ZOA64-04 ♦ �(�4- 0�
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES DELIVERED:
Rezoning - Hazel Bourdeaux ZOA #64-04
Lj 90
" o o
'37 � v� o
3SA
;7D
I
r
OP€ICIAL kl=CX
CnT OF nIDLVY
PUNIC lme=
BO= TIM
PLANi3M COI SSZON
TO cam rr Na Com e
Notice U hereby given that there will be a Public gearing
of the Planning Can .e pion of the City of Fridley in the City Hall
at 6431 Univnaity Avenue N.S. on May 14, 1964 in the Council
Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of s
Consideration of a request by Hazel Bourdeaux
to rezone from R-1 (single family duelling) to
Rm3A (general multiple family dwelling) (ZCA 64-04)
all of Lots 809 81, 82, and 83, Block A, Riverview
ights ogether with the vacated service drive
and fozuer Minneapolis Anoka and Cuyuna Railroad
right of way that lies south of the north line of
Lot 83, Block A, Riverview Heights extended
iresterly and north of the south ling of Lot BSD,
Block A, Riverview Heights extended westerly.
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above
matter will be hand at this meeting.
IMUMIR L. MtAPIK
CHAIMW
PLANM IG CM24ESSION
Publishx April 29, 1964
May 6, 1904
Quit Claim Deed. Otnl NO. 28�1V1. Aliller•Uavis Co.,Minneapolus,Mina
Individual to Corporation. Minnesota Uniform Conveyancing Blanks(1931).
s i
� [S3 �lY�C11tUrE. .Made this_..........................................day of.........April......................I...............1 19..64....,
i
between............ltA?.EL...,J.....DQU.I DEAUX..................................................................................................................... ................................................
i
of the County of.....................!�noka...............................................and State of.................
part.Y........ of the first part, and............... .I ...OF....VAIDJ,EX..................................................................................................................
.
.................................................................................................................................................................................................
....,
f
munic- L rt o the second art, I
a�eorpora�rton under the laws of the State of............................................................................. , party f p
1
l gg�Qt}� That the sa'd art...Y...... o the first part, in consideration of the sum of
One and No/1 ITP anCL otlier vallues receiv d-----------------------------DOLL4RS,
.—........................................................................................... . . . ......................................................................................................................
to.....Party......................................in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is
hereby acknowledged, do. ea.... hereby Brant, Bargain, Quitclaim, and Convey unto the said party of I
the second part, its successors and assigns, Forever, all the tract..... or parcel...... of land lying and being j
in the County of.........Anoka............................................................and State of Minnesota, described as follows, to-wit: I
{ j
i
{
j
Lot 27, Block A, Riverview Heights
j
i
i
i
a
� I
i
4
1
{
i
I
i
1
1
t
1
Zo jbabe anb to j!)oib the gDa111e, Together with all the hereditaments and appurtenances there-
unto belonging or in anywise appertaining, to the said party of the second part, its successors and assigns,
Forever.
In Tefstimonp Wbemf, The said part.y...... of the first part ha.s......... hereunto set......her.....................
Ihand..... t1_n dn y n;r1d ynnr first nitnrr! Zf;7•Ltte71.
i
3
In pixsence of ....... .................... ....... ........
a..............« c t.
....................................................................................................................
................................................. .. ............. ............................................................ ............._.. ..........
r I
CITY OF FMLBY
PUMM HSAMG
BnT= T
PTAW= CM&MSSIOX
TO mW IT K&Y CMrjW s
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing
of the Plying Commission of the City of Fridley iu the City Hall
at 6431 Hniveaity Avenue N.E. on May 14, 1964 in the Council
Chamber at 700 P.M. fav the purpose of:
Considerativ a of a request by Haaal Bourdeaux
to rasme from gm1 (single family &&Ming) to
R-3A (general multiple family dwelling) (ZOA 64-04)
all of Lots 80, 81, 821, and 83, Block A, 8iveavieu
Heights ,together with the vacated service drive
and former Minneapolis Anoka and Cuyuna railroad
right of Bray that lies south of the north line of
Lot 83, Block A, Riverview Heights extended
westerly and north of the south lime of Lot 80,
Black A. Riverview heights extended westerly.
Anyone desiring to be hw=d with reference to the above
matter will be Heard at this meeting.
L. XRAVIK
CHAraw
PLE4G C ,SION
Publish% April 29, 1964
May 69 1964
i
6 April 1965
The Planning Commission
Fridley, Minnesota
Attention: Mr. Kenneth L. Kravik, Chairman
Re: 'Technical Assistance Request
Rezoning Request: ZOA # 64-04
Hazel Bourdeaux
Gentlemen:
The following observations are made regarding the above request and our general
understanding of the situation:
a
1. Generally, multi-family units tend to generate more traffic than
single family dwellings and consequently should casually be located
toward the outer boundaries of residential neighborhoods. This
avoids the detrimental effects of higher traffic volumes for single
family residences. A standard planning principle is that, by no
means, should multiple dwellings be located in interior lots where
traffic generation and land use characteristics would be detrimental
to less intensive urban uses. Along arterial streets, East River
Road for example, multiple dwellings could be appropriate, but
location, lot size and general character of the area should be
considered. Financial hardship, alone, is not a valid reason for
approving a rezoning request.
2. During subsequent studies, Ea. st River Road may provide a unique
"opportunity area" as a scenic traffic route. Further, since the
present high volumes of traffic are likely to continue, vehicular
access onto East River Road should be held to an absolute minimum
or reduced if possible.
3. Existing multiple family uses adjoining the site and, commercial uses
in the sites' general area mitigate the effects of new multiple dwelling
construction in a single family district.
4. Lots 78 and 79 are under separate ownership and possess only 50'
of frontage. Either the consent of this property owner or acquis ition
of these properties by Mrs. Bourdeaux should be a prere visite to
approval of the rezoning request.
The Planning Commission
Fridley,y, Minrs ota -2- 6 April 1965
5. Fridley°s existing lot area requirements for multi-family devel-
op,ment in a R-3a district should insure that the essential residen-
tis.l character of the sites' surroundings will be preserved.
6. There appears to be some confusion as to the ownership of the
land between East River Road and lots 80 and 83 inclusive. Before
granting any rezoning request, the ownership of the land should be
clarified.
With s .yspect to this request our recommendation is as follows°
% 1. The request for rezoning from R- 1 to R-3a be denied pending
/ receipt of-
a. Indication from all abutting property owners, particularly
the owner of lots 78 and 79, that they favor the requested
rezoning; or also, such indication coupled with the purchase
of lots 78 and 79 by Mrs. Bourdeaux.
b. Documentation indicating the type and size of the project
anticipated and specifically indicating the location of
vehicular access points.
c. Clarification of the ownership of the land between the
western edge of lots 80 through 83 inclusive and the
eastern edge of the East River Road right-of-way. A
Certified Survey by a registered land surveyor may be
desirable.
Upon receipt of the above documentation, consideration could be
be given to approving the requested rezoning. Generally, the
residential character of the area should be preserved and no
structure placed on the site which would be detrimental to this
character. A four plea would not necessarily be detrimental,
but an eight unit multiple dwelling would be. The difficulty is
that under Fridley"s existing ordinance only minimal controls
exist to limit the number of units in the multiple dwelling district.
Ccaisequently there is no assurance that the number of units will
be Hin. iced. Our office feels that a well designed four plex would
be. appropriate to the site but no larger multiple dwelling would
be.
The Planning Commission
Fridley, Minnesota -3- 6 April 1965
2. The Planning Commission should consider recommending to
Mrs. Bourdeaux that a rezoning to R•-2, thereby permitting
double bungalows, might be a possibility. Or also, con-
struction of a single family dwelling on the eastern portion
of the property and a duplex on the western portion might
be a possibility under R-2 zoning,
3. Irrespective of the ultimate construction on this property,
screening with vegetation (trees and shrubs) should be
considered along the East River Road side of the property
to protect future building occupants from the detractive
characteristics of high street traffic volumes. Also, exist-
ing trees to the rear of the arterial lot should be preserved
as an amenity for the adjoining property and also for the
future occupants of the site.
Each and every rezoning request of this type should be accompanied by a site
plan indicating, with reasonable exactness, the development contemplated.
This should be true whether or not the requestor is the prospective builder
or is simply requesting the rezoning to facilitate sale. Otherwise, under
Fridley's present zoning ordinance, the character of R.-3a uses cannot be
adequately controlled.
Sincerely yours,
HODNE ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS
W7.6
Thomas H. Hodne, ALA, Assoc. ALP
THHomkt
v
I�
INS—.
{f '
toil
e
1`„ l
Su
sr ,
1
v '
f
71 ,
a
_
Y
u
�► N %z SEC. 3 T3(-,' N 82YW
Rezone 20,A 64-04
Hazel Bourdeaux
Rezone from Rel to
R"3A
2,6
27•�G 2 s
� a 1
to
N � 30'
6A
J_ 1
CHIFatt" JR y
[?LC'A V.i011L_�
Plaminj C miesion. at�M. - A2r31 9, 1964 Page 2
It was pointed out that Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision #25, has
seven different owners and the lots are described by mates and
bounds. The City has an Ordinance requiring that land be platted
that cannot be described in a sample manner. In this instance,
Mr. Nordling was asked if he would be in favor of platting providing
the rest of the crmars could be contacted and would approve. He
agreed. It was pointed out that he had until May 31st for the split-
ting of assessts.
KION by Thompson, seconded by Bandel, that the Planning Com-
mission continue Lot Split request L.S. #64-03, Lot 1, Auditor®s
Subdivisions. #25, Thacker, et al., until May 14th meeting, and have
all material required to effect a plat and set tine public hearing
data for said plat on May 14, 1964. Upon a voice vote, all voting
wje, the motion carried.
2. REZONING REQUEST: ZOA #64-05 - TIMISEN°S MARKET,, n1C.: Lots 13 thru
16, Block 3, Rice Creek Te:-race Plat #2. Rezone fro R-1, single
family dwelling, to C-IS, local shopping area.
Mr. C. T. Wellman., Attorney and Mr. J. L. Theisen, Sr. were
present. Mr. Wellman presented the new plans and specifications for
the shopping center stating the Building Board had approved the plans
for the buildings, ,and agreed the setbacks were adequate.
Part of the discussion centered around the fact that this rezoning
has been brought up previously several times, the last being two yeare
ago. The principle concern, from the standpoint of the home owners
adjacent to the prognosed rezoning, is the effect upon the value of the
how. Mr. Johanson suggested the City appoint an appraiser to estimate
the value of the four residential lots to determine the increase in
value because of the rezoning, and of the four houses abutting giving
the valuation before and after rezoning. If this were available at the
public hearing, the Planning Commission would be in a better position to
make a decision.
TION by Johanson, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission
set a public hearing date of May 14, 1964 for the: rezoning request
relative to Lots 13 through 16, Block 3, Rice Creek Terrace Plat #2
by Theisen°s Market from R-1, single family dwelling, to C-IS, local
shopping area. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried.
T ION by Johanson, seconded by Bergmann, that the Planning Commission
ask the Council to approve an appraisal on the homes on Lots 13, 14, 15,
Block 2 and bot 12, Block 3 Rice Creek Terrace Plat M. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye except Thompson who voted nay, the motion carried.
f3. REZONING REQUEST: ZOA #64-04, LOTS 80 THDU 83, BLOCK A, RVMIEW
HEIGNS - HAZEL BOA: Rezone from R-1, single family dwelling
to R-3A, general multiple duelling.
:planing Commission Meeting - May 14, 1964 Page 3
MMON by Thompson, rseconded bar Bandel. that the PLaM!P Oom�isQ
c 1 o s i the ;Purb2 .e ear# and dzoniES of ZOA #64-05 of Lots
13 thxu L6r .Block 3 Crook Terrace Plat #2, requested bj Theisen's
Market, Inc.. and recommend sere to the Council. Upon a voice vote,
Z-1 voting aye, the motion as iade
2. AML`i.0 .MMa 88ZO MIG;.' , .T ZOA X04 HAZS IOURIlEM: Lots
80 thru 83, Block A, Rivervieaw..Hei ghts. Rezone from Rol to Ra-3A.
Those present interested in this item were: Mrs. Baurdeaux,
Thomas Stuck and Ernest Draheim.
Mrs. Bourdeaux stated there were apartments north of the property
v ro: Draheim'_isrotested;the -Texoning because h,® felt- there would
be mese requests in the area,.to rezones for the soma thing.
Vt. St*A staffed that--this spot zoning would result in the resi-
�, dential ne3ghboThood being surrounded by apartment houses. He felt
apartiment houses should be restricted to one area of She City.
The Planning Gomi.ssion. stated they have besa: reviewing the
zoning..along East River Road, but have not completed- the study.
M'1?OLt.by Thompsons seconded-,by Nadel, that the.Plamaing Com-
mission clogo a public hoer of the rezoning �cequest, Zak #64-04,
Hazel Baurdsaux, Lots 80,thru 83, .Block A, RivervLOW Heights, from
Rel to R-3A, and continuethe hearing until November 12th, unless
opened before then. Upon a vo.3ca votes all voting ayes the oration
earrleid- unanimously.
3. PEIBLTC HUMGs P_ROMSD PLAT, P.S. #64.094 GE&M M
TERUCHi MUM Gam: Lot 10 and 11, except the,nortlumteurly
0 fact:front and Tear, Block-2, Hn" Lake Hills.
t9�T by Handal. secondedby �S�shans , lir tib-P• i.�angss,�
cion clasa,-. ha blic hearing of the oro sed Pre�Kt.
#64-M, Terrace. be Lots 10 and 11. excevt the northvesterly
40;'feet7.:f ut and rear Block 2. Moore Lake. HUL#pmnd r
ap ac�vgl to the�ttv._�il_e _ Vpoa a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion � .
4. PD$LLC HEARIM: PROPOSED P t PLAT P.S. SOS GAMIEW
ADOMO t WAYVE STIP_TA�tT: sl �p1at of Block 1, of Block 7, Berlin
Addition.
MMON_W Johanson seconded bY Btaadel, that than Plasmiaae Oooar-
zissLan close the public hearing of the naropose I P 5, 6G►-05&—
--
Gailsview Addit sMw 5tomt b lasplat off Block 1. 94 of
Berlin Addition:; and recd a inval to tiffs O Councilo
SCpan a vol+ vote, all voting ayes the motion saai-04y
I
Page 1
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - MARCH 11, 1965
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kravik at 7:45 P.M.
ROLL CALL: Members present: Johanson, Kravik, Hughes, Bergman, Handel
. 1, Others present: Earl P. Wagner, City Manager
APPROVE MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION: JANUARY 14, 1965:
MOTION by Hughes, seconded by Johanson, that the minutes of the
Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1965 be approved. Upon a
voice vote, the motion carried.
APPROVE MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION: FEBRUARY 4, 1965:
MOTION by Hughes, seconded by Johanson, that the minutes of the
Planning Commission meeting of February 4, 1965 be approved. Upon a
voice vote, the motion carried.
APPROVE MINUTES OF PLANNINGCOMMISSION: FEBRUARY 25, 1965:
MOTION by Hughes, seconded by Johanson, that the minutes of the
Planning Commission meeting of February 25, 1965 be approved. Upon a
voice vote, the motion carried.
APPROVE MINUTES OF SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION: MARCH 4, 196$:
MOTION by Hughes, seconded by Johanson, that the minutes of the Special
Planning Commission meeting of March 4, 1965 be approved. Upon a
voice vote, the motion carried.
RECEIVE MINUTES OF PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING - JANUARY 18, 1965:
MOTION by Hughes, seconded by Bergman, that the minutes of the
Parks and Playgrounds Sub-Committee meeting of January 18, 1965 be
received. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried.
RECEIVE MINUTES OF PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS SUB-ammTra MEETING - FEBRUARY 16, 1965:
MOTION by Hughes, seconded by Bergman, that the minutes of the
Parks and Playgrounds Sub-Committee meeting of February 16, 1965 be
received. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried.
RECEIVE MINUTES OF BUILDING STANDARDS SUB-COMMITTEE_MEBTING - FEBRUARY 16, 1965:
MOTION by Johanson, seconded by Bergman, that the minutes of the
Building Standards Sub-Committee meeting of February 16, 1965 be
received. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried.
DISCUSSION OF THE SIGHT ITEMS REPORTED ON BY THE PLANNING CONSULTANT TO
THE COMMISSION;
Mr. Kravik explained that the Commission engaged the planning
consultants to get their opinion of the effect changing the existing
zoning might have on their program, and what the effect mould be in
` PLANNING COMHISSION MEETING - MARCH 11, 1965 Page 2
the future. As a result, the Consultant reviewed these eight areas
and came back with the recommendation that it was, in his opinion,
advisable to defer any action that would result in changing the existing
zoning category of each particular property involved, at this time.
There would be no action taken at this time to recommend approval
of a zoning change, and the Chairman asked if any petitioner would
care to agree to table, or withdraw, his request until some time in the
future. It would be quite difficult at this time to nay when in the
future that would be. The other alternate is to continue on with the
rezoning request as submitted, and ask the Planning Commission to come
to a conclusion one way or another.
The petitioners were asko-d to present their petition and state
their particular problem.
to Mr. Walter Ek, (Capital Sales, Incorporated, rezoning request,
ZOA #64-12, Lots 3 thru 7, Block 4, Rees Addition to Fridley Park, to
rezone from R-1, single family dwelling, to C-2, general business area,)
spoke of the urgency of his request. Because of the opportunity to put
in a bid for the new post office, and the fact that commercial zoning
surrounded his property, and that the bids were to be in by April 2nd,
he asked for an opinion.
The Commission stated that the. City of Fridley has engaged a firm
to study, advise and make certain recommendations that the Planning
Commission and Council can evaluate in terms of the methods to be used
in Fridley, and while the Firm is in the process of doing this, there
is still the problem relative to these requests. Regarding the problem
of Mr. Ek, it was suggested he check back with the City Manager relative
to whether or not rezoning is necessary in order for him to bid on using
his site for the post office.
Mr. Sk requested that the Planning Commission act on his rezoning
request at this meeting.
MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Johanson, that the Item 1 rezoning
request, ZOA #64-12, Capital Sales, Incorporated, Walter 8k, Lots 3 thru
7, Block 4, Rees Addition to Fridley Park, to rezone from R-1, single
family dwelling, to C-2, general business area, be denied, and so recommend
to the Council. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried.
Chairman Kravik asked Mr. Wagner to read the letters from Hodne,
Associates, Architects/Planners regarding their outline for "Comprehensive
Workable Action Planning Program" which he prefaced by the following
explanation: The 701 program equals 2/3 Federal participation and 1/3
City. It is administered by the State Community Planning Division of the
Department of Business Development. The City to participate in this
program interviews consultant firms and chooses one. There is no charge
by the firm at this point. The Consultant spends from two to three months
working out a comprehensive programs outlining what planning is needed in
Fridley, which he will present to the Planning Commission, City Council,
and State Community Planning Division for their approval. The cost of
the program will be approved by City and State when the program is approved,
If it is accepted by the City and State, a contract is signed. One third,
the City's portion, is deposited with the State , who pays the bills.
` PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - MARCH 11, 1965 Page 3
The Consultant can be engaged on a T. A. Basis. He submits a
schedule of fees for his services. Council recently accepted this
proposal. Ths Planning Commission can use his services and pay him
for this work. The Planning Commission turned over these eight items
and got his viewpoint on them. His recommendation is to wait, if at
all possible, until the planning program proceeds.
After reading the letter from Mr. Hodne, Mr, Kravik stated the
Planning Commission, by motion, accepted and received this letter and
agreed in general this type of approach would follow most along the
line that has been suggested here.
2. Mrs. Grace Manley, representing the rezoning, ZOA #64-10, and
#64-10A, Lot 3, except East 1580.4 feet, Auditor's Subdivision #25,
Lot 2, Block 3, Terry's Addition and part of Lot 5, Auditor's
Subdivision #25, to be rezoned from R-3, general multiple family
dwelling, to C-2, general business, stated her reason for wishing
action at this times. She said it is impossible for her to sell the
land as it is zoned now because the purchaser wants to know how he
can use the land before buying. This makes it impossible for her to
make any plans for the future.
Mr. Edward Lowe, representating Bernard Julkowski, asked, at this
time, what the length of time applicantswould have to wait on any of
the items before they caaa know what they can do, providing they
have a specific use and a valid request.
At this point, Mr. Hughes stated he believed the Planning Commission
had not made it clear what the procedure should be. They realise Fridley
cannot stand still for two years while the planner works. Our aim is
to provide an operating plan for the future: development that would be
efficient and beneficial. There ar-- some areas which are not in use,
and which, perhaps, must change in their zoning before they can be used
to the best advantage both for the owners and the City at large. One
of the first things which will be done is to study the existing situation
by the planner, to get axquainted with the City. We suggest we give him
the opportunity of getting better acquainted with the City as it is, so
that he can more correctly advise us and so that we can more completely
work with him on requests such as these. We have not established a.
schedule, nor has he given us a statement of time for this part of the
program. We believe it will take about six months for the planner to
acquire the necessary background to allow him to make decisions an4
during that time will have built up with him a close enough relationship
1 be able to mutually understand each other. tie. ask that
so that we will y
the people give the Planning Commission time to work with him.
Mr. Bergman noted that the majority of the resoning requests are
to rezone to commercial. The study will consider the amount of commercial
property and subsequent commercial construction which the City of Fridley
and surrounding users can support. Although the studies all take time,
the general concept is, as far as the City and Public is concerned, it
is frequently better to wait than make a decision which might be wrong.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - MARCH 11, 1965 Page 4
i
Mr. Harvey Peterson asked, if a petitioner had a specific use for
a certain piece of land, could this problem be given to Mr. Hodne,
and was informed that it could be.
Mr. Bergman stated that if any of the petitioners for rezoning have
something specific and urgent in mind, that they should be able to
document this particular thing.
Mr. Johanson stated the Planning Commission cannot recommend any
change until Mr. Hodne makes a study.
3. Mr. Edward Lowe, speaking of rezoning request ZOA #65-01, Lots
5 thru 11, 15 thru 21, Block 2 and Lots 13 thru 16, Block 3, Meadowmoor
Terrace, rezoning from R-1, single family dwelling, to R-2, limited
multiple family dwelling, asked if the Commission didn't consider this
as a specific request. It was agreed that this seemed to be the case,
but Mr. Hodne should be consulted.
4. Mrs. Graham commented upon their rezoning request, ZOA #64-11, Lots 23
thru 30, Block 13, Hamilton's Addition to Mechanicsville:, rezoning from
R-3, general multiple family dwelling, to C-1, local business area, saying
they had considered a restaurant when the request was first made, and
that time and finances are elements of consideration.
5. Mrs. Thomas Greig represented the rezoning ZOA #64-04, Lots 80 thru
83, Block A, Riverview Heights, to be rezoned from R-1, single family
dwelling, to R-3A, multiple dwelling. She explained that her mother
had tried to sell this property, but could not under the present zoning.
6, Mr. J. L. Theisen, Sr. and Jr. were present. They agreed to refer
this back to Mr. Hodne.
7. Mr. Edward Lowe said the owners of Lots 27 thru 30, Block 2v
Meadowmoor, Terrace, Bernard Julkowski and Edward Chies, to be rezoned
from R-1, single family dwelling to C-1, local business would be willing
to table this item.
8. Mr. Robert Schroer stated he would continue the rezoning request,
ZOA #63-21, Lots 39 thru 42, Block 6, Fridley Park, rezoning from R-1, single
family dwelling to C-1, local business area.
9. Mr. Harvey Peterson stated the rezoning request, ZOA #64-09, Dr.
Richard Trezona, et al., the Southeast corner of Mississippi Street and
5th Street, Lots 1 and 2, Lots 29 and 30, Block 2, Proposed Riedel Plat,
could be tabled.
MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Hughes, that Items 2, 4, and 8 as
above in the minutes be tabled as specifically submitted and request that
the City Manager advise each of these petitioners, subject to a consultation,
as to what is meant by specific detail documentation, and if any can so
document the item can be reopened for specific study and subsequent
recommendation. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried.
PLANNING COtWSSION MEETING - MARCH 11, 1965 Page 5
MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Hughes, that Items 3 anus
above in the minutes be continued until the next meeting and that
Mr. Hodne study each separate one and give a definite recommendation
or evaluation in ;detail° Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried. .
MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Bandel, that Items 7, 6, and 9 as
above in the minutes be continued subject to a report from the Planning
Consultant in the normal course of events,
10, SPECIAL USE PERMIT: DOUBIR BUNGALOW, HARLAND BERRY: Lots 1 thru 7,
Block 11, OOstgan's 3rd Addition. (North side of Hickory Drive from East
River Road to'7068 Hickory Drive).
Mr. Berry was present.
MOTION by Johanson, seconded by Bergman, that the Planning Commission
concur with the Board of Appeals and recommend that a Special Use Permit
for double bungalows be issued to Harland Berry on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1,
Ostman's Third Addition with the stipulation that a single car garage
be provided for each unit and that additional paved off-street parking
be provided for a least one car per unit. Upon a voice vote, Bandel
and Kravik voting nay, Johanson, Bergman and Hughes voting aye, the
motion carried.
11. Mr. Steve Hawrysh inquired of the Planning Commission of the procedure
of the proposed plat. He was informed there would be three steps to
this problem. 1 Submit the drawing to the Plats and Subdivisions
Sub-Committee and Streets and Utilities for road problem. 2. Submit
the proposed plat to the Planning Coemission. 3. Request rezoning.
MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Johanson, that the Planning Commission
refer to the Plats and Subdivisions Sub-Committee and Streets and Utilities
Sub-Committee the Proposed Sylvan Hills Plat 8 by Steve Hawrysh. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried.
Mr. Hughes asked if, at the next meeting with the Planning Consultant,
the Planning Commission could ask him to give some idea of those things
which they could look for themselves and use as a gauge as to whether
the request is likely to conflict with future plans.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, Chairman Kravik adjourned the
meeting at 11:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
n t
Hazel.O'Brian
Recording Secretary
7
` PTXMING CU01ISSION MINUTES MMR 25, 1965
The meeting was called to order by Chairmen Kravik.
Members present: Kravik, Hughes, Johanson, BeLgmsn at 3:00 p.m., Bandel
9:00 P.M.
Others present: Engineering Assistant Clark
An informal meeting of the City Planning Conmuission was held on
$larch 25, 1965.
Main topics of discussion pertained to zoning requests.
quite a bit of discussion pertained to the idea of adopting a
Planning and Zoning application. It was felt that such a form would
have merit. The Planning Commission used the Coon Rapids application
as an outline. It was the eoncensus of opinion that we should think
about adding to the form a ferry statements pertaining to the reasons
for rezoning. It was felt that these statements Mould be on the
application so that an applicant would know some of the facts that
this Commissions is interested in. It was decided that each member
take a copy of the Coon rapids application and study it more thoroughly
before a form for Fridley .would be drafted up.
Some time was spam 4iscussing the two pending rezouing requests,
namely Mrs. Bourdeaux°s a rd Julkowski°s double bungalows in
ZS-sadowmoor Addition. It was felt that this Commission would have to
make some definite recommendations on these two matters at the next
meting to be held in April. Mr. Hodne has been asked to make some
specific comments in regards to these two matters before that
meeting.
The members of the Plauniag, Commission felt that perhaps they
should try to establish some new categories such es those talked
about last winter.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
0 official Minutes
aSe
a ry
�lC
PLANNING CCHMISSION =TING MIi313 ES - APRIL 8, 1965 Page 3.
willing to table it at this time. The Planning Commission felt that the
petitioner had two ways open to him at this time. To either have the
public hearing as dated on Item 1 or withdraw it. In their opinion, the
request as stated should be denied or should be reworded so that a Special
Use Permit would be the vehicle by which the planning could be moved from
residential towards commercial.
MMON by Bergman, seconded by Johanson, that the Planning
c ,fi�n den ,the re�vAest�or t e rezon3.n ot' ats yorll;" 0 21,
Block 21 Lots_ 13 to 16�Block1.Meadowmooz Terrace to rezone free 8-1,
siaZle familt dwelling to x-2, limited;alt le farm-1l welling, but that
G"; a�nera should coiider theossibility_of Special Use Permits F.for
double g�alo6is for Lots 5 hrough 11_,aRi 1Srthro_ughx 21, 11. k 2, Meadvwmoor
Terrace, which would pezm3t a uniform develoeat of.the area. Upon a voice
vote, all ayes, the A9ttoa carried. -
Mr. Lowe was informed, that if the petitioners wished, they can
still hold the public hearing and follow through with the request; but if
not, they can withdraw the request and present the suggested solutiono
2. CONZZNUED REZONING: ZOA #64-04, TEAZEL BOURDEAUR: Lots 80-83, Block A
Riverview Heights. Rezone from R-1, single family dwelling, to R-3A,
multiple dwellings.
Mrs. Hazel Bourdeaux was present at the meeting.
It was noted that the public hearing for this request was made
on May 4, 1964. Firs. Bourdeaux stated sha lived on Lot 76 and 77, and there
are two lots between her house and the four lots in this request. Because
of the traffic problem already existing on East River Road, additional
access on the road would create more problems regarding safety. Use of this
property, therefore, should be such that the access should be on Hugo Street
and not on East River Road. The committee felt that Lots 78 and 79, which
are not owned by Firs.. Bourdeaux, should be considered in the rezoning request.
The ideal situation would be for all the lots to be zoned the same. The
committee felt they would have to consider what is going to happen to these
two lots in the future, if the existing use of the adjacent property is
changed.
Mr. Bughea coms>ented that he felt it had been the intent of the
Planning Commission to upgrade any area with which it had dealings. His
feelings were it would not work in this direction, at best working towards
maintaining the status quo. It would be far better to continue this
particular issue until such time as the owners of the land covered by this
application and of the Lots 78 and 79 have come to some agreement for the
development of that whole plat and on that basis urged that this motion not
be passed.
Mr. Bergman stated he felt ewe of the concern that Mr, Hughes
reported including Lots 78 ar-d 79, Be looked at the area and would concur
06
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 8, 1965 Page 4.
with some of the comments made from the petitioner as far as the appearance
of the area. Because multiple dwellings do abut the area, he did not
consider this to be spot rezoning. It is also more than likely, that the
owner of Lots 78 and 79 has been made aware of this rezoning request, but
he stated that he would be in favor of the motion as made with one
qualification, that unless proper precautions can be taken the traffic from
double bungalows and rental units facing each other would not be acceptable.
At the presentation of this rezoning request before Council, that the owner
of these two lots be made aware of this situation and given an opportunity
to state his opinion.
Mr. Johanson stated he also liked to upgrade the community but
this hearing was presented a year ago and the citizen had been most patient
to wait this long. He did not belive it is downgrading.
MOTION by Johanson, seconded by Bandel, that the_Plann B$ Commission_
recommend to the Council that rezonin (ZOA #64-04, Hazel Bourdesux) of Lots
80-83, Block A, Riverview Heights, from R-1, side family dwelling to R-3A.
_.Muni le dw_ellin�be acted with the stimulation that the buildings face on
Hugo Street. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, except Hughes,_who voted
naf, the motion carried.
Mrs. Bourdeaux was informed that this request would go to the
Council on April 19th.
3. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. #65-02, WILLIAM H. COSTELLO: Lot 24, Auditor's
Subdivision #92.
Mrs. Costello was present.
Mr. Bergman stated that the Streets and Utilities Sub-Committee
requested the City Engineering Department to give them some background
data of the street problem of this area.
MOTION by Bergman, seconded by Hughes, that the Planning Cam<lission
defer the item of a Lot Split Request, (L.S. #65-02, William H. Costello) ,
Lot 24, Auditor's Subdivision #92, until the Streets & Utilities Sub-Committes
have received their report from the City Engineering Department and acted
on same. Upon a voice vote, all aye, the motion carried.
4. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT: P.S. #65-01, CARLSON & LAVINE, INC.: Sytan Hills
Plat 8.
Mr. Wagner explained that Mr. LaVi:ne had called him, because he was
unable to attend the me eting, and requested rezoning of the proposed Lot 4
to R-3A, stating the east half of the proposed plat presently was zoned .,
C-2-S and the west half M-1. The Lot 4 is in the proposed Sylvan Hills Plat 8,
and is roughly 145 feet by 450 feet. Mr. LaVine felt that the R-3A zoning
would make a buffer between the commercial and residential. The Streets &
Utilities Sub-Committee approved the road as shown on the proposed preliminary
plat of Sylvan Hills Plat 8.
1965
Hazel Bourdeaux - ZOA #64-04 - Rezone to R-3A
(Official Publication)
OFFICIAL NOTICE
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
CITY COUNCIL
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
that there will be a Public Hear-
ing of the City Council of the
City of Fridley in the City Hall
at 6431 University Avenue N.E.
on May 17, 1965 in the Council
Chamber at 8:00 p.m. for the
purpose of:
Consideration of a request by
Hazel Bourdeaux to rezone
from R-1 (single family dwell-
ing) to R-3A (general multi-
6ffamily h0)
4.04) all Lots881, 82,
and 83, Block A, Riverview
Heights together with t h e
vacated service drive and
former Minneapolis Anoka
and Cuyuna Railroad right-of-
way that lies south of the
north line of Lot 83, Block A,
Riverview Heights extended
westerly and north of the
south line of Lot 80, Block
A. Riverview Heights extend-
ed westerly.
Anyone desiring to be heard
with reference to the above mat.
ter will be heard at this meeting.
WILLIAM J. NEE
Mayor
(April 28, May 5, 1965)—TC-2A
OFFICIAL NOTICE
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PUBLIC BEARING
BEFORE THE
CITY COUNCIL
TO WHOM IT MAY CONC SRNs
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there will be a Public Hearing
of the City Council of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at
6431 University Avenue N.E. on May 17, 1965 in the Council Chandber
at 8:00 P.M. for the purpose ofs
Consideration of a request by Hazel Bourdeaux to
rezone from R-1 (single family dwelling) to R-3A
(general multiple family dwelling) (ZOA 64-04)
all of Lots 80, 81Q 82, and 83, Block A, Riverview
Heights together with the vacated service drive
and former Minneapolis Anoka and Cuyuna Railroad
right-of-sway that lies south of the north line of
Lot 830 Block A, Riverview Heights extended west-
erly and north of the south line of Lot 80, Block
A, Riverview Heights extended westerly.
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above
matter will be heard at this meeting.
William J. Nee
MAYOR
Publish: April 28, 1965
May 5, 1965
a
Page 7,
SPECIAL USE PERMIT DOUBLE BUNGALOW, HARLAD413 BERRY:
The City Manager explained the request of Mr. Berry for a Special Use Permit
for the construction of two double bungalows. The Planning Commission recommended
to the Council that the request for a Special Use Permit for the construction of
two double bungalows be granted. The Planning Commission concurs with the Board
of Appeals in a stipulation that a single car garage be provided for each unit
of the double bungalow and that additional, paved, off-street parking be provided
for at least one car per unit. The City Manager stated that the Board of Appeals
recommends to the Council the stipulation that Vr. Berry provide the right-sof way
to align Hickory Drive with Riverwood Drive at an intersection with East River
Road and that the owner dedicate to the City the land to make a connection between
the service drive on the East side of East River Road with Hickory Drive.
Councilman Thompson asked if a public hearing were required for the issuance of
the Special Use Permit. The City Manager answered that a public hearing is
required. Councilman Thompson asked whether the Planting Commission held a
public hearing when considering the request for the Special Use Permit. The City
Manager answered, "No, the Board of Appeals held a public hearing." The Mayor
stated that issuing a Special Use Permit has the effect of rezoning two lots.
Councilman Thompson asked which date the Manager would propose for a public hearing.
The City Manager proposed the date of April 19, 1965.
Motion by Kirkham to authorize the City Manager to set the date for a public
hearing to consider the request of Harland Berry for a permit to construct two
double bungalows upon Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Ostman'a Third Addition. Seconded
by Thompson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
REZONING ZOA #64-04, MRS. HAZEL BORDEAtQE
The Mayor asked why the request of Mrs. hazel Bordeaux for the rezoning of Lots
80 through 83, Block A, Riverview Heights was being denied. The City Manager
answered that the request of Mrs. Hazel Bordeaux was not being denied, but that
consideration of the request was being referred to the Planning Consultant for
recommendation.
BUILDING BOARD MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 10, 1965:
Mr. Schlesinger, representative of Phillips 66, was present at the Council
meeting. He.explained to the Council that Phillips 66 had made a mistake in
assuming that the crossover for an interchange on University would be close to
the property which Phillips 66 had originally purchased for construction of a
service station. Mr. Schlesinger stated that he had negotiated for the purchase
of Mr. Schuur"s Property at 5669 University Avenue Northeast and had negotiated
with Mr. Schuur to purchase the property at 5759 University Awsnue Northeast which
Phillips 66 had originally purchased. Mr. Schlesinger then read a letter of Mr.
Schuur to the Council. Mr. Schuur requested the Council to grant permission for
him to move his business to 5759 University Avenue Northeast, and stated that he
would use the building for his own office to repair his own cars and will store
all junk cars in back of the building. He does not plan to continue the body
shop repair business. He states that he would prefer to run a towing business
only and does not plan to run a service station or a body shop. The paint booths
Page 2.
Motion by Kirkham to grant the- request for a Special Use Permit with the
atipulatious that (1) a single car garage be provided for each unit of the double
bungalow, (2) that additional off street parking be provided for a least one car
per unit, (3) that Mr. Berry provide the right-of-wap to align Hickory Drive with River-
wood Drive at its intersection with East River Road, and (4) that mr. Berry dedicate
to the City the land to males a connection between the service drive on the east side
of East River Road with Hickory Drive. Seconded by 'Thompson. Upon a roll call vote,
there being no nays, .the motion carried unanimously.
OItDh1ANC.R ADDING CHAPTER ?? TO CITY CODE JRWD 4/2Z65110
Councilman Kirkham stated thlat he had read an article in the paper describing
logialation which applied specifically to motor bikes rather than including all
qotor vehicles. Councilman Thocipsbn stated that he' believed this ordinance required
farther, Study to relate it more aPccifically to motor bikes and not to motor vehicles
in genteral o
Notion by Kirkham to refer to the City Attorney for revisions and further study the
ordinance adding Chapter " to'the City Code. 36conded' by Thompson. Upon a voice`
vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
SECOND READING OF. .MDXNANCE V0. 300 AMNDING SECTION 45.16;
The City Manager read the ordinance.
Lotion by Wright to adopt and publish the Ordinance No.. 300 amending Section 45.16
utxm second reading. Seconded by Thompson. Upon a roll call vote, there_.being no
nays, vthe motion carried UrAniaaausiy.
PLANNING COMHISSION HRTING MINUS - APRIL 8. 1965:
CONS ON Of REZONING R$ URST. _ ZOA #65-Olt JULKOWSKI & CHYES;
The City Manager explained that the Planning Cotmaisaion had recoaamended to the
owners that they apply for a 'Special Use Permit for double bungalows for Lots 5
through 11 and 15 through 21, Block 2, Headowwoor Terrace, in order to permit uniform
development of the area rather than requesting rezoning.. Re .stated further that he
believed the applicants for the rezoning request planned to apply for Special Use
Peraaits.
Motion by Wright to concur with the action of the Planning Commission and deny the
_request for rezoning. Seconded by Sheridan. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays,
the 100�ion carried unanimously.,
CO1 WRA ON OF REZON G VEST; ZOA #64®04 HAZEL BOURDZ=-
The City Manager explained the action of the Planning Commission recommending that
the Rezoning request by Hamel Bourdeaux be granted aith the stipulation that these
dwellings face Hugo Street. The Mayor stated that granting this request would
require ,motification and holding of a public hearing.' Councilman Wright stated
that the owners on the adjoining logs should be notified of the hearing.
4 Page 3.
Motion by Sheridan to concur with the action of the Planning Commission and net
the date for a publiclsering on the request of Hazel Bourdeaux for rezoning Lots
80 to $39 81ock A, Riverview Heights, from R-1, single family dwelling, to R-3,
multiple dwelling, for the Regular Council Meeting of Flay 17, 1965. Setconded by
Kirkham. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
MLIMIMY PIAT: , P.S. #65-012 ,CARMON & LAVINE, INC.: MVAN HILLS
PLAT 8:
The City Manager explained the action of the Planning Commission reemmending that
information concerning the proposed preliminary plat be given to the Planning.
Consultant for his recommendation. He stated that Council action could authorize
the City Manager to forward the information to tha Planning Consultant.
Motion by Sheridan to concur with the action of the Planning Commission and refer
to the Plaming Consultant the information concerning the proposed preliminary
plat for hie recommandatioum., Seconded by Wright. Upon a voice vote, there being
no nays , the motion carried unanimously.
PARK
%a City Manager explained that the Planning Commission recommended that the
Plowing Consultant be hired to perform site planning of facilities in Locke Park,
and in, one of the River Front sites, working with the Chairman of the Parks and
Pleyg0unds Sub•Caomittea, Councilman Kirkham asked what is the cost of hiring
the Planning Consultant for this purpose. The City Manager stated the cost varied
and this maxim= cost would be $18.00 per hour for the chief planner of the Planning
Consul ant. The cost, the. City Manager said further, could run as high as $500.00.
CounciLasn Thompson stated that he believed the cost to be a good Investment. The
City Wamager stated that he would consult with the Planning Consultant regarding
the covit of the project before authorizing him to work on the project.
Motion 1* Thompson to concur iwith the action of the Planning Commission a�4
authoriise the City Manager to hire the Planning Consultant for the purposes of site
plannirg in hocks Park and one of the River Front sites, working with the Chairman
of the Parks and Playgrounds Sub-Committee. Seconded by Wright. Upon a voice vote,
there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
LOT SPLIT RS USSTs L.S. #65-04, 10NAID 9SMITH: LOT 3 AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION #390
Mra David Anderson was present at the Council Meeting to confer with the Council
regarditig the Lot Split Request. Mr. Anderson stated that it was his 'original
intent. to build homes. on the lots, but that it was not posaible to bio so under any
of th*' agxisting xoning, regu}lations. Now he is requesting the Lot Split with the
inteinti(m of building double bungalows upon the, proporty. Councilman Wright stated
that than land borders industrial property and that he was favorably disposed to
develop=ing this land in this manner.
Notion 17 Wright to concur with the action of the Planning Commission and allow
the Lot Split, L.S. #65-04, the lot to be split dawn the middle making approximately
two 57t foot lots. Seconded by Kirkham. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays,
the motion carried unanimously.
1
Page 2.
Notion by Sheridan to accept the minutes of the Special Meeting of May 11,
1965 as amended. Seconded by `fright. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays,
the notion carried unanimously.
APMWAL OF AfIUMS SPSCIAIe_10MC: MAY 12, 19651
Notion by Kirtdinu to accept the minutes of the Special Meeting of May 12, 1965.
Seconded by Wright. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion
carried unanimously.
APPROVAL CF MINUTES - SPitCIAI. MATING - NAY 13, 1965
Notion by Kirkham to amend the minutes of the Special Neeting of May 13, 1963
to the effect that the vote adopting Resolution No. 82-1965 was adopted by
roll call vote, Councilman Sheridan, Councilman Wright, Councilman Thompson,
and Heyor Nes voting aye; Councilman Kirkham voting nay. Seconded by Sheridan.
Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
Notion by Kirkham to accept the minutes of the Special Council Meting of May
13, 1963 as amended. Seconded by Thompson. Upon a voice vote, there being no
nays, the motion carried unanknously.
PUNJC HMMINGS s
MMCIMM R-1 TO R-3A CM 80 TO 83 BIQgK A RIVBRVM HEIGHTS):
2layor 1106 explained the reasons for holding the Public Nearing on Rezoning Lots
80 to 83, Block A, nivarview Heights, and asked if anyone wished to have the
notice of hearing read at the Council meating. No one replied to this question.
Uillian ?once was present at the Council meeting and asked the Mayor if he
could have an explanation of the requirements for R-3A Zoning. The City
Mm=g3r euplained the &-3A Zone is limited to multiple dwellings; with setback
requirements and other requirements the lama as R-2 zoning requirements.
The Mayor asked if anyono present at the Council meeting was for or against
the Proposal to rezone these lots from R-1 to R-3A. lira. Bourdeaux was present
at the Council megtiag and stated that it is her request to have the lots
rezoned to R-3A. Mayor Nue declared the hearing closed.
Motion by Kirkham to request the administration to bring an ordinance to the
following Council meeting for the rezoning of Lots 80 to 83, Block A,
Riverviav heights, frac► R-1 to R-3A. Seconded by Sheridan. Upon a voice vote,
there being no nays, the matice carried unaalmeasly.
SHCQW READING OF ORDINANCII At#U211G CHAPTER 77:
Notion by Sheridan to adopt upon second reading the Ordinance adding Chapter 77
to the City Code. Seconded by Thompson. Upon a voice vote, there 'being no nays,
too action carried unanimously.
Cotmcilo= tkigbt statod that Section l and Section 77.01, defining motor
vehiclea, ruled out.907. of the motor vehicles as they are c mmmly defined.
He aslod cahethar it xjould be possible to change thee* two sections of Ordinance
No. 77. The City Attorney sweated that this Ordinance could ba written to
apply to motorized vehicles ratter than motor vehicles. The Mayor stated that
the Ordinance as written applied to motor vehicle rentals and not to motor
vehicles alone. Councilman Wright stated that someone going into the auto renting
Page 24.
i
AN= 1Ty Cm • x8Z 80 • 83 A RI!RVUW GETS
rA poftON - MUST 1=WQ o
The City Manager explained this was the request of Mrs. Hanel Bordeaux to resone
these lots in order to build double bungalows. Mayor Nee asked whether the
request required the votes of four Councilmen. The City Lager replied that
he did not believe this to be the case on first reading, but if it did the action
could be reaffirmed by the Council later.
Nation by Kirkham to adopt- the Ordinance amending the City Code, to resosne Lots
80 to 83, Block A. 8ivervieu Heights, upon first r*ading. Seconded by Sheridan.
Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
Notion by Sheridan to approve General and Public Utilities Claims #5252 through
#5521.. Seconded by Kirkham. Upon a voice vote, there being no says, the motion
carried unanimously.
Motion by Kirkhm to approve the Liquor Claims #7485 through #7530. Seconded by
Sheridan. Upon a voice vote, there being no *ayes the motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Sheridan, seconded by Kirkham to approve claim by Truck Crane Company,
payment #1, for $12,301.13 for debris clearance up to lay 21, 1965. Upon a voice
vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
USES:
Mayor Be* stated that in looking over the license applications he noticed that
there is an applications by the Wiens Construction Company. He stated that he
had heard complaints that the inns Construction Company was proposing, to
,-property owners, building alterations whidh are in, Violation of the Code of the
City of Fridley and was proposing to make these alterations after the Building
Inspector had infozmed them that these proposals are in violation of the City
Code. Councilman Sheridan asked whether the license applications had been dhecked
with the Better Business Bureau to determine the reputation of the firms applying
for licensee. The City Manager replied that it is the policy of the Inspection
Department to check with the Better Business Buvpau concerning new license
applications but that there have been so mmy new applications for licenses in the
past month that he couldnat guaraintee, that the Inspection Department had been able
to check all of themo Councilua Kirkham stated that he believes the City should
check the applications for licenses with the Better Business Bureau and with
other Cities where these firms are licensed before granting licenses. Mayor Nee
suggested that the Council den; the application of the Somans Construction Company
for a License, since the Romens Construction Company has not cooperated with the
Building Inspector and has not followed their orders as well as would be expected
of a construction company. He suggested that the Council issue licenses for
renewal applications, first and then consider the now license applications.
Motion by Sheridan to approve the licenses for electrical contractors and append
the list to the minutes. Seconded by Kirkham. Upon a voice vote, there being no'
nays, the motion carried unanimously.
e
I
'f Page 21.
READXNQ Cr ORDINANCE AMEND'LNG CITY CODE - REZONE IM 80 - 83 BLACK A
RIMVIEW HEIGHTS ADDITION (EMMMM.
Mayor Nee explained that the purpose of the ordinance is to rezone Dots 80 -83,
Block A, Riverview Heights Addition from R-1, single family dwellings, to R-3A,
special multiple dwellings classification. Mayor Nee asked whether anyone at
the Council meeting would like to have the ordinance read. There were no replies.
Dation by Wright to waive the second reading of the ordinance rezoning Lots 80 -
83, Block A, Riverview Heights Addition, to adopt the ordinance and publish
same. Seconded by Kirkham. Upon a roll call vote, there being no nays, the motion
carried unanimously.
DEMOLITION - 129 HORIZON CIRCLE {TABU D 6/4/65, 665, 6(14L6.5)°
Mayor Nee explained that a final decision concerning the demolition of 129 Horizon
V Circle had been tabled previously upon the request of the attorneys representing
'tl the parties involved. The Mayor asked whether anyone was present at the Council
! ' meeting who wished to speak concerning demolition of the structure at 129 Horizon
Circle. The City Attorney said that hebelieves this case has been resolved. The
► City Manager said that this case had been tabled only to allow the Council time to
receive more information concerning the structure of the home and that it is the
Council's decision whether to table this action or conclude consideration of
�l
demolition of the hoose.
- Councilman Wright stated that he would like to know whether documents such as the
one describing exactly what contractors said they would do to reconstruct the
home to comply with the City Code would be useful to the Building Inspector in
L working with the contractors in the future, and to the homeowner in negotiating
f with his insurance company. The City Manager stated that the Budding Inspector
was present at the Council meeting when the home at 129 Horizon Circle was under
consideration and the Building Inspector has a copy of the statements made by the
contractors for the insurance companies.
Motion by Kirkham to table consideration of a delay of demolition of the home at
129 Horizon Circle to the next regular Council meeting. Seconded by Wright. Upon
a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously.
�IZAMMM 0gp3NANCB No, 304 - PREVIOUSLY PASSED JUNE 9, 1965.
The City Manager read the Ordinance to the Council meeting.
` Motion by Wright to reaffirm Emergency Ordinance No. 304 as adopted by the
Council during the meeting of Jane 9, 1965. Seconded by Sheridan. Upon a roll
call vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously,
J REAL+FIRMING RESOLUTION NO. 94-1965 PREVIOUSLY PASSED JUNE 9, 19650
Motion by Wright to reaffirm Resolution No. 94-1965 as passed by the Council during
the meeting on June 9, 1965. Seconded by Thompson. Upon a voice vote,
Councilman Kirkham voting nay, the motion carried.
. Z
t
II
` ORDINANCE NO. 91 I
AN ORDINANCE UNDER BEC-
TION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHAR-
TER, TO VACATE AN UNNAMED
STREET OR ROAD ON THE
SOUTHWESTERLY BIDE OF LOTS 1
e-i
ONE TO FOUR (1 • 4), BOTH IN-
CLUSIVE AND LOTS EIGHTY TO
EIGHTY-J RREE (80 • 83), BOTH
" INCLUSIVE, BLOCK A, RIVER I
ti VIEW HEIGHTS, ANOKA COUN-
TY, MINNESOTA.
The City of Fridley do ordain as
follows:
Section 1. The unnamed road ly-
iIng s one O to Four ( - 4
on the southwisterl� bsie
oth int
' cluslve, and Lots Eighty to Ei hty-
three, (80 - 83), both inclusive, lock
A, 'Riverview Heights, Anoka Coun-
ty, Minnesota, is hereby vacated.
Passed by the City Council of the
City of Fridley this 26th day o1 De-
cember, 1967.
T. E. GREIG, Mayor
ATTEST:
CLARENCE E. MADDY.
City Manager.
Date of First Reading: Dec. 17; 1967
Date of Second Reading: Dec. 26,
1967.
Publication In Columbia Heights
RECORD.
Recorded in office of the Register of
Deeds in and for Anoka- County,
Minnesota.
Jan. 23rd, 1968.
I
t '
c
J'
�._.._...�.. _ 1
��►.�.
_.^�
.'. •s
i
(Official Publication)
ORDINANCE NO.305
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY
OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA BY
MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING}
DISTRICTS
The Council of the City of Frid-
ley do ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Appendix D of the
City Code of Fridley is amended
as hereinafter indicated.
SECTION 2. The tract or area
within the County of Anoka and
the City of Fridley and described
as:
All of Lots 80, 81, 82 and 83,
Block A, Riverview Heights to.
gether with the vacated serv.
ice drive and former Minneap-
olis, Anoka and Cuyuna Rail-
road right of way that lies
south of the north line of Lot
83, Block A, Riverview Heights
extended westerly and North
of the south line of Lot 80,
Block A, Riverview Heights
extended westerly, all lying in
Section 3, T-30, R-24, County
of Anoka, State of Minnesota.
Is hereby designated to be in
the Zoned District known as
R-3A (general multiple dwell-
ing).
SECTION 3. That the Zoning Ad-
ministrator is directed to change
the official zoning map to show
said tract or area from zoned dis-
trict R-1 (single family dwelling)
to R-3A (general multiple dwell-
ing).
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
21st DAY OF JUNE, 1965.
WILLIAM J.NEE
ATTEST: Mayor
MARVIN C.BRUNSELL
City Clerk
Public Hearing: May 17, 1965
First Reading: June 7, 1965
Second Reading:June 21, 1965
Publish: June 30,1965
(Jun-30, 1965)—TC-2A
f 0$DlnM= 170.
AN ORDW2:CE TO MEIM THE C= CODE OF T CIT-7 OF
FRIDLEY, WIR SSOM BY HAMM A CHGS W ZOVING
DISTUM
The Council of the City of rridley do ordain as sollmas:
. SECT1011 1. Appendix D of the City Code of Fridley ie
amended as herainaftes indicated.
ST TXON 2. Mhe tract~ or area within: the County of A-tok-a
and the City of FTidley and described an:
{, Al? of Lots 80, 81, 82 and 83, Block A.,
TUve--miew Heights together with the vacated
service drive and four Minneapolis, Anoka
and Cuyuua Railroad right of slay that: lies
f soy€t»h of the north line of Lot 833 Block A2
F Riva m ew Heights est:ended westerly and
fi. Nortb of :the south line of Lot: 80, Block A,.
Riverview Uoighta amIteaded westerly, all
lye in Section 3, Tw30, Bw24, County of
fi kas Shave of mlmnesot:a
1's, hereby deoiZnated to be in the Zone
District: know a as R-3A (general mlt iple
SECTION 3. That the Zonftrr Aeaministratcor is dizected to
change the official zoning map to show said
tract or area from zoned district E-1 (single
fam- ily dwe lliug) to H-3A {general amltiple
d�rellsng3.
PASSED W? TM. Ci:`1'Z COMMIL OF MEM CITY OF VERLET THIS
MY OF s 1965.
William J. Neel
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK 3 m.<:lm, C•
Public Bearing:
First
Si:wond Ee�tdi�tg:
Publish.. .....
•�.���,.
-�
,.. � ,s
I