PL 06/04/1986 - 30613��
�
�'1
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COP�9ISSION-MEETING, JUNE 4, 1986
................................
CALL TO ORDER:
Acting Chairperson Kondrick called the �une 4, 1986, Planning Commission meeting
to order at 7:34 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba, Richard Svanda (for Wayne Lde7lan),
Donald Betzold
P9embers Absent:
Others Present:
LeRoy Oquist, Sue Sherek
Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator
Jock Robertson, Community�Development Director
Myron Ostlund, 1400 66th Ave. N.E.
Richard Brickner, 1233 12th Ave. N.l�.,
R. Podvin, 1391 P9ississippi St. N.E.
Jon � Rachel Gottwa7d, 1415 �7ississippi
Robert & Doris Nelson, 1439 P�ississippi
�oseph i�enth, 1388 66th Ave. N.E.
APpRO11AL OF P�AY 28, 1986, PtANNING COP�`9ISSION (�INUTES:
New Brighton
St. N. E.
St. N. E.
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA� 5ECONDED BY MR. 5VANDA, TO APPROVE THE MAY 28� Z986, PTIANP72NG
COr�?25SION MINUTE5 A5 WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING.AYE, ACTING CHrAIRPER50N KOND.RICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
1. PUBLIC HEARI�JG: CONSIDERATION pF PRECIMINARY RLAT, P:S. #86-02, CREEKRIDGE
' IC' RD � RICKNER; ' HOP� S' L' OT� ERG; ' ND� THE � CIT�'' OF � FRIDL' EY:
Consi eration of a Preliminary Plat, P.S. 86-02, Creekri ge Plat 2 y
Richard Brickner, Thomas Blomberg and the City of Fridley, being a replat of
that part of the West one-half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, T-30,
R-24, described as follows: Commencing at a point which is 742.5 feet North
of the Southwest corner on the West line of said quarter section and 467.5 feet
East on a line which is parallel with the South line of said quarter section;
thence East on a line parallel with the South line of said quarter section a
distance of 412.5 feet; thence South at right angles and parallel with the
west line of said quarter section 107.25 feet; thence West parallel with first
course a distance of 412.5 feet; thence North a distance of 107.25 feet to
place of beginning, containing one acre and two and one-half rods more or less
according to the Government survey thereof, also described as part of Lot 6,
Auditor's Subdivision No. 10 and now known as Lot 14, Revised Auditor's Sub-
division No. 10, except the East 249 feet, front and rear, according to the
plat-thereof on f.ile and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles
in and for Anoka County, Minnesota, and also that part of Lot 6, Revised
Auditor's Subdivision No. 70, described as follows: Commencing at a point
467.5 feet East of the Southwest corner of said L.ot 6; thence North parallel
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1986 PAGE 2
with the West boundary line of s�id Lot 6 140.25 feet; thence East parallel
W1th the South boundary line of said Lot 6 412.5 feet, more or less, to
a point in the East line of said Lot 6; thence South along the East boundary
line of said Lo� 6 140.25 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 6; thence
West along said South bo.undar� line to the poin� of beginning, EXCEPT the
East 249 feet, front and rear, according to the plat thereof on file and of
record 1n the Office of tFie Registrar of Titles in a�d for Anoka County,
Minnesota, and also all of Outlot A, Dennis Addition, excepting therefrom the
East 249 feet and excepting therefrom the West 417.5 feet, according to the
map or pla� thereof an file and o� record..in the office of the Registrar of
Tltles in and for Anoka Coanty, Minnesota, a�d also all of Lot 1, Block l,
�idden Woods, and also all of Outlot ], Block 1, Gena-Rae Addition, all lying
in the North half of Section 13, T�30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka,
State of Minnesota.
MOPION BY MR. BETZOLD� 5ECONDED BY MR. 5ABA, TO WAIVE THE READIIVG OF THE
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE.
UPON A VOICE VOZ'E, ALL VOTING AYE, ACTING CHATRPERSON DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNAN,I�'DUSLY.
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA� 5ECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO OPEN'THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIIVG AIrE, ACTING CHAIRPER50N KOIVDRICK DECLARED THE
� PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:36 P.M.
Mr. Robinson stated the property was located north of Creek Park Lane and
east of Central Ave. Proposed was a repl-at of fnur°pa_�cels, 214�, 1620 all of
Outlot 1, Block 1, Gena-Rae pddition, and Lot I, Block 1, Hidden Woods. The
replat was being requested primarily because two large lots could be sub-
divided into four buildable lots. In order for lot 1620 to gain access to
Cree�C Parfc Lane, an easement must be granted across the northeast portion of
Outlot 1, Block 1, Gena-Rae Addition. The City would retain ownership of that
portion of the property.
Mr. Robinson stated that lot 1620 was currently being assessed for sewer and
water and street for two lots.
Mr. Richard Podvin, 1391 Mississippi St. N.E., �sked that if the City retained
ownership of that corner of the property in order for driveways to access onto
Creek Park Lane, who held li�bility for those driveways--the City or the
homeowners?
Mr. Robinson stated the City was just granting access easement, and it would
be the owner's liability. It wasn't any different than anywhere in the City
where driveways cross city boulevards.
Mr. Podvin stated he would like to state the following questions as "food for
thought" for the Planning Commission members:
�
�
/"�
PLANNING CO�MISSION �EETING; JUNE�4;'1986 � PAGE 3
1. Why would the son of a successfui developer purchase landlocked
property on November 15, 1983, un7ess he knew in advance that there
�tould be a way to open up the land?
2. Did the fact that the school was p�at up for sale on April 14, 1983,
have anything to do with his decision to buy the property?
3. How else could he open this land without the corner of Gena-Rae?
4. Did it help to have his father, Tom Brickner, appointed to the
Sites and Disposition Committee of the School Board on Dec. 14, 1982?
5. Did it help him to have his father suggest to the City that they
obtain Gena-Rae as a park knowing the road would be built to the
north?
6. The City had a choi�e of runnang Creek Park La�e to the north, thus
landlocking lots to the south, or running it straight east and west,
and landlocking land to the north. Was the road run to the north
6ecause Brickner owns land there?
7. Did Brickner offer a small strip of land for a walkway in exchange
for the corner of Gena-Rae?
^ 8. The walkway is approximately 2500 sq, ft. in area. The corner is
approx.8000 sq. ft. Is th�t a faiar exchange for the taxpayer?
9. At the time Gena-Rae was condemned, the City ultimately paid the
owners 76.5� per sq, ft. Using this as a figure, the Brickner strip
is worth approx. $1,912. The corner of Gena-Rae, being approxi-
mately 8,000 sq, ft., is worth approximately $6,120, leaving a
difference of $4,208. Is Brickner going to pay the taxpayers the
difference?
10. On November 21, 1983, P�r. Boudreau stated,"7'he City needs a minimum
of 3 to 5 acres." The park presently is down to 2.28 acres after
su6tracting the ho]ding pond, the street, and the u�ausable 9 foot
strip to tFie north of the street. The Planning Commission is now
considering a plat submitted by Richard Brickner which will reduce
the park even further, to a total of approximately 2.1 acres.
Doesn't the City of Fridley have an engineer on staff cr�ative
enough to make use of the corner of the park for the children of
this area?
11. At this time, somebody is already building a house on the Blomberg
lot included in the preliminary plat you are considering tonight.
B�cause Richard Brickner submitted this plat, we assume he is the
one building. How can he be buildinc� when his plat has not even had
preliminary approval yet?
,�
`-
r"�
PLANNIr�G COMMI_SSION'�EETING, JUNE 4;'1986� PAGE 4
12. Based on all of these possibilities, could one not assume that the
acquisition of this corner was cut and dried as far back as 1983?
13. Mayor Nee, in 1985, gave me his personal word that the corner in
question would always re�ain a part of the park as long as he was
Mayor. Is he sti71 the Mayor?
Mr. Joe P4enth, 1388 66th Ave. N.E., stated he shared some of the same concerns
expressed by Mr. Podvin. He stated he was primarily concerned with the two
lots from this subdivision that would face 66th Ave. He stated that currently
all the homes along 66th Ave. are single story dwellings that have been there
for about 30 years. He would be concerned with continuity in the neighborhood
and that homes not be bui7t that would be oui of character such as two story
homes or spli� entry homes.
Mr. Richard Brickner stated he had no plans at this time for these houses, but
he would keep Mr. Menth's concerns in mind.
Mr. Robinson stated the City cannot regulate the style of a house. If
Mr. Brickner chose to build a certain style of house, that was up to him.
Mr. Menth stated he would strongly urge Mr. Brickner to consider building
single story houses on 66th Ave. to maintain continuity in the neighborhood.
^ Mr. Kondrick stated that Mr. Podvin ha� sos�e very valid concerns, and he
- uJrged ]'7r, Podvin to express these concerns to the City Council also as the
Ci�y Council would make the final decision on this preliminary plat.
Mr. Podvin stated that because the City of Fridley felt it needed 3-5 acres
of land for a park, the Gena-Rae, property was condemned to use as a park.
He stated the neighbors had a promise from Nasim Qureshi, City Manager, that
every square foot of this land would remain a park forever. He stated he had
witnesses to that statement. It was his feeling that when land is taken for
a park, the land should remain as a park and not be given away just so
Mr. Brickner can build houses. He stated it was sad when tax revenue was
more important than children in a neighborhood. P�tting driveways across
that corner of land would make it unusable for children. This,was the
builder's problem, not the City's or the other property owners'. He stated
it was unbelievable that the City of Fridley would give away a corner of this
park land for free. The taxpayers paid �6,200 for that piece of land, and
novr the City wants to give it away so someone can build on two lots and put
two driveways across it.
Mr. Menth stated he had attended the meeting when the City said they had to
fiave a certain amount of area for a park, whether it came out of the Rice
Creek School property or somewhere else. He felt this corner piece of property
could he used as a tot lot or something.
Mr. Robinson stated he questioned the safety of having a part of a park across
�"'� the street from the main part of the park. He stated P1r. Brickner's property
`- is being assessed, and he should be al�owed to build on his property.
PLANNING CO��ISSION�MEETING; JUNE'4;�1986 � PAGE 5
,�
� Mr. Podvin stated that by granting this easement, the City would be opening
up the north 7ots, but the south lots were still landlocked. He stated there
were peop7e in the audi;ence whose double lots were landlocked because of the
way Creek Park Lane was put in, and they are not happy about that,
��. Brickner stated that most of the things said by Mr. Podvin had nothing
to do with him personally. He stated with the easement he could build on
two lots. He could still build two ]ots on 66th Ave., and if he is not
allowed the easement onto Creek Park Lane, he would want to make sure the
assessments are taken off that property.
�9r, Myron Ostlund, 1400 66th Ave., stated that when the Rice Creek School
property was deve7oped, it was developed on the basis of opening up as much
landlocked land as possible. The way Creek Park Lane was developed did open
up five lots.
MOTION BY MR. SABA� 5ECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO CLO5E THE PUBLSC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL vOTING AYE� ACTING CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
.PUHLIC HEARING CLO5ED AT 8:20 P.M.
Mr. Svand a stated this land was condemned for use as a park. What limita-
tions did that p7ace on the City for uses other than a park; in this case,
an extension of new homeowners' front yards?
� •
- Mr. Rob�nson stated that in discussions with the City Attorne,�
t'�� t�� �C���ty_ was� f'ee- owners _ a�f the_ property and, as suc�i, woul d
easements. He stated he did not know if the land was �ondemned
or a public purpose. The corner piece of property right now is
citizens m��h� g�pd, It is basical]y unusable and is landlocking
property,
n
it was expressed
be authorized to gran�
for a park
not doing the
usable �-1
Mr. Svanda stated he did agree with Mr. Robinson that to utilize this corner
piece of property across the street from the main part of the park would not
be very wise.
Mr. Betzold stated he was uncomfortable with the City retaining fee ownership
of a piece of property that was of absolutely no benefit to the City but was
of benefit to the landowners. There may be some va7id reasons for retaining
the fee ownership, and maybe those reasons should be addressed at the City
Council me�ting. He did not like to see property landlocked, and there was
the option to either expand the park on both sides of the street or go ahead
and allow the 7andlocked land to be developed.
I9r. Kondrick stated he was the Chairperson of the Parks & Recreation Commission,
and he shared some o� the same concerns as the neighbors about this park.
However, he did agree with Mr. Betzold about this tri�ngular piece of property;
and since there did not seem to be any use for it, it might as well be used
PLANNING COM�ISSION MEETING, JUNE 4;�1986� PAGE 6
for access onto Creek Park Lane and open up the two lots for development.
He stated that if it was advantageous for the new lots, he felt that
trianqular piece of property should be purchased by the homeowners or the
developer.
Mr. Saba stated he agreed with that.
Mr. Robinson stated the issue of sale versus the granting of an easement was
an issue that would have to be taken up by the Ci�y Council.
MOTI'ON BY MR. 5ABA, 5ECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO RECOMMEND TO CI�'Y COUNCIL
APPROT7AL OF PRELII�9INARY PZ,AT, P.5. #86-02� CREEKRIDGE PLAT 2 BY RICNARD
BRICKNER, THOMAS BLOMBERG, AND THE CITY OF FRIDLEY� 5UBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
STIPULATION5:
1. THAT THE PROPERTY BE 50LD TO THE DEVELOPER SO EA5EMENTS ARE NOT
NECESSARY.
2. MR. BRICKNER PAY THREE PARK FEES OF $1�500 EACH W.ZTH FIRST THREE
OF FOUR BUILDING PERMITS.
3. PEPIDING A5SESSMENTS PLUS INTEREST TO BE PAID WITN THE BUILDING
PERMITS OlV TRACTS C AND D.
UPON A UOICE UOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� ACTING G'NAIRPER50N KONDRZCK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
n Mr. Kondrick stated this item wou7d go to City Council on�July 7.
2. RECEIVE MAY 20, 1986, ENVIRONMENTAL QUACITY COMMISSION MINUTES:
Minutes not available at the meeting.
3. OTHER BUSINESS:
a. Proposed Ordinance Change - Dean Saba
Mr. Saba stated he would like to recommend that the Planning Corr�nission
consider r?ecommending to City Council a change to Ordinance No. 115.01.7
regarding Swimming Pools. He stated one problem with the ordinance is
that it treats above ground and below ground pools the same as far as the
height of fencing.
Mr. Saba stated the State Code requires 4 ft. fencing, and so do most of
the surrounding communities. What the current code is doing is forcing
people to bui7d 6 ft, high fences around their yard or pool in addition
to existing fencing for the express purpose of ineeting code. He stated
it was virtually impossible for a child to walk into a yard and fall into
a pool that is already 4 ft, high (above ground pool).
I�r. Saba stated he felt the fencing requirement should be changed. He
stated he had no problem with any of the requirements for be]ow ground
^ pools; his objection was to the fencing requirement for above ground
�
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1986 PAGE 7
pools. It was not
additional fencing.
almost prohibiti�e
compl� w-ith code.
reasonable to ask people to s�end �1,000-1,200 in
It made the cost of installing an above ground pool
and forced people to b�aild above ground pools and not
Mr. Saba stated he had obtained a copy of the New Brighton Ordinance,
Chapter 27, entitled "Swimming Pools". New Brighton �as less
restrictive than Fridley.
Mr. Saba stated he would like to give Staff an opportunity to review
this proposal before proceeding any further.
�r, Betzold stated he was concerned about an "attractive nuisance" without
fencing around a pool. If there was a way to get into a pool, a child
will find a way. He did not want to see the m forego the safety aspect of
the code.
Mr. Kondrick and Mr. Sva�da agreed with Mr. Saba that Staff should look
into this proposal and report back at the next Commission meeting.
MOTION BY MR. SABA, 5ECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO DIRECT 5TAFF TO REVIEW
THE 5WIMMING POOL ORDINANCE AND REPORT BACK AT THE NEXT PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING.
UPON A I70ICE I70TE � ALL VOTIIdG AYE,ACTING CHAIRPER50N KONDRICK DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MR. 5ABA� 5ECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO ADJOURPI THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE
VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, ACTING CHASRPERSOIV KONDRICK DECLARED THE JUNE 4� 1986�
PLANNING COMMI55ION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:05 P.M.
Respectfully su mitted,
1.
`. .
yn Saba
Recording Secretary
. �-
«
_ - -- — . � -
� '�� .��.. --- _ A.. -- _-__
_� �. _ __ --- -___ _-- �,. .__P__ - - -.��_s_� ���� . -- -.s .�^� u_. � �_ ._ y ' - _ ___ _`.. _
_ _. _ _____�_._�- = 2-_ �---- --. _ _- ----- __ _- _ _ _�� 6� _ ._ _ --
.
� _ __ . _ _. ��.�rrcJ _ � _ . ___ _ _ _- . .
Q��%� _-� 1� ���.� -
,z -
_
� ��i � �
_ � - �--- ���Dr} �'�� r �(/� - �-- ��i s�.a� _ _ _ � _ _ �_ � a.�.
�LC��_ Yl_Yt��c►�_� N- _�._..____��.__..iZ 3i �z�c�t�_�c s_�� _ -�--_ _--.- ._ _ ° l',
_ �_cJ_.�.s„�-� < <-�-- -- -�_-a-�3�',�= � '� -�- ---
��i�� _���!!'--- - _ __. _ _�_ �--__ � _� __: _� _
_ .,
_ ___ __ _
%� ��,�� /� ____a---�--- - __-----__ �! _ _�� - _
- . � ,
/ �'
� �7`_ j�f�,
- - _ _�, _ -��CL-odil'__ - �. -� _ -_���� - �� _�_ - �
e
-----�- -
- --- -
� _ �__a_ ; _ �g �� � __�_�� e �_z _� __ --_-
.
_ ___ _
_ _���,�-���� i�-?� �:, ��__�.�_� ��-�_� _ - / _�� _ _� � __ _ _
��--��-_ _�.
n-_