PL 05/28/1986 - 30614�,
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING-COPIP�ISSION PIEETIP�G, h1AY 2t3, 1986
. . .......
CALL TO ORDER:
�`��e-Chairperson Oquist called the May 28, 1986, Planning Commission meeting
to order at 7:35 p.m.
ROCt CALL:
Mer�bers Present: LeRoy Oquist, Dean Sa6a, Sue Shere[c, Richard Svanda �for
Wayne Wellan�, Donald Betzold
Mer�bers Absent: Dave ICondrick
Ot[ters Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator
Jock Robertson, Community DevelopmEnt Director
Leslie KoFianeCc, 5825 65th Ave. No.
William R9onlos, 5825 65th Ave. No.
E�arris Ratnayake, 298 Liberty St. N.E.
Pastor Denyes.; 472 Osborne-Rd.
D. Anderson, 124 N. lst St.
�im Winkels, 5780 Lincoln Dr.
� APPROVAL OF P�AY 7, 1986, PLANNING CO��I��ISSIO�J P�INl1TES:
MOTION BY P?R. BETZOLD� 5ECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO APPROVE' THE MAY 7� 1986,
PLANNING COMMIS5ION MINUTE5 AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, �'iIICE-CHAI.RPERSON OQfJI5T DECLARED �'HE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAt USE PERI�IIT, SP #86-04, BY
� SLIE ICOFIANEK:
Per Section 05.18.1, C, 9 of the Fridley City Code, to allow exterior
storage of materzals and equipment on Lots 1 through 8, Block 5, Ohaway,
t.�ie same _6eing 55 - 77th �day N. E.
MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD, 5ECONDED BY M5. 5HEREK, TO OPEN THE pUBLIC HEAR2IVG.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERiON OQU.i5T DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:36 P.M.
P�r. Robinson stated the property was located on Gumwood St, between 77th
and 78th and just east of the railroad tracks. The property was zoned P1-2,
_Fieavy industrial, and most of the property in the immediate area was also
industrial. The proposal was for outdoor storage. The petitioner has applied
for a variance for a side yard setback from 24 ft, to 0 ft, along the center
line of the vacated Gumwood St. That variance was approved by the Appeals
� Cor!nnission and would go to City Council along with this special use permit
on �7une 2. There was also a pu6lic hearing for the vacation of a utility
e�serpent along Gumwood. The right of way has already been vacated.
�,
PLANNING COM�IISSION�PIEETIN�,�1qAY'28; 1986 PAGE 2
Mr, itobinson stated the storage �tard was approximately 1/2 acre. It sits
approximately 165 ft. from 77th on the southand approximately 125 ft. from
78th on the qor�h Tfie area would be entirely fenced with an 8 ft, fence,
t��iich should provide a good screening of the area.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recommending the following stipulations:
1. Provide an 8 foot fiigh screening fence around the perimeter of
tFie storage area (solid wood or chain link with slats).
2. Provide a 6erming, landscaping and irrigation plan for
staff approval.
3. Provide a storm drainage plan for staff approval.
4. Work witfi Display Arts to accomplish a joint driveway easement
on tFi.e west half of vacated Gumwood, lying south of Lot 11.
5. Provide a site performance 6ond equal to 3% of construction
value.
6. No material to be stored so as to be visible from the right-of-
�rays .
� Mr. Svanda asked what kind of material would be stored in the storage area.
Mr. Kohanek stated Fiis company manufactures wooden pallets. The raw wood
comes down from up north in-�undles. The:bundles would be stored plus some
of ��.e finisFied Rrood palle�s.
Mr. Monlos stated he was to]d that the fencing would not be required on the
�est side along the railroad tracks.
Mr. Robinson stated that was true. He did not see any par�icular reason why
screening would 6e needed along the railroad tracks.
Mr. Kohanek stated that with some of the siacks of wood that are 42-5 ft.
—�igh, since they are 165 ft. from 77th, some of the stacks might be visible
from �[ie road.
Mr. Robinson stated one thing P�r. Kohanek could do was install a berm to
add some extra elevation to the fence.
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA, 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO CLDSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQU,ZST DECLARED THE
PUBLIC SEARING CLO5ED AT 7:49 P.M.
�
PLANNING COM�ISSION �1EETING, MAY 28, 1986 PAGE 3
n
1H0'l'�ON BY 1�7S. SH�REIC� .jF.COND�,'D BY MR. BETZOLD, TO RECOMMEND TO CS2'Y COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF�-SPECIAL. Z7SE' PERR2IT, 5P #86-04, BY LESL,TE KOHAIVEK� PER SECTION
205.18.Z, C, 9 OF THE RRIDLEY CITY CODE TO•ALLOW EXTERSOR 5TORAGE OF MATERIAL5
AND EQUIPMENT ON LOTS 1. THROUGH 8, BLOCK 5� ONAWAY, THE 5AME BEING
55 - 77TH WAY N.E., WITH THE FOZLOWING 5TIPULATION5:
1. PROVIDE AN 8 FOOT HIGH 5CREENING FENCE AROUND THE PERIMETER OF
THE' STORAGE AREA EXCEPT.THAT SCREENING NOT BE REgUIRED ON THE
�'E`ST SIDE ADJACENT TO THE RAILROAD R�,'�HT-OF-WAY. (50LID WOOD OR
CHAIN LINK . WITH S,LA2"5. J
2. PROVIDE A BERMING� I�ANDSCAPING, AND IRRIGAZ70N PLAN FOR
STAFF APPROVAL. , , ° --
3. PROVIDE A 52'ORM DRAINAGE PZAN FOR STAFF APPROVAL.
4. 6iTORK. WITK DrSP�AY AR2'S TO ACCOMPLI5F1 A JOINT DR.rVEWAY EASEMENT
ON THE WEST HALF OF VACATED.GUMWOOD, LY.ZNG SOUTH OF LOT 11.
5. PROVl'DE A SITE PERFORMANCE BOND EQUAL TO 38� OF CONSTRUCTION
VALUE.
6. NO MATE.FhIAL TO BE S20.RED 50 AS TO BE VI5IBLE FROM THE RIGHT-
�F-WAY5. �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAI.RPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE
-N10TION CARRIED UIVANIlyOUSLY.
2. PUBLIC.HERRING.:..'.�C4NSIDERATION OF A�SPECIAC USE PERPIIT, SP #86-05
. uv ��nrlmrw� na
�-� W'1RRLJ �cr► i ivHrHict: -. -
^ er Section 205.07.1, C, 2 of the Fridley City Code to allow a Montessori/
day care facility on Lots 1 througfi 5 and part of Lots 8 through 12,
_�locf� 1, Os6orne Manor Second Addition, the same bein g 472 Osborne Road N. E.
MOTION BY MR. 5VANDA, SECONDED BY MS. SHEREK, TO OPEN THE PiIBLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, I7ICE-CHAIRPF.RSON OQUI5T DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARIIVG OPEIV AT 7: 51 P. M.
Mr. Robinsor. stated this property was located on the southeast corner of
Osborne and 5th St. The property was zoned R�-1 as was the surrounding
area which included Unity Hospital. The proposal was for a �-9ontessori/
day care facility for up to 30 children and application has been made to the
State to license the facility. The age group would be 22-6 yrs., and the
hours of operation would be 7:00 a.m, to 6:00 p.m. Mlonday through Friday.
Mr. Robinson stated there was no real concern at this point on the traffic
impact to the surrounding neighborhood; however, Staff had some concern
a6out the surrounding traffic and its potential impact on the children. So,
one of the stipulations recommended by Staff was to provide a fenced area
�[ith tot lot equipment prior to occupancy. This fenced area could be in
the re�►r of the faci 1 i ty.
Mr. Robinson stated the day care facility itself would be located behind
�,,,1 the sanctuary of the church in the southwest corner.
�
�'1
�
PtANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28, 1986 PAGE 4
Mr. Ro6i�son stated the traffic concern was related to a lot of �arking in
tFie area, both on the church property and also to the south with the Unity
Hospita� deve7opment.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recorrm�ending the following stipulations:
1. Petitioner to provide a fenced area with tot lot equipment
prior to occupancy.
2. Owners to work with staff to provide landscaping and concrete
curbing to meet City codes.
3. Owner to provide performance bond in the amount of $5,000
to cover site improvements.
Mr. Robinson $tated he has talked to Pastor Denyes, who indicated they are
in the process of selling the property to Health Central and that it might
be a waste of money to make the landscaping and curbing improvements at this
time, Mr. Robinson was suggesting that the City give the church until
September to finalize their plans, but to allow the day care facility to be
instated. If by September, the church's plans are not finalized, then the
church would be requi�ed to install the landscapi_ng and curbing improvements.
Mr. Betzold asked Mr. Ratnayake that if the church might be moving, would
he still go ahead with incurring the cost of the fencing and tot lot
equipment?
Mr. Ratnayake stated that if the fencing and tot lot equipment are easily
moved, there would not be any problem.
Pastor Denyes stated that it was going to take them at least a year to build
their new bwilding so they will still be in their current facility for a
year after it is sold.
Ms. Sherek stated she thought stipulations 2& 3 would have to be reconsidered
in September, because it will then depend upon whether a church occupied the
property or if Heaith Central purchased the property. If a church was going
to occupy the property, then the City would expect the landscaping and curb-
ing improvements to be made. If the property was sold to Health Central,
then the City would have to wait until they knew Health Central's plans for
the property.
Mr, Robinson asked Pastor Denyes if he would be willing to make the improve-
ments to the property if, in fact, they do sell the property to another church.
Pastor Denyes stated he felt something could be worked out and could be part
of an overall sales agreement between the two parties. He would be wiiling
to commit to making the improvements if they do sell the property to another
church.
,�
�
!`�
PLANNIN� CO1��ISSION �EETI�G, JyAY 28, 1986 PAGE 5
MO?'ION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MS. SHEREK, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC NEARING.
UPOIiT A VOICE 110TEr ALL I10TING AYE� I12CE-CHAIRPERSOAI DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED AT 8:Q5 P.M,
MOTION BY 1�IR. SABA, 5ECONDED BY M5. 5HEREK, TO RECONIMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
�PROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, 5P #86-05, BY HARRIS RATNAYAKE, PER
SECTION 205.07.1, C, 2 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE 20 ALLOW A MONTE550RI/
DAY CARE FACILITY ON LOTS 1 THROUGH 5 AND PART OF LOT5 8�"HROUGH 12,
BLOCK Z, OSBORNE h?ANOR 5ECOND ADDITION, THE SAME BE,ING 472 05BORNE ROAD N,E.,
WITH THE FOLLOWING 5TIPULATIONS:
1. PETITIOIVER TO PROV�DE A FENCED AREA WITH TOT LOT EQUIPMENT
- PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY.
2. OWNERS TO WORK WITH STAFF TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPING AND CONCRETE
Ci1RBING TO MEET CITY CODE5.
3. OIa11TER TO PROVIDE PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF ,55, 000
TO COVER 5ITE .ZMPROVEMENTyS.
STIPULATIONS 2& 3 TO BE ,REVIEWED IN SEPTEMBER BY CITY S�"AFF. �l�' WHEN� THE
DI5P05ITI0111 OF THE PROPERTY IS DECIDED, IF THE DI5POSITION I5 Z'O ANDTHER
CHURCH, THEN THESE IMPI�iIE'MENTS MUST BE MADE AT TNAT TIME; IF THE PROPERTY
IS SOLD TO HEALTH CENTRAL, THEN THE CITY WILL TAKE TNE MATTER UP WITH THEM.
UpOIV A fIOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE�, VICE-CHALRPERSON OQUIST DECZARF.D THE
1�?OTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATiON OF A SPECIAC IJSE PERMIT, SP #86-06 BY
WINFIELD DEVECOPMENT:
t�er Section 205.17.1, C, 1 of the Fridley City Code to allow offices not
assbciated with a principal use on Lot 4, except the northerly 35 ft.,
Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, Paco Industrial Park.
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA, SECONDED BY MR. S17ANDA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UpON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTIING A�'E, V'1'CE-CHAI.RPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING OPE1V AT 8:10 P.M.
Mr. Ro6inson stated this property �as located �cest of Univeristy Ave, sout[i
of U.S. Swim � Fitness and north of the Community Park. The proposa7 was for
an office/warehouse facility located in MJ�-1 industrtal zoning, At tfiis time,
the petitioners are not entirely sure how the faci7ity is going to 7ease up
in terms of office users. Because of the high quality office/a�ar�����.� type
cor�s.�Cructzon s��iilar to the East River Road'Business Center,_they._°are anticipating it
coli7d very well ��ease up wiih a majority of office as opposed to industrial
Lsers. The special use permit is for office use in an industrial zone.
Mr. Robinson stated the parcel of property is approximately 4.6 acres. The
gross floor area of the building is 58,550 sq, ft. It would normally call
for a spec�alative parking ratio of 1- 500 which would yie]d 117 spaces.
f�hat they are providing is 50% office/25% manufacturing/25% warehouse for a
tota] of 161 spaces. The petitioner feels that should be enough parking for
the intended office users.
i�
PLANNING CO�MISSION �EETING, �A� 28, 1986 PAGE 6
�r, Robinson stated Staff was recommendirg tFie follo�ing stip�l�tions:
1. Developer to provide written comroitment to pay all costs
associated with the realigi�ment of cul�de�sac.
2. Developer to supply ongoing tenant information, prior to
each occupancy, to allow the City to monitor par�ing need on
a case by case basis. Parking demand not to e�ceed supply.
3. Provide a landscape plan which includes plantings and berm�ng
of all perimeter areas; heavy screening to be provided to buffer
loading area.
4. All dumpsters to be lo��ted inside or within approved masonry
structures.
5. All roof equipment to be screened to mute visual affect.
6. Easement for joint parking with U. S. Swim & Fitness to be
recorded against properties prior to building permit.
7. Provide connecting sidewa7k between the U.S. Swim & Fitness Center
and proposed development.
� 8. Petitioner to combine lots for tax purposes.
Mr. Betzold stated the petitioner came before the Appeals Commission on
May 13 with four variance requests which will go to City Counci7 on June 2
with this special use permit request. He stated at that meeting, Dave Harris
was very concerned about the traffic problems in the area and wanted to see
an agreement between this property and the U.S. Swim & Fitness property for
shared parking. Mr. Harris apparently owns the lot immediately to the south
and p7ans to build there and does not want to see the parking situation get
any worse.
Mr. Winkels, Winfield Development, stated he wanted to thank the Planning
Commission for rescheduling their meeting in order that they might make the
June 2 City Council meeting. They have worked quite closely with staff on
this project for the past'few weeks. The appreciated the work Staff has
done for them. He stated they have no problem with the stipulations. They
also very much agree with a shared �arking situation with U. S. Swim � Fitness
and are in the process of finalizing an agreement with them right now.
Relative to a drainage plan, they are meeting with the Rice Creek Watershed
District and have been told by their engineers that the drainage plan is fine.
Mr. Winkels stated the building itself was a multi-tenant building. They
are projecting it wi71 be split 50/50 in terms of office/warehouse based
on their experience in the Twin Cities with this type of �uilding. They
currently have approx. 600,000 sq. ft, of this type of product in the Cities
� and a�ew more bui7ding under construction. In general, they are finding
� r�ht around a 50/50 spl it.
n
PCANNING COP9F�ISSION MEETING, MAY 28, 1986 PAGE 7
Mr. Winkels stated it was suggested by Staff that they apply for a special
usE permit so the deve]oper can count on that plan in terms of the use of
the property and so the City and the developer can work together to make
sure the parking coincides with the use. In terras of their experience, they
are satisfied��hey have adequate parking spaces for their needs.
3�10'� T�ON BY MR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY MR. 5ABA, TO CLO5E THE PUBLIC HEARING.
U�ON A I702CE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING CLO5ED AT 8:25 P.M.
MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDE� BY MR. BETZOLD� TO RECOINMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #86-06, BY WINFIELD DEUE'LOP.MENT: PER
SECTION 205.17.1, C, Z OF THE FRTDLEY CITY CODE TO ALLOW OFFICES NOT AS50CIATED
WITH A PRIIVCIPAL USE ON LOT 4, EXCEPT THE NORTHERLY 35 FT., LOT5 5 AND 6�
BLOCK 1, PACO INDU5TRIAL PARK, WITH THE FOLLOW.ING 5TIPULATION5:
Z. DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMITMENT TO PAY ALL COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE REALIGNMENT OF CUL-DE-SAC.
2. DEVELOPER TO SUPPLY ONGOING TENANT IIVFORMATION, PRIOR TO EACH
OCCUPANCY, Z'O ALLOW THE Cl2'Y TO MONITOR PARKING 1VEED ON A C�LS'E-
BY-CASE BA5IS. PARKING DEMAND NOT TO EXCEED SUPpLY.
3. PROD.IDE A LANDSCAPE PLAN WHICH INCLUDES PLANTING5 AND BERMING
OF ALL PERIMETER AREAS; HEAVY 5CREENIIITG TO BE PROV.IDED TO BUFFER
LOADING AREA.
� 4. ALL DUMPSTER5 TO BE LOCATED INSIDE OR WITHIN APpROVED MA50NRY
,STRUCTURES.
5. ALL ROOF EQUIPMENT TO BE 5CREENED TO MUTE VI5UAL AFFECT.
6. EA3EMENT FOR JOINT PARKING WITH U. 5. SWIM & FITNE5S TO BE
RECORDED AGAIIVST PROPERTIES PRIOR TO BUILDIPIG PERMSZ'.
7. PROVIDE CONNECTING 5IDEWALIC BETWEEN THE U. S. SWIM & FITNE55
CENTER AND PROPO5ED DEVELOPMENT.
8. PETITIONER TO COMBINE LOT5 FOR TAX PURpO5ES.
9. $ETITIONER TO SUBMIT A COMPREHENSIVE 5IGN PLAN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE
1�IOTION CAR.RIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. REVIEW OF LAKE POIIVTE CORPORATE_CENTER�PLANS:
Mr. Robinson stated that, as the Comroissioners were au�are, in January they
had the rezoning and platting of the Lalce Pointe Corporate Center, Since
then, 6Joodbridge has been moving ahead on the environmental permits and has
succeeded in getting their Environmental Assessment lJorksheet approved.
An Environmental Impact Statement was not required. They are now in the
process of getting an Indirect Source Permit from the M�CA which is quite
time-consuming. He stated they have now submitted the construction plans
for the first building which is a 6-story building. In the agenda was a
letter from David Weir of 4Joodbridge Properties outlining the architectural
character of the building. Also included in the agenda were landscaping
'"� plans, elevation plans and flonr �lan� �f th� proposed bui]ding.
One element of tbe master plan �vhich staff wanted to bring to the commissioners
attention was the use of.9' par?king stalls on all surface and ramp parking.
Site�parking is predominantly employee parki.ng which probably lends itself
to 9 parking stalls.
��
�
�
PLANNING GOPIPIISSION PIEETIP�G, P1AY 28, 7936 PAGE 8
P�Ir. Robinson stated this was for the Coir�nission's information only and
no action was required.
5. CnPJSIDERATION OF THE TWO P�OTIONS REGARDIPJG'THE S:O:R.T. RECYCLING SITE TO
,�-�.�. _ _
1986:
Mr. Robinson stated he would recom�nend this item be tahled [�ecause of some mis-
understanding of funding from Anoka County. The original agreement with
Anoka County was for $13,000 a year; however, th� �7oint PowPrs Agreement
was for $13,000 in a two and one iialf period, so this was going to have to be
clarified 6efore tFie Commission could take any action on the motions.
MOmION BY MR. BETZOLD, 5ECONDED BY MR. 5ABA, TO TABLE THI5 ITEM UNTIL
THE NEXT MEETIIVG.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER50N OQUIS�' DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
6. RECEIVE P1AY 1, 1986, NtJP9AN RESOIJRCES COMI�IIISSIf1N MI�JUTES:
MOTION BY M5. 5HEREK� 5ECONDED BY MR, SABA, TD RECEIIIE' THE MAY l� 1986�
HUN1.z1N RE50URCES COMMISSION MINUTE5.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUSS�' DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UN�INIMOU5LY.
7. RECEIVE MAY 5, 1986, PARKS & RECREAT.�ON COMMISSION IdIINIJTES:
MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD, SECONDED BY M5. 5HEREK, TO RECElVE THE.F!'AY 5� 1986,
PARICS & RECREATION COMMI5SION M.ZINUTE5.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOT.ZNG AYE, rilCE-CHAIRPERSON OQUI5T DECLARED THE
MOTI0111 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. RECEIVE P�1AY 8, 1986, HOIJSING �& REDEVELOPP�ENT' AUTHORITY ��II��UTES:
MOTION BY MR. SVANDA� 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD, TO RECEIVE THE MAY 8, 1986,
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES.
UPOPT A VOICE VOZ'E, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER50N OQUIST DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. RECEIVE P1AY 13, 1986, APPEALS COMI�IISSIOPJ � MINl1TES:
MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD, SECONDED BY M5. SHEREK, TO RECE.IVE 7'HE MAY 13, 1986,
APPEAL5 C01�7MIS5ION MINUTE5.
UPOlV A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER50N OQUIST DECLARED THE
M07_70N CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
/"'�
PLANNING COM�ISSION �EETING; MAY 28, 1986 PAGE 9
P1r. Betzold stated he would like to reiterate again that because the
Appeals Commission has had many variance requests regarding parking
stall widtfi reductions, they feel it is an important enough issue that the
City Council should consider an ordinance change. The Appeals Commission
would rather not have to continue with these kinds of requests on a piece-
meal basis.
10. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Day Care Facilities
�9r. Robinson stated that because of a recent application for a special
use permit for a day care facility in an Rml zone, it had prompted Staff
to re-evaluate the City's day care restrictions. He stated Staff was
recoromending the following changes in the code`s day care provisions:
1. Redefine Section 205.03.32.F, Home Occupations, to read: Day care
faci 1 i ties that serve tdvel ve (12� or fewer cfii 1 dren. (Thi s change
will 6ring the city code into compliance with State Law.)
2, Standardize all nomenclature of pertaining codes, to read: Day care
centers/nursery schools/nurseries.
3. Allow day care centers/'nursery scFiools�nurseries Zn ��1� RR2, Rr3,
n and R�-4 with a special use permit provided they are to be located in
churches, private schools or other s�tructures on arterial or
co7lector streets.
4. Allow day care centers/nursery schools/nurseries in C-1 and CR-1 zones
with a special use permit.
5. All day care facilities must meet Minnesota Statutes to be considered
for a special use permit.
Ms. Sherek asked if they really needed to increase the number of children
to 12 to conform with State Law (change #1). She stated Hennepin County
limits it to 10, and the City of P�inneapolis has a requirement that home day
care cannot exceed 10 children.
P�r.Robinson stated they had received correspondence from the City Attorney's
offi�e stating they should conform with State Law. The City Attorney had
received that notification from the State. He stated he would check into this
again for clarification.
The. Commission members agreed - atitl� - t�e� `°- changes recommend'ed by
Staff .
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, f�AY 28; 1986 PAGE 10
�
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA, SECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD, TO CONCUR WITH 5TAFF'S
RECOMMENDATION5 FOR CHANGE5 TO THE CITY'S DAY CARE PROVZ5ION5 AS
OUTLINED ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHA2RPERSON O�UIST DECLARED
THE MOTIOIV CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
b. Cyty Recogni�ion for Pa� Gabel
A?OTZON BY MR. BETZOLD, 5ECONDED Bi' MR. 5ABA� TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
COULVCIL THAT APpROPRIATE RECOGNITIDN BE GIVEN TO PAZ' GABEZ FOR HER
N1ANY DEDICATED YEAR5 OF�5ERUICE TO BOTFI THE APPEALS COMMI5SION AND
THE PLANNIIVG COMMI55ION.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPF,R50N QQUZ'52' DECLA.RED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
c. Minnesota Petroleum Service, 5333 Univers�ty Ave.
��r. Oq`��st stated he would like to see the City write a letter to
Minnesota Petroleum Service commending them for a great job in cleaning
up their property. He stated they have been very cooperative with the
City and did everything they said they would do.
� Both Mr. Jock �obertson and Mr. Jim Robinson agreed that was an excellent
suggestion. Mr. Jock Robertson stated they would have a letter prepared
for tFie next Planning Commission meeting�and have maybe both the Planning
Commission�,and City Council members sign the letter.
ADJOURNMENT:
MO�'ION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY M5. SHEREK, TO ADJOURN THE MEETIAiG. UPON A VOICE
VOTE, ALL VOTIIVG AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER50N OQUIST DECLARED THE MAY 28� Z986, PLANNIIVG
COMMIS5ION MEETING ADJOURNED A2' 9:Z8 P.M.
Respectful7y submitted,
� ��
r
yr a a
Recording Secretary
/`�