LS84-03 ' 8
1 ,
• CITY OF i�
FAIOLY, SUBJECT LOT SPLIT LS I �
m. SA31 L"VeRarTY AIV[. "a-
ppimmr, MN. 0saae 46%m&"-3450 RECORDED:
s
L I I1 C 33 "- 3 77777 ,
ADDRESS: _p( ! CSO O L_Af_-CC-_. L_r _ _ DATE:
PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE �LL NO_______
CITY COUNCIL: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE NO
PARK FEE REQUIRED: AMOUNT PAID
STIPULATIONS:
NAME GERALS.G. JOHNSON FEE RECEIPT NO
PROPERTY OWNER(S) GERALD G. JOHNSON TELEPHONE NO 421 -9469
MILDRED E. HEINE TELEPHONE NO
ADDRESS(ES)_ 712 River Lane, Anoka, Minn. 55303
PROPERTY LOCAaION ON STREET Lucia Lane .and Mississippi Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY The West 112 of Lot 4 and all of Lots 5, 6, and 7,
=y.
TOTAL AREA OF PROPERTY 64.100 sQ_ ft_ _ PRESENT ZONING_
REASON FOR LOT SPLIT To make two (2) residential lots on Lucia Lane
The undersigned hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this
application are true and correct.
DATE: . _� SIGNATURE
NOTICE: A sketch of the property and the proposed lot split with any existing struc-
tures shown should accompany this application.
(See reverse side for additional instructions)
L 1 7.3
Low 3 S�LiT �lv (v
LOT � SPL IT-
oASao g V.% .. a 3>�f g
-sail! d
3NV1 vi3n1 y
3.sv.1f.os -0.0 r- °
in
0
� W � 0 � � p O i •�':
d o
t f ` N r til
u < _ m N all
z ,a - .+1
-
I o
I m P r
N T"
LO.06 46'66
M.Gf.50 0
9 aol io,Ol .sv3 sc )wig 1s3M � ; c j
- 0-06-
4;
0.06-s i
haoN p n6i M r• .". d
_ L J
O • V { ! ` '6
W s
W
CC
r I
a
cc
�n v
r- - — — — — - - - _ � — _ _ _ _ v!
ac o a
.,
N �_" a
I
r u a
2
o �.
� Z
cn
lA
� N U
O'06
0'061
- N-0,foN -0,0#2
Q W
99 `ON AVMHJIH )WHI 31d1S
� m
o
= o�
U �
z v
it
f ,68 0 �esl Ord: t �iagly�fr V G 7;
OA�• /8 1 �9' 4
_ f� t : J ••6 0l8 018 (Q ` p ` =
.10, f
�Q"s► •:ov
Alif
low, 4
t ? wa. 710
2 . -r. '�• � ._ ice: 'a. ,� ,-:!
10
F to �� •� _ � `•• ..;:' �_�•:;' �, ,: . _ "
�1.• Wil.i�Ti♦ � — � - _ : i-��,_':1^ � �-� �� - +vier'
. {` ♦ :�J ��� Y _ [7,
_ Ca�� saw,. •bL7d
• ��x Q:� ,•` Y' � ���. .y�•. 6661 j 6663- 2 7
tGL70 SO
-
.... 664'1 -'• ''_ — i_�_�ttJ�_
:6T1 AV
E.
_ _._
.. .., -
6 q Or._. . �i3ao) (.(..q 6640+ 28alp
. .
ACV
= �b31
w 'it � ; Y • �..� _ '�1--- -- 6
• C - -
. 6 C o�oo
1, 6 608 f •:
fist/ o +�;- 6.3.4_ a�� :Ezo
: 1c
? w
y tu- -- - �--m b b 10
w -- ' • '` 6 t, -" b 610 1255
r V ♦•a•,•av r 6 't , \ G(Q - •i ,3� •� 1:•tMO� Q ��H�
•t,•f.•.'� li 6 El's , f►.,
533
656 i •.�:e at/
sb �w rl t• .
2 s r. F*o� 6600 3� , o
B,A..� a
3 4x
ILUSSS {_" '_ . --- ,- -- ltw
16561
3�irt/ e ' /3 s.s bStO
1 . < 2 /
2
AAA
(},s�► "24 --�- - -- 4= 12 ss V3 ``
46
b f I KIS
10-ieY 031
(1oroJO bS10 6s33
8 6 �R.. bs 32
► g I - /v S W /e,7bS1
• ax
X543116651
,.
9 " ; - - 6 9 6• y o
lot
• _ _ �� Soo
Shy
• •.. • � �•-'� � 7 �' � �' •� t\, �! �� SR S 'as _.� �t• �•-• - .;•i ■■■/•��•
ar - 1 ���t�.•, �sY3iijari�`0rr:•
`V ,+r;� _ 'moi r'..-� f - • `•:`s. ,.r . �� ' ,
• .l : 't- 'i' %•l•x,.�•'►.1_r��,-� ;. %'`;,'v- ^•?�.�% .,•�� ri�• • •�`s! _� u �' ,••�•-��+ •r **�. �*rw,�c•
. •' -. V •. -•: �w�••�•; `;'�••,'_. tT a ji �ji:••�'^ - •7; *•�.► {, qtr •'L'� -s�v •! ��
� �• � �. .�(��.. •� ;-.• �'?+�� ts,�a,` -: -. t�3.t� r•:.L a,RTi ,,�.•• 'T• ,_ 71 '' �i'.� �� N, ..
• - r �j-• �•••.+�`•�„ �a- ••?��,��l �i'-j �� ����`;,►fit. LY•I�t•: . ��1C 'S,�� :��•�► � �r� .
.. ^ -�••.• v.. ::.:* ' •`'�:'?}� �• S;~_ t'.1�• �..vE ii-'7--s•• Y•��•�14 E fl�+ i- f }+_• �..
♦ � - _ mss. _: ,..�. `at a. ��.r'-•�wr ',���4i '�<..' .�'► .• J. a� e
„�,'.a. :!-. Yi+ t ;' . �iT<� :�. �•'• • !js� • •at �� .,_11.�•'`�L,�4 j'S � ••• .� :. �� ��a. •• ' L
• -�• •� • •� •;`'� �"•'• aP • ��� •'•f •+�� �`�1►'•�!t�.�� • y'�.'-Af�e;�t.:��i� �.�iy. sem,•: !('• ••-t• "�' •• ��. •�•
ilk itri NS J.Rns+n
e 86
11-41Ao00d3 13-T4
13 .24000083 -
Mi�9¢6fl �-IEIN�
�71 I co'� AvE, n1.E.
WJV6F, Moj SSS 14
13 -7A •84 -w
14ENfs HAeDTW
v510 WCIA r..4nE N , E.
GeiPLEy I MN S5437,e
lk
411AAAY
u om
aMX-.l Aik3 a
ISOZZ LAM k vs-=44
CITY OF FRIDLEY, COMMISSION APPLICATION
MINNESOTA REE-VIEW
De Divi Number Rev Page Approved by
FILA Oi A 9RE s FIL
COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST
RETURN TO PLANNING OUE E
COMMENTS
JIM
Lu k
Darrel /V�
Mark 04#7 IVI
Clyde
M,;,John
kf4j
Q Leon
ov� 7
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 18, 1984
ALL TO ORDER:
Cha',rwoman Schnabel called the April 18, 1984, Planning Commission meeting to
orde at 7:33 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Pr ent: Ms. Schnabel , Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel , Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Saba,
Mr. Goodspeed
Members Absent: Mr. Svanda
Others Present: m Robinson, Planning Specialist
Ge ld G. Johnson, 712 River Lane, Anoka
Robe t Erickson, 2178 - 17th St. N.W. , New Brighton
Mark ggerty, 6401 University Ave. N.E.
APPROVAL OF MARCH 28 1984 NNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED Y MR. SABA, TO APPROVE THE MARCH 28, 1984,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES A5 WR ,TEN.
Ms. Schnabel stated that at this meet'ng, the Commission asked for some
clarification from the City Council re rding park fees.
Mr. Robinson stated a memo was sent to the City Council . The Council 's inter-
pretation was what he had said at the March 8th meeting, that on a 9-lot plat,
the park fee was on the 9 lots. Mr. Blomberg ad questioned paying a park fee
on the 9th lot, because there was an existing elling on it.
Mr. Robinson stated that on a lot split, a $750 pa '\DECLARED
id on each new lot
that is created. However this is not a lot split is" her a plat.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHND THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPROVAL OF APRIL 4, 1984, PLANNING COMMISSION MIN
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO APR 4, 1984,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHND THE '^ION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 18, 1984 PAGE 2
1 . LOT SPLIT RE U L.S. #84-03 BY GERALD B. JOHNSON: Split off the West
112 of Lot of and 7, Lucia Iane Addition, into three
tracts as follows:
Tract A: The north 90 feet of Lot 5, along with the North 90 feet of the
East 20 feet of Lot 6, Lucia Lane Addition, the same being 6516 Lucia Lane N.E.
Tract B: That part of Lot 5 lying south of the North 90 feet of said Lot 5,
and that part of the East 20 feet of said Lot 6, Lucia Lane Addition, the
same being 6500 Lucia Lane N.E.
Tract C: Lot 7, along with the West half of Lot 4, and that part of Lot 6
lying west of the east 20 feet of said Lot 6, Lucia Lane Addition, the same
being 1133 and 1145 Mississippi Street N.E.
Mr. Robinson stated this property was located north of Mississippi St. ,
west of Lucia Lane, and east if Highway 65. The property presently consists
of Lots 5, 6, 7, and the west half of Lot 4, The petitioner is requesting that
this property be split in such a manner so that Lot 5 will be basically split
in half with 20 ft. from Lot 6 being added to Lot 5, and the remainder of Lot 6
and Lot 7 being added to the half of Lot 4, to make three tracts, Tract A,
Tract B, and Tract C.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff has some definite concerns that have been discussed
with the petitioner, Mr. Gerald Johnson. One of the Staff concerns is that
the legal descriptions are quite lengthy, and Staff feels Mr. Johnson should
apply for a plat rather than a lot split and not allow this type of reworking
of the land with a lot split.
Mr. Robinson stated another Staff concern was the traffic on Mississippi St.
With two R-1 lots on Lucia Lane and one rather large tract of over 42,000
sq. ft. off Mississippi St. , Staff felt access should be required off Lucia
Lane with no access onto Mississippi St. He stated that presently there are
plans to widen Mississippi St. and put in a median so access onto Mississippi
would be very limited.
Mr. Robinson stated the third Staff recommendation would be a 15 ft. bikeway/
walkway easement along Mississippi St.
Ms. Schnabel asked the petitioner, Mr. Johnson, if he would like to make some
statements regarding his proposal for this property.
Mr. Mark Haggerty stated he was an attorney representing Mr. Gerald Johnson.
He stated Mr. Bob Erickson, who was a contractor, was also at the meeting.
Mr. Haggerty stated he would first give the Planning Commission members a
little background on this parcel of land. He stated this parcel of land has
been before the Planning Commission and City Council about six times in the
last six years. There have been proposals for everything from restaurants
and office buildings to duplexes and condominiums.
Mr. Haggerty stated the problem was a "catch-22" which has been created by
the City of Fridley. On Lucia Lane, with the Knights of Columbus and the
apartment buildings, the neighbors claim there is a tremendous traffic problem
down Lucia Lane. Obviously, they cannot get access to Highway 65. The City
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 18, 1984 PAGE 3
claims there is a tremendous traffic problem on Mississippi St. He said
they have met with the neighbors many times, and the neighbors say they
want no access onto Lucia Lane. The City wants no access onto Mississippi
St. , even though at this time, Mr. Johnson could pull a building permit
on Lots 7, 6, and 5, and the City could not do anything about it.
Mr. Haggerty stated he had just become involved with this proposal that day,
and he believed the dimensions on the drawing were not quite accurate.
What was really meant was to have a Tract A and Tract B and two buildable
lots on Tract C, making four buildable residential lots.
Mr. Haggerty stated Staff has talked about running a road in from Lucia
Lane. That would be great, except for two things: (1 ) the cost; and (2)
the neighbors on Lucia Lane would be very upset. The neighbors have stated
they want nice residential homes and try to preserve the beautiful oak trees
that are on the land, in order to maintain the residential character of the
neighborhood and not create a traffic problem.
Mr. Haggerty stated they are asking the Planning Commission, and ultimately
the City Council , to compromise. The City says there are traffic problems on
Mississippi St. , and the neighbors don't want traffic congestion on Lucia
Lane and the neighbors do not want multiple development. So, they are propos-
ing to take one lot off Mississippi St. , put two lots on Lucia Lane, so
there are two lots on Mississippi, as opposed to three lots. He stated he did
not know what would happen with the westerly portion of Lot 4. It would
make a nice backyard for someone. The petitioner is primarily concerned with
the four residential lots without the additional cost of having to put in a
road that would meet city standards. That would run another $60,000. With
a total square footage of 64,000 maximum, that just doesn't justify a road.
Ms. Schnabel asked either Mr. Johnson or Mr. Haggerty to comment on the
staff recommendations, particularly the first recommendation that because of
the complex legal descriptions, the City would like to see a plat.
Mr. Haggerty stated he did not feel the legal descriptions were that complex.
Regarding the drawing, he felt Tract C should have been two tracts, and that
could be corrected. If the legal descriptions were too complicated, they
would find that out very fast at the County Recorder's office. Under state
law, if the legal descriptions are too complicated, the County Recorder has
the right to reject them. In checking with the County Clerk, these legal
descriptions did not appear to be that objectionable.
Ms. Schnabel stated she was concerned about Mr. Haggerty's comment that the
drawing was not totally correct.
Mr. Haggerty stated the drawing showed adding 20 ft. from Lot 6 to Lot 5, and
he believed that should be around 15 ft. , which would create four buildable
lots with minimum square footages and minimum frontages.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 18, 1984 PAGE 4
Mr. Haggerty stated they could drop the westerly portion of Lot 4, and just
work with Lots 7, 6, and 5. That parcel was not necessary for the minimum
square footages on Lots 7 and 6.
Mr. Haggerty stated Mr. Johnson has held this property for a long time, and
he pays $3,000/year in real estate taxes on the property. He stated they
would request that the Planning Commission approve this lot split request,
taking into consideration some of the problems there have been in the past,
and the change of adding 15 ft. to Lot 5, rather than 20 ft. , as indicated
on the drawing.
Mr. Oquist stated he really could see nothing wrong with this request. With
only two driveways coming out onto Mississippi St. , that would only be 2-4
additional cars coming out onto Mississippi.
Ms. Schnabel suggested the possibility of combining the driveways for Lots
7 and 6 so that both homes would be accessing onto Mississippi from one
single driveway.
Mr. Haggerty stated the problems were basically legal and marketing problems.
If people are going to buy a single family home, they want a single family
home where everything on it is theirs. If a driveway is combined, it has to
be done right. There has to be a reciprocal easement and reciprocal maintenance
agreement that runs with the land. He stated that kind of thing scares people
off and makes it very difficult to market a single family home. In his
experience, it has been a very difficult problem.
Ms. Schnabel stated she was a little uncomfortable with this request with
no public hearing, considering that in the past history of this property,
the neighbors have been very vocal . She realized that a lot split did not
require a public hearing by ordinance, but she still felt uncomfortable
without having some kind of vehicle for those neighbors to make comment on
this proposal .
Mr. Haggerty stated that in the meetings with the neighbors, of all the plans
they submitted to the neighbors, when they started getting down to the 8, 7,
and 6 unit density level , the concern from the neighbors lessened. Now, they
are down to the 4-unit level . He stated they could have three units without
any trouble, but they are trying to accommodate the City by putting one more
driveway onto Lucia Lane, as opposed to Mississippi , and still make the total
package economically feasible enough so that something can he done. He
stated it is getting to the latter third of April , and they would like to get
going. To go through a public hearing process at this time would be very
burdensome.
Mr. Robinson stated one thing he was a little concerned about was that, with
the original lot split, the westerly part of Lot 4 was included. If they do
as Mr. Haggerty suggested and drop that portion, that piece of land would be
�( completely landlocked.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL -18, 1984 PAGE 5
Mr. Haggerty agreed, but he stated they are willing to give up development
on that lot in order to be able to get some development going on these
four new lots.
Mr. Oquist stated that of all the plans they have seen for this property,
this seemed to be the most viable plan.
Mr. Robinson suggested that 5 ft. from Tract A be added to Tract B, making
a little more room on Tract B because of greater setbacks on a corner lot.
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. #84-03, FOR THE CREATION OF TRACT A AND
TRACT B, LEAVING LOTS 6 AND 7 AS BUILDABLE LOTS, WITH THE FOLL DING
STIP ULA TIONS:
1. A 15 FT. BIKEWAY/WALKLTAY EASEMENT ON MISSISSIPPI ST.
2. CORRECTION IN CLERICAL ERROR THAT THE 20 FT. FROM LOT 6 TO BE
ADDED TO LOT 5 BE CHANGED TO 15 FT. AND THAT THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS BE PRESENTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THIS ITEM GOES
TO CITY COUNCIL.
3. A CORRECTED DOCUMENT BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE FRONTAGE ON TRACT A BE CHANGED FROM
90 FT. TO 85 FT. , ADDING 5 FT. TO TRACT B.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel stated this would go to City Council on May 7.
DISCUSSION ON TARGET PROPOSAL FOR PROPERTY NORTH OF CITY HALL:
Mr. binson stated the plans for the Target facility north of City Hall
are ve uickly becoming finalized, and Staff felt they should come to
the Planni Commission and explain the Target proposal to the Commission.
Mr. Robinson stat it involves the area north of City Hall , 4.8 acres.
Target will be const ting a 75,000 sq. ft. building, three stories, with
a possible expansion of 16,000 sq. ft. for administrative operations and
computer-type operations. et will be relocating employees
from Paco Industrial Park. Thi a $5 million facility and will create
$200,000/year in taxes.
Mr. Robinson stated Target will be using s 'liar type brick and stucco and
the same plaza motif will be carried throughou the area. Landscaping will
also be consistent with the total development.
Mr. Robinson stated that primarily the access to the parN par ' lot will be
off the service drive to City Hall . There will be more lime access off
Mississippi St. The parking lot will have 311 , 9' x 18' , sta11 .
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 18, 1984 PAGE 6
\RECEIVE
Commission members wondered why Target did not have their
off 5th St. past the median, rather than having a shared
h City Hall and the Police Dept.
stated that right now the City is working on relocation of
inesses on the property, and everything seems to be going well .
3. H 26 1984 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. ONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST, TO RECEIVE THE MAR. 26, 1984,
PARKS & RECREAT N COMMISSION MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ` LL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.'`
4. RECEIVE MARCH 27 198\ NERGY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECOND BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECEEVE THE MAR. 27, I0,84,
ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING R , CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. RECEIVE APRIL 5, 1984, HUMAN RESOUR , S COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. GOODSPEED, SECONDED BY KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST,
TO RECEIVE; THE APRIL _S, 1984, HUMAN RESO CES COMMISSION MINUTES.
Mr. Goodspeed stated the Commission members came up with their recommenda-
tions to City Council for human service fundq of 1983 CDBG funds.
He stated those recommendations were stated in'•4 motion to the City Council
on page 5.
Ms. Schnabel stated the Planning Commission appreciAted all the work the
Human Resources Commissirn has done in coming up with°,these recommendations
for human service funding. The Planning Commission wa!�,';in agreement with
what the Human Resources Commission had recommended.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DEC L D THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. RECEIVE APRIL 10, 1984, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO RECEIVE THE APRIL 19, 1984,
APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRP70MAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THF. MOT N
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
t
COtIL [ 71NG OF MAY 7, 1984
the existing garage on Lot 6 is to be removed. Seconded by Councilman
Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the
motion carried unanimously.
5. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINIMErTI' TO ENERGY COMMISSION (TABLED 4/16/84)
MOTION by Councilman Barnette to table this Seconded by
Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all 7appoinfiMernt.
ting e, Mayor Nee declared
the motion carried unanimously.
NEW BUSIMSej
6. CpNSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE THE 12 FOOT ALLEY
W BALANCE OF GUMWOOD STREET SOUTH OF LOT 11 BLOCK 6, ONAWAY (SAV #84-02,
DISPLAY ARTS, INC.) :
MOTION by Councilman HamernikInN o waive the first reading and approve the
ordinance upon first reading. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
EW
7. QDNSIDOF FIRST` READING OF AN ORDINANCE-,WAK� CITY T CDDF 9F-ME
CITY F A
MO'T'ION by Co ilman Schneider to waive the first reading and approve the
ordinance n first reading. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a •
voice vot all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimo y.
8.
8A. IkYr SPLIT REQUEST, L S #84-03, TO SPLIT THE WEST HALF Of- 4. AND
ALL OF LDT S. 6 AND 7 LUCIA LANE ADDITION I= TRACKS A, B AND C,
ADDRF,SSED ON LUCIA LANE AND MISSISSIPPI STREET, BYGERALD B. JOHNSON:
Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, this is a request to split off the west
half of Lot 4 and all of Lots 5, 6 , and 7 in Lucia Lane Addition to make
three tracts A, B, and C in order to make four buildable residential lots.
Mr. Flora stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the lot
split, providing a 15 foot bikeway/walkway easement on Mississippi Street,
and that the clerical error be corrected to reflect that the 20 feet from
Lot 6 added to Lot 5 be changed to 15 feet and a corrected document
submitted to the Council with the recommendation that the frontage on Tract
A be changed from 90 fet to 85 feet, adding five feet to Tract B.
Mr. Flora stated the above corrections recommended by the Planning
Ccrwd ssion have been made on the Council's copies.
Mr. Mark Haggerty, representing the developer, stated residents in this area
were concerned about traffic on Lucia Lane. He felt this plan provides an
-6-
OOUNCIL MF Izx; OF MAX 7. 1984
economically feasible solution for four residential lots.
Councilman Schneider clarified their intention to build four single family
homes on Tract A, B, C and Lot 7.
Mr. Russell Burris, 1150 Mississippi Street, stated if four single family
homes are built on this property, he would be happy as that is what the
neighborhood wanted for the last 30 years.
Councilman Schneider asked Mr. Haggerty if he knew of any plans to cane back
for other permits. Mr. Haggerty stated if this is approved, he was assured
by the owners they will be putting up single family hones.
MDTION by Councilman Schneider to approve Lot Split, LS #84-03 with the
following stipulations: (1) a park fee of $1,500 be paid; and (2) a 15 foot
bikeway/walkway easement on tracks B and 4Z and Lot 7 be provided along
Mississippi Street. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
8B. ITEM FROM HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 5. 1984:
REC MMENDATION ON HUMAN SERVICE FUNDS OF1983 CDHG FUIW:
Mr. Peter Treuenfels, representing the Human Resources Commission, stated
the total funding recommended was $17,000 which was broken S3awn as follows:
SAGA, $5,000; Central Center for Family Resources, $3,70 , Anoka County CAP,
$4,150; and Senior Citizens Center, $4,150.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to concur with the recommendation of the
Human Resources Card ssion to make a $17,000rallocation from CDBG funds as
follows: SAGA, $5,000; Central Center for Family Resources $3,700; Anoka
County CAP, $4,150; and Senior Citizens Center, $4,150. Seconded by
Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vo , all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared
the motion carried unanimously.
8C. ITEM FROM APPEALS MEETING Ox APRIL 10, 1984:
1, F A SIGR-FQR-A-2ER=
ON VRCET ERTY AT 759 53RD AVENUE N.E. ICHAEL J.
CARDINAL: /
Mr. Flora, Public Worlds/Director, stated this is a request for a variance to
increase the size of' a sign located at Target. He stated the gas station on
this property is ,leased to Citgo and they have requested a separate pylon
sign and the code limits the signs to one per development and Target
currently has/6 sign on this parcel.
J
Mr. Flora stated because of the distance involved, staff does not have any
objection/to a separate pylon sign for the Citgo operation. He stated the
hardship is Citgo is leasing the gas station from Target and they need
exposure" to Highway 65.
-7-
1 4
CITY OF FRIOLEY
6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N. E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432
TELEPHONE j 612)571 -3450
CITY COUNCIL May 24, 1984
ACTION TAKEN NOTICE
?� Gerald B. Johnson
Mildrid E. Heine
'3 712 River Lane
Anoka, MN 55303
On May 7, 1984 the Fridley City Council officially
approved your request for L.S. #84--03 to split off the west half of Lot 4, and Lots
with the stipulations listed below. 5. 6. and 7 in Lucia Lane Addition to make
three tracts A, B, and C in order to make
four buildable residential lots.
I. That the 20 feet from Lot 6 added to Lot 5 be changed to 15 feet and a
corrected document be submitted to the Council with the recommendation
that the frontage on Tract A be changed from 90 feet to 85 feet, adding
5 feet to Tract B.
2. A park fee of $1 ,500 be paid.
3. A 15 foot bikeway/walkway easement on Tracts B and C and Lot 7 be provided
along Mississippi Street.
if you have any questions regarding Lhe above dCLioii, please call the riai-ining
Department at 571-3450.
Sincerely,
JAMES L. ROBINSON
PLANNING SPECIALIST
JLR/de
Please review the noted stipulation, sign the statement below, and return one
copy to the City of Fridley.
Concur with action taken.
- 12P
STATE OF MINNESOTA • CITY LCIL PROCEEDINGS
CLTY OF FRIDLEY
C6 4:11
In the Matter of a Lot Split L.S. #84-03
PLAVLOT SPLIT
Gerald B. Johnson & Mildrid Heinbwner
712 River talle, Anoka, MN 55--
The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley
and was heard on the -'J,7th day of May , 1984, on a petition
for a plat pursuant to tfie City of Frid ey s Platting Ordinance, for the
following described property:
West 1/2 of Lot 4, and all of Lots 5, b, and 7
IT IS ORDERED that a plat be granted as upon the following conditions or
reasons:
This lot split granted at City Council meeting of May 7, 1984
minutes attached
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF ANOKA ) ss. OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY OF FRIDLEY )
I, Sidney C. Inman, City Clerk for the City of Fridley with an in for said City
of Fridley, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy and Order
granting a plat 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 gLty of Fridley,
Minnesota, in the County of Anoka on the / - day of ZZrte/✓ 19 Vis:
DRAFTED BY:
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 SIDNEY INMAN, CITY CLERK
4-
.,
(SEAL)
+Af .;