PL 10/05/1967 - 7243�4
�
�
�
A G E N D A
PLANNING C0:��1IS S ION P�E i'�NG
(Rescheduled from October 12, 1967)
ROLL CALL:
OCTOBER 5, 1967
� �. r.n.3
APPROV}� P-1INIJTES OF PLAI�'NING _COa�[�ZISSIOAT MEETING : SEPTEAZBEt� 28, 1967
RECEIVE MINUTES OF BUILDING STANDARDS-DESICN C�NTR�L SUBCOMMITTEE
MEETING: S�PTEMBER 19, 19G7 �
RECEIVE MIN[iTES �F B�AIi�_!F_A.'PEALS i�LFETING: SEPTEMBE� 27 1967
___.. - - - ---- �,,,�,�, � � �-,g...�.�.
ORDER OF AGENAA:
7:30 P.M.
P�e s
1 - 9
10
1I.-t2
1. CONTINUED LOT SPLIT RFQUEST : L. S, ���`J-�S'x�,�� ���t
AND RQNALD L. WERNER ATTY.: Lots 52, 5'3, '„�f, Block E, River-
view Heights . � ��,��,� ���� ��� �E �(�,,,,� S..
V�em�oa �y I��+� �CCQ�Ago —� Ft� mF'Z+aE so�.. 2s'�4aszs,�
.S�e pa�ea � C0 7 of Planning C�issiaR Mirnites 9/2$/67. 13-14
2. PARK TIvLPROVEI�IT'NT PROGRAM:
3. PROPOSED ZONING CODE:
Please bring your wor.k copies.
1s-22
::�:
� .
� ;�'
'�-6��,
____ , _ _--- - ____ , . ._. _ __
--- , �, �-�.« ��. c�„�a.�.a� _ _ . _ ---_ �" ___._
r �, , . : =------=------_ ___ ---- _ _-
.,�+- � . • � _ _
r : -�.��: c, _�._.�.�_ , s 1 � � .� _ _ ,
-- — �
_ _ _
/��, ��. � � . -�.
�' _ _ _ -- __
_.__ _ __ ____ _____ __
. ��� � , ;�� _ _ __ _ _ _
. � •
�-L-7re.-s--rUy+`"i 1 - f �F , " -L�YL'Yl.� _
_ _ __ , _ _. _
_ _ __._ �°'�"-�iC� ._ —V �.� _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __. _
�'� �
G�l.�li O � �
_ _,�'"44 _ $ __ �1�.✓ c,t ,Ci'� � �t _ _��- _ 1
/ � o. N. 7� S'v�e�
___ %i1�C'��{.tr � f��i�jeJ'ap�, �,f_5<<3 .
,
- -_. _ _
__ ._ .
_.. _ _ �
__ _ .
���� �!�f°"� _ _ _
���� C� n.�.
__ _ _ _ _ "'`"tiy _ _ _ _
�^�*f J
_._____ _ __ _ _ / . _ _ _
,.? :
i _ _ _.__ _ _ __ _ - -
. . _ , -�. _. _... _
�, 1 s �
i , J ';
�° � �y -�� __ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ __
✓�� / ff ' � _
_ .__ _ ____ _ (_�/����`� _ �e _
_
- �'�",.� - - =-�%��-_ _ _ _ .
� , %���� ,�''�"--�"�� •
-
_ _-- - _-.
_ __ ,
�
,�,_ . � _. :� �.. � ` �
,.�.:
r;�X..•
r�_,.
____._ ..�-,._
�'
: _ � -------. _. -
_ _ _ _ . _ _---. _ . _ - -- -- - - . __ _ ___ __�_ .
�''�
_ .
_ _. _ _ _. _ _
__
� _
. _
�
�
PLANNING COMMTSSION MEETING SEPTEMBEI: 28, 1967 PAGE 1
ROLL CALL:
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Hughes at 7:35 P.M.
Members presen�: rlyhra, Jensen, Hughes, Ylinen, Erickson
Others present: Darrel Clark, Engineering Assistant
APPRUV� MII3UTES OF PLANNING COI�fISSION MEETl'NG: SEPTEMBER 14 1967:
MOTION by Erickson, seconded by Ylinen, that the minutes of ihe Planning
Commission Meeting of September 14, 1967 be approved. Upon a voice vote, all
voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
REC�IVE MINUTES OF BUILDING STANDARDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING:
SEPTEMBER 6, 1967:
MOTION by Erickson, seconded by Myhra, that the Planni.ng Commission
receive the minutes of the Building Standards-Design Control Subcommittee
� meeting of September 6, 1967. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion
carried unanimously.
^
ORDLR OF AGENDA:
The Planning Commission decided-the order of the Agenda should be:
Items 1 and 2 as listed, Item 3 to be the rezoning request (ZOA ��67-10),
and the balance of the agenda as written.
1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HAROLD SCHROEDER,
ZOA ��66-06) :
Mr. Harold Schroeder and Mr. Howaxd Dumphy were present.
� Chairman Hughes stated the public hearing was still open and was held open
for consideration of a number of items, including a report from the Building
Standards-Design Control Subcommittee.
' Member Erickson, referring to the Building Standards-Design Control minutes
of September 19th, said the Subcommittee's motion was that the Planning Co�nis-
sion accept the general concept and design together �aith the exterior treatment
as proposed, but parking requirements and setbacks must conform to the City
Ordinances. He said they noted the setbacks sho�aed 30 feet and the�should be
35 feet, and an additional su�gestion was made that some overhead protection,
such as a walkway or tunnel_access from the �arages to the_ a�_artments be con-
�sidered. These were suggestions by a member, but were not in the motion �
^ The Engi.neering Assistant said that Mr. Schroeder did revise the parkinh
______ _ ._._..____�.____...
_an setbacks, reduced the commercial area and increa.sed the parking_lot._area�,
He said we met with Mr.. Schroeder and found the same error as the Building _
Standards-Design Control did. The question of access could not be answered
__ . . ��.. �. � _. _ _ . .. ______� _____________ __.,._....�.._._._._ _�_ __ _ >
completely�until i.t is known where, and if,_signals are_to be_installeci, It
Planning Commission Meetin� •- Septembex 28, 1967 _ Page 2
^ was suggested an additional 24 feet from the property._be given_so that more
. __.._--- __...�_._.. ..
lanes can be added to East River Road and if this is done, wheth�r,or_not it
_ _.__._. , _ _____
_ _.._ . .. . — _ _ __ ._ -
should Ue considerecl part of the paik�.ng requirement area _ The dra�.nage sh_ould:
be no problem. � -___.._._. _ . _ ___.L.w .__.�_.__. _
Mr. Schroeder said he prepared an addendum to the previous report. At the
meeting with Mr. Qures�zi, City Engineer, Mr. Belisle, Building Tnspector, and
Darrel Clark, some of the problems �aere reviewed. Basically these have been
resubmitted with this dza.�ying. On the commercial area �ae have subscribed to
_ _ _._ _ .. ._ _ _ ..
the 25 foot setback from the property .l�.ne to the edge_of_the propelty lines.
� ___t._ _.. ---- �__� .__ _ --- .._ � . ___.__..,
We have reduced the amount of total floor area in the shopping center area
...._._ . __ _ -------- _._..___ .___..___.w._.
rather ihan tryzng to znfringe more_upon the creek_property. Mr. Schroeder
read the Addendum to the Commission reviewing and commenting on the Statistics,
211uminations Staxidards fox Exteriox Spaces, Signs, Proceduxe fer Establishing
Street Access and Egress to the Shopping Center, and to the Apartment Comp�e�,
Procedu-re for Establistiing the D�sign of Truck Loading and Unloading Areas in
the Commezcial.Center. He said to note that the garages have been moved back
__--- _._ ��-.---.�. __ --- ___._.._ _ ____ �. ___._
to 35 feet from the property line of_East River Road He said that if they
. �_.__._________ _. _ .w. ._�.._ ___ _ ___._.._. _. . ..
were to have 108 units, they should have 270,000 square feet ground area and
are aboizt 515 square feei: short of the 2, 500 square foot_ per_ unit. He felt
., _ T_ ---.__. _ __ _ .._ �_ ___� __. _._._ _.� ..
that this might._be justiiied on the basi.s that they_ have 25 fooi; se�back from
. . _ . __. _ __ ___ . _ __ _ __ __
..�� _..�____
the edge_of the_�arkin�_lot.. He �aid th� conform_in all_other respect,s,,
In answer to Chairman Hughes asking�if the_Engineering_Department had
__ ,_ _ _...__ _
checked all the material submitted for the Planned Development of Springbrook
...,.. .. __. ._ _ _ _.. ... . _. _ ._... ...
-- - .
Park Darrel Clark said it had been done. --- ��-�"��" -y��'�"-�-�--�.-�.=.--"'
^ «_._.e_........9-,._.,._.._...,W..._ ,_.__�_._ _-'__...�..._.
Member Jensen asked if subsu-rface drainage was consiclered to pick up the
water in parking lot areas wh.ich is where you would have the most intense xun
off. Mr. Schroeder said_they felt they could rely solely on surface drainage,
having the runoff property main�:.ained to prevent erosion. If that does not
appear to be adequate, some sort of undergraund system could be devised. Storm
sewers are not deep enough to keep open in the winter. He added that he thought,
as Darrel mentioned, they do have the best opportunity for handling storm water
because they have adjacent streets where �here are storrl sewers and the creek.
Chairman Hughes mentioned the fact that the road from the apartments to the
parking lots on the Southeast cor,ner is raised considerably above the garage
area which could present a water problem.
Member Myhra said he had recently driven through an apartment complex and
was amazed at the number of young children, and he asked Mr. Schroeder where
he had planned the play area.
._ Mr.__Schroeder said they planned a controlled area with swimming_�o_ol.,
_ _. ___ ___ �--- --
and whether it was enclosed or__open,_ it would be protected according_to__law.
Member Jensen said that sometrow he seemed to recall th� pool_was part_of
___ __._ _ _�. _. __
-- --- __ __ _.. __.. ---
_the package in the beginning. .Mr___Schroeder said it ��as part _of the__master
__...�_ __ _ __-- -. ._ --- --
_. _
plan and is in the phasing either as second or third phase�_depending ho�a__the
_____ _---___ ___. ._ _ _.---- __ _ ._
� financin� is arra�i�eci. I-Ie said 'ne felt , it is an important part in that it sets
— _ _.___ __. _ __y_. _ _ _ _.��. : _..,
the tone of the complex. It should be considered in tI?i:s phase and further
- -- - — __—__ _ _ - -
elaboration should be made of the recreational faciliti�s in general. Mr.
Schroeder said that if�the Plannir.g Co�mnission would like, he��aoul.d��be happy -.
to accept an approval of the Planned Development Plan at this phase with the
�provisi.on that the tinal determination of the recreation facilities would be
Plannin� Commission Meeting - SePtetnber 28, I967 Pa�e 3
_ -- �
acceptable to the Planning Commission and Engineering Departmen�.
^
�
Chairman Hughes said it would be desirat�le to have a minimum area for
+.._— _�_ --
----- -----_ _ _.
_ _ ..._. ------ -_�_,
recreationa �acilit�es shoVm no��,, but_he realized it �aould be difficult to.
�___.____ _.�_--
_.. _.___ __
tell now �,That basic facilities are to be installed. �^� y-----�-'
There Caere no objections to that by P1r. Schroeder. The Creek, obviously,
is one area, apartment buildings another, pa-rking lot and garage anoth�r, and
they would accept the balance of the area for recreational facilities.
Chairman Hughes asked if Mr. Schroeder thaught the approach specifying
a minimum area in resex-ve accomplisres tl�.is?
Member Jensen. said that the recreational a-rea could be anyi;hi_ng__from_ a
__
__. _ _ ___.
.. _ _ _ ___
awn up to and includin a fully developed park_ Recreational area in a
--- ---- .--_._— � ___ _.
_ _ _. _ ,
- - ___ __ _.___ ._-------._____
gene:ca _ocation is a].ittle too vagueTfor our_purposes,, He continued that
he hoped they were aiming at a little higher rental market.
Mr. Scliroeder said they h.oped for.professional people.
Member Myhxa said he could see Mr. Schroeder's problem, but he wondered
if thar.e were some standard for a recreation axea conunensurate with the needs
o� the people.
Mr. Schroeder answered, with the kind of money that is going to be investe��.
they are obviously going to do cahatever is necessary to induce people to rent
apartments. Member Myhra felt the recreational area should be incox orated in
_._
___ __ --
_- -- —
— - --. ----- �_—. -
�e p__an_to insure_playgrounds for the chzldren. Member Jensen felt the layout
_�--
..._ ----
was i�eal. Chairman Hu hes asked if it tivould be feasible to take the most
. _.._. �_ ___
-___..�_.__.__ �---- �
�.�__robable outcome at this poinL- and�outline a_plan on the basis of that and
._ _.__ � _ _ --- --__..� _ .
~indicate there is a possibility of chan e needs as far as la
-- �� ---
�.�._. ___ __ _ , _.-- g---- --_ P_._Y_g�'ounds are con-
_ __ -..._ ..._ ,_.
,..`�cerned Mr Schxoeder asked hoia specific a�tatement did the want and added
_. �__
_.
- - .._ _ _.._ ..
_ _ .____ __.__ _
he would like to give this statement this evenin I3e said e could mention,
__..__ ___---.. `__ g:
---- --_.
the t e of vla a �^ `4-
_ -.
y pparatus such as swin s ---
and�--- - _�_.__ ^._�_._g_ ,__sand box areas teeter-totters
toddler yaxd will be rovidPd. ���'��`""��-""-`'�--�"`T--�-------- --��--
---------- ---P-- -
Member Erickson said he was not at all interested in holding Mr. Schroeder
to a swimming pool. He thought if it were essential to renters or the complex,
it �1 be put in.
1ni0v � rJ
Chairman Hughes said it would be better to have some definite mention of
....__--
- - -�--- ---. .----
_ _ _ . _ _., __ _. _. _ - - -__.._.
_it, and some indication under which the g�ol wa..11 or w�ll not be built. In
� __...__ _� --- --- — L _�� _
the future_some other committee may be facPd with deciding whether substantial
- — —._ ----
compliance has been met with and they will�look thought the plan�for 'some�� �
�__-__----- ..___- �---�--------
__ _ _-- - _ - -
guidance� He agreed the Planning Commi.ssion has no business telling people
whether they should have a pool or not, but as long as it was a potential
facility a� this time, mention shoul.d be made of it.
Mr, Schroeder said that in the future`if-they do want to build the pool,
then they caould ask the Planning Commission for approval. To eliminate the
pool from the plan as showr� would solve more proble�ns.
^ when
NIember Mynra asked that the^Planned Development is completed, what happens;�
Chairznan fiughes answered that it_ is treated like any other City pxoperty,
but the plan continues -- does not die. In this particular circumstance, the
petitioner would come up and receive a building permit through regular channels.
Planna.ng Commission Meetixrg - Sepi:ember 28 1967 Page 4
--�
^ Chairman Hughes recalled that Mr Schroedex mentioned at the last meeting
that the intent �aas to provide a bxidge across_ihe__creek_behi;ncl_,the_Eon�tnexci�l_
----------_ _ ------- — ---_._..._
area, and also mentioned some type af access on the other side out to Rutii.
----___.__.�_... _ ___. _.__. __ ._ --.-_.__.__... ___.�.__
`�S t r e e t ; -______ ------- --.. _ ., ___`. __ _.._-----.----- --
Mr. Schroeder said the lot concerned with the bridge is a rather short
lot, not buildable but it would be in the best use for access to the property,
r2'hey planned to keep ,the ownership, but if the _City__ever._wants it__and_�TOU.Id
maintaiii it the would co �� �
_____.-------.-----'-_-----Y _�____.__._,_nsider_-deeding_ i.�__over:
PZember Jensen said, si�ealcing of the lot, that it would remai.n entirely a
private parcel, no easemen�s and the uevcloper would have control o-ver the
use of it and maintain it, as it would be encompassed within the boundaries
of the plan.
Mr. Uumphy identified the lot as beir.g Lot 4, and that if Fairmonfi Circle
were to be vacated, this request would Ue made in the usual manner.
Chairman Hughes said it might be desirable from the owners' point of
view to have the property all one zone. Access onto Ruth Street is also_,
desirab le . _.._._ ___---.___.._._ _.___----_._�.-.------- - -
Member Erickson aslced if it is the intent te have one free standing sign�
would it be advisable that there are no other signs and where should the sign
be set.
� Mr. Schxoeder said a tempoxaxy sign would be erected for the Projec* and
there would be other signs to i.dentify the apartment complex notifying the
public �hat the apartments are for rent.
Mr. Dumphy said that if we have any identifying signs as-far as the
apartment complex is concerned, we should arrange it so the signs axe back
far enough off Liberty Street so as not to be in conflict with traff:ic, should
be visible from F.ast River Road, and the sign be worked into a brzck planter
arrangement.
Chairman Hughes stated the entrance road off Liber�y Stxeet will be for
the `formal ident�..Eication of the apartment com�lex. ---�M' --`"-"-
It was mentioned that the signs_would ob� the_si�n ordinance,.
In speaking of illumination standards for exterior spaces, Mr. Schroeder
said that one half foot candle would only allow a person.to see w,rhere he was
going but it still would permit peaple to stumble and create shadows. �wo foot
_.________. _.
is a level which one can safely negotiate with and drive without lights and
- -- -------�. �- --_ �._ __ _ _
___ _ _ _..----- _.__._. __--__ ��
at �is the one� they propose using.
Member Jensen wondered if the possibility of a sign being erecfied on �
buildin and protruding above the wall uzas intentionally left out. ���--'
� � � :� �� �
^ Chairman Hu�hes said the decision is whether a sign is acceptable vr not
_ ____. . _.._.__� _.._.. _.___ .._ .__. . __ ---.- .---. ._-- ---____ _. � _ _ _ ___ _.
to a andlorcl �-t,That are the standards a la.ndloxd �vould use? A si �i �ahich,
._._ _ __� _ .__
covered the entire front surface of a store would not be acceptable, o-r built
_. _ _- __ - - _. __. _._
on tlie�front surface bat extends 50 f�.et above the stiucture would not be very'
.�.
_ _ __ _ _ -- - -- .._ .._-- . -- _
__ __._._._ .
_ esirable to_the Plaiining_Gonunissign,: The sign ordinance covers it, but is
there any ot�ier type ��e should ta11c about?
, Plannin�Commission Meetl.ng - Se�tembex 28, 1967 Page 5
Mr,___Dumphy__said_the signs would be unifoxm_so as not to disturb the con-
_ ________ _— ---------------------
^ _formiL-y__of the, buil.dzn�. ,
Mr. Schroeder said the landl.ord would control the type of sign put up,
.but if the tenant wants a large_._size _sign.,_the landlord_can say_!'no`!,,
Chaixman Hughes wondered if they could layout some percentage the landlord
could use. The person who is leasing the pxemises always Waiii.s a large sign.
Mr. Sch•roedex said it gets to the point t,�here really the landlord is the
person who would have the greai.:est arnount to lose to permit a sign which is
not in good tasi:e wi.th either himself or the other tenants. Most of the
shopping centers are exercising this kind of control.
The Planning Cornruission felt only one pei-manent single free standir,g sign
_. .. . n _-- - - -�_ _ --- - - -- _._ -_ -
.--
may be elected in fihe d�strict adjacerit to East R�.ver Road to ident�.fy fhe
�_ _.._ - ---..-- -. _._.. _ _ _- -- _ _ ._._�___ .T__ ____.------------- - -
�sliopping center.
Chairman Hughes said the Planning Commission was quite well satisfied on
the basis of the speeifie people with whom they are dealing.
Mr. Schroeder sai_d they would be happy to include wha�ever percentage the
Planning Commission would want.
Member ,7ensen asked, as this comes up for final develo ment a
p pproval, will
you have some leases? Mr. Schroeder saici i:he more perr�anent tenants probably
^ would be secured by lease.
MOTTON by Myhra, seconded by Ylinen, that the Publi.c Hearing of the
Planned Development District, Harold Schroeder (ZOA ��66-06) be closed. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
MOTIOII by Erickson, seconded �,y Jensen, that the Planning Commission
recommend to Council approval of the_Planned Development District of Springbrook
_ _��. . --..,
Park as amended at the meeting of September 28, 1967 and calling Council's, �
_-- - - ---- -- --- _- - -- --- � _ .. . �_
^attention �to�the d�.scussions of the changes_ of the proposals as underl_ined_in.
the�minutes. Upon a vozce vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously,
2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L S ��67-05, ROBERT DeGARDNER REPRESENTED BY RONALD J
WERNER, ATTORNEY, Lots 52, 53 and 54, Block E, Riverview Heights.
Mr. Werner, representing Mr. DeGardner, Mrs. Viola Johnson and James Riley,
attorney, was present and also i�Ir. DeGardner.
Mr. Werner gave a short resume of the problems relating to the requested
lot split saying they found several title defects and the matter af title
opinion was subject to what a survey would disclose. Tt became apparent it
would be necessary to torrens all of the property because of the problems. A
torrens petition was initia�ed in Anoka County anci a decree issued on February 6,
1967 at 10:23 A.ri, and signed by William T. Johnson, District Judge. This was
^ done without a su�-ve3�. The toxrens examiner did not require a survey. The
real estate agent stepped off what they thougl�t was the encroachment and came
up with 10 feet. The survey aslced for in the contract for deed was requested
six months aiter titl.e. A letter was received from the City of Fridley becausE
the County was asked to split assessm�nts a?id had to get a lot split approval.
, Plannin� Commission Meeti_x�; - Se�ember 28�1967 Pa�Le 6�
Mr. DeG�rdner said h� had gotten a permit to build a house on Lots 54,55
/"� ancl 56 .
Mr. 4lerner said Mr. Suhl, preser_t occupant of �he house in question, has
enough land even if the house is off cen�er.
Mr. DeGardner added that the lots are 90 feet deep and have 75 feet front-
age. !'he problem i.s ho�•� mr.ch to give on the lot split. The present home is
an old two story farm housc aiid it would not be feasible to pay th.e assessments
as is (two frontages, on two street.$).
Mr. Werner said P�Tr. Suhl has been put on formal notice by Mr. Riley and
himself to protect i:he cantract for deed. At the present time, Mr. Suh7_ is
four months in default, Ti1e o�one-t of t1�is pro�erty, A1rs. Vexa Johnson of
Winona, does not have the facilities to invest. She still o�sns Lots 15, 16
, and 17 plus 10 feet on Lots 52 and 53. 2�Ir. DeGardner o�ans Lots 48, 49 and
50, and part of 51. The-re is an old garage on Lot 51 which will be remo-ved.
Z`his is a lot split request and also a request that Mr. DeGardner. be allowed
to build on Lots 5J_, 52 and 53, and i:o continue construetion on Lots 54, 55
and 56.
The Engineering Assz.stazLi: said tha� in this area, a fifty fflot loi can
be built on.
Mr. Werner said they feel the best thing caould be to tear down the old
house, but it is not desirable at this time. An alternate is to gut somezhing
� beautiful on Lots 51, 52 ard 53 and it will Uecome an asset to the communi_ty._
Mr. DeGardner said if he had to give more than 20 feet, he could not do
it and build.
Chairman Hughes said that one of the basic reasons for specifying mi.nimum
side yard serbacks is to avoid close crowding between stxucture. In this parti-
cular instance, it seems likely that any new structure that is having to con-
form, from the standpoi.nt of cxowdiiig of the structures, does not offer this
' problem, Is there a problem presented by water dropping from the eav�s? Would
clearance have to be provided? The proposed lot line is 2.2 feet from the
foundation.
Mr. Werner said there were no utility easements along the back lot line.
He said he wrote a letter to AZr. Suhl datEd August 31, 1967 urging him to
retain 1ega1 council and attend the proceedings.
Mr. Werner asked just where is tne drain field and what lots does that
dxain field eff.ect, it any?
Chairman Hugh�s said if the drain field is not on Mr, Suhl's property,
there is no effect:.
Mr. Werner saicl the mortoage company, which loaned the money, would like
�o knotia what is going on and they w�� �z��n�t- ue -i�i.te approval.
� �
Meinber EricksoTz said it seems ��.*� �� �-�.{-,�rnn has already taken pla.ce. It
is going to require an approva.l of a let splii: i.n order to build on tha� por--
tion right now. Before I Would vote for such a lot split, all parties involved
should be contacted. I do not think the City could be a part of such a lot
split without everybody involved.
, Planning Commission Meetir�_Septembex 28� 1967 _ Pa�e 7
Member Myhra asked whose responsibi.li.ty it was to noi:ify alJ. parties con-
/, cerned in a lot split. Chai_rnian Hugl�es replied that the Planning Comx-�iissio:z
could not consider the application unless al1 of the ot,mers involved are partie�
to the application and he was no±� sure thi.s was the situation in this request. -
He suggested the matter be carried ovex u�.ztil October 12th and instruct the
secretary to send copies of the minutes, along with a letter, indicati.ng when
the matter tiaill be discussed again to PZr. Suhl. The letter should urge him to
attend the meetix�g or. the 1.2th.
1�Iember Jensen asked if rir. Wexner could vexify the location of the sewage
disposal facilities.
Mr. Werizer believed a permanent �,ot split would be the best solution.
Mr. Suhl may have something in rnind such as a private five foot easement for
the 7.and ur_der the eaves so that a stepl�cider could be used for painting or
xepairs of the eaves.
Member Ericicson asked_if there �aould be a liability on the part of the
City if they granted a lot split without Mr. Suh1 being at the meeting, and
did Mr. DeGazdner intend to convey the 20 feet by deed. Mr. DeGardner said
on Lot 54 the deed has already been given.
MOTION by �'rickson, secoiided by Ylinen, that the Planiiing Commxssioi� table
until October 12th the Lot Split (L.S. ��b7-05), Robcrt DeGardner, of Lots 52,
53 and 54, B1ock E, Riverview Heigtits and request Mr. Suhl to be notified of the
meeting and request his presence at this meeting. Upon a voice vote, all votin�
� aye, the motion carried unanimously.
3. REZONING REQUEST, Z0� ��67-10, HENRY LAPIDESt Lots 29 and 30, Block 12, Hyde
Park to be rezoned from R-2 i:o R-3A.
Mr. Henry Lapi.des was present and asked the Planning Corcunission to refer
to the drawing of the proposed apartment unit, and also t-he drawing sho�ving
the structures i�.z the neighborhood. He felt that by putting a nice appearing
buildii�g on the cornex lot, and taking away an old building, they could enhance
the neighborhood and still fit in with the rest of the area. In back of the
apartmnnt house is Univer.sity �venue, there is commercial on 3rd Street on
the South end and at 59th Avenue is another commercial piece. This is a mixed
area with several types of uses.
MOTION by Ylinen, seconded by Nyhra, that the Planning Cott�nission set a
public hearing date of October 26, 1967 for ZOA ��67-10, Henry Lapides, of Lots
29 and 30, Block 12, Hyde Park to be rezoned from R-2 to R-3A. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, the motion caxried unanimously.
RE: ITEM 2, LOT SPLIT REQUEST (L.S. ��67-05 :
The Plan�.in� Co:r�nission decided to hold a Special Meeting on Thursd.ay,
October 5, 1967 for the purpose of hearing the Lot Split (L.S. ��67-05),
^ Robert DeGardner of Lots 52, 53 and 54, Block E. Riverview Heighis instead
of the regula-r meeting of October 12, 1967.
4. BONDING OF CONTRACIO�S: ,
The City Atto�-r�ey Herrick to].d the Commission he talked with the Rich-
field Attoxney who stated i.hat Richfiel.d use OfF Street Parking Permit
Agreement fo�m and Bonding procedure to ever.ything e�ccept single fami_ly
Plann�.ngz_Coir�ni.ssion Meeting'-�SeptembeY' 28, 1967 �a�;G�8
dwellings. When the owner of propeitq makes application for a building pe�.�nit,
^ they axe required to fi11 out these fo�.-ms and then, at the time the Council
issues the buildin.g pez�nif:, they pas's a xesolution. The building pexmif.
is not issued until an.agreeme�zt is signed and bond p�stad. An example of how
the amount of the bond is reached is as follows: $2.00 a lineal foot for
cuxbing, $I.50 per square yard for b1�.ck.top, 65' a square foot fox concrete
sidewallcs and an estimated figure for landscaping. When the work is completed,
the inspectors i_n the Engineering Departmeni, if found satisfactory, foz-caard
ar►other xesol.ution to Council releasing the ot�mer and Bonding Company. The
owner puts up tl�e bond �alzich is a co�-porate performance bond, or. they a11ow
escrow. They indicated they never had to bxing suit but have, on a few occa-
sions, con�acted tl�e Uo�.Zding com.paiiy and advis�d them that if the owner didn't
get going, they woul:l take action.
�
,�
5.
�
Membe:r Erzck.son said that. oxi Page 37, Item 18 regarding ingxess and egres�,
we run into thi� all th� time.
The City Attoxney said he didn't ask if it applies to parking lots or
driveways.
Member Erickson also said that in some instances �ohere building is begun
in the winter, they would like to occupy the parking lot.
Chai�.�man Hughes said that if thexe is a reason for requixing off street
parking, then there is some reason ioz denying occupancy of the building until
it is finished ancl available.
The Czty Attnrney thought the term "off street parking" is too compreher_�
szve ancl felt a better terminology could be found such as "site development".
Membe-r Erickson continued that we need something in our ordinance to make
these people comp3.y with parking and la.r_dGcaping. We just don`t have it. In
order not to be a h�.rdship, perhaps something could be passed that the bond
would not have to be paid until the time of occupancy. If the work can be
completely finished, the contractor would not have t� buy a bond. He asked
the City Attorney if we have in any ardinance any way to enf.orce somebody
moving in without a certificate. The ans�ver was "no", but we could insert a
provision that the City will not provide sewer and water service until all
xequirements are met with.
Chairman hughes left the meeting at 10:50 P,M, and Vice Chaixman Exickson
took the chaix.
MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Jensen, that the Planning Commission
recomznend to tt�e City Council the adoption of an ordinance based on that in
force in the Czty oi Richfi.eld which rPquires owne:rs who are seeking building
permits to be req�sired in making a contract, to agree i.o put: up a bond at
the time they are see��ir�g occupancy certificates if cu-rbs, paxking lots,
streets, landscaping, etc., are not completed at that time. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
PROPOSED ZONING CODr:
The Commission requested this item be carried over to the October 5, 196j
Special Pleeting. ,
Planning Conunission Meeti�g � September 28, 1967 Page 9
^ ADJOUPNATFNT ;
There being no fu_rther business, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M.
Respectfully subrnitted
�, _
,
(���:£��� � �.c-�--
Haze1�0'Brian
Recording Secretary
�
�
•- -- _ � �
. - �
THE MINUTES OF THE BUILDING STANDARDS - DLSIGN CONTROL SUBCOMMITTEE MEETIP3G
r..` SE PTEMBER 19 , 196 7
The Meeting was called to order by Chairman Erickson at 7:42 P.M.
ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT; Erickson, Hauge, Dittes, Tonco, Biermann
MEMBERS ABSENT: Nor�e
OTHERS PRESENT; Fire Prevention Chief Aldrich, Building Inspectors Belisle
and Gasterland
OLD BUSINESS:
. 1. CONTINUED DISCUSS�ON - APARTMENT COMPLEX - NIAURICE FILISTER;
There was no need for further discussion since there was no new presentation
for the project.
NEW BUSINESS:
2. CONSIDERATION OF AIV' APARTMENT COMPLEX - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT -
BLOCK ONE, BOURDEAUX'S SPRINGBROOK ADDITION LOTS ONE �l) THROUGH TWELVE
(12) INCLUSIVE, BLOCK TWO (2) SPRINGBROOK ADDITION, BLOCK ONE (1) SPRINGBROOK
^ PARK ShCOND ADDITION. (APPROXIMATELY 81ST AND EAST RIVER ROAD� (REQUEST BY
HOWARD DUMPHY, OWNER)•
Chairman Erickson presented the background.material on this project which he
had gained from the presentation before the Planning Commission. Comments
were generally favorable to the general plan anci the exterior design. There
is a shortage in the necessary co;nmercial parking as required by Ordinance
��45.343. There was also a question about the distance between the pro?osed
garages and the dwelling units. A suggestion was made by Mr. Biermann for
more of a consideration for overhead protection for the access to the garages.
MOTION hy Hauge, seconded by Tonco, that the Planning Co:�nmission accept the
general concept and design together with the exterior treatment as proposed,
but parking requirements and setbacks must conform to the City Ordinances.
Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, Chairman Erickson declared the motion
carried. �
3. CONTINiJED DISCUSSIONS OF UPGRADING ORDINANCES:
After a lengthy discussion over the various proposals; it was decided to continue
discussion at subsequent Design Control meetings before drafting possible
revisions of Chapter 49.
ADJOURNMENT •
^ There being no further business, Chairman Erickson declared the m�sting
adjourned at 11:00 P.M.
I�e�spectfu � su�mi�ted, _
( ;� � �,��_ j/
,� ��� � J' '��_���' /`r�C! ����u �;
Jan Gasterland, Building Official
Acting Secretary to the Loard
�
�
THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF SLPTEr113ER 27, 1967
^
The Meeting was called to order by Chairman Ylinen at 7:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL
NLMBERS PRESENT: Ylinen, Ahonen, Minish, Mittelstadt
MEMBERS ABSENT: Saunders
ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF AUGliST 30, 1967;
MOTION by Minish to approve the minutes of the August 30, 1967 meeting.
Secondeci by Mittelstadt. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the
motion carried unanimously.
l. P.EQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROr1 THE CITY CODE OI' FRIDLEY, MINNESC�TA 1963,
REVISFD llECEMBER 31, 1965 BY WAIVER OF SIDE YARll VARIANCE FROM RE UIRED
FIVE FEET TO TWO FEET FROM SECTION 45.24 TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF AN
ATTACHED GARAGE AND BREEZET�TAY AT 5714 WEST MOORE LAKE DRIVE. LOT 4,
BLOCK 5, DONNAY'S LAKEVIEW MANOR ADDITION. (REQUEST BY ROSS HAIDLE,
5714 WEST MOORE LAKE DRxVE, FRIDLEY, MINNES�TA, 55421�
._ __ .. �-�.
Mr. Haidle was present and explained his proposal to the Board of Appeals.
He sta.Led that the next door neighbor, Mr. Jerry Johnson, did not have
any objection. There was no one else present on this item,
^
MOTION by Mittelstadt to accept the variance as it is an improvement to
the property, and the neighbors to the south do not object. Seconded
by Ahonen. Those voting in favor; Mittelstadt, Ahonen, Ylinen.
Opposed: Minish. The motion carried.
2. RESUEST FOR VARIANCES FROM THE CITY COUE OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA� 1963, REVISED
DECEMBER 31, 1965, BY WAIVER OF SIDE YARD RE UIREMENT FROM 17 FEET 6 INCHES
TO 13.2 FEET SECTION 45.24 BY WAIVER OF REAR YARD REQUIRENIENT OF 25 FEET
TO 10.25 FEET SECTION 45.25, AND BY WAIVER OF FRONT YARD SETI3ACK REQUIREMENT
OF 35 FEET TO 26 FEET SECTION 45.26, TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF AN ATTACHED
GARAGE ON LOT 6, BLOCK 1, ELT,;�LL'S RIVERSIDE HEfGHTS ADDITION ANOKA COUNTY
M�NNESOTA. SAME BEING 7571 ALDEN WAY NORTHEAST FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, 55432.
(REQUEST BY CHARLF`S F. AMES, 7571 ALDEN WPY NORTHEAST, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA)
Mr. Ames was present and explained his proposal to the Board of Appeals.
Mr. Ames explained that the kitchen was on the side of the house that he
would like to put the attached garage, and therefore, he o�ould not like to
put it on the opposite side of the house.
Mr. Leroy Henderson, 7581 Alden Way, was present and explained that he
objects to the proposal. There was further discussion on this matter.
MOTION by Mittelstadt to not accept the variance, not primarily because of
^ the objection, but because the garage is not in line with the buildings
along Alden Way, and it is only 13 feet from the curb and would be a traffic
hazard. Seconded by Ahonen. Upon a voi.ce vote, there being no nays, Chairman
Ylinen declared the moti.on carried.
�
�
�
. _ . ��
�
THE MINUTES OF TIIE BOARD OF APPEALS, SEPTEM33ER 27, 1967 PAGE 2
ADJOURNi�ZENT •
MOTION by Mittelstadt to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Ahonen. Upon
a voice vote, there being no nays, Chairman Ylinen declar.ed the meeting
adjourned at 7:50 P.M.
Respectfully submitted, .
C �9�C�/Z(�""�.'
Marvin C. Bruns 1
Secretary to the Board
�
,
�
�
e
�
�
�
�
I.
�
r�s"°"''' ': • n }? �i'-�1
��i= . y . N?.: ' �`, . .
� �j _ � . S : �1
..l.P.. 3 « ...:�JS.,_5;.�. ... _. .-1. ��....e
Y i � t -'].$
d��: n'�f. ♦...ae, ni1 ♦ s'{.i a...
7i �..t ? . i�' ��r-..7. � S :1�,� Y �1 `a�3
� Z . . <e �- . �
..��:.�s��`, a�;.r. i,�rk_`i'.
I=z't�, a � :�' �,,`:t i. '� 1' _ _ < �. �. ��:�: , .. r � c , r
L 6 ..,�, ` S F.:.t I S�P f �i
`d.� _..a.-,��� ... <.., T .� a_ .... ____�.S_'S.��i.�Y. ...� fr a ' v °,� ,ti.
«}+.t.�� w u-...� � .ys�t�...� i.- .t...t ..i.fi u.�:F4��Y_,a� 6-t.� ♦ _'F �... F Y._.t. u ,�r.. ,.sd.,..
� i~'♦ l w-�.i '.•,;} 1 ' . • � � �
Y 4
�., �`.:. { - � +�.i" .� SYri.c: r ,-` .:.k� � �z .d.�' A y.' - :�`..
i�'.�'-��_: 7` �_r i.'Ct� n . .__� .,.. _ ..., �,.:_°;u �.i1 t�"..�35.`= ...`:. � . - 4.. - ,,. , . .
.t. . ..
�
E.� i . . t t 's. ' � e. - ~ i s _ i. 4.. � t - ., s. - : e.:. `} . � < . r. yp
( p� p . 3.�. f . x. <<�: -�i�
4-Et �i kS �'r � .�. . a:t,�.� .f3f...�v � i +.d�._ .d � �. v br..�.. ^� �SS.4
.:., ; 't � . ' a �:S
4? d.s7 tz .? �.:: Sy .._.. h a�:� L, � ir °�. �1�� : i., . o. +. . L.�o ^t .��....-.., f
; �. �;:,� �rka�C
� 4.. .. - .� d � ..{
�t `.4�;: . t��2e.i :.. �.t .3 r�4.,... .2.t :-elE= 4v.y: z..o !z: �... ��:.ti. �3.°'�.i.ii-e 1�%+1Ti�Q7*�..
�'• _ { _ . �:� �!,` ��-L': �i� •�i'"T'.' ��, .. � � ='; �*S: � '- ?'° � :..
3c,;:�I �s.�£'� �.4. ,� .,r...,` r � __ Yl��rg�#.��,'tta �� �e.ltl�afi�- 7 3iz P.�7.,''.., �r��
�S,.l.�`r f � .3. �� . a f ir � �` ��t` ` • �: �
r • c . `,`i" ..�, �;.7/, �� ��ib G,�t►7t:� d��:2lifly -_ t1
���::z;=w? c���ta�� ��;y p�y,a�,� ox l�tte� p�i�r �es �E�.a�t da
C��yr =s��� i•:.r�.. :}s:`, :'<;��)
r�; : �'.:�
. �.i � .: � :: `r i' :�'�7 �. L`';I �. ;' �
j . - . _1
�L� ' .- . :�. %.`_.a , :
;�_�..'4.±?.::.^.'l.z`, �-� =' =` � ..e..
�.�
�
�
` �
���
` ' �'�w,
' .} % �; 7 \ -� , y ;� \ �� Robt. DeGardner L.S. ��67-05 l _ \, '
� � ai� �.' �> _ � ._ ��
� Q, � � � `�a_ _, __ " L. 52, 53 & 54, Bl. E, Riverview �its. '
i a . 1 7n. io - 1�FC ,�R
_ ,•
,,� -_.......� . .
� ��_09.9�� �� � ��' .
� �__ c • -_ ` , �" _ ,
� /� o I � o �/ � i�
� ° � � _ l,.G ` _J `D� > �'i�t: �..�
.
;- .. I ___._?.G/.��-- ----- � - ';� -- .._ -� :v� � . c : � � . _
c
% � ) --- / 1
r:-� �. 9 0.•`: �� /� 1:m � O lMt� �
� ;;. �"`� �o � V �� . � t� - . .
% 4
W �} o ✓ .:,�.,,i � �%�;G _ �-- :.i.9 � ° f�, '7 � �
i (s� Z.�3.7r .r.: i�c --r �c c -ioc � _ -
i'. ` �, ` --- ------ - � -- ` .,-.� / i 3• S � � g ' � t
. � �� ' � .f I I !I ,
� � •-t o �
� � � ; ' � r `o � :c "
t t� � � _-_'_z`_CS_ 7'_!,.-__-" �„ h /� hl �f / �I / �1 -t-
`� � �:�„ - ,., � , �I /3 �� �2 � / � �p R 9 � , :
�,`� i �� N ��:! ` � � /� '' 'i: .
i -r-^�"'�-�,:. " ,? `� /6C.2 /oo 00 0[ /no /6S i
:.,,�,Q r � J i3 3 � . .,..._� � .__ �"'�....._..�._.....u. �_ ,��._,_,...�,........,�...,...._.. . � ........ ......� _..._.�. .....,.:.__.a.�»... ...._..._.._..._..m_.�......._ y :.. i ;
�-� , �.._ _..�,.._. �
.
C/j°'�aE`c. gG � � \ F-. -� at � --_ _ _ _'-. . €'* �� . . '° �)t%v. � 4
° "�� 3 �'+ l �IJvI:?C:�f> - -- - 3
.
. i Sp � °�.R..,.,,,,,; , t -
� - 70' oT M � � �j � Y, � :
��.
�r � / �33 .. � .w..�:. ..,..,....»__..�v . ,v.'.?c .' e,�':; _jm` i ': i'�`-I ;� I'.�: �,� � .�0 . <G .ee� ;� �� %c 3' �:� i,z` 5 �t�i3 F � .
... ll pp i [.S� ��; , :� 7,�z%; e39 iv'J a ,� �4 �4 it' .. �S
. .. `� � lJ ..-- 1 !] y^/ �2 ' 3 3 � � oi Vi `� p� ° �'e\ '� f��j �
�\ ( i SI% i���� I'�y t,� � �, f,t�. $' 4p ,�S�J '1��1/O�r�� f• ] ��J
S '{ �y
, . � � �`t� t� i .1 y T1�� `� t E �..` \ � 11� l �`..��• �,�,� ��,o �f f
1 � J � ,' y \ 4 � � �� � � o \
� � � � o. � ' i �! � c � 1 � �� � � rw c � �,-� a
V � f r °I y �' �' � ,�'i ` �� ��1 ,l2 I`��1\g`� � ,�� o,'0 1°..�=��o •
7 �; � \(� � ai I % I .� • � � �t ` � �Y 3 � ,,1y \� �-�� � � o � �• ',
. . . // r^� �/G. \ �9 \� 2� O �/ c1 t ' :iitf� „� ^` '�.70��'�,\�u'P��1`151, �.�,,"�1 " t..i�,fj•` °`�����1� �/ \/SC�'r p�''� '
e �, � :; `, � 2I , '� \ •i...,�- �zf �� ' � 9Z
' I `�� � 'h� 'n i � ij � � �.Z,�, 3 �-` ^ �,,,` '�y,t'y""a ..,r,;: ;;°(��• ` �, r °.'�;:: •', .
� � �i�� � ,�.,����t;�;�;y"°� '1 t�.�- ',� 1 `6,, 7r��fi ,,� � � 1 ,,
_ \ �� ( 1. 1�,s1 ,P;; ;,?� `' �1" \ .�t 'y����' � 11 _/• a'^ . �
f"���� � � 6..�"s S�' ��'`,�� 1 ��f�3� ! �G 3D , _� i N ,� �
.. j i � � ,. % �.�'1`'<< 1 '� ` � j/�b�yCL'��N � �1�i �� \� gf>> ``
° � ._,._.�.,._...._.1fC'_..,._. J._l..- ,ao _ .o fl/_,e� a �s '^°� \" 1 ��ti:�F�i'H r =�` 1 1 c✓ k, , .
# � �.�.>� - �p;a�..�'� �� hF ' `` �, `n,�'1'r�'�^��� i 1 � ��s��'�[ , �1 ` \,j��,%0,9,��a ° ♦tl' .
%-� �.' l? ^� � i..E �. `:�. ��'' . ; ,o , ' ., t" , z � �„ „ >
. . ,
1� � t�.n .2 n `� h q �q9 � ', C/ 1-'�; \ �� �/ i,��` , � a �
� -_ ____._ }-_ �a. _�_ .!2/o.c� .. � _ �^ 1� � `I 1 1 ��i�� 1.����` } �, �ir�',Cf�11 , �`'1��1� "y '?
r Q /�£;oj --- a _� 2 2~07 .�.q'� � `��i��" ,�1,• "-1� �, i\, ���".ZC• `}'� � ,` " „�i� o �>
� i?�i�'� E�J : `� �� r� _ � ° `� � �,� � ''� � � �"` � 1 1 i 1 F•r�rZ3� 1, t.,�" �,1 �rt', �� 30 ° `o
,� ,� .,.✓ i L_. � ^� 2ii.,E9_ � k��To1� �,^9` IIx,fG�'\ ` � ;� �Y'• �S\�a�',,�a � 2 v
9 ," +�'- ��` a�
s � -- � � � I � 1 � �'`�~ � ° �3 _: i �
-----\IiZ�m) �`� .- i i' �.• � �Ct S° 11�??i�2l� ', 0; 1����. �� �«yY3%9 ` �.i a = � 4
�. y ` `Ya�__ � � � o hf'-•� E o1 1 `��:s- i C��.�• � � .r,a,. ` /; ,
� i�'� ��v,- � V�,t t �� .>> -? ��5 �,. �. i �,,��,�.:,.• �a'�r ! ✓'',� \ 3_. _ .
\ �. ' t
� 1 9 `5'aa �,�.o �„l,.r° .�n G� � \
t . 1 �-•� f l �3` .f ' 0'?' y '�'C-
,>_ �, _ � °' � j
, z . . , _. � - - � ,
� •i�316-„-:e�. -��,1•,-�� � � ,1�.. ,sr � ,>4N����i },o. /i:.2�2� �r /'� � ;"�-�}�fi+.IpP6! n - - - �', - y-�
� ,3 j , �/ .�.7� zi � ` ` � lt � .! •
„ � Fy' ;y ° t �'`y�,1��°� .3 c� Z ,�, r ��� :' .. ° �G �; `� �j�`� �`�3�aR�} `, � � ` \ �`, � 1 �� � �� `' �
i i �t! � � , • y ,li
��`;� , � �{ �[ �t J� � � 1 '�..^' .r��" -i� t {„ � J �9J ' ` � 1 '. [ /�" ��` n p fi.� � Y�!
� ��iH a `1 1, 9 � �� l. 1 L+� ° � .t�,.-.- .w„° ;''`�� ;�"'`,3 0 � %�' 7 � ` „ 1 ,•1'. 1 �� :i � 8 q �G ;� � \ 16 3c 3 • -'� � .w i
- g' 13 �I(11�� 1` �� �°' r; �_, ° 1 1 1, �� �\ y �, }�;a�s,' n1 � � �-�^01 _°,
'�t7. ° �, 3`�' , � �;F��` i(=� o�; ` � �,�� < • � °� _,.,...-~'t',o'�� � ;;
r � c � �: �,,,`'.�-- "�Yw l., � s 1�1f1,3 '� �i � i� ° ''' �'¢�` Z `, , 2�'�z �� f � ..,' t°'°� � A r" FS1\3c`�30 Y`� 2 -�`y
� �' " 1 ` :Ot}!� , ,•,2. } � \�D� , ,!�r .) ...._ ..' �, 1° i �..�
, 1�, ,�� . ��'
o p..^.t„`.�-%' � � g�� 3P r� '� j - s ' `�,33''.'-'�i �� � � _ �.,, , , ;`:., ``.t-, �c�9 � °"" �'
_� f�„iSLi' �Z�� ��y1%�' , �• i ,1.,i� � ` Jo' ��7 1 C �•�"� 1 � 1 ` r�.tS;��G-rr . �-: " ',
�� vy_-a, 3l,;,33, ,`� T \ 1 11 i =_� , ,'��, ..r� , , ,,:� ;3;5 r � ` ? �� -- s ,
jt"r' �%[i�1,2� I` 1�r1�� �1�1�1, 1� 4'f,312 J� ?i.�? 1, 1 �� I.J/.`��LfS ��, ,,MI�_�.15 '' J'1
c� n9 i' > > 1 �1 ° � t0 �� , " � t `4 -}9' r a �, ��, �^� � � 't� 1
� };1��G1����� ��_? �` 3`f� ��\JC'•19 $ ��,� ',�°''�^y � �5 '^, , � �214)�'�"��'�•:, ,` � \ i `��'���� ` , ; c ��
'S `f� \ � � ° � r �.lr;'� `� �� �, - � ' �2: �� /
:�� 4 �� _?3 � 111;�`�1� 1 � � ` , �� , ,`"1,:- ...-�,�jc 3 �� ���31;3� � ` � ., ,1 ',.r''_ t `r' '', ( , , �5,�q l3 , � '��/'� :
s �2�}l i��l,� � , � 1., -"` 6 '� ` � � �� , 1 _,�c' � p� ,� � i 4 17��� � !1` �'- .
�� ,i�e�i 1` .o, '`�� ,1 ` ��` iA ' '� "�. , `5;l��1Y/,'� �� 5',.'�1 zs�L, ��� � 1 11 ' i :� Z2f,�G'��'��� `, ``, 1,'r"'-� _ ,
t �r ��� ��--- ; � � 1 � � � ,�,,', 4 ` 1- 1� '� 1 � ^ ,� �� , 5 `3'j 1 1 � 1 �`-`.. - -i _,/'��
i 1 ^SZ2 �. l � I�1� � `,}'�;5� �t 1� 1 .o1�d � .� � � � 2,`:-� � �1 � �.. . , � • Y'' is.�✓"' '
� � �..��.i"O�� 'I �- �1` `1', �p`,:ql'�92�1j� ,`1l „`'� F`�,3 �'� �,� `�1 `�I�;J'�,y�� �� 1 ,.,��`^��' .�.�"�.�"' ':'3i� ,} •';';`S� ' . .
� � .,'\I>> ht ,, 1 � �':'' 1, .
� �1 �i � � t �h � ����.:5'� . ?� � �� �� �� �� �-r` � � � 1��� \� �� � � o .�e.. ��S"-•-�� � � � � � � f�r'
'� � iLV c, 2 � � �t , 'r�� \ ,� !' % xD ' �` -''� �� `, I r(Z'S3 ��` � : -
i s 2'� c: '( -( � �, r 1 f� � �'
1 '3 � �,� - ,( ,� ��� j ; �,�,- ��•,..,� ,; 1 �';9?� � ,� `
,s � J �' a �
� � ;°�oZo---1+I� ».t5 `\' ` _ . •1! 1'I�1 �v`�,�� , ,`"`; °,'r ..,'� ���1,• 1�� S?,�f���� rr �1 .> 1,,��•-'tJ� �
. I � ;� , z_�_t , �,j J `{ „�=� 4_, `;� ` �� \ � ., �;Z. , ; /f,{T.�..t � �.
� - r^�3- � n\� �\ �� � ..�a � 1 „t�'1,��,..�- ..---:'1 , , , � p J�4' i 1 � , "-9 , , .,�J3:
� ? �1"^ o�z�` ` ; /° �' , r'•„' � s ` r1 l �` 9�����`, ` '�.• =t' � '` 1'l �'%5i .
9 a �.= �5� �1�z� �;` � , �.,�„�„�„� ,t � � ,` �,3",� � `„ ��, ��� ,�.t� 1 1,'!9r ' . ::-%
r �..� „` r�' ` � T, ...t ;1 �l S , � \ �--r� � �, , �� �5 , '� ".-
� � � ; �i= �'-Z� �\ ` � .1� , `, ,X 1 �: , ,,1�?t�1-1-' , ` j , Y.7, 1 `
� ;�?� "'" l t � I r 3. �� � � '� � � r��7.�. �f � �� �,.yf: S
n }y;�22igi�?' '�1(, t _,� 1"'�f,C � :J J � � fJf;2��z>> C �1 t -�r..�-. ) :�-.
_ ' �. , � � ''_ .,
� _ i,'1,.,;...,,. .i .-��" `,1' 1� ; .,. j5�,��..} ir: \� 1 1 �f�{\3� � ���, ` �.jp:Cs�;.ir ,` , � � ••'�'�.1.' 4.:i� ��%..
�- � � � � .� . y'G\25 � . ,1 ` , :, 11 t� } , ` `11`, h!� ` , � �3\�L 1 � `t ,1 � � �...-t'` � �` ,, . . � � �
� � y� y � t j 1 , ` � � ' " ' ) , � ' I � �� r ;1 � ,..--"-� 4� � .-�"r' ^ �, � -
j'1^ ^, � ,��r `,z� `'-�' '� ,�`,,, ', .r i-, � "1 1 y`.3 L t � _ ��-�"'�" ..- , �-
� `•= ^,,,,�, ;� 1 � � r ✓ 5 �` � �,.. _ ,�''` '}' `, ^^ t,5 -
� � `� y` i� s �.Ir Z\o ( �1 � _ 1�' - � 1 :I'1, � �`8;7 1 ,ZS�i,'.:: M�,...• -�„^`� 1 `, 1~,` ,f, ,1�!�, ''i � .
, 1 � � Y -�3 `'� �- ` C ;`, � ' yi 1 ,;,,,.����==, 1 - �._=;t� �` , , 1 ` � ,;,L.; -��° ��'� � -
;
� -.
s ' ` /J.� ��1 � ` 1 �`, `� y-�°� J`'! � ���\1 1 1 i`1��f1\! ` , ,, 'j-
i � � 'i �L' -`�� �=',�1�-' �,`J+3�/�,��11�',�-�_` � , _,1,; `�'� � 1,J�37t�'`�,' d `r11 � ,1,�� -�� .
i , � � ,/, ,l, , � 1 ���� �;�': , �, 'r`,, j 1,
� °-,• �S l � I S , C y1951,�,.r':''' ') I ; � �, � � N...- j, �' 1 ii � i , f. �.. t - •� _ Z � f`�� \ 1 l � ` � � h ( ; . . , t.. ^
} i!?�. ti ,� 70, _ ���� ` ,� y<7�J��}/ ' �1 , .�`9 Z:r':r ( C� :
� I 1;,;.,,. ,,,,r � 1 � ��1,, p�r r \ f 0�'' ,, i qE, f� � t __�
j � �� � I ej � �20 � � "� � �' �� � 1 �� •�d ;�, � � �1 5��� � ���� �� 1qf�9�L �� � � .�� _ �.
C- � ,'' i�.. - -"..s �, 1, �,„�,�,,�,�h"� �„�., ,1!� ` ;� ; � �� �,��1`1.\��'(�; , ���•\"` . � ,,�!"
•1�. .! ,'s;, �<:N° p`� 1 ,�j" l' t �i , �, `" f�=' `', � � `�11.�� .;-� 1s"-!�1 a�,�<1,:.�'� (''� "�� ' .
� �'',> �t";i ,�.1�1°'��� . ,�.`� (", t� `�1 , , ; 1/,��`'J 1�,� I_�� ,i'�� ! ...�;, �� ' �.
_ ` ,, . � . � _ �,-. , �� , . . ._�, .
�
0
�
^
��
October 3, J.967
To the Fridley Planr.ing Commission:
As you are aware, the Parks and Recreation Commission has been stucying the City's
needs for parks for some time. ive s�et out about a year ago to look at the popula-
tion and trends of groi,�th, tiUe have also looked at the existing and likely uses
for land in the City to get some idea of what to expect in the way of park re-
quirements.
Our study has pointed up so�iie of the t}iinas that we already knew and has also
broughtto light some things which we hadn't realized before. For one thing, we
had not realized that there were so many areas in.town with completely inadequate
parks. The high�aays, railroads and creek which divide Fridley in mutually inacces-
sible neighborhoods make it impossible for the children in one neighborhood to
utilize parks in adjoining neighborhoods, even though they may be close enough in
distance. In addition to this, we have neighborhoods, notably Summit T4anor and
Hyde Park where the e�itire neighborhood was built up before the City adopted its
policy of requiring land developers to dedicat� park land in eac}i area developed.
This has resulted in whole neighborhoods where there not only are no parks at
present but where there is no open land on which to locate parks.
Two or three months ago the Parks and Recreation Commission met with the City Coun-
cil to discuss the approach to the park situation in general. The outcome of that
meeting was a concensus in both the Commission and Council that is we are to pro-
vide for the park needs of the City at any time in the foreseeable future, �,�e
must stop relying on current income for park acquisition and development. The
exact approach to be takeri from that point was left open, but it was more or less
assumed by all that the most likely means of financing ivas bondi.ng. We agreed that
the Commission would contirue its study with the objective of arriving at a proposal
for a park improvement program which would include both acquisition of ne�-r lands
�
0
- ,�, �„ .
.. (2) _. .
J�yiJr
^ for immediate and future developmeilt and tl�e developnler.t of our existing par.k
lands to the extent tl;at the prese�zt population around them will have use of
them.
The Commission arrived at a teni:at.i�re conclusi.on to their study late in August.
In examining alter.natives leading up to ttie conclusicn, the Commission had the
assistance of Paul Brotan, our Parks and Recreation Director, and of Ed Braddock,
formerly the Chief Engineer for the �9inneapolis Parl: I3oard and presently a pro-
� fessional park consultant. We utiliz.ed Ed primarily for his experience i.n :e�ti-
mating costs and deiernu.ning the actual tasks'to be performed in carrying out
particular. projects. Paul, with a much better knotivledge of the local needs, was
instrumental in evaluating t}ie basic type of projects to include and.their rela-
tive value to the citizens. The members of the Cammission proposed projects for
^ evaluation, assisted in judging the relative need for specific projects, and in
the end exercised their juclgement as to �ahich projects to include in the overall
program.
�
The Commission arid Council met to give the prel.iminary proposal a going-ever
early in September. After that discussion, the Commission continued its work
and adopted a recommendatioil to the Counci.l on September 11. At another meeting
with the Council on September 13 this propo�al was discussed and the Commission
agreed to modify its originai proposal sli.ghtly. The amended proposal was adopt-
ed by the Commi.ssion on September 13 and reconm:ended to the Council for action.
The Commission's motion did not specifically call for a bond issue, but all con-
versations with the Council had beer. based on the assumption that a bond �.ssue
is li.kely the only ivay of impl�menting the probram recommended.
The C�uncil received the for;nal. recoi;linen�l�tion o£ the Par_ks and Recreation Co�n-
mission at its ineeting on September 18, and at.that time held it over to a special
z
^
. ' �3�
meeti�Ig on September 28. It is my understanding tY1at due to the need to con-
sider the a�Inual budget for the City, the proposal �aas not thoraughly di.scussed
at that meeting and that the Couiicil's action is yet pending.
This brings us up to date on Hrhere �e have been a�id what we have been doing.
As to the reconunendation tvhich the Parks and Recreation Commissior, finally
adopted, the attached material will describe it partially. I titi�ould like to
take some of your time to discuss i.t with you at our meeting on October 5, 1967,
if we can work it in. �
There are several points for discussion and for considerat�_on by the Plannirg
Commission before such a plan as this is actually put into effect. Street access,
utilities, and adjacent land use are a fe►a of these. I'll try to cover suc}i items
/'1 when we talk.
�
In the meantime, I would appreciaie your reading through the material attached
ar_d considering the proposal from the standpoint of its impact on the land use
pattern of the City and its ad�;antages and disadvantages to the City and its
citizens.
�
R. J. Hughes
Chairman, Parks and Recreation Commission
Acting Chairman, Planning Commission
�s
�
n
^ FAC1'S ON FRIDL�Y Pt�RK LANll ACQUISIl'ION AND llEVELOPI�9EN'I' PRQGRAI�9
The program was proposed by the Fridley Park and Recre�.tion Conm�ission. 1'he
Proposai ti�as formally ado;�ted at the Commissi.on's meeting on September 13, 1967.
Formulation and adoption of the program culminates a year-long study by the
Cornmission and Parks and Recrea.tion Director, Paul Bro�vn.
1'lie Commissioii utilized the expert services o.f Mr. Edward �raddock, park consul-
tant and fo-r.mer Ctiief Engineer for the Mirinea.polis Par.k Board duriiig the work
planning and cost esti.mating phases of the study.
Alembers of the Parks and Recreation Commission are Rohert J. Hughes, Chairma.n;
Thomas D. Cochran; Edti,rard J. Fitzpatrick; John F. Dunphy; and James M. Spence.
The proposal was made to the Fridley City Council. It was formally reported to
^ the Council at their meeting of September 18, 196%. Conunission Chairman Hughes
descr.ibed ttie proposal. as a"program to provide parks for the people who live in
Fridley no�a". The Council took the proposal under consiueratioii and scheduled
a special meeting for September 28, 1967, to discuss i.t.
In summary, the major projects in the program include (1) acquisition of land for
four new parks and development of these parks for immediate use; (2) development
of four tracts presently owned by the City but not. being used as parks; (3) comple-
tion of the development of six parks now in use; and (�) acc{uisition of three
sites for future development.
The projects included in the proposed program are outlined below. The numbers on
the projects refer to the map. Exi.sting Fridley parks are shown on the map in
� solid shading.
NORT'HtdEST ARE:�
(1) The existing park at the corner of Br.oad Avenue and Hugo Street 4ai11 be up-
c2� �9
' graded by grading anc� planting the area and thc adclit.ion of feneing, play
^ equipment a.nd benches,
(2) In the area east of the River Road and in the area. of Ironton, Hu�o, Rutli,
and Ely Streets lan;l will be acc{uired for a major neighborhood park. Develop-
ment of this park �vi_11 i.nclude grading, plaliting, and the addition of skating
rink and play court, ball diamonds, a.nd play equipment.
(3) In the existing park land along tlle A9ississippi River at the foot of Bellaire
Way, a boat launclling facility including a r.oadway, par}:ing area, and launch-
ing ramp �aill be built.
(4) Loga11 Park will be brought to completion by the addition oF play equipment
and lighting.
(5) In the area north of I,ocke Lake and east of �River Road, la.nd will be acr,uir-
ed and a neighborhood playground will be deveLoped.
/'1 NORTHEAST AREA
(6) Land will be acquired in the northceest portion of the hlelody Manor area and
a.small neighborhood playground will be developed ai1 it.
(7) A neighborhood playground will be developed on land in the northeast portion
of the Dlelody Alanor area.
(8) The development of A4adsen Park will be completed. Facilities in this park
will inclucie hockey and skating rinks, a shelter-warming house, ball diamonds,
play equipmeni, and a picnic area.
(9) The access to Locke Park wil.l be upgraded. Hard surfaced parking lots and
connection to roads �tiill be provided. -
(10) A small tract of land adjacent to the St. Paul �Vater Department's pipeline
on the south shore of Spring Lake will be acquired. While no development
is planned for this tract at present, it cvill provide a la}:e access for
�
skating or swimming for the people in the northeast part of the City,
(11) The development af Flan�ry Paxk will be compl�ted with the addition of a
shelter building, play equipmeiit, and a picnic area.
�
tV1.S'T CENTRAL AR�A �
�3)
f�l��
^ (12) A small traci: of land will be acc�uiz:ed to� connect the t►ti-o parts of Jay Park
presently held by the City. Play equipment, benches, a.nd a picnic area will
be added to Ja.y Park.
(13) Sylvan Park's development iai.11 be completecl by the improventent of park
drai�iage and addition of play equipment and lighting.
(14) A small tract of land separating twc parcels presently held by the City will
be acqtiired just nortli of Chase's Island. This tract will be held for develop-
. ment at the same time Chase°s ?sland is brought to completion.
(15) Land will be acquired in the area south of 61st Averlue and west of b4ain Street
and a. major area playfield for the Sylvan }lills and Hyde Park neighbor3iood
will be developed. The park �,iill include baseball and softball dianionds,
play equipment, and a play court.
^ CEi�'TRAL AP.EA
(16) Terrace Park �vill be completed by the addition of a s}ielter building ar.d play
equipment.
(17) The undeveloped park south of Kennaston Drive and Over.ton Avenue will be en-
larged and developed. Land will be acc{uired to provide access to the park
from 68th Avenue on the north and 66th Avenue and Oakley Street on the south.
The development of the park will include baseball and softball diamonds,
skating facilities, a play cour.t, and play ec{uipment.
(18) The Fridley Commons (the City's most intensively used park) will be com-
pleted by the addition of a shelter building, landscapino, a har.d sur.faced
play area, teilnis courts, and fenci.ng.
(19) The undeveloped park area on the west side of I�;oore Lake in front of the
� Senior Hig}i School will be developed to the extent necessary to allo�a its
maintenance as a"rest and relaxation" park. {ti'or}: tivill include preparation '
and smoothing of the area, planting, picni'c tat�les, and a small play ec{uiprnent
area.
�
i��
�
���
EASi' C1;NTRAL �1P.L:A �
^ (ZO) Land will be aec{uirecl for latcr developme�t as a major nature park along
Rice Creek.
(21) Land will be acRuired for latcr development as a neighborhood park in the
area east of Centxal A�renue a.nd south of Rice Creek Road.
SOU1'I1 AREA
(22) The development of Hackmann Circle Park will be completed with the addition
of planting, fencing, pl.ay equipment, and benches.
(23) Land will be acquired for the addition of a major neighborhood playfi.eld
in the Summit Alanor neighborh�od. Development of this facility �vill include
preparation, fill, grading, baseball and sof.tball diamonds and playground
equipme�lt .
�24) The undeveloped park sout.h of 53rd Avenue and adjacent to the City Water
^ Department site will be developed by tlie addition of a hard surfaced play
court and play equipme�It.
The total program will add approximately 100 acres of park laTid tc the C.i.ty sys-
tem for a total acreage over 300. The program will provide for de.velopment of
parks in all parts of the City where there is presently a significant concentration
of population and will provide 1a71d for later development in all parts of the City
where growth patterns point to future population concentrations. Overall cost of
the program as proposed is $1.3 million.
For additi.onai information call:
Robert J. Hughes, Chairman, Parks arld Recreation Commiss�.on
560-2615 or 331-4141, Ext. 5577
� Paul Brown, Director, Parks ancl Recreatioii Department
560-3^50
/"`
�
F
�
�
tf
��
t� �
i�
1 ��
��4
�
-- -- -- --- ---� --_ _ ----
; 4 v ..
�7,�•� C1�'_Y nf F RIC_LF:! ''�' �
...
,,', . . .� .. , i%i
. . • --
. � ; �
ir�; � �... � .
: � i:._ , � �, ,
, : � -- -; --
: ; �.t� J
.,_ ..._ ; � ',-r t � N:�` � _
i, j ��
: .... ` { . .. , , _ .-,
._ ,, _ . � . I � _=
._ .... a ;.` �
{.. _ .^,i _.
: i ` —' -
` � ry R�ti� IC% �
' , . oo. `
' I �-.�.., ' � ( P% , Npov -•_
� _ "`
� I 1 , � , �NfI
i
. .Y : � . . . �._ . �.. _.:.�
�
1
f' ` _ , r� � ����
� �! � '. ...., � "
�� ,:�:
� , F
1 ° . " �'
�� _ � '. '.... �
:..
� � ' + � . �
' � i
_.. { . ' . ' !.
_ ._ .. , / �� � 1 ., , "' _ _. I',
1 � _ _ ' . . 1 . _ - � . . . : - .
. . �.�. . i . .... ..� � ' ..
- o��� � � �._'
; ��
�� �
- � ._.
' , _ � _ � r` - ; i_.,
. ._ ��.,� � _ .,,.;� 3 �, 4 . i� �
� s , � !'
f F �� � � • �� __
� _ `
� y.i �w ` l l � ,� ..
� � � 1 1 . - ---_� .
p, 1 •%� � � ��+ �.�, �. � y`
u -- :,.
t
( G. � � � � �
�
/ , (� �
,. � - - ` r
j, . s
� ' � ��'' �� i `, � �=' r� ( � ��__.€
, ,
; ,. � .- �
.., �,., � � _ .. „ ` � ` ,
. , . ' ,
_ , � , ' __ � � ,;
,, . , . , _ . �
i — � - , �, �. � ���
�� - � , 3 ; ;_ �._ ; :;_<
3 , ��� rl f E - � � . -;� +I`
� � �. � _°� � : r ti =� ,� a � � � i
�� � � �. �- s � . .-� -...� �-�_ F
,� :�
� � �� i� � �
-� �- � � f ,� /�. ` �� -�....� � � ,;
� � ��1 1 I � : � . _ � � � � ; �; , � �� � `
� I�.� I I __ � yoaa � ii i
7 �� t, �� 1`.�'. � � p�
�i��:i�1� 1�;�� ��' . -, �
. , ,�
� _ r � � i; ; .� -, �.'_ c� �>,�.,,...<e�.4:... _
_ i !p I _ _ � � ' _ �` <
r
� � _ � � .�: � I " �� � � - � �
.�_1 ' —\ / � s,� � HI
'\ � - = I
;� � :,� � � � e � � �
i.�s-,�� �� _;-� ' _ _ .E � � ��� �
��� i �—'� o fi 7 . 7 � � ' ��-�� ::-� � : !� � �� =— .....5,...,.�
� ��isi I'= f- ; I
� �: _= - — .. �€
�
'i� I_..
7 ��'� a � i�
i � - -- — ---
' �� �,_ � �- " --a�
�. , ., ' � �
� ` i �, - - _ _. I � � I
� �1�1 �� _- - _ _ �l
\"" ; ; "', i ' r, � , ' ._ � ;_ —
: � �
' �� �.
t I i � _ '_ ' '. " v.. .. • I — � �
� �� J_ I . _
. �; -
,.
,.
i "
� ._ I l I::
I �
� �
I !
�,
;t-- - -
i ; ....
- �
��� -- I�,'__
- i -
s?r �"!�.,`__` ° c �,- r _e�=
• � : «� ,
�L� Etz� il � �:J� ';i'
_ .__� = i.
�h �
} `�
tit� .. _y -t S i
� r�' + �`,T; y E _
t ' Y
. . 5 t': x.� � .
�. ........ .....,....,.... .`.' �-�q
__'...__'__. °�. ..._ .:
�;fi.1 • �1',j a�� s�
�`._�s ' _�r �..
_- --- - �- `-�. --_�
9 eu
��
_ �1�- ti r �-�-;-
' ,� M
i�'
�
���
f�
��
F��
�
'��
��
r
��
� ' �
��
�
J
O
�
�
�
J
U
W
Q7
•
�
7
v
Z
�
�
�
�
�
,
��
�
S
RK STUDY, SH�P
�O
-� � - ---
� �O
�O
R
��
e �'4�
- �`
��
� O
r� . . ti
��e� �or
9,� � o��,y
b
9
�/��d��1� W ) dS��w N
��.
�. �
!
G
�
r
�
�
D
�
�
�
r
D
2
�
�
�
�
e
�
�
�
�'y
MELSA: ". to secure area-wide solutions to area-wide problems."
� � - DR. HERBERT GOLDHOR
ANOKA
RAMSEY
HENNEPIN
CARVER
� ���n �
` Cooperation among the nineteen dif-
ferent public libraries in the seven-county
Twin City Metropolitan Area to lower the
present barriers among them so that
BOOKS and INFORMATION may pass
freely to you across the entire area;
� A program of well-equipped library read-
ing and information centers to meet needs
DAKOTA NOW, and looking forward to our needs
in 1970 — 1980 — and the future.
�����I��
IS HIGH AND GROWING in the seven-county
Twin City Metropolitan Area, and with a large
number of people employed in a county other
than that in which they live, there is a wide and
growing tendency to find and use the BEST avail-
able library service, inside or outside their own
taxing area ... making an area-wide service base
desirable for libraries. (People cross political
boundaries for many kinds of activity — schools,
churches, stores, recreation facilities.)
ALONG WITH diversity in present library ser-
vices, high mobility, and a profile above the
national average in educational achievement and
income, the metroplitan area seven counties to-
gether hold 2821 square miles of land, into which
an estimated 2,157,000 population (1975) and
4,000,000 (by the year 2000) will flow.
THIS IS THE BACKGROUND of A PLAN FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC LIBRARY
SERVICE IN THE MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL
METROPOLITAN AREA developed by Dr. Her-
bert Goldhor, director of the Graduate School of
Library Science of the University of Illinois, at
Urbana.
POPULATION GROWTH
-;:�
1
z 2
0
J 3
J
� 4
5
1964 1980 2000
"Of the 19 public library systems in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, only six have one or more
branches each, viz., Anoka County Library, Dakota-Scott Regional Library, Hennepin County Li-
brary, Minneapolis Public Library, Ramsey County Public Library, and St. Paul Public Library. These
six systems have 98% of the area served by all 19 public libraries and 92% of the 1965 popula-
tion so served. ..." Agreement between two or three of these library systems on some of the
common area library objectives could create the MELSA framework.
� s '
CHAPTER I
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This study was made in response to the request of the Ztain Cities Metropolitan Area Library Study
Committee. Its purpose was to draft a plan for the optimal organization of public library service in the
seven counties around Minneapolis and Saint Paul, so as to provide quality library service for all the people
in the years ahead. The resulting report seeks to be economically and politically realistic, and at the same
time to provide an effective and yet flexible mechanism for change and improvement.
Guidint� Principles
As a guide for evaluation of the present circumstances and for planning for the future, twenty
principles of good quality public library service were enunciated, as follows.
A. The Structure of Public Library Organization.
1. Public libraries are and should be related to local government.
2. Public libraries are creatures of state law, and should be financed and controlled in part
by the state government. -
3. Public libraries are also properly a concern of the Federal Government.
4. The administrative structure of the public library, especially in a metropolitan area,
should be such as to secure the benefits of large sfze and to retain the flexibility and
other advantages of smaller units.
5. The organizational structure of the public library should provide quality service to all
the people of a given socio-economic area, and facilitate close cooperation with all other
types of libraries, in the face of inevitable changes in society.
B. Library Materials and Their Organization for Use.
6. The organization of public library service in a given area should provide iimnediate
access for all the people, insofar as possible, to most of the currently useful books.
7. Any person living within the service area of a public library should be able to get access,
within a reasonably short time, to the basic stock of all books.
8. The public library should include not only books but other forma of print and other media
of co�nunication.
9. The materials held by public libraries should be classified (or grouped by suUject) and
cataloged, so that readers may aacertain what is available by author, title or subject,
and where it is.
C. Library Services.
10. There should be reasonably uniform and liberal regulations over the whole area for the use
of libraries and the loan of books.
11. There should be good quality reference service available to all citizens within a reason-
able distance.
12. Other specialized services should be available in at least some public libraries in the
area, e.g., subject literature experts, reader's advisers, group discussion leaders, young
adult librarians, etc.
D. Physical Plant.
13. There should be a reasonable number of public library outlets of different sizes and func-
tions.
14. Public library buildings should be located in centers of pedestrian activity.
15. Public library buildings should be functional, flexible�, attractive and well-equipped.
E. Staff and Administration.
16. The staff of a public library should be adequate in number and in preparation.
17. Public library employees should have good working conditions and encouragement to develop
to their fullest.
18. Library administrators should be receptive to new ideas and be willing to experiment.
19. Public library revenue should be adequate,and there should be an approximately normal
pattern of expenditures.
20. Attention should be given regularly to long-range planning, and to evaluatfon and research.
Some Asvects of the Present Situation
In looking at the present circumstances, attention was directed first at the major characteristics
of the seven counties (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington). Together they have
2821 square miles of land, and had 1,186,000 people in 1950, 1,525,000 in 1960, and 1,736,000 in 1965,
and will have an estimated population of 2,157,000 in 1975 and 4,000,000 in the year 2000. The two central
- 1 -
a
cities embrace an ever smaller percentage of the total population (70% in 1950, 53% in 1960, 46% in 1965,
and 39% in 1975), while the surrounding counties account for an ever larger proportion. The population of
the area is above the national average in educational achievement and in earnings and income.
There are 316 local government units in the metropolitan area, including 7 counties, 73 townships,
107 villages, 24 cities, 84 school districts, and 19 special diatricts. More than four-fifths of the town-
ships, villages and cities had less than 10,000 people each in 1965. A fundamental assumption of this study
is that no over-all unit of inetropolitan government wi11 be set up in the near future, and which would
affect the existing public libraries.
There were in all 19 different public library systems in the seven counties as of 1966. Of
these, 13 consisted of only one agency each and served an average of less than 10,000 people in 1965; six
libraries had more than one agency each (an average of 10) and served over 250,000 people each in 1965.
The 13 small libraries were those of Anoka City and Columbia Heights (in Anoka County), Chaska, Waconia and
Watertown (in Carver County), South Saint Paul (in Dakota County), Hopkins (in Hennepin County), North Saint
Paul and White Bear Lake (in Ramsey County), and Bayport, Forest Lake, Newport, and Stillwater (in Washing-
ton County). The six large libraries were those of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, of Anoka, Hennepin, and
Ramsey Counties, and the Dakota-Scott Regional Library. Even so, this is a smaller total number of public
libraries and a larger average aize than is to be found in some other metropolitan areas.
The 19 public libraries had a total of 76 agencies in fixed locations, in 1966, and data were
compiled on various aspects of these agencies. For example, the median average age of the buildings in
which these agencies were located was 36 years (35 for the 63 agencies of the six large libraries, and
40 for the 13 small libraries). Almost half were not originally built or designed for library use; 28%
were located in commercial areas (and more than half of these were less than 25 years old) while 22% were
in residential areas (and almost all were more than 25 years old), and the rest were in mixed residential
and cou�ercial locations. These 76 agencies had a total of 676,000 suare feet of space (0.4 per capita of
the population served) or 20% less than the usual standard of 0.5 square feet per person served, and 50%
less than will be needed in 1975. The number of seats for readers, usually figured at two for each thousand
persons served, was actually 8% more in 1965 than required by this standard, but if not increased will be
10% short of what is required in 1975. The median average agency had 3200 square feet and 36 seats for
readers, with no off-street parking for patrons, and was open 42 hours a week.
Another important aspect of the 19 libraries' present circumstances was their book stock, the
total of which increased from about a million and a half in 1950 to two and a half million in 1965, but on
a per capita basis it rose only from 1.4 to 1.50 versus the usual atandard of two volumes per person served.
The median average of all 76 library agencies was 17,150 volumes in 1966 (and for the 13 smaller libraries,
12,000 volumes). Estimates were made of the quality of the book collections, based on detailed studies done
in a sample of 12 of the 76 agencies. By the measures used, it appears that these agencies did a consist-
ently good job of selecting adult fiction, though some of them had a lower than desirable proportion of new
books. Of 100 titles on a recent liat of selected books on American history, these 12 agencies had an
average of 25; of 210 titles reco�ended for college-bound high school students, they had an average of 55%
(and less than two copies of each title held). The average of these 12 agencies had 6 encyclopedias (and
about 5 years old in general), one unabridged dictionary, and one periodical index, and received 71 period-
icals including SO of the 125 indexed in the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature. A final measure in-
volved an analysis of a sample of up to 100 reference books from each of the 12 agencies; 42% of these were
included in the single most appropriate list of reference books for public libraries, and 15% were not fosnd
on any of six lists used. Of the total, 48% were published in the last five years, and 27% were more than
ten years old.
In regard to staff, these 19 libraries had 646 employees in 1965, or only 3% less than the number
required by the old standard of one employee for every 2500 persons aerved (it would be 23% less in compar-
ison with the new standard of one employee for every 2000 persons). The number of professional librarians
was 10% less than desirable in general (one for every 7500 persons served, by the old standard), but the 13
smaller libraries had only half as many professional librarians as they should have had. A detailed anal-
ysis was done of 170 full-time professional librarians; 14% were men and all but one were in three of the
large libraries. The median age was 46, and these librariane had had a dozen or more years of experience
in their present library but only qne year of work experience in any other library, on the average. The
median salary of these professional librarians was $7600, and half of them earned between $6800 to $9200
a year.
Between 1960 and 1965, these 19 libraries increased their total revenues for current operations
by 40%, from three and two-third million dollars to five and a half million dollars. Local tax income
increased 40% also, but on a per capita basis only 23% from $2.23 to $2.74, compared with an estimated $5
per capita needed in 1965 to provide good quality public library service. The 13 smaller libraries more
than doubled their local tax income in those five years, but still had only $2.02 per capita in 1965 com-
pared with $2.80 per capita for the 6 large libraries; usually the smaller the library the more money per
capita it needs to give service of the same level. The actual average tax rate for the 19 libraries was
less than.four mills in 1965. If all libraries had levied a five mill tax (the maximum permitted county
libraries), they would have had almost six million dollars or $3.50 per capita; and if they had levied a
tax of eight mills (the maximum permitted municipal libraries other than those in cities of the first class),
they would have had nine and a half million dollars or $5.65 per capita. In other words, the tax potential
is available.
The purpose of having public libraries is to serve readers. Services were considered under three
main heads - rules for the use of the library, the circulation of materials, and reference work. These 19
- 2 -
libraries exhibit a great variety of regulations in regard to borrower registration, the type and nature of
their systems for recording the loan of books, and the regulations for the circulation of materials (e.g.,
the length of loan period, renewals, overdue fines, etc.) Even more differences are introduced by the form
of material (such as periodicals), by whether the books in question are new or old, by the age of the reader
(the rules for children are usually different from those for aduits), and by variations for different agen-
cies in the same system. The use of these various libraries is impeded by these many differences.
In 1960, these 19 libraries recorded a total circulation of almost seven million books and other
materials (4.5 per person served); in 1965, this rose to almost 8,200,000 loans (or 4.7 per capita). The 13
small libraries chalked up an even larger increase in circulation than did the large libraries, but still had
only about half of the circulation which they should have had by national standards for libraries of their
size; the 6 large libraries were about two-thirds of what the standard specified for them. Apart from the
Dakota-Scott Regional Library (which was only 7 years old in 1966), these libraries in 1965 borrowed very few
books for their patrons from other libraries with which they were not directly related. The Hennepin County
Library borrowed more books for its patrons, from the Minneapolis Public Library - with which it has a con-
tract and shares a headquarters building - than did all the other libraries together.
In regard to reference aervice - the answering of factual questions of readers, the national stan-
dard calls for 0.5 to one reference question per year per person served, but only a few of the 19 libraries
record the number of queations asked. A set of 10 questions (for which answers were known) was given to the
person in charge of 12 of the 76 library agencies (not including the two main central libraries); the average
number of questions answered was half. Any of these agencies, especially the branches of large syatems,
could call their headquarters or other large library for assistance on such questiona in real life, but in
this study they were asked to use only their own resources, as a measure of the service they were equipped
to give.
The Proposed Solution
In the light of these existing conditions, a path is to be charted for maintaining and improving
library service generally. Various alternatives were considered, e.g., the merger of all 19 libraries into
one big public library district. The solution reconmended and discussed at aome length is the creation of a
Metropolitan Library Service Agency (MELSA)• This is conceived as a librarians' library, i.e., an agency to
serve existing libraries and not indfvidual readers directly. One main reason for favoring auch an agency
is to provide a mechanism which could expand in time from serving only member libraries in the ltain City area,
to serving all libraries in that area, and eventually to serving all libraries in the whole state.
Specifically it is proposed that MELSA be formed under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act by three or
more of the six large libraries which alone have the present and potential resources necessary. Each member
library caould have to agree (a) to give the same service to the patrons of other member libraries which it
gives to its own borrowers, (b) to lend to any other member library whatever materials it lends to its own
patrons, and (c) to submit all proposals for construction of new or enlarged buildings to the Board of
1Yustees of MELSA for a judgment as to how they fit into the over-all plan of library development.
MELSA would be governed by a board of citizens, composed of two persons for each member library,
who will be appointed for four year terms by the county coffiissioners or city council of the respective unit
of government. A Co�nittee of Library Directors will give the MELSA Board an advisory opinion or reco�enda-
tion on every action to come before it, but the Board would make the decisions. Specifically the Board would
decide what functions MELSA should undertake, in what order, and in what manner. The staff of the Agency
would emphasize planning, and coordination; their three great assets would be (a) the competence derived from
area-wide experience, but with detachment from purely local circumstances, (b) the forward thrust of working
on problems of general interest and in the context of a developing over-all plan, and (c) the stimulus of
state and federal aid.
The revenues of MELSA would come from three main sources, viz., member libraries' dues, fees for
certain of its services, and grants of state and federal funds through the Library Division of the State De-
partment of Education. Each member library shouid pay a small fee to MELSA, on the principle that people
are more careful of money when even a small part of the total is their own. If each member library were to
pay SC per person in its area of tax support, all six libraries together would have provided less than
$90,000 in 1966. Some services of MELSA will undoubtedly be rendered at no direct charge to member libraries
or even to non-member libraries, but some ought to be financed in whole or in part by fees assessed in pro-
portion to the amount of use by each library, e.g., book processing. Using 1966 figures of state aid for
public libraries and of the authorized amounts of federal aid to Minnesota (under Titles I and III of the
Library Services and Construction Act), it is estimated that over $100,000 at minimum could be made avail-
able to MELSA each year. This is a reasonable estimate, since about half the population of the state is in
these seven counties, and since the money given to MELSA would benefit primarily only those librariea which
agree to serve all ather member libraries' patrons. In return for these grants, the State Library Division
should be represented on the MELSA Board and on the Committee of Library Directors.
Remembering then that MELSA should be free to adapt to new and changing circumstances, 13 possible
"soft" services and 13 "hard" services are auggested for the benefit and improvement of all member libraries,
as follows:
A. Soft Services
1. A streamlined and centralized system of book selection.
- 3 -
2. Assignment of subject fields, for specialization in collection of materials, to all
appropriate libraries.
3. A prompt and effective system of inter-library loan, operated by either the Minneapolis
Public Library or the Saint Paul Public Library by contract, in place of the Library
Division which now handles and coordinatea the service.
4. Creation and maintenance of a union list of serials in all local libraries other than the
University of Minnesota Library.
5. A central reference service available only to libraries, to help answer difficult questions
(with toll-free telephone lines) and to advise agency personnel on all aspects of refer-
ence work, to be operated by one or the other of the two city libraries by contract.
6. Standardization of borrower registration rules and circulation regulations, including
possibly one circulation system for all member libraries.
7. A central overdue book collection service.
8. Preparation and maintenance of a public library agency development program, to keep all
interested parties fully informed and to lay the basis for future planning.
9. Coa�ercial contracts for specified aervices for all member libraries, e.g., for book pur-
chases, binding, insurance, etc.
10. Continuing and varied in-service training for all main types of inember libraries' employ-
ees (and for their trustees too).
11. Proviaion of specialized resource peraonnel on a shared basis, for a limited or in-
definite period, e.g., children's story-teller, public relations director, or cost account-
ant.
12. Research and experimentation in matters of concern to member libraries, e.g., the cost
and benefit of taking an inventory of book stock, or on how to serve the culturally dis-
advantaged.
13. Continuous, long-range, and broad gauge planning for the future, in the light of changing
problems, circumstances and priorities.
B. Hard Services
1. The central ordering, cataloging, classification and processing of new books for member
libraries (and in time posaibly for school libraries, public libraries in the rest of the
state, etc.). This is probably the single most important potential service which MELSA
might render, especially in the light of the possible use of electronic data procesaing
equipment and the desirability of producing a printed catalog in multiple copies listing
all books added by all member libraries. To analyze this particular group of problems,
Dr. Wesley C. Simonton of the Univereity of Minnesota Library School was cou�iasioned to
do a special study, reported here in Chapter 7. Briefly, he finds that a centralized
book processing center is feasible, and that a book catalog c,nould be desirable. There
are some difficult technical questions involved, and more detailed studies will be needed,
especially in preparing for the uae of a computer, but there are now several dozen such
processing centers in operation around the country with varying degrees of success. The
Anoka County Library is already engaged in this sort of work.
2. Development of a data processing center, including a computer, for various library appli-
cations other than book processing, e.g., an automated circulation control system, prepar-
ation of a union list of serials, etc.
3. The selection, ordering and processing of paperback books, pamphlets, government documents,
local history items, etc.
4. Rapid inter-agency cowaunications, possibly by teletype.
S. Daily truck delivery service to all member library agencies.
6. Provision of a large collection of 16 �. educational motion pictures, poasibly by con-
tract with the Minneapolis Public Library which now has the largest number of films to be
found in any local public library.
7. Selection, ordering, cataloging and processing of phonorecords.
8. Storage of worthwhile books and magazines for which member libraries have no room, and
which could then be made available to any other member library.
9. The central handiing of public relations, e.g., radio and TV programs, news releases,
standard exhibits, etc.
10. Good quality printing for member libraries by modern equipment and skilled operators.
11. Book repair service, with pick-up and delivery and return of books in a week.
12. Repair of motion picture projectors, record players, etc., with extra units available
for i�ediate use.
13. The manufacture and sale (to libraries only) of specialized and experimental furniture
and equipment, e.g., book trucks, exhibit cases, display racks, shelving units,etc.
Reqional and Neighborhood Branches
Equally important as the creation of MELSA is the proposal for the erection of large regional
branch libraries in this seven county area, in order to level up the service which people should be able to
get within (in most cases) no �re than fifteen minutes' driving time. By a regional branch is meant an
agency in a building of about 50,000 square feet, with 100,000 to 200,000 volumes, and a staff of 8 librar-
ians and 16 other employees. Only the Minneapolis and Saint Paul central libraries now meet or exceed these
specifications, and both of them are really area-wide resources. These proposed regional branches would be
built, owned, operated, financed, and controlled by one or another of the six large libraries, but would
serve all the people who live in the tax support area of any member library of MELSA; ten of the 12 new sites
�'�
proposed for regional branches will encompass within three miles more than the one unit of government to
which each belongs.
It is expected that such a regional branch will lend about 500,000 books and answer at least
50,000 reference questions a year. It ahould have a reference collection of about 10,000 volumes, receive
about 500 magazines, and have at least 200 seats for readers. It will cost about two million dollars to build
and equip each such branch, including about $320,000 for four to five acres of ground, a million dollars for
construction plus at least 10% more for equipment, and about $500,000 for the initial stock of books. Oper-
ating costs are estimated at $210,000 a year, mainly for staff salaries and new books.
A large regional branch should ideally be located at a major shopping center or other point with
heavy pedestrian traffic, in an area with about 100,000 persons within three miles and a growth potential
in twenty years to perhaps 200,000 persons, and with access to major highways carrying about 10,000 cars a
day. In more or less general accordance with these criteria, the following sites are suggested (see the map
in Chapter 8):
1. At the intersection of county highway 42 and US interstate highway 35 W, in Burnsville
in Dakota County. This site is reco�ended as a future possibility, and because the new
headquarters of the Dakota-Scott Regional Library will be built here.
2. At US interstate highway 35 W and 98th St., in Bloomington in Hennepin County. This site
too is not yet ready for a regional branch, but the Bloomington Branch of the Hennepin
County Library needs to be larger and might well be located here, with provision for
future expansion.
3. West 69th St. and Valiey View Road, just across France Ave. from the Southdale Shopping
Center, in Edina in Hennepin County. The Dayton Company has given three acres of land
here for a major branch; though even more land and a location closer to the shopping
center would be desirable, this is a good site for a regional branch.
4. US highway 12 and Hennepin County highway 18, in the extreme northwest corner of St. Louis
Park. It is possible that a major new shopping center will be located here, and it is
already the intersection of two main highways. It would be wise to get an option for some
land here for a library agency.
5. Osseo Road (state highway 152) and 56th Ave. North, at Brookdale Shopping Center in
Brooklyn Center in Hennepin County. This is an excellent site for a regional branch,
except that the new Brooklyn Center Branch of the Hennepin County Library is here, with
only 13,000 square feet and not easily enlarged, and about three blocks from the shopping
center. It is suggested that in a few years it will become clear which of the possible
courses of action would be best followed, to resolve this dilemna.
6. The Minneapolis central library, at Hennepin, Nicollet, 3rd and 4th Sts., in downtown
Minneapolis.
7. Chicago and Lake Sts., in Minneapolis. This is in the middle of the second most impor-
tant shopping and co�ercial district of the city; though only two miles from the Minne-
apolis central library, it is well situated with regard to the whole southeast quarter
of the city. A regional branch here (or near here) should be among the first to be built.
8. Ford Parkway and South Cleveland Ave., in Saint Paul. Again (as with Brookdale) there
is a major shopping center and a heavy population concentration here, but also an exist-
ing library agency. The Ford Parkway Branch of the 5aint Paul Public Library has only
5000 square feet and is two blocks away from the ideal site, but is the busiest branch
library in the city.
9. Saint Paul central library, Market and Washington Sts., West 4th St., and Kellogg Blvd.,
in Saint Paul.
10. Thirty-seventh Ave. Northeast and Silver Lake Road, at Apache Plaza Shopping Center in
Saint Anthony Village, in Ramsey County. This is the second largest shopping center in the
seven county area, and within three miles there are agencies of five different library
systems. This is a good example of how MELSA could serve to erase political barriers and
give library service equally to all who live at least in the area of those libraries
which become members of MELSA. This eite is reco�ended for first priority.
11. County Road B and Snelling Ave. North, in Roseville in Ramsey County. This is the loca-
tion of the Har Mar Mall Shopping Center; four blocks away is the new headquarters build-
ing of the Ramsey County Public Library, with 14,000 aquare feet on two acres of ground.
12. Minnesota highway 36 and White Bear Ave., in Maplewood Village, Ramsey County. This
� location is recotmnended for future consideration, if plans materialize for a new shopping
area to be built here.
13. US highway 12 and McKnight Road, at the Sun Ray Shopping Center, in Saint Paul. This area
too will have to develop further to justify a regional branch, but it has good potential-
ities.
14. North Concord St. and Grand Ave., in South Saint Paul, in Dakota County. This is the
largest commercial district of the southeast part of the metropolitan area. Against it
is the fact that South Saint Paul is not a part of the Dakota-Scott Regional Library,
and that the South Saint Paul Public Library building is three blocks away and up a steep
hill.
Nothing said so far should be taken to mean that the usual neighborhood or community branches
should not be continued and improved. They have an important role to play, particularly in rural co�unities
and in neighborhoods more than two miles from a regional branch. These smaller branches are of particular
importance in serving children, the general reading needs of adults, and the reference and book needs of
students. To fill such varied roles, the specifications for such branches must also be on a sliding scale,
- 5 -
from a population of no less than 4000 in three equare miles to about 25,000 in seven square miles.
A neighborhood branch should be located at the coumunity center of activity, possibly in rented
quarters, with at least 2000 aquare feet and up to about 10,000 equare feet, and with approximately 8000
to 40,000 volumea. To build and equip such a library will cost from $40,000 to $240,000, and there ahould
be no less than two full-time non-professional employees to at leset 8.5 staff inembere including two librar-
ians. Such a branch ahould loan five volumes per pereon aerved, or from 20,000 to 125,000 books a year.
Special Considerations
Several special problems needed to be covered. One concerns the future of the 13 small public
libraries now functioning in the metropolitan area. Three of these are in Carver County and four are in
Washington County, and their best course of action is to help start a county library which could then become
a member library of MELSA directly or by contract with one of the four existing county libraries. White
Bear Lake is in process of joining the Ramaey County Public Library, and the other five (Anoka City, Columbia
Heights, Hopkins, North Saint Paul, and South Saint Paul) should also seriously consider joining their re-
spective county libraries. Small independent librariea such as theae are more expenaive to maintain and less
able to perform the range of aervices which should be available to the citizens of any modern coamtunity,
than when they function together with neighboring co�unities.
But if they choose to remain independent, they should be able to secure the benefits of MELSA,
if their county library becomes a member library, simply by an exchange of letters by which they agree to
serve all other member librariea' patrons, to lend other member libraries whatever they lend their own
readers, and to consult the MEI,SA Board on any proposed new library buildings. They would not have repre-
sentation on the MELSA Board, and they would have to pay whatever fees or charges all member libraries pay.
Another problem concerns what should be the proper relationship between the Hennepin County Library
and the Minneapolis Public Library. The two function separately but share some co�n facilities, with an
annual contract involving a money payment by the County Library ( of $260,000 in 1965) for access to all
city library services for county residents (other than those in Hopkins). It is a tangled and difficult
question, but the present consultant (like most others who have studied the matter in recent years) favors
merger or consolidation of the two libraries, and suggests that the city library become a part of the countp
library. It is felt that this will be best for the future financial support of the city-county library,
among other reasons.
A somewhat parallel situation exists in regard to the Saint Paul Public Library and the Ramsey
County Public Library. Population and asaessed valuation are increasing much more rapidly in the county
than in the city; the two libraries need to work together ever more closely, and should desirably consoli-
date under the county.
The Library Division of the State Department of Education is inevitably involved in public library
developments in the area. The Division has in recent years wiaely divested itself of such operations as
the loan of small collections of books to local public libraries and the servicing of the Minnesota Library
Film Circuit. It is reco�ended that the Division in addition proceed to contract with one or another of
the two big city public libraries to provide inter-library loan service for pubiic libraries all over the
state. In place of these functiona, the Library Division should take on itself the responsibility for pro-
viding leadership in library development, through state-wide planning, specialized consultants, wise admin-
istration of state and federal aid funds, and the encouragement of cooperation and coordination between
libraries of the same type and of different types - functions which no other existing agency can now perform.
Finally, conaideration was given briefly to the other types of libraries in the metroplitan area.
It is estimated that there were about 10,000,000 books in over 700 libraries of all kinds in this area,
making it one of the great library centers of the country. The University of Minnesota Library by itself
has almost a fourth of all theae booka, but there are 16 other college and university libraries and at least
50 special libraries, and these all tend to have subject literature in depth. There are over 500 school
libraries can supplement each other, but only if they work together'. No clear pattern of cooperation between
these two types of librariea has yet evolved in this country, but there are some promising avenues of en-
these two types of libraries have yet evolved in this country, but there are some promising avenues of en-
deavor. MELSA should plan to explore them, and in time to aerve directly the needs of all libraries in the
metropolitan area. Increasingly there is a seamlesa web of library service in any given comnunity.
National, state, and local developments all point clearly to an ever more important place, in the
social fabric, of libraries in general and of public libraries in particular. To cope with present problems
and to prepare for future possibilitiea of service, libraries need to find a new pattern of organization
which is both effective in the light of present circumstances and flexible enough to cope with the inevit-
able changes in the years ahead.
- 6 -
ORGANIZATION
To obtain the advantages both of size and
flexibility, public libraries should be related
to city and county government, be financed
in part by the state government, and also
be a concern of Federal government.
Their administration should be such as
to secure the benefits of large size in book
collections, purchasing, specialized staff,
etc., yet retain the flexibility and other ad-
vantages of smaller community units.
�\//
�IATERIALS POLICIES
Public library service should provide immediate There should be liberal and reasonably uniform
access for all the people in a given area, so far regulations over the whole area for the use of
as possible, to most of the currently useful libraries and the loan of books, recordings, peri-
books, obtainable at any library agency. odicals, films, pamphlets, prints, or other library
materials.
r
i
BUILDINGS � �ERSONNEI
There should be a sufficient number of reason-
ably located, public library outlets of different The public library staff should be adequate in
sizes and functions — attractive, and well- numbers and preparation to meet the high level
equipped. modern library service demands.
"A final factor in the present situation which is conducive to planning for the future is the current
climate of feeling. The Twin Cities Metropolitan Planning Commission has helped accustom people
to think in terms of the whole area."
,
TO JOIN MELSA a library
... would have to agree (a) to give the same
service to the patrons of other member libraries
which it gives to its own borrowers, (b) to lend
� to any other member library whatever materials
� ,,,� 0�����' it lends to its own patrons, and (c) to submit all
proposals for construction of new or enlarged
buildings to the Board of Trustees of MELSA
for a judgment as to how they fit into the over-
_-.= ' all plan of library development.
MELSA would be governed by a board of citi- ... possibly a printed catalog in multiple copies
zens, appointed by county boards of commis- listing all books added by member libraries ...
sioners and city councils with an advisory com- development of a data processing center ...
mittee of librarians. REVENUE would come daily truck delivery to all member agencies ...
from three main sources: member library dues, provision of a large collection of 16 mm. educa-
fees for certain services, and grants of state tional motion pictures, phono-records, and non-
and federal funds through the Library Division book materials of all kinds.
of the State Department of Education. gRANCHES ... as important as the creation
AMONG SERVICES OF MELSA could be ... of MELSA, is planning toward regional branch
a prompt and effective system of inter-library libraries in the seven-county area, to be located
lo�n ... a central reference service among li- at strategic points of population and mobility,
braries ... uniform borrower registration and and inter-library cooperation among all TYPES
circulation procedures ... central ordering, and of libraries — public, college and university,
processing of new books for member libraries school, and special — in the area.
"This study was made in response to the request of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Library Study
Committee. Its purpose was to draft a plan for the optimal organization of public library service
in the seven counties around Minneapolis and Saint Paul, so as to provide quality library service
for all the people in the years ahead. The resulting report seeks to be economically and politically
realistic, and at the same time to provide an effective and yet flexible mechanism for change and
IflljJrOV@r71@flt." — DR. HERBERT GOLDHOR
,.�
.. ��,�� �..
��. , w, xi�� - „�av�-�.,�x.� -
-�" '"t.6� � � � l �.� � �l \
u ��
`
. �- ^ � ;
.
r � (
� � � r � �� � � ��t � :�
metropolitan library service agency
- -_ �