Loading...
PL 09/14/1977 - 30475�� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING CONiMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 197,� CAI,L TO ORDER: Chairperson Harris called the September 14, 19?7 Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:34. p�M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Shea, Oquist, Harris, Peterson� Schnabel Mr. Langenfeld arrived at 8;30 P.M. , Bergman (Mr. Oquist rras his representative) Jerrold Boardman, City Planner APPROVE PLAPINING COMr4ISSI0N MII�NTES • AUGUST 17, 19,�7 Ms. Schnabel requested that the last paragraph on Page 11 be eliminated. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Ms. Sh�a, to approve the minutes of the August 17, 19?7, meeting as amended. Upon a voice vote� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Peterson, to suspend the rules to accept the Appeals Commission meeting minuies as the next item on the Adenda. Upon a voice vote, all ''�° voting aye, the motion carried unanimously, � , � MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by t�Ir. Oquist, to suspend the rules to accept the Parks u Recreation Commission meeting minutes after the acceptance of the Appeals Commission meeting minutes. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 1. RECEIVE: APPEALS COMMISSION ME�,TING MINUTES OF AIIGUST 2, 1977 MOTION by Ms. Schnabel� seconded by Mse Shea, to receive the minutes of the August 23, 19?7, Appeals Commission Meeting. Ms. Fat Gabel was present at the meeting. Chairperson Harris reauested Ms. Gabel to be available to ans�ver any questions that may arrise regarding Itep #1 of the August 23, 1977, Appeals Cocnmission meeting. � Ms. Gabel indicated that the biggest concern of the neighborhood had been the amount of fires that had occurred at the Industrial Spray Paintin� Company. She �vent on to explain that the proposed plans �vould eliminate some of the potential hazards because the Comuany �,�rould enclose the rear docks. She indicated that in the past several fires had been set in the dock area by children playing �vith matches. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTEMB�R 14, 197� Pa�e 2 Ms. Gabel explained that in the past the Company had leased the building and that they had recently bought the building; thereby, creating a"pride of ovmership�� situation. She said that another concern of the nei�hborhood had been the screening that vrould be used as a means of landscaping. She said that after seeing the Plans of the proposed building, most of the neighbors �vere satisfied ti��ith the ptay the building �rould eventually look. Ms. Schnabel rranted to see the Plans that Ms. Gabel had referred to. P�Ir. Boarclman shotsred plan. He er.plained as of Sept 14, 19?7. the Planning Commission the original that the plans had not been approved The members of the Planning Commissi�n reviewed the plans, Mr. Boardman explained all that �ras being planned. P�s. Gabel indicated that she had talked to I�is. L. Sporre and that her bigges% concern �vas still the landsca.ping/ screening plans. Chairperson Harris indicated that the landscaping/screening �as basically a concern of Staff. He said that the Planning Comnission, etc. had to iirst be sure that the proposed build.ing and improvements v�ould meet all the codes. Mr. & Mrs. A1 Toetivs, Mr. & t�1rs. r'lrne Toeti�as, Mr. Ralph Officer, Mrs. Ralph Officer, r�ere all present at the Planning Co�misaion meeting regarding the request for variances by Industrial Spray Pai.nting Company. Mr. Toe�vs indicated that the reason he had appeared at the meeting rras because at the Appeals Commission there had been a petition that had been against the granting of the variances. He v�anted to be sure to be at the meeting in the event that the petition ��ould have been presented to the Planning Commission. Ms. Gabel indicated to the Planning Commission that Mr. Ken Sporre had had a petition at the Appeals Commission meeting that he chose not ta present to the Commission, because after talking with the Toetivs', he felt that the plan cvas good and he t�ranted to take the petition back to the people that had originally signed it and explain exactly �rhat rras being planned for that building. There vras no petition presented to the Planning Commissiono �� ���� ,� �. PLANidTNG COMNIISSION ME�TIN, G� SF�TENiB�R 1l�, 197 ; Pa�e _ '�, The neighbors that were at the Planning Commission meeting � were in favor of the proposed plans. - UPON A VOIC� VOTE, all voting aye, the minutes of the August 23, 1977, Appeals Commission Meeting were received. 2. RECEIVE: ARKS & RECREATION CONa�lISSION MEETING MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to receive the minutes of the August 22, 1977, Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. Mr. Peterson pointed out Item B of page 2. He informed Mr. Harris that tcro neti�r tennis courts �rould be built in the Rivervieti�r Heights area. UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the minutes of the August 22, 1977, p arks & Recreation Conunission meeting were received. 3• TAB ED: LOT SPLI� REOU�ST, L.S. #77-08, RON NEILSON T'Pa`I rmr�o ri � _ _ . _ i� s �u.y �LL•� �1��LL 1�+�,, ���1SL121g nouse on balance o �, o- 1 5- 71 Z r�Jay P1E. ) � MOTION by A2s. Sehnabel, seconded by Mr. Peterson, to remove the item from the table, Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. The item �vas removed from the Table at 7:52 p�M� Mr. Boardman explained that the lot in question rfas a very long lot, wYiich the petitioner wanted to split into two parcels. Mr. Boardman explained that the 49esterly 130 foot measurement Nas from the center of the street to the lot line. 105 feet of the 130 feet is the actual lot. He said that that had been the confusion at the previous meeting tivhen the item had been tabled. Chairperson Harris asked about the exi.sting structure that tvould be split by the new lot line. Mr. Don Nielsen of 115-71� jtday N� indicated that the structure tivas in the process of being moved. PLANNING COMr4ISSI0N MEETING - SEPTL'NIBFR 14, 1 q77 Pa�e 4_ � Mr. Boardman said that the City did not need any easements. �; He explained that the lot would be served by Alden Circle. Mr. Boardman explained that the Planning Commission had the authority with a Lot Split, that when the lot split �vas approved a variance tivould automatically be granted. He said that this authority vrould have to be exercised in the request since the resulting lot would be less than 9,000 square feet. Mr. Boardman Nent on to explain that the variance �rould only be granted regarding the lot size and not for the type or size of house that could be constructed on the lot. The buyer of the property indicated that he nroposed to construct a house that Urovld face Alden Circle. Mr. Boardman said that it �vould be possible to build the hous.e facing Alden Circle that rrould not require any additional variances. Ms. Schnabel asked if the Planning Commission �vas seeing a verified survey. Mr. Boardman indicated that it t��as a verified survey. l'�, Chairperson Harris had questions regarding the street right-of-vray that r4r. Boardman �vas �ble to adequately a.nsv�er. MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Ms. Shea, that the Planning Commission recommend the granting of the Lot Split request: L.S. �77-08, Ron Neilson: Split off the v�esterly 130 feet o� Lot 31� Auditor's subdivision Pdo. 77, subject to street easements, to make a neti�� building site on the corner of 71� 6�Jay NE and Alden Circle 1VE. (Existing house on balance of lot - 115 ?1� 1'7ay �'.) Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 4. PUBLIC HEARING Rn�U�ST �Q S r�T AT t�F PFI�ZIT� S p, �#77-1 1, BY RODNEY BR�'1PINON: PER FRIDL�;Y CITY CODE SECTION' 205.101 3H TO �Z0�9 AN AUTOI��OBILE CAR 4VASIi ESTABLISHr1ENT IN A C-2S (GEPI�RAL 5HOPPING) ON LOT 2� BLOCK 1, TARG�T ADDITION THE SAME BEING 775-53rd AVENUE NE. MOTION by ris. Shea, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to open the public hearing. U�n a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the Public Hearing vras opened at 8:0�- P.M. ��-, PLAPINING COMMISSIOIV MEETING - SEPTENIBER 14,_ 197,� Pa�e Mr. Boardman showed the Planning Commission a design plan ,^ of vrhat the automobile car vrash establishment vrould look like. -�- He explained where it would be located in relationship to Target and the Pop Shoppe. He explained that a system of service roads was being planned for the area. Mr. Oquist asked when the proposed island ti�ould be constructed. Mr. Albergotti, Jr., of Dayton Hudson Properties, said that it ti��as planned to be completed by Spring 1978, Chairperson Harris questioned the grading involved bett7een Embers a.nd the proposed Car L'Jash. Mr. Boardtnan said that at the Appeals Commission, the Brannon�s had agreed to reduce the size of each bay in an attempt to have the car �vash as far acray from the hillside as possible. Mr..Peterson asked if Target o�vned the property in question. Mr. Albergotti explained that the property belonged to Dayton Hudson Properties and that the Brannon � s jrould be purchasing the property. Mr. Rodney Brannon of 1�22 l'Jest Innsbruck Parkrray exx�lained � that he tivasn � t planning to construct the ��typical" type car �vash. He said that he planned to purchase the best equipment possible and hoped to have his car rrash be a model car i*Tash for the State of t•2innesota. He said that the car lrash ti�ould be maintained from 6:30 A.M. until 11:00 P.M. r1r. Peterson aske� if the car tiwrash would be opened if the attendant �vas not present. Mr. Brannon sai.d that originally they had planned to have the car rrash open 24 hours; hoi��rever, he said that they have since decided to only have the car��vash open for business when an attendant �vo.uld be present. Chairperson Harris wanted to knoj� P�lr.. Brannon�s plans of maintaining the one-to-one slope that would exist on his property. Mr. Brannon explained that he vrould be considering land- scaping the hill using some type of ground cover such as some type of rose bush and/or Russian Olive trees� � 1 ChairPked o t briStaffutotprevent the possibility oftails be rior Y shabby appearances in the Area. Mr. Brannon exulained that he had a big investment involved viith interest�Jtohbe sureethaththelenytiredlotl7asemaintained best properly a.t all times. Some questions arose reeaenoughtandsadequ tetenough toe area and tirere they lar� handle a car wash. Mr. Boardman indicated th�t there ti*�as an adequate se�rer/ water system in the area. Mr. Boa.rdman expressed a concern he had regarding the request for a special use nermit. He made the statee�ct that once a car t1rash� is a� car r�ash, is a car �vash, He said that if for some reason the Brannon's didn't make �nkrupt or if it in the car ti��ash business and �vould go b� it is discovered that the particular lot vras not a good locaiion for a car <<rash, the City �rould be "stuck" ti�ith a buildin� thattualld couldtonly belused for a cararashhat the builcling ac y business. Mr. Br�nnon inc�icated that he hoped the car lvash �vould be a future livelihood for him and his family. �ie said that they had talked to many peovle in the car tiarash business and they thought that the particular location in auestion was an excellent S��Offmaking hiysacar ti•ashsbusiness GOOD. had every intentio Ms. Schnabel asked if P�r. Brannon had any �lans to try to recycle the �faater used in the business, Mr. Brannon said that he ��Jas looking at hoHe�said�attthe v�ould be necessary to recycle the 1Frater. actu�l recycling of the t}Jater still had a few "bugs" that had to be erorked on, He said that as soon as those problems tvere solved� he �}aould probably be able to go right into recycling the t►�ater. Ms. Schnabel indicatedthattshouldtbe lookecl into,l standpoint it ��ould be sometl�ing Mr. Boardman indicated that solar panels on the roof of heatin� of the ��rater. the Brannon' s had plans to build the car l�rash to assist in the �,, � �� PLANNING COt��ISSIOPi M�,�TING - SLPTFa�IBER 14, 1977 Pa�;e 7 Ms. Schnabel said that a problem in the ti•rinter could be ��� caused by cars leaving the car ti�rash tvithout rriping the - excess ti7ater from the car. This mater ti��ould then be deposited on the streets in the area, thus creating an ice hazard. Mr. Brannon said that they crould have a system installed that contained an air-dry cycle that could be used to blor� most of the excess ti�aater off the car. Mrs. Brannon sai.d that there rrould be infrared heaters inside the doors of each bay. She said that that rrould heip dry the cars also. She also exp].ained that the ligh.ts in every tti�ro units ti,rere separate. Therefore, she said that at the time business tisras slot�r, the lights could be turned off in the bays that t�ere not in use, thereby ' saving energy, , Mr. Brannon said that they vrould use a five ioot high sign to .advertise the car tix�ash. Mr. Oauist asked horl many ��s could be backed up behind each ba.y. Mr. Brannc�n said that they could be backed un three deep. � Chairperson Harris asked if the Brannon�s planned to sell any oil products. � Mrs. Brannon said that they ti�ould sell no oil products. Nis. Shea asked vrhen they vrould plan construction. Mr. Brannon said that they crould like to start construction as soon as possible. Mr. Albergotti said that Target and Dayton Hudson Properties both felt that the Brannon�s rrould keep both the building and the property tivell maintained. Mr. Oquist asked tierho would be responsiUle for the roadvrays. Mr. Albergotti sai.d that Target ��rould ma.intain the roadc�ays and the other businesses crould pay an annual fee to Target. ris. Schnabel asked Mr. Brannon to explain the exact traffic flo�v to her. Tir. Brannon eh-�lained on the plan exactly ho�v the traffic �rould flo���. � � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTE�IBER 14, 1977 P a�e 8 MOTIOPI by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, , to close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye' the. Public Hearing rras closed at 8:35 P.M. Ms. Schnabel said that she was concerned about the large traffic flo<<� problem that already existed in the area. She felt that the car �aash could only contribute to that problem. Ms. Shea indicated that that had been her first thoughts t=rhen she had read the requsst. Ho<<rever, she said that since then she had decided that the car ��ash did have a good design� it vaas a good location; and, if the road improvenents �rere done as planned, it really �vouldn't pose any additional problems for the area. Mr. Albergotti said that since there cras already a traffic problem in the area, the street iraprovments could only improve the overall traffic problems. Mr, Boaxdnan pointed out that Dayton Hudson Properties had contracted the sar�e peo�le to c�o the service road project that ��rere doing ihe 53rd Avenue improvements. He said that the �rorls rrould all be done �.t the same time. MOTION by T�1s. Shea, secondecl by t•Zr. Peterson, that the Plan�.ing Commission recommend the apgroval of the request for Special Use Permit, S.F. #77-11, by Rodney Brannan: Per Fridley City Cod� Section Z05.101 3H to allo��r an autonobile car srash establishment in a C-2S (General Shopping) on Lot 2� Block 1� Target Addition, the same being 775-53rd Avenue NE. Upon a voice vote, all voting a.ye� the motion carried unaninously. (r�Is. Schnabel gave a reluctant aye. ) (Ms. Schnabel tivas reluctant because she felt that Dayton Hudson Properties should proceed �vith their internal improvements ahead of the 53rd Avenue Project). � r"� � ,---, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTa"IBER 14� 1977 PaQe 9 . 5. PUBLIC HFARING: RE S.P. #77-12 - NAS��I A. ANSARI: As per Section 205.131 �A, OF THE FRIDL� C.ITY CODE, TO ALL0�9 A PUBLIC AUTO REPAIR C�'NTER USE� O1V THE SOUTHERLY 805 FEET OF THE EASTERLY � OF THE NORTHEASTERLY � OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY 4 OF SECTIOPI 3-T30-R24, EXCEPT THE WESTERLY 328 FEET ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF (SUBJECT TO THE EAS�'IENT AGREII�fENT OF 1�/12/74) THE SAME BEING 7900 MAIN STREET NE. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to open the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote� all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously and the Public Hearing v�as opened at 8:46 P.M. Mr. Boardman explained that Mr. Naseem A. Ansari ��ras not able to attend the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Boardman indicated that the request was to enable the use of 13,000 square feet of bay area in one of the Bryant- Franitlin buildings at 7900 Main Street NE to have a self- serve type of garage space. He said that Mr. Ansari's iclea �vas to provide the space, tools, racks, etc. for people to do their oti�rn �vork on their cars charging them on a time basis. Mr. Boardman said ,�.� business ti��as not for that type of that the location service. that P�r. Ansasi felt that that type of asound the area and that there tivas support facility. He said that Mr, Ans�ri felt tivas a good location for that type of Mr. Boaxdman indicated that the building rras already divided into bays Ms. Schnabel asked if the building �rould be divided into more bayso Mr. Boardman said that Mr. Ans�ari was going to use the existing bays. Mr. Oquist asked if there v�ould be an attendant on duty at the bay area. Mr. Boardman indicated that there �rould be a maa.ntenance- type person at the building. Mr. Oquist asked if there would be any hoists available in the bay area. Mr. Boarclraan indicated ihat the pro ject �vould be more of a minor repair type of space. He said it tivould basically � be providing garage work-space for some people �vho didn't have a gara�e or enough garage space to do the minor repair work on their cars such as oil changes, minor tune ups, etc. , -�.--� pLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTggFiER 14, 1977 Pap�e 10 Mr. Oquist asked if there ��ould be a fire hazard for that type of business. Mr. Boardman said that Mr. Ansari �vould have to meet all the Fire Code reouirements for that type of use. Mr. Robert Schroer of �.90 Rice Creek Blvd. commented that a division of a big Corporation had established several buildings in other parts of the country'for the purpose of self-serve service centers. He said that many had to be closed dov�n because of a lack of acceptance. Mr. Langenfeld asked if that type of occupancy �ould be compatible vrith the other type of occupancies in the area. Mr. Boardman said that it �vas probably mero fcameatibHe in an industrial area than in any other typ explained that there was no place in the ordinances that allot�red for automobile repair facilities. He said that that type of business had to be handled by Special Use Pernits. Mr. Boardman suogested that the item be tabled until such time that Mr. Ansari could appear before the Commission and ans��rer the questions tha.t the members had, MOTION by Air. Peterson, seconded by 1�Zr. Langenfeld, that the Planning Commission table the renuest for Special Use Permit� S.P. �77-�Z, Naseem A. �nsari: As per Section 205.131 (3,A,10) oi the Fridley City Code, to alloti�r a public auto rep�air eenter use, on the Southerly 805 feet of the Easterly Z of the Nortlieasterly �. of the Southeasterly � of Section 3-T30-R24, Lxcept the ti`Jesterly 328 feet according to ihe plat thereof (subject to the easement agreement of 4/12/74) the same being 7900 M�-� Street N�. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Harris indicated that the item vrould be tabled until such time that P�r. Naseem A. Ansari could speak before the Planning Commission. He said that the Public Hearing would remain open. n �� n pT.n rTN�; r.n Ts,�Or1 MEETING - SEPTENIBER 1�, 1977 Pa�e 11 6. LOT SPLIT RE�UEST, L.S. #77-10 BY HEIGHTS BUILDERS � .: S Ll'� O�FF�HE �� ERT LY 30 FEET OF LOTS 1-y. � �K A� RIVERVIEV9 HEIGHTS ADDITION AND ADD THII�I TO LOTS 5-6, BLOCK A� RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS ADDITION TO MAKE TWO BUILDING SITES. ' Mr. Boardman indicated to the Pla.nning Commissi.on on the map v�hich lots were being discussed. The person representing Heights Builders Inc. said that he owned Lots 1, 2, 3, 1�, 5, &. 6. He indicated that Lots 1� 2, 3, & 4 ran east and ���est and Lots 5& 6 ran north and south. He also indicated to the Commission the lots an.d area that Anoka County otivned. He said that he vranted to make tti��o buildable lots. Chairperson Harris asked if he had any of the vacated street that �ras indicated on the map. The person represen�ing Heights Builclers Inc. said that he did not. Mr. Boardman indicated �that the City �aould not require any additional easements on the lots. Ms. Schnabel as��ed if he intended to build the homes on the ttvo lots or tivould he sell the lots. ;� The person representing Heights Builders Inc. said that he Mould build the homes and that they vrould be priced in the �55-60,000 area. Ms. Schnabel pointed out that the lots would be less than the required 9,000 sauare feet. Chairperson Harris indicated that one lot cvould be 8,160 square feet and the other lot u�ould be approximately 8,466 square feet. Mr. Peterson said that the request rrould be consistent tia3.th the City�s present housing codes to encourage housing that people could afford and he said it �ras one tiFray to utilize the lots. . MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to recommend the approval of Lot Split Request L.S� �77_10 by Fieights Builders Inc.: Split off the easterly 30 feet of lots 1-4, Block A, Riverview Heights addition and add them to Lots 5-6� Block A, Riverview Heights addition to make ttivo building. sites. �, PLANNING COtRRISSION ME�TING - SEPTEMBER 1l{: 1977 Pa�e 12 Mr. Boardman indicated that the access�and a11 utilities would be off of Hugo Street. � UPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye� the motion carried unanimously. ?o LOT SPLIT RE�UEST L.S. �-�77-11 BY ROBERT H. SCHROER: SPLIT OFF TIIE SOUTH�RL z FE 0 , B �, EA,ST RANCH ESTATES 2ND ADDITION IN ORDER TO MAKE T��'10 BUILDING SITES. Mr. Boardman indicated that there ti�rould be a building on lots 7& 8 and that Lot 6 Gv�s presently being built on. He said that the rea�on P�r. Schroer titranted the lot split �vas because he had tti•ro buyers for the lot. He said the proposed building ti+tould be back-to-back buildings that ��ould meet a11 requirements. He said that basically all Mr. Schroer needed rras a lot split. Mr. Bo�rdman said that the only problem that could be seen was the question as to hocr service would be gotten into the back properties. Mr. Schroer said that the area had been discussed many tines. 13e said the main concern �vas on Tot 3, Block 3. He indicated on diagrams to the Planning Com�i�sion the exact location of the lot being discussed. He indicated that one of the plans could be to go betti�reen lo �s 5& 6 v�ith a cul-de-sac to service lot 3. He said that there could also be a.cul-de- sac off Ranchers Road to serve Lot 1�. NIs. Schnabel asked if Lot 4 could receive its access from the one cul-de-sac bet�veen lots 5& 6. Mr. Schroer said that it could� but it �rould depend on rahat 1*�ould be built on the lot. Mr. Schroer said that there �ould be a possibility of Lot �. & 5 going to the same buyer, thereby eliminating many problems. He also pointed out that if Lots 3, 4, & 5�rent to the same buyer, a11 the problems Nould be eliminated. Mr. Boardman indicated that the concern was, ho�r the City �vould service the tti��o lots in question. Mr. Schroer said that he had basically showri . the Planning Commission ho��r he could access the lots properly. He said that there tiaould be several alternatives as to rrhat could be done, including a dead-end turn-around type street. He said he t��as shod�ring ho�� all the lots COULD be accessed, if all the lots ti•�ere bought and built- on by separate buyers. Mr. Boardman explained the different areas of the lots in question. �� n � PLAI�INIPIG COMMISSION MFETING - SLP__ T�7BER 11� 19?� _�pa,�,e 1� Chairperson Harris suggested holding the road easements as �"', a private roadrray. . Mr. Boardman said that even if it rras maintained as a private roadway, it tivould have to be built to city standards to handle any problem in the future, if the oti�mer decided they didn�t �ant to maintain it any longer and would 1'Ic�.21t the city to maintain it. � Mr. Boardman indicated that the Code read that the back-to-back buildings �t�ould not require a special variance. He said that the buildin�s could be bac�-to-back ti��ith the �r�ritten agreement from both property oti�mers. P40TION by r1r. Peterson, seconcled by Mr. Langenfeld, to recommend approval of Lot Split Reauest, L.S. �?7_11, by Robert H. Schroer: Split off the southerly 1572 Feet of Lot 6, Block 2, East Ranch Estates znd Addition in order to make tiro building sites ti�rith the stipulation tha� access be provided to Lot 3 by easement over I,ot 5 and that no portion of that easement �rould go onto Lot 6. rir. Schroer said that the Cul-De-Sac 1�ould be tvhatever the City crould require if it ti�rould be City �Zaintained. P�Ir. Board.�an said that before the City �rould issue a building �, permit, they trould require a definite plan. Mr. Schroer said that he felt that anyone buil.ding on T,ot 3 �rould �vant a City Street and not a Private Street. UPON A VOICE VOT�, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECESS: A recess ivas called by Chairperson Hasris at 9:39 P.M� RECONVENED: Reconvened at 9: �.9 P.Ni. Shea, Oqt�ist, Harris, Schnabel, Langenfeld �vere all present. Mr. Peterson had to leave due to personal reasons. � n �LANPJING COMMISSIOPI MEETING - SEPTEl�IBER 14, 1977 Pa�e 11� MOTION by Ms. Shea, seconded by t�ir. Langenfeld, to amend the agenda and add Item 10A, Receive Human Resources Commission �"', Meeting Minutes of September�l, 1977. Upon a voice vote, all votin� aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by t�Ir. Langenfeld, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to receive the letter from Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company of the Trrin Cities, Inc. to Mayor 11Jillian J. Nee and to rPceive the AZemorandum from Virgil C. Herrick, City Attorney to Richard Sobiech, Director of Public .9orks, regarding the Billboard Ordinance. Upon a v�ice vote, all voting aye, the motion carriecl unaninously. The letters vJere received at 9:51 P.M. $. REVI�Y PROPOSED SICAI ORDINA�ICE Mr. Boardman explained that it had been the intent that the City Council only revie��� the Sign Ordinance. He said that the Ordinance had not been ready for the First Reading. Mr. Boardman said that he had some problems ti�rith the memorandum from Virgil C. iierrick, City �lttorney, in that throughout the memo he had given a lot of statements but had given no legal ideas as to ho�Fa to change it. Chairperson Harris said that he had gone to the City Council meeting on 09/12/7'% to get an idea ��rhere the City Council ti*aas on this item. He said that the City Attorney had indicated that he vras �:;illing to assist in the cariting oz the legal verbage into the Ordinance. rir. Harris said that since P�ir. Herrick had raised the questions, the Commission had best ansNer them. Ms. Schnabel said that she had gone through the memorandum and had mad.e notes on her copy of the Ordinance along t�rith notes of her ol�m. She proceeded to go through the Ordinance indicatino possible changes. Ms. Schnabel said that the first Section 214.01 PURPOS� ��as okay as ��rritten. Section 21t�.02 DEFINITIONS, A. Abandoned Signs� Ms. Schnabel felt cras proper in that it helped the Zoning Administor. Ms. Schnabel, tivith agreement from the other members, felt it r�ould be proper to remove the Examples that ��rere listed in item B. Accessory Use. �is. Schnabel �rent on to discuss She felt that the statement (includinb sm�].1 plastic flags, special announcements) should be item G. B�nners and Pennants. grand opening signs, or deleted. �"� � PLANNING COt�IISSI0I�1 MEETIr1G - SEPTE�'iBER 14� 1977 Page 15 Ms. Schnabel next discussed H. Bench Signs. She felt � that the vrords "such as a bus stop" should be deleted since later in the ter.t of the Ordinance it tivas stated that 6 Bench Signs vrould be prohibited except at the bus stops. ,�, � Ms. Schnabel suggested that the crording of Item I. Billboard be changed to read, "BILLBOARD means an advertising sign rrhich directs attention to a business, commodity, service� or entertainment ��hich is conaucted, sold or offered �� else��here than on the prenises of tivhich the sign is located. It ��las decided to nut a auestion mark next to Item J. CAPIOPY signs. 2�Is. Schnabel said that if t�ie definition ti•ras to be left in the section z14.02, then the term Canopy Sign had to be used in the text of the ordinance. Chairperson Harris thought that some��rhere in the text it r�as referred to as to the differences of roof signs and canopy signs. Mr. Langenfeld said that the terninology had been used to clarify roof signs versus canopy signs versus ���hatever other type of sign. The discussion next ti�ras on K. CHANG�ABLE COPY SIGNS. Ms. Schnabel needed clarifieation as to exactly tivhat a Readerboasd ;iras. Mr. Boardman suggested leaving out �he i.e., reader boards ��rith chan�eable letters or changeable pictorial panels, from the definition. Ms. Schnabel then referred to Items S and V. She saicl that item S. IDENTIFICATION SIGNS and letter V. INSTITUTIONAL SIGNS, ti�ere the same definition and meant the same thir_g. She said that they rrere crorded somel�rhat different but did say the same thing. Mr. Foardman said that that had been done to define the differences betr�een Institutional Signs and Advertising Signs. He explained that an Tnstitutional Sign ��ras an advertising sign; hot•rever he said that there ti�ere parts of the te�t that vrould alloti�� an institutional sign of cert�i.n square foota�e rather than just an advertising sign. It tivas decided to leave the tvro definitions as they read. Item Z. PORTl�BLE SIGN t�ras next discussed. Ms. Schnabel said that the tirording ti�as confusing. Chairperson Harris suggested the rrording to be changed to re1d, "PORT�L� SIGN means a sign so designed as to be mov�ble from one location to another and �rhich is not permanently attached to the ground� a sign structure, or a buildin�.�� PLIINNING CON��IISSION M�ETING - SEPT�IBER 14, 1977 Pa�e 16 ., . Ms. Schnabel ask�d if there was a specific sign that �ras called a PORTA-PAN�L. . Mr. I,angenfeld said that the ��rords ��back-to-back�' made the sign different from a PORTAfiLE SIGN. Mr. Boardman said that it had to be listed in the definitions because in the text portable signs �ere not being prohibited, but porta-panels lvere being prohibited. Ms. Schnabel asked for an example of exactly �°�hat a RFADER BOARD ti�tas. Chairperson Harris said that Bob�s Produce had a Reader Boarc'.. Mr. Boardman suggested eliminating the aefinition for Raader Boards because the only place they are mentioned was under Signs Alloti�red tiaith Special Use Permits. P�ir. Oauist said that before any of the items c�ere removed that it ti7as verifieci that the items srere not actually mentioned some place in the te:�t. Mr. Oquist c�idn't really agree that an Ordinance could ever have too many definitions. Ms. Schnabel said that Item GG SIGN 1�REA �vas too ��rordsy and cumbersome. A�ir. Boarchnan suggested that the i'ten be rrorded, "SIGN AREA means the tota7. area of the sign, including the border and the surface ti�rhich bears the advertisement; or in the c�se of inessages, figures, or symbols attached directly to the builcling, it is that area tirhich is incluciea in the smallest rectange ��hich can be r�ade to circumscribe the message, figure, or symbol displayed tliereon. The stipulated maxi�um sign area for a free stanc�ing sign refers to a single facing.�� Ms. Schnabel questioned item NN. UNLA'�'7FUL SIGNS. She �vanted to kno�� if the Ordinance tiras giving too much potuer to one person in authority to make the determination of unla�vful signs. Chairperson Harris said that there �ras no provision for due process. rir. Boardman suggested that the �aordin� be changed to, �'UNLA��lFUL SIGN means a sign rrhich is in conflict with this ordinance." � � � -� PLANNIPIG COr�MISSTON MEETI_ NG - SFPTEMBER 14� 1977 Pap�e 1? Ms. Schnabel next discussed item B under Section 21�..031 ,.� SIGNS PROHIF3ITED IN 1�I,L DISTRICTS. She t�anted to knovr who made the decision as to �rhat tirould be obscene, pornographic, ! or immoral character, or vrhat tirould be untruthful advertising. Cha3rperson Harris said that the Courts had to make the decision as to rrhat is pornographic. Mr. Oquist asked if he could appeal to the Courts if the Si�n Aclministrator allotivs a sign that he felt vras obscene. Chairperson Harris said that the Public could appeal any decision made by the City Administrator. Chairperson Harris said th�t the State �.ttorney General determined i=rhat ti�ras false or untruthful advertising and that nart of the item B should be taken out. Ms. Schnabel sug�ested retivording E to be, �tSigns Nliich resemble an official traffic sign or signal (exce�t directional signs on private pronerty).11 Ms. Schnabel ne�.t discussed item I. She felt if that item ��ias left in the tezt, then an additional Item "0" should be added and FLASHING SIGNS should be included� A2s. Schnabel su�gested that Item I be reti�rorded to, � "Illuminateci sign t�hich changes in either color or in intensity of light or is aninated. She said that Item 0 ti��oul� cover Flashing Signs. Ms. Schnabel indicated that item J�ras confusing to her. Chairperson Hasris said that in speaking to the City Council there had been a lot of resistence to Item J� iTrhich included billboards. Mr. Langenfeld said that he personally felt that the Ordinance ti��as curtailing rights. He felt that a precedent r�as being set and that it rras a form of censorship and he said that it should be ha.ndled very carefully. Ms. Schnabel saa.d that her personal feelings �vere that if City Council tFrould override r.►hat the Sign Comnittee had done, then she hoped that the Council ti�rould take the action to limit the number of signs allotived in the community. r—. Ch�irperson Harris brought up the subject that some communities are drive-thru communities and others are t��alli-thru communi�ies ancl the types of signs and advertising are dependent on that aspect also. PLI�NNING COMT��ISSION Ni��TING - SLPT�t�IBER 14� 1977 , Pa�e 18 Chairperson Harris pointed out that tivhen he talked to the City Council it had been their feeling that the Ordmance ^ rras too restrictive and that it s�ras abolishing some things that they felt shouldn�t be abolished. He said that by discussing the items again it could be sai.d that it rras the Commission� s consensus that it �vas �vhat �vas �vanted. Mr. Oc�uist said that he crould rather have something too restrictive than too loose; tiFrhich tras the current ordinance�s problems - too loose. Chairperson Harris said that it had been the consensus of the Planning Com�ission to leave item J under section 214.031 as it read. Chairnerson Harris sa.id that the attachment to the letter from T�Taegele Outdoor Advertising Cora�any ti�ras totally unacceptable. Chairperson Harris commented on item C of section 214.032 SIGNS PLRT�IITTED IPT ALL �IS^1RICTS. He sai.d that the Fridley City Code had an ordinance regaraing the display and use of the �imerican Flag, entitled, "TFIE FL.�G ORDIN�1`10E". There ti�ras much discussion regarding the use of the U.S. Flag as a means of advertisin�. In particular tliey discussed how City could control Per�in�s use of the U.S, Flag. Ms. Schnabel asked if there rfould be a possibility of limiting the size of the Flag to the size of the building. R�r. Boardman said that since tliere ^ras no permit required to display the U.S. Flag, it rrould be hard to control. Chai.rAerson Harris said that it could be possible to linit^ the height of the rlag pole. �Ie asked r�Ir. Boardman to determine ti�rhat a�ood height for a flag vole ���ould be. The next item that ��as discussed v�as Section 214.032, H, 5, l�is. Schnabel said that there should be an Item 5a and and item 5b, 5a �}rould be Banners and Pennants commemorating a special event not connected c��.th a business and must be removed r�ithin five days follobving the event; and 5b rrould be Banners or pennants for businesses ti��ill be allo���ed for grand openings of businesses only for a ten day maximum Aeriod. � � PL�INNING CO1�R�IISSION MEETING - SEPTT�IBER 14, 1977 PaP;e 19 - P4s. Schnabel said that Section 21y..042, I3 should actually be shovm under Section 211�.032 SIGPiS P�Fd�IITTED SiV I1LL �, DISTRICTS, H(Temporary Signs), 2(Real Estate Signs)� - arid should be listed as item c) Vacancy Signs: etc. Mr. Bo�xdman felt that there should be some type of control on Vacancy Signs. Ms. Schnabel said that ti�rhen a person had rental units� there r�as more response to a sign on the rental unit than any other type of advertising. � Ms. Schnabel felt that the Ma.Yimum three square feet in area ��as sonetimes not an adequate sign. Mr. Boardman felt that the large apartment complexes didn't necessarily need any type of sign, since they almost al���ays either had a vacancy or else they haci the rental offices ti�rhere a person could inauire as to a vacancy or at least put their names on a rraiting list. rgr. Boardman said that the smaller units that did not have a renta7. office could utilize the tnree sauare foot sign to an advantage, since it ti�rould be large enough to advertise that they had a vacancy. Mr. Boar��nan pointed out that nany times in Section 214.01�1�, 214.045, and Section 211�.01�6 ite� D, :7a11 Signs, should � read "D. ;`dall Si • �' , gn. 1. ;Jall sign area sha].1 not exceec� 15 times the sc�uare root of the �rall length on tirhich the . sign is to be pl�ced�'t Ms. Schnabel suggested that vnder Section Z11�.01�5, B, 2, the rtord ��P�Iaximua" should be added so that the item <<rould read, ��2. AZa,Yimum of eighty ($0) square feet per development,'� Mr. Boardman suggested that item B� 1� under sections Z1l�.044, 214.0�.5, and 211�,046 should read, ��l�, r7ininum height ten (10) feet from bottom of sign to finished ground level r�hen tiv� thin z5 feet of a drive���ay". Ms. Schnabel said that rir. Herrick questioned the item A� 2 under Section 211�.05. l�ir� Boardman said that he liked the tirording of the item. He said that since all the conditions placed on a sign by the Zonin� Administrator i�rere subject to appeal� he felt that that rrould be control enough. tir. Boardman explained th�.t any person could appeal any decision that ctas made in the City of Fridley. � PL11P1�iING COr1MISSION M�ETING - SEPTr�IBER 14, 1977 Pa�e 20 Ms. Shea left the Planning Commission meeting at 12:05 A.M. due to illness. Chairperson Harris said that a City Policy should be set up re�arding the informing of people of their right of regress. � P�s. Schnabel said that Section 214.05, A, 3, should be re�torded to, "3. Temporary signs erected by a non-profit organization are not exempt from obtaining a permit for signs� but the City ma ti�raive the fee requi:�ment." Ms. Schnabel suggested that some of the items in Section 214.05, A, �. should have been listed separately. Mr. Boardman said that in the retyping of the Ordinance the different types of signs 1'rould be listed separately. Ais. Schnabel said that item E. Exenptions under Section 211�.05 should read, ��The exemptions perraitted by Section z14.05� A, �-, shall apnl;� only to the requizement of a�ermit and/or fee, and shall not be construed as relievin� the installer o� the sign, or the ormer of the property on �'rhich the sign is located, from conforr�ing ��rith the other provisions of this cllapter. " Mr. Boardman suggested that Section 214.05, iteci F� 1, should be ret�rorded to, "1. �very sign shall be maintained in a safe condition at all times." Ms. Schnabe� said that under Section 21y..05, item F, 3 should be L�rritten in the Sectic�n z14.06 ENFORC�.!�LNT Pis. Schnabel s�.id that Section 211�.05, G, 2, a, 1) should read, "1)The sign is altered in any rray in structure or copy ( except for changeable copy and normal maintena..n.ce) �ahich makes tlze sign less in compliance ���ith the requirements of this ordinance than it tiras before the alterations; or 2) The sign is relocated; or 3) etc." Ms. Schnabel suggested that under Section 211�.05, item G, 2, a�, 4), should be entirely left out. She said that it was non-constitutional. � � � PL11N1�TING COt•'IMISSSON MErTING - SEPTEMBER 14� 1977 Pa�e 21 — Mr. Boardman sug�ested the r�ording of Section Z14.05, � item G, 2, a) , 5, should be re���orded to, "If the sign became 50/ delapitated, it had to be removed or brought - totally into complia.nce. If a sign is brou�ht 5�/ into compliance, then it had to be brought into total compliance". Ch�.irp erson Harris felt that the item tended to discourage sign i�provements. Ms. Schnabel said tha� Section 214.06, A, should be changed to be, ��A. The Zoning Administrator or agents shall be responsible for the �enforcement of this chapter". She said that the other items vrould be lettered B, C� D, & E. Ms. Schnabel said that under Notificat�.on of Violation of Code under Section 214.06, the sixth line� the �vord HE should not remain. Also the iw�ord HIS in item 2 under Td�tification of Violation of Code should also be removed. Mr. �oardman said that Section 214.Ob, C, 2, should be ret►rorded to, "The Zoning Aclministrator or. agent may cause any sign or other advertising s�ructure �rhich is an immediate public hazard to be removed summarily and ��ithout notice". Chairperson Harris said. that the aclvertisinb structure that rrould `�e removed ti�rould be hanciled the same as � junk cars. They tiSrould be held in storage for X number of days and if not picked up in that amount of tine, it ti�rould go into public auction, MOTSON by T�Ir. Langenfeld� seconded by Ms, Schnabel, to submi-t to City Council the Proposed Si�n Ordinance �vitYi changes indicated. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 9. CONTINU�D: PROPOSED P•iAINTi''VANCE CODE: P�20TION by Nis. Schnabel, seconded by P�ir. Langenfeld, to continue the P�Zaintenance Code. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye� the motion carried unanimously at 12:31 A.M. 10. CONTINUED: PARI�.S & OPLN SP 4CE PL11N gi0TI0N by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by rZr. Oauist, to continue the PaY�:; s and Open Space Plan. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye� the motion carried unanimously. �"� PLAI�TNIPTG COi�7ISSI0N rR�rTI1VG - SEPTF��iBER 14, 1977 Pa�;e 22 _------_-------_ 11. i OF ., , . o , � MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by I�s. Schnabel, to - receive the minutes of the Environmental Commission meeting o f�,ugust 16 � 1977. Mr. Langenfeld suggested that the members pay particular attention to Page 2, para.gra.ph 3, and Pa�e 3, the bottom pasagranh. He indicated that the Commission had much discussion on the Open Space Plan. He felt thai the Plan needed overhauling in order to be adaptable to the City. P��r. Langenfeld said that the subject of noise pollution cras really interesting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 1-2. RF,C�IVL: HUI�1n.1�I p�SOURCLS CO%��TISSI01�? N.'tNLITES. Or " +-'=' '� 9 AZOTIOId by i�fs. Schnabel9 seconded by P�lr. Langenfelc�s to receive the ninutes of the Htunan Resources Cor�mission �eeting of September 1, 1g77. LT�on a voice vote, all vo�ing aye, the motion carried unani�ouslyo Ms. Schnabel said that since the Code of Ethics had been adopted by the City Council� i:ould a form be aeveloped that the members of the Commissions could fill out so as to be sure all the information �Frould be provided. Mr. Boardman said that a form t�as in the process of bein� developed. ADJOURNMErtT : MOTIOV by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by t•Zr. Oauist, to adjourn. Uvon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carrie�. unanimously and the meeting ti7as adjourned at 12:46 A.NI. � Respectfully submitted, jyL,QJL+ ..��:.� � ,, � iGryL e Carhil Recording Secretary � ��