PL 06/08/1977 - 30469, CITY OF FRIDLEY
�
PLANNING COM�ISSION MEETING
JUNE 8, 1977
MOTION by Mrs• Schnabel, seconded�by Ms• Shea to appoint
Mr• Bergman as acting Chairperson• Upon a voxce vote, all
voting aye, the motion carried unanimously•
CALL TO ORDER:
Acting thairperson Bergman called the June �, 1977, Planning
Commission �eeting to order at 7:35 P•M-
ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Shea, Bergman, Suhrbier, Schnabel, Langenfeld
Peterson, Harris
Jerrold Boardman, City Flanner
APPROVE PtANNING COMMISSION �INUTESe MAY 18, 1977
Mrs• Schnabel added to the end of the second paragraph on Page 16,
^in the new Senior Citizen Building^•
� t�r• Frederic Fos�er of 6441 Riverview Terrace indic�ted that
the second paragraph on Page 6 was actuaZly said by
Mr• Luckow of 161-64 1/2 W�y N•E•
MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by �s� Shea, that the
Planning Commission minutes of May 18, 1977, be appr�ved as
amended• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motzon carried
° unanimously-
MOTI4N by Ms• Shea to add an agenda item 3A �o be RECOMMENDATION
FOR $1,00� FOR THE SENIOR CITIZEN WELL CLINIt {CAP}• Upon a voice
vote, all voting �ye, the motion carried unanimously•
1• CONTINUED: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA �77-03, BY C• D- CHANDLER:
To rezone tot 1� Block 2, Johnson's River Lane �ddition, from
R-1 {Single family dwelling areas} to R-3 {multiple family
d�velling 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 dwelling areas}, so these three lots
can be used for the construction of a row house development
and/or townhouses, generally lecated between 64 1/2.and
Mississippi place, on the West side of East River Road•
public Hearing open•
��
PLAN�ING COM�IISSION �EETTNG — JUNE 8, y9?7 PAGE 2
Mr• Lhandler of 11320 Mississippi Drive, Champlin, and �r• Ken Talbot �
of Calhoun Realty of Coon Rapids were �resent•
Mr• Chandler presented a plat to the planning Commission• �"'
The Planning Commission rev�ewed the plat• Mr• Boardman explained
the plat and what had been decided upon• He said that the plat
showed seven units with fourteen parking spaces• Ne said that
a rear�ard setback variance would be required-
Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know who had ti�le to the easement•
Mr• Chandler responded that it belonged to the County•
��ting Chairperson Bergman wanted to know if the easement was in
the setback requirement or was there to be 35 feet of setback
plus seven feet of easement•
Mr� Chandler indicated on the plat the locations of the setbacks
and the easements•
Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if the seven foot easement would
revert back to the property owner•
�r• Chandler said it would•
Ms• Shea explained that if the setback was moved to include the
easement, then � variance wouldn't be n�eded•
�.
There was some dzscussion at this point regarding the setbacks
and easement requirements•
Mr• T�lbot pointed out to the Planning Commission that what had
been requested was a plat describing the location of the building/s
on the lot• He said that the plat they tdere looking at was
indicating the maximum of what could be put on that property•
Mrs• Schnabel said that Mr• Chandler had previously indicated that
he would meet all city codes� She said �hat if th� plat was not the
final plat and if the property was rezoned, she wanted to know if
there was any way to bind the property to a structure that wouldn't
contain any variances to the City Codes• �
Mr• Chandler said that he hadn't been aware that the plat hadn't
met all the City Codes- �
Mr• Talbot explained that the plat was only off by six inches and
that the plat was only a preliminary and once an architect drew
up the final plat, the dimensions would be more exact•
Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if the contractor would be bound to
the plat• She felt that there would be no guardntee that the new
purchaser would construct that number of units- �,,.,�
t-
���
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 197? RAGE 3
Mr• Chandler felt that the buyer wouldn't go more than seven units
because of the fact that he would have to provide facilities
for the handicapped if he built more tr�an seven units and
�, Mr• Chandler didn't think that the person would go that additional
expense•
/"�
Mr• Talbot wanted confirmation as to exactly how much of a
variance was needed•
Mr• goardman explained that if the easement was part of the
property, then a very minor amount would be needed {approximately
six inches}; however, he said that if the easement was not part
of the property, it would be approximately seven feet six inches•
Mr• �angenfeld indicated that if a rezoning was given, then the
Planning Commission itself would lose control of the type of
building that would be constructed on the property•
Acting Chairperson Bergman said that if the rezoning was granted,
that the Planning Commission could put stipulations on the
recommendation for approval�
Mr. Boardman stated that the maximum that could be placed on that
property was eight units• He said that the planninq Commission
had requested a plat and what they had to decide was that if
they felt the area was right for an R-3 zoning, then the rezoning
should be approved; if they decided that the area wds not right
for an R-3 zoning, then they should refuse the request• He
di�n't se� why �he Commissian was concerned about tying the
property to a specific design•
Mrs• Schnabel s�id that part
site plan was because of the
concern of the neighbors•
of the reason for requesting a
traffic patterns which were a
Mr• Boardman felt that the plan was good in that it would be
situated on the lot with plenty of green area and ample parking
areas•
Mr• Talbot explained that the parking areas could be situated
on either side of the building•
;.
At that point, Mr• Chandler showed the site plan to
Mr• & f1rs• Frederic Foster of 6441 Riverview Terrace•
Mr• Foster said that he didn*t want to see any apartments at all,
however, if the rezoning was to be approved, then he wanted
to see the parking lot on the Mississippi Place side of the
building• .
Mrs• Foster explained that there was a park located near the lots
in question• She said that many�children played in the pork and
that was the reasoning in requesting that the parking lot not be
n, located on the 64-1,/2 Way side of the building.
��
_ �.�. _
;
PLANNING COMMISSION �EETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 4
Mr• Langenfeld wanted to know if the Foster's were representing
everyone in the neighborhood or just themselves•
Mr• Foster
themselves•
didn't want
that other
Hearing•
said that they weren•t representing anyone other than
He said that he knew that all the other neighbors
to see any more multiple dwellings in the area, but
commitments kept them from appearing at the Public
Mrs• Foster said that she had talked to many of the people on
Riverview Terrace and that they were against any more multiple
dwellings• She said that it had been decided that if multiple
dwellings had to be constructed, then most of the �eople
preferred to see duplexes rather than apartment complexes•
Mrs• Foster also indicatEd that she didn't feel that any variances
shauld be allowed•
Mr• Langenfeld pointed out to the Planning Commission that a very
hazardous situation did exist in the area because of the abundance
of children and the amount of existing traffic-
Mr• Chandler pointed out that the rezoning would be an upgrading
of the present zoning�
MOTION by Ms• Shea, seconded by Mr• Langenfeld, to close the
public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the Public
Hearing was closed at 8:D5 P.M-
Mrs• Schnabel indicated that she felt there was a definite hardship
on the peti�ioner in retaining the piece o� property with two
separate zonings• She said that the fact that two of the lots were
zoned Commerical {C-1S} and were not large enough, in themselves,
tp construct as Commercial, she felt that �r• Chandler had a serious
hardship as to how to develop his property• Mrs• Schnabel also felt
that a commercial en�erprise wouldn't be beneficial to that
neighborhood• She said that she would rather see a multiple
dwelling of some type rather than commercial• She indicated that
she was concerned about the traffic patterns, the size of the units,
and the setbacks• She said that the residents of the neighborhood
had a very legi�imate concern as to the traffic and the children, etc-
However, after careful consideration, she felt that the following
motion was in order-
�
,�
�^
;.�
PL�NNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8� 19r7 PAGE 5
MOTION by �rs• Schnabel, seconded by Ms• Shea, that the Planning
Commission recommends to City �ouncil the approval of the
� Rezaning Reauest, ZGA �77-D3, by C• D• Chandl�r: To rezone Lot 1,
� Block 2, Johnson°s P.iver Lane Addition, from R-1 {single family
dwelling areas} to R-3 {�ultipl,e family dwelling areas}, and rezone
Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, ,lohnson's Rive�r Larie Addition fram C-1S
{local shopping areas} to R-3 {multiple family dwelling areas},
� so these three lots can be used for the construction of a row
housE development and/or townhouses, generally located between
64 1/2 and Mississippi Place, on the Glest side of East River Road,
with the stipulation that traffic ingress and egress be onto
Mississippi Place ONLY• Upon a voice vote, Ms• Shea, Mr• Bergman,
Ms• Suhrbier, and P1rs• Schnabel voting aye and Mr• Langenfeld
voting nay, the motion carried•
n
n
�
Acting Chairperson Bergman indicated that this would go to
City �ouncil on June 2�, 1977, and at that time a Public H�aring
would be set•
Mrs• Schnabel initiated a brief discussion about the use of
traffic bumps in the neighborhood, especially along
Riverview Terrace•
Mr• Boardman
traffic bunps
street plows•
indic�ted that the City tried to avoid putting
on streets becau'se of the p,roblems with
2• LAT SPLITi REQUEST: L-S• �77-�5, BY MORRIS J• LONGERBONEa� '
Split tot 28, Auditor°s Subdivision No• 92, into three
parcels as follo�s: Parcel I: The South 72 feet of Lot 28
{5895 Arthur Street N•E•}; Parcel II: The North 72 feet of
the South 144 feet {5875 Arthur Street N•E•} both as measured
at right angles of the City of Fridley in Arth�ar Street N•E-�
and Parcel III: That part of Lot 28, lying North of the
South 144 feet as measured at right angles to the South line
thereof, together wi�h that p�rt of Gardena Avenue vacated,
also subject to the rights of the City of Fridley in Arthur
Street N•E- and in Gardena Avenue, {1494 Gardena Avenue N•E•}•
Mr• Morris J• Longerbone of 1494 Gardena Avenue was present�
Mr• Boardman explained that the general location was at the corners
of Gardena and Arthur Street N-E- He said that the petitioner wanted
to split the property into three parcels, parcels ], and 2 would be
over 9,OOp square feet; however, the lots widths would be 72 feet
instead of the required 75 feet� parcel 3 would be an extra large
lot size that would be well over the 10,000 squ�re feet which
was required for a corner lot• All the parcels of land were
serviceable with sewer and water already in• He said that from
the City's standpoint, there weren*t any problems•
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 6
Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if the City had any easements on
Arthur or Gardena streets•
�
Mr- �oardman indicated that all the sewer, water, utilities,
telephone, etc• were already in the streets, so that no ea�ements
would be required•
Mr• Longerbone said that he would be tearing down the existing
houses• �
Ms• Suhrbier wanted to know what price range the pl�anned house
would be in•
Mr• Longerbone said it would be approximately $60,D�0•
Mr� Longerbone indicated that he felt he didn't need all the
property since his family was grown• He said that he wanted to
split the lots to sell so that he could make his life a little
easier•
Mrs- Schnabel wanted to know which parcel of land Mr- Longerbone
intended to build his home•
Mr- Longerbone said he would build on Parcel 1• He said that the
exis�ing houses would be torn down before the sale of the �
remaining parcels•
MOTTON by Ms• Shea, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the Planning ^
�ommission recommenc�s to City Council the approval of Lot Split
Request: L•S• �77-05, by 1�orris J• Longerbone: Split Lo� 28,
Auditor's Subdivision No•92, into three parcels as follows:
Parcel I: The South 72 feet of Lot 28 {5895 Arthur Stree� N•E-}�
parcel II= the North 72 feet of the South 144 feet {5875
Arthu�^ Street N•E•} both as measured at right angles to the South
line thereof, subject to the rights of the City of Friciley in
Arthur Street N•E�� and Rarcel III: That part of Lot 28, lying
North of the South 144 feet as measured at right angles to the
South line thereof, together with that part of Gardena Avenue
vacated, also subject to the rights of the City of Fridley in
Arthur Street N•E• and in Gardena Avenue {1494 Gardena Avenue N-E•}
with the stipulation that the existing structures be removed �
from the property prior to the-sale of that property- Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously•
�
0
� �
�
n
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 7
3• VACATION REQUEST, SAV �77-OS, CITY OF FRIDLEY:�
Vacate the 5 oot right o way or Lakesi e Road
on Lot �, Auditor's Subdivisian No• 108, because
change in street pattern• {The City now has a 5�
right of way for 73 1/2 Avenue that cul-de-sac's
Replat of f1arxen Terrace•}
for 276 feet
of a
foot
on the
Mr• Boardman explained that because of the changes in the street
patterns that the City no longer needed the Lakeside Road
righL-of-way• He said that the City would vacate Lakeside
Road right of way; however that the City must retain a drainage
and utility easement over the westerly 1,? feet•
Acting Chairperson Bergman wanted to know why the City was
asking for the Vacation•
Mr• Boardman indicated that the City no longer needed the
Lakeside Road right of way•
MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Ms• Shea, that the
Planning Commission recommend to City Council the approval of
Vacation Request, SAV �77-�5, City of Fridley: Vacate the 25
foot right of way for Lakeside Road for 276 feet on �ot 4,
Auditor•s Subdivision No• 108, because of a change in street
pattern- {The tity now has a 50 foot right of way for 73 1/2
Av�nue that cul-de--sac*s on ihe Replat of Marxen Terrace•} wi��h
the stipulation that the City maintain 7,7 feet• for drainage and
utility easements over the westerly 17 feetc- Upon a voice vote,
a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously•
3A• REC0�1f1ENDATION FOR $]„ 000 FOR SENIOR CITIZEN WELL CLINIC {CAP}
MOTION by Ms Shea, seconded by �irs• Schnabel, to remove this
item from the Table• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously•
Ms• Shea said that the donation was being asked for the Senior
�itizen Well Clinic located in the North Suburban Family
Services Clinic in Coon Rapids-
I�r• Kline of 9030 Jefferson, CAP, gave the background information
on the Senior Citizen Well Clinic• We said that the clinic had
been in opera�ion for three years• He said the intention of the
Clinic was to provide preventative medicine for senior citizens
at a very minimal cost to them•
PLANNING COMMISSION �EETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE b
.Mr• Kline indicated to the Planning Commission that all Federal
assistance ceased at the end of June 1977 and the Clinic was on its
own for at least 18 months, at which time, possibly, United Way
would give its support• He said that the total cash needs for !�
that 18-month period would be $56,000• He said that Anoka County
had pledged $22,5�0- He explained that the attempt was being made
to raise $16,60D through local foundations• He said that the
Senior Citizen Well Clinic was a County-Wide Program•
Ms- Shea wanted to know if CAP had approached Columbia Heigh�s-
�r• Kline said that they had a call in to Columbia Heights, but
that the call had not been returned as yet•
�r• Kline indicate� that Coon Rapids had given $5,000 worth of
space and supplies�
Acting Chairperson Bergman wanted to know why anyone with Medicare/
Medicaid benefits would go to the Clinic•
Mr• Kline explained that Medicare would not provide preventative
medicine- He said that the main purpose of the Clinic was to keep
all the Senior Citizens in good health•
MOTION by Mr• Langen�eld, seconded by �s• Shea, to receive the
Qnnual Evaluation for the Well Senior Ci�izen Cl�nic• Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• The booklet
was received• � ^
Mr• Langenfeld wanted to know where the Clinic was located-
�r• Kline responded that it was located in the North Suburban
Family Practice Clinic at 1323 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Coon
Rapids• He explained that it was directly past Coon Rapids
City Hall an Coon Rapids Boulevard•
Mr• Langenf�ld asked if there were doctors at the Clinic donating
their time•
�r• Kline said that they hired the doctors because of the cost of
Malpractice Insurance• He indicated that when the physician is
hired, he brings his own insurance with him•
Mr• Langenfeld quoted the fact that United Way would give support
in 1979; he wanted to know if it was a^for sure^ thing•
Mr• Kline said that there was no way of being positive• He said
that United Way had been to the Clinic and they had been impressed
with what they saw• He went on to explain that United Way would
have more of a supporting role IF it gives its support at all•
�"�
�
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION �EETING — JUNE 8, 1977, PAGE 9
Mr• Langenfeld asked if Mr- Kline was dealing with Jerry Lewis•
�r• Kline said that we was-
Mr• Langenfeld wanted to know if Mr• Kline was going to handle
all the paperwork and forms himself•
Mr• Kline said that he would be handling all the paperwork
involved•
Ms• Suhrbier wanted to know if the senior citizens went to the
Clinic only for a physical examination and not for an illness-
Mr• Kline said that �he Clinic was basically preventative
medicine but that th� Senior Citizens could go to the Clinic
and have a diagnostic work–up and if something was discovered
that required medical attention, the person would be
recommended to their own physician for treatment•
Mrs- Schnabel expressed surprise that �56,000 was needed to
run a Clinic, four hours a day, for two days a week, for
18 months• She said that �hat would equal more than $3,00�
per mon�h•
Mr• Kline explained that the physicians were paid $4�/hour•
He said that two physicians were working each of the days-
He then went on to explain the other costs involved with
running the clinic, over and above the wages of.the physicians•
_ Mr- Kline also pointed out that costs should �e considered on tl�e
number of physical exami�ations that are conducted at the clinic
compared to the cnst to do them at a regular doctor's office•
He said that approximately 1�0 senior citizens per month are
seen by the doctors at the Clinic•
Acting Chairperson Bergman wanted to
provisions for free transportation•
Mr• Kline said that none of the money
go to provide free transportation•
know if there were any
being requested would
Mr• Langenfeld asked if Mr• Kline was aware of the fact that the
Fridley's Lion Club had donated a bus to �noka County•
Mr• Kline indicated that he was aware of the bus but there was
a problem in getting a driver for the bus• He said that the
County was in the process of establishing a Senior Citizeri Office
that �dould coordinate Senior Citizeri Programs• He said that once
that Office is implemented and staffed, many of the problems
presently being experienced by the Senior Citizens would �e dealt
with•
�
�
�-.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 19�7 PAGE 10
Mr• Langenfeld indicated that the Fridley's Lion Club had donated
a bus to A�oka County for the primary purpose of assisting the
Senior Citizens and Handicapped people in Anoka County• He said that
when someone wanted the use of the bus, they were told they had to
pay $6•50 per hour• He said that it had come to the point that if
Anoka Coun�y could not agree about the way of handling the use of
the bus, then the Lion Club was going to ask for �he return of the
bus•
Mrs• Schnabel had conflicts because she fel� the services provided
for people unable to financially have health services and other
services was good, but she was disturbed at the cost of some of
those services• She felt that the costs were way out of line as
to the original intent of the different programs• She said that
as a tax payer one gets more and more upset when they hear of the
high cost of those services
Mr• Kline said that the Clin=c was originally formed by a Coon Rapids
women's group that needed help in funding• He pointed out that
many times people become medically unable to take care of thenselves
and require a Nursing Home of which, much of the monies needed to
run the Nursing Homes ar� picked up by the tax payers� He felt
that the Program wouldn't have to keep too many people out of
Nursing Homes in order for the Program to break even-
/"1
Mr• Langenfeld pointed out that the Planning Commission should keep
in mind that at one point in time the present Senior Citizens were ^
tax payers and he felt that the Commission was almost obligated
to grant the money being requested•
In response to a question asked by Acting Chairperson Bergman,
Mr• Kline indicated that if a physician at the Clinic discovered
an alarming medical problem, the person would be encouraged to
see their own physician immediately• He said that at that point,
Medicare would pick up any costs for treatment of the medical problem•
Mr• Kline went on to say that approximately one of every five people
seen at the Clinic are referred to their physicians for treatment•
He said that the Clinic was identifiying many probl�ms at an early
stage •
Ms• Suhrbier asked if the Program was only for Anoka County•
Mr- Kline said that they wouldn't turn anyone away, but that it
was mainly Anoka County• He said that the plans were to expand
if, and when, United Way took over•
Mr• Langenfeld pointed out that even though ther� was much concern
about the costs, it should be kept in mind that the Commission
members would all be Senior Citizens some day• He hoped that at
that time that a Program such as this would be in effect•
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 11
Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know why Mr• Kline had waited so long before
asking for money from Fridley• If he knew that the money would be
� running out, why hadn't they started sooner•
Mr• Kline said that the strategy had been going on since
August 1976• He said that they presently had Anoka County
committed and had approached five different foundations•
�"1
�,
Mrs- Schnabel wanted to know why United Way hadn*t been approached
sooner so that they could have taken over immediately rather
than waiting for 18 months•
Mr� Kline said that United Way was obviously the major por�ion
of fundi�g source, but that United tiay was not optimistic about
picking up an operation immediately following Federal assistance•
United Way wants the operation to be on its own for a short time•
He said that the lead time needed to get United Way support was
usually two to three years•
Mrs• Helen Deeg of 1�68 South Circle NE said that she had been on
the Advisory Board of the Well Senior Citizens for three years•
She indica�ed that since the Commission had already heard how the
Clinic works, she thought it would be interesting for them to
hear from a person who had been helped by the Clinic�
r1s• Hazel Hartman of 193 Hartman Circle said that iJhen she went
to the Clinic that the doctor found a spot on her face an� that
she w�s blind in her left eye• She was told to see her pwr�
physician regarding the spot on her face• She said that her
doctor found the spot to be skin cancer• He operated on the
spot and, hopefully, got all the disease• She said that if
the spot had not been taken care of at that early stage the
outcome could have been much worse• She said that she had
been one of the first patients to use the Clinic and that she had
been back two or three times since• She was really satisfied
with the care given her at the Clinic• She said that a person
gets a thorough physical examination {t��e kind a person would
probably pay $90 for at a regular poctor•s Office}.
Mr• Earl Deeg of 1068 South Circle NE indicated that he took
people to the Clinic and other places• He said that he was
also a Senior Citizen and many of the people he drives around
could not get any place without help•
Acting Chairperson Bergman wanted to know if Mr• Deeg used his
own automobile along with volunteering his time•
Mr• Deeg said that he did get mileage when he brought people to
the Clinic, but that he did use his own car•
PLAPJNING COM�ISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 12
MOTION by Ms• Shea, seconded by Mr• Langenfeld, that the Flanning
Commission recomnends to City Council the approval of the $1,0�0 for
the Senior Citizen Well Clinic {tAP}- .
^
Ms• Hartman cited another example to the Commission when a friend of
hers had gone to the Clinic and the doctors told her to immediately
see her physician• This person ended up being in the operating
room 6-1/2 hours to try to take care of cancer that had taken over
much of her stomach• Ms• Hartman said that that person was still
around today•
UPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously•
Acting Chairperson Bergman declared a short break at 9:Z5 P•M•
Acting Chairperson Bergman called the meeting back to order at
9:25 P.�•
4• RECEIVE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES�
---.._,� ,�.,.,
Mr• Langenfeld referenced Page 41, the eighth paragraph• He wanted
the sentence to read, ^P1r• Langenfeld stated that if a member of
the Cummission could not come �o the meeting and be a participaiing
member,then that personshould not be a member^•
MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the
planning Commissian receives the Environmeni:al Quality Commission /�
minutes of May 17, 1977• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously•
Mr• Langenfeld wanted to know how one co�Zd implement the policy
guidelines of the Open Space and Park Plan {Page 37, second paragraph}•
Mr• Boardman pointed out that the guidelines in itself was not an
implementation �of the guidelines under the Refere��c;um He said tha�t
it would come through the development of the policy and implementation•
Mr• Langenfeld wanted �o know when the City Council would hold
the final disposition• .
Mr• Boardman indicated that there had been some delays on the
proposed Parks and Open Space Plan but that the maps and revised
copies should be sent out by the end of that week-
Acting Chairperson Bergman felt that they had had a meaningful
discussion at the Community Development Commission Meeting.
Mr• Boardman thought that the basics of the plan were very sound
and the basics were what was needed to start,a discussion•
�
� v .i. .. u a. v
Mr• Langenfeld di:scussed the fourth paragraph on page 38,
"All of tl�e parks within that area were within the river
corridor area, but not all of them would be considered as having
river recreation potential• Islands of Peace, Mahnomen Park, and
� probably Riverview Heights, would be•^ Mr• Langenfeld didn't
really think the City had thought of any type of Marina Plan•
Mr• goardman responded that the entire Mississippi Area was a critical
area� He said that certain regulations would have to be set up as
far as r^estrictions-► setbacks, etc• for the protection of the River
and the protection of recreation spaces U�ithin that area•
For recreation purposes, the City required a plan to cover the
critical areas• This plan was to include any proposals for
City road use or access to the Riyer� development of any
recreation activities, that would relate to the River• This
was the primary goal of the Critical Areas Plan•
Mr- Boardman also indicated that the corridor designation
in the City of Fridley was between the middle of East River Road
and the �lississippi River•
i�lr�• Langenf�ld said that the East River RoGd Project �ommittee
was losing its strength due to the lack of one of �he members•
He wanted to stress to the Pltnning Commission th�� the �
Environmental Quality �ommission did not have a specific
report to meet the Planning Commission request as to the stop
light problems on 79th and East River Road other than what had
been indicated in the �linutes of (�ay 17, 1977•
^ Acting Chairperson Bergman explained �hat there had been an
- assigr�men� from the Pl�nning Commission to look at the problem
raised by the Board of Appeals• He said that �ommunity
Development had declined to accept the assignmen�, therefore,
the Environmental Quality Commission had fcaken it over and
what had been written in the minutes was all that was available
at that time• f1r- Bergman asked if the Commission planhed to
drop the assignment•
Mr• Langenfeld indicated that the report would only be delayed•
�1rs• Schnabel felt that the second paragraph on .page 4D should
be brought to the attention of the City Council• She felt that
it was the ^heart^ of the matter• It pointed out that 79th
was going to be a very critical crossing and the fact of the
matter was that the �ounty didn�t want to put a stop ligh� at
that corner� She said that short of writing a formal report,
that the best thing would be to have the Council's attention
brought specifically �o that paragraph so that they could see
what the Environmental Qu�lifcy Commission had come up with regarding
the East River Road situation•
Mr• Langenfeld said tha� since it was already in the minutes,
it should be adequate•
,^,
., _
._ �.
PLANNING CO�MISSSON MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 14
Mr• Boardman indicated that if the Planning Commission felt that
signalization was needed at 79th and E�st River Road, then they
should make a formal motion s�ating that after the. study of the ^
79th and East River Road intersection they felt that it would be
important to have that signal• .
MOTION by �rs• Schnabel, seconded by Mr• Langenfeld, that based
on the study done by the Eest River Road project Committee and
their repor� to the Environmental Quali�y Commission on 05/17/77
that the Planning Commission recommends to City Council that a
traffic light be placed at the intersection of 79th and
East River Road as quickly as possible• Upon a voice vote, all.
voting aye, the motion carried unanimously•
Mr• LGngenfeld said that he had been requested to be the
Chairperson of the East River Road projec� Committee but he
fel� it would be a conflic� of interest for him to chair a
Project Commit�ee in addition to the Commission• He wanted
confirmation of that statement�
Mr• Boardman said that there was nothing in the Ordinance that
said a Chairperson couldn't chair � Projec� Commi�tee•
Mr• Langenfeld discussed the Noise Pollu�ion Model Ordinance•
He said that the Environmental Quality Commiss.ion I�oped �o have
a special program regarding noise pollution at the July 19, 1977
meeting• He felt tha� the planned program would be.very
informative and he urged the members of the Rlanning Commission r"�
to plan to attend• Mr• Langenfeld went on to say that the Program
would include all the presen� regulations on noise pollu�ion• He
also indicated that from the presentation a person would become
familiar with the terminology used when noise pollution was
discussed•
At that point there was a disucssion on what a decibel was in
regards to noise poll�tion•
Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if the plan was to come up with a
Noise Pollution Model Ordinance for the City of Fridley and why
the State and Federal Controls weren't adequate•
Acting Chairperson Bergman said that if Fridley had a noise
pollution ordinance, it would probably be more strict than the
State or Federal controls-
There was much discussion amongst the Alanniry Cammission on
noise pollution as well as the manners of enforcem�nt• That
discussion also involved the present Noise Barriers located
on Interstate 694• • '
r��
PLANNING CO�MISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 15
5• RECEIVE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
�� MAY 23, 7,977
Mrs• Schnabel wanted to know if anyone could go on the
June 23, 1977, tour of all the park facilities to see what was
being done and wi�at the parks had {Page 48 paragraph F}•
Mr• Boardman commented that he was sure anyone from the
Planning Commission could go on the tour•
Mr• Langenfeld wantced to commend 1�r• Peterson on his s�atemen�c
made on Page 47, par�graph 9, ^••that he apprecia�ed having some
of the neighborhood project committee members attend the meeting•
This was a working plan and i�c was the key thing in trying fco
put fcogeLher a system �hat would give everyone in the City
an opportunity to enjoy recreation, no matter whaic it might be^•
�1r• Langenfeld wanted to know if the Parks & Recreation Commission
was planning �o meet with the Rice Creek Water Shed District�
f1s• Suhrbier said that there would be a m�eting and the Planning
Commission would be invited•
Mr• Langenfeld waniced to know if the meeting would get involved
� with the profalem regarding the dredging of Lock�e Lake•
i"�
�
Ms• Suhrbi�r said that she thought it would since it was
planned to be a tot�l report•
f10TI0N by �1s• Suhrbier, seconded by Mrs• Schnabel, that the
Planning Commission receive the Parks & Recreation Commission
Minutes of �►ay 23, 1977• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,
the motion carried unanimously•
Ms• Suhrbier discussed the Land plan and stated that she felt
the City of Fridley needed to connect the present parks with a
bikeway system rather than acquiring more land•
There was much discussion at that point regarding the bik�eways
and the City�s present plans�
Acting Chairperson Bergman suggested that if the Planning
Commission had any definite suggestions/recommendations that they
be documented in the minutes so that he would be able to take
them back to the Community Development Commission so that they
can be reviewed by the Bikeway/Walk:way Project �ommittee so they
can be discussed at the next meeting•
0
PLAPJNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 16
6• RE�EIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES=
f1AY 25, b977
�
MOTION by Mr• Langenfeld, seconded,by Ms• Shea, that the Planning
Commission receive the Community Development Commission minutes
of i1ay 25, ],977• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion
carried unanimously•
Mr• Bergman indica.ted �hat most of the Community Development
Commission meeting dealt with the reporic by Pat G�bel, the
Chairperson of the Sign Ordinance Projecic Committee•
Mr• Langenfeld wanted to commend Ms• Gabel on her work•
Mrs• Schnabel said �hat she knew Ms• Gabe1 had pu� a lot of
personal time into the report•
7• COPJTINUED, PROPOSED MAINTENANCE CODE
It was decided that the Planning Commission would hold a Workshop
after the formal adjournmen� of the June S, 1977, Planning
Commission meeting•
8• OTHER BUSINESS
Mrs• Schnabel said that she had read Mr• Boardman*s report on the
Hyde Park prok�lems and thought i�t was EXCELLENT • She I�ighly %"`�
commended �1r• Boardman• ,�
There was a duscussion regarding the Hyde Park Report, the meeting
tha� had been held, and the outcome•
Mrs• Boardman indicated that there was a petition submitted to
rezone the Hyde Park area back to residential• He said he
thought the decision was going in that direction•
MOTION by Ms- Shea, seconded by Mr• Langenfeld, to suspend the
rules and elect a Vice—Chairperson before Item 7• Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously•
Mr• Boardman said that a Vice—Chairperson had to be elected annually•
He indicated that Mr• Harris was the Chairperson�
MOTION by Ms• Shea, seconded by Ms• Suhrbier to nominate
Mr• Bergman as Vice—Chairperson of the Planning Commission• Upon
a voice vote, Ms• Shea, Ms• Suhrbier, Mrs• Schnabel, and
Mr• Langenfeld voting aye, Mr• Bergman sustaining, the motion
carried•
�
0
�
r"�
�
_�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 8, 1977 PAGE 17
ADJOtJRN�IE�JT :
f10TI0fJ by �1s• Shea,
Pl�nning Commission
Upon a voice vote,
unanimously-
seconded by f1rs• Schnabel, that the
meeting of June 8, ),977, be adjourned•
all voting aye, f.he motion carried
Acting Chairpers�n Bergman declared the Planning Commission
meeting of June 8, ],977, adjourned at 10:25 P.M.
The Planning Commissian held a workshop on the PROROSED
f1AI��TENANCE CODE aficer the formal adjournment of the
June 8� 1,�77, Planning Commission meeicing•
Respectfully submitted,
/�, %
%%%i ���.. �
�lar ee Carhill
Recording Secretary
0