Loading...
PL 05/18/1977 - 6610CITY OF FRIDLEY - AGENDA � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 18, 1977 NOTE: THIS MEETIN across the CALL TO ORDER: RCLL CALL: BE HELD IN THE COMMUNITY ROOM APPROVE PLANNING CO�dMISSION MINUTES: MAY 4, 1977 1. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST ZOA #77-02, BY ROBERT FLATEN: Rezone Lot 41, B ock 12, Spring Brook Park Addition, from M-1 (light industrial areas) to R-1 (single family dwelling areas), so it can be combined with Lot 42, Block 12, Spring Brook Park Addition,(already zoned R-1), to make a residential building site, the same being 176 Ely Street N.E. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #77-03 �. u. �nHNU�tK: rcezone �ot i, tiloCK "L, �onnson's River Lane Addition, from R-1 (single family dwelling areas) to R-3 (multiple family dwelling areas), and, rezone Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Johnson's River •:_i Lane Addition, from C-1S (local shopping areas) to R-3 (multiple family dwelling areas) so these three lots can be used for the construction of a 7 unit row house development and/or townhouses, generally located between 64 1/2 Way and Mississippi P7ace on the West side of East River Road N.E. 3. VACATION REQUEST, SAV �77-04, FRIDLEY UNITED METHODIST CNURCH: Vacate the utility easement over the South 5 feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3, and the North 5 feet of Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25, all in Block 2, Christie Addition, ta allow an addition to an existing church, the same being 666 Mississippi Street N.E. � 5. CONTINUED: PROPOSED MAINTENANCE CO�E & RECREATIDP 7:30 P.M. PAGES 1 - 34 3�5-40 L1Qi:? 49 - 57 Separate : .. 6. RECEIVE APPEALS COh1MISSION MINUTES: MAY 10, 1977 6� '$$ 7. RECEIVE HUMA COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 5: 1977 89 - 96 �a. Recommendation for T,000 for Senior Citizen Well Clinic (CAP) � b. Recommendation for $2Q0 for Teen Center �, ADJOURNMENT: � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIN6 4, 1977 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harris called the meeting to order at 7:40 P•M• ROLL CALL� Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Shea, Bergman, Harris, Peterson, Schnabel, Langenfeld � Jerrold Boardman, City Planner APPROVE PLAIJNING COM�ISSION MIN�TES= April 20, 1977 Mrs• Shea requested that the flotion on page 32 be corrected• She stated that the �otion was not complete and should read ^�o.o=that a memo be sent to all Commissions before their next meetings stating that elections are to be held and stating the duties and obligations of inembers of those commissions and officers of those commissions. � Mr. Langenfeld indicated that Page 1 ROLL CALL, the last �ame listed as Members Present is spelled wrong• Lagenfeld should be Langenfeld• Mr• Langenfeld indicated that on Page Z4, first paragraph, the sentence reading ^He indicated that many people think that this project will be subsidized, therefore, that it would be sub- standard^, should read ^Ne indicated that since this project would be subsidized, that some people felt it would be sub- standard•^ Mr. Langenfeld felt that the word "think^ gives the impression that people are thinking of something that does not exist when, in fact, it is a subsidized project• Mr• Langenfeld corrected tfie seventh paragraph from the top of Page 31• It should have read ^Mr• Langenfeld asked the Commission not to call a Special Interest Group^ and not =•••�--a Special Interest meeting• MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr- Bergman� that the Planning Commissio� minutes of April 20, 1977, be approved as amended- Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• � Planninq Commissian Meeting — May 4, Z477 Page 2 1• CQNTINUED: PUBLIC HEARING� REZONING REQUEST, ZOA �77-01 BY GARY PETERSON= Rezone from C-1 {local business areas} to R-2 {two family dwelling areas}, Lots 3, 4, 22 and 23, Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, to allow the construction of double bungalows/duplexes, the same being 1326-28 Osborne Road N.E•, 1344-46 Osborne Road N.E•, 1345-47 Meadowmoor Drive N•E•� and 1331-33 Meadowmoor Drive N�E. MOTION by Mrs• Shea, seconded by Mr. Bergman, Hearing rezoning req�est, ZOA �77-01� by Gary voice vote, all voting aye, C�airperson Harris Public Hearing open at 7:45 P.M. Mr• Gary Peterson was present- to open the Public Peterson• Upon a declared the MOTION by Mrso Shea, seconded by Mr. Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission receives the thr2e letters from Mr- Peterson, Mr• Richard S� Carlson {Briar Homes, Inc•}, and Mr• Edward Chies= Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the letters were received• Chairperson Harris indicated that the letters were part of the file and would go to City Council= Chairperson Harris asked if Mr• Boardman had any additional comments on this item. Mr. Boardman answered that he did not• Chairperson Harris asked Mr= Peterson if he wished to address this subject• Mr. Peterson commented �hat he didn't have anything to say other than that he had put in for a rezoning and wanted to know if it was going to be allowed or not. Chairperson Harris asked if there was anyone in the audience wfio wished to speak for or against the request• Mrs. Richard Morin of 7635 Meadowmoor Drive wanted to know what the three letters received by the Planning Commission concerned• Chairperson Harris informed her who the letters were from and proceeded to read the letters to the audience- Mr. Richard Morin of 7635 Meadowmoor Drive indicated that he had no objection to duplexes/double bungalows going in on Osborne Road- He said that his objection was building duplaxes/double bungalows on Meadowmoor Drive� He indicated that they {Mr. Morin and the people accompanying him} had been to a previous meeting and had, at that time, voiced their objections• He also said that at the previous meeting they had been under the assumption that all tfiese lots were zoned R-1� not C-1- Mr= Morin indicated that the neighbors would like to see the lots on Meadowmoor Drive zoned as R-Z and anything that Mr• Peterson wanted on Osborne Road � � iJ �� 1 ssi � Mr• Morin continued by children on one block to eight more families family moving into the — flav 4, stating that presently area on Meadowmc.ow Drive with the average of 2•5 area� Paqe they have 70 He objected •children per Mrs• Richard Morin said that another objection she had to double bungalows was the upkeep• She indicated that even though it had been stated that these double bungalows would be owner occupied, the owners could move out in a couple of days and the property would be total re��tal• She felt that too many times the rente+^s don't care how the property is kept up and the double bungalows begin to look shabby, therefore� making the whole neighborhood look sharbY� Mrs• Douglas Pavlik of 7h51 fleadowmoor Drive wanted to know if anyone checked into the fact that the neighborhood didn't know�that the lots were zoned C-1• She indicated that there was concern among the neighbors that they had been told that all these lots were R-1 lots• Chairperson Harris commented that he suspected that whoever caZled City Hall did not specify the particular lots when they asked what the zoning was• Mrsa hlorin said that she told City Hall what lots she wanted � to know about. She said she indicated the two vacant loLs on Meadowmoor {one fronted on Old Central and P1eadowrrioor} and two other vacant lots that were just on Cleadowmooro She said that she was told that all the lo'ts were zoned for single family houses• � Chairperson Harris said informed this; however, C-1 since about 1959- that it was possible she had been he said that the lots had been zoned f1r. Langenfeld indicated that the problems brought up at this meeting and at previous meetings had been brought before Council by one of the Council members and these problems were in the minutes as items to be looked into• Mr. 6oardman indicated that in regards to upkeep� the City covers every street once a year- Mr• Richard Morin indicated to the Planning Commission that the neighborhood turnout was not as good as the last time because some people were intimidated by what had been said at the last meeting• At the previous meeting, the neiqhborhood presented a petition to the Planning Commission indicating their wishes to keep the lots zoned C-1• They were informed at that time what could go on the lots as a C-1 zoning• Mr• Mori� felt that the Commission fiad painted a bleak picture for the neighbors• He also felt that many people didn't show up because they felt there wasn`t any use to• Mr• Morin again indicated that, for the records, he would still rather see these lots remain C-1 than to see double bungalows/duplexes built on the lots• He said that he had taken his name off the petition because of what the Commission had said; however, Planninq Commission Meetina — Mav 4, 1977 Page 4 he indicated he wanted his name put back on the petition. His reasoning was that if the lots were zoned R-2 then it would be over with and they would have to live with the double dwellings for a long time• However, he said that if Ieft as C-1 perhaps � they wouZd have a chance for a compromise with Mr• Peterson• Chairperson Harris defended the Commission and City Staff saying that it had not been their intent to intimidate the people. He continued by saying that their intent had been to inform the neighbors. Mr. Morin said that the effect was intimidation even if it wasn't tfie intent Mr. Chuck Lindman o� 1378 Meadowmoor Drive pointed out that there were still many names on the petition and the people would still like the lots to remain C-1 rather than R-2. Mr. Lindman also indicated that since Meadowmoor Drive was not a through-traffic street, he didn't think anyone would want to build any business on those lots. He continued to say that �r• Peterson would probably have to take a loss if he did put sorne type of busi�ess on these lots• Mr. Lindman said that he felt Mr• Peterson wanted R-2 because of more profit. Mrs. Morin indicated to the Planning Commission that she and her husband wanted to put their names back on the petition• Chairperson Harris said that that would be possible if the � petition had not gone to City Council. Mrs• Morin indicated that she had heard rumors that nobody would buy lots for private homes on Meadowmoor. She said that they had talked to the Realtor and he had indicated that he already had people who wented to build on Meadowmoor• Mrs. Morin said that she made the statement for Mra Peterson's benefit, so he would know that the Realtor had indicated that there were people interested in buying single family dwellings on tfiose Iots• Mr• Bergman asked for someone to refresh his memory regarding Lots 5 and 21 on the East and Lots 2 and 25 on the West. He wanted to know if these lots were developed and what they were zoned as. Mrs. Morin indicated that all the other houses in the area were single family• � .��. Planninq Commi�sion Meeting — Mav 4, 1977 Pa e 5 � Mr. Boardman indicated that the lots East were single family dwellings and the lots West were commercial. Mrs. Morin said that she only meant that there were no other multi-family homes in the area. Mr. Morin indicated that the commercial buiidings a11 face on Central Avenue. He said that two of the duplexes would face Osborne Road• He continued to say that they were only concerned with the building of duplexes on Meadowmoor Drive Mrs. Schnabel wanted to know if the concensus of opinion of the neighbors tliat were present was that they did not want any or the property rezoned or specifically they didn't want the two lots on Meadowmoor Drive rezoned• Mr� Morin indicated that they either wanted the lots to remain C-1 or R-1, but they did not want the lots rezoned to R-2 on Meadowmoor Drive� He said they weren't concerned about the lots on Osborne Road Chairperson Harris asked Mrs- Schnabel if she had handled this particular item in the Appeals Commission Meeting of ppril 26, 197?. He also wanted to knnw the recommendation made- � Mrs. Schnabel indicated that that the Appeals Commission did not handle this item because the petitioner was not present at the meeting• She also said that there �oas no person from the neighborhood present at the meeting. She said that the Commission felt they wouldn't act upon it until such time as either the petitioner requested to come before the Appeals Commission or some person from the neighborhood made a request- The Commission felt that there wasn't enough information to go on so the item was tabled• Mr. Bergman wanted to know what the item was that had gone before the Appeals Commission• Mrs. Schnabel indicated that it was a request for a reduction in lot size for R-2. Mrs• Morin indicated that she had called City Hall to talk to someone regarding the meeting for that night. The person she talked to told her that it wasn't necessary for the neighbors to appear because no matter what decision was reached, it would be based upon the contingency that the lots were rezoned� � Planning Commission Meetin — May 4, 1977 Pa4e 6 Chairperson Harris said that he objected to what Mrs. Morin had bean told• He indicated that if Staff was passing out that type of information, he objected. �rs� Schnabe2 indicated that she was really sorry to hear what Mrs= Morin had said� 3he told Mrs• Morin that they rely on the opinions of the adjacent neighbors to the property that is before the Appeals Commission. She indicated that the comments are used by the Appeals Commission so that they can make a decision at the Appeals Commission ievel. She continued to say that if the Commission doesn`t hear from anyone, they can only assume that everyone is in agreement with whatever appeal is coming througho Mrs• Schnabel did indicate that what �rs. Morin was told was true, that whatever decision was reached, it would be based on the contingency that the lots were rezoned• Nevertheless, Mrs• Schnabel felt that Mrs. Morin should have been told to attend the Appeals Commission meeting- Mr. Boardman asked been told that she Commission meeting• for a verification that Mrs• Morin had did not have to come to the Appeals Mrs. Morin indicated that she had been told that it was completely unnecessary. Mr. Langenfeld indicated that on this particular ^subject^ he felt the people had been terribiy misinformed in more ways than one• Chairperson Harris suggested that this item be added to the agenda for the evening to be discussed later, after the Public Hearings• Mr. Bergman also felt that there was a lot of confusion on this subject• He indicated that the petition seemed to be the last thing completely firm as to who was for and who was against the request• Mr. Bergman wanted confirmation that this petition was placed into record as it stood as of the last meeting that was he].d on this subject. Chairperson Harris acknowledged that this had been done- Mro Lindman indicated that any names that were Ieft on the petition sti21 preferred to see C-1 than R-2 zoning on the lots. He also said that if there was any problem, he would be able to get the entire block of Meadowmoor Drive to sign the petition• � r � � Planninq Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 7_ � Mr. Bergman asked Mr. Peterson if he was aware that there was a fair arnount of neighborhoo� opposition and confusion as to the neighbors understanding his rights as well as their own options� He continued to ask Mr. Peterson if he had any contingency plans to develop the property as C-1� if the rezoning request was not approved- Mre Peterson responded that he would probably build a warehouse and office space� Chairperson Harris responded that warehouses are not allowed in C-1 zones. Mr= Peterson clarified his statement as saying office and warehouse� not just a warehouse- Mr• Berqman asked Mr. Peterson if there was some hardship in • his ability to develop the lots as C-1 or leave the lots for future development as C-1= Ne wanted to know if this was part of Mr� Peterson's request for the change� �r• Peterson indicated that there was no identifiable hardship• Mr• Peterson felt that R-2 would be better as a buffer zone• Mr. Bergman asked Mr. Peterson that if after listening to the � Reighbors objections, if he would reconsider zoning the lots fronting on Meadowmoor to R-1• Mr= Peterson indicated that he would have to give the matter some thought• He said that there was definitely a financial difference in selling R-1 compared with selling R-2 and that the difference would have to come out of his pocket� Chairperson Harris asked Mr• Boardman about the lot sizes• Mr= Boardman responded that one 1ot on Meadowmoor mas 120 feet deep with 75 foot frontage and the other lot on Meadowmoor was 120 feet deep with 65 foot frontage and 90 foot rear. Chairperson Harris asked Mr- Boardman if the normal R-1 lot was 75 feet- Mr• Boardman said yes. Chairperson Harris continued by saying that 9,000 square feet was the minimum R-1 lot size; therefore, it appeared that the lots on Meadowmoor would be considered as minimum R-1 lots• i Planning Commission Meetinq — Ma 4, 1977 Paqe 8 Mrs• Schnabel indicated to Mr. Boardman that the Code Book stated that the lot width at the set 6ack on a C-1 lot should be not less than 160 feeto Mr. Boardman said that the lot width of not less than 160 feet or 20,Oa� square feet. Chairperson Harris told Mrs• Schnabel that by putting all four iots together, a person would have a buildable C-1 lot. Mrs� Schnabel indicated that if the two lots on Osborne Road were rezoned, and the lots on Meadowmoor were kept as C-1, then the result would be an unbuildable C-1 Iot. Mrs. Pavlik wanted to know if the lots on Meadowmoor were the normal R-1 lot size, would the lot be big enougfi to build R-2`s. Chairperson Harris indicated that he would need a variance• He then asked Mr. Boardman what the minimum lot size was for an R-2. Mr. Boardman said that the minimum lot size was 10,000 square feet• Chairperson Narris said that minimum square footaga• He presently 9,000 square feet• at present these Iots did not make indicated that the lots were Mrs• Schnabel indicatad that the variance requests were the reasons the subject had been brought before the Appeals Commission. She said that the four lots individually did not meet the minimum square footage of 10,QQQ square feet. Mrs. Morin wanted to know if the variance requests would be before the Appeals Commission again= Mrs= Schnabel said that the items were tabled until the petitioner requested to again appear before the Appeals Commission. Mr. Morin indicated that they had been led to believe that the Appea2s Commission meeting was inconsequ2ntial• He said that actually the Appeals meeting was the key meeting because if they had won their appeal at the Appeals Commission meeting, Mr. Peterson wouldn't be able to build ft-2's on those lots• Chairperson Harris indicated that because of the misunderstanding reqarding the neighbors attendance at the Appeals Commission meeting was the reason the Planning Commission was going to have a discussion later in the evening, � m � � Planning Commission Meetin — Mav 4, 1977 Pa e 9 Mrso Morin wanted to know Mr• Peterson's reasons for not iwanting to buiid R-1's on the lots• Mr. Peterson indicated that he would have to give the idea some thouqht. Mr. Walter Lizakowski of 1402 Meadowmoor Drive indicated that he felt the main objection to the R-2`s was the amount of children that couid possibly be added to the already over- whelming amount presently on Meadowmoor Drivea �r. Morin said that they presently had a high instance of vandalism mostly caused by children and he didn't feel that more children should be added- Chairperson Harris asked Mr� Peterson if he wanted his request to stand as stated or if he wished to change it in any way. s Mro peterson wantec? to know how he was to go about changing the request, if his decision was to change it. Chairperson Harris said that since they were down-zoning, he would be able to just state to the Planning Commission whatever change he wouid want• Mr. Peterson wanted to give the subject some thought. He said She would let the Planning Commission know either by telephone or letter• Chairperson Harris indicated that the Planning Commission could continUe by making their recommendation to Council and then Council would set up a public hearing to hear the matter and then make a decision. He said that the Counc.il's decision would be final• He told Mr= Peterson that the Planning Commission oniy makes recommendations to the City Council� Mr= Peterson wanted to know if it would be permissable to let City Council know at the time they set the Public Hearing if he wanted to change his request� Chairperson Harris said it would be okay as long as it was before City Council made publication of the Public Nearing Mr. Peterson wanted to know when exactly he would have to notify someone as to changing his request• Chairperson Harris indicated that the Planning Commission Meeting minutes would go to City Council on May 16, 1977, at which time Councii would set a Public Hearing. r i 1J Planning Commission Meeting — Mav 4, 1977 page 10 Mra Langenfeld wanted to be sure that the neighbors were aware � of what could be established in a C-1 designation= The neighbors in.the audience said that they were aware of the possibilities• Mr• Langenfeld indicated to the neighbors in the audience that if he had in any way imposed �pon them or put them ^on the spot^ it had not been his intention. MQTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mrs• Shea, to close the Public Hearing on the Rezoning Request, ZOA #77-01, by Gary Peterson- Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing closed at 8:23 P.M. MOTION by Langenfeld to deny the rezoning request, ZOA �77-01, by Gary Peterson: Rezone from C-1 {local business areas} to R-2 {two family dwelling areast, Lots 3, 4, 22, and 23, BZock 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, to allow the construction of double bungalows/duplexes, the same being 1326-28 Osborne Road N=E=, 1344-46 Osborne Road N•Eo, 1345-47 Meadowmoor Drive N=E., and 1331-33 Meadowmoor Drive N=E. due to the objections from the neighbarhood� MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF SECOND- MOTION by Mrs. Schnabel, seconded by Mrs. Shea, that the � Planning Commission recommends to City Council the approval of the rezoning request, Z0A �77-Q1, by Gary Peterson: Rezone from C-1 {local business areas} to R-2 {two family dwelling areas}, Lots 3 and 4, Block Z, Meadowmoor Terrace, to allow the construction of double bungalows/duplexes, the same being 3326-28 Osborne Road N�Eo and 1344-46 Osborne Road N.E-; AND recommend to City Council the denial of the rezoning request, ZOA #77-01, by Gary Peterson: Rezone from C-1 {local business areas} to R-2 {two family dwelling areas} Lots 22 and 23, Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, to allow the construction of double bungalows/duplexes, the same being 1345-47 Meadowmoor Drive N.Ee and 1331-33 Meadowmoor Drive N-E• fhairperson Harris did not Iike the Motion by Mrs� Schnabel because that proposal would create an unbuildable C-1 lot. He said he would rather have someone recommend the rezoning of the lots on Osborne Road to R-2 and rezoning the lots on Meadowmoor Drive to R-1= Mrs. Schnabel indicated that the petitioner had not requested for a rezoning as such� Chairperson Harris said that the Planning Commission could recommend such a rezoning= � � . i Planning Commission Meetin4 — May 4, 1977 Pa e 11 Mr. Boardman said it would be best to deny the rezoning and leave all the lots as C-1- Mr. Langenfeld said that that was why he had made his particular motion as such= He recommended that the request that was before the Planninq Commission be denied� Mr. Bergman stated that to recommend that the request be denied would penalize the requester as to time to change his mind= Mr. Boardman pointed out that the Planning Commission could only make the recommendation to City Council to deny the request a�d that the decision would be made at the Council level and any arrangements could be made at that time. Mrsa Schnabel indicated that her intent in making the motion was to grant the petitioner the ability to put R-2 dwellings on the two lots on Osborne Road. She said that she understood that an unbuildable C-1 lot would result, however, her intent was to hope that the action would, in a sense, force Mr. Peterson to rezone the lots on Meaaowmoor Drive to R-1• Mr. Bergman hoped the Planning Commission would take a positive position, including possibly their thoughts as to how the Commission hoped th� petitioner would ch�nge his request-, and pass on to the City Council those thoughts assuming that his request would be cons=.stent with the Planning Commission- Therefore, Mr• Bergman voted against Mrs. Schnabel`s motion• Mr. Peterson didn't think the motion by Mrs• Schnabel was in line with what the petitioner had requested• Mrs. Schnabel indicated that the petitioner wes requesting rezoning on two parcels of land and she recommended approving one and denyin9 the other� At this point there was discussion among the Commission as to whether the land was one or two parcels• Chairperson Harris said that the Public Hearing notice indicated the lots as two parcels of land; one located at 1326 and 1344 Qsborne Road N.E. and one located at 1331 and 1345 Meadowmoor Drive N•E. Mr• Langenfeld felt the commission should stick to the petition itself. He said that the Commission couldn't split something that a�asn't in the form of the petition- Mr• Langenfeld again indicated that his motion had been to deny the stated request by Mr= Gary Peterson• � Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Pa e 12 Chairperson Harris indicated that it was in the Ordinance that � the Planning Commission was allowed to recommend a lesser zone without re-publication• Mr. Boardman said that the policy stated that thzs tould be done at the petitioner's request, but that the petitioner had not made a request. He continued to say that the Planning Commission did have the authority to recommend any rezoning on a lesser basis without re-publication• Mrs. Schnabel said that the Planning Commission's motions are only recommendations to the City Council and not final approval• She said that the petitioner had the option to change his request at the City CounciZ level• UPON A VOICE UOTE, 2 voting aye and 4 voting nay, the motio� failed : Mr. Bergman indicated that the Planning Commission was opposed to the total and specific request of rezoning four lots to R-2a He also indicated the the Commission would be unfavorable towards a C-1 development of the four lots. Therefore, he said that a compromise would be in the best interest of the qeneral neighborhood� He continued by seying that a valid land use of the four lots would seem to be for lots 22 and 23 to be � rezoned for single family development and that lots 3 and 4 be rezoned for buffer zoning for duplexes• MOTION by f1r. Bergman that since the petitioner had indicated some interest in the above modification and with the anticipation that Mr� Peterson may choose to change his request, Mr= Bergman suggested that the request be passed on to CounciZ with �he Planning Commission's thoughts. MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND� MOTIflN by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission recommends to City Council the denial of the rezoning request, Z0A �77-01, by Gary Peterson� Rezone from C-1 {local business areas} to R-2 {two family dwelling areas}, Lots 3, 4, 22, and 23, Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace, to allow the construction of double bungalows/duplexes, the same being 1326-28 Osborne Road N.E=, Z344-46 Osborne Road N.E.., Z345-47 Meadowmoor Drive N.E., and 1331-33 Meadowmoor Drive N•E� with the understanding that the City Council would read all of the minutes of the Planning Commission to find out the intent of the neighbors as well as the intent of the Planning Commission UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairperson Harris indicated that the rezoning request ZOA �77-D1 � by Gary Peterson had been recommended for denial and that the request would go to City Counci� on May 16, 1977, and that a date for a Public Nearing would be set at that time• He also said that the audience would be notified by mail of the date for that Public Hearing• Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 13 � Mrs• Pavlik wanted to know was going to be done regarding the rezoning and the size of the lots• Chairperson Harris indicated that the subject would have to be appear before the Appeals Commission- However, he stated that if the petitioner decided to go along with the previous discussions regarding the Meadowmoor Drive lots, he would not have to go before the Appeals Commission• Chairperson Harris indicated that Mr• Peterson might have to go before the Appeals Commission regarding the lots cn Osborne Road. Mra Morin requested to be notified if the subject went before the Appeals Commission again• Mr� Boardman indicated that usually people aren`t notified on an item that had been previously tabled• � Chairperson Harris indicated that it would be best, in this particular case, to notify the people that would be concerned. Mr• �9orin assured the Planning �ommissicn that if they would be notified, that there would be a good turn-out. Mr• Baardman said that the people would be notified by mail- � 2� PUBLIC HEARING- COh1SI�ERATION GF A FRELIMINARY PLAT, P.S� �77-�3, IWEN TEPRACE, BY Ao T. GEARMAN: Replat o Part of Lots 3, 4, end 5, Auditor's Subdivisicn No. 25, generally located immediateiy South of the 100� Block of Lynde Drive N.E�, East of Polk Street N-E= and West of Fillmore Street N=E. MQTION by Mr. Bergman, seconded by Mr. Peterson, to open the Public Hearing on the Consideration of a preliminary plat, P.So �77-03, Iwen Terrace, by A• T- Gearman• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 8:40 P.M. MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mr• Peterson, that the Planning tommission receive the memorandum to Jerry Boardman from Thomas A Colbert, Assistant City Engineer, dated May 4, 19?� regarding the Iwen Terrace Plat• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the memorandum was received• � planning Commission Meetinq — May 4, 1977 Paqe 14 Chairperson Harris asked Mr. Boardman to give the backgrou�d on this item. Mr= Boardman indicated that the proposal was to plat some open � property betwaen Polk and Fillmore Streets N.E=, just south of LYnde Drive• He said that presently there was a large ponding area on this property= He continued to say that there was a proposed plat on this area at one time to make buildable sites out of the area, however, that plan fell through and this proposal e>as what came out o� it• He indicated that the proposal was for six lots� Mr• Boardman showed the Planning Commission a copy of the proposed plato He indicated that the lots are lar,e having between 87 8 89 feet in width and about 304 feet deep� He said that it was the intent of the city to retain a drainage pond on the back portion of the property with drainage easement picked up on lots 4& 5o He said that the ponding area would drain off drainage into the sewer system on Polk Street= Mrso Shea wanted to know about the easements• Mr. Boardman indicated on the drawing the easements that the City wanted. Chairperson Harris wanted to know if Lot 4 would be buildable• Mr= Boardman indicated on the drawing an araa that would be � regraded and he said that there would be a sizable area to build on this lot. He indicated, further, that at the time they were not sure of the exact angle of the lot but said that before the final plat went to City Council the angle of Lot 4 could be changed� He said that the drawing would be reworked and proceeded to show the Commission different areas that wouid be reconsidered• Mro Bergman asked Mr= Boardman what the depth of lots would bea Mr. Boardman indicated that the lots would be 3�4 feet, of which the City would take 75 feet to allow for ponding area= Mrs• Schnabel asked why tha City wanted a curved easement on Lot 4 rather than makea right-angle turn onto tfie connecting street. Mr. Boardman indicated that it was mainly because of the slopes of the hillsides• He said that the angle of the curve had not been decided yeto He indicated that before the final plat went before the City Council he would be �eeting With the Engineering Department to determine actually how much easement would be needed- � Planning Commission Meetin — Ma 4, 1977 Paqe 15 � Mrs• Schna6el showed concern about the ponding area in terms of high water levels. She wanted to know if the drawing was showing the pond at its highest level or at its present level• � � Mr. Boardman indicated that it was shown at its current water level• Mrs• Schnabel said that at times the pond had been known to become quite large• Mr. Boardman said that the proposed plat had been to the Engineering Department and they felt that the ?5 foot easement on each side, with a modification of the drainage area, wouid handle the higher water levels• Chairperson Harris asked if the City was presently dumping water into the pond. Mr. Boardman indicated on the drawing the present areas that are draining into the pond which in turn went to �oore Lake• Mr� Boardman also indicated that the po^ding area was a temporary solution to the present plat. He said that if the petitioner, at a later date, decided to split the lots; then drainage would have to go onto Po1k Street and woul.d be taken care of by a new storm sewer system. However, he said that the pond was a solution to the drainage that e�as presently there. Mr• Langenfeld wanted to know if the Rice Creek Water Shed District had any authority in the praposed plat• Mr• Boardman indicated that any proposals for drainage into Moore Lake are sent to the ftice Creek Water Shed District. Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if the intent was to drain the pond entirely in the future- Mr• Boardman indicated that the intent presently was to try to limit the drainage going into Moore Lake� Mr. Iwen {works for Mr• Gearman} indicated that presently this pond drained into Moore Lake• He said that the water level of the pond had to be kept d�wn, otherwise the people in the area would have water in their basements. Mrs. H• C• McKinley of 101❑ Lynde Drive said that they never had water in their basements until someone started draining the pond the last time {the year of the big tor�ado}= She continued to say that the basements had always been dry because Lynde Drive was high and on solid ground• e PZanninq Commission Meetinq — May 4, Z477 PaQe 16 Chairperson Harris wanted to know if it was Mr� Iwen's intent � to make the pond into a drainage retention pond• Mr. Iwen said that it was his in�ent to make it into a drainage retention pond� Chairperson Harris asked what he planned to do with the pond� He wanted to know if Mra Iwen planned �o dig it or dredge it or put in control structures, or basically what did he plan to doo Mr= Iwen indicated he wanted to leave the pond as it presently was. Mr. Boardman indicated that the Engineerinq Department recommended six stipulations be placed on the Plat• Mrs= McKinley wanted to know what the zoning was on the six lots� Mr. Boardman indicated that the Iots were zoned R-1• Mr= Boardman wanted the following six stipulations read into the record• 1• Comments and any pertinent requirements if any, must be obtained from the Department of Natural Resources regarding allowable alterations to the existing wet � land within this plat prior to approval. 2= A 75 foot drainage and uti2ity easement along the east lot line of lots 4, 5 and 6 and along the west lot line of lots 1, 2 and 3- 3• Q 24 foot drainage and utility easement centered over the common lot line of lots 4 and 5. 4• A 5 foot drainage and utility easement along all property lines not previously mentioned• 5. Unless expressly prohibited by the Department of Natural Resources, the owner should relocate the existing drainage ditch presently centered on lot 4 to the common property line of lots 4 and 5, and an appropriate inlet structure to be constructed as a connection to the existing storm sewer line on Polk Street- A timetable of one year would be appropriate with an acceptable performance bond of $2,OD�.00. An alternative would be the acceptance of an agreement together with an escrow of $2,000•0� for such construction in the future• • Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 17 � 6� A triangular street and utility easement over the southwest corner of lot 4, for future street and utility purposes, the dimensions of which to be determined by the Engineering Division and property owners prior to submission of final plat- As Mra Boardman read each of the stipulations, he clarified some of the statements to be sure that everyone clearly understood each point. Mr• Bergman wanted to know if the Engineering Department's recommendations for drainagc- easements and systems would be an improvement from the present flooding situations• Mr= Boar•dman said that it was his understanding from Engineering that what they were basically doing was taking wha� was already v existing, obtai�ing easements, and getting a utility and drainage easement centered over the common line between lots 4 and 5, to allow Lot 4 to be built and also to get drainage out to the Polk Street storm sewer system- Mr. Boardman didn't knoo� if the Engineerir.g Department felt. that this system would be better. All �r• Boardman knew was that tliey Planned to maintain tiie existing sys*ern until there � was further development in the area. He continued to say that if there was to be an additional re-plat of the property, then something would have L-o be done with the storm sewer system in the area to handle the additional drainage• He said that there was presently a ponding area on the property because - o� the incomplete development- Mr. Bergman indicated that the reason he asked the question was that it was his inpression that it was not specifically part of the requestor*s intent to improve on the flooding problema Mr= Iwen wasn't aware that there was a flooding problem� Mr- Bergman indicated that he felt that it was the time to address that problem= Mrs• McKinley wanted to know what flooding problem Mr. Bergman was talking abo�t• Mr. Bergman said that she had commented about having water in her basement• Mrs. McKiniey said that there had been,no problem in the last few years because the pond had been low. � Mr. Peterso� wanted to know if Mrs. McKinley had water in her basement in 1975. Planninq Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 18 Mrs• McKinley explained that two things had happened the year of � the ^big^ tornado� The first thing was that the tornado took the roof off the apartment building and then bounced down to the swamp and she indicated that her house ^sang^� She said that every wire and pipe in the house vibrated and made a very eerie sound= Sh2 continued to say that that was the same year that a construction company tried to drain the swamp. Mrs• McKinley said that the first few years they lived in the house they never had any water problems• The first time they experienced any problems was the year mentioned above and she cauldn't say which of the items, the tornado or the draining of the swamp, caused the water problem. Mr. Peterson again askad if Mrs. McKinley had water in her basement two years ago when the water was so high• Mrs. McKinley indicated that she did. Mr= Iwen indicated that there was presently a drainage system out of the pond. He said that possibly the system was too high� He continued to explain that there was a culvert and that when the water got just so higfi in the pond, it drained into the storm sewer on Polk and then into Moore Lake• He said that no matter how much rain we qot, the pond shouldn't raise any higher than a certain level• i Chairperson Harris wanted to know how large the outfall structure was. Mr� Iwen said that the structure was a makeshift, temporary thing with no piping• He said that it was just a culvert i� a storm sewer and when the water got to a certain point in the swamp, it would just drain off. Mr• Iwen indicated that he believed that it would take about two years to get the legal items worked out regarding the corner• Mrs• McKinley wanted to know when the work would be started if th2 1ot did get re-platted= Mro 2wen guessed that it would be Fall before any work got started= Chairperson Narris asked Mr. Iwen if he had had a chance to read through the six stipulations. Mr. Iwen indicated that he had read them through and the only item he questioned was Item 6"A triangular street and utility easement over the southwest corner of Lot 4, for future street and utility purposes, the dimensions of which to be � determined by the Engineering Division and property owners prior to submission of final plat"• C� • � Planninq tommission Meetinq — Mav 4, 1977 Pa4e 19 Mr• Iwen wanted to k�ow if this stipulation wou2d leave a buildable lot. Mr• Boardman said that there would be no problems and Mr- Gearman would have a buildable lot• Mr• Iwen indica�ed that everything on the Iist was agreeable to him. Mr• Robert Prois of 1060 Lynde Drive N-Ee indicated that his family enjoyed the pond and the natural setting and he wanted to recommend that the City buy this parcel of land and leave it in its natvral state� Mrs• McKinley indicated that she feit the whole block enjoyed the land in its natural state and felt that a park would be ideal= However, she said if that couldn't be done, then R-1 would be better than a lot of things that could happen to these lotsa She did indicate that she would like to see the pond left natural• She said that most of the neighbors enjoyed the birds that came to the pond. She also said that if people kept draining and meving the ��atv�al wetlands, the children two or three generations from now wouldn't even know what a water bird looks like. Chairperson Harris wanted to know if Lhis ponding area encompassed entirely on the area in question. Mr. Boardman indicated that the ponding area also went back into Lots 6, 7 & 8• Mrs• McKinley wanted to know what was going to happen to the natural drainoff from the service road. Mr• 6oardman indicated it would go into the road. Mr. Iwen indicated that he wanted the pond• He said that they could have gone into the area and filled the pond and made 2❑ to 30 lots to build on• He pointed out that he was only planning to have six lots and he planned to keep the pond. One of the reasons he gave was that it would have been too expensive to go into the area and build a development with 2� to 30 houses• He said he would have had to put sewer and water, streets, curbs, and gutters. He said that by doing it the way he proposed, he already had sewer and water on both Polk and Fillmore Streets and he could leave the pond in its present state• d Plannin�Commission Meeting — May 4, E977 Page 2� Ghairperson Harris wanted to know what Mr. Iwen planned to do • with the lots- Mr. Iwen indicated that the lots would be sold for individual homes• Mrs• McKinley wanted to know if Mr• Iwen planned to build the homes himseZf. Mr� Iwen didn't want to say whether he would build the homes or not• Mrs. McKinley wanted to know if there would be any restrictions on the homes- Mr. Iwen said that he didn't believe there would be any other than the same restrictions placed on any home in the area- Mrs. McKinley felt that there would have been a bigger turn out if more people could have figured out what the Public Hearing notice was trying to say� Chairperson Harris indicated that tha Planning Commission was required by law to publish the legal description of the property. � Mr. R= M• Frank of 5512 Fillmore Street wanted to know if an individual could buy one of the six planned Zots and then break that lot into two lots, thereby creating a possibility of 12 lots instead of the original plan of six lots� Chairperson Harris indicated that a person would be able to make a request to split the lot; however, whether the City would allow it would be another matter. Mr• Frank wanted to know if there was enough square footage to make these lots into two lots. Chairperson Harris said that he assumed there was enough square footage on the lots to enable a possible lot split. Mr� Frank wanted to know if Lot 4 would be a buildable lot- Mr• Iwen said that he was told it would be a buildable lot� flr� Frank wanted to know if the replat was being requested to make Lot 4 buildable. • � Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 197? Page 21 Mr. Iwen indicated that the purpose of the replat was to make all six lots buildab�e= Mr- Frank wanted to know when the new street would be put in. Mr. Iwen indicated that he didn't plan to put a street in� Mr. Boardman pointed out on a drawinq to Mrs Frank the area he was referring to and indicated that the street would come at the time when whoever owned the back land decided what they wanted to do with the property. Mr- Frank wanted to know if the entire are on the drawing was zoned as ft-1• 6 Mr. Boardman again pointed out on the drawing the areas zoned as R-1 and the lots that were zoned R-3• MOTION by Mr= Langenfeld, seconded by Mr• Bergman, to close the , Public Hearing on the consideration of a preliminary plat, P=S� �77-�3, Iwen Terrace, by A• T� Gearman• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, thairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing � closed at 9:1Ci P.Mo Mr= Bergman asked �r• Iwen if he felt any particular burden or had any strong objections to the six conditions and stipulations recommended by the Engineering Division Mr• Iwen only asked that he was left with six buildable lots. MOTION by Mr. Bergman, seconded by Mr- Peterson, that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of the consideration of a preliminary plat, PoS� �77-03, Iwen Terrace, by A� T- Gearman: Replat of Part of Lots 3, 4, and 5, Auditor's Subdivision No- 25, generally located immediately South of the 1000 Block of Lynde Drive NeE., East of Polk Street NaE. and West of Fillmore Street NoE. subject to the six stipulations recommended by City Engineering• Mr• Langenfeld wanted it to go on record that the comments and opinions of the Rice Creek Water Shed District should be considered �hairperson Harris indicated that these would be considered- Mrs. McKiniey wanted to know why the Rice Creek Water Shed District had to be tonsulted. • Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 22 �r• Langenfeld said that Mrs- McKinley had showed great concern of the pond and it was Mr• Langenfeld's opinion that the Rice Creek Water Shed District was very concerned about the deletion of wetlands, ponding areas, etc• because of the effect it has on the surrounding areas in regards to eliminating the natural water resources• Chairperson Harris also indicated that the pond dumps into Moore Lake which in turns dumps into Rice Creek= He said that that was another reason to consult the Rice Creek Water Shed District• UPON A VOICE V4TE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• �hairperson Harris indicated that the Planning Commission would be recommending to City Council approval of the consideration of a preliminary plat, PoS� �77-03, Iwen Terrace, by A= T• Gearman subject to the six stipulations recommended by City Engineering• Chairperson Harris said the item would go to the City Council on May y6, Z977, and they would set a date fo'r pu6lic hearing• 3� Keplat oT Lot 13, Aud the Easterly Z0� feet South side of Norto� Central Avanue N-E. NARY PLAT, AVENUE HO�ESITES, BY WY�AN SMITH� itor's Subdivision No. 89, except thereof, generally Iocated on the Avenue where it intersects with MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Shea, to open the Public Hearing on the consideration of a preliminary plat, p•S. #77-04, Norton Avenue Homesites, by Wyman Smith. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 9:15 P.M= �r� Wyman Smith of 1�5� Builders Exchange Bldg� was present• MOTION by Mrs. Shea, seconded by Mrso Schnabel, that the Planning Commission receives the Ietter from Mr. Jerry 4 Sympson• Upon a voice vote� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously= Chairperson Harris indicated that the letter was received and that it would go with the file to the City Council• • � i Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 23 . Mr. Boardman indicated that the proposal was for six lots and that portion of Lot 13 minus the 200 feet to the East• He said that there had been a mix up with'the Staff in that Mr. Smith didn't have 442 feet but rather had 475 feet. Mra Soardman indicated that Mr• Smith had another drawi�g that he had sketched out• Mr• Wyman Smith gave the background up to the point of the meeting• He indicated that by using the 475 feet, he could have five lots of 79 foot width and one 1ot of 80-foot width• He said that by doing it that way all six lots would have over the 75 foot minimum requirement� Mr. Boardman said that he had laid it out as two lots having 75-foot width and four lots with 80-foot width and then Mr• Smith would have five feet of out-lot. He indicated that with the five foot out-lot, the 15� feet on the corner could possibly have two single family lots, if Mr. Leroy Smith so desired= By having the five foot outlot, Mr� Wyman Smith could sell or give the five feet to Mr. Leroy Smith, thereoy giving Leroy the required amount of square footage without having to qo through a lot split• Mr. Wyman Smith indicated that the coi�ner lot could not be taken care ot the way Mr� Boaroman suggested because • Mr= Leroy Smith had �25,0�0 involved and a person couldn't get that kind of money out of two dwelling lots� Mr. Wyman Smith suggested that the five lots with 79-foot width and one lot with 80-foot width be laid out. Mr. goardman indicated that the requirements of the lots would be that the City would need five foot utility and drainage easements along the side of each of the lots and ten foot utility and drainage easements along the back� Mr. Boardman asked Mr. Smith if he was aware of the park fee that would be involved with the plating• Mr. Smith indicated that he was not aware of this park fee• Mr. Boardman explained that there would be a park fee that turns out to be ten percent of the land value of the property which would equal approximately •038 cents per square foot- Mr. Smith wanted to know what he was to do next. �r. Boardman indicated that the final plat would have to be drawn up for City Council- i Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 24 MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr• Bergmah, to �lose the Public Hearing on the consideration of a preliminary plat, � P.$e #77-04, Norton Avenue Homesites, by Wyman Smith• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Aublic Hearing closed at 9:25 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. Bergman, that the Planning Commission recommend to City �ouncil approval _ of a preliminary plat, PoS� #77-04, Norton Avenue Homesites, by Wyman Smith: Replat of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision No• 89, except the Easterly 200 feet thereof, generally located on the South side of �yorton Avenue where it intersects with Central Avenue M•E• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Harris indicated that the consideration of a preliminary plat, P•S• �77-04, Norton Avenue Homesites, by Wyman Smith had been recommended to City Council for approval• � He said that it would go to Council on May 16, 1977, and they would set a date for a Public Hearing• Chairperson Harris declared that the Planning Commission would take a ten minute break at 9:35 P.M. Chairperson Harris called the meeting back to order at 9:45 P.M� �OTION by Mr= Peterson, seconded by Mr= Bergman, that the • Planning Commission move Item 8 of the Agenda to Item 4• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously� 8. STAFF ACTIVITY RE6ARDING INFOftMATION TD CAILERS. Mr� peterson said that he shared the entire Planning Commission's embarrassment at the statement that was made• He felt that the Staff should be very carefuZ about suggesting that people not appear in front of commissions that are meeting if the people are effected because if the commissioners volunteer their time, then it is important that if the people have anything to say, they should be encouraged to be at the meetings Mr. Bergman commented that the entire item had been a very confusing item• He felt that the public should take more time in developing their thoughts and their positions• Ne also indicated that the people in the audience should be more careful about stating their requests when they call City Hall for information• He cited the example where Mrs• Morin indicated she called City Hall and asked someone if she was required to attend the Appeals Commission meeting• Mr• Bergman stated that N0, she wasn't required to attend the meeting. • �� • � Planning Commission Meetinq — May 4, 1977 Page 25 Mr• Bergman did say that rather than just person could have informed the cailer that his benefit and that he should attend. saying N0, the Staff it might be to Mr= gergman stated that very possibly the people are asking the wrong questions or are using the wrong wards when stating a question because there was too much indication of confusion and misguiding for it to all be one-sided• Mr- Peterson stated that the Staff peoplethat understand the Ordinances and are workin9 at City Hall fu11 time sould have a little more burden on them than does the citizen who is not as well informeda Staff person should have realized that when the caller asked if she was required, the caller really meant was anything going to happen of impertance� Mr. Peterson felt the staff should be discerning enough to understand even if the wrong word might have been used• Chairperson Harris said that a policy or procedure had to be set up on how to handle instances such as this� Mr= Boardman commented that prior to that time, there had been no policy or procedure regarding this problem• He wen� on to say that ther� were going to be corrections made� He stated that staff was planning to set up a seven-day time requirement before any application had to go to paper for Public Hearing Notice or any application notice that would have to be sent with an agenda. He said that Staff would require seven-day application time during which time the application would be reviewed by all Staff personnel and then, and only then, would that item be put on an agenda or set up for a Public Hearing= Mr• Boardman indicated that the second thing that would happen would be a Staff Checklist• He said that on Friday, May 6, 1977, a Staff Checklist Procedure would be set up in which a checklist sheet would be attached to all Building Permits and all applications for rezoning, special use permits, etc• and it would go through the entire review process• It would then be returned to one person who would be the responsible person for following the request through. He indicated that it would be returned to him if it was an application for the Planning Commission and that he would have a complete handle as to all the recommendations from the other areas• He indicated that other requests and applications would be sent to the appropriate person responsible• Planninq Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 26 Mr� 8oardman also discussed with t1r- Sobiech the giving out of information. He indicated that since the secretaries did handle much of the load for the Administrative Staff, that the secretaries be informed that certain information would have to be given out by certain personnel• He saici that a firm conclusion had not been reached but the problem was being worked on• f1r. Langenfeld indicated that he felt it effected both the Commission and the audience wher, the peopie joined forces and talked about an item and then came to the meeting with just one idea in mind, that being WHAT THEY WANT, and then when any person on the Commission tried to inform them or educate them, it would turn into an accusation that the Comrnission had tried to intimidate them• He felt that sometzmes the Commission was faced with a mental block that had to be penetrated before tha item could even be discussed• Chairperson Harris indicated that the problem with mis- information from City Staff was that it was worse than no information at all• He said that the people would get the misinformation and then that would be changed and then the people get defensive and belligerent. Mr• Boardman indicated that there had been several cases when a person would consult the City on a piece of property and ask how many units they could build on this piece o� property• He continued to say that without any further information on that pieca of property, they could only tell what would be possible on that much square footage of land= Chairperson Harris said that the requestor should be asked exactly what specific piece of property he was talking about• Mr• Boardman said that even with that information, they would have to take the time to layout the building and layout the parking lot- He indicated that usually they inform the person that according to the Code he would be allowed to build eight units on that property if all of the other requirements were met. f^r• Boardman said that then the person is told to draw up a site plan and bring it in to City Hall and they could discuss the plan further. Mr Peterson mentioned to Mr• Boardman that perhaps many of the requests were from Real Estate Agents who would want the information to be able to tell a potential buyer. l� r� • i Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 27 � Mro Boardman indicated that they still could only tell the person that according to the square footage, he would be able to build a certain amount of units but that there would be other code requii^ements that would also have to be met� Mr= Boardman cited an example to the Commission� Mr• Peterson suggesed that in certain cases the requestor be given a copy of the Code and have him discuss it with his attorney rather than Staff saying anything• Mr= Boardman said that usually they indicated that according to the square footage they could be thinking of that certain amount of units. The� the r•equestor would be qiven a copy of the Ordinance and would be informed that those would be the ordinances that would have to be met and before there would be any more discussion on the plan the requestor would have to have a site plan• Mr= Bergman said that he felt that the num6er af units that would be allowed was a r•easonable questian for a citizen to ask and that Staff should give him an answer. Mrs= Schnabel mentioned that in the Appeals Commission that raost of the members go o4t and do a site inspection on each piece of property that would oo before the Commission• She said that they do this inspection individuaYly and on their own time• She indicated that particularly when there was an appeal that was unusual in nature and toould present some distinct problems to the adjacent neighbors, she has gone to the site a�d talked to the neighbors about the request. She said that the Appeals Commission had a particular request that was appearing for the second time and when she was at the site, she talked with a neighbor who indicated that she was not going to the meeting• Mrs� Schnabel talked with the neighbor and indicated that the Appeals Commission needed their input and it turned out that the neighbor had been opposed to the particular request and because of Mrs• Schnabel's encourageme�t the person went around the neighborhood and had a new petition signed and that neighbor and several others appeared at the meeting• Mrse Schnabel indicated that she didn't like to ^hand-hold" people from their homes to the meeting but she was concerned about the person at the meeting that indicated that she had called and had not been encouraged to attend the meeting� Mrs. Schnabel said that she would like to see a memo sent to the Staff indicating that any time there is a public hearing and someone calls re9arding that meeting, that the person calling definitely be encouraged to go to the meeting• • Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 page 28 Chairperson Harris cited an example to the Commission that a person would call City Hall and ask what a particular address was zoned as and they would be told, for example, R-1= He said that then the reques�or would say thank you and hang up and City Hall would have no idea what was across the street or in the neighborhood• Then when the owner of some adjacent property wants to build some factory or something on his property, the citizen would be upset because he had been told by City Hall that his lot was zoned as R-1• Chairperson Harris indicated that the citizen didn't always have the exact facts. He said that the citizen had been told that HIS Iot was R-1 but there had been no indication that the adjacent lot was also an R-1 lot- Mr= goardman indicated that the only way to correct that type of misunderstanding would be to ask the person calling to go into City Hall and review, with a Staff inember, the Zoning Mapo Chairperson Harris wanted to know if something could be mailed to a person requesting zoning information, showing them the zonings near them• Mr. Boardman indicated that an abundance nf requests come_ into City Hall each day, and to do that type of mailing would be quite an additional expenditure just for mailing costs• Chairperson indicated that the present way the zoning information calls were being handled was not adequate• fir. Boardman felt that the number of complaints received compared to the amount of information that went out of City Hall each day was relatively small• Mr• Boardman indicated that it seemed that the main area o�F misunderstanding was in the area of requests for zoning information. He went on to say that the prcblem could be caused by some Real Estate Agent telling a perspective buyer that he had talked to City Hall and had been told that the lots were zoned whatever. Chairperson Narris suggested that when a person wo�ld call City Nall to request information on zonings that the person be requested to go to City Hall and discuss their question with someone who could explain the exact zonings in the particular area • Chairperson Harris then asked Mr. Boardman if this procedure could be imp7.emented. Mr• Boardman said that the requests for zoning information could 6e handled as outlined by Chairperson Harris. n �J f� � � Pianninq Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 29 4• CONSIDERkTION OF THE RFCOMMENDATION FROM THE APPEALS � CO�frrISSION THAt PROPFRTY OWNERS OF RESIDE�4TIAL PROPE ��rm�`�"rrm nc •e�v nnroem'rnnr ♦nnt vTnir FnA orCR_ Mr= Boardman indicated that at the time the Beer Ordinance was reviewed, the City Attorney suggested that such notification should not be a condition of the licensing but should be a condition of the aoning• Therefore, it was not written into the Licensing Ordinance• Mr. Boardman indicated that at the present time Staff was working with the City Attorney on the conditions for notifications. He requested that the PZanning Commission table the item until Staff received further response from the City Attorney- Mr• Peterson asked if Chairperson Harris wanted the item continued so it could go to other Commissions or did he want the item back on the agenda• f14TI0N by Mr- Peterson, seconded by Mrs• 5hea, that the Planning Commission continue the consideraticn of the recommendation from the Appeals Commission that property owners of residential property within 20� feet of any operation applying for beer, wine or 7iGUOr licenses be noti:fied ��' of this application until the first meeting of July so tfiat each member Commission would have a chance to review it. Chairperson Harris asked that the City Attorney research in particular Item 11 in Ordinance �435, Section II — Conditions of License: 11• Any police officer, or any properly designated officer or employee of the City shall have the right to enter, inspect, and search the premises of the licensee during the business hours without a warrant• He requested that the City Attorney kept in mind the Fourth Amendment to the U.S• Constitution: ^The right of the people to be secure in th�ir pe'rsons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particulariy describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized•^ � Planning Commission Meeting —�ay 4, �977 page 30 Chairperson Harris also requested the City Attorney to keep in mind the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S� Constitution that states: ^All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside� No State shall make or enforce any law which sha21 abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws-" Chairperson Harris felt that this Ordinance was unconstitutional• Mr Peterson acknowledged to Chairperson Harris that he agreed completely with his statement. He also said that the Ordinance made references to persons 21 years of age and he indicated that presently the 1ega1 age is 19 years• He indicated that he thought the entire ordinance needed rewriting• Chairperson Harris also didn't Zike the wording of Section 9— Persons Ineligible for License• In particular he questioned the second item ^Who is not of good moral character^. He wanted to know the definition of ^good moral character^. UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• The consideration of the recommendation from the Appeals Commission that property owners of resid2ntial property within 200 feet of any operation applying for beer, wine, or liquor licenses be notified of this application will be continued at the first Planning Commission meeting in July• Mrs. $chnabel asked Mr• 8oardman if he expected to have the City Attorney's response before the first meeting in July• Mr= Boardman indi,cated that he should have the City Attorney's response before July• Mr- Peterson indicated that on flonday, May 9, 1977, the Parks and Recreation Commission would ba having a special meeting regarding the Commission's goals and objectives and other forward looking things and he extended an invitation to the Planning Commission members to attend. Chairperson Harris indicated to Mr. Peterson that he had a petition for the Parks and Recreation Commission. MOTION by Mr, peterson, seconded by Mrs- Schnabel, that the Rianning Commission receive the petition and forward it on to the Parks and Recreation Commission for inclusion on their agenda. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried and the petition was received and forwarded• � ,� �� .� � Planning Commission �eeting — May 4, 1977 Page 31 MOTION by Mr= Langenfeld, secanded 6y Mr• Bergman, to receive the Park and Qpen Space Plan� Mr•Boardman distributed a copy of the Plan to each member of the Planning Commission indicating that Staff had completed their version and that it was to go before the Parks and Recreation Commission• He explained that there were a few maps still missing from the document and that they would be dist��ibuted to the Commission members in a few days- Mrs= Schnabel wanted to know if a small map delineating the neighborhoods would be included• Mr. Boardman indicated that the particular map Mrs� Schnabel had referred to in addition to several other maps would be distributed in a few days= Mr• Peterson pointed out to the Commission that the Parks and Open Space Plan reflected the thinking of a�out 12� pe0��2 �h�t had served on the neighborhood committees one year ago� Mr• Boardman said Uhat the Parks and Open Space Plan was quite �� an action plan• He saio that it made some very strong recommendations, some of which might be controversial; but said that it was a document that Staff feZt was essential to the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the future development in the City of Fridley� UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously� The Planning Commission received the Parks and Open Space plan� 5• CONTINUED� PROPOSED MAINTENANCE CODE� Chairperson Harris indicated that this item would be deferred until later in the meeting� 6• RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES= APRIL 26, 1977 MOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded by Mro gergman, that the Planning Commission receive the Appeals Commission Minutes of April 26, 1977. Mr. Langenfeld said that he really liked the way the Appeals Commissio� minutes are set up regarding the Administrative Staff Report• He indicated that it would save time if the Planning tommission had a similar form to refer to on each of the items discussed at the meetingso �� Planning Commission Meetin4 — Mav 4, 1977 paqe 32 �rs• Schnabel indicated that the entire Appeals Commission � felt that the Administrative Staff Report was a very helpful tool= Mr. Boardman asked Chairperson Harris if he felt an Administrative Staff Report was actually needed or if the oral presentation was adequate• Chairperson Harris indicated that a Staff Report wauld be helpful� He asked Mr. Boardman if th�re would be staff available to make Administrative Staff Reports for the Planning Commission• Mr. Boardman indicated that he could possibly delegate the task of producing Administrative Staff Reports to another person, but that he personally would not have the time• � There was some discussion on the reasons for a rezoning request to be before the Planning_Commission at the same time that a variance request was before the Appeals Commission• Mr• Boerdman wanted to know if a rezoning was approved with a certain thing in mind that would require a variance, would the Planning Commission be putting a burden on the Appeals Commission to grant the variance• �� Chairperson Harris said that if the City Council approved a rezoning as it stood, they would be giving taci� approval to the variance request• . Mr• Boardman indicated that the whole purpose of the re-organization of the Planning Commission was done so that all the information would come together at the Planning Commission and they would make a full recommendation to the City Council taking into consideration the variances and the rezonings that would be needed• He felt that the position of the Appeals Commission was a recommending commission for the City Council, with their recommendations going through the Planning Commission• He felt it was very essential that sometimes the Appeals Commission would have action on a variance request befora the Planning �ommission acted on a rezoning request• Mrs- 3chnabel indicated that sometimes the Appeals Commission was very untomfortable handling a variance request on some property before a rezoning had been approved. She felt that when a petitioner went before the Appeals Commission for a variance request with a plan in which there would be alternatives, she didn't think it appropriate to hear the request before � the Planning Commission had acted on the rezoning• � Planning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Page 33 Mr• Boardman indicated that the Planning Commission should � present to the City Council a"full picture^• He also felt that the petitioner sho�ld have the ^full picture^ of the different Commissions responses before he goes before the City Council• � � �� Mrs. Schnabel and Mr. Boardrnan discussed for a short time their reasons for and against the handling of a variance request by the Appeals Commission before the Planning Commission had approved the rezoning• Mr• Boardman felt that a clear picture is not given to City Council when too many different things on the same property go to the City Council at different times• Chairperson Harris said that the intent of the way the Planning Commission was set up was to present a complete package to City Council on a project with all the materials and recommendations all together- UPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the Planning Commission received the Appeais Cormnission minutes of Aprii 26, 1977• 7. MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by �rs� Schnabel, tha� the Planning Commission receive the Environmental_ Quality Commission minutes of April 19, 1977• Mr• Langenfeld indicated that the Environmental Commission was going to embark on a Noice Pollution Ordinance very shortly= Mr• Langenfeld referred to the statement he made that he would appear before City Council with the request by �eag�e of Women Voters for the Environmental Quality Commission to co-sponsor a public meeting on ^Energy^ on Monday, April 25th•.••• Mr. Langenfeld indicated that the date was actually May 2, 19?7= Mr• Langenfeld told the Planning Commission about the May 2nd meeting• He explained that he worked the Environrnental Resources simulator• He expTained that the top of the machine had knobs representing our means of energy and the bottom of the machine had knobs representing our energy consumers {such as automobiles, industries, agriculture, etc}- He explained how he worked the machine and said that the goal was to try to make the energy resources last for 500 years• He said that after many tries, they made the resources last for about 683 years but that they fiad tompletely cut out automobiles, airplanes, and air conditioners• He explained that the whole purpose of that machine was to show that by merely conserving on one thinq was certainly not goi�g to solve any problems- Rlanning Commission Meeting — May 4, 1977 Pa e 34 Mrs. Schnabel said that she was pleased to see that the Environmental Ruality Commission was going to foilow up on the request from the Appeals Commission regarding the East River Road traffic problems. Mr. Langenfeld indicated that he had used the 7-1Z Store to be located at 79th and East River Road as a^case^ item to try to show the Environmental Ruality Commission how i�volved just one particular problem could get. lie also said that he hoped that the East River ftoad Project Committee could provide the necessary information that had been requested• UPON A VOICE VOTE, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and tne Planning Commission received the Environmental QUality Commission �inutes of April 19, 1977• Chairperson Harris discussed items received from Mr. Mike E. 0'8annon and Mra A1 Kordiak. He also had a copy of the Annual Financial Report from the CiCy of Fridley• Mr. Langenfeld, �rs� Schnabel, and Mrs. Shea requested to receive a copy of the Annual Financial Report� AD JOUP.NCIENT= MOTION by Mr- Langenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Shea, that the Planning Commission meeting be adjourned• Upon a voice vote, all voting aya, Chairperson Harris declared the Planning Commission meeting of f1ay 4, 19?? adjourned at 1��55 P.M� The Planning Commission decided to have a one-hour Workshop on the Proposed Maintenance Code= Respectively Submitted, /// �v'`-et.1 1.�.�i%L��tt�' �' MARY lEE CARHILL, Secretary rT LZ � ' �� ; ! i � 3� PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNItJG COMMISSION TO WkOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning Comnission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, May 18, 1977 in the Council Chamber at 1;3� P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a rezonin9 request, ZOA #77-02, by Robert Flaten, to rezone Lot 41, Slock 12, Spring Brook Park Addition, from M-7 (light industrial � areas) to R-] (single family dwelling areas), so � it can be combined with Lot 42, Block 12, Spring Brook Park Addition (already zoned R-1), to make a residential building site, located i� the South Nalf of Section 3, T-30, R-24, City of Fridiey, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Generally located at 176 Ely Street N.E. �• Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. �• Publish: May 4, 1977 May 11, 1977 RICHARD H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION - -� CITY 01' 1'RIULGY MINNGSO'PA • PLANNING ANO ZONING fORhi NUM6GR Z�`.9� i7i7-�+yL. � APPLICANI''S SIGNATURL �Z�� ���/ Address ���% u%t7� Lire% f/'�f_e� �%n. Telephone Number '��f/-D�'Q,S ' PROPGR'fY OA'NCR' S SICNATURG 36 771'G OP REQUGST , �_ Rezoning Special Use Permit Approval of Premin- inary £, rinal Plat Streets or Alley , / Vacations Address 7�/.1<i W¢Sf �re�r� fii�a'�✓�� Other Telephone Number %�y Q�(',,� � Fee /�, C/� Receipt No. �E,i/ Q Street Location of Property ��(� �4`t '�►i�L�r't�r� Legal Description of Property (rpT QF� .4�t.liG1L 1i. SPRA.iJ6� RQo�L.. ►'L+ Present Zoning Classification fYR•1 F�cisting Use of Property (�+6lC'A.,►7'C� ti'�`L,A n � Acreage of Proper.ty d� Describe briefly the proposed zoning classification or. type of use and improvement proposed_ �{g,Z,n�„1R TD Q�� 7d • �'C�ct C�'aw►��y� C��cs-ia� L�� �.`t �`�h. /� ��.����,��i�.. fLC�:. � Has t]ie present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat, oUtain a lot split or''rr� variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes� no. IVhat was requested and when? ` �� The undersigned understands tliat: (a) a list of all residents and oianers of property within 300 feet (350 feet for rezoning) must be attaclicd to tliis application, (b) ThiS application must Ue signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation given irhy this is not the case. (c) P.esponsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure Yo list the names and addresscs of all residents and property oi��ners of property in question, Ue2ongs Yo thc undersigned. A sketcli of proposed property and structure must Ue dr�t��i and attached, showing the followin�: 1. North Direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on the lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposca structure, and fro�yt and side setU�cks. 4. Strcet Names, S. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (���ithin 300 feet). Thc uncicrsigned hcreby declares that all thc facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. DATG :�j�-, ���-� SIGNA'1'URF. �/�'��1JSa4 f (APl'LICANI') . 1 ' Dat� Cilccl Datc of llcaring Plunning Conunissioi► Approved City Council Approvcd (datcs) Ucnied (dates} Denicd � � P1anning Commission_ May 3, 1977 City Council MAILING LIST ZOA #77-02, ROGER FLATEN Rezone Lot 41, Block 5, Spring Brook Park Roger Flaten 7424 West Circle Fridley, Mn 55432 8erkeley Pump 181 Ely Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 5 & W Realty 140 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Lawrence Schmitz 160 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. James Bergstrom 170 Liberty Street N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 � � Mr. & Mrs. John Wozniak 180 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. William Super 190 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. John Super 200 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Timothy Zembal 204 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Hoff 215 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. William Sicora 201 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Bryan Kohl 220 E1y Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr, & Mrs. Frank Niznick 191 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Ms. Gertrude Emerick 181 Liberty Street N.E. fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Harlan Erickson 175 Liberty Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Veronica Stenze 4435 Minnehaha Apt. 10 Minneapolis, Mn 55406 Mr. & Mrs. Howard Stine 1532 3rd Avenue South Anoka, Mn 55303 Mr. Glen Syverson Route 1, Box 104N Big Lake, Minnesota, 55309 A-1 Tool Company 160 Ely Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Lance W. Peterson 1625 2nd Avenue New Port, Mn 55055 Mr. & Mrso Gary Anderson 196 E1y Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Neco Engineer9ng 161 Ely Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Marshatl Johnsoq �� 200 Ely Street N.E. Mr, Keith Larson Fridley, Mn 55432 222 18th Avenue South South St. Paul, Mn 55075 Mr. & Mrs. Edward Bishop 212 Ely Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55A32 3� Page 2 � Mailing List for ZOA #77-02, Roger Flaten Mr. & Mrs. Robert Tumnel 223 Ely Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 6unner Jensen 1301 Mar Les W. Santa Anna, California 92706 � �� : � ��"�°d°�C="6��� � ��'r' ��6��'�`�� ��,r,;7c� �. �te��ae-a 3� �c�s,�o ��ra�eve�� 40p21EFFElISON ST. N.E. COLUtAIiIAHLIGiII'S55421 . )88-9�G3 1 I7::R:]Y 4fiTi'.+% THA7 71117 CU:IVEY. PLAN, p.Z R_pOiiT WA'J PRCPARtp py ME OR UNDEIt MY DIRCCT 6UPC:iV1]ION 4)!O TItAT i P�l,1 /1 pyJV! LI_^G�6TMR30 tAND GURVcY0:1 UNpER THE Ul%6 OT THC �TwTL OP 6{INNF30'!A. t � r' ' +4� `'� ;. . � DATE 3-fC�-7�T l� ,t . ��`'� , ..:t., ' l � ,.E " — l.r��K -x �' r�t�: SCALE 1 3�� MiNN�50�A REGISTRATIpfV P7p. 5332 o-1RON MONUNIENT '�. NO 1RONS P�ACCD ` i E I� Sfree �" l._._ � hr'� r� r- � i r-- � --r . . , _ . . - - - 19 � 0 � 7 .1 1!� N � � � ,�. , � - ,_ _. , � � --- ,� � : ' ._ ; � � jV_CoO.,OO ti ALI�LY � � ��. '1� �� � r j � .�� — o K �i� N l.ot 4i and 42, filockl2, Sprin9 4roo4; Park, Anaka County, tlinnesota � • F; ;? �,.: �,n �c `'�V� 1:�, G`iG `� ,r � r�Qdtr ' rr• '�� __ ...� , 7 , ���5 :� ,-' , �,; : -r',,;:; . f— i` 3 ^����,_� � � �, �� {,,.,���...' A ,;, Lo�-���[.o�/ _,`, \ -�, �� :• '� j yo 1 ,'; , : i,9� • `�'' � � a "`. .. ♦ ti ..'�SR y r i `�` �{.r rr. : • �' �� '��. F s, f� j`�,Bii ,$5 � 7 . ��3l�Q✓ "��+� �, ��.j� � '�:� i �/�(�,. ,-�, �' ,. �O�j` �r� ,r ... ��'�QYPf t. 1 � �� j � 0 , �U .. , �P-r . .,a�, O•. I �.a •' "� /' i �ri �\Itw �,�'N i I , . ; � 40 ' i 20A #77-02, ROGER FLATEN ` Rezone Lot 41, Block 12, Spring Brook Park from M-1 to R-1 so that together with Lot 42 w 71 c eate a residential building sit , me eing 176 Ely St.; �=--- y 1 `; ... Ssp :� ; _—_ , , i • \1 1 , : i ` �, . i�13���f��O�il $ `\, `/'',�''J�' � 1 I �C l�t 1�61 ` `\ K` � ../ � �:.�,. _L�.. . L= �.- _ '�'�_— _ �`,�`:• f ST�E�T I ' c:� ' : '� y� a.:3 �: vti3 4 i? 1:�� -cu"'zc..7 �;f-a i: . t 2� zs� Q:,I,. ... I � I:s `. � f -. _ , � : � ; „ . . . , ,�. - �; � �-r- , � I� � � � j�{ I j s i4 S/t :ii.y��v �/.Z 3�4�5 7'a 5�/ny!/7,r�/t�GrS/-. :+. i `?I !��✓' '' 3: � / /, � ��� ( � � � � � � !� �'� � F . . > 7: .. . . . . _ ; 9 �"+�---;,::�:.--. :��A�------{y,-�--- — # .:w . is> .1t �.' � r ' �1 �'� ,�,� �`��z,5'y,� � �� �?,f : � � �r � , � �` .;� � � /v '_". ; , . . � u�—_-_ ��s � vw � ` _ .i ` ._� �" � . . -.3ttie ..r...�r�.r 1 ,• � � , >�y 50l ..' ',°', � . .. ; :i I . � �� �t'.;� l, . ; ; � � �( `Y , ! � ' • lr L� f ,. � \ ._ ,'o�,� � D - � � A� .�'�nk4e, r+r — �� 41 PUIILIC H[ARING QEFORE 7HE PLAP�NING C01•i��IISSION TO WNOM IT MAY CONC[RN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Nearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Wednesday, May 18, 1977 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Consideration of a rezoning request, ZOA #77-03, by C. D. Cf�andler, to rezone Lot 1, Block 2, Johnson's River Lane Addition, from R-1 {singTe family d�aelling areasj, to R-3 (multiple family dwelling areas} and, rezone Lots 2 and 3, 87ock 2, Johnson's River Lane � Addition, from C-1S (local shopping areas) to R-3 (multiple family dwelling areasj, so these three lots can be used for the construction of a 7-unit row house development and/or townhouses, all located in the South Half of Section 15, T-3�, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Generally located bettideen 64 1/2 Vlay and Mississippi �• Place on the 61est side of East River Road N.E. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter .�nay be heard at this time. Publish: May 4, 1977 May 11, 1977 �� RICHARO H. HARRIS CHAIRMAN PLANNING GOh1MISSION ...�.. _ CI7'Y 01� PIiTULCY MINNGSOTA • ,/ PLANNING AND ZONING POI2M NUh96GR� ��T+ J�.��3 �) `�' (,�/,� � /�/�� �� APPLIC 7''S SIGNATURIi �� �K��%�.CL�Y�� Address %/ ��`' �ylf SSlSS l/'''�I l��'. ������(�Ll� ' � � Telephonc NumUer �uZ � ' � �{ �� `% PROPERTY OIQNGR'S SIG�ATURE �(,��������c":����-" � � Address � � - . ����^ � Telephone NumUer �2 TYPC 01� RGQUGST , _� Rezoning Special Usc Pcrmit Approval of Premin- inary f, Pinal Plat Streets or Alley Vacations Other �i ' Fee /SSDOReceipt No. �/o/r1 � Street Location of Property �`f %� �-��v��.�-% ��-��. � / % ( c:-/ 5 -'� = � � � � � J Legal Description of Property �r/Y % �. t � ' � � '� �jf--�v`�N''�'� '�`""'" `�{``` �{� _'��?J � �z � i=t.�- Presept Zoning Classificatio�,Zf3(.zcNGl� Fxisting Use of Property 1���'/'/',_ �! - Acreage of Property � 4, �iG ��� __ Describe briefly the proposed zoning classification � __ or.type of use and improvement proposed - ,,,,, _ %I Has the present applicant previously souglit to rezone, plat, obtain a lot split or variance or special use permit on the subject site or part of it? yes�j _no. lVhat 4aas requested and iahen? The undersigned understands that: (a) a list of all residents and o�aners of property H�itliiii 300 feet (350 feet for rczoning) must be attached to this application. (b) This application must be signed by all o�aners of thc property, or an explanation given �ahy this is not the case. (c) Responsibility for any defect in the proceedings resulting from the failure to list the names and addresscs of all residents and property ot,mers of property in question, belongs to the undcrsigned. . A sketch of proposed property and structure must be dra���i and attached, showing the following: 1. North Direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on the lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and frant and side setUacks. 4. Street Names. 5. Location and use of adjacent existing builJings (within 300 feet). The undcrsigned hcreby cicclares that all thc facts and representations stated in this pPPlic.ation are truc and corrcct. � - DATE �%';k, ���I�77 SIGNAI'U[tE ����"�i � �,�.��E;C%j,� —T— � (APi'LICAN"C) . pate Fiicd Datc of 1[cari Planning Commission Approved (dates� Dcnicd City Council Approved (Jates) Dcnicd__ .. , � a,,,o__. ` ZOA �77-03, Rezone � Lots 1,2„3 Dlock 2 Johnson's River Lane MAILIN6 L1ST , � r• �� River Road East Corporati.on 6540 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Robert & Geraid Schroer & Peter J. Lindberg 6330 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 D. C. Chandler 11320 Mississippi Drive Champl i n Mn � s i 3/W Robert H. Schlecter 6520 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Carl Moen 6502 Hickory Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mary Dolin 95 Mississippi Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Michael Zgodova 6501 East River Road N.E, Fridley, Mn 55432 Duane Oftelie 4511 Gettsburg Avenue Mi.nneapolis, Mn 55428 Mr. & Mrs. Louis Nash 65Q9 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Allen Erickson 6551 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Jeffrey Schneck 6601 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55+332 Charles E. Johanson 580 69th Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Eugene Anderson 6661 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Planning Comnission 5_2_77 Counci 1 !1� Mr. & Mrs. Robert Sutter 98 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Lyle Kuienkamp 58 Mississippi Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Darryl Ericson 6468 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Harlin Cook 6446 Ashton Fridley, Mn 55432 Ms. Annella Lee 6434 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Hughes b424 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Arne Lundgren 6412 Ashton Avenue N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Eugene Emerson 99 64th Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Kenneth Gillette 6409 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Warren Palm 6421 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gilbert Felt Rt. 2, Box 727 Wyoming, Mn 55092 Mr. & Mrs. LeRoy Erlandson 60 Mississippi Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55�132 Mr. Donald Wescom 117 Mississippi Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 � �\ �� \ �..w�r� ,� r• T1 _� ZOA 1177-3 Page 2 Mailing List Mr. & Mrs. Albert Jnhnson 137 Mississippi P1ace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. A11en Mattson 157 Mississippi Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Gordon Aspenson 6489 Riverview Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Mattie i4� Mississippi Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. Chris Je1avarou 160 Mississippi Place N.E. Fridley, Mn 554321� Mr. & Mrs. John Koprowski 6470 Riverview Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Murco Stations, Inc. 6485 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Leif Nenriksen 6434 Riverview Terrace N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Zera, Inc. 6500 East River Road Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Edward Sakry 121 64 1/2 ►Jay N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Walter Luckow 161 64 1/2 Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs, larry Gilmer 141 64 1/2 Way N,E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Haroid Beckman 6430 East River Road N.E. Fridley,Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Raymond 6420 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Ms. Leora Smuder 6414 East River Road N.E. Fridley Mn 55432 Mr, & Mrs. Donald Sibell 6408 East River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. John Kimbler 80 Mississippi Way N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. Leo Carda 6443 Edst River Road N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Mr. & Mrs. arre Palm �42�, E t R er R ad � �c� e , 5 32 -Z�X �� i � � �, :�,a-4%"�.� , �! � , E �`� �,- - ' ,. I N 7 3� �2'1.5� � i 33V'" � �n� � . 94 55 \ � . . 1 � � .. 3 2� 4 � d � ' d N 5'C m1., m� " � � , P �c W m .a 6 � � , o 3 , � : �� ��o � a \ ; -. • � � . m d o•,� 1 � � . W, i � ' 7 n\ ', Q � 9` .� � S � 1 �A " � j \ /� � � . ! '✓ � Y V1 ♦ (� � , _ a m� � � -� � � � �� ` r � " j2141 . -'' 1i ` °� . � g9.25 t ` . �\ -� : N °� ° Q � .,� o D �� � a� w O , � m � �' \ � CL \ ,y �a 1 ,y , y�,� �' � ;� oY� d SCALE-1��= 30� ° ', ., � `� " � OC T. 1973 N No O` GO ' ' ... _l _ ^ l � � �, `� N � � D � �zi.�2 �: �N \fd CG � ;.+ �_� g2.y5. N W , Z o, � � � � � �' � 'Y, - � � , ? � � ,� � �; N �o, N� r '� \ u1 ..w � ° �, � m \ 1s� � � � 3 Nl�..s , t � � � �=i � �1 Y ' �` , �.o � �✓ �� \ � ` o � t' r 53�� _\-� � l� - ' � �\ � � , j � o \ � �z7'4 ` o ` �_ - 5� 90�56 . � � � � �� . ` v �� _ � � r ; N,: ' 1^= c f f^ �'� ;ti � �.: w.�'�t� . ,� ;a'� d'1 � . _ • _ _ . . ....------._ AL�' 1 a � o �- 5�771U � �,58`c` �7 � � `I2 ;^'-�"�G _:�� 3URVEY QF LOT {,2,A3 BLOCK 2 JOHNSON�S RtYER ' LANE ADDITION • PITV nC �nln� rv ar�.•� � d-� =' y�'�` Ir: 6 Q • ' F W �J Q i_....� � _.._ � � i.. � . . f �� i. �I tJ �� - :,� L' ��� �� �� N ;1 � �Y £ ( r �� fp� � 1%..a i.. i,.. 4� �/ ' �1 .� \ r' �f :�...i'......a��,,,. ,=0'.i°�DI°!`�'° � . •_ ` � i: . x,•. ` ' .. : ' �, � FJ� t,,� . �Lr �� .,\\ ,�ff� .c. � � I .� / '\t S?S�if9 i . •-. � .!l ' F � ,-'-'-��/ t' ' ' .�._ ... ` i 1 'F �o [ • "yi.�•\.��� j t .y .. 1 : I 1 ��� C Ji j � c, P�' -- � ; _ �_'. � � �� t,..��S�S-� -�` � (� -' - � '` ,s� ., 2 F(r {� � � . , r� 1� . l��� �� .�,.a\\`� . % �.+` �v,E)� Y:qO: � _ l . � �,.�,_ � �,� � �� ! � � � - O �� ��� _— �� � � . �' "� 1 - .i ' ` v.. ', i . t�' _. " �'i ` ^'' t�,� !r�ai::f'� ✓ (:1 �'�1�,,t� .�4 .i�� eti�.( .,S 5 �i� _ , � F ,d � - r � t'/�� F) 1' . � :: � � � ' . � f_. _ [?. e • K��, ,�-��� � C�� )�� �j�i. �� � 1 .![ t �,�ll t : �, r.. " \.�,'J � � :.�ti �J� • Y i -�. /` .s { i 3 . e / U.1 + , 'lu�i � j �� �s 4 .�- t'�—'_�� - � ; t � j �,,, .. _� , 4 �� ` � • � �.� '° { ., t ,�.r- �.; `t•`� � �.\� �, .� z` ,, ` .` ,�� -` , ` � � k �� ���� '_ �,. 1 ' � ��"° �'' � b��5�-1 I � � ��,�1 � p � > _ :� � _ � �3 ` � . , i �. c .,, � � � l v . � - � • � � / 'XJi -. .> '_...�_ <a� i ��,` ��70,� � ,., ° _. �1��. �` �:. ' � _ ���� � - � F 1 ; , /� •y '� C] -�: —±- y` , /�' ����� J t �• I •`�k'ly�, ��>1�� � �`�n �`}�'f' 'r l��� � `{ ct i� �S� ''� �` {"� 1 ` � y'? ' � ! G �,�� � � b .:��`' h"� r r _---� �— ,��- -! �. �. � ,. : - ' s ``� t,%. a ,. ; :,�-, G , � .; � r, ` v . :� i ; ; � � .� 7 �ti1� , i � :�`�—� �: `. � \�. 1 � �, f1',� �?f ���� �L � �1��,J� � }! \�t t .V} � �Fr_ W'� i i v'`�1�:`4h�' "� �'�lEti`''� • n� ��.� �,. ;t S;�i }' �C � _j__. �{;7 ' f f; � . i �� t �,� : �. , g _=�,,, �1r,'S't 1� � Tri � �'� - � l.. � ' � - ^� -e �� : l� , , � � 4 , . - jC�' �t! ' � `' . .:�� ,` `� .�y�5 _ �_ j �� Qi$ . �, �� r rJ � _ .--. : \ ° , , O 1� t'' , r- , 3pr,�q i�;; =i. .�ifi.� %t;���� � �`� \\ 3;�r i�i� F 7 c s- P -� ,�� , 7 r`'��. . .. ; e i �\\ �`".,� .>�� '"' °1� '�_ �,(. t''��.,� � ���� � �'r3� ., ' ��: • �' �i5'�'�e - _ rr _.�_. . 1 ��,`,, ; ��I�' ' . --- ��� � �2�� ��� ;� , � �. �,-- �t, �" � -_ , ' . � '` I � �',. '� . l��) �5{t J �� o ,1 �(,(' i �''1� ' hG . � /,S /J .c0 Z/ : . � ` , � � � _ t� n(��' 1 � n � . �1� ` � ;.,:-�" �•� k t - �---'�"`" � . .�� �� � ` •�_�. rjt� -�'--,1 b � . � � _, f1; . ��";, I i �' ' f .. tr � io� - �> �-Y" �.;[, ►�w �� 12� , i ' � �e'' 63~Il2 ; l • - `t}�'J _�( �U ,C)y• � 4 4 ' � 1 . {�_ 1-' ^ �. • LLl ' �}n �0 - ..�`� 1 i�i �i,� �{ � ,, . .'z > pd 'iD"'� �0�6 . ,; ' � ,�'� <<� ,` . , � „�-� R n , . 9, ,, y .> a � .' y . � 1- - t I ��' ef a � . . `� - ( I � � �Y . . . ( ,�, . i � "' � . � � 4 �r s �H1 1'�' �q L: : i _.. _..._�-.-� ,, , , ` . ' � . �. ° f� �` ----•�. `t'' 1 ' �i,' i!',�' i71 1�l��t t� ,, , ; i � � � _.._ •--- ,- U)r :• i �" . , ' .' _n`'t+ --f -i � ld,Y . �' t�.E. „ _ � lo� ' ,`_' � ' '� ', � ��jiT' 1 , T t ^.����,.����' � : ���' i -i � � (1 �'--__._.�,i "---'----- , 22 { -, n �'�, � I �•� �t,��.�il 1q�� 1`3� I��n ��,� �►��,,��`N��rrr I' , ti.,�•C`t __ , � _ . !'�'V ? . . . .,� � �l � ��le��� �- •�,y :� ' ^l,� '� -!. . i` S �e � � �. i ( '� � + _ � , �: %�.,j � �// )'P ` .9 • C � M1 � : : � �• r+ N � a � � - � � __ �� � � � p00� 'lZ '. - ( . J j J � > AREN� � GARAG�� �. y0� �� � `1 )': ;1 .: � .. 4i�� acoura ..��s �� �p�� . - / � � ro� ` ' � �.�. �o��,«. �,�. _,,,�' .�. � Q �,�''' � 4� _ ,.r�� , 1 � lui� -, {,watt, t.. •r +..� .. iN� , . -��l .�. ,sA ,ow �.- - � „��. ,.,, .. �i� " �'•� � 4i°a ,� 1o61DAV�)��� . . �• :, 5' y,`� �1� f�fG+i �` �� . , o� ' �t Irs' �.p � . `�jCU'�`\y� ::Z, _ � �, A� ' 4.' �� , y.J� %�tF a. �AD3.S J' a � �+`` � `. • . la��'.= � �� f� Y, o - �� � �- :�, ��. � ` ` � ro � s r � O ,� �' p�� °f �. �'gr � . �, ',' � � �� .,r . ' �; „\ ���` �;�,�'"�'Fki� �'�'% �` �:: � ] �, b L �y , a ; , � �,� �,_ � � `� ' �,: . ' { � *a`r � . _ , �:r ..+;.d . :ti {i�, .� / i� � +' �-=-.�` �� if�<L._1 4Rf�K �; �n�':� K c t- . ' � �� ;$ , �\ , i �_�r�wMAL'f� . P�a, __,.__ � .a,.,��+�:r�. ��;,�t W •� , . , .,. . a ,� £ � - r�•���. ' �. :.:i :>:,z:n :, . �. �, � ` � c _ V�' �NOBT�OUIS�'� ^ �.� ��'STEVENSONE- i '��-% � ELEN. SCN� i � O v_•� � �� �. h��n i. ���. � � �',/�/ w.. '.16LAtfDJ e 70 ��R, � 2 � ESl $ , i r...� g � "� a� o ,, � ��. � '� J0 • � � �'. � � � i �; � � i Q �.C.'�i�', �� �1 � � � �♦ '�'�'� �:< � ;� ; i, : ,: J�; � �. i�!� . �� _ + � � � � �:�-_ �„ :;, . i� �� -� \ y, py"'('3�r'��� ; Fr �T��' � !� � .7� w��[.}�.� I J � � . g ��_,. P��!� r � ��.: ���� ��� ,�] �. r�z� . � ��2: - , \�� �_�i a . � � ��.�_'ry � Fl i 1�3�1'1f�l�F "�i ; � :.� �� � :.:� � CITY AF I�l2IULGY htINNIiSOTA PLANNING AND ZONING fORhf NUMf3G • {/ % � �� APPLICAN7''S SIGNA7URG can� /���u.. � �h :�.,�. , ,�.�-a Address (� 6G /I �/Ss�ss PPi _ST +� F- Telephonc Number '��-IS 2G �� TYPG OF RGQUGST Rezoning Special Usc Pcrmit Approval of Premin- inary $ rinal Plat PROPERTY 01ti'Ne2'S SIG��nTUae Fridley United Methodist Church �� Streets or Alley Vacations Address 666 Mississippi Street N.E. • Other Telephone Number 571-1526 �/� � " Fee a0 Recci.pt �o, 8��2 r/�' Street Location of Property �GG /17r5S�5:; i �r� � S�', SV. C. Lega2 Description of Property �o�-S n'un�B���Ei� �� 3 a�? -Z' -?`� �'�•�� �GOCK `� CHRIJT/E AU�jTIDN� ANUK/{Co4N� }', MlNNr�oTN , Present Zoning Classification �- i 8xisting Use o£ Property CNi/�Cf/ Acreage of Property �"S -/ 5p �k'R�S Describe briefly the proposed zoning classification or type of use and improvement proposed�/�%�r.nv. n:- �r� r'�9�+u= T,�.: /l.'�ri.!a'r:�i'�c� Jvc'<'TfiEON �rArES fO�u�.n f g/hN�a-� ,-EP./.� � � p,Stil7rh�S .:u� � �z, `� � uF L�Tn � �.• !� .:�t�'YK 3.Lni2 111J. S� aF LC�'S :t2� 2,j�,:l'f d,+.(� u'CS A�t �ti+ di,Y� �� CNk'1sJle ilnn. TiC-+L, /iiY:=/cjl. Has the present appli.cant previously sought to rezone, plat, oUtain a lot split or vaTiance or special use permit on the suUject site or part of it? yes �� no. What was requested and when? � The undersigned understands that: (a) a list of all residents and owners of property within 300 feet (350 feet for rezonino) must be attached to this application. (b) Tlus application must be signecl by all owners of thc property, or an esplanation given l4}1)' i�11S 15 110t t}7C C15e. �C� rC5OOIISlUilli)� ii;7 uTl� .:C:cC� 1R iil° gre�^��ti-^.^s resulting from thc failure to list the namcs and addresscs of all residents and � propert�� o�rners of property in question, belongs to the undersigned. A sketch of proposed groperty and structure must 6c dra��n and attached, s]iowi��R the follotaing: 1, iv'orth Direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on the lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side setUacks. A. Strect Names. 5. Location and use of adjaccnt cxisting buildings (within 300 fect). 71�e undersigncd hercUy declares that all thc facts and representations stated in this npplication are true and corz•ect., �.�5'���F;' Gn,�IIEO /%%ErrrvDiry Cduk'�H DATE �/F'�5'�L .<% /`%%% SICNA . Date r•���a Datc of Planning Commission Approved (dltcs) Ucnicd_ !u�') cvA�� r. %,CusTE'i'S SK�C'tTA/j' y 6�'R�J !F l,Pdi i�S / City Council Approved (datcs) Denicd �� S� � � Minnegasco Minnesota Gas Company 733 marquetle avenue. minneapolis, minnesota 55402 April 25, 1977 Mr. Darrel Clark. Fridley City Hall 6431 University Avenue Li.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55421 Dear Mr. Clark: The Minnesota Gas Company has no facilities within those platted utility easements described as foliows: The South 5 feet of Lota 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 also. '• The North 5 feet o£ i.ots 22, 23, 24 and 25, Bluck 2. All in - Christie AddiCion, Village of Fridley, County of Anoka. We therefore have no objection to the encroachmenC or vacation of said utility easements nor are any future easement reservations necessary for the Minnesota Gas Company. WRS/Lcr cc: William S. Peterson J. H. Anderson M Very truly yours, , , / � �C"%CL_1�.� /�c.,- William R, Schram Real EsCate Sectlon • � � N O R T H E R N Apri I 25, 1977 ��, S T A T E S P O W E R C O M P A N Y 460f BBTH AVENUE NORTH . BROOKLYN CENTER. MINNESOTA 6S42B Mr Darrel Clark Community Development Administrator City of Fridley 643T University Ave N E Fridley, -Mn 55432 Dear Mr Cfark Please be advised that NSP Company has no objection to the requesY of the Fridley Methodist Church to encroach on the utility and drainage easement - South 5 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, Block 2 and the north 5 feet of Lots 22, 23, 24, 25, Block 2 of the Christie Addition, City of Fridley - or the ultimate vacation of that easement SAV 77.04. NSP does request a permanent easement for our existing facilities presently in place on or over the property presently owned by the Fridley Methodist Church adjacent to the easement in question or be reimbursed for rerouting them . Thank you for your consideration in this matter. $incerel Y %�� � � �rZ �Gc�=cL John L Ranck Municipal $ervices Representative North Division cc Mr Bill Peterson 5' � r,� � �� a � �\V / �� � . . � j��'���� ;��-:_� rvons�irar� sxnrr.s ro�n�eR cor,tirnr�v lslf3 cl,�.::t-mit nvc. n11NNrnPn�J':. n'.iNN6ROrn R3401 � Iipril 2�i, ].977 h1r. S�7i11iam S. Petnrson, I�rchitect-I'ridley United Methoclist Chusci� 51�1 Posh�v Toc�e-r. Alinneapolis D?ti SSn02 Dear Mr. Peterson: L�p�\ � This is in ansr•�er to your letter of April 20, 1977, regarding i.he vlcation of existing easements on the plat of Christie Addition. Please be advisecl that �,�e have no objection to the release o� �ns' inter2st in L-he easements described as iollacas: The south 5 feet of Lots 1, 2, and 3, f�loc}c Z; also The north 5 feet of Lots 2.2, ?3, 2n, anc' 25, Blocl� 2. All in Christie Addition,_ Villac7e of Fridley, Crnurl.v �f Anolc�. It is our ttnrlerstandinc� that we ���ill be qrantecl �n easement ���cr the rTest 5 i^: t of S,ot 3, iiloc}; ? ancl the �test. 5 feet of I,ot ':?: Blocic 2 in saic� Christie Acldition. Your:; trttly, �-� C.� Georqe C. Lewis Superrisor - P.ight oi TVay GCL/mer cc: Parre� Clzr.k � J�mes rlcL;l�:�ain � 55 FRIDLLY METkIODIST CIIURCtI Present Suilding � ':�� Proposed Addition !/� . . � rf�wrMM�'� . .. � l . = '. � .. . . . . . _... .. .. .' �r �. . . . . . . . . . . . . �� ' - _ ._ . ' . . . ..�. _ `..-� ������ �- ..,.���i�-� /.������-��� -�� � �.���L�� ..___ L . � ,__..� �____. ��.. ����- VILLAGF. oF FRiDLEY, CoUNT'Y. OF `ANOKA " � �. � .��1�7� �����.5�'�`�� �7 � � `� ��>� � � Z.L�- _ ENC7INEE.F25 Ar1D SUR�/EYORS �_ led �n R�ce �Creekr � �.�- - -' � .. ' - ' - � . . � . .� _ r.:: � ( -��'• `��,-� '� � '" E_ � =c. r; .. c: _�. F�' l._:,�-a '� �J �G L �racC Pts�ri � —' . � . . • .. . .. Nos� t!Y 1in! et Seo F� � a� See�ien W. O'oo' ' _' 12'Z�i_'��i- — _ �9����SSB��� � T.2$ � r,�S ~� 'T � 6 �+ 5 T SS_' z "_'_'90_" '"�'_ °_""—_'_""' _ ' g'_ "�'-�5'_" '��S'"_ __'�. , Wr u}ili4T £ Drain Easa >"' 17 m 18 �^ 19 m 20 .8B '15 15 "1 �S � ��i"M 3� ��� . � lR.:�.Gl s � i � r/ p �; ' 9 6; � J �i i� 13G.�'l � t� �� ml �� � 19 0 , s� � w: �� ,a1 2Z � � N � a O r 5' t ,�.. �-, r i e.e�'�s' q.tc.)3 � 2 13b.15 3 P1t74 � 2t __' _.�e— iY. :n� � � . 0 22 � 23 /vc.39 s2- / t -ea+ •� , 80 30 a.zs.Ki � � . Qe� M, 25 w.o-oo•� tl! ${ � Y � f•2$ T•75 �w 120.?.6 ' 12' // F y �� —1 ' (A et� 37-eY 1 1 1'--' ` : {re•70'SS' 1 i d 1 R.14.G1 N � ,.n t� ` 20 � i � c s� 50. i � — ' "io.b"! 14y 4 � ` 1� �� � m i' d' 0 o i9 0 ; " � � 4 I$ IeG �7 . Ji Ha• 39 n•ne•sa= n•as { 2 5' �S � � 3 169 GG 0 N � < � • N � fi, � � . � M! N• �� F '`- � I a c .g IY Y i ; , 5; > � , .L�. ,,.. • . - . , (,•I • R r 14:..: t. :LL �' . r ,' ��l C�'�''� O� 6����L�lt::.�.,,�, ..,�,.,;,::.� : m �1 . 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MI'NNESOTA 55432 ��' ��' � � . TEL�PHONE (612}571-3450 � • May 11> 1977 4,. . `%:` �- ' .. :, .„�. �. CITY COUPlCTL ACTIOi1 TAKET� hOTICE Fridley Method9st Church 666 Mississippi Street N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 6entlemen: On Ma,�2y 1977 , the Fridley Cify Council officially approved ��o��r reou�st for easement encroachment o-r�th the st�pulat�ions listed belco-i. Please reviel•r the noted stipulatior�s, sign the stateri�n� b°lcr:, and return one copy to i:he City of Fridley. � If yuu have any q;�es;ior�s regardir�; tke ahore actiun, please call the Co.^.Gnunity Ge�relil�T^r� Office a� 571-345C. Sincereiy, CITYvPl�1�v�;Ff; ��LG/de Stipulations: None (this was subject to a vacation request which had already Co��cur ti�rith action tak^n. been applied for before Council meeting) � ,,,., .,;,,. " �: � i 1 `'. ...,,,::.,< -,,._.,: : �, . '�° x .' T .-r� .. � :�, � _ . �. �. . . �-.i s " � � �.. . :j .- ` ,,r �� •��CS`� RE�ttEATiON CO�fi�{1�" �TINf�, AYRIL 25 , I'377 FAGE 2 :7 ' i3r, p�terae� seated tha� t#e apeciaY meeting had been set for May 9, 1977, at 7c00 p.m. • � � > " � ��„ . �: Mr. $audreau stated it���tie tt�t�zg3tt C�is needed ttte �oirmission's full attention ' ", - without any other busii�#s, s�, l�op�fuily, at thy�L Cime they could;ask the Neighborhood ` Praject C«nmittee C$airg+�saus:,'C"9 atEend. �"' Ct1�IS�i3ERt�TION���DF ITEMS` �7f. C�=�4z1:` � � � ,> pbc. goudreau aeked tha� �?'3�n. �,A�.as' ^ name be ad$gd as Ttem!F' uader the "Director's ;- ��� &egoxEt' and Ms �. Saeger. �ated:�g" xsould like �`the�,�Fa�k RanBgr•' added as �tem 8 uader �� '�Qkd ; �usiness". k: }%�L€�t 1tq �an Seeges, '��ena�cleel:,�y �obi.n Suhrbier, to adopt Ehe agenda with 'the two �bovE �x1sf3.C2ons. Upoa � voice'�fote,,,,ali voting aye, the motion carri�3 unanimously. i `z � . . :. , : ... . I . � � .. i�` : �. Mr., 1�terson stat�d he �icnuX� &�ssr li�e recarded ia the minutes tha$ t2fie election of i` offieers would. be helc� flt'the..'�'-�gula� May meeti� as scheduled by Che Plaaning Goiimiission�; ' H� wa�ted to st�ess Lha� the v�3.ce-ct�;frpersoa wa& Ci�e agptoved alt�rnaie`for the chair- �r�+r atad had the reAg�nsi��,�ty of -attendittg PTaztning�Commission ime�tfn$s in the : absest�e of Clie C�atrp�trri.eu. , , ,. � , fllRl�#A�S 1tE�2tis A. �X Prtrgrem Bt€tc�ti��e ���?ir. ��ou�reau s�ated ti#�t �tt��#umuiex� �rogram brocY3ute wanld be mail@d a�at and should be � =� �� xece#�xed around the 7�'0� H�'_. H� ��$fd he thought- it was a� very i#terestfng hrochure �; : and eatir�2y di€ferent`#haztl�fote.: T�ey had gp�e to a flip-type �ra6h�re'wfiich ° iaelu8ed other info;m�G��it fa'4qn otitetr departmenta in the City. Two e7cei,ting new- i activities ehis yeax e�re a c�ive eatp].oratfon a�'sfcateboard lessone; along with the ' oEh��zts`ad�fl3onal aeC£v3tiasC�� � � � B'. A'�r# gaciiity Vand�:fsm P��sh�eq� � = �..____. „ ? � �r :�buictr�su st�ted �iia� Lhe�� had �een a g�eaC..�le�l of vandaliam in �he parks, espeeially `- �,oc&��"�trT�. There hai1;3��en a<great"`deal of daua�ge to picn3c t�bl�!s aad the shelter, ; ;; but'i�eothing t��C cauld:ao# be?:repai3ed and which ahould have been'repaired already. ;' ile R&i�d he had talked it>'the police DepartmenC �td the guhiic Woxl�s pi�ecYor and they had ind#c�tad that t��a was itte �i� 'bf year £o�` a rash flf vandali:sm.` Tfr. Boudreau esi�,-t�y h�d >Che cs��rat�oa: ef �fee.Palice De�'Gment for gatsallin� on *aeekends + �r��tir-"the �ee�erve uni��,�scrd 1E;had �ewed ta hel�r reduce some oE ttie pr�slems. ":.: . i ' i E. �Soccer �r�� at Lc� Pat& ���' � � � , , �- �:=,�ora�d�au s�ated t�ie:�C the 'soeeer area hasl 6g#n planted and sod vtas �a be @elivezed th�;���t� fia be placsd on�,�lte sc�ctth hanks aud a�:sing the east b�nk tA contrnl erosion. °" Y`ht� �Kd °pl�cme� some �ags ��h�jt coald not aE�ord to sod the entfre aiea. $e safd � tise;�z��e had heen part#at7,y �ed'-along fi9th.#venue in keepiug With the landscap#ng � px�.'� fbr a barrier for th�"iesi�nts. They`wer"e hapi.ng that the beautification � �rraj�sE wo�id make it �£��t� mor�`�r2easant for tfie �r�idet�ta.. �-_� i � � 3 ' �' % % [ � `; � : ��,e�, r�. ,� , _. . _ ._, .<. . � �'�� d - x ,�t . � 7 � ��`. ``��S �".� � i � " r� _ � ' _ �, 'r°'' : ^ t �r�; .- �, � • �ie'+j :� � ` .�,,,�T'�,�.�� '� ' " �� �s �` V!/ ;: �° Y°� u �`.�� , . _ �'�: � . . . , - :,c: >Y�'>" �:. � - �> �.' >'sS '�� .&�: Ifai Ct'�fllTSS APRIL 25, t F ° PAGE 3 y "� �;x: � � :,i •g � �. . . �:. �,. .�. _ - - . . - �eutt3a� fi�iv.�t LightiAg at 1�oore �ke ,, : _ _ . , ,:" `'. � g��e�#�_ytated, ti►e,t as the Co�ission vas awar��rihay Were getting together e �#�� �# .gettitig �bids rnxE t4 l�.ght the two tenais �#��cts at �M�re Lake to begin a g� �f some #bghting far aight nse of same•of the:GiE�+'s tennis courts. Moore - '�„p� � s,,cairts we�e ohos�n because of their ceniral location, the beach area Pg=ki*18. •���>�;�� adjacerFt to atty residents. . They hoped to have the lfghts in by `_` ���:��-,� Juae £ar -summer p�ay. �, ���hak2�as+�isakl 8egistraEion - ��su,st�terl th8t the saftball/baseball registraticu had been completed with s �t; t with F.Y.S,A. He'said the prog=ann loaked abaut the same as last year �ti��,�_1itr�.� iuciease in girls� aad ladies` softbali. �his year, since there was a. �et ��.��+a�jke,SR g�crestian Depar.tment of€ered au addit�Qne�.service by helptng wlth the >�g���Y,iut so L2tat besides the set times for registicat3mn, people could also come • � �hs_daq to �be p€£i�e to register. • ��t � �'. , . ��� ., �, ��$�y ��g6ed that Mr. Salas had started a soccer program and had ccme-to ' �, �� �,��. #he iequest that the City run off the copies aunounciag the soccer ;�pgr�,:3ri,t� a'-�egistratfoa fee. He understood €rom Mr. Salas that in previous years ;�� �ee;it�td if��t► collected by the City and the pragr�m was operated in conjunction ���,�� �,i�p=, '�#s year klr., Sal��-*�)HS going to colleet the registLation fee.to buy' �,���$��r* �7.1a,.etc., aud the City voutd only nm off,Che brochures. Mr. Boudreau t��et_� kegqa: i� �i�e Ca�qmission wan[ed to fo1Zw this line. of thinking with an ;�d.#�-•r��iiai #oecer gtogzam af ,activity or did they wat�t ta maintain the policy that they �. ,ytflu�ei +a��c s�tith associationa wl5ich vere non-profft a�h as the: H.A.F- and F•Y•S.A•, _ � ���;�}�y,� y�y pther eugge8tions on a logical so}.ution to this.problem. � ��pq,esg�iai.ped to Ms. Suhrbier the.City's history of operating�witk these �,�gg�g�3,� whers g Liai$an was basically maintained b�t a c�stitutioa which was�'" ,, ;;p�R�qeit: h� �; pseociations and then mutually agreed upou by the Asaociations and � �ie �i.ssiin►. 17�e $ity iuraished t�e facilities. -j z ,�, ��q�-sta�ted that they wer� planning to organfze �r c>wn soecer organization �, � � L#i� ,year. Kridle�* was a1re�Y a me�+er of the Mia9,a#sr� Junior Soccer Association .� ' � �a�1,�; �Salas atated tkiey n�ad&d tfie money from regis�3oct to jain vith th� Minneaota � �i�n#;ot 6o¢cer,�sociaEion att�"for unifoims, etc. H$•:€+�� �y having their own oFgani- � `.�►ti�t,s:'the pr,ogram 4ouid be_ imgroved. � : a�. 3�c,,•_ ,�� , y,stsced �tl�at aaat� aoseern ha t�ad vas L�s�- ti►e �City �hoB� to have' an '` �a' and he did not f��' C}�ate would be any conflict. ; -�)oZCer- Fro&t�Apt. .,, .a�� - �''�� '. .. - , _ „ ': �'�i`y�IS �o8t'ams wouid�t�ava"�irs�'priority. . � ' : � ,�. Fet�csat �aa�tccl tq kuow wLy an lnstructianal Pr�� �� ��� �Q'�ission h� always :1Y,t¢d-x18a; �o1#$y' in.fihe paet to neve� run canpetitive prag�:ams:;:#�Ch the volunteer programs4 � �� �� � F� i ,t�i t _ _ , • _; , ,. �<: , , .z . , ..._. . �� , �_. � �R f � � � � r - ' . ::. � - '. : / . � , ' . =.(. � � � �� °� � � � � ry � � � PAGE 4 ` �' � PARKS & RECBHA If3� C�Il'iiS�iON �$TI3iG 'APRIL 25, 19i7: C , ,. � Mr. Bovdresu stated he did not see this as a dupli,cation. It would work in association �F � with Mr. 3�las' program: He sai.d Dir. S$las basica�ly had a traveling team which played ' throughout the Twin Cifi"e� and C�is instructional ie�gue, which w8s �int ccanpetitive, could teach the basics af soeear f�o� �he sma2ler �ges on up. Mr, galas stated that far sfx weeke,`khe kids lea�ited how to play soccer, formed teams, = and played within the Gity. Af�er th�r.six weeks (in July), they Drganized the traveling � team. He said he was not opposed ta t3�ia inseructio�tal progYam. �.Mr. Baudremn stated that he fe�,�'tao uaariy times they have no eo�trol wer the direction �° of the programs and manp of the prt�g�s4ns become highly campetitive fbr tha younger child �- vhen it should be more tnstxuctiortll> teaching the h#sics of a game and how to enjoy ' the sport. Between the ages af=12 an�et'up, there was enou�h canpetit3on. He thought there was a reai feeling across th� c±wntry that s�netimes we puahed our children i.nto ' competition at soo early=an t�g�y espe"eially,in recreatian when the uitimate goal was enjoyaaettt a�td hap�iness: He t�ughC t�e hockey, bsseball,,and footb.all programs already o< had amee �f€-this instructian, �t he did know that theg had some prohlems with competition ' with the �vwer age levet withitf �hose groups. ' ; �, g��eau statad that tiae Gt�Y�s pragram wbuld begin in June and could take in those � kids not %tt Mr. Salas' t�ave�ittg.team who still crished to play. It would not be in disect eompetitiion with'.i+flr. Ss,�as� t�m• BuG, he stated, the main iss�e was how far did the C�mission want'Lo wurk wftla;�gn i.ndividual citiaen as opposed to recognized Assn's� : tir. Peterson stated he+#�lt u��q unc�mfartable working with an indiyiduat and perhaps � they could work out so� kind-� tr��itional period, with a definite period of time invoLv2d- cvftM M�`. 5a1a8. �ie ��i31d Y�R� Peel comforCaiile with a soccer assoeiation untii � they had lt3vked at their bylaw�; etc.;- to be sure eweryone in Fridley had the opportunity � to'participaC`e. With str�tball; h�eic�ry, football, e€c., eo girl or boy was'refused the oppoxY�a�.ty to participate. ; py;, �oudreau suggested �ltat Mr: Sa1a�'attend au F.y,S.A. meetiug as that might be the lagicai,spansoring organizaticm ta jQ3n. t -p�. �afas eta�ed he wss going xo att�end the nex� F.Y.S.�. meeting. � Mr. Yetersbn sC�ted the Commieision yas at an impasse until there was an organization. � �n sumnary; Mr: Peterson said, thaE .as a citizen tor the people in'Fridleq, Mr. Salas had tequesied �he use of a soacer f��ld and the Ci[y had complied in'trying to give hS.� sQace and that Che City was goiug ta be xunnf�tg an instructional pragram hecause f a# a void in the recreational,gragiam itt the CiEy at this time. Ae ertcouraged Mr. Salas - t� attend the next F•Y•S.A• �eting,and after tkat tneeting, mayfie r[r. Soudreau and ; ti�e C�ma�3ssion members could i�e ava�lable to gefi a soccer association sCarted. At tfiat�po�At, Chzy could consider it &s a regvlar.C�+issfon item. �1r. E�eterson asked ' i�fr. pi�cii�r zo give Mr. Salas`8 copy of the H.A�F• $ylgws. Mr. PeLers6�t sEated that �he �rnimf3asion had certainly �pr��c�,ated everything Mr.,5alas had tlone, but-now they were at the point where they �t�Ed move on to the next "siep. 1" , , � �, . 3:� - .. ' .. `�. � J� �: ..�ie . < < ; ' '�'� �'u. . F_ - , . _ �• � ,� :3±1s du M a$il� x '� .� o-_ tit#,€2r<i , `��3 � tz 3.,- �M ,... ' fie�. �� �� ��V' L�9s"'�x. . Z5 , t; . _ V�r _ . P/I�GB 5 ��.-.:; :; �-t���;:�;,g _�1976-197T 8�$� � � � � ��eT stgt�d that the season had been extreame�y �k'1 nm considering the problem p�a-��ike � the +cakd'Weather. They had about 85i� children which included the �-ESBm Mqekey, girls br'oomball, and-house hockeg. They had 23 House teams, t�li�ag teams; $nd lI. Sreomball teams. The Houae keague had five girls playing tiitsoq, He seid he acuui i�lr.'$wdreau had had a coupie of ineetings and had a iew �zp}��.�,s; and,;hope�ully, through these meetinge s�d expressing some ideas, these ; o� ¢ould be soived. Tk�e me�or problem Was about the klouse League officials. When :�h� had addressad Che C�n+ission last year, they had talked about removing the s�f�.ty. of, sclsedu3fng officials fram the City,-funded director to the direceor in a��,Ag$ociaCfon t�here theze was more or less cot�t�ol• He sai.d he and �r. Boudreau lk�d ah�uC some s�eon gra�nd and, hopefullq, th�r_;�tauld come to a decision on tha[, ssher stated he �aanted to thank Mr. Boutlreau fox �he super job he did despite c� catditions and the sGrilse. ?tr. Boudreau kegt- €nnr rinks uaeable and in good �p�,�� t}��y appregiate3 his coaperatie+a and the escellent job he did. �}�� g��E� that the-ne`a H.A•F• PTesident w�s �'. Jack Hansen, Jr., �o would a8�$r� be£ore the C�ission ior the 1977-19.�$P:�eason• G�tlrtut �a�eked ]br., Fiach� i£ the� Ii.A.g •� b� $���'�8 �+T�th each p8rent of the � boy& ;;��yelistg Ceam so fihe $arent8 were familiar s�iiitli' the .traveiing team rules . s�her,stated that aki Che parents vere requ�ted,-t� Be at'a traveling team meeting E�i�y d�d;�ake aa efforC'to explain to the parenCa what: was going to be done: e�er s�sEed that Mr. Ii�rris had naentianed that sc� lights had been out and had rq�b2em heen,;taken care of2 ua�mau sEated tfiat the lighting was poor at its besC. He said they were°loakia$ aya:�o.may�e replace thQ:iights and weie looking at new syst�s. t�_ ��tngez Q�et attated she wanted :to imow why they did'not ha'ye a park ranger.anymore, what ties p�e�e, and :if some 'ef the vandalism could �ta�!#�=been prevented if there had b8en a park �anger. ,ycjzeau sCNCSd'tliat, based oa his nine months ��$ job and four months working is� gark;ranget,: there'vas no wray he cauld detexns��e'i£ vandalism was prevented ��,,,p�� �angez, The pask ranger aas,�goc+� as x��Ee�,ic � relations persaa� and as a :��.=�„y�indalism. }�� e�i�B the 3ndividual vho c��s;�e park ranger tendered }�is ��tn,plavember sud was now e�loyed as a cusCt��d'��� at Parkview School. P1ens ��e to utiiize, with in[ernal personnel cha��c, a gentlemen'working with the i;}�e�a�tmertt as,a Park/School Ranger-type of ind3:Vidu�i. Then, this gentlemen �d�a �e�rt atGack. So, they 1wd gone ta the•;es�i�ee uaits to:try to reduce the :�a9�. . . -r �£ <� , , � � �. � - � �� PXRKS &. I#SCR�ATTON CQ�lTS�ION t�TItI�:�PlEIL 25, 1977 , �> � PAGE 8 Mr.'Boudrean stated thaC"�h� basic pvs��ion of the P�rk Raager was one of surveillance, Crying to eliminate vand&I.ism b�tw�ea �he schools an$'the parks--a public relations outreach, phe park ran�' had uery iiCtle suthorf�y:' Mr. Boudreau said they were we11 aware that some ki3[�:.of gr�gram was needed aa+� maphe they needed a regular police flfficer who had the autht�t°Lty t� atop and issue aa arrest. Mr. Feterson stated that Chis iCem sltould be put crn the May agenda because by then, there would have been aacither cocirdinating meeting with the schoois.; `NEW BI75iNESS: A. Wi2liam Boatman - Ae�.dent �. $aatman stated tha£.�.n refe;;en2e to Che gark ranger, as far as public relations, he was doing a gaod joix< �iid everybt�dy-.liked him. $uC, as far as doing aaything for the parks, he did not. p3r. $iiat�tatY atate� that ke walked Chrough the park almost daily, = usually;b�tween the hour� of n�ne anb:ten and s�atimes e3even o'clock. ,Atthose times, the pa��s t,�as empty--the vanddliffi�t was occurring att u�eekepds in tFee earlier hours when `the kf8s we�e:partgiug., Mr. $a�turan'staterl thaC, =ba$ic�i33y, h� had attended the meeCing far.th�ae reasons: 1,' ^�u�e�",employmemt for sCud�eiCs 3n the parks. tte stated his;oldest son Ha�# xanYk.ed in tl�e par}�s w�en he was in college and now his;youngesC sori had ap{tYfed an�i had qot gt�t�en a position Mr Boatman sEated he had _! �� s'; ;; cal2gd the City to ae� sahat �he criterfa was to choose these yaung people: � He had 6een talti that the C�ty had many apgiications and those who had worked befare?h�d pre��xenc�; He said he cauld underst�nd:that, hat ehey ' al&o.lsad aaid `tk�at the new applicants were screened on theibasis of their '' e�tper%ence. �;, BoatmaA stated that it did not require.much experience to mow lawns, pairi� fenc�s, eta,' ge said it was ve�y difficuj:t for yaung people ta get �c�b�, aiid sin�e these jobs were being paid for with tax moaay, the q�ang peop2e sho+ald-have firs¢ shot at �he fobs, He eaid he feZt $ very fazr way to choi�s these yo�#�g people tor the yobs was on s lottery basis. If it was &Bne on that basis, he-would feei h3s son had gbtten a fai�:s3fake. 2,. �1e. �csstman sta�ed he'taas.g�owing more and more disenchanted with what was going ou ftt'the p�rks a�d'Locke'Paric;was well on iCS way to not being a park; He wa� cnncern�d a�iout the mound of dirt behind t�ie archery range t�rgets �G Locke Paric,` He said aayone wa'2king on Che other sfde of the mo?ind cc�uld nat a?ge anyiine shooCing anci could get hurt. �le felt the �nountl a# dirt �hould #�e xemoved. ,Another Ghing about the :arclrer}r range ti2at 3�e felt w�s park gallirkion were the persts used to mark of£ the yards. ,� sa3d these �re n�t nec�SSary attid did ndt beautify the;park in any way, $.- At Che'=end of Rice Creek Boulevard was a baseball field wi.th a parking lat far the pkayers � speetators. There'was piea€y Qf parking, but ;f�stead the:peaple w�e parking on both a#des af the street aliowing attly oxee car tt� get tiirough on the stzeet and the vie�r was obstructed at the intersectiv�+. H� s&�.d parking on these streets should be prohibited. ,, ',` _ � � � �.�: . . � ` , ,, �� , -, � � a � , . . . - -- � ��- ,—.. — — — �j. f i:' � � < rt� f. ��.:� � ���,$aud�eau aLat.�d he h$d nt�Ci€ied the Police Depax �` � about the sCreet parking. �, `}�t, g�s� ,,�ated he t�i�uid also litce to know how ma�q"�i?ttds were allocated to the � e�e.� qr�;t,ke soc�e� Eield at Y,ucke Park. He rea�ig €elt that the City had to t � ;�' ftiG41'ar pd. Chis cnntinuaus expansion s� develapwent. It seeoed the Gity '.t�g, `�' '�� trging [o do th3ngs higgex aad better aAd these things alwa*s came ���;�.,_. }�,had seen the wildtife disappear from tI�e :parks• The real'solution �y��{� ��;�st uti�izetion of motorized vehicles in F'ridley, because they were ;���.�s�BCia�`;hf,7t�s, Ms, ga4tman said he appreciated the Comnission's patience dn �, Iie�en�iig ta t�. � ,�, .�wd�eau sGated- that if 'i�'. B�tman would get a petxtion •from his neighborhood, �ti.ylGCttt���lp-in getting paY�.�n$ eiiminated on Rice Creek-8oulevard by the baseball ; ; =�j,$, �gr.'�psstteau :eaid L#te!GitY appreciated this kind of input. ,� '����€Cated`k�e *+ould also trq to get_a petitfoa far a stop sign.at that � q���tio�:,: t: � p��.�$�+n,st;stecl Li�at the C�fa�?� had talked abouE a snawmobile policy for the - �� ,�i,ty.at-;��i-itareit,28ti� meeting, and they would appreciate any input Mr. Boatman had olte th#s ;sub��t withiII the nest month;or so. � - ' .�, gn��ns�, al�o s�.Ated he felt the Parks & Ha�=eation BePBxtment should give serious ���„�touglst-�s 'aeq�J:ring Che taad aCross tLe tracks froeq` Ehe e�isting Locke Park �e€ore ��.�°�"a�ek lsi� was totally indusCtia�.izeA: k B. Rac�C1�.E��,tTs� Re9uesKs � �� �,t�dj�t�u;��at�d that t�e�t k�ad quite a few faciii� ase Xaguests for softba2l fields. ` �;�.`�sad,-s�tli��gt1 fielda in the past.: Ae said the Co�is$i� ttee�e�.to [ake .a lvok at ; ;j�St,;T�� prt��y had beea on the outaide use: of the fields, qnother ite�n oE Cammission ? �pm�gta.iQta&-'�ossiblg ��troll�.ng same-of the nsage with �ame icind of fee. � �: 1. �.; ��AS La��a Par& : �, �r, gauStreBu state��t.Che'City of Spr�$ L� Park had requested use ,� ,p�`.}�i�gen.gs�k aAd ��aLmery F8rk and that mps; of the children partfcipating °` '�e l►ri3leg.phi�dta� �*3�0 �rould be elfminaEe�;'"�.£ fihis request was not �_ _ :�t,p�axed, Tyey aisc' i�iii¢atad that this req��= h8d been honored in tt�e past. ,� � �, �gtersan stated �hat, to his knowledge, t1�i�t' liad never beea brought � �o �}c���ai�ssion be�++��:, �Ad there was nottEisti� "�.n t`!te minutes saying they }t�,��`Cpt heaored th�:��c�sL"; He said he wtutld feel more comfo�table if.' _ .�1r, ��eau would ���"-t�Yh the St: ypnis Park pazks Director'and.get more inf�rrm�tfpn,' If St. L�is Park waa running dupEtcate programs to Frtdley's � �rog�C�ms -and, the youngsters in that area f+ere ;►asticipating in both programs °-aad eatsaing problems with soaie of Fridkey's scheduled activities, that was ; p�te thiug� bnt if the children were not pattiCipating in Fr3d�ey's programs, c�ts E$a Sems�f�sion ahould take a look at it: �S. Petersac s.t$ted this item �����- •���� a$�� to tbe�, May 9th apeeial meeting �ts a, spec'ial item of basiness, �,, , a�,'�►ey 8hould have a SEaff recommendation oat it. : ' � k , ^= � ' �� : : , _ _ _ � , _ �_ ._ �� E .. f • . � ,. �. . . �� '}' - " . � . .. PARK'S �CREATiON COI4SIS$�iON T�ETING APRIL ZS 11?7 PAG$ 8 2. `Narth Suburban Wc�nen's �6ftbai'3 League �',`` �+y, ,�ogC was at the meet3n$ t€�. request one Pield for seven ever�ings on �ursd;ays during 3une a�td par� of August for Che North Suburban Wamen's " gaftball League;. S�e 3re�e residents of Fridley and xhey were &ponseared by plympia Consttuction in Fr�t:dley.. MOTTQN by Jan S�s$ar, seeonded by Robin Suhrhier, that becausa the North �ub�rban S�omea`s�Scsfttzai] L��e was�a Fridl�y team���3n t�ie �Coo�ission'�� deEirzition, they.be all�ti.ta participate and c�se a Fridley field;if `� thep �eould 6e schadulaki.�ttte+ Ehe program. t�on a vc�ice wote, all voting� :aye; the matioa �arriet}"�nimously. 3. Medtronica, ine.: _ ` Mr: Peterson sta�ed �h�t th� G�ission d#d have a policy thae, it a person worked pr Zived=i.r� ��tdley, they coatd use Fridley facilities; and it was an administ�ative proeedure thraugh t�ie Larks & Recreation � pegartment office. M�tronfes would_quai�fy because they vrere in the - �ity, but they had to ec�e tp Mr. B�dreau ot� a saheduling bas'Le. . Comni,ssion poiicy was :�Y�aC a�l programs hac� to cooperate so aIi got equaT us�8e• 4. �r��,dley pthleY.�.� .4sso#iat�4cF {Covenant C�rch) �r, goufl�reau-s�ated t'tiey were asking fo� orte Saturday in Jitly and had � been!sliowed to'nse F�3dtep'� facilieies in past,years. i �t, peterson s�d tha �aven�+t Church hac'1 been A1lowed to play before and should he_ailcsws3'to pl�y again;.this y�ar. ; �, t � . ... .. . . . . i . �:� ��c, pe[erson s�kated that the �t�t£sdti.o� had:a poYfcy�by action that they no2�have any ;" innd raising saftbali touznam�ttts it� the City otlier than the J�ycees-and the Firemen's ; t�ssaci�tion:` '�3s e13m,inated any reguests of t�tat nature. I OTF3$&� SS; , Mr, poudreau stated it� had a 1�xtE'x addressed to Mr. Dennis Sehnei!der, Ccruncilman, ; su�gest3ng 2 park be p�t in ti8tween.pld Central and Mississippi SCreet. Mr. Boudreau : stated this:had been p.tt into the garks plau and he gave it only as a matter of infarmaCion,. �ir, gp�adrean stated �e had ariitir�her request fraQS a gentlematt who w�nt�d to put in a redt�iiod fince betweet�'�ii� p�eyyertY and Riee Cre�k park and was as�Cing Che City to reintlsctrse hfm for half-th� r„psY of a ehain linic.fence. ± ' Mr. P�'Lerson stated th�E unle�°§-the'City Council a%anged the pbli�y,- the Commission k�ad said "'no" fran the seandpaiixt r�i vandalism ��d then-Che City was arked to keep � the fei�ce maintained . ., � �,.: • �i � -� =�, � . � � � �� � � 't _ ; j< �. � . . � . . .v .. effilX.4 & . . . , . . . .. � . . � �.aS.v��:�... $��'" �" �'+'-r N �' �.. r,,,:. , �,., � t, Syhrhier stated that the �hrubs around Farr Lak� 3ke¢�,Ysd clipping and adequate x.: �i,ghting w� a�teeded in North ;nnsbruck Park. � �l��f±�. _ ���,- �t�,.,T� See,�er, sectruded;6y Robin Suhrbier, to adj+c�rn the meeting at 10:20 p.m. ,t. �Y � vc��.�a vate,- a11 vot#� $ye, the motion carried unanimously. - , .�3;� �,es�reet�#u72y submitted, �' � � . �� � . ,�i�'sl:E}tg. Secretary � � ;, � � ._, , £ f - �'_�; � � �� � � � G _ ; � ;. � � �`� _�X . . .. . . ��. � y �� Y. ... � � _ ?iS � ..�•� . . . � - . . . X � . . � . .. . . . . . _ . ... . . � .. . � . � ... . .' `�-!!4 .r �ik � r:`Fn' �.. . , . . . . ,. . .. . . . . .. . �. 4 � .. . � i� � . . �. . . . : � . . . .. . � F- - " . <.�. . . . . . . • � �ITY OF FftIDLEY 6% APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1977 Pa e 1 CALL TO ORDER: Chairwoman Schnabel called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Qthers Present: Schnabel, Gabel, Plemel, Barna Kemper Ron HoZden, 8uilding Inspection Officer APPROVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES� APRIL 26, 197? Mrs. Gabel requested that the tenth and eleventh paragraphs on Page 5 be stricken from the records� MOTION by Mr• Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, that the minutes of the April 26, 1977, Appeals Commission meeting be approved as amended• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously- Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that the Appeals Commission would be handZing the first four items on the Agenda at the same time• 1• TABLED= REQUEST FOR VARIAfdCES OF THE FRIDLFY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS� SECTION 205.064, 1, TO REDUCE THE LOT AREA FROM 10,0�❑ SQUARE FEET TO 9,600 SQUARE FEET, AND SECTION 2a5.063, 4, C, TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROfI 30 FEET TO 29 FEET {1/4 OF LOT DEPTH}, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO FAMILY DWELIING ON LOT 3, BLOCK 2, MEADOWMOOR TERRACE, THE SAME BEING 1326-1328 OSB4RNE ROAD N.Eo, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA= {Request by Lambert & Peterson, Inc•, 136� Osborne Road N.E�, Fridley, Minnesota 55432}= 2- TABLED� REQUEST FOR VARIANCES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS� SECTION 205•D63, 1� TO REDUCE THE LOT AREA FROCi 10,000 SQUARE FEET TO 9,OOC SQUARE FEET, AND SECTIQN 2Q5•053, 3, C, TO ftEDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK . FROM 3G FEET TO 29 FEET {1/4 OF LOT DEPTH}, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO FAMILY DWELLING ON LOT 5, BLOCK 2, MEADCWMOOR TERRACE, THE SAME BEING 1344-1346 OSBORIQE ROAD N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA• {Request by Lambert & Peterson, Inc•, 136� Osborne ftoad N•E•, Fridley, Minnesota 55432}. `�" �� APPEALS COMMISSTON MEETING — MAY 10, 1977 Page 2 3• TABLED� REQUEST FOR UAftIANCES-OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLL4WS: SECTION 205•063, 1, TO REDUCE THE LOT AREA FROM 10,0�0 SQUARE fEET TO 9,6�0 3QLlARE FEET, AND SECTION 205•053, 4, C, Td REDUCE TNE REARYARD SETSACK FROM 30 FEET TO 29 FEET {1/4 OF LOT DEPTH}, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO FAMILY DWELLING ON LOT 23, BL4CK 2, MEADOWMOOR TERRACE, THE SAf1E BEING 1345-1347 MEADOWMOOR DRIVE N•E•, FRIDLEY, (1INNESOTA• {Request by Lambert and Peterson, Inc•, 1360 Osborne Road N.E�+ Fridley, Minnesota 55432}- 4• TABLED� REQUEST FOR VARIANCES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS� SECTION 205•063� 1, TO ftEDUCE THE L4T AREA FROM 10,�0� SQUAftE FEET TO 4,OOQ SQUARE FEET, AND SECTION 2D5•�63, 4, C, TO REDUCE THE REAR YkRD SETBACK FROM 3Q FEET TO 29 FEET {1/4 OF LOT DEPTH}, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO FAMILY DWELLING ON LOT 22, BLOCK Z, MEADOWMOOft TERRACE, THE SA(1E BEING 1345-1347 MEADOWMOOR DRIVE N.E•, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA• {Request by Lambert & Peterson, 7,360 Osborne Road N.E., Fridlay, Minnesota}• The above variances requested are on property that is presently zoned C-1, and any approval of variances would be contingent upon approval of a rezoning request to ft-2- MOTION by Mro Barna, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to open the Public Hearing on the first four items. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 7:3? Paf1. MOTION by Mr• Barna, seconded by Mrs� Gabel, that the Appeals Commission remove the first four items from the Table• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairwoman Schnabel explained to the Commission that at the May 4, 1977, Planning Commission meeting the decision had been made to recommend to City Council denial of Mr• Peterson's requests for rezoninq with the recommendation that the City Council read a11 the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting to be able to know the feelings of the neighbors and the Commission members regarding those four lots= Mr. Peterson of Lambert & Peterson, 1,360 Osborne Road N-E= was present at the meeting- Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that Mr. Peterson would have to indicate any changes to his requests before it went before the City Council• Chairwoman Schnabel asked Mr. Peterson if he wished to ask for variances on all four lots• . . � APPEALS COMMTSSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1977• Page 3 �� Mr. Peterson indicated that he wished to withdraw his • requests for variances on the lots located on Meadowmoor Drive. He said he planned to build R-1 dwellings on Meadowmobr Drive and R-2 dwellings on Osborne Road. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF ftEPORT A• PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.Ob3� 1, requiring a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet in an R-2 {two family dwelling areas} zone• Public purpose served to avoid the condition of over crowding of the residential neighborhood� Section 2�5.063, 4, C� requiring a minimum rear yard of 25i of the lot depth with a minimum of 25 feet in an ft-2 {two family dwelling areas} zone• Public pUrpose served is to provide desired rear yard space to be used for green areas which add to the attractability of the neighborhood= B• STATED NARDSHIP� • Lots, if rezoned to R-2, cannot be developed withcut requested variances= C• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW� The configuration of the lot is such that in order to maintain the existing front yard setback of 35 feet, the structure must be shifted to the rear. This shift reduces the rear yard to less than 25i of the lot depth required by City Code- Approval of this request would be contingent upon rezoning of the property= Mrs. Gabel wanted to know if both the Planning Commission and the neighbors wanted R-1's on Meadowmoor Drive= Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that there had been mixeo feelings regarding the lots on �eadowmoor; some of the neighbors wanted the lots to remain as C-1 and others would rather see R-1's built• Mr. Peterson indicated that if the City Cou�cil denied his request for rezoning to R-2 on Osborne Road, he would probably withdraw his request for R-1 rexoning on Meadowmoor Drive• � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1977 Page 4 , '� � Chairwoman Schnabel verified that Mr. Peterson would have the option to withdraw his requests. Mr. Holden, Mr• Peterson, and the Appeals Commission i discussed the plans that Mr. Peterson had for the R-2 dwellings to be built on Osborne Road. Mrs• Gabel wanted to know exactly what Mr- Peterson would be requesting at the City Co�ncil meeting. Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that Mr. Peterson would be requesting to make the two lots on Osborne Road as R-2 and the two lots on Meadowmoor as R-1• Mr• Peterson indicated that the homes would be built for resale purposes- Mr• Maxey of 1413 Meadowmoor Arive wanted to know what would happen to the lots if City Council denied Mr. Peterson's requests to rezone to R-2 on Osborne Road and Mr. Peterson withdrew his requests to rezone to R-Z on fieadowmoor Drive- Chairwoman Schnabel told him that the lots would then remain as C-1 lots. Mr• Maxey wanted to know if the people on Osborne Road would be notified of that meeting. He indicated that many of the people on Osborne Road assumed the lots were to be kept as C-Z• � Chairwoman Schnabel said that i1r. 8oardman, the City Planner, had indicated at the Planning Commission meeting that, in this particular case, the people within 2�0 feet of the lots in question would be sent notices of the City Council meeting. Chairwoman Schnabel also indicated that the people on Osborne Road had no right to assume anything until a final decision had been reached by the City touncil or if Mr� peterson would withdraw his entire request. She said that if the people on Osborne Road were opposed to the building of R-2's on those lots, they should be at the City Council meeting. Chairwoman Scfinabel told the audience that if they did not receive a notice of the May 16, ],977, City Council meeting, that they should call City Hail to confirm that the items would be appearing before the City Council on that date. Mr• Heille of 1418 Meadowmoor Drive wanted to know if Mr• Peterson owned the lot located between the Beauty Shop and the house on Central dven�e {Lot 27}• Mr• Peterson indicated that Mr•Chies owned that � particular lot• �� . • -- __— � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10,.1977 Page S Mr. Heille want to know what Lot 27 was zoned aso �� Mr. Holden indicated that it was zoned as R-1� Mr. Heille suggested that all the remaining lots in the area should be zoned R-1• Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to Mr• Heille that he should consult the Zoning Map located at City Hall whenever he had a question regarding the zoning on any lot- Mr. Holden asked Mrs• Peterson that if he got approval for the rezoning and the variances, would he be building the houses at the same time. Mr. Peterson indicated that he would build on all four lots at the same time� MOTION by Mr= the Public Hearing= the motion carried closed at 8:1D P•M. Plemel, seconded by Mr• Barna, to close Upon a voice vote� all voting aye, unanimously• The Public Hearing was Mr. Holden indicated that there were at least four structures Iike the ones Mr• Peterson proposed to build located in the City• He said thai all were working out fine both structurally and aesthetically� The Appeals Commission discussed further the deisgn plans of the double bungalows that Mr. Peterson was proposing to build on the two lots on Osborne Road� MOTION by �r. Barna, seconded by Mr. Plemel, that the Appeals Commission recommend for approval the request fcr variances of the Fridley City Code as follows= Section 205=064, 1, to reduce the lot area from Z0,000 square feet to 9,6D� square feet, the same being 1326-1328 Osborne Road N-E=, Fridley, Min�esota AtdD Section 2�5•�63, 1� to reduce the lot area from 10,00� square feet to 9,0�� square feet the same being 1344-1346 Osborne Road N.E�, Fridley, Minnesota; AND section 265.�63, 4, C� to reduce the rear yard setback from 3❑ feet to 29 feet {1/4 of 1ot death} to allow the construction of two far�ily dwellings on Lot 3 and Lot 5, Block 2, Meadowmoor Terrace• UPON a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously- Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that the Appeals Commission had approved the variance requests conti�gent upon approval of a rezoning request to R-2. �.e - - N6 — MAY 1�, 1977 6 5• REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF SECTION 205-053, 5, {g4}, PRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 5 FEET TO 4 FEET, TO ALLOW A GARAGE ADDITION OF 22 FEET TO AN EXISTING GAftAGE, LOCATED ON LOTS 5 and 6, 6LOCK 11� PLYMOUTH ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 4638 2 1/2 STREET N•E•, FRIDLEY, MIhNESOTA- {Request by Carroll L� Jensen, 4638 2 1/2 Street N�E•� Fridley, Minnesota 55432•} MOTION by Mr• Barna, seconded by Mrs• Gabel, to open the Pubiic Nearing• Upon a voice vote,all voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 8:2� P•M• A• n C ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT� Section 2�5•053, 4, B4, requiring a side yard setbaek of 5 feet from an attached garage- Public purpose served is to provide space hetween individual structures to reduce conrlayration of fire, to provide access to the rear yard for emergencies and to limit the condition of crowding in the residential neighborhood• STATED HARDSHIP� The garage I now have is too smalZ and I would like roam for another car• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFP REPORT: The proposed attached garage additicn will be approximately 4 feet from the comraon prcperty line• The neighbors detached garage is located 3 feet to the rear of the praposed additio»'s rear wall• The neighbors �arage is 2•2 feet from the common property line• Note that if the petitioner`s proposed garage were detached, he could build to within 3 feet of the common line• Mr• Jensen, Mr• Holden, and the Appeals Commission discussed the plans that Mr- Jensen nad with him• Mr• Jensen also indicated that he mainly wanted the addition for more storage space and workshop space• f1r• Barna wanted to know if Mr- Jensen did any kind of engine repair or body work in his garage• Mr• Jensen said that he did not•. He only wanted the addition because he needed more space for a work bench and to store items• i • ____--- � � � �.�I � APPEkLS tOMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1977 Paqe 7 MOTION by Mr• P2eme1, seconded by the public hearing• Upon a voice vote, �" public hearing was closed at 8:26 P.M• Mrs• Gabel, to close all voting aye, the Mrs• Gabel said that since Mr• Jensen wanted the garage for the additional storage space and for a work bench, aesthetically she thought tha variance should be granted• Mr• Holden indicated that there was enough room to the North of Mr• Jensen�s home te allow for any emergency access to the back of the house� MOTION by Mr• plemel, seconded by Mrs• Gabel, to approve the request for variance of Section 205•Q53, 5, {B4}� Fridley City Code, to reduce the required side yard setback from five feet to four feet, to allow a garage addition of 22 feet to an existing garage, located on Lots 5 and 6, Block 11, plymouth Addition, the same being 4638 2 112 Street N•E-, Fridley, Minnesota• UPON a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to Mrs• Jensen that the Appeals Commission had approved his variance request and he was free to apply for a building permit• 6• REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF SECTION 205•054, 2, {A3}, FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE MTNIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREt1ENT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT OF A SPLIT LEVEL DESIGN OF THREE BE4ROOMS OR LESS, FROM 1,020 SQUARE FEET TO 928 SRUARE FEET, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTIQN QF A HQUSE AND GARAGE ON LOTS 27, 28, 29 and 30, BLOCK Q, RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS, THE SAME BEIN6 8241 RIVERVIEW TERRpCE N•E•, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA• {Request by Robert Mikulak, 1420 3rd Street N.E-, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55418}• MOTION by Mrs• Gabel, seconded by Mr• Barna, to open the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 8:30 P•�. %3 [�.� APPEALS COMMISSI6N MEETING — MAY Z�, Z977, Page 8 �4 a. 0 C ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205•054, 2, living areas in the level design placed feet• {A3} requiring 1�2❑ square feet of upper 2 levels of a house of split on a lot in excess of 9,000 square public purpose served is to provide for adequate house size and living area in residential buildings• STATED HARDSHIP: We feel that 928 square feet is adequate space for our family• We do not wish to have to heat the additional floor space• The'rooms are designed to meet all the space requirements• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The petitianeris proposing a 4 level split design with essentially 2 levels finished with room on the 3rd level for a bedroom and recreation room• Were this a 2 level split entry, or split foyer house, with the same outside dimensions, it would meet zoning code requirements of 768 square feet of gross flcor area• Please note that the setbacks for front yard off Rivervzew Terrace are to 6� 35 feet from the District Court Line• Mr• Mikulak, Mr• Holden, and the Appeals Commission discussed the plansthat Mr• Mikulal< had for the house he proposed to build• MOTION by Mr• Barna, seconded by �rs• Gabel, to close the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was closed at 8:45 P�M• MOTION by Mrs• Gabel, seconded by Mr• Barna, to approve the request for variance of Section 2�5�654, 2, {A3}, Fridley City Code, to reduce the minimum square footage requirement for a single family dwelling unit of a split level design of three bedrooms or less, from 1�020 square feet to 928 square feet, to allow the construction of a house and garage on Lots 27, 28, 29 and 3�, Block Q, Riverview Heights, the same being 8241 Riverview Terrace N•E•� Fridley, Minnesota• � � � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1977 Page 9 r �� UPQN a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried � unanimously• Chairwoman Schnabel explained to Mr• Jensen that the Appeals �ommission had approved his variance request and that he was free to apply for a Building Permit• 7• REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF SECTION 205•053, 4, {6,1} FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE �INIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMEPdT ON THE LIVING SIDE OF A DWELLING FROM 10 FEET TO 5 FEET, SO THAT A SINGLE ATTACHED GARdGE CAN BE CONVERTED INTO A FAMILY ROOM, LOCATED ON LOT 4� BLOCK 1, DON'S SECOND ADDITIOtd, THE SAME BEING 6548 CHANNEL ROAD N�E•, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA• {Request by David Bona, 6548 Channel Road N•E•� Fridiey, Minnesota 55432}. MOTION by Mr• P1eme1, seconded by Mr� Barna, to open the Public Hearing- Upon a voice vote, al1 voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 8:5� P•M• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT A• PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY RERUIREMENT: Section 205•053, 4, {b,�} requiring a 10 foot side yard setback for living area in an R-1 zone• � Public puroose served by this section of the code is tc maintain a minimum of 2� feet between iiving areas ir adjacent structures and �� feet between garages and living areas in adjacent structur�s, to re�uce exposure to conflag�ation of fire between structures• Also tc allow for aes*hetically pleasing open areas around residential structures• B- STATED HARDSNIP� I have a single attached garage which is too small• I would like to convert the existing garage into a farnily room, and build a double car detached garage in tne- Back yard• . APPEALS COMMISSION MEETZNG — MAY 10, 1977 Pa e 10 ,�6 C• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The South wall of 6548 Channel Road {which is the garage wall}• is 16•2 feet from the living area of the house to the South• The owner inCends to remove his existing garage door and driveway, and build a new double garage in the rear• The actual hazard of a garage is greater than that of a family room• Therefore, converting this garage to living area would reduce the fire hazard exposure to the neighboring house to the South- The typical separation of two living areas is 20 feet• Mr. Bona, Mr• Holden, and the Appeals Commission discussed Mr. Bona's plan• He had a picture of the home as it presently appeared• Ne indicated on the picture the area where he planned to build a double car garage. Chairwoman Schnabel asked Mr� Bona when he planned to begin construction. Mr. Bona replied that he would start in about six months. He said that he would build the double car garage first and then tfie family room• Mr. Holden indicated that the two projects would have to be done at the same time; or at least within a short time of each other. Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that the intent of reo,uiring the simultaneous construction would be so the requestor would not have two garages at the same time• Mr. Bona indicated to the Appeals Commission that the present driveway and.curbing would be removed soon and the driveway would be moved to the new position. Chairwoman Schnabel wanted to know how Mr• Bona intended to heat the new addition• Mr. Bona had no idea at the time- Mr. Bona explained to the Commission the locations of the entrances in regards to the proposed fam'ly room. MOTYON by Mr• Barna, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was cZosed at 9:d0 P.M. � 0 � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, Z977 Page 11 %% The Appeals Commission discussed the request• Mr. Barna thought the proposed plan would upgrade the house• MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barna, that the Appeals Commission approve the request for variance of Section 205.�53, 4, {6,1} Fridley City Code, to reduce the minimum side yard setback requirement on the living side of a dwelling from ten feet to five feet, so that a single attached garage can be converted into a family room, located on Lot 4, Block 1, ➢on's Second Addition, the same beiny 6548 Channel Road N•E•, Fridley, Minnesota• UPON a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously= Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to Mr� Bana that the Appeals Commission had approved his request and he was free to apply for a Building Permit• She also told him that the City would require that he not use tF�e existing garage as garage space once the detached garage was finished� 8• REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF SECTION 205=053, B, i5,�} TG ftEDUCE THE SIDE SIDE YARD WIDTH ON A STREET ST_�F OF A CORNER LOT, FROM THE RERUIRED 17=5 FEET TO 6•5 FEET, TO ALLOW A 16 FOOT x 26 FDOT ADDITION, ON LOT 28, BLOCK 6, PEARSON'S CRAIGWAY ESTATES SECOND ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7847 ALDEN WAY NoE., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA� {ftequest by Donald J• Leivermann, 78N7 Alden Way N•E•, Fridley, Minnesota 55432}• MOTION by Mrs• Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 9:05 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIRE�ENT� Section 2�5=�53, 4, B{Sa} Corner lot side yard set6ack of 17.5 feet for living area of structure= Public Purpose served by tfiis section of the code is to maintain a higher degree of traffic visibility and reduce the light of sight encroachment into the neighbors front yeard. � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, �977 Page 12 �� B. STATED HAftDSHIP: This addition would enable the owners to double the size � of a very small kitchen and provide a larger living and dining room which are badly needed for the purpose of business-related entertaining• New construction costs make building prohibitive• C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The proposed addition has been plotted on the survey submitted and shows the corner side yard setback at 6.79 feet, with a distance of 18.5 feet from the curb to the proposed wall line- As near as can be determined, extending the North wall to 16 feet to the North wi11 not impede vision of the intersectiono In a typical Fridley neighborhood with a 50 ft. right of way and 36 ft• wide street, the boulevard is usually 7 ft. wida� Addin9 17 1/2 feet to the ? foot boulevard, a typical c�rb to house distance of 24 1/2 feet is encountered= In this request the curb to house distance will be 18 1/2 feet. MOTION by Mr� Barna, seconded by Mrs• Gabel, that the Appeals Commission receive a letter from Victor P� Seiler dated May 9, 1977, supporting the variance reques't by the Leivermann's• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, �he letter was received and would be made part of the file= Mra Leivermann, Mr. Holden, and the Appeals Commission discussed the proposed plan= The Appeals Commission asked several questions regarding the proposed addition and how it would be sit�ated on the lot and its closeness to the street. Mr. Leivermann had appropriate answers to all the questions• Mr. Paul Burkholder wanted to go on record as encouraging the Appeais Commission to approve Mra Leivermann's request• He said that Mr. Leivermann was an asset to the neighborhood and the neighbors would like to keep him in the neighborhood� Ne continueo to say that he thought that what Mr. �eivermann intended to do would be aesthetically good and couldn't see why anyone would object• Mr. Leivermann indicated to the Appeals Commission the people he had talked to and that none of them said they were opposed• � � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 1�, 1977 Page 13 MOTION by Mr• Barna, the Public Hearing- Upon Public Nearing was closed• seconded by Mrs• Gabel, to close ,�� a voice vote, all voting aye, the Mrs• Gabel asked if Mr. Leivermann intended to put a basement under the addition• Mr• Leiverman� said that•he would put a fu11 basement under the new addition- MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs• Gabel, that the Appeals Commission approve Mr. Leivermann's request for variance of section 205.�53, B, d5,a} to reduce the side yard width on a street side of a corner lot, from the required 17•5 feet to 6•5 feet, to allow a 16 foot x 26 foot addition, on Lot 28, Block 6, Pearson's Craigway Estates Second Addition, the same being 7847 Alden Way N•E•, Fridley, �innesota- Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to Mr. Leivermann that the Appeals Commission had approved his variance request. and that he was free to apply for a Building Permit• Chairwoman Schnabel declared that the Appeals Commission would be taking a ten minute break at 9:25 P=M. Chairwoman Schnabel called the meeting back to order at 9:35 P•M. 9• REQUEST FOR VARIANCES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS� SECTION 2D5�054, 2, {A,3} TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT QF A SPLIT LEVEL DESIGN OF THREE SEDROOMS OR LESS, FROM 1,020 SQUARE FEET TO 960 SQUARE FEET, dND SECTION 205.055, 2, A, TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT ALL LOTS HAVIN6 A MINIMUM OF LOT AREA OF 9,000 SQUARE FEET SHALL HAVE A MINI�U� OF A SINGLE STALL GARAGE, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DWEL�IN6 ON LOT 3, BLOCK 2, HILLCREST ADDITION, THE SAME BEIN6 7135 EAST RIVER ROAD N•E., FRIDLEY MINNESOTA= {Request by Steven 0'Quinn, 994 NE Lynde Drive, Apt- 6, Fridley, Minnesota 55432}= {S• J• Construction, Inc., John Doyle}� MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs• Gabel, to open the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, ali voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 9:4D P•M. :� APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1�77 Page 14 A. f:� Ca PUBLTC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT� Section 205•054, 2� {A,3} requiring 1,020 square feet in the upper two levels of a split level design house on lots over 9,000 square feet. Public purpose served is to provide for adequate house size and living area in r2sidential buildings• Section 205.055, 2, A, requiring a minimum of a single stall garage on lots over 9,0�0 square feet• Public purpose served is to provide space storage during inclement weather as well goods and materials which would otherwise pollution• STATED HARDSHIP: for automobile as to house cause visual If a garage is required on our new home, the prica will be in excess of $37,500• We have applied for an MHFA Loan at 6 1/2i interest and if the total acquisition cost exceeds $3?,500 the home does not qualify for the low interest and we will not qualify to buy it. Please see attached excerpts from the MHFA manual• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW= A survey of houses on similar sized lots on East River Road shows the following sized houses: 7155, 24' x 3b'; 71B1, 24' x Z8'; 7201, 24' x 32'; 727,5, 25' x 41'• The respective fioor areas are 864, 672, 768, 1,�25 square feet. {Note that these are original house sizes before any additions}. The proposed building site is not bordared immediately by any deveZoped lots- f1re Doyle, Mr. Holden, and the Appeals Commission reviewed the proposed house pJ.ans. Mr. Doyle explained to the Commission that Mr. 0`Quinn was planning to buy the home through the MHFA Program which was a program designed specifically for young people who didn't have super incomes and were buyzng their first home. He said that in this Program, the buyer was limited to a maximum sale price of $37,500• Chairwoman Schnabel wented to k�ow how it would effect the people if at the time they receive the loan they qualified but then their incomes increase; and what if at a later date the people built an addition onto their homes that would increase the value of the home• � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10� 1977 Pa e 15 Mr• Doyle indicated that the program had no provisions Sa` � to increase the hou�e payments after the home had been purchased• He said that this Program was not like the old FHA 235 Program. He said that this Program was set up in such a way that it takes very,.very responsible peo�leo He said that the people ?n the Program would not be going into the homes with �0 down- Mr• Doyle explained to the Appeals Commission that the big problem that this Program had run into were two-fold� a} Finding people that would fall into the income b�acket- b} Einding some place where they could build the homes in decent neighborhoods and still keep the price down• Mrs• Gabel indicated that she had talked to a reaitor who was familiar with that Program and he had said that the requirements for the Program were very strinqent and was not an easily obtainable loan- Mr• Doyle indicated of all the people that apply for a loan under this Program, about one in fifteen qualify� Mra Doyle indicated to the Appeals Commission that the � proposed house would be 960 square feet� He said that the lot was not as exper:sive as a typical F�idley lot. Ne indicated that the proposed lot was valued at 57,0�0� Chairwoman Schnabel said that she thought the last 50 foot lot sold in Riverview Heights area was valued a* $12,00�. Mrs• Gabel wanted to know how the home was to be located on the lot. She asked if there was going to be space left for the building of a garage in the future= Mr. Doyle said that space for a future garage was going to be allowed for. Mr. Doyle indicated that the home he proposed to build was very typical to the homes in the Riverview Heights area. Chairwoman Schnabel wanted to know how soon Mr• Doyle intended to start building, if the requests were approvedo Mr. Doyle said that he hoped to start within the month- Mr. Doyle indicated th�t he felt that it would be the buyers intent to bUild a garage in the future. S,� APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, Z977 Rage 16 Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that it was the City's main concern with garages was to provide some type of storage area for the accessory items that people accummulate in addition to the cars• She said that in terms of visual aesthetics it would be better to have a 9arage. She said that over the past years the Commission had becpme aware that with the increase in costs, for some people it was not financially realistic to put a garage on the house at the time of construction= Mr• Plemel wanted to know if Mr- Doyle was putting in a paved driveway. Mr• Doyle said that he would be putting in an asphalt driveway along side the home. Mr. Tomczyk of 3327 Pierce Street NE showed co�cern about Mr. Doyle's plan to run the asphalt driveway from the house all the way to Easi River Road. He wanted to know what Mr- Doyle was planning to do regarding the easement left for Meyers Street• Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that at the present time there appeared to be no plans to put in the street. She said that it could be dependent on what the County planned to do with East River Road. Mr= Holden indicated that it seemed that the most logical thing to do with this easement would be to make it south yard area• Mr� Tomczyk said that that would mean there would 6e about nine turnoffs from East River Road• Mr• Holden indicated that he agreed with the fact that it would be nice to make Meyers Street into an access road; but he said that the question that was being considered was relative to the house size and having a garage or noto Chairwoman Schnabel agreed with Mr. Tomczyk that she would like to see all tha driveways onto East River Road eliminated and try to put a service road of some type that would be the ingress and egress on East River Road= Mr• Tomczyk indicated that he owned lots 5, 6, & 1� and he had no plans to develop these lots. � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 1�� 1977 Page 17 Mr. Tomczyk felt that it was wrong to have all the � driveways onto East River Road. He thou9ht it would look nice� if a side road or service road of some type could 6e put in and have only one access onto East River Road. Mr• Barna indicated that everybody in that particular block would have to petition to t�e City to install a service road• There was much discussion regarding different ways to go about getting some type of service road put into that area. In answer to a questien asked by Mr• Plemel, Mr- Doyle indicated that the actual position of the driveways would have to be discussed with the future owners of the lots. Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that according to the code book, the paving required to provide a parking stall must not be in the front yard• Mr. Doyle indicated that the parking stall was beyond the front yard, alorg S1G2 the house• Mrs• Gabel �sked Mr. 0'Qui�n what his future plans were regarding a garage- Mr• 0'Quinn indicated that he did plan to build a garage in the r"uture ard that he presently had one car. Mr. Barna asked Mr� Doyle if he planned to landscape and sod these lots• Mra Doyle said that landscaping would be the responsibility of the owners- Mrs• Gabel wanted to know if the price of the home included appliances and carpetino. Mr• Doyle said that it did nat include the appliances; but that he had offered to sell the buyers the appliances at his cost• Ne said that the price did include carpeting in the livingroom, the hallway, and the three bedrooms• It also included vinyl flooring in the kitchen, eating area, bathroom and entry area• Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that the code required Mr. Doyle to either seed or sod the property= She said that if he didn't, he would be required to obtain another variance- Mr. Barna indicated that the � be done either by the home owner would have to be done• seeding or sodding could or the builder — it just � . .y 8 4 APPEALS COMMISSI'ON MEETING — MAY 10, y977 Page 18 Chairwoman Schnabel asked Mr. 0'Quinn if he had anything to add to the diseussion. Mr• 0'Quinn had nothing further to add- Mr. Barna asked ifi Mr. 0'Quinn was aware of the traffic probiems on East River Road• Mr• 0'Quinn indicated that he was very aware of the traffic problems on East River Road. There was more discussion regarding the MNFA loans and the types of homes that qualified� MOTION by Mr� Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to close the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, aIl vating aye, the motion carried unanimously• The Public Hearing was declared close at 10:25 P.M. Mr. Plemel indicated that he felt that this was a good use of the property. He said that since the State was encouraging this type of Program, he w�uld like to have Fridley have room for these homes. Mrs. Gabel also felt that with the rising costs of construction, it would be hard to deny someone the right to own a home just because they could not afford to build the garage at that time, She said that she firmly believed that the home owners would build a garage when it became economically feasible• Mr• Holden read to the Commission a section of the Zoning portion of the City Code {2�5•152, the General area of Lot Requirements}• Mrs• Gabel felt thet that portion of the City Code tied into the Housing Survey that was conducted• It was the intent to provide housing at different income levels. She felt that this request presented an excellent opportunity to do so• Mr. Holden asked the Commission what their feelings were on the Hillcrest Avenue Vacation situation, basically how to proceed on it. Mainly, in regards to the fact that Hillcrest Avenue was present on the Iand and what should be done with it• Mrs. Gabel pointed out that if the City was to put in a road, it would cost the homeowners money- There was much discussion on different ways to handle the idea of a service road in regards to the fact that a vacation request would be needed or not and how to go about petitioning for some type of a solution to the problem of having a direct driveway onto East River Roado �1 � v � � � � � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1977 Page 19 Mr• Sarna pointed o��t that the main concern at that time was to make it possible for Mr. 0'�uinn to build his house and to move into it� MOTION by Mr• Barna, second�d by Mrs� Gabel, to approve the request for variances of the Fridley City Code as follows: Section 245.�54, 2, {A,3} to reduce the minimum sGuare footage �equirement for a single family dwelling unit of three bedrooms or less, from 1,020 square feet to 960 square feet, and section 2�5•055, 2, A, to waive the requirement that all lots having a minimum of lot area of 9,0�� square feet shall have a minimum of a single stall garage, to allow the construction of a dwelling on Lot 3, Block 2, Hillcrest Addition, the same being 7135 East River Road N�E�, Fridley, Minnesota• UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairwom<�n Schnabel indicated to Mr• 0'Quinn that the APPeals Commission had approved his requests and that he was free to apply for a Building Permit and proceed with the construction• y0. REQUEST FOR VARIANCES OF THE FftIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS� SECTION 2Q5=�54, 2, {A�3}, TO RE�UCE THE MINIMUM S�UARE F00?AGE ftERU2REMENT FOR A SIN6LE FA�ILY DWELLING UNIT OF THREE BEDROOMS OR LESS FROM 1,OZ0 SQUAftE FEET TO 960 SQUARE FEET, AND SECTION 205•055, 2, A, TO WAIVE THE REQUIftEMENT THAT ALL LOTS HAVING A MINIMll� OF LOT AREA OF 9,D00 SQUARE FEET SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF A SINGLE STAL� GARAGE, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING ON LQT 4, BLOCK 2, HIL�CREST ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7129 EAST RIVER ROAD N.E�, PRZDLEY, MINNESOTA. {Request by John M� Kehner, 640 Gorman Avenue, Apt= 9, Minneapolis� Minnesota 55426}• {S.J= Construction, Inc., John Doyle} MQTI6N by Mro Barna, seconded by Mr• Plemel, to open the public hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public Hearing was opened at 1�:45 P=Mo ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT A• PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT= Section 205•054, 2, {A�3} requiring 1�02Q square feet in the upper two levels of a split level design house on lots over 9,000 square feet. �• 0 ���7 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 1�, 1977 Page 2� 0 C• Public purpose served is to provide for adequate house size and living area in residential buildings• Section 2D5•D55, 2, A, requiring a minimum of a single stall garage on lots over 9,�00 square feeto Public purpose served is to provide space for automobile storage during inclement weather as well as to house goods and materials which would otherwise cause visual pollution• STATED NARDSHIP: If a garage is required on our new home, the price will be in excess of $37,5Q0• We have applied for an MHFA loan at 6],/2i interest and if the total acquisition cost exceeds $37,5�0 the home does not qualify for the low interest and we will not qualify to buy it= Please see attached excerpts from the MHFA manual� ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: A survey of houses on similar sized lots on East River Roed shows the fo�lowing sized houses: 7155, 24' r. 36'; 7181, 24' x 28'; 72�1� 24' x 32'; 7Zl•5, 25' x 41°� The respective floor areas are 864, 672, 768, I„ 025 square feet. {Note that these are original house sizes before any additions=} The proposed buildzng site is not bordered immediately by any developed lots= Mr= Doyle explained that everything that had been said regarding the previous item is the same for this lot- Mra Kehner replied to Mrs� Gabel question that he did intend to build a garage within the next two or three years. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, Public Hearing was closed at 1�:47 P.M. Mr. Barna, to close alI voting aye, the r�, r� L � APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 10, 1977 Page 21 • MOTION by Mrs- Gabel, seconded k�y Mr• Barna, that the Appeals Commission approve the request for variances of the Fridley City Code as follows� 3ection 205•054, 2, {A,3}� to reduce the minimum square footage requirement for a single family dwelling unit of three bedrooms or less from 1,42t1 square feet to 960 square feet, and section 205.�55, 2, to aaive the requirement that all lots having a minimum of lot area of 9,OOd square feet shall have a minimum of a single stall garage, to allow the construction of a dwelling on Lot 4, Block 2, Hillcrest Addition, the same being 7129 East River Road N-E., Fridley, MinResota• UPON a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously- Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to Mr• Kehner that the Appeals Commission had approved his requests and that he was free to apply for a Building Permit and proceed with the construction of his home� 11• ELECTION OF OFFICERS MOTION by Mrs. Gabel, seconded by Mr� Plemel, to nominate Mrs• Schnabel for the position of Chairman of � the Appeals Gommission• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motio� carried unanimously- Chairwoman Schnabel said she was pleased to accept the nomination. MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr• Plemel, to nominate Mrs. Gabel for the position of Vice-Chairman of the Appeals Commission• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Vice-Chairwoma� Gabel was pleased to accept the nomination. �1. A� �� APPEALS COMMISSION MEETIN6 — MAY 1Q, 1977 _ Page P2 12• OTHEft BUSINESS Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to the Appeals Commission that she had taken the question to the Planning Commission regarding the recommendation that property owners of residential property within 20� feet of any operation applying for beer, wine ar liquor licenses be notified of this application- She said that members of the Planning Commission had received 49 pages of literature in response to this subject• Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that at the Planning Commission it was decided that the entire Ordinance should be re-written= Also she said that the City Attorney would be looking at the prcblem of the �otification of the property owners and would be getting back to the Planning Commission with his suggestions� There was some discussion on the Lambert & Petersen property regarding ttie mass confusion and possibie misunderstandings, and the planned carrections to the problem.of dissemina±ing zoning information over the phone. It was decided that the next Appeals Commission meetir�g would be held on Wednesday, May 25, 1977. Mro Holden dzscussed the memo from Mr� Boardman th�at indicated that an additional seven days�applicatibn time was going to be required. He proceeded t.a r=ad the memo to the.Appeals Commission• ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr• Barna, seconded by Mrs• Gabel, the Appeals Camrnission meeting of May 1Q, 1977, be Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the meeting was at 11=15 P-M� Respectfully submitted, ;,���,.���: G' _ �,.L/ MARY LEE CARHILL, Secretary that adjourned� adjourned . � � � {= � � . ��ir�-i�H'-3.'t� 4 � ���"�, ��� �� � d��� � � �s T � �.. �� ��` � N , ` ' , � ��_"`�� RY�'c.°.Re L '�r F S �i A� d. f &. y� �t '��'t.+i° '� � t . � � � `4` � . 1 { �E� yc � � .,. � w .. C ... ...� � '.. *" �� ��"" �� . . is k Y X `0. K 4 p±} u{ "�g� _�„�; �"itis,.y3h n � i� ,5' r.�� "i � - @� � x` �',_$ �pL . �� ' 3 � .T`Efr- ` �p�'Sn��a"' ^�` . � h� �h � -, `�5`.Y ta'q'$.S .� i? �^°xy., `f'�� �' . g � � � i � r y��� r.a r eL� - . . s' Y3 . Ylo�ai� �$ i.y g . � �,�,x4S ++'T� . �+ �: �"� g'+� �. � � . p� � 1 �+�,tt � . . . .. � � F 'Y �, 5`d � .: K i�YY,.. � i �T'L`! °w"+ +`3��"-zrs < ss- £h,y# �'Sf3 ''�? TS i Y �S � r�- � .� �.-�. _ - � - � � ' � �T5�,} ,� ] mT � 4 ♦�� '�.1i^"X 1` �' . , . . . .. :4 ,' . - . , y^ '� a.,��tr ' �� $C�r18 � n+li �.� ..$COti � �,.�.�a��'$i►��r �I'$�B �.y�►�, s ' `,.�,� r� � � ,� �a 1v- $ �' d- � '� \n� � -� � h � . � � � � k� ' �E � �r �? �;i,�it���<¢�4.�f�e�s+o�:S�r* �t,+��s'��ne - Pla�er for C.A.P. � r '������ r � .i�'y ��sc�►z ib34-��-� b8tic _Jt'�� �'.$ _ _ Af�' �'`� 4 ��x �' . .. . � a '�'"`t 1 ; ' ` �- �" - . � ° - _ . J ��� _ � ` �„w' -. . �,� . ' . b. fi 3 } : ?i �+. � t'a.- '� :.. �. [FV $' " � 43� - F: . . . � . � � � . s �'�..�. ,�s ;. � �✓. __,: . �. `_': �� : .' S`y; i 3 � � : - @ , : � � �l'�ir.d 't116 m�eC��Y't8 f13�C1e� a� � *,��« � � � �'� Y k � ;.; ;, , � . r _z. y ��q - � k �'a '�'"'e�ai'_.2-E� �� �.�l��ys � �A+a�r.. � ��������F� r , . - . . � �S^•F,Yg .�' '3k+""�r - �� -.. . ,,;�� �. r .,., .,, ,% - . . . # . , � h �� �Ott, secoade& �Girac� i,y�3t� ��sa�.�s a cae►aunfcatio� daEed } �.� ;.�,�p�=ap �iz���� �.;j}�i±¢�tor, wfth ref@reuce to � �+� _ _':r>;�,�jri1 14,` ii7�, �}l�maa �#ts , 8foai mia�tes: UP� a, voice � '�� : _ �'�s �he motioA caYried' waanf�Q�s��s .. a� 1�� rv � � � „_ _; �' ^�, k�C+a�t,. seca�cisd .�tg f+x8cs i� �?�ev�_,�he Apr31 14, I977, k `; ''`" °�ssia� atitwt� �.writt�: �A� �+��'vate; all voti�g. �4ye, the + e '' t�i.muxtsly. E � � � � �� �� �� £ s � � =-� �°. �t�UR �LL �'. � ��; ��' 3; -�d: Y[e �cac the P}.�er fer t.he �� tp Action Ptogram for X�►Qka � � � � -� '' i �"` ` a�e�Z �pE�#..€3.e. py�+je€ts waa' �he �iai� ' aetR W�11 , Glinic . 17r�s � � $1�� rtM1� � ia� �sA�i�e�n.�f� tkrae ycer� ��"o£ Sune 1477. He said the � �` "� . �.�as £utut�cC#sy 1'�tie xhree af L�e �..��i��'s Act of the=U.S. Coagrese. ^ a= ` x� �h�8� 8;a� ere tl�t the f���. Ye�t.s�C are funded; the second year, ' ;< " '' ,�:�htrd ye�j°ti��_waated 1Qeal.rae�s�ces developed if the project � �li �€; _. � ,� �pa}-a�d �aa' a vs.�,liairle p;to�e�t. �� year was the end o� the Federa} z` ��� ��iit' st�� ��8y iia� detrela�ec� t.ite :S��aE.egy that, fhe clia�c had. been • h �, r ,f� ��,'.�', #�g ��y�°�';��gs�t 's�pr'q?�i.mate�g 1.r���Q� �senior� citizens :per �moath �' � ^ �' e�a, i+a E#te £pt�t: paaEticipatiag, so &hat c�as a , �4> 4i1� ����'�� � ,� _�� ' t�at� �:v'"�i+A98'��8e st�,`BE�e�* Lh�Y. tnere pzoposing was tl3at t�e. � ' y� -#�puiti, pi-� tFP. a�rtion af ;Chg co� s�*�a clinfc in that preventative f � =' are �s.�#s �eei ini wht�h the County goare���4�`k�a+d--&ome respensibility, but � �.,��%g�'E�g�a ie�f�i�iEg; =�#e fees cp3.letted aC ;�: el�aic did help ga toward the <:<: � i -� ° , : "` a � �< .� � � - . � . . g :' ,' nl'�.'F �° ' n' ' . 3 e' ' y"-'�Syr�: >t � ° � . �. 4 '�"fT �, � x �C�-. 'Yn , .. � yS s '%a� -4� �" `t� :C'41 !i �- � � - 3�'`� ,�^f --� '���2 . � ��� �2. '���5 � ' � .. � � '`^ �.' '^34 �.}� � �.'4F - � .. ,- -.,..... � �le, . ._ Ft _ , > _ ., . . .. � _ s..� _ . � _. . � � . ��t . e .� $�"*��, � ��� ?r i < tr� . . � ��`. ;":: ���� �� cnt�t �€ � ,upexs�ion; ` o# th���s`:' ift+e -�rtsb_i Jvt►e �'�Ti}`� tn �there� c+a a 6udget of $Sfi,4i�0, s indnaCi�Yr servir,e 6rga making cons�tderati�� pr ta ask'the Cc�mias�:� t4fs'p�ojec[. Mt'. L�ch state� thaE ' C.�.P�..: �t she said a i�4d2�y ses�ckenta, '�itid Mz. S�ertt aaked �,. $1 ;:at ehe �ffect af FFaus� . Mta 1C�.�#Yt �sC@d "they A�tt �tt statod ;th� • �as aaae��r cic�tzens. y aYrwt the tratespotkat# •' Ai�r. R�+s3�t` s�azed Chat •_ aenit�s citizeng ��ttin � be dC�' i�csi� e#aipy. � �� vtt�a�er c�oy� �s�tize and -s�k �v, tfte $e�a9.s�z Mr. Bel� sC��E� ,3t si thae t3��+,api�sr +e;ftizs iliusi��Ciah o£ tiasr ea whtr �d.#sum�at+:s�rv3e.� f: . if�. �t- ss&ed' f�:'. �Ie I. ts�a�;�tia� . �accsuc�d �ka Pfr. �e#�i stat�d tha��.; kt�d t� baeis, b,�t t�e¢ a� d�ff�remt i��`3:v� i3� . ��o�t �tatet�` l�e m� iti ti�#.r platmin�, the �ys of`�deeantralizat� C�tsp iiil�°!am ScoC sftm reca�mended oper�ti�rccs durf�g f�ii.e� � �, �ear��.�.�ianimaus�p. � Y � tb geG: Uai axlie�t t# ad of =i8 v ed $3r�OQ able tg v� 3 of the 8i aay th��.r;i L�, bu�-h� fbe figure # �eruing n sento"r c ���.�r�d�t�ator . � � '� � a ns�r ��: sp�'�a"PQrtat#o� �did 1tt�ow a�rou7 ca���,�►siile FrfdX� *# ' :� �t i€ tti�y #�Y'�"tkaught .oE 6:�ty',, � i�et ��F�: di�i'cul t t'o 'c ��_ . ` �rl;c�d �resaiire 4 � �.�iLi £$�XY` #Y� �'rit18 C�.tdl�.f.y ��va, � e2�u�ht ta f�� �., ��s;, of that � �ISe �x : ,�. �a6!��; b]�'Hed 5tdri�, Upon a voi, tat;;�R'!> 24� ias -�o ` ss -g „� ? �„�GF+_-2 afkher portion fitnds was � worked out `.�: F � et t'oY�� #�ain looal �; �t¢, "Ha'�a#d::they were �ed<he�,�+a� ���;the meeting it+� se�iatie LimughC; to s #�e �as :ari emgio�ree of s irgi[� �lie `slinic were ' i ��in�, &a� they looked < �; a sief��fte coam�itment. � f �ia �ati�t�t"s; pop�iation ' aa�:d �te �s e4hce�ned��- � �sac�#�i�: . p itt�rmgtton Co the , o Lhis 'pr�r�eet, it could a� 'ti�as -�re� �rsf` charge s and f 2i �the! �ea3LA I�p�rtmeat r � �s e��rn�ct ab,vu�, 'Tsut the` fact - � 4e �3rpe� of' tt�,ia$8: _, �t was, another � �� tus hcunan sat�v�sarg for peopte � � [ng �p s�13, cl;��t'sc� at diffesent � ' � ` yge sT�rk �'a �atellite - �" aitd thf�, tg�e of thittg �; E. .et�qra�ed ;M� � I�l�aig that, i �se F�.Ie t3�►e,. iac�oking at ( � ,, ' � Ekfdley H�.Reso�urces ! �be givec� .�9�,Q�i £ot their { ' k' vat�.ng : ay�, the mot3 oa � t� ��Y? �� � a � . . . "��-. �p t � .. .e . � � . __.a � . � �5��_�IN�S.� Y 5>� _ � : r�}e. �� ' t� .LOtal #�dgl�t'is �a�=;�.+a� fta �aa���-�v� 52 mi�lfn�t.� §� �r6 �l�.;i�.ke ttr<�r �,�metk��. �C �srf .i�el�a Gcs�Y� hai�`,�cc� 1�i ��It�'-a �ej�4rt a�� the bud�e:t; � 4`. �.!�'r�7.8�':: �TB , g ... pg;�' �- �i�� �'e37�� i!. �e �$"�t h�_ �an�$d thii �;� �.CT �tf�(?SY�i'n �-,$c�rtt, sa�e�dect by iQed .�tax:ia�i � �eTM progosal. UPcu a,yoiee-.,t+ti��±l� � �tite Gs�armitt�i,e }}ad "a:eaeet#� �pd �ttee. HvsL o�-��e peqPle:a�� C ca�aay�. �#to augg,es�st' �aed t1�--varicmi� areaa, th¢y : -�#�iag a p�olilem-aqivin�. �it t�c;:�u advaaee yiin gaes�ixlems` �tha�.e �L3e Lahe a�e�bersl�iP, uP 1ret�t�i,-� i�.i?.��-. f�ore t2� Y5 unirs) #-� tti Y• � vt�f;ae vcsCe,-, &1 z ca��bership ==af � � �: ,�- r � - � .is� � ' � �'; .' , .,�t #� .Chat t�ie ��C�e conCact tj� '�" F �� "the meet�a$, a� :t€ave she.�� ap� :.,`kF-i �}43.=uyh x.`-a�. at � - . . ; t`�at 1� a��eed stitti this , but' iit# r.,� a� �.,, � .y�€€e� Che Cnmi-ttee vas es�ab# � , �y ,_ � � _ - < �: ��'. � '� � �� � " - `� ��`�`�,� �`�.� ,� �_ =,���,Y�.t� �� ;.. .'..i ., i b„=�� . � � 9 _ . -,$�'' .� . _ , .... .. . . . . . .3e3: - � :;� �� < � � � _; �' �- ` ;Y �� �:�a ,�. : _1��E` 3 -.$"` 1 i . 'p�t �tealtil '�!S$SEtwCAt, 8IIf1: It�re t4e-,$Y-�iliieut went in EI i_&tate, at1� Cwntq u�auies . ���f ths Analca C+�iaty Health 2e $unan ge.9ource'�ouwission. ueaFt coomission meetiag. cre ihe °Rridley �easnt/Landlord ;-eqe, the eaoCiou carried sd t8e creation a£•: a�ta�.ey • ,�re;tenants with b�e repre- 4d`be villing to v6xk-tm the Eke to get into. �RReep decided G vould vnrk ia the-area of eith properties fn Che coamunity. t cowpiexes (1.ess thaa.25 units) _ if�tp.: They had a representative �dl,e➢) and a.mamher af xhe i -�iti tha� .quite $ fe,w;people i-?k;►dfcated they wpulc�.=Zike f[ese people were f�� Che ;�- He said Chey ;planned on �o put out a call to apartm$nt re_a note dated [�prii 26, 1977, : expressing interejcE ia a. °aye, tha motion ca�ried �-aad �tet�aaks should ttot-:haue ta�ts, there'should'be six �e ssid there are ma�ty more �eaented than landZords. to,get input fr� Ehe �ity. By b�lgz►cing out- the :�.�e wauld noti obj9:ct to i�'m�ership vas satfsfactory :� `�piexes, snch as George- � �.regate ta the C�it[ee. � xighC now vas getting out iusyBe they caild ge� out to � � 'F.-. ��'i � F'�< �� y ��� r 1Qt j� . �� a�� �� ` Mr � -.S�t�c. i�a+ie.- C�Ze �a17 groposal:_ jchac�e9 ai tTridea. �'!iffiaB�S1�I1*'' {lst p��`ra�►) . (3� p�`a�.'a�hi -' il�� ?+PtJ1L��$": y �r ii�de� "+�€�1"14�N"? � �#i�* iJi311a� Sctit� "iPrid_ 8y.;:��C%i,att�ilox Mr. �+��`$r"ma sYated ite vri't _ in p�,�wc��n tio t� 1� of tfi�s� �r: �t�f.t staC@d° t"k#E �i� ahauld i��g these eo,�cit ahovict •�c�or.t 'to the G�! :Mr , �lgam stai�d'ti�t ' get �'eoakts an�g l�&at3o� u��v�zze� �u� � � .� .. � _ .. , �:Y �y �y Z � � i< � ,� S , ks77 ` ;��� �ro the "i?rL� �`i��a J' , �,-��, - ! or maa&�istg a rental ao��' in gt ln Fri.cl3.eyi �ffi�,cis�ati maite�Cfs<m�e�; �nd P tt�e F�id]�r �umas , k be ag�ioitste�y � � fe Commitc� �tal�::i I fXaner)��� +r�1i rar as co-�{�^�pe�3rn B fli$ ��ATdt$C�k$�� 31 e �will° cea�i2p Ga e: nd/or �pc� a �ajo� �_.,. �` ied tltat th4te �tEed t8�. kit��= g.` ' tite Ccxignfst��� ntion o£ a�2'e' r repoXC �a��e ` he had wa� ti l ,�l�t Comaittee}: r > e�ta3k cansist B _r�:sidential a�ing a small �rtembers'- who k::one (1) �er; snd ��aion. All =t ' t$�ir �oc� likumbera, arc+tl� (1 ` 8�xttal' ataek` te� d�sll act : ma� �eaaurces a �ility of 3ife t h ihe standards i el�fp4ng methads , f¢�ta nf t�anta.� . . f: � . (, ��` � � � �. ,'. �:... ;�y .; Qt uPtn3. cauip%eticsu af their � ty vot�e of�'C3� �tmsn �sources � i .i'. z t��ish �e �x�t�ou a£ a a1 wes �re#ex��d and amended, � i d ge �ore kes�0.n�s rep=resented � he,Got�Yas�.s�q, �p�ksers thought � � ��� - eor�ce�s s�sti�;a� this, they j- tatLve .of �It� ��mittee orho f C�p�m#ssio� v�.�lx a;recnma�endaCianj, e �tt�e r�lio�id attempt to � � �� Y ✓ E : 3 � � i� r, : , t a. � ;�_. �� ,�� i �!5—+`,T'q.'t�`l�ie:�' �' ��i� .�r* � 3 �N'� . P... �S �� :i�i���ffi 5�ot contfqa�'�ris ques2 t� void #� ��tis com�ai�y it t+�. Ix�►s+m `ask+� ;�f it to r�ts�� 'iit 8ettti#�g. out pvl�liCi�:ziag, far t3ze C# � 1Rr . b�q�C� ��ed �ba� '� tu dev�lop'th�.Y�ttoa� ��'�iy �S.'c1:st Belyu a jots:�e�&r3ptict�s P4r ? Mr. �etac� d�aYi�sr�i as-{ c�i��t�, ' ke �iss2d ': 2�, �[�g�s� Wit�t$�E�t tk� 'SLBC"�N�t�' c�Pi�ERS: it�;hy riS.i�.ta�n �coc� frcm ee�y Baard�a�aA -r� a voie� voce,: s�.l vaetj � hy l;racie .L�ah,� � � � �haiYpe�aon . �� � ,R€t�� -eat� clos&d . �J�oiY a �taic� � MOTIt� t>y ir�iiii� Scv� cocum�!B�e.ed iur �e� ci�d� sha ��feved as 4ice Cha; se t� 1'+ieesning Cc�mmiSi S+�oE�> %�9��> 8e1$�m. ; C���Y Graae L�ttets�` �hei�ex�on �►f� cicss�fi. ' �sxrn a va#�.y p�TTE� by Wilti� gc�i � the P���LB�cit of A�k+t� c'cxnmei�t�i�8 Mr. �orla-zi ttse �aias�asi��ra� ve� �asnmi,esipa '�'fie C�ig the �c+�awst�.ty as evid�i � � L?'nc�� ��$�Egu�;;��`vtt„+ � ' � ,_ � �. 5.` _ .._ .� �i � � _ �6— �� ��� Dy �aes Lyttch srmii�=' at�i u�ke rec�m�i JPort;� vti9.@e� vate, a�,l :� xx�t b�'a -�oasft�ilit� [h; vsr re�&�s:' dff�eresit,� �se.#�� ssion rt:ou1� ti��� ?� �'a�son 6tas 1 see���€;�ec� Sto�1a, aQ�il �,' 8p'�A P��aon �, > �, �� `':�. � �.� - 1 .. . � � �� X:: ! P�8 b i° C �aroi�3 Belgu�i bit �,xeeted to :�na tn fi11 tlt� � � aye, `the mot$a �e ciry �on�si u�e :s , etc �--somen�ie tuas.t a .�ET� Pe�s< ,d , Wiili�on Scfltt' p� in ��e t�ty of; F� k urace L�ch�, �zt Ye�: ection vf Cb�f�par� ia�i ca�riect�+c�tli�#? ye, k s;}eet. � E$3'A p�rson o eould-start they would have � �._ ��d�to formulate .i��'� t�y. ; �nd other � �r; : �. k: �: ;, 4 :ed Maq 5', 1977 > rperson." Upon , �>. ' ; �,� dec2�re� t�e n�inations m ��:r�ed i�nsnima�u�#Y • � :h�e�.:�gtrg8rsc�; �i�tara Shea he �' �ai�'pari§�rn and � Ch�t �+�as-:be%re whert � ' �L ple�as�d wi��theii.��representatio���: � s. :�hea,atien3d:d._ I�on� a voice��wEe, �'� � tin�,m�, the vwtit�c ca�ied . � �t T�d..'¢3to�a qe sto��ated for � ' >,`= 34� . "Btsea deCla�;`ed' the nominations � ' in e4sxiec�un���ly-- # . e Ehe. Cowu��.ssfcnr�correspa�d to � r 8=-eu�_ Gt.�'Mrk �-S�u�Cla'�s garents, �-�. • �ra+�a,-�' dte Cpa�.SSion and thzt € �.'in����-_ea a 9i��� ts€��:th$ � �'�� �� ���k �ine :out�t��rig me�er of { , f�. �an^ a`' i*a3ce voYe, Shea, .� �, �==fa�CiOt! c�z€+�d. ;;: ,> � , �,�, 9 v � �1 � t _.�z'�wAS-�..a � � rv.+.c _ �}L`a � 3 . �' r?',°�'3�i-x ' = . sr➢ s +.w•.t �: f � 3.a.c: e"'�S".�: - : � ".e. : ^: '� ° � i? � _�tAX S .��� -": s 7 � � , . � �, � �r=� r• , . „b,_ � � _ . = r _._ . - �- z � . : : , - �; ,. �� _ . �� �.. _, ..., � � r� �' �� � r� :th�t a s�g$est#�eb had L�Rea ��".�.�t th#� avard b� a�ed t` �'�i.�at . . �8I_;�he `��:�9f� -had al�ead�+ �_��t the award be called the �'.�1��� A��` aud s�e fe�E�.#� �#i�i�1d be left that way for thia r�i f,�aC:;£be .�is� a�mbeiC�s_;�d:.=�iaye, tu come back to ehe Qe3ct 1e �e� o� i�#ivi;d�a�is fax tLi,s av�dt ,-,.. � f.�# -t3x8 �,sii' f�aftex vas ip. a�et3 p�'to�q;e,y iur suppiiea to; get the �=foF:ps�l�caCions far fu� rs��qex�., �k�, seacorZded"•by Grace Ly�A, t� �be given the �een Genter to be � a�`-Eor pu�I:irca�lc.�s for #s�nd ss�i��.�.i:, t�+on a voice vote;- a11 uoting �.tg� aneaii�t�s�y. . �t�t .th�' Tesat Center was ,apoii�r �;e of the need to get ttze-neve � '�: F�C#.�Zey . : : ��ght Co the Goa�issf4n's BCt�#�9rt t�:adults had been usfng Che �aCilfties �}rese ad�i�,s .�gl beesr �sf�g alcohoYic beverages �ltfenae tm `the �oembets �-�?k`t�`st CenLer . �.$cnit, seces�st�€ hy Grace �yn�df, t.�;.��ahereas, it had c�aa to the �➢p�alLss3aa's :�ce�fott that ,�� }� �� coming iato the �een Ceneer . q�.'trf _alcoh�l to u�.-the re$CY�aqt ��ai:��,-ties.; _ and, wheYeas,: the �� ¢r�tsider t�aE- i�.;ld ,of in#i�� �y��iv� to t�e well-beittg o£ p48���;: therefore. t}�...Coatm#.s:sitm r�c��tl Chat the :City eqaip.the �t"�i�al reatroom f�ilities �or ti�ase,-�e,�ple who a=e uuab�e to : .�rGi� af �icq}�olic bevasx�ges, _,�g�i� voice vote, all:votfng. z�#� uaisu3s�us�q. - F .. �.�. _. �.. ..� ' . . . . . � �"_ .: � �E � C� „�A�iag��emmissi� apeet3�S#g�the etvesing before, t}iey had �'tir�t� �Pg�r• lteeases fo�..��Ce ��g�'si# -gridley and vere given the �." $be eaid.�,�whole,,ordi�a��e:`tiv�s a.�3.s.�ster: �'��t, Sect�si�d �}*: ii�d St�tr#;e3 -Cti rge�tivate the �ry,iguor Ordinattce ��;�ai�es; vot�,:: all vdt#ug aY�r t�s ¢aD��4� carried unaqi�osxsly, " . - �_ - � ' ��8��i se�oucied by�K�i�iaw Scatt, ip-ai�jeurn the meeting at,9:3Q_:p.m. � S Y �sr'���'�sXfn$,sy�f Lh�';IaotiCA-L'&k'i"ied.,'�tmr�L&2y. { ��d� _ ' , ; SecxeCazy' } . _- . _ �� • Y . . . _ , . P Z ' . ` .; .:, � . .. . . � � �y� .� __ _ _ . . � � ��. �� �� 1j � ai � T � x � � �. � � x � � q a:, 4 : � {, �� � � --� t{. � �. 0 ,r � a C m m �' _ � 8 !4 e �� ��: 'i3 � f+ r+ tl � � ��€S' � ��4'�'RQ3:,. -< 4�I�` � � # :�ted � F £y �. P 3�T8 BFId L F �C the sam t auehe5 =' �oa�itt �:s . I� oaaae;�+ �r ugon a m� s R-y^'�� . :�5 , �; � � /LiAalar'd. Yrm�jeet Ettee sha�� consist ,- � j s isrg�,re�idential . �er� ot�i� a,-small G3c �ti}.�m�rers who � s�Qei�. �taie,415 � - i: $��t.'3E:,£$8+,'(.t,�@1S� f L�k;°�a'�eZ� . �i�-�#�` '�i tlWtti.'II �$y"�';�Ei� ';1� .._$' 0.��. _,� ect: Ct�t�e �h ��.� }�iqiett-$EB$S�' q�lity af li�� st�n�d�xds �if -a�, tiuui� >,.iPol,'�ials : ze�-a�'..].aqd ic�cd� CI#��a�`� a1Z, B�erve v#t�i h re�Por�� a� t a� � �li.l 4CR7i'L'28 � ? !; p ,' 3J �i8 � y� �� H�iB:o . � t- .. ;��. stoek ' i = S �' : s€t as . �� C�isstim G re�fd8ntial '� i :saiaenta tn id means of t;e pratected ��.u.sa �tuca itv��... F�.., �TlTiG2g € staeed herein. �' � ��5` or � ,..- eted by tfie •� si�ail be haid l� ' � {�iOf[titj,tt20 ��. � } a€tend i�e� � osi�h.' Ail � nz3 rec«�uaenda- ,,4 !. �6+mmlesfon � � � � €4e f#ndings ,� f �- -� - srf; tAeir k,; �n Reeources �' ., . <; � � �=��; �'< � � � � � ���;�, �... �� � _ ;�_, _-�� �. , � � . , _ _ ,���� _ _ _ - _ _ ¢.�n ��d'� - % _ ___ 1� l�� 7 � c,��� � Q'<� ��� �-----, �°.� � �.� ��� � � %�y ��o�.���- � �. �<� ._ . __ c�.�� �s��i � %�,�.�� /�-��/ �� ��, �?�� � �y�y w�� er3� �,�����, ��- �����, _ __ _ _ °�- , CITY OF FRIDLEY \ PLANNING CONMISTION MEETING - May 18, 1977 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harris called the meeting to order at 7:40 P•M- ROLL CALL� 11embers Present: Mem6ers Absent: Others Present: Storla, Bergman, Harris, Schnabel, Langenfeld Peterson Jerrold Boardman, City Planner APPROVE PLANNING tOMMISSION MINUTES: May 4, 197? Mrs• Schnabel clarified the ninth paragraph on Page 8, the second sentence• She said it should read, ^She said that each of the four lots individually�•••^ Mrs• 3chnabel corrected a typographical error on Page 21� fifth paragraph• It should read ^Mr• Frank wanted to know if the entire area on the draWing was zoned as R-1^• Mrs• Schnabel wanted the eighth paragraph on Pa9e 22 to indicate that Mr• Wyman Smith was _ representing Dr• Sakamoto, the owner af the property• MOTI9N by Mr- Langenfeld, seconded by Mr• Bergman, that the Planning Cammission minutes of May 4, 1977, be approved as amended- Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unania�ously- 1• , ROB T FLAT �s Rezone Lot 41, Block 1�, Spring drooK Parc A itxo , from [1-]� {light industrial areas} to R-1 {single family dwelling areas}+ so it can be combined with Lot 42, Block 12, Spring Brook Park Addition, {already zo►wd R-1}+ to make a residQntial building site, the same being 176 Ely Street N•E- MOTION by Mrs� Schnabel, seconded by Mr• Lenqenfeld, to open the Public Hearing Rezoning Request ZOA } 7i-02, by Robert Flaten- Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing open at 7:48 P.M- Mr• Robert Flaten of 7424 liest Circle was present• PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 2 Mr- Boardman explained that the petitioner planned to combine Lots 41 and 42 so that he could construct a one-family residence• Lot 42 is zoned R-1� however, Lot 41 was zoned M-1• The request is to rezone Lot 41 to an R-1 Lot• Mr• Flaten said that he wanted to build a house on the Lots• He said that when he applied for a Building Permit he had been informed that he would have to apply for a Rezoning of Lot 41• Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if he planned to live in the house or if he planned to build it for re-sale• Mr• Fiaten indicated that he intended to live in the house• Chairperson Harris wanted to know the frontage on the two lots- Mr- Boardman explained that both lots were 30-foot Lots• He said that the two lots combined would make a 60-foot Lot upon which Mr• Fiaten could construct a single-family dwelling• Chairperson Harris wanted to know if there were any adjacent M-1 properties• Mr• Boardman explained where the industrial sites were located in regards to the lats in questio�• MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mr• Bergman, to close the public Hearing Rezoning Request ZOA t77-02 by Robert Flaten- Upon a voice vote, all voti�g aye, Chairperson Harris declared the Public Hearing closed at 7:55 P-M- MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mr• Bergman, that the planning Commission recommend to the Ctty,�QUncil approval of the Rezoning Request ZOA �77-�2, by Robert Flaten: to rezQne Lot 41, Block 12, Spring Brook Park Addition, from M-1 {light industrial areas} to R-1 {single family dwelling areas}, so it can be combined with Lot 4Z, Block 12, Spring Brnok Park Addition, {already zoned R-1}� to make a residential building site, the same being 176 Ely Street N•E• Chairperson Harris asked Mr• Baardman if there would be any easement problems• Mr- 8oardman indicated that there would not be any easement problems• UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried u�animously• PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING —�AY 18, 1977 Page 3 2• PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA �77-03, BY C• D• CHANDLER: Rezone Lot 1+ B oc , Jo nson s River Lane A ition, from R-1 {single family dwelling areas} to R-3 {multiple family dwelling areas}� and, rezane Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Johnson's River Lane Addition, from C-LS {local shopping areas} to R-3 {multiple family dwelling areas} so these three lots can be used for the construction of a 7 unit row house development and/or townhouses, generally located between 64 1/2 Way and Mississippi Place an the West side of East River Road N.E• MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Tchnabel, to open the Public Hearing on the Rezoning Request, ZOA �77-03, by C• D• Chandler. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Harris declared the public hearing open at 7:58 P•M- Mr• Boardman explained that there mere three lots involved in the request• He said that Lots 2 and 3 were zoned C-1S and Lot 1 was zoned R-1• He said that the request was to rezone all three lots to R-3 so that the lots can be used for the construction of a row-house development andlor townhouses• Mr• Boardman continued to explain that Mr• Chandler had proposed building a certain type of dwellings, however, bi6h that particular design he could only fit six units on the property while the square footage of the property would allow the construction of eight units• Therefore, he said that Mr• Chandler decided to first get a rezoning of the property and then he would proceed with the planning of exactly what would be built on the property• Mr. Chandler af 1132❑ Mississippi Drive and Mr• Ta16ot of Calhoun Realty were present• Mr• Chandler explained to the Commission that he had owned the property for about 15 years and was now trying to build something on the property in order to get back his investment• He had pictures of the property, surrounding areas and buildings, and the types of units he was contemplating- He indicated that he felt that what he planned for the property would be a good use for the particular lots and location• Mrs• Luckow of 161 - 64 1/2 Way N•E• wanted to know if Mr• Chandler had any defi�ite plans of what he was going to build on the Lots and if they would be for rental or re-sale• She also wanted to know what size the units would be• Mr• Chandler indicated that at that point he had no definite plans• He pointed out that whatever he would do would meet all the existing codes• He wasn't sure if the property would be for rental purposes or sold• He also said that he wasn't sure of the size of the units• P�ANNING COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 4 Mr• Talbot of Calhoun Realty explained that everything they had proposed to that point in time had not met various codes and would have needed nemevoas variances• He indicated that the owner had decided to first get the rezoninq and then get together with the City and decide exactly what could be built on the property that would meet all existing codes• Mr• Fred Foster of 6441 Riverview Terrace expressed disappointment that he had not been notified of the Pu61ic Hearing especially since they would be greatly effected by the proposed plan since they lived on the carner of 64 1/2 Way and Riverview Terrace� He also indicated that he was greatiy disappointed in the present multiple dwellings in the area• He said that the people living in the apartments in the area didn't pay attention to pos]�tlspeed signs; he said that there wasn�t adequate off-street parking so that cars were always parked up and down the streets• He continued by saying that the nearby apartments were not neat and were not kept up• He said there was always garbage around the yard and most were detrimental to the area• Mr. Foster felt that with the taxes he had to pay he didn't want to see any more apartment buildings in the area• Chairperson Harris tried to explain to Mr• Foster why he hadn't been notified of the Public Hearing� He said that City Hall could have slipped up and not sent him a notice• However, he cuntinued by saying that there had been a sign posted on the property indicating that there was to be a Public Hearing on the property• He said that City Hall most definitely tried to be sure that everyone that would be concerned or effected by the rezoning was notified• He apologized for the oversight• Mr• Dennis Phitzner of 6430 Riverview Terrace agreed with what Mr• Foster had said re9arding the_present apartment buildings and the people living therein• He felt that more apartment buildings would only give more headaches to the home omners in the area• Mr• Luckow of 161 - 64 1/2 Way N•E- questioned the construction of a seven-unit row house on the three lots- He wanted to know how many square feet would be far off-street parking• Chairperson Harris said that an off-street parking stall was 10 x 2D feet or 200 square feet• nrs• Schnabel indicated that the current ordinance required off-street parking• She said that 1-1/2 stalls had to be allowed for each one-bedroom unit and two stalls for each two-bedroom unit and 2-1/2 stalls for each three bedroom unit• PLANNING COMMI3SION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 5 Mr- Chandler indicated to the audience that he was requesting a higher and better use for the property• Mrs• Foster indicated that all the children played in a park located near the lots in question• She said that the park mas the only play area for the children and she couldn't see bringing in seven more families, with children- She said what the area really needed was more recreation area and not more apartments• Mrs• Luckow wanted clarification as to exactly what could be constructed on a C-1S Lot• Chairperson Harris read to the audience exactly what would be allowed on a C-1S Lot• At that point Mr• Boardman said that on C-1S properties, 160 foot frontage was required• He said that the �ommercial property did not meet that requirement• He said that the Commercial only had about 1/Z of the required square footage• Mr� Chandler indicated that what he had been told by the Building Inspector did not agree with what Mr• Boardman had said• He said that he would take it back to Court• He said that he had an investment of over 540,000 and he wasn't going to put up with the City condemning his property from any use• Mr• Bergman wanted to know if Lnts 2 and 3 mere ever large enough to build as C-1S• Mr• Boardman indicated that Lots 2 and 3 were never large enough to meet the square footage requirements to build as C-1T• He said that they could be buildable mith a variance- Mr• Boardman went on to exp�a4n that there was an exclusion in the R-1 District code that would allow an R-1 lot to be used as a parking 1ot by getting a Special Use Permit• �He said that together With Lots 2 and 3, Lot 1 could be used as parking area, therefo�e, making lots 2 and 3 buildable C-1S Lots- Mr� Chandler indicated that his request was a very natural request and it would be an upgrade for the property• He asked them to rea�ize that the entire street had apartment buildings• Mr• 8 Mrs• Foster indicated that they would like to see some plans• PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 6 Mr• Chandler said that he didn't have any definite style plans at that time• He indicated that whatever was planned for those lots, that all City Codes would be met• He said that the first thing he wanted to do was to get a rezoning of the property and that he would proceed from that point• Mr•� Foster asked Mr• Chandler that if he got the lots rezoned to R-3, would he try to get eight units on the property• Mr• Boardman indicated that if Mr• Cha�dler had the right design, that eight units could be constructed on that property• Mrs• Foster asked if Mr- Chandler planned for a yard area• Mr• Chandler said that he would have all the required setbacks- Mrs• Lukow wanted to know if provisions would be made for children• Mr. Boardman indicated that there were no requirements to provide play areas for the children• thair�erson Harris made refe�ence to the�Pl"at-as to the �B���w�eot aiiey thai was�'located=�ext to 64 1/2 �ay• Mr• Foster indicated that when they moved into the area, they had a private drive-way onto East River Road• He said that now the street had taken up the alley• Chairperson Harris manted to know how much of the property � in question had been taken for the East River Road and Mississippi Street intersection improvement• Mr. Chandler indicated that approximately 30 feet had been taken from both ends of the lot• Chairperson Harris asked if the property would have been a leqal C-1S lot before the condemnation• Mr• Boardman said that even before the condemnation, the lots were not buildable C-1S lots• He said that very probably the �ity would have HAD to grant a variance since Mr• Chandler would have had just cause for a hardship• Mr• Langenfeld asked Mr• Chandler if his plans were speculative at that time• Mr• Chandler said that he had a contract for the purchase of the land if and when the property Was rezoned• PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 7 Chairperson Harris asked Mr• Chandler if his contractor would draw a site plan• Mr• thandler indicated that he fiad already drawn up three site plans and had gotten no results• He said that they really needed the rezoning first• Mr• Boardman explained the other requests that Mr• Chandler had made and what had happened on each of them• He said that the last plan he saw was for five tma-bedroom units and three three-bedroom units• Mr• Boardman indicated that the plan would be for a two-story unit in answer to a question by Mr• Foster• Mr• Phitzner didn't like the idea that the City_put in a that was noZ and`would not be larg� enough to handle the in the_area•_ AlsB`he said that:t�� Perk was located on a street that �as basically dangerous due`to the a�undance of treffic tontri5uted-to by the apartm�nt �cm.�pb���s:in the area• - - park children At that point, Chairperson Harris said that he considered this request a major rezoning and that it was not unusual to require a site plan• He indicated that he mould not be able to vote on the request until he saw a site plan• Mr• Langenfeld wanted to knom, if the rezoning was granted, when Mr• Chandler would plan to start construction• Mr• Chandler responded that actually he had no idea but figured probably sometime in the Fall• Mr- Langenfeld explained to the audience and Mr- Chandler that the Commission had to make their decisions based on the City Codes and Ordinances• He said that in this case it should be noted that the members of the Commission were very concerned about the safety of the children in the area as mell as the general safety of the public• He continued to say that they had to keep in mind that the request was to rezone two lots presently zoned C-1S and one lot zoned R-1 to three lots zoned R-3• He said that it should be kept in mind that any of the pre�iously stated commercial enterprises could be constructed on the lots in question• He said that he only e:�� made the statement for informati�e purposes- Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know Mr• Chandler's explanation of Row Houses and Townhouses- � PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 8_ Mr� Chandler first wanted to explain that what Was stated on the Public Hearing notice was not actualiy what was being planned- He said that the notices had been sent out before he had withdrawn his initial plan• Mr• Chandler then explained that he felt the definition of the two housing types were interchangeable• Mrs• Schnabel indicated that she did not feel comfortable giving approvals for rezoning without seeing a site plan• Mr• Talbot asked for verification as to exactly what the Commission Wanted in regards to a site plan• Chairperson Harris shoWed Mr• Talbot an example of what he wanted- At that point, Mr• Talbot showed the Commission the site plan that had originally been drawn up before they decided to first rezone the property and then draw up plans that would meet all City Codes• Mrs- Foster asked Mr• Chandler if he could try to plan the units so that the traffic from the units did not go to Riverview Terrace. Mr- Chandler felt that it would be impossible to say what the traffic would decide to do- Mrs• Fos��e- indicated that she felt the City should buy these lots• Mr• Chandler said that he didn't care who bought the lots• Mr- Langenfeld asked Mr• Chandler if he had considered putting up single family dwellings on the lots• Mr• Chandler indicated that the lots were too expensive to try to sell single family dwellings• Mr• Boardman explained that when they were going through the layout of the praperty with a particular type of construction, they could only get six units on the property without a variance• The owners of the property felt that six units would not pay for the property• PtANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 9 Mr• Bergman explained that he thought Mr• Chandler would like to do something with his property after many years of tax paying and ownership• However, he felt that the neighbors also had justifiable fears of more children in the area , inadequate playgrounds and more traffic problems• He said that it did 6other him to have a plan submitted that would require variances• He felt that if the best use of that property was for townhouses, then the pro6lem that should be dealt with would be one of density• Mr• Chandler pointed out that the site plan before the Commission was not the plan that they were going mith� He said that the new plan that would be drawn up would meet all requirements that the City needed• Mr• Bergman said that a request for a plan did nat imply approval even if the plan did meet codes• He said that 6asically the request at hand was for rezoning and the site plan would not commit the owner to do exactly as the site plan stated• Mr• Boardman indicated that it also would not bind him to that site plan• Mrs• Schnabel pointed out to the audience that if the rezoning was granted, that any requests for variances would have to go before the Appeals Commission• She said that at that time the neighbors would again be able to express their feelings in regard• to the number of units and the layout of the units• Also she said that the requester would have to have concrete plans before he cauld appear before the Appeals Commissian• Mr- Bergman indicated that the Commission was dealing with Mr• Chandler regarding a request for a rezaning• However, he said that once the rezaning was granted, theywaauNd��a�e ta deal mith the developer and he could come up with anything within the ordinance for that zone and the Planning Commission would have no control• He said that the developer could have a whole different picture as to what he wanted to do with the lots• Mr• Langenfeld said that he understood pr• Chandler's position as far as he had property that he mas paying taxes on• However, he said that he could not vote for a rezoning until he knew exactly what was going to be done with the Lots in question• At that point there was much discussion amongst the Planning Commission as far as putting stipulations on the rezoning and whether the stipulations could be enforced• PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 10 Chairperson Harris said that stipulations could be enforced as far as the location of the units on the property, the number of units, and the access to the units• Mr• Chandler felt that putting stipulations on a rezoning was not part of the Flanning Commission's jurisdiction• He felt that since the rezoning would be an improvement to the property and that as long as they met all the City Codes and requirements, the Commission should not be able to put any stipulations on the rezoning request• He continued to say that the Planning Commisssion was not putting enough confidence in the City Planning Department• He felt that most of the issues that were being brought into the rezoning request were already controlled by the City �odes. Mrs• Schnabel indicated that she was amare of both sides of the issue- She said thet the residents in the area definitely had to be concerned abaut the safety of the children and that they also had a definte traffic problem• However she said that if the property were to remain commercial, it would result in a hardship for Mr• Chandler in terms of access to and from the property• Mrs• Foster said that she felt adequate off-street parking HAD to be required• Mrs• Schnabel said that the current ordinance required off- street parking• In response to Mr• Bergman's question regarding the zoning af the neighboring areas, Mr• Boardman ex.a�aY�ff� all the zonings in the area• „ Mr• Bergman indicated that he personally felt there was no problem with an R-3 zoning for the lots; however, he felt the problem was the density• He said that he would be for the rezoning if a limitation could be set on the density but he mas not sure how that could legally be handled• Mr• Chandler felt that that was covered in the Building Code• Chairperson Harris with his contractor property and have a said that he wanted Mr• �handler to get and decide what would be done on the site plan drawn up• Mr• Chandler agreed that he would try to get in tauch with the contractor and have a site plan drawn up• Mr- Foster wanted to know exactly how many units were being considered• Mr• Chandler indicated that seven units was the tentative plan• PLANNIN6 COMMIS3ION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 11 Mr• Phitzner said that no matter how many units were in the plan, he didn�t feel the neighborhood needed any more traffic or any more peaple• Chairperson Harris told the audience that the Planning Commission had to respond to Mr• Chandler's request- Mr• Bergman indicated that just 6ecause the Ordinance would allow seven or eight units, it didn't mean that the developer would HAVE to put the maximum number of units on the property• He said that perhaps the developer could consider a little more green area and a few less units• MOTION by Mr• Bergman, seconded by Mr• Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission continue the public Hearing on the Rezoning Request, ZOA � 77-03, BY C• D• CHANDLERr to rezone Lot 1, Block 2, Johnson's River Lane Additian, From R-1 {single family dwelling areas} to R-3 {multiple family dwel2ing areas}, and, rezone Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Johnson's River Lane Addition, from C-1S {local shopping areas} to R-3 {multiple family dmelling areas} so these three lots can be used for the construction of a 7 unit row house development and/or townhouses, generally located between 64 1/2 Way and Mississippi Place on the West side of East River Road N•E• until the next Planning Commission meeting {June 8, 1977} at which time Mr• Chandler and the developer would come before the Commission with a definite site plan• Chairperson Harris indicated that the Planning Commission wasn't allowed to tell Mr• Chandler how to draw his site plan, he said that the Commission could only respond to a site plan and his request• He said that Mr• Chandler was to have a plan drawn up and the Planning Commission would respond to the request• UPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimausly• MOTION by Mr• Storla, seconded by Mr• Bergman, that the Planning Commission suspend the rules and handle Item 7B of the agenda RECOMMENDATION FOR �200 FOR TEEN CENTER- Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously- PLANNING COMMISSION .�.MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 12 7b RECOMMENDATION FOR 520� FdR TEEN CENTER Ms• Mary Anderson, the Coordinator for the Fridley Teen Center was present• Ms• Andersan indicated that it had been brought up at the Human Resources Commission that a fund be established to help start up the Fridley Teen Center• She then presented a report listing the items that were needed to help the 7een Center get started• The Planning Commission took a few minutes to study the report• MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the Planning Commission receive the report from Ms• Anderson• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Ms• Anderson briefly explained the items listed on the report• She also answered a few questions that the Commission had on several of the items• �r• Storla explained that the Teen Center personnel had been economical with the money it had previously received from the Fridley State Bank to help them put on a dance• He said that the dance went fairly Well considera4gg it had been held on the same night as a student-faculty basketball game• He said that the Committee ended up with about $20 down� Mr• Storla said that at that time they needed money to help to notify people that the Teen Center mas open and to help the Teen Center get off the ground• Mrs• Schnabel asked if the report indicated the dollars that were needed- �s• Anderson said that they mere only requesting 5200• MOTION by Mr• Bergman, seconded by Mr• Langenfeld, that the Planning Commissian recommends to City Council approval of the request for �200 for the Fridley Teen Center• Mr• Langenfeld made a suggestion that the Teen Center try to sell Stock in the Teen �enter• He felt that possibly the suggestion would get more people interested in the Teen Ce�teP= Chairperson Harris and Mr• Storla expressed that they felt it was a goad idea worth looking into• UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• PLANNING COMMITSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 13 3• �yURCH:. Vacate the utility easement over the South 5 feat of Lots 1� 2 and 3, and the North 5 feet of Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25, all in Block 2, Christie Addition, to allow an addition to an existing church, the same being 666 Mississippi Street N•E• Mr• Boardman said that this request was a requirement of the Building Permit• He said that they had applied for a Building Permit which the City was going to hold up unless they had approval fram the City Council for encroachment on the easements- The Council approved*b�eir request for easement encroachment with the stipulation that they apply for a vacation of the easements• The Vacation Request, SAV t 77-04 is for that vaCation• Chairperson Harris said that the drawing looked as though the Church was already over the easements• Mr• Boardman responded that they were• Chairperson Harris asked if the easements were still there• Mr• Boardman didn't know• Mr• Bergman asked Mr• Boardman if Fridley Methodist Church also owned lots 22, 23, 24 and 25• Mr• Boardman said that those lots were the Church parking lat• MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mr• Ttorla, that the Planning Commission receive the two Ietters from Northern States Power Company and the one letter from Minnegasco regarding Fridley United Methodist Church vacation request• Upon a voice vate, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if the Planning Commission was being requested to obtain easements• Mr• Boardman said that the church is requesting the vacation arod��he Staff is asking that Lhe planning Commission, as part of the Vacation, stipulate the rededication of easements• PLANNING COMMISSI4N MEETING —�AY 18, 1977 Page 14 MOTION by Mrs• Schnabei, seconded 6y Mr• Bergman, that the Planning Commission recommends to City Council agprova3 of the Vacation Request, SAV �77-04, Fridley United Methodist Church t� uacate the utility easement over the South five feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3, and the North five feet of Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25, all in Block 2, Christie Addition, to allow an addition to an existing church, the same being 666 Mississippi Street N-E• and that they stipulate the rededication of easements of ten feet along the west property line of Lot 3; 15 feet along the west property line of Lot 22; and five feet along the north property line of Lot 22• UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried• Cahirperson Harris declared a short break at 9:5� P•M- Chairperson Harris called the meeting back to order at 10:D0 P•M- nOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded by Mr� Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission suspend the rules and handle Items 5, 6, 7, and 7a and hald Item 4 until after adjournment• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairperson Harris indicated that item 4 C4NTINUED= PROPOSED MAINTENANCE CODE be handled as Workshop after adjournment of the Planning Commission Meeting• 5• N COMMISSION MOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded by Mr• @erg�an;:tMat� the Planning Commission receive the pe�ke7� Secreation Commission Minutes of April 250 1977• Mrs• Schnabel indicated that on page 64, the secood p axr�graph, second to last sentence should read ••• ^The real solution would be to outlaw utilization of motorized RECREATIONAL vehicles in Fridley, •••^• Mrs• Schnabel indicated on page 64, the last paragraph, had what she believed to be typographical errors• Reference was made all through the paragraph to St• Louis Park and she felt that they should have been Spring Lake Park• UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 15 6• RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES� MAY 10, 1977 MOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded by Mr• Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission receive the Appeals Commission Minutes of May 10, 1977• Mrs• Schnabel indicated that on Page 79 at the end of the fourth paragraph, a sentence should 6e added —"Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously^• Mr• Langenfeld wanted to know if a motion was necessary to take an item from the Table• Chairperson Harris indicated that it was necessary• There was some discussion regarding Mr• Peterson's variance requests• Mrs• Schnabel said that at the Appeals Commission meeting, Mr• Peterson, had withdrawn his request to build multiple dwellings on Meadowmoor Drive• She said that after that statement, the neighbors in the audience were not very vocal• Mr• Boardman indicated that it had gone to City Council and that Mr• Peterson had decided to build single family dwellings on Meadowmoor Drive• �PON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously- 7• MOTION by Mr• Storla, seconded by Mr• Bergman, that the Planning Commission receive the Human Resources Commission minutes of May 5, 1977• Mrs- Schnabel asked Mr• Storla if there had been any problem regarding the Tenant/Landlord Project Committee with two people on the Committee from the same Complex• Mr• Storla responded that they preferred that the Committee had only one tenant from each complex• However he said that that was a large complex and there did appear to be more interest in that complex than in most of the other places• Therefore, he said that they decided to allow it• Mr• Storla continued to briefly explain the actual function of the Committee• Chairperson Harris wanted to know what the Tenant/Landlord Project Committee's objective was• PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 16 Mr• Storla indicated that the Fridley Tenant/Landlord Project Committee shall act as an advisory committee to the Fridley Human Resources Commission for the purpose of maintaining a quality af life in residential rental stock consistent with the standards of all residents in the community; and developing methods, policies, and means of ensuring that the rights of tenants and landlords are protected and harmonious relationships facilitated• He said that basically the objective was to maintain the quality of life and to increase communication between both the tenants and landlords to try to work out any problems before they become so accute that the tenants are evicted or a tenant ^skips^ out on his renC• Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if the members of the Committee would be serving as a screening board for future rental applications• Mr• Storla said that they would have some set committee to do the screening• Mr• Bergman wanted to know if this Committee was connected with the Tenants Union• Mr• Storla said that there was no connection• The Tenants Union was for the people in the City of Minneapolis• He went on to say that the Tenants Union was more of a^last resort^ type thing• He said that the Tenant/Landlord Project Committee was formed to get the communications established between the tenants and landlords before the problems resulted in an eviction or someone ^skipping out^ on his rent• Mr• Langenfeld wanted to make a point regarding a statement made 6y Mr• William Scott on Page 95, seventh paragraph, in which he stated ^••�under the influence of alcohol to use the restroom facilities; and, whereas, the Commission did not consider that kind of influence conducive to the well-being of Fridley's young people; •••^• Mr• Langenfeld felt that Mr• Scott was labelin9 people without having all the pertinent facts• Mr• Storla indicated that Mr• Scott only made the statement after several people had made the statement to him• He was taking someone else's word• Mr• Boardman said that the Rest Rooms were open to the public and asked Mr• Storla what the Commission intended ta recommend• Mr• Storla said that they made a motion to have satellites set up• UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• There was a short discussion on the elections of officers at the various Commission meetings• PLANNING COMMI3SION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 17 7a- RECOMMENDATION FO Mr• Storla apologized that he couldn't give much 6ackground on the item• He indicated that Mr• Kline was going to be present at the planning Commission meeting to give a formal presentation� However, since Mr- Kline did not show up, Mr• Storla said he would try to ansmer any questions as best he could• Mr• Storla circulated copies of a booklet he had regarding the Se�ior Citizen Well Clinic Program• Mr• Boardman asked where the tlinic was located• Mr• Storla said that it was in the North Suburban Family Clinic in Coon Rapids• Chairperson Harris wanted to know if the Program was just for the Senior Citizens in Eridley and Columbia Heights• Mr• Storla said it was for all Anoka County Senior Citizens• Chairperson Harris wanted to know how long the Program had been in operation• Mr• Baardman said that it was in its third year of operation• He said that the Frogram needed local iunds to keep going• Chairperson Harris wanted to know how much money the Cnunty was contributing• Mr- Storla didn't know• Mrs� Schnabel referred to the booklet and that that Anoka County was contributing $56,0�0- She said that according to the booklet the Program couldn't qet United Way funds until June 1979• There was much discussion as to where the funds were going to come from and how much they would be receiving from the different sources• Mr• Storla read a list of the agencies that had already been approached• He said that the Program was trying ta qet $9,500 from businesses and organizations• Chairperson Harris felt that this particular program was a County function and should be funded by the County• Mr• Bergman indicated that �1,D0� was a lot of tax-payer's money• PLANNING COMMIS3ION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 18 Chairperson Harris sa�d that it was not the City's responsibility to handle a County project• Mr• Langenfeld said that the Fridley Lion`s Club had donated a bus to Anoka County� In turn, he said, that when the Fridley Lion's Club wanted to use the bus, Anoka County charged them• He indicated that the Fridley Lion's Club was in the process of asking for the return of the bus• Mr• Bergman felt that the free transportation of Senior Citizens to the Well Clinics should be limited to those persons that cannot drive or have no other means of transportation• He didn't feel that this should be offered to the Senior Citizens as a luxury item• He felt it should be an item offered in light of the need for the transportation service� Mr• Starla felt that possibly the item should be tabled until such time that Mr• Kline appeared before the Plann"ang Commission and explained why Anoka County wasn't backing ii up• Chairperson Harris and Mrs• Schnabel felt that it would be imQortant to have Mr• Kline talk to the Planning Commission and indicate exactly what the plan wes all about• MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the Planning Commission table the recommendation for 51,000 for Senior Citizen Well Clinic {CAP} until such time that Mr• Kline could appear before the Commission to provide the necessary facts needed before the Commission could reach a decision• UPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• 8• OTHER BUSINESS MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Schna6el, that the Planning Commission receive the memo from Mr• Boardman to Mr� Sobiech re9arding the action required to settle the Hyde Park rezoning issue• nr• Boardman indicated that the memo of necessary actions was given to the Planning Commission for informative purposes• He said that several questions had to be brought up before the expenditure of money: a} The question of the rezoning• b} Are the street patterns good to promote the commercial development IF that commercial development should be promoted� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — MAY 18, 1977 Page 19 The Planning tommission discussed at length the Hyde Park rezoning issue• They arrived at several different thoughts and ideas of what they would like to see and not see done• They indicated many questions that they felt had to be answered regarding the subject• Chairperson Harris suggested tfiat the Planning Commission attend the City Council conference meetinq on May 23, 1977. : Mr• Boardman made reference tn several points he had made in the memo and reiterated his reasoning for making several of the comments he had made� UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• The memo was received• 1QDJQURNMENT ` ' - ���- MOTION by Mr• Bergman, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the Planning Commission meeting of May 18, 1977, be adjourned• Llpon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• fkzairperson Harris declared the Planning Commission Meeting of May 18, 1977, adjourned at 11:15 P•M- The Planning Commission held a workshop on the PROPOSED HAINTENANCE CODE after the furmal adjournment of the May 18+ 1977, Planning Commission Meeting• Respectfully Submitted, %%�il�� �.�iGbt.lu/�-�' Mary���—