Loading...
PL 10/03/1979 - 30520� . CITY OF FRIDLEY �� PLANNZNG COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 3. 1979 CALL TO ORDER• _ Chairman Harris called the regular meeting ot the Planning Commission to order at 7 :30 P .M. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Mx, Harris, Mse Hughes, Mro Oquist, Mr,.Treuenfels, Ms. Gabel Members Absent: Ms. Schnabel.(represented by Ms. Gabel), Mr. Langenfeld (arrived at the end of the meeting) Others 1'resent: Jerry Boardman, City Planner and Bill Deblon, Associate City P lanne� � 1. GONTINUED: LOT SPLIT REQUEST L.S q��79-04 EDWARD To BAULER• Split off the Westerly 60 feet of Lot 14, A.S. ��22, except tha Southerly 390 Feet, also Lot 30, Blc�ck 2, Irvington Addition, and adjoining vacated streets and alleys in Irvington Addition, to be sold as open space for an adjoining property, the same being 1420 Rice Creelc Road NoE. Chairman Harris asked Mro Boardman for comments on this request. 'i Mro Boardman told the Planning Co�ission when considering this item, that i� was very '�~ j� important to consider planning for the whole district. The entire area was quite large rJ wii:h many undeveloped lots. He stated other landowners in �his area have contacted him regardi.ng the question of lot splits. His two main questions were how to get access to all of this land and what kind of use the land would service Fridley best. He realized Mr. Bauler only wants to split off 60 feet, but this would make the loti substandard in width and a very deep lot. This lot could become landlocked in the future. When planning we have to look at 15 to 20 years down the road. He realized this will put a burden on Mre Bauler n�w. The City already has a 30 foot road right- of�way along t��r. Bauler's land, This was platted many years ago on the old Irvington Addition. All the streets and alleys in the area have been vacated, The City would have to obtain an additional 30 feet �o make room for a road. Mr. Boardmar. recommended denial of the lot split. Mro Harris said the reason for continuing this request was the question of access to the rear properti�s, plus, to find out what the other property owner°s intents where. Piro Boardman said they did not ask each owner what their intent was, because perhaps in 5 years from now they may sell to a developer and we have to plan for that now. Mro Harris said they were also looicing for some sort of a plan for this area. Mr, Boardman said this was what he did on his proposed road plan and lot plan. Because of lack of time, everything was not planned from an engineering standpoint, but the plan as far as a road systeni, lot division and lot size was feasible. He asked if.we do this split now, what problems are we creating down the line. He recommen�ed denial � because the lot would be too narrow. It would be only 60 feet wide, which was substandard � und Chat has never been allowed before. If the commission okays the lot split, it would be saying the lo� was buildable, which was not true. Mr. Boardman questianed if PLANNING COMP'IISSION MEETING,^OCTOBER 3, 1979 PAGE 2 , the Commission could legally approve the lot split because it would be going against � the ordinance requirements for size. Mr. Boarclman also recommended denial because the rest of the land would be inacce�sible and the City could not get the needed road right-of-way. � � �'� Mr. Harris asked if the terrain was too steep for roads. Mr. Boardman said there are variations in the terrain, but there are low points which are fairly level and could be serviceable. The proposed plan was about the besC one for road access and creating lots. ' Ms. Gabel pointed out on the p�oposed road plan, some houses were in the way. She questioned what happes to them. Mr. Boardman replied this road plan was not definite. It may have to be moved around for those homes, some lots made smaller or larger or if the price was right, the developer would purchase the hom�sand relocate them. Ms. Hughes asked how many property owners were affected. Mr. Boardma.n said the land was owned by 9�homeowners and they each have a large amount of 1and. fle then showed a map of each homeowner's land. Mr. Boardman suggested to Mr. Bauler to split off some other area of h.is land. Mr. Bauler, 1420 Rice Creek Road, said he has a buyer for this land already and he did not want to sell anymore of his land. Mr. Boardman sai:d this neighbor would be able to put in his tennis couxt, with this- �_�^ lot split aud then split off his original land and sell. He has seen this happen -\J before. Mr. Bauler would then be left with inaccessi ble land on his back property. Mr. Robert Barnette, 541 Rice Creek Blvd., speaking as a friend for Mr. Bauler, pointed out the only reason Mr. Bauler was selling was because of financial need. He said if he sold this 60 feet to his neighbor, ultimately the tennis court would go in, and when the road was needed, it would be part of the neighbor's land that would be condemiied. The burden would be on the purchaser of the property, not on Mr. Bauler. It would be up to the neighbor to settle on the cost of this lot, not Mr. Bauler. The burden should not be on the petitioner because of something 20 years down the road. . Mr. Boardman said the burden was on the City, because they would be saying the lot split was buildable and it was not. Mr. Harris said he did not see how the Planning Commission could approve a lot split for this size because it goes against the ordinance. Mr. Bauler said he did not want to se11 off more of his land closer to his house. That was all part of his home and he had lived there since 1938. Mr. Harris said there have been no lot splits of less than 75 feet since 19660 Ms. Gabel asked if CoCo would buy another configuration of his land, , � The Commission tried to work out various ways to split the land, but because of needed road right-of-way and future la.nd development, nothing was feasible. Also, Mr. Bauler 0 a s PI.ANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 3, 1979 PAGE 3 R��1 could not agree with any of the suggestions because it would infringe on hia home and his life style. Mr. Bauler stated he wanted to leave his land t� his children. Mr. Harris suggested splitting off the land along Rice Creek Road, leaving an access to his home. This lot would be more valuable then the original request, somewhere in the area of $15 - 16,000. This lot would also meet all the requirements. An easement would be given for future road right-of-way to give access to the land to the rear. This split would stillleave Mr. Bauler the land axound his home and allow him to do what he wants with it. Mro Barnette pointed out that �he neighbor was not interested in tY}is land. Mr. Harris said considering land shortage and the location, this lot should se11 very easily. Mro Boardma.n suggested leasing the land t�e'�neighbor wasnted for his tennis court and j also split the front lot on Rice Creek Road. The proposecl road plan. would then be s�ifted j be along this lot and an easement could be dedicated for road right-of-way when the lot � was sold. This would satisfy the neighbor's p1an,- and give M"r. Baulfer the-money"he i requires and still leave 2 lots left of his land. IMro Bauler said he fought placing a road here in 1967, but looks now like he has lost. I Mr, Sarnette asked what t e of I yp procedure Ed would have to go thru. i �, �. �,^ Mro Harris said he would only need a lot split for the land on Itice Creek Road. He '�` also suggested working out a written a�reement with the neighbor on Zeasing the land for � `Che tennis court. This should include and easement for access to the tennis court for motorized vehicles. Mr. Ha�ris said they would continue this item until Mr. Baulter had time to talk with his neighbor ori this proposaT and'work out the new lot spli�. � MOTZON by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mso Hughes, to continue Lot Split Request, L.S. ��79-04, Edward T. Bauler, until further notice. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN H.ARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CAttRIED UNAI�TIMOUSLY , 2. RECEIVE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: SEPTII'��ER 13 1979: MOTION by Mrm Oquist, seconded by Ms,Gabel to receive the Housing an' Redevelopment minutes of September 13, 19790 Mr. Boardman pointed out the motion on page 3 regarding ehe discussion on .reliminary Development Standards and the Center City Project. "Motion by Mr. Houck, seconded by Mr. Prieditis, to recommend to City Council, through Planning Commission, that they adopt some guidelines for controls sim- ilar to the "Preliminary Development Standards" to be implemented in the zoning ordinance. Upon a Voice Vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers de- clared the motion carried unanimously. • � He said he was presently working on zoning controls for the Center City project and should be bringing them to the Planning Commission soon. He �ated he was looking at " this area as an overlay district which would require Special Use Permits for all buil- dings in the Center City pr�ject. Special Use Permits would take care of variances, . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 3, 1979 PAGE 4 �=• with proper notice. Mre Harris asked if he had a timetable fox the developmento Mr. Boardman said he hopes to get a brochure out to developers by mid-November. That puts �ny firm development commitment into January or Februaryo He felt if everything was done in a year's time, we would be doing good. /'� , UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLAItED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ' 3. RECEIVE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES: SEPTII�ER 18, 1979: MOTION by Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the Environmental Quality Commission minutes of September 18, 1979. - UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. CONTINUED: PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHAPTER 205. ZOIVING: MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Treuenfels to continue the discussion of Proposed Changes to Chapter 205. Zoningo UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE,-�I�AIRM�,N HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY . ^�., Mr. Boardman asked the commission to set up a special meeting to discuss the zoning changes onlyo This was the only portion of the re-codification that had to be done. MOTION by Ms, Hughes, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to hold a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission to discuss Proposed Changes of Chapter 205. Zoning, on Wednesday, October 10, 1979, at 7:30 P.M. in the downstairs classroom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLYo Chairma.n Harris asked to have this meeting posted because it was a special meeting. 5. OTHER BUSINESS• Mr. Treuenfels asked if the number of housing units (Comprehensive Plan) suggested by the Metropolitan Council was subsidized by other agencies. Mro Boardman replied yes. He also stated he has had some discussions with the l�ietro- politan Council on the number of uni�s to be ma.de available in a 10 year pexiod. The Cou.ncil now feels it cannot require a community to build X number of homes in 10 years if the Federal monies are not available. They now look at a 3 year period and say we have so much money that can be granted t� a community and therefore the units caill be built according to the monies available. This does not change the goals or objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, but will change some numbers in the implementation process. � Mr. TreuenFels aslced if the funds come through the Metro Council. � � a F � 1 P �-`�"`;;�.r. Boardman said �he Metrop�litan CouMinnesotaaHousing Finance was�used properly. � made sure the money granted by H[JD or "" "� `y - Mr. Boardman said he had talked to Coon Rapids on the o� allgtheureportsf�chaxtsnew 6 acre development on Hwy. 47 in Blaine. He said he g this area and was satis- stati�stics, etc. from the architect firm thualits of drainage were being usedo They fied that proper controls on quaniity and q 3' Which was the same re- are using a 100 year rain or 24 hour - 6 inch rain run-off, quired by the Rice Crels foreruneof�ist�e�� waseaPlotlof si ti g9inhthe area and the pxesen� storage contro of this developer was embarrassed bkst The quantity of�runloffbwaslbeinggcontrolledeand the silt in the next 2 to 3 wee quality of the water was improving. Mr. Boardman stated there had been no si ting into Noxth Park only ihe ditches. Mr. Boardman intr�duced the Critical Area P1a1979a�toadiscussdthis.�aHe said thislwas ge asked for a Public Hearing on October 24, , to have been sent to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Commission in September for review . MOTION by Mr. Oquist, secondea by M�c. Treuenfels, to receive the Mississippi River Coxridor Critical Area Plan. U�ON A VOICE �JOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN I�RR�S DECI,�,RED �'I� MOTION CARRIED iTi�1ANIM0USLY . �. Oquist asked i� this was the sama as what was in the Compxehensive P1an. Mro Boardman replied it was the same up to page 21, After that page it was new and should be xeviewed by the Planning �a dlhave beenoin effect since 1976ageHe6aslcedse requixements are state requirements the members to pay close attention to the regula�ions wbluffsadvisualr�vegationersetre many requirements undex Federal regulations concerning � backs, etc. He said signing was not covered in this plan as that had been taken care oL by the existing code requirements. Mr. Harris said he noticed a 4 feet x 8 feet yellow sign along the river by 62nd Ave. regarding boats. He did not think this sign should be there. Mr. Boaxdman said he would check into it. Ms. Hughas asked about the status of the Great River Road funding on the F.MoC. property. This is covered in this plan. Mre Boardman said it was good. �henhouse,atakinglover�the�saltestor ge aroe�alandlaq iring understood there was money for There w i11 be a walkway walkway �asements along the riber by George��o�an Apartments. along the river from Island obi ecle tath e W� hinPthesnexte4 months�nlsland1ofyPeace nect up to the Camden Bridge y P and the gest of this property will be designated by the Metro Council as a regional par . � PLANNZNG COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3 1979 PAGE 6 •, Nir. Treuenfe�is questioned page 21 were it reads . e."the City will take the following measures: Ammend Chapter 205 of the City Code to indlude special development regula- � tions for the corridor." � Mro Boardman said this was wha� the Critical Area Plan will do. We axe incorporating state regulations with our own. Ms. Gabel pointed out some o£ the statie requirements were too loose. Mr. Boardman said they are loose, but those requlations are encompassing the eni:ire river. We help interpret them and then add our own requirements. rZs. Gabel asked how we find out if we are consista.n.t w ith other communities on this plan. Mro Boardman explained the process was to have our City approve the plan first, then send it to our sister communities for approval, From there it goes the Metropolitan Council for approval and on to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Commission. The MEQC looks it ove� and sends it back to us to tell us where to change or s�rengthen our requirements. Mr. Boardman �.lso noted LoS. �79-05, City of Fridley, that was discussed at �che Sep�ember 26, 1979,.mee�ing. The commission hacl questioned the status of �he lot owned by the I City of Fridley. This lot was not a designatea park area, but ra�her a drainage area I for dumping of storm se�aer water. As of now, th.e City has not decided what to do w ith it . � .� ADJOUr•NMENT • I�IOTTON by Mro Oquis�, seconded by Mx. Txeuenfels, to adjourn the Pl�,nning Commission meeti.ng of Octobe�c 39 1979. UPON A �iOICE VOTE, ALL VOTTNG AYE, CHATRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MEETTNG ADJ'OURNED AT 9 :10 P oM. � - Respecttully submitted, ' � �. Paula Loa.ig, ecoxding (�ecretary ' 'i �"�