The URL can be used to link to this page

SAV96-01 CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (612)571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VACATION APPLICATION FORM PROPERTY INFORMATION - site plan required for submittal; see attached Address: Ko�A'l , oAie, GT• Property Identification Number(PIN) Legal description: Lot Block J- Tract/Addition rOTjt4O &KIVX, AD ?1gi7t Legal description of easement to be vacated: Lam. t-�CAV'w I Current zoning: Square footage/acreage Reason for vacation: O—InA!}bZ.uc l ol� 6-1-- 14 EW Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? Yes No If yes, which city? If yes, what type of business? Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title) (Contract Purchasers: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to processing) NAME 9�—Pl 604AQ2 K 6141X!j_ It IC. ADDRESS 14 I C1 to At)yei / • _ J 14-Pf�l DAYTIME PHONE SIGNATURE DATE PETITIONER INFORMATION NAME P1 f2kMe-J-2 16 ADDRESS ,a(s LE-Alk �l Vkl I DAYTIME PHONE SIGNATURE '� ' DATE Fee: $250.00 -41--74s- Permit SAV C Receipt# Application received by: Scheduled Planning Commission date I P Scheduled City Council date: CITY OF FRIDLEY PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST Applicants for vacations must submit the legal description of the B. Site Plan: parcel (easement, street, etc.) to be vacated. 1. Property line dimensions, location of all existing and Complete site proposed structures with distance from boundaries, p plans, signed by a registered architect, civil distance between structures, building dimensions and engineer, landscape architect, or other design professional, to floor elevations include the following: A. General: 2. Grading and drainage plan showing existing natural features (topography, wetlands, vegetation, etc.) as well 1. Name and address of project as proposed grade elevations and sedimentation and storm water retention ponds. Calculations for storm water 2. Legal description (certificate of survey may be required) detention/retention areas. 3. Name, address, and telephone number of a 3. All existing and proposed points of egress/ingress engineer, and owner of record applicant, showing widths of property lines, turning radii abutting rights-of-way with indicated center line, paving width, existing and proposed median cuts, and intersections of 4. Date proposed, north arrow, scale, number of sheets, name streets and driveways of drawer 5. Description of intended use of site, buildings, and 4. Vehicular circulation system showing location and structures inn t dimensions for all driveways, parking spaces, parking lot g ype of occupancy and estimated aisles, service roads, loadin areas fire lanes, occupancy load emergency access (if necessary), public and private 6. Existing zoning and land use streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike paths, direction of traffic flow, and traffic-control devices 7. Tabulation box indicating: 5. Landscaping Plan (i) Size of parcel in sq. ft. 6. Location, access, and screening detail of trash (ii) Gross floor area of buildings enclosures (iii) Percent of site covered by building 7. Location and screening detail of rooftop equipment (iv) Percent of site covered by impervious surface 8. Building elevations from all directions 9. Utility plan identifying size and direction of existing (v) Percent of site covered by green area water and sewer lines, fire hydrants, distance of (vi) Projected number of employees hydrant to proposed building (vii) Number of seats if intended use is a restaurant or place of assembly (viii) Number of parking spaces required (ix) Number of parking spaces provided including handicapped (x) Height of all buildings and structures and number of stories Form No.31-M—QUIT CLAIM DEED Minnesota Uniform Conveyancing Blanks(1978) Miner-Davis Co.,Minneapolis Corporation or Partnership to Corporation or Partnership No delinquent taxes and transfer entered;Certificate of Real Estate Value ( ) filed ( ) not required Certificate of Real Estate Value No. _ , 19 -- County 19 _County Auditor by Deputy STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: $ Date: May 16 , 1g 96 (reserved for recording data) FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. , a Corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota , Grantor, hereby conveys and quitclaims to The City of Fridley , Grantee, a Municipal Corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota , real property in Anoka _County, Minnesota, described as follows: A perpetual easement for drainage purposes across that part of Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65. 10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet; thence North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West 47.24 feet to said north line; thence easterly along said north line to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. (if more space is needed,continue on back) together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto. ROYAL OAKS REALTY, INC. Affix Deed Tax Sump Here By Its Marcel Eibensteiner, President By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF Ramsey The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of May , 19 96 , by Marcel Eibensteiner Na , the President )Wod of Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. , a Corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota , on behalf of the Corporation NOTARIAL STAMP OR SEAL(OR OTHER TITLE OR RANK) SIGNATURE OF PERSON TAKING ACKNOWLEDGMENT Tax Statements for the real property described in this instrument should be sent to(Include name and address of Grantee): The City of Fridley _..........._._._.......----._.._.._.........___ _........................._._.__..............._... 6431 University Avenue NE THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY(NAME AND ADDRESS): Fridley, MN 55432 Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. 4196 Lexington Avenue Shoreview, MN 55126 Arm CITY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER•6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432• (612)571-3450• FAX (612)571-1287 March 4, 1996 To Whom It May Concern: The City of Fridley Planning Commission will be holding an informal hearing on a vacation request, SAV #96-01, by Imperial Homes, Inc., to vacate that part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage and utility easement 64.13 feet; thence South 38 degrees 00 minutes East 32.00 feet; thence North 24 Degrees 16 Minutes 58 Seconds West 92.63 feet to a point on said north line distant 12 feet east of said point of beginning; thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds West 12.00 feet to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof, generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court NE. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday, March 20, 1996 at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. at 7:30 p.m. Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Community Development Department at 572-3599. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than March 13, 1996. DAVID NEWMAN CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION SAV #96-01 Im erial Homes. 7-77 �` � H I 1 r �I p� 1j �� 1f II II II N SAV #96-01 Royal Oaks Realty L CATION MAP SAV ##96-01 Mailing List Mailed: March 1, 1996 Imperial Homes Inc. for Royal Oaks Realty Imperial Homes Inc. Joseph Andert John/Phyllis O'Brien for Royal Oaks Realty or Current Resident or Current Resident 4196 Lexington Avenue 1445 North Danube Rd NE 14 3 North Danube Rd NE Shoreview, MN 55126 F ' ley, MN 55432 F y, MN R r%43 Duane/Karon Narog Terry/Connie Reyes ilton/Paulette Bullock or Current Resident or Current Resident or Current Resident 1465 North Danube Rd HE 1479 North Danube Rd NE 5674 Arthur Street NE Fridl 5 432 Fr' lef, MN 5543 amm. 2 I Thaddeus/Gail Jude Gordon/Linda Backlund' or Current Resident or Current Resident or Current Resident 5688 Arthur Street NE 5805 Arthur Street NE 5809 Arthur Street NE Fridley, 5532 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Lyle/Patricia Elmberg Donald/Shirlie Moore The Dio ese of St. Paul or Current Resident or Current Resident 328 Kellogg Boulevard W 5801 Arthur Street NE 5821 Arthur Street NE St. Paul, MN 55102 Fri ley, b4 Fridley, MN 55432 Cit Council Membe s David Newman Planning Comm. Chair 7635 Alden Way NE Fridley, MN 55432 QQ r I i 2 i i i i y SAV #96-01 Mailing List Mailed: March 1, 1996 Imperial Homes Inc. April 2, 1996 for Royal Oaks Realty Imperial Homes Inc. Joseph Andert John/Phyllis O'Brien for Royal Oaks Realty or Current Resident or Current Resident 4196 Lexington Avenue 1445 North Danube Rd NE 1453 North Danube Rd NE Shoreview, MN 55126 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Duane/Karon Narog Terry/Connie Reyes Milton/Paulette Bullock or Current Resident or Current Resident or Current Resident 1465 North Danube Rd NE 1479 North Danube Rd NE 5674 Arthur Street NE Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Thaddeus/Gail Jude Gordon/Linda Backlund Jacob/Emma Wiens or Current Resident or Current Resident or Current Resident 5688 Arthur Street NE 5805 Arthur Street NE 5809 Arthur Street NE Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Lyle/Patricia Elmberg Donald/Shirlie Moore The Diocese of St. Paul or Current Resident or Current Resident 328 Kellogg Boulevard W 5801 Arthur Street NE 5821 Arthur Street NE St. Paul, MN 55102 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 City Council Members David Newman Planning Comm. Chair 7635 Alden Way NE Fridley, MN 55432 2 Builders Development & Finance, Inc. 1055 East Wayzata Blvd., P.O. Box 637, Wayzata, MN 55391 (612) 473-8511 December 2, 1994 City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. Fridley, MN 55432 RE: Royal Oaks Realty Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 13357 Totino Grace Addition Dear Sir or Madam: Please be advised that the aforementioned Irrevocable Letter of Credit is amended as follows: 1 . Amount is reduced from $100,000 to $10,000. 2. All other terms and conditions remain the same. BUILDERS DEVELOPMENT& FINANCE, INC. By T Its ;X'(27�;P&-T 4. Be presented for payment during regular business hours at our Collection Department, 1055 East Wayzata. Boulevard, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391, no later than 2:00 p.m. on October 31, 1995, at which time this Letter of Credit shall expire. The amount of this Letter of Credit shall be automatically reduced in the amount of One Hundred percent (100%) for the estimated cost of the work completed as each portion of the Improvements are completed and the consulting engineer' for the City approves in writing such completion. Each drawing hereunder shall reduce in the amount of such drawing the amount- available under this Letter of Credit. We hereby agree that drafts drawn under and presented in conformity with the terms of this Letter of Credit will be duly honored upon presentation. Except as otherwise expressly stated, this Letter of Credit is subject to the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (1983 Revision) , International Chamber of Commerce Publications No. 400 (the "Uniform Customs") . This Letter of Credit shall be deemed to be a contract made under the laws of the State of Minnesota and, as to matters not governed by the Uniform Customs, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, including the Uniform Commercial Code as in effect in the State of Minnesota. This Letter of Credit is not transferable or assignable and is not issued for the benefit of any third party claimant. We shall not be called upon to resolve issues of fact or law between the City and the Developer. BUILDERS DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE, INC. By Its ffMb 1/.-A-14 L,04- 5,L- �mv+ Jun 21 199 i�rs G �( wod" '44e., z Tr vu(--IL l Cc✓vEC-i V-(_- xt,c�r vrE.g I f !L�✓6.,^' 1,4, BV✓ A ist �1/"uc.1/ / .�+I.�.q/� .� °w..?0 o- ��e,h¢vZ� I I �SCa�. 1 tit-.., S *. la.b_`- �_ 4 A3--'K 3•r ��-_ V V � 9_.� �i�a � �+'•+� -eF:�ax��.'I4`� r_.]k6 a�a^ir�j- �y�•`--.ya..*tgl+�i_FR.�, Ab _ .b' +µwwaph+-'r.- „s�g�BaF _ ...... - - - u+ •, YasmM.§ wr., I >a�a i 1i .ii '« - V Fs�a i"m�'• L � t t. r • t-t -�M+•r- 1 - .8-.- .ass 1 . .. -.. _.. ...;spy..ie�etv.+crcf,.c•--_:.-_.rm+F.. _.:.:. _ ,., _ - ,:-tehrs September 12, 1995 Marcel Eibensteiner Imperial Homes 4196 Lexington Avenue Shoreview, MN 55126 Dear Mr. Eibensteiner: This letter is to summarize our meeting of September 7, 1995, at which time we met at 1436 Royal Oak Court. This letter will outline the City's expectations of Imperial Homes to correct the cutting which occurred on the property at 1465 North Danube Road. The City expects Imperial Homes to complete the following activities: 1. Aerate the soil beneath the oak trees which was compacted by the heavy equipment. 2. Plant 50 to 100 18 inch Dogwood and Serviceberry shrubs prior to September 29, 1995. Appropriate spacing shall be determined in the field. 3. Fertilize shrubs and oak trees as recommended by a horticultural expert. 4. Provide care and maintenance for the plants for one year after planting. If Imperial Homes fails to complete the above tasks, the City will cash the performance bond currently in the City's possession. In addition, on the remaining lots, Imperial Homes shall install two rows of temporary snow fence, one at the property line and the second at the 15 foot "no cut" area to prevent a second occurrence of the error made at 1436 Royal Oak Court. The city appreciates Imperial Homes cooperation in this matter. If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact me at 572-3593. Michele McPherson Planning Assistant MP/je cc:: Kathy Fahey, 1465 North Danube Road, Fridley, MN 55432 or • ROYAL O1�KS REALTY, INC. February 16, 1996 Mr. Scott Hickok Planning Coordinator City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432-4383 Dear Mr. Hickok: Imperial Homes, Inc. will be constructing a new home on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition for Bob and Cheryl Horeck. The house will be constructed within all front, side and rear set back lines. We are, however, requesting the City to vacate a portion of the existing drainage easement on the northeasterly portion of the lot. Attached are two drawings explaining our intentions. The first drawing shows the existing conditions of the property and the proposed house location. The second drawing shows the easement area to be vacated and legal description. The construction of this home and the vacation of the easement will not be a negative impact on the subject property or surrounding properties for the following reasons: • The new easement line will still be above the 100 year flood elevation of the adjacent pond (951.0') • The new easement line will be above the wetland delineation line • There will be no grading below the 953' contour • The rear yard lowest walk out elevation will be at the 955.0' elevation (four feet above the 100 year pond elevation) 4196 Lexington Avenue • Shoreview, Minnesota 55126 • (612) 483-5518 • Fax (612)483-5642 In retrospect, the drainage easement provided on this lot was wider or larger in area that what was actually needed to protect the natural conditions of the property. Vacating only a small portion of this easement will allow Mr. and Mrs. Horeck to construct their "dream home" custom designed to fit this lot. Thank you for your consideration. Yours truly, �'.L v-x-�u Michael J. Black, Project Manager Land Development Division .4 r March 20, 1996 To: Fridley Planning Commission From: Bob and Cheryl Horeck Subj: Vacation of Easement at 1435 Royal Oak Court We are the homeowners building the house on the subject lot. Our plans have been approved and construction is underway. We seek a restatement of the easement line to permit a full third stall on our garage. Statement of our problem: As the easement line sits,we are required to cut a diagonal corner(roughly 35 square feet) off the garage to avoid crossing the easement line. Since the garage is built with a pre-stressed concrete floor over a hobby workshop,we have elected to cantilever the garage over a portion of the diagonal and to cut the lower corner to comply with the easement. This causes two problems: 1. The angle of the outer garage wall restricts access to a staircase leading to the lower level from the garage. We anticipate the need to support our parents in the house and they have physical handicaps that will most likely require building a stairway lift system to access to the lower living quarters. The angled corner may prove to be a major problem in getting sufficient clearance at the top of the stairs should wheel chair access be necessary. 2. The angled wall severely detracts from the beauty of the overall house and restricts the size of the exit door that can be placed on the remaining portion of the lower level north wall. Concerns expressed: • Site does not meet setback and easement restrictions. Our plan has been approved and meets all setback and elevation restrictions placed on the lot. We believe that the placement of the drainage easement was erroneous at the onset and should have followed the 953' contour line. • Neighbors have objected to developers plans. The attached sheet with all but one of the neighbor(those sent the meeting notification) signatures shows that the neighbors have no problem with our request. Quite to the contrary, we were repeatedly welcomed to the neighborhood during the signature acquisition process. • Construction will destroy the natural beauty of the wetlands and create unfavorable visual impression. We have lived just two blocks from the site for the past 22 years. During this time,most recently the summer of 1995, we have participated in many planning and council meetings to object to destruction of wetlands. We are avid supporters of the beauty of the neighborhood. Our plan is to clean up the dumping done by Totino and others in the pond and to maintain as much of a wild setting as possible. We are not removing any of the trees adjacent to the pond. We anticipate adding wild flowers along the pond to help enhance it's beauty. Since the house is being built and will require removal of a significant amount of foliage, we feel that the two level angled walls on the garage create a major, and totally unnecessary, eyesore. We feel that our request for vacation is reasonable, causes no impact on any neighbor, and clearly does not violate the intent of any of the restrictions placed on the property. We look forward to your favorable recommendation to the city council. Sincerely, PZ Robert and Cheryl Horeck 5505 West Danube Rd. ROYALbHOAKS 4� A REALTY, INC. Date: April 24, 1996 To: Barbara Dacy, AICP, Community Devel pment Director, City of Fridley From: Mike Black, Royal Oaks Realty, Inc ` 6\ L Subj: Easement vacation, Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition On behalf of Royal Oaks Realty, Imperial Homes and Bob & Cheryl Horeck, I am requesting a modification to our request for vacation of the existing drainage easement (SAV #96-01). It is clear that the request as originally proposed is an unacceptable solution. We are requesting the city staff and council to consider an expansion of the existing drainage easement in return for vacating only that area necessary to exempt any possible areas of conflict. We are proposing the following: 1. That the easement be diverted to 11/2 feet east of the dwelling walls (garage, house and deck lines) and 11/2 feet north of those same boundaries. This modification will bring the total vacation to approximately 75-80 square feet. 2. In exchange, we are proposing adding a 150-200 square foot extension to the northeast corner of the existing easement line. The extension is shown on the attached drawing and proceeds from the large oak tree immediately to the northeast of the deck to a point roughly 20-25 feet to the west of the existing easement on the north lot line. It is our intention to, at a minimum, provide a 2:1 easement replacement ratio. Should this meet with your approval as a viable alternative, we will have the surveyor create the legal description and exact measurements post haste. Thank you for the opportunity to seek an equitable solution. 4196 Lexington Avenue • Shoreview, Minnesota 55126 • (612) 483-5518 • Fax (612) 483-5642 4 Z4', -3'31 C11YOF CITY OF FRIDLEY FMDLEY COMMISSION APPLICATION REVIEW File Number 8 File Date 3/4/96 Meeting Date3/20/96 Description: Vacation request , SAV #96-01 , by Imperial Homes; 1435 Royal Oaks Court NE Return to the Community Development Department Barbara Dacy Community Development Director John Flora Public Works Director Ed Hervin City Assessor Scott Hickok Planning Coordinator Ron Julkowski Chief Building Official Dick Larson Fire Marshall Michele McPherson Planning Assistant Dave Sallman Police Chief Jon Wilczek Asst. Public Works Director APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST FI LE: "Ki .......... .......... APPLICATION RECEIVED DEVELOPMENT M,V-,tfi- REviEw Comm da�1,-� W46J ADDRESS FILE REVIEWED * LAND USE FILES? PETITIONER CALLED SITE VISIT/MEETING AERIAL PHOTO MADE MAPS DONE REPORT WRITTEN Community Development Department 0 -"/u PLANNING DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: September 6, 1995 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Informational Memorandum: Prohibited Tree Cutting at 1416 Royal Oak Court On Thursday, August 31, 1995, staff received a complaint from the property owner at 1465 North Danube Road regarding illegal tree cutting by Imperial Homes constructing a dwelling at 1456 Royal Oak Court. The contractor cleared the underbrush approximately 10 to 15 feet into the complainant's adjacent yard. The City Council may recall that the City stipulated a 15 foot "No Cut" zone along the rear property lines of the dwellings located on Royal Oak Court. The developer has been in contact with the property owner; has been extremely apologetic that a mistake was made and has offered to re-vegetate the area. City staff visited the site on September 5th and September 6th to review the damage that had occurred and to discuss with the developer the appropriate means of restitution. The developer met with complainant on September 5th. The complainant indicated that they would like evergreen trees to be planted along the common property line. In a meeting with the developer on September 6th, it was staffs opinion that evergreen trees would not be easily established due to the lack of available sunlight in the remaining forested area. Staff recommended to the developer; if it is agreeable with the adjacent property owner, that dogwood and serviceberry shrubs be planted on the adjacent property as well as within the 15 foot "No Cut" zone to re-vegetate the area. Staff also discussed with the developer the installation of a more substantial barrier such as temporary orange snowfence along the property line and along the 15 foot "No Cut" area to prevent the occurrence of prohibited cutting for the remaining properties. There are two lots with the "No Cut" zone remaining to be developed. Staff has worked with the developer regarding the tree cutting prior to construction of the dwelling on Royal Oak Court. The petitioner has been very cooperative in staking the trees as required by the stipulations, and calling staff out to inspect the site. On the property in Prohibited Tree Cutting at 1456 Royal Oak Court September 6, 1995 Page 2 question, staff visited the site in early June prior to issuance of a building permit, and also in July in response to an earlier complaint by a different property owner. This particular incident appears to be as a result of miscommunication between the developer and the subcontractor responsible for clearing the site. This memo is for informational purposes only. No action is required by the City Council at this time. MM:da M-95-476 1 ( C v 14 .�o i ,�. .T. m i : � 3 '�� .Gq =�'' r•�' Vit: =• •'- � �� y'S, Z o� '�lu�\ ,,t •^:; �\E ; �\ '� .„i= t^'j 3,' ,.t. `cr�/ ` "�)Y `v5 s is 'fy aywy o y a i ° Ml M`� - REGNSTY - "•• _ .� �0.` Z a `� L a S f It -TE SON DRIyEc 'Y�•'YO f is tit• H Cq m � i Y +��, ai �� y � � yS tr °, '4 ♦ h p moi. L 3 �� i RES SSW�' MATTERHORN DRIVE 3N l ✓ t j' D IF M r P .r "�DRfVE�x—•—y:v� r. w��' -.0, ,a O v --,�}, ... t a �4 `\_ F— I -9 y g zz t A Ipf� >; 4_ =` Z♦ Z jam` ♦.� �'� t I i ,_ ♦3 � q.q' r z a � 3 rr,w, F` r r �s r' ��i'•II y,- :r ' ve 0 �vl do c /r� ,,�_ �. _ •"' r i' ` , 1 LL a, u.. ,t0 •�� a' �Tay R r. � `i' - .;"+ . �r� •. Y^p8 " mow. w_ �q iso w 2:5 O I _ m i ,f.,....7�.• i Jp y � ! ._ 4 I _.,t I ° ` 'AF`J;`.C''9�: N• Z tl s I N • �` - - 9� to Y vi�Ul �Ra �•'� "��. qAV #96-01 Royal Oaks Realty CERTIrmir.4orr: OF: SURVE""To FOR: Marcel Eibensteiner aseme„t to be vacated Of E ti 14 Delin �t a NORTH 44 W SJ 1 1 Ry,troryE r's�. meq, 3r 10 i a r _ 65 LEV. 950.9 952.98 6.07 .(� Finish Grade Z Rear W� Elev Q A • yrk -7 \ +955.23 95 5911 \AV 952 SOO o , �� z ant Line y N; 1010 d Delineation point 63. -As - 6 Z. \ 49O� AV 5 11°t�9 5 �e F Wetland Delineation I 9S3.77 per Pot Arlig 0-A s53.o'April 29, 1994 0 { +X57.95° 53 Contour 95 ^� 00 9 .27 gs?a L c 61 95 ^ o + n 7 R7005g'24,0 �. = 50.00 h� 956.70 C BRGS 72-40,25 E L 9ye 42.96 = 12°00'27„ = Diag.:94.1 x 48.7 = 105.95 �� R 205.00 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: 02 DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. GARAGE FLOOR =963.5 x1011.2 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. TOP OF BLOCK =963.8LOWEST FLOOR =953.7 DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. & 955.0 ® DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. 13 crs wo Lot 7, Block 1, TOTINO GRAGL- >_?ITION, Anoka County, Minnesota. Scale 1"= 30' 1 O Denotes Iron Mon. Bearing Datum: Assumed I Job No. 95585BT lDrwg By --EA O Disk We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of I. Co. RUM 4 SONS, ANO a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the LAND SURVEYORS location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, 918{ LEXINGTON AVE. NO. if any, from or on said land. E. N CIRCLE PINES, MINNESOTA Dated this 15th February By 55014-3625 TEL. '186-5,556 day of Y 1996 Minnesota License No. 9808 71 SAV #96—QI sketch � ��cri tion Royal Oaks Realty of Easement Vacation across Lot 7, Block 1, TOTINO GRA E ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota t � Nor5 th 1-ine of �o, N 87008'25" W �o�t� i ',° A4q, W � 3 , S 65. 5\ A\ u7 0 \ �\ 17 .7- o� 2 \` \ Ln a 9/y9cF 0 0 V) �Fti °° t� Z-A \ ego°o F Wetland Delineation per Pat Arlig April 29, 1994 _ I I. !�L61 95 �- --- J M 70°59'24" 50.00 t 1 = 42.96� =12000'27» O� c R = 205.00 DESCRIPTION FOR EASEMENT VACATION: • That part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, TOTINO GRACE ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage and utility easement 64.13 feet; thence South 38 degrees 00 minutes East 32.00 feet; thence North 24 Degrees 16 Minutes 58 Seconds West 92.63 feet to a point on said north line distant 12 feet east of said point of beginning; thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds West 12.00 feet to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or �. �. ��Da INC was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly LAND SUP.VEYORS Registered Land Surveyor under the laws 9180 LEXINGTON AVE. NO, of the�Sta of m es a CIRGL!>�PINES, MINNESOTA Date 2-15-96 Registration No 9808 55014- *25 TEL. '186-5556 of Easement Vacation across Lot 7, Block 1, TOTINO GRA E ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota DESCRIPTION FOR EASEMENT VACATION That part of the drainage easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, TOTINO GRACE ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on on assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 3.80 feet; thence South 22 degrees 08 minutes 07 seconds East 34.86 feet; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 7.20 feet; thence South 18 degrees 10 minutes 00 seconds East 19.96 feet to said west line; thence northerly along said west line to the point of beginning. DESCRIPTION FOR EASEMENT DEDICATION A perpetual easement for drainagge purposes across that part of Lot 7, Block 1, TOTTN0 GRACE ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on on assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet; thence North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West 47.24 feet to said north line; thence easterly along said north line to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. I� Area to be vacated 140 sq.ft. 0 e of �-ot N 87008'25" W I�Iko31,4 W-77 5 _ S 51.13 � $6;65.10'' �' -59 0 r, IL y 5 f �\ U-) oLn cod 2 `\ •: I 'y 0. W \ \ \ \ I (n C% tJ, 0. \ Wetland Delineation per Pat Arlig April 29, 1994 o 4 L-_700 �0 YRL 00 4 0 C 1 I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or T report was prepared by me or under my 42.96 direct supervision and that I am a duly =12°00'•27" E. G. RUD t SONS, INC Registered Land Surveyor under the laws R = 205.00 LAND "VIYOR6 o he tate ofi M' esot s18m L.ISXINOTON AYS, NO. 1� 2.04 GIRGLt PINt6,MINN1160TA Date.4fZ9-?6 Registration No 56m14-3625 TXL. 186-5556 Sketch 4 Mescrition of Easement Vacation across Lot 7, Block 1, TOTINO GRA E ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota North Une 0f Lo ter, N 87008'25" W NORTH i ,44" W '91 13 03A I S ��g6.55 C11 a • `d'a E ASF-r194tr �cPAN 71o04 a, .11 15 oo`� �\ ---------- -7 t' g F-�°tS��LEt�T VArG�tot� o Q aP Z 7 s \ ( 9cF i > > O �° F \ �S?o r;! 9sF s 00. Ztq —A \ �go-00 ki '.\ \ 00' 1 F Wetland Delineation 51� �/ per Pat Arlig April 29, 1994 p� 100 6195 �-- _Jc6 R`=70059'24" o 50.00 L 42.96 Rod- 1 12°00'27 �4� " O40C car. R = 205.00 DESCRIPTION FOR EASEMENT VACATION: �S That part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, TOTINO GRACE ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage and utility easement 64.13 feet; thence South 38 degrees 00 minutes East 32.00 feet; thence North 24 Degrees 16 Minutes 58 Seconds West 92.63 feet to a point on said north line distant 12 feet east of said point of beginning; thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds West 12.00 feet to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or IL �. �� INC was prepared by me or under my `�{� � direct supervision and that I am a duly ` LAND SURVEYORS Registered Land Surveyor under the laws Zy,q(0 9182 LEXINGTON AVE. NO. of the t of Mjt CIRCLE PINES, MINNESOTA Date 2-15-96 Registration No 9808 55214-3625 TEL. 186-5556 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 9 They would consider selling the lot if they had an offer fro a contractor. Either way, there would be new construction i that area. Mr. Newman suggested stating as a condition that the t/ime frame be 12 months for a building permit to be issued with/,A certificate of occupancy being issued within 18 months and, if this is not done, the petitioner then must take d the garage. Mr. Oquist stated he can understand the concer about nonconforming use but, on the other hand, it rge empty area. The points staff has made are valid. ;,He has no problem with- the stipulations. Mr. Newman asked if the petitioners had / the recommendations that staff had recommended and if they as comfortable with those. Mr. Brody stated they had seen th and had no problems. No further comments from the pub c were received. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded y Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval of Lot Split Request L.S. #96-01, by Valley Investment Company, to split Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 27, -Hyde Park, together with all that part of the vacated alley lying west of said lots and lying between the Westerly extension of the North line of said Lot 1, and the Westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 3 into two parcels as described: Parcel A. The West 65 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, Block 27, Hyde Park, Anoka County, Minnesota, as measured along the North line of said Lot 1, and along the South lir of said Lot 3, together with all that part of the vacated alley lying West of said lots, and .lying between the Westerly extension of the North /'line of said Lot 1, and the Westerly extension of f the South line of said Lot 3. Parcel B. That part of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Hyde Park, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying East of the West 65 feet thereof as measured along the North line of said Lot 1 and along the South line of said Lot 3. /Thilproperty is generally located at 276-78 - 58th Avenue N.E. , following stipulations: petitioner acknowledges the City's action creates a nonconforming- front yard setback. s PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 10 2. If the petitioner fails to obtain%a building permit for a single family residence within months of the approval of the Lot Split and fails to ob in a Certificate of Occupancy for said structure within 18 months of the approval of the Lot Split, then the garage ocated on Parcel B shall be removed. 3. The petitioner acknowledges that Lot B has a long, narrow buildable area and shall design a house to fit that area. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL OTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IMOUSLY. Ms. McPherson stat d the City Council would consider this request on April 8th. 3. CONSIDERATION OF A VACATION REQUEST SAV 496-01, BY IMPERIAL HOMES, INC. : To vacate that part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage and utility easement 64.13 feet; thence South 38 degrees 00 minutes East 32.00 feet; thence North 24 degrees 16 minutes 58 .seconds West. 92.63 feet to a point on said north line distant 12 feet east of said point ' of beginning; thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds West 12. 00 feet to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof, generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. Ms. McPherson stated the request is for a recently subdivided lot in the Totino-Grace addition located near Arthur Street, southeast of the school and located adjacent to a wetland next to Arthur Street. The petitioner is requesting that a portion of a drainage and utility easement located on the property be vacated. The petitioner is requesting the vacation in order to construct a single family dwelling with an attached garage. The northeast corner of the garage encroaches into the easement area. The petitioner is currently constructing a house and at this point is avoiding the area of the garage to avoid encroachment into the easement area. Ms. McPherson stated the purpose of the drainage and utility easement is to provide additional buffer space for the wetland area beyond the line delineated by the wetland specialist. The petitioners have designed-a--house.,for.=their client. Unfortunately, the design of the house does not fit within the buildable area when taking into account the easement and setback 15.13 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 11 requirements. Wetland delineations are not an exact science. The additional buffer provided by the drainage and utility easement is an advantage. The vacation of the easement would reduce the buffer from 7 feet to approximately 1.5 feet at its closest point. Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending the request be denied. The petitioner has designed the garage so that it could be cantilevered over the easement area which would not require footings or foundations in the easement; however, the garage would still hang over and into the air rights of the easement. There are no utilities that the City would require access to in this area. The purpose of the drainage and utility easement is only to protect the wetland located north and east of the site. Mr. Oquist asked if the petitioner could still cantilever the garage over the easement even if the request was denied. Ms. McPherson stated yes. The original design of the garage had space below the garage which was intended to allow the petitioner workshop space. That would need to be omitted if the vacation request is denied. Mr. Kondrick asked how much the setback would be reduced. Ms. McPherson stated the setback would be from 7 feet to 1.5 feet at the closest point based on the new line of the easement. Mr. Newman asked if the City had an ordinance that requires a specific setback from a wetland. Ms. McPherson stated no, the City does not have such an ordinance. Mr. Kondrick asked if it was correct that this is meant to keep buildings as far away as possible from the pond. Mr. Oquist stated this is meant to keep the footings away from the pond. Mr. Newman stated the drainage and utility easement is meant to protect the wetland soils and vegetation. Whether there is a pond or not is immaterial. The area is designated a wetland and the easement is to keep that from being disturbed. Mr. Black stated Bob and Cheryl Horeck currently live at 4555 Danview, have lived there for 20 years and are building their dream home. Mr. Riemersma, Imperial Homes, spent much time with the applicants looking at their home, looking at what they would like to build, and designing a home for the lot. There have been many adjustments made to the plan and they thought they had it 15.14 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 12 until it was staked out on the property, and they were told they were not allowed to go onto this drainage easement on the northeast portion of the lot. Mr. Black stated they are asking consideration to vacate only a portion of the easement. They are not talking about any setback variances. The house meets all the setback requirements. It is the encroachment over the drainage easement that is the problem. The drainage easement line was not something required by the City. It is not a requirement that they have this in a certain spot. It is really the surveyor who drew the easement line up and above the 100-year flood plane of that pond. If we had known this, they would have moved the easement over because it is not going to make a difference. Stringent requirements were placed on them as they came through the process to get this plat approved. On this particular lot, there were a number of stipulations they had to abide by in order to build a home on this lot. Mr. Black stated the pond has a 100-year flood plane elevation of 951 feet. The easement line as they wish to amend it will still be above 951 feet. The easement line as currently shown was delineated by Mr. Harley, a respected person when it comes to wetland delineation. However, the wetland soils meander up and down the hill. The easement line would still be above the wetland line. The change as proposed would not allow any encroachment into the wetland. It is not their intention to encroach into the wetland. Mr. Black stated another stipulation was that there shall be no construction below the 953 contour. That is a stipulation we are abiding by. Regarding flood protection, there is a requirement that the lowest opening on the lower level cannot be below the 955 elevation. The lower level elevation is at 959. Mr. Black stated the request is to vacate a portion of this easement. It will not encroach upon any of the stipulations placed upon us when the plat was approved. Mr. Black reviewed the building plan. Mr. Oquist asked what portion of the easement the petitioner was requesting to vacate. Mr. Black stated the area is shown on the Certificate of Survey as a somewhat triangular shaped shaded area. It could be made somewhat smaller. Only a small corner of the garage would encroach totalling approximately 35 square feet. The buffer area is an area that staff would like to have, but there is nothing in the code that requires a setback from a wetland.. In many lots, it is common to have drainage easements along property lines and the homeowner maintains the easement. In this area, there will PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 13 be some maintenance within the easement area. The easement line is the setback line. The house is a walkout rambler with a three-car garage. It is the back corner of the garage where the problem occurs. The area below the garage would be a storage area with an outside access. Mr. Newman asked if the area of issue is under the third stall of the garage. Mr. Black stated yes. To avoid encroachment, they have designed the wall at an angle with the upper level cantilevered two feet over the footings in order to provide room for another vehicle. This creates some other structural problems including an unusual roof line and an odd exterior elevation. Mr. Black stated the Horecks are excited about building the house. They have the permits and are under construction. The house sits well on the lot and there have been adjustments made to fit the lot. It is now the issue of the easement. There is no reason to have the easement this wide because they can still meet all the environmental protection requirements with a shallower easement area. Mr. Newman asked how the easement was set as it is. Mr. Black stated the easements are drawn on the final plat which does not reflect the final contours of the property. The easement line was drawn on the plat close to the wetland at a point the surveyor thought was above the 100-year flood plain elevation. It was accepted, and they thought they had enough room to build. It was not a mistake on the part of the surveyor. Knowing that these lots had restrictions and that the homes would be custom homes, in retrospect they perhaps should have paid more attention. Mr. Newman asked, when the City approved the plat, did we require the easement be a certain distance away from the delineation. Ms. McPherson stated no. Mr. Newman asked if they had assumed the surveyor was drawing the line to be consistent with the delineation of a wetland. Ms. McPherson stated this was correct. Mr. Newman asked if the original delineation had changed. Ms. McPherson stated no. Mr. Newman stated there was then no reason for additional area to be dedicated. The surveyor drew it and we accepted that. 15.16 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 14 Ms. McPherson stated this was correct. Unless it is for a specific engineering request, we do not stipulate the width of easements. Mr. Newman stated, since there is no such thing as a wetland easement, you use a drainage easement. Ms. McPherson stated this was correct. Mr. Newman stated, whether or not a hardship is caused, the problem is that from a structural standpoint cantilevering the garage is going to be difficult. Mr. Riemersma stated, from a standpoint of doing custom design homes and fitting them onto the lots, we run into problems quite often with setbacks and certain requirements. On this particular lot, the reason we are where we are in the construction is that when we designed the home we did take into consideration all the setbacks. When he wrote a summary of the requirements for this lot, the requirement was to not build below 953 feet. So, he designed the home under that assumption not realizing there was a drainage and utility easement at that corner of the garage. His impression was that they could build within the 953 line which is what they are proposing. The reason we are constructing at this point in the way we are is that we could get a building permit without having a foundation shown on that easement. The City would allow them to build the garage with an angle and cantilevered. Upon putting together the purchase agreement requirements, etc. , they then found this was within the easement. Mr. Horeck is the future owner of the home. He distributed copies of his memo to the Fridley Planning Commission dated March 20, 1996, regarding the vacation of the easement. Mr. Horeck stated they have a stairway from the garage going to the lower level. They have elderly parents who are not in good health and they expect their parents to come and live with them. He expects to install a lift system which requires adequate clearance by the corner of the stairway. The cantilever leaves marginal room and could cause problems. Beyond that, they feel the angled wall detracts from the house and the beauty of the neighborhood. They have had a number of concerns expressed by staff. The first was that they did not meet the setbacks. Mr. Black has discussed this in detail. The second was that the neighbors have serious objections. They have lived in the neighborhood for 22 years. He went to each person listed on the notice. With the exception of one person, they have all signed. The one person objecting is at the meeting. They have spoken about the objections and it comes down to destroying the beauty of the wetlands and not wanting the development in their backyard in the first place. The development is here. The house will be PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 15 built. They want to preserve and enjoy the wetland. They have been avid about preserving the wetland. Their plan is to leave the wetland and easement as it is but they want to get the footings in for the garage. They have an elevation of 955 feet at the back of the house at the door on the lower level. The corner of the garage is an area of 35 square feet that would encroach. If the wall is angled, the egress is tight if they have a wheelchair situation. Mr. Horeck stated he has no objection to the buffer area. They plan to leave the area wild, clean up as much as they can and keep it as natural as they can. They have two places that are a problem. The first is the 35 square feet at the angled wall and the other is one footing for a deck in the very back corner. He does not see how they are going to upset anyone's view by making the garage the right shape. They have no neighbors that will be affected. This is a reasonable request and he hopes to get approval. Mr. Reyes stated he is speaking in support of staff's recommendation that the wetland and drainage easement be retained. He was aware of the restrictions and covenants. These were done for many good reasons, including the preservation of the wetlands and retaining the natural beauty. He is concerned about this request. In his experience, the developer has already encroached on property. His next door neighbor had his land encroached upon by a bulldozer which leveled everything there. That neighbor has resolved the matter but the developer did not have permission to do that. He is concerned that this request, though for a minimum amount of space, can end up being different than what is expected. He is concerned that what is being asked for may not be the final product. This area has had a lot of water runoff in the last few years. He is concerned that the home was started before this request was made. It is close to the wetland as it is. He is surprised that a home of that size is going in that close to a body of water. He would support that the land and easement be retained as they are. Mr. Saba asked if there was any other way to do this without giving up the entire easement, such as by a variance. Ms. McPherson stated the issue is not a setback requirement. Mr. Newman stated he does not like the fact that, if the Planning Commission approves the vacation, it allows a home to be within 1.5 feed of a dedicated wetland but the City has no ordinance requiring a setback. The surveyor may have made an error. If so, we have to correct that mistake. This request is to correct the delineation. Mr. Oquist stated the request is not to build into the wetland. 15.18 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 16 It is still 1.5 feet away. He thought they could assure Mr. Reyes in making sure this is constructed properly. Mr. Newman stated he would assume, if they added a stipulation, that we want the edge of that wetland clearly marked and staked during the construction period, that would be acceptable so it is clear to the builders, neighbors and City inspectors where the line is. Mr. Sielaff stated he is concerned about a broader issue. One can argue that the easement is accurate or not accurate. He is concerned about other drainage easements that are done and what this does when they review other requests that come up. The lines are put on paper for a reason and now we are starting to move those lines a little more and then someone requests a little more. Where to you then draw the line? He is concerned from a broader perspective. He has no qualms that the owner will take care of his property and take care of the wetlands, but he sees a broader issue. Mr. Oquist stated this easement was arbitrarily placed there where in other situations they are well defined easements along lot lines. Mr. Newman recommended, when they are done, that staff look at an ordinance specifying setbacks from a wetland. Since we do not now have such an ordinance in place, he did not think they could impose it in this case. Mr. Saba stated he could go along with that recommendation. He would also like to see a setback ordinance for wetlands. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval of Vacation Request, SAV #96-01, by Imperial Homes, Inc. , to vacate that part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65. 10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage and utility easement 64.13 feet; thence South 38 degrees 00 minutes East 32.00 feet; thence North 24 degrees 16 minutes 58 seconds West 92. 63 feet to a point on said north line distant 12 feet east of said point of beginning; thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds West 12. 00 feet to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof, generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. , with the following stipulation: 1. The edge of the wetland be clearly marked at not greater than 10-foot intervals so all concerned persons can monitor. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 17 Mr. Saba stated he was concerned about the lack of consideration by the construction company going into the neighbor's property and being careless. Ms. McPherson updated the commission on this issue. An error was made by the subcontractor on one of the lots. Staff immediately worked with the petitioner and the neighboring property owner to bring resolution and correct the error. They have re-vegetated and re-planted what was destroyed. As a result, in order to enforce the 15-foot no cut zone, staff has required the petitioner to install orange snow fencing to prevent sub- contractors from misunderstanding where the construction area is. Staff is holding a performance bond of the petitioner as well. Staff have put mechanics in place to prevent further inadvertent encroachment. This will apply to this lot as well. UPON A VOICE VOTE, WITH MS. MODIG, MR. NEWMAN, MR. KONDRICK, MR. OQUIST, AND MR. SABA VOTING AYE, AND MR. SIELAFF VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION BY A MAJORITY VOTE. Ms. McPherson stated vacation requests require a public hearing. The City Council on April 8th will establish the public hearing for April 22. The City Council will consider this request on April 22. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend that staff review and evaluate the possibility of adopting a wetland setback ordinance. Ms. McPherson stated this may be included in the shoreline ordinance. Mr. Newman thought this would get buried there. He felt this should be part of the zoning requirements. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTUORITY OF FEBRUARY 8, 1996 MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to deceive the minutes of the Housing & Redevelopment Author' meeting of February 8, 1996. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF .THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 1996 15.20 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 20, 1996 PAGE 18 MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive th minutes of the Appeals Commission meeting of February 14 1996. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN ECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL 0U1 CITY AND ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 20, 1996 MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Saba to receive the minutes of the Environmental Quality and E ergy Commission meeting of February 20, 1996. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, RPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS / Mr. Hickok stated the first ne' hborhood meeting in Hyde Park regarding the Frank's Used C site had been conducted. Many residents would prefer to s a single-family development. Others had some interestin comments regarding a townhouse development. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr4KKond/r* k, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE , ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CD AND THE MARCH 20, 1996, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOAT 9:05 P.M. Respectfully/ submitted, _7�D hu,� Lavon Cooper Reco ing Secretary City of Fridley PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Fridley City Council at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6 2 v 31Un University Avenue N.E. on Monday,April at 7:30 p.m.for the purpose Of: Consideration of a vacation request, SAV part off heldrain drainage and rial sutlity easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition,described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7;thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage and utility easement 64.13 feet;thence South 38 degrees 00 minutes East 32.00 feet;thence North 24 Degrees 16 Minutes 58 Seconds West 92.63 feet to a point on said north line distant 12 feet east of said point of beginning;thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds West 12.00 feet to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof,generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court NE. Any and all persosdesire the above stato be t- edbe given an opportunity atthe erelated to ed time and place. Any questions this item may be referred to the Community Development Department at 572-3599. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than April 15,1996. WILLIAM J.NEE MAYOR (April 11,18, 1996)Fridley Focus News PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Fridley City Council at the Fridley Municipal Center , 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Monday, April 22, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of : Consideration of a vacation request, SAV #96 - 01, by Imperial Homes, Inc . , to vacate that part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated on Lot 7 , Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, described as follows : Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65 . 10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7 ; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage and utility easement 64 . 13 feet; thence South 38 degrees 00 minutes East 32 . 00 feet; thence North 24 Degrees 16 Minutes 58 Seconds West 92 .63 feet to a point on said north line distant 12 feet east of said point of beginning; thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds West 12 . 00 feet to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof, generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court NE. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Community Development Department at 572-3599 . Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572 -3500 no later than April 15, 1996 . WILLIAM J. NEE MAYOR Publish: April 11, 1996 April 18, 1996 s w ...........I.................. ........................... ............ .................................................................................-.... ......... . .......... ........................... ............................ ........................... .......................... ....................... ................ ......... ,..................-.......... I...,....................... { .:: IdLY 'PIOJEC" S VACATION REQUEST, SAV #96-01, BY ROYAL OAKS REALTY; 1435 ROYAL OAK CT ga ltem... : ' : .: ::. RPAt .i. ..:.Y° :.:: ;>::;: ........... : .aiationC : : .i::... . .:.. . ... `x.:: ..... . ....................... a�'tavewl >: e to .. eting D: >> > ::>:>:: > . ( . <<: b...'..;.: , . ....... nI 22, 996 C1ty Nlanag Auinaat�on. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The petitioner requests that a portion of a drainage and utility easement located on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition be vacated. If approved, the vacation would allow encroachment of 25 square feet of a garage 5.5 feet into the easement. SUMMARY OF ISSUES: The purpose of the drainage and utility easement was to provide a buffer around the protected wetland located on the site. The petitioner designed a dwelling for a client which does not fit within the buildable portion of the lot as defined by the setbacks and easements. The drainage and utility easement aids the City in enforcing stipulations placed on the subdivision. RECOMMENDATION: For the April 22, 1996 meeting, staff recommends that the City Council conduct the required public hearing. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the vacation request, as the drainage and utility easement provides additional buffering and protection for the protected wetland located on the property. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission voted 5:1 to approve the vacation request as presented. L Staff Report SAV #96-01, by Royal Oaks Realty Page 2 PROJECT DETAILS Petition For: Vacation of a portion of a drainage and utility easement. Location 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. of Property: Legal Description Lot 7, Block 1, Totino-Grace Addition of Property: Size: Topography: Somewhat rolling; wetland in northeast corner of the property. Existing Oak trees Vegetation: Existing R-1, Single Family Dwelling; Totino-Grace Addition; 1994 Zoning/Platting: Availability In Royal Oak Court of Municipal Utilities: Vehicular Royal Oak Court Access: Pedestrian N/A Access: Engineering Provide adequate buffering for wetland Issues: Site Planning Issues: Staff Report SAV #96-01, by Royal Oaks Realty Page 3 REQUEST The petitioner requests that a portion of a drainage and utility easement located on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition be vacated in order to allow construction of a single family dwelling unit. PARCEL DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY The subject parcel is located in a subdivision recently platted in 1994. The subdivision is located adjacent to Totino Grace High School and near an established residential district. During the subdivision process, the neighborhood testified that the existing trees and wetlands were significant environmental features, and that the proposed subdivision would adversely impact this remnant of what is known as "Peck's Woods". As a result of the neighborhood testimony, the City Council, at the recommendation of the Planning Commission, established 22 stipulations intending to protect the natural features to the greatest extent possible. These included conditions regarding tree cutting, tree preservation, grading limits, construction limits, and the placement of dwellings. An easement was recorded over the pond as part of the plat, but the pond is privately maintained. ANALYSIS The petitioner's proposal would vacate a portion of a drainage and utility easement which, on the plat, surrounds a protected Type 3 wetland located in the northeast corner of the subject property. The drainage and utility easement does not contain any City utilities. The vacation of this portion of the easement would essentially move the protected area of the wetland closer to the wetland edge. This easement was dedicated on the plat at the recommendation of the registered land surveyor and based on a wetland delineation by Ms. Pat Arlig. The delineation of wetlands is not an exact science; therefore, providing an ample buffer is appropriate. The vacation of the easement would reduce the buffer to the wetland from 7 feet to approximately 1.5 feet. To insure adequate protection of the wetland, the wider buffer provided by the drainage and utility easement should be maintained. The vacation request is a result of the petitioner designing a dwelling for a client which is larger than the buildable area on the lot when setbacks and easements are considered. It would have been more appropriate had the designers started with a buildable area and designed the house to fit within the site constraints. The Staff Report SAV #96-01, by Royal Oaks Realty Page 4 petitioner chose to begin construction at his own risk, but the affected foundation wall of the garage will not be constructed until the conclusion of the vacation process. Another option is to cantilever the garage over the easement, but the petitioner does not want to angle the foundation. RECOMMENDATION As the drainage and utility easement provides additional buffering and protection of the natural environment, i.e. the wetland, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to vacate a portion of a drainage and utility easement. ADJACENT SITES WEST: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Dwelling Land Use: School SOUTH: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Dwelling Land Use: Residential EAST: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Dwelling Land Use: Residential NORTH: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Dwelling Land Use: School Comprehensive Planning Issues: Public Hearing There was one neighbor, Mr. Reyes, who spoke in opposition to Comments: the request. CITY COUNCIL ACTION Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing. MEMORANDUM ` l µ"hh.J?} U4 DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR opment errt 7: h• development DATE: April 4, 1996 TO: William Burns, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Establish Public Hearing for April 22, 1996 for a Vacation Request, SAV #96-01, by Imperial Homes, Inc.; 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. The Planning Commission reviewed the vacation request, SAV #96-01, to vacate a portion of a drainage and utility easement on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition. The City Charter requires the City Council to conduct a public hearing for all vacation requests. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council establish April 22, 1996 as the date of the public hearing for this vacation request. MM/dw M-96-148 7.01 ?n µ MEMORANDUM &vee DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Y K Ac• bpffmrd DATE: May 2, 1996 TO: William Burns, City Manager, �y FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: First Reading of a Vacation, SAV #96-01, by Imperial Homes, Inc.; 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. The City Council conducted a public hearing regarding the vacation request at its April 22, 1996 meeting. Since the public hearing, the petitioner has submitted the attached drawing for staff's review. The drawing depicts the area to be vacated which equals 140 square feet and a proposed alternative easement area which grants the City an easement of 280 square feet two times that which is being vacated. This easement area will protect additional natural features on the site and is good compensation for the area to be vacated. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the first reading of the attached ordinance vacating a portion of the drainage easement on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino- Grace Addition in exchange for the easement indicated on the attached drawing to be submitted by second and final reading. M M/dw M-96-207 L— 14.01 < . : MEMORANDUM &W n DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR k, w K nt DATE: May 16, 1996 TO: William Burns, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Second Reading of a Vacation, SAV #96-01, by Imperial Homes, Inc.; 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. The City Council conducted the first reading of the attached ordinance at its May 6, 1996 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the second reading of the attached ordinance vacating a portion of the drainage easement on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino- Grace Addition. MM/dw M-96-232 2.01 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8 1996 GE 3 square feet. He stated that the lot split wil also have the impact of officially redesignating the fr t and rear yards of the duplex which now fronts on Third treet. Mr. Burns stated that, currently, the plex has a non- conforming rear yard of only 14 feet ins ad of the required 35. 61 feet. He stated that if the 1 split is approved, the 58th Avenue side of the property will become the front yard, and the new front yard wil measure only 14 feet instead of the required 35 fee . He stated that, in essence, the lot split has th effect of swapping non- conformities for the duplex. e stated the garage that now serves the southern most half f the duplex will be moved to Lot A, and a driveway wil be constructed along the west side of the duplex to sery the relocated garage. Mr. Burns stated that t e newly created Lot B is being sold for development of a ew single family home that must be built within a 42 . 9 foot by 66. 18 foot area or 2, 841.77 square feet. He s ted that the lot split was unanimously approved by the P nning Commission subject to the following stipulations: 1) the petitioner acknowledges that the City's action reates a non-conforming front yard setback for the exis ng duplex; (2) if the petitioner fails to obtain a ilding permit within twelve months and a certificat of occupancy within eighteen months after approval f the lot split, then the petitioner shall remove the gar ge on Lot B; (3) the petitioner acknowledges that Lot B as a long, narrow buildable area and shall design a hous to fit that area; and (4) the petitioner shall provide ade uate parking for the duplex. Mr. Burns stated that there were no objections raised by s rounding neighbors, and staff recommends Council approval w th the four stipulations. DOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 27-1996 WITH THE ABOVE FOUR STIPULATIONS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT A. 7 . ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 22 1996 ON A VACATION REQUEST, SAV #96-01, BY IMPERIAL HOMES, INC. , TO VACATE A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1435 ROYAL OAK COURT N.E. (WARD 2) : SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS VACATION REQUEST, SAV #96-01 FOR APRIL 22, 1996. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8 , 1996 PAGE 4 8. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 TO LOCKE LAKE DAM RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT NO. 211: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that in/ot g the payment of the Locke Lake dam, staff that additional rebar was used in construction . He stated that although the additional rebar luded in the original design, it was agreed toy the contractor, Lunda Construction Company, ity's consulting engineer, Ayres & Associates, me of construction. Altogether 7, 493 additions pounds of steel was installed, raising the value of the,.,,'steel from $25, 300 to $29, 421. 15 or by $4 , 121. 15. He,` stated that staff recommends approval of the change rder to Lunda Con- struction Company in the amount of $ , 121. 15 for the Locke Lake Dam reconstruction. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE/ING ENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 28-1996 AUTHORIHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE VIRST QUARTER OF 1996: Mr. Burns, City Manager s ated that the adjustments have arisen as a result of un oreseen expenditures, donations, and reclassification of ine items. He stated that all of the General Fund adj tments ($4,950) are covered by donations from commun' y organizations, particularly the Fridley Lions Club, w contributed $4, 500 for construction of a decontamination rea at our main fire station. Mr. Burns stated th t this resolution also covers $25, 000 in expenditures for ' vestigation of a fuel oil leak from one of two fuel oil anks located between the main Municipal Center and the olice Department garages. He stated that thus far we ha e spent about $9 , 000 for the services of an environmental consultant, Bruce A. Liesch and Associates, and expect t spend up to $25, 000 in 1996. He stated that ninety per nt of the City's costs are recoverable from Petro Fund . ADOPTED ESOLUTION NO. 28-1996. 10. CLAIMS• AUTH IZED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 67194 THROUGH 67553 . 11. LI NSES• APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE IN THE LICENSE CLERK'S OFFICE. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 16 14 . PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ROHIBITING THE RETURN OF ABATED PROPERTY TO ITS ORIGI>AL LOCATION IF IT CONTINUES TO BE IN VIOLATION OF CITY OR ANCES: MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to wai the reading of the public hearing notice and open the pub c hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voic vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried u imously and the public hearing opened at 10: 05 p.m. Mr. Hickok, Planning Coor nator, stated that this ordinance deals with the release of aba d property. He stated that the amendment includes a release property agreement to be signed before reclaiming any aba d material and a provision which allows the City to abate sa or similar violations from a location in which an abatement h already occurred. He stated that an abbreviated but reasonabl notice period will still be required. No person in the audience spoke regarding this proposed ordinance amendme . MOT N by Councilwoman Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Se onded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting e, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 10: 08 p.m. 15. PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION REQUEST, SAV #96-01, BY ROYAL OAKS REALTY, INC. , TO VACATE A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1435 ROYAL OAK COURT N.E. (WARD 2) : MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 10: 09 P.M. Mr. Hickok, stated that this is a request to vacate a portion of an easement at 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. He stated that in the development process, an area was described as an easement area that surrounded the wetland delineation for this site. He stated that this is part of Peck' s Woods . As the development occurred there were two major concerns; the wetlands and the existing stand of oak trees. Mr. Hickok stated that this vacation is for a portion of a drainage and utility easement which surrounds a protected Type 3 wetland located in the northeast corner of the subject property. He stated that the vacation would essentially move the protected area of the wetland closer to the wetland edge. This easement was dedicated on the plat at the recommendation of the registered land surveyor and was based on a wetland delineation. He stated that the vacation of i FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 15 requirements; an aggrieved owner hearing process; and a;,%one-year "sunset date" to allow for re-examination of the ordinange one year from its adoption. Mr. Hickok stated that the Planning Commission reco ended .approval of this ordinance amendment. Councilman Schneider felt that under Section 14 . 02, 3d, the word "vital" should be added after the word "lack He also questioned an abandoned unsafe vehicle versus an aband ed safe vehicle. Mr. Hickok stated that this would be valuated, but he felt it could be handled under current regulati ns. Councilman Schneider asked how it ould be determined what the added portions are since there ould be no underlining which currently delineates the portion that have been added once the ordinance is adopted. Mr. Hickok stated that staff w uld rely on the records. Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that she heard from one resident who wanted Council to make thiilordinance as strong as possible. Councilwoman Bolkcom as ed where a notice is sent if a car is parked at a residence ut the owner of the vehicle does not live there? Mr. Hickok stated t t it is a very difficult issue to pinpoint the vehicle's, owner. e stated that the property owner and the last known vehicle own r would be notified. He stated that staff would work with the Po ice Department to find out who is the responsible party and make 1 the necessary notifications. Mr. John Hal ka, 5660 Arthur Street, stated that his son has an abandoned mo orcycle in his yard and asked if this would be towed under this rdinance. Councilwo an Jorgenson stated that it would if it is left there for more tha five days. No oth r persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed ordin ce amendment . MOT N by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing. Se nded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting ay , Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the p blic hearing closed at 10: 05 p.m. i FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 22 Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that she has to make a judgment that she feels in her conscience is important. She stated that she is very sorry they have gone this far, but that was not the reason she voted against the vacation. She stated that she felt she owes the people who attended all the hearings on this development. . Mr. Horeck asked if there could be further discussion. He stated that they followed all the proper procedures for the vacation. Councilman Billings stated that the first reading ordinance for this vacation will be on Council' s agenda for the next meeting to either approve or disapprove. RECESS: Mayor Nee called a recess at 10: 20 p.m. RECONVENED: Mayor Nee reconvened the meeting at 10: 32 p.m. All members of the Council were present. OLD BUSINESS: 16. ORDINANCE NO. 1065 TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DIS ICTS (REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #95-01, BY THE ROTTLUND COMPAN , INC. , GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF MISSISSIPPI STREET, WEST OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE, AND NORTH OF SATELLITE LANE) (A6ED 1) : Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated at this is the second and final reading of an ordinance to rez e 14 acres to S-2 in the Southwest Quadrant of Mississippi reet and University Avenue to allow for a development by Rott nd Homes. She stated that the development agreement has been viewed and signed by the developer, the Chairman of the Housing nd Redevelopment Authority and its Executive Director. Ms. Dacy stated that the develo r agreed to all of the stipula- tions approved by Council but r quested modification of Stipulation #15 regarding marketing the V' lage Homes on the west side of Third Street. She stated that t values were changed on the units, and there was an addition of ording that the price limitations for the Village Homes shall e ire the later of one year after building permits for the u ' ts are available or one year after the redeveloper has mar eted the project describing the availability of the units, but no earlier than July 1, 1997 . Ms. Dacy sta d that the S-2 zoning is proposed on an approved development lan which is one of the stipulations of the rezoning approval. he stated that any changes must be approved by Council, the HRA d the Planning Commission. MOTIO by Councilwoman Jorgenson to waive the reading and adopt Ord' ance No. 1065 on the second reading and order publication, subject to the following stipulations: (1) Rottlund Homes, Inc. ti FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 21 MOTION by Councilman Schneider to grant vacation request, SAV - #96-01, to vacate a drainage and wetland easement on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court in such a manner that the vacation is one foot north of the north side of the garage and one foot east of the east side. of the garage. Further, that the developer will bring to staff the surveys and legal description. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Mr. Haluska stated that the easement is the property of the City and has value. He asked what compensation the City would receive if it is vacated for the private use. Councilman Billings stated that the City has not requested reimbursement in the past. He stated that if it was required in this particular case, he felt that the City would be found to be arbitrary and capricious. Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that she cannot support the motion. She felt that there was a commitment to the City. She felt that the City had to stand by it. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she has a problem with the way this was done. Councilman Schneider stated that this is a minor vacation, and he wondered if it would be in the best interests of the community to deny the vacation. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, Councilman Schneider voted in favor of the motion. Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilwoman Bolkcom, Councilman Billings, and Mayor Nee voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the MOTION FAILED. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that the City Charter requires that the public hearing be closed, and the procedure has been to bring the ordinance back to the Council at the next meeting for a vote for or against the vacation. She stated that the Charter also requires a four-fifths vote to approve the vacation. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously, and the public hearing closed at 11 : 10 p.m. Mrs . Horeck stated that they asked for 25 feet and could not get it. She stated that she listened to all the rules and regulations, but none of the Council has to live with it. She stated that they only requested a small portion of the easement. She stated that this is a $350, 000 home, and they would pay huge taxes. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 20 Mr. Black stated that they are within all the stipulations originally placed on this property. Councilman Schneider stated that is untrue. He stated that there is a line for wetland delineation and not the drainage easement. Councilman Billings stated that in this particular case, they came to staff to apply for the building permit and, at that time, discussed the options. He stated that one of the options was to apply for the vacation, and there was another suggestion for cantilevering. He stated that he did not think they had proceeded and built the home without being given choices. He stated that the other element is that he doesn't know if the developer chose the footprint of the home. He stated that the person constructing the home indicated he would be somewhat flexible and felt that they were trying to be as open as possible under the circumstances. Mr. Haluska asked if building over the easement is the same as building on the easement. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that if there is an encroachment that impedes the public use for road purposes, that would impede the public purpose. He stated that in a conservation easement, it would be an encroachment over the easement, and the question would be if the public purpose would be affected by this encroachment. He stated that in the conservation easement, there is a distinct possibility unless there is something that states otherwise, anything that encroaches over the easement isan encroachment. Mr. Rick Riemersma, Imperial Homes, stated that the plans they originally brought forward that show the encroachment on the drainage easement has the corner of the garage cut off. He stated that the footing would be on an angle that matches the easement line. He stated that they proceeded with construction and applied for the vacation. He stated that regarding the issue of the cantilever, they went ahead with the plans, as approved by the Building Division, which included the cantilever. He stated that what they are doing at this point is trying to get the other 25 square feet with the easiest way being to draw a straight line to the back. Mr. Hickok stated that when they applied for the building permit, staff indicated this was not a favorable solution, and they should seek others . He stated that the Building Division contacted the Planning Department and stated that they were taking out a building permit and questioned the garage. He stated that the petitioners indicated they would not build a garage until a decision was made by Council on the vacation. He stated that a permit was issued for the house, and staff talked about the cantilever option. The Building Division stated that the petitioner would leave the corner of the garage open. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 19 garage, as he believes it was an error in the first place, and the line is in the wrong place. Councilman Billings stated that he has a problem with the extensive width of the variance at the rear of the lot. He stated that he could support a delineation of an area 1 to 1-1/2 feet east of the east wall to 1 to 1-1/2 feet north of the north wall. He stated that the point was made that this easement line was an arbitrary line prepared by the surveyor. He stated that, at the same time, this is the line that the Council and neighbors were told would be upheld. He stated that, with that in mind, if the Council chose to deny the vacation, nothing more is being asked of the developer than what the Council was told in the first place. Mr. John Haluska, 5660 Arthur Street, stated that he was not included in the mailing. He stated that he would certainly hope Council would not approve this vacation. He stated that Council went through negotiations with this builder and had assurances from the builder on what a fine project this would be, and they would abide by every rule and regulation. He stated that if this vacation is approved, Council is rewarding ignorance and probably some deceit. He stated that he cannot believe the gall they have to come before Council with some of the construction already completed. Mr. Haluska questioned if the home owner could cantilever his home over the street if Council approved the option to cantilever. He felt that the easement would have to remain in tact, as it serves as an important easement to protect that pond. He stated that he is sure Mr. Horeck would be an excellent neighbor, but he could not support this vacation. He stated that this drainage easement mitigates non-point pollution problems, and if it is waived in this case, Council will receive other requests for a waiver. He stated that the developer had every option to design the home to fit the lot. Mr. Hickok stated that in response to Mr. Haluska' s comment, the statutory requirement is for notification of persons within 350 feet from the project area. Mr. Reyes, 1479 N. Danube Road, stated that he and Mr. Haluska are of the belief that the City worked out strong agreements with the developer, the Planning Commission, and the EPA so that whatever delineation lines were set were accomplished. He stated that what he is hearing is that the surveyor made a mistake. He stated that the developer has an obligation to honor the agreements. Mr. Reyes stated that it is unfortunate this happened, but the construction of the house has proceeded almost interrupted. He felt that this was a pressure move on behalf of the developer. Mr. Reyes stated that the woods are no longer thick, and he felt that all the efforts of the residents and City should be honored in these agreements. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 18 Mr. Mike Black, Royal Oaks Realty, stated that the request is for vacation of a portion of the drainage easement. He stated that the easement was placed on the lot to protect the existing body of water adjacent to the property and protect the 100 year flood plain. He stated that Imperial Homes began working with the proposed home owners, Mr. and Mrs. Horeck, and they were aware of the restrictions originally placed on the property. He stated that all the criteria was met for a 100 year flood with no fill below the 953 elevation. He stated that, unfortunately, it was not until a permit was requested and the property was staked that it was discovered this property was six feet into the easement. Mr. Black stated that the easement was drawn as a pencil line in the area where it lies. Councilman Schneider asked if they needed the entire vacation or only part of it . Mr. Black stated that they only need a portion, but the easement line right now covers the entire area. He stated that the encroachment at its widest point is six feet; however, it could be modified. He stated that a straight line was drawn for a less complicated lot description. He stated that the vacation process was begun before construction started on the home. Councilman Schneider felt that it was a shady practice to begin construction and to get to the point where there is a substantial investment. He stated that the developer knew the rules, and now puts the Council in a spot where it is difficult to deny this vacation, and he resents it. Mr. Black stated that he apologized, but there were in a time constraint to get the construction started. Mr. Horeck, the proposed homeowner, stated that when they applied for a building permit, the plan was to notch the back corner of the garage. He stated that they plan to have a workshop underneath the garage and have elderly parents who may live with them. He stated that they wished to have a wide stairway so that they could potentially put in a lift. He stated that the biggest inconveni- ence of having a notched corner is there may be a problem with wheelchair access. Mr. Horeck stated that he has contacted every one of his neighbors, and they had no objection. He has also contacted the three new neighbors. Mr. Horeck stated that the vacation would not disrupt the harmony of the pond, and they will retain all the foliage they possibly can around it. He stated that they wish to protect the pond and have no problem of a wider drainage easement. He stated that the biggest concern is to obtain the vacation for the portion of the FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1996 PAGE 17 the easement would reduce the buffer to the wetland from 7 feet to approximately 1 .5 feet. Mr. Hickok stated that the vacation is requested as a result of the petitioner designing a dwelling for a client which is larger than the buildable area on the lot when setbacks and easements are considered. He stated that the petitioner chose to begin construction at his own risk, but the affected foundation wall of the garage will not be constructed until the conclusion of the vacation process. Mr. Hickok stated that another option may be to cantilever the garage over the easement; however, the petitioner does not want to angle the foundation. Mr. Hickok stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval of this vacation request on a five to one vote. Councilman Schneider asked why staff recommended denial . Mr. Hickok stated that the home could have been designed to be constructed outside of that easement area, and it is the design that caused the encroachment. Councilman Schneider asked if the area that is proposed to be vacated is an arbitrary line that was drawn or if it was necessary to protect the wetlands. Mr. Hickok stated that it was an added safety area along the delineation line to protect the wetlands. Councilman Schneider felt that the vacation could be reduced only to allow the garage to be constructed and to minimize the disruption of the protection of the wetlands. Mr. Hickok stated that this could be done, but it would need a very lengthy lot description. Councilman Billings asked if the person who cited the home was aware of the easement. Mr. Hickok stated that he believed this was the case as they picked the home and then found out later that it would not work to meet all the requirements. Councilman Billings asked when the City became aware that this was encroaching into the easement. Mr. Hickok stated that the builder, developer, and home owner asked if they could begin constructing the foundation and leave the garage as an open question depending on Council ' s action on the vacation. He stated that the petitioner knew the risks of beginning construction prior to Council action. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 61f 1996 PAGE 9 Mayor Nee stated that Council appreciated her represent ion on the City' s behalf and her years of service. Representative Johnson encouraged Council to keep er informed on the issues that are important to the City. RICHARD NETZ & LEROY ANDERSON RE: ALDEN W PETITIONS: Mr. Richard Netz, 7776 Alden Way, submi ted a petition for reconstruction of Alden Way. He felt t street needed to be widened, and he believed he had the necess y signatures to proceed with this improvement. Although there s a lot of objection to widening the street and having no par ing, the majority are in favor of it. Mr. Leroy Anderson, 7581 Alden Way, also submitted a petition for reconstruction of Alden Way. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to receive the two petitions, No. 7 -1996 and 8-1996, for the rec struction of Alden Way. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carri unanimously. Ms. Leslie Richter, 7847 Al en Way, stated that she and her husband purchased their home on Al en Way in 1990. She takes pride in the fact that they made a co cience decision to stay in Fridley where both of them lived andtended Fridley schools. Ms. Richter felt the City should take a vantage of the resources and invest in the improvement of Alden ay. People are willing to make investments to improve their hom and she felt it was also necessary to have good streets. S encouraged Council to proceed with the improvement. Dr. Joseph Lapins i, 7680 Alden Way, stated that he would agree the City needs good treets and curbs and gutters, but he has a problem with widening t e street. He objects to the state regulations that a street nee to be a certain width, which he felt was not appropriate f r Alden Way and not conducive to good living. Mr. Flora, ublic Works Director, stated that Alden Way is 30 feet wide, but with the new curb and gutter, there would be an additiona one foot of concrete on each side, making the street 32 feet wid from curb to curb. The state standards require that a street feet wide have parking only on one side. Counci woman Bolkcom stated that no shrubs or trees would be affec ed by the widening. She honestly did not believe the speed woul increase. Co ncilwoman Jorgenson stated that streets have been improved all ov r the City, and the argument that everyone will drive faster simply is not true. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 6, 1996 PAGE 10 Dr. Lapinski stated that when universal laws are applied it does not work. The majority of the property owners are in favor of curb and gutter but he did not understand why there cannot be an exception regarding the width and parking. He questioned how t ese standards could be changed or modified. Councilwoman Bolkcom advised him to contact his legislato s. Mr. Flora stated that he serves on the task force th reviews the state standards for streets. They have finished de ing with rural roads and will be discussing urban state standard in the future. Mr. Jerry Fuhr, 7836 Alden Way, stated that h is disappointed that there is not a better solution. With pres re from his neighbors and the fact that he would like an impr ed street, he supported the petition, although he has not sig d it. He would like the street as a residential street and no have the parking limited. Ms. Richter stated that she agre with Dr. Lapinski 's comments. She felt once the improvements ere completed, the property owners may want to use their own resources to make the street as aesthetically pleasing and a unique as possible. Councilwoman Bolkcom sta d that she appreciated the work of those who circulated the peti ions. Mr. Leroy Anderson ked if a decision could be made this evening. Councilwoman Jor enson advised him that this is not an agenda item. Councilwoman olkcom stated that if this was an agenda item, action could be t en by Council. These petitions were submitted under the open rum segment so it was not an official agenda item. Mr. F ra stated that fifty percent of the residents are in favor Of t e project. This improvement could be added to the 1996 street im ovement project and placed on Council' s agenda for action at e next meeting. NEW BUSINESS: 14 . FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12. 07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE (VACATION REQUEST, SAV #96-01, BY IMPERIAL HOMES, INC. , GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1435 ROYAL OAK COURT N.E. ) (WARD 2) : Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that this is the first reading of an ordinance for a vacation at 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. He stated that the vacation is for a portion of a drainage easement to allow construction of a home at this address. A public hearing was held on this vacation request on April 22 . FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 6, 1996 PAGE 11 Mr. Hickok stated that the question before Council this evening is whether to allow an exchange of property. The area to be vacated equals 140 square feet, and a proposed alternative easement area is 280 square feet or two times that which is being vacated. This easement area will protect additional natural features on the site and is good compensation for the area to be vacated. Mr. Hickok stated that staff's original recommendation was for denial; however, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacation. At this time, staff is recommending approval, as they believe the exchange is an appropriate exchange of land. It also offers something of value where a smaller area would be vacated and a larger area preserved. Councilman Schneider stated that the ordinance does not contain the legal description of the new easement to be dedicated. Mr. Hickok stated that when the ordinance is before Council for a second reading it will contain the legal description of the new 280 square foot easement. Councilman Schneider stated he understood that this vacation was a wetland buffer zone. Mr. Hickok stated that this was a drainage easement added as part of the plat to help provide a buffer around the wetland delineation. Councilman Schneider stated that he had reservations relative to the way this was presented. He felt this certainly made some sense in that the City is adding a drainage protection area and expanding the size of the protected area. Mayor Nee felt that this was a very creative solution to a tough problem. He congratulated Councilman Billings on presenting a solution. Councilwoman Jorgenson questioned the elevation of the new easement area and the direction of the drainage. Mr. Hickok stated that the drainage follows roughly the same contour. There is vegetation that will be protected in this area. He concluded that there may be some water in this 280 square feet easement during heavy rainfall . MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading. Further, to direct staff to add the appropriate language into the ordinance to indicate the dedication of the new easement in exchange for the vacation before it comes back to the Council for second reading. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. f FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 6, 1996 PAGE 12 Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that she understands this is a satisfactory compromise. Mr. Hickok stated that Mr. Haluska had spoken in opposition at the public hearing; however, he was unable to attend the meeting this evening. Mr. Haluska advised Mr. Hickok that he could support the exchange. Mr. Reyes, 1479 N. Danube Road, stated that he tried to reach Mr. Haluska, but understands he is out of town on business. He was not aware that Mr. Haluska approved of this plan. Mr. Reyes stated both he and his family are opposed to the plan. Mr. Reyes stated that the issues are still the same and it seemed Council had significant opposition at the public hearing. A great deal of attention has been brought to this matter, and he wondered how this decision can be made this evening without further input. Mr. Reyes stated that he attended six months of meetings on this matter. Promises were made by Council that lines .drawn on surveys would be honored by all parties. He is now hearing that wetland delineation can be changed for the convenience of the developer. In regard to the area to be added to the back of the lot, he did not know the effect on the wetland. He is concerned what would happen to the wetland if building is allowed in this easement. Mr. Hickok clarified that this is not an encroachment on the wetland delineation but an encroachment on the drainage easement created for an additional buffer. The delineation of the wetland is not affected, but the easement area is. Mayor Nee pointed out that the exchange is fairly common and is used throughout Minnesota. It is not unusual to have a two-to-one exchange which is reasonable for wetlands. Mr. Reyes stated that this is a new plan that has been brought forward, and there was no discussion at the last meeting about this exchange. He was troubled by the process if a vote would have been taken. Councilman Schneider stated that the public hearing was for the vacation of an easement, and that is what Council is considering. The reality is that a mistake was made, and Council is trying to figure out a way so that everyone wins. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that Council would be voting on the first reading of the ordinance; however, there is a second reading before adoption. Mr. Horeck, the proposed homeowner, stated that the original mailing included ten property owners, and nine have indicated no objection. Since this time, three new property owners support the vacation, and he submitted a list. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 6, 1996 PAGE 13 MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive the letter of support. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Horeck stated that he has gone through the process and felt this was a solution that would work. The whole garage wall is open, and the problem is with the water. He requested Council to take action for approval. Councilman Schneider stated that there must be two readings of this ordinance before it can be adopted, and the process cannot be shortened. Generally, the second reading is a procedural matter, but if the garage is closed before the second reading there is a risk involved. Councilman Billings stated that the normal procedure is to vacate drainage easements when there is a potential encroachment. Drainage easements have been vacated many times, and the City never received any trade. As a result of the input from the public hearing, the City is actually receiving land in exchange for the vacation. Ms. Alicia Reyes, 1479 N. Danube Road, stated that after the article in Focus News, it was very definitive that Council was against this vacation and to vote for it would be a hypocrisy. She is strongly opposed to giving up land for the architect and the developer because this would excuse incompetence. Councilman Schneider said what is involved is a small area, and there is the question of being reasonable. He asked Ms. Reyes if she was really concerned about the few square feet involved or if she really does not want a home at this location. Ms. Reyes stated that if a person gets away with a small mistake, it could lead to others. She did not want mistakes to be excused. Councilman Billings stated that he never viewed this as a mistake but as a change. The developer submitted plans and the persons purchasing the property wanted to build a home that would not exactly fit onto the property as defined in the plan. A request was then submitted for a change. He did not think the homeowners made a mistake or that the developer or architect is inept. Councilman Billings stated that the article in the newspaper probably overstated Council ' s intensity on this issue, and some people placed a greater emphasis on this matter. He wanted to leave his options open and be in a position to reconsider if an acceptable proposal was forthcoming. Councilman Billings stated for someone to interpret that he was totally opposed to the vacation of this easement is inadequate. UPON A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE MOTION FOR FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE, Councilman Schneider, Councilwoman Bolkcom, Councilman FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 6, 1996 Pi_ Billings and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion, and Councilwoman Jorgenson voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried by a four to one vote. 15. RECONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #80-06 (WAI ING STIPULATION) BY JEROME CHRISTENSON, GENERALLY LOCATED A 6260 STARLITE BOULEVARD N.E. (WARD 1) : Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that this is/aequest to waive a stipulation on a special use permit issued The petitioner is requesting release from an agreement quires him to sell two single family lots as one unit, wh' ch was part of the approval of Special Use Permit, SP #80-06. Mr. Hickok stated that the petitioner recently agreed to sell but has not closed the sale on a single fami y dwelling at 6260 Starlite Boulevard. The other lot at 6250 tarlite Boulevard has only a second accessory structure for whic the special use permit was issued in 1980. At the time of prepa ng to close the sale the petitioner was made aware of the agreeme t which required both lots to be sold together. Mr. Hickok stated that the petiti er has agreed that if he is released from this agreement and ' f the adjacent lot is not sold within ninety days, he would app y for a building permit for the property and proceed with const uction of a home. He stated that Mr. Christenson did have a h me designed for the site, and the garage was built with frost footings and necessary connections. The plan now for the home i to downsize it from 1, 500 square feet to 1, 200 square feet. If r. Christenson sells the property, the new owner would be requi ed to apply for a building permit within 45 days of closing. Councilman Billings s ated that at the time this special use permit was issued, both Co cil and the Planning Commission emphasized to Mr. Christenson th placing a garage on an empty lot, without a home, was not the normal procedure, and this is how they came up with this soluti He stated that Mr. Christenson's letter states that he will tr to sell the property or take out a building permit for a home wi in a certain period of time. It has been sixteen years, and t ere still is no home on the lot. He asked if there was a reaso . Mr. Chri tenson stated that when he originally purchased the property, his intention was to construct a home on that lot, and plans re drawn in 1988. At that time, he had a job change. He is no traveling a lot, and the property is too much for him to main in. He knew about the agreement on the property at 6250 Sta ite Boulevard but was unaware it covered the property at 6260 St rlite Boulevard. Councilman Billings stated that as he understands it from Mr. Christenson's letter, if the adjacent lot is not sold within ninety FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 20, 19 PAGE 3 submitted a letter in support o a speed limit study for 85th Avenue. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO 9-1996. 2 . SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12 . 07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE (VACATION REQUEST, SAV #96-01, BY IMPERIAL HOMES, INC. , GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1435 ROYAL OAK COURT N.E. ) (WARD 2) : Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that at the April 22 and May 6 Council meetings, Council heard considerable testimony regarding the vacation of a 140 square foot portion of a drainage easement at 1435 Royal Oak Court. The area had been designated as a buffer to protect an adjoining wetland. Mr. Burns stated that as a tradeoff, the petitioner has agreed to designate a 280 square foot . area to the rear of the property as a replacement drainage easement. This tradeoff is reflected in a revised copy of the ordinance. Mr. Burns said the City has received the replacement easement document from the petitioner, and the petitioner has stated that nine out of ten of the neighbors have no problem with the proposed vacation. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 3. ORDINANCE NO. 1068 AMENDING CHAPTER 114 OF THE LEY CITY CODE REGARDING THE ABATEMENT OF JUNK OR UNS VEHICLES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated hat these ordinance amendments provide a more det ' ed definition of what constitutes a junk vehicle and eferences state statutes in defining unsafe motor vehic S. The ordinance provides a detailed five-day notifi ion and abatement process that replaces the current tw ty-day process. The ordinance also establishes an aggri d owner hearing process and identifies a one-year "sunse date" to allow for re-examination of the ordinance one y r from its adoption. The strengthened junk car ordinance as supported by 62 percent of those responding to a recent completed citizens survey. WAIVED HE SECOND READING AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1068 ON THE COND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 20, 1996 PAGE 4 4 . ORDINANCE NO. 1069 AMENDING CHAPTER 128 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE REGARDING THE RELEASE OF ABATED PROPERTY AND THE ABATEMENT OF SAME OR SIMILAR VIOLATIONS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that these ordinanc� amendments require an agreement with the property owner prior to the return of abated materials to the site of the ini/t�ial abatement and requires the property owner to pay any orf the City' s cost for removal or storage of abated material . The ordinance also requires the property owner to agre not to return abated items to their original location an provides for an abbreviated notice for removal of illeg ly stored items that have previously been abated. WAIVED THE SECOND READING AND ADOPTED ORDI E NO. 1069 ON THE SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION. NEW BUSINESS: 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING C ISSION MEETING OF MAY 1, 1996: RECEIVED THE MINUTES OF THE P7TWEEN G COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 1, 1996. 6. APPROVE 1996 LEASE AGREEMENT B THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND RECYCLE MINNESOTA RESOURCES, INC. FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY'S RECYCLING CENTER (WAR 1) : Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the City sent out two requests for proposals eeking a recycling company that was willing to assist in t redevelopment of our recycling center in exchange for the p ivilege of operating this center. Most recently, a request or proposal has been sent out asking for an operator and e ipment only. None of these requests have resulted in an ac ptable response. Mr. Burns stat that since no proposals were received, staff has met wit the current contractor, Recycle Minnesota Resources, I c. to negotiate a new lease agreement. The terms of this ag ement are as follows: the effective date is June 1 to Dec er 31, 1996; the City will pay $500 per month operatin fee; the contractor shall operate Tuesday through Saturda between the hours of 9: 00 a.m. and 5: 00 p.m. ; the contra for will provide quarterly tonnage reports of all recy ed materials; the City agrees to run water and sewer lin s to the building no later than August 1, 1996; and the co tractor agrees to require its staff to meet quarterly to scuss customer service expectations and to complete customer ervice training. Staff recommends approval of the contract with the understanding that this seven-month contract period FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 20, 1996 PAGE 10 driveways. The survey would analyze their kerns as Council moves forward with the ordinance. When the/survey is completed, those persons who are interested and are on the mailing list will be notified when this item is on the Council ' s agenda. Mr. Burns stated that the survey" would also include financial options that are available. No other persons spoke regarding this proposed ordinance amendment. MOTION by Councilman Billings to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Pro Tem Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously, and.-the public hearing closed at 8 : 13 p.m. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to direct staff to cease any further activity on this maximum lot coverage issue. Seconded by Councili!Wfi Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Pro Tem J genson declared the motion carried unanimously. NBUSINESS: 2 . ORDINANCE NO. 1067 UNDER SECTION 12. 07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE (VACATION REQUEST SAV #96-01, BY IMPERIAL HOMES, INC. , GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1435 ROYAL OAK COURT N.E. ) (WARD 2) : Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated the easement that will replace this vacated easement does match the description discussed at the last Council meeting. Staff felt that all necessary documents had been submitted to proceed with this vacation request. Councilman. Schneider asked how many affirmative votes were needed to adopt this ordinance. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that the City Charter requires four affirmative votes. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she has been opposed to the vacation; however, Mayor Nee has been in favor. At this point, she would vote in the affirmative in order for the petitioner to proceed with the home construction. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1067 on the second reading and order publication. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Pro Tem Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 20, 1996 PAGE 9 hearing on the final assessment, and a Zhh e sent requesting that the assessment be deferred. Mr. Burns stated that he believed the fer the assessment are being received at this timFinance Department. PUBLIC HEARING: 16. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE APENDMENT ESTABLISHING A MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF 300) OF THE CALCULATED FRONT YARD AREA FOR D SURFACE AREAS IN R-1 AND R-2 ZONING DISTRICTS (TABLED APR L 22, 1996) : MOTION by Councilman Billings/or, nue the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneida voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Pro Tem Jorgenred the motion carried unanimously, and the public head at 8: 01 p.m. Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordiated that it has been determined that this amendmenould permit no more than thirty percent maximum hard su face lot coverage be abandoned. The reasoning of the Planning Cofission is that it is too restrictive, another permit process woul be needed, this issue would be self- policing because of the cos of concrete or asphalt, and a majority of the residents have an appropriate balance between landscaping and hard surface areas i the front yard. Mr. Hickok stated that taff also recommends that Council not amend the ordinance becaus of the growing trend of two and three car additions which woul require additional front yard pavement and a coverage limitatio may deter residential home improvement projects. Ther is no permit requirement for pavement installation, an the City' s enforcement for this requirement would, in all 1 ' elihood, take place after the driveway has been installed. It would also be difficult to determine the exact amount of co erage from the street while conducting typical systematic co enforcement inspections. Councilman chneider pointed out that the hard surface driveway issue is se arate from this issue. Mr. Hick o stated that on the issue of hard surface driveways, staff is preparing a survey that will be sent to residents involved in hard surface driveway improvement projects and is separate from what C ncil is now considering. Mr. urtis Barsness, 6581 Central Avenue, stated that he thought the and surface driveway issue was to be discussed. Mr. Hickok stated that Council determined that a survey should be done for those residents who would be required to pave their City of t naiey ORDINANCE NO.1067 AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. To vacate public drainage easements described as follows: That part of the drainage easement as dedi- cated on Lot 7,Block 1,Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as fol- lows: Commencing at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 min- utes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet to the point of beginning;thence North 71 degrees 50 min- utes 00 seconds East 3.80 feet;thence South 22 degrees 08 minutes 07 seconds East 34.86 feet; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 7.20 feet; thence South 18 degrees 10 minutes 00 seconds East 19.96 feet to said west line; thence northerly along said west line to the point of beginning. Be and is hereby vacated. SECTION 2. The said vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code shall be so amended. SECTION 3. In return, the petitioner has agreed to dedicate a perpetual easement for drainage purposes across that part of Lot 7; Block 1,Totino Grace Addition,Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet; thence North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West 47.24 feet to said north line; thence easterly along said north line to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 20TH DAY OF MAY,1996. WILLIAM J.NEE-MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM A.CHAMPA,CITY CLERK Public Hearing: April 22,1996 First Reading: May 6,1996 Second Reading: May 20,1996 (May 30,1996)Fridley Focus News 4 ORDINANCE NO. 1067 AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. To vacate public drainage easements described as follows: That part of the drainage easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65. 10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7 ; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29 . 75 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 3 .80 feet; thence South 22 degrees 08 minutes 07 seconds East 34 .86 feet; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 7 . 20 feet; thence South 18 degrees 10 minutes 00 seconds East 19 . 96 feet to said west line; thence northerly along said west line to the point of beginning. Be and is hereby vacated. SECTION 2 . The said vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and pursuant to Section 12 . 07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code shall be so amended. SECTION 3 . In return, the petitioner has agreed to dedicate a perpetual easement for drainage purposes across that part of Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65. 10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7 ; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29 .75 feet; thence North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West 47 . 24 feet to said north line; thence easterly along said north line to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. Page 2 - Ordinance No. 1067 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 20TH DAY OF MAY, 1996. WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, CITY CLERK Public Hearing: April 22 , 1996 First Reading: May 6, 1996 Second Reading: May 20, 1996 Publication: May 30, 1996 CITY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER •6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(617)571-3450• FAX (612) 571-1287 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE June 10, 1996 Imperial Homes Inc. for Royal Oaks Realty Mike Black 4196 Lexington Avenue Shoreview, MN 55126 Dear Mr. Black: On May 20, 1996, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a vacation request, SAV #96-01, to vacate that part of the drainage and utility easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, described as follows: That part of the drainage easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 3.80 feet; thence South 22 degrees 08 minutes 07 seconds East 34.86 feet; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 7.20 feet; thence South 18 degrees 10 minutes 00 seconds East 19.96 feet to said west line; thence northerly along said west line to the point of beginning. In return, the petitioner has agreed to dedicate a perpetual easement for drainage purposes across that part of Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Imperial Homes SAV June 10, 1996 Page 2 Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet; thence North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West 47.24 feet to said north line; thence easterly along said north line to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. This property is generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court NE. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 572-3590. Sincerely, Barbara Dacy, AICP Community Development Director BD/dw Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by June 24, 1996. Concur with action taken. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS COUNTY OF ANOKA ) VACATION CITY OF FRIDLEY ) In the Matter of: a vacation, SAV #96-01 1262310 Owner: Robert S. Horeck and Cheryl A. Horeck The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 20th day of May , 19 96 , on a petition for a vacation pursuant to the City of Fridley's City Code and City Charter, for the following described property: To vacate that part of the drainage and utility easement generally located at 1435 Royal Oak Court N.E. Please see attached for complete legal description. IT IS ORDERED that a vacation be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons: Approval with no stipulations. See City Council meeting minutes of May 20, 1996. a L4- 3 0-ZR LJ -0 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY OF FRIDLEY ) I, William A. Champa, 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 vacation 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 Z3,e4 day of 11917 DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 William A. Champa, City Clerk /1 r 4y i E;�t3. L r" ORDINANCE NO. 1067 AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. To vacate public drainage easements described as follows: That part of the drainage easement as dedicated on Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65.10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 3.80 feet; thence South 22 degrees 08 minutes 07 seconds East 34.86 feet; thence North 71 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds East 7.20 feet; thence South 18 degrees 10 minutes 00 seconds East 19.96 feet to said west line; thence northerly along said west line to the point of beginning. Be and is hereby vacated. SECTION 2. The said vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code shall be so amended. SECTION 3. In return, the petitioner has agreed to dedicate a perpetual easement for drainage purposes across that part of Lot 7, Block 1, Totino Grace Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7 distant 65. 10 feet east from the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 28 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the west line of said drainage easement 29.75 feet; thence North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West 47.24 feet to said north line; thence easterly along said north line to the point of beginning. Except the north 5 feet thereof. Page 2 - Ordinance No. 1067 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 20TH DAY OF MAY, 1996. WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, CITY CLERK Public Hearing: April 22, 1996 First Reading: May 6, 1996 Second Reading: May 20, 1996 Publication: May 30, 1996 i FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL FETING OF MAY 20, 1996 PAGE 10 driveways . The survey would analyze their c cerns as Council moves forward with the ordinance. When the urvey is completed, those persons who are interested and are the mailing list will be notified when this item is on the Cou il ` s agenda. Mr. Burns stated that the surve would also include financial options that are available. No other persons spoke rega ing this proposed ordinance amendment. MOTION by Councilman illings to close the public hearing. Seconded by Council n Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Pro Tem Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously, an the public hearing closed at 8 : 13 p.m. MOTION by ncilman Schneider to direct staff to cease any further activity on this maximum lot coverage issue. Seconded by Counci an Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Pro Tem orgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. EW BUSINESS : 2 . ORDINANCE NO. 1067 UNDER SECTION 12 . 07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE (VACATION REQUEST SAV #96-01, BY IMPERIAL HOMES, INC. , GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1435 ROYAL OAK COURT N.E. ) (WARD 2) : Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated the easement that will replace this vacated easement does match the description discussed at the last Council meeting. Staff felt that all necessary documents had been submitted to proceed with this vacation request. Councilman Schneider asked how many affirmative votes were needed to adopt this ordinance. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that the City Charter -requires Lour affirmative votes. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she has been opposed to the vacation; however, Mayor Nee has been in favor. At this point, she would vote in the affirmative in order for the petitioner to proceed with the home construction. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1067 on the second reading and order publication. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Pro Tem Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. Receipt p_75'to l/19 CICiertitied Copp DOCUMENT N0. r^�7 1262340 . 0 ABSTRACT Tak LitansrReteases DatefTlme 1-3. 1-g/ '1 / �'oTo LJfjMunbCo.Dw,Tau Paid ANOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA Doc.Order ( of — -- 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT WAS FILED IN THIS OFFICE Chocked by: � ^^/--- ( rarifei New FOR RECORD ON JAN 31 97 Rwordatwoty -L �-g �-�j D�0" AT r, n(� pM AND WAS DULY RECORDED. R !_.�Divieion LJ GAC FEES AND TRX�SIRTHE AMOUNT OFPAID. $19 . 50 Detlnqu" Plns C9-,o ®Oet. S'K RECEIPT N0. q'7(� EDWA7? '7 Sll�i.�R&A ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES BY KH.T DEPUTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES