost, space limitations, dangers witli the difference in elevation of our property and the adjoining Fridley Medical Center and blind spot at the curve of the driveway, this is not acceptable to us. Another alternative is access across our front yard which is also much more expensive and creates a very long driveway for plowing and maintenance as well as detracting from our appearance. The main reas„n of objection by our neighbors is increased traffic on Lyric f Lane. We agree that traffic has increased somewhat but normal growth in the M � area mainly, not Fridley Convalescent, has caused this. Melody Manor was primarily young families with one car. Now those same families have working mothers and teenage children, thus more vehicles and traffic. Times change and will continue to change - that's only progress. Unity Hospital has grown to keep in pace with health care demands. Unity Professional building provides the professional physician expertise our community needs. Fridley Convalescent provides quality health care to our elderly population and the Fridley Medical Center offers a variety of health care services. All of these health care providers have been in this location for quite a number of years. We are not new to the community and our track records should speak for themselves in that we are concerned about our community and neighborhood. We all provide quality services, employ many local residents, purchase supplies locally, keep well maintained buildings and yards and only ask that the community be sensitive to our needs and endeavors as well. I am enclosing some information presented to our neighbors along Lyric Lane and also invite you to visit our nursing home prior to your meeting' of June 3rd so you can get a first hand look at our situation. Our one hundred and twenty nine residents, their families, our staff of one hundred and forty three and myself welcome you! Sincerely, Mr Jacqueline redlicki Administrator JJ w r f r r June 3, 1985 City Planner City of Fridley Fridley Civic Center 6431 University Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Sir: I am the homeowner at 7583 Lyric Lane, NE in Fridley which is almost directly across from the proposed parking lot for the Fridley Convalescent Home. Since I was unable to be at the hearing on May 8 and also on June 3, I am writing to you instead. I am opposed to the proposed parking lot with access to Lyric Lane just as I was against the Fridley Convalescent Home's proposed Lyric Lane access driveway in 1980. At that time, I was present at the hearing and did speak openly my opposition to the proposal which I am sure is in the records of that hearing. I have read all the material sent me from the Fridley Convalescent Home. I feel their proposal is biased, unreasonable and empathic. I don't feel that we residents of the Lyric Lane, Melody Manor area have really been given just considerations. My home was built on Lyric Lane long before the Fridley Convalescent Home ever came into existence. Obviously the original owners/builders of the Fridley Convalescent Home did not foresee the growth that would require additional parking and also that the property just was not big enough to grow out only up. There must be other solutions to this parking problem, i .e. , car pooling, employer provided transportation or special assigned parking areas in the Unity Hospital (which is also operated by Health Central ) parking lots. Lyric Lane does not need anymore traffic than it already has. Children and adults who live in Melody Manor must walk in the street because of no sidewalks. However, we residents all chose to live in this area because it was a small , quiet community type of environment with comparable amenities. I would also like to correct the statement of Fridley Convalescent Home on the school buses. Only a temporary cold weather bus is available to the District 16 elementary and high school students east of Madison St. on Lyric Lane so the walking traffic on Lyric Lane is constant. My four children always walked to school -- Woodcrest then Spring Lake Park Jr. & Sr. High. Yes, the Fridley Convalescent Home building itself has been kept up nicely but I can' say that through the years that I was ever very pleased about their "landscaping" and I really don' t think that will ever change. If you need any further comments or information from me, please write or call . Yours truly, Elsie Nielsen 7583 Lyric Lane NE cc: Virginia Schnabel Fridley, MN 55432 - 784-2783 Bruce Barsness CONCERNS RAISED IN PEGARn To FCH PArKING LnT PRMPOSAL: Safety for Children TIalking to School - '"he nronosed Parking lot wi a used by Employees only. ",he majority of our employees arrive between 5 A.M. and 6 A.M. and leave at 2: 30 P.M. or earlier. Our afternoon shift arrives between 2 P.M. and 2: 30 P.M. and leaves at 9 P.M. or 10: 30 P.M. Woodcrest Elementary School starts at 9: 35 A."t. and recesses at 3: 30 P.M. Westwood Junior High students are bused. Spring Lake Park Senior High students are also bused. Since times of highest traffic volume from the nursing home do not coincide with the times when children are going to and from school, we feel there is no additional hazard. Children would run a much greater risk by having neighhors across the street with driveways into each home than with only one drive- way into the proposed parking lot. Concern about Apartment r'om lex asking for access onto Lyric Lane - Fridlev ordinance states all property owners must be all8wed allowedaccess to their property and onto a street. The apartment complex already has access to their property and onto a street and they have no hardship. The nursing home is a different situation. ' T-Te do not have access to this property. Alternatives which denial of. the Lyric Lane access would force us to consider - that of creating a driveway across the front yard which would he less attractive for both neighbors and residents of the nursing home. Tt would he a disturbance anrl safety hazard to residents also. r'ity code requires a set-back of 20 ' from the nr_onerty line for all raved surfaces which would nut the drivewav almost at the front door of the nursing home. Another possible alternative - access from the rear of the building. -his is nearly an imnossible alternative that would result in great additional expense and much inconvenience. -he stmrage garane and fenced in garbage collection area would have to he moved, therefore requiring a new foundation for both. The nrronerty, slopes down greatly which would require a lot of fill to accommodate access to the garage and garbage collection area and also to widen the drivewav enough so. that employees could by-pass semi trucks that park here to unload supplies for the nursing home. The driveway would take up part of our concrete patio and cut through the private area for our residents that is so beautifully landscaped and fenced. This backyard patio area was accomplished through employee fund raisers and family don- ations. To disrupt it would-be devastating! tither alternative would create hardship for the home. Present Parkin2 Lot Situation Limits visitors - Our present lot will accommodate s-�.ty nine (39) cars. Our emp ogees, take up most of these spaces leaving few spaces for visitors who end up walking a good block or more. This is not only inconvenient but as a great number of our visitors are elderly themselves, it is very unsafe and often people do not visit because of. this. "'he driveway coming into our present parking lot is at quite an incline. In the winter, with the snow and ice of. Minnesota, it is very difficult. Some of our employees continually park on Madison Street to mal-e snots available for visitors but we still are unable to accommodate them all. During the winter months employees often have to go out and move their cars off the street when the streets are being plowed or their cars will be ticketed and towed. This is a waste of employee time and irritating to all. Good Relationship Tlith our. Neighborhood - rKe have made a serious effort to be good neighbors in keeping our yard groomed, adding many new trees to our front yard, totally redoing the back vard with a patio area where residents enjoy the out of doors, weekly Picnics and daily activities when weather permits along with many family events. We've asked our employees not to park on Lyric Lane for your convenience. '^he nursing home has a good reputation in the health care industry and we are proud of our home. We are also "Home" to 121 senior residents who deserve to be cared for with dignity and in pleasant surrounr?ings. '•'e employ a total of 140 staff members, all From this area and nurchase� our_ supplies and many services locally. our employees are our greatest asset and our concern about adequate and safe parking for them is valid. You need only drive along "4adison Street r'uring the day to see our concern, mhan}- you; 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 444 LAFAYETTE ROAD ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 March 27, 1986 Zoning and Planning Administrator City of Fridley 6431 University AVenue Fridley, MN 55432 Re: Zoning Notification of Application for Department of Human Services Program License This is to inform your that we have received an application for a program license under Minnesota Rules, Parts 9520.0500-9520.0690 from Community Options, located at 5384 Northeast 5th Street, Fridley, MN, to provide residential care and treatment services for 14 mentally ill resients, ages 18 years and over. Issuance of this license is subject to compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 245.812, as amended in the 1984 Legislative Session. If we do not hear from you within 30 days of receipt of this letter, , we will consider this facility to be in compliance with your local zoning code. Sincerely, lirg=niaPPrespley-Jackson Human Services Licensor 296-6230 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER DHS-2489 (10-84) Meetin date: 5/8/85 TY OF FRIDLEY, COMMISSION APPLICATION MINNESOTA CIFREVIEW in+•at .rn Nveow er op• Approves by Planning 20 — FILE IND, ADDACi• SP 85-,3 FVu DATE COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST Fridley Convalescent Home 4/2/85 RETURN TO PLANNING parking lot expansion on DUE DATE Lot 1 Block 1 Mapl-e Manor A M COMMENTS 0-- Q .o c,�.-„�.�.., �v s� PHIL l = Darrel �- '- �� a /2 9 3E Fier,/7-y IA-e Mark 3 Clyde y - o 4- ohn so P.oPJ. Leon ~ 0,,ez kik ik y t V. No T E NTE R tq rwA4X""T4-S) F e�'H/9r *15 (! r 0✓n �J ` �7 /�” /f t r �" 14J lqx PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIITC, JUNE 4, 1980 I PAGE 3 Ms . Schnabel stated that on the request for a variance at 5750 Main Street on pages 1-3, it should be noted to the City Council that the drainage situation was a real concern to the neighborhood. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5 . PIMLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #80-04, FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT H0�1E: Per Fridley City Code, Section 205 .051, 3, F, to allow an entrance from Lyric Lane because of expansion of the nursing home, to add clerical, office and classroom-meeting space, located on Lot 1, Block 1, Maple Manor Addition, the same being 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. , Fridley, Minnesota. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. .Langenfeld, to open the public hearing on SP x`80-04 by the Fridley. Convalescent Home. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the public hearing open at 7:35 p.m. Mr. Boardman stated that he would give a little background on this item. When the nursing home was proposed on this site in 1968, the Planning Commission and City Council recommended a special use permit with the determination that there be no access off Lyric Lane. The reason this has come back to the Planning Commission for a special use hearing is because what is being proposed is something that was suggested not take place in the original special use permit . This special use permit request is for a modification of that recommen- dation or stipulation on the 1968 special use permit approval. The Fridley Convalescent Home is proposing an addition to the office administration area with an access road coming in to the parking area that goes past the front of the building as a drop-off point. This access road would be a one-way in off of Lyric Lane. This is in violation of the original special use permit. Mr. Boardman stated that Staff has several problems with this, primarily access problems . If this is approved for any reason, Staff feels this drive, instead of coming in at an angle onto Lyric Lane, should be dropped back a little bit wore and brought more out on a right angle onto Lyric Lane. Regard- less of whether or not the driveway is approved, Staff feels that additional plantings and screening should be put around the parking lot to screen it from the residential neighborhood. Ms . Schnabel asked if Staff had any other alternatives to recommend. Mr. Boardman stated the only other alternative without access to Lyric Lane would be a roadway that would completely circle the building. He did not know if that was the best alternative, because there are residences all along there. Mr. Johanson stated he was sitting on the Planning Commission 15-17 years ago, and he was the one who made the motion not to allow access onto Lyric Lane. However, at that time, the area was being zoned for apartments, and now it is a nursing home . He stated there is a real need for the access, and parking PLANNING CO,gffSSION MEETING JUNE 4 1980 PAGE 4 is a real problem. He stated they could be very proud of the parents and relatives who visit the older people in the nursing home and getting in and out of the nursing home is very hard. At this time, they cannot drive up to the front door. They have to drive to the back of the building and walk around to the front door. Mr. Johanson stated there really is no outside recreation area for the residents, and he could not see where this would hurt the neighbors on the other side. He felt they have done a good job with screening, and what they have done in protecting the neighbors should speak quite well . Ms . Schnabel stated she had read all the minutes and information attached to the agenda, and she could find no reference where it specifically stated that there shall be no access off Lyric Lane. Ms . Hughes stated that on page 19 of the agenda (Regular Council meeting of Oct. 21, 1968, page 24) , there is a motion made by Councilman Samuelson to "concur with the Board of Appeals with the exception that the egress and exit should be on Madison St. and upon submitting more complete plans showing just what land was involved". She thought that sounded like a stipulation. She wondered if the Planning Commission couldn't proceed on the basis that there was such a stipulation. Did Mr. Johanson agree there was a stipulation of no egress onto Lyric Lane? Mr. Johanson stated he did remember the stipulation, but did not remember the dates. Mr. Harris asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to speak to the item. Mr. Buhn, 7573 Lyric Lane, stated he thought 'he was at the meetings when that stipulation was made that there be no egress onto Lyric Lane. He didn't think the traffic has decreased any on Lyric Lane and felt that a driveway into the nursing home would only increase the traffic. He was in complete agreement with the nursing home wanting a nice area outside for the residents, but why clutter it up with a driveway? Mr. Johanson stated that to put in a circle driveway, they would have to come in off Madison and go all around the building. They would like to be able to have some of the people come in off Lyric Lane, discharge a resident at the front door, drive to the parking lot, and exit onto Madison. They are having very heavy traffic access on Madison because of Unity Hospital and the doctors' parking lot. Because of the nursing home's small parking lot, a lot of people are parking on the street and in the hospital parking lot in order to visit parents or friends. He really did not believe the access onto Lyric Lane would increase traffic on Lyric Lane. Ms. Nielsen, 7583 Lyric Lane, stated she lives almost across the street from the proposed driveway. Right now they have more traffic than they can bear. Unity Hospital has an entrance onto Lyric Lane which is supposedly an employees' parking lot, and that traffic is heavy during the changes in shifts . She PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1980 PAGE 5 stated that their children all walk to school as there is no bus service on the area from Madison to Jackson on Lyric Lane. The children have to walk in the street because there are no sidewalks until they get to Osborne. Her main concern was the children, and she would hate to see a child hit by a car because of that driveway into the nursing home. Mr. Langenfeld asked how Ms . Nielsen felt the traffic would actually increase. He had the impression from what he had already heard that the traffic already existed, and this access would not necessarily increase the traffic. Ms . Nielsen stated that right now the heaviest traffic occurs during the changes in shifts at the hospital. It was her feeling that by putting in a driveway to the nursing home, there would be visitors coming and going all day long and it would increase the traffic. The employees would also use that entrance. Mr. Buhn stated that a good portion of the traffic now going off Madison that drops off people at the nursing home and the nursing home employees would start coming in through the driveway on Lyric Lane. He asked if it was possible to change the entrance to the nursing home as long as they would be remodeling and continue to use Madison as the main entrance? Mr. Johanson stated it was not possible to rearrange administration, plus the fact that there was a setback needed from Madison. The setback from Lyric Lane still meets city code. He stated there is no basement under a good share of the building, and the building was not really built to increase the size of it . By adding on to the front, they don't have to depend on the other utilities in the nursing home and can build on for less money. He stated the nursing home really cannot afford even this . The State sets the rate they can charge for a patient and the nursing home has to live within that budget. Mr. Summers, 7553 Lyric Lane, stated he has lived on Lyric Lane since 1968 and watched the nursing home being built. He stated the nursing home does not use the front door at all. As he has observed, the traffic for the people coming to the nursing home comes off Osborne, goes down Madison into the nursing home parking lot, and leaves on Madison. This new proposed driveway would increase the traffic in front of their homes . He was also concerned about the children who have to walk. Ms. Judlicki stated, that as Mr. Summers has stated, most of the traffic does come off Osborne Road. She stated the only people using the Lyric Lane access would be relatives of residents in order to drop the residents off at a central location. Right now all the residents have to come through the west entrance. That means all the traffic is coming through the living quarters of the residents which makes privacy almost impossible. The new driveway would take the traffic to the main area of the nursing home. The employees and staff would continue to use the parking lot off Madison. Mr.- Langenfeld asked Ms. Judlicki approximately how many people she felt would be dropped off at the main entrance in a day. PLANNING CMI4aSSION MEETING, JUNE 42 1980 PAGE 6 Ms. Judlicki stated it would be 4-5 residents at the most . This access would also be easier for outings when they hire a bus or a van, because it would be easier for the residents to get on and off a bus . Mr. Barsne^s,7589 Lyric Lane, stated he was concerned about the traffic . They would like to think of Lyric Lane as a residential street, and now it was in danger of being a too heavily traveled street. He stated he also had a second concern not yet mentioned and that was the fact that directly east of the nursing home is a large apartment complex. The apartment complex has a parking lot running north and south with one entrance onto Osborne. He did not live in the neighborhood at the time the complex was built, but he under- stood that the apartment complex also came before the Planning Commission to have an access onto Lyric Lane, and that access was denied. He stated there are still a number of cars who use Lyric Lane to get to the apartment complex parking lot anyway. He stated they do not want to deny anything to the elderly, but if an access is allowed onto Lyric Lane for the nursing home, it would be pretty hard to deny the easement for the people in the apartment complex. The _ neighborhood definitely does not want an easement for the apartment complex. Ms . Hughes stated that if there was a front entrance, was it the intention of the nursing home to close off the west entrance? Ms . Judlicki stated they would not close that entrance because of the employees and other people who regularly use it now. 14s. Schnabel stated she was not totally convinced that putting this driveway in was going to increase the traffic that much. As she saw it, the driveway would be used on two occasions . One would be for dropping off the handicapped or elderly person at the front door, and the other would be in inclement weather when there are several passengers in a car and those passengers are dropped off at the front door. Othenrise, if she were a visitor who had a relative in the nursing home, she would not use the front entrance at all, but would always take Madison, park in the lot, and walk to the easiest or closest entrance. From a practical standpoint, she could not see how this proposal would increase the traffic that much over what currently existed. From what she has heard so far, the traffic is really related to hospital traffic or possible apartment traffic. Mr. Harris asked how many residents are inthe nursing home. Is. Judlicki stated there are 129 nursing home residents . Ms. Hughes-asked Ms . Judlicki what happens to the people visiting the residents who are handicapped. Ms. Judlicki stated they are dropped off at the west entrance. They have a handicapped parking slot by the west entrance, but it is on a slope so it is very difficult for a person handicapped in any way. Ms . Hughes stated that with the driveway being one-way to the west, this would require anyone using the driveway to make a left turn off Madison and a left turn off Lyric Lane unless the traffic was coming from the east on Lyric Lane. This could be a dangerous traffic situation if there are people stacked up to turn left. She was also concerned about whether school buses or vans could make that turn easily. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1980 PAGE 7 i Ms . Nielsen stated there was also the problem in the wintertime when the snow is piled up. This would make visibility very difficult and could be an even greater danger to the children, Mr. Buhn stated that Mr. Johanson had said that the reason for enlarging the nursing home parking lot and getting more parking at Unity is because they can't handle the amount of cars they have now. That has to be proof that the neighborhood is going to be subject to more traffic than it has now. Ms. Carroll, 7567 Lyric Lane, stated she lives practically across the street from the nursing home. Her children walk to school, play and ride bikes in the street, and she is concerned about the traffic. Mr. Johanson stated that rather than do anything to upset the neighbors across the street, they would rather do nothing. He has been on the Hospital Board since the day the City put him on the North Suburban Hospital District. They have worked with the people 'on Lyric Lane and have planted trees and done everything to keep good relations with the neighbors and would like it to stay that way. He was concerned about the children also, but he could see a real benefit to the older people living in the nursing home to have that entrance. That entrance would be very little used. Ms . Barsness, 7589 Lyric Lane, stated she was also concerned about the traffic and the children walking. She works at Unity and walks to work. It is especially dangerous in the wintertime. She is opposed to the access off Lyric Lane. Mr. Oquist stated that the concern expressed by Mr. Barsness was something the Planning Commission should discuss, and that was regarding the apartment building complex. If they allow the entrance for the nursing home, they would have to consider the apartment complex also. Mr. Treuenfels asked anyone in the audience to answer a question and that was how much they would estimate the traffic to increase if this particular drive- way off Lyric Lane was put in? Ms. Nielsen stated that, after the nursing home addition, she would estimate an increase of 50 or more cars in a 24 hr. day. Mr. Summers stated he agreed with that figure and further stated that most of those cars would probably come off Madison, make a left-hand turn onto Lyric Lane, and a left hand turn into the nursing home driveway, which would put traffic across the westbound traffic that is coming down Lyric Lane right now. The comment was made that this would be a one-Way entrance, but he felt that even though you put up signs, people are going to go both directions . Mr. Harris asked where the deliveries are made now. Mr. Johanson stated that all deliveries come to the rear of the building . All mail deliveries come to the west entrance. PLANNING CON12-IISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1980 PAGE 8 Mr. SunL»ers stated that most of the neighbors have expressed their opinions that they are concerned about the traffic. They do not look forward to seeing a driveway added and not one of them is in favor of the driveway. Mr. Johanson had already stated that if this was not agreeable to the neighbor- hood, he would go along with that . Mr. Johanson stated that, yes , they probably would; however, if they spend money to go around the back, they will not have the money to spend on the land- scaping they had planned. They are trying to do the nicest thing for everyone. Mr. Langenfeld asked Mr. Johanson that if the driveway was not agreed upon, how great a hardship would it be for the nursing home? Mr. Johanson stated they have been planning this for close to a year, and they would probably try to come up with an alternative plan. They feel there is a real need for the expansion. Ms. Hughes asked about the Hospital Board for the nursing home that Mr. Johanson had talked about. Mr. Johanson stated the Hospital Board consists of three members who run the nursing home. They are Betty Wall of the North Suburban Hospital District, Dean Tollefson of the First National Bank in Blaine, and himself. MOTION by Ms . Schnabel, seconded by Mr.Langenfeld, to close the public hearing on SP #80-04 by the Fridley Convalescent Home. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the public hearing closed at 9: 07 p.m. Ms . Hughes asked if there was enough access to the building for fire emergencies . Mr. Boardman stated that fire access is made primarily from the street, and there is no problem with that. MOTION by Ms . Hughes, seconded by Mr. Langenfeld, to recommend to City Council denial of the amendment to Special Use Permit, SP #80-04, by the Fridley Convalescent Home: Per Fridley City Code, Section 205 .051, 3, F, to allow an entrance from Lyric Lane because of expansion of the nursing home, to add clerical, office and classroom-meeting space, located on Lot 1 , Block 1, Maple Manor Addition, the same being 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. , Fridley, Minnesota, for the following reasons: _ 1. There appears to be no overwhelming need for the access as ___ presented by the petitioners . 2. There are some potential problems with the one-way configuration in terms of a traffic danger because of a left turn required off Lyric Lane. 3. The recedent that might be set for other apartment buildings that have been denied access onto Lyric Lane. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1980 PAGE 9 Ms . Hughes stated that it appeared to her that the parking lot that is being considered to be added only encourages the use of the west entrance in the back. If they really want to encourage use of the front door, they should consider using the large area to the east in some kind of a parking lot that would include a driveway turn-around. The concerns of a disturbance to the nursing home residents by having a drive close to them can. easily be accommo- dated on that lot by moving the parking lot away from the residents and having a large grassy area between the building and the parking lot. They could still have the drop-off by having a one-way drive that comes in close to Lyric Lane. This should all be considered by the traffic people. Mr. Langenfeld stated it was his opinion that the traffic was definitely a problem. The petitioner has stated he may consider an alternative method. At this point in time, he could see the feasibility of such a drop-off for the residents ; however, he was inclined to go with the motion to deny entrance off Lyric Lane. Mr. Treuenfels stated that one of the reasons for denial in the motion was the . possible precedent they would be setting for other driveways onto Lyric Lane. He would like more information on what they would be getting into with some- thing like this . Mr. Boardman stated that the reason this driveway petition was brought to the Planning Counission was because of some questions in the original special use permit as to whether a driveway would or wuuld not be allowed to Lyric Lane. In reviewing the previous minutes and information, Staff felt this would require an amendment to the special use permit approved at that time. That is why it is before the Planning Commission. He stated that anyone has the right to have access onto a street. If the apartment building wants access to Lyric Lane, the Staff would most likely say "no" to that access . There is nothing in the city codes that can stop that access . It is primarily an administrative judgment, and if the apartment building disagreed with that judgment, then they can appeal the staff judgment. Mr. Harris referred to page 15 of the agenda (Minutes of the Board of Appeals, Nov. 6, 1968) noting the second stipulation in a motion made by himself: "The new plot plan is agreeable with,egress on Madison St." It was the Board of Appeals feeling at that time, and he has not seen any reason to change that feeling in the past 12-13 years, that they wanted accesses to the project off Madison St. because they felt any turning on Lyric Lane would present a safety hazard. That was the reasoning for the "no egress" for the apartment building and the nursing home. Under the present proposal, it was his opinion that the turning from either direction would create a traffic hazard with the amount of traffic already on Lyric Lane. It was the Board of Appeals feeling, and was still his opinion, that they wanted to see uninterrupted traffic flow down Lyric Lane. Mr. Boardman stated he had a question which dealt with the code requirements on setback of parking as compared to setback of driveway. In a driveway situation, there is no setback from the right-of-way, primarily because that driveway has access/egress off the street and therefore allows a driveway to go to the property line. When they run into problems is when a driveway PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1980 PAGE 10 becomes part of a parking lot and there are no accesses off to the street . Therefore, they look at it as a setback of 20 ft. from the property line . If this driveway is not accessed off onto Lyric Lane, then would the Planning Commission view it still as a driveway or a driveway as part of a parking lot and therefore have to meet the 20 ft. setback requirement? If it has to meet a 20 ft. setback requirement, then it cannot be located in the front yard without a variance. He posed this question for the Planning Commission's consideration, because the Planning Commission may or may not have to act on it at sometime in the future. Ms . Schnabel stated that in thinking about the motion, she had decided she would vote against the motion for the following reasons: 1. She did not think the circumstances of the handicapped have been truly addressed in trying to decide how these people are going to be easily picked up and dropped off at the nursing home, specifically if the entrance is not permitted. The petitioners have indicated they are having difficulty currently with their handicapped people trying to get them in and out, and she did not think they have really addressed the needs of those residents of our city. She has had quite a bit of experience recently with nursing home patients and can relate to the problems these people are experiencing in trying to provide all services to their residents . She found the best argument against the driveway was the argument of additional deliveries, the mail, United Parcel Service, etc. She agreed with that concern, but perhaps those issues could be solved by specifically delineating special areas for package deliveries, other than mail . 2. In talking about putting one driveway on that side of the street, they fail to realize that across the street each one of the people in the audience represents a driveway that does come out on Lyric Lane, maybe another ten driveways coming out on that side of Lyric Lane, with the same situations existing--that there are children walking in the street, there is traffic, and the many other things brought up at the meeting. Because of that, she felt it was hard to find a real reason not to provide the access to the nursing home via only one driveway. She could not, in good conscience, deny the nursing home that easy access . Mr. Wharton stated he agreed with Ms . Schnabel and would also vote against the motion. He felt this driveway off Lyric Lane is a very prudent driveway. He felt the petitioners have shown a need and lie has not been convinced during the meeting that the traffic is going to increase on Lyric Lane to any degree over what residences on the nursing home side of the street would have or what he has on the other side of his street by having residents who back their cars out of the driveways . Children run a much greater risk by having neighbors across the street with driveways into each home than he felt the residents along Lyric Lane would have with one driveway across from them going into the property only. PLANNING C014aSSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1980 PAGE 11 Mr. Wharton stated that the idea of a driveway going over to the east end of the property with a cul-de-sac or parking lot is not going to be a convenience, because cars out of necessity would be going east, discharging their passengers on the south side of the driveway. The passengers would have to walk across the driveway to get into the building, or else the car would have to proceed to the cul-de-sac to turn around and come back west to discharge the passenger. This could be more of a hazard than a benefit. Mr. Oquist stated he did not think the question had been answered about the precedent setting regarding the possibility of the apartment complex wanting access onto Lyric Lane. Mr. Harris stated that from a practical standpoint, he felt if they start allowing accesses, they will be setting a precedent. Staff can say "no", but the apartment people still have the right to come in and ask for a variance. or mitigation of the circumstances. Ms. Schnabel stated she disagreed with that. It was a completely different situation with a whole different set of hardships . The apartment complex would, in effect, be creating a whole new street from Lyric Lane to Osborne, which would be a completely different situation from that of the nursing home. Mr. Boardman agreed with Ms. Schnabel. He stated there are two completely different situations with two different procedures--a variance procedure requires proof of a hardship, whereas, under a special use permit, no hardship is required. Mr. Langenfeld stated this was a very difficult thing to make a decision on. He was very much aware of the needs of the handicapped people by nature of his profession. It was his hope that some alternative decision might be made that would meet the needs of the citizens as well as the handicapped and the nursing home. Ms . Hughes stated she works with handicapped persons every day .•end is well acquainted with some of the problems they have in gaining access to buildings . She did not think any of the considerations suggested in the motion were an imposition on the handicapped. What the petitioners presented was not informa- tion about how desperately they needed access for the handicapped,with the exception that they don't want them coming in the west door because of the problems mentioned. She felt it was not the Planning Commission's job to plan the access to the building, but to let the petitioner go back and make some new plans and arrangements . UPON A VOICE VOTE, OQUIST, HUGHES, HARRIS, AND LANGENFELD VOTING AYE, idHARTO\, SC}I\'AHEL, AND TREUEhTELS VOTING NAY, CHAIRhLAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION TO DENY SP #80-04 CARRIED WITH A 4-3 VOTE. Mr. Harris thanked everyone for coming and stated this would go before the City Council on June 16. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1.980 PAGE 12 Ms . Hughes stated sho- would suggest that the Energy Commission meet with someone from Unity Hospital to encourage carpooling and vanpooling by their employees. (Ms . Hughes left the meeting at 9:48 p.m.) Chairman Harris declared a ten-minute recess at 9:49 p.m. 6. CO?TTINUED: PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHAPTER 205. ZONING Page 50 205.12 P DISTRICT REGULATIONS 205 .121 Uses Permitted Mr. Harris stated that at the last meeting, there was some discussion regarding Item 1, Principal Uses, and that some of these uses should require a special use permit. He had suggested that the Commissioners think about this and bring back suggestions and concerns at this meeting. Ms . Schnabel stated that since this particular item did refer to parks and the development of parks, she would like to delay the item until Ms. Hughes could be present to discuss the item. 140TION by Ms . Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Langenfeld, to table discussion on "Principal Uses in P District Regulations" until such a time as Ms. Hughes can be present for the discussion. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairman Harris declared the motion carried unanimously. Page 51 205 .122, 205 .123, 205 .124, 205 .125 #1. Change "any other district" to "those districts" Page 52 205 .13 C-1 DISTRICT REGULATIONS 205.131 Uses Permitted 3-D. Change to "Banks, financial institutions, .and other uses having drive-in facilities." 205.133 Lot Requirements and Setbacks 1. Lot Area - should read: "Minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet is required." Delete "Lot width" - Item 2 REGULAR PEE T i'1l; OF JUNE 1G, 1430 PAGE 2 OPE'! F(`BU.'d, I11SVIORS: Jim Lan;;nfcld, Treasurer of the Islands of Peace Foundation, stated the Founiatio r.ct earlier this evening and m;rde a motion to remove Ed tildes as Coor5'inaLor and Groundskeeper until such tire as he is fully able to r resur,e such duties. The motion further stated he rias to arrange for hos.- pitalizatio; to treat his present illne%s and in the event he failed to do so, Lc m;rst vacate the premises either voluntarily or by court order. Mr. langefeld stated Mr. Wilmes was cor'.rended for his c:forts in the past, horrr. _r, his personal behavior and health is detrimental not only to him, but others. tie stated the motion carried unanimously and :•�r. Wilmes was pres.vnt at the meeting. CounciL;.an Barnette stated he felt the reason for this is humanitarian and in the long run, it would serve Ed Wilmes' best interests. MOTION by Councilman Barnette to receive the motion from, the Islands of Peacc Foundation. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. NEW C SINESS: LR111'1VIl,'G PLAN:1ING CO1J•iISSiO'! flINUTES OF J1G_E 4_1980: 0"SH)rRAT1L:`: OF A REQ,JEST FOR A SlIC1AL USE PIRI"!T, SP X80-0^, TO AL1.01:L TkA!CEFR1LLi1 CONVALFSCLL1 hl!<'SING _c, 7590 1-YR L LANEreshi, City Manager, stated this iter,, was withdrawn at the request of licant, to Johanson, aid they are looking at ethler altcrn.:tives. by Councilr:onizn Moses to table indefinitely. Seconded by Councilman rickUpon a voice vete, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion unanir:o: iy. APPEALS COL•C:ISSION MINUTES OF MAY 27. 1980: A. kF f4$7 FOR iy"1 'CL TO REDUCE FFA.? AT 5750 trIN' SIREf.T, PARI OF F^ 'OSF� T�,u! bJ 1D11;0 C4;,'iEX 5730, 57i(i 5£0.3 rSAl_STRLFT, RAUENliO�;ST - - Mr. Flora, Public idurl:s Director, stated the Pauenhorst Corporation is planr?ny three large buildings it, this area, with two facing Main Street and one Luilding abutting the railroad tracks. h'.r•. Flora stated a variance is requested for the rear building, which abut the tracks, to reduce the rear yard fro-n the required 25 feet to 7.1 fer-t. Ile sta?cd the Appeals C011--nis5ion has considered this variance rcy::':s;, and recoa::,cndE,d approval. M.,-. flora stated, if the Council approved the variance, it is reco,-.,:•n.ied there be two stipulations, (1) increased landscaping along the front facing the residential properties and (2) an underground spri!;!.lirg 31;. 1:i;.h21lrz FGtter, representing P,auenhorst Corporation, stated she was not sure what was ircant in the stipulation for increased land,capin'. She stated a landscaPing plan was submitted several ago a hosed on f.o;:.',cllts fi-o:r, the City staff, thr. size was increased and another plar: s&iiitteu. Shc stated, if t!"_ landscaping plan is acceptable, then the stipulation would not be a problem. Mr. Flora stated the plan was received this afternoon.ar,d staff is presently revie::ing it and felt something can be worked out. i r CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 CALL TO ORDER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the May 8, 1985, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel , Mr. Oquist, Mr. Minton, Mr. Nielsen, Mr. Saba, Mr. Kondri ck Members Absent: Ms. Gabel Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator Betty Wall , 5425 Quincy St. N.W. Jackie Judlicki , Fridley Convalescent Home Lance Lindman, 4565 3rd St. N.E. Robert McAdam, 7580 Alden Way N.E. See attached list APPROVAL OF APRIL 3, 1985, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO APPROVE THE APRIL 3, 1985, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr. Minton stated that on page 14, paragraph 1 , the words "she stated" should be deleted. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MINUTES APPROVED AS AMENDED. 1 . PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP 085-03, FRIULLY UUNVALE5LLN1 HOME, BY BETTY J. WALL: Per Section , C, 6, of the Fridley City Code to allow parkinq lot expansion on Lot 1 , Block 1 , Maple Manor Addition, the same being 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. MOTILIN BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. NIELSEN, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #85-03 FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME, BY BETTY J. WALL. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:35 P.M. Mr. Robinson stated this property was located on the northeast corner of Madison and Lyric Lane, just east of the Unity Hospital complex. The zoning was R-1 or single family. The neighborhood to the south was predominately single family, an apartment complex to the east and north, and CR-1 (local ) office) just to the north which included the Fridley Medical Clinic property. i c PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PArr 2 Mr. Robinson stated the proposal was for a 40-stall narking lot on the east side of the property with access off Lyric Lane and one-way circulation within the interior of the parking lot. There was an existing 39-stall parking lot on the west side. Mr. Robinson stated the Planning Commission members had received conies of the June 4, 1980, Planning Commission minutes when there was a public hearing regarding a special use permit for an entrance from Lyric Lane because of expansion of the nursing home. Key points had been highlighted in yellow. City Planner, Mr. Boardman, had stated that "when the nursing home was proposed in 1968, the Nanning Commission and City Council recommended a special use permit with the determination that there would be no access off Lyric Lane". At that meeting, there was a great deal of discussion and reference was made to the original City Council arproval that egress and exit should be on Madison St. The special use permit at the June 4, 1980, Planning Commission meeting was recommended denial by the Planning Commission with reasons, and the request was then withdrawn at the June 16, 1980, City Council meetinq. Tonight, this request was really a re-request for the same proposal . Mr. Robinson stated Staff has put together what they feel was one solution which would serve the general needs of the Fridley Convalescent Home and the whole area, and would maintain and continue the existing access off Madison St. This would involve the removal of the existing storage garage area to the north. They would suggest that the proposed access onto Lyric Lane be closed off and landscaped. Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recommending the following stipulations: 1 . There be no access off Lyric Lane; that the access be off Madison St. 2. The parking lot be screened, both from the driveway and the residential property. 3. Any lighting in the parking lot be diffused lighting. 4. There be cne-way signs placod in the parking lot. 5. Petitioner work with City Engineering on drainage requirements. Mr. Robinson stated he had received a telephone call from a resident, Janice Carroll , 7567 Lyric Lane, who could not attend this meeting. She lives directly across the street. She stated she was against access off Lyric Lane. She had a problem because of the already existing traffic and Droblem of property values. She was not against the parking lot if properly screened and would support the parking lot with access off Madison. Mr. Robinson stated the parking lot as described was for employees only so there wouldn't be a high turn-over of cars coming and going. Mr. Robinson stated one other issue that should be raisedwas the apartment building just to the east, Highland Park Apartments. There has been complaints to the past of people from the apartment building driving over the boulevard onto Lyric Lane. It has been suggested that a barricade be put up so they PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 3 cannot continue to do that. One of the fears of the neighborhood is that if access is allowed off Lyric Lane for the Fridley Convalescent Home, they would have a hard time denying a permit to the apartment building for the same access off Lyric Lane. There is the concern that the residential quality of the neighborhood would suffer. Mr. Robinson stated City Staff has met on site with people from the nursing home and went over the feasibility of moving the garage and putting the driveway through to the proposed east parking lot. One of the big concerns of the nursing home was they have a patio area for the residents behind the building, and the driveway would be an intrusion on that passive area. Mr. Saba asked how many people were employed at the Fridley Convalescent Home. Ms. Jackie Judlicki stated she was the Administrator of the Fridley Conva- lescent Home. She stated they have 140 employees. The maximum number of employees per shift is 50. The shifts are 6:00 a.m. - 2:30 p.m. ; 2:00 p.m. - 10:30 p.m. ; night shift. Ms. Judlicki stated the proposed parking lot would be an employee parking lot and would be used solely for that purpose. She stated it was very difficult to visualize the real situation at the rear of the building unless people had actually been there and looked at it. She stated there is not only a garage, but a garbage collection area. The property to the north slopes down at a great incline, so in order to extend the driveway, a lot of fill would have to be hauled in and some type of retaining wall constructed. They could not go with a single driveway as described by City Staff. At the rear of the building just before the garage, there are double doors. That is the emergency entrance. Also, all deliveries are made to the rear of the building, so large semi 's come in and they can take up the whole driveway for up to 1/2 hour in order to unload supplies. There would have to be enough room for cars to bypass what- ever vehicle was in the driveway. Ms. Judlicki stated that, as Mr. Robinson had mentioned, they do have a patio area in the rear--a concrete area with nice landscaping that is used not only by the employees, but by the residents and families of residents. Many family activities are held there. She felt that for the safety of the residents, some of whom are very confused, she could not envision a driveway right there. Ms. Judlicki stated the existing parking lot does accommodate 39 cars. That is hardly enough for their employees, let alone visitors, doctors, various services coming into the nursing home (such as mobile dental , eye doctor, lab, portable x-ray, etc. ). Their employees are parking on the street; and at one time, were utilizing Unity Hospital parking lot; but now with the expansion of their facilities, Unity is also crowded for parking. Ms. Judlicki stated that many visitors to the nursing home are elderly them- selves, and it is very difficult for them to visit their families and friends. The driveway coming off Madison St. for the existing parking lot is coming in at an incline so in the winter with ice and snow, it is not only an inconvenience, but also a safety hazard to anyone having to walk up to the building. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 4 Ms. Judlicki stated the expense of putting the driveway through in the rear would probably cost 3-4 times more than putting a driveway in off Lyric Lane, plus the disruption of their passive patio area and the safety of their residents. Mr. Minton asked if a study had been done in-house of how much additional cost would be incurred by extending the driveway from Madison. Ms. Judlicki stated they had not done a study. Ms. Schnabel asked how they would indicate that the proposed lot was for employee parking only. Ms. Judlicki stated they would have signs indicating it was an employee parking lot only. Each employee would have a sticker for the car, and it would be monitored through the maintenance department. Mr. Phil Dahlen, 1378 Skywood Lane N.E. , stated his mother has been a patient at the Fridley Convalescent Home for 12 years. From the existing driveway from where it slants and goes back to the double doors, there are some blocks that go up to separate the cars that are facing east and the cars that are facing west and also cars up against the buildinq. When you are tryinq to get out of the double doors area, you have to back in between a set of parked cars which is practically impossible. He stated there is no other way to turn around in that slant. Mr. Dahlen stated that as to the parking facilities on the west side of the building, there is very few parking spaces for people like himself coming to visit. There is handicapped parking on the very northwest corner where the double doors are. He stated that during the winter time, it is physically impossible to go uphill , because the existing parking lot is downhill . The employees have to park some place; and if the employees are takinq up parkinq spaces, there are no parking spaces for visitors except ori L'he street. He stated he had no intention of parking his car on the street at any time. Mr. Dahlen stated that on the north side of the driveway, it is all downhill . In order to extend the driveway, there would have to be a lot of fill brought in. As far as the distance, he did not think there could be a 25 ft. driveway in there at all . As far as access off Lyric Lane, cars would not be coming in convoy fashion. It was when the shift ended that there might be a problem, because everyone wants to get out at the same time. The possible solution would be like it is at Northtown, where the cars go in on one side with a little bit of an island and comes out on the other side, with a right turn only onto Lyric Lane, so no one can cross the street making a left turn going to Jackson St. around 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon. Ms. Carol Basil , 810 Rice Creek Terrace, stated she does go to the nursing home to visit her father and she has yet to be able to park in the parking lot. She has either had to park on the street or leave and come back later. She PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 5 would be in favor of an additional parking lot. The existing driveway is very narrow, and she did not think that would be a good access to the proposed parking lot on the east. Ms. Dorothy Newton, 228 - 104th Lane N.W. , stated she wondered if anyone had taken into consideration the building for the new medical center across the street at Unity Hospital . Because of the construction, the workmen take uD a lot of the street parking. She stated she has spoken to people at the Fridley Medical Clinic next door, and they object to visitors from the nursing home parking in their lot. Some of the visitors to the nursing home have to use the church parking lot. She stated she usually goes to the nursing home between 1 :00-2:30 p.m. and usually there is no place to park. She stated her mother has been in the nursing home for &; years. That is her mother's home. All her mother has to look forward to are her visitors as she cannot get out of bed and cannot walk. Many people who would like to come to the nursing home do not because they cannot walk from the street or other parking lots. Ms. Newton stated that on Dec. 28, 1984, there was a fire at the Fridley Convalescent Home. How would the fire engines have gotten across to the east side of the building without a parking lot and drivekaay if there has been a lot of snow? She stated they have to take the safety factors into consideration, too. Ms. Newton stated that many cars parked on the street are parked so close together that there are near collisions to cars exiting because people cannot see someone trying to enter. She stated these are all very bad situat'ons. Ms. Merle Herbert stated she lives in Minneapolis. Her mother has lived in the Fridley Convalescent Home for 14 years. She stated she believed when she goes to visit her mother, she would have the right to park just like any other person who visits his/her mother. She stated that if Ms. Judlicki said things would be kept up, they could take her word as the Fridley Convalescent Home is a "home". If Ms. Judlicki tells her stuff how to park, they will do Ghat she says. Ms. Frances Frank stated she was an employee at the Fridley Convalescent Home. She stated she felt that the existing parking lot should be for visitors only, and the new parking lot should be for employees only. She did not think it was good to have access from Madison and have to move the garage or the beautiful patio the residents enjoy. Mr. Bruce Barsness, 7589 Lyric Lane, stated he was opposed to the parking lot and to the access onto Lyric Lane. He stated he has been a homeowner on Lyric Lane for 81-Z years. During that time, there has been considerable expan- sion of all the property owned by the North Suburban Hospital District and operated by Health Central , Inc. The size of Unity is much bigger than it was 8 years ago. The amount of traffic is much larger than 8 years ago. If they compare the traffic on Lyric Lane to the traffic on any other street in the Melody Manor area, there was a considerable difference. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 6 Mr. Barsness stated they have some rapidly expanding businesses on the north side. Homeowners who were there first are on the south side. The homeowners want one thing and the businesses want something else. He has not seen any expansion plans that take into account both the homeowners and the businesses. Mr. Barsness stated he lives across the street from the Highland Park Apart- ments. There is a parking lot there, and he did not need two parking lots across the street from him. One other concern had to do with property values. The value of the homes on Lyric Lane are less than the homes in the interior of Melody Manor. Mr. Barsness stated that five years ago there was a proposal by the Fridley Convalescent Home for a U-shaped driveway and expansion of the structure to the east. There was no mention at that time of a need for more parking, so apparently this additional parking need has arisen since that time. Six years ago the nursing home did not have a patio or storage building on the back side. He questioned the nursing home's planning. Why weren't these parking problems foreseen before these things were put in? Mr. Barsness stated that besides the traffic, he had some other concerns regarding the access onto Lyric Lane. If the lot overflows either because there are too many employees, snow removal problems, repairs, etc. , those cars are all going to be out on Lyric Lane. Mr. Barsness stated that as far as the City's proposal for the driveway going in from the back, the only way he would find that acceptable was if the lot was fenced in all the way around including the Lyric Lane side and landscaped so they would not have to look at the cars. One of his concerns with the City 's plan was that when landscaping goes in, it is always quite small . Cars would still be able to drive in over the grass just like they do at the Highland Park Apartments. He wanted to make sure there was no way the cars could get to Lyric Lane from the parking lot. Mr. Barsness stated parking on the east lot would have to be controlled because there could be a potential problem there. He had heard there was going to be a sticker system, "employee parking only" signs, and he believed those were good intentions, but sometimes things change over a period of time. Once that lot is in, it cannot be removed. Mr. Lloyd Larson, 7549 Lyric Lane, asked if the driveway could be extended to an east parking lot. Was there enough land? He stated people have talked about safety of the people in the nursing home, but what about the safety of the children who walk up and down the street because there are no sidewalks? If the Fridley Convalescent Home gets a driveway onto Lyric Lane, then the apart- ment building should have the same access. Right now the street is very busy. He could agree to the parking lot, but no access onto Lyric Lane. He would like to see the driveway on the back side if there is enough room. Then every- body's problem would be solved. Mr. Larson stated that when the Fridley Convalescent Home was built, it was stipulated that there would be no access onto Lyric Lane because the people PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 7 did not want it. Five years ago they tried for access onto Lyric Lane, and here thev are again. If the building was not enlarged as proposed five ,years ago and the parking lot was big enough then, why the need for more parking now? Ms. Judlicki stated the building has not been expanded. Since it was built in 1970, however, there have been a lot of internal changes in the buildinq. They are receiving residents into the home who require much more care than they did in 1970-1975-1979. Hospitals have to discharge patients much sooner. They are getting people who are almost in the critical state. This requires more staff and services to care for the residents, and that means more cars. They have done a lot to encourage family participation, family care conferences , family events, etc. They want the residents to feel part of a family unit, and so the families have to get to the nursing home. With a new parking lot for employees , they would be able to add more handicapped parking. Many employees park on Madison St. now in order to free up parking spaces for visitors. This isn't just a temporary problem; it has been going on for a long time. They, too, are concerned for the safety of the children. Thev have checked with an elementary school about school schedules , and the employees would be coming and leaving before and after the children are walking to from school . Mr. Larson stated that when the second shift at the nursing home gets out, the children from Spring Lake Park High School are coming home. Ms. Dorothy Artmann, 254 Rice Creek Boulevard, stated she was an employee at the Fridlev Convalescent Home, and also had a loved one living in the nursing home. There are a lot of Fridley employees who have out up with a lot of inconvenience with the parking. When you care about someone being able to visit a resident, then you don 't park in the lot. She stated her aunt was a resident at the nursing home, and her mother is elderly. It is hard for her mother to walk; and if the weather is not good, then her mother does not visit her aunt, which means her aunt is denied a visit. There were onlv three people to visit her aunt--her sister, her mother, and herself. Ms. Artmann stated they were not asking the people on Lyric Lane to be inconvenienced. The hospital and the nursing home were there before the homeowners. Children can also create a problem for traffic. She stated they really need a parking lot. Some day she may be a resident in that nursinq home, and if they do not get it the way they want it now, they will not have it. Mr. John Haines, 448 Rice Creek Blvd. , stated he would like to make a few comments from the hospital perspective. They recognize that part of the problem is because of the expansion going on right now at Unity Hospital , but they are trying to correct those problems. He stated they are trying to be good neigh- bors. Right now there is no doctors' lot, as such, because they had to take over part of the employee lot for the doctors. There is also expansion on the professional building to the west. All this expansion should be done by summer and hopefully that will help with the traffic and parking problem. Mr. Haines stated they have tried to maintain the landscaping between the hospital and the neighbors. They have been complimented on it. Sometimes, when the neighbors are crowded for parking space, they will use the hospital parking lot for extra space. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 8 Mr. Haines stated he had one other concern, and he has tried to get Anoka County to look at this problem. He believed a lot of traffic was added from the hospital from Madison St. east. Cars will come down to Lyric Lane because they can get out on Osborne and make a left hand turn because there are stop signs there. He stated they cannot seem to get stop signs installed at Madison St. and Osborne. The c6ngestion gets so bad on Madison trying to make a left hand turn that many people are going to take Lyric Lane. He stated he had talked to Paul McCarron, Anoka County Commissioner, about this problem last fall . Mr. McCarron had said he would see that a traffic study was done on Madison and Osborne, but one has not been done yet. He stated he did believe that stop signs on Osborne and Madison would help with a lot of the traffic on Lyric Lane. Ms. Edna Barsness, 7589 Lyric Lane, stated she is a registered nurse and works at Unity Hospital . She knows a lot of the patients from her station do go to the nursing home. Before she was a nurse, she was a nursing assistant in a nursing home and her mother resided in a nursing home so she was not against the nursing home. She was against the parking lot with access onto Lyric Lane. The nursing home operates 24 hrs/day, 7 days/week, 365 days/year. School is not in session all year, and the children are out in the street riding bikes, etc. She stated you can say that most of the children are old enough to know better, but what about the little children who do not know better. The apart- ment building poses a concern also because there are many youngsters in that complex , some very young, and they have very few places to play. She was amazed that no one had gotten hart, as many of the children cross the street. Ms. Barsness stated she believed that if the nursing home got access onto Lyric Lane, the apartment building would want access , too, and that would pose a lot more traffic. Ms. Barsness stated it was her understanding that it was not possible for the nursing home to get access onto Lyric Lane without special permission. If the Fridlev Convalescent Home knew that, why was the storage shed built there and why, was the beautiful patio built there without any thought to where they were going to get access? This just did not make sense to her. Ms. Barsness stated she did not especially want a narking lot across the street from her, but if they have to have it, then she didn't want access off Lvric Lane, and the parking lot would have to be well bounded so that no cars could drive across the grass. She hoped the City would maintain its policy and vote against any access onto Lyric Lane. Mr. Charlie Johanson, 424 Rice Creek Blvd. , stated that even if they moved the garage, he did not think there was enough room to put a two-car driveway behind the building. There was only 33 ft. from the building to the corner at the narrowest point. Ms. Schnabel asked if the Fridley Convalescent Home had discussed the possi- bility of purchasing a little section of land from the propQrty owners to tha north. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING,, MAY 8, 1985 PACE 9 Mr. Johanson stated they have talked to the property owners to the north, but they are also short of parking. Ms. Schnabel stated that she would think that if there was any possibility of acquiring that small section, it would certainly enhance the nursing home's chances of putting in the wider driveway. Mr. Johanson stated the nursing home also had another option, and that was to come off Madison and go in front of the building. Mr. Julian Boyda, 7593 Lyric Lane, stated he moved to Lyric Lane in 1972, and it was his understanding the nursing home was not going to be expanded. He stated the neighbors opposed the expansion proposal five years ago, and they still opposed the access coming out onto Lyric Lane. He stated he loved children, and he was very concerned about the children because of the traffic. Ms. Norma Wetterberg stated her mother was a resident of the Fridley Convalescent Home. She used to park in the got, but now there is nowhere to Dark. She is one of the people who have had to park on Lyric Lane. She stated she would like the Planning Commission to give serious consideration to allowing an entrance to the proposed parking lot from Lyric Lane. Mr. Michael Boo, 2810 57th Ave. N. , stated he was reprzsenting the Fridley Convalescent Home. He stated he would like to again summarize their position. The reason why the request is before the Planning Commission and why it is appropriate that the Planning Commission act on it at this meeting as opposed to the proposal five years ago was because of the changes in the area, pressures from Unity Hospital and its expansion, the taking away of parking space that was normally allowed and that is no longer available. Those things are not going to change. Fridley itself has expanded in ways it could not have envisioned even five years ago. The nursing home has become basically an acute care nursing center with an increase in staff as a result, and clearly there was the need for the parking lot. Mr. Boo stated the question seems to come down to (1 ) the relationship to the apartment building, and he was not sure that was an issue here. The pressures the nursing home is feeling are both internal and from the west, and the apart- ment building is not under those same pressures; (2) access across the back onto Madison. He wanted to summarize a few statements made earlier, and that was that space is currently being used for emergency access and loading and unloading of supplies. There is a garage there with a foundation. There is a patio that is being used by the residents quite frequently which suggests the possible safety hazards to the residents from the traffic; (3) the comment was made of why were the patio and garage located there? He stated he did not think the nursing home people foresaw what kind of expansion would occur. Perhaps that was an oversight on the part of the develoDers, but perhaps no one could have foreseen the trends that have taken and are taking place. Mr. Boo stated that regarding the access off Madison St. , extensive fill would have to be brought in to build out to the property line. It was a very PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 10 expensive proposition; it raises safety hazards for emergency access and to the residents, and it was a tight and difficult access that he did not think would be adequate. Ms. Judlicki stated she would like to introduce Leota Herylu, a resident and President of the Resident Council , who would like a moment to speak to the Commission. Ms. Herylu stated she had been a patient at Unity Hospital who couldn't return home so Fridley Convalescent Home became her permanent home. She stated her family comes to visit, and they do not have a place to park, and they cannot get in back to pick her up. She stated it would be nice for the employees to have their own parking lot so the visitors could get closer to pick up the residents for outings. She stated the residents were all in favor of the employee parking lot. Mr. Saba stated he has seen a lot of situations where additional parking can be made available by having a remote parking lot and a shuttle bus service. He asked if this possibility had been considered. It would eliminate the need for a parking lot for the employees, or the visitors could even use the shuttle service. Mr. Boo stated it was something that could be considered; however, there are sometimes a lot of costs built into something like that and businesses for profit can afford those costs easier than businesses that are not for profit. That might be the reason why this was not possible in this case. Mr. Minton asked if the Fridley Convalescent Home had given any consideration to expanding the parking lot on the west down to Lyric Lane. Ms. Judlicki stated they expanded the parking lot once in 1976, and the City told them at that time that it was the closest they could come to Lvric Lane. MOTION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #85-03, FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME, BY BETTY J. WALL. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:00 P.M. Mr. Robinson stated he realized the City Staff's solution was not the cheapest or the easiest, but they did spend a good deal of time on site and felt that with the appropriate engineering, their suggestion could be accomplished. He did not feel there has been any real significant study done on this proposal , and maybe that should be done. Mr. Kondrick stated he definitely felt the nursing home needed a new parking lot. The issue here was whether access should be off Lyric Lane or not. In visiting the site and looking it over, he felt there was enough room to accommodate a wider driveway. However, before he could make any kind of recommendation, he would want to make sure there was room for a semi-trailer and a car. They also need to know a "ball park" figure of how large 3 cost the City would be imposing on the nursing home. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 11 Mr. Oquist stated he agreed. He could see the need for the parking lot, but before he could vote on it, he would like to see the feasibility of the drive- way coming across the back of the property from Madison with a cost estimate. He thought access onto Lyric Lane did pose a problem. Ms. Schnabel asked what the timetable was for the parking lot. Ms. Judlick stated they were hoping to have the parking lot completed by early fall . Ms. Schnabel stated if the Planning Commission were to table this item, there would be time for the Fridley Convalescent staff and City Staff to conduct a study on the feasibility of the driveway behind the building and put together some cost figures. Ms. Judlick stated they would be willing to do this. MOTION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO TABLE DISCUSSION ON SP #85-03 FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME, BY BETTY J. WALL, UNTIL THE MAY 22, 1985, PL?" NG COMMISSION MEETING FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING A BRIEF STUDY FROM THF ::.AL7t1 CENTRAL ENGINEERS AND THE CITY OF FRIDLEY ENG17;FERS ON TNF FEASIBILI' F A WIDER DRIVEWAY BEHIND THE FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME TO THE NEW PROPC."_ D PARKING LOT. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABF.L DECLARED THF. Jv_-710N CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP 085-04 , BY Per Section , of the Frl ,, C"ty Code, to ow t e construction of a second accessory building, a 20 by 16 foot garag to be used for storage of a classic car, on Lot 26 and the North 25 feet Lot 25, Block 16, Plymouth including the vacated alley, the same being 41565 3rd Street N.E. MOTION BY MR. KO ICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP #85-04 BY LAN A. LINDMAN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL ING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SC:i`7ABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:17 P.M. The petitioner, Mr. Lindman,had en at V� :eetinq but had left. The Commissioners agreed they were not omfc -- _ le making a decision without the petitioner present. NOTION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR. EN, TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL LATER IN THE MEETING IN CASE THE PE`=_LONER TURNED TO THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, .;HAIRWOMAN SC EL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. f, PPLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 8, 1985 PAGE 12 • 3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT, P.S. #85-Olp LANDMARK ADDITION, BY ROBERT HcADAM: Being a rep at of the property described as Lot 5, Revisedu itor s ubdivision No. 77 MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON P.S. #85-01, LANDMARK ADDITION, BY ROBERT MCADAM. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:19 P.M. Mr. Robinson stated the property was located north of Osborne, stretching all the way to 77th Ave. , east of the railroad tracks, and west of Main St. It was a subdivision of a large piece of pronert_v. The plat was for 3.61 acres. Mr. Robinson stat*d the proposal was for mini-storage facilities--two lonq buildinqs, approx.` 42,300 sq. ft. of storage space. The structures will 705 ft. long each, separated with fire wails as per code. Cars will ent, north of 77th. There is two-way traffic throughout the entire complex. ere is approx. 10 ft. green area on the west and 5 ft. of green area on th. St. The waterworks easement will stay green at the City' s request . Therc would be a small office/residential facility in the northwest corner tit, Property for a live-in caretaker for the facility. There would be I .:r rark- Ing stalls adjoining the office/residence. There would be 22 par► =r�q stalls required for a development of this size. But, because there is '-the need for parking, four stalls are all that will be put in. There wo: ' J be additional parking area if it would become a problem. He stated the en+ area will be fenced with a 6 ft. high chain link fence with 6 strands of e for a total of 7 ft. Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recommending the following ­ipulations : 1 . Redwood or cedar slats and vines to be installed in fencinq along right-o,`-:rays and to 150 ft back from all four fence corners. Additional screening to be provided depending on future deve-,opment. 2. Developer to work with the City to achieve a satisfactory landscape plan. 3. All storage building masonry to be r `k face block. 4. Office building to be brick mas— \ 5. Developer to comply with fire --e requirements\abuildinq 6. Developer to provide and re--: ve approval of a agreement with rules and rec..lations for storag 7. Park fee of $3,616.36 to ::e paid prior to issua permit. CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION-MEETING, MAY-22, 1985 CALL TO ORDER: ChSrwoman Schnabel called the May 22, 1985, Planning Commission meeting to order at :35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel , Mr. Oquist, Mr. Nielsen, Mr. Minton, Mr. Saba, Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Barna Members Absent: None Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator Betty Wall , 5425 Quincy St. N.W. , New Brighton Jackie Judlicki, Fridley Convalescent Home John Haines, 448 Rice Creek Blvd. Michael Boo, 2810 57th Ave. N. , Brooklyn Center Charley Johanson, 424 Rice Creek Blvd. Edna & Bruce Barsness, 7589 Lyric Lane N.E. Dorothy Artmann, 254 Rice Creek Blvd. Lloyd & Patricia Larson, 7549 Lyric Lane N.E. Lance A. Lindman, 4565 3rd St. N.E. Janice Carroll , 7567 Lyric Lane N.E. APPROVAL OF MAY 81 1985; PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO APPROVE THE MAY 8, 1985, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1 . TA 8/85: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT CONVALESCENT HOME Y B J. . Per Section 05.O7.1 ,C,6, idley City Code to allow Farking lot expansion on Lot 1 , Block 1 , Maple Manor Addition, the same being 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. MOTION BY MR. MINTON, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO REMOVE THE ITEM FROM THE TABLE. " -UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. NIELSEN, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SP 185-03. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:37 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 22, 1985 PAGE 2 Mr. Robinson stated this proposal was for the expansion of a parking lot at the Fridley Convalescent Home. The property is located on the northeast corner of Madison and Lyric Lane. The property is zoned R-1 and is surrounded by office OC R,11, R-3, and predominately single family (R-1 ) on the south. At the last me:!ttng, the major issue was the access, whether it should be off Lyric Lane or of Madtson St. The petitioner has requested access off Lyric Lane. He stated City Staff had suggested access be off Madison St. , that the garage be relocated, and the driveway extended back to the parking lot. The petitioners felt this was not feasible because of the loading area, ambulance and emergency entrance, and the need for a great deal of fill because of the slope and that a retaininq wall would be necessary. Mr. Robinson stated that as agreed at the last meeting, City Staff met on the site with the Health Central engineer and looked over the feasibility of other ideas. They did come up with a proposal which both agreed was possible. It would involve using the existing access off Madison, tapering that back to the north of the existing garage so the garage would not have to be moved, and then tying back to the proposed parking lot area. This would eliminate any access off Lyric Lane. He stated there are several costs associated with this proposal which the engineer had outlined. Those costs are: additional fencing to protect the patio area - $1 ,500 widening of the road to accommodate both trucks, cars, as well as ambulances - 1 ,400 relocation of existing catch basin 1 ,000 $7=1 These costs together with the increased run of driveway associated with this proposal as opposed to the first proposal with access off Lyric Lane equalled a total difference of $6,132.50. Mr. Robinson stated he had not spoken with the petitioners to see if they were willing to go with L';is proposal , but they did comply with the Planning Commission' s suggestion that they analyze the feasibility of a driveway in the rear alonq with a cost analysis. He stated the stipulations as outlined at the last meeting would be basically unchanged. 1 . No access by provided off Lyric Lane. 2. Screen parking lot from right-of-way and residential properties. 3. Appropriate signage be placed in parking lot 4. Parking lot lighting to be diffused. 5. Work with City Engineer on drainage requirements. Mr. Robinson stated that a variance would be needed on the north by the lot line. The code requires a 5 ft. setback, and what is shown is basically a zero lot line. Mr. Michael Boo stated he was representing the Fridley Convalescent Home. Their architect met with representatives from the City on the site,and they also further discussed these plans with Suburban Engineers. They remain concerned about the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 'MAY-22; '1985' ' " PAGE 3 access across the back for many of the reasons discussed at the last meeting. Their arch_ftect and enginear have expressed their thoughts on the feasibility and workability and concerns- of this alternative plan. This. alternative is difficult for a number of reasons: 1 . The cost factor--roughly a $6,100 difference between the two plans. (,The total parking lot cost with access off Lyric Lane, not including fencing and landscaping, was estimated at $18,000. ) 2. Traffic flow--resulting in one entrance being used for both parking lot access and, at certain times during the day, would create traffic flow problems. This will continue to make it difficult for trucks and ambulances, at least during that period of time. Those problems exist now and would remain with this alternative. 3. The problems will only be increased during the winter time. Snow removal will be very difficult with this locatior of the driveway. 4. The safety issue is a very important and critical problem for them. This alternative does permit them to retain most of the patio area but will require fencing for safety. There will be a significant flow of traffic during certain periods of the day through a very narrow area and seasonal impacts will only make that situation worse. Mr. Boo stated they believe this alternative plan was a very difficult plan for them to accept, and, therefore, would urge that the Lyric Lane alternative be recommended. The Lyric Lane access will permit traffic to be more orderly or more spread out, it will permit traffic to be more controlled, and that is important to them. Mr. Boo stated he had some petitions that were signed by both residents of the Fridley Convalescent Home as well as employees who live in Fridley. These petitions again stated their concern about the need for the parking lot with access off Lyric Lane. Mr. Boo stated there was also a third alternative that was possible, and that was access accross the front of the building. He did not know the ramifications of that alternative, but even in contrast to the alternative of the driveway across the back, it would be something they would want to take a look at. Ms. Schnabel stated the statement has been made about the problems with the amount of traffic generated going behind the building, the nearness to the patio -area and garage, and the delivery trucks, ambulances, etc. Yet, if this new '.lot is to be used strictly by employees, there would really only be traffic M Oig basically three times in a 24 hr. period. One would be at. 6:00 a.m. Wvift there would not likely be people on the patio area. The afternoon shift would probably experience the most traffic, but then not again at night. She wondered about the deliveries being made. Mention was made about the deliveries being at the same time as the shifts were changing, but maybe there was the possibility that the providers could be scheduled to come at hours around shift changes. She knew it was not an uncommon practice for companies to PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 22, 1985 PAGE 4 request that deliveries be made only at certain hours. But, she really wondered how great an impact that traffic situation is really going to be if the new lot is only used by employees. r- Ms. Judlicki stated many of their deliveries are in the morning. Paper products and nursing supplies come in the afternoon. The afternoon was the time when she would have the concern. When a semi was backed in there, she did not know if there would be enough room for a car to get around it. Ms. Judlicki stated her greater concern was with the snowplowing in the winter time, and someone coming around the back side of the garage might not be able to see someone- coming from the other direction. She did not know how they would be able to push the snow because the line on the north is a 6 ft. high fence belonging to the property adjacent to them. If they are going to be pushing the snow through there, she did not think that fence would remain Intact very long. Mr. Johanson stated he wanted to point out that there was a 3-4 ft. drop from the corner down to the parking lot of the Fridley Medical Center. Any car coming and sliding on a piece of ice could end up in that parking lot. He stated the engineer from Suburban Engineers said that no engineer would recommend this alternative and said that if this access was put in, the Fridley Conva- lescent Home better increase its insurance because there will be accidents. Ms. Betty Wall stated she was Chairman of the North Suburban Hospital District Board. The District owns Unity Hospital and the property where the Fridley Convalescent Home is located. She stated they have requested this permit to make it a little bit easier for them to keep up with the changing health care. They have made a simple request for a parking lot. In making this request, they are going with what they think is the cheapest way. They did not want to raise any more issues on cost than they have to. Fridley is part of the North Suburban Hospital District, and Fridlev is also contributing to the costs the District incurs and the expenses the District has. So, this is part of Fridley's program. Mrs. Johanson is Fridley's District representative. Because of illness, she could not be at the meeting. She stated all District Board members are requesting that the City of Fridley give them permission to do their parking lot. They do not want to make an issue or trouble for anyone and will abide by whatever recommendation the City makes. Ms. Edna Barsness, 7589 Lyric Lane, stated she had a petition which contained 69 signatures representing 41 of the 51 homes on Lyric Lane. In her opinion, it showed that the neighborhood was really against a parking lot with access onto Lyric Lane. She did not think they would be opposed to the access being on Madison. Ms. Barsness stated she had some concerns about safety. The nursing home people are concerned about the safety of the residents and the additional cost for fencing. She looked at it from a different point of view. The residents are adult-size people and only the employees would be driving behind the building and only at the time of shift changes. The nursing home could fence the patio area and impose a reduced speed limit. Yet, they don't see that same 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 225 -1985 PAGE 5 traffic as posing a risk to the neighborhood by putting access onto Lyric Lane. Children are compulsive by nature; they do run out into the street, and young c t1 dren are not as visible as adults. The speed limit on Lyric Lane is 30 m.p.h. , and any excess traffic on that street is really a safety hazard. E There is a lot of traffic on Lyric Lane now. Ms. Barsness stated Health Central has made it known that they want to please the area residents and keep a happy neighborhood, and the residents do, too. She thought access onto Madison would be a much better compromise and it would give the nursing Dome the parking lot they need. Therefore, she hoped the Planning Commission would maintain no access onto Lyric Lane. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. BARNA, TO RECEIVE PETITIONS 9 & 10 - 1985 FROM THE FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME, EMPLOYEES OF THE FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME, AND RESIDENTS ON LYRIC LANE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Bruce Barsness stated the point the homeowners wanted to make was said at the last meeting. As far as the new proposal with access at the back of the building, he would be willing to accept that plan if a couple of things were added; 1 . landscaping--that there be some way that the City reviews the plans or work afterwards to make sure adequate landscaping and screening is put in. 2. a fence that goes on the south side of the lot to the building 3. that a "right turn only" sign be posted at the driveway onto Madison so traffic leaving both of the lots has to turn north on Madison rather than south. If the traffic turns south,it will go on Lyric Lane. Mr. Barsness stated he was not against Health Central , Unity Hospital , or the Fridley Convalescent Home. He wanted them to be able to expand and maintain their businesses as best they can but not at the expense of the neighborhood streets and not at the expense of the property values of their homes. Mr. Lloyd Larson, 7549 Lyric Lane, stated there are no sidewalks in the area, and the children have to walk in the street. By having access onto Madison, =this situation could be corrected. He agreed with a "right turn only" sign Coining out onto Madison. He'-stated that at the last meeting, Mr. Haines had 6Pought up his concern about no stop signs on Osborne at Madison.- That would also help the situation. He stated the way things are now, their homes have been devaluated by the construction and the traffic. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 22, 1985 PAGE 6 Ms. Dorothy Artmann, 254 Rice Creek Blvd. , stated she could not see where there would be that much traffic coming out onto Lyric Lane when the lot will only be used by employees and only at three times during the day. She f_was also speaking as a taxpayer of Fridley, and that was her tax dollar, too, that was going to help pay for the increased cost of the driveway if it has to go around the back of the building. Ms. Judlicki stated that regarding snow removal , they are a 24 hr. business, and it is not a matter of having the snow cleared by morning; it is a matter of keeping the parking lots open at all times of the day. If people compare the rates of the Fridley Convalescent Home to other nursing homes in the area, they will find they are very cost-conscious people. She stated they try to keep their rates reasonable and feel they offer the best long term care in the area. They are concerned about their rates and do not want to have to increase the rates so that it is a bigger burden on the residents. Mr. Haines stated he would be concerned about the suggestion of a "right turn only" sign coming out of the parking lot onto Madison. If they were to do that, they could say that all the traffic coming out of the parking lot in front of the hospital would also have to go left instead of right. They have a lot of employees and patients who live in the Melody Manor area. Are they going to make these people go all the way around or are they going to let them go right home? He also hoped they could get the County to help them with some of the traffic by getting stop signs on Osborne at Madison. Mr. Haines stated that last year, the hospital had 52,000 patients (11 ,000 in-patients, 42,000 out-patients) , usually coming with other people or emer- gency vehicles. The in-patients have a minimum of five visitors while they are in the hospital . That results in a lot of traffic. He stated they do want to be sensitive to the neighbors and have tried to demonstrate. But, on the other hand, he lost a lot of sympathy when people have moved in knowing the hospital is there. He has also had people tell him that the reason their houses sold so quickly was because the hospital was there, and he knew of two families who bought homes in the neighborhood because the hospital was there. Mr. Barna stated mention was made of the possibility of access across the front of the building. He stated what is considered the front of the building is actually the side yard since the front is the narrow part on a side street lot So, the southern end of the lot was the actual side yard, and they could have a driveway through a side yard 17 ft. from right-of-way setback. Roughly guesstimating, the Fridley Convalescent Home would have room for a nice wide .driveway, shrubberv,plantings, and room for snow removal . He asked if the nursing home had looked at the cost of this alternative. Mr. Boo stated it was just simply an option they would like to look at if access to Lyric Lane is denied. They do feel it would be a cheaper option than the access around the back and, more importantly, they would not have the same safety or snow removal issues. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING;'14Ay 22; '1985 . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 7 MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON S-lI3, FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME, BY BETTY J. WALL. ,UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC 98ARING CLOSED AT 8:32 P.M. Mr. Oquist stated the issue before the Planning Commission was to allow the arking expansion. He definitely saw the need for that parking expansion or the employees. He did have a concern about the driveway access onto Lyric Lane, although that was the most logical place to have it. If they allowed access onto Lyric Lane for the nursing home, they would have to allow the same access to the apartment complex. From his experience on the Planning Commission, that would happen. He would be in favor of approving the special use permit with access onto Madison, either in front of the building or behind the building with proper landscaping. Of those two alternatives, the front was probably the most logical . It might cost more because of the extra length of driveway, but yet it might not be because of the fill that would be required for the driveway in the rear. Mr. Oquist stated he did agree with the snowplowing concerns and the safety concerns in coming around the garage in the rear. He could not agree to a "right turn only" sign onto Madison because there are people who live in the area, and it is not fair to make them go all the way around. He did not think it was necessary to put up a fence around the parking lot. He felt that proper landscaping and berming by the parking lot would be more than adequate. MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #85-03, FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME, BY BETTY J. WALL: PER SECTION 205.07.1, C, 6, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO ALLOW PARKING LOT EXPANSION ON LOT 1, BLOCK 1, MAPLE MANOR ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7590 LYRIC LANE N.E., WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1. NO ACCESS BE PROVIDED OFF LYRIC LANE. 2. SCREEN PARKING LOT FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIZL 3. APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE BE PLACED IN PARKING LOT TO INDICATE EMPLOYEE PARKING. 4. PARKING LOT LIGHTING TO BE DIFFUSED. 5. WORK WITH CITY ENGINEER ON DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS. 6. IF THE CHOICE IS THE DRIVEWAY ACCESS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING, VARIANCES ON THE NORTH LOT LINE TO BE AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED WITH THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Mr; Saba stated the "right turn only" sign sounded like a good idea and Wuld probably be investigated. The nursing home might ,just want to make that request to the visitors and employees who do not want to add to the problems of -the neighborhood. He stated this is a beautiful - neighborhood, and if he lived in the neighborhood, he would be opposed to the access onto Lyric Lane. He did feel that putting access in front of the building would spoil the visual image of the building. He knew there were problems, but he felt the only fitting place for it was in the rear of the building. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 22, 1985 PAGE 8 Mr. Barna stated he would concur with the motion as stated. He stated that regarding the "right turn only" sign, if the nursing home did put up that sign, it was not a sign the police would enforce. It would just be a t_d rectional information sign for visitors and employees of the facility. The cost of the sign and the cost in good will might help the situation. The sign would not restrict anyone from turning left on Madison. Ms. Schnabel stated she could appreciate the concern about keeping the traffic off Lyric Lane. What she was really interested in pursuing was that if the Planning Commission or the City of Fridley could be of any assistance to Mr. Haines in his effort to get the stop signs on the corner of Osborne and Madison, she was sure they would be more than willing to help in any way possible. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to City Council on June 3. If the Fridley Convalescent Home representatives came up with another proposal with the driveway in front of the building, she would urge that they have that plan prepared for the June 3 meeting. 3. TABLED 5/8/85: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERM , Per777 Section o ridley-04, BY LANCE A. LINDMAN: City Code to allow the cons ruction of a second accessory buil ng, a 20 by 16 foot garage, to be used for storage of a classic car on t 26 and the North 25 feet of Lot 25, Block 16, Plymouth including t vacated alley, the same being 4565 - 3rd Street N.E. Public hearing open. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR MINTON, TO REMOVE THE ITEM FROM THE TABLE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING E, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Robinson stated t 's was a single family lot located just east of 3rd St. and south of 46th. he proposal was for a second accessory building/garage to store a class ' car. The garage would not have a driveway. The petitioner will drive th ar only at the most once a week during the summer and not at all during a winter. The only stipulation recommended by staff was that this spe ' 1 use permit be reviewed in a year to make sure the driveway is not worn. Mr Kondrick asked if there had been any comments or concerns from the neighbors. Mr. Robinson stated they have not received any telephone calls or letters from any of the neighbors. CIl ------IInF JIM 1, 1985 0Duncilman Goodspeed questioned the relationship between Fridley Qbnval escent Hine and Health Central. his. Judl icki stated the property is owned by North Suburban Hospital District and Health Central leases the total operation, under the same agreement as Unity Hospital. She stated they are all under the same parent organizatian. m un ci 1 man Goodspeed questioned if additional parking couldn' t be obt a i ne d at Unity Hospital. Ms. Judl icki stated with unity ' s new addition, there isn't room for parking by their employees. She stated Fridley Medical Qinic also was using Unity Hospital' s parking fatalities, but now rust rent parking frm the church across the street. Ks. Judlicki stated they are now parking on Madison Street and wherever they can find a F.laee. She stated many of their visitors have to do the sar,e thinc and some are elderly which makes it difficult for then to visit relatives at the nursing hone. M. Bruce Barsness, 7589 Lyric Lane, stated he is opposed to accers onto Lyric Lane. He stated Lyric Lane is a narrow residential street ar,a felt if there was access onto it, it would be difficult to turn in and out of the Iarkinc lot. Mt. Barsness felt if access onto Lyric Lane was provided for the convalescent hone, other persons, such as those residing, the the Hiynlar.d Park Afartrents, would ask for access onto this street. He stated residents of this apartrrent comilex dose to snake their awn access onto Lyric Lane b,• driving over the boulevard this fast winter. Ft. Barsness pointed out the convalescent here is located on Ircperty zoned R-1 with a special use permit. He stated there was acreErent at u:e tine the permit was issued that there would be no access onto Lyric Lane. ht. Barsness stated access onto Lyric Lane would create prct.lEr, s for hcc,e owners ct rec t-ly across the street. He fel t, once the lot is filled, true overflow of cars would end LF, in front of the homes. He states this is al ready hapFening on Mdi son Street. He stated the constr ucti tin going on at Unity Hospital anly acids to the pr otil ems. He stated the hospi tat also has a lot of undeveloped lard which is inaccessible except fz-- a residentlaal street. Mr. Barsness stated his goal is not to drive Health Central out of the neighborhood, but to insure traffic on Lyric Lane doesn' t get worse than it is now. He stated any expansion done in this area should be done intelligently Fancier a well thought out master plan. He asked the Council to approve the Flan reaormended by the Planning Ccu rdssim. Mr. F nil Dahling, 1378 Skywood Lane, stated he has a mother living at the Fridley Convalescent Home and parking facilities for visitors are F;a cti cal ly norr existent. He stated the pr opo sal for access off Lyric Lane is the most feasible. -13- :i OF = 31 1985 Mr. Lloyd Larson, 7549 Lyric Lane, stated there are no sidewalks on Lyric Lane and the children have to walk on the streets. He stated they are usually walking on the street during shift changes at the nursing herie. He stated he would be in favor of Froviding aooe:s frm the north side of the bui 1 di ng and keepi ng tr of f i c of f Ly ri c Lane. Ms. Monica Wienert, 7311 Lyric Lane, stated with shift changes at the hospital and convalescent hare, Lyric Lane looks like the Indy 500. She• asked if the hospital and convalescent hone are tax paying organizations. Ms. Judl icki stated they are non-profit and do rpt Fay Fxojer ty taxes. Pis. Barsness, 7589 Lyric Lane, stated she was opposed to the parking lot with access onto Lyric Lane. She stated she was concerned about the saf ety as there are no sidewalks. She stated there is a high concentration of children in toe area, be co use cf the aFe r trr ent tui 1 di nc and generally tY i ey are Foorly supervised and often run into the street. Ms. Barsness stated she really tries to see toth sides of the issue as sne knows the nursing hme is concerned about the safety of their residents. She stated there is a nur..ber of things that could be done to reduce the risk on %di son S tr eet and that is to reduce the speed lir-it. Ms. Barsness stated when, the special use permit was issued the stijkdation was that there would be no access onto Lyric Lane. She stated she felt thi-,; was done becaLse of the traffic on this curving, narrow residential street. She stated traffic in the area has increased, as both the hospital ar-d rredi ca.1 center have expanded. She felt, if access to Lyric Lane was giv En to the OorvaleEoent Hine, it would set a Frecedent for other accesses onto this street, and she was concerned about the aFartr ent buil di nc, r er uesti n5 such an access. P's. Barsr.ess stated she felt the nursing hme needs sorre Parking, but access onto Lyric Lane wouldn' t solve all the prod er^.s. She felt access to the front of the building would give visitors an advantage ty decreasing the walking distance to the nursing hone. She also felt access to the front would facilitate fire fighting. Pis. Barsness stated the access on Madison Street would be a corgi r cr. i se a r.d hoped the Council would take the reax=,,endation of the Planning Cor.u„issiorj and uphcld it so there would be no further access onto Lyric Lane. P7. Glen. Byl, 7513 Lyric Lane, stated he f el t the nur si ng horse shcul d t'e more f 1 exib1 e and move the garage to make a nice driveway for the parkin g lot. He stated a driveway aping onto Lyric Lane would be an eyesore. Mir. Boo, attorney representing Fridley Convalescent Hme, stated there are many people here from the nursing hme who would like to speak to the issue of the reed for the Fsrking lot. He stated what it boils down to is the question of access. He stated the access across the back is really an ir,.practi cal alternative and creates a safety prot1 en. Mr. Boo stated this leaves two options, access onto Lyric Lane or across tr,e -14- COUNCT,L MET--r2C OF JUNE 3, 1985 front of the building. He stated to construct a--cess across the front, it would run close to the entrance. He stated other factors must be identified regarding why the nursing hone supports the Lyric Lane access. Mr. Boo stated the cost is one factor, the other factors are the fact that there is currently a problem identified on Osborne Road and Madison Avenue. He stated there is difficulty oaring up Madison onto Osborne. He stated the parking patterns will be an Lyric Lane ane way or the other. He stated you have to mr.sider the most econmical and useful access which is off Lyric Lane. Myor Nee asked Mr. Boo if he had any comment regarding the stipulation, whey, the special use permit was issued, that there would be no access to Lyric Lane. W. Boo stated the stipulation of access came up in 1980 . He stated right now they are talking about the need for parking and the best wa,• to facilitate that parking and access is best from Lyric Lane. Mayor Nee asked if the Farking lot in question was part of the special use I�erndt when it was issued. his. Judlicki stated the convalescent hme didn' t own this Ft ope r ty at the time the special use perm,i t was issued. his. Janice Carroll, 7567 Lyric Lane, stated she believed the Barsr.ess' s covered everything. She stated she has no proble7, with the nursing hor, e larking lot, but ol4o s+e s access onto Lyric Lane. ODuncilran Goodslaeed stated the question raised was if the nursing hone had access, peol:le fror-: the adjacent ar.artlrent miyht try to Lark in their LBrking lot. He questioned if they wo:ild be constructing a fence so it would be Fhysically impossible for someone to get frm their lot to the aprtrrent building. Ms. Judlicki stated a fence would be Constructed on the east sde of the Frolerty between their property and the alartr.ent comr.lex. She stated there is an existing fence on the north side, but aE far aE controlling who Fork= there, it will be signed and er.Iloyees wi11 be issued stickers. She felt if the aFert-rent building residents wanted to bark on the nursing home' s property, they would be doing so now as there is no fencing. She didn' t feel this would be a pcoLlen. W. Charles Johanson, 424 P.ice Creek Blvd. , stated he knows qute a bit about Melody F1anor as he has lived in F7idley since 1918. He stated Melocy Mnor has increased frm one car to two car garages bzinging more traffic to the area. He didn' t feel the larking lot would create additional traffic. He stated it wouldn' t be like a shcIldng center wt.ere people are coming and going constantly, but only at certain hours of the day. He stated it is hard to make plans for the future and right now the nursing hone is taking a lot of patients from the hospital. W. Lhhlirg stated both he and his wife have been em Fl ay ed at one time or another at a nursing hme and the parking lots are very well controlled. W. Jeff Beyer, pnysical therapist at the nursing hme, stated he knows how important it is for his patients to have visitors. He felt the type of traffic they are talking about for this emlloyee lot isn' t going to si gni f i cantly affect the traffic on Lyric Lane. He stated the nursing h ori.e and hospital are val ua hl a assets to the e =xd ty and felt some allowanceE: -15- S`gg ML K;STI G OF JUNE 3. 1985 : should be made. W. ?Tilton Hoffa, 551 Hugo Street, stated he currently has a mother in the Fridley QDnvalesoent Hone. He stated these residents have payed taxes for over 60 years so he felt they are entitled to --me consideration. He stated the traffic is already there and having an access onto Lyric Lane isn' t going to change the situation. He didn' t feel the nursing hone should be subject to a higher cost as this is passed on to the residents. He felt' something should be worked out to give it a trial Period and if there are aou.11 ai nts, then rectify i t. t''s. Bar sne ss felt once the access is there, it would be there forever and it would be too late to rectify. Ms. Frances Frank, 517 Manor Drive, Spring Lake Park, stated she is an er,ilvyee of the convalescent home. She stated she understands what these ieoile are going through as she lives on the street where Cub Foods is located. She stated wher. they take a break at 9 a.rr,. and view Lyric Lane, there isn't that much traffic at that time. Mrs. Dorothy Artr, ann, 254 rice Creek Blvd. , stated she works at the convalescent home and has ar. aunt who resides there. She stated if she 1 iv ed at the home, she would'nt want a drive,�ay in f ront of her bedroom or in front of her window. She stated the residents of the home cart cone down ar,.o voice an opinion and felt b$c; that someone would destroy a front yard to int in a drive,,ay. She stated she was strongly against a driveway in front of the nursing hme. M-. Delores Peterson, 8810 Nadisor. Street, stated she lives across tine street f ran two churches, but they put up with the tr a.f f i c. She stated, as tar as the nursing hme, it is dangerous walking in the street. She stated all visitors have to corse from the street and those two drives are treacherous. W. Qureshi, Qty [✓macer, stated it is very clear how the neighborhood feels abo-t access onto Lyric Lane. He stated he woul d 1 i ke to wcr k w i tr, the convalescent home to see about other options. He queL.tioneci if ars easerent could be obtained frau the aFertrrent building. Mr . Boo stated nE didn' t feel it would be a good alternative be ca Lse of where the F1 ay area i s 1 oca ted. Cslrran Goodspeed stated he has the highest regard for the services provided by the nursing hme. He stated they don't have to spend this money to alleviate the perking protler in the area, but could tell peofle to iark on Lyric Lane. He stated the reason he is having trouble with access onto Lyric Lane is beca:se the City due si't have control over the sye e d 1 it i t. He stated if the cost cf about $6,000 is the main objection to having the drive going in the tack, it is not enough. Iris. Judlick stated it isn' t the main objection. She stated the main reason is taking away from the back patio area and the blir.d curve that would be in the back. (buncilman Goodspeed stated he has to consider the residents of the nur si rn(= 1 -16- C[X1NCI1• =2C OF JU' 3. 1985 hare as renters and if you added their voice to who wanted access, it would pr oba biy be 3ust as many as those who are opposed. tr MON by Cb un cil man Goodspeed to grant special use permit, SP #85-03 with access onto Lyric Lane with the following st i pul ati ons: (1) Health Central screen off the snoke stack; and (2) this special use permit reviewed of ter one year. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Mr. Boo stated this application is by North Suburban Hospital District and they are responsible for the cost. He stated he has no idea what could be done about screening the spoke stack. He stated he frankly didn' t see how the two are tied together, but more importantly would envision the cost to be quite extraordinary. He stated he has no idea whether or not this is acceptabl e. MOTION WAS WITHDR.Ai�N BY CDUNCILKkN GOODSPEED WITH PERMISSION OF HIS SECONDER, CDUNCY-LM N SCHNEIDER. M=ON by Councilman Goodspeed to deny special use permit, SP 185-03 with access onto Lyric Lane for the parking lot. Seconded by Councilrar, Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Goodspeed to concur with the reco=.endation of the Pl anni n o Corr-i ss i on to a i-pr ov e sl.e ci al use pe m i t, Sp #85-03 s uk D e ct to t h e following stipulations: (1) no access be provided off Lyric Lane; (2) screen parking lot from right-of-way and residential properties; ( 3) appropriate signage be placed in the parking lot to indicate er: loyee farkipg; (4) parking lot lighting to be diffused; (5) work with City Engineer on drainage requir( ments; and (6) if the choice is the driveway access on the north side of the building, varianoes on the north lot line to be automatically approved with the special use permit. Seconded by ODuncilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion tarried unanimously. B. CONSDERATIOti _ .E�I�_1 �. P ?MIT.__�p ���=�4SS?_ d "ELKfi E--QF_A SEM:Z) BY IANCE Li INDYA:, Mr. Flora, Puhlic Works Director, stated this is a uest for a specsad use permit to allow construction of a second aoce building, a 20 x 16 foot garage, to be used for storage of an anti car. He stated this oarace would not have a driveway, as the peti • er will drive the car only about once a week during the sur..er and at all in the winter. it. Flora stated the Pl ' ng Commisson recommended approval with a stipulation that the al use perru t be r ev i ew ed by staf f in one y ea r. KYrION by Cb un ' Fi tz pa tr i ck to concur with the recommendation of the PIwming , ission and grant special use permit, SP 185-04 with the fallow , stipulation: That the special use permit be reviewed by staff ir. o ear. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting •e, Mayor Nee de cl ar ed the motion carried unanimously. - 17 - R 679844 N,�en«s Grantor t Grantee Becmded Checked Margin Tr.index OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER STATE OF Mk7',! 'H'0iA CJ's d 'Y or A'lOKA, I hereby ce t;iy- 'L at t;.e ti,; ment was filets in ti�:ib L;J;c� iv; ,e--,d on the JUL 16 196 �A.D., 19 3%.30 o'c.ockprj., a..0 was duly re--orded in coamy i:ecotder or��y City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. N.E. Fridley, MH 55432 CITYOF FRIDLEY CIVIC CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY,MINNESOTA 55432 PHONE(612)571-3450 Betty J. Wall Fridley Convalescent Home CITY COUNCIL 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 ACTION TAKEN NOTICE On June 3, 1985 the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for SP #85-03-to allow parking lot expansion. with the following stipulations: 1 . No access be provided off Lyric Lane. 2. Screen parking lot from right-of-way and residential properties. 3. Appropriate signage be placed in parking lot to indicated employee parking. 4. Parking lot lighting to be diffused. 5. Work with City Engineer on drainage requirements. 6. If the choice is the driveway access on the North side of the building, Variances on the North lot line to be automatically approved with the Special Use Permit. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the Planning Department at 571-3450. Sincerely, , JAMES L. ROBINSON PLANNING COORDINATOR JLR/de Please review the noted stipulations, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley. Concur with act taken. STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF FRIDLEY In the Matter of a special use permit request located on Lot 1 , Block 1 , Maple Manor Addition, the same being SPECIAL USE PERMIT 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. SP #85-03 Fridley Convalescent Home Owner The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 3rd day of June , of 1985 , on a petition for a special use permit pursuant to the City of Fridley' s Zoning Ordinance, for the following described property. To allow parking lot expansion on Lot 1 , Block 1 , Maple Manor Addition, the same being 7590 Lyric Lane N.E. IT IS ORDERED that a special use permit be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons: See City Council minutes of June 3, 1985. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) ss. OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY OF FRIDLEY ) I, Sidney C. Inman, City Clerk for the City of Fridley with and in for said City of Fridley, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy and Order granting a special use permit with the original record thereof preserved in my office and have found the same to be a correct and true transcript of the whole thereof. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my hand at the City of Fridley, Minnesota, in the County of Anoka on the day of 19 . DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley =' 6431 University Avenue N.E. '- Fridley,MN 55432 SIDNE C. INMAN, CITY CLERK- A Special Use Permit shall become void one year after being granted by the .City of , Fridley unless or if discontinued for a period of 90 days. (SEAL) FRIDLEY CONVALESCENT HOME S. U . P. #35-03 STIPULATIONS 1. NO ACCESS BE PROVIDED OFF LYRIC LANE , Z. SCREEN PARKING LOT FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES , 3. APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE BE PLACED IN PARKING LOT . 4. PARKING LOT LIGHTING TO BE DIFFUSED . 5. WORK WITH CITY ENGINEER ON DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS , 7590 Lyric Lane NE, by Betty J. Wall Special Use Permit, SP #85-03 7o Allow Parking Lot Expansion, Fridley Convalescent Home, Council Action 6/3/85 Denied parking lot with drive on Lyric Lane Approved Special Use Permit as identified on Page 1OF of Council Agenda, with 6 stips on page 10F. Deb, please send letter