10/27/1993 I
}
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Wednesday, October 27, 1993
7:30 p.m.
Public Copy
i
City of Fridley
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1993 7:30 P.M.
LOCATION: Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E.
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: September 22, 1993
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #93-07.
BY ANIMAL MEDICAL CLINIC (tabled 5/26/93) :
Per Section 205. 14. 01.C. (10) of the Fridley City Code, to allow
veterinary clinics conducting vaccinations on Lots 1, 2, 28, and
29, Block 2, Commerce Park, generally located at 250 Osborne Road
N.E.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT. P.S. #93-04.
BY DALE EDSTROM OF NORTHCO CORPORATION:
Northco Business Park 4th Addition, to replat Lots 7 and 8, Block
2, Northco Business Park, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Anoka County, Minnesota, and Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Park.
3rd Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota, generally located at 500 - 73rd Avenue N.E.
RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 9, 1993
RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING
OF SEPTEMBER 13, 1993
RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY AND ENERGY
COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 21, 1993
RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER
28, 1993
RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER
19, 1993
OTHER BUSINESS:
ADJOURNMENT
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR
NOVEMBER 3, 1993 HAS BEEN CANCELLED DUE TO A LACK OF ITEMS.
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Newman called the September 22, 1993, Planning
Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Dave Newman, Dean Saba, Diane Savage,
Connie Modig, LeRoy Oquist
Members Absent: Dave Kondrick, Brad Sielaff
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Marvin and Karen Just, 661 Cheryl Street N.E.
APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1993, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to approve the
September 8, 1993, Planning Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP
#93-15, BY MARVIN AND KAREN JUST:
Per Section 205.24. 04.D. of the Fridley City Code, to allow
the construction of a three season porch addition in the CRP-
2 (Flood Fringe) district, on Lots 13-15, Block W, Riverview
Heights, generally located at 661 Cheryl Street N.E.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the property is zoned R-1, Single Family
Dwelling, as are all surrounding parcels. The petitioners are
proposing to construct a 12 ft. by 14 ft. three season porch
addition off the rear of the property. The original dwelling unit
was constructed in 1962 prior to the adoption of the flood plain
regulations which the City adopted in 1977. The flood plain
regulations permit construction of accessory structures and
habitable living space with special use permit approval by the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 2
City. For habitable structures or spaces, the ordinance requires
that the first floor elevation be a minimum of one foot above the
100 year flood elevation. In this case, the first floor elevation
needs to be 823 .6 feet above sea level. All materials used in the
construction below that elevation must be floodproofed in
accordance with the current building code regulations.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioners will be required to submit a
elevation certificate which must be completed by a registered land
surveyor which will verify that the first floor elevation is at
823 . 6 feet or higher.
Ms. McPherson stated the addition as proposed does not adversely
impact the lot coverage or the required setbacks. Staff recommends
that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the special use
permit request with three stipulations:
1. A floor elevation of the addition shall be at 823.6 feet
• or greater.
2 . The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate
completed by a registered land surveyor verifying the
first floor elevation of the addition.
3 . All materials below the regulatory elevation shall be
floodproofed in accordance with current regulations.
Mr. Oquist asked if ,staff knows what the first floor elevation is
and where that would put the addition in relation to the existing
house?
Ms. McPherson stated staff does not have any records on the first
floor of the dwelling unit.
Mr. Newman asked what happens of the Commission recommends approval
and then the City finds out later that the porch is quite a bit
higher than the house. Does the Commission want to authorize
construction of a porch that is built on stilts and is higher than
the house?
Ms. Dacy stated the City does have data on file of the elevations
at certain points along Cheryl Street and Dover Street so there
are some benchmarks. Based on previous experiences, there have
not been any major problems with the elevations in this area.
Mr. Newman stated that having been involved in sandbagging this
residential area in 1969 when there was flooding and experiencing
the floods this summer, it is his opinion that this area is not
going to flood again if it did not flood this year. Is there much
likelihood that this area will ever flood again in light of the
work that has been done at the Coon Rapids Dam?
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 3
Ms. Dacy stated the Public Works Director, John Flora, is trying
to convince the Army Corps of Engineers and the federal officials
to re-evaluate the flood plain, but that will take a number of
years to accomplish. Certainly, the improvements at Coon Rapids
Dam have improved the possibility of maintaining the areas in
there, so the potential for flooding is probably minimal.
Unfortunately, as long as the Federal Emergency Management Agency
maps are still enforced, the City has no choice but to enforce
them.
Ms. Karen Just stated that they have lived in their home for 16
years and have never had a drop of water in their basement. They
really do not consider their property to be in the flood plain.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:46 P.M.
•
MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend to City
Council approval of special use permit, SP #93-15, by Marvin and
Karen Just, per Section 205.24. 04.D. of the Fridley City Code, to
allow the construction of a three season porch addition in the CRP-
2 (Flood Fringe) district, on Lots 13-15, Block W, Riverview
Heights, generally located at 661 Cheryl Street N.E. , with the
following stipulations:
1. A floor elevation of the addition shall be at 823. 6 feet
or greater.
2. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate
completed by a registered land surveyor verifying the
first floor elevation of the addition.
3 . All materials below the regulatory elevation shall be
floodproofed in accordance with current regulations.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to the City Council on
October 4, 1993 .
2 . RECEIVE AUGUST 9, 1993, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Savage, to receive the August
9, 1993 , Parks & Recreation Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 4
3. RECEIVE SEPTEMBER 9, 1993, HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the
September 9, 1993, Human Resources Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
4 . RECEIVE SEPTEMBER 14 , 1993, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive the
September 14, 1993, Appeals Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
5. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Tabled: Amortization of Gravel Driveways
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Modig, to remove this item
from the table.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ms. Dacy stated that at the last meeting, the Commission
discussed this subject and asked staff to research four or
five areas. Staff now has the results of that research.
Staff would like the Commission to continue discussion on this
issue to see if the Commission is prepared to make a
recommendation to the City Council.
1. Assessment - The Commission wanted to know that if
the City adopted an ordinance that required gravel
driveways to be paved, could the City do the work
and assess the costs back to the property owners,
the advantage being that the costs would be spread
out over time, and the owners would not have to pay
all the costs immediately.
Ms. Dacy stated the Commission members had received
by mail a copy of the City Attorney' s response to
this issue. In his memo, Mr. Herrick said it is
possible if, when the City adopts the ordinance, it
finds a gravel driveway to be either a safety
hazard, nuisance, or a hazardous condition. Mr.
Herrick listed under a variety of statutes how the
City could assess the property owners in terms of
how many payments and what percentage rate. This
is good news in terms of the property owners who
might be affected by this ordinance.
•
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 5
2. Income information for the 350 properties that would
be affected
Ms. Dacy stated that Ms. McPherson worked with the
Finance Department and determined that 15 out of
the 350 households who have gravel driveways are
eligible for the low income utility rate program.
3. Driveway definition, what constitutes a hard surface
driveway?
Ms. Dacy stated Mr. Barg called Columbia Heights,
Crystal, and Roseville. These cities are very
definitive. Concrete or asphalt are the only
acceptable materials allowed by those cities. In
the City of Fridley's code, it is defined as
"concrete, blacktop, or other hard surface material
approved by the City" .
4. Financial assistance -
Ms. Dacy stated she has not had an opportunity to
discuss this directly with the HRA, but she did
discuss this with Grant Fernelius, the Housing
Coordinator. If a person who owned a gravel
driveway applied for one of the HRA-sponsored grants
or loans, paving the driveway would be an eligible
expense under the program. The assessment option
proposed by the City Attorney also helps the
financial burden. The HRA would have to decide how
to expend monies on this particular project. Staff
identified two options:
a. The HRA could choose only to assist the
low income seniors (15 families) and pay
for all the costs; or
b. If there is the question of fairness, the
HRA could develop a policy that paid for
a portion of the costs for all the
property owners.
The estimated price tag for the first option is
$20, 000. If they assist everyone, the cost would
be about $75, 000.
Ms. Dacy stated that it would be difficult for staff
to recommend that the HRA pay that amount of money
when they are scrounging for dollars to do other
things that may have more of a public purpose than
paving driveways.
•
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 6
Ms. Dacy stated there are two important questions the
Commission must address:
1. Does the Commission want to pursue an ordinance
amendment which would require property owners
without hard surface parking areas to provide paved
driveways?
2. If the answer to the above question is "yes", the
following issues should be addressed:
a. What materials should be considered acceptable
in meeting the hard surface requirement?
b. How long should property owners have to pave
driveways?
c. Should additional time be granted for property
owners with driveways in excess of 50 feet?
Mr. Newman stated staff has done a very good job in addressing
the issues. Now the 'Commission has to address the first
question: Do they want to have an ordinance that would
require people with gravel driveways to hard surface those
driveways?
Mr. Saba stated he liked the idea of requiring gravel
driveways to be hard surfaced, but the definition of "hard
surface" should be broadened somewhat. However, he would not
want to require people to have hard surface driveways to
accessory structures in the rear yard that are used for
storage only and not for vehicle use.
Mr. Oquist stated he has mixed emotions. He is in favor of
hard surface driveways, but he is against the hardship that
it will put on some people. The Commission really needs to
take that into consideration. Staff has determined that there
are about 15 low income property owners who would be affected,
but there are other people who are not necessarily low income
who are living on the edge and are going to be affected as
well. To force them to pay an average of $1, 000 for a hard
surface driveway could be a real hardship.
Mr. Oquist stated he believed they need to first define "hard
surface" . Brick and concrete pavers can look much better than
asphalt.
Ms. Modig stated that the eight reasons for hard surface
driveways prepared by staff are very good, but she also has
a problem with the cost they will be forcing people to pay
for these driveways. There are a lot of people who are not
•
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 7
low income who are on the edge and another $1, 000 is a lot of
money. She did not know if the City has the right to dictate
this kind of thing. It might be better to enforce the hard
surface driveway requirement at the time of sale or when the
property changes hands. She is not sure what to recommend.
Ms. Savage stated she believed it is a good idea to require
gravel driveways to be hard surfaced. When you live in a
community, you have to conform to a lot of requirements for
the general betterment of the community. She understood the
concerns expressed by the other Commission members and the
financial burden on the property owners, and the City should
do anything it can to help ease that burden. One way is
through some type of assistance. It is a fairly minimal
amount of people in terms of the total population of Fridley.
She also has no problem in giving people time to put in hard
surface driveways, but she did think it is a good plan and is
for the betterment of the City.
Mr. Newman stated he is concerned about the financial impact
on the property owners and also concerned that the $1, 000
might better be used to enhance their properties in other
ways. He could not help thinking that if they had a room full
of property owners asking why the Commission was recommending
an ordinance that would force them to blacktop their driveways
and why the Commission feels this is an appropriate
expenditure of $1, 000, he would have a hard time justifying
that. In some cases, that $1, 000 could better be used to
replace a new roof or put on a fresh coat of paint. Even
though the hard surface driveways would have some aesthetic
benefit, he would oppose an ordinance for the reasons he has
stated.
Ms. Modig stated it is rather unfair when this is not new
construction. Many of these people have been living in their
homes for many years without hard surface driveways, and many
of them purchased these homes without hard surface driveways.
She is not so concerned about the low income property owners,
because they can get assistance through various programs. She
is concerned about the people who do not meet the criteria for
low income but are close to low income and the City is telling
them they have a certain amount of time to conform to an
ordinance that is basically visual. She would rather see this
hard surface requirement handled through the sale of the home
or when a building permit is issued.
Mr. Newman stated he was not sure if the City Attorney's memo
addressed some type of assessment plan where property owners
could pay for an improvement through an easy installment plan.
Staff might want to explore this as it might be another avenue
for those people who want to put in hard surface driveways.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 8
Mr. Saba stated that the City sends out letters every year to
those property owners who do not have hard surface driveways
letting them know of the rates if they want to hard surface
their driveways during City street projects. Maybe, this
should be publicized more and promoted a little heavier.
Maybe the City could follow up on these letters with a
telephone call.
Mr. Oquist stated there are some people who just do not care
whether their driveway is hard surface or not.
Ms. Dacy stated that is true, but staff could certainly
advertise a little more.
Mr. Newman asked the Commission if they wanted to recommend
to City Council an ordinance amendment requiring property
owners without hard surface parking areas to provide paved
driveways.
MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to recommend to
City Council that the City retroactively require that all non-
hard surface driveways become hard surface driveways.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, NEWMAN AND MODIG VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON
NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3-2.
Mr. Newman stated the Commission must now address the other
questions. They should also include the question raised by
Mr. Saba about whether or not to require a hard surface
driveway to accessory structures in the rear yard and the
issue of some type of assessment process.
a. What materials should be considered acceptable in meeting
the hard surface requirement?
Mr. Oquist stated he believed the acceptable materials for
hard surface should be cement, asphalt, brick, or concrete
pavers.
The Commission members agreed that the acceptable hard surface
materials should be limited to cement, asphalt, brick, and
concrete pavers.
b. How long should property owners have to pave driveways?
Mr. Saba suggested a requirement where a hard surface driveway
must be installed whenever the house is sold or the title
transfers.
Ms. Dacy stated the problem with the on-sale issue is it would
mean another inspection requirement that staff would have to
try to track, and there are 400-500 sales per year.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 9
Ms. Dacy stated staff is going to be evaluating a truth-in-
sale ordinance, and they could add a requirement for hard
surface driveway at that time.
Mr. Newman suggested that the City take the current ordinance
which requires a hard surface driveway and file it against the
350 properties. Then, when the property owner sells his/her
home, the buyer is going to know he/she has to conform to the
ordinance and that a hard surface driveway is required. That
will ensure, in some respects, an automatic enforcement, and
the City can do the followup. It will be a lot cheaper than
an inspection.
Ms. Dacy stated that the problem is that each filing costs
about $20 which would mean about $6,000 which is not in the
budget.
Mr. Newman stated the City might have some problems with
amortization if subsequent buyers are not made aware of the
hard surface requirement. He stated that $20 per filing or
approximately $6,000 might be nothing compared to the cost of
legal fees five years from now to enforce any amortization.
Mr. Oquist stated the hard surface requirement is already in
the ordinance. He suggested the hard surface requirement be
contingent upon the following requirements, whichever comes
first:
(1) a time period such as five years
(2) the sale of the property
(3) when a permit is requested from the City such as a
building permit or special use permit
c. Should additional time be granted for property owners
with driveways in excess of 50 feet?
Mr. Oquist stated the whole idea is to clean up properties,
so he would say "no" to this question.
d. Should a hard surface driveway to accessory structures
in the rear yard be required?
Mr. Saba stated he would not want to see this requirement for
accessory structures that are used for storage.
Mr. Oquist stated that if a hard surface driveway to an
accessory structure in the rear yard is required, it can be
handled with a stipulation on the special use permit.
Mk
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 PAGE 10
e. Should there be some type of assessment process?
Mr. Saba stated the City should make every effort to contact
these property owners and encourage them to take advantage of
the City's contractors for installing hard surface driveways.
Mr. Oquist stated he believed there should be some type of
assistance, not only for low income property owners, but also
some type of assessment process where property owners can be
assessed for the cost and pay it over a longer period of time.
MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to summarize the
consensus of the Planning Commission regarding the hard
surface driveway requirement as follows:
a. What materials should be considered acceptable in
meeting the hard surface requirement?
Concrete, bituminous, brick, concrete pavers
b. How long should property owners have to pave
driveways?
Whichever comes first:
• Five years from the adoption of an ordinance;
• When the property is sold;
• When a permit is required from the City
c. Should additional time be granted for property
owners with driveways in excess of 50 feet?
No
d. Should a hard surface driveway to accessory
structures in the rear yard be required?
The City will exclude from this ordinance any
secondary storage facilities that are not used for
vehicular storage.
e. Should there be some type of assessment process?
The Commission encourages the City Council to make
use of the special assessment process for payment
of this improvement and to make every effort to
include this improvement with other improvements in
City programs for rehabilitation or repair.
. H
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993
PAGE 11
Mr. Newman stated he will vote against the motion because of
the costs, not the least of which would be legal fees, in
trying to enforce the hard surface driveway requirement.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, NEWMAN AND MODIG VOTING
NAY, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE
OF 3-2.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Modig, to adjourn the meeting.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Newman declared the
motion carried and the September 22, 1993, Planning Commission
meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Respectfully sub 'tted,
5 `
yn Saba
Rec ding Secretary
r r=3
STAFF REPORT
nCommunity Development Department
Appeals Commission Date
PlanningCommission Date : May 26, 1993
October 27, 1993
City Council Date
REQUEST
Permit Number SP #93-07
Applicant Animal Medical Clinic
Proposed To allow animal/veterinary clinics which administer
Request vaccinations.
Location 250 Osborne Road N.E.
SITE DATA
Size
Density
Present Zoning C-2, General Business
Present Land Use(s) Retail
Adjacent C-2, General Business to the East; C-1 , Local Business and
Zoning
M-1 , Light Industrial to the South; M-2, Heavy Industrial to
the West; C-2, General Business and C-3, General Shopping
Adjacent Land Use(s) to the North - Retail and Industrial -
Utilities
Park Dedication
Watershed District Six Cities
ANALYSIS
Financial Implications
Conformance to the
Comprehensive Plan
Compatibility with Adjacent
Zoning and Uses
Environmental
Considerations
RECOMMENDATION
Staff Approval
Appeals Commission
Planning Commission
Author MM/dn
Ammini.
1 .
. SP #93-07
Animal-Medical;Ciinic
•
NI/2 SEC.
CITY OF
21
0 .i Id
/
NW CORNER �„ �,
• -SEC Nam- ... ..... _ ���.
t ST RA ESTATES - _ '!
EAES TES M) F(RS7l4 : ` . t i. 102
' _• TH/R ADD. M ADQ_• � ' I...�r
..„ , gi •filM, ... 1 trgtAt.Wrik
/ . ; !e' '; :
- <..: R .a+
; 1, 1 Eel ma
mil 62 Oren
(51.4.5• - , inzlez .211:1
2 = ai4e) Li
s INOOI ..J • 1
el/ I. 'MSC MIMI I. rl.00)
m��z N or) ts) :. , i �/� •
1 )1 .
(9 fs0o) ,
Oct ' -rco'a (+1luo/ [w aii i��` Valil• h—r-----7t--; , .po0/ ; 2 - . .,ram ;/ ,I r. • w.� I 4v • N..M: 1
I z }e • % _ M
t !s 7
I
/0: N110) G .7-(s001 I W I 'c + y 4,S •(a) 0 �,r
• (:100) . : : jtMELO i J J,. ,
il
1 J S.IJJo1 i CC N iti7 •,1 / i 9. I i r . . pn
- i ; nracf • _-'i- '.'-'. 747H IMENUE N.E.. IV
I
•
. _ �•
W �
n w) . .(ssor jjji z . ,
4.
•
.
I -", ' w J!. Or ;..
.`3ve. ,A
, iAce
PE isi
.
lit
1(yJ J , ;
13001 0 ` •• -t ' N M • 7 < ' J
j () ; I/,101 s. I fas . r+ J` :t
•• i. W . WII00) b.l ,1!�� I ' p ,' 2-
q
W / ` a
::' ..
IlJG) . i.
/ • ~ E�j ,/s 7
O i 13 smi, , im
, az1 ,
V rs0o) • p (, . ! ,ras°, 1 j . •
49
•
•
Sill
Ec. . I23 � I` : :18"
CA TI4NM'11i . I tt . . ,fwr !73R0
w IyR /40$07416•1s•i
if 1
•
SP #93-07 -
•
Animal Medical Clinic e
cc
O 7l1 /
K
•
731
W
Z •
Q •
'4
i,, rf /lllllllCr ,
4 :1
, ./
7(/ffi' o
:.
4/
4 IJ//I►!♦!♦♦♦-• `
i"4 ►♦♦♦v♦♦♦
►♦♦O•♦:::
,/ ►.♦♦♦`".#1 s -
• i♦•♦•�••
•♦�♦;
4 9 ►♦♦♦♦4i.i i
7 zW ♦♦4• h♦O
a V
►♦♦♦�41 11,...♦,—
►♦♦♦•gI col
-
♦4 ••• �V: /` rirl./lus .la�,rt:IWO" 3/-FrE i . V _ ,
04
4d.1) t Z_ 1 ' i'I"t'111iipo, - • I t° " UNITY •
' ...
•
E
;; ..a ��t` a1 T' HOSPITAL o '
li a
r...�: :. ; � ;
uula!!!� 3 , ;
��lulu!■ �� 13 'A s I Z 1
' , reijovyL...:::: �s ;,say • 3J
wn!■4/ s .: .11f : yillk .
rutain .
\I ., ...
r. .lrlt t' TM AVE e ' . �o. -y
r _ .:\ # 32 ,
: rziOtIft:111. 1 77::.:14;:..:1.:?:.:,:—(...0:-:;:1 r � n .
4:i:
&.T4Lel 1,,*/ , .44. It. ' f.1 ;:
5741741 d
lt,7,14, !°. . ' 4k-.. , ':\ If%L I
rir VittgAM; kr -'? . = ' 4i; - ‘' -&s)-- ,\
yeivetivAvivA cr ap :..,.: : 4,' ,-.-*' , ,,. .,10:: ,.: . ...:: i .14. f! ,
N i'HMO' - . ..,
,� 11/1'1AA1 „' � .. vl s s
, , itr. .
,„,„ , .
' 111
3C
ZONINn MAD
Staff Report
SP #93-07, by Animal Medical Clinic
Page 2
Request
The petitioner, Animal Medical Clinic, requests that a special use
permit be issued to allow veterinary clinics which conduct
vaccinations. The request is for Lots 1, 2, 28, and 29, Block 2,
Commerce Park, generally located at 250 Osborne Road N.E.
Site
Located on the property is a single story, multi-tenant, masonry
building. The primary use of the building is retail. The property
is zoned C-2, General Business. The property to the east is zoned
C-1, Local Business. The property to the south is zoned M-1, Light
Industrial and C-2, General Business. The property to the west is
zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, and the property to the north is zoned
C-3, General Shopping Center and C-2, General Business.
Analysis
The Planning Commission reviewed a similar request by H & H
Veterinary in December of 1992. The City Council approved the
special use permit for the veterinary service at its February 1,
1993 meeting. Pet Food Warehouse, whose tenant space is used to
conduct the vaccination clinics, is changing service providers for
the veterinary services. It is their opinion that having a service
provider which is connected to an established clinic provides
better customer service to pet owners. A new special use permit
must be issued due to the change in service providers and also a
change in the intensity of the clinic. The H & H Veterinary
application proposed clinic hours three to five hours per weekend
every three to five weeks. Animal Medical Clinic is proposing to
conduct vaccination clinics every weekend for approximately three
to four hours.
Section 205. 14.01.C. (10) of the Fridley City Code permits with a
special use permit animal clinics, veterinary clinics, animal
hospitals, public kennels, obedience schools, and training services
provided the following conditions are met in order to eliminate
offensive noise and odors:
A. All windows in the area of the building housing animals shall
be double glazed with a fixed sash.
B. Any ventilation system shall be designed so that no odors or
organisms will spread between wards or to the outside air.
C. There shall be no outside pens or holding areas.
Staff Report
SP #93-07, by Animal Medical Clinic
Page 3
The intent of the ordinance section is to provide standards for
full service clinics which maintain animals in their facilities on
a round-the-clock basis. As in the original special use permit,
the petitioner does not intend to provide full-scale veterinary
services at the vaccination clinics. The petitioner only intends
to provide vaccination clinics on a regular basis. There will not
be holding pens, either in or outside of the building. The
petitioner intends to use a small portion of the receiving area to
establish the examination and vaccination area.
In the original special use permit request, the petitioner provided
plans for storage of the biological and pharmacy items to be used
during the vaccination process. They also stated their plans to
prevent the public from accessing these materials as well as used
syringes and any waste associated with the vaccinations. The
current petitioner has indicated that they do not need an
infectious waste generators license; however, a more specified plan
detailing how medical wastes are handled and stored while at the
clinic site should be submitted by the petitioner.
The petitioner of the original request indicated that they were
currently licensed by the Minnesota Board of Veterinary Medicine.
According to the State, the current petitioner was under probation
by the Minnesota Board of Veterinary Medicine. The petitioner was
placed on probation due to the following allegations:
1. The petitioner provided unnecessary services.
2. The petitioner directed or permitted veterinary technicians
to perform procedures reserved for licensed veterinarians.
3. The petitioner prescribed or provided medications for human
use.
The order and stipulation imposed by the Board of Veterinary
Medicine expired October 22, 1993. Dr. Olson of the Board of
Veterinary Medicine indicated that there have been no subsequent
problems or allegations while the petitioner was on probation.
Recommendation
The request meets all of the zoning code standards set forth in
Section 205.14.01.C. (10) of the zoning code. Staff recommends that
the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request to the
City Council with the following stipulations:
1. No vaccination supplies or medical waste shall be stored on
the site.
Staff Report
SP #93-07, by Animal Medical Clinic
Page 4
2. Any alterations to the building will require issuance of a
building permit.
3. Future violations similar to those set forth in the Board of
Veterinary Medicine's stipulation order against the petitioner
shall be grounds for revocation of the special use permit.
W SP #93-07 f
Animal Medical Clinic
r
V 1t t 1
a
I
1 + X 0 _s)
' --i 1
iv,
4-.
.r. 1
a - c,z
lr - f 3
r f � �
U.) ! I
0____\2_6_..c
i AT
- L _ J
} 37$y 1 . :0
1i- w bX3
2 - G- 1
E :.,
�` -r S
V K' v
_J
n r — —1 � s a
a � o d a N
v ! � J -` ID 1
g ' 1
-1 r : i 0
e=" -- „tii,t,� --2 , C)
1 f
f
1 K \\( 1
a. 04-S 1 \ -.Nv hJin1a"-Ja.)
do ap•suI o1..
CITY OF FRIDLEY
6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. jiWIJ
FRIDLEY,MN 55432
(612)571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
PROPERTY INFOR M sTION- site plan required for submittal; see attached
Address: 2.s 0 O$f2 bid.f e; �)
Property Identification Number(PIN) ( i i 3 o 2- s-)-oc�-
Legal description:�7 s �, e - uL
Lot '"�r' � 'ec � T�
Block Tract/Addition
Current zoning: Square footage/acreage 11. /}Q
Reason for special use permit: fr Va
C[ .� wc TN �1E7" �yoa Section of City Code:
Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license?
Yes—�C --- No If yes, which city?
If yes, what type of business?
14o5
Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes
No
FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title)
(Contract Purchasers: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to processing)
NAME OSRo ea e e Ross jKIC S
ADDRESS z 3 0 ,5
C ENT L. 4J
Ail A.S - ' Y�
SIGNATURE DA PHONE 3 5�o p
DATE s 0-3`
PETITIONER TNFnn i
NAME nh E:br�L �� �►.o PA
ADDRESS 60 3 „9n1 E-p j SO
lYl P�.S !a 08 DAYTIME PHONE 3 714-'Pi>
SIGNATURE
DATE `1im..0 1 93
$:
Fee200.00 $100.00
Fee: 0 # for residential 2nd accessory buildings
Application received by: Receipt#
Scheduled Planning Commission date:
Scheduled City Council date:
• .
'"` MINNESOTAMEDICINE
; •. , BOARD OF VETERINARY
=It V.7 -1 :; 2700 University Avenue West #102 • St. Paul, MN 55 1 14-108 1
77 `._ (612) 642-0597
October 14, 1993
City of Fridley Planning Commission
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432
To Whom It May Concern:
In the matter of Joel Lockett, DVM, Minnetota Veterinary License
number 0970.
Dr. Joel Lockett, by Stipulation and Order of the Board of
Veterinary currently
the Board for
is under
probationary
removallicense
the
status. Dr. Locketz may
e
t
probationary status tishanticspatedethatdmeeting Board mwellnbeaduring
October 22, 1993. It1994.
the first two weeks of January,
Dr. Lockett has complied with alls of the informatSonpthat,mayacome
Order to date. Barring any derogatory I
to the attention of the Board prior to the January meeting.
expect that the over thed °probationaryd act rably statusnfDr.rom hisk
plicense.
petition and remov
Sincerely,
/
0/1( -
R land C. Olson, DVM
Executive Director
RCO/dc
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
•
if4:, :"- MINNESOTA BOARD OF VETERINARY�;_-���� MEDICINE
. ,,_`�} ,: = 2700 University Avenue West #102 • St. Paul, MN 55114-1081
` - (612) 642-0597
i1�gr.
•
September 30, 1993
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: -
In May, 1993 , KSTP-TV aired a sensationalized TV news segment
showing, on hidden camera, video footage of two veterinarians
performing surgical procedures that appeared to violate
current rules of the Board of Veterinary Medicine regarding
humane treatment of animals and minimum standards for
performance of surgery.
Near the end of the program, _ a video shot of the Animal Medical
Clinic of Minneapolis was shown and a voice-over statement was
made by the narrator that a veterinarian at that clinic was
accused of serious veterinary law violations, leaving the
distinct impression that those violations were the same as had
been shown on the program - inhumane treatment and substandard
surgery practices.
This attempt by KSTP-TV to equate the Board probation of Dr.
Locketz with the activities of the two veterinarians that were
the subjects of the show is false and misleading. There were no allegations or charges of inhumane treatment or substandard
surgical practices involved in the probationary action of the
Board of Veterinary Medicine.
Since ely,
7(.,v6, _- ____ i , /, ,,/,/
Roland C. Olson, DVM
Executive Director
RCO/dc
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
. ,`
-Anima[ fliec/icaf Clinic, Ap
2r. Ad orocLt, 2'011 2603 — lennepin &aA
• �innearoIL, ma. 55408
(612) 374-4414
•
5/ 1 /93
Attn: C.i,.ty. Counc.i..(', C.it/ 06 FiLdZey
P un p o 6 e: To e 6 t a b L.i 6 h a t n•e 5.s C tL n.L c at .the Pet Food W a n e h o u 6 e,
City os F'.idtey
M.i.66an: To pnov.i.de pkeven-ta.t-i.ve pet hearth cane in an e44icLen.t
and co6.t-e65ee.tLve manner .to a wide range popu.Qa.Lon.
Location 6L.te: At Pet Food Wanehouoe F&Ldtey, 250 06borne Rd.
Ct i.enZ6 .
AS6ondabZe na.te6 w.i..E!L. •6enve a new poputa.tLon that doe6 not
u6e ve.er.i,nany ho6pi.Uats .
Increa6e .the popu.f!ation o6 an.i.maL6 that w.itt be Lnnocuta.ted
Son Rab.i.e6 .
LLeen6e a tan.ge popuLat-Lon os pex6.
LLeen'e appLLca.tLon6 w.i,UL be dL6.tkibu.ted at the cL.in.i.c6
City w.iLL gain home extra revenue tom thL6 .
Mn Board o6 Ve.ten.inany Medicine:
Met with Dn RoLand OL6on pen6onat y, .they have no
ne6.tkiet.ion6 on .th.i.6 type 04 practice.
Mee.t6 Mn veterinary hearth 6 tandand6 -
Type6 06 Service6 :
"wettne66 Ctinic6 "-pneven.ta.t.i.ve medicine to a bkoad
range poputa.t.Lon. .
-Routine Phy4icat Fxamina.tion6
- Vaccination6 .
-HeaL.th Screen Te6.t6
- Stoot exam6
- Hean.twonm Te6t6
-Feline Leukemia Te6.t6
- Di6 p en6 e H ear.tworm Pn ev enta.tiv e PiLL6
Contrite Velecinaiy &reicee .`Jor *to- ..$ecia/Contraption
r.�--
1V' Animal Medical Cftnic, /O ,4
21, Ad cCocLar:, 2V717 2603 .. ennerin S0 ih
Minnearotil, Inn. 55408
( 2 ) (612) 374-4414
•
Compaaa.t,Lve Set-ups :
-Many commun.i.t.ie. .pon.oa Rab.ie. CZLnLc. in City Natt.
- at Fine Bann.
- Human FLetd
-Ca...Lboania- Ft.0 vaccination. given in .upenma'cke.t.
- FLoh,i.da-8tood .te.-tLng c inic. .caeen.i.ng bon chate..te'.ot,
g!uco.e, £Lve'c/k.idney dL.ea.e and blood pne..uke
tun by pa.i.va.te med-Lcct Lab. .
Type o b C tinLc. : •
-Limited ba.Le-weekend. — 3-4 hrs 1 day per TeekendA
each —eel_end per month.
S.ta 4 6 :
-Mn ...i,een.ed ve.te&.inaa.ian.
-ve.tea.Lnaay a...i...tan.t.
-2-3 ,intake p en.ones.
Set-upg
-2 pon.tabte examination -table.
-back dnop .eaeen
-con4eaenee -table. ( 2-3 ) and 4otdLn.g eha.i.a.
-wa.Ze 'eeep.t.i,cte. (.to be .taken o46-.L.te al5,te' ctin.ic houn. )
No.p-Ltat Back-up:
-An.Lmat Med.i.caL CLLn-ic and Ho.p.i-tat PA 2603 Hennepin Ave So
M.inneapoti. Mn 55408
- 2 Futt--tLme Doc-to'c. and pa'.-t-.ti_me doc-toa.
Da Joe.. Locke.tz-24 yeast. expen.ience
Dit Dawn Bn.ad.haw -2 yeaa. expekience
Da. David Man.hLahava- 19 yea'. expe'.ienee
Pt. Jane Spnangea.- 7 years.. expekience
-FULL .env.ice Ho.pL-tat- Suageay, Den.tL..t'cy, Boan.dLng, Gnoom.i.ng
Fmengency Setv.ice Back-up
- 0.the't pno4e.- LonaL .,ta66 oK 10 Oat and pat.t-time peit.onet.
•
Complete Veterinary Srvires 5or YOU. �eciat Comranion1
•
1r4
�V Animal Medical Clinic, /24
aUr. �oe�oLochetz, eU V/// 2603 ilennepin & ih
Minneapolis, Mn. 55408
(3) (612) 374-4414
Membe&ehip.i.n 6oe.ietLe6 and Onganizat.ion4 :
-A44.itate Membea off Amen.ican An.i.ma.2 Hosp.i..ta.e. A6,soc.iat.ion
-Metnopoti.tan An-i.mat Ho.pLtat A6aoc.iation
-Vete/Una/Ey HospLtaI Managet6 A.hoc.Lation
-M.i,nne,sota Vete.'LLnaay Med.ica2 A46ocLation
Amekican Vetea.inaay Med.ica! A'6ociation
--Mn Veten..Lnan.y Academy o{y Continuing Education
-Amen.Lean Society o, Fetine Pnact.i.t.i.one&.
Witt have:
-Ctvtame&. Seay.i.ce numbea to that ctien-ts mat( ca.0 the
doc.to' o-'c nu'tae with que6tLon4
-wit/ at4o nece.Lve the docto't ' a phone numbea who -tkeated
theL4 pet in eaae emergency
-the numbe't ob the Emergency Sen.v.i.ce w.itt a!iso be pnovLded
•n/7 .1;
anept Ir ?Urinary Urinary Srvicr u! �r Yrr -Sorrier(0 l�n
oonpanion
V: Anima[ Medical Clinic, PA
21. floe[ a ocbefz, 2 MM �/y/2603 ilennepin South
Minneapolis, Mn. 55408
(612) 374-4414
ray 4, 1993
City of Fridley
To Thom it may concern :
The Animal Medical is not a generator of infectious waste
and as such is not required by State Lap- to have a license for
that purpose.
At the proposed Fidley site Te Till be conducting "Wellness
Clinics" providing exams vaccinations and health screen tests.
All material and syringes generated from this Tell animal
clinic, Till be taken off site to our main hospital at
2603 Hennepin Ave So There Te contract waste Panagement ,Savage
for disposal.
Sincerely,
4
Dr oel Locketz DV: t
amp[e& Veterinary &rvicee .tor your Special Companion
O
ill
O CO
� z ►= N
U = O
C� o U a.
-
st
} W � 0 COW
cc O
lilt•" z Q 9 �✓: Z . Q:
ccF}- zv. `^`, N CY
-- -� W w Ns
Q cf)4-' > > Q � IdLID z
z UC.,)O
u, z a
OJT Z
+-+ Li o `r' < -.J .
r.
rZS Q W
4.4 Q N --J ° CI
b , O W a" se-'''�ioo O "-
W CO
11- O
l' t7E h '0 & 7t/ . W
E-,.
.
. ~
AW
Now
2575 North Fairview 9 Suite 200 0 Rou*vi||o, Minnesota 55113 w Phone: (612) 638'0220 w F/0(: (612) 636~9207
'
May 1O.. � 993
'
City of FriJle�
wi�helle �cPhsrs�r, �ssistant Cit� Pla `ns
6431 Unive/sit� Avenue N. E ' '
Fridley, MN 55432 '
McPherson:
vet �et Food Warehouse has decided to change the
erznarians who operate vaccination d h lt
•
To: City of Fridley May.12, 1993
From: H&H Veterinary Services
Re: Special Use Permit request by Joel D. Locketz, DVM/Animal Medical Clinic
It has come to our attention that Joel Locketz, DVM/Animal Medical Clinic has applied for a
Special Use Permit with the City of Fridley. As a veterinarian, as business owners and as
members of this community, we feel it is our duty to inform you of the following:
The Minnesota Board of Veterinary Medicine has placed Joel Locketz, DVM(licensed to
practice veterinary medicine in the State of Minnesota) on probation because of the
following allegations(see attached report, pg. 1):
Licensee provided unnecessary services;
Licensee directed or permitted veterinary technicians to perform procedures
reserved for licensees;
Licensee prescribed or provided medications for human use.
It was Dr. Locketz's decision to expressly waive formal hearings on all facts and legal
conclusions regarding the case in exchange for being placed on probation for at least two
years(pp. 2,5,7).
Dr. Locketz recently approached H & H Veterinary Services regarding the vaccination clinics
being conducted at Pet Food Warehouse stores. Pet Food Warehouse stores recently underwent
a change of ownership and management. With this change, though they were satisfied with the
services provided by H&H Veterinary Services, Pet Food Warehouse decided that further clinics
would be conducted by Dr. Locketz/Animal Medical Clinic. Upon that decision, Dr. Locketz
contacted H & H Veterinary Services asking for complete operating procedures, copies of all
forms and all client records in exchange for employment with his clinic. Before making any
decisions, we did some background research on Dr. Locketz. We found the attached report as
well as many rumors. Upon our next conversation with Dr. Locketz, we expressed our intent to
consult with an attorney before handing over afty forms, records, procedures, etc. Dr. Locketz,
then, promptly hung up the phone and never resumed contact with H & H Veterinary Services.
Since then, H & H Veterinary Services has been conducting vaccination clinics in other pet food
stores in the Twin Cities.
We are concerned about the moral character and ethics of anyone conducting business in our
community. We hope the information provided will help you come to a decision regarding this
matter.
Sincerely,
Uri Herzberg, DVM A • hp
Mala Herzberg, Manager``,d1
a l i\ M- 1Caa 'ni c CL S caso ,s1,.Ls u. M✓vki2.1 S ' Leo-nd- rep,r -
av l oca Q veke6► O c;an5.
STATE OF MINNESOTA BEFORE THE MINNESOTA
BOARD OF VETERINARY MEDICINE
In the Matter of
Joel D. Locketz, DVM STIPULATION AND ORDER
•
License No. 0-9-70
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Board of Veterinary Medicine (Board) is an
agency duly established under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 156, for the purposes, among
others, of licensing veterinarians and regulating the practice of veterinary medicine in the
State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Joel D. Locketz, DVM, (Licensee) was licensed by the Board in
1970; and
WHEREAS, Licensee is the owner of Animal Medical Clinic, 2603 Hennepin
Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota, where he has practiced veterinary medicine for the past
19 years; and
WHEREAS, on or about August 12, 1991, the Board instituted the above-
captioned matter by serving upon Licensee notice of the scheduling of a conference with
the Board Complaint Review (Committee); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the notice, Licensee and his attorney met with the
Committee on August 28, 1991, to discuss allegations that while practicing at Animal
Medical Clinic, Licensee provided unnecessary services, directed or permitted veterinary
technicians to perform procedures reserved for licensees, prescribed or provided
medications for human use; and
WHEREAS based upon the conference discussion, the parties wish to resolve
this matter without the necessity and expense of a contested case hearing by entering into
the instant Stipulation.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by
and between Licensee and the Board as follows:
A. During all times material herein, Licensee has been and now is subject
to the jurisdiction of the Board;
B. If the Board in its discretion does not approve this Stipulation, it shall
be deemed withdrawn and of no evidentiary value and shall not be introduced or relied on
by either party; except that Licensee agrees that, should the Board reject this Stipulation
and if this case proceeds to hearing, Licensee will assert no claim that the Board was
prejudiced by its review and discussion of this Stipulation or of any records relating hereto;
C. Without admission of any wrongdoing, Licensee expressly waives
formal hearing on all facts and legal conclusions referenced herein and any and all
procedures before the Board relative to said facts and conclusions to which he might
otherwise be entitled by law;
D. The Board may forthwith adopt and implement the following order:
1. Licensee is hereby .placed on probation with the Board, effective
immediately.
2. During probation, the following terms and conditions shall apply:
a.1) During the first six (6) months of probation, Licensee shall retain an
adviser. The adviser shall be selected by Licensee from a list provided by the Committee.
' The list shall include the names of not less than three persons, all of whom shall be Board
licensees. Licensee shall select the adviser within twenty (20) days of service upon him of
the list and shall notify the Committee of the selection within the same twenty-day period.
2) It shall be the role of the adviser to observe and/or inspect and
provide any indicated recommendations to Licensee relative to:
a) Licensee's inpatient and outpatient procedures;
b) Licensee's surgical techniques;
c) Licensee's supervision of his staff;
•
-2-
•
•
d) Licensee's records and recordkeeping procedures,
including billing procedures; and
e) Such other practice-related matters as the adviser deems
appropriate.
All observations and inspections shall be conducted at the discretion of the
adviser during normal practice hours, not to exceed a total of four (4) hours each week.
Licensee shall provide a copy of this Order to the adviser before or immediately upon the
•
adviser's first visit to Licensee's practice premises.
The adviser shall submit a written report directly to the Committee each
month, including a final report.
3) Licensee shall pay all costs and fees associated with the adviser's
functions, including mileage and a reasonable hourly fee for the time expended by the
adviser to travel to and from Licensee's practice premises, for the time spent at Licensee's
practice premises, and for. the time expended to prepare all reports required to be
submitted to the Committee. All such fees and costs shall be paid promptly by Licensee to
the adviser upon the adviser's submission of a monthly statement to Licensee.
4) Licensee shall fully cooperate with the adviser and the Committee to
facilitate the effective implementation of the requirements of this paragraph.
b. Nothing herein shall prevent the Board, or authorized Board
agents, from entering and inspecting Licensee's practice premises, with or without
notice, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 156.12, Subdivision 5, and
156.20 (1990)
c.1) Within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, Licensee shall
refund $70.95 to the pertinent individual identified by the parties at the conference
herein.
2) Within the same ten day period, Licensee shall provide written
verification of the refund to the Committee.
-3-
•
3) In the event the individual cannot be located by Licensee upon a
reasonable effort, Licensee shall donate $70.95 to a charity for the betterment of veterinary
medicine. Licensee shall provide written verification of the donation to the Committee not
more than ten (10) days after the donation.
d.1) Within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, Licensee
shall conspicuously post at his practice premises and provide to all employees and to
the Committee written statements of policy and practice.
2) At a minimum, the statements shall:
a) Identify the specific functions and procedures which are
permitted by law to be performed by persons not licensed
by the Board to practice veterinary medicine;
b) Identify the specific functions and procedures which may
be performed only by persons licensed by the Board; and
c) Set forth procedures to be followed in animal medical
emergencies, including emergencies which arise during
normal practice hours when no person licensed by the
Board is on the premises.
The statements shall include language to clearly indicate that persons not
licensed to practice in Minnesota shall not diagnose, prescribe medications, including
refills, or perform surgical correction, and that these prohibitions apply whether or not the
unlicensed person is under the direction and supervision of a Board licensee.
e.1) Within one-hundred eighty (180) days from the date of the
parties' previously referenced conference herein or by February 24, 1992, Licensee
shall attend a course or seminar approved in advance by the Committee relating to
veterinary medical ethics.
2) Not later than fourteen (14) days following the course or seminar,
Licensee shall submit written evidence of attendance to the Committee.
-4-
3) All costs associated with Licensee's compliance with this paragraph
shall be borne by Licensee.
f. License shall not prescribe or dispense any prescription drug, including
refills, to any person.
g• Licensee shall refrain from providing any medically unnecessary or
excessive services.
h. Licensee shall make and maintain all medical records in a manner
consistent with the hereto attached standards of the American Animal Hospital
Association.
i• Licensee shall strictly comply with all recordkeeping requirements for
veterinary drug transactions set forth at Minnesota Statutes Section 156.18, Subdivisions 3
and 4 (1990).
j. Licensee shall not presign or authorize the presigning of any health
certificate; nor shall he authorize or permit any health certificate to be signed except by a
licensed veterinarian.
k.1) Not earlier than twenty-four (24) months from the date of this
Order, Licensee may petition the Board for the termination of probation.
2) Any such petition shall be in writing and shall include an affidavit form
Licensee indicating whether he has fully complied with all of the terms and conditions of
probation.
3) Any petition submitted in accordance with parts 1) and 2), immediately
above, shall be considered by the Board not later than the Board's first regular meeting
after the petition's receipt; provided that the petition must be received at least fourteen
(14) days before the meeting. .
4) The Board shall grant a petition submitted in accordance with this
paragraph if it determines that the preponderance of information received indicates that
Licensee has fully complied with the Order and if Licensee is not the subject of any
-5-
•
complaint pending endin before the Board in which conduct substantially similar to that discussed
by the parties at the conference herein of August 28, 1991, is alleged. If the Board denies a
petition submitted under this paragraph, Licensee shall not submit another petition for the
termination of probation earlier than six (6)months from the date of the denial.
3.(i) If Licensee fails to comply with all of the terms, conditions and
requirements of this Order, (ii) if additional, verifiable allegations similar to those
discussed at the parties' conference herein on August 28, 1991, are received by the
Committee during the period of probation, or (iii) if any report from the adviser required
under paragraph 2.a.2) hereof discloses a violation of this Order, Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 156, or Board rule, the Board shall so notify Licensee in writing at his last known
address filed with the Board. Licensee shall have the opportunity to contest the allegations
by submitting a written request to so contest within 30 days after service of the notice:
a. If licensee does not submit a written request to contest the allegations
withindays
30 da s of service of a Notice Of Opportunity To Contest The Allegations, the
issues set forth in the notice may be taken as true or deemed proved without further
evidence. Upon a report to the Board of such allegations and of Licensee's failure to
contest, the Board may impose additional disciplinary action, including revocation. Any
Bo
ard order issued under this paragraph shall be final and binding upon Licensee and shall
not be subject to judicial or administrative review or to a judicial stay pending any attempts
to seek such review;
b. If Licensee submits a written request within 30 days to contest the
•
allegations, the Board may initiate either a proceeding conducted pursuant to Minn. Stat.
ch. 214 or a contested case hearing pursuant to Minn.
Stat. ch. 14.
4. This Order and the Stipulation of which it is a part, including all
attachments hereto, are and shall be deemed to be public documents.
F. IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this Stipulation
shall not in any way limit or affect the authority of the Board to initiate administrative
-6-
•
contested case proceedings against Licensee on the basis of any act, conduct, or omission of
Licensee occurring before or after the date of this Stipulation which is not related to the
specific facts and circumstances or requirements referenced herein;
G. Licensee has voluntarily entered into this Stipulation without threat or
promise by the Board or any of its members, employees or agents, and after consultation
with and advice from Licensee's counsel.
H. This Stipulation contains the entire agreement between the parties,
there being no other agreement of any kind, verbal or otherwise, which varies this
Stipulation.
Dated: tV(7`( / , 1991
/19 etyektAir
J,9EL D. LOCKETZ, DVM
Licensee
Upon consideration of this stipulation and all of the files, records and
proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the terms of this stipulation are adopted and
implemented by the Board this 2.?— day of C:-'C-' , 1991.
MINNESOTA BOARD OF
• VETERINARY MEDICINE
7
ROLAND C. OLSON, DVM
Executive Director
-7-
AMC L ow Cost Vaccination Clinics ,�►
2603 Hennepin Avenue So.-Minneapolis,Minnesota 55408-374-4515
June 8, 1993
City of Fridley
Michelle McPherson, Assistant City Planner
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN. 55432
Dear Ms. McPherson:
It has come to my attention that Dr. Urie and M a Hertthat b are not accurate
Mobile Veterinary Services have made statements
and do not fairly represent the communication that transpired between
them, my wife and myself. The following summarizes these transactions to
the best of our recollections:
During the third week of this past February, my wife and I met with Jeff
Sell, Pet Food Warehouse General Manager, to discuss details of an
agreement to have Animal Medical Clinic assume responsibility for all
.
locations. In
vaccination clinics being held or to be held at all existing PFW
the course of this conversation, Jeff stated that he had informed H & H
Veterinary Services of this change in Vaccination Clinic management and
was concerned about the transition, given an existing relationship with the
Hertzbergers. His desire was to make this transition in the most respectful
way possible and would leave the strategy to me.
I discussed this transition matter further with my wife (an organization
development consultant) and we decided to meet with the Hertzbergers to
give them an adequate explanation of what led up to this veterinary
change and to inquire as to their receptivity and/or desire to become a
part of the new organization.
•
AMC Low Cost Vaccination Clinics
2603 Hennepin Avenue So.- Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408-374-4515
-2-
This meeting with the Hertzbergers took place on February 26, 1993 at the
Embers restaurant following a tour of the Animal Medical Clinic. The
meeting began with a brief explanation of the business agreement that Pet
Food Warehouses and the Animal Medical Clinic entered into and the
extensive groundwork that Animal Medical Clinic had already laid to
develop its vaccination clinic organization, advertising capability and
highly trained staff. I discussed how I was currently envisioning the
organization and the work flow.
After this initial presentation, I acknowledged the experience and
expertise that H& H Veterinary Services have and extended an offer to Dr.
Urie Hertzberger to join my new organization and to be compensated at a
level commensurate with both his expertise and vaccination clinic
experience. He seemed to be relieved by this gesture and began discussing
some of his experiences at the vaccination clinics, the University of
Minnesota and his family situation. It was at this point that he mentioned
his wife, Malla, was pregnant with their second child. I asked Malla what
role she played in their vaccination clinic operation and she began
describing an impressive administrative role and apparent business savvy.
I decided (both out of compassion and need) to also offer Malla a position
in my new organization. Both seemed pleased with this second offer. As it
appeared that they welcomed my offers, I proceeded to request that they
begin assembling various data to be entered into the Animal Medical Clinic
data base, ie; client records, job descriptions, staff names, salary
information, etc. We all shook hands and decided to meet again, probably
at our home, to work out final details of this new employment
arrangement. My wife and I suggested that they bring over their child to
play with our two children and looked forward to the beginning of a new
work, and possible social relationship. Malla agreed to contact us soon with
a date and time that would be convenient to meet at our home.
Approximately one week later, having not heard from Malla, I called Malla
to follow-up on our last conversation. When I asked why she had not
contacted me, she said that her daughter was ill and we could not get
together at this time. Another week followed with a commitment to
contact me and subsequent lack of communication. Again, I called Malla.
This time she said that they were not interested in my offer and upon the
AMC Low Cost Vaccination Clinics ,,
2603 Hennepin Avenue So.-Minneapolis,Minnesota 55408-374-4515
-3 -
advise of their attorney, they would not be turning records over to me. I
said thank you and hung up the phone as her voice tone left no opening for
further discussion.
In summary, I believe that I treated the Hertzbergers with fairness and
respect. I have entered into an agreement with Pet Food Warehouses
based on my proven professional and business expertise and experience
and not dependent on defaming the reputation of any other professionals.
I believe there is a need for veterinary services that address a multitude
of pet owner needs, one such need being low cost preventive medical
services.
Thank you for your consideration of my perspective and position. I would
welcome an opportunity to discuss this matter in person.
Sincerely,
Dr. Joel D. Locketz, D.V.M.
Hilicrest Animal despite.
1320 EAST COUNTY ROAD D AT HIGHWAY 61
WHITE BEAR LAKE,MINN. 55110
t
Phone 12- 484-7211
6/10/92
•
•
MINNESOTA BOARD OF VETERINARY"'MEDICINE ` .
2700 University Avenue
St.Paul, MN 55114
Dear Board;
I have monitored Dr. Joel LOchetz 's ANIMAL MEDICAL CLINIC both by
direct visit. and numerous phone' .son versat±o:.a since January 17 of
this year. A total of approximately 24 hours' were spent at the
clinic. in. increments ranging from 11 /2 to 3 hours, the longer periods
at the beginning. of the visits.
There are. 2 veterinarians, one 'from Germany and one from Mexico that
are - doing technician duties and I have impressed on them the need::to
avoid letting• cliefits-think that they are licensed veterinarians.
I am satisfied that they are doing this. -In' phone calls to the clinic
I 'find they often answer the phone and have never passed themselves •
off to be - DVMs. They do. seem to be very cdmpetent in their duties.
Dr. Dawn Bradshaw is working .full time now although was at 30 hours
a week before April. 1st. She is a Minnesota graduate. A Dr.Marshava.
'does fill in work and -Joel is there every day but devotes a good
deal of' time to management. I think that: the clinic is doing very
acceptable work. It is clean and well run.
After' considerable conversation with Joel, I do think that some dis-
gruntled help contributed to a lot of his problem and that it is
something that could happen to any of us.His explanation seems very
logical to me and I have found him to be a cooperative pleasant guy
to associate with-. I am convinced that' he has his act together and
there will be no more problems. It is my opinion that my services are
no longer needed.
.
•
• Sin . ly,
C.J.12 ell D.V.M.
Dr. Locketz denies that he has violated licensing statutes. The complaints that
prompted the Board's investigation appear to have been made by one or more disgruntled
former employees.
In our investigation, we spoke with some of the individuals whose pets were the
subject of those complaints. Our investigation showed that these pet owners had not filed
complaints and had not even been contacted about the complaints. In several instances
the complaints were refuted altogether. In others, the complaints involved isolated
circumstances what could not be verified one way or the other.
Dr. Locketz does not believe that he has violated licensing statutes. He believes
that he has always provided high quality care to the pets he has treated. However,
because of the expense and stress involved in a full hearing, he has agreed not to pursue
this in administrative proceedings. Because of some technical violations (not involving
poor care to animals, and some involving office procedures, all of which were corrected
or modified nearly a year ago), Dr. Locketz has agreed to the terms of the agreement.
Dr. Locketz and Animal Medical ainic will continue to make quality pet care their
highest priority.
joaps\�\' HEARING DOG PROGRAM OF MINNESOTA
2223 East 35th Street
1
Minneapolis,MN 55407
612/729-5986(Voice) Alan M.Peters
612/729-5914(TDD) Executive Director
June 1, 1993
Ms. Michele McPherson
Assistant City Planner
City of Fridley
6431 University Ave N
Fridley MN 55432
Dear Ms. McPherson:
At the request of Dr. Joel Locketzg I am writing a letter of recommendation.
Over the past two or three years, Dr. Locket'has:generously donated services to
The Hearing Dog Program of Minnesota, caring for a.number of our guide dogs.
Our dogs help deaf people know when sounds'happen in their homes and work
places. We have always received good quality care from Dr. Locketz and his
staff.
If you should have any questions about our experience,rplease&f el free to give me
a call.
Sincerely,
Alan M. Peters
Executive Director
The Hearing Dog Program of Minnesota is a division of The Companion Dog Connection,Inc.,a non-profit Minnesota corporation.The Companion
Dog Connection is dedicated to identifying and developing new ways to establish mutually beneficial relationships between people and dogs.
JOHN J. FLAGLER
Arbitrator
2104 Girard Avenue South Social Security # 116-16-6898
Minnem4 fVligrta 55405
Federal I.D. # 72-2405310
Phone: 612-374-1505
William Hunt, Assistant City Manager
City of Fridley Offices
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Bill:
I am writing on behalf of my friend Joel Locketz who has an application before the City
of Fridley Planning Commission to conduct an Animal License Clinic (a low cost pet
vaccination and health screening activity). Dr. Locketz and his associates are
presently conducting a number of such clinics throughout the seven county
metropolitan area.
I understand that opposition to Dr. Locketz's application has arisen in Fridley from a
local veterinarian. The opposing veterinarian has challenged Dr. Locketz's application
on the grounds that he was once the subject of an investigation by the State Board of
Veterinary Medicine.
It is important to know that the State Board found no cause for action as a result of its
investigation (see the enclosed Exhibits A and B). I wish to add my own personal
recommendation in support of Dr. Locketz's application. I have known Joel for the
past five years and have employed his professional services for our two dogs. In the
course of such veterinary care I have visited Dr. Locketz's ANIMAL MEDICAL CLINIC.
On these several occasions I have seen a spotless facility, well administered, where
my pets received excellent medical attention. Several of my friends and neighbors
also patronize the Animal Medical Clinic with complete satisfaction at the quality of
professional attention paid to their animals.
Beyond these observations ! have come to know Dr. Locketz and his wife in
connection with community activities. They are both active in women's, youth and
minority issues and are positive factors in the health and welfare of the community.
I can support without reservation Dr. Joel Locketz's application for a wellness clinic in
Fridley. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
• r ly, goor
John J. F agler
Professor of Industrial Relations and Labor Arbitrator
cc: Michelle McPhearson
M 6
EXHIBIT A
Text of State Board of Veterinary Medicine's Decision on re. Joel Locketz
;The complaints that
prompted the Board's investigation appear to have been made by one or more disgruntled
former employees.
In ow investigation, we spoke with some of the individuals whose pets were the
subject of those complaints. Our investigation showed that these pet owners had not filed
complaints and had not even been contacted about the complaints. In several instances
the complaints were refuted altogether. In others, the complaints involved isolated
circumstances what could not be verified one way or the other.
Dr. Locketz does not believe that he has violated licensing statutes. He believes
that he has always provided high quality care to the pets he has treated. However,
because of the expense and stress involved in a full hearing, he has agreed not to pursue
this in administrative proceedings. Because of some technical violations (not involving
poor care to animals, and some involving office procedures, all of which were corrected
or modified nearly a year ago), Dr. Locketz has agreed to the terms of the agreement.
Dr. Locketz and Animal Medical Clinic will continue to make quality pet care their
highest priority.
•
EXHIBIT B •
Text of Monitoring DVM Assigned to Locketz Case
•
Hillcrest Animal Hospital
4320 EAST COUNTY ROAD D AT HIGHWAY 61
WHITE BEAR LAKE,MINN. 55110
• Phone ¢12 - 484-7211 •
6/10/92
MINNESOTA BOARD OF VETERINARY 'MEDICINE '
• 2700 University Avenue . .
St. Paul, MN 55114
Dear Board; -
•
I have monitored Dr. Joel LOchetz' s . ANIMAL MEDICAL CLINIC both by
it evt visit and numerous phane- oollverstitions since January 17 of
this. year. A total of approximately 24 hours were spent at the
clinic . i, . increments ranging from 11 /2 to 3 hours, the longer per:
at the beginning. of the visits .
There are 2 veterinarians, one 'from Germany and one from Mexico tl
are ' doing technician duties and I have impressed on them the need
avoid l.eting• clients th'irik that they are ' licensed veterinarians .
I am satisfied that they are doing this . .In . phone calls to the cl
I find they often answer the phone "ard' have never passed themselv
off to be . DVMs . They do seem to be very cdmpetent in their duties
Dr. Dawn Bradshaw is working full time now although was at 30 hou
a week before April 1st. She is a Minnesota graduate. A Dr.Marsha
does fill in work and `Joel' is there every day but devotes a good
deal of time to management. I think that—the clinic is doing very
acceptable -work. It is . clean and well .run.
After considerable conversation with _Joel, I do think that some d
gruntled help contributed to a lot. of his problem and that it is
something that could happen .to any. of us .His explanation seems ve
logical to me and I have found him to lie a"'cooperative pleasant c,
to associate with. tam convincedthat' he has his act together ar
there will be no more problems . It is my opinion that my 'services
no longer needed.
•
Sir cfr iy,
Gam,
C .J .ft ell D.V.M.
T t „
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 26, 1993
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Newman called the May 26, 1993 meetin order at 7:30
p.m.
ROLL CALL: %
�i
Members Present: Dave Newman, pclan Saba, Diane Savage, Brad
Sielaff, Connie Modig, LeRoy Oquist, Dave
Kondrick
Members Absent: None
Others Present: :arbara Dacy, Community Development Director
APPROVAL OF MA 12 1993 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION b 'r. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to approve the May
12, 199, Planning Commission minutes as written.
U . A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
•TION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP
#93-07, BY ANIMAL MEDICAL CLINIC:
Per Section 205.14.O1.C. (10) of the Fridley City Code, to
allow veterinary clinics conducting vaccinations on Lots 1,
2, 28, and 29, Block 2, Commerce Park, generally located at
250 Osborne Road N.E.
Ms. Dacy advised the Commission that the petitioner had submitted
a letter requesting that "the item be tabled until the last quarter
of 1993 . Ms. Dacy distributed the letter dated May 25, 1993.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Savage, to table the
special use permit as requested by the petitioner.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY AND ENERGY
COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 20, 1993
MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. SaJ, to receive the April
20, 1993 Environmental Quality and End gy Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING , CHAIRPERSON NEWMAN DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. COMPREHENSIVE P DISCUSSION
Ms. Dacy sugge . ed that as a result of the meeting with the City
STAFF
REPORT
Community Development Department
Appeals Commission Date
Planning Commission Date: October 27, 1993
City Council Date
REQUEST
Permit Number P.S. #93-04
Applicant Fridley Business Center Partnership
Proposed To replat three lots in the Northco Business Addition into
Request four lots.
Location 500 - 73rd Avenue N.E.
SITE DATA
Size 1 , 163,587 square feet 26.71 acres
Density
Present Zoning M-2, Heavy Industrial
Present Land Use(s) Industrial
Adjacent M-2, Heavy Industrial to the East and West; R-1, Single Family
Zoning to the North; P, Public, to the South.
Adjacent Land Use(s) Industrial to the East and West; Residential to the North; Park
Utilities to the South
Park Dedication $.023 per square foot
Watershed District Rice Creek
ANALYSIS
Financial Implications
Conformance to the
Comprehensive Plan
Compatibility with Adjacent
Zoning and Uses
Environmental
Considerations
RECOMMENDATION
Staff Approval with stipulations
Appeals Commission
Planning Commission
Author MM/dn
.
P.S. #93-04
Fridley Bus. Center Part.
2
�/ SEG.. // . T 30, R. 24
CITY OF FRIDLEY
0 'O 42
-
l l \ CEN R L l • l \
k. J t S£.//
I �IaTn.•.q•w n5LD4�
`J ' - -I 1 e9 1<` ,-- ---' TRACT A -
1
.;,...2.---;„-.s"....4-:;.? ..
.; „11/.• ., • , 172 1 E‘:- -
z i skGISL:r \''. .
TRACT B,, 5J
U, ? _ C. LAND I
(X�i
,\FtedeN126.
N .,1dS. I i ` to--i, r- P��
4' ......, Q co
SURVEY
. ¢ a9.
-....r.... -sfe:'-' •/ - /j i- / / / //i _� a� .1` J
1 i . - E4IP .
F
''I
.♦
1
v� I is41. l COLUMIA ARENA 1
LO CK E
y •Z '
„ I1. , / 0 ,
} I � _.... n 1
.TRACT 13 .; i
� «) x '.i ,
I Y 1 l
p 1
,, s
' i
.. e �y rzlcy
1 ; c
(----...\\....._.) _____
.-_I.---- .u%rr t
;----t--Cf'..s„if'. 69TH AVE. NE. //4 co-
3 . ' 16 ! 43
LOCATION MAP
P.S. ##93-04
•
Fridley Bus. Center Part.
/
.. 7-/I ;r �� "r0i IA/'[ L! i/(7..J'A/A..i Alm. n -7
.i I ,--1 I l_ ••�I I 1 /111 /• I I I _7/i k i ..-1I 1 Y 1. �r l
I' II1IIII/C-c`/�(� IT�/ 11/C-4I//C" AI C." 1
I L/I V% Y 1_/I.1sidt I-.Y L. I J.. 1. I Y.I_. / l
---- 1 N0.11.41 .51.40 -- -80.40...
Mr
F' n AN„u I �rlV r .L 'tl.d8 $ r \ I
, 7-2 .r \ O
u .. I t 1
-) r ,..• /.. _I" 1 r r ,� gal = (-1
t :1 :
441
u ' t III •
/�/ � o f �n �.
NE... 46s/77 4:1 C 1
" L__=:r_ o
2
4 \ (A < 0
O 1i[ r
P 4% e. 1‘-=.1%.,./Ipr .4
"fi _ :...._.\1.1 IC-.. ....:":1... ...-.-.. 0
L ! , ` `4 M. r
pLI. b.__, CO
11
CO
LOT C ACCESS
t ;- L• ACCESS ANO I ..3,,_, . „lc_ z
PARKING ve. s!! : I e. (.71
741X,T
twlf ra rn
1 / NO==C[L,_ �PARCfL, .4.1 1 NI - 1.11
21141 ,.„..,..j, r._
I Lf.lai -S. iNt . LOT 1 V
u & 1(� • ..� MI '- ..,.-NNE-srve.�F i ,If.Strrr
oi
rVi. .+r , ni «T7
$ I / ;I 1 k .e 1 r, 7C
' n l — in % = I C7 t�
t o II 1 o l�
a x .: '' i e y C Er_
n {`vA`R
1 i t I 1_ 1i ; I
O
O J — L I r
r b; /X "CI c- -
i :••. : :_
lii'
_ I 3 0; s. c6 i r tr..rt s
MIN el
111*•-' s0.'r71`E lo.3I MCl.L 1SI0;MR.LL --- Il
g
. 8<
-10
t 2== *-!— .Z ,1
1 r23
LOCATION MAP
• P.S. #93-04
Fridley Bus. Center Part.
"fr.el ��K . ' ç .i4 ;RH 3t6 i 1 • •
° I UNITY " • ' ' ' '-
• �� ffl� dl. E ` HOSPITAL o I a°o1�
ii•ite:1
1' o
111 Vs' , , f 2: N
11ll11i�, r . Etj.. ? -
is
/� .. 4
illooll ; •11 - tii. I
■an::o•■ z1 ��� • !it*' .„ 16 40 Illis -: ...t- L.:1::: (, 447 :'
A !!!1 alas � :✓ z` k , / %'.
Irlysi
�•1�111 TH AVE. N.E. r 11 Ie 3 ,`•l '
WEAR, -*:j1; '''' . Ge"1.-,::**:::zi:.:\ 411P4 < ,N1-7" 1
-fr. -1::i.:. ,-, _
AtthAst ' ''..•-•;:--r.° .:-I .--. ,...- e % ..
."... _,, IN "'.t. \
AI�i����> o <. r,, ` , .� moo- `' y� 6 /3,¢ ,� /`- ,��7
112
Two/X amp.3831P 1 -'
NAVA. . i., , a,„0/4 - - --5 • - ?-., 01 Ai
ffI W ` 111111110: . ' 9 ®@ / .- f , , MADSEN ' E
1�'1 �� MINN • s Itituir ,i7 vlw 'Y; "� free
if, �,1��'1,1l� hurch ,
9 is t i _ sat_ 2
II I�••••• N ' ) — J 1 ,
.'= 73RO AV NUE . N E
1►4,W1 r ACT
:Milii • Z . TRACT Bwo1011i �� '
OW
iihteitrr�� , /RE91 TERE G;ERi
ttf MI LzAl\i/D 'LA)
'4 erg >-
iird 1 ,Ii/s .,
z r7
!e,�� 1
d' v/ //A
I. •71ST AVENUE NE `�''i ..;i �J '.
Ne,-71/4:: '‹-' 1 ... � Bow `� ' 'kg ::::
'.--c---" :-Lri-•". '''57(...:.::;::::, i„ :;;� '
e:')
..,
, i '- ��' ')j- . fir.
ZONING MAP
Staff Report
P.S. #93-04, by Fridley Business Center Partnership
Page 2
Request
The petitioner requests that a plat be considered to replat three
lots of Northco Business Park into four. The request is generally
located at 500 - 73rd Avenue N.E.
The Fridley Business Center Partnership is comprised of Northco and
Jim Gray, owner of Quick File. Quick File is located in the
manufacturing facility located on the subject parcel. Mr. Gray is
choosing to remove his interest from the partnership and wants to
own the property where Quick File is located. In addition to Quick
File, Carter Day Company and Steinwall, Inc. are also located in
the building.
Site
The subject parcel is a combination of vacant and occupied parcels.
Located on one parcel are two buildings; one used for research and
development, the other as a manufacturing facility. The property
is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the parcels to the east and
west. The property to the north is zoned R-1, Single Family
Dwelling, and the property to the south is zoned P, Public.
Analysis
The proposed plat would create four parcels; two directly adjacent
to 73rd Avenue with direct access onto 73rd Avenue, one adjacent
to Northco Drive, and the fourth adjacent to 71st Avenue. The
fourth parcel does not have access onto 71st Avenue as it abuts
Locke Park. A 25 foot "flag" will be created to provide road
access to this parcel from Northco Drive.
As proposed, the lots meet all of the minimum requirements outlined
in the M-2, Heavy Industrial zoning district regulations, including
the minimum lot area of 1 1/2 acres and minimum lot width of 150
feet. The Engineering Department has indicated that an additional
utility easement will need to be dedicated adjacent to the most
northerly curve of Northco Drive. Two ten inch water lines
intersect outside of the dedicated right-of-way and therjefore a
triangular utility easement needs to be dedicated on the plat
(please see enclosed drawing) .
Recommendation
As the proposed plat request meets the minimum M-2, Heavy
Industrial standards, staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the request with the following stipulation:
1. An additional utility easement shall be dedicated on the plat
as indicated on the attached drawing.
.. •
P.S. #93-04 •4
t
'I •
__ . 1 .3 IC eZ•OS Fridley Bus. Cuter
Par ..!
-
.
i i \ i . 4,40ca • Via, , _• • i 111
/ 136., ,..
‘• / 1 .•`
. i •
1 i • /
\ i .11 •
' \ 1 ..
•
i •/
I - _..../ ‘ •• : •
,
.. ._.---.
..- I
., - i . , c• - , ---- - - •'
.
"• r •
• .: I
-• 1 : J I k .. ' •
% I ; : . ' ,• '
1 ' • i
_
j -I- . . ..:
• I ' '.' ' , • ' i
I ' .-,-,--..t. i •..
•..
' • ' '' j . . .11
-'
I(II • •
•
•
' I I. . . .. .... 1 I
'I: -1, ,- " :1 ,. , . I -....
0 Z !1* - •• .
I
_
i ' I ,
2 1 !1 l' ' % 1' ' 3 I 1 .!
, .. ., \ , s
_. i I;
1 .: „,, ! D • , I I '
41 1 '0, .A. • 1 . c., , •
t., • . -. 3 • .
' i I •
-• ; 1 x 1\l,1 . l',, -. ,
An \, -,
. ,
. , 21 ,,.','.,'' ;;-• -
• : I•,, -,.1 /A
—
. • i: . 11'..: ____:___11--- , ,
- i. p - I-
-. -- ..• ‘,„ 0 ,_
li !II
;,. / . .1-- ., .,,, _ -1
' i i II- li i21' : I
/' \ ' ,' "' .. J
. .., ,
e . 1: :.._ 1 i : .-.. . . ,- 0 '
-i _ .. .. , .
— , 7
, .
!
/
. ..
ff-'
\ ,___a______ •.- 1 ,....-5,- .i i• • • r------\ e - '• . • • 1,
:•, , , , __ , ,
:.i. t• ..,_ „ ..
1-f•- •-•-•I $ * ' •; 1.----- •A g '.\I..., .'''..'• • i. I I •'' •" • '' ' ;•-•-••-• -
--*•:-.---..-.........:-......---.-....----
: ) lki . •• I ' -. ' 1._•- 1 r_____Li____:
, 7"y"+_. •,1p.ti : _.,,x., „. ._ -i, - 1 --• s 1 1 ,x -
.../ .
• '111 ..‘-- .1--:-/- '' •-•; i, .. , :.:. . ' '; '. ' I— . ••.---••••-•-•' -'"'-7- ' '-- • .i.. i r' 1: ,I l'' , --:.'--•-,--,-.,.1
: § ' 1 , A. '',-4., '. , 1. .. ...-.,, ' : ---i--.•••i - ' ...:-% L.14_,,,....L..._. . '-,..-:71-ii- 07:-',71--?..-;=;;-7-%.•;t-T---1-ii. IX 1 I 1,___L__,,, . !...:
:•___. — •- ' .„ . - ,,i2 '-. 2:1=-'---02. • I
' ',.:21 Pit.LN•__\_-1-.--1-C:1-_---2-------:77-Z---- ---------•.--q,c1-_?.:•- -- -- . :-..--- "=-----IL——='..-----( i I 4 1 .21 iiit ----e, "— '- 'I! l'- I , 311 il
\_.,:.,,,,„, .0„
.• ,,, . -, \ .-. '.- . , , .
....1 -----....._ .....,
., . _.i.- ----i, 1 • ! 6') •27 — . 1 1 .,., i . 82 •I
.--2'-"'"T....-,"1 „
II , Ir s• ---I--- -'-- 1 i.`!--: -- -:• - ‘,-, - •-• • .- .. ..... ... ..:x\v:7:.Z.• "'" MAALAM
w .. [a.V .,, ,/ ((> .,• .-- - -
• --
\ ', . .
/
. %eh %'''.. ..---
at .. ,, •
t 1
...•
\ - ...
,:,, .' -', • .; 1- -', t;
'PI 1 N %\i-, _.•‘--I ., \--..,:' . -- , /
------ ---------------Z------- . i," 1 ':,-;
• A ----____ -----4,--ii •., -•:•,:
. ---•-•-..0c,,_g,$),, -..\
'Ott I ••rI• \:•,..:\ "•-,,,
1....1 ''' •••• '\ z--..,
.''• \N
E...4
241. I . 1
A 2
a 1
.,E I
A.
Ci) . , 11 il
it.8 l' .
' : .1 6.• "....- ! , :- i •••••••.,• !
Pmi, 1 ... '3 2.1i-1, i •2 13 3I ...j. ..8 3 1.1. ..„ .. .
• P" 1 1 31 iii.; 2/ i 2i ii
3 3
• (:) l' " ", -, ' tt,... . ''. t! 43 1 11 11 3 SiF.A 311
ai= a =., iii,..11 ,.. a..:: .! I-. - .... .... .. :,.... . ,i1 : 1 ,... .
• (...) 4 ,:: :: . 3" f..,i; ; .,-. i " ." fi;.• :333
aI 2'- 11 1
4 31 ''.1 1 ''''''1 iti ail. nil 1 : i: :••• a = r
•
TOP.869.4 I M H (0
4.� INV=,859.4I IP," PCP SAt
P.S. f93-U4
MH 'MH Fridl y Bus. Centeif Part.
TOP.869.7
A 1'VENUE _
1 A09 _______ .7:1
i i ,M n ( --
--,.....- I I ,\ /-
/- — r-- ---
11
LP `,Q S
,(87 0 I \ --L
inZ-1 ...-\
/ ' (AS PIPE 0-4 / ��� ���c�
'Sc
1/ ,
.r�
NM( 8 70
ua
ui c / I \ 1\
U
L_ f\ I \l
•
' \
. Ain •,,,--'.--/ _,-)--->/ . ...,--- -,---_--L_Ly•- -
iI
® E3 G R
�--
�r -/YOOP' 65.6 / S
Y ,. INV863.2
/5/8��G A q. GM
jn
I � g6g
) l 0 p a . E EC.
PP `�
be cl.ed.'c -icS
CONC.
6� PST- i 0 I , „
°\ '` Q=43°343
0 ':'G / , JN, S
,_
_- .
&i.6 16 v M c
•. . '- ' 'S I -Li 1 N
----. " I
Q=31 "�2 \
G R
L=61. = . 4 4s s i
10\ \ • ,
j
1 7 /qt j
a 671D o SAN S
q N v 864.0
1 I-, ly SI. S_-�r P 8s1 g /
I NV80 . ; ,/; .
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, October 27, 1993 at 7:30 p.m.
for the purpose of:
Consideration of a Preliminary Plat, P.S. #93-
04, by Dale Edstrom of Northco Corporation,
Northco Business Park 4th Addition, to replat
Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, Northco Business Park,
according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka
County, Minnesota, and Lot 1, Block 1, Northco
Business Park 3rd Addition, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota,
generally located at 500 - 73rd Avenue N.E;
Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter
or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids
should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than October
20, 1993 .
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an
opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions
related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community
Development Department at 571-3450.
DAVID NEWMAN
CHAIR
PLANNING COMMISSION
Publish: October 12, 1993
October 19, 1993
CITY OF FRIDLEY
6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.
FRIDLEY, MN 55432
(612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLAT APPLICATION FORM
PROPERTY INFORMATION-- site plan required for submittal; see attached
PARCEL NO. 1:
Address: no address assigned
Property Identification Number (PIN): 11-30-24-31-0008
Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 1. Northco Business Park 3rd Addition
Current Zoning: M-2 Square footage/acreage: 202.872 square feet
PARCEL NO. 2:
Address: 500 73rd Avenue NE, Fridley, Minnesota
Property Identification Number (PIN): 11-30-24-42-0003
Legal Description: Lot 7. Block 2, Northco Business Park
Current Zoning: M-2 Square footage/acreage: 830.040 square feet
PARCEL NO. 3:
Address: no address assigned
Property Identification Number (PIN): 11-30-24-42-0004
Legal Description: Lot 8. Block 2. Northco Business Park
Current Zoning: M-2 Square footage/acreage: 130.682 square feet
REASON FOR PLAT: Petitioner would like to split Parcel No. 2 into two separate
parcels. In order to accomplish such a split and comply with the City's requirements
for frontage along a dedicated public road. Parcels 1 and 3 must also be reconfigured.
Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license?
Yes No XX If yes, which city?
If yes, what type of business?
Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No
+ y
FEE OWNER INFORMATION(as it appears on the property title)
(Contract Purchasers: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to processing)
NAME Fridley Business Center Partnership, a Minnesota partnership
ADDRESS 1201 Marquette Avenue, Suite 110, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55403
DAYTIME PHONE (612) 332-2212
SIGNATURE DATE
By Dale R. Edstrom, President of Northco Corporation,
the general partner of Northco-Fridley Associates
Limited Partnership, the general partner of Fridley
Business Center Partnership
PETITIONER INFORMATION
NAME Fridley Business Center Partnership, a Minnesota partnership
ADDRESS 1201 Marquette Avenue, Suite 110, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55403
DAYTIME PHONE (612) 332-2212
SIGNATURE DATE 7/73
By Dale R. Edstrom, President bf Northco Corporation,
the general partner of Northco-Fridley Associates
Limited Partnership, the general partner of Fridley
Business Center Partnership
Fee: $500.00 for 20 lots ✓ $15.00 for each additionaltiio lot
Permit P.S.# ' a Receipt #
Application received by: gi+ rar! - "WAIL
Scheduled Planning Comm ssion Date:
Scheduled City Council Date:
205939
2
r
P.S. #93-04 Planning 10/8/93
Dale Edstrom
Northco Corporation MAILING LIST Council
Dale Edstrom Dennis Kudak John Bielawski
Northco Corporation 7320 Melody Drive N.E. 7311 Lyric Lane N.E.
1201 Marquette Avenue, # 110 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Gerald Dahle Michael Varichak
Current Resident 7310 Melody Drive N.E. 7321 Symphony Street N.E.
7110 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
Fridley, MN 55432
Brian Skelly Donald Johnson
Fridley Business Limited 7300 Melody Drive N.E. 7331 Symphony Street N.E.
Partnership Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
5780 Lincoln Drive
Edina, MN 55436 James Freberg Norman Young
7331 Tempo Terrace N.E. 7330 Lyric Lane N.E.
US Swim and Fitness Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
7200 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 James Warhol Hugh DeWar Rohrbaher
7321 Tempo Terrace N.E. 7320 Lyric Lane N.E.
Current Resident Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
500 - 73rd Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 Richard Almstead Earl Noble
7311 Tempo Terrace N.E. 7310 Lyric Lane N.E.
Columbia Ice Arena Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
7011 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 Harvey Benson Allan Quam
7301 Tempo Terrace N.E. 399 - 73rd Avenue N.E.
County of Anoka Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
325 Eat Main Street
Anoka, MN 55303 Carol Oberlander Phillip Knutson
7321 Lyric Lane N.E. 7301 Symphony Street N.E.
Tri-State Land Company Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
1601 Soo Line Building
Minneapolis, MN Bruce Smith George Deutsch
7331 Lyric Lane N.E. 7311 Symphony Street N.E.
John Gassner Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
7310 Concerto Curve N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 Thomas Irwin Ronald Mattson
7330 Tempo Terrace N.E. 7324 Symphony Street N.E.
David Windmeier Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
7300 Concerto Curve N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 James Bergerson Edward Czarnecki
7320 Tempo Terrace N.E. 7312 Symphony Street N.E.
David Lissner Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
7301 Melody Drive N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 James Holmen James Sandquist
7310 Tempo Terrace N.E. 7300 Symphony Street N.E.
John Giedlinski Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
7311 Melody Drive N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 Thomas Stimart Lloyd Smith
7300 Tempo Terrace N.E. 8327 Able Street N.E.
Edward Windels Fridley, MN 55432 Spring Lake Park, MN 55432
7321 Melody Drive N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 Clifford Boltman Current Resident
7301 Lyric Lane N.E. 7301 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432
K Y
P.S. #93-04
Dale Edstrom
Northco Corporation
Page 2
Current Resident
7315 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Bruce Zwirtz
1001 Palm Street N.W.
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
Planning Comm. Chair
City Council Members