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
�
��