The URL can be used to link to this page

PS99-03 CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR: Plat Lot Split PROPERTYINFORMATION: - site plan required for submittal, see attached Address: r S �3 77=_e Aj, Property Identification Number: . 43 O� Legal De ri tion: Lot Block Tra t/Addition i 0 CC)CA 44 Current Zoning: Square footage/acreage: J, 6-6 Mq-2gl3o Reason for Subdivision:. ;r C)U;-, u ,.. 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 OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title) (ContractgZhasers: F wners must sign this form prior to process ng NAME: ��'e/d17.c. i r% �S �� ADDRESS: / 5-9-,T / 14?i,. 7 DAYTIME PHONE: 5'?/—/Q/ 0 SIGNATURE/ ATE: --- VAr.V/V•+r.Vv/VV-r.V.V�r-r/VH/V/r/Vnrhr Ar NN�rHH^IA/•V►IV N/r�rrV ArNN.r tir.v PETITIONER INFORMATI N NAME: e sk ADDRESS: l - - r f r `J DAYTIME PHONE: S`7 - / bio SIGNATURE/DATE: -.Y gy FEES Plat: $500.00 for 20 Lots, $15.00 for each additional lot Total Fee: Lot Split: $250.00 Receipt #: . Received By: Application Number: PSS. 9y-C� Scheduled Planning Commission Date: �U/ Scheduled City Council Date: ql Ip 10 Day Application Complete Noti ication Date: S-.L oe- /y `ISI 60 Day Date: aII&A < I City of Fridley Land Use r r ProcessA I �ppcation 60 Day Agency Action Law Application Date Planning Commission Meeting City Council Decision 60 Day Window Starts Recommendation to Council Approval or Denial 21-40 Days i 50-60 Days ' � � P,pproved, Action Taken Letter Application Complete 10 Day Notice Tabled, 60 More Days Submit Complete Public Hearings: Application and Variance ; Denied Materials Vacations Lot Splits Public Hearings: Plats Rezonings Rezonings Zoning Amendments Zoning Amendments Wetland Replacements Comprehensive Plan Special Use Permits Community Development Department City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley MN 55432 763.572.3592 K[P - Ey Fax: 763.571.1287 www.ci.fridley.mn.us SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR: Plat PS 4 (-c 3,L'i I Lot Split Property Information Address: 5-vt�a �— �'� S Nb L �' Z_ Anoka County Property Identification Number(PIN#): - -1 -�'( ( L Legal Description: L6T 1 Vpr I< t kz'_ Current Zoning: �5 S` Square footage of Parcel: `- Reason for Subdivision (one sentence summary, please attached full description) 4�E,�Ao Fee/Property Owner Information (as it appears on property title) **Fee owner must sign this form prior to processing Name (please print): AN t,i U!;;V- f/-, t�) Mailing address: ti` City: t. (z State: Zip code: Daytime Phone: 7 - �-0 S© Fax Number: Cell Phone: E-mail address: ( l K4&1 A kSEAJX-AnVUQG� -�-t IS-00uK4c S�G,rif 5�7' Tlz"t C� Signature/Date. 6 f a t) 1 6 — -Petitioner Information Company Name (please print): Contact Person's Name (please print): Mailing address: City: State: Zip code: Daytime Phone: Fax Number: Cell Phone: E-mail address: Signature/Date: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Fees lat: $1,500 f 20 Lots, $15.00 for each additional lot i : $1,250 Application Number: "rl"o-1 eceip#: Received By: Application Date: - 15 Day Application Complete Notification Date: ,t-' Scheduled Planning Commission Date: �r Scheduled City Council Date: � -- 60 Day Date: -- 60 Day Extension Date: SUBDIVISION APPLICATION SUBMISSIN CHECKLIST f The following shall be the minimum submission requirements when submitting a Subdivision application. Applications will not be accepted if the following is NOT submitted. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Item Submitted Complete Reviewer's Initials Completed application, with fee. (Application is considered complete if all blanks are completed, and both the fee owner and petitioner have signed the application.) For Lot Splits—To scale certificate of survey, by a licensed surveyor. Showing north arrow, existing and proposed lot lines, existing and proposed legal descriptions, existing improvements, etc. Must be signed by a registered surveyor. For Plats—A preliminary plat showing north arrow, existing and proposed lot lines, existing and proposed legal descriptions, easements, spot elevations, existing improvements, etc. Must be signed by a registered surveyor. Plans to be submitted should include three (3) FOLDED full size copies,with one (1) 11x17 to- scale reduction and one (1) 8% x 11 reduction and an electronic pdf file via e-mail or CD. The City reserves the right, based on a case by case analysis, to waive any of the above requirements. The City also reserves the right,to require additional submittal items if it is deemed necessary to act upon the vacation. i Easement 1481492 Individual(s)to Corporation(s) or Partnership No delinquent taxes and transfer entered;Certificate of Real Estate Value ()filed()not required Certificate of Real Estate Value No. r- ao ,A20 County Auditor by �- Deputy STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: S O 04 5 BP Date December 27 19 99 Stephen P. Varichak ' — Dolores M. Varichak James Surdyk FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Lynne E. Surdyk , Grantor(s), hereby conveys an easement 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: The North 50.00 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Varichak Addition, according to the duly recorded plat thereof The City of Fridley hereby accepts this easement for drainage purposes. Debra A.Skogen-Cit C rk Subject to easements of record: / �P t hen P. Vchak res aric a s Surd STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )Ss Lynne E. Surdy County of Anoka ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this 13"` day of J a.— -WAte' by Stephen P. Varichak, Dolores M. Varichak. ,Gmntor(s). James Surdyk, Lynne E. Surdyk Signature of Persofi Ta 'ng A nowwlledd ent THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: .,., z� City of Fridley IM■ ■�w+ry�w:�w.. +v.fv:s rw.wwv+ 6431 University Ave.,N.E. Fridley,MN 55432 ABSTRACT Receipt#,SZ�V I.�9,S O ❑Certified Copy Date/Time:Vpy/t 1; 3 Date Mailed __ DOCUMENT NO. 14 814 92.0 ABSTRACT El Tax Liens/Releases ANOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA Doc.Order of Z ❑Multi-Co Doc Tax Pd I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT WAS BLED IN THIS OFFICE ✓by: Pins: FOR RECORD ON JAN 20 2000 QQp AT 11:30 AM AND WAS DULY RECORDED. Recordability/Delgs: ep ❑Transfer ❑New Desc. $2 9.50 FEES AND TAXES IN THE AMOUNT OF PAID. Filing Fees: ZL5.50 KS- ❑Division ❑GAC RECEIPT NO. 2000005236 Well Certificate ❑status ❑Det.Spec EDWARD M.TRESKA Received this Date: Anoka County Recorder ❑Other ❑No Change OKACOUNlYPROPEBipADMtNISTR4TOR/AECORDERIAEGISTRAA01"TITLES Notes: BY DEPUTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTAATQR/RECORDER/REGISTAAA OF TITLES �_o C,UcS N e — n J �J+.�1 , J , f `i City of Fridley PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, July 7, 1999, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a replat request, PS #99-03, by Stephen Varichak & James Surdyk,to create 3 separate lots from Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue. 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 Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator at 612-572-3599. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxil- iary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 612-572-3500 no later than June 30, 1999. DIANE SAVAGE CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION (June 24, July 1, 1999) Fridley, Columbia Heights,Hilltop Focus News CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: All property owners/residents within 350 feet of property generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue. CASE NUMBER: PS #99-03 APPLICANT. Stephen Varichak & James Surdyk Petitioner or representative must attend the Planning Commission meeting. PURPOSE: To create 3 separate lots from Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92. LOCATION OF 1583 Gardena Avenue PROPERTY AND LEGAL Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92. DESCRIPTION: DATE AND TIME OF Planning Commission Meeting: HEARING: Wednesday, July 7, 1999, at 7:30 p.m. The Planning Commission Meetings are televised live the night of the meeting on Channel 35. PLACE OF Fridley Municipal Center, City Council Chambers HEARING: 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN HOW TO 1. You may attend hearings and testify. PARTICIPATE: 2. You may send a letter before the hearing to Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator, at 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN 55432 or FAX at 612-571-1287. SPECIAL Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an ACCOMODATIONS: Interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 612-572-3500 no later than June 30, 1999. ANY QUESTIONS: Contact Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator at 612-572-3599 or Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant at 612-572-3593. Publish: June 24, 1999 July 1, 1999 UTY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER-6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432-(612)571-3450- FAX(612)571-1287 July 23, 1999 Dear Resident: The Public Hearing for Replat, PS #99-03, by Stephen Varichak & James Surdyk, to create 3 separate lots from Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue was scheduled for the Monday, July 26, 1999, City Council meeting; however, the soil boring test has not been completed. The meeting will be postponed to the Monday, August 9, 1999, City Council meeting. This serves as your public hearing notice for that meeting. If you have any questions, please contract Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator at 612- 572-3599. Sincerely, CITY OF FRIDLEY City of Community Development Department Fridley Land Use Permit Notification 1IIIn ! !' 11111 1 05OBIIOK OQO®IIOK OBIOK ON! }3 R vmYfR RK 1 1 B E� rt�1610.K � w�E� ' G nam�'K I IO�ME�.EK � Y C KIOFSTK �j Al I I I I I O"®0.tifK v�OwtK �HfK rK V . x I I.. sR . 77 KnwM WK � NbMLMK SA � �� 5 I I ! 1 I i I j Y is �i R-1-One Family tInits EM M-1-Light Industrial Sources: ®R-2-Tm Farrily(nits =M-2-Heavy Industrial - N Fridley L Planning R-3-General Multiple Units =M•3- Outdoor Intensive Meavy Industrial Fridley GIS Z ®R-4-Mobile Horne Parks P-public Facilities U PUD-Planned Upm nit Develoent Anoka County GIS S•1-Hyde Park Nle' borhoods 0 RR-RailroadsPlat Request, PS 99-03 Anoka County � ®S-2-Redevelopment District q LU EM Gt-Local Business N Parcel i Lot Lines 1583 Gardena C-2-General Business -;- Water Features Stephen Verichek I G3-Gera-al Shopping GRI-General Office NO AMERICAN ISLAMIC TRUST INC CURRENT RESIDENT SIMMS WILLIAM L & MARY E 10900 W WASHINGTON ST 1401 GARDENA AVE NE 1494 GARDENA AVE NE INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46231 FRIDLEY, MN 0 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ERICKSON CHARLES H & R A TILLER BAILEY A& MARIE M TILLER VICKY MAE 1508 GARDENA AVE NE 1535 GARDENA AVE NE 1538 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 TILLER JEROME L &ANNE M LONG WESLEY C &JANICE P CURRENT RESIDENT 1555 GARDENA AVE NE 1560 60TH AVE NE 1560 HILL DR NEr RekvvnecO FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 0 PC, -so C47 # ROLLAND MARJORIE M KUHLMEYER ERIKA L WICK SUSAN M 1561 GARDENA AVE NE 1564 GARDENA AVE NE 1565 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 WICK SUSAN M MATHIS WILLIAM H &CAROLYNNE B CURRENT RESIDENT 1568 GARDENA AVE NE 1570 60TH AVE NE 1578 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 0 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 0 BOLICH JOHN JR& ELAINE LILLEMOEN BERTHA LAURA WILSON ROGER P 1580 60TH AVE NE 1583 GARDENA AVE NE 1588 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MORRISSEY MICHAEL P & KARI L OKERSTROM S J & FREDERIKSEN A HARRINGTON DANIEL C & M D 1590 60TH AVE NE 1601 GARDENA AVE NE 1620 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 COSTELLO ANNA M TAUSCHECK THOMAS L & RUTH A BAILEY JERALD M & BARBARA C 1623 GARDENA AVE NE 1624 GARDENA AVE NE 1628 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MLINARCIK JOHN F & MARY M STANGE CURTIS L & HELEN L LIEPKE ROSE M 1630 KRISTIN CT NE 1633 GARDENA AVE NE 1634 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 KADECHKA JAMES E & DIANNE K ANDERSON GLEN G BLANK TIMOTHY J &ALICIA M 1636 KRISTIN CT NE 1642 KRISTIN CT NE 1648 KRISTIN CT NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 SOLBERG TIMOTHY D & CYNTHIA LARSON MICHAEL S & CYNTHIA M LILLMARS GLENN A 1654 KRISTIN CT NE 1660 KRISTIN CT NE 325 CEDAR ST-STE 525 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ST PAUL, MN 55101 SMOLIK RONALD R& SOFIA E CURRENT RESIDENT CAMERON JOHN R & SUSAN M 5921 BENJAMIN ST NE 5923 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 5924 OAKWOOD MANOR NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 BAKER KENNETH J & MYRNA A JOHNSON DANIEL M &SUSAN F STEIFER T A& MILLER C A 5925 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 5941 BENJAMIN ST NE 5950 BENJAMIN ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 Cuvre lit- (�si BENSON JANNELL RHEY SATTERNESS N &JOHAANESEN L T"" a o R DIANE St E 5951 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 5955 BENJAMIN ST NE 5961 BENJAMIN ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 BURMIS CHESTER J & GRACE B SAKARIASON GILBERT& NINA HAUKAAS JON H & HUBER JEAN A 5963 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 5965 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 5991 BENJAMIN ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 WALUS MICHAEL D & MARY ANN CURRENT RESIDENT VOJACEK KENNETH A 5993 BENJAMIN ST NE 6431 194TH LN NEvt'. N 4. 7525 LAKESIDE RD NE FRIDLEY, MN 0 FRIDLEY, MN 0 - FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY CITY OF Bad Address 2 KIZZEE RONALD E & BARBARA Bad Address 1 FRIDLEY, MN Bad Address 3 FRIDLEY, MN 0 4946 JACKSON NE COL HGTS, MN 55421 FRIDLEY CITY OF Bad Address 4 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 KHAN SARDAR MN STATE OF IN TRUST FRIDLEY CITY OF 5906 BENJAMIN ST NE 2100 3RD AVE 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 ANOKA,MN 55303-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 SANGIOVANNI EMIRO REHMANN CARRIE RYD CRAIG A&JUDITH L 1568 GARDENA AVE NE 1538 GARDENA AVE NE 5961 BENJAMIN ST NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 BAILEY JERALD M&BARBARA C HUNTER DANIEL E BAKER KENNETH J&MYRNA A 1628 GARDENA AVE NE 1561 GARDENA AVE NE 5925 OAKWOOD MANOR NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY CITY OF LEITNER JOHN CHINNOCK SCOTT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE NE 1535 GARDENA AVE NE 1648 KRISTIN CT NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 ERICKSON CHARLES H&R A DICKSON KATHRYN BOLICH JR JOHN 1508 GARDENA AVE NE 185 17TH AVE NW 29315 N 144TH ST FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 NEW BRIGHTON,MN 55112 SCOTTSDALE,AZ 85262 FREDERIKSEN ANGELIQUE LILLMARS GLENN HOFFER ALLEN 5942 BENJAMIN ST NE 654 5 1/2 STREET 5960 OAKWOOD MANOR NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 CLAYTON,WI 54004 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 BENSON JANELL RHEY RICKENBACH J S&N O BURMIS CHESTER J&GRACE B 5951 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 700 67TH AVE NE 5963 OAKWOOD MANOR NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 COSTELLO ANNA M HAMILTON JAMES P&VICKI A COLE JENNIFER 1623 GARDENA AVE NE 5990 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 5991 BENJAMIN ST NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 GYALTSEN TSERING WALUS MICHAEL D&MARY ANN COLLINS MAUREEN 5921 BENJAMIN ST NE 5993 BENJAMIN ST NE 1660 KRISTIN CT NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 TAYLOR CATHERINE E BENSON STEPHEN J&SUSAN K KADECHKA JAMES E&DIANNE K 1565 GARDENA AVE NE 5910 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 1636 KRISTIN CT NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 OSMAN AARIF TILLER JEROME L&ANNE M MLINARCIK JOHN F&MARY M 5924 BENJAMIN ST NE 1555 GARDENA AVE NE 1630 KRISTIN CT NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 RAHMOUNE DJAMAL&AIDA MORRISSEY MICHAEL P&KARI L KHAN SARDAR 1601 GARDENA AVE NE 1590 60TH AVE NE 5906 BENJAMIN ST NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 BINA JOHN G&JIMMI A L HERNANDEZ SERGIO MATHIS WILLIAM H&CAROLYNNE B 1499 GARDENA AVE NE 5926 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 1570 60TH AVE NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 HARRINGTON DANIEL C&M D CAMERON JOHN R&SUSAN M TERRY JOSEPH J&HEATHER L 1620 GARDENA AVE NE 5924 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 1642 KRISTIN CT NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 WILSON ROGER P HATTEN WILLIAM P&EDER M D TAUSCHECK THOMAS L&RUTH A 1588 GARDENA AVE NE 5955 BENJAMIN ST NE 1624 GARDENA AVE NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 NO AMERICAN ISLAMIC TRUST INC STEIFER T A&MILLER C A KEELER TINA M 1401 GARDENA AVE NE 5950 BENJAMIN ST NE 5928 OAKWOOD MANOR FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0001 JOHNSON DANIEL M&SUSAN F WALUS MICHAEL D&MARY ANN 5941 BENJAMIN ST NE 5993 BENJAMIN ST NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 SHORMA STEPHEN F&KAREN R LOOD ALISON 5916 OAKWOOD MANOR NE 707 339TH AVE NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 CAMBRIDGE,MN 55008 WANGCHEN DORJEE FRIDLEY CITY OF 1633 GARDENA AVE NE 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 TAYLOR CATHERINE E SOLBERG TIMOTHY D&CYNTHIA 1565 GARDENA AVE NE 1654 KRISTIN CT NE FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 FRIDLEY,MN 55432-0000 Uj ov cC:� Tp- O, .UJ ave f- !D--VCA-Aj T L- Ey CA U14 rO-Aj bo iL- rz2 IV Nf l is eMad :( rrtl.��u.�2 tom- • cot 1. Grading and drainage plan shall be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the Northern most edge of property. 2. Petitioner shall provide a 20-foot drainage and utility easement along North property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the North property line of proposed Lot 1. 4. Petitioner shall provide proof that old well located on the site is properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner shall pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant code required 12-foot utility and drainage easement along western boundary of property. 8. Petitioner shall pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. Petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 10. Appropriate soil testing shall be done to assure buildable home sites on Lots 1, 2, and 3, and to have that information available by the next City Council meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, SAVAGE, KONDRICK, SABA, AND SIE!AFF VOTING AYE, MODIG VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. Mr. Bolin stated this item would be considered by the City Council on July 26. Mr. Varichak stated that it is possible he wi!I sell to individual parties. It depends on who purchases the property. He will not be the builder. Mr. Bailey Tiller stated he has lived in the neighborhood for 60 years. He hoped that the Commission would listen to the people that live there. Ms. Savage stated that regardless of the recommendation made by the Planning Commission, the final decision will be made by the City Council. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:25 P.M. Ms. Modig stated she lives in the neighborhood, and she has been on the property. The City is bound by the statutes and the laws or what they can or cannot do. As long as the property owner meets the criteria, they can divide the property. The City cannot say no. Her feeling is that she would really like to table the request and let the property owner meet with the neighbors to determine if it was possible to do a two-way split. She felt there would be some value to do that, but she thought this was not going to happen. She would vote against the request because there are too many variables regarding drainage, grading, the trees, ponding, etc. The City has been assured by the engineers that there is not a wetland there. They keep hearing from the neighbors about a pond that forms after it rains, so perhaps they need to look at the drainage in the area. There are too many ifs for her. She would vote against the request. Mr. Kondrick stated he would vote in favor of the request because of the criteria they have to follow. He is basing his decision upon the fact that the engineers know what they are doing. It is his understanding that, if three houses are built, there cannot be any more water than �.rhat is there now. He does not see how they can deny the owner from putting three pretty homes in the area if it can be done. The lots are over sized. They are doing what they can to put the third house back 50 feet. There are some tough stipulations. He walked the property and is aware of what the neighbors are talking about. Lot 1 will be a challenge for anyone that decides to build there. That is the way things happen sometimes. He will trust that the Planning staff and Engineering staff know what they are doing. If the stipulations are adhered to, he would vote to approve. Ms. Modig stated she did not mean to infer staff did not know what they are doing. She just feels that there is so much neighborhood animosity towards the request, and she feels that three lots are just too many. Mr. Sielaff stated he is empathetic to the residents. In his job, he has to deal with minimum standards. The minimum can become how far you can go down. On the flip side, minimum standards will improve the quality throughout the City. He recognizes this, and it is frustrating that they cannot do much about it. The City has a code with certain standards. Any person can purchase land and design down to those standards. The petitioner is the landowner and meets the minimum standards. He would vote in favor of the request. Mr. Saba stated that if he was to vote his personal feelings, he would vote against the request. He loves trees and wetland areas. It appears to be a very nice property; however, three legal lots are proposed. The City engineers have looked at the drainage and agree that it is workable. That puts some responsibility back on the City. The Planning Commission's recommendation will go on to City Council for a final decision, and everything the neighbors have said will go to the City Council. It is certainly a tough decision. The lots are legal size with sufficient room for three legal homes. He is very concerned about Lot 1 and where the house is placed. There are market forces that would have to determine the placement of the house and the trees to be saved. He would vote in favor of the request. Ms. Savage stated that if it were her neighborhood, she would be out in the audience. This is an extremely difficult decision. She is very concerned about the reaction of the neighborhood and very concerned about taking down mature trees. On the other side, she is a lawyer, and she cannot see any way to deny a request that meets the standards of the code. She would have to agree with the majority and vote in favor of the request. Ms. Modig asked if it would be possible to add another stipulation regarding the testing of the soil and that this be done before the replat is done. Mr. Hickok stated this can be done. If the Commission makes the motion with the stipulations, staff will make sure that this happens. Ms. Modig stated that if the soil tests show that there are a lot of problems, the petitioner may decide not to do the project. Mr. Kondrick suggested the wording for the stipulation: "Appropriate soil testing shall be done to assure a buildable home sites." Mr. Hickok asked what the timing expectation is on the added stipulation. Ms. Savage stated it would be helpful to have this done before the City Council meeting. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to recommend approval of Replat Request, P.S. #99-03, by Stephen Varichak and James Surdyk, to create three separate lots from Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue, with the following stipulations: Mr. Hickok stated the code sets a minimum standard through the zoning and subdivision ordinance on what is in the City of Fridley. By doing that, there is a standard that is essentially an invitation to developers. As you look at property, you would look at the subdivision ordinance and the zoning ordinance to see if your proposed development for that lot meets the City's requirements. Through the State statutes, the City has the ability to subdivide the land within the City the way it sees fit. The City considers requests based on the standards. Has the developer met the minimum standards of the subdivision ordinance? Yes. Has the developer met the minimum standards of the zoning code? Yes. If these are met, staff cannot recommend denial. Mr. Jerome Tiller asked if staff is predisposed to protect the investment of developers regardless of the impact it might have on aesthetics. Ms. Savage stated staff must follow the law. She did not think it had anything to do with favoring development. There may be other considerations beyond the fact the property meets the standards. There are other considerations, and that is why there is this meeting. Mr. Jerome Tiller asked what would be some of the other considerations. Ms. Savage stated one would be neighborhood reaction. She stated this is very difficult. as they all understand how the neighbors feel. Every Commission member would like to have property or property close to them that is beautiful with trees and wildlife. But, at the same time, they are bound by laws, statutes, and regulations. Mr. Jerome Tiller stated they are bound by laws, statutes and regulations that determine what a minimum code would be. Are they obligated to protect the investment of a land speculator? What value do you place on aesthetics and neighborhood aesthetics? Values are subjective. Does a code invite developers to develop? He is having trouble with that. Mr. Sielaff stated the Commission also has to consider land ownership. What can you do with land that you own? Ms. Kuhlmeyer asked what the timeline was for the completion of this project. Mr. Varichak stated that if everything goes according to schedule through the City, County, etc., this process will probably be completed at the end of September. Ms. Modig asked the petitioner if he is going to develop the property himself or if he is planning to sell the parcels to individual parties. Ile Petition to the City of Fridley Re: Sub Division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue We are signing this petition to express our concerns and displeasure regarding the proposed subdivision of 1583 Gardena Avenue into three separate lots. Open land and the beauty is prevalent here in our neighborhood. This neighborhood is one of the few left in the city that has retained this for many years. We want to retain this for many more years. Sub dividing the property would ruin this effect. In the lot itself,not including bordering trees,are 24 mature Oak trees. There's room for the children of the neighborhood to enjoy sledding and playing in the woods. Along with that-there is ample wildlife- between the lots we have ducks,geese,rabbits,raccoons,squirrels,birds and even an occasional deer from the nearby wooded area's. Development of multiple single family housing could detour wildlife from being in this natural setting. Bertha-the little old woman who owned this property before her death,adamantly opposed any sub division of property in the Fridley area. It is a sad fact that a developer has purchased the property that she owned. She never wanted to see it or any other properties split in sections,losing the wooded areas and open land. Besides the effects of the views and mature trees-there are other concerns with the property being sub divided. 1) With the grading of the land-what considerations are there for development and possible issues with the lands at the base,lower section of the lot. Will there be extra storm run off that could potentially ruin the land and deteriorate the hill with erosion if the trees and natural grasses are gone. 2) While new construction can mean extra money to the City for property taxes-what about the current residents? We are not prepared,nor believe that we should bare the extra costs through assessments to pay for the extra water and sewage lines that will be needed to support extra residence in the neighborhood. We want to be assured that assessments for any improvements be charged to the developers. We opposed the splitting of the property into three separate lots and losing the trees that are within the property. We want to keep our neighborhood quiet,charming and in a natural state for our children and theirs. Over all-protecting the natural environment of the property and adjoining properties. _ Date Name Address Phone u� Zk, 31� 5-7 t- 12Zy 5 .3 Signatures for Petition regarding property at 1583 Gardena Avenue Date Name Address Phone is o4el )I we—xq4Lf jw(� �-9 t 1 l5 4 I (4 -0 �1 Petition to the City of Fridley Re: Sub Division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue We are signing this petition to express our concerns and displeasure regarding the proposed subdivision of 1583 Gardena Avenue into three separate lots. Open land and the beauty is prevalent here in our neighborhood. This neighborhood is one of the few left in the city that has retained this for many years. We want to retain this for many more years. Sub dividing the property would ruin this effect. In the lot itself,not including bordering trees,are 24 mature Oak trees. There's room for the children of the neighborhood to enjoy sledding and playing in the woods. Along with that-there is ample wildlife- between the lots we have ducks,geese,rabbits,raccoons,squirrels,birds and even an occasional deer from the nearby wooded area's. Development of multiple single family housing could detour wildlife from being in this natural setting. Bertha-the little old woman who owned this property before her death,adamantly opposed any sub division of property in the Fridley area. It is a sad fact that a developer has purchased the property that she owned. She never wanted to see it or any other properties split in sections,losing the wooded areas and open land. Besides the effects of the views and mature trees-there are other concerns with the property being sub divided. 1) With the grading of the land-what considerations are there for development and possible issues with the lands at the base,lower section of the lot. Will there be extra storm run off that could potentially ruin the land and deteriorate the hill with erosion if the trees and natural grasses are gone. 2) While new construction can mean extra money to the City for property taxes-what about the current residents? We are notre ared,nor believe that we should bare the extra costs through assessments to P P g pay for the extra water and sewage lines that will be needed to support extra residence in the neighborhood. We want to be assured that assessments for any improvements be charged to the developers. We opposed the splitting of the property into three separate lots and losing the trees that are within the property. We want to keep our neighborhood quiet,charming and in a natural state for our children and theirs. Over all-protecting the natural environment of the property and adjoining properties. Date Name Address Phone yiso f2t LE L2-5171 Ll A-7 J L� olz-s 7I-6Q 1 ' / lG of Z Signatures for Petition regarding property at 1583 Gardena Avenue Date NJ�l e Address Phone C ' _ 1 AA 'PUAAJ (J36 1� 12 C J5 y3 x'71 _U V r e.,3�- a �' �,� ,�c��r /S5l - ti'-C 5-Y y3L— -S71 X107 Petition to the City of Fridley Re: Sub Division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue We are signing this petition to express our concerns and displeasure regarding the proposed subdivision of 1583 Gardena Avenue into three separate lots. Open land and the beauty is prevalent here in our neighborhood. This neighborhood is one of the few left in the city that has retained this for many years. We want to retain this for many more years. Sub dividing the property would ruin this effect. In the lot itself,not including bordering trees,are 24 mature Oak trees. There's room for the children of the neighborhood to enjoy sledding and playing in the woods. Along with that-there is ample wildlife- between the lots we have ducks,geese,rabbits,raccoons,squirrels,birds and even an occasional deer from the nearby wooded area's. Development of multiple single family housing could detour wildlife from being in this natural setting. Bertha-the little old woman who owned this property before her death,adamantly opposed any sub division of property in the Fridley area. It is a sad fact that a developer has purchased the property that she owned. She never wanted to see it or any other properties split in sections,losing the wooded areas and open land. Besides the effects of the views and mature trees-there are other concerns with the property being sub divided. 1) With the grading of the land-what considerations are there for development and possible issues with the lands at the base,lower section of the lot. Will there be extra storm run off that could potentially ruin the land and deteriorate the hill with erosion if the trees and natural grasses are gone. 2) While new construction can mean extra money to the City for property taxes-what about the current residents? We are not prepared,nor believe that we should bare the extra costs through assessments to pay for the extra water and sewage lines that will be needed to support extra residence in the neighborhood. We want to be assured that assessments for any improvements be charged to the developers. We opposed the splitting of the property into three separate lots and losing the trees that are within the property. We want to keep our neighborhood quiet,charming and in a natural state for our children and theirs. Over all-protecting the natural environment of the property and adjoining properties. _ Date Name A \ Phone ^^ �� 7 f`� � �, Al �� Jud �✓'.�� /"�= lYi�� &2 C 6rc -7(' -� 5 /d � L wVII � ss432 61Z -,,2-5 5-Y ro x9199 hr Petition to the City of Fridley Re: Sub Division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue We are signing this petition to express our concerns and displeasure regarding the proposed subdivision of 1583 Gardena Avenue into three separate lots. Open land and the beauty is prevalent here in our neighborhood. This neighborhood is one of the few left in the city that has retained this for many years. We want to retain this for many more years. Sub dividing the property would ruin this effect. In the lot itself,not including bordering trees,are 24 mature Oak trees. There's room for the children of the neighborhood to enjoy sledding and playing in the woods. Along with that-there is ample wildlife- between the lots we have ducks,geese,rabbits,raccoons,squirrels,birds and even an occasional deer from the nearby wooded area's. Development of multiple single family housing could detour wildlife from being in this natural setting. Bertha-the little old woman who owned this property before her death,adamantly opposed any sub division of property in the Fridley area. It is a sad fact that a developer has purchased the property that she owned. She never wanted to see it or any other properties split in sections,losing the wooded areas and open land. Besides the effects of the views and mature trees-there are other concerns with the property being sub divided. 1) With the grading of the land-what considerations are there for development and possible issues with the lands at the base,lower section of the lot. Will there be extra storm run off that could potentially ruin the land and deteriorate the hill with erosion if the trees and natural grasses are gone. 2) While new construction can mean extra money to the City for property taxes-what about the current residents? We are not prepared,nor believe that we should bare the extra costs through assessments to pay for the extra water and sewage lines that will be needed to support extra residence in the neighborhood. We want to be assured that assessments for any improvements be charged to the developers. We opposed the splitting of the property into three separate lots and losing the trees that are within the property. We want to keep our neighborhood quiet,charming and in a natural state for our children and theirs. Over all-protecting the natural environment of the property and adjoining properties. _ Date Name Address Phone I zy �y biz ©y�y: 7 - ,0 r�L Ui�Kti�lr��nIa►Jv2 Signatures for Petition regarding property at 1583 Gardena Avenue Date Name Address Phone � � T l s�� 5�2- S 16129 '� �'� /� �,e �ryl-,g"6 y z Z - / �ZQ9� S kU 57 �� 2YZi x .3`71- 6-5-33 07/01/99 THU 10:58 FAX 612 349 6378 USPS BUSINESS MAIL ENTRY 001 UN/TEDSrdTES POSTAL SERVICE FACSIMILE COVER LETTER DATE: {—) _�r PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGES `f FROM: BUSINESS MAIL ENTRY UNIT To: SCS �-I-`�ud� MINNEAPOLIS METRO FLUB 3501 BROADWAY ST NE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413-9651 612-349-4743 PAX: 612-349-6376 NUMBER OF PAGES((NCLUDING COMER): 1 COMMENTS' ,dlsz_ S V VL s.rz D � BUSINESS MAIL ENTRY UNIT 3501 BROADWAY SY NE MINNEAPOLIS,MN 55413-9651 612-349.4743 1= G12J49.6376 Marjorie M. Rolland 1561 Gardena Avenue Northeast Fridley, MN 55432 612/571-0919 June 27, 1999 Mr. Scott Hickok Planning Coordinator City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Re: Proposed division of lot at 1583 Gardena Avenue NE Dear Mr. Hickok: I have received your Notice of Public Hearing regarding the above-proposed subdivision. 1 have lived at this address since 1973 and have seen many improvements to the homes and neighborhood. I question whether the eyisting lot can be made into three buildable lots. I wouid also like to be advised of the plans for the lots after they are divided. Please advise. Sincerely, Marjorie M. Rolland MMR;mof June 30, 1999 Mr. Scott Hickok Planning Coordinator City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 Regarding: Case Number PS#99-03 Dear Mr. Hickok: I am the owner of the property indicated on the map adjacent to 1583 Gardena Ave. I believe it is Lot 4, Block 1, Larry's Second Addition. I have paid taxes on this property for some thirty years. I will not be available to attend the July 7, 1999 meeting. I have sought to develop this property for my personal use for some years but have been declined because it was in a ravine. When I purchased the property it was platted for a home site and there was a cul-de-sac planned for access to this property. I believe it was Hill Street. If someone else is seeking to develop the adjacent property in the ravine, then I or someone else should be able to develop my property or I should be paid for my property, as it will not be accessible if the adjacent property is developed. In summary, I hereby object to development of 1583 Gardena Ave. unless I am compensated for my land at a rate commensurate with other land in the area. L Glenn A. Lillmar C/O Glenn Corpora ion 325 Csdar St. St. P ul, MN 55,11 July 1, 1999 City of Fridley Planning Commission and City Council Attn: Scott Hickok Re: Sub Division of property located at 1533 Gardena Avenue We,Cathy Miller and Thomas Steifer,are,adjoining property owners of the above mentioned lot We are writing today to express our concerns and displeasure reg riling the proposed subdivision of 1583 Gardena Avenue into three separate lots. We have been in our house for 15 years.During this time,the greatest benefits of owning our property in this neighborhood are the open land and beauty that is prevalent here.The majority of the new homeowners on Benjamin Street based part of their decision to move here because of the natural view.This neighborhood is one of the few left in the city that has retained this for many years.We want it to remain as such for many more years. Sub dividing the property would nun this effect for future generations. Through a conversation with Steve Vancl ak,we were informed that while some of the border(perimeter)trees would not be removed,there are no guarantees that any of the other Oak trees would remain intact In the lot itself,not including bordering trees,there are 24 mature Oak trees.As you most likely know,these Oak trees have a safe,forest-like look to them,are aesthetically magnificent,and their roots provide a base in the soil to help evade erosion.There's room for the children of the neighborhood to enjoy sledding and playing in the woods.Along with that- there is ample wildlife-between the lots we have ducks,geese,rabbits,raccoons,squirrels,birds and even an occasional deer from the nearby wooded area's.Development of multiple single family housing could detour wildlife from being in this natural setting. We remember Bertha-the little old woman who owned this property before her death. She came to our house one night in the rain when a different sub division meeting had arose in the neighborhood She adamantly opposed any sub division of property in Fridley-to the point of telling us never to sell to"those developers"and nun the neighborhood she had enjoyed for so many years. It is a sad fact that a developer has purchased the property that she once owned. She never wanted to see it nor any other properties split into sections,thus losing the wooded areas and open land. Page 2 Re:Sub Division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue Besides the loss of the view(s)and mature awes-there are other concerns with the property being sub divided 1) With the grading of the land,what considerations are there for development and possible issues with the lands at the lower section of the lot that borders our South section?Will there be extra,storm nm off that could potentially nun the land and deteriorate the hill with erosion if de trees and natural g nsses are gone?In addition,could this also nun the land and carie erosion to:he surrounding properties? 2) While new construction can mean extra money to the City for property taxes- what about the current residents?We are not prepared,nor believe that we should bare the extra costs incurred through assessments for the added water and sewage lines that will be needed to support additional residence in the neighborhood- We eighborhoodWe want to be assured that assessments for any improvements be charged to the developers. We do understand why developers would choose to expand in our neighborhood, in a seller's market there is much room for financial gain.However,we ask you to consider all that could be given up if this sub division of three lots were to be approved We want you to preserve and protect the natural environment within this neighborhood Most Sincerely, Cathy Miller&Thomas Steifer 5950 Benjamin Street NE Fridley,NIN 55432-5805 (612) 5714762 07/01/99 THU 07:28 FAX 6123798559 LAWSON SOFTWARE 002 July 1, 1999 City of Fridley Planning Commission and City Council Attn: Scott Hickok Re: Sub Division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue We, Cathy Miller and Thomas Steifer, are.adjoining property owners of the above mentioned lot. We are writing today to express our concerns and displeasure regarding the proposed subdivision of 1583 Gardena Avenue into three separate lots. We have been in our house for 15 years. During this time, the greatest benefits of owning our property in this neighborhood are the open land and beauty that is prevalent here. The majority of the new homeowners on Benjamin Street based part of their decision to move here because of the natural view. This neighborhood is one of the few left in the city that has retained this for many years. We want it to remain as such for many more years. Sub dividing the property would ruin this effect for future generations, Through a conversation with Steve Varichak, we were informed that while some of the border (perimeter) trees would not be removed, there are no guarantees that any of the other Oak trees would remain intact. 1n the lot itself, not including bordering trees, there are 24 mature Oak trees. As you most likely know, these Oak trees have a safe, forest-like look to them, are aesthetically magnificent, and their roots provide a base in the soil to help evade erosion. There's room for the children of the neighborhood to enjoy sledding and playing in the woods. Along with that - there is ample wildlife -between the lots we have ducks, geese, rabbits, raccoons, squirrels, birds and even an occasional deer from the nearby wooded area's. Development of multiple single family housing could detour wildlife from being in this natural setting. We remember Bertha- the .little old woman who owned this property before her death. She came to our house one night in the rain when a different sub division meeting had arose in the neighborhood. She adamantly opposed any sub division of property in Fridley - to the point of telling us never to sell to "those developers" and ruin the neighborhood she had enjoyed for so many years. It is a sad fact that a developer has purchased the property that she once owned. She never wanted to see it nor any other properties split into sections, thus losing the wooded areas and open land. 07/01/99 THU 07:29 FAX 6123798569 LAWSON SOFTWARE 003 Page 2 Re: Sub Division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue Besides the loss of the view(s) and mature trees - there are other concerns with the property being sub divided. 1) With the grading of the land, what considerations are there for development and possible issues with the lands at the lower section of the lot that borders our South section? Will there be extra storm run off that could potentially ruin the land and deteriorate the krill with erosion. i.fthe trees and natural grasses are gone? In addition, could this also ruin the land and cause erosion to the surrounding properties? 2) While new construction can mean extra money to the City for property taxes - what about the current residents? We are not prepared, nor believe that we should bare the extra costs incurred through assessments for the added water and sewage lines that will be needed to support additional residence in the neighborhood. We want to be assured that assessments for any improvements be charged to the developers. We do understand why developers would choose to expand in our neighborhood, in a seller's market there is much room for financial gain. However, we ask you, to consider all that could be given up if this sub division of three lots were to be approved. We want you to preserve and protect the natural environment within this neighborhood. Most Sincerely, Cathy ler& Thomas Steifer 5950 Benjamin Street NE Fridley, MN 55432-5805 (612) 571-4762 07/06/99 TUE 08:52 FAX 6126681320 EDISON H.S. R001 July 6, 1999 Scott Hickok Fridley Municipal Center City Council 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Hickok: RE: Sub division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue I am writing this letter against the proposed sub division of the property at 1583 Gardena Avenue. Why ruin our neighborhood? The oak trees are priceless. I cannot believe that the City Council would approve of their removal. My children play in this area, our Boy Scout Den has had countless den meetings in the area. They use this area to explore and identify the trees, leaves, wildlife, etc. not only for the Boys Scouts but also for their school projects. This area is used all year round. I want our children to continue to enjoy this area. I want my grandchildren to enjoy this area. Please don't destroy it. Sincerely, Vicki Hamilton 5990 Oakwood Manor Fridley MN 55432 07/06/99 TUE 08:52 FAX 6126681320 EDISON H.S. R002 July 6, 1999 Scott Hickok Fridley Municipal Center City Council 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Hickok: RE: Sub division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue I am writing this letter against the proposed sub division of the property at 1583 Gardena Avenue. I am a Boy Scout Den Leader. My den has enjoyed the area you are thinking about destroying for the past few years. They have been able to identify the wildlife we have found there, the tracks of various animals who have visited the area and have talked about the life of the oak trees. How to identify the kind of tree it is, how old it is, etc. There are 24 mature Oak trees on the property, not including any trees that border the property. If you build a house(s), these would have to be destroyed. I do not believe this area should be destroyed. Please do not approve the sub division of this property. Thank you. S i ely, l J es Hamilton 990 Oakwood Manor ridley MN 55432 Mariorie M. Rolland 1561 Gardena Avenue Northeast Fridley, MN 55432 612/571-0919 June 27, 1999 Mr. Scott Hickok Planning Coordinator City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Re: Proposed division of lot at1583 Gardena Avenue NE Dear Mr. Hickok: I have received your Notice of Public Hearing regarding the above-proposed subdivision. I have lived at this address since 1973 and have seen many improvements to the homes and neighborhood. I question whether the existing lot can be made into three buildable lots. I would also like to be advised of the plans for the lots after they are divided. Please advise. Sincerely, I rl Madorieil +Rland� MMR;mof '^ City of Community Development Department Fridley Land Use Permit Notification I � A LE F—111— L �e 1 Nuys� -T I_ R J-1 _ -- —1 L_L_ _ s LU s-- a r Y R-1-One Fam3F-71 M-1-Light Industrial Sources: p R-2- wFarnilKits Eg M•2-Heavy Industrial Fridley Planning R-3-General Multiple Units ®M-3- Outdoor Intensive Heavy Industrial A S-2-Redevelopment Distnd Q Fridley GIS Z R-4-Mobile Horne Parks P-public Facilities W PUD-Planned Unit Development Anoka County GIS ® Asse S-1-Hyde Park Neighborhoods RRRailroads Plat Request, PS 99-03 ROW Anoka�`'n� ssing LU 0 G1-Local Business / /parcel/Lot Lines 1 583 Gardena J G2-General Business Water Features StephenVerichek G3-General Shopping GR1-General Office PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, July 7, 1999, at 7 :30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a replat request, PS #99-03, by Stephen Varichak & James Surdyk, to create 3 separate lots from Lot 22 Auditor' s Subdivision #92 generally located at g Y 1583 Gardena Avenue. 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 Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator at 612-572-3599. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 612-572-3500 no later than June 30, 1999 . DIANE SAVAGE CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION Publish: June 24, 1999 July 1, 1999 CITY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER•6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432•(612) 571-3450• FAX(612)571-1287 July 30, 1999 Stephen Varichak 1558 Briardale Road Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Varichak: This letter is to inform you that your first window of the 60-Day Agency Action date of August 2, 1999, has been extended to the second window of the 60-Day Agency Action date which is September 30, 1999, for Replat#99-03, to replat property to accommodate 3 single family homes. The reason for this extension is because the soil boring test required by the Planning Commission was not complete prior to the July 28, 1999, City Council meeting. This serves as your legal notice in accordance with State Statute 15.99. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Hickok at 612-572-3599. Since y, c Hicko la ning Coordinator BD\jt C-99-136 07/06/99 TUB 08:52 FAX 6126681320 EDISON H.S. July 6, 1999 Scott Hickok Fridley Municipal Center City Council 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley,NIN 55432 Dear W.Hickok. RE: Sub division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue I am writing this letter against the proposed sub division of the property at 1583 Gardena Avenue. Why nun our neighborhood? The oak trees are priceless. I cannot believe that the City Council would approve of their removal. My children play in this area,our Boy Scout Den has bad countless den meetings in the area They use this area to explore and identify the trees, leaves,wildlife,etc.not only for the Boys Scouts but also for their school projects.This area is used all year round I want our children to continue to enjoy this area.I want my grandchildren to enjoy this area.Please don't destroy it. Sincerely, Vicki Hamilton 5990 Oakwood Manor Fridley MN 55432 07/06/99 TUE 08:52 FAX 6126681320 EDISON H.S. July 6, 1999 Scott Hickok Fridley Municipal center city council 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley,MN 55432 Dear Mr.Hickok: RE: Sub division of property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue I am writing this letter against the proposed sub division of the property at 1583 Gardena Avenue. I am a Boy Scout Den Leader.My den has enjoyed the area you are thinking about destroying for the past few years.They have been able to identify the wildlife we have found there,the tracks of various animals who have visited the area and have talked about the life of the oak trees.How to identify the kind of tree it is,how old it is,etc. There are 24 mature Oak trees on the property,not including any trees that border the property.If you build a house(s),these would have to be destroyed I do not believe this area should be destroyed Please do not approve the sub division of this property.Thank you. Sincerely, James Hamilton 5990 Oakwood Manor Fridley MN 55432 Arm CITYOF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER•6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY,MN 55432•(612) 571-3450•FAX (612)571-1287 December 4, 2000 PW00-123 Mr. Stephen Varichak 1558 Briardale Road Fridley MN 55432 Subject: Varichak Addition Dear Mr.Varichak: It has been nearly a year since the Fridley City Council approved the final plat for the Varichak Addition. The stipulations for plat approval required the petitioner to install water and sanitary sewer services to the two northerly lots. This work has not yet been completed Please provide the City with the details of this work to include the proposed contractor and work schedule by April 1,2001. If you cannot provide for this construction,the City shall initiate a contract for the work and assess the cost back to you. If you have any questions,please contact me at 763-572-3550. Sincerely, r Jon H. Haukaas Acting Public Works Director JHH:cz MOORE, HALSEY & ESKOLA, L.L.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW PACO OFFICE CENTER-SUITE 160 7260 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NORTHEAST WILLIAM G. MOORE FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432-3132 STEPHEN M. HALSEY TELEPHONE FAX RICHARD S. ESKOLA (763)571-2410 (763) 571-2549 December 11, 2000 John H. Haukaas Acting Public Works Director CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 RE: Varichak Addition Dear Mr. Haukaas: Please be advised that the undersigned has been retained by Stephen Varichak to represent him with respect to the above-entitled matter. My client is in receipt of your letter to him dated December 4, 2000. The purpose of this letter is to address the concerns raised by said letter. My client has reviewed the Development Agreement in this matter and it is his position that there is no deadline contained in the agreement for the water and sanitary sewer services to be installed. That is, prior to construction on the lots in question the water and sanitary sewer services do not need to be installed. Clearly the owners of the lots, when the lots are developed,will need to install water and sanitary sewer services for the lots in question pursuant to the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement is clear that it is binding on all heirs and assigns of the original parties to the agreement. Therefore, based on this analysis it is not Mr. Varichak's responsibility or obligation to install water and sanitary sewer services to the lots until actual construction is contemplated. It is my understanding that the owners of the lots are fully aware of this obligation and that the water and sanitary sewer services will be installed when construction actually takes place. My client strenuously objects to the threat that you shall assess any costs of installation of said water and sanitary sewer services back to my client when in fact the obligation to install such water and sanitary sewer services does not exist at this time and there was no deadline in the original contract. If you have any questions please contact me or have the City's counsel contact me. Ve my yours, Ric&ard S. Eskola RSE/ch cc: Mr. Stephen Varichak WL M I I Cr 11NG C. 1.1 < 41 U!5UU 1►; B• Afi.11er, Inc. Page No. 1 6701 Norris Lake RoI d N W PROPOSAL of 1 pages Elk River, Minnesota 55330 (763)241-0397 fax 763) 241-0580 GATE , VKOVQ1 Ht ,Dumivn'r rC,u• i v: '.;o�+.'Z0, ' NAME JOB NAME City of Fridley John Thompson STREET STREET CITY CITY ST 7E i We hereby submit iftcations;and estimate for. Furnish and Install ewer and Water Service on Benjamin Street acid Gardena Including; Sanitary MH/Inside Drops 2 "PVC Sewer Service 2 "Water Service move and Replace necessary Bituminous and Curb and Gutter . .1 We hereby propose to £tunish labor and materials - complete in accordance �th the :above specifications, for sum of $Z'wentp nine thousand seven hundred seventy five and reo✓�00. 0 dollars (S 29:71K.00) ith payment to be made as follows: ,Payment due uDOn completion. All material is guaran eed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to'standard practices. Any alteration or de tion from above specifications involving extra costs, will be executed only upon writt�n orders, and will become an extra char a over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes,accident or delays�eyand our control. This proposal subject t acceptance within 30 days and is void thereafter at the option of the dersign Authorized Signa i � r ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices, s cifications and conditions are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do dIe work as specified. Payrneril will be made as outlined above. ACCEPTED: - Signature z. DATE _ Signature i 0m Torn lemsun :52 Wd 3362 ru John rt1f7mu'jo11 Date 3/20,01 Time 11 26 42 4M Page 2 01_ #7104 VALLEY-RICH CO., INC. Commercial & Industrial SEWER & WATER Bid: Benjamin St. NE Sewer and Water Services, Fridley Date: 3/20101 Site Utilities We will furnish and install two 1"water services and two 4" sanitary sewer services, includes new manhole with two inside drops. Service stubs to end at property line. Note: Soil borings were not reviewed in preparation of this bid. Base bid: $21,100 0__T� i d Alternate: Restore street. Add $6,800 ` The following items are not included: SAC WAC and/or other connection charges, dewatering, soil correction and/or replacement, pipe support, removal of buried obstructions,jacking, frost charges, rock excavation, construction staking, compaction tests, hauling of excess soils, erosion control, tree removal and/or replacement, grubbing, sheeting, shoring, bracing. Sincerely, Valley-Rich Co., Inc. q4 A44 John Miklya For scheduling of work contact John Miklya at (952) 448-3002 147 Jonathan Blvd. N., Ste. 4 Chaska, Minnesota 65318 Office: (962) 448-3002 Fax: (962) 448-3362 ti MAR-19-01 MON 09:43 AM LAMETTI FAX NO. 651 426 0044 P. 01 lametti & Sons , Inc . =� FAX COVER LETTER DATE: TO: �o al-�..t —t' o i�AS o•.� COMPANY: F,4-,rA"L-`f FAX 1 (.,3 - 511 -M-91 FROM: C-z•r�; L..a..-�s o�1 . Number of Pages Including Fax Cover Letter COMMENTS: r - — 1L.�E,r'uo v•{, �, �.�p��,c.� t�.t,�s�-►•..:C� � ,Ty�v��o v S d L�. � L..._,., S P� Y •-t STS c.1. 1 ls.Jw.[ R__ Sc.tri� c�S 1 Yu.o�crt.T4' L4 -4 r 16028 Forest Boulevard North P.O. Box 477 Hugo, MN 55038 651/426-1380 Fax: 651/426-W44 Equal Opportunity Employer 2-c>AC 1t o J pp i LL r L r- l ju l ��'�(�,� Tri ��-- �� u � ,�/ - � � _ �.... �� v �� °c� '�.. � �� ,, `��.� � ``�'� �. � �. �" ,- �-- � _``~.� v =� ' �=� � � � � �. � ---_ ef. f r+ � r _ �� .! s � ��_ \ \_ C� � ,� --�_� `' �� ", � -�- � �e -�—„mss. --�`��. vvv 19 vv�?`/,x 3 A�A V —r?v 3-vj,.�c . -7 vv X W-3-L-VCv7 Opportunity • RAINXCHANGE , RaiwhXchange"' Rainwater Harvest Systems by Aquascape Inc. WHY RAINWATER HARVEST`' ' ' . U The earth is known as the Blue Planet for a reason, it's no surprise . ,THEINI VE TH' that water is a dominant part of our everyday lives. The world's current challenge is to improve the planet's water quality and then �, ® ® t maintain clean and healthy water that supports all life forms in our diverse environment. I inch of t Traditional ways of rainwate rainfall on a 1 250 1 CAPTURING AND REUSING 2,000 sq.ft. Gallons of Rain%changer"'by Aquasca RAINWATER MAKES roof water capturing and teusing our n DOLLARS AND"SENSE Reduce water bills including city THE RM INXCL storm sewer charges Alleviate demand on municipal 1 inch of rainfall on a 2,000 sq.ft. systems residential roof generates 1.250 gallons Aquascape's RalnXchE of water that can be reused. a revolutionary design Avoid strict watering schedules That same roof in a region receiving recirculating deCorativ bL f l Lig FUR YOU11 LA NU6LArL 30 inches of annual rainfall generates with a sub-surface rain THAN MUNICIPALLY 4 1,000 gallons of reusable water. storage system. The average US household with a TREATFn WATER Rainwater is extremely rich in 10,000 square foot lot uses up to Clean, Filtered Wate nutrients 3,000 gallons of water weekly for you enjoy the benefi landscape irrigation. water feature, the R Using rainwater to irrigate will Running a sprinkler for 2 hours can use System filters the st reduce fertilizer use up to 500 gallons of water. prevent stagnation No chemicals have been added to The RainXchangelm allows you to collect unhealthy bacteria. rainwater thousands of gallons of water anywhere, The RainXchangeTM even in the Desert! a beautiful water fee easily into existing Ii HOW •N YOU REUSE RAINWATER USIINGLocating and storing underground mainta • • • • • beauty of your home Landscape irrigation I 1 1 •_ 1 _ I 1 and 1 • III 1 �`.rr�w • Washing I 1 property patio or deck frorn ToiletI water supply Call Your I • Distributor 11ut This Opportunity Today! :STS WOULD YOU O . no surprise , VE THIS world's current JA r; Traditional ways of rainwater harvesting do not add beauty or value to a home or office setting. 4125Q TM revolutionary Gallons at RainXchange by Aquascape Inc.adds the beauty of a water feature to a re tionar system for o u y y Water capturing and reusing our most precious resource,water. THE RAINXCHANGETM SYSTEM IS REVOLUTIONARY! )00 sq.ft. 1,250 gallonsTM Aquascape s RainXchange System is sd. a revolutionary design that combines a i receiving recirculating decorative water feature all generates ,le water. with a sub-surface rainwater harvest d with a storage system. yes up to Clean, Filtered Water Storage-While �p eeklyfor you enjoy the benefits of a decorative water feature, the RainXchangeTm hours can use System filters the stored water to T. prevent stagnation and growth of rs you to collect unhealthy bacteria. ater anywhere, The RainkhangeTM System reveals only � a beautiful water feature that integrates G f"�►- easily into existing landscape. �r" Locating and storing the water underground maintains the integrity and beauty of your home and landscape. zter features, _ J Is, [lot tubs "° ®-•.. ndry 7nity To day See pages 21-23 for distributor locations. i • I I II • It's as easy as 1, 2, 3 Capture • . Rain anger 0 IRRIGATION SYST EM AQUATIC PLANIS VERFLOW PVC RainXchang( DOWNSPOUT FtLTER MODULAR Rain Barrel STORAGE BASIN .. VAULT& EFFICIENCY „ FEATURES: LE LARGE 75-gallon ca j 5-year warranty I How The RainXchange'" System Works: Requires no electrici 1 Downspout Filter 7 Overflow Infiltration -Large safety overfio% ` Captures and removes pollutants flushed • Excess rainwater is sent to a storage area water in the barrel o + away from the hous( • into the system during a rain event that facilitates the infiltration of water Y 2 Connecting Pipe into deeper soils and aquifers Lid can also be uses • Carries the water via gravity to the main 8 Biological Filtration planter storage chamber(sold separately) • Beneficial bacteria and enzymes reduce Thick plastic walls i 3 Modular Storage Basin organic wates and pollutants to less toxic durable and will wit • Modular design can be configured to fit a substances that can be absorbed by extreme conditions wide variety of applications and settings plants, thereby creating a perfect cycle of Childproof lockable • EPDM rubber membrane creates a nutrient re-use Brass spigot for gar water-tight basin 9 Aquatic Plants hose connection 4 Snorkel'" Vault& Centipede" Module Providing food and shelter for a great • Optimum water utilization within the number of birds, insects and amphibians #98766(Terra Cott system and a convenient access point for and the cornerstone for maintaining our #98767(Sandston yearly maintenance and cleaning biodiversity Size:40'•H x 29"W 5 High Efficiency Pumps 10 Irrigation System 6 Flexible PVC Pipe Natural water is loaded with Total: micronutrients and compounds that will make your plants flourish -Pricing in Info . 1 ' . 1 1 RainXchange"System RainXchange`" Sal The RainXchange—System is a revolutionary design that combines a recirculating decorative water feature with This full-color sales broct a sub-surface rainwater harvest storage system.Learn how to install the system that can clean,filter,and store capture and reuse rainwa water in a beautiful water feature that integrates easily into existing landscape.Contact your local distributor or in their yard.Check out tf visit www.aquascapstraining.com for the 2009 schedule. contractormarketingtool has to offer to support thi ! 18 Call 866.877.6637 for a distributor near you or for more information. Visit www.aquascapt Stromberg, Stacy From: Miller, Cathy [cathy.miller@us.lawson.com] Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 9:32 AM To: Stromberg, Stacy Cc: fredea2@me.com; Hickok, Scott; Jones, Julie Subject: RE: 5942 Benjamin St- Landscaping Plans Stacy and Scott—Tom and I will support the current plans for 5942 Benjamin St with the changed verbiage to Stipulation #3. The plan appears to be visually and functionally beneficial to the lots and neighborhood. I'll come to the meeting to support this. Thank you for your time and assistance. ............................................................................................................-................................................................................................................-.......................................................... From: Stromberg, Stacy [maiIto:Strom bergS@)ci.fridley.mn.us] Sent: Monday, June 20, 20119:25 AM To: Miller, Cathy Cc: fredea2@)me.com; Hickok, Scott; Jones, Julie Subject: RE: 5942 Benjamin St - Landscaping Plans Good Morning Cathy, I'm out of the office on Thursdays and Fridays,so this task was on my to-do list for this morning. City staff is proposing to ask the City Council to amend stipulation#3 on PS#99-03,which currently states,"No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1"to instead read "Any grading or land alteration within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1,shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to commencement of project. Any work approved shall protect trees on this property or adjacent properties with the use of a protective fence around the drip line of the trees." Please let me know if this is acceptable. Stacy Stromberg Planner City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley,Minnesota 55432 strombergs0 ci.fridley.mmus Phone:763.572.3595 Fax: 763-571-12877 www.ci.fridl ey.mn.us .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... From: Miller, Cathy [maiIto:cathy.miHem@us.lawson.com] Sent: Saturday,June 18, 20114:24 PM To: Miller, Cathy; Stromberg, Stacy Cc: fredea20me.com Subject: RE: 5942 Benjamin St- Landscaping Plans Stacy and Angel - sorry - I had Angel's e-mail address wrong on initial e-mail I From: Miller, Cathy Sent: Saturday, ]une18, 20114:23 PM To: Cc: Mi|ler, Cathy Subject: 5942 Benjamin St - Landscaping Plans Stacy - per our discussion earlier this week regarding the Landscaping for 5942 Benjamin SL I arnstill awaiting an e-mail from you and Scott Hickok regarding proposed change to Stipulation # 3 on this property. We discussed removing Item # ], and adding Stipulations for Tree Drip line protection (fencing) for neighboring property trees on North Property Line. Also discussed any future Excavation plans in the S0foot section needing approval by the city. Can you please send as we discussed the proposed change/new ones. Ianmcopying AngeUquaonthis aswell. Angel ' if you have any questions, please feel free tocall me. Thanks, Cathy Home - 7O3-571-4702 Cell 612-272-6088 2 Stromberg, Stacy From: Hickok, Scott Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 2:04 PM To: Pam Reynolds Cc: Jones, Julie; Stromberg, Stacy Subject: RE: Plat amendment Good Afternoon Pam: This action is not to modify the plat itself, but instead to modify a stipulation that was placed on the plat by the City Council.The original stipulation was to protect the existing storm water drainage system and to further protect an adjacent property owner to the north.There is no physical modification to the plat layout being proposed. If there were, that action would require Planning Commission review. How this came to be...There is currently a proposed grading plan for the 50' area by the owners of Lot 1. It is a plan that is very beneficial to the plat, the existing storm water system,and the neighboring property. Once completed, it would further filter and refine the storm water before it would reach the surface storm pond area. Both the neighbors that were being protected by the stipulation and the City engineering staff have agreed that what is being proposed is a beneficial addition to the 50'area and the neighborhood as a whole. Current wording of the stipulation however,would not allow the proposed modification.Therefore,the stipulation is being revisited by Council through the public hearing process. Here is how the stipulation currently reads and what is proposed as an amendment: Existing Language: No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1 Proposed Language: Any grading or land alteration within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1,shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to commencement of project. Any work approved shall protect adjacent trees, whose drip line is within the project area, with the use of a protective fence around that drip line of the trees. I hope this information is helpful. Scott Scott J. Hickok, AICP Community Development Director City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 PH: 763-572-3590 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... From: Pam Reynolds [mailto:fnpam0hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday,June 21, 2011 10:03 AM 1 f � To: Hickok, Scott Subject: Plat amendment Scott, Why does the amendment request for PS #99-03 go straight to Council and not through the Planning Commission first? Thanks, Pam Reynolds 2 City of Fridley MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Dacy,�iCommunity, Development Director PW99-128 FROM: John G. F1ora,�Public Works Director DATE: July 20, 1999 SUBJECT: Replat PS 99-03 In reviewing the Planning Commission minutes of July 17, 1999 regarding the replat request PS 99-03 for the property generally located at 1583 Gardena Ave, there were a number of questions raised on storm water runoff and drainage problems. The properties can be developed,minimizing the drainage to the street. The adjoining property indicated that they have some erosion occurring and since the front yards will be going to the street, an appropriate solution would be to add another catch basin at the low point in Benjamin to receive the water faster thereby reducing the overflow of the gutter water on the driveway into the property. If appropriate,this additional catch basin can be installed prior to the redevelopment of the parcel. JGF:cz cc: W. W. Burns City of Fridley MEMORANDUM TO: William W. Bums,City Manager PW99-138 r FROM: John G. Flora, Public Works Director DATE: July 27, 1999 SUBJECT: Miller's(5950 Benjamin)Storm Water Issue The Miller's reside at 5950 Benjamin Street and have raised an issue regarding ponding of storm water in the rear of their property. The property is part of the Van Cleaves Addition of which only a small portion of the lot is within the natural depression in that area. The tonography of the area provides a 19 foot depression from Benjamin. The majority of the depression is outside of the Miller's property and remains in the adjoining two parcels. Question was raised whether the City can fix the Miller's drainage problem. There is no gravity method of removing surface water from the depression as it provides the natural drainage for the approximate 8 acre area. If desired, a storm water lift station could be constructed on the property for approximately$50,000 plus O&M cost in the future. This pump station would then have to be piped to Ferndale to an existing storm water system through seven properties (Option A) or within Benjamin Street in front of five properties (Option B). The pipe construction for either option is approximately$50,000. The restoration cost would run from$25,000 to$55,000 based upon the trees and vegetation in the yards or replacement of a major portion of Benjamin Street. Currently, there is only a 10-foot utility easement along the rear of the Miller property. There are no existing drainage easements on any of the adjoining properties or the properties north of 60`h Avenue. Any work along Option A would require the accumulation or purchase of the necessary drainage and utility easements from the affected properties. While there is a solution to this problem,the cost would most equitably be placed against the benefitting properties which would include all the homes in that area. As this was a natural depression and was platted and developed with full knowledge of this situation and while development in the area has occurred, the rain events are still draining to the natural areas with possibly some improvement by carrying some of the water away along Gardena, 60'Ave and Benjamin. JGF:cz Attachments Q �& 4 5 izry'Z;. ��.�'.-._ ---�.^<.rr._c rG!3 he'='= - � J �, ! � 'E' - �� V � � •.,__'x l QN Pa 0;73 r Q LA 1 I• U,;.. t ; lWD � 9 � N N'! it •`' 7 t S I Oq p N E qo w i�uYN. il,.• O I } .. ��' •i-'�'P N �r i Vf q ''A� a� 'd� i i'� �•��` 9? W*i tit '`� i �1'.'� Y .Q � � 't'' !� Lam` �`�• � � w!�j •" Y" �'� •� O ..i -- jet: ,� t 7C �a i I•. rt 1„ n N:�T � H p �. .�.� ) 'Vji.ii� SCJ` r n1 i 'I-• 'Y , _ i2 C.Z a� A M '641 `� O• L _ 01 taw+ T a a Y, Z N /• �I' Z r 1., f-S f! a K j�, i� �` y� EL �!. 1 •�!i, ki� V ;°,�„n O Wft z g h PRATE "LIMITS OF IC11Y• ��(i�fSLEY o o o T R 0 2 � CO - x n A I Jt loft r -M-ft i, C"" { ; a � r - Y { f '. t j'"`i'1' t.: t Lf" ,-G 1''rT� —r T....r�r.�:•`•��.¢+ i _l�.w,� , tf 3� - � .y ..«fix - �r'�,� ��t�� • 1 5 r•� R. ( rSP'YiV - Yr_ ' ,.f s'•�K .. �' �vi� ., it ,�'��ESt":_?�` "•r �''�K�' �q��.3 Y,��11• e�.:• Y �:�Ga.� ��p-�,,y��rrrrS��, l' r�r+�" y 'r��Y � _ '�r .mow a _ _ i fi =•„ � ':- f p{ irk 1✓- t3.-�`X J`_]��i• ��k,-�: :�°� .?.., %i!'t ° � s�" .f-•L{: ._ �� s wiy � d� � -iS"1.:7� � �.�e. Kf�i-ry •�s K' .� � i •� v ria �� y � wf I � e ss. S�L` f� �.�q�� r`1`; ''' .1,,; �ta�'4'4Y1.�•`�`• : J 4- yAl }�{da�r1 i`r►' •n'r'7"�• *' -f` s fr :r,r�.� <-�v-•�'•R,�.j }i:.=��. ��.. 40 "-V4.. .y '♦ r�}'It fi 'a4; 'yam �•�� _ �� 1: F'S �. ra ,y 4}.�s,li�, .�'/i A •'.� �� Y"^Z',Q°. .. � ��`t yrs,� �ti • r- �I s��f�Q'yk;' si '�3 �� ~h �; `z "=�� .(� `��-j,��¢y ksd'' "1 s �s '-7�` i i +� pt t4_ at:wl^: 4 u.��i�a.�T��6',�°k4.�L.--y�� _ l ,,Y�y;f�t`�'-• •il. r _ _ � f �• �.'� ±rr��x" ei-�� i}'��'kr�',e s�-��+" vim• ti .'� y �� ,�}�: ,. : b i�v v Y}l�t♦ted ti� �+k r 7N•� rah • �` rtPl".. w� .�:'Y+ �. �� ;,rte irk -�tc.fM4�v.yvt� k�� s�P'� 3 t'�•''w.' d ..,X fi'.- M� •�- .ham. S�. y Y•a=.s ar w +r4 ti .Yt 7�''� r}y.��r R `9^a Ccu r, 't•7ft a! L � r `OLi: .fi r'�✓�i 7G � ..�� ,�� T li !�} „r��'/iir�a•.r�• t:r`4r`�T Ij� c t�f -.�' y*.r � I, ._.sem #.� �.�� rl-S�r� ��.-� - �� -�.. :.i - ' .• ,i' -.('l�Q`: � � �r •' d �4 � I .su ' h s wasn`ad rr u Ulan -�: ¢ -� r s.l 1 bT� Y`•v-f y� T9 J 77 I X v w T9 n iX ! 97 3 — E " �T 972 oil IN an 11121 No IN T 7,3 i X a 7 977-i j� � f 1 - -- 7� '• - - -- i 7-973 in S� _ � II Q �t t 7 HXD- 4 x • f x x a �� 1..'� - o Tia Ii. . II• . � x / 7972 I I / I )(• 1 979 Q -- • n AVE �- 1UU UU Ir66 U iENUE 44TR AvEh�f t � i cr .1 00 -/rcUtTM13313S:PP _ RCT If • : 1 t ANA a�Z4. .. r . I W% a ICCI.D - lu 12r 1-, I `:-M r I Ct---� - � sc 26- 15.. 6 Is Is •� Jn, NICE �" 1MOAO '�t,,�+ v ,i Y •' o' j y wOOCSC E R T , � u 6C r AVE- !II %I P" 7 41 mr 7. J L t •R ._ •a�.�� ir+t/'•.�.tr!:��!+�a.cv- .,Zi�:rt _ _ !S"'s'a�: 't.:F rt'�b .,- S.;•'-.:,: :.«'_Z'Z' - \A`SX= f r1 '� f.. v I.l - Wit:_, (y:Y' _ j,.,.` J ..•�.'f--� s ;I>.t .r.. . - "= t. _.:�... . _- = TH LM t• Airt'CM/ - ••.lull-CITE ST, ..._.. .. -i.• �. . .. - nn �s r ' l Li I r S IDERATIOK t) A _,U DAY XX'K.N l(): 1TFc:41 TS - VALi. ca)VOKAl'LON: The Ci tt�-r icy said t crc are .i number o t ownhou�e permits and apit i cmenr- permits issued andcrc may be a ewer prui,lc:rt wiLlj t ryinb t,• "„ivurt the permits to all townhouses . aid it is his feeling the permits should lit;: revised and issued for the all tuwnitu • • ,l, vel.,pment .:nd „n the same basis per permit . flv said there is a difference in the_ • ts,ectiuti clt.,r Ae;; ul .tn apartment ,end ., t ownho•lse in the City. He said he thought ey should make application for t,ew permits . Councilman F;reidcr questioned the ffercncc: to SA( charges LIML this action may create. He questioned if this could done. The City Attorney said the permits were issue ich the consido."ration tleat the construc- tion would be done in a proper and rt:.,bu:,,,1b1c tim He said he had so-„z question if this would be proper with the Metro Sewer Board. Councilman Breider said if this brought them to a higher lcv lee did not think there would be any qualms about it . MOTION by Councilman Utter to approve the: extension of the tuilding perm for the Wall Corporation.. Seconded by Councilman Stdrwalt. Upon, a ::nice vote, all ing aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION REGARDING BACK YARD DRAINAGE PROBLEM IN THE BE`:.!AMIN STREET/6 0,- 11 AVENUE AF-CA: MOTION by Councilman Nee CO receive the com-nunicutiu,, from Ur. Robert L. Erickson, 5950 Benjamin St . , dated .June 29, 1973. Seconded by Cuuncilm;,n �tarwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Lie!,'. declared tr,c ,uotiorl carried Unanimously . is The City Engineer said the=u are two routes Lhac cuu;,i be taken , but liv Felt Cournciim-an -i Starwalc could bet the feeling of the area people and consider if a 1.n:,lic hearing on the matter is necessary at this time. He said he had nor. :;tanned to complete r_he system for awhile. ra Ccuncilman Utter referred to the meeting of a year ago .i,itj asked ahy tl.:s f.aci nc.t Lee;, taken care of at chis time. Councilman Breider said the street is draining on the propert.•:. Councilman U-_r-:•r asked if Benjamin Street was built up more when the street wag installed? The City Engineer said this was the only prstical solutio:,. ile added . the people are not ready to develop their buck lots . He said this would deStl .,�- the nature and beauty of the area at this time. Councilman Starwalt said the property owner had purchased ti:c 1•roperty without knowledge of what would happenwhen there was a rain. lie said he did nut kn„w he would have two or three feet of water in the low area. He questioned if the problem could be taken care of at this time. The City Engineer said the installation would have to go through the hill and the area people are not ready to go in and tear up the area until it developed. Councilman Starve alt said there are two people in the area who have mon?y escrowed. He said he had visited the site that morning and there was no water in the area. Ne added, it soaks in rapidly. He said he felt there wouid be some problem- in the future in that area. Fru Councilman Scarwalt said jig Vould not favor a puhlic hearing on the taa_te- It A City Council minutes )u=y --- PAGE 17 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 2, 1973 there is no acti MOTICN by Councilman Starwalt that on neondgdocher vicevote[, allevotinge Letters at this time . Seconded by Counilman Utter. Up aye, Mayor Liebl declared the motion carrid unanimously. e C SICK REGARDING ACQUISITION OF AN EASEMENT FOR PROVIDING AN OUTLET INTO THE AREA NOR F RICE CREEK ROAD: The City gineer said he thought thenCity hsaid theould property ire an as propertyowStorm owner has tried to Sewer outle in the area. The City Engineer sell the pro rty to developers and the seleaoffthee arearhave been callingeandls some flooding the area. He said t peoP requesting somet ng be done about it. The City Engineer sa the City is at the point where they should go out and get the appraised. He sugg es making two appraisals of the area for the acquisition of the area for a drainage ease ent . Mayor Liebl read from the C ncil Meeting minutes of February 28, 1972, where it is stated by motion that the Cit Engineer should acquire easements for the drainage o the area. The City Engineer said all the Coun ' L w011edmadeauthorizing is that the appraisals for the aquisition of. the easement c Id b Mayor Liebl suggested that local apprais s be employed. ION b Councilman Utter authorize two prnlaavoice vote, allfor votingoayei,g MOT Y cilman Starwalt. easement. Seconded by Councio Mayor Liebl declared the motion catried unanimo ly. The City Engineer said this would be a part of the tal development of the Storm Sewer development of the area, UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, Mayor Liebl ATA PROCESSIN declared t motion carried unanimous NT FOR CONSIDERATION OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMEFRIDLEYDAND THE CITY OF LOKA: SALES AND INVENTORY SYSTE11 BETWEEN THE CITY 0 AND RESOLUTION JP80-1973 - AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF A JOINT POWERS AGREE dT FOR DATA PROCESSING LI UOR STORE AND INVENTORY SYSTEM) : ;pp_ b Councilman Breider to authorize the administration to negotiate a oiet MOTIONY t Resolution #80- 1973. S powers agreement of Data oProcessing n a voice vo[e ,aatovotingoaye, Mayor Liebl declared the mo: by Councilman Utter. Up carried unanimously. •:1)x.1 t[ REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1975 PAGE 9 f • • i 1 r Cound Starwalt said at the expense of ruining his political career, he would not 1 offer anot tion. Councilwoman Kukowski said she would not touch it. She further explained that Council had been asked by three groups to put up three different signs. Councilman alt said they had proposed two and one was taken out. Mayor i Nee explained that the it had taken action to install the sign on 61st and unless this action is reconsidered epealed, the sign would have to be installed. t MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to rec 'dEr the installation of the stop sign on 61st and Benjamin. Mayor Nee DECLARED TH ION DEAD FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilman Breider suggested that the Council tryign on 61st for some time and direct the Police Department to study the area and stage patrolling of the area ina way that it will not be at the same time of day. He sai a work will get out that the area is being patrolled at random. He said he agreed wi he residents in that they should not have to police the area and sign complaints against v tors. He again said, why can't the signs be tried for some time? The City Manager said the sign would be installed. CONSIDERATION OF DRAINAGE PR06LEM 5950 BENJAMIN STREET N. E. RO3ERT ERICKSON)(FROM MEETING OF MAY 5, 1975 Councilman Starwalt said he was asked to make a.recommendation- to the Council. He called on the Public Works Director to make a presentation of the plans proposed. The Public Works Director explained the four proposals as follows: Alternate B-1 has a projected cost of $20,981.25. He explained that this proposal would intercept runoff at the catch basin on Benjamin and pipe it directly to 60th and Oakwood Manor and would not include any alteration of the low area. Alternate B-2 indicates a projected cost of 524,481.25. This is the same proposal as alternate B-1 with the addition of lowering the pipe four feet. If future development occurs in the vicinity of the low area, approximately 7,500 cubic yards of fill would be required to make use of the facility. The installation of the energy dissipator is the third alternative with a projected cost of $1,000. This alternative ,is offered with the intent of the City to install the energy dissipator with the necessary restoration. The fourth Alternative, Alternate F, would require easement acquisition with a projected cost of $10,150.00. This plan would involve the installation of a pipe to the low area from the catch basin on Benjamin with the addition of obtaining an easement for ponding purposes. It also involves remodification of the intersection at Benjamin and Gardena. The City Manager said the people of the area have to be called in if anything but the original proposal for this area would be used. Mayor Nee asked if there would be any overlappinq of assessments. The City Manaocr said the maximum amount for the area would be $8 per 170 square feet. Mr. Erickson said it was not clear to him who would pay for the various plans. tfayo l Nee said the Citylaould pay for the energy dissipator from the general fundi. He said the other three proposals mould be assessed to the district. :ir. Erickson said prC�osals E and D would not be acceptable to him. lie said he had tried a crude eneriy dissi;ctor and it did not work. lie asked if the costs on alternate F r:ould be shared by the people' on Benjamin Street. Ile questioned if the residents of Benjamin Street would want to pay out this amount for a temporary solution. f Mr. Erickson said he would like to clarify a point with Mr. Starwalt. He mentioned that Councilman Starwalt had visited with some of the residents of the area and had a copy of the petition that had been signed by those people, but attached to the petition, there was a map of the proposal for the storm sewer Mr. Erickson had suggested. He said it %•.as the people's impression that this map had accompanied the petition and it had not. Councilman Starwalt explained that this is the way he had been presented the material from the administration and he was also under the impression that it had accompanied the petition, but it had not. I Mr. Erickson questioned the method used to draw the drainage district. Nayor Nee said this ,. 4- by m 1a �v > tnnnnr.1nl11ra1 man Iln cairl thry am wiliinn to testifv thr: the vrater PAGE 10 a` REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Of JUNE 2, 1975 to do something about the restoration of his property- lie said he et an answer before beginning legal action against the City. the City was going had repeatedly tried to 9 proposals ari MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to seta public hearing to discuss the v14,o1975. Seconded for the installation of the storm sewer in the Benjamin area for July by Councilwoman questioned what was 1583 Gardena Avenue, addressed the Council and q ublic Mrs. B. L. Lillemoen, Mayor Nee in the various plans. Councilman Breidersaithe least expensivesprojected at he D Y hearing. Mrs. Lillemoen said she would prefer said the least expensive project is not acceptable to Mr. Erickson. all voting ayeMayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously- UPON UPON A VOICE VOTE, ___ COiiSi RATION OF AN ORDINANCE GOVERNING IMTOXICAnce prohibBEVERAits s any i ntoxND 3.2 BicatiM or non 9 explained that the present ordinance prohibits Y are using The Cit ana er exp arks. He said as the Council knows, people intoxicat g beer and liquor in City P it in the p ks. and the AOninistration felt if there eit Should ordinance enforced.on thThe-Ciite�it should compl with the desires of the community , rohibited in the small size Manger explai ed theproposal to allow the use of 2 beer in Locke Park with a p and in Comn on rk. He said the use of 3.2 beer :+ou.d beon on P hood ar He said there had been someiscusswhethertthepCounciltwould he tlike neighbor D ro sal. He acted direction Council concerning thisap opop°sed. He thought this type of ordinance would allow the people an ordinance prepar to act legally. Councilman Fitzpatrick 99 ested that the Council approve the recommendation of the Nee said the motion on the part of the Parks and REcreation Depa tment. Mayor Nee sriNehe did not think this was the recommendation of the Parks and Recreatio Department. Mayo what Commission was to enforce th ordinance. Councilman Fitzpatrick said this �s no the City Manager had d. Manager p mould be a feasible change. He said the ordinance Cit ointed out tha earlier in the discussion the members of the Caordin nc The Y believed tha this permitted. Fiayor Nee had stated that they ted activity that could be would provide the mechanics for se the public Safety Director. Mayor Nee referred said the proposal had been received that she woul agree to this modification and voted for the to the motion in the miutes of the Pa ks and Recreation Commission and said Ffo Shirley Caldwell had said motion to enforce the law. picnics in said this bee be provided with a permit from the City Mayor Nee said he :•rouldi�a�ee�°saee 3.2 bee be allowed for neighborhood small parks. The City 9 Council. rks in the softball tournaments Fir. Ken Sporre questioned the use of the Smaller ^ is not large enough to accomodate the Jaycees. Fie mentioned that Comm, He qun.stioned if the proposal did sponsored by the ordinance the entire tournament so the smaller parks are Used• He said thewaY could this be continue e1• said this is all against not include tl:e smaller Darks, The City Attorney is n°�+, they can sell beer at all of them. The City Ma 9 e are 1 ti:e current ordinances and anythoingcabout it atnall. of r gray. said he didnot care to say rd Harris, to for Locke Park .,here this would not Pli • Richard Chairman of the Planning Con��ission addr sed the Council and roviSion in the esta 1i uor, not asked if, there :•:as surae P prohibits the use of intoxicat q' be. allowed. t•iayor Hee said Lhis beer. ittcd i hborhood parks. ; Mayor Nee agaairjds�1Yehto�seedtheLe to see ordinance3brought back with this typ beer per of amendment. He said he The City Manager said it f°Nee said yesid be ble to serve, but not sell in tit other neighborhood parks. Mayo The City Manager said this mould be brought back for the first reading with hoperype f,modification• The City Attorney said tl�c person would have to submit the and the City Manager said yes. application.to the City at th with file provision that 3.2 beer rwill be Secon ed f MOTION by Councilman Breider to b9759 the ordinance back for first readingall next regular meeting . June 1G, arks upon application to tine City Coun`ili'ayorapee declared the in the neighborhood p vote, all voting ay'• by Cournci lwoma n Y.ukowski . Upon a voice mntinn carried unanimously- 0' TH MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF JULY 14, 1975 The Publ Hearing meeting of the Fridley City Council of July 15, 1975 was called to order at 7: P.M. by Mayor Nee. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIA Mayor Nee invited those esent at the meeting to join the Council in saying the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Sta t, Councilman Fitzpatrick, Mayor Nee, Councilwoman Kuko i, Councilman Breider. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: Mayor Nee said there would be one addition, the considerat of a resolution in opposition to the Rules and Regulations of the Municipal Shoreland Manag nt Act. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt the Agenda as amended wit *he addition of the Resolution in Opposition to the rules and regulations of the Shoreland agement Act. Seconded by Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor a declared the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: PUBLIC HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT - STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 118. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the public hearing opened at 7:36 P.M. The Public Works Director said the current matter was brought to the Council to solve a problem in the middle of a drainage district. He explained the first proposal for the elimination of the drainage problem to pick up the water at the catch basin on Benjamin Street and take it to the north to 60th to the existing storm sewer at 60th and Oakwood Manor. He said this would collect the water being directed to the low area on private property. He said the water had been collecting in the low area prior to the construction of the street. He said the water still drains to the low area through the catch basin. He said there would be some benefit to the remainder of the property in the drainage district. He said the estimate for this improvement would be approximately $20,981.25 which would result in the assessment of $8.66 per 10q square feet. Mayor Nee asked if this improvement would influence the surface or pavement of the existing improvement. The Public Works Director said no, this could be installed in the boulevard area. He explained the only restoration work to be sodding of the boulevard and driveways on 60th Avenue. He said the $8.66 is a very high assessment, and it is the highest proposed in the City to this date. The Public Works Director said an alternate proposal had been figured for the direction of the water by piping from the existing catch basin on Benjamin south to the mutual property line and into the lot area.. He said this would still allow the flow of the water to the depression or low area where it has been flowing all along. He said this would require the City to acquire some easements for the construction of the system and the lot area. He said this estimated cost would be approximately $10,150 or an assessment of $4.19 per 100 square feet. He said this solution would be more compatible to the assessments of the other areas of the City. This would eliminate the idea of development in the low area and the City would maintain the property in the low area. He said the water would be collected in the low area where it has been collecting for some time. Mayor Nee asked if this improvement had been petitioned for. The Public Works Director ` said no, it was brought to the Council at the direction of the Council. Councilwoman Kukowski asked who would be assessed for the second proposal, and the Public Works Director said everyone who would be assessed for the first improvement. He sair.' they were talking about the same area. Councilman Starwalt said if the easements are acquired, there would be no future development PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF JULY 14, 1915 Page 2 in the back lots. He asked if this action could be overturned in the future if development is desired. The Public Works Director said it would be possible but it would be difficult and costly because the piping would exist in the area. He said this could be done by filling the low area and replacing the piping system. 'ors. B.L. Lillemoen, 1583 Gardena Avenue, addressed the Council and indicated she lived on'Lot 22. She said she would not be in favor of any easement. She also said she may want rq develop her property in the future but she did not know when. She suggested that if there there is any easement necessary, this be done on Mr. Erickson's property because he is the one with the problem. Mayor Nee asked Mrs. Lillemoen howshe felt about the proposed project which were alternatives one and two. Mrs. Lillemoen said she would like the pipe installed on his property, not her own. Mayor Nee asked if she would favor the improvement if the pipe was placed on Mr. Erickson's property, and Mrs. Lillemoen said she would not give up any easements at all. Councilman Starwalt asked if the easements were on Mr. Erickson's property, would Mrs. Lillemoen favor either the first or second proposals. Mrs. Lillemoen said she would not favor any of the proposals. She suggested that a pipe be run under his driveway close to his steps with a catch basin installed in the low area. She suggested that the expense be taken care of by Mr. Erickson or spread around to everybody. She mentioned that this was the City Engineer's first proposal , and this would take the shortest amount of pipe and involve the least cost. She suggested the pipe be covered with dirt. She said she did not want the pipe on her property line, she would not be in favor of this. Mr. Jim Tiller, 5929 Oakwood Manor, said the water had been coming into that area fory ears. He said the basic drainage area has not changed. He said he did not think there was -more water in the low area, and it was there when the house was bought by the present owner. He said there could be more water in the area since the improvement of the street. Mr. Tiller said the improvement would benefit one individual. He said he had been by the property after a recent rain, and there was no water standing in the low area the next day. He said he had not noticed any erosion. Mr. Tiller said he could not see this ; kind of expense to take care cf someone else's problem. Mayor Nee asked if the people of the area had been assessed for any other storm sewer lateral. The City Manager said there had been some assessment for storm sewer, bull this was a very small portion. Mr. Bailey Tiller, 1535 Gardena Avenue , addressed the Council and asked how deep the storm sewer would have to be in this area. He asked if a tank was to be installed. The Public Works Director said neither one of the systems contains this type of installation. Mr. Bailey Tiller explained he did not understand the implications of the proposed improvements, and he had talked to an attorney who would represent him in this action with the City. Mayor Nee asked Mr. Bailey Tiller if he was opposed to one or both of the proposals. Mr. Tiller answered that he was talking about something being installed like a tank. He said he would not favor the condemnation of any property. He said he questioned if anyone would want to develop the back area and said this was a beautiful area with wildlife. He said he did not understand the current proposals. He mentioned Mr. Don Savelkoul would represent him in this consideration. Mayor Nee asked Mr. Tiller if he had any inclination to split off his lot, and Mr. Tiller said he did not. Mayor Nee asked if he had any interest in having -ghother building site in the back of his land, and Mr. Tiller said not at this time. Mr. Tiller said he had no intention of selling his front lot. !The City Manager said no one is saying the land would be condemned. He said the owner °could give the City the right to install the pipe, and there would be no reason to acquire or condemn. Mayor Nee asked if the estimate of $10,00() included money for condemnation. The Public Works Director said yes. Mrs. Nina Sakariason, 5965 Oakwood Manor, said she is still paying for the road, and if any more is added, she would not be able to pay this. She added, even if it would be a little bit, it would be too much. Councilman Starwalt questioned if there would be additional assessments in the future, and the Public Works Director said yes, they are in a subdistrict within a larger district, and they would receive assessments in the future development. Councilman Breider questioned the method of assessment at this time and in the future if this improvement was approved at this time. The Public Works Director explained there l`92 been a City policy where a large area is taken and the assessments are equalized r PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF JULY 14 , 1975 Page 3 for rate in the whole area . He said this would depend on the amount of benefit received , and this would have to be reviewed again. Mr. Nick Garaffa , 6750 Monroe Street, asked how this proposed improvement would compare to the conditions in the area where Mr. Miller had developed. The Public Works Director said this would differ in the manner that there are many property owners , and Mr. Miller was the sole owner of the property at the time there was a drainage problem on his property. He said it —4- would be similar in that the area was draining into a low hole. Mr. Garaffa recalled that Mr. Miller had asked that the property be drained. The Public Works Director mentioned that Mr. Miller was the sole owner of the property. Mr. Garaffa pointed out that the property owner may not have been aware of the problem or condition when the property was purchased. He said he felt the precedent has been set by the Council action in the Miller case which drained sites to allow more buildable lots . Mr. Bailey Tiller said he would like to clarify the statement that was made by Mr. Starwalt. He said his water does not drain into Mr. Erickson's property, the street drainage goes into the Erickson property. Mr. Tiller said he lived in the area for many years , and Mr. Erickson never had any water on his property until the Engineering Department putinthe street. Mr. John Bolich , 1580 60th Avenue, said he had a garden in the low area for three years , and he had never had any water in the garden. He explained when the property was sold , he had to give up the garden. He said he had lived in the area for 11. years , and there was never any problem with the water until the street was put in. Mayor Nee asked Mr. Bolich if he agreed swith the border of the drainage district. Mr. Bolich answered , he did not know, he had not taken a transit to get this information. Mayor Nee said the street improvement generated the problem. Mr. Bolich said why they did not put the storm sewer in at the time the street was installed, _ he did not know. He said now they would have to cut up the area to do this . Mayor Nee asked Mr. Bolich how he felt about the proposed improvement at this time. Mr. Bolich said he was not for or against the improvement. He said he would not want an increase in his assessments . He said he would agree that there is a problem and something would have to be done, but he could not offer a solution. Mayor Nee asked Mr. Bolich which plan he would favor ,and Mr. Bolich said the least expensive. Mrs . Dorothy Lillmars , owner of Lot 1 , Block 1 , Route 2, Stacy, Minnesota , questioned the amount of assessments on this lot, and Mayor Nee said this woul',d be 831 .36. Mrs. Lillmars said she believed this to be excessive for a lot with no accessability. Mayor Nee said they did have a deprived access. Mayor Nee said the City did have a plan where the back lots would be built on, and now the people say they do not want to buil& on the back lots ; now the plan is invalid. Mayor Nee asked Mrs . Lillmars if they would like to develop their land. Mrs . Lillmars said her husband thought this would be possible. Mr. Bailey Tiller said he thought there were only two buildable sites in the back portions . Mr. Mahlon S. Moe, 5955 Benjamin Street, addressed the Council and said he owned Outlot A and asked how much the assessment would be for this parcel . He said there is no access to this property and no hope of access in the future. Mayor Nee said this is estimated at $1 ,379.27. Mr. Mahlon said the assessment for Lot 1 , Block 1 , Acorn Hill Addition is $921 .42. He said this voulq make his assessments in the area of $2,200. He said he would not be in favor of the improvement. Mrs. Lillmars asked how much the assessment would be for 1561 Gardena Avenue. Mayor Nee said this is estimated at $498.81 . Mrs . Lillmars asked why this was only one half of the price of the other lot. The Public Works Dt'rector satdthe front half of this lot is in another assessment area and has already been as-se§sed. PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF JULY 14, 1975 Page 4 Mrs. Fredrick Schmitt , 5963 Oakwood Manor, said she is opposed to any more assessments. She said she did not feel that she contributed to the water. Mayor Ne.e asked Mrs .Schmitt if she had any intentions of splitting off her back lot. Mrs . Schmitt said the lot had been landscaped in the back portion to take care of erosion , and she did not feel she would split it. rs. Sakariason said her property does not contribute to the water. She said she is paying $4,000 in assessments at the present time. Mr. Lawrence Peterson, 5991 Benjamin Street N.E. , addressed the Council and said he thought all of this water was going to the Erickson property. He said with the proposed system of piping from Benjamin to 60th, this would have to be a very deep system. He said the people of the area should have had the system installed at the same time as the street was installed. Mr. Peterson asked how long the water stands on the Erickson property. ` ' Mr. Erickson said from one to two days. He said all of the debris from the street such as sand, gravel and silt is washed into the area. Mayor Nee asked how deep the cut would be to install the storm sewer and, the Public Works Director said, in the deepest place, as deep as 13 feet. Mr. Erickson said he is the person who catches all of the water, and when he bought the place, there was no water in that area. He said he would like to clear up some misconceptions. He said he thought the problem was created by the City,and the City knew there was going to be a problem there. ` He said this concern had come up on the hearing. He said he had come to the City and asked that the damages be care of. He said there are -some funds escrowed, and some people do not know there are funds escrowed for this type of improvement. He said when they had purchased the house, they thought there was a pending assessment for the storm sewer construction. Mr. Erickson said he was not in favor of the second proposal . He said he thought this was too much money for a poor solution. He said as long as he had the money in escrow, he would favor the construction of the complete system or alternative number one. f Mayor Nee asked if the volume of the water had been increased with the \ construction of the improvement of the street. He asked if the water coming down Gardena was routed in another direction before the street Improvement. The Public Works Director said the drainage district had not been increased. He explained that this drainage is directed into New Brighton and there may be a small amount coming into this area. Mayor Nee asked if this had drained in this area before, and the Public Works Director said yes. Mayor Nee said the paving has accentuated the problem. Councilman Starwalt said the water does route to Benjamin, and if anyone had ever stood there in a rain , they would be surprised at the amount. -The Public Works Director said he had been there in a rain. Councilman Starwalt said the water did go east on Gardena and now it goes north on Benjamin to Mr. Erickson 's property. The City Attorney said generally speaking, the laws on surface water drainage as far as municipalities saythat they can dispose of this water in a reasonable fashion. He said a municipality can drain into a low area that had been burdened with this water previously. He said when the streets are improved, there is going to be more and faster runoff. The City Attorney = said in his opinion, the City has some liability because the water is being collected and disposed of by means of the culvert onto Mr. Erickson's property. He said he did not think this would be considered a reasonable way to dispose of the water. He said if there is damage, erosion and gravel being deposited, he felt Mr. Erickson would be entitled to some legal regress . He said if the City chose the second alternative, subject to the acquisition of the low area , this would be logical and reasonable. He said he was not advising that this be done, but just mentioning that this would be a logical solution and one option that the City would have. Mayor Nee said one question that would have to be answered would• be if the people of the area want access available for the back lots . He said the City has some obligation to find some solution. He said this would be a legal obligation if not a moral obligation. y PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF JULY 14, 1975 Page 5 Mrs. Lillmars said she has lived in the area for many years and there was never any water down in the low area . She said she thought it would be the City's responsibility to solve the problem if it has been caused by the City. Mr. Robert Erickson said he was not pushing any one of the plans. He was Just seeking action on the damage that has been done. He said this is a problem the City created, and he expected to have something done about it. He said this is the reason that this public hearing had been called . and the reason for the funds being escrowed for the storn sewer. He said whether or not the storm sewer is installed or the whole thing is dumped , he would like the damaged taken care of. He said these damages would run from $10,000 to $12 ,000. Councilman Starwalt referred to the damage done and said he would question if they would be that high. He said he would agree at one time after a rain there was four feet of water standing in the low area , and a couple of times when there was three feet of water in the low area, but it drains away fast. He said five people had escrowed money for future storm sewer construction in this area . He ,said he would not want to personally declare that there will not be any storm sewer project; they are working with too many unknowns. He said he thought the escrow process is a reasonable process for a situation such as this. He said he was not on the Council at the time that this was decided upon. He said he would not want to see the escrow accounts to be in jeopardy. Councilman Starwalt said he recalled that one time Mr. Erickson said he would be pleased if the City would pipe the runoff water rather than have it overland. Mr. Erickson said he had told Councilman Starwalt at City Council meetings and also in private that this is not an acceptable solution to the problem. He said only one time did he say he would consider this type of thing , and this was if it was a temporary solution and it would be done out of general funds . He said he had corrected Councilman Starwalt on this point at two meetings. He said he only agreed to this type of solution if. it were to be temporary and out of general funds. He said now the second alternative comes up with this type of action, but the land will be condemned , and it is to be a permanent solution. He said he was not in favor of this kind of solution. Councilman Starwalt said Mr. Erickson had said he would accept the under- ground construction. Mr. Erickson said he agreed if this would be temporary and out of general funds. He said the current proposal or second alter- native would ruin other people's property and his own , and they would have to pay a great expense for this . Councilman Starwalt asked Mr. Erickson if he would accept the piping of the water to the low area if this would be at no cost to him. Mr. Erickson asked who would pay the cost. Councilman Starwalt said it would be at no _ cost to Mr. Erickson. Mr. Erickson asked if he meant that no one would be assessed. Councilman Starwalt said yes. Mr. Erickson said he would agree to this if it was a temporary solution and no one was assessed and if the escrow account was not disturbed. Councilman Starwalt asked now much in jeopardy the escrow funds are at the present time. The City Attorney said if this was challenged in court, he did not want -to say that the City would win the challenge. He said this would be doubtful or questionable. He said the City wouldihave a 50/50 or less chance. He questioned if the City had the right to hold the escrow funds indefinitely. The City Attorney said .there is no .time limit for holding the escrow, but they state a reasonable time limit. He mentioned two to three years would be okay, but any longer than this, he would not say the City could be sure to win a challenge. Councilman Starwalt said the temporary solution would not take care of any i future development. He again mentioned there are so many unknowns in this consideration. He asked if the people would say that this area was to be developed, and they were put on record saying this , would this have a bearing on how long the escrow monies could be held. The City Attorney - zss PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF JULY 14 , 1975 Page 6 said no, he did not see where this would be a consideration. Council-man Starwalt said something would have to be done that the people agree with. He said the majority of the people do not want to have an improvement project with the exception of Mr. Erickson. Mr. Erickson said he had not expressed the desire for either of the alter- natives . He said he is not in favor of the second proposal . Mr. Erickson stated he would like the money retained in escrow. He said he would like something done about the damage to his property. He said he had $1 ,500 in escrow for storm sewer. Mayor Nee asked if the money would go to Mr. Erickson or the previous property owner if the escrow is given up. Councilman Starwalt said in this case, it would go to the prior property owner. Mr. Bailey Tiller said he thought he was obligated to contribute to the improvement. He said he would like to see something installed such as a Ceptic tank in the low area. He said he is opposed to the two proposals presented at the present meeting , but he felt he should pay his share. Mayor Nee asked Mr. Tiller if he was suggesting an installation such as a dry well , and. Mr. Tiller said yes . The Public Works Director said one of the proposals had been to put in an energy dissapator which would takeup the force of the water flowing into the low area. Mayor Nee said it would seem to him that this would increase the costs . He said the energy dissapator would allow the water to remain running over land to the low area . Councilman Breider questioned if this could and should be done from the ;general fund. He said Mr. Erickson had reluctantly agreed to this as a `itemporary solution. Mr. Erickson agreedto this statement. - The Public Works Director said it would be difficult to calculate the price for this type of system. The Public Works Director said if the parcel of property was cut by the pipe on a triangular line, this would solve the problem of not having the pipe on the property line. Councilman Starwalt said he thought Mr. Erickson would provide the easement. Mr. Erickson said he did not know about this . Mr. Erickson said he would have to have someone appraise the property. The Public Works Director said he thought. this -temporary solution may be from $5,000to $7 ,000. Mr. Erickson asked if they were talking about a pipe running through the center of his yard. The Public Works Director said yes , and Mr. Erickson said forget it. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski . Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously, and the public hearing closed at 9:18 P.M. Mayor Nee informed the property owners that the Council would. not be taking attone of the next twon on the item at the meetingsnaftertthe, this staff isallowed be done additional information. prepare IC HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT - STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST 1975-1: NO. 3: MOTION by Counci Starwalt to waive the reading of thepublic hearing notice and open the p 'c hearing. Seconded by Councilman Kukowski . a voice vote, all voting a Mayor Nee declared the motion carried Upon unanimously, and the public h opened at 9 :19 P.M. The Public Works Director explained this Of Siverts Lane, one of the last remaining unin9 toedostreetsncernhin�thpv eoCitynt of Fridley. He said up until this time the City ha en maintaining the unimproved street and plowing it in the winter months. aid there had been grading done on a few occasions. He said the maintenan street was done with the anticipation that the sanitary sewer an this would be installed in the future to serve the y r -Siverts Lane. Mr. Sobiech recalled at a recent rCitytCouncil emeeting, there s REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 21, 1975 PAGE 10 The City Manager said the City Council would have to amend the stipulations to allow ingress from East River Road with the two additional stipulations. He said if the applican cannot live with this, he could comp back to the Council. Mayor Nee sa" he is opposed to an exit on to East River Road, but the entrance would not be this s ious. Mayor Nee suggested the Council be polled fot pproval of this item and the a inistration prepare sufficient documentation and bring this back for formal Council a roval. Councilwoman Kukows asked when the signal would be installed. The Public Wcrks Director said "not sh tly". He explained that the City Council has adopted a resolution indicating eir intent to modify this intersection and this would depend on the FAUU progr Councilwoman Kukowski aske hen this construction would be completed. The represent- ative said if the Council ap oved the request, construction could begin in 60 days. said this is four months la r representative said they would than what they would have liked to get started. The present time. Mayor Nee said he reefer that the Council process the request at the specifically in a documented form. It that the amendments should be dealt with The Public Works Director said i;t wou be in order to approve with a motion to include the stipulations. He said they ould like to proceed. He mentioned the City staff had talked to the County concernin this intersection. Mayor Nee asked if the dedication of the Ian for the roadway in 79th would be O cne of the stipulations. The Public Works i ctor said yes. He continued to explain the City would also need the dedication of adds ional property along the entire westerly Portion of the property for the deceleration Ian Mr. Nordale said he ha(' not understood this. He said he would have to take th" matter under advisement. He said this would be a great deal of length and frontage a they would have to consider it. Mayor Nee said this matter was really not in meeting. shape to ke action on at the current Councilwoman Kukowski said she would agree with the propose usage and stipulations. Councilman Starwalt Said he Would also agree. Councilman Br 'der said he would agree as long as there is a deceleration lane. Councilman Fitzpatri said he would agree with the new proposal. The Public Works Director asked if there should be a letter of and tanding. Mayor Nee said there seems to be some confusion and disagreement with the dication of the land and other factors. He advised the Public Works Director to get is down on paper. The Public Works Director asked for clarification that the Council :!ould a ow the ingress from East River Road, but not the egress. Mayor Nee said this was c rrect. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT, FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AN M E HE S H R S RM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #118: The Public Works Director pointed out the area of the proposed im �:• north of Benjamin to 60th and to tie into the existing storm sewer oneOakwood Manor. He said this improvement would eliminate the collection of storm sewer water in the low area on Benjamin Street. He said there are several alternate rolls. He said they Benjamin alongsthegthe propertyginal linesrtolthedlowtareate F wherehich the water c provide piping from there was some objection to both alternatives. He said it was suggested that they collects. He said Prepare another alternative which would pipe from the driveway where the catch basin said he would recommend at this time that this alternative be approved which would exists through the yard at 5950 Benjamin, following the terrain to the low area. He be approximately $2,170 based on the fact that the City of Fridley would rl.o the work. He said with this final proposal, the people of the area would be assessed and the money would be taken from the City's general funds. Councilman Starwalt asked if Council action to install a system on private property using general funds would set a precedent. The Puhlic Works Director said in order to settle the matter in a negotiated method, this would be in order. Councilman Starwalt asked if this would be a permanent solution and the Public Works I►i)-ector said it would not. Councilman Starwalt asked why the determination would have to be made concernin the 9 I1 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Of JULY 21, 1975 PAGE 11 escrow funds because of this solution. The Public Works Director said the escrow money could only be held for a reasonable amount of time and if the temporary system isinstalled. He questioned if from a legal standpoint they could continue to hold the funds. Councilman Starwalt said it is very difficult to put a time limit on the development of the area. He said it could not be determined at this time how the area will develop. He mentioned that other developers in the area had been required to escrow money. The Public Works Director explained that what they were talking about He said if there is a project pending, not pending assessments. P J P 9 ► -; was escrow money, P 9 - this should be followed through in a reasonable amount of time. He said this would 6..i be the difference between pending and escrow. The Public Works Director said Mr. Miller, tor. O'Bannon and Mr. Harris, all in this area have escrow accounts. Council- man StarNalt said from the legal standpoint, it has not been determined how long the money can be held. The Public Works Director said the opinion of the Attorney General 's office said this should be a reasonable length of time. He said this would have been a 1972 project. He said the time is running out. The City Attorney advised the Council that the State Statutes are silent in this point and do not say any specific time period. He said the Council had ordered the project but not issued the contract. He added according to the Assistant Attorney General , when the project is ordered, it becomes a pending assessment and has to be completed in a certain amount of time. He questioned what the legislature intended and said he did not think the City of Fridley was in complete compliance. He said if the City was challenged in court, lie would not guarantee successtbn the part of the City. Mayor Nee asked what project ordered in the improvement. The City Attorney responded that the project was ordered in and only a portion of it was constructed. He said the entire project actually stands. He said when it came to letting the project, only a portion of the area was completed. The City Manager said this is true, this is a part of a large drainage area. He said a small area was deleted from the large drainage district. He explained the boundaries of the large district. He said the assessments were onl% levied on the area where the improvement was a benefit. The City Manager further explained that if the assessment y were to have been figured over the entire area, this would have been divided equally throughout the district. He said because this had been divided into a small subdistrict, they will face a higher level of assessments. The City Manager further explained that the improvement at that time would have included the acquisition) f the easements and the filling in of the low property to tie into the storm sewer. He explained there had been some discussion concerning the development of the area and some on the Council and some of the residents of the area feel there will not be any development in the back parcels. He also mentioned that some individuals have voiced the thought that they may want to develop the back lots. The City Manager said he felt this would be setting a precedent. He said this kind of thing has never been done before. He said at first there was to have been an expenditure of about $1 ,000 to take care of the problem and now the figure has come up to $2,000 with out the inclusion of the labor costs from the City personnel. The City Manager mentioned the assessment rate for this improvement to be $8.66 and said this would be the highest assessment rate in the City and he questioned if the value of the property would be increased in a comparable amount. He said this would bring about some problems and he thought $3 and $4 might be more realistic. The City Manager briefly explained the three alternative proposals to the Council . Councilman Starwalt said he was not prepared to vote on the project in at this time. ye said there are too many unknowns at this time and he would rot want to vote in a $20,000 project. Councilman Starwalt said if the solution could come from a nominal and reasonable amount of costs to be taken from the general fund, he could be in favor of this. Ile mentioned if Mr. Erickson would come back to the City and want additional work done he would like to alleviate this possibility at the current time. He said he would want this system to suffice until the other people of the area are ready to develop their land or complete the improvement project. Councilman Starwalt said he would not want the escrow accounts jeopardized. He added, he thought the City should just take the chance that someone would not take the City to court to see if the method is right and proper. Councilman Starwalt said at the current meeting the Council was to vote on whether or not to vote in Project #118. He said perhaps they should stick with this. Councilman Breider said this item has been on the agenda a number of times and they had talked about the pros and cons. He mentioned years ago there had been a $50,000 system proposed for this area which had not been developed. He said he realized there REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 21, 1975 PAGE 12 is a problem, but he was not in a positio4o order in a $20,000 improvement at this time. He said he would favor the installation of the lesser expensive alternative that had been proposed for this area. Mr. Erickson asked why the system could not be placed on the property line rather than cut through the center of his yard. The Public Works Director said they were talking about a system that would only be three feet deep. He said because of the terrain, if this would be placed on the property line, this would be a much more expensive system. He said with the current proposal , , they would not acquire any easements. He said he thought this system would function most of the time. Mr. Erickson questioned if this would require maintenance and he would have people working in the center of his yard. Mr. Erickson said a great deal of dirt would be washed into the system and there is still the possibility of the system freezing. The City Attorney asked if the system could be done in the same way by following the property lines. The Public Works Director explained this would be impossible becaUie of the terrain in the area. He said this would necessitate a deep construction and he questioned if it would take the drainage to the proper location in the low area. Mr. Erickson said he was told that this may freeze. He questioned the alternative that had been discussed previously with the installation of the rock. The Public Works Director said currently they are discussing an underground system and the one Mr. Erickson was referring to would be an over grourd system. Mr. Erickson said this would overflow with every rain. He said no system would hold this amount of water. The Public Works Director said this would be a temporary system. Mr. Erickson said the maintenance of the system would have to be conducted in the middle of his back yard. He said this could be run on the property line where it would not disturb the property. He asked what would happen if the pipe is plugged. The Public Works Director said this would have to be a deeper system. He .-also stated the system would have to go down Benjamin and would not follow the swale. Mr. Erickson said he did not think there was too much difference. Councilman Breider said he would like the Council polled on whether they would accept this kind of proposal and said if so, the Administration could work with Mr. Erickson for a satisfactory solution. Mayor Nee explained to Mr. Erickson that the City would make an offer something like had been proposed at the current meeting. He said no one in the area would be assessed- for this system. The City Attorney said he agreed wiht the suggestion of Councilman Breider in that the details of the system could be worked out with the staff and the property owner. Councilman Starwalt mentioned Mr. Erickson had said that the City was not asking him his opinion on the system and he said he would like to take care of the details of the plan the current evening. Councilman Starwalt mentioned that everything that is suggested by the City is rejected by Mr. Erickson. Mr. Erickson said he had suffered' a high property loss and he had escrowed $1,000 for a storm sewer system. He said the City had suggested that he put up with the water in the low arca and dedicate easement besides. He said he thought this would be .quite a high price when this was not his mistake. Councilman Starwalt said he was not sure that the City had made the mistake. Councilman Breider said he did not agree. He said the man has a problem and the City would have to tell him what they are going to do about it. He said he would not want the storm sewer project at this time, he did feel that this would be the answer. He said he felt the Council should say they are going to do something like the list proposal. Council- man Breider said the City would have to give Mr. Erickson an answer. Mayor Nee said the proper order would be`to consider the resolution and if it fails, the system would be put in out of general funds for a partial and temporary solution. He said the question would be to put in the system that was being discussed or adopt the resolution for the improvement project. Mayor Nee asked if there was a motion for the adoption of the resolution for project #118 and there was no response. Mayor Nee asked if they would be taking actionon the original proposal or Alternate F. Councilman Starwalt said he thought the $20,000 proposal was the one being addressed in the resolution. He said he was prepared to vote against this proposal. Mayor Nee said if no one make a motion, this proposal would fail. Councilman Breider said he !,ad a problem accepting the proposal that if the $20,000 project is not ordered at this time that the escrow money would not be held. He 1., REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 21, 1975 PAGE 13 questioned if the City Council could determine that there would never be a project in this area. The City Attorney said the money was in escrow because a previous City Council has done this is a previous action. Mayor Nee again explained that if the members of the Council are opposed to the improvement, they did not have to make a resolution to adopt. Councilwoman Kukowski asked how the matter would be disposed of. Mayor Nee said if not adopted, it would be disposed of. j Mayor Nee asked if there was a motion to adopt the resolution and said if there is not a motion, the consideration is dead for lack of a motion. Mayor Nee asked if there was a motion for the adoption of Alternate F and there was no response. MOTION by Councilman Breider to instruct the Administration to work with Mr. Erickson and the adjacent property owners for a plan to construct a system of piping to the low area and that this cost be taken care of by general funds and that the plan be brought back to the City Council for approval. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Erickson said he would like to work out something reasonable. He thanked Councilman Breider for getting something moving on the consideration. The City Manager asked what would be done with the escrow monies or pending assessments. The City Attorney said no action had been taken on this matter. The City Manager said the escrow money is unrealistic. He mentioned in some cases it is $3 per 100 square I feet and the present need is over $8. Mayor Nee said there had not been any motion to delete the previous project. The City Manager said the problem will not go away when the Council takes no action. Councilman Breider said the escrow funds may be needed to take care of future storm sewer improvement. He said if someone would file suit, the City could say that they anticipate a future storm sewer improvement. The City Attorney said the City Council should know the Administration will be under some pressure because this is not resolved. He said all the Administration could tell the people is that the City Council did not wish to discontinue their original action. He said a project has been ordered in and there is no immediate plan for construction. He said the Administration would do what they can to hold the City's position. Mayor Nee said if no action is taken i Y en n this line at the present time, the money would have to remain in escorw. Councilman Breider asked if the City Attorney could be able to put up with the heat. The City Attorney said he thought he would 'face it. He mentioend they would have to live with the situation created by previous Council. He said if there is going to be a higher assessment rate in the future, the City can assess the additional amount. Councilman Starwalt said the amount being collected at the present time may be increased or recinded in the future. He asked if the City Council could take action at this time to take care of the proper assessment. The City Attorney said he did not know how to direct `he Council at this time to deal with this problerr. The City Manager said the assessments would have to be equalized in the future and if there is any change in the cost over the project that had been ordered, they would have to hold another public hearing. He said there would have to be another hearing because of the increased costs. He said if they had n6ted a specific cost of the project and the cost is increased substanially, then this would have to be brought back to the people. The City Attorney said as a legal matter, this is not required, but as a moral obligation, the City should. The City Manager said there is a question of the benefit. to the property. Mayor Nee asked if he meant the realining of the money. The City Manager said they would have to do something because the escrow would not cover the cost of the improvement. He said if someone would take the City to court, it might have to be released. Mayor Nee said if the CIty would loose such action, perhaps the money should be released. The City Manager said the City Attorney had mentioned the City's chances would not be too good in court. Mayor Nee asked if Mr. Erickson would receive the money, if it was released. The City Manager said Mr. Erickson would not get the escrow money, it would go to the previous owner of the property. Mr. Erickson said it would go to the former owner of the property from the mortgage company. The City Manager said •-V%%.Would like to solve the problem and not bring it back to the Council again. CITY OF FWDLEY CIVIC CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 -PHONE(612)571-3.450 July 24, 1987 Mr. ' Tam Steif er 5950 Benjamin Street N.E. Fridley, MV 55432 Re: Drainage Correction at 5950 Benjamin Street N.E. Dear Mr. Steif er: At our meeting on Wednesday, July 22, 1987 , we agreed that the City would assist you with the drainage problem under your driveway by installing a new culvert under the driveway, connecting the north end to the culvert from Benjamin Street, and installing a 900 elbow on the south end to dissipate the energy of the flowing water. We will also patch the asphalt in your driveway where the new culvert is to be installed. The understanding in our agreement is that all maintenance of this culvert, including cleaning of the outlet, is your responsibility. We are requesting that you indicate your concurrence with the agreement by signing this letter as provided below. 'Ihe City crews will proceed with construction of this culvert as soon as we receive your concurrence. Please feel free to contact me at 571-3450 if you have any questions on this matter. Sincerely, MARK L. BIk2CEi Asst. Public Works Director I am in agreement with the conditions outlined in this letter. 7—2 P-Z TUM STEOER DATE City of Fridley MEMORANDUM TO: William W. Burns, City Manager PW99-146 FROM: John (f Flora, Public Works Director Jon Hukaas, Assistant Public Works Director DATE: August 5, 1999 SUBJECT: Benjamin Street Drainage Benjamin Street has a low point between Gardena Ave and 60th Ave. As the low point for that section of the roadway, this area has experienced some problems with drainage from excessive rains, clogged catch basin and ice-up during winter. The extent of these problems was not fully understood until recent dialog about the replat of 1583 Gardena raised the issue. Comments from the neighborhood at the Planning Commission meeting and subsequent discussions with residents in the area have brought to light additional information and concerns prompting us to look into this matter further. The existing storm sewer drains to the west under the driveway at 5950 Benjamin Street, Kathy Miller residence,to an outlet near the south edge of the property. During periods of high rain fall,the flow of water backups up in driveways as well as entering the Miller driveway causing erosion as it runs off the sides. In addition,the channel directing water from the storm sewer outlet around the yard to the area low point often overflows and causes water to flow across a portion of the yard, resulting in erosion and sediment deposition. The City can reconstruct or add catch basins on the street to handle large rainfall events and diminish or eliminate the problems with water backing up in driveways. In discussions with Kathy Miller, she has agreed to provide a drainage easement along the existing storm sewer and outlet channel to allow the City to do some drainage improvements such as channel stabilization and berming. These improvements will keep the water in the intended drainage route. JHH/JGF:cz cc: Kathy Miller City of Fridley Land Use Application PS-99-03 August 5, 1999 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Stephen Varichak Transportation: 1558 Briardale Rd. Homes will be accessed from Benjamin Fridley,MN 55432 Street. Requested Action: Physical Characteristics: Replat of property to accommodate 3 Tree covered,relatively level with the single family homes. exception of the northern edge of property. Existing Zoning: ' SUMMARY OF REQUEST R-1, One Family Residential Petitioner is seeking to create 3 separate lots from Location: Lot 2,Auditors Subdivision,in order to construct 3 1583 Gardena Ave. single family homes. Size: SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS 53,70$square feet 1.23 acres Existing Land Use: City Staff recommends approval of this plat Older single.family request. amily home(to be razed). . Proposed lots exceed the size standards Surrounding Land Use&Zoning: N:Single family home&R-1 required by the City of Fridley Zoning Code. E: Single family home&R-1 a All final grading and drainage plans will meet the S: Single family home&R-1 approval of City Engineering staff before W:Single family home&R-1 building permits are issued. Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Use of property is consistent with Plan. Zoning Ordinance Conformance: All three proposed lots exceed the City's minimum lot size standard.. E Zoning History: A 1949 -Lot is platted. ry • 1956-Home is built. • 1976-Existing home is connected to City water& sewer. zt Legal Description of Property: Lot 2,Auditors Subdivision#92 Council Action: August 9, 1999 Public Utilities: Located near property. EX'S`'ng Home Staff Report Prepared by. Paul Bolin PS 99-03 ANALYSIS Petitioner is seeking to create 3 separate lots from Lot 2, Auditors Subdivision, in order to construct 3 single family homes. Currently there is an older home and garage located on the Southern portion of the lot, which was build in 1956. The home has fallen into some disrepair and will be razed to make room for a new home in its place. RECOMMENDATIONS City Staff recommends approval of this preliminary plat request, with stipulations. Proposed lots exceed the size standards required by the City of Fridley Zoning Code. Fridley requires that lots in an R-1 district be a minimum of 75' in width with a minimum total lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposed lots range in width from 80'to 127' and in area from 10,704 square feet to 17,105 square feet. All final grading and drainage plans shall meet the approval of City Engineering staff before building permits are issued, in order to minimize impacts to this area. North edge of property. PLANNING COMivilSSIGN ACTION Planning Commission recommended approval of the plat but stipulated that the petitioner complete soil borings on each lot. To follow is the staff analysis of the soil reports and an update on other issues identified during the hearing process. SOILS In accordance with the Planning Commission's stipulation, the petitioner hired STS Consulting, Inc. to prepare a soil report on each of the 3 lots. The report was reviewed by engineering and planning staff. The soils are favorable and conditions are right for standard 22"wide running footings on each of the 3 homes. Staff is recommending the addition of 13 stipulations based on the information contained in the soil report. These stipulations, generally, echo what was stated as construction recommendations in the soil report. The petitioner has agreed with the additional stipulations. TREES The number of 27 trees was used several times during the public hearing by neighbors. Staff staked the approximate setback locations on each lot and counted trees within the typical building area and within the setbacks. About 22 significant (mature) trees are located within the property boundaries (there are some shrubs along the boundaries of the site, and a clump of shrubs between Lots 1 and 2, 1 being the northerly lot). 8 -10 trees lie within the buildable areas for the homes. The petitioner stated that he believed that the number of trees he thought he would need to remove was between 5-10. Staff has stipulated that the petitioner prepare a tree preservation plan for each lot to assure that only those trees absolutely necessary to be removed, are removed. This approach was also used at the Royal Oaks development. SLOPES The slopes on this site are workable from a construction standpoint and are actually very favorable for attracting homebuyers looking for a lot with character, in a well-established neighborhood. Staff is however, recommending that the petitioner move the lot lines on the southernmost lots. Lot 2 would then be 75 feet, rather than 80 wide and Lot 3 would then be 80 feet, rather than 90 feet wide (lot 3 is the one at the corner of Gardena and Benjamin). These widths still comply with the minimum requirements. By shifting the lot lines to the south, 15 additional feet on the uphill side of the slope for Lot 1 becomes available. It moves a potential house further south, away from existing neighbors, and it may make the difference in saving 2 additional trees. RUN-OFF Council will note in one of the new staff stipulations there is a requirement that the run-off from the 3 new roofs be directed through gutter and downspouts to the west drainage easement. In that easement area, minor terraces will be required (in areas safe from tree roots) to slow the roof-top water down and allow saturation, prior to any residual water entering the low area on the northernmost lot. In addition, the northerly 50 feet of Lot 1 will dedicated as a drainage easement to protect the area from development. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that the following stipulations be attached to the preliminary plat approval: 1. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the Northern most edge of property. The plan shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of 12%, or less around the home's foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the 12' drainage easement, to slow existing run-off and assure some saturation of roof-top run- off directed toward the pond. 2. The petitioner shall dedicate a 20' utility easement and a50 foot drainage easemen along North property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 of the North property line of proposed Lot 1. 4. Provide proof that the old well located on the site is properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner to pay$750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner to grant code required 12' utility and drainage easement along western boundary of property. 8. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 10. A perimeter drain system, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drain pipe shall be a free draining granular material such as 1/4 to 1 '/z inch rock or pea gravel. 11.No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the uppermost 18 to 20 inches to act as a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 12.AII masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 13.The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be a frea-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants Ltd., Project#97479, dated July 27, 1999. 14.Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 15.AI backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not settle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 16.All exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the walls in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 17.Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all run-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submitted will be partly predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed. 18. All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 19. Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly attached to the structure to allow free/independent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 20. No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills of sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 21. A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 22. Adequate compaction and density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 23. The preliminary plat shall be revised to reduce the width of lot 3 by 10' to 80 feet and lot 2 shall be reduced by 5'to 75 feet in width to provide a more level building pad for lot 1. The revised preliminary plat shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to submission of the final plat. EXHIBIT,&- PLAT APPROVED BY COUNCIL N y r- y ii ----------------------- 30 I -- ------ ri 111>YY1�:3F3 I I �j • J.8YlI.L6 NII(rf18A � � I ij --•---- � wTN f • pit • • p • �. 1 C7 j iS i I CJ (1j r I w cal I �. 1 I I'J 1 f-------------- -_J mvi towe I ■ 1 + „�.� 5.1,bJYl � I I 1 X fi r - fu v E•i cr iS I I� list e � .■ t.lf 1 IZM t��t t tsE 1• 46 EXHIBITJ9- PLAT APPROVED BY COUNCIL N o f0 J •,1) y :� I io •°: ��Sl.'J�t?.^.5 S.?JOar.^.Y t I 1 ii 1 I I I —J 1 f'--- .33M:: 111fiYft:38 " j � " I I 1 j � JJIYI{lr atttrnaa " t ii i; ------ 1 wv . r- ------IS I c ic r l {, I 1 �I � I■ I iL--- --———_J w.r� La,xni ix cl C) z v �o c� ij I fit 0 all 0 N I 46 .. 1 r~ I;C�•� I N.E. CORNER 4 I`�S ' x 6( ST AVE. RE' ,o tip, ' AVE N _ s ' d. +.r..• nJ ?. s ,/ kz. u,. + ,r%iLI 74;(1yi LL $ p1 � .4 A VEM'. , s 4y I c.cl ys a 0 '_° ►dry � // ` , 10 .70 0�; p, 4 (,,07 11` _ tiP �.�5 � Y IfA/s�Yoe1�f 1�If^J c�oSo(��)'�y =•1�,1�i ~wA:�N��.L.N�`��^- —�•/�^��[I Iw 1�.wI/ri0�..' 1.� s,r,- R l F, ,- ni._'iASiG.iO7oai/(,d%l1i!✓'!�',h��•4''oI711C�4 0`,)�ti t4,04' (6 �'`"a`�9,y��Zol ryG�,��rf Y'irlV5.i:�^°r W ro•.� lap p �.Slc�/6�0 11,17 7-fP ( i- ,+ re,• 40 of-,?09 1505 1511 01 t I Ago, lop fs �#5 60 • . ,F "1v v/! (/ Cf EAVE 1n7Ji+1fp0o. t or M q1 1A 2 16 ski \ - ti 5950 A HILL 'h 04v 1. J, e. r uj 22 � 24 25 '�- �, 1555 ��s2/ 15,0 J�GoI (�?3 (G33 !� jl (111 ,,I�M �� /!)/ �' �r•.� ��'�: ^4 S 1K r, ,) � ;/Jbs! (,'s�y rs68 - ,R,e y fGjo ro 3I32 � 3 5'3 3 e ,9`. I;sa�, cn I N^ 1�Yol6YG S9 9O 1 f.. s 381, 42 ,9 _ F s �•9ZG' y'AQt Ld'ML. THEY APPEAR IN THE ANOKA COUNTY i R24 QFFICE$AFFECTING THE AREA SHOWN, I THIS DRAWING is 10 BE USED ONLY FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES AND THE COON- j TY 15 NOT RESPONSWE FOR ANY IN- i ACCURACIES HEREIN CONTAINED. 53924 r 2 II E. COAWER .40 - �A f 1` CREST' DRIVE _ ./ -♦i �1 � -` ,d+• jrl 4 , PO �' Z }.� .S.� �w��..rw*iTc' � �4+ �' VE - ` �� : '`a p• SA A "�.a_ �•`.,:;;�.-;. of � I �� .. Z �r-� _y.I_y�{}}• -.. �m V.'� r`e r�� `'nJ a ai ` - •� - ,. , x � : VAN C E VES ` "I'��;I= +c� r• iKRI EN•CP �T1 ON <' ADW. `wys iRD£MA £LEM�ENTA � �� 2r _ 22 m ' w' SC�OOL > Q p i� 24 :� a y, o (rw elm+ yo pk ;j 29 31 32 ��Q. 3/ 38 = 42 40 `l P� ¢. a. �E 39 �� , a` 46 i 47 /0 45 ,7 r ! pw ow. PARA• �, 52 RO qk :.CT. t « 50 s ?� s • 4 �'. •m v +rs1 1- " r (� I a d •Ili -• E/,+t RY�R L( v SEC. II - vsmuq V/ 13 sr,,, ,• 44 COUNTY SURVEYOR ANocw COW+n, ..xwESC�r. OD. 3 � k 1➢ .. y tN 1 jty t3 + �.1 y •• lY 1 4 7 t A c r 2 -,w 6000 Me-bmim ow soon, dell OF . 4 41Z ' r 4t,,} M Wi. w :r Al M OWN . 3 •� <s •.ft CCM ' v.�':.f �.✓ ( } :... 52- u { y '9"}� � $ ..�.,.....�.'-.µ...nyie..+y.:w..nrM..•y....... +.. "�YIY`�•�!.` ' wn'�rPti`y�^',�."^t.+................. ......,...,+.�. 1 s r x VillIt ##? t 4 � 4 • M i S . 1 1 ! I ( � N.E. CORNER 4 . .,� -. 61 ST AVE. 05 ff"IA 2,f rt �sIpil 6 '9 78Z k a % w /iS/, 1s C MA " ' a I` ►sal 'r� ' {� N� „ 9lk /Af .. �'2 ��a� I� .n its .:/i..,• ��Ip1`)� 'P •� (Ipltl� is �i1� 1�1 n � � MIN !r J >.� '�` s7e.• 'JO ?O � �/' ^ .'D �� OP z f r� e-q... e•....._; / is s n a r d kC �rer.AQ/':nu f�, �I Ibl (r0� �,1 ♦� �V/� 3' (i7¢ And ti+R.( i'nr.ditM (610) �1� y a o 1 / O �.r,�r• \- M:Adrs/ Fantc �010 [D�{ (S Jlf9o7v9•w � , Q Z �(�y� y�?I�I�� cOi�) � ,e.+ ;�.•��. rw, � ;` � 1`G��ar tisv$tir'c �P / � / .'� �1` IUB,Q� r.,°;f�� ye .• 7r�.. x_ va, _•_ _: VO iTl 1511 uur.�T/ s^ wi. ,,5976 er sig, ar M iro.. Z AV mc e - (�� h %✓r,i7rnc6 So�r.i rr t .-1 3 /fGa z �,,..4-". Irl,7s I coC EVES VA A' s1? T 595D a�_ HILL it k4 ,�rru/A T/ N,;� x , 7 Ir r. (/230f !t)� fZ75y� �/35�1 1 I.i,!{7'�' t OrA.r.7/e�� s �,�✓o fldrs'e/� ui . `Vr""':Y— g �.ZD I e w r .I (/1},t� 1� '/180 e..,��'� o✓r% ow.•%It�� 22 5 24 25 ava 90 : ��4 pp. (��*V) ;LL. 1, �010 l_S9/Q '.i • ,y„E. I sem.,..,..+•r r�-•,r. --f'�� a�a..�i' � � tY i :"1; (.1e5 0p 6 /eB9 7$ Niq � � �S.�R 1 �� (�4) I IJI) (iS:a7 •NerrYl /]J) N.� t sr N � l 1p) i/Its` •v GG it'•snr .'J. hJ io /Y7"J '�^ �J log l6) E.ti �� Wo � 31 32 ,E-�,� 3 1,03 �3 k , o .. ('/I30f '°` LIQ O• � fI4) ; � t.a�u'` ; s 1: t6Yo fGY6 s�90 �- ` 7f 42 _ .o AW rs4� iy4.�' / :9Z4,1 - ,�ay.r c Yi Lroir 5637 0 40 n l rib 70cr00 '3J eexlom/,v �o cr fee o _; •o I � i r+ i ••.. rr fr;dirt' - � 44U I i •� j _ _ I (2o4pJ �3�> I5830 1 46 .',1 I tf�:R'/F:/Oh �,YFt Ate• r �,� I �?2DD,I I IMA 1 /rt' nT FA.o(fy 4� 1 1 u ITY U Y I _D LE Y COUNTY 01 otc t� 966.18 l A n 1 i t r-- w 93V/-(�-p�\v L.L_7-\ V L_ , W Q ` \, .9 953 A O Q r\LJV1 1 1U1 v 953.34 w O } O 958.99 959.6R� O1 � 95694 958. 3 1 I D�8 sn -163.82 )S88*34'45"E-" 66.94 m.M. E=967.40 V=950.35 r\ E.7 1 /r Z 9S ��` 956 9,, I V �_ I �--I'� �U�.0{S�T6AGK .�INE - -� ti. 9 r K t � :, �' �lt.64 Y' !' i 30 ►5I � 961.3 O h I 56 98 Nti 9N. ay1y I ( I { 6` o O I' o p in it 9 p 67.62 64 4 c - \ 68.67 obotton 9 3 \ `-9 2- \ 65.7 q .76 / \ 04 ui 4T_ _ i O V1 64.94 4` .9 / 4G9.2� .,... tton ,'h' O � LJ 976.41 \ / �" _ I•\ ` Z 3 O 977. 977. to Oto 00 O- 971.37 - 6.7 � 1 I J - (i I 9A1..4 } _ A c 2;1 ` $ T ' Lij 10 / 9809 ® O 4 I 10 II 04 1J� me f 9 .1 QO 1 F 17 • 1 O M { M a) 00 p ,.._.. 984, p 3 37 "� q o N - Ic cu 0 Cul J i G RAGE 40,. AZE lb 973.12 799,7I p �Q86_, rn 06 <l N 06d nc I i I ` rn L i n 10 1 1 �' O l__-.. _ _-.. _ •. _ �� a-tsar" jg b�� ' c cu u L�; 986 70 i 1 _ - -�-- - 979 31 97360 133.80 / _ S88932 10 E 1 W z co 10 I I OUSE TO BE P.AZE i0 1 a a / /� II ( 1 z QO 9A5.19 '✓ !9' 1111 o 981 50 o c I 98 r 9 9 93 I 74,46 ,• �3 L 71r982.27 sJ 3�-- 1 0 � I 1 � Ch i toi I i to � 1 SETBACK LINE / I - 0 09A0.1975 14 r 3 _ --- - 78.55 9eo`a4 133.79 9 9 g o o-_ c --- L 975.93 - p 9T75! [ I Q 9 tc Pc 976.06 � fI ' 8" SANITARY SEWER + PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 7, 1999 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF REPLAT REQUEST, #99-03, BY STEPHEN VARICHAK & JAMES SURDYK: To create three separate lots from Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision ##92, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:58 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioner is requesting a repiat of Lot 2, Auditor's Subdivision #92, to develop three separate lots which would accommodate three single fami!y homes on the property located at 1583 Gardena. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are the surrounding properties with the exception of a small parcel just to the south of this property. A 40-foot strip of land is owned by the City and used as access into the park for maintenance. A home and a number of large trees currently exist on the property, The northernmost edge of the property is lower than the other part of the property. Mr. Bolin stated the lot was platted in 1949. In 1956, the existing home was constructed. In 1976, the existing home was connected to City sewer and water. Mr. Bolin stated that in reviewing the preliminary plat, staff has noted that the proposed lots exceed the code requirements for size and street frontage. Staff recommends approval of the request with the following stipulations: 1. Grading and drainage plan shall be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the Northern most edge of property. 2. Petitioner shall provide a 20-foot drainage and utility easement along North property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50-feet of the North property line of proposed Lot 1. 4. Petitioner shall provide proof that the old well located on the site is properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner shall pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant code required 12-foot utility and drainage easement along western boundary of property. 8. Petitioner shall pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and -approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. Mr. Bolin stated the northernmost lot, Lot 1, would be approximately 17,000 square feet, Lot 2 would be about 11,000 square feet, and Lot 3 would be just over 12,000 square feet. Lot 1 acts as a natural drainage area. The 20-foot easement would give the City a drainage easement in that area. Also, to address some of the neighborhood concerns with drainage and open space, staff has requested a stipulation stating that no land alterations shall happen within 50 feet of the northernmost property line. Ms. Savage asked why this is a replat rather than a lot split. Mr. Bolin stated this is because there are three lots involved. This is a reconfiguring of the entire site rather than splitting one parcel into two parcels. Ms. Savage asked if there were any legal guidelines or statutes in a situation like this where it is clear that these lots are the proper size. Are there any other guidelines in making a recommendation to approve or deny? Mr. Bolin stated staff goes by the City zoning code to make sure that all the lots will be buildable. Not only must the lots meet certain size requirements, but also that homes can be built on the lots. This is a residential area, and these will be single family homes. According to the code, the petitioners can do this and meet the requirements. Ms. Savage asked for staffs response to the letter from Glenn Lillmars indicating that he owns an adjoining property that he wanted to build on and that he was not able to build. Mr. Bolin stated he believed Mr. Lillmars' property abuts this property and was at one time platted even though they do not have access. About the same time, a 25-foot portion of the proposed Hill Drive was also platted. It is highly unlikely that Hill Drive will be extended due to the topographic constraints. In order to construct Hill Drive, it would be necessary to fill in the entire low area, which would cause drainage problems for the entire area. There would also be issues in acquiring property in order to put in a road. The City code requires 60-foot roadways with 30 feet of paved surface and 15 feet of right-of-way on either side. It is landlocked and without some major purchases of property, it would be impossible to come off Benjamin onto Hill Drive. Mr. Kondrick asked the minimum lot size. Mr. Bolin stated the minimum lot size is 9,000 square feet. Ms. Modig asked why the lots are not being separated into equal size lots. Mr. Bolin stated the main reason is that, when the petitioner was drawing up the lots, he was thinking about the low area at the nothernmost lot. In order to make that a buildable lot, he made the northernmost lot larger than the other two. Ms. Modig stated that once this subdivision is done, what prevents the future owner from making a topographic change in that low area? Mr. Bolin stated a future owner would need a grading permit. There is a storm sewer culvert that goes under Benjamin just to the north of this property. That drainage comes partially across the neighbor's property. Practically, this would not be a possibility. Mr. Hickok stated there is a stipulation that states the subdivision was approved under certain conditions. If this was filled, it would be a violation of the law. Mr. Saba stated that in walking the property, it appears there is wetland soil at the northernmost area. Has anyone looked at whether there is wetland material and if there is mitigation involved? Mr. Bolin stated he understands that the water does not set in the area very long and drains quickly. Any potential wetland in the area would be small enough in size that it would not trigger any mitigation. The area lacks wetland vegetation. Mr. Saba stated the lot located north of Lot 1 has severe erosion. What will construction do to that property as well as other? Will removing trees and vegetation add to that? Mr. Bolin stated that in reviewing this with the City engineers, they are confident that the 50-foot buffer along the northern edge and engineering staff having final approval of the grading plans would stop any potential problems with erosion and runoff. Anything done on Lot 1 should not affect the property to the north. Mr. Saba asked where the house would be located. Mr. Bolin stated a house would have to be located on the southern portion of Lot 1 at a place where they would meet the required setbacks and still stay away from that 50-foot line. Mr. Sielaff asked if the former sewage treatment systems had been properly abandoned. Mr. Bolin stated that if there is one, it will be removed when the existing home is razed. This is a requirement of the demolition permit. Ms. Modig stated that where is the drainage going to go? Mr. Bolin stated the engineering staff would like to see all the drainage go toward Benjamin. Ms. Modig stated that when the grading and drainage plan is approved, the idea is that it is going to drain away from the property itself into Benjamin. There is drainage further to the north. Will it accommodate this? Mr. Bolin stated those are all good concerns and are things that the engineering staff has looked at. The engineering staff does not want to allow any more drainage into that area, and they believe this will work. Ms. Modig stated she understands that. These are concerns of the neighborhood that have to be addressed for the neighborhood in order for it to be a peaceful project. She has concerns about that. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive into the public record letters received from Vicki Hamilton dated July 6, 1999; from James Hamilton dated July 6, 1999; and from Marjorie Rolland dated June 27, 1999. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Varichak stated he lives three blocks away and has lived there for the last 15 years. He is very familiar with the property. He is looking at this for investment purposes. They will remove the old house and build three new ones. It will improve the area. He purchased the property a few months ago. The lots are all nice sized lots. At this time, he has two people interested in building on the lots. Ms. Savage asked if the petitioner had any problems with the stipulations. Mr. Varichak stated he has no problems. They made the northern lot big in order to accommodate the landscaping. That is a nice walkout lot. They will try to save as many trees as possible. Mr. Saba asked where he would put a house on Lot 1. Mr. Varichak stated they would have to mark where 50 feet is from the north end. It is really the buyer's option to position the house. They will pick out a plan and see if it is a good fit for the lot. Currently, there are no plans. Ms. Winiecki stated she is attending the meeting on behalf of the three owners directly north of the three proposed lots. Cathy Miller and Thomas Steifer wrote a letter to the City regarding the request, which was included in the agenda packet. Ms. Winiecki read portions of the letter. Ms. Winiecki stated the homeowners she is representing purchased their lots primarily because of the scenery. Throughout the years, the entire neighborhood has enjoyed the natural setting tucked away in a big city. It appears to her the developer will come into the neighborhood, create a less than desirable area for the existing homeowners, and exit the scene without regard for the current residents. Surely, in this case, the developer will benefit. In what way will the existing property owners benefit? Will they enjoy looking at the sides or backs of the homes he built rather than taking in the beauty of the oak trees or open areas? Will they enjoy the loss of some of the wildlife in the area? Will they enjoy the additional traffic or homes being created? Will their property values go down? Most importantly, if this lot is lost to subdivision, will the next home that is sold then allow for an additional subdivision? Surely some of the lots are large enough to entice another developer? In order to protect the current residents, they need to stop this subdivision from taking place. The current homeowners like the neighborhood as it is. There is no question a developer with significant capital can subdivide the lot, take away the essence of the neighborhood, and make a hefty profit. The real question is, should they be allowed to? Ms. Wick stated she lives on the property immediately west of this property. Her entire property borders the property in question. There are a couple of things going on. One is the emotional aspect of cutting down trees. There are 24 oak trees are on the site. When stepping out her back door on a sunny day, she sees trees that are green. She will now look at siding, and she is not sure how she feels about that. She displayed a diagram showing two trees and she thought that was about the perimeter. The perimeter holds about two trees. With three houses, there will be three families, four to nine kids, six or more cars, RV's, boats, etc., instead of all these really nice oak trees. That is the emotional piece. Ms. Wick stated the other part is about it being problematic. The Commission asked great questions. What about the erosion? What about the drainage? Can you put a house on that big lot? Is it going to change the drainage? Can you expect that there will not be erosion when it is occurring now on the property to the north? She was not sure these questions were answered. Her concern is how the Planning Commission can make a decision until they know those answers from the engineers? If members have not been to the site, she would invite them to come out and walk the lot. She loves the trees and thought they were over 100 years old. Ms. Wick stated she has spoken with Mr. Varichak. He seemed like a nice man. While he does live in the neighborhood, he does not live next door. She is willing to accept some compromise. Maybe she does not have a choice, but she and her neighbors are willing to take a look at a compromise - perhaps two houses rather than three to save more trees. At the slope, there is a pocket of eight or nine trees that will have to go. If two houses are put at the higher portion of the lot, they will be closer to the road. She agreed that it is probably okay for the house to be demolished. There is more compromise than just marking some trees. She thought they needed to go further than just 95% of these big old trees missing. Ms. Wick stated she has a petition signed by approximately 65 of the neighbors. She asked that this be presented to the City Council. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded to Ms. Modig, to accept the signed petition into the public record. UPON A VOICE VOTE,ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Larson stated he lives across the street from the property. He agrees that the house should be demolished. He has talked to the neighbors and all are opposed to three houses going in. All the lots around there are fairly decent size. All the properties have mature trees. If they start taking them down, they will not see mature trees. This is not an investment to him. He will not see anything in his pocket. This is all that the petitioner is looking at. He thinks there could be a compromise. He has a child who enjoys getting out and playing in the neighborhood. It would be sad for him to have three houses go in there. Besides the extra traffic, Gardena is a busy street as it is right now. With three houses, there will be a minimum of six cars. He just doesn't think this is right. Ms. Wilson lives directly across the street from the property. She concurs with everything that has been said so far. She had concerns about Lot#3 and asked for the dimensions of that lot. Mr. Bolin stated Lot#3 measures 90 feet x 134 feet. Ms. Wilson asked if staff had described the slope that is there from Lot 3 to Lot 1, and how a house could be built into that hill. Mr. Bolin stated Lot 2 is fairly level. Most of the slope is on Lot 1. Ms. Wilson stated she concurred that the house should be taken down. They had heard rumors of having 3 feet taken off that property. As a neighborhood, they have all mature trees, deep lots, park land behind them, lots of animals, and lots of rolling hills. She is very opposed to squishing three houses in there. If the developer had come to the neighborhood with a proposal for two houses, that might have been easier to swallow. Ms. Kuhlmeyer concurred with the comments. She lives across the street from the property. She is concerned about the tax ramifications and special assessments. Are there any assessments or taxes they should be concerned about as property owners? Mr. Hickok stated that as far as assessments, all of the costs of development are borne by the developer. Neighbors and residents in the area should not expect any additional assessment because of this development. There is the added revenue of having three homes where one had existed. Ms. Hatten stated she lives across from the 50-foot area and looks at it from her front window. They purchased their house in November. The front does not look very nice because they have a big tree so they don't get any sun and grass won't grow. They have erosion and they will have erosion down the street. They are debating about taking out a tree, and now this is talking about taking out 24 trees across the street. She has a huge problem with that. Her property at the street is where water drains out. This winter, there was a cycle of freeze, thaw, freeze, etc. That part of the street was all ice. There is a huge drainage problem there right now. They already have water that backs up into the driveway when it rains heavily. She would like the City to do something about that. A house on Lot 1 with the slope will have erosion. The drainage will go into the pond. She would like someone to look further into that. Ms. Hatten stated she is totally against three houses there. She does not want to look at that across the street. She did not think this is aesthetically pleasing. If they put in a huge house, it makes the rest of the houses built in the 1950's look like dumps. That does not help her as a property owner. She stated Mr. Varichak is a very nice guy; and, if he wants to make some money, that's fine, but can he reduce the size of the houses so they fit in with the other homes in the neighborhood? She would like that to be considered. Ms. Winiecki stated that a few years ago when the north property owners had some drainage problems, the City needed to come in and redo the driveway. In addition, some of the front yard had additional fill put in. This happened during the construction of the street on Benjamin. Mr. Bailey Tiller stated he has lived in the area for 60 years. Years ago, when they started the City, they were very fortunate to have a very good manager. The taxes were $88 per year. Now the taxes are $200 and they talk about development that is costly. It is costly because keeping everything in order costs a lot of money. They have enjoyed the block the way it is, and they want to keep it the way it is. The taxes cannot take care of all the extras. You cannot put this in to get more taxes. There is nothing so nice as when you have nature. It would be nice to have it natural. If you drive off Gardena and Oakwood Manor to the west, years ago they were going to put houses in there. Now there is the most beautiful nature. They have to keep what they have as good gifts and so he wants to keep this now as a gift. Mr. Jerome Tiller stated he has lived here for 50 years and is a long time resident of the neighborhood. The Commission is faced with a terrible dilemma. Here is a gentleman who has lived three or four blocks from the neighborhood for 15 years who purchased this property on speculation. The Commission's decision is either to protect the speculator's investment or to somehow reach some sort of compromise and protect the neighborhood's investment in this beautiful lot. Some of the members have been there. This is a special lot. He always thought they would have rich neighbors someday because he never thought anyone would take that lot and split it up. There is also a steep slope on that hill. He does not know how they intend to arrange that land and put a house on that site. It will be costly in the long run because of the potential drainage problems. Mr. Jerome Tiller asked the Commission to take a hard look at the situation before making a decision. He though the neighborhood was willing to compromise. He would prefer to see one lot, but they are probably realistically thinking two lots, but he did not think anyone in the neighborhood would live very well with three lots. It would destroy the present unique situation. Fridley has a few nice garden spots. Gardena is a very old neighborhood. It has a nice mix of old and new; it is a beautiful area. You need to preserve it the best way you can. Ms. Friedmann stated she has some concerns with this proposal. The first is squishing three newly constructed homes and making them consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. She has lived in the area for about 10 years, and they liked the charm and the large trees. The glarng inconsistency of the three new homes would not be very pleasant. Her second concern is the soil composition and the potential for erosion. She has spent many years as an environmental engineer and understands this. Along with the erosion and increased drainage (which will by nature want to go north and further erode rather than going up hill onto Benjamin), erosion will be a considerable factor as well as the integrity of the structure on that soil. Her third concern is the precedent that this sets. She lives across from another elderly lady who has a beautiful lot with large old oak trees that is oversized and square footage-wise could very conceivably be split into three lots. It is a beautiful site. You could conceivably put two houses on this site. It is so inconsistent with the rest of the houses in the area and the scenery. Both of these areas are in her neighborhood. When she is out walking her dog, she enjoys the shade and the scenery and would like that to remain. Mr. Jerome Tiller stated he thought the trees are more like 300 years old. When he was little, those trees were as big as they are now. Ms. Savage asked the petitioner his reaction to a double lot split. Mr. Varichak asked if the City would consider purchasing the lot. Ms. Modig asked the petitioner if they had soil testing done on the property. Sometimes after a soil test is done, you may find that it is not buildable. Mr. Varichak stated the site is buildable. Mr. Sielaff asked how staff determined the measurement of 50 feet. Mr. Bolin stated staff sat down with the engineering department and figured out how far up the hill they would need to go to preserve that area. Mr. Sielaff stated he is concerned that Lot 1 is buildable. He is riot sure if there were any restrictions in the code that constitutes a buildable lot and what doesn't. Mr. Hickok stated the zoning code sets standards for setbacks, landscape, etc., but it does not talk about soil conditions. The building code addresses that. There is a requirement that the foundation be adequate to support the home, to prove that the footings need to be based on soil compaction tests, etc. As they build homes, they need to verify that the soil conditions are such that it will support the home proposed for the site. The questions about soil conditions are valid. The builder would find out at the time of the soil tests. Oftentimes it is not the soil but the design of the footing that needs to match that soil. Those are building issues that need to be taken to the building department. The grading requirement is specific in the building code. If the land steps down, that needs to be considered in the design of the home. On Lot 1, the builder will need to determine the contour that will be needed and the placement of the home in order to make this work properly. Mr. Sielaff stated there is no specific requirement on the degree of slope or no restrictions on degree of slope. Mr. Hickok stated there is none on a lot like this. Along the river, there is a bluff requirement. Ms. Hatten asked if the City has considered the flow of drainage to the street and how that collects in the sewer and goes back down into the pond. Has the City considered the extra impact in the area of the additional water in that area? Will that end up having standing water? Mr. Hickok stated City staff met with a development review committee consisting of staff from engineering, fire, police, assessor, and building departments to analyze the questions that the neighbors are asking. It is important to know that the planning staff is presenting information received from a number of different sources. A determination was made that three lots and three homes can work. Mr. Saba asked what level of rainfall these calculations are based upon. Mr. Hickok stated that in commercial and industrial development, they base the calculations on 10 year, 15 year, and 100 year storm events. In residential areas, it is done in very much the same fashion. They look at the density of the development, the roofs and driveways, and the kind of runoff they will get as a result of that development. They look at the hard surface area and the areas to handle that capacity. In this case, the answer has been yes. Mr. Saba asked what criteria is used to save trees. Mr. Hickok stated they were obligated under stipulation as part of the subdivision to protect the trees in the Royal Oaks Development south of Totino- Grace. This stipulation was in place as well. Staff did go down and mark the trees. He thinks that was a good end product. There are a good number of mature trees that were left as a result of marking the trees and then protecting those that are left during construction. Mr. Saba asked if there is an estimate of the number of trees that could be saved. Mr. Hickok stated that would depend upon the placement of the homes. Staff have talked to the developer about this. Trees are valuable to a lot. The more trees you can preserve, the more value you have in a lot. To design a home for a wooded lot, the footprint looks at the lay of the land to minimize the impact. The more trees that are preserved, the better off they are. Ms. Hatten asked if the engineers are saying that the drainage system that they have now is adequate. She did not think the current system in adequate because the water is backing up their driveway when it rains. Mr. Hickok stated there is no plan at this time to upgrade the storm sewer on Benjamin. Ms. Wick stated there are some tough questions that need to be answered. She felt like the neighbors are fighting the City. She wondered what the motivation was to try to convince the Commission that three lots is a qood idea. CITY OF Communit Development Department FRIDLEY y p p Public Hearing Notice M 1340 31 GO 6040 6031 0 6025 6030 1331 13 N-+ 1338 N c c o 6020 6021 6015 6020 6011 h�ca a' S` 6000 N M 6 ��s 1336 �' r 5995 S 6000 860T VF 'M 5993 N 5990 0 7660 CA 5965 o0 o m 5991 5960 on Z 6 �n 5928 5963 5950 > 5961 1648 1655 5926 5951 Z 5955 IgA2 1647 4' 59255941 6,50 Y 76390 CA 5940 1401 5924 5923 00 � �o 0 1631 5920 5916 LO Ln 5924 5921 Cl) C14 M rn o V 2 c°'n m Cl) c 1651 a, — 5906 1601 J J M LO r w W w 1465co , A NA co 5g 0 -1 M (O co LO � � O 00w R V 0 co to Ln co co LU 1508 c� 5871 5855 5837 5876 5829 5864 5821 55854 0 5830 5815 1423 pws 5809 SOURCES Fridley Engineering N Fridley GIS Anoka County GIS Plat Amendment Request, PS#99-03 Revised wE Petitioner: Angelique Frederiksen and Susan Okerstrom Map Date:June 13, 2011 Address: 5942 Benjamin Street NE S sun City of Fridley (Official Publication) 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 Cen- ter, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on mossommommoon Monday,June 27,2011,at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of an amendment to Plat, PS #99-03,(Varichak Addition), by Angelique Frederiksen&Susan Ok- erstrom, to amend stipulation #3, which was approved as part of Final Plat,PS#99-03,and required that"No grading or land alterations shall be per- mitted within 50 feet of the north prop- erty line of Lot V Generally located at 5942 Benjamin Street. 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 Stacy Stromberg, Planner at 763-572-3595. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreteror other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572-3500 no later than June 22,2011. The TDD number is 763-572-3534. SCOTT J.LUND MAYOR (June 16,2011)F2-BenjaminStreet 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, June 27, 2011, at 7 :30 p.m. for the purpose of : Consideration of an amendment to Plat, PS #99-03 , (Varichak Addition) , by Angelique Frederiksen & Susan Okerstrom, to amend stipulation #3 , which was approved as part of Final Plat, PS #99-03 , and required that "No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1 . " Generally located at 5942 Benjamin Street . 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 Stacy Stromberg, Planner at 763-572-3595 . Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572-3500 no later than June 22 , 2011 . The TDD number is 763-572-3534 . SCOTT J. LUND MAYOR Publish: June 16, 2011 CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO: All property owners/residents within 350 feet of property, generally located at 5942 Benjamin Street. APPLICANT: Plat, PS #99-03, (Varichak Addition), by Angelique Frederiksen & Susan Okerstrom PURPOSE: Consideration of an amendment to stipulation #3, which was approved as part of Final Plat, PS #99-03, and required that "No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1." LOCATION OF 5942 Benjamin Street PROPERTY AND LEGAL Legal description is on file and available at Fridley Municipal DESCRIPTION: Center. DATE AND TIME OF City Council Meeting: HEARING: Monday, June 27, 2011, 7:30 p.m. The City Council Meetings are televised live the night of the meeting on Channel 17. PLACE OF HEARING: Fridley Municipal Center, City Council Chambers 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN. HOW TO 1. You may attend hearings and testify. PARTICIPATE: 2. You may send a letter before the hearing to Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator, at 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN 55432 or FAX at 763-571-1287. SPECIAL Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an ACCOMODATIONS: Interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572-3500 no later than June 22, 2011. The TDD # is 763-572-3534. ANY QUESTIONS: Contact Stacy Stromberg, Planner, at 763-572-3595. Publish: June 16, 2011 AGENDA ITEM ri CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 99 1999 CrrY OF FRIDLEY Date:8/5/99 To: William Bums, City Manager From:Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Planning Commission action on PS#99-03 M-99-169 INTRODUCTION The City of Fridley has been asked by Stephen Varichak to grant preliminary plat approval, of the lot currently located at 1583 Gardena Avenue, allowing him to construct 3 single-family homes on the proposed lots. All three lots, if preliminary plat approval were granted, would meet all zoning code requirements for lot size and provide for required setbacks. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION At the July 7, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, a pubiic hearing was held for PS#99-03. A motion was made to approve preliminary plat, PS #99-03, to allow the property located at 1583 Gardena Avenue to be platted into three lots. An additional stipulation was placed on the plat approval, requiring the petitioner to have appropriate soil testing done to assure buildable home sites on Lots 1,2, and 3, before the next City Council meeting. The motion passed by majority vote. SOILS In accordance with the Planning Commission's stipulation,the petitioner hired STS Consulting, Inc. to prepare a soil report on each of the 3 lots. The report was reviewed by engineering and planning staff. The soils are favorable and conditions are right for standard 22" wide running footings on each of the 3 homes. Staff is recommending the addition of 13 stipulations based on the information contained in the soil report. These stipulations, generally, echo what was stated as construction recommendations in the soil report. The petitioner has agreed with the additional stipulations. TREES The number of 27 trees was used several times during the public hearing by neighbors. Staff staked the approximate setback locations on each lot and counted trees within the typical building area and within the setbacks. About 22 significant (mature) trees are located within the property boundaries (there are some shrubs along the boundaries of the site, and a clump of shrubs between Lots 1 and 2, 1 being the northerly lot). 8 -10 trees lie within the buildable areas for the homes. The petitioner stated that he believed that the number of trees he thought he would need to remove was between 5 - 10. Staff has stipulated that the petitioner prepare a tree preservation plan for each lot to assure that only those trees absolutely necessary to be removed, are removed. This approach was also used at the Royal Oaks development. SLOPES The slopes on this site are workable from a construction standpoint and are actually very favorable for attracting homebuyers looking for a lot with character, in a well-established neighborhood. Staff is however, recommending that the petitioner move the lot lines on the southernmost lots. Lot 2 would then be 75 feet, rather than 80 wide and Lot 3 would then be 80 feet,rather than 90 feet wide (lot 3 is the one at the corner of Gardena and Benjamin). These widths still comply with the minimum requirements. By shifting the lot lines to the south, 15 additional feet on the uphill side of the slope for Lot 1 becomes available. It moves a potential house further south, away from existing neighbors, and it may make the difference in saving 2 additional trees. RUN-OFF Council will note in one of the new staff stipulations there is a requirement that the run-off from the 3 new roofs be directed through gutter and downspouts to the west drainage easement. In that easement area, minor terraces will be required (in areas safe from tree roots) to slow the roof-top water down and allow saturation, prior to any residual water entering the low area on the northernmost lot. In addition, the northerly 50 feet of Lot 1 will dedicated as'a drainage easement to protect the area from development. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning Commission and grant the proposed preliminary plat request, PS##99-03,with 23 stipulations as presented: 1. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the Northern most edge of property. The plan shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of 12%, or less around the home's foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the 12' drainage easement, to slow existing run-off and assure some saturation of roof-top run-off directed toward the pond. 2. The petitioner shall dedicate a 20' utility easement and a 50 foot drainage easement along North property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 of the North property line of proposed Lot 1. 4. Provide proof that the old well located on the site is properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner to pay$750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner to grant code required 12' utility and drainage easement along western boundary of property. 8. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 10. A perimeter drain system, as reco.=nended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drain pipe shall be a free draining granular material such as 3/4 to 1 %i inch rock or pea gravel. 11. No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the uppermost 18 to 20 inches to act as a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 12. All masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 13. The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be a free-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants Ltd., Project# 97479, dated July 27, 1999. 14. Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 15. Al backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not settle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 16. All exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the walls in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 17. Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all run-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submitted will be partly predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed. 18. All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 19. Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly attached to the structure to allow free/independent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 20. No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills of sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 21. A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 22. Adequate compaction and density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 23. The preliminary plat shall be revised to reduce the width of lot 3 by 10' to 80 feet and lot 2 shall be reduced by 5' to 75 feet in width to provide a more level building pad for lot 1. The revised preliminary plat shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to submission of the final plat. AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 139 1999 ILIFRIDLOE DATE: December 9, 1999 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager ( FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott J. Hickok, Planning Coordinator SUBJECT: Final Plat for the Varichak Addition On August 9, 1999, the City Council approved the Varichak Addition preliminary plat to create three lots at the northwest Corner of Benjamin and Gardena. The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of this request at their July 7, 1999 meeting. The preliminary plat approval required certain lot size and easement modification be completed prior to the creation of the final plat. With one exception, all modifications were made. The modification that was not made, was an oversight on the part of the surveyor's office. A 20' utility easement and a 50' drainage easement along the north property line were both required. The 20, utility easement was prepared on the mylars. The 50' easement was overlooked. In lieu of having the mylars redrawn, the County will accept an easement document (to be filed with the plat). This document will describe the 50' easement area and assure that in future searches the easement information is revealed. Staff is comfortable with a companion document filed with the plat to identify the 50' easement. Staff would recommend however, that Council's approval be based on one additional stipulation. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the enclosed plat with the 23 stipulations approved with the preliminary plat, plus one additional stipulation. The petitioner shall have an easement document prepared, in recordable form, identifying the 50' required along the entire north property line. M-99-302 47 t AGENDA ITEM ri CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 13, 1999 ffFRIDLOEY DATE: December 9, 1999 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott J. Hickok, Planning Coordinator SUBJECT: Development Agreement for the Varichak Addition On August 9, 1999, the City Council approved the Varichak Addition plat to create three lots at the northwest Corner of Benjamin and Gardena. At the August 9t" meeting, City Attorney, Fritz Knaak, suggested that due to the complexity and number of stipulations, that a development agreement be required to be filed with the plat. That development agreement has been attached for your review and approval. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the enclosed development agreement as submitted. M-99-300 39 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this ______ day of _________1 1999, between the City of Fridley, acting through its Mayor and City Manager(hereinafter called the "City"), and Stephen P. Varichak, Dolores M. Varichak, James Surdyk, and Lynne E. Surdyk (hereinafter called the "Developers"). WHEREAS, The Developers have made application to the City Council for the approval of a plat of land within the corporate limits of the City described as follows: See attached Exhibit A. (the "Subdivision"); and WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution# , adopted ________1 1999, granted Developer's plat request for a portion of the property to allow it to construct three single family homes on the subdivision on the condition that the subdivision is developed according to the site plan, dated _____1 1999, and in accordance with stipulations of approval incorporated herein by reference (See attached Exhibit B). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby agreed as follows: 1. Improvements. Improvements shall include, but not be limited to the following: Concrete curb and gutter repair at driveway aprons ♦ Approved site grading and drainage plans ♦ Underground utilities for the three new homes ♦ Setting of lot and block monuments ♦ Surveying and staking ♦ Temporary tree protection devices The improvements shall be installed in accordance with City standards, ordinances, City Council prescribed stipulations, and technical specifications. The Developers, future owner, its contractor or subcontractors, shall construct 3 new single family homes. The Developers, future owner, its contractors or subcontractors, shall follow all instructions received from the City's inspectors. The Developer, future owner, their engineer or builders shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Hall with all parties concerned, including the City Staff, to review the program for the construction of each home. 2. Water and Sewer A water and sewer lateral fee assessment will be applied to each lot. 40 (A) The Developers, future owner, its contractor, or subcontractors shall stub water and sewer services to the two additional lots located off Benjamin Drive. These water and sewer services shall be inspected and must meet all City standards. The City (at the developer's expense)will patch the street following the installation of water and sewer services, the Developers, future owner, its contractors, or subcontractors must have the cut approved by the Public Works Department of the City. 3. Grading, Erosion Control, and Tree Preservation Plans. The Developers, future owner, its contractor, or subcontractor shall submit a grading and drainage, erosion control, and tree preservation plan which shall clearly show for each lot: (A) The grading limits for the construction of the new home. (B)All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfill operations shall be re-sodded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan. If the Developers, future homeowner, its contractor, or subcontractor does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City and the Anoka County Soil and Water Conservation District, or the Rice Creek Watershed District, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion. The City will endeavor to notify the Developers, future homeowner, contractor, or subcontractor in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developers' and City's rights or obligations hereunder. (C)The location of warning signage (tree protection ribbon) that will be placed around the perimeter of the construction limits protecting all significant trees outside the construction limits. (D)The location of any significant trees to be saved inside the construction limits. Any significant trees to be saved shall have fencing around them, which shall extend wherever possible to the tree drip line. No construction or grading work shall commence until the City staff has field inspected items (1) and (2) above. 4. Street Clean Up. At any time upon the request of City staff and after the construction is complete, the Developers shall clear all soil, earth, or debris from the streets and storm sewer and from the lots within the development resulting from any construction on the land within the development by the Developers, future owners, contractors and subcontractors. 5. Permits. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits for the development of the property. The Developers, future owners, contractors, or subcontractors shall pay SAC fees at the time of the building permit issuance. 41 6. Park Dedication. In accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City, the Developer shall pay a park dedication fee at a rate of$750.00 per lot at the time of building permit issuance. The total park dedication fee for the development is $2,250.00. (three lots x $750.00 = $2,250.00). 7. Drainage Easement. The Developer shall provide the City with a drainage easement dedicated on the plat over the northernmost 50' of the property. 8. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers, and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 9. Final Plat Approval. The City agrees to give final approval and shall sign the final plat of the subdivision upon execution and delivery of this agreement, and approval of the plat by the County and of all required petitions, bonds, and security. 10. Legal Proceedings. In addition to the foregoing, the City may institute any proper action of proceeding at law or at equity to abate violation of this Development Agreement, or to prevent use or occupancy of the proposed dwellings. 11. Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion of the work and construction required by this agreement, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property without further notice or action. 12. Transfers of Interest . The Developer agrees that it will not sell, rent, nor cause to be occupied, any premises constructed on the development or within the development until the City has approved the construction of the improvements covered by this Development Agreement, the applicable building codes, and other applicable government regulations and has issued a Certificate of Occupancy, unless the City has agreed in writing to waive this requirement as to specific premises. 13. Attorneys' Fees. The Developer agrees to pay the City reasonable attorneys'fees and costs incurred in the event of any lawsuit or action is commenced to enforce the terms of this agreement and to collect sums due by the City under the terms of this agreement. 14. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this contract is for any reason held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provisions of this contract, and the remaining provisions of this contract shall not in any way be affected or impaired. 42 r 15. Binding Effect. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns if any of the Developers and City hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of all or any part of the subdivision, and shall be deemed covenants running with the land. Reference in this document to the developer, if there be more than one, shall mean each and all of them. This agreement, at the option of the City, shall be placed of record so as to give notice of this agreement to subsequent purchasers and encumbrances of all or any part of the subdivision. All recording fees, if any, shall be paid by the developer. SIGNED AND EXECUTED by the parties hereto on this----_—day of ----------------- 1999 DEVELOPERS CITY OF FRIDLEY By:----------------------- By:----------------------- Stephen P. Varichak Nancy J. Jorgenson, Mayor By:----------------------- Dolores M. Varichak By:----------------------- James Surdyk By:----------------------- Lynne E. Surdyk ATTEST: ----------------------------- Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk 43 EXHIBIT B - STIPULATIONS APPROVED BY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL 1. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the northernmost edge of the property. The plan shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of twelve percent(12%), or less around the homes foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the twelve foot drainage easement, to slow existing run-off and assure some saturation of roof-top run-off directed toward the pond. 2. The petitioner shall dedicate a 20 foot utility easement and a 50 foot drainage easement along north property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1. 4. Provide proof that the old well located on the site has been properly capped or removed. s. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. The petitioner shall pay$750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant Code required 12 foot utility and drainage easement along the western boundary of the property. s. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site plan for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. io. A perimeter drain system, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drainpipe shall be a free draining granular material such as three quarter inch to one and one quarter inch rock or pea gravel. 1 i. No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the uppermost 18 -20 inches to act s a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 12. All masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 13. The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be free-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants., Project#97479, dated July 27, 1999. 44 14. Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. is. All backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not settle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 16. All exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the walls in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 17. Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all run-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submitted will be in-part predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed. is. All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. i9. Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly attached to the structure to allow free/independent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 20. No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills of sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 21. A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 22. Adequate compaction density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 23.The final plat shall reflect a reduced the width of Lot 3 by 10' to 80' and said Lot 2 shall be reduced by 5' from 80' to 75' in width to provide a more level building pad for Lot 1. 45 r EXHIBIT,&- PLAT APPROVED BY COUNCIL s N d h o ro In•' y' �- y OC C3 I I --- 1338:S rr1MM-28 " I __ --•.uaaas co«r-- _ I I • -- • • rox • _- w _ ° R I r� I •c M r I �� 'O•� j i I �; 1 �� i5� I I L (`� 1 I '• .,;.view I I � a I �� [6-4 l 1 n� rr ^ I C> I r l J I I I I 1• I I------ ------ J L--------I L--- I ! • wtn ° Wif • ° cove ° r°R- I — I I I I I I C; � I (r I U 2 l\J\ 10 LI V) it In fit iS I , t � - 1r R _ 0 46 AM AGENDA ITEM ri CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 279 2011 My OF FRIDLEY Date: June 20, 2011 (� To: William Burns, City ManagerI" From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Manager Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Public Hearing Regarding Amending Stipulation #3 for PS#99-03 ANALYSIS In 1999, the single family property at 1583 Gardena Avenue was replatted to allow the �o creation of three single family lots. Those lots have since been developed and are addressed as 5906, 5924, and 5942 Benjamin Street. During the preliminary plat process there was a great deal of concern about the drainage impacts that these newly created lots would have on the surrounding area and as a result, m several stipulations were developed to help alleviate those concerns. One of those stipulations was#3, which states, "No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1", which is 5942 Benjamin Street. That 50 feet was dedicated as a drainage easement to manage the flow of water from Benjamin Street to the i�s1 isss low area west of this property. As a result of that stipulation, the property owners simply sodded this area when they constructed their ` house and have left it that way until recently. � ncaR'e�traa� auF wa=- = A few weeks ago, the City's Engineering staff hk noticed that landscape work was being done w , within this 50 feet area, and alerted the 1 property owners to the stipulation. As a result,the property owners and their landscape contractor came in and met with City staff. The property owner's landscape contractor explained to City staff that they are proposing to install a "rain water harvest system." He explains that, "the rain water harvest system allows the homeowner to retain several hundred gallons of rainwater while circulating it through an artistic waterfall and stream. The goal is to keep the rainwater and recycle it back into the landscape." He also states that "the new landscape plan will in no way hinder drainage on this site, in fact it will allow for less run-off from this property to the low area to the west of the property.The existing slope will be minimized, therefore reducing water run-off from the property and into the watershed. " Based on the discussions with the landscape contractor, the literature provided from him on the rainwater harvest system, and discussions with Cathy Miller,who owns the property north of the subject property at 5950 Benjamin Street, who will be most closely affected by this project, staff is agreeable to amend stipulation#3. Staff is proposing that stipulation#3 read, "Any grading or land alteration within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1 shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to commencement of project. Any work approved shall protect adjacent trees, whose drip line is within the project area,with the use of a protective fence around that drip line of the trees." RECOMMENDATION City staff requests that the City Council hold a public hearing on June 27, 2011 to ensure that any public concerns regarding this change are heard and given consideration regarding any modifications to stipulation No. 3 on the Varichak Plat, PS#99-03. Staffs proposed change is: 3. '"'^ of T Any grading or land alteration within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1 shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to commencement of project. Any work approved shall protect adjacent trees, whose drip line is within the project area, with the use of a protective fence around that drip line of the trees. 2 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE 3 management. Mr./�K�naak, Attorney, recommended the development agreement format, which was Stipulatpon approval by Council, the agreement would be recorded. Staff recommendedurrence. APPROVED DEVAGREEMENT. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 96-1999 APPROVING A FINAL PLAT, PS #99-03, BY STEPHEN VARICHAK TO REPLAT PROPERTY TO ACCOMMODATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GARDENA AVENUE AND BENJAMIN STREET (WARD 2): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that staff recommended the approval of the final plat with one additional stipulation. Since the petitioner's surveyor inadvertently neglected to include a 50 foot drainage easement on the mylars for the final plat, staff stipulated that an easement document be prepared in recordable form and that the document be attached to the recorded final plat. With this change, staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 96-1999. 8. RESOLUTION NO.,97-1999 APPROVING A VACATION SAV #99-07 VACATING DRAINAGE AND U LITY EASEMENTS BY MEDTRONIC INC. WARD 1): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that Medtronic requested that Council vacate the drainage and utility easements that were riginally associated with the seven single family lots on Jackson and Quincy Streets. They also quested the vacation of an easement on the northeast corner of the site. These vacated ease men would be replaced by a new easement which encompasses newly constructed utilities. After re 'ew at their December 1 meeting, the Planning Commission gave their unanimous consent to th e two vacations with two stipulations. Staff recommended Council's concurrence. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 7-1999. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 98-1999 APP OVING A PLAT PS #99-01 BY MEDTRONIC INC. TO REPLAT PROPERTY TO A COMMODATE THE MEDTRONIC CORPORATE CAMPUS GENERALLY LOCAT D AT MEDTRONIC PARKWAY AND TH 65 (WARD 1): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the eliminary plat for the Medtronic project as approved by Council on May 24, 1999 has been fina 'zed. The final plat was in order and contained the easements which were required as part of th drainage and utility vacation action considered in Item No. 8. The council agenda book contain d an exhibit that includes all of the stipulations for this plat. Staff recommended Council's approv 1. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NUMBER NO. 98 1999. 10. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL LEGISLATION AND APPROVING EXTENSION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANC G DISTRICT NO. 6: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this resolution w Id approve the terms for extension of the Medtronic Tax Increment District that were contain d in legislation adopted by the State I FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13 1999 PAGE 4 Legislature in 1999. The law enables the City to extend the/DEVLOPNIENT this dist ' t, TIF District No. 6, from 2011 to 2025. These terms have been agreed tool strict No. 13 and by Anoka County. The City must file a certificate attesting ov s as well as its own approval prior to the beginning of the next legislative sessioion is to remain valid. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA AFTER ITEM NO. 27. 11. RESOLUTION NO. 100-1999 MODIFYING THEPNIENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT #1 AND THE TAX I CREMENT FINANICNG PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NUMBERS 1 THROUGH 3 6 7 AND 9 THROUGH 16 TO REFLECT ENLARGE NT OF THE PROJECT AREA AND INCREASED PROJECT COSTS TO BE UNDE AKEN WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NUMBER 1: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that there are t e actions encompassed by this resolution. The first action is enlargement of the City's red elopment project area. The second action is modification of TIF budgets within the rede elopment plan. The third action is amendment of the plan as it relates to TIF District No. 6 * a manner which extends the district in accordance with 1999 State law. Mr. Burns said that there were maps in uded in the packet of the enlargement of the project area. Extension encompasses land along 1- 94 from Highway 65 to the Mississippi River. It covers the Gateway East and Hyde Park a as east of the railroad tracks. It also covers all of the area west of the tracks from 61" Av ue South. Additionally, it covers Riverview Heights and seventy scattered parcels that w have identified for future rehabilitation. By extending the project area, the City would g n the flexibility to do future projects in this area. The action, however, does not create tax increment financing districts in theses areas. These would be created later when the City d es specific projects. Mr. Burns continued by aying that the modification of the budgets are for existing districts, including the Medtronic istrict (District No. 6). They restate district expenditures in keeping with revenues raised in e districts. Restated budgets for District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 are ntained in Exhibit I-C of Council's packet material. Amendment of the IF Plan No. 6 is to extend the duration of the district. By this action, staff would be modifyi g the plan for District No. 6 as provided for in 1999 State legislation. These modifications ha e been approved by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), the Columbia eights School Board and the Anoka County Board. Staff recommended Council's app oval of these items. THIS ITE WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE RE ULAR AGENDA. 12. RESO TION NO. 101-1999 WAIVING PREPAYMENT PROVISIONS RELATING TO GENF,AAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT NOTE SERIES 1997: FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE 4 Legislature in 1999. The law enables the City to extend the/DEVLOPMENT this dist ' t, TIF District No. 6, from 2011 to 2025. These terms have been agreed tool strict No. 13 and by Anoka County. The City must file a certificate attesting ov s as well as its own approval prior to the beginning of the next legislative sessioion is to remain valid. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA AFTER ITEM NO. 27. 11. RESOLUTION NO. 100-1999 MODIFYING THEPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT #1 AND THE TAX Il CREivIENT FINANICNG PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NUMBERS 1 THROUGH 3 6 7 AND 9 THROUGH 16 TO REFLECT ENLARGEIVttNT OF THE PROJECT AREA AND INCREASED PROJECT COSTS TO BE UNDE AKEN WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NUMBER 1: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that there are t ee actions encompassed by this resolution. The first action is enlargement of the City's red elopment project area. The second action is modification of TIF budgets within the rede elopment plan. The third action is amendment of the plan as it relates to TIF District No. 6 * a manner which extends the district in accordance with 1999 State law. Mr. Burns said that there were maps in uded in the packet of the enlargement of the project area. Extension encompasses land along I- 94 from Highway 65 to the Mississippi River. It covers the Gateway East and Hyde Park a as east of the railroad tracks. It also covers all of the area west of the tracks from 61" Av ue South. Additionally, it covers Riverview Heights and seventy scattered parcels that w have identified for future rehabilitation. By extending the project area, the City would g n the flexibility to do future projects in this area. The action, however, does not create tax increment financing districts in theses areas. These would be created later when the City d es specific projects. Mr. Burns continued by aying that the modification of the budgets are for existing districts, including the Medtronic istrict (District No. 6). They restate district expenditures in keeping with revenues raised in e districts. Restated budgets for District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 are ntained in Exhibit I-C of Council's packet material. Amendment of the IF Plan No. 6 is to extend the duration of the district. By this action, staff would be modifyi g the plan for District No. 6 as provided for in 1999 State legislation. These modifications ha e been approved by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), the Columbia eights School Board and the Anoka County Board. Staff recommended Council's app oval of these items. THIS ITE I WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE RE ULAR AGENDA. 12. RESOI, TION NO 101-1999 WAIVING PREPAYMENT PROVISIONS RELATING TO GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT NOTE, SERIES 1997: RESOLUTION NO. 96- 1999 RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLAT, P.S. #99-03, BY STEPHEN VARICHAK TO REPLAT PROPERTY TO ACCOMMODATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GARDENA AND BENJAMIN. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 7, 1999, and recommended approval of said plat; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for the VARICHAK ADDITION at the August 9, 1999, with stipulations attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes that the VARICHAK ADDITION replaces the former Lot 2, Auditor's Subdivision 92; and WHEREAS, a copy of the VARICHAK ADDITION has been attached as Exhibit B. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council approves the Final Plat for VARICHAK ADDITION and directs the petitioner to record plat at Anoka County within six months of this approval or such approval shall be null and void. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 13th DAY OF DECEMBER, 1999. ANcy J� E/N ON-MAYOR ATTEST: L DE RA A. SKOGEN- TY CLERK CI7YOF FMDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER•6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY,MN 55432•(612)571-3450•FAX(612)571-1287 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE December 15, 1999 Stephen Varichak and James Surdyk 1558 Briardale Road Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Varichak & Mr. Surdyk: On December 13, 1999, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a Final Plat, PS #99-03, to create three lots at the northwest corner of Benjamin and Gardena, legally described as Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92, Anoka County, MN, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue. Approval of this Plat, PS #99-03, is contingent upon the following stipulations: 1. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the northernmost edge of the property. The plan shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of twelve percent (12%), or less around the homes foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the twelve foot drainage easerrierii, W siow existing run-off aid as3urc_ -CM.3 :,uturutbn of roof- top run-off directed toward the pond. 2. The petitioner shall dedicate a 20 foot utility easement and a 50 foot drainage easement along north property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1. 4. Provide proof that the old well located on the site has been properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. The petitioner shall pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant Code required 12 foot utility and drainage easement along the western boundary of the property. 8. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site plan for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 1o. A perimeter drain system, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drainpipe shall be a free draining granular material such as three quarter inch to one and one quarter inch rock or pea gravel. 11. No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the uppermost 18 - 20 inches to act s a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 12. All masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 13. The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be free-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants., Project# 97479, dated July 27, 1999. 14. Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 15. All backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not settle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 16. All exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the wails in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 17. Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all run-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submitted will be in-part predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed. 18. All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 19. Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly attached to the structure to allow free/independent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 20. No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills of sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 21. A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 22. Adequate compaction density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 23. Tile final pini jii8il ieii8:t a 12di!:,C:u the wlutli of Lvt '.' by 1 to 80' and said Lot 2 shall be reduced by 5' from 80' to 75' in width to provide a more level building pad for Lot 1. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 612-572-3590. Si c rely, arbara Dacy, AICP Community Development Director BD/jt cc: Address File Assessing Dept. Gis Dept. Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by December 27, 1999. oncur with action taken. C-99-218 RESOLUTION NO. 2011-29 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO A STIPULATION ON PLAT,P.S. #99-03, VARICHAK ADDITION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5906, 5924,AND 5942 BENJAMIN STREET NE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 7, 1999, and recommended approval of said plat; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for VARICHAK ADDITION at the August 9, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the final plat at their December 13, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS, there has been a request from the property owners at 5942 Benjamin Street, legally described as LOT 1, BLOCK 1, VARICHAK ADDITION, to modify stipulation#3 originally approved with the VARICHAK ADDITION, which relates to grading and land alterations within 50 feet of the north property line of the property at 5942 Benjamin Street; and WHEREAS, that stipulation amendment has been reviewed and approved by City staff and is attached in Exhibit A attached; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the City Council approves the stipulation amendment for stipulation#3 on Plat, P.S. #99-03, VARICHAK ADDITION. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 27'M DAY OF JUNE 2011. AVIV SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGE - CITY CLERK Resolution No. 2011-29 Page 2 VARICHAK ADDITION STIPULATION AMENDMENT EXHIBIT A STIPULATIONS 3. Ne grading ef land after-miens shall be peffnitted within 50 fiaet ef the ne pfepei4y line ef Let 1, Any grading or land alteration within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot I shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to commencement of project. Any work approved shall protect adjacent trees, whose drip line is within the project area, with the use of a protective fence around that drip line of the trees. Resolution No. 96-1999 Page 2 EXHIBIT A STIPULATIONS APPROVED BY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL FOR PS 99-03 1. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the northernmost edge of the property. The plan shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of twelve percent (12%), or less around the homes foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the twelve foot drainage easement, to slow existing run-off and assure some saturation of roof-top run- off directed toward the pond. 2. The petitioner shall dedicate a 20 foot utility easement and a 50 foot drainage easement along north property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1. 4. Provide proof that the old well located on the site has been properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. The petitioner shall pay$750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant Code required 12 foot utility and drainage easement along the western boundary of the property. 8. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site plan for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 10. A perimeter drain system, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drainpipe shall be a free draining granular material such as three quarter inch to one and one quarter inch rock or pea gravel. 11. No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the uppermost 18 - 20 inches to act s a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 12. All masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. Resolution No. 96-1999 Page 3 13. The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be free-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants., Project # 97479, dated July 27, 1999. 14. Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 15. All backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not settle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 16. All exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the walls in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 17. Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all run-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submitted will be in-part predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed. 18. All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 19. Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly attached to the structure to allow free/independent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 20. No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills of sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 21. A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 22. Adequate compaction density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 23. The final plat shall reflect a reduced the width of Lot 3 by 10' to 80' and said Lot 2 shall be reduced by 5' from 80' to 75' in width to provide a more level building pad for Lot 1. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HIS AGREEMENT, made this_ day of ' 1999, between the City of Fridley, acting through its Mayor and City Manager (hereinafter called the "City"), and Stephen P. Varichak, Dolores M. Varichak, James Surdyk, and Lynne E. Surdyk(hereinafter called the "Developers"). WHEREAS, The Developers have made application to the City Council for the approval of a plat of land within the corporate limits of the City described as follows: See attached Exhibit A. (the"Subdivision"); and WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution# , adopted , 1999, granted Developer's plat request for a portion of the property to allow it to construct three single family homes on the subdivision on the condition that the subdivision is developed according to the site plan, dated 1999, and in accordance with stipulations of approval incorporated herein by reference (See attached Exhibit B). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby agreed as follows: 1. Improvements. Improvements shall include, but not be limited to the following: ♦ Concrete curb and gutter repair at driveway aprons Approved site grading and drainage plans ♦ Underground utilities for the three new homes Setting of lot and block monuments ♦ Surveying and staking ♦ Temporary tree protection devices The improvements shall be installed in accordance with City standards, ordinances, City Council prescribed stipulations, and technical specifications. The Developers, future owner, its contractor or subcontractors, shall construct 3 new single family homes. The Developers, future owner, its contractors or subcontractors, shall follow all instructions received from the City's inspectors. The Developer, future owner, their engineer or builders shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Hall with all parties concerned, including the City Staff, to review the program for the construction of each home. 2. Water and Sewer A water and sewer lateral fee assessment will be applied to each lot. 40 (A) The Developers, future owner, its contractor, or subcontractors shall stub water and sewer services to the two additional lots located off Benjamin Drive. These water and sewer services shall be inspected and must meet all City standards. The City (at the developer's expense) will patch the street following the installation of water and sewer services, the Developers, future owner, its contractors, or subcontractors must have the cut approved by the Public Works Department of the City. 3. Grading, Erosion Control, and Tree Preservation Plans. The Developers, future owner, its contractor, or subcontractor shall submit a grading and drainage, erosion control, and tree preservation plan which shall clearly show for each lot: (A) The grading limits for the construction of the new home. (B) All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfill operations shall be re-sodded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan. If the Developers, future homeowner, its contractor, or subcontractor does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City and the Anoka County Soil and Water Conservation District, or the Rice Creek Watershed District, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion. The City will endeavor to notify the Developers, future homeowner, contractor, or subcontractor in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developers' and City's rights or obligations hereunder. (C)The location of warning signage (tree protection ribbon) that will be placed around the perimeter of the construction limits protecting all significant trees outside the construction limits. (D)The location of any significant trees to be saved inside the construction limits. Any significant trees to be saved shall have fencing around them, which shall extend wherever possible to the tree drip line. No construction or grading work shall commence until the City staff has field inspected items (1) and (2) above. 4. Street Clean Up. At any time upon the request of City staff and after the construction is complete, the Developers shall clear all soil, earth, or debris from the streets and storm sewer and from the lots within the development resulting from any construction on the land within the development by the Developers, future owners, contractors and subcontractors. 5. Permits. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits for the development of the property. The Developers, future owners, contractors, or subcontractors shall pay SAC fees at the time of the building permit issuance. 41 6. Park Dedication. In accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City, the Developer shall pay a park dedication fee at a rate of$750.00 per lot at the tirr°i of building permit issuance. The total park dedication fee for the development is$2,250.00. (three lots x $750.00 = $2,250.00). 7. Drainage Easement. The Developer shall provide the City with a drainage easement dedicated on the plat over the northernmost 50' of the property. 8. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers, and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 9. Final Plat Approval. The City agrees to give final approval and shall sign the final plat of the subdivision upon execution and delivery of this agreement, and approval of the plat by the County and of all required petitions, bonds, and security. 10. Legal Proceedings. In addition to the foregoing, the City may institute any proper action of proceeding at law or at equity to abate violation of this Development Agreement, or to prevent use or occupancy of the proposed dwellings. 11. Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion of the work and construction required by this agreement, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property without further notice or action. 12. Transfers of Interest . The Developer agrees that it will not sell, rent, nor cause to be occupied, any premises constructed on the development or within the development until the City has approved the construction of the improvements covered by this Development Agreement, the applicable building codes, and other applicable government regulations and has issued a Certificate of Occupancy, unless the City has agreed in writing to waive this requirement as to specific premises. 13. Attorneys' Fees. The Developer agrees to pay the City reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in the event of any lawsuit or action is commenced to enforce the terms of this agreement and to collect sums due by the City under the terms of this agreement. 14. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this contract is for any reason held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provisions of this contract, and the remaining provisions of this contract shall not in any way be affected or impaired. 42 15. Binding Effect. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns if any of the Developers and City hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of all or any part of the subdivision, and shall be deemed covenants running with the land. Reference in this document to the developer, if there be more than one, shall mean each and all of them. This agreement, at the option of the City, shall be placed of record so as to give notice of this agreement to subsequent purchasers and encumbrances of all or any part of the subdivision. All recording fees, if any, shall be paid by the developer. SIGNED AND EXECUTED by the parties hereto on this day of , 1999 DEVELOPERS CITY OF FRIDLEY By-------------- By: Stephen P. Varichak Nancy J. Jorgenson, Mayor By. — - -- Dolores M. Varichak BY----------- James Surdyk B1"--------------- Lynne E. Surdyk ATTEST: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk 43 EXHIBIT B - STIPULATIONS APPROVED BY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL 1. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the northernmost edge of the property. The plan shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of twelve percent (12%), or less around the homes foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the twelve foot drainage easement, to slow existing run-off and assure some saturation of roof-top run-off directed toward the pond. 2. The petitioner shall dedicate a 20 foot utility easement and a 50 foot drainage easement along north property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1. 4. Provide proof that the old well located on the site has been properly capped or removed. s. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. The petitioner shall pay$750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant Code required 12 foot utility and drainage easement along the western boundary of the property. s. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site plan for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. io. A perimeter drain system, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drainpipe shall be a free draining granular material such as three quarter inch to one and one quarter inch rock or pea gravel. i i. No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the uppermost 18 -20 inches to act s a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 12. All masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 13. The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be free-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants., Project#97479, dated July 27, 1999. 44 14. Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 15. All backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not settle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 16. All exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the walls in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 17. Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all run-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submitted will be in-part predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed. 18. All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. i9. Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly - attached to the structure to allow freerndependent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 20. No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills of sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 21. A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 22. Adequate compaction density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 23.The final plat shall reflect a reduced the width of Lot 3 by 10'to 80' and said Lot 2 shall be reduced by 5'from 80' to 75' in width to provide a more level building pad for Lot 1. 45 t : EXHIBIT„ft- PLAT APPROVED BY COUNCIL N L� �oo h aoz 3 o N f3 r° Cr�' to ri I 1 1 •t --- :33M:a ttil'fYP::38 ; � is 1 I j 431= MOWN= • --, p•M • • 4.,r ' `s °': ' I i t I is w_, 2r 1 T IC (j C I L I ''��i _j i. r t N I I fI 6;+ Q 1. I 1•--------------JL-- -------J . la ;I I • ws+ • • wsd cep • ��— + + I a ri s•n u•,--•- �l f1 � � I I I I •: i7 M i� c� i3 I I' t• list N I 46 Plat Name Date of Number Record of Lots Acorn Hill Addition 10-5-61 6 Amber Oaks 7-28-69 19 Herrig Addition 10-6-61 4 Larry's 1St Addition 5-13-63 4 Larry's 2nd Addition 5-31-63 4 Mattson's Addition 3-25-63 2 Sakariason's Addition 4-3-63 5 Shady Oak Manor 3-15-72 7 VanCleave's Addition 11-17-59 8 Worrel's Addition 10-16-62 4 Zander's 1St Addition 6-14-76 6 5�0� y-�r��rnr rl Pesti► - a� - 3� -a� -�l- X133 SE Prier I�uKe � MN .55317 P�r� a -36) - -?a 3��e✓��- wars `I S o q aondva�o- Pve-, N 3 r KC ,� P�rKi MIV 5540 ,3 5 q�a �eraJa��l pl:rj ?q-30 -�tj- I1 - 0131 Lot Split Name Address Information Number 94-05 John Tiller 1538 Gardena Ave. Split lot 20 into 2 parcels. 87-01 Charles Rice 1541 Ferndale Ave. Split lot 1 into 2 parcels. 79-02 Allen Fehn 1601 Gardena Ave. Split s. 222' of lot 23. 73-03 Amber Construction 6070 Stinson Blvd. Make a buildable lot. 66-02 Robert O. Hale 5928 Oakwood South 75' Manor 65-03 Bailey Tiller 1535 Gardena Ave. 65-02 Costello 1623 Gardena Ave. 64-24 Gilbert Sakariason 5965 Oakwood From VanCleave Manor Addition 64-17 Walter A. Peterson 1601 Gardena Ave. Split from lot 23. 1172 16 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS SUBDIVISION (PLAT OR LOT SPLIT) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) CITY OF FRIDLEY ) In the Matter of: A Preliminary Plat, P.S. #"-03 Owner: Stephen Varichak and James Surdyk The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 9th day of August, 1999, on a petition for a subdivision pursuant to the City of Fridley's Zoning Ordinance, for the following described property: To create three single-family homes on the proposed lots, legally described as Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue. IT IS ORDERED that a subdivision be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons: Approval with 25 stipulations. See City Council meeting minutes of August 9, 1999. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY OF FRIDLEY ) • t I, Debra A. Skogen, 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 subdivision 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 :P L4 day of 19 DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. m/ Fridley, MN 55432 Debra A. Skogen, City Clerki , 'y .�° (SEAL}Y f , THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9. 1999 PAGE 21 Councilmember Billings explained that the motion brings before them the 1 , age that has the minor modifications that staff has made in the last month since the public earing and after the first reading in the agenda at the present time. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORG SON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to amend Section 09.05 by adding the following sentence: "For purposes of this section customers shall me each separately metered use of the service provided under the franchise." Seconded by Coun lmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, N OR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to amend cction 409.02, Fee Schedules, item number 1 by inserting the word "metered" between the ords monthly and gas. In item number 2 strike the word "gas" and insert the word "meter d electric" between the words monthly and bill. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTI G AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE 1,IOTION CARRIED UNANINIOU Y. MOTION by Councilmember B ette to add a new.section to Section 409.06 stating "any school district paying for one or ore customers in the City of Fridley may receive a rebate of franchise fees paid in excess of 2,000 in any given calendar year. Those eligible for the rebate can make application for the r ate at the City on any business day of the year following the year in which the rebate is app ' able. The City shall either affirm or deny the rebate within a reasonable time. For pure ses of this section customer shall mean each separately metered use of the service provided u der the franchise." This motion includes renumbering Sections 409.07 and 409.08. Seconded Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE V TE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DELCARED THE MOTION CARRI D UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Jorgenso stated that the ordinance would be published. There was a sixty-day period for the City to wa' until the ordinance was enacted, but it would appear on November's utility statement. Mayor Jorg son stated that she has been asked by the Council for a five minute break before continuing ith the meeting. The meet' g was recessed at 10:30 p.m. The me ing was reconvened at 10:45 p.m. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 22 NEW BUSINESS: - 17. REPLAT REQUEST, PS #99-03, BY STEPHEN VARICHAK, TO CREATE THREE SEPARATE LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1583 GARDENA AVENUE (WARD 2): Mr. Craig A. Ryd, 5961 Benjamin Street, stated that he wanted to make acomment briefly before he had to leave for work. He stated that there is a drainage problem that exists on his property that has almost become a safety issue. His wife and two kids have slipped and fallen when getting the mail because the water pools into his driveway. The driveway has a water problem at the beginning of the driveway. Water comes down the hill and pools into his driveway. He is not the only one with the problem in his neighborhood. In considering building in that area please, be aware that there are problems with safety issues. The trees make the area a lovely area. Preserving that area as far as the trees are concemed--was very important to the group of people in the neighborhood. The trees are beautiful. He thanked Council and stated that he was a correctional officer and had to go to work. Mr. Hickok explained that this is a replat of Lot 2 on the corner of Benjamin Street and Gardena Avenue out of Auditors Subdivision 92 to develop three separate lots to accommodate three single family homes. Currently, on that lot there exists a single amnily home with a garage. The plan was for that to be removed. In 1949 the lot was platted. In 1966 the existing home was built. In 1976 the existing home was connected to City water and sewer. The Planning Commission decided on July 7, 1999 to recommend approval- of the plat if the-petitioner completed soil analysis on each plat. The analysis has been completed, and the information has been forwarded to staff. The soil has favorable conditions for a 22-inch wide running footing and on each of the three lots. Mr. Hickok stated that the proposed lots exceed the size standard required by City Code. All three lots have suitable soils, and all grading site plans will need approval of the City's Engineering staff prior to the issuance of building permits. Councilmember Wolfe asked Mr. Hickok about the grading issue on Lot 3. He asked if they dig down to grade would that expose the roots of the trees. Mr. Hickok stated that the roots are below the grading line. Ms. Sue Wick, residing at 1565 Gardena Avenue N.E., stated that she thought the only tree it would not affect would be the tree on the corner and she thought there was a tree missing. Mr. Hickok stated that he thought that the tree missing was actually on the adjacent property. Ms. Sue Wick stated that she lived on the adjacent property and would give comment later. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Hickok for clarification of the tree document Mr. Hickok has shown. He asked if the area shown to represent the setback area could mean that the house can be no closer to the property 'lines than that but that does not necessarily mean that someone was going to build right down by that particular tree. Mr. Hickok stated that was correct and staff believed a home could be built without affecting the roots of the trees. He said the developer should come up with a plan. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 23 Councilmember Barnette stated that the house directly behind where he lives was a heavily wooded lot with mature oak trees. When that home was built about twenty years ago they had some of the same concerns. They have a tree right next to their house and all of those trees have survived. Ms. Wick stated that was some consolation. She stated that she was also concerned about how the drainage ditch adjacent to her property would work. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Hickok if the petitioner wanted to remove any of the trees would they have to justify that. Mr. Hickok stated that it was much like the Totino-Grace development. City staff would evaluate based on the setbacks where the trees would be removed. They would expect to see every building permit plan that comes in. They have to identify the trees and beyond the removal of four trees to be removed staff would be very critical. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that one of Ms. Wick's concerns was that one of her trees might be affected even though it is not on the property. Because of the root system there might be a problem. Mr. Hickok stated that staff has done the best they could based on their estimations. He was unable to say that it would not damage her tree for certain. That tree is outside of the building area, and they do not anticipate that the builder and the future home buyer would need to damage the trees on the otter edge. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what all the stipulations about soil and backfill do for drainage. Mr. Hickok stated that many of them deal with the fact that this is very sandy soil. A foundation should not be cut into a hill and then backfilled with sand, for example. More granular material would be needed to hold itself together pressed against the foundation like it should. Sand in that condition would drop down and erode out exposing the foundation eventually. Other stipulations talk about downspouts says that these three homes will not be bringing their new roof areas down the driveway through Benjamin and down the catch basin but instead it would come off the roof through the gutter downspout system and come over land which is far better because with sand you get saturation. Part of that stipulation is protecting the root system of the trees. Every time you step water it has a potential of wanting to seep in before it goes down to the next level. After the water drains to the street it would go to the catch basin which have been utilized as a drainage area. The catch basins are there already but are not working at the present time. That was something new that staff has heard through the Planning Commission process. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that one of the biggest issues is with the drainage problem of the driveway into the slope. Mr. Hickok stated that there was an existing condition. Related to this project, the City is not going to contribute to any drainage problem, control the rooftop drainage, take very little water ending up coming off the driveway, and put it into that area. It is a very nominal amount. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what he meant by a very nominal amount. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 24 Mr. Hickok stated this area was designed to accommodate the water coming off from the driveway or off the roof on the backside. It was not a question about whether or not the drainage area could accommodate the water coming off the roof or driveways. The hole is deep enough, and you could not take enough water off that roof and driveways to make that fail. Councilmember Wolfe stated that it was not going to change the amount of water flowing by building. It is just that right now the issue was not so much flowing off the driveway it was that the catch basin was not handling the water properly the way it is. Mr. John Flora, Public Works Director, stated that he just received the information in the Planning Commission meeting minutes regarding the drainage problem. They have not seen the problem but would certainly look at it to see if it is something that has to be dealt with. Mr. Stephen Varichak, 1558 Briardale, stated that Mr. Hickok has done a great job. Mr. Varichak said he was willing to go with whatever Mr. Hickok requires. He stated that-he was , only adding two driveways. He said he was unaware of the water problems being discussed. There was drainage that goes down into the hole. There were no water tables in the property currently nor when they bore 15 feet down. He stated that unless they would get a monsoon rain- they would probably never see any water run off the back of the lots. He stated that they would eliminate part of the City's financial deficit problem by building three new houses. They would. raise the local tax base from $1,000 to probably $10,000 to $12,000. Any builder would have to go through the requirements the City has. He thinks there would be very minimal amount of excess runoff. Ms. Kathy Miller, 5950 Benjamin Street, owns the property adjacent to this property onthenorth side. She stated that it was a sad day when the property owners needed to come before the City Council to request the City to take action to stop or reduce development and subdivisions in her neighborhood. They have been informed by members of the City Council that the neighborhood's opinions should be voiced, but that the decision would not be based on the neighborhood's opinion. She asked why she was there. Residents and voters would like change. They no longer are looking for City Council to vote as they have in the past. The City Council can vote, hopefully, based on the majority interest of the taxpayers, and she thought the majority were present. The trees and the open space are really one of the major issues, and the City needs to preserve and protect the natural environment in the neighborhood. Ms. Miller felt that everyone needed to start protecting the integrity and dignity of neighborhoods in the City of Fridley in general. She felt everyone needed to follow community values and model it. She asked what would happen if the builders back into a tree that was not marked to be taken out? Children play in the area, slide down the hills, and use their imagination in the woods. It has been a safe and natural environment for children and the neighbors would like to keep that. There are Boy Scouts who come to the woods to work toward their different achievements. The replating of the three houses would ruin this. Ms. Miller stated that the Drainage Section 205.04.04 Section I states that "No land shall be altered and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing flooding, erosion, or its deposits of minerals on the adjacent properties." Drainage Code 205.04.08 Section D Erosion states "No erosion shall be permitted onto neighboring properties or into natural waterways." .As far as she knows, there was no section code that overrides this code from her property, even THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 25 " though it has a current water drainage or a natural water flow. There would be more water, and there was erosion on that property. Ms. Miller felt the current issue was that adding additional water to that property with the way it was sitting, would create erosion on the hill next to their driveway, going down the center of their lawn, and would create additional grass slowly deteriorating on that point on the lawn. Thirty-five percent of the trees would be taken out, possibly more, which naturally absorb water. New sod would be put in and probably have a little more water flow with that. There was definite erosion on the street. The catch basins do not work, water flows back into her two neighbors across the street on their driveways. She asked if Council could guarantee one hundred percent that there would be no erosion, and no additional water by placing two additional houses on the adjacent lot. Ms. Miller did not think so. It sounded to her from everything she has read in the code that Council could not adversely affect neighboring properties. She still did not see any code that states you can adversely effect her property because there was a natural water flow down there. If the City does look at this issue of the erosion problem, then there are two areas of erosion taken care of potentially. The taxpayers of the City of Fridley would have to pay for the developers to have the ability to send extra water into her yard without paying for the improvements that need to be made. The neighborhood group has tried an alternative plan which was on the table, but she has not heard frorn Mr. Varichak or his partner Mr.Surdyk. Ms. Miller stated. that she assumed since she has not received a response that the developers are move interested in the.bottom line than in the preservation of the current environment. There was ars offer still on the table to put out $25,000 for a portion of Lot 1 to help preserve the space and the trees. The option was to increase the two lots at the south end of the property which would raise the sale price of those two lots. This offer was somewhat contingent on the fact that as a neighborhood they would only like to see two houses built on the property to retain more of the trees, natural beauty, dignity and integrity that they are up their trying to keep. This offer was not going to raise the value of her property but would retain the dignity they have in the neighborhood. The trees and open space are important to all communities, and the City needs to preserve and protect the natural environment within this neighborhood. Councilmember Barnette asked Ms. Miller who had proposed the $25,000 for the property. Ms. Miller stated that she had spoken with Mr. Varichak and was given a proposal saying that. she would like to buy a portion of Lot 1, enough of it to save the four trees at least. Thee proposal also allows Mr. Varichak to expand out in the other properties, as much as it would take for him to get some more money, but to keep this plan down to two houses. Councilmember Wolfe stated that building bigger houses does not fit in the neighborhood there. They would be more of an eyesore in the neighborhood. Ms. Miller stated that it would be an eyesore to a point. Ms. Miller did not think it was about building two huge houses to make up the money. Part of everybody's responsibility as a citizen, investor, or whatever is to retain the integrity of what you are building on. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that just because you have a bigger lot does not mean you need to build a bigger home. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 26 Ms. Miller stated that you could build a little bit bigger home-and get a little bit of that extra dollar back. Maybe two bigger homes would look a lot better than three homes scrunched in together. Mayor Jorgenson stated that that would be an agreement they could work out with Mr. Varichak. It was not something the City could work on, that would be a private thing. Councilmember Billings asked if the City subsidizes the drainage correction for the developer. Is Ms. Miller saying that if this development does not go through and there are not three houses here that there does not need to be a change in the drainage. Ms. Miller stated that there probably still would need to be a change in the drainage. Unfortunately, she did not have a lot of faith that that would happen. It has not been looked at before even though it was an issue before. Councilmember Billings asked if the drainage needed to be corrected anyway, how would the City arrive at the correction of the drainage being a subsidy for the developer. He asked if it needed to be fixed whether the developer does something or not. Ms Miller stated that it should be. Once the erosion goes away, the issue goes away. She stated that she was guessing that by the time this thing was done, Council would allow it anyway, and would also allow extra water flow in there. Putting in different catch basins would not take care of all of the erosion issues. There are other issues going through the center of the lot too. She assumed that extra water was going to mean some extra firming that would need to be done to that area, that she is sure would mean an additional cost to the City. Mayor Jorgenson stated that one of the issues that she heard loud and clear from the neighborhood was that they did not want any additional water going into the neighborhood, but they also do not want to have any assessment against the neighborhood for any correction of the water that was already there. If the City does water improvements they are assessed against the benefiting property owners. What the neighborhood group was asking for was exactly what they said they do not want. Ms. Miller stated that she believed she heard that the City has a budget set aside for correction of storm water issues. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the City does have another budget set aside,but it is also the benefiting properties that pay toward any issues being corrected. Ms. Miller stated that she believed the residents many, many years ago had an assessment for corrections that have been paid even before she was a property owner. Mayor Jorgenson stated that some of the properties have paid $200 to $300 toward the correction of storm water issues. Currently storm water correction issues are basically no more than $1,000 per lot. Ms. Miller stated that her question was that until there is a project, corrections are not going to be assessed to the property owners. In a previous conversation with City staff she wondered if it meant that now it was assessable when it was not a week ago. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 27 Mayor Jorgenson stated that the money Ms. Miller referred to for the Storm Water Improvement Projects go through a capital improvements process in which they look three to five years ahead as to which projects are going to be done. Mr. Flora stated that two different issues are being discussed. Storm Water Improvement is an assessable project. When they are talking about putting in a catch basin or fixing a ditch basin, that would become a maintenance issue. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that one would be assessed and one would not. The catch basins would not be assessed. The Stonybrook Project was a major project, and homeowners were assessed W,000. The surrounding group was also assessed. r Ms. Miller asked Mr. Flora what a good example would be for what would be assessable. . Mr. Flora stated that, for example, fixing the hole, by draining. Braining the hole involves a storm pipe going a long distance. If they are talking about just fixing the catch basin, that is a maintenance type of project. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that it sounds like there are drainage issues there currently, so, ultimately, no one can say at this time how to fix it. They need to study it in more detail. Mr. Flora stated that staff has not seen the problem. A possible solution would be to increase the catch basin or to change the catch basin in order to allow better water flow. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that 'Mr. John Haukaas, Assistant Public Works Director, was out in the neighborhood and could see some issues with problems or potential problems. Ms. Miller stated that the improvements they are talking about are not assessable, the issue brought forth tonight was truly the additional erosion or potential for additional erosion by adding more water onto her property or her neighbor's property. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there are multiple houses with the same adverse effect and if it was documented the water was not there before. She asked if it had to be corrected. Mr. Flora stated that he does not think they are talking about additional water. The water that would come from a rainfall was the same water that would go to the same place. The only issue was the timing. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there was additional erosion that was not there today. It happens after the homes are built. Now someone has to fix it. She asked how they would determine if that is what happened because of the homes being built there. should Mr. Flora stated that that might not occur. Mr. Hickok identified that rt s_ preclude that from happening. Ms. Miller stated that additional driveways are additional hard surface. They do appreciate the stipulations they have in place, but she did not think that they could tell her one hundred percept that there would not be additional water going into her lawn. Trees would be gone that would have been naturally absorbing water. Two extra driveways would be putting extra water onto THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9,1999 PAGE 28 Benjamin Street, and there are two extra roofs putting more water into the back and flowing it down the hill. She heard minimal effect when the TCAAP project. The Councilmembers have seen that effect since that project. Mr. Jerry Tiller, 1555 Gardena Avenue, stated that he has a degree in Soil Science from the University of Minnesota. He would like to plunge into the discussion, but that is not the issue he came to talk about. He will leave it alone, except to say that there will be additional water added. to this site from construction of the houses, and there will be less water removed when you take those big oak trees off the lot. He stated that the City of Fridley seems to be in a difficult transition period. In 1982, the City put together a comprehensive community plan that mapped out visions for the future. Not long after, the City embarked on a Values First program, that identifies and promotes the values our community and neighborhoods live by. More-recently, Council endorsed a Facing the Future with Hope Program. That program was initiated by.an interfaith collaboration of City churches. It was linked to a similar purpose and enhances the Fridley Community Vision and Values First Program already established. Mr. Tiller stated that while everyone strives to instill values and mold a progressive vision for our future our zoning and subdivision ordinances first enacted in 1958, and only tweaked a few times since then, are inadequate to support the values of the espoused and the future we hope for. Fridley is a mature, inner-ring suburb, long past its high growth hey day, yet everyone has to still abide by a subdivision ordinance that is simplistically pro-development. Unlike the Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis, and many progressive growth communities in the metropolitan area including Blaine, Fridley's subdivision ordinance stands obsolete with its inattention to preservation. It contains a few small pegs on which to hang the value preservation ideal in this modern age. As written in the ordinance, the City Council are the most substantial of those few pegs. Mr. Tiller felt that this evening, the unified Gardena neighborhood was trying to pry Council out and far enough away from a wall of an obsolete ordinance so that the residents could hang their hopes for the future upon Council. He would make four points to convince you to facilitate the reasonable compromise:Ms. Miller has just put on the table. That .compromise would allow development of the two truly buildable lots of the proposed replat, while preserving almost all of the magnificent oaks that help to give our neighborhood its character. Mr. Tiller hoped that the four points taken together, with all of the others, would help Council to summon up the courage to take a concrete step for facilitating that compromise tonight at this stage of the process. However, the neighborhood was so committed to the compromise that they were prepared to go as far into the process as they needed to go in order to achieve it. During the Planning Commission meeting on July 7, 1999 the Chair and Vice Chair both stated that a property owner could do anything they saw fit as long as it adheres to the zoning guidelines. He asked if Council would take note and begin comparing destruction of those oaks to the destruction to the trees in the rain forest. Mr. Tiller said that recently the three Fridley area churches that initiated the Facing the Future with Hope program that City Council endorsed conducted a survey Fridley neighborhoods in order to determine the values and concerns of Fridley's citizens and reported their findings to the City Council. The Gardena neighborhood was not selected for the survey so instead now more directly let the attendance of Gardena residents at tonight's meeting and the petition you have been presented, be a survey of our values and concerns. Simply stated, "We are opposed to a THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9. 1999 PAGE 29 three-lot replat of Gardena Lot 422, we believe that the proposed Lot 41 would be reckless and irresponsible, destructive to neighboring lots, and insensitive to the character and value of our neighborhood." Mr. Tiller concluded by reminding Council that Gardena is one of Fridley's oldest neighborhoods. It was first settled when Fridley was still a village, a full decade before Fridley became a city in 1949. It was correct to say that as Fridley celebrates its.50t' birthday, Gardena neighborhood celebrates its 60'. Mr. Tiller said that the previous owner homesteaded this lot for fifty years. Originally, like many of her neighbors, she lived in a basement house. In 1956, she built the house that now stands atop her original basement dwelling. Many know her adamant wish that her beautiful lot would always be preserved from development. .A few of the neighbors suspect that a conservation covenant was written into her will. The neighbors have not finished their investigation of that yet, but they do know that her son sold her property to a buyer who intends to keep the present lot intact. Mr. Tiller said that so far it is all the neighborhood knows about the history of transactions concerning that piece of-property, other than that Mr. Varichak purchased it on speculation that he would split it into three. Fridley is in a period of difficuit transition. Council has promoted the Values First program, and now by Council's actions they must face the challenge of living up to those values. Council has endorsed an interfaith effort to bring Fridley's citizens into a discussion about values and into planning for the City's future. Now Council must closely listen to what the residents have to say and act accordingly. Mr. Tiller asked Council not to let the fear of legal reprisals force them into adhering to Fridley's out of date anti-preservation ordinances. Through Council's ability to attach stipulations to replat petitions, they have the power to differentiate between what was worth preserving and what was not. Do not say that Council sympathizes with the neighborhood's concerns but that they are powerless to act appropriately. If Council is powerless then they are not our leaders. The neighbors did not come to the meeting to hear sympathy from aihninistrators. If Council is indeed leaders they would not approve Mr. Varichak's petition, especially since there was a viable compromise alternative on the table. The Gardena neighborhood urged Council to facilitate that compromise with eager determination and expected that Council would do so. The neighborhood knew that Council could. Mr. Tiller thanked Council. Mayor Jorgenson asked Mr. Tiller if his property was split off of his father's property. Mr. Tiller stated that his father split his property into three other lots, so there are four lots altogether. He split it with the intention of giving each lot to one of his three sons, which he did. They all took great care to preserve the trees on the lots. Mayor Jorgenson stated that at one time that area was called Peck's Woods. Mr. Tiller stated that he loved Peck's Woods. He said it was the greatest playground a child could ever have. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 30 Councilmember Barnette stated that it was like deja vu. He remembered 35 years ago Jerry Tiller's dad stood up and asked Council to not touch Peck's Woods. He stated that his question was how Council could deny Mr. Varichak the same rights that they allowed his dad. Mr. Tiller stated that it was a different, unusual lot. It was more densely populated with trees than his father's lots ever were. Councilmember Barnette stated that there has been a compromise between Mr. Varichak and staff to preserve as many trees as they can. Mr. Tiller stated that at first there were only nine stipulations. It was a good thing Council opposed it thus far because now there are more stipulations at least. There are 23 stipulations already, however, there should probably be more and better ones in terms of preserving trees. It was still a wish list as far as he was concerned about preserving the trees. Mr. Tiller knew that oak trees are probably the most sensitive trees to root-damage. Preservation of this lot was - important. If houses could be easily built. They could feel comfortable that it would not cause a lot of the damage to the adjacent lots, and they would not remove more trees than are necessary that would be different. Councilmember Barnette stated that these are quite large lots. Mr. Tiller stated that a 75 foot frontage is not a large lot. Mr. Hickok stated that initially they ranged from 11,000- 1.7,000 square feet. Presently 9,000 is the minimum. Mr. Tiller stated that given the character of the land, three was too much. He felt that Council had the power to do what they needed to do if they believe. There was a reasonable compromise on the table currently. Councilmember Barnette stated that it was a compromise that Council cannot make because they do not own the property. Mr. Tiller stated that Council has set 23 stipulations already. He wondered what was to stop Council from setting two more. Councilmember Barnette asked Mr. Tiller what they would be. Mr. Tiller stated that if Council gets specific then there could be a stipulation that might encourage preservation and might facilitate the compromise. Councilmember Bolkcom asked him what the compromise he was speaking of was. Mr. Tiller stated that the compromise was the offer that Ms. Miller made to Mr. Varichak t purchase part of Lot #1 for $25,000 with no intention of developing it but making the other two lots larger and more valuable in terms of size. Councilmember Billings asked what the size of the northerly lot would be then. THE NI NUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 31 Mr. Tiller stated that sizing was not discussed. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Varichak to address the specifics of Ms. Miller's offer. Mr. Varichak stated that he was, basically, offered $25,000 for a lot. It does not make any sense to him. If she wants to buy the lot for a minimum of$65,000 that was fine. If she wants to develop it down the road that would be fine. It does not make any sense to him to take a chunk out of that lot and have dead area there. If she would like to preserve it she could buy the whole thing. That lot would sell for about $65,000. The other two lots would sell for a minimum of 555,000. If you go out and look at lots today and go up to Ham Lake and Hugo, they are getting 550,000 plus for about the same size of lot. These lots would be a bargain in that respect. It would not be a problem to sell these lots. Mayor Jorgenson asked Mr. Knaak if the City could stipulate that the developer not move more than four trees on that lot. She asked if the City would be telling the developer that he could not sell that piece of property and then taking it away from him. Mr. Knaak stated that stipulation by definition requires mutual agreement. When you are dealing with a development agreement, as a condition for approvals, these kinds of concessions are mutually agreeable. If the City were to tr-y to unilaterally impose that kind of condition, it would raise the question that Mayor Jorgenson presented. Mayor Jorgenson asked if Lot 91 was taken over by the neighbors who pulled together and decided to acquire this property, in order to preserve the property. She asked if it would be well advised to put it into some type of nature conservancy prograin rather than have someone-later down the line acquire all of the property and turn it into development. Mayor Knaak stated that what they could do is transfer it to a trust or put covenants on the property that would restrict its use well into the future. That would be a voluntary private transaction, and those neighbors could do what they wanted. Mr. Bailey Tiller, residing at 1535 Gardena Avenue, asked Council to go and look at the beautiful area as it is. When Council saw it and enjoyed it, they would know why the residents attended the meeting and stayed so late in the night. He thanked Council. Mayor Jorgenson stated that they have all been to see the site. Councilmember Wolfe asked Mr. Knaak if they could legally stop Mr. Varichak from devei6ping the lots. Mr. Knaak stated that Council was not under obligation to permit the plat, but if he met the basic conditions of the platting, it was possible that he could persuade the court on the development and compel the City. Mr. Tiller stated that the problem in the subdi=vision ordinance was that it was not up-to-date. There are preservation ordinances in certain communities. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Knaak if they could legally not approve the subdivision because they want to change the ordinance. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 32 Mr. Knaak stated that they are at the preliminary plat approval stage. Something like a moratorium could be considered and passed for the purpose of conducting a study. However, that did not apply to a plat that has been preliminarily approved. Council was at the right point in the process because it has not been preliminarily approved. Councilmember Wolfe stated that everyone invests in things that we do not want to lose. He did not feel that Mr. Varichak should be punished. City staff and Mr. Flora looked at ways.of- making sure it works to keep it nice. For example, if you buy a stock you want to make money on it, but sometimes you cannot. He felt that, basically, what Mr. Varichak was doing.was buying stock and hoping to make some money. Mr. Tiller stated that in the schools they teach preservation. It is not always the economic aspect of things that should govern the decisions. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Tiller if he would agree that both of the options would each-- indicate that there would be three lots there. He would like to preserve the northernmost lot, and construction on the two southerly lots was reasonable. Mr. Tiller stated that was correct. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Varichak if he was indicating that the northernmost lot could be purchased by the neighborhood because he doesn't have any commitments to sell that to anybody else at this point in time. Mr. Varichak stated that was correct. Councilmember Billings stated that as he saw it, it boiled down to two things -- where was the lot line between the two northerly lots, and what is the selling price of the lot. Mr. Tiller stated that the person offering to buy the lot has no intention of ever redeveloping and reselling it. It adds preservation value to the neighborhood. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Varichak if he agreed that the selling price of the northerly lot would be offered at no greater cost than$10,000 more than the average cost that the southerly two lots would sell for. Mr. Varichak stated that he would agree. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Varichak if he would agree to a time frame for the neighborhood group to gather money to buy the lot. Mr. Varichak stated that he was thinking of the time frame being within a year by June 1, 2000. Mr. Tiller stated that they were offering a deal that they were simply not interested in. Councilmember Billings stated that if Mr. Varichak was willing to sell the lot to the neighborhood then it sounds like what the neighborhood was asking for. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 33 Mr. Tiller stated that Ms. Miller proposed, two larger lots on the south side. A portion of the present lot she would purchase and preserve with her money. It was property that adjoins her property, and she was intending to put the lot into some conservancy covenant. Mavor Jorgenson would encourage the neighborhood to investigate putting together a purchase price to acquire that lot and put it into the conservancy. The City Council could not be a broker for the neighborhood. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Mr. Varichak was saying no deal to Ms. Miller's proposal, so the neighborhood need to move beyond that point. Councilmember Barnette asked how the neighborhood could deny Mr. Varichak the very same thing that Mr. Tiller was allowed. Ms. Wick stated that she thought Mr. Tiller's letter was incredibly powerful. She stated that it seemed incredibly ridiculous for-the neighborhood to come up with $65,000. She thanked the of Council for coming out to look at the site. She stated that she felt now there was not a chance for anyone to win. She felt what Council was leaning toward was probably to approve the replat request. Mr. Varichak was not winning-because he has had to put more money out to approve the soil. The ��eighborhood was not %rinr�ing because they did not want to see three houses go in there. Ms. Wick said she hated the idea of walking out her back door and seeing air conditioner units, siding, trampolines, swingsets, kids and cars in what used to be a gorgeous area. Moving all of. the houses closer together would put them closer to her backyard, and she could not be happy with that. There was also her trees' roots would be destroyed. She did not like the idea that someone wants to make a compromise, because it was 12:30 p.m., so maybe they should table it. Ms. Wick said she was one of the people who delivered the flyers and wanted to share some responses she got. Most of the people stated that they were surprised that three houses were going into the lot because it seems too small to fit three. She stated that it was really interesting that they were all talking about integrity, values, and preservation for their nice city, but it came down to someone who wanted money, the developer. When they were on the other issue, they wanted to put the franchise fee to keep the City nice, but the first people to march up to the microphone are the people who are concerned about paying the money. Ms. Wick said she felt the important point Mr. Tiller brought up was whether or not Council has the courage to walk away from the current ordinances. Mayor Jorgenson stated that she thought everyone was entitled to a reasonable return on their investment. The tough part was for Council to consistently apply the decisions they make. The compromise Councilmember Billings was trying to bring about for the neighborhood was his effort to try to bring a win-win situation. She felt it was a reasonable solution. She asked Mr. Hickok where they were with the sixty-day action law. Mr. Hickok stated that sixty days would be up in early October. Ms. Wicks asked if there was any other consideration for the moratorium and would urge Council to consider this. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1999 PAGE 34 Mayor Jorgenson stated that there was a potential for the moratorium for tree preservation, but that was something Council would have to think about. Whether the Council chooses to table this item was something they would have to decide. Ms. Michelle Hatlen, 5955 Benjamin Street, stated that she would like to see Council table this for the moratorium or see if they could come up with a compromise with Mr. Varichak. Ms. Miller stated that she was concerned that Council would approve the plat request. The concern with the plat was the excess water. She felt that.the issues would not be recognized one week later. Mr. Flora stated that he would have additional information available regarding the catch basin after the next major rainfall. Staff needs to see the.issue.first before they.decide what action to take. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Ms. Miller could telephone Council or come to the open forum portion of a Council meeting to address the issue. - Ms. Miller stated that additional water would effect her property. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she felt she would like to table this item, and she wanted to pursue tree preservation. Councilmember Wolfe stated that Mr. Varichak has been given 23 stipulations. He asked Mr. Varichak his feelings on negotiating with the neighbors. - Mr. Varichak stated that he would give the neighbors until June 1, 2000. Tabling the decision would be wasting his time. Mayor Jorgenson stated that she wanted issues discussed regarding tree preservation and water drainage problems. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she wanted to wait two weeks to find out more information about the tree preservation ordinances. Councilmember Wolfe stated that it seemed like Mr. Varichak has made the most adjustments. He asked how Council could stop Mr...Varichak.and-still stay consistent with what Council has -. done for Fridley. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to approve the Replat Request PS #99-03 with the following 23 stipulations. 1) Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the northern most edge of property. The-plan-shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of twelve percent (12%), or less around the home's foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the twelve inch drainage easement, to slow existing run-off and assure some saturation of roof-top directed toward the pond, 2) The petitioner shall dedicate a 20 foot utility easement and a 50 foot drainage easement along north property line of proposed Lot 1; 3) No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of proposed Lot 1; 4) Provide proof that the THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9. 1999 PAGE 35 old well located on the site is properly capped or removed; 5) During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable; 6) Petitioner to pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits; 7) Petitioner to grant code required 12 foot utility and drainage easement along western boundary of property; 8) Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees; 9) The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits; 10) A perimeter drain system, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drain pipe shall be a free draining granular material such as three-quarter-inch to one and one-half inch rock or pea gravel; 11) No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the !uppermost 18 to 20 inches to act as a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 12) All masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 13) The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be a free-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants Ltd., Project # 97479, dated July 27, 1999; 14) Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 15) All backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not s.ttle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 16) Ail exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the walls in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 17) Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all ran-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submittcd will be partly predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed; 18) All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 19) Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly attached to the structure to allow free/independent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 20) No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills cf sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 21) A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; 22) Adequate compaction and density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases .of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner; and 23) The preliminary plat shall be revised to reduce the width of lot 3 by 10' to 80 feet and lot 2 shall be reduced by 5' to 75 feet in width to provide a more level building pad for lot 1. The revised preliminary plat shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to submission of the final plat. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBERS BARNETTE, BILLINGS AND WOLFE VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VO'T'ING NAY, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Jorgenson asked Mr. Knaak if they could add a 24' stipulation to deal with possible costs of runoff repair in the event of additional damage to the Miller property. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 9. 1999 PAGE 36 Mr. Knaak stated that they could do that and have the conditions contained in the development agreement to hold the developer responsible. Mayor Jorgenson asked Mr. Varichak if he would agree to a 24' and 25' stipulation. Mr. Varichak stated that he would not have a problem with that. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to amend the motion to add the 24`h and 25' stipulation: 24) Any water runoff problems arising from the construction or development of the plat will be corrected by the petitioner or owners, and 25) These conditions will be included in -a development agreement between the petitioner and the City of Fridley and will be recorded as a condition of final approval of the plat and shall bind the petitioner and his heirs and assigns. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Councilmember BX(61i2) 72-3500. ted that there was a 50t' Anniversary Task Force Meeting on Thursday at 5:30 pked that everyone who is planning to attend the meeting please call Roberta Collins at Councilmember Bsaid a Craigbrook/Pearson Way-meeting was held last Wednesday evening. 'there will be an in\th on-national letter going out for people who could not attend the meeting. Mayor Jorgenson stated thaursday she attended a meeting with the Minnesota Department of Transportationity received a Governor's award for cooperative planning on the Highway 65 improvemere done. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to djourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING A MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:10 A.N. Respectfully submitted, Signe L. Johnson Nancy J. rgenson Recording Secretary Mayor ABSTRACT Receipt,o J' ' ❑ Certified Copy Date Mailed Date/Time: 3 / 17.00 DOCUMENT NO. 1472910 . 0 ABSTRACT ❑ Tax Liens/Releases Doc.Order of A 13 Multi-Co Doc Tax Pd NOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA ./by: Pins: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT WAS FILED IN THIS OFFICE Recordability/Delgs: ❑ Transfer ❑ New Desc. FOR RECORD ON DEC 03 1999 ,q -- KK AT 5 : 00 PM AND DU Y ECORDED. Filing Fees: ' !V-� ❑ Division ❑ GAC FEES AND TAXES IN THE AMOUNT OF $ � ' PAID. Well Certificate ❑ Status ❑ Def.Spec1999124543 Received this Date: RECEIPT NO. Anoka County Recorder ❑ Other ZNo Change EDWARD M.TRESKA Notes: �(,��i ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY Tff ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES G (J �S SL BY DEPUTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES ?qrw 2q- 3o--meq 4q STATE OF MINNESOTA ) CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS SUBDIVISION (PLAT OR LOT SPLIT) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) CITY OF FRIDLEY ) In the Matter of: A Final Plat, P.S. #99-03 Owner: Stephen Varichak and James Surdyk The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 13' day of December, 2000, on a petition for a subdivision pursuant to the City of Fridley's Zoning Ordinance, for the following described property: To replat property to accommodate three single family residential lots, legally described as VARICHAK ADDITION, generally located at the northwest corner of Gardena and Benjamin. IT IS ORDERED that a subdivision be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons: Approval with 23 stipulations. See City Council meeting minutes of December 13, 1999. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY OF FRIDLEY ) I, Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk for the City of Fridley, with and in for said City of Fridley, do hereby certify that have compared the foregoing copy and Order granting a subdivision 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 sub cribed my hand at the City of Fridley, Minnesota, in the County of Anoka on the )-3(d day of re.V r-"try , 2006 DRAFTED BY: City of Fridleyal 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Debr A. Skogen, City Jerk �} 6 l �• t.la '.lT� tr e �, , �L) /� � a_u✓ty r a'a .i FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE_3 management. Mr./�K�naak, CiAttorney, recommended the development agreement format, which was Stipulatpon approval by Council, the agreement would be recorded. Staff recommendedurrence. APPROVED DEVAGREEMENT. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 96-1999 APPROVING A FINAL PLAT, PS #99-03, BY STEPHEN VARICHAK TO REPLAT PROPERTY TO ACCOMMODATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GARDENA AVENUE AND BENJAMIN STREET (WARD 2): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that staff recommended the approval of the final plat with one additional stipulation. Since the petitioner's surveyor inadvertently neglected to include a 50 foot drainage easement on the mylars for the final plat, staff stipulated that an easement document be prepared in recordable form and that the document be attached to the recorded final plat. With this change, staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 96-1999. 8. RESOLUTION NO.,97-1999 APPROVING A VACATION SAV #99-07 VACATING DRAINAGE AND U LITY EASEMENTS BY MEDTRONIC INC. WARD 1): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that Medtronic requested that Council vacate the drainage and utility easements that were riginally associated with the seven single family lots on Jackson and Quincy Streets. They also quested the vacation of an easement on the northeast corner of the site. These vacated easemen would be replaced by a new easement which encompasses newly constructed utilities. After re�'ew at their December 1 meeting, the Planning Commission gave their unanimous consent to th e two vacations with two stipulations. Staff recommended Council's concurrence. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 7-1999. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 98-1999 APP OVING A PLAT PS #99-01 BY NIEDTRONIC INC. TO REPLAT PROPERTY TOA CONIMODATE THE MEDTRONIC CORPORATE CAMPUS GENERALLY LOCAT D AT MEDTRONIC PARKWAY AND TH 65 (WARD 1): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the eliminary plat for the Medtronic project as approved by Council on May 24, 1999 has been fina 'zed. The final plat was in order and contained the easements which were required as part of th drainage and utility vacation action considered in Item No. 8. The council agenda book contain d an exhibit that includes all of the stipulations for this plat. Staff recommended Council's approv 1. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NUMBER NO. 98 1999. 10. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL LEGISLATION AND APPROVING EXTENSION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANC G DISTRICT NO. 6: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this resolution w Id approve the terms for extension of the Medtronic Tax Increment District that were contain d in legislation adopted by the State FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 1999 PAGE 4 Legislature in 1999. The law enables the City to extend the duration of this dist i t, TIF District No. 6, from 2011 to 2025. These terms have been agreed to by both School strict No. 13 and by Anoka County. The City must file a certificate attesting to these approv s as well as its own approval prior to the beginning of the next legislative session if the exte ion is to remain valid. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT A NDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA AFTER ITEM NO. 27. 11. RESOLUTION NO. 100-1999 MODIFYING THE DEVLOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT #1 AND THE TAX Ii CREVIENT FINANICNG PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NUMBERS 1 THROUGH 3 6 7 AND 9 THROUGH 16 TO REFLECT ENLARGE NT OF THE PROJECT AREA AND INCREASED PROJECT COSTS TO BE UNDEWfAKEN WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NUMBER 1: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that there are t ee actions encompassed by this resolution. The first action is enlargement of the City's red elopment project area. The second action is modification of TIF budgets within the rede elopment plan. The third action is amendment of the plan as it relates to TIF District No. 6 ' a manner which extends the district in accordance with 1999 State law. Mr. Burns said that there were maps in uded in the packet of the enlargement of the project area. Extension encompasses land along I- 94 from Highway 65 to the Mississippi River. It covers the Gateway East and Hyde Park a as east of the railroad tracks. It also covers all of the area west of the tracks from 61" Av ue South. Additionally, it covers Riverview Heights and seventy scattered parcels that w have identified for future rehabilitation. By extending the project area, the City would g n the flexibility to do future projects in this area. The action, however, does not create tax increment financing districts in theses areas. These would be created later when the City d es specific projects. Mr. Burns continued by aying that the modification of the budgets are for existing districts, including the Medtronic istrict (District No. 6). They restate district expenditures in keeping with revenues raised in e districts. Restated budgets for District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 are ntained in Exhibit I-C of Council's packet material. Amendment of the IF Plan No. 6 is to extend the duration of the district. By this action, staff would be modifyi g the plan for District No. 6 as provided for in 1999 State legislation. These modifications ha e been approved by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), the Columbia eights School Board and the Anoka County Board. Staff recommended Council's app oval of these items. THIS ITE I WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE RE ULAR AGENDA. 12. RESO TION NO. 101-1999 WAIVING PREPAYMENT PROVISIONS RELATING TO GEN L OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT NOTE SERIES 1997: RESOLUTION NO. 96- 1999 RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLAT, P.S. #99-03, BY STEPHEN VARICHAK TO REPLAT PROPERTY TO ACCOMMODATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GARDENA AND BENJAMIN. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 7, 1999, and recommended approval of said plat; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for the VARICHAK ADDITION at the August 9, 1999, with stipulations attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes that the VARICHAK ADDITION replaces the former Lot 22-, Auditor's Subdivision 92; and WHEREAS, a copy of the VARICHAK ADDITION has been attached as Exhibit B. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council approves the Final Plat for VARICHAK ADDITION and directs the petitioner to record plat at Anoka County within six months of this approval or such approval shall be null and void. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 13th DAY OF DECEMBER, 1999. AN J. E) ON-MAYOR ATTEST: a& — I DE RA A. SKOGEN- TY CLERK Resolution No. 96-1999 Page 2 EXHIBIT A STIPULATIONS APPROVED BY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL FOR PS 99-03 1. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the northernmost edge of the property. The plan shall include retaining walls on Lot 1, immediately adjacent to the home, to assure a slope of twelve percent (12%), or less around the homes foundation. The plan shall also include a terraced drainage area, in the twelve foot drainage easement, to slow existing run-off and assure some saturation of roof-top run- off directed toward the pond. 2. The petitioner shall dedicate a 20 foot utility easement and a 50 foot drainage easement along north property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1. 4. Provide proof that the old well located on the site has been properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. The petitioner shall pay$750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant Code required 12 foot utility and drainage easement along the western boundary of the property. 8. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be identified on the proposed site plan for each house, and shall be marked on the site plan for approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 10. A perimeter drain system, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner, shall be installed around the outside of each house basement, in accordance with FHA Special Bulletin 87-1. Backfill around and over the drainpipe shall be a free draining granular material such as three quarter inch to one and one quarter inch rock or pea gravel. 11. No silt soils shall be used as wall backfill, except for the uppermost 18 - 20 inches to act s a cap, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 12. All masonry shall be thoroughly braced internally prior to backfilling, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. I Resolution No. 96-1999 Page 3 13. The soil used as exterior backfill, for a distance of at least 18 inches from the walls should be free-draining sand in accordance with paragraph 4.5, of the STS Consultants., Project # 97479, dated July 27, 1999. 14. Silty soil from the site shall only be utilized to cap the backfill at the surface, as recommended in the STS consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 15. All backfill shall be sufficiently compacted so as to not settle after construction as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 16. All exterior grades shall be sloped positively away from the walls in all directions to reduce groundwater infiltration into the backfill, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 17. Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on all three homes and shall direct all run-off from all roof areas to the west drainage easement. Approval of each home plan submitted will be in-part predicated on this information about how the downspouts and gutters will be designed and installed. 18. All door stoops should be supported on frost depth footings, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 19. Sidewalks and other slabs appurtenant to the building shall not be rigidly attached to the structure to allow free/independent movement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 20. No patio slabs shall be cast to extend under the sills of sliding glass doors, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 21. A sub-base course of a minimum depth of 12 inches and consisting of pit run sand shall be installed below the conventional driveway pavement, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report submitted by the petitioner. 22. Adequate compaction density of the footing subsoil, compaction of backfill around foundations and under the floor slabs, particularly the garage slabs will be required. To assure this is true, these phases of construction, as recommended in the STS Consultants soil report. 23. The final plat shall reflect a reduced the width of Lot 3 by 10' to 80' and said Lot 2 shall be reduced by 5' from 80' to 75' in width to provide a more level building pad for Lot 1. i EXHIBIT- PLAT APPROVED BY COUNCIL N ci C �1 � o � 3 f �Ci Vo yIX C3 • I ------ ---------------------------------------� F--- .33Mu IlIMM38 I ------� i J84MLC NtIfVhSB 01 s I ii I IF p u IF cl � i L--------------J L-------J L------- J la 1 ! • wsn • • o« • • cow • ��— I r--- z v fu is 0 i5 I o V, e • 46 ABSTRACT Receipt# l f!p�8 2�1'S`b ❑ Certified Copy Date Mailed Date/Time: / .DOCUMENT N0 14 8 8 5 4 3 . 0 ABS Tax Liens/Releases T Doc.Order L of � ABSTRACT ❑ Multi-Co Doc Tax Pd ANOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA ✓by: Pins: �C y►,� I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT WAS FILED IN THIS Recordability/Delgs:' t El Transfer 1:1 New Desc. AOR RECORD ON T 5 : Q Q MAR 03 2000 OFFICE PM Filing Fees: �� NS ❑ Division 13GAC FEES AND TAXES IN THE AMOUNT OF AND WAS DULY RECORDED. $29 . 50 PAID. Well Certificate ❑ Status 1:1 Def.Spec RECEIPT N0. 2 0 0 0 017 6$$ Received this Date: Anoka County Recorder ❑ Other Xlo Change EDWARD M TRESKA ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES Notes: BY JAR DEPUTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR Of TITLES 27 I, Debra A. Skogen, 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 subdivision 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 )141\ day of , 2011 DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Debra A. Skogen, Cit lerk (SEAL) 91 T 1 . M RESOLUTION NO. 2011-29 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO A STIPULATION ON PLAT, P.S. #99-03, VARICHAK ADDITION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5906, 5924,AND 5942 BENJAMIN STREET NE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 7, 1999, and recommended approval of said plat; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for VARICHAK ADDITION at the August 9, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS,the City Council approved the final plat at their December 13, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS,there has been a request from the property owners at 5942 Benjamin Street, legally described as LOT 1, BLOCK 1, VARICHAK ADDITION,to modify stipulation#3 originally approved with the VARICHAK ADDITION, which relates to grading and land alterations within 50 feet of the north property line of the property at 5942 Benjamin Street; and WHEREAS,that stipulation amendment has been reviewed and approved by City staff and is attached in Exhibit A attached; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the City Council approves the stipulation amendment for stipulation#3 on Plat,P.S. #99-03, VARICHAK ADDITION. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF F RIDLEY THIS 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2011. SCOTT f LUND -MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGE - CITY CLERK y Resolution No. 2011-29 Page 2 VARICHAK ADDITION STIPULATION AMENDMENT EXHIBIT A STIPULATIONS 3. Ne grading er-land alter-atiens shetil be permitted within 50 fee4 ef the ne Let 4. Any grading or land alteration within 50 feet of the north property line of Lot 1 shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to commencement of project Any work approved shall protect adjacent trees, whose drip line is within the project area, with the use of a protective fence around that drip line of the trees. AN\TOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA Document No.: 2023026.016 ABSTRACT I hereby certify that the within instrument was filed in this office for record on: 06/30.`2011 10:02:00 AM Fees/Taxes In the Amount of: $46.00 LARRY W. DALIEN Anoka County Property Tax Adtuinistrator,'Recorder,'Registrar of Titles BMC, Deputy Record ID: 2415856 t