04/22/1991 - 5099FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL 1dEETING
�a� ATTENDENCE SHEET
Mon�ay, April 22, 1991
7:30 P.M.
LEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
INT NAME (CLEARLY)
ADDRESS
ITEM
NUMBER
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCSL MEETSNG OF APAIL 22, 1991 Paqe 2
PIIBLIC HEARING:
Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City
Code, entitled "Zoning," by Amending
Sections 205.03, "Definitions," and
Section 205.07, "R-1, One Family Dwelling
District Regulations" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1HH
Registered Land Survey, P.S. #91-02,
by Steven Bruns for Midwest Super
Stop, to Replat Property Generally
Located at 8100 East River Road N.E. ......... 2- 2T
OLD BUSINESS:
Resolution Approving a Subdivision,
Lot Split, L.S. #91-02, to Split
Lots 1-5, Auditor�s Subdivision
No. 153 into Two Separate Parcels,
Parcel A and Parcel B, Generally
Located at 5201 - 5275 Central
Avenue N.E. (Tabled 4/08/91) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3D
Receive an Item from the Appeals
Commission Meeting of March 12, 1991:
A. Variance Request, VAR #91-04,
by Milestone Hotel Investments,
Inc., to Reduce the Side Yard
Setback from 15 Feet to 0 Feet
for Proposed Lots 1 and 2,
Block 1, Skywood Mall Addition,
to Allow a Zero Lot Line in a
Commercial District, Generally
Located at 5201 - 5275 Central
Avenue N.E. (Tabled 4/08/91) . . . . . . . . 4 - 4Q
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1991
OLD BUSINESS (CONTINIIED):
Receive an Item from the Planning
Commission Meeting of March 27, 1991:
A. Special Use Permit, SP #90-18,
by Humberto Martinez, per
Section 205.18.03.C{4) of the
Fridley City Code, to Allow
the Lot Coverage to be
Increased from 40 Percent
Maximum to 44 Percent
Maximum on Lots 1 through 5,
Block 6, Onaway Addition,
Generally•Located at 7786
Beech Street N.E. (Tabled
4/08/91) . . . . . . . . . . .
Receive an Item from the Appeals
Commission Meeting of�March 26, 1991:
A. Variance, VAR #90-31, by
Humberto Martinez, to
Reduce the Lot Area from
1 1/2 Acres (65,340 Square
Feet) to 1/3 Acre (14,320
Square Feet); to Reduce
the Required Lot Width
From 150 Feet to 88 Feet;
to Reduce the Side Yard
Setback from 20 Feet to
8 Feet; to Reduce the Side
Yard Setback on a Corner
Lot From 35 Feet to 8 Feet;
to Reduce the Rear Yard
Setback from 25 Feet to
8 Feet; to Reduce the
Parking Setback from 20
Feet to 8 Feet to Allow
the Construction of an
Addition on Lots 1-5,
Block 6, Onaway Addition,
the Same Being 7786 Beech
Street N.E. (Tabled 4/08/91)
Page 3
. . . . . . . 5 - 5T
. . . . . . . . 6 - 6W
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1991 Paqe 4
NEW BIISINESS:
Resolution Approving Registered Land
Survey, P.S. #91-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 7B
Approval of the Closing of Springbrook
Trail Project No. 732 a�d Reallocating
the Remaining Funds to the Riverview
Heights Acquisition Project Fund . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 8A
Approval of 1991-1992 Contract with
the Twin City Area Urban Corps . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 - 9E
Receive Bids and Award Contract for
0.5 MG Water Tank Painting/Altitude
Valve and Vault Installation Project
No. a1a,
and
Motion to amend the 1991 Capital
Improvement Program to Increase the
0.5 MG Water Tank Painting/Altitude
Valve and Vault Installation Project
No. 212 by $166, 670. 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 10F
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 1991 Paqe 5
NEW BIISINE88 (CONTINIIED):
Receive Bids and Award Contract
for Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1991 - 10 (Sealcoat) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 11B
Resolution Revoking Municipal
State Aid Street (MSAS No. 344) . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 12A
Resolution Establishing a
Municipal State Aid Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 13A
Resolution in Support of
Participating in Planning
for Alternatives for Transit
Services in the City of
Fridley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - 14A
Resolution in Support of an
Application for a Minnesota
Lawful Gambling Premise Permit
to the Knights of Columbus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 15E
�
FRIDLEY CITY COIINGIL MEETING OF�APRIL 2�, 1991 Pac1e�6
I�iEW BIISINE88 (CONTINIILD) :� � � � � . �
Consideration of Building
Inspection Issue Raised by
Frederick Rochelle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 16A
Informal Status Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 19W
Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
ADJOURN:
THE MINIITES OF T8E MEETING OF T8E BOARD OF REVIEW OF APRIL 8 1991
The meeting of the Board of Review was called to order at 7:38 p.m.
by Mayor Nee.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Nee led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
ROLL CALL•
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Nee, Councilman Billings, Councilman
Schneider, and Councilman Fitzpatrick
MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Jorgenson
Mayor Nee stated that there are two parts to the Council meeting
this evening, the first being the meeting of the Board of Review
and the other is the Regular City Council meeting. He stated that
the purpose of the Board of Review is to detez�aine if the estimated
market value meets the standards of fairness and equity.
Mr. Leon Madsen, City Assessor, introduced Mr. Starky and Mr. Barck
of the Anoka County Assessor's Office. He stated that they would
answer any questions regarding the values placed on apartments or
mobile homes. He stated that this Board of Review meeting is to
hear from property owners regarding their 1991 assessment which
will affect the taxes payable in 1992. He stated that notices of
valuation were sent to all property owners advising them to contact
the City Assessor's Office if they wished to appear before the
Board of Review.
Mr. Madsen stated that his office received a number of calls and
were able to resolve most oi the questions raised. He stated that
the cases where an agreement could not be reached will be presented
this evening. He stated that the Board of Review has the authority
to affirm the valuation placed on a property or to increase or
decrease the value. He stated that, however, no increases in the
valuation can be made if the property owner is not present.
Mayor Nee stated that a property owner will have the right to
appeal to the County if they are not satisfied with the findings
of this Board. He stated that there is an appeal process, and if
a property owner wishes to appeal to the County it is important
that this be known.
JAMES AND MARLENE BAUER, 7630 BACON DRIVE•
Mr. Bauer stated that the value of his home rose over $16,000 due
to his addition and he wished to protest this increase. He stated
BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 2
that he has no idea on the selling price for homes in his area,
with the exception of the property at 7665 Bacon Drive.
Mr. Madsen stated that his office felt a comparable home was the
property at 1437 - 76th Avenue which sold for $112,900 and has a
value of $98,600. He stated another home that would be comparable
is at 7665 Bacon Drive.
Mr. Madsen stated that the main reason for Mr. Bauer's increase in
value was because of the addition.
Councilman Billings stated that the average value of comparable
homes in the area is $97,600, and he would be willing to reduce the
value on this property by $6,800.
Councilman Schneider asked Mr. Bauer what he believed was a fair
value. He stated that he felt $93,000 was fair based on the
selling price of other homes in the neighborhood.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to reduce the estimated market value
on the property at 7630 Bacon Drive by $6,600 to $93,000. Seconded
by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Bauer stated that he was satisfied with this value and would
not appeal to the County.
ROGER AND DEBORAH HARMON 5498 WEST DANUBE ROAD:
Mr. Harmon stated that he purchased this property last summer for
$130,000 and his market value is over $154,000. Mr. Harmon stated
that there are other homes in the area that sold for considerably
less than the estimated market values. He stated that these homes
were located at 5528 West Danube Road, 1479 Danube Road North, 1467
Innsbruck Drive North, and 1600 Innsbruck Drive.
Mr. Harmon stated that the home at 5250 St. Imier Drive sold for
$136,000 and had an estimated market value of $128,700. He stated
that this home is similar to his home in size but has a better lot
and two fireplaces. He stated that the total square footage for
this home is 1, 752 , and his home has 1, 958 square feet with the
addition.
Mr. Madsen stated that in his comparison of sales in the Innsbruck
area they did not go back any further than 1990. He stated that
he felt the sale at 1425 North Innsbruck Drive was an excellent
comparable. He stated that the size is within 100 square feet and
is the same age as Mr. Harmon's home. He stated that the property
at 5250 St. Imier Drive was constructed in 1968, and Mr. Harmon's
home was built in 1979.
BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGE 3
Councilman Billings stated that he would like ta have an
opportunity to look at Mr. Harmon's property.
MOTION by Counciiman Billings to continue this item to April 22,
1991. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all
voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Schneider stated that he was concerned about the square
footage value as Mr. Harmon's sale stands out that it was a
remarkable buy.
ROGER MOBERG 1601 NORTH INNSBRUCK DRIVE:
Mr. Moberg stated that he wished to protest the value placed on his
property. He stated that he paid over $50,000 and could not even
sell it for $38,000. He stated that this unit is a two bedroom
located on the third floor, and the estimated market value is
$40,800. He stated that in 1988 there were forty units for sale
with only seven being sold.
Mayor Nee asked if the seven units that were sold were HUD
foreclosures.
Mr. Moberg stated that he did not know what type of sale was
involved. He stated that it would be easier to sell if there was
an assumable mortgage.
Mr. Madsen stated that this is a problem area, and the values have
been reduced yearly from 1983 with the exception of 1988. He
stated that there have been two very distinct markets, the HUD
activity and the open market. He stated that the HUD sales realZy
are not a market sale and, in tracking sales in 1989 and 1990 of
non-HUD units, the ratio is 90 to 92 percent. Mr. Madsen felt that
the values were less than the selling prices on the open market for
these units, but he would not argue that this is a difficult
market. He stated that this is true for condominium sales
throughout the country.
Councilman Schneider asked if all the units were appraised the
same.
Mr. Madsen stated that third floor units have sold for more, and
there is indication they are worth more than those on the ground
level.
Mr. Moberg stated he is shocked that HUD values are not considered
because it seems this is a real meaning as to what the property is
worth.
Mr. Madsen stated that there are two different marketing scenarios,
one is the government selling and wanti.ng to cut their losses, and
the other market is for those who sell at their leisure.
BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 4
Mayor Nee asked Mr. Moberg what he believed might be the selling
price for his unit.
Mr. Moberg stated that he does not have any idea but with taxes
rising it would not help in selling the unit.
Mayor Nee stated the history has been that the values have been
adjusted down for a number of years and has decreased from last
year.
Councilman Schneider stated that he was sympathetic, but there are
some comparables, and it seems if this value was adjusted it would
be necessary to adjust all the values on these units.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to concur with the Assessor's
estimated market value for this property at $40,800. Further, to
note Mr. Moberg's protest in order that he may proceed with his
appeal to the Caunty, if he so desires. Seconded by Councilman
Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared
the motion carried unanimously.
MIRABLAS SAJADY, 5849 - 3RD STREET:
Mr. Madsen stated that Mr. Sajady's main concern was that he
purchased the property from HUD last year for $74,000 and it is
valued at $76,600. He stated that Mr. Sajady has left the meeting,
but stated that a realtor advised him the property was only worth
$65,000. Mr. Madsen stated that his office would recommend the
$76,600 value be upheld.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to reaffirm the value of $76,600
placed on this property with the stipulation that the property
owner be advised that he could appeal to the County. Seconded by
Councilman 5chneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee
declared the motion carried unanimously.
YOAVA KLUCSAR, 1420 RICE CREEK ROAD:
Mr. Klucsar stated that he wished to protest the value of $77,800
placed on his property. He stated that he has a two bedroom home
with only half the basement finished and the other half is crawl
space. He stated that one of the comparable homes was a three
bedroom which sold for $78,900. He stated that even though his lot
is large it is not level. Mr. Klucsar stated that he was advised
by Merrill Lynch Realty that his home would be worth between
$65,000 and $70,000. He stated that another realtor advised him,
if he were to seil, he could ask $75,000 but felt he should take
any offer over $65,000.
Mr. Madsen stated that the value in 1987 was $61,900 and the
addition brought the value to $64,800. He stated that in 1989
there was an increase in the land value only for a total value of
BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGE 5
$69,300. He stated that in 1990 the addition was completed, a
value of $77,400 was established, and this year it is $77,800.
Mr. Klucsar stated that the addition was 22 by 18 feet for a
bedroom and entryway. He stated that the size of his home is 920
square feet.
Mr. Madsen stated that the record shows the home is over 1,100
square feet and felt this should be checked further.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to continue this item to April 22,
1991. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all
voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
LOIS WHITE, 7736 ALDEN WAY:
Ms. White stated that she has spoken with the Assessor several �
times and is appearing this evening to protect her right to appeal
to the County. She stated that her value is $10,000 over the
selling price and did not feel she should be assessed for more than
she could sell her home.
Ms. White stated that in 1985 she had three separate appraisals.
She stated that all of these appraisals were $10,000 less than the
estimated market value of her home. She stated that she did
receive a reduction on one occasion because of the property across
the street.
Ms. White stated that her home has 900 square feet and a problem
with water, cracks, and constant erosion. She stated that last
fall she had an appraisal and was advised, if she were to sell, to
list the home for $125,000. She stated that the value on her home
is $130,200.
Mr. Madsen stated that in regard to the square footage, there seems
to be a discrepancy as the record indicates the home has 1,100
square feet.
Mayor Nee stated that it would be appropriate for someone in the
Adsessor's Ofiice to meet with Ms. White and, if she is not
satisfied with the value placed on her property, she could appeal
to the County.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to continue this item to April
22, 1991. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
BRUCE AND SHELDYN HIMLE, 158$ WOODSIDE COURT:
Mr. Madsen stated that a letter was received from the Himle's as
they wished to go on record in order to be able to appeal to the
County.
BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 6
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive the letter from the
Himle's. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to continue this meeting of the Board
of Review to April 22, 1991. Seconded by Councilman Schneider.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee adjourned this meeting
at 9:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Carole Haddad
Recording Secretary
Approved:
William J. Nee
Mayor
THE MINIITES OF THE REGIILAR ME$TING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL OF
APRIL 8, 1991
The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order
at 9:05 p.m. by Mayor Nee, after the Board of Review meeting.
ROLL CALL•
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Nee, Councilman Billings, Councilman
Schneider, and Councilman Fitzpatrick
MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Jorgenson
Mayor Nee stated that Councilwoman Jorgenson was absent this
evening due to a death in the family.
Mayor Nee stated that the City Manager, Bill Burns, was attending
a conference on economic development and finance. He stated that
Jim Hill was the Acting City Manager for tonight's meeting.
PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION:
MINNESOTA SPECIAL OLYMPICS DAY - JULY 13, 1991:
Mayor Nee read and issued a proclamation proclaiming July 13, 1991
as Minnesota �pecial Olympics Day and encouraged Fridley citizens
to attend the Minnesota Special Olympics softball games at
Community Park.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
COUNCIL MEETING. MARCH 25, 1991:
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the minutes as presented.
seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt the agenda as submitted.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
OPEN FORUM, VISITORS:
JEAN HAGBERG, 5881 - 2ND STREET N.E.:
Ms. Hagberg, 5881 - 2nd Street N.E., stated that the homeowners at
the end of 59th Avenue would like to install some fences and close
off the alley. She stated that the alley is not paved or
maintained and that persons are driving through this area.
'1
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGB 2
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated that there is a process to vacate an
alley and asked that Ms. Hagberg contact Barb Dacy in Community
Development to obtain information on this procedure.
PUBLIC HEARING:
2. PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL PLAT P S #91-01 BY MILESTONE HOTEL
INVESTMENTS, INC., TO REPLAT PART OF LOTS l, 2, 3, 4 AND 5,
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 153, TO BE DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1
AND 2, BLOCK 1, SKYWOOD MALL ADDITION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT
5201 -5275 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E.:
MOTION by Councilman Billings to waive the reading of the public
hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman
Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee deelared
the motion carried unanimously, and the public hearing opened at
9:12 p.m.
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that the property
in question is zoned commercial with R-1 to the east, to the north
Menard's property, and to the south apartment buildings. She
stated that the proposal is to subdivide the property into two
lots.
Ms. Dacy stated that this plat is part of a three part application
by Milestone Hotel Investments Inc. She stated that the
petitioners are also seeking a lot split to accomplish this
subdivision by metes and bounds. She stated that another issue
was a side yard variance for a zero lot line between the motel and
the shopping mall.
Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the plat with the stipulations that a 30 foot easement be
dedicated to accommodate a water line improvement and that the
agreement and easements referred to in the lot split application
be recorded on the final plat.
Ms. Judy Engebretson, 5216 Taylor Street, requested that if the
Council approves this lot split a stipulation be placed on the
resolution denying a future request for a liquor license. She
stated that previous promises at the Council meeting of October 17,
1983 were made to the residents that there would be no liquor
license for this property. Ms. Engebretson referred to a letter
to the residents of Taylor Street dated July 25, 1984 from Mr.
DeRosier in which he indicated that previous statements made
concerning the liquor license were true and correct and at the
present time there have been no changes. She stated that by
attaching a stipulation to the lot split there would be no future
misunderstandings in regard to a liquor license. She stated that
the residents will no longer rely on promises of good faith
concerning this property. She requested that this stipulation be
put in writing and that it be recorded.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MBETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 3
Ms. Engebretson stated that when the motel was constructed it was
presented as a family-oriented motel. She stated it has been
noticed that the majority of the users use the motel for party
facilities on weekends. She stated they are fully aware that
liquor is on the premises and is brought in by private parties.
Ms. Engebretson presented a petition requesting that any vote in
favor of granting a lot split for this motel contain a stipulation
that would deny the granting of any present or future requests for
a liquor license on either property excluding the site now being
occupied by the Ground Round.
Ms. Engebretson also submitted a letter from William and June
Kuether, 5268 Taylor Street, regarding a liquor license and the
maintenance of the hill behind the motel.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to receive Petition No. 1-1991 and
to also receive the letter from William and June Kuether dated
April 2, 1991. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
Mr. Tim Ring, representing Marquette Bank, stated that when the
industrial development revenue financing was considered by the
Council in 1983 the only statement regarding the liquor was from
Mr. DeRosier. He stated that Mr. DeRosier did not want a liquor
license. Mr. Ring stated that tying the lot split with prohibiting
liquor is not necessary because it should be addressed in an
application for a liquor license. He stated that what Milestone
Hotel Investments wants is the opportunity in the future to request
a liquor license. He stated that in order to sell the property
liquor prohibition cannot be tied to this lot split.
Mr. Ring stated that the property has deteriorated, and the
proposed buyers plan to invest $300,000 to $400,000 in the motel.
He stated that he believed it was in the best interests of the City
to approve the lot split and variance and to control the liquor
license through the licensing procedure.
Mr. Donald Delich, 5284 Taylor Street, stated that he was concerned
about the statement that the buyers do not want a liquor license
now but may request it in the future. He stated that he felt the
residents needed protection. He stated that he did not feel the
bank should request this type of concession to guarantee the value
of that property.
Mr. Bill Leavey, 1240 - 52nd Avenue, stated that there ars three
bars within two blocks of the motel. He stated that the motel now
has group parties, and there is a certain amount of liquor that is
brought into the motel. He stated that a lot of times teenagers
are involved. Mr. Leavey felt that if there are problems now he
questioned what it would be like if the motel had a liquor license.
FRIDLEY CITY COONCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 4
Mr. Steve Kantorowicz, 5200 Taylor Street, stated that the parking
lot at the motel is full when there are parties and receptions.
He stated that people are in the parking lot talking loudly and
arguing. He questioned the number of police calls to the motel.
Mr. Kantorowicz stated that he cannot sit in his back yard because
there are young people sitting on the hill in back of the motel
just below his home.
Mayor Nee stated that the problem may be reduced if the motel had
a liquor license as they would have better control.
Mr. Hiil, Acting City Manager, stated that in 1990 there were 47
police calls to the motel involving such things as disturbing the
peace, liquor violations, theft, and damages to property. He
stated that he would like Mr. Kantorowicz to call every time he
observes juveniles drinking.
Mr. Ring stated that this was not the appropriate time to consider
the liquor issue. He stated that all the buyers want is the
opportunity to come before the Council in the future for a liquor
license.
Mr. Pat Conlin, representing Milestone Hotel Investments, Inc.,
stated that he would agree this is not the proper time to discuss
the liquor issue but to discuss the current situation at the motel
of persons partying outside the premises. He stated that from a
management standpoint, when you have people bringing liquor on-site
there is less control than if liquor is being served at the motel.
He stated that if the motel had a liquor license he felt that there
would be a lot less problems with liquor and with minors consuming
alcohol on the premises.
Ms. Engebretson stated that from past experiences she has found
out that a stipulation in regard to the liquor license is the only
way to deal with the situation as it has to be down in writing.
She stated that in 1983 the developer promised to upgrade the mall.
She stated that, unfortunately, for some reason that particular
area seems to be doomed regardless of how much money or renovation
is put into the property. She stated that this is the reason
residents are here to make sure that a stipulation be recorded
regarding the liquor license so there will not be any future
misunderstandings.
Mr. Craig Alshouse, Craig Company, stated that he was hired by
Marquette Bank to market the motel, and it was his idea to split
this property. He stated that there are three different businesses
on this parcel; the office building, retail spaces, and the motel.
He stated that the office and retail spaces are real estate leasing
operations, and the reason the property is in this state is because
it does not work with one owner. He stated that he does not know
a person who knows how to handle all three of these businesses
properly.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGB 5
Mr. Alshouse stated that they have looked at every alternative to
improve the property such as to add capital to the retail site and
to bring in major tenants. He stated that the mall needs several
major tenants, and he felt the City would be better off to split
the parcel. He felt that this would allow a motel expert to
purchase the motel and a retail e�cpert to purchase the retail
portion and bring them up to code. He stated that the purchase
agreement requires the buyers to make improvements to the motel.
Mr. Alshouse stated that Marquette Bank does not own the property,
but that 400 bond holders around the country own it. He stated
that Marquette Bank is the trustee, not the mortgagee, and the bank
did not lend any money on this property.
Mr. Kantorowicz questioned where people would park if the motel
were to obtain a liquor license.
Ms. Dacy stated that the site does not meet the parking
requirements according to today's standards. She stated that the
extra parking lot constructed between the Ground Round and Twin
City Federal does help, but the property is short about 100 spaces.
She stated that there is space to stripe about an additional twenty
spaces.
Mr. Curt Gudmundson, representing Milestone Hotel Investments,
Inc., stated that they are not applying for a liquor license and
are in the motel business. He stated that he would guarantee they
have not had 47 police calls to all of their motels. Mr.
Gudmundson stated that they are requesting the liquor license be
open to its own process. He stated that they do not have a liquor
emphasis at the motel, but for motels to be competitive it is
appropriate to have liquor. He stated that he did not feel it made
sense to tie a liquor license to a lot split. He stated that the
problem is not the liquor license but bringing liquor into the
establishment.
Councilman Billings stated that he is curious as to the marketing
strategy for the motel. He asked what kind of changes they are
proposing.
Mr. Gudmundson stated that the rooms and banquet facilities have
to be lightened as the decor now leaves a very depressed feeling.
He stated that the motel should be pleasant. He stated that
another emphasis was on value and felt pricing was important. Mr.
Gudmundson stated that they are in the hospitality business and do
not have a liquor emphasis.
Councilman Billings asked Mr. Gudmundson to define the hospitality
business.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGE 6
Mr. Gudmundson stated that they would not rule out food and
beverage. He stated that the motel is built as a fu11 service
property as opposed to a limited service property.
Councilman Billings stated that he did not want to address the
liquor license per se, but the concept that was sold to the
neighborhood several years ago was that this would be a family-
oriented motel and used by travelers who come to Fridley and not
to attract people for banquets and weddings. He stated that this
motel exists because the developer made certain promises to the
Council and to the neighborhood.
Councilman Billings stated he would have to disagree that the most
important thing is the sale of the property. He stated that the
most important thing is the preservation of this neighborhood. He
stated that no where has he seen that it was his duty as a
Councilmember to protect the financial integrity of any bond
holders or commercial and industrial property to the detriment of
the residents of this City.
Mr. Gudmundson stated that the property can be enhanced by approval
of the lot split. He stated that they are only saying the City has
a procedure for a liquor license as opposed to placing restrictions
on the lot split. He stated that he felt it was a chance to
upgrade the motel.
Councilman Billings stated that the issue before the Council is the
lot split and the replatting of the property. He stated that he
finds it incredible the amount of tenacity that both sides of the
issue have relative to the liquor license. He stated that it is
obviously a very important issue. He stated that he almost feels
compelled to address the issue because of the strong feelings on
both sides. Councilman Billings stated that his concern is the
neighborhood and the impact this property has on the neighborhood.
Mr. Gudmundson stated that they are in full agreement with those
concerns. He stated that they are trying to bring some money into
the community, and it seems they are not welcome.
Mr. Kantorowicz asked how many of the other motels owned by
Milestone Investments are adjacent to private property.
Mr. Gudmundson stated that probably about one-third of them. He
stated that they are not coming into the City to make things worse
and are not responsible for the failures in the past.
Mr. Conlin stated that he felt the sale was related to the
preservation of the neighborhood. He stated that if there was no
sale he felt that the property would further deteriorate and,
without any capital put into it, it would probably be very negative
to the community.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MBETING OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAG$ 7
Councilman Schneider stated that he felt the Council made a promise
to the neighborhood not to have liquor at this establishment. He
asked the City Attorney if the Council had the discretion of voting
against a liquor license.
Mr. Gregg Herrick, representing the City Attorney's Office, stated
that it seems there are concerns here that would allow the Council
to deny the liquor license if an application was submitted because
of problems that have materialized such as the noise, traffic, and
late night parties.
Councilman Schneider asked if the lot split could be granted and
then a resolution of intent passed which would serve notice to the
property owners that it is very unlikely a liquor license would be
granted.
Mr. Herrick stated that the Council could make that declaration
based on past findings and the present use of the property. He
stated that he did not know if it would be binding but it would be
a declaration of intent.
Mr. Leavey stated that he did not have anything against Milestone
Investments but felt that the residents did not want a liquor
license for this property. He stated that he felt a liquor license
was not needed to run a properly managed motel.
Councilman Schneider stated that the prospective buyers want the
option to apply for a liquor license, but there is very little
doubt in his mind, given the situation as it is today, that it
would be approved. -°
Mr. Leavey asked if a liquor license was necessary for the motel
to thrive.
Mr. Gudmundson stated that it was not necessary, but they did not
want to give up their right to come before the Council in the
future for a liquor license.
Councilman Schneider asked if it would be appropriate to add the
stipulation to the lot split regarding the liquor license.
Mr. Herrick stated that the lot split should stand on its own. He
stated that if there was an application for a liquor license at a
later date, the liquor license should be reviewed by the Council
as to its appropriateness.
Mr. Herrick stated that the other issue is the covenant on the
Ground Round lease. He stated that he does not have a copy of the
fully executed lease but understands the Ground Round lease
indicates that for the period of its lease it will be the only
liquor license establishment in that area. He stated that in the
deed to the Skywood Mall, of which his copy is not a completely
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETINQ OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGE 8
executed one, it indicates the property is subject to that covenant
or subject to the rights of the Ground Round. He stated that it
seems another liquor license would be excluded by reason of those
recorded documents.
Councilman Schneider asked if the lot split was granted and a
stipulation added regarding liquor, if it puts the City at risk if
the lot split is challenged.
Mr. Herrick stated that the option would exist for an argument that
it is an inappropriate restriction on the development of property.
He stated that if the purchase agreement is contingent on no
restriction on the liquor license application, and the court finds
that it is inappropriate and the sale is lost, it could be a
problem.
Councilman Billings stated that in reference to the Ground Round's
lease, the lease specifically indicates that within 1,500 feet of
the premises to be used or occupied that there will not be a
restaurant business or sale or furnishing of food, desserts, etc.
He stated that the lease goes on to make some exceptions for those
businesses that existed at the time the lease was executed. He
stated that there is already a food operation which would be
contrary to this clause of the Howard Johnson lease. He stated
that he did not know if Howard Johnson has signed off on that
restaurant, but his concern is not to protect Howard Johnson,
Ground Round, or the bond holders.
Councilman Billings stated that he is concerned about the
residential properties and the shortage of over 100 parking spaces.
He stated that he is concerned with any change in the business
operation that would promote additional traffic on the site for
different activities. He stated that the Council may want to
consider a stipulation to the lot split stating that there be no
changes in the operation that would create the need for additional
parking.
Mayor Nee stated that he felt the question was would this property
have a better chance for success if the ownership was split. He
stated that the parking question is related as well as the cross
easements and the maintenance agreements.
Councilman Schneider stated that his concern was for the
neighborhood, and the Council made the commitment not to allow
liquor to be sold at this motel.
Mr. Kantorowicz stated that if an application is received for a
liquor license for this motel, he requested that the residents be
notified.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to close the public hearing.
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 9
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the
public hearing closed at 10:19 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS:
3. ORDINANCE NO. 969 RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE. CHAPTER
125, ENTITLED "SAUNAS AND MASSAGE PARLORS," BY AMENDING
SECTION 125.02.06, BY ADDING NEW SECTION 125.03 "EXCEPTIONS."
AND BY RENUMBERING THE REMAINING SECTIONS CONSECUTIVELY:
Mr. Hill, Acting City Manager, stated that this was an amendment
to the sauna and massage parlor ordinance, primarily to allow the
therapeutic massage group to practice their profession. He stated
that this group has been active in other cities, and the other
cities have been amending their ordinances in order to allow these
persons to perform therapeutic massage.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the second reading of
Ordinance No. 969 and adopt it on the second reading and order
publication. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick.
Councilman Billings stated that, as he indicated at the last
meeting, several years ago the City passed the original sauna and
massage ordinance to clean up a problem in the City. He stated
that he personall,y did not think it was appropriate at this time
to change the ordinance. He stated that persons can get
therapeutic massage in other cities and did not think the ordinance
should be changed so one person could have a home occupation.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAI�N ON THE ABOVE MOTION, Councilman Schneider,
Councilman Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion.
Councilman Billings voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared
the motion carried by a 3 to 1 vote.
4. VARIANCE REOUEST. VAR #90-32, BY FIRST WESTERN DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION (TABLED 3/25/91):
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to receive the letter from First
Western Development and table consideration of this variance
request, VAR #90-32, indefinitely. Seconded by Councilman
Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared
the motion carried unanimously.
5. RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION, LOT SPLIT. L.S. #91-02,
TO SPLIT LOTS 1-5 AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 153 INTO TWO
SEPARATE PARCELS. PARCEL A AND PARCEL B, GENERALLY LOCATED AT
5201 - 5275 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. (TABLED 3f25f91):
MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item to April 22, 1991.
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY CDIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 10
6. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM TIiE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH
12, 1991•
A. VARIANCE RE4UEST, VAR #91-04, BY MILESTONE HOTEL INVESTMENTS,
INC., TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FEET TO 0 FEET
FOR PROPO5ED LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1. SKYWOOD MALL ADDITION, TO
ALLOW A ZERO LOT LINE IN A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 5201 - 5275 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. (TABLED 3j25191):
MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item to April 22, 1991.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS•
7. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
MARCH 27, 1991•
A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #90-18, BY HUMBERTO MARTINEZ, PER
SECTION 205.18.03.C�4) OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE. TO ALLAW THE
LOT COVERAGE TO BE INCREASED FROM 40 PERCENT MAXIMUM TO 44
PERCENT MAXIMUM ON LOTS 1 THROUGH 5, BLOCK 6, ONAWAY ADDITION.
GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7786 BEECH STREET N.E.:
Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Martinez was not present this evening,
therefore, the following action was taken:
MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item to April 22, 1991.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
B. SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #91-04. BY DAVID AND SHERI McCATN, PER
SECTION 205.24.04(D) OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING HOUSE IN THE CRP-2
(FLOOD FRINGE) DISTRICT, ON LOTS 17-20, BLOCK T, RIVERVIEW
HEIGHTS, THE SAME BEING 689 FAIRMONT STREET N.E.:
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that Mr. and Mrs.
McCain stated they wished to withdraw this request. She stated
she asked that they submit this request in writing. Ms. Dacy
stated that they are withdrawing their application for the special
use permit as they felt they would be over building in that area.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to table this item to April 22,
1991. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all
voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COtTNCIL MEETINQ OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 11
C. SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP #91-05, BY RANDALL OLCHEFSRE OF
RIVERSIDE CAR WASH, PER SECTION 205.14.O1.C.6 OF THE FRIDLEY
CITY CODE, TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE WASH
ESTABLISHMENT ON TRACT D, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 19. THE
SAME BEING 6520 EAST RIVER ROAD N.E.:
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this property
is located in the northwest corner of Mississippi Street and East
River Road and is zoned C-2. She stated that this special use
permit is requested for expansion of the car wash facility. She
stated that the petitioner wishes to remove a portion of the
existing building and construct a new addition to enclose the
westerly part of the building. She stated that the purpose of this
enclosure is to provide an area for a full service car wash.
Ms. Dacy stated that staff is recommending approval despite the
fact that a variance is needed for the enclosure. She stated that
this expansion does not alter the traffic patterns on the property.
Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval
with the stipulation that the variance also be granted.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grant Special Use Permit,
SP #91-05, with the stipulation that Variance Request, VAR �91-06,
is also approved. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously. �
D. SET_�UBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 22, 1991. FOR A REGISTERED LAND
SURVEY, P.S. #91-02. BY STEVEN BRUNS FOR MIDWEST SUPER STOP
TO REPLAT PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 8100 EAST RIVER
ROAD N.E.•
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to set the public hearing on
P.S. #91-02 for April 22, 1991. Seconded by Councilman Billings.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion
carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive the minutes of the
Planning Commission Meeting of March 27, 1991. Seconded by
Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 12
8. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 1991•
A. VARIANCE VAR #90-31, BY HUMBERTO MARTINEZ, TO REDUCE THE LOT
AREA FROM 1-1j2 ACRES (65,340 SQUARE FEET) TO 1j3 ACRE (14,320
SQUARE FEET); TO REDUCE THE REOUIRED LOT WIDTH FROM 150 FEET
TO 88 FEET; TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO
8 FEET: TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK ON A CORNER LOT FROM
35 FEET TO 8 FEET; TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 25
FEET TO 8 FEET; TO REDUCE THE PARKING SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO
8 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ON LOTS 1-5
BLOCK 6. ONAWAY ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7786 BEECH
STREET N.E.•
MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item to April 22, 1991.
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
9. RECEIVE ITEMS FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12,
1991•
A. VARIANCE RE4UEST, VAR #91-05, BY DAVID AND SHERI MCCAIN TO
REDUCE THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 35 FEET TO 24
FEET, TO ALIAW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ON LOTS 17, 18,
19 AND 20, BLOCK T. RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS ADDITION. THE SAME BEING
689 FAIRMONT STREET N.E.:
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to table this item to April 22,
1991. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all
voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
B. VARIANCE RE4UEST, VAR #91-06, BY RANDALL OLCHEFSKE FOR
RIVERSIDE CAR WASH TO REDUCE THE REOUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK
ON A CORNER LOT FROM 35 FEET TO 19 FEET. ON TRACT D.
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 19, THE SAME BEING 6520 EAST RIVER
ROAD N.E.•
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grant Variance .Request,
VAR #91-06 to reduce the required side yard setback on a corner lot
from 35 feet to 19 feet. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
10. APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO THE MOORE LAKE COMMONS EAST
COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN:
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this
amendment is to provide signage for second floor office tenants in
the Moore Lake Commons East shopping center. She stated that staff
is recommending approval of this amendment as it meets the
requirements of the sign ordinance.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETINQ OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGE 13
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the amendment to the
Moore Lake Commons East comprehensive sign plan. Seconded by
Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
11. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR 1991 MISCELLANEOUS
CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK PROJECT:
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to receive the following bids for
the 1991 miscellaneous concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk project:
COMPANY
Halvorson Construction
4227 - 165th Avenue NE
Anoka, MN 55304
Standard Sidewalk
29635 Neal Avenue
Lindstrom, MN 55045
Advance Concrete
7438 Upton
Richfield, MN 55423
Landmark Concrete
1548 - 164th Lane NE
Ham Lake, MN 55304
Gunderson Bros.
2325 Snelling Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55404
Lindahl & Carlson
1821 University Avenue
Suite 318
St. Paul, MN 55104
Jim Clausen Construction
16821 Pebble Brook Ct.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Thomas and Sons
13925 Northdale Blvd.
P.O. Box 303
Rogers, MN 55374-0303
TOTAL
BID
$25,502.30
$28,530.00
$28,650.00
$29,038.00
$30,585.00
$32,390.00
$32,910.00
$33,980.00
ALTERNATE
BID
$28,084.00
$32,025.00
$ 7,570.10
(voided)
$16,869.86
$21,693.00
$25,072.60
NO BID
$26,320.00
DNCON
7870 - 161st Street West $34,593.00 $28,210.00
Lakeville, MN 55044
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 14
Curbmasters Inc.
10150 - 101st Street N.
Stillwater, MN 55082
Van Norman Concrete
4245 - 165th Avenue
Ham Lake, MN 55304
Sunram Landscaping
7675 Troy Lane
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Neeck Construction
8321 Knollwood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
$35,600.00
$36,680.00
$47,900.00
$49,393.00
$19,488.00
NO BID
20,857.20
$32,121.00
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that thirteen bids were
received for the 1991 miscellaneous concrete curb, gutter,and
sidewalk project. He stated that an alternate bid was added for
the construction of the foundation and slab work at the Fire
Training Center.
Mr. Flora stated that the low bidder for concrete curb, gutter, and
sidewalk was Halvorson Construction with a bid of $25,502.30 and
the low bidder for the foundation and slab work at the Fire
Training Center was Landmark Concrete at $16,869.86. He stated
that the bid from Advance concrete was voided as the bidder made
an error and bid on square feet rather than square yards.
Mr. Flora stated that he would recommend the contracts be awarded
to the low bidders, Halvorson Construction and Landmark Concrete.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to award the contract for the 1991
miscellaneous concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk project to the
low bidder, Halvorson Construction, in the amount of $25,502.30 and
to award the contract for the foundation and slab work at the Fire
Training Center to the low bidder, Landmark Concrete, in the amount
of $16,869.86. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick.
Councilman Billings asked if there is a clause in the contracts
relative to prevailing wages. Mr. Flora stated that clause is in
all of the contracts.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8. 1991 PAGE 15
12. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR SANITARY SEWER PROJECT
NO. 221 (HACKMANN AVENUE):
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive the following bids for
Sanitary Sewer Project No. 221:
COMPANY
Insituforna Central
6167 North Kent Ave.
Milwaukee, WI 53217
Visu-Sewer Clean & Seal
2849 Hedborg Drive
Minneapolis, MN 55343
TOTAL BID
$25,101.00
$25,139.00
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that two bids were
received for this project and recommended that the contract be
awarded to the low bidder, Insituform Central in the amount of
$25,101.00.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to award the contract for Sanitary
Sewer Project No. 221 to the low bidder, Insituform Central, in the
amount of $25,101.00. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
13. RESOLUTION NO. 35-1991 IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR �1
MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT TO THE WOMEN'S
ASSOCIATION OF ALLIED BEVERAGE INDUSTRIES, INC. (WAAB):
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this gamblinq premise
permit is for the Shorewood Restaurant and Lounge. He stated that
the PubZic Safety Director, Jim Hill, has approved the gambling
permit, and Minnesota statutes requires the adoption of a
resolution approving or denying any type of gambling permit.
Ms. Reba Whiteoak, representing the WAAB, stated that this
organization was formed over 45 years ago, and they raise funds for
charitable purposes. She stated that this is a national
organization and has charters alZ over the United States. Ms.
Whiteoak stated they felt that by going into charitable gambling,
they would have a chance to make more money for those who need
their help.
Mr. Hill, Acting City Manager, stated that he was contacted by this
organization regarding the possibility of their operating a pull-
tab operation from the Shorewood Restaurant and Lounge. He stated
that the City no longer approves the specific gainbling license, and
FRIDLEY CITY COIJNCiL MEETING OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGE 16
he suggested they apply for the license with the State and then
apply for the premise permit for where they wished to locate.
Mr. Hill stated that he had some concern regarding the
organization's understanding of the City's ordinances regarding
fifty percent of their profits going to the Fridley trade area.
He stated that he has reviewed their files to determine where they
have donated to charity and about one-third would qualify under the
City's current ordinances. He stated that the organization has
indicated they would have no difficulty in fulfilling the ordinance
requirements.
MOTiON by Councilman 5chneider to adopt Resalution No. 35-1991.
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
14. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS:
There were no informal status reports.
15. CLAIMS`
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to authorize payment of Claims No.
36920 through 37106. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee decl.ared the motion carried
unanimously.
16. LICENSES•
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the licenses as submitted
and as on file in the License Clerk's Office. Seconded by
Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
17. ESTIMATES•
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to
submitted:
Layne Minnesota Co.
3147 California Street N.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55418
approve the estimates as
Repair and Maintenance of Well No. 9,
Project No. 215
(Well Nos. 1& 4 are pending)
FZNAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,608.00
FRIDLEY CITY COLJNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8, 1991 PAGE 17
Herrick & Newman
205 Fridley Plaza Office Building
6401 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Services Rendered as City Attorney for
the Month of March, 1991 . . . . . . . . . . $5,909.25
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT•
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adjourn the meeting. Seconded
by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Regular
Meeting of the Fridley City Council of April 8, 1991 adjourned at
10:46 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Carole Haddad William J. Nee
Secretary to the City Council Mayor
Approved:
r _►
�
Community Development Department
PLANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: April 16, 1991 �
TO: William Burns, City Manager�;n�
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Public Hearing for the Proposed Ordinance
Amendment Regarding Accessory Apartments
The City Council established the meeting on April 22, 1991 to
conduct the public hearing regarding the proposed ordinance
amendment for accessory apartments, or mother-in-law apartments.
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing
and receive testimony regarding this issue. The first reading of
an ordinance could be presented to the City Council at its May 6,
1991 meeting.
BD/dn
M-91-276
lJ
r �
�
.
DATE:
TO:
Community Development Department
PLANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
March 8, 1991
Planning Commission Members
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance Amendment Regarding
Accessory Apartments
Previous Action
On November 14, 1990, the Planning Commission directed staff to
prepare an ordinance amendment which would permit accessory
apartments, but place a number of specific requirements on the
operation and function of the apartment. The Planning Commission
asked us to investigate with the City Attorney's office whether or
not the City could require a license for unrelated individuals only
and not a person related by blood or marriage.
Attached is the City Attorney's opinion dated December 13, 1990
stating that such a license procedure is possible.
Proposed Ordinance
The intent of the ordinance is to provide a set of standards and
a process to permit an accessory apartment to be created within a
single family home so that it would not adversely affect the
character of the single family district in which it is located.
Changing demographics in our society indicate that household sizes
are becoming smaller, but at the same time, available housing is
not affordable. Some of these issues have already been exemplified
in the testimony before the Planning Commission at the October and
November meetings. For example, elderly persons may want to rent
out part of their home to an individual in order to be eligible for
State assistance.
The Human Resources Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance
amendment and had a number of recommendations:
1.
�
�
The number of bedrooms per accessory apartment should be
limited to one bedroom.
The accessory apartment could be rented to no more than two
adults, and no more than three occupants.
The license may not be issued if there have been a number of
substantiated public nuisanc� complaints within the prior
year.
1A
Accessory Apartments
March 8, 1991
Page 2
4. The license must be posted in a public place of the residence.
The Human Resources Commission also discussed and debated whether
or not a special use permit versus a license should be used.
Although a special use permit could be required, the license option
is recommended. The standards in the ordinance would have to be
met, otherwise, the license would not be issued. Also from an
administrative standpoint, the license would have to be received
on an annual basis. The owner would have to verify each year the
number and names of tenants that are occupying the accessory
apartment. The commission had inquired if the license would be
issued to the owner and the tenant only, and that when the tenant
changes, a new license would need to be issued. From an
administrative and a consistency standpoint, because we require
licenses on an annual basis for other types of rental units,
requiring a license for changes of tenancy beyond the annual
process would make the administration process more difficult.
Also attached is a portion of the existing code on licensing rental
properties. It requires posting of the license which was also
requested by the Human Resources Commission. The Human Resources
Commission also wanted a statement prohibiting issuance of a
license if substantial public nuisance complaints have been filed.
We are currently checking to see if the section regarding
revocation already enables the City to do so.
Therefore, we have amended the public hearing notice to include not
only the Human Resource Co�naission's recommendations, but also the
City Attorney�s.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission should review the proposed ordinance and
make any recommended changes. If approved, the item would be
brought to the City Council for public hearing in April 1991.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended
proposed ordinance amendment with minor changes
public hearing ad reflects those changes. Minutes
Planning Commission meetings have been attached.
BD/dn
M-91-167
�
approval of the
. The enclosed
from all of the
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
CITY COUNCIL
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the
Fridley City Council at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431
University Avenue N.E. on Monday, April 8, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. for
the purpose of:
Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code, entitled "Zoning",
by amending Sections 205.03, "Definitions", and Section 205.07, "R-
1, One Family Dwelling District Regulations", as follows:
Section 205.03. DEFINITIONS
205.03.01 Accessory Apartment
A dwellin� unit that is contained within the structure of a one
familv dwellina and clearly subordinate to the principal use of the
structure as a one family dwellina
205.03.23 Dwelling, Multiple.
A building or portion thereof designed for occupancy by two (2) or
more• families living independently of each other.-�.n separate
dwelling units. �
205.03.24 Dwelling, One-Family.
A detached building designed exclusively for occupancy by one (1)
family.
205.03.25 Dwelling, Two-Family.
A building designed exclusively for occupancy by two (2) families
living independent of each other.-and containing two (2� dwellinq
units.
205.03.26 Dwelling Unit.
�����3'��'����G1TC�T��1.'�� F.. ... � l � L � .. R.�
/
s�ee�i-�; ,''' --g, ee�e�c�g, ~a � �-� � ^ne or more rooms
connected toaether, but which are separated from any other dwellina
unit in the same building which rooms constitute a separate
indenendent unit with cooking and bathroom facilities and areas for
livina and sleeping, and used for residential purposes
205.07. R-1 ONE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS
1. USES PERMITTED
A. Principal Uses.
1C
The following are principal uses in R-1 Districts:
(2) Single family attached development as per conditions
under Section 205.11 of this Code.
B. Accessory Uses.
(4) The following are accessory uses in R-1 Districts:
,� Accessorp �partments subiect to the following
standards•
� Accessory apartments shall be located in
single family dwellinqs only;
� The one familv dwellina must be owner
occupied with the owner residing in either
the primary or accessorv unit on a
continuous basis except for tempora
absences. There shall be no sex�arate
ownership of the accessory apartment;
j�3., No more than one accessorv apartment per
one family dwellinq is vermitted:
� The accessory apartment must comply with
applicabie buildincr, fire, electrical,
plumbing,�heating, and related codes of
the Citv;
L5,1 If a separate entrance is provided to the
required by the Uniform Fire Code;
� There shall be no substantial exterior
architectural chancies to the home such
separate �urb/driveway entrances, separate
entrances on the front of the one family
dwellinc� separate water and sewer
connections;
� The floor area of the accessory apartment
cannot eaual or exceed the floor area of
the primary living area of the dwelling;
� If the accessory auartment is to be rented
to an individual not related to the owner,
the owner is required to obtain a license
from the City as required in Section
1D
220.13 of the City Code;
� �dequate off-street �a�kinq shall be
provided for both units with such parkinq
to be in a garage, car�ort, or on a paved
area;
10 There shall be no more than one (1)
bedroom within the accessory apartment;
{11� The maximum number of occupants of the
accessory apartment shal� not exceed two
adults , and no more than three occupants .
12
in complianc�e with the standards outlined
above. The accessorv apartment shall be
brought into conformance or the dwellinq
returned to a one familv dwelling within
three years of the date of the adoption
of this ordinance.
Amending Chapter 220 of the
"Residential Rental Property
Maintenance" by amending Section
Section 220.13 LICENSING
220.13.01 Requirement.
Fridley City .Code, entitled
and Condominium Common Area
220.13, "Licensing", as follows:
To allow for a systematic enforcement of this Chapter upon
residential rental property, and condominiums, no person shall
operate a residential rental property, and condominiums without
first having obtained a license to do so from the City as
hereinafter provided. In the case of rental of an accessorv
apartment, licenses are required only if the apartment is to be
rented to individuals unrelated by blood or marriage to the owner.
License renewals shall be filed at least 30 days prior to the
license expiration date.
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an
opportunity at the above stated time and place.
WILLIAM J. NEE
MAYOR
Publish: March 27, 1991
April 3, 1991
Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley
Community Development Department, 571-3450.
1E
Virgil C. Herrick
James L"►. Hceft
Gregg V. Herrick
Of Counsel
David P. Newman
�1te114���ll1� � l�'� V'V' �i�'1.LL��
_ �
AZ"I'ORN�YS AT LA�'4'
M E M 0 R A N D U M
TO: Barbara Dacy, Community Development��irector
FROM: Virgil Herrick, City Attorney ,��/�'G/J� _"
DATE: March 19, 1991 �
RE: Interpretation of the Definition of a Family
This memorandum is in response to your request dated March 14,
1991 regarding the above subject. In your memorandum you
indicated that Councilman Billings asked for our opinion as to
whether two hypothetical situations that he posed would be
consistent with our definition of "family" as used in our City
Code. Before responding to the two hypotheticals, I refer you to
my memorandum dated December 13, 1990 regarding mother-in-law
apartments. In that memorandum, and in an earlier memorandum on
the same subject, I indicated that the United States Supreme Court
held that zoning ordinances restricting the number of unrelated
persons who may live together in a residential zone are not in
violation of the 14th Amendment. I also indicated that there is
a substantial split on this question among various state courts.
I finally indicated that there is no Minnesota Supreme Court case
deterznining the constitutionality of an ordinance that restricts
the number of unrelated persons who may live together. Nor am I
aware of any Minnesota Supreme Court case that has considered the
validity of a definition of "family" as applied to fact situations
similar to those in the hypothetical.
Councilman Billings' first hypothetical is as follows:
"1.The parents of three brothers die unexpectedly. The three
brothers inherit the single family home. In order to make
ends meet, the brothers decide to rent to four unrelated
individuals. There are now seven people living within the
home; three are related, four are not. Does this violate the
definition of a Family?"
I would be of the opinion that the facts in this case would
be in violation of the Fridley Ordinance.
Suite 205, fi401 CJniversity Avenue '� �.� ��dley, Minnesota 55432, 612-571-385U
Memo to Barb Dacy
March 19, 1991
Page 2
In a New Jersey case, Berlin v. Christiansen 89 NJ Super 543, 215
A2d 593, the court found the owner of a single family home guilty
of violating a zoning ordinance that limited the use of the
property to a"single-family dwelling," where the owner occupied
a bedroom on the lowest level and rented three bedrooms on the
upper level to friends and their three children. The court
stated that the use as a single-family residence was proper if
the family use was the principal use, and the rental use was
merely incidental. However, the court concluded, the rental use
in the instant case outweighed the family use, not only because
the friends were more numerous, but also because they occupied a
greater portion of the dwelling. And more decisively, the court
said, the payment of a fair market rent in the normal landlord-
tenant relationship caused the use to be principally a rental use
and only incidentally an everyday family use.
In the case of Henrietta v. Fairchild 53 Misc. 2d 862, 279 NYS2d
992, the court held that a zoning ordinance permitting single-
family dwelling use in residential districts precluded use of a
single-family house by the owner and three to seven persons not
related.except for one who was the owner's brother, and enjoined
such use of the property. The court rejected the owner's argument
that he and his associated group constituted a single-family, and
concluded the owner's actual status or service was similar to a
boardinghouse keeper, notwithstanding the ingenious form of
economic arrangement.
The above hypothetical might also violate the Fridley City Code
provision that limits rental to two roomers.
Councilman Billings' second hypothetical is as follows:
"2. A man and a woman are living together in a single-family
home out of wedlock. The man has two children, and the woman
has three children. A total of six people live within the
single-family home. Does this violate the definition of a
Family?"
I am ot the opinion that the facts in this situation would
not violate the Fridley definition of "family."
In Takoma Park v. Count Board of Appeals, 259 Md 619, 270 A2d 772,
the Maryland court held that the male awner of a house and a woman
friend and her two children who occupied the home with him were a
family within the meaning of a zoning ordinance that defined
family as "an individual, or two or more persons related by blood
or marriage, or a group of not more than five persons not related
by blood or marriage, living together as a single housekeeping
group.
1G
Memo to Barb Dacy
March 19, 1991
Page 3
In the case of People v. Skidmore, 69 Misc. 2d 320, 329 NYS2d
881, a New York court dismissed a prosection for violation of a
zoning ordinance brought against two unrelated adults who
occupied a single-family dwelling with their children, one of the
defendants having three children and the other having four
children. In this case, the municipality had a provision in its
zoning code that more than five persons, exclusive of issue and
domestic servants, not related by blood, marriage or adoption,
shall not be considered to constitute one family. The court
pointed out that the ordinance specifically provided for the
exclusion of issue in measuring one family, and concluded that
there were merely two individuals, who had, for economic or other
reasons, joined forces in occupying a one-family dwelling as a
family unit.
Depending on the desire of
our defimition of "family"
facts to "those contained in
VCH:ldb
the Council, we may wish to redefine
to be more specific regarding similar
the hypothetical questions.
1H
22U.13.5
B. Every dWelling unit Within a dwelling or condominium shall be
provided With a smoke detector, detecting products of combustio n other
than heat, and conforming to the requirements of the Qnderi+riters
Laboratories or approved by the Internatio nal Conference of Building
Officials. When actuated, the deteetor shall provide aa alarm ia the
dWelling unit.
3. Fire Protectioa System.
All fixed and portable Pire protection systems aad appliances must be
accessible and maintained for immediate emergencq use.
4. Prohibiting Inside Connection oP External Applianees.
It shall be unlaxful for an o�rner of a residential rental property or
condominium to al1oW electrical drop cords, extension cords or any
electrical Wire to run from any electrical outlet from inside the dyelling
or dWelling unit for service to an electrical appliance outside of the
dr+elling or dWelling unit.
220.13• LICEHSING
1. Requirement.
To alloW for a systematic enforcement of this Chapter upon residential
rental property and condominiums, no person shall operate a residential
renta2 property or condominlum Without first having obtained a license to
do so from the City as hereinafter provided. License reneWals shall be
filed at least 30 days prior to the license expiration date.
2. Conformance.
No operating license shall be issued or reneWed unless the residential
rental property or condominium conforms to the ordinances of the City and
the laxs of the State of Minnesota.
3. Fees.
The annual liaense fee and expiration date shall be as provided in Chapter
11 of the City Code.
4. OWner or Agent to Apply.
License application or rene�ral shall be made by the oxner or
agent. Application forms may be acquired from and subsequently
the City.
5. Agent Required.
the oWner's
filed kith
No operating license shall be issued to an oWner Who does not reside in
either Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott or Washington County
unless the oWner designates in uriting, to the City, the name of an agent
Who resides in either Hennepin� Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott or
1!
EXISTING LICENSING
Licensing
220-13
ORDINI�NCE
220.14..1
Washington County. The designated ageat shall be re�ponsible for
maintenance and upkeep; legally constituted and empoWered to receive anq
notification of City ordinance violations; authorized to iastitute remedial
action to effect such orders; and accept all service or process pursuant to
la�. This requirement may be Waived if, in the City's determination, the
oWner not living in oae of the aforementioned connties, is nonethshall
sufficiently accessible for the purposes of this Chapter. The City
be notified in writing of any change of agent. -
6. Inspection.
No operating license shall be issued or reneWed unless the oWner agrees in
the application to permit inspections pursuant to Section 220.14 of thia
Chapter.
7. Posting of License.
Every licensee shall cause to be conspicuously posted in the main entry Way -
of the d�elling, or other conspicuous location therein, the curreat license
for the dwelling.
8. Transferability.
No operating license shall be transferable. Every person holding an
operating license shall give notice in Writing to the City xithin f ive (5)
business days after having legally conveyed ar otheririse dispoaed of the
legal control of any licensed property. Such notice shall include the name
and address of the person succeeding to the oW nership or control of such
residential rental property or condominium.
�
9. Suspension or Revocation.
Every operating license issued under the proVisions of this Chapter is
subject to suspension or revocation by the City Council should the licensee
or the duly authorized agent fail to operate or maintain the licensed
residential rental property or condominium therein consistent With the
provisions of the codes of the City and the laWS of the State of Minnesota.
In the event that an operating license is suspended or revoked by the City
Council for just cause� it shall be unlaWful Por the oxner or duly
authorized agent to thereafter permit any neW occupancies of vacant or
thereafter vacated dWellings or dWelling units until such time as a valid
operating license may be restored by the City Council.
22p.14. ADHINISTRATION
1. Enforcement.
��
�
The City Manager and/or the City Manager's designated agent shall
administer and enforce the provisions of this Chapter and is/are herebq
authorized to cause inspectians on a scheduled basis and/or When reason
exists to believe that a violation of this Chapter has been or is being
committed.
�2�-14 1 J
��
� �-
Admiaistration
t'
Virgil C. Herrick
James D. Hoeft
Gregg V. Herrick
Of Couns¢1
David P. Newman
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
������llv � ����1'�
ATTORNEYS AT LAV�I
MEMORANDUM
^�';
Barb Dacy n�'.i ��,-�
Virgil C. Herrick FUY`
December 13, 1990
Mother-In-Law Apartment Ordinance Amendment
This Memorandum is in response to your Memorandum of December 4,
1990. I have reviewed your memo and the attached minutes of the
planning commission meeting of November 14, 1990.
.As I interpret your Memorandum and the minutes the planning
commission has asked the question whether the City can allow a
homeowner to rent to related individuals without a license while
requiring a homeowner to obtain a license if they rent to
non-related individuals. I have researched that question and
cannot find any authority on that issue.
The legal question revolves around whether there is a rational
basis to distinguish between renting to related individuals and
renting to non-related individuals. If there were a challenge to
this type of ordinance it probably would be under the equal
protection clause of the United States or state constitution.
Those clauses require that if there is to be a different
treatment for related and unrelated individuals that there has to
be a valid distinction. As I indicated I have not been able to
find any cases directly in point.
The question being asked is somewhat similar to a question that
was asked in your Memorandum dated November 30, 1989. I
responded to those questions in a Memorandum directed to Jock
Robertson, Steve Barg and yourself on December 12, 1989. In that
Memorandum the question was asked whether a city can limit the
number of unrelated individuals through the definition of
"family". I stated that the United States Supreme Court in the
case of Belle Terre v. Boraas, decided in 1974, held that zoning
ordinances having the effect of restricting the number of
unrelated persons who may live together in a residential zone are
not in violation of the 14th amendment regarding equal
Suite 205, 6401 University Avenue r.`�1 � dle}; Minnesota 55432, 612-571-3850
MEMORANDM
Barbara Dacy
December 13, 1990
Page -2-
protection. I went on to state that some states have followed
the United States Supreme Court decision while others have held
that under their own state constitutions that this was
unconstitutional as a violation of their state constitution's
equal protection clause. I further stated that the State of
Minnesota has not ruled on that issue.
I believe that a rational argument could be made to the court, if
an ordinance requiring licenses for unrelated individuals were
adopted. The City could state that it has a policy of allowing
homeowners to provide rooms or apartments in their residence for
related individuals; and that the policy goal is to permit
homeowners to provide shelter to people who are related to the
homeowner by blood or marriage. Conversely the City could adopt
a policy that would state that it wishes to restrict the rental
of apartments in single family residential areas to people not
related to the family where the purpose of the rental would be
for economic considerations. We could further argue that the
United States Supreme Court has recognized a distinction between
related and unrelated individuals in that they have authorized a
numerical limitation on the number of unrelated people that can
live in a single family home while not authorizing a similar
numerical limitation for the number of related people that can
live in a single family home. Whether these arguments would be
successful it is impossible to say with any great certainty. As
planning commission member Savage stated, "What is legally
discriminatory is what the court says is legally discriminatory."
I do, however, feel that if the planning commission wishes to
make this recommendation to the counci2 that we could make a
rational argument to defend it.
VCH/lal
1L
H
z
�
a
�
a
0
�
�
w
U
U
�
z
H
E+
N
H
X
W
d d
s� o .�'c s� ° �
m o o b aitli �o a� "'�' °�
-•�� N � A b ���W G�1 � 3a.1
dC'�.� � O O G�1 tT u� O GI G�l � � W b+
> O O 3> Q �+ C> ia af � G!
�i� !a � W �.�1 �-1 Q O Ci W f� rt-.i �
G � RY �i � � N ri i� i� .�1 �1 N
N 01 W•` rl Ri LI •� 41 C. -'1 a"..
:� 13 f�' Sd A.-1 L� r-1 rt'Cf r-1 �1 E3 G1 +� CI .� U
C! 01 U O N W �-1 Gl N G 3� �.1 p
�3� �•° �ma ° °�a�io G °►°a �ro m
oa a4w o,� � � � v�-+.a o E�w v�w a
d
A m d
C ,�
L�i � W W -.�� b+
+� o ro p' 1°
U � A
?� �.��1 > Y"� G1 � � �.�1 'O
3�.� A � r1 y�,� � � � "� '[
� W i� d �-1 U
b �� 3 � G) CI O � U �
W � m+� O OW c�i1W �
ir O '[
�
d U O b G�! .,�.1 b+
w a`�i � .� � d �i s�,
-•��ro c ooa � � G �m �+
dA o 03> c o H ro��
a� 3.� .V d -.i �o a► �+ �c •a ¢3
cn a � b � > � �+ +� r, .0 d
-•i d d•- -•a aJ at a -•+ .0
�+ .[ ia A�-1 3a � L4 � Gt .1� G1 �-1 U
o+o •�°o d>a o o d mo roo .�
a° � �w o� � � � o ow v�iw �
'-1 1 3a
ba�i m �a
RTS U A� N > C
�� °1 �b '� w�
>� o �°' � oa
�� � �a � ;��
�U UO �� � -'�1�,�-�
� M+ a+ o 30 0 3o x.� -.�
v�i� �w E H E � 3�+A
O d
a° o
�
� aC
� z°
O
O
�
b
N
A
�
�
.a
�
A
a
m
�
m
Gl
-•� N
� �-�1 O
� U '�O
a4 r=°, �'
1M
d
�
-.�.i �
ro
:� Rf � d �
� � �y �
� d � N� �
0 ow '[nw �
i
N
A N �
a� m� a a '� �, ro
O A�3� O i3 � C m b+
b+ .��iw aaa�i � y � �++ a�i
"� E'i � tll �+� Fa W+i d.-1 U
�0 W�O�G! N d0 AU 1�
ai �C -•�+ t�+ ° b�+ o o w v�i w �
m
v
� w N
dJ
� � � d Cl U � J�
�� °�m° a�'i">i m� c� ro
> 3� � H +� 3� J•� +� � U ia
a� za �u�i ow �w �
1N
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the
Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431
University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, October 24, 1990 at 7:30 p.m.
for the purpose of:
Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code, entitled
"Zoning", by amending Sections 205.03, "Definitions", and
Section 205.07, "R-1, One Family Dwelling District
Regulations", as follows:
Section 205.03. DEFINITIONS
205.03.23 Dwelling, Multiple.
A building or portion thereof designed for occupancy by
two (2) or more families living independently of each
other-in separate dwelling units.
205.03.24 Dwelling, One-Family.
A detached building designed exclusively for occupancy
by one (1) family.-and containing one (1) dwe].lina unit.
205.03.25 Dwelling, Two-Family.
A building designed exclusively for occupancy by two (2)
families living independent of each other-and containina
two (2) dwelling units.
205.03.26 Dwelling Unit.
}�e�-e-t�—fl�e*a*�-s-�-e�t�---€�e . � ,
, . ne or more rooms connected
together, but which are separated from any other dwellinq
unit in the same buildinQ, which rooms constitute a
separate, independent unit with cooking and bathroom
facilities and areas for living and sleeping, and used
for residential purposes.
205.07. R-1 ONE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS
1. USES PERMITTED
A. Principal Uses.
10
ORIGINAL ORDINANCE
The following are principal uses in R-1 Districts:
(1) One-family dwellings.—which may be occupied
bv the owner or mav be rented to one familv.
(2) Single family attached development as per
conditions under Section 205.11 of this Code.
205.07.02 USES EXCLUDED
A. Any use allowed or excluded in any other
district unless specifically allowed under Uses
Permitted in e€ this district are excluded in R-1
Districts. `
B. Except as permitted in 205.07.O1.B.(4)(d)
above no part or portion of any one family dwel l ina
shall be rented to any person or persons.
C. Any one family dwellincx that has a current
rental license from the Citv shall have three (3)
years to amortize the investment in the rental unit;
said three (3� vear period shall commence on the
effective date of this ordinance. After said three
(3) year �eriod the rental of said unit is
prohibited.
.
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an
opportunity at the above stated time and place.
DONALD BETZOLD
CHAIRMAN
PLANNING COMMISSION
Publish: October 10, 1990
October 17, 1990
Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley
Community Development Department, 571-3450.
�l r
.-.
�
tp
tn
�
�
n
�
<
�
�
ci
0
Z
�
Z
C
G
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
A
O
Z
-�
�
O
i
.-.
�
�
�
3
w
w
<
�
.�
LEVEL OF ADMINISTRATIVE EFFORT TO CONTROL
ro
n
0
�
w
tr'
w
rr
F•-
O
�
�-,�rraro
a�wmors
►raerroo
'O tS � fD � 1,-
F�-� � � ;J fD F+
w rt w 't7 ct
A h'S e'F W W
'�G W fD E �! O
--�aoa�
M N Ct
O N- O
►i O M
I �
W O SD '� !A
ID � r! tD 'O
N r � (p
r't 'C \ � µ
�¢t+ �' rt Ai
iC�� �A�
�D F�• Q. O G
�- rt �• ►�s m
m� �
a co
b r
�
�
x �• d �n �r u�
vm����
►t C. r- w
to a� rr w
wc�tp.� ~
�nmr•C
N Q� �(�D
(trh�
O 1 O
�
1
� N
CL `J
N N
ri N
N �
W
fi
�
an ��
O O F•- 1�
O � < F-'
n �t r- o
�W�E
O tu o�
►��am
wo rt�o
A N fG pt
� E � a
W F•- ft
ft � N
?
�ro
�- m
rr r�
�
N-
�fi
cr
a tr
��
Q.
an
n �-
aw
m �
cr
r'i W IrD�
N�.'7'9
��
rt
�
m�
rr
an
�w
Q. w
i�
�
��W MEDIUM- HIGH
1Q
SIIRVBY OF OTHER COMMIINITIES�
ACCESSORY OR MOTHER-IN-LAW APARTMENT REGIILATIONS
Citv Regulations
Brooklyn Park No more than two renters per dwelling as
an accessory use.
Columbia Heights
Coon Rapids
Fridley
Hopkins
Minnetonka
New Brighton
Richfield
Spring Lake Park
St. Louis Park
White Bear Lake
Majority of the city is zoned R-2, Two
Family Dwelling. Mother-in-law apartments
are permitted in R-2 zone only.
Special use permit subject to specific
standards.
No more than two renters per single family
dwelling.
No more than two renters as an accessory
use.
"Accessory apartments" are conditional
uses in R-1 districts.
No more than two renters, but must share
one permanent kitchen. If two kitchens
are in place, one must be removed.
Duplex permitted as special use permit in
R-1 district.
Special use permit required to rent a
room.
No more than two renters; must share
kitchen and cooking facilities.
Permits as conditional use permit for
elderly persons and handicapped
individuals only.
1R
MOTION by Ms. Sherek,
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL
THE MOTION CARRIED AND
by Mr. Saba, to close the public
'ING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
PtTBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:10 P.M.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that i�
petitioner's attorney agree
harmless and indemnification
liability, that seems to
situation. He stated he t
stipulation #1 to include tY
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, secon
City Counail approval of sp
and Christine Hansen, per Se
Code, to allow an accessory
Fringe) on Lot 13, Block �
generally located at 230 �
following stipulations:
the petitioner is willing and if the
that it makes sense to execute a hold
agreement to release the City from any
e the most appropriate for this
i ught it was appropriate to change
� and to omit stipulation #2.
le by Mr. Dahlberg, to recommend to
�ci 1 use permit, SP #90-17, by Lynn
;ti n 205.24.05.B of the Fridley City
�uil ing in the CRP-2 District (Flood
, R ce Creek Plaza North Addition,
ice reek Boulevard N.E., with the
1. The petitioner shall execute hold harmless and
indemnification agreemen to release the City of any
liability or damage to t e accessory building or its
contents prior to the issu nce of a building permit.
2. Any materials, which include �
fertilizers, etc., that wo
hazard when released into the
accessory building.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYB,
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to
5, 1990.
ine, oil, insecticides,
pose an environmental
:r are prohibited in the
BETZOLD DECLARED
ty Council on November
Mr. Dahlberg asked that staff submit the rew itten stipulations as
well as the hold harmless and indemnificati n agreements to the
petitioner so that they can be reviewed y the petitioner's
attorney before the Council meeting.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
REGARDTNG MOTHER-IN-LAW APARTMENTS
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to open the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:17 P.M.
Ms. Dacy stated that about 1 1/2 years ago, the City Council
brought to staff's attention their concern about seeing a number
1S
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 24, 1990 PAGE 9
of advertisements for "apartment units" for rent in local
newspapers as well as the Minneapolis Star Tribune. A number of
these situations occurred in single family zoned areas. What the
general planning world has called a"mother-in-law" apartment,
means "an area of a single family home where a living area exists,
a bedroom, bath, kitchen, which is used for a blood related
individual". Unfortunately, after the mother-in-law leaves,
sometimes these types of areas within homes have either been rented
out to individuals not related, or more improvements to the home
have been made which has separated that living area more from the
main living area of the home.
Ms. Dacy stated that also during the last 1 1/2 years, the Council
has asked staff to analyze the City's licensing procedure for
rental units. Until just recently, staff has determined that
rental licenses have been issued to persons owning single family
property for rental of a portion of their homes which are, in fact,
zoned for single family use. The City was actually authorizing a
two family dwelling/duplex in a single family zone. Until
recently, the Fire Department was responsible for issuing the
licenses, and there were no zoning checks by the Community
Development Department. That procedure has since been amended.
Ms. Dacy stated that through a review of past files, staff has
determined about 10 situations in the City where the City has
consistently for 3-4 years issued a rental license to create
another unit within a single family home within a single family
zoned district.
Ms. Dacy stated the purpose of the proposed ordinance amendment is
to strengthen the City's existing policies regarding this type of
situation. Right now, a"mother-in-law" apartment is not
permitted; that is, they cannot have a two family dwelling in a
single family area. The ordinance amendment proposes additional
language to say that a part of a living area cannot be rented to
any other individual. It does not discriminate between blood
related individual or a non-related individual.
Ms. Dacy reviewed the existing code provisions:
1. Guest rooms may be rented to no more than two persons,
providsd that no kitchen facilities are provided. This
is a permitted accessory use in the R-1 district.
2. The definition of a"family" permits up to five unrelated
individuals within a single family home, and an unlimited
number of persons related by blood or marriage. For
example, they could have three students and two nurses
living in a single family home renting as one unit. In
that case, that would be an absentee landlord.
1T
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 24, 1990 PAGE 10
3. The City has currently been enforcing its informal "door"
policy. They have required that one of the doors
separating two living areas must be removed. By removing
the door, free access is provided between the two living
areas; therefore, an argument cannot made that the door
provides separation between the two areas.
4. There are existing single family homes in the City which
have two kitchens but are not renting rooms.
5. Early in the 1970's, the City did allow those structures
to be constructed under a special use permit. This
ordinance amendment would not affect those homes.
However, for those units that have been issued a rental
license to operate more or less as a two family unit or
a duplex, there is a section in the proposed ordinance
which would require the amortization of that use within
three years.
Ms. Dacy stated the proposed ordinance language amends the
definition of a one family and two family dwelling. In the
permitted use section, it states that they cannot rent any part or
portions of a unit to any other member. Again, it does not
distinguish between blood relation or non-related individual. And,
finally, it does provide for an amortization schedule of three
years to have the use revert back to the single family use.
Ms. Dacy stated that if the Planning Commission chooses to
recommend approval of this zoning ordinance amendment, it would go
to the City Council for another public hearing on November 19,
1990.
Mr. Betzold asked if there have been complaints from citizens about
abuses of too many people living in single family homes in R-1
districts.
Ms. Dacy stated, yes, the City's Code Enforcement Officer handles
about 3-5 different complaints per year of this nature.
Mr. Tay Kersey stated he represents Rodney Billman who owns rental
property on 7th Street in Fridley which falls under this category.
Mr. Kersey stated it is difficult to come and "argue" against a
proposed ordinance that strengthens an existing ordinance and that
clarifies that renting another unit in a single family dwelling is
an illegal activity. Their particular property was granted
building permits that essentially said this type of use was o.k.
They have tried to conform with the City whenever asked by the
City. They have removed the doors so that one person has total
access to the building.
1U
PLANNING COMMISSION MEBTING, OCTOBER 24, 1990 PAGE 11
Mr. Kersey
5
complaints
there are
with.
stated that to write a new ordinance because of 3-
a year seemed to be stretching the point. Certainly
more important issues in the City that should be dealt
Mr. Kersey stated a question he had was whether they would be
"grandfathered in" so to speak and that this ordinance amendment
would not apply to them. Staff has made it clear they would have
three years to comply, but he questioned the legality of that when
they were granted licenses to build the units and they have been
licensed by the City for a number of years to operate as two family
dwellings.
Mr. Betzold asked Mr. Kersey to address specifically how this
ordinance amendment would affect his rental property.
Mr. Kersey stated they are forced to comply with the ordinance if
it is amended, it would mean that they would suddenly have either
4 or 5 bedroom units they would have to rent either to one family
or to five single individuals. He believed they would have to
remove one of the kitchens.
Mr. Kersey stated one of the main questions of this whole thing
is: What is a family? The City of Fridley says five unrelated
individuals. Then he wondered about the situation where there are
two broth�rs and three other persons. Is that five, or does that
suddenly become 4, in essence, because two are related?
Mr. Kersey handed out an article from the Minneapolis Star Tribune
dated October 19, 1990, re: "Minnetonka rejects plan to limit the
definition of a family." Minnetonka wrestled with this problem and
finally just threw it out because they cannot come up with a
definition for a"family". He would ask that the Commission
wrestle with this problem also.
Mr. Kersey stated it is not unusual for Hmong families to have many
related individuals living in the home.
Mr. Kersey stated he would conclude with one of the statements made
by one of the Minnetonka Councilmembers: "It is easy to write an
ordinance or write a definition of family. It only gets difficult
if you ever have to use it." He sees problems with the enforcement
of this type of ordinance, and he would speak against trying to
change an existing ordinance or strengthening an existing ordinance
to the point where it is going to create more problems,
particularly along the lines of the definition of a family.
Ms. Sherek asked if it is possible to rezone some of these single
family homes that are being used as multiple family dwellings so
that they become conforming.
1V
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 24, 1990 PAGE 12
Ms. Dacy stated that is an option. The advantage the 7th Street
location has is that it backs up to the Village Green complex and
another multiple family complex, so that might be a possibility.
If there is a duplex in the middle of a R-1 area, then that is
probably not an option.
Mr. Kersey stated that regarding the rezoning issue, it is unusual
to have the high rise across the holding pond and then not have a
buffer to the single family units. He would welcome any
consideration in this regard.
Mr. Betzold stated it is something Mr. Kersey might want to pursue
with City staff.
Mr. Robert Lange, 189 Logan Parkway, stated he lives near a house
that has been oacupied by more than one family for many years, and
he has not complained. He had a question about the definition of
rent. Does rent include any kind of in-kind expenses or forgiving
of liabilities, rather than monetary reimbursement?
Mr. Betzold stated Mr. Lange had a good point.
Ms. Dacy stated that up until this point in time, she thought it
was the Council's intent that it was the typical rent check, and
the point raised by Mr. Lange is one of the issues that will have
to be addressed in the enforcement of this ordinance. The other
issue is: What happens if the persons renting the home share all
the expenses? It would be up to the City to prove that the person
is paying rent and living under some type of arrangement.
Mr. Betzold asked Mr. Lange what he saw as problems as a result of
non-family members living in a single family house.
Mr. Lange stated it affects the property values of other single
family homes in the neighborhood. There is more garbage and more
traffic. There are five vehicles for one house instead of the
typical two or three.
Mr. Roger Stene, 870 Pandora Drive, stated he has a mother-in-law
apartment in his home. Presently his mentally ill son occupies
this space. He stated this proposed ordinance amendment will have
a great impact on his situation. He stated his son has tried other
living arrangements--group homes, board and care, Village Green,
etc.
Mr. Stene stated that after seeing these undesirable living
conditions, they signed up for Section 8 housing. However, they
found out that most of the Section 8 housing that is available is
designed for a 2 bedroom situation, primarily for a single parent
with children. The amount of subsidized housing for single males
is very limited. So, they approached the Section 8 housing people
and asked about putting a mother-in-law apartment in his home. In
1W
PLANNING COMMISSION MLETING, OCTOBBR 24, 1990 PAGE 13
order to do that, he had to make some changes to the home. Because
of his son's paranoia which is part of his illness and fear as the
result of abuse and being beaten up several times, he also made the
house secure with bars on the basement windows.
Mr. Stene stated he has done many things to make this apartment
comfortable for his son. His son is very happy living there; and
as a result, he requires little medication compared to what he was
on when he was in other living situations.
Mr. Stene stated his son has to live in a separate apartment. If
he lives with his father, his social security is cut in half. In
order to qualify for the work program at RISE, he must pay rent.
Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Stene is in compliance with the ordinance
now, because he is renting to a blood-related individual. However,
under the new ordinance, he would not be allowed to rent to his
son.
Mr. Stene stated his home has been used as a model by Section 8 as
an ideal living arrangement for him and his son's type of
situation. He stated he does not consider his apartment situation
a detriment to the neighborhood. They keep the property up nicely,
and there is no extra traffic or cars.
Mr. Stene stated that if this ordinance is amended, he would like
to see some type of conditional permit for him and other people in
similar circumstances.
Mr. Betzold stated Mr. Stene and his son's situation is very
interesting. He stated this type of situation certainly merits
some serious consideration. He told Mr. Stene that his son was
very fortunate to have such family involvement.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:05 P.M.
Ms . Sherek stated that when elderly adults have their home occupied
by another individual, whether family member or not, and are
receiving medical assistance from the State of Minnesota, often
they are required to be compensated for the space being occupied
in their home. This ordinance amendment would prohibit that.
Since it has always been the intent of the City Council to assist
people to stay in their homes, this amendment seems to be
counterproductive.
Ms. Sherek stated a window should be left open when these types of
situations exist, and maybe the answer is a special use permit.
1X
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 24, 1990 PAGE 14
Ms. Dacy stated the other option is that if the ordinance is
created to permit mother-in-law apartments by special use permits,
there are standards that can be imposed such as: (1) The unit be
owner-occupied; (2) Some type of restriction be recorded at the
County that the special use permit is for a specific type of
situation; (3) Standards could be put on the special use permit
that would regulate any exterior improvements to the house, limit
the number of cars, etc.
Ms. Dacy stated that at this time, the Commission has two options:
1. They can act on the Mother-in-Law Zoning Ordinance
Amendment and send a recommendation to the City Council.
2. If the Commission is not happy with the ordinance
amendment, they can recommend that staff rework the
ordinance amendment.
Ms. Sherek stated she is more comfortable with option #2. She
stated she does not like the ordinance amendment. The idea of one
family has certainly changed drastically and continues to change.
Many older single adults who choose to remain in their home as they
grow older are going to need someone living with them. There has
to be a window that would permit the non- traditional types of
uses.
Mr. Betzold stated he is troubled with this whole thing. As far
as not being able to rent to any person, he coulc� see people
finding a way to get around that. Maybe as long as they have the
special use permit option, that won't be as much of a danger.
Ms. Modig stated she saw trouble enforcing this kind of ordinance.
It is going to be enforced the way it is today through the 3-4
complaints the City receives per year, and those are the people who
are not going to adhere to the ordinance anyway.
Mr. Dahlberg stated people just won't indicate that they are
renting a portion of their home either to a son/daughter, elderly
parent, whatever.
Mr. Betzold asked what they can do about the situation presented
earlier by Mr. Kersey where buildings were built as duplexes, and
it will be very difficult to rent or sell those buildings if this
ordinance amendment is passed.
Ms. Dacy stated that in the split level example where there are
three college students on the first level and two nurses on the
bottom level, right now the owner receives two rent checks, but if
in the future the owner receives one rent check from all five
individuals, it would be up to the City to prove that they are not.
The property owner has the right to rent out his building.
1Y
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 24. 1990 PAGE 15
Ms. Sherek stated that in this example, it sounds like the City
would rather have a property owner rent to five individuals who
will be coming and going with multiple vehicles than they would to
have the owner rent to families with one child each. That does not
make sense, and this ordinance does not make any sense.
Mr. Saba stated he liked the concept of a mother-in-law ordinance
that can be enforced, but he did not think this is an enforceable
ordinance. However, he did have a problem with single family homes
degrading into multiple family rental units. He would like to see
staff rewrite the ordinance.
Ms. Dacy stated staff has done a lot of research, and she thought
staff could come back with a revision at the next meeting.
MOTION by
discussion
apartments
meeting.
Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to table further
on the ordinance amendment regarding mother-in-law
and request staff to bring back a revision at another
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Mr. Betzold stated he would like to see more publicity in the
newspaper on this subject, and that the people at this meeting be
invited to back when this subject is discussed again.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSID]
LANDSCAPE RE4UIREMENTS:
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg,
public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTEi ALL VOTING
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THB PIIB:
by Mr. Kondrick, to open the
:� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
HEARING OPEN AT 9:22 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated staff has een working on the proposed
landscape ordinance requirements f r about a year. They are now
in the process of hoping to adopt e ordinance amendments. The
purpose of the amendment is not to 'nclude something new in the
ordinance; it is to make the existing requirements fairly explicit
to aid staff in evaluating site pl ns, landscape plans, on a
consistent, fair, and equitable manner It will also provide some
assistance to those staff inembers who not have training in the
landscape architecture to evaluate the andscape plans that come
to the City. In addition, the Commissio may be aware that it has
been the Community Development Depar ent's policy to hire
landscape interns to do work over the ummer to help evaluate
landscape plans and, in some cases, to a tually design plans to
meet the ordinance requirements. As t ere are no specific
requirements in the current ordinance, th requirements of the
1Z
pi•�INa COMMI68ION KBBTINQ. �iOVSMBER 14. 1990 PAQE 4
Sylvan Hills, qenerally located at 6261 Rainbow Drive N.E.,
with the following Btipulations:
1. The accessory buildinq shall be architecturally
consistent with the existing house.
2. The height.of the accessory building shall be
limited to 14 feet.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ]1LL VOTINQ ll7C$, CSAIRPBR80N BET
DECLARED THE 140TION Cl1RRIED �NANIKOIISLY. /
Ms. McPherson stated both the Bpecial use permit r quest and the
variance request will go to City Council on Dec er 10, 1990.
2. BLIC ARING: S O O G V
.S. 90-06 GLAC R MPAN •
To replat that part of Lots 2 and 3 Auditor's Subdivision
No. 78, Anoka County, Minnesota, nerally located north of
I-694 and west of Main Street N.
O ON by Mr. Rondrick, sec ded by Ms. Savage, to waive the
reading of the public hea ng notice and open the public
hearing.
QPON � VOIC$ VOT$, VOTINQ A7C$, CH�iIRP$RSON HETZOLD
DECL�iRED TSE 1SOTI CARRISD I1DiD THE PQBLIC BEARZNQ OPEN !►T
7:45 P.M.
Ms. Dacy st ed that since no one was in the audience
represent' g the petitioner, the Commission might want to
table t's item until later in the meeting.
OT by Mr. Rondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to table P.S.
�9 -06 by Glacier Park Company untii later in the meeting.
IIPON !1 VOIC$ VOTE, 71LL VOTING 11YE � CSl�ZRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED TSE I�IOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY.
3. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 205 OF THE
�'RIDLEY CITY CODE ENTITLED, "ZONING". BY AMENDING SECTIONS
205.03. "DEFINITIONS". AND SECTION 205.07. "R-1. ONE FAMILY
DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS"
Ms. Dacy stated there have been articles in the Fridley
Focus about this ordinance amendment, and staff has received
a number of calls reqarding this issue.
Ms. Dacy stated this ordinance amendment �ras originally
brought to the Commission's attention at their October 24,
1990, meeting at the request of the City Council. The City
Council is concerned because they have received complaints
1AA
�I
c • ,� • xt_ : c �� �-_�: - ' � , c -
about sinqle family homes that have been converted into
"illeqal duplexes"--two dwellinq units in one sinqle family
home. The Council fB concerned that this erodfnq the intent
of the sinqle family district.
Ms. Dacy stated the current ordinance does prevent the
creation of a second unit within a sinqle family home. It
does permit the rental of a quest room for up to two people-
-the difference being that a guest room is defined as not
having a kitchen.
Ms. Dacy stated the Council felt that because of the
violations that have been occurrinq in the City, the current
ordinance is not etrong enough. So, the proposed amendment
would still permit quest rooms, but no other portion of a
dwelling could be rented to a person(s). Based on the
advice of the City Attorney, there could not be a
discrimination between a related individual and an unrelated
individual.
Ms. Dacy stated that at the October 24 Planning Commission
meeting, a number of individuals testified regarding
different situations which the proposed amendment would
prevent. These situations were:
1. Where an elderly person would rent out part of the
home to an individual in arder to be eliqible for
state assistance.
2. Where a rental situation exists for a family
member who must, in order to participate in other
social service proqrams, be payinq rent.
3. The split level homes constructed on the west side
of 7th Street in the Alice Wall Addition.
Ms. Dacy stated that based on the Commission's direction at
that meeting, staff tried to determine ways to permit some
of these naturally occurrinq incidences but still try to get
at the Council's intent of trying to prevent some of the
nuisances. She stated that it is not easy.
Ms. Dacy stated that the staff's analysis included
evaluating and comparinq existing situations within the City
(chart was included in the agenda packet):
1. A typical single family home with the rental of
quest rooms as now permitted.
2. The experience of the split level homes�in the
Alice Wall Addition on the west side of 7th
STreet. �
w �
L��� 14. 1990 PAdE_6
PLANNIN�i COM�+II88ION K88'1'ZNd. NOVBr��
3� the October824ua1990,eP1anninqeCommission meetinqt
4. An elderly person livinq in a sinqle family home
wanting to rent out a portion of the home for a
person to assist them, or an elderly person who
wants to live with their adult children.
5. Homes which we have issued rental licenses to,
including 541 - 53 1/2 Avenue, 7430 Able Street,
4042 Main Street, 6070 Central, and 6428-30
Dellwood Drive.
Ms. Dacy stated that if it is the intent of the City council
to prohibit the creation of two units in one structure/
create a duplex, thereby erodinq the intent of the single
family neighborhood, then they must create performance
standards to ensure the "accessory nature" of these living
areas. Therefore, the followinq standards should be imposed
as part of a rental license for an "accessory apartment":
1. Require owner-occupancy of the structure.
2. Limit the size of the livinq area of the accessory
apartment so that it is clearly subordinate.
3. Requlate outdoor impacts, i.e., a separate
entrance into the accessory apartment can only be
created at the side or rear of the home and that
there shall be no substantial exterior
architectural changes to the single family home
such that the home appears to be a two family
dwellinq.
4. One accessory apartment shall be permitted per
single family dwelling.
5. The accessory apartment must meet the Uniform
Buildinq Code and Uniform Fire Code.
Ms. Dacy stated staff believes these requirements will
regulate and keep out the types of situations they believe
the Council is trying to prevent. They do not believe they
will get a lot of applications at this point in time and
believe they have the staff on hand to handle a license
application procedure. In the long term, they do expect
that these types of license requests would increase given
the demographics of this society and might help them catch
those situations that are illeqal. It seemed that the
oriqinal ordinance would prevent livinq situations that the
City Council had intended to affect.
1CC
yW�
' \� • +
pLANNINQ CO1rIIrII88ION KE$TIN�i. NOVEMBBR 14. 1990 PP1aB 7
Ms. Dacy stated staff is recommendinq that the Commission
endorse the concept of permittinq a mother-in-law/accessory
apartment as an accessory use in the R-1, Sinqle Family
District, eubject to receivinq a license. Incorporated into
the ordinance and prior to the issuance of a license would
be the followinq standards:
1.
2.
3.
The owner of the sinqle family home must occupy
the dwellinq.
One accessory apartment per sinqle family
dwellinq.
The secondary livinq area must comply with
building and fire codes.
4. A separate entrance to the apartment must be
located on the side or rear of the house to
maintain the sinqle family appearance; exterior
stairways shall not be added to single family
structures unless required by the Uniform Fire
Code.
5. There shall be no substantial exterior
architectural chanqes to the single family home
such that the home appears to be a two family
dweliinq. �
6. Establish a minimum size of the apartment such
that it is clearly subordinate to the principal
use of the single family home.
Mr. Saba asked how they are qoinq to address the current
violations--the homes that have already been modified for
two families.
Ms. Dacy stated staff is still discussing the issue of the
7th Street homes, which is different from the other
situations looked at by staff, but they would still have a
three year amortization period for the other violation
situations.
Mr. Betzold asked if the license process would be difficult
enough to discourage rentinq. �
Ms. Dacy stated that is the reason for the requirement for
owner-occupancy. If the owner of a property is required to
live in the home, that owner has a vested interest in seeing
what happens on his/her property. If the owner is affected
by a"bad tenant", then the owner ia qoing to take more of a
direct interest in the property than the absentee landlord.
1DD
�
�� R
�
*� �..,�.�.. MWTOQTAV v�4mrvrt _ tJnvRl�tRR�! ia _ 199A PA�iE 8
��Y'Y�l�1i�V �►Vi7i'a1oViVa� aaai�is•
What is ironic is that the houses on 7th Street are more
towards a duplex than any other situation with an absentee
landlord, yet the City has had no complaints or any probiems
from that neighborhood. So, there are a lot of these
situations that exist in single family areas without any
problems.
Mr. Jack Kirkham, 43'0 - 67th Avenue, stated he and his wife,
Corine, would like to present to the Commission a letter
dated November 12, 1990, addressed to Barb Dacy and the
Planning Commission. He read this letter to the_Commission.
He stated this letter addressed the article they read in the
Fridley Focus about the proposed ordinance. Their letter
stated their opposition to the proposed ordinance which
would prohibit the rentinq of any portion of a single family
home to blood relatives.
OT ON by Mr. Rondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to receive
into the record the letter from Jack and Corine Rirkham
dated November 12, 1990.
OPON A VOICE VOTE, lILL VOTING AYE� CBAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE ![OTION Cl�RRIED �PtANIMOIIBLY.
Mr. Betzold asked Mr. Rirkham how he felt about the person
who wishes to rent out a portion of his/her house, not to
take care of an aqing relative or a child who suffers from
mental illness, but to gain the extra income, and the
neighbors are now complaining that it is changing the
character of a single family neiqhborhood, creating more
traffic, etc.
Mr. Kirkham stated that was a hard question to respond to,
because that type of situation did not bother him. He cited
the example of a divorcee on a limited income who must rent
out the basement in order to stay in her home. There is
another family in the same neighborhood, with 2 adults and
two grown children. They have 6 vehicles and a single car
garage, but he did not know of anyone who has complained
about it. He stated it is hard for him to respond to people
who are upset about other people who wish to have someone
else live in their home.
Mr. Rirkham stated he did not see how licensing would
resolve this issue. For example, if his neiqhbor converted
his basement to living space with a kitchen, etc., and he
complained about this situation, the neighbor could then go
to the City and obtain a license. Then his complaint would
no longer be legal and nothing would be resolved.
Ms. Dacy stated they have to start somewhere to control what
is appropriate and what is not appropriate. What they are
1EE
P
� pLANNING COlrIIdIBBION ltEETING. �OV8K88R 14. 1990 p�a$ 9
; tryinq to avoid with the proposed Btandards is an absentee
J landlord situation where a two story house fs beinq rented
� to two families.
Kr. Saba stated the real2y qray area seems to be the
definition of a single family home and the definition of a
duplex. Maybe they need to just enforce the zoninq code.
It is important to protect the inteqrity of the R-1 zoning.
The other thinq he saw of value is the owner-occupancy
standard.
Ms. Sherek stated the City should never qet into the
position of leqislating who can live in a building in terms
of: Can five unrelated individuals live in a building or
not? She did not think a license procedure is appropriate.
She did not see a problem with 3-5 complaints per year.
Ms. Modig stated ehe believed they should leave the
ordinance as it is now and not make any changes.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that in a situation where they have
several people living in a building, they need to be
concerned about the life safety issues. A lot of these
types of arranqements do r►ot meet the life safety
requirements. What percentaqe of people who remodel their
homes ever come in and apply for building permit?
Ms. Dacy stated they have only been able to catch this type
of situation when some of the rental areas are for Section 8
clients, because HUD requires certain size eqress windows,
etc. Pat Wolfe, the staff person who works with Section 8,
has said that some of these units could occur without her
kriowledqe, and it could be a very danqerous situation.
Mr. Betzold stated he is not opposed to any of the standards
recommended by staff. They seem to be gettinq hung up more
over the licensing issue than they are on the standards
presented by staff.
Ms. Dacy stated the issue they are discussing is not so much
the standards as the level of control.
Mr. Rirkham stated it seemed to him that the timing is not
good for this proposed ordinance chanqe. All the
socioloqists are reminding them of the good old days when
they had extended families where people took care of their
own, and they didn't have to have so many nursinq homes,
state homes, etc. Sociologists are recommending that people
qet back to those qood old days. The state and federal
qovernments are faced with buildinq and maintaininq more and
more facilities to take care of those people who cannot take
care of themselves. This proposed ordinance would make it
1FF
n
c �y� �1 • �1. _ � �� � :, s I : _ � � - �
much more�restrictive and would discourage people from
trying to take care of their own.
Mr. Kirkham stated he also thought the licensinq procedure
fs nat qood because it puts the emphasis and burden on the
homeowner. He resented the additional qovernmental
restrictions and would resent having to qo and ask for a
license just to take: care of his own family. Maybe the
people who need the license are the people who are trying to
make a profit by rentinq out part of their home.
�
Mr. Dahlberq stated he disagreed. If they are qoing to
require a license in one instance, then they should require
that a license is necessary in every instance.
Ms. Sherek stated she aqreed with Mr. Kfrkham in that she is
flatly opposed to havinq to qet a license to have a relative
live in her home at any time under any circumstance. It is
nobody else�s business if eomeone lives in the basement of
her home. If the home is unsafe, then that is her problem.
Ms. Modiq stated there is also the situation of having older
children living in your home. Would she need a license to
allow her own children to live in her home? She would
definitely be opposed to that.
Mr. Betzold stated he still thouqht the present code needed
a little more clarification to provide a little more
enforcement.
Mr. Saba stated they should be able to have the ability to
require the licensinq procedure for the renting to non-
related individuals only.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that is discrimination.
Ms. Sherek stated they are already discriminating, because
right now they do not limit the number of related
individuals living in a home but they do limit the number of
unrelated individuals to five.
Mr. Dahlberg stated he disaqreed. Just by virtue of saying
a person has to come in for a license if the person is
unrelated is discriminatory, because they are not saying the
person who is related has to come in for a license. If they
are going to require a license, then they have to require it
of everyone.
Ms. Savage stated what is leqally discriminatory is what the
courts say is leqally discriminatory. �
1 GG
PL�I�NINa COldMIBBION lI88TINQ. 'iOV81'�$R 14. 1990 ��GE 11
4.
Ms. Corine Kirkham etated that Jack's mom lived in their
home in the "mother-in-law apartment" for several years. If
ehe had not been related, they would not have allowed anyone
else to live in their home. Their adult children have also
made use of this apartment. If these people had not been
related, they would not have felt obligated to share their
living quarters. She.did not think they can say it is
discrimination. If it is family, you help them out. She
stated renting to related people i6 very different from
rentinq to unrelated people.
Mr. Saba stated that maybe they need an opinion from the
City Attorney as to whether it would be discriminatory to
require a license for unrelated individuals only.
Ms. Modig aqreed they need a leqal opinion, but she had a
real problem with the whole licensing procedure.
Mr. Betzold asked if the Commission had any problems with
the six recommendations made by staff.
Ms. Sherek recommended that along with item �6, they include
a maximum size of 35$ or 800-900 sq. ft.--something to
indicate that there is definitely a smaller self-contained
unit within a larqer home.
Mr. Betzold stated if there is a hardship by holding to a
certain percentage, that can be addressed through the
variance process. He believed they should have a maximum
size, and he would go along with 35�.
Ms. Dacy stated that based on the plans she has worked on,
she would feel more comfortable with 40$.
Mr. Betzold asked staff to qet a leqal opinion from the City
Attorney on licensing for unrelated individuals versus
related individuals and to draft an ordinance for the next
Planning Commission meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A REGISTERED T�ND SURVEY.___
P.S �90 06 BY GLACIER PARK COMPANY:
To replat that part of Lots 2 and 3, Auditor's division
No. 78, Anoka County, l�tinnesota, generall ocated north of
I-694 and west of Main Street N.E.
O� TION by Ms. Sherek,
item from the table.
Ms. Modig, to remove this
IIPON A VOIC$ $, 7►LL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPBR80�T BBTZOLD
DECLARED 1�IOTION CARRIED IINl�NIMOOSLY.
1HH
r �
�
J
Community Development Department
PL,ANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: April 12, 1991 �
�,,, .
TO: William Burns, City Manager �
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Registered Land Survey, P.S. #91-02, by Steven
Bruns for Midwest Super Stop
Attached please find the above-referenced staff report. The City
Council set the public hearing date for the request for April 22,
1991. Staff recommends that the City Council hold the public
hearing.
A resolution approving the plat will appear later in the agenda.
MM/ dn
M-91-272
I,
�
�
�
�► STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE
Ci�OF PLANNING COMMISSION DATE : March 27, 1991
FRtDLEY CITI( CO�CIL �/�� : April 8, 1991 AuTHOA M��d�
REQI�EST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCAfiION
S1�'� �flATA
S�ZE
DENSlTY
PRESENT �ONING
ADJAC�NT LAND USES
8� ZONING
U�(fIE$
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL IMPUCATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPATIBILITY WlTH
ADJACENT USES & ZONING
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONStDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSiON
RECOMMENDATION
P.S. ��91-02
Steve Bruns for Midwest Super Stop
To subdivide and clarify L.S. 4�87-03
8100 East River Road N.E.
22,058 square feet
C-1, Local Business
C-1, Local Business to the North; R-1, Single Family
Dwelling to the West; PUD, Planned Unit Development to
the East.
Yes
Yes
Approval
Approval
�
i- �
►� `
P.S. #91-02
Steve Bruns
CITY OF
� , cooN RaPios- .
� .- -- --„�,.��_----
, .,' �::... ---•-��so.:,•...._ �
_ ;i -�`�..:o .,•---- I
� ---- __ �i6���• E/i.19� -'
' � .�.a r 6� _'� '�'_'_ "�"�_ .
` ��j C��Y �• �
� , '!�+ t�ial ,� OF � , i
� � � �.��: ,� RI�LEY � �,
��' �-y '��`� ; E V. <� : Q :
�: uo�
c�va....e,; � c ,y..e
� v.►... � . . y�
� � s GY�� L �e• . : fiM �klf �
, 2 7l � �1
9. /IS p
J ��� �� :��� r%9�i. 'Sc.:
'` � Os � P�'�►// t". � �' �
l'i �; � 2 r?�i! � � C.(A�►;. � �
� .,,%� �A V ' � Gl '' � A yPj "' '"b' • 36 % �
u - r.r.._ 6 � �,) "'"' .�. �r
IROy,T�N
�F��"��'��� ��
� r.
�,�-��, � �
� �
� � r
_�.�A@�i�
�
�� (� ) �� �' q + 4 �
� 7 i S Il
°i 1 � 0 � .
uo `�� �� ,,,,,�5
►.. g�a
.� . � —v
� y.v c. es. -� �s.e �vi�
� z��-� ��.,.� z CN 1�l� tj = w> ',!
,g .n�;, � ti .•;
� � I� � a� .3� �w \' /�O e�
...619 �9, � �� � �- i ��u � , :�"'� ,acE I
�
-� -- - .$�� .
1 �� aly`` �� �.' `f IY-I N'N✓ • ^ A+• �� 8 �•6
1 ��J ) - . g13J'(r) ; i
a. L /
��� ��5� ' � .`�� N�v ..
. �'� . :�� i •��
� FAIF�MON ��M ..,l��biL } �`' si4
A f ,
• # A8~/�, Ct� /s`n'N� � : `g��) `r� �, l
h M, � 8/ fg �a. ! `sa 7' D �� ��'8
;� � x
� �• �1Y
1 � / i
•
' `� lf �"� �� : 81a�' ' '`� .y++�
� .
`, �.y z 81 oy. P,1 Q� ��,.. �.; •� 8�
�. � �
� � _ r ��ro CIRCLE .,.; � b /,K �11.
�...s �•.�. - . ra � ,1f CjCi�
s��• � -�•��, ' ii�� . C
(ew,f h� -• Hf� � �� ,
.A�neiiten :;; �� la�iJ ' Y� J�� 't � • r
1 � � {7% ' � n �] s. - • • � �t �j� -
� •. i.B07/ � � t
$�oo „ � ao4, e:�� � . �, aa
��u_
� --- r:r _ ev��.r�",
2B
2�
LOCATION MAP
� P.S. ��91-02
Steve Bruns
�
�
,
,
� •
, ,
i
! crTY
. .
� Tt/OMOSIDA�'
RiVERV/EW D
� HEK'sHTS
�0 ��� �
oF
� � �
� �0�3 �
� � .�;
.�.� � � f
�� �
� � �
:.�';;;
� ��
, ` �� �
��„�.
� w
:�
� P �' �.r � 'F
; jo�s, 5�.
_. / (A �
� � IRON70N
, � RE ET
� 12� % C� SJ� , M R� �: ��
r 6 J � t�'
Q Q SPRIt�, i • aos � :
°` �' BPROOfC ► h � ;
} r `�'R ' �'' . � �W
Y i.
� 1 N ; B � s c. ..
� � T ♦, ♦ � , ��,i
`_ � P�K C � a � � �4 •) . i c .
> 15 � b � � l :
" � � � � R�
� ' t N E � , ' . ' , � ,�`f��
►- A i ♦ �..� 'Wi
J i � �. . � . �. , . K
. � �
. i • R � �. � i�
v��►•s s 1� s� s
� � v � 0 L" �•y lY
f /� � i � :
1i . / � � � ` � � � * �� � �
� � �a P �
. ` ; ;
� ` � I.IBERTY
'� � � ,��
�, 7 S� � _
�
� , �, x e
I � �� � �, LONGF LIOW
!
� \` '`. �� � Y� '�
, �� y
� . ���� � z . ,., . . ..� .
� � , . . . ., .•.. .
, � _. ,
� ,
�. . .
R i V E R � � '� i. �`."' • � � � . .
. �
NEIGHTW \�,r : �` `CR��-�,� 1 �+,j ; •� � ae � ��.� ���
`� � 4' d f'�' R � � ; • • 1
� l �!' � . � '� QF. t • ` , ; �����• •
� l � }�► , � ��s1 ,,��V • � ��������
� �+�i1►� fi • � q� � ti �, � �
� j I ��� i'�`� , s � • �
�� � � � 1 / S' + � � ; : '.'�
� �„ e { . � `� ♦ • •
�� � , � ,� • 1 A � , �'
�\\ � � `t , � �0' , 1
. ,•� t` , , i �� .' �i •• ;
'' 4..� f•: . � •. 0 1 . � � _ dri� _ � � � . �i
2C
ZONING MAP
Staff Report
P.S. #91-02, Steve Bruns
Page 2
Request
The petitioner is requesting that a Registered Lan
approved by the City Council in order to allow a lot
was processed in 1987 to be recorded at Anoka County.
is for 8100 East River Road N.E.
Site
d Survey be
split which
The request
Located on the property is a gas station/convenience store (Midwest
Super Stop) and is located at the southwest corner of Fairmont
Street and East River Road. The property is zoned C-1, Local
Business, with additional C-1 zoning to the north. The property
to the west is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, and PUD, Planned
Unit Development zoning is to the east.
Analysis
In 1987, the City processed a lot split to realign the west
property line of the subject parcel with an existing fence that is
located to the rear of the gas station (see attached map from 1987
request). After an extension to record the lot split was granted
by the City in 1988, the property was sold to the petitioner's
client. In attempting to record the legal description at Anoka
County, the County refused to record the document and requested
that the petitioner process a Registered Land Survey to clarify the
legal descriptions of the parcel.
The proposed Registered Land Survey will create four parcels;
Tracts A, B, C, and D. Tract D should be dedicated to Anoka County
as right-of-way for East River Road, Tracts A and B are for the gas
station, and Tract C should be deeded to the property owner to the
west. It should be noted that the lower portion of the triangle
which was originally split in 1987 is abstract property and has
been recorded, while Tract C is considered torrens property and
will be deeded once the Registered Land Survey is completed. The
property will meet the minimum lot area requirements for the C-1,
Local Business district regulations. Several of the stipulations
are outstanding from the 1987 approval, and should be applied to
the request (see letter dated July 16, 1990).
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the Registered Land Survey to the City Council with the
following stipulations:
1. Complete curbing along the south side of the parking lot.
2D
Staff Report
P.S. #91-02, Steve Bruns
Page 3
2. Construct a masonry dumpster enclosure with a chain link fence
gate with vinyl slats.
3. Dedicate Tract D to Anoka County as right-of-way for East
River Road.
4. Combine Tract A and B for tax purposes.
5. Deed Tract C to the property owner to the west.
6. Record a 17 foot street, utility, and bikeway/walkway easement
previously dedicated to the City.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission voted unamimously to recommend approval of
the request as presented to the City Council.
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning
Commission action.
2E
�EC� I S TER� D �ati�o
CI T Y OF F�?!D L E Y
, ,
� aCnc�ts iron r.�cncime��' st'.
• p'Qno!es irnn m�.�umen,� ;�';,�nc��
rh[ Oricn�p�ion cr �SiS �'PA'�i�� S✓S''tm �S
bas�d on �tie fou,!ti /in� n j f�e sEr � n;"!Se
�l'l�b'1,'�!- o� ,ftCli^n 3� H�p..�^� �.2� i,'av�n1
an assumed he��•%n� �;'' E��s',`.
SCa/¢ in Fie f
� -- f5 `�� -- — _ cc �r
-- --- -�--�
.�'ca� = 1 i�ch . 30 �Q�
�� �
�
✓; ..
. . ` /� ` .. � ` �J
.
� � . " v� . �; , � �
� �; � � , �
.. , . . -
�r
��
, . . ' /, -r'
�� �
T' n �.
�, �
P.S. �691-02
Steve Bruns
SU� �'E �' NO.
COUNT Y OF ANOKq
,i 3 3
1
� _,
�
0
�� c�
' �� ��
1� 33 ` ^' % Cr�
� ` C�
. s�
1 (c,
, ,. G� c- i
� _. 77 t
� , ~ � % ���
�;
�' �n� ,_
1 R-� �` , � /
, �� o ��, !
: y �
. �^ � �'� � ` `?
^ j _� 1 C' '�
� , ^� t�
���� Q ,
~ t
.%� f
,.0 ; � �1
"� ��
., Q,� a , �
. , ._ ��/��C/ � .Mh � r
' 7 ♦!1 r
- ���� �� ^� �' 12 g0 " . 3j '', c R Z��� �
� � i �� . . j � � � .�o_ o � ` ` (
: �
'', r ,, � i .,' '`' `��� 'r .- 1
� _' �' -Y�� � . :; ^ s� p. -�. � � . :
p .` `�'c� �J��.' : ':�rl,SC n � . � p �e, j � `, i
�?../: ":7�' �� '�� � '� , 7 �i �i /)� � NN 11 �b t
� � =, CF .u, � a-�`,'( " ` �" o ' ? j � ?,
{ _ � M � �n .t P►� � , -f ,, T- i ` �
i N�� P a ,, c;�i � NR!'2r4B �'� ?'^ �
r " ' �� � N ' V -34. 04• `•'�` �
? � � i•. .
, � _ � %•. •n ,� �
'� �.f. I 1 J7. 05 , a, i
; � r , � . ;� G .�4: ;:= � ��a�•z��as-E �:,z � i
� ��
� <,� ,, ; '' �pG ,Z� °�ti , - . ,;,,� ,, t„ .r- ..; ;�. .r. -.. �' ��
?�� \ ,�! � r` � C�a q. `O.��i .�, EO..< .�y CX.�G01:�^q „� Q
+J , ✓ ; ... ..�' M `+i
�...... �.�,.... . . -.. _ .r• ..._ . .. _ � .
` ' . m ��
'`_�jN 1 � in � v/ �T � a�-.- v i�..�i�✓/ I^V'I�V� ���
`: o�� � ,• . � � Z • TRA�CT B ` ?� �� ��n
. �.� . ... w � ....�
i. n1� '� i��� � �.W r.; tn �Al
�� �� ,a -. � n�G
N`
.�� �� � a� � ✓/ (�+ /l / �/ 7 C� %v1 A� � �NG
� � � � . ✓ . r . �� • � O �� C
_ -j`
` � a�,� � r N�. :, m
„ -,ye / �` � �.
:
.� .0 \ C � L� �
�_ � �. � � �..�
���t� : 1
• `.` _ - ` _ •
i� •
SQ�� ,'� � � 2
• �' "� ... ��/� i ��
� � �
�° ;
-- ' � _ - - - �►. - e5. no - _ �18. oC
-,,— �- :�,,; � � .. _ - . � _ ..... 152 IB ---- �
zx: t, :,,:..,,;' .� -r' :' �i�; • ,> ... _ �
. Ea s r
. . . . . ' . •- .' . . ... ' i _'r •;iM �, :i1; �.^> >SC 1.1�� ��
. .. . _ .. .. ... _ ..,i.�. ... :../ ,wi !nf i
2F
.�a. �t .'
— '�" 1
33 . '
SITE PLAN
•' • , CI'A'Y OF' FRIDLEY
` 6431 I�IIVIIiSITY AVII�IJE N.E.
FRIDIESC� 1�1 55432
(612j 571-3450
•� n in �� h �_a�c_ .,� ii u� �_:.� _ K�n.a1
......_... ...r.r.r.,..r.r..._..
PT�AT APPT�IC��IOId F�
....��.,..,...�.r.�...�....�._.,.�.�.......�,.r.r ,,,�,,,
PliOPEttTY II�DI�TI�1 - site plan required for sul�mittals: see attadied
�re�; 81 fl� Ea_st River Roa.d, Fridley, MN �
I�gal desc�.lption; See attached
1
Iat B1oc,Jc TractlAtk�iti:ca�
Tract A - 6103 -Tract C -
C�urerit zorwx�: �- � Square foatag%� T r a c t B- 15 7 7 6
Reason for plat: Registered Land Survey required by Anoka County
Regi_strar of Titles
FEE O�F7I�R II�10R'N�TI�TT .
_-
(�ntract Purci�asers: Fee Ownexs must sign this fona prior to processir�gj
�ME Donald. M, and Patricia A. Kisch
A,p� 9855 Revere Lane North
Maple Grove, MN 55369 �,. �,� � y a y-����
Sz�
SIGNATURE
•; ia�• � i • •� r• •�
� � ��-�f
DATE o� - �� 9�
� Steven H. Bruns, attorney for fee owner
� 1900 S�1ver Lake Road, Suite 202
���r.�►. � 1:
New Br_ighton, MN 55112
�for 20 lots
$ 15.00 for each additional lvt
�t P.S. # �' � -aZ
Application Y�eoeived by:
Scheduled Planning Ocemnissior� date:
#
Sc�eduled City �il date: �
�}�� pgp� 636-15Q0
L]ATE c�-�� %/'��
�� , � �
5�
. 2G
1;1
That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter of Section 3, Township 30, Range 24, Anoka
County, Minnesota, lying southerly of t�e south line of
Lot 50, Block J, "RIVER VIEW HEIGHTS, Anoka County,
Minnesota" and the easterly extension of said south
line, westerly of the southerly extension of the center
line of EAST RIVER BOULEVARD, as shown on said plat
(now known as County State Aid Highway No. 1), and
easterly of a line drawn from a point on the east line
of Lot 2, Block 1, WAYNE'S FIRST ADDITION distant 1.50
feet south from the northeast corner of said Lot 2 to a
point on the south line of said Southeast Quarter of
the Northwest Quarter distant 45.00 feet east fro� the
southeast corner of said Lot 2.
That part of Lot Fifty (50), Block J, Riverview
Heights, lying East of a line drawn parallel to and One
Hundred Fifty (150) feet East, measured at right angles
from the West line of Lot Thirteen (13), Revised
Auditor's Subdivision Number One Hundred Three (103),
Anoka County, Minnesota, according to the plat thereof
on file and of record in the office of the Register of
Deeds in and for said Anoka County.
2H
� � �
� _
>.:;
C[TYOF
FRlDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287
July 16, 1990
Bernadette Benson
5716 - 42nd Avenue North
Robbinsdale, l�t 55423
Dear Ms. Benson:
This is to review the outstanding stipulations that need to be
completed as a result of Lot Split, L.S. �87-03, approved by the
City Council on June 1, 1987 and the Special Use Permit, SP #84-
16, approved by the City Council on November 5, 1984. As of this
date, the following items need to be completed:
1. Recording of the 17 foot road easement along East River Road.
We have this easement in our possession; however, we have been
unable to record it because we have not been able to obtain
the certificate of title from Joyce Gabrelcik.
2. Complete the curbing along the south side of the parking lot.
3. Construct a masonry dumpster enclosure with a chain link fence
with vinyl slats.
4. Although all of the landscaping stipulations have been met,
some of the landscaping on-site is dead and needs to be
replaced. Further, the landscaped rock areas may need to have
weeds removed.
The parcel is zoned C-1, Local Business District. A car wash is
not a permitted use in the C-1 district. A rezoning to C-2,
General Business District, would have to be approved as well as a
special use permit.
Sincerely,
Barbara Dacy
Planning Coordinator
cc: Donna Strusinski
BD/dn
�'
C-90-279
2 �
s � _ �' f " L.S. #87-03 ` � _��;
? ' ' Bernadette Bensoai ,�
t .
:.. • :
T
� C�RT'X�ic,A�'� �� SURV�Y
�-
urvey fOr
R --.- ._ -. i7. 7'3
8l
� �
� _
i � .
f!Y�4 YNE .s .
C � S�' .
' : � A DD.
�
� LDT Z '��
.� � f.
' ,,S
� ��'�h
���0
(� v
� 04
� � �.
��
��Q��?
� p� �
�� o �y `
� h� �
` 9_
(-,.?y� ��r
�A/RMonJT" S
Nf. co�e
^�� ���oT2
;�
.�
�
J Q
�{" � �
v tiw � `
, �
a1 � a
� ; ,� W
n � i�
. c� a.
�o��j
q0� a
��r ��
P
/ MET.
� U Tl .
'�-�'� S 5. S//EO
$CALE l `+ 30' `�
N = J'RON M oN..r'NP�c
Q r IRON MoN. SET
�
V
.V
�7� •
/3./
�O T .5"D
,B�OCK T
R�v�R Yi� vy H�IGHrs
�y . .
.�
W °°
V ,
h O
��♦
:
Q �
��
h�
��
�`�
21,� �
C" ' 1 �� .
Q
`� � Lor �3
�
� REYr6E'O A�uO� ro�2's
Q SLLBD/VYS/ON NQ /03
�
� '//7;•.
�2 �6 ,
�
.
1
1
�' M
��
tiN
Q�
��
33
�.
�
r .� � 5° 15 �4
�
� �.
; � hal'6Dy certtty tnat tAl� is a true anQ corroct roprosentatton of � �uney ot th� boundutes ct —TH,E FRD/� • i AS^
� �:s�/'�.� Q. �/Y ��f�EE-?�2 �.i�N�, OiC!A�i County. MlnnaOla �nd ot M� locatlon o! at1 bulidlnps thotoon, and a0
vlsible ��croachment�, it any, irom or on saiG tand. Sunoyed by me thls s�_ Qay.ol ����MBE� . 1p �:L-,
I��v!.SE� fFS. 5� l 9B6 �
'� �''���i�9g7 PAU1. B. SCHOBO
• MINN STATE REG NO 'f4T00
:
t
►
2
;
:
;
{
. . .
SCHOBORG .i�AND SURVEYING
RT. 2� BOX 1�� . .
�
t.v_
V
DEl.ANO,MN. 5532a • • Sf/FET /af2
���.-.��2� 2� . .
fo.m No. tl�M-OUIT CLAIM DEED _ M��+•�• um�urm �unwr...r�o..
1/Hf.vMu�� IN �o CwOO��twn
or Pntnv�nlp
No delinquent taxes and transfer entered: Certiti(
of Real Estatc Value ( ) tiied ( ) not requL I
Certificate ot Real Estate Vilue No.
.19
County Auditor
by
STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: S �
Date: J�Y 12 . 19 88
FOR VALUABLE CONSlDERATION, Jovce B Gabrelcik Widos NoC Iiat�'i.ed
, Grantor (•1.
ImxiW s�MU� '
hereby convey (s) and quitctaim (s) to � atY of FYiclleY
. ��. :
i t�rsicipal.ity under the laws ot ���� •
real property in �� County, Minnesota, deacribed as follows:
A 17-foat street, utility, arxi bikeway/walkwaY ��+�^t de�r� � follows:
Lying within that part adjacent to and 17 feet west of. as measured at right
angles to, the c,�est line of East Riv�er Ii�ad as is now 1� �t ��3��
located within that part of Iat 50, Block J, Rivezview Heights lying east of a
lire parallel with and 15a feet east of as measured at right arsgles to, the t.est
line of �nt 13, Aevised Audibor's Subdivision No. 103 and also located within that
part of said Int 13.
The City of Fridley hereby accepts tlus easarent for the abwe-mentioned pu�poses•
Siurley A. - City Clerk
(i1 mon �paa k�wWO. contN�w on Wd�l
together with atl hereditaments and appurtenances bebngin�eceto.
„�, � . ,�� � ` J
. - .....•;n�,1t�i�.
J�B. Gabrelcik �
STATE OF AflNNESOTA
ss.
COUNTY OF n� a
Thc foregoing instrument waa uknowledged before me thu �LC day ot < <� ,1���,
�y �: . - b G 4Kiltrc.Li� CJ� J'.-��i ti'�/� 2c+'n�u�r��-<<i
_ ,GtNiA!(s).
NoTwR1AL S7Alif OR SFAL (O& OTHER TITLE OA RANR) �
I
�JONN J. BERGUiND
JS NOTMY/�{I!{JC-MWNqpTA
n�a� cou�TM
W ConwN..�on E+�In. Aa.. 6+�N
I
TNIS tYSTRUAIENT M'AS DM[T[D BY (N AMt ANO ADDAL88):'��
1
�
I
City of FYidley i
6431 Univer�ity Avenue ,
Fridley, FN 55432
i
i
__. __ _..,
�
u( a4 for 4u �ul V'ooMy dweAMd In ehN W[rvewt �You4
� o Owelud� yw� uA Wd.w� ot W�st��):
City of FYidley
6431 University Avenue
£ridley, MV 55432
�
�
2K
t -v
� , .. . � . . . �
>
rs�s.:�: *, j { ,;�
�. : � . , , .
:: S. r`� � - . .
� 'Y.
y� �, : .4� � ��,. � - ,, .
.�Y 5����� .-� �. - .".i: ;
. .. ��
r ': � � �'' . . . l . . .
PLAr�tJIt�G COMt�1ISSION MEETIPJG, MAY 6, 1987
PAGE 12
Mr. Eillings stated he wanted the City Council to note that at least three
Planning Commission members were in favor of two lots rather than three lots.
Also, they would like the City Council to note that the garage t at a permit
was issued for in 1983 has not yet been completed.
5. COtaSIDERATION OF A VACATION RE UEST, SAV #87-03, BY DOF� OLSON:
To vacate a 6 foot drainage and utility easement cre d by Veit's Second
Addition, generally located at 6431 East River Ro N.E.
Mr. Robinson stated there was presently a 6 , utility easement that ran
across the �niddle of the existing lot. T's would have to be vacated in order
to build a new house. There were no ilities in that easement. The only
recommendation they had was fron NSP and f�ortel Cable that the easement be
replaced with a 10 ft. easement ng the west and along the north side of
the property. The prior stip tions with the plat included the provision
for that easement and also at there be underground electrical service.
Ti�ere a�ere no further sti lations.
MOTIOP� by �4s. Sherel� seconded by t1r. Kondrick, to recommend to City Council
approval of Vacat' n Request, SAV #87-03, by Donna Oison, to vacate a 6 ft.
drainage and ut' ity easement created by Veit's �Second Addition, generally
located at 6 East River Road N.E.
Upon a vq%e vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Billings declared the motion
carrieyl�unanimously.
Mr Robinson stated this vacation request and tt�e preliminary plat would go
o City Councii on June 1.
6. COf�SIDERATIOtd OF A LOT SPLIT, L.S. #87-03, BY BER�JADETTE BENSO�� OF P1IDbJEST
SUPER STOP: To split off all that part of Lot 13, Revised Auditor's Sub-
division No. 103, Anoka County, Minnesota, accordina to the plat on file
and of record in the office of the Anoka County Recorder, lyin� easterly of
the easterly line of Lot 2, Block 1, �daynes First Addition and westerly of
a line drawn from a point on the easteriy line of said Lot 2, Block 1,
distant 1.5 feet southerly of the northeast corner of said Lot 2 to a point
on the easterly extension of the southerly line of said Lot 2, BlocE: 1,
distant 45.0 feet east of the southeast corner thereof, generally located
at 8100 East River Road IJ.E.
t•1r. Robinson stated tt�e property was located on the southv�est corner of
Fairmont and East River=Road. In 1984 a special use perr�it v�as issued for
the construction of a gasoline facility. He stated the petitioner,
Bernadette Benson, had done a very nice job of rehabbing that corner. After
moving into the building, they discovered their property line was not identical
to the fence line west of the building but ran at a drastic angle to what
would be the side and back yard of the adjacent family house. In order to
clean up this problem, they have agreed to split the property �aest of the
fe��ce and will be selling the property to the neighbor who will combine t�iat
with his iot which will then bring his �ot up to code. After the split, the
lot area for the gas station will be 21,800 sq. ft. which was more than adequate
by code. Code requirement was 20,000 sq. ft.
2L
PLAIVNItdG COFIF4ISSION MEETItlG, MAY 6, 1987
PAGE 13
Mr. Robinson stated Staff was reconmending the following stipulations:
1. Execute and return street easement agreement (17 ft. along East River
Road) prior to recording lot split.
2, Provide dumpster screening prior to recording lot split.
3. Provide hedging along Fairmont Street with edging, weed barrier, and
mulch prior to recording.
4. Suhdivided parcel to be added to residential lot to west concurrently
r�ith recording.
MOTION by �4r. Bondow, seconded by P1r. Kondrick, to recommend to City Council
approval of Lot Split, L.S. #II7-03, by Bernadette Benson of Midwest Super
Stop, with tlie following stipulations:
1. Execute and return street easement agreement (17 ft. along East
River Road) prior to recording lot split.
2. Provide dur�pster screening prior to recording lot split.
3. Provide hedging along Fairmont Street with edging, weed barrier,
and mulch prior to recordinq.
4. Subdivided parcel to be added to residential lot to west
concurrently witii recording. .
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Billings declared the motion
carried unanimously.
Mr. Robinson stated this would go to City Council on t4ay 18.
7. RECEIVE t1ARCH 2, 1987, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSIAN PIINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Betzold, to rec ' e March 2, 1987,
Parks � Recreation Commission minutes.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson llings declared the
motion carried unanimously.
8. RE_CEIVE APRIL 2, 1987, NUMAN RESOURCE
- — - �
�OP1MISSI�N f1INUTES:
P�10TION by �1s. Sherek, seconded b 1r. Betzo7d, to receive April 2, 1987,
Human Resources Commission mi tes.
Upon a voice vote, all oting aye, Chairperson Billings declared the
motion carried una ' ously.
9. RECEIVE APRI , 1987 NOUSIt�G & REDEVELOPPIENT AUTHORITY 1'IIt4UTES:
MOTION t1r. Kondrick, seconded by t�s. Sherek, to receive the April 9, 1987,
Housi & Redevelopr:�ent Authority minutes.
ilpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Billings declared the
motion carried unanimously.
2M
�� �. � i� y � ,� • : � :
be appraved b� staff; driveway tfl be at least three feet fran adjoining lat;
driveway slope to be reduved as muc� as possible; and owner to se�ure NSP
authorization of cprage glac�nent Frior to o�nstruction.
�`
Mr. Robertson stated staff had reoommended the garage facade match the
house, however, the petitiorrer stated the house has white steel siding and
sinoe the cprage would be close to the park, p�ssibly a� redwood facade would
be more ap�xxoFxiate. He stated the Planning �anission's reoomanendation is
that the garage facade be ap�xaved b� staff. �=`
Mr. C�ustafs�n stated he has a�ntacted Northern,�States ibwer and they did not
have any otrj ec�ion to his plac�neryt of the �rage on this Froperty.
�.,
NDTION b� CAUncilman Goodspeed to a�ncur with the reoommendaton of the
Planning Commission and grant special use permit, SP #87-08, with the
follawing stipulations: (1) garage y�acade to be approved by staff; (2) -
drive�aay to be at least three feet �,�r-'an adjoini.ng lot; (3) drivavay slope to
be reduoed as much as possitale; and` (4) owner to secure NSP authorization of
garage ptac�nent prior to o�nstruiition. Sea�nded b� Q�imcilman FitzFatrick.
Upon a voioe vote, all v�oting a�e, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimotzsly. ,�
�
7
N1�TION by Counciljman Fitzpatrick to set the public hearing on this
�e1 iminary plat �for Jta�e 1, 1987. Seo�nded tr� Cb�ncilman Schneider. Lpon
a voice vote, rall voting aye, N,ayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously. �s
D. CpN�ID�RAT_ION OF �1 YACA�'ION RDQUEST, SAV #$7-03, _� V�1 �ATE A 6 F�00'�
GENERAI�I,Y L(X'ATED AT 6430 EAST RIVER ROAD N.E.. BY DONNA OL90N:
MJTION� tr� (b�cilman Fitzpatrick to set the public hearing on this vacation
req�st for J�me l, 1987. Se�nded lx 4�uncilman Sch�ider. Upon a voice
v,o�e, all vating aye, N'�yor Nee declared the motion carried imanimously.
�
�• u • • • • ��_ � : � • �� • � •
� � / �� • � • • _ Y : � �I _� y� � i • � � ��
: 1 1 • , •,� • � : : ►� � : `• 1 �- �
�. . � .
Mr. Robertson, Community Develognent Director, stated this property is
located on the s�uthwest oorner of Fainnont ana East River Road. He stated
in 1984, a special use permit was issued for oonstr�ction of a service
station. He stated after the petitioner moved into the building, they
disa�vered thei r property lir�e was not ideritical to the f ence 1 ine west of
the builcb.ng, but ran at a drastic angle to what would be the side and back
yard of the adj aoerit hane. He stated in order to clear up this Froblen, the
�Z
2N
�ih !�. ,��� • �. • � ' �i
petitior�er has agreed to sgl it the Froperty caest o� the f ence and sell the
property to the reic�b�r who will c�mbir�e it with his Iot to kxing it up to
oode. He stated after the lat split, the lot area for the serviae station
will be 21,800 s�uare feet whid� is more than adequate as the oode requires
20,000 s3uare fee�
Mr. Robertson stated the Planning Cbnunission revieaed this request on May 6
and re�om�r►ended appc�aval with the stipulations that the petitioner execute
and return a street eagement agreement (Z7 feet along East River Road) prior
to rewrding the lot split; dumpster screening be provided prior to
reoording; hedging along Fairmont Street with edging, weed barrier, and
mulci� be Fravided prior to reaording; and the subdivided paroel be added to
the residential lot to the west o�ncurrer�ly with re�rding.
NDTION tr� Gbtncilman FitzFatrick to aoncur with the reaommendation of the
Planning Conunission and �ant lot spl it, L. S. �87-03, with the following
stipulations: (1) petitiarer eaaecute and return street easement agreeqnent
(17 feet along East River Rraad) prior to reo�rding lot spl it; ( 2) dumpster
screening be provided prior to recording lot split; (3) hedgirig along
Faiunor�t Street with edging, weed barrier, and mulch be provided prior to
rea�rding; and (4) subdivic7ed parael to be added to residential lot to the
west mncurrently with reoording. Seconded tr� Q�tncilman Gooclspeed. Up�n a
voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
NDT30N tH Councilman Goodspeed to reaeive the minutes of the Planning
Ca�nission meeting of May 6, 1987. Sec�ondecl by Councilman Fi�zpatrick.
Upon a voioe vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimotzsly. ,
I1. R�7CEIVING �iE MINUI�S OF TfiE CHA�i'ER (Xk7l�ISSION h'IEETING OF MARC�i °'30�. 1987 :
1K�TION by Coimcilman Schneider to receive the minutes� of the Charter
Cbmmission meeting of March 30, 198'7. Seoonded tr� .Qiiaicilman Fitzpatrick.
Upon a voive vote, all v�ting aye, Mayor Nee c�eclared the motion carried
unanimously.
12.
Mr. Flora, Public Works Direct,oY; stated after oansic3erable negotiation with
FriC, the Ci.ty has reoeived a�'�iold harmless agreement for the storm water
system within the FMC-Nav�sproperty and extending across the Anoka County
Park to the Mississippi�`River. . He stated the agreement establishes total
resp�nsibility for that system to F1�C and holds the City and County
harmless. Mr. Flora stated sinoe this is a Frivate systeqn and the City now
has an agreanent` that FriC will maintain it, he would recommend the Council
authorize execution of this agreement.
;
�
Mr. Ftiofa stated FMC has requested the City waive the past and present storm
water c�ainage fees. He stated sinoe the fee was acbpted, �IC has not paid
�ry of those charges and are in arrears $13,416.42 and a current fee of
-&-
2�
• �� •�v,. � • • • �• ZZ:�:j
6. �NSIDERATION OF A REZONING ZQA #87-01, Zb REZONE �'f2fJM R-3, GENERAL MULTIPLE
�4VELLING. TO C-2, GEI�RAL BUSINESS. ON LOTS 23 AND 24 TOGETHER WITH HALF
yA�TED ALI,EY. BLOCR 6. FRIDLEY PARK. ACaORDING � THE PIAT THERDOF ON FILE
AI�ID OF REQORD IN TEIE OFFICE OF THE O�UIJI'Y REOORDER IN A1�ID FOR ANOKA .COUN'1'X.
�IINNE90TA, Tf� SAME BEING 6501 EAST RIVER ROAD N E , BY CHRISTENSEN AU'1'0
DY:
Mr. �bertson, Cbmn�nity Developnent Director, stated a hcarif�g on this
rezoning was held on rlardl 11, 1987 before the Planning Comnission and they
recAnunenaed appro�val with several stipulations. He stat�ed a public hearing
was scheclulec3 before the Gbt,mcil for Apr`il 6, 1987, hc7wever, the petitioner
requestec3 the item be tabled in orsl�r to work out a ooncern regarding the
stipulation for a street ea�±ement. Ae stated this concern has been
adc3ressed and the petiti �ef wishes to proceed with the publ ic hearing
before the City Co�cil,.��'"
IrDTION kr� Cbuncil<man FS.tzFatrick to set the public h�ring on this propored
rezoning fo�,-�rch 28, 1988. Seoonded tr� Cbuncilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a
voice v�'€, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
una�,,�usly.
�i����.,_ 8 -0 Y ERNADETTE
7. OOhSIDERATION OF AN EXTENSION OF A LOT $PLIT, L. S. # 7 3. B B
BEN�I�j OF MIDWEST SUPER SIt�P:
Mr. Imbertson, Cbirem.mity Developnent Director, stated the petitioner has
requested a three month extension frcm this date in orcier to recoza a lot
sglit, L.S. �87-03, ap�xaved tr� Cbuzcil on June 1, 1987. He stateci it is
suogested this extension be appraved, with the follawing stipulations: (1)
ex�ecute and return street easement agreement (17 feet along East River Road)
prior to recordinq lot split; (2) provide dumpster screening prior to
reaorc�.ng lot split; (30) pravide hedo�ing along Fairmont Street with eclging,
weed barrier anu mulch prior to reoording; and (4) subdivi6e �arcel to be
adcied to resiciential lot to west ooneurrently with reoorc3ing.
NDTION tX CAlmcilman FYtz�atrick to apprave a three month extension of Lot
Sglit, L. S. #87-03, to J�me 7, 1988 with the following stipulations: (1)
e}aecute and return street easement agrecment (17 feet along East River Road)
prior to recording lot split; (2) provide aumpster �creening proir to
recbrding lot sRlit; (3) pravide hedUi.ng along Fairn�ont Street with edging,
weea }�rrier and mulch prior to reaording; and (4� subdivide �rcel to be
acic�ed to resiclential lot to west ooncurrently with re�rc3ing. Seconded by
Cbimcilman Schneider. Upon a voioe vote, all voting aye, Aayor r3ee c�clared
the mation carried unanimously.
8. C�ONSIDERATIOI� OF R�IISED QOMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN FUR RIVERBOAT PLAZA. 7899
EAST RIVER RQAD•
N�. R�bertron, Cb�tmiLnity Develo�ment Director, stated the petitioner, N',r.
Klus is appealing the CAlmcil's ac�ion on this �hopping center's sign plan
whici� was approved by Council 'bn July 20, 1987. He stated because the
rx�tic�e that this item would'�be on the (buncil's aaencfa went to the shopping
center's address anc3 not h�. Klus' residenoe or business, Mr. IQus felt this
��..
/--""� -11-
�.,` _
2R
IIPON A VOICB VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMO LY.
Ms. McPherson stated the vari ce request and special use
permit request will go to Ci Council on April 8, 1991.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
P.S. #91-02, BY STEVEN BRUNS FOR MIDWEST SUPER STOP TO REPLAT
THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 4UARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER
OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 24, ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 50 BLOCK J.
RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS. ANOKA COUNTY. MINNESOTA AND THE EASTERLY
EXTENSION OF SAID SOUTH LINE, WESTERLY TO THE SOUTHERLY
EXTENSION OF THE CENTER LINE OF EAST RIVER ROAD, AS SHOWN ON
SAID PLAT (NOW KNOWN AS COUNTY STATE ATD HIGHWAY NO l) AND
EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF LOT
2 BLOCK 1 WAYNE'S FIRST ADDITION DISTANT 1 50 �'EET SOUTH
FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2 TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST OUARTER
DISTANT 45.00 FEET EAST FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT
2.
THAT PART OF LOT 50. BLOCK J, RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS, LYING EAST
OF A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL TO AND 150 FEET EAST� MEASURED AT
RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE WEST LINE OF LOT 13. REVISED AUDITOR'S
SUBDIVISION NO 103 ANOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA ACCORDING TO
THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE AND OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF TIiE
REGIST OF DEEDS IN AND FOR SAID ANOKA COUNTY. GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 8100 EAST RIVER ROAD N.E.
MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Ms. Savage, to waive the
reading of the public hearing notice and open the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BLTZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT
8:15 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this property is located at the southwest
corner of the intersection of Fairmont Street and East River
Road. The property is zoned C-1, Local Business, with
additional C-1 zoning to the north. The properties to the
west are zoned R-1, Single Family, and PUD, Planned Unit
Development, on the property to the east.
Ms. McPherson stated that the City processed a lot split, L.S.
#87-03, in 1987 to realign the west property line of the
subject parcel with an existing fence located to the rear of
the gas station. After an extension to record the lot split
was granted by the City in 1988, the property was soid. In
attempting to record the iegal description, the County
recommended a registered land survey be processed.
2 C�
pLANNING CO1rII�I88ION MEETING, MARCH 27, 1991 PAGE 10
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed Registered Land Survey will
create four parcels: Tracts A, B, C, and D. Tract D should
be dedicated to Anoka County as right-of-way for East River
Road, Tracts A and B are for the gas station, and Tract C will
be deeded to the property owner to the west. To correct an
error in the staff report, the lower portion of Tract C is
actually abstract property and has been recorded while the
main triangle is torrens property and will be recorded after
the Registered Land Survey is recorded.
Ms. McPherson stated the property does meet the lot area
requirements for the C-1, Local Business district regulations.
There are several outstanding stipulations from the 198'7 lot
split approval that shonld be applied to this request.
Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends the Planning Commission
recommend to the City Council approval of the Registered Land
Survey with the following stipulations (#l, #2, and �6 are
remaining from the 1987 lot split request):
1. Complete curbing along the south side of the parking
lot.
2. Construct a masonry dumpster enclosure with a chain
link fence gate with vinyl slats.
3. Dedicate Tract D to Anoka county as right-of-way
for East River Road.
4. Combine Tracts A and B for tax purposes.
5. Deed Tract C to the property owner to the west.
6. Record a 17 foot street, utility, and bikeway/
walkway easement dedicated to the City by Ms.
Gabrelick, previous awner.
Mr. Steve Bruns stated that the property is now known as East
River Road Texaco and the owner is Donald Kisch. He stated
his firm was hired by Title Insurance Company who attempted
to record the documents at Anoka County but were unable to do
so and were asked to get a Registered Land Survey.
Mr. Bruns stated he is concerned with the first two
stipulations. These two stipulations were unknown to the new
owner or the title company or anyone else when the property
was purchased; in fact, the original approval of the lot
split, at least as it appears on the deeds, was without
conditions. He stated they are in agreement with the other
stipulations.
C'!�_i]
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETTNG. MARCH 27, 1991 PAGE 11
Mr. Bruns stated he was unable to contact Mr. Kisch, but he
did talk to the station manager. He did not believe the
dumpster will be a problem, although it is going to require
the buyer to spend additional monies for things he was not
aware of just to get the documents recorded from the closing
last November. Regarding the curbing, there has been some
discussion about improving the site to add a bay car wash.
If that is the case, the curb stops would have to be moved.
Ms. McPherson stated she did speak with the survey company
the previous week regarding the code requirements for
setbacks. There was talk of a car wash at that time, and she
did send them information on the special use permit process.
Ms. Dacy stated that when Bernadette Benson was trying to
sell the property last summer and prior to the closing, she
wrote Ms. Benson a letter dated July 16, 1990, regarding the
outstanding stipulations. If the stipulations were not on the
lot split, then they were made part of the special use permit,
SP #84-16. If the seller did not tell the buyer about these
conditions, then the buyer might want to approach the seller
about them.
Ms. Dacy stated that if the owner is considering adding a car
wash, a rezoning will be needed from C-1, Local Business, to
C-2, General Business, plus a special use permit. If the
owner wants to find out about those processes prior to making
an investment on the curbing, he could discuss it with staff
and establish some timeline for compliance. Also, if the
owner does not want to comply with these stipulations, he can
request a rehearing of the special use permit and try to get
the stipulations changed.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Savage, to close the
public hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARiNG CLOSED AT
8:26 P.M.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to recommend
to City Council approval of Registered Land Survey, P.S. #91-
02, by Steven Bruns for Midwest Super Stop to replat that part
of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section
3, Township 30, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying
southerly of the south line of Lot 50, Block J, Riverview
Heights, Anoka County, Minnesota, and the easterly extension
of said south line, westerly to the southerly extension of the
center line of East River Road, as shown on said plat (now
known as County State Aid Highway No. 1), and easterly of a
line drawn from a point on the east line of Lot 2, Block 1,
Wayne's First Addition distant 1.50 feet south from the
��
PLANNING COMMIBSION MEETING, MARCH 27. 1991 PAGL_12
northeast corner of said Lot 2 to a point on the south line
of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant
45.00 Feet east from the southeast corner of said Lot 2.
That part of Lot 50, Block J, Riverview Heights, lying east
of a line drawn parallel to and 150 feet east, measured at
right angles from th�e west line of Lot 13, Revised Auditor's
Subdivision No. 103, Anoka County, Minnesota, according to
the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the
Registrar of Deeds in and for said Anoka County, generally
located at 8100 East River Road N.E., with the following
stipulations:
1. Complete curbing along the south side of the parking
lot.
2. Construct a masonry dumpster enclosure with a chain
link fence gate with vinyl slats.
3. Dedicate Tract D to Anoka county as right-of-way
for East River Road.
4. Combine Tracts A and B for tax purposes.
5. Deed Tract C to the property owner to the west.
6. Record a 17 foot street, utility, and bikeway/
walkway easement dedicated to the City by Ms.
Gabrelick, previous owner.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRiED IINANIMOIISLY.
5. RECEIVE FEBRUARY 19 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND ENERGY
COMMISSION MINUTES: /
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to eive the
February 19, 1991, Environmental Quality and En Commission
minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING , CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINAN OOSLY.
6. RECEIVE MARCH 7 1991 RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Shere seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive the
March 7, 1991, Hu n Resources Commission minutes.
IIPON A VOI VOTEi ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED MOTION CARRIED QNANIMOIISLY.
2T
r �
�
I
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Community Development Department
PLANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
April 4, 1991
William Burns Cit Mana er ��� '
. Y g A�
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Lot Split, L.S. #91-02, by Milestone Hotel
Investments
At the March 25, 1991 City Council meeting, the City Council tabled
action on the lot split request. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the request with the following
stipulations:
1. A 30 foot easement shall be dedicated to the City for the
water line improvement and recorded when the lot split is
recorded. �
2. Common party wall and shared easement agreements shall be
recorded when the lot split is recorded.
3. A hold harmless agreement relieving the City of any liability
for waiving the Uniform Building Code requirements shall be
recorded against the lot split.
4.
5.
Variance request, VAR #91-04, shall be approved.
Plat request, P.S. #91-01, shall be completed by May 6, 1991.
Councilman Billings discussed with the petitioner his reluctance
to recommend approval if more signage is going to be added to the
property. Therefore, we have drafted a potential stipulation for
the City Council review to add to the lot split approval:
6. No additional free standing signage may be added to the site
beyond the amount of signage that was originally approved in
the 1985 variance request. Wall signs may be permitted if in
compliance with the sign ordinance.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the lot split
request with the recommended stipulations from the Planning
Commission and the additional stipulation regarding signage.
BD/dn
M-91-248
3
RESOLUTION NO. - 1991
RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION, LOT SPLIT,
L.S. #91-02, TO SPLIT IATS 1-5, AUDITOR'S
SUBDIVISION NO. 153 INTO TWO SEPARATE PARCELS,
PARCEL A AND PARCEL B, GENERALLY LOCATED AT
5201 - 5275 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E.
WHEREAS, the City Council approved a lot split at the
, 1991 meeting; and the Planning Commission
stipulations attached as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, such approval was to split:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 153, City of
Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, subject to an easement for public
utilities to the City of Fridley over the east 50 feet of Lots 1,
2, 3, 4, and 5 of Auditor's Subdivision No. 153; also subject to
an easement for road purposes over the south 25 feet of said Lot
5; also except that part taken by the State of Minnesota for
highway purposes, except the following described parcels.
Commencing at a point on the east line of the west 50 feet of said
Lot 3 distant 47.17 feet South from the north line of said Lot 3;
thence North and parallel with the west line of said Lots 3 and 2
a distance of 96.67 feet, said point being 49.5 feet North and 50
feet East of the southwest corner of said Lot 2; thence
northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the south line of
the north 30 feet to said Lot 1, distant 25 feet East from its
intersection with the east line of the west 50 feet of said Lot 1;
thence East along the south line of the north 30 feet of said Lot
1, a distance of 163.67 feet; thence South and parallel with the
west line of said Lots l, 2, and 3, a distance of 248.17 feet;
thence West and parallel with the north line of said Lot 3, a
distance of 188.67 feet to the point of commencement. Also except
the west 275 feet of Lot 5, except the north 36.67 feet thereof,
Auditor's Subdivision No. 153, Anoka County, Minnesota, subject to
the rights of the public in highway on the west 50 feet and the
south 25 feet of said premises, and together with an easement for
walkway and road purposes over the east 50 feet of the west 325
feet of Lot 5 except the north 36.67 feet thereof,
into two separate parcels described as:
Parcel A: That part of Lots l, 2, 3, and 4, Auditor's Subdivision
No. 153, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning
at the northeast corner of Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 153;
thence South 00 degrees 29 minutes 30 seconds East, on an assumed
bearing, aiong the east line of said Lots 1, 2, and 3, a distance
of 337.60 feet; thence South 89 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds West,
a distance of 258.39 feet; thence South 00 degrees 30 minutes 31
seconds East, a distance of 100.14 feet; thence South 89 degrees
27 minutes 59 seconds West, a distance of 196.26 feet; thence North
3A
Resolution No. - 1991
Page 2
00 degrees 32 minutes O1 seconds West, a distance of 9.37 feet;
thence South 89 degrees 16 minutes 28 seconds West, a distance of
i45.55 feet; thence North 00 degrees 43 minutes 32 seconds West,
a distance of 29.05 feet; thence South 89 degrees 41 minutes 31
seconds West, a distance of 229.20 feet; to the east line of State
Trunk Highway No. 65; thence northerly, easterly, and northerly
along said east line of State Trunk Highway No. 65 to the north
line of said Lot 1; thence East along the north line of Lot 1 to
the point of beginning. Except the following described parcel:
Beginning at a point on the east line of the west 50 feet of said
Lot 3, distant 47.17 feet South from the north line of said Lot 3;
thence North and parallel with the west line of said Lots 3 and 2
a distance of 96.67 feet, said point being 49.5 feet North and 50
feet East of the southwest corner of said Lot 2; thence
northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the south line of
the north 30 feet of said Lot 1, distant 25 feet East from its
intersection with the east line of the west 50 feet of said Lot 1;
thence East along the south line of the north 30 feet of said Lot
1 a distance of 163.67 feet; thence South and parallel with the
west line of said Lots 1, 2, and 3, a distance of 248.17 feet;
thence West and parallel with the north line of said Lot 3 a
distance of 188.67 feet to the point of beginning.
Parcel B: That part of Lots 3, 4, and 5, Auditor's Subdivision No.
153, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at
the northeast corner of Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 153;
thence South 00 degrees 29 minutes 30 seconds East, on an assumed
bearing, along the east line of said Lots 1, 2, and 3, a distance
of 33'7.60 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be
described; thence South 89 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds West, a
distance of 258.39 feet; thence South 00 degrees 30 minutes 31
seconds East, a distance of 100.14 feet; thence South 89 degrees
27 minutes 59 seconds West, a distance of 196.26 feet; thence North
00 degrees 32 minutes O1 seconds West, a distance of 9.37 feet;
thence South 89 degrees 16 minutes 28 seconds West, a distance of
145.55 feet; thence North 00 degrees 43 minutes 32 seconds West,
a distance of 29.05 feet; thence South 89 degrees 41 minutes 31
seconds West, a distance of 229.20 feet; to the east line of State
Trunk Highway No. 65; thence southerly, along said east line of
State Trunk Highway No. 65 to the south line of said Lot 5; thence
East along the south line of Lot 5 to the southeast corner of Lot
5; thence North along the east line of Lots 3, 4, and 5 to the
point of beginning. Except the west 275.00 feet of Lot 5 lying
South of the north 36.67 feet thereof.
Generally located at 5201 - 5275 Central Avenue N.E.
WHEREAS, the City has received the required Certificate of Survey
from the owner; and
WHEREAS, such approval will create two separate parcels.
�
� � Resolution No. - 1991 ' � ' �
Page 3 - �
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council directs the
petitioner to record this lot split at Anoka County within six
months of this approval or else such approval shall be null and
void.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
3C
EXHIBIT A
Resolution No. - 1991
1. A 30 foot easement shall be dedicated to the City for the
water line improvement and recorded when the lot split is
recorded.
2. Common party wall and shared easement agreements shall be
recorded when the lot split is recorded.
3. A hold harmless agreement waiving the City of any liability
for allowing the Uniform Building Code requirements shall be
recorded against the lot split.
4. Variance request, VAR #91-04, shall be approved.
5. Plat request, P.S. #91-01, shall be completed by May 6, 1991.
3D
r �
�
J
Community Development Department
G DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: March 20, 1991 Q,
� (O
TO: William Burns, City Manager �, `
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT: Variance Request, VAR #91-04, by Milestone
Hotel Investments
Attached is the above referenced staff report. At their March 12,
1991, meeting, the Appeals Commission voted unanimously to
recommend to the City Council approval of the request with the
following stipulation:
1. The variance shall be granted in conjunction with the
granting of the lot split request.
Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Appeals
Commission action.
MM:ls
M-91-178
�
r._,
�
�
crnroF
FRIDLEY
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSEO REQUEST
LOCATION
STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE March 12, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE
CITY COI�VCIL DATE r�arcti 25, ]
SITE DA�'A
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONWG
ADJACENT LANO USES
& ZONWG
UT�fi'IES
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FtNANCtAL 1MPLtCATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPATIBILITY WITH
AOJACENT USES & ZONOVG
ENVlRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENOATION
nuraioa ��
VAR #91-a4
Milestone Hotel Investments
To reduoe the reqwi,red side yard setbacic frcm 15 feet to
0 feet
5201-5275 Central ?�venue N,E.
11.8 acres
C-3, General Shopping Center District
C-1, Ir�cal Business District to the sauth; R-1, Single
Family Dwelling to the ea.st; C�-3, General Shopping C�nter,
to the north
Yes
Yes
Approval
� �
' a�r r+
� �
' y I
�
.: '� �sq�, �23
,-
VAR '��91-04
Milestone Hotel
N �/2
C/TY
ci rr
2�
� r� �
SEC
OF
.
.�
Of
CG
C,
NL
�q .
�
.� i �
'�i
*
�
j Ih
�/
y �.
�; 4
j
8 �
�>�
'A �
��
�Iy
�
y
a
�b�
:1 .r
�� ,i r� �
24 ,'
LOCATION MAP
.
Staff Report
VAR #91-04, Milestone Hotel Investments, Inc.
Page 2
A. STATED HARDSHIP:
None stated.
B. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Request
The petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the required
side yard setback from 15 feet to 0 feet for 5201-5275 Central
Avenue N.E. The request is a result of a proposed lot split
and plat request which staff is currently processing and which
will create a lot line between the Skywood Motel and the
Skywood Mall. The lot line will be created so that the motel
may be sold independent of the mall.
Site
The property is approximately 11.8 acres in area. Located on
the parcel is a 100-unit motel and a retail mall which share
a common fire wall. The property is zoned C-3, General
Shopping Center. The property to the south is zoned C-1,
Local Business. The property to the east is zoned R-1, Single
Family Dwelling, and there is additional C-3, General Shopping
Center, zoning to the north.
Analysis
3ection 205.15.03.C.(2) of the Fridley City Code requires a
15 foot side yard setback when two side yards are required.
Public purpose of this requirement is to provide for adequate
open areas (green divider areas) around commercial structures,
maintain clear access for fire fighting, and reduce the
possibility of fire.
The C-3 zoning district regulations require that a side yard
setback of a minimum 15 feet exist for all parcels. However,
Section 205.17.03.D.(2).(c) and Section 205.18.03.D.(2).(c)
(industrial districts) allow a zero lot line where a common
wall is provided between two buildings. The creation of a
common lot line between the two facilities in this zoning
districts creates the need for the variance. In this
instance, the code is placing the hardship upon the property,
and the property is unique in the fact that a common wall will
be shared by two buildings. The cross parking and access
easements will continue to be maintained after the lot split
and plat are approved. Therefore, the two lots will continue
to function as one.
i �
Staff Report
VAR #91-04, Milestone Hotel Investments, Inc.
Page 2
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend to the
City Council approval of the variance, with the following
stipulation:
1. Lot Split request, L.S. #91-02, shall be approved.
Appeals Commission Action
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request with the following
stipulation:
1. The variance shall be granted in conjunction with
the granting of the lot split request.
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Appeals
Commission action.
4E
�
J
d
�
�
<
z
J
W
�
n.
1
i
S
�
O Q
�
}
� i .
/h!u�� �cl�v
�., / �.,
Iy'�� -
- Y`I - — — — - -- — -- -
f�)� t
� �
LI -- --
C�,��
a �
�
!
fi�
VAR #91-04
� � �i�w�;��!_';�! ii��=;�:�i` c �i:�iiFit�;i�si
i i li;:a.=s.s=�i !i:�:Sii=�� i 3?i�i:i�i��;��i
� � i � '�:�������i�i �l=i:_':�_'-�� E ��:illF�j�iii!i
� .. . .. � :il:�.i . � - fii 1'j"r��.
f � � 1 �F;1:.;:::;!; i��.i=c�i!' ' �i�!...j.,.f3:i
� ' •" ii•iii.• �_•.: 1 - iii:E�i..:i
� �' �s-� i� i� iiit;:..�-. . ��:�---:-_-}�f.
jf =i3T�liii�IFII rj:�dii�z� ��fil:,�s,es::=ci^j�.
j ��:..._._-!° iis�.. . �i=�:s::z:s;3:.i
ss t:� __•_"_:_ti �3:. �- __ - - �;
; tj � i•i••:: . . i:iiisi:!:i i i='�I�IIItii;ii
f � � i :�iFliiii�i �i � ..
�� I� �s: ::e..-I �p !�_s:.....:�::i!
i1 - �1 . . -', � . i
. � �- � . !. . � � i � I
('3Ad 1t12i1N3� ) ''r •: �'� AVMH9IH
i
l=jiie
Si�'t r It
i i:�s 4
!�;!��, �
�t'�ss
i i e �' I
����� :
t:�f� SI
w
Z-
� �tt �
� �, i s r =
` '� :� _� .9
- _:
i- : E: _
� _ '°
j E 5 5 �
Z
W
i
a
� � ; � �; �
-----•r--• •— c .
--�.. __ N
--�----- � �A
` 1MiNKY3" 0�0� � •�•.1�r „
,� { � n �w! � 1�1 ��r . � �I� �. � �
\ • .,.A � i (
. . . � � �
i � 4}
I Y qi
��/ `
�/ Z � � �
,,:� o . ��:
qi
i� /j _� � : ; Nd;
_ / � i / d . i �i i
W _ �
W j !
------�---- -- �I
— _ � �
N N n a 1 31 dl S�, __,.,.,.� ._..�. '
4FPRELIMINARY PLAT
�
LEGAL DESCRIPTION SKYWOOD MALL & HOTEL
I Robert L. Peters, a Registered Land Surveyor in and for the State of
Minnesota, do hereby certify to F& M Marquette National Bank as Trustee
under an Indenture of Trust dated December 1, 1983; Liberty Title Company;
and Chicago Title Insurance Company Chat this is a true and correct plat
of survey of :
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4& 5, Auditor's Subdivision Number 153, City of Fridley,
Anoka CounCy, Minnesota, subject Co an easemenC for public utilities
to the City of Fridley over the east 50 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4& 5 of
Auditor's Subdiv_ision Number 153; also subject to an easement for road
purposes over the south 25 feet of said Lot 5; also except that part
taken by the State of MinnesoCa for highway purposes, except the following
described parcels.
Commencin� at a point on the east line of the west 50 feet of said Lot 3
distant 47.17 feet South from the north line of said Lot 3; thence North
and parallel with the west line of said Lots 3 and 2 a distance of 96.67
feet, said point being 49.5 feet North and 50 feet East of the southwesC
corner of said Lot 2; thence northeasterly in a straight line to a point
on the south line of the north 30 feet of said Lot 1, distant 25 feet
East from its intersection wiC� the east line of the west 50 feet of
said Lot 1; thence East along the south line of the north 30 feet of
said Lot�i, a distance of 163.$7 feet; thence South and parallel with
Che west line of said Lots 1, -� & 3, a distance of 248.17 feet; thence
West and parallel with the north line of said Lot 3, a disCance of 188.67
feet to the point of commencement.
Also except the west 275 feet
thereof, Auditor's Subdivision
to the rights o£ the public in
25 feet of said premises, and
road purposes over the east SO
the north 36.67 feet thereof.
of Lot 5, except the north 36.67 feet
No. 153, Anoka County, Minnesota, subject
highway on the west SO feet and the south
together with an easement for walkway and
feet of the west 325 feet of Lot 5 except
correctly shows Lhe location of alI buildings on said described property;
recorded easements per Chicago Titie Insurance Company Commitment No.
L17673-C dated January 31, 1990, and all applicable building setback lines;
that there are no visible encroachments onto adjoining properties, streets
or alleys by any of said buildings; that there are no visible right-of-ways
or easements on said property, except as shown on said survey; and that there
are no party walls or visible encroachments on said described property by
buildings, structures or other improvements situated on adjoining property.
As surveyed by me this Z��"� day of ,1�%a�ci'j , 19 9��
PETERS, PRICE & SAMSUN LAND SURVEYURS, LTD.
�� �
ttobert L. Peters, Land Surveyor
.Minnesota License No. 14890
� � � -
QTiI OF FRIDI�SC
6431 iA�RSITY AVF3�lUE N.E.
FRIDLEY, I�T 55432
(612) 571-3450
�• u n� i � - • � n � � _� _ .�i �
VARI.l�K'� AP�'LIC�TI�i FO�Ni
PlmP�T'Y II�TIo�T - site plan required far suk�mittals: see attac3ied _yy~
Address; 5201-5275 Central Ave., Fridley, Minnesota 55421
I,ag-dl desCriptlon: See attached
I�t See attached B1pcJc T�'act�Additiarl Auditors subdivision 153
C�rent zoni.tx�: C-3 Squ,are foo�tage/acr�eage 11.8 acres
Rea..son for variance arr3 harr��,; p:
Sectiaaz of City Oode:
FFF.E �lt II�ORI�TI�1 ~....^.�~
(Contract Pum��asexs: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to pz+ooes.sing)
Marquette Bank Minneapolis National Association as Trustee
NAME under Indenture of Trust dated December 1, 1983
AD�S 6th & Marquette, Minneapolis, MN 55480
LIAYTIME pFIONE 341-5804
n� a/6�g>
w.�..._ ..�... .._�._..._,......�.�.._....�. ..�...�....�..._...._�_
r�rriz� n�o��t
t�1ME Milestone Hotel Investments, Inc.
AD�S 681 E. Lake Street, ��246
Wayzata, NIN 55391
DAYT7MF'. pgp� 612/476-8516
' � ��� l�.(
Fee: $ioo.00 � �C ._.....__..........�....�_�
$ 60.00 for residential praperties
Permit vAR # I- 0 Reoeipt # `� y/ a D
Application i�+eoeived by:
Scheduled Appeals �ion�date: 3•!Y-�l
Sc�eduled City Oamcil date:
...r.....r...�.._�__.w._.��_..��.�.....__�_�...._.. . .........r....._..�..__....__
4H
POBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
APPEALS COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of
Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing at the Fridley Municipal
Center at 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, March 12, 1991,
at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of:
Consideration of variance request, VAR #91-04, by
Milestone Hotel Investments, Inc.:
Per Section 205.15.03.C.(2) of the Fridley City Code to
reduce the side yard setback from 15 feet to 0 feet for
proposed Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Skywood Mall Addition,
currently described as:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 153,
City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, subject to an
easement for public utilities to the City of Fridley over
the east 50 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of Auditor's
Subdivision No. 153 ; also subj ect to an easement for road
purposes over the south 25 feet of said Lot 5; also
except that part taken by the State of Minnesota for
highway purposes, except the following described parcels.
Commencing at a point on the east line of the west 50
feet of said Lot 3 distant 47.17 feet South from the
north line of said Lot 3; thence North and parallel with
the west line of said Lots 3 and 2 a distance of 96.67
feet, said point being 49.5 feet North and 50 feet East
of the southwest corner of said Lot 2; thence
northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the south
line of the north 30 feet to said Lot 1, distant 25 feet
East from its intersection with the east line of the west
50 feet of said Lot 1; thence East along the south line
of the north 30 feet of said Lot 1, a distance of 163.67
feet; thence South and parallel with the west line of
said Lots 1, 2, and 3, a distance of 248.17 feet; thence
West and parallel with the north line of said Lot 3, a
distance of 188.67 feet to the point of commencement.
Also except the west 275 feet of Lot 5, except the north
36.67 feet thereof, Auditor's Subdivision No. 153, Anoka
County, Minnesota, subject to the rights of the public
in highway on the west 50 feet and the south 25 feet of
said premises, and together with an easement for walkway
and road purposes over the east 50 feet of the west 325
feet of Lot 5 except the north 36.67 feet thereof, to be
described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Skywood Mail
Addition, generally located at 5201 - 5275 Central Avenue
N.E.
41
VAR #91-04, Milestone Hotel Investments, Inc.
Page 2
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given the
opportunity at the above stated time and place.
DIANE SAVAGE
CHAIRPERSON
APPEALS COMMISSION
Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley
Community Development Department, 57�-3450.
4J
City Cbtaici.l
Ci.ty Manager
Diiane Savage
567 RiQe C3.�elc �lerraoe N.E.
F'ridley, N�V 55432
Mi les tone Hot�e l Inves trnents
681 E. Lake Street, #246
' Wayzata, M�i 55391
Mazquette Bank Minneapolis
6th. and Marquette
Minneapolis, NN 55480
City of Columbia Heights
Planning Department
590 - 40th.Avenue N.E.
Coltunbia Heights, N� 55421
Fi�rs Restaurant
� 54Q0 Central Avenu� N.E.
Fridley, M�1 55421
'i Chet Herringex
4121 Stinson Boulevard
, Oolimibia Heigh.ts, DT1 55421
I 7bta1 DZinnesota, Inc.
5300 Central Avent� N.E.
I Fridley, Ni�i 55421
I 'lbtal Minnesota, Inc.
999 - 18th Street
'I Suite 2201
Denv�r, O� 80202
MAII�]G LIST FC�t
VARI�E # 91-�4
5201-5275 Central Avenue N,E,
Mi.lest�one Hotel Investments, Inc.
Mena�rds F Inc.
5351 Central Avenue N.E,
Fridley, ,NN 55421 �
Menaxd�� Iric.
RAUte 2
Eau Claire, Wi 547Q1
O�u�zoe Paark T.nvestirents
3989 Centra7..l�veni,;�e N.E.
Col�ia Heic�Iits, NY�T 55421
k�land Lang
1278 S1cy4a�od Lane N.F.
Fridley, NN 5542I
Yun Tee
12�8 Skyv,rood Lane `N.E.
Fridley, AN 55421
Carl H�ggestad
1258 Skywood T,ane N.E,
Fridley, N1V 55421
Nlazy Nlattti�ws
1259 Skywood Lane Pd. E.
Fridley, N�1 55421
Ground Round Res taurant
5277 Central Aventbe N, E.
Fxidley, NN 55421
�
Mailed: 3/1/9i
Haward Johnson Company
Box 38
Wahkon, NIl�T 56386
skyw�ood znn
5201 Qentral Avenue N,F.
Fridley, NN 55421
S]cyHrood Mall
5251 Central Avenue N.E.
FYidley, r�T 55421
Iee Warcls
5289 �ntral Avenue N.E.
F'ridley, MV 5542I
�
Current Tenant
5267 Central Av�nue N.E.
Fridley, I��I 55421
Adventures in Video
5211 Q�ntra3. Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MV 55421
'It�vin City Fec7exal
5205 Central Avenue N.E.
Fridley, NN 55432
'l�vin City Fec�eral
801 Maxquette Avenue
Minneapolis, NJrd 55402
Ftobert Hall Clothes
1075 Central Park Avenue
Scarsdale, NY 10583
VAR #91-04
5201-5275 Cer�tral Avenue N.E.
Page 2
Great American Musie
515i Qentral Avenue N.E.
Fridley, N�1 55421
Izwin Kallman
115 East 57th Street, #1240
New.York, NY 1OQ22
RQnald �ax�.zek
5258 F'illiroxe Stxeet rI.E.
Fridley, NN 55421
Marvin �:cFie�nk_
5246 k'�1lmore Stx�eet N. E.
Fridley, NN 55421
����
Mardc Investn�nt Oonpany Fet�ex 1�b11�axa
7601 Wayzata Blvd. ,#206 5234 �'i,1lm�xe .Street N.E.
Minneapolis, MV 55426 F'ridley, 1�Il�i � 55421
Current Resident
109� -� 52nd Avenue N.E.
Fridley, NN 55421
Curre.nt Resic3�nt
112Q .-- 52nd Avenue N.E.
Fridle�, Na�i 55421
Current Resic�nt
117Q -� 52nd Avenue N.E.
F�idley, �N 55421
Lyle Mandel ��z�'�
695Q i�la�zata Blvd. , �2Q6
Golc�en Valley, D�V 55426
Giarrent Resident
215 -� 53rd AVenue N�E.
Fridley, Nll�T 55421
Thomas Skovran
5298 Fil]smxe St,reet N.E.
Fridley, NiV 55421
Rayimnd k'oxss
5222 �'il]irore Stxe�t N.ER
Fridle�, NN 55421
Dean �liss
5212 F�.,17a�pxe .Stx�et N.E.
FYidley=, I�N 55421
�oseph N�i�gc�
520Q Fillmo.�e �treet N.E.
Fridley�, NN 55421
C'�ary� Zbwn��le�
1301 -- 52nd 1�venue N,E.
Fridley, NY�I 55421
Michael Jaro�lawski,
5201 Ta�rlox �txeet N. E.
Fridley, 1�TI 55421
Francis Jab
52Q9 Taylor Star�eet N�E,
Fridley�, NN 55421
�
�rxi Wallace
5217 Taylor Stt�t N.E.
Fridley, M�T 55421
Edward Ko�nzal
5235 Taylor Street N.E.
F'ridley, M�T 55421
Daniel Dolezal
5251. '!'aylor Street N.E.
Fridley, NN 55421
Ja¢nes Roseiaeuer
5285 Taylor Stre�t N.E.
Fridley, rR�T 55421
Kwin I,emke
529g Taylor Street N.E.
Fridl�y, N�i 55421
Donald Delich
5284 Taylor Stxeet N.E.
Fridley, NN 55421
WilLiam Kuether
5268 Taylor Street N.E.
Fridley, r�T 55421
inlill�am Job
5250 Taylor Street N.E.
Fridley, 1��T 55421
Timothy McC.auley
5234 Taylor Street N.E.
Frid].ey, NN 55421
VAR #91-04
52Q1-5275 Central Avenue IJ.E.
Page 3
Aar� Engebretson
5216 Taylor Street N. E.
Fridley, NN 55421
Stevpn Kantoraw.icz
52QQ Tayl.or Street N.E.
FYi.dley, Nr1 55421
Gerald Sorenson
1280 -� 52nd Av�ni� N. E.
�ridley, NN 55421
Jan�s Vant
126Q �- 52nd Avenue N.E.
Fridley, NN 55421
William Leavey
124Q - 52nd Avenu� N.E.
Fridley, NN 55421
'� ]►'�I
�
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. MARCH 12, 1991 PAGE 10
CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REOUEST VAR #91-04 BY MILESTONE HOTEL
INVESTMENTS. INC.:
Per Section 205.15.03.C.(2) of the Fridley City Code to reduce
the side yard setback from 15 feet to 0 feet for proposed Lots
1 and 2, Block 1, Skywood Mall Addition, currently described
as:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 153, City
of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, subject to an easement
for public utilities to the City of Fridley,over the east 50
feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of Auditor's Subdivision No.
153; also subject to an easement for road purposes over the
south 25 feet of said Lot 5; also except that part taken by
the State of Minnesota for highway purposes, except the
following described parcels. Commencing at a point on the
east line of the west 50 feet of said Lot 3 distant 47.17 feet
South from the north line of said Lot 3; thence North and
parallel with the west line of said Lots 3 and 2 a distance
of 96.67 feet, said point being 49.5 feet North and 50 feet
East of the southwest corner of said Lot 2; thence
northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the south line
of the north 30 feet to said Lot l, distant 25 feet East from
its intersection with the east line of the west 50 feet of
said Lot 1; thence East along the south line of the north 30
feet of said Lot 1, a distance of 163.67 feet; thence South
and parallel with the west line of said Lots 1, 2, and 3, a
distance of 248.i7 feet; thence West and parallel with the
north line of said Lot 3, a distance of 188.67 feet to the
point of commencement. Also except the west 275 feet of Lot
5, except the north 36.67 feet thereof, Auditor's Subdivision
No. 153, Anoka County, Minnesota, subject to the rights of the
public in highway on the west 50 feet and the south 25 feet
of said premises, and together with an easement for walkway
and road purposes over the east 50 feet of the west 325 feet
of Lot 5 except the north 36.67 feet thereof, to be described
as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Skywood Mall Addition, generally
located at 5201 - 5275 Central Avenue N.E., Fridley,
Minnesota, 55421
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Dr. Vos, to waive the reading
of the variance request and to open the public hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:14 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed request is to reduce the side
yard setback requirement from 15 feet to 0 feet for 5201-5275
Central Avenue, otherwise known as the Skywood Mall and Motel,
located at the intersection of Central and 52nd Avenues. The
property is zoned C-3, General Shopping Center District. There is
4N
APPEALS COMMISBION MEETING, MARCH 12, 1991 PAGE 11
additional C-3 zoning to the north. The property to the south is
zoned C-1, Local Business. Although the property is zoned
commercial to the south, there is some multiple family apartments
in that area and there is R-1, Single Family Dwelling, to the east.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is also processing a lot split
and a plat request which will create two lots. Therefore, the
variance includes both lots once they are newly created. The lot
split is being processed for closing on April 1 and the plat will
be finalized sometime in April. This will allow the petitioner to
purchase the hotel portion of the complex and remodel in time for
the busy season. The proposed lot split and plat will create a new
lot line which will split the hotel portion from the retail and
which will allow the motel to be sold independently of the mall.
The C-3 district zoning regulations do not allow for a zero lot
line to exist. The regulations require a minimum of a 15 foot
setback. The City does have a zero lot line option in the
industrial district where there is a common wall between industrial
buildings. The Code is creating a hardship for this particular
parcel.
Ms. McPherson stated the site will continue to operate as a single
unit. Parking agreements will continue to be maintained and will
continue to function as is. Staff recommends approval of the
variance with the stipulation that the lot split be approved. ,
Dr. Vos asked why there is a jog in the lot line.
Ms. McPherson stated, the way the City requested the petitioner
draw the line is because it is along the face of the fire wall
along the mall portion of the building. The south part is all
motel and the north part is mall.
Dr. Vos asked if there are jogs outside.
Ms. McPherson stated the site is currently underparked and was
approved this way. However, they have tried to draw the lot line
so the motel portion meets the code as much as possible. The
Planning Commission will try to address this issue. The site has
as much parking as is available without going to ramps. This past
summer, the trustee in control of the property completed the
parking which was an outstanding stipulation from when the project
was first approved.
Mr. Ring, Marquette Bank, stated the bank is the trustee now in
control of both facilities. The need for splitting the lot is to
maximize the recovery for the bond holders. As it currently
exists, there is a mall and a hotel that is unsaleable because
malls and hotels are managed differently.
Dr. Vos asked if the petitioner is the potential buyer.
i �
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 12 1991 PAGE 12
Mr. Ring stated this is correct.
Ms. Savage stated there is no information about what is going to
be done. Is there a proposed buyer for the mall?
Mr. Ring stated the mall is being �anaged by Towle Real Estate and
is being offered for sa1e.
Ms. Savage asked what the status is of the hotel.
Mr. Ring stated Marquette, as trustee, is currently negotiating
with Milestone Hotel for the sale of the hotel portion. This
variance and lot split is a condition of the sale.
Mr. Bliss asked if the variance is to reduce the lot line to the
north.
Ms. McPherson stated that usually what happens when there is a lot
line between two buildings, there would technically be 30 feet
between the buildings. In approving a zero lot line, they are
saying that buildings can exist at the lot line.
MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Dr. Vos, to close the public
hearing.
QPON A VOICB VOTE� ALL VOTING AYL, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARSD THE
MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PIIBLIC BEARING CLOSED AT 8:30 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the lot split and plat will be heard by the
Planning Commission on March 13. Therefore, the Planning
Commission will be informed verbally of the Appeals Commission's
action.
Dr. Vos stated this is an existing condition which is the biggest
hardship you can get. To deny it would be to deny a solution to
the problem.
Mr. Kuechle stated he concurred. This should be tied to the lot
split, so that if the lot split is not approved, the variance is
not approved.
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Dr. Vos, to approve variance
request, VAR #91-04, per Section 205.15.03.C.(2) of the Fridley
City Code to reduce the side yard setback from 15 feet to 0 feet
for proposed Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Skywood Mall Addition, with the
following stipulation:
1. The variance shall be granted in conjunction with the
granting of the lot split request.
i '
APP$ALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 12. 1992 PAGE 13
IIPON A VOICE 40TE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Ms. McPherson stated a�emo was included in the agenda packet
summarizing action taken on requests the Commissian previously
acted upon.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Dr. Vos, to adjourn the
meeting.
IIPON A VOTCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE MARCH 12, 1991, APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING
ADJOURNED AT 8:30 P.M.
Res ectfully submitted,
�
Lavonn Cooper ,
Recording Secretary
i �
r �
�
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Community Development Department
PL�!►NNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
April 4, 1991 � � •
William Burns, City Manager �•
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Special Use Permit, SP #90-18, by Humberto
Martinez
Attached please find the above-referenced staff report. The
special use permit request is to allow an increase in the allowable
lot coverage by 4�, from 40� to 44�, at 7786 Beech Street N.E. The
Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the
request to the City Council with one stipulation:
1. The petitianer shall sign a restrictive covenant limiting the
use of the addition to the warehouse.
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the request, as it does
not meet the standards outlined in Section 205.18.03.C.(4) of the
Fridley City Code.
MM/dn
M-91-239
5
�
�► STAFF REP4RT
APPEALS DATE
Cj�Of PL�1I�IIVG CO��$$I� DATE : December 12, 1990 ; March 27, 1991
F(���.� CITY COI�iCIL DATE : Apri1 s, 199I qUTHOR �/_d�
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION
SITE DATA
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONING
ADJACENT LAND USES
8� ZONING
UT�JTIES
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL IMPLICATiONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPATIBILITY WITH
ADJACENT USES 8� ZONWG
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENOATION
SP ��90-18
Humberto Martinez
To increase the allowable lot coverage by 4� from
40% to 44%.
7786 Beech Street N.E.
14,320 square feet
M-2, Heavy Industrial
M-2, Heavy Industrial to the south, north, west, and
east
Yes
Yes
Denial
Approval
�
�_
i
i
—�
/
SP ��90-18
Humberto Martinez
�Ml� K A COMNLII�ON Of �«OS IS .
T. 30, R. 2 ,�. ,�� � ,� ,�• �,�� �
dilC(f AffEC7IMG INE AlEA y10WN
TM6 ORAWING K i01E USED uv"� ;�q
REfElEWGE I!Y►pjg A�,�p �� ���Y
FR/OLEY A � �� f�. ,H. ,,:_-
� ��� ��. �,.►.,.-.�
�� 53903
�.
� �,
�r�,.
• � \
�
. .a
�•
;�����i�����
►�s����.�w�
��
��
�.
E. I/I. COiM'FR �
iEG!
N
����1
\,
1,
f
I
�� - �. - . �ij e� --a-1 �--'-- ;
t
`�-�=--- - �y � i� � .
:�`=-__-�\ =�—�aig n� I��
� � y -- ,�. .-� � I I k
-) i �.J. �
..i `:1 � � � �nI
� ��`� 1 I
, � ,
;
- i =' � ,�:. I I I
;, ,tl . . . � i `S. � � .�� I
� � '
�:� . - I� . � � � � � � �
� �t� i. 7 �l_ - 1 I �
s •{ �+� - .T_ a- _ i .i. r- i'F _-� a I , .. ... .. , .. . . _� �L �
,� ' �,� . � I T \_ ��
� . �r � �: 1.3 � � e ' / ' 7 � .'17�(�j1�pj� I S� N .+j. �s ' f J• �� . . . . 7 � , — - ' � � �\ ; �
T;�t' ��1� •�i: I I � � I _i� �'. � / �� . . _�� �
1�����������J _���-�� _� ��
d .y \
`w >,y.�. r � �+
ARS N• �� H .�' " il = =i:c �i ,ii = �� `� icn.i• �i,,
I� � � � - 1 � �* � � i :.2 i F ��/> . °'°P . k- i �i7 ♦ ` 2 �N � -
.. / �li% � . - � �3 e - . . . . 3 . W ' /B � ) ;tr% W iF ° ' yWj ` iE « � J r �
� '�,� O . .. � . . � ' 'I : �'`� �. I- /9 '.4' i /9 �_.+ t .y • %f �
��� . . � � . J. . �. ;�, r a zc --su�a zc�•� ,£�
�� . . 2. , . . G i�' � 6 :-I� _ 11.s • . .
�� ,t � -+• M' 1I 1."� - •-�'•
. � / ,.� ��s, . . . .: � P�— —f!: i f � ?� ..f Cit .i
B� 1� � 9 • 7� , 9 rl 14 , ' 9 EJ +
»�, MEAD ��. RUN ° � � , > zs •. . ;� zt, � ,� ,�f � , ,o
��• . `•• � � ,��. , Q ,�: r; �� . .;, z� „W
,3 ' \:` � Y . � �I ST :i1 : � C 1 0 �
��`'" �,`� . ' � � . 1 V :f'i�;4 (�F'v3 � IE .- 'i3 Oi' n ' :F / i3
\ � . . z.`Ig // �F9 �iI N- 19 '.r
�� .7�(..` 4. ♦- �. .. ' � . � �� yl o . ' : K .� • « :� .� .
n. 96. '� \ /ST ADD. '�Z TeTM..� _ N� i N.E.
� r.�: �• �. �e.. . , . a .�
• (/), �re. �.\ . . _ — _�__.. . � ; /�� J � �.i6�. ;i � � .O�- . � .
� � _ ..` i� .1�
r �i� 2
� r • I`.�rA \ \ -� _�_ _ .n .3 ' W , if. ^'i •�iB 3
! � � , :!"I j � • . �* � � • N). .y 4 e, ..iy9 .�
j: �,' J'. �y, '` ' � '�`; � O �. .- IG . �.S ,.ri,IG J
(���,� „" �•Py,'..• ;. � � e � �� �. � �A� 47 Pi i ' �7�. f.
��- zz• 1Z'
✓'. � � � , `M � `C°�'= � . PEARS ""_ .. ' _ . � r v . es . • E ,�•1j . f
� O,k, � :Y� � • � L �� � I 9 � W 1/ � 9 � 1/ � 9
i�' O ' �\ . Y � ' .'' .-\ O �r Wt � .'J � ..:� � 1JA"�i /O
�. .�� •��OQ• •'�' �n. i,�. � \2N0;,� _ '\ , O `I` �IL'''_� �' .i�}O: W ?F� ,}i•
} ��-P ',: -•��� °+ � ADD. •' . ;.
• `. � ;7i' ����. \ � � [s {(
�: `-� �i .� l.-. x::: ��,(54��, ` i - - �'
COqNEN ''�✓) ' + � 'E• NfR
.J �• •'1.�'� SE�;;�n -.
43 �' 44 �; =�;,.
8 � µ..;;.
,�''�:;:: �'�z;-:;: - -
�: _ 5B
L
OCATION MAP
���
�
■ tt'Irs: •�
V
t� 0 1� /
� i
, ► 1,
� �
�; `� ��:�e
E a�.
:
SP 4�90-18
Humberto Martine
� TTTI't . . .
//J/
r 7
W
�
res
0
�
�_
.
.
�.1 :!. •'
• � i'?
�.
���a���• Z
• r • • p
i�' 139 ���� �
. • �y�,�►' • ;, 2
'•�,� . .�•�� >
� • • � • • , �
•. •. •.�7
� �'3r1L f/Adl� : �
;��
5C ZnNIN[� M � p
I
Staff Report
SP �90-18, Humberto Martinez
Page 2
Rec�uest
The petitioner, Humberto Martinez, is requesting that a special use
permit be granted to increase the allowable lot coverage by 10�,
from 40� to 50� maximum. This would allow Mr. Martinez to
construct a 3,500 square foot addition to his existing building
located on Lots 1 through 5, Block 6, Onaway Addition, the same
being 7786 Beech Street N.E.
The petitioner has also applied for several variances in order to
construct the addition which the Appeals Commission recommended
denial of to the City Council.
Site
Located on the property is a two story single family dwelling unit
which is attached to a concrete block building which is used as an
assembly and warehouse facility. To the rear and side of the
property is a fenced storage area, which the petitioner is
proposing to enclose. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial
as are the surrounding properties to the north, south, east, and
west.
Analysis
The City Council recently adopted Section 205.18.03.C.(4) which
would allow a 10� increase in lot coverage with a special use
permit. The code section sets forth two standards which should be
evaluated prior to the issuance of a special use permit:
1. For existing developed properties, the total amount of
existing hardsurface areas should be evaluated to determine
whether a reduction in the total building and parking coverage
can be achieved. In this particular request, there would not
be a reduction in building and parking coverage. The
petitioner is proposing to increase the lot coverage by 10�
and the total amount of green area available on the site would
be reduced.
2. The petitioner shall prove that all other ordinance
requirements are met, including but not limited to, parking,
storm water management, and landscaping.
Currently, the use of the building requires seven parking spaces
based on the various parking ratios outlined in the City's zoning
code. However, if the use should change and the amount of
manufacturing square footage increases, the property would not be
able to provide parking for more than ten cars if the proposed
addition is constructed. In addition to lack of available parking
5D
Staff Report
SP #90-18, Humberto Martinez
Page 3
area, the amount of green space which remains would not be adequate
to provide area for storm water retention or detention basins, and
would decrease the amount of area that water would be able to
infiltrate into the soil. There is also currently little area on
the site for landscaping and green space.
Recommendation and Stipulations for December 12. 1990
As the property would not fulfill the standards outlined in Section
205.18.3.C.(4).(a-b), staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend denial of the request to increase the allowable lot
coverage by 10�, from 40$ to 50� to the City Council.
Revised Request
Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, the petitioner has
submitted a new site plan which reduces the maximum lot coverage
from 50� to 44�. The petitioner still needs a variance to reduce
the side yard setback from 20 feet to 0 feet.
Though this request has less of an impact on the site than the
original request, there is still the possibility that this request
would be over-building the site. The proposed expansion would
maintain a 32 foot rear yard setback, where a drainage/retention
pond could be maintained. However, if the use of the building
changed to primarily manufacturing, this same area would need to
be used to provide additional parking.
Recommendation
The site with the new proposal would not meet all the standards
outlined in Section 205.18.03.C.(4)(a-b). Staff recommends that
the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to increase
the allowable lot coverage from 40� to 44� to the City Council.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of
the request to the City Council with the following stipulation:
1. The petitioner shall sign a restrictive cavenant limiting the
use of the addition to the warehouse.
Staff Report Update
The Planning Commission directed staff to research the parking and
drainage issues further. The parking needs for specific uses are
as follows:
5E
Staff Report
SP #90-18, Humberto Martinez
Page 4
Square Feet Warehouse Manufacturinq Office
Existing: 4,860 2.43 12.15 19.44
Addition: 1,440 .72 3.6 5.76
Total 6,300 3.15 15.75 25.20
If the building were to change use to manufacturing, 16 spaces
would be required. The site could only provide 13 spaces.
Storm water would either collect in the southwest corner of the
property if the rear yard remained unpaved, or would flow into the
78th Avenue if it were paved. The storm water system would then
dispose of the runoff.
Cit� Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the request as it does
not meet all the standards outlined in Section 205.18.03.C.(4).(a-
b) .
5F
i
r . f
. �.
. . � . . . ..: � - - - - - ---
� �.
! � � ��� �� ' �� � .r ' ..�r �r- �� ' �.r -
' ! �
I
; � �.ro ,� r�� ,. ,
, �,
, i �� .�,�
; I�� �
I
� ,M .
i .
' , ��
; �
� �n �
m
� I �
, ; ' �
, � I . ���-;
; �� �:�
� � .� _ � -�,;
� -�. --
, ;
� �� �
� { �
� N
f �
� — -
I
U�
m
1 �
. � �
, � �_
.
� .
. �, � _-- ��
�,IL, �„
r
, ;c�
a
' � T
T
•
� � J �G � 1 �-
,.
,�.
SP 4�90-18
Humberto Martinez
t
' __�
�. — � �
� .�.
f
m ���
� � � � -�
� 'v '
I _`,_
� �
�, '
� �
! �
� � �
r.-�!--�
,
�
I� : �
�
�
�
; � �
I ch
^� L�
1 �;
�
� ��
r
� � � 1.
, l_ .l.J
f (
i
�
� 1
; �
�
Ic�
m
�.
�
�
�
i
� - - --
�, �� � • � i _ �
. . ._ .. fi � _�� � .
�t'.�.(� t ��
17
r
. ■
. �.
�
'
,
ORIGINAL SITE PLAN
a�
�
c
a�
Q
t
�
ao
ti
�
C
�
f
0 �
m
� '
Z
�
�
Beech Street
i� -� � � �
-� m
�
w
�
�
�
�
ti
�
m� �
�
�
�
� m ,
� - � - ---- --. _ _ . _ . _ ---�
5H
�
�
�
,
i
�
z ���-
NEW SITE PLAN
���
� � � �= �c���,�
6431 �ITY AVENUE N.E.
F'RIDLEY, 1�T 55432
(612) 571-3450
�� i� iii �� �: •� n a � a.� . �i� ci
BP�L USE PE[t�T AFPZ.IC�iTIOId Ft3RNi
PRDPIIn.'Y II��1 - site plan z�equired,..for suba►ittals: see attac�ed
'eq ..
1�dres.s: ���� �J?.,Q,�.OL ���Y��e�"' - � ; - � � � �
�,. . �,: �: _, . . ..� ... .. .
• .. , � . �.. .. .
I�agdl descs'lj7tlOri: _ � - c:
I,at � B1ocJt �.0 ; Tract/Ad�dit3.ori �v�a.�,J� Y-,f�ddv-�ta-,n,
C�.irrnnt zoning: i�-'�� 1
Reason for s�pecial use p
Section of City Qode: �c
FEE dWl�t II��O�TI�J
(�ntract Purchasers: Fee Owners naast sign thi.s form prior:to Prooessix�g)
N�1ME �v w.��t1� �1�G r� v` --t_
AD�S `1-1 ��o - t3Qe.c�l. �- �'�
SS�k�Z
r. r• -�
DAyTIl� pFi�IE S'"i t� 2ov
, : DATE l �-- 1 �f �-�t ��
, >.. , f.;,, ; , _.
PETITI�it II�1E�Oi2MATI�1 �` � .
sr .� ,
N�ME -�7v-.�� � �-' .. . ��
AD�S , _
, . .
; � ; . < �� : L1AY'rIl� PHONE � � . � `-
:; .., , . ,:
SIC3�ZURE . - ��
......r.r.r... ....., _.......::..,...� .r.r...............,..,......
Fee: $200.00 ' �C . , . .
�, �$100. 00 � �for residerit].a1 seoor�d aoc�essoly buildi.ngs
�t� sp #����� 9��— l8 �� �� # � �.� ��.�`� 3 � �
Application reoeived by: i���D�t,da,r( � :
srheaul�a Planning �►issiom aate: Jv I Z•90
Scheduled City �nuicil date:
5i
��
T
i
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBLR 12� 1990
CALL TO ORDER'
Chairperson Betzold called the December
Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL•
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Don Betzold, Dean Saba,
Diane Savage, Paul Dah�
Dave Kondrick, Conni� Modig
12,� 1990, Planning
Sherek,
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Pla ing Coordinator
Michele McPherso , Planning Assistant
Iiumberto Martin z, 7786 Beech Street N.E.
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 4 990 P NG CO SS O MI T S:
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seco ed by Mr. Dahlberq, to approve the
November 14, 1990, Plannin Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTS, ALL OTING
THE MOTION CARRIED IINAN OIISLY.
1.
2.
AYE, CHAIRPERSON B$TZOLD DECI,ARED
PUSLIC HEAKING: CVI�151ur:ttA'1'1v1v c�r- A �vri��� � r� ��-�� y=
CRYSTEEL TRUCK UIPMENT:
To rezone that part of the east 225 feet of the west 475 feet
of the north alf of the northeast quarter of the southwest
quarter of ction 12, T-30, R-24, Anoka County, Minnesota,
lying north of the south 405.60 feet of said north half of the
northeast arter of the southwest quarter, from M-1, Light
Industri , to C-2, General Business, the same being 1130 -
73rd Av ue N.E.
yV� OY �.tCi.711'+r+L lnvt.i� r+ vira•aLa�i.
Per Section 205.17.01.C.(11) of the Fridley City Code, to
al ow exterior storage of materials and equipment on that part
o the east 225 feet of the west 475 feet of the north half
f the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section
12, T-30, R-24, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying north of the
south 405.60 feet of said north half of the northeast quarter
of the southwest quarter, the same being 1130 - 73rd Avenue
N.E.
5J
Ms. Dacy stated that the petitioner has ested that these
two items be tabled until January , 991.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, se ded by Mr. Saba, to table rezoning
request, ZOA �90-0 nd special use permit request, SP #90-
19, by Crystee ruck Equipment until January 9, 1991.
IIPON OICE VOTE; ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
D RED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMDIISLY.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP
#90-18, BY HUMBERTO MARTINEZ:
Per Section 205.18.03.C. (4) of the Fridley City Code, to allow
the lot coverage to be increased from 40$ maximum to 50�
maximum, on Lots 1 through 5, Block 6, Onaway Addition,.
generally located at 7786 Beech Street N.E.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Savage, to waive the
reading of the public hearing notice and open the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC BEARING OPEN AT
7:35 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is requesting a lot
coverage increase from 40� maximum to 50� maximum. This
increase would allow the petitioner to construct a 3,500 sq.
ft. addition onto the existing building. The property is
zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the properties surrounding
this property.
Ms. McPherson stated a two story single family dwelling unit
is located on the property. This dwelling unit is attached
to a concrete block building which serves as a warehousing
and assembly facility for Mr. Martinez' business, which is
Food Process Control. An existing fenced outdoor storage
located to the rear and side yards is where the petitioner is
requesting to construct the addition.
Ms. McPherson stated the City Council recently adopted an
ordinance amendment which would allow a 10� increase in lot
coverage in industrial districts with a special use permit.
There are two standards that need to be evaluated prior to
the issuance of a special use germit. Those standards are:
1. For existing developed properties, the total amount
of existing hard surface areas should be evaluated
to determine whether a reduction in the total
building and parking coverage can be achieved. In
this particular request, there would not be a
reduction in building and parking coverage. The
r� ►�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 12. 1990 PAGE 3
petitioner is proposing to increase the lot coverage
by 10� and the total amount of green area available
on the site would be reduced.
2. The petitioner shall prove that all other ordinance
requirements are met including, but not limited to,
parking, stona water management, and landscaping.-
Ms. McPherson stated that the building currently requires 6.89
parking spaces based on the warehousing and manufacturing ratios
outlined in the M-2 district regulations. However, there is always
the chance that this particular use could change and a use higher
in manufacturing or office space than warehousing spac� could
change the required amount of parking needed for this property.
Currently, there is an area for approximately 10 cars to park on
the driveway which fronts Beech Street. However, if more than 10
spaces were required by the ordinance, there would not be adequate
area with the proposed addition for those additional spaces. In
addition, the proposed addition would greatly reduce the green area
or open space available on site which would be normally used for
storm water detention and area for water to infiltrate the
surrounding soil. As this building exists, there is little or no
area for landscaping and green space. .
Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending that the Planning
Commission recommend denial of this special use permit as the
request would not meet the standards outlined under Section
208.18.03.C.(4).(a-b) of �the Zoning Code to allow a 10� increase
in the maximum lot coverage.
Mr. Dahlberg stated asked if staff has looked at this request from
the standpoint of a lesser increase in maximum lot coverage so that
if the Commission recommends denial, would the petitioner still
have the ability to potentially add onto this property?
Ms. McPherson stated that currently the building does not meet the
40% lot coverage. The petitioner could add about 1,900 sq. ft. to
increase the lot coverage to 40� without a specia7. use permit.
Staff has not discussed that option with the petitioner.
Ms. McPherson stated that in order for the petitioner to expand
the building to the 50� lot coverage as requested, the petitioner
did go to the Appeals Commission for several variances to reduce
the side and rear yard building setbacks. The Appeals Commission
did recommend denial of those particular variances to the City
Council. Even though she had not done a specific analysis, the
1, 900 sq. ft. addition to come to the 40� lot coverage may also
require some type of variances.
Mr. Humberto Martinez stated he is presenting his request to expand
his building because he needs to get the materials needed for his
business inside. These materials which are used in the processing
5L
PLANNING GOMMIBSION MEETING, DECEMBER 12. 1990 PAGE 4
plants he services are relatively expensive, and these materials
have been stolen from the storage area, even though it is fenced.
Mr. Martinez stated this is a very old section of Fridley, and the
lot sizes do not and cannot conform with the existing codes. His
property was originally two lots. His neighbor to the south has
only about 9,600 square feet or 30� of the lot remaining in open
space. This neighbor has also built right up to the lot line. He
is proposing to build 8 feet from the lot line.
Mr. Martinez stated his addition is not going to cause any parking
problems. He will have adequate parking for his business. There
will be adequate space for fire trucks to access the building.
Most importantly, he needs to save his business from these thefts.
Mr. Betzold stated that if this special use permit is granted and
this addition is added to the building to accommodate Mr. Martinez'
present business, it might be very difficult for Mr. Martinez to
sell the building in the future, because there might not be enough
parking spaces for a change in use of the building. He asked Mr.
Martinez if he realized that he could be stuck with a building that
he could not sell.
Mr. Martinez stated he understood that. Any potential buyers would
have to see that there are limitations on the use of this building.
He purchased this building four years ago and does not plan any
change in the use of the building.
Ms. Dacy stated the Onaway Addition has been pl.atted since 1911.
A number of the buildings in this area were constructed in the late
1950's and 1960's. For the Stock Roofing special use permit
request that the Planning Commission evaluated last summer, staff
did an analysis for the petitioner on the number of variances
granted just in this particular area. Setback variances have been
granted for almost every property; and, as Mr. Martinez said, a
number of the buildings in this area have been built to the zero
lot line.
Ms. Savage stated there are alternatives to controlling theft in
outdoor storage areas. One way is to install a type of moving
alarm system. If the petitioner was able to control the problem
of theft, would he be able to continue keeping the materials
outside?
Mr. Martinez stated an alarm system is certainly something to
consider; however, in the wintertime, these materials freeze. He
has been renting trailers to keep some of these materials inside.
Mr. Martinez stated that if he is kept to the setback restrictions
and lot coverage, he would only be able to add about an 8 foot
strip to the rear and sides of his building. That is not very
feasible, because of the high cost of construction.
5M
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. DECBMBER 12. 1990 PAGE 5
Ms. McPherson stated Mr. Martinez could construct a 1,951 square
foot addition to bring the building to 40� lot coverage. This is
a little more than 1/2 of the si2e proposed by Mr. Martinez.
However, variances may still be needed.
Mr. Dahlberg asked Mr. Martinez that if he is allowed to build an
additional 1,951 square feet (40� lot coverage) and is able to get
the necessary variances, would that size an addition be sufficient
to meet his needs?
Mr. Martinez stated he has not given it much thought. He stated
he is definitely willing to meet with staff and find out what is
the maximum size addition he can build that is economically
feasible.
Mr. Saba asked Mr. Martinez if he has considered off-site storage.
Mr. Martinez stated he has had to store materials off-site in the
past, and it is not good for his business. The reason he purchased
this building is so that he could have all his materials stored on-
site. With his type of business, when the customers need parts,
he needs to access those parts immediately.
Mr. Saba stated that sometimes it is necessary for a business that
has limited space to either look at off-site storage of some
inventory or look into purchasing another building. He stated the
City would like to accommodate Mr. Martinez as much as possible,
but they also want to keep properties, even properties in the older
sections of the City, as close to meeting codes as possible.
Mr. Betzold stated he agreed with Mr. Saba. He definitely had a
problem with going to 50$ lot coverage.
Mr. Martinez stated he is willing to rework his plans with staff
and see if there is some reasonable alternative. However, he did
have some questions about other buildings in the area that have
been allowed to build to zero lot line and have gotten variances
for setbacks and lot coverage.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to table special use
permit, SP #90-18, by Humberto Martinez, to allow the petitioner
time to work with staff on expansion alternatives.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED QNANIMOIISLY.
4. RECEIVE THE OCTOBER 16 1990 ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY AND ENERGY
COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded . Saba, to receive the
October 16, 1990, Environment uality and Energy Commission
minutes. -
�
/
5N
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 12. 1990 PAGE 5
QPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED T8E MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
5.
C'�
7.
8.
MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Sherelt, seconded by Mr. :
November 1, 1990, Human Resources Commi�
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AY ,
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOII LY.
COMMISSION MINLTTES:
MOTION by Mr. Saba,.seconded
November 7, 1990, Environment
minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRI
�Sa, to receive the
ion minutes.
CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
�Mr. Dahlberg, to receive the
Quality and Energy Commission
�TING AYE, CHATRPERSON BETZOLD
IINANIMOIISLY.
AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Savage seconded by Ms. Sherek, to receive the
November 8, 1990, H sing & Redevelopment Authority minutes.
IIPON A V4ICE VO , ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOT N CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY.
MOTION by Ms� Savage, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the
December 4, 990, Appeals Commission minutes.
IIPON A VO,�CE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED 7Y�iE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by . Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Savage, to adjourn the
meeting. pon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Betzold
declared e motion carried and the December 12, 1990, Planning
Commissi adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Re�pect,�ully sul�mitted,
Ly�h}� Saba �
Reco�rding Secretary
50
��
, ■
�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINC:� MARCH 27, 1991
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Betzold called the March 27, 1991,
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. �
ROLL CALL:
ing Commission
Members Present: Don Betzold, Dean S a, Sue Sherek, Diane Savage,
Connie Modiq, Br Sielaff
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Dave
Barbara cy, Community Development Director
Michele cPherson, Planning Assistant
Humbe o Martinez, 7786 Beeeh Street N.E.
Dav' McCain, 689 Fairmont Street N.E.
R dall Olchefske, Riverside Car Wash
� teve Bruns, 1900 Silver Lake Road, New Brighton
MoTION by/Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the March
13, 19 � Planning Commission minutes as written.
!'A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPEIt30N BETZOLD DLCLARED
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
1. CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP #90-18 BY HUMBERTO
MAR.TINEZ, PER SECTION 205.18.03.C.(4) OF THE FRIDLEY CITY
CODE, TO ALLOW THE LOT COVERAGE TO BE INCREASED FROM 40�
MAXIMUM TO 44� MAXIMUM ON LOTS 1 THROUGH 5 BLOCK 6 ONAWAY
ADD_I_TION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7786 BEECH STREET N E:
(Tabled December 12, 1990 - Public Hearing open)
MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to remove
Special Use Permit, SP #90-18, from the table.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Ms. McPherson stated the property is located at the southwest
corner of 78th Avenue and Beech Street in the Onaway Addition.
The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the
properties to the north, south, east, and west.
5P
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MARCH 27. 1991 PAGE 2
Ms. McPherson stated the request is to increase the maximum
lot coverage from 40� to 44� which has been revised from the
original request to increase the lot coverage from 40� to 50�.
On December 12, 1990, when the Planning Commissian reviewed
this request, the proposed e�cpansion was both to the south and
also to the west, which would have required a reduction in the
side yards from 20 and 25 feet to 8 feet. The petitioner has
revised the request to expand the building only to the south
property line. The petitioner has also requested a variance
to reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 0 feet. On
March 26, 1991, the Appeals Commission voted to recommend to
the City Council approval of the variance request to reduce
the side yard setback from 20 feet to 2 feet for this
particular proposal.
Ms. McPherson stated that in the industrial section of the
Zoning Code, Section 205.18.03.C.(4), there are two standards
that must be met before a special use permit can be granted
to allow the lot coverage to be increased over 40�. While the
new request only increases the lot coverage to 44$, there are
still questions as to whether or not the site would be able
to meet the detention and retention requirements and
additional parking requirements, should the primary use of the
faciZity change from the current warehouse use to either
manufacturing or office and manufacturing. It is possibie
that the area to the rear of the building which the petitioner
is reserving could hold an additional six parking spaces;
however, there would then be less area for detention of
stormwater as per the City's requirements.
Ms. McPherson stated staff still believes the proposed request
would not meet a11 the standards in the Zoning Code and,
therefore, recommends that the Planning Commission recommend
to the City Council denial of the request to increase the
allowable lot coverage from 40$ to 44$.
Mr. Martinez stated that at the December 12, 1990, Planning
Commission meeting, the Commissioners suggested that he come
up with a compromise, and the reduction in lot coverage from
50� to 44$ is the compromise he is requesting. He is just
asking that he be allowed to expand his business. He wanted
to emphasize again that this is an old section of Fridley in
which a lot of the buildings are not in compliance with
existing codes. At the time many buildings were built, the
codes did not exist.
Mr. Betzold asked Mr. Martinez if this is the minimum
expansion he can do and still make it economically feasible.
Mr. Martinez stated that is correct.
5Q
s
PLANNING COMMIBSION MEETING� MARCH 27, 1991 PAGB 3
Ms. Savage stated that at the Appeals Commission, she was very
reluctant to vote in favor of the variance request. She
stated Mr. Martinez has made an attempt to camply with the
Code. He has reduced the size of his addition considerably,
and has provided some space at the rear of the building for
parking that was not there in the original proposal. Her
biggest concern is that there is a lot of nonconformity in
this area, but that doesn't mean they should continue that
nonconformity.
Mr. Martinez stated the area to the rear of the building will
be left grassy or gravel for a parking lot, so there should
be no additional drainage problems. He stated 40$ lot
coverage is allowed, and he is only asking for 44�. Some
buildings in this area have 60� lot coverage and more.
Mr. Betzold stated he is not very comfortable making a
decision on this special use permit until the Commission knows
more about whether there is sufficient or insufficient area
for water retention.
Ms. McPherson stated she believed that if the rear of the
property is not needed for parking, there is adequate area to
create a detention facility. The issue rises when the
building changes owners and changes use, and then there is a
conflict over where the extra spaces are created and where
the detention facility is maintain�d at the same time.
Mr. Sielaff asked about the nonconformity in this area.
Ms. Dacy stated that at least 80� of the properties in the
Onaway Addition have been granted some type of variances.
The Onaway Addition was platted in the earl.y 1900's, and the
lot sizes are less than 20,000 sq. ft. There is no way for
the properties to meet the standards for the M-2 district
which is set up for 1 1/2 acre lots. A number of the
buildings were constructed in the early 1960's, some
constructed in the 1970's, and a lot of them have been issued
variances.
Ms. Savage stated Mr. Martinez' existing building is
nonconforming, and part of the variance request is to bring
the existing building into conformity. Staff recommended in
favor of that.
Ms. Modig stated that if the property changes use and there
are future parking problems, is there any way to prevent
future variance requests on that property?
Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission or the City
Council could not bind a future Council on a future variance
request. Anyone has the right to request a variance. At the
5R
PLANNING COMMIBSION ME$TING, MARCH 27, 1991 PAGE 4
December meeting, the Planning Commission discussed the
possibility of placing a covenant restriction against the
addition requirinq that the addition always be used as
warehouse space. There still is the possibility if the other
part of the building changes to a manufacturing use that
parking is going to be tighter, but now_there is the back
portion of the lot� to accommodate six additional spaces.
Before this item goes to City Council, staff wiZl analyze the
parking requirements. If the addition is reserved for storage
use only, the petitioner might be able to meet the parking
requirements. That would also give the petitioner some
flexibility in a resale.
Ms. Sherek stated another question is: Realistically, is
there a stormwater detention problem in this specific area of
the City? When she looked at the property in December, she
did not think that detention would be a problem and would not
be a nuisance to someone else. She would be in favor of
letting Mr. Martinez expand his building with the restriction
of the use on the expansion, but staff should make sure that
they are not facing any potential water problems with the
additional lot coverage.
Mr. Betzold stated he is uncomfortable passing this on to
Council without more infonaation on the water detention and
retention; however, if staff does find a problem, he would
like the special use permit to come back to Planning
Commission.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to close the
public hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PQBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT
7:55 P.M.
Mr. Saba stated he would be in favor of recommending approval
of the special use permit with a stipulation regarding the
covenant restriction on the addition and that the drainage
issue be reviewed for any potential problems. He stated Mr.
Martinez has done what the Planning Commission asked him to
which was to review his proposed plans and try to come np with
a compromise.
Ms. Sherek stated Mr. Martinez has made a reasonable attempt
to accommodate the Commission's and City's concerns, and the
Commission should make a reasonable attempt to accommodate
Mr. Martinez.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded Ms. Sherek, to recommend to City
Council approval of Special Use Permit, SP �90-18, by Humberto
Martinez, per Section 205.18.03.C.(4j of the Fridley City
5S
0
t
PLANNING COMMIBSION MEETING, MARCH 27, 1991 PAGS 5
2.
Code, to allow the lot coverage to be increased from 40�
maximum to 44� maximum on Lots 1 through 5, Block 6, Onaway
Addition, generally located at 7786 Beech Street N.E., with
the following stipulations:
1. A covenant restriction be placed on the property
that any future use of the expansion be for
warehouse use only.
2. If the City Engineering staff finds any major water
retention problems created by the parking situation,
then the special use permit will again be reviewed
by the Planning Commission.
IIPON A VOICB VOTS, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Ms. McPherson stated the variance request and special use
permit request will go to Council on April 8, 1991.
�
L10 iilllil v1V lAJTa� 1/�L V ISJ�IJ(:1� '
BEING 689 FAIRMONT STREET N E
MoTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Ms. Sh ek, to waive the
reading of the public hearing notice d open the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTS, ALL VOTING � CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT
8:00 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the s cial use permit request is to
allow the construction of addition to a single family home
in the CRP-2 Flood Fring District.� The property is zoned R-
l, Single Family Dwell' g, as are the properties to the north,
south, east, and wes . Currently located on the property is
a single family dwe ing unit and a 12 ft. by 20 ft. accessory
structure.
Ms. McPherso�
Commission
reduce th fr
propose add�
the ad tion.
�/ stated that on March 12, 1991, the Appeals
:commended approval of a variance request to
�nt yard setback from 35 feet to 24 feet for the
tion, with the exception of the garage area of
Ms. cPherson stated the proposed addition will include a two
c garage, two bedrooms, and a living area. The building
ill not have a basement, but will have a crawl space. This
5T
r �
�
I
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SIIBJECT:
Community Development Department
PI.��NNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
March 27, 1991 � �
William Burns, City Manager � �
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Variance Request, VAR #90-31, by Humberto Martinez
Attached is the above referenced staff report. The Appeals
Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval to the City
Council of the following variances to correct existing conditions
at 7786 Beech Street N.E.:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
To reduce the minimum lot area from 1 1/2 acres to 1/3
acre; : .
To reduce the required lot width from 150 feet to 88
feet;
To reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35
feet to 8 feet;
To reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
To reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 2 feet.
The Commission also recommended to the City Council approval of the
variance for a proposed addition:
1. To reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 2 feet.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the variance
requests for the existing conditions but deny the variance request
for the proposed addition.
MM:ls
M-91-214
�
�
�
C[TY OF
FRlDLEY
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION
STAFF REPURT
APPEALS DATE : March 26, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE
CITY COIAVCIL DATE: �pz;.l s, »9 i_
SITE DATA
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONING
ADJACENT LAND USES
& ZONING
UT�ff IES
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPATIBILITY WITH
ADJACENT USES � ZONpVG
ENVIRONMENTAL
GONSIDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSlON
RECOMMENDATION
� #90-31
Htm�berto Martinez
See public hearing notice
7786 Bee�rh Street N.E.
14,320 sq. ft.
N�-2, Heavy Industrial
Nf-2, Heavy Industrial to the N, S, E, & �d
Approval, partial
Denial, partial
. �
.�,T� ��
�
�
/t
f
J
VAR ��90-31
Humberto Martinez
�Ma K . :o.vuuar+ a aKO+eos .s
T. 30, R. 24 ,�.,�� �,�.� �,MY�
OI'HiCEf �ffERU/G 1NE �� yIOW!v
rws de.wa�w a ro u wtc u�r i.aQ
REfLRENC( MY/� µp �� �WMy
FR JO L E Y a��f fOR ANY .,: � �
� � . CURAUES IRMEM CbN/�';.'_•
41 53903
�A
f���������� ��������i�i�
� � �� � I
. .�.�����:��� � ���,�����
��������a���� ��������l�
� .� . �I
— +����� ���n�am�
S
2'
� �'r
\� s
.\
�
9
��
��.
�
� E. IN COAiYfi1
dEG l
�r -
. .. - ..-.�..,. .. � -
— =.�:7.«...Y --,i,,. �.v.� - ----
�� ,�=--- j 1 � �--- � --- � _�)
,. , i j j------�,� , " ;,
. i � �:� �
;� i:� ,
. , ��
� l It� :�i.,
. I � �.1 I �
; � �, t� � ,� ,
� � � ;:� �Iri '\ I,
� � \ ) j�i � )jt
r �'1 �'I �---------- /--�� , .
��_ ____-�= _= J� � � --a--� i----- -'s'
•y �._ ;��� nl
�.. i ��--'-�� i i +
i,,,� ; � � �
°;j '.�� � I I
,I i'. � '. ,t� l I 1
:,� � i i ► � i
;�� , , - i i i.
, �:� i� i
: f I�� � �� �'�; i� � i
� � .. .v. . .- , .. . . `'-!; ,� + T � ` i; .,
E� � i,' ' � �.
� _ ! i ��� I �
li�___—__--__—�� I ��—_a_—_�_—___T��
,.
i-�� _' : ��,s � i is�•� Ae ":� �s^ �iC, . .
'.\.. /ST � � � � � . .. - . Z � t r ,y�: r :'H � n `.;z .k- �s 2 . . � -
1 �.I�ii � � . � � _ 3 �. . ��it . � iB � � 3 •.Q% yWj iE :
�Y�� � . � . . . ; ♦�t � �/9 �i' t �i5 •I
.:, s a•� r� • • s p u s
�� . .�' P' . - � ,i � f� — t!;'� F�Y. �1' .�
ir�, �'" MEADG� �` � '' � . . 9 z. � `9
��- RUN �. k z�, ,,� :t;� ,�
,%. • �� �, . `.;� a r�: ;, �� . .,>
, � / .j ' �' � 't� �.z Z �rt
� - •�t�,'- �,� . � . . .� � �;. 't = �• :E'd�' d'1'3t SE. .'i.i
' . lr/;� �c.� � , . . `_ � - 19 • N ��f � i�
� � �� o. _i
>,, . �9'- � tST �• ADD. � -'Z 7 T � ENU£ .. ..
' �• \ :
i9, 'i �/�s •, ",,iE: .ti
e. � -- '— - ..
? i7 ?r2
°� � ' � �� r� , � \ - \ -� ,_�.�s— _ ` r .3 � � . � f n +.:��
�. � q i .�C M) �9 � ♦
'�/1���,�. " r'.p�;t :���� •tJ `�`.� :�' \\;. - �,�� _M) •�i
J...� ',� '.�� „ �� PEARS "°`� �° � _ •�. t = .::
• �•�+ ~ r� '� . . � L . �. � I ? , � W : t
r� � � � ��� � .\_ O :zWS � Z1
,'� r • �pQ' , �,,,: � � ,2N0 � � ' =� o ,. �,, ' z:
� jQ-� 'µ' � \�• \ \ - ' \, 1
; c. `�p , � � � :A;. � ,,., `:v �� QDD. ` y ".
R� �F` \ 't.. f�
��� �_ ri- i� - L'�w _��r,��;.��✓�. 1_ L
CORNfR •' "' , .�t ' � v " �i- . . . �. �..
.! • `^-
8 43
, ��: 44
-
..
0
W � if cv � � 3�h+
W
� :y .�,
►�y � 7C�t? �T: ,
If
�" 7 ��� .���
-�%E 3
�/%f �
�'1G S
,I�� 6r
zz . '
-�1i • �--
ze � s
� rsm: � �o
'i � ?F� . 1 ii
W � .t
� E _ '
SE� �'� " '
♦. . µ s�. ♦ _ _
.M . .w� _. �:� �
LOCATION MAP
.
�v�
� ,
♦
♦
♦
+1
, �
■ a �: �
t v
• 0 1�,% .
� , �.
k 1�
� �
�.J' .
��� ��e
' `: � .
a �`
VAR �� 90-31
Humberto Martinez
►� ...-• •-_-
�
/ d
�
Y�
O
Z
4
%
�
�
. J . � � � •
� � ' i' "':\
....�
.....'Z
l',�••�o
�39 '�'� �
f • �b�/�► • i �
����t'� •�s�� �
• • • d • • flG
\• • • � • ��7
• • • • • • �
� �w,iw.t.w.�
�\� "%�� �`�
%�� l//./ �,�
��� %���i. ���i
6C ZnNiN[� M�1
Staff Report
VAR #90-31, 7786 Beech Street N.E.
Page 2
A. STATED HARDSHIP:
"We need this variance to build an addition to our building
for storage purposes."
B. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Request
The petitioner, Humberto Martinez, is requesting the following
variances:
1. To reduce the required lot area from 1 1/2 acres (65,340
square feet) to 1/3 acre (14,320 square feet):
2. To reduce the required lot width from 150 feet to 89
feet;
3. To reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
4. To reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35
feet to 8 feet;
5. To reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet.
The variance request is for Lots 1-5, Block 6, Onaway
Addition, the same being 7786 Beech Street.
In addition, to the variances, the petitioner has applied for
a special use permit which will be heard by the Planning
Commission at their December 12, 1990, meeting to allow the
maximum lot coverage to be increased from 40� to 50�.
Site
The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the
properties to the east, west, north, and south. Located on
the site is a two-story single family home which has had
several additions to it to create warehouse and manufacturing
space for the Food Process & Control Corporation.
To the rear and side of the property is a fenced storage yard
which the petitioner is proposing to be enclosed and would
increase the total square footage of the builcling by 3, 518 sq.
ft.
6D
Staff Report
VAR #90-31, 7786 Beech Street N.E.
Page 3
Analysis
Section 205.18.03.A requires a lot area of not less than 1 1/2
acres for one main building.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide for
adequate parking, open landscaped areas, and to limit
congestion in industrial areas.
Section 205.18.03.B requires a lot width of 150 feet at the
required front setback.
Public purpose served by this requirement is provide an
adequately wide lot for access, separation from adjacent land
uses, and to limit congestion in industrial areas.
Lot Area and Lot Aidth
The property has been a parcel of record since 1911 when the
Onaway Addition was platted. The single family dwelling unit
was constructed in 1950 and the City adopted the zoning
classification of M-2, iieavy Industrial, for this property in
1958. While the lot does not meet the minimum requirements
for the M-2 industrial district for lot area and lot width,
to deny these variances to reduce the lot area and 1ot width
would render the property nonbuildable and would, therefore,
constitute a taking by the City.
Section 205.18.03.D.(2) requires two side yard setbacks, each
with a width of not less than 20 feet.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide
adequate open space areas around industrial structures for
aesthetic and fire-fighting purposes.
Section 205.18.03.D.(2).(b) requires a side yard setback of
35 feet where a side yard abuts a street of a corner lot.
Public purpose served by this requirement is maintain a higher
degree of traffic visibility and to reduce the "line of sight"
encroachment into the adjacent building's front yard.
Side and Rear Yard Setbacks
Of the three requested variances to reduce the side and rear
yard setbacks, two of the variances will be "new conditions"
created by the expansion.
6E
Staff Report
VAR #90-31, 7786 Beech Street N.E.
Page 4
The side yard setback from 35 feet to 8 feet on a side corner
is an existing condition which was created when the building
was expanded in the early 1970's. Staff reviewed the address
file and determined that no previous variances have been
granted to this property and, therefore, the Commission should
grant the variance to reduce the side yard setback on a corner
from 35 feet to 8 feet to bring the property into conformance
with the Zoning Code.
The proposed expansion will bring the building within 8 feet
of the side and rear lot lines. In addition to reducing the
side and rear yard setbacks, the petitioner will be increasing
the lot coverage to 50.9�. To allow such a large expansion
on this particular lot would eliminate any area for a storm
water detention or retention basin, would reduce the amount
of green area on the property, and would eliminate any
potential space for additional parking if the use changes from
its predominately warehouse use to a manufacturing and/or
office use. By maintaining the required setbacks, the
petitioner would eliminate the above conflicts.
section 205.18.05.D.(5).(a) requires all parking and hard
surface areas to be no closer than 20 feet from any street
right-of-way.
Public purpose served by this requirement is t
encroachment into neighboring sight lines and
aesthetically pleasing open areas adjacent to
of-ways.
Parkinq Setback
o limit visual
to allow for
public right-
As with the lot area and lot width variance requests, the
parking setback from the public right-of-way is also an
existing condition. The parking area is only an overly large
driveway with space to park 10 cars and does not meet the code
requirements for setbacks. The parking setback from the
public right-of-way from 78th Avenue is only 8 feet, whereas
the Code does require a setback of 20 feet. The parking area
is adequate for the existing use; however, if the use should
change to manufacturing and office use, the parking area would
not be adequate to meet the code requirements for those
particular uses.
Recommendation - December 4, 1990
Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend
approval of the following variances to acknowledge existing
conditions on the site:
� F
Staff Report
VAR #90-31, 7786 Beech Street N.E.
Page 5
1. To reduce the minimum lot area from 1 1/2 acre to 1/3
acre;
2. To reduce the required Iot width from 150 feet to 89
feet;
3. To redttce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35
feet to 8 feet;
4. To reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet.
These variances are the result of an existing condition and
granting them will bring the property into conformance with
the M-2, Heavy Industrial District, regulations.
Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial
of the following variances:
1. To reduce the side yard setback from 20 Peet to 8 feet;
2. To reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet.
Denying the variances would ensure that adequate area remains
for storm water detention, adequate separation between uses,
and area to provide off-street parking should the primary use
of the building change from warehousing to manufacturing and
office.
Appeals Commission Action - December 4, 1990
The Appeals Commission voted 2-1 to recommend, per staff's
recommendation, denial of the request to the City Council.
Revised Request
Section 205.18.03.D.(2) requires two side yard setbacks, each
with a width of not less than 20 feet.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide
adequate open space areas around industrial structures for
aesthetic and fire-fighting purposes.
Upon the Planning Commission's recommendation, the petitioner
has revised his request, reducing it to require only a side
yard variance from 20 feet to 0 feet (see attached site plan) .
The other existing conditions which required variances and
which the Appeals Commission voted to recommend approval to
the City Council remain the same.
6G
Staff Report
VAR #90-31, 7786 Beech Street N.E.
Page 6
The petitioner's new request will expand the building toward
the southern lot line, to a zero lot line. This expansion
maintains a 32 foot setback along the rear property line.
This area could then be used for drainage, storage, or
additional parking (6 spaces) should the use of the building
change.
Recommendation
While the petitioner's revised request has less impact on the
site, the site is being overbuilt. Currently, the building
is used primarily for warehouse space with some office space
and only 7 spaces are required, which can be accommodated by
the large driveway. However, if the use changed to
manufacturing, 15 spaces would be required, impacting the
areas to the rear which would be used for drainage, etc.
Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend to the
City Council denial of the request to reduce the side yard
setback from 20 feet to 0 feet. If the Commission chooses to
recommend.to the�City Council approval of the request, the
petitioner should have the adjacent property owner write a
letter acknowledging the existence of the zero lot line.
Appeals Commission Action - March 26, 1991
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval
of the variance request, to reduce the side yard setback for
the proposed addition from 20 feet to 2 feet to the City
Council
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the variances
to bring the existing conditions into conformance, but deny
the variance for the proposed addition.
L�
d
i
l
�
;
�
�
�
,;
�
;
�
►�
� 1
i
i
i
�
VAR �f 90-31
Humberto Martinez
. �
• �
\ ::;; -- - - -� .
�- - —
�
�
� �.�. _.... -.,... — — • _. ..... �... . _:: : '
I , . r
�:� :� --��,
i �" �
, • j�� • ' � + 7 '
1 � ' '.
� �c{ck-�1 o n � , � v �
t. . . �— , �
,
-�
,
.I I'' �
I �
� �� r
n
m
� 1 . . i 1 �..-=--�
� �x� �
. �. t , -�� : : �
i_:... � . e �
_
�
�, -- t �
�
j ; � F----�+
cn
� � � ^' �� .
N � �..
.�.' �� � ,
� - � :,-� , ,��.
� �
� r
� :
ti ��
, i'
�
�
V)
m
. 1 � �
�
b �
, o, � _._ _ r;
�� tt)
�
� �
��
' � T
l
•
,�; ��
� u
� _i c � �..
!
!
� ;
t
I
f �
�
�.
I
�
1
1 � �. .. �
., � ,�, � � >�--�- �
R
�/�:G.t/� � �� •
r�
n
�
r
�
ORIGINAL SITE PLAN
a�
�
_
>
Q
�
�
ao
ti
�
C
�---�
�
� �
�
�---� �
Z
�
�
��
w
�
�
�
c.a..�
1'tiJ
�+
VAR ��90-3 i
O
tA
Beech Street r
>
C � �
� pp _._"'__ _'. _ ._.. . -�
1
6J
;�
�
�
�
�
�
�
��
ca
—+a
I
I
�
1 � '
�
I
I
,
NEW SlTE PLAN
CT�'Y OF' FRIDS�Y
6431 t�iIVIIiSITY AVII�IUE N.E.
FRIDLEY, I�i 55432
(612) 571-3450
�� n in �� �' .� n a � a.� _ •n a
--�-�_ .....w..,�........
VARIAAIC.'E AP'PTaI(�TI0�1 1�DIi'�i
�..........,..... r...... r..
PtmPEttT�t II�TIo�I - site plan required for sti�bmittals: see attac�ed y.�.~
7�cldress: "1'3 8G F3 e.ec� g'� • i.1 E,
Legal de.scription:
Lat BtocJc Tract/Additi� l� � `310
Q1rre�t Zotlitlg: �"�. Squ�are footage/acr�eage ��'ti32 C.� ��'
Reason for vari�rx�e ar�d ha,��h;p: �.,���osV t�
Sectio� of City Cbde:
FEE aWI�It IPIIFiDit�ZZ�1 .--...�.��_..�___
(Oo�tract Pur�: Fee Own�xs meu.st sign this form prior to prooes.sir�g)
� �v�be�a �+cir���.az
�ss _ �t? g� P� Q�a.�c� � •
. r�
�rti�� �-�l � 5 5+�'3�- nAx�rn� Pxor� _ 5 7 i�2 00
�� c,►: , ,-
� ��i���►d
�-rrri� n��a�r -----� .�.___.....,�
� _ �G_w.,Q� -
p�DDRESS •
r. ►• �
I1�YTII�fE PHC)1VE _ 51 [(�: 2 U t7
n� t�t�j��
Fee: $100. 00 .�..,........�._._.� .._______...,...._..___�
$ 60.00 for residenti.al properties
Piermit VAR # _ ��_,�.Y,� R�oeipt � �
Application reoeived by: �-{�{�
Sc�eduled Appeals �iari date: l � -- � �(`�
Scheduled City �icil date: ��' �' � 7- �(�
6K
CITY OF FRIDLEY
APPEALS COMMISSION MEBTING� DECEMBBR 4� 1990
NA1�A��►�wq V N�►�NIY��M�►A�Mw�►S�MMM�NMM�Nw��M�NMM�YNNti���Y�►�M�►�w�►NM�Y�M�M��►��
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Savage called the December 4, 1990, Commission meeting
to order at 7:35 p.m..
�OLL CALL•
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Diane Savage, Ken Vos, Larry Kuechle
Cathy Smith
Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 30. 1990. APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Dr. Vos, to approve the October
30, 1990, Appeals Commission minutes as written.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTINt3 AYE, CHAIRPBRSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REOUE5T, VAR #90-31, BY HUMBERTO
MARTINEZ•
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Per Section 205.18.03.A of the Fridley City Code, to reduce
the required lot area from 1 1/2 acres (65,340 square feetj
to 1/3 acre (14,320 square feet);
Per Section 205.18.03.B of the Fridley City Code, to reduce
the required lot width from 150 feet to 89 feet;
Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2).(b) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the side yard �setback on a corner lot from 35 feet to
8 feet;
Per Section 205.18.p3.D.(3) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet;
Per Section 205.18.05.D.(5).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
6L
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, D$CEMB$R 4. 1990 PAGE 2
To allow the construction of an addition on Lots 1-5, Block 6,
Onaway Addition, the same being 7786 Beech Street N.E. (Food
Process & Control).
MOT ON by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Ruechle, to open the public
hearing. •
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYL, CBAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:37 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this property is located at the intersection
of 78th Avenue and Beech Street. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy
Industrial, as are the surrounding properties.
Ms. McPherson stated that located on the property is a two-story
single family home which has had several additions to it to create
a warehouse and manufacturing space for the Food Process and
Control Corporation. To the rear of the main house and storage
area is a fenced storage area that the petitioner is requesting
variances for in order to enclose that space and to aliow the
building to encroach within 8 feet of the property line.
Ms. McPherson stated that in addition to
petitioner has applied for"a special use
maximum lot coverage to increase from 40� to
district.
Lot Area and Lot Width Variances
the �variances, the
permit to allow the
50� in an industrial
Ms. McPherson stated this property has been a parcel of record
since 1911 when the Onaway Addition was originaZly platted. The
single family dwelling unit was constructed in 1950 and in 1958
the City adopted over that particular parcel the M-2, Heavy
Industrial, zoning classification. This property does not meet
the minimum standards for the M-2, Heavy Industrial district, for
lot width or lot area; however, to deny these two particular
variances would rende� the property nonbuildable and would
therefore constitute a taking by the City. Staff would recommend
that the Commission approve the two variances to reduce the lot
area and the lot width.
side and Rear Yard Setback Variances
Ms. McPherson stated there are several variances regarding side
and rear yard setbacks, two of which are created by the expansion.
The side yard setback to reduce the side yard from 35 feet to 8
feet on a corner lot is already an existing condition. Staff is
recommending the Commission recommend approval of this variance as
it is an existing condition and would bring the property into
conformance.
L�1 l'� I
APPEALS COMMIBSION MEETING. DECBMBER 4. 1990 PAGE 3
Ms. McPherson stated that the other two side yard and rear yard
variances occur if the petitioner is allowed to expand the
building. The expansion brings the building to within 8 feet of
the lot line at both the rear and side (southj property lines.
Granted, if the variances are denied, the proposed building
expansion would not be as large as the petitioner has requested;
however, there is still area for the petitioner to expand his
building for additional storage space. For these reasons, staff
is recommending that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of the
two variances to reduce the side yard and rear yard setbacks to 8
feet.
Ms. McPherson stated the last variance is to reduce the parking
setback from 20 feet to 8 feet. The parking area occurs at the
front of the building which is like a very larqe many car driveway
and which would allow approximately ten cars to park. The parking
area is an existing condition; and if it was built unc�er today's
code would require a setback of 20 feet from the lot line. Staff
is recommending that the Appeals Commission recommend approval of
this variance.
Ms. McPherson stated that in addition to the fact that the
petitioner has a second alternative for the building expansion,
the parking area is only adequate for the existing use. Should
the use change to manufacturing or office use in the future, the
parking area would not be adequate to meet the code requirements
for those particular uses. By denying the variances, the
Commission can ensure that there is adequate area for additional
parking, should the petitioner or some future tenant require more
parking.
Ms. McPherson stated that, in summary, staff recommends that the
Appeals Commission recommend approval of the following variances
to acknowledge existing conditions on the site:
1. To reduce the minimum lot area from 1 1/2 acre to 1/3
acre;
2.
3.
To reduce the required lot width from 150 feet to 89
feet;
To reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35
feet to 8 feet;
4. To reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet.
These variances are the result of an existing condition and
granting them will bring the property into conformance with
the M-2, Heavy Industrial District, regulations.
Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of
the following variances:
sN
�PPEALS COMMISSION ME$TING, DECEMBgR 4. 1990 PAQE 4
l. To reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
2. To reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet.
Denying the variances would ensure that adequate area remains
for storm water detention, adequate separation between uses,
and area to provide off-street parking should the primary use
of the building change from warehousing to manufacturing and
office. .
Mr. Kuechle asked staff how many parking spaces are required for
the building as it exists and how many parking spaces would be
required with the proposed expansion.
Ms. McPherson stated the existing building is approximately 5,000
sq. ft, of warehouse space; and with the additional space, the
petitioner would need 6.9 spaces total. The proposed expansion
would require 1.75 spaces.
Mr. Kuechle stated 8 feet from the lot line does not give much room
for fire access.
Dr. Vos stated the expansion as proposed by staff is less than half
Qf that proposed by the petitioner. It is•pretty narrow. •
Mr. Humberto Martinez stated that he has been in business in
Fridley since 1980. He is working in the design for food
processing plants such as General Mills, Pillsbury, Land 'O Lakes.
He has big business competition, and it has been a 10 year
struggle. He purchased this building 4 years ago, and he has made
repairs and tried to improve the appearance during the last four
years.
Mr. Martinez stated that people have been stealing materials out
of his storage yard, even though it is fenced. At the last
inventory check, he had lost $5,000 in 20 foot lonq.pipes. That
is.the reason he is presenting this plan to expand his building so
that he can store his materials inside. He is not planning any
other future manufacturing use or anything for this building. He
just needs to get his valuable materials inside.
Mr. Martinez stated this is a very old building and does not meet
any of the existing codes. The building to the south is built
right up to the lot line, and he is asking to build 8 feet from
the lot line. There is a parking lot between his building and the
building to the south, so there would be 30 feet between the
buildings and plenty of room for fire access.
Mr. Martinez stated it is not feasible to expand his building as
proposed by staff because of the high cost of building. He is
proposing an additional 3,000 sq. ft. If the variances are not
� .1
�PPEALB CQI�Q+IIBBION KEETING. DgCEMB$R 4. 1990 P�QE S
granted, he would be willing to neqotiate a reasonable area that
would be economically feasible to build.
Ms. Savage asked about the concern about storm water run-off.
Mr. Martinez stated he is not very familiar with that, but it could
be taken care of with the building permit to keep the run-off from
going onto other properties.
Ms. Dacy stated staff realizes this is a very small property;
however, the addition proposed by the petitioner is almost 50$ of
the lot. Although the petitioner has said he does not need any
additional area for parking or use the space as warehouse space,
he may not be here 5-10 years from now. Staff is concerned that
if the property changes use, there is a building that is basically
too big for the property and a problem has been created. Staff
understands that Mr. Martinez needs to expand, but they are just
adhering to the principles identified in the Code.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, lILL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER80N 8AVlilGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED l�ND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOBED 71T 8s10 P.M.
Mr. Kuechle stated this request is a d�ifficult one. On one hand,
he likes to see a business stay in Fridley; yet on.the other hand,
the water retention and parking concerns are not really addressed
in any meaningful way. Until there is a plan that takes care of
these two problems, he would recommend denial of the side yard and
rear yard variances. He would recommend approval of the lot area,
lot width, side yard setback on a corner lot, and the parking
setback variances--conditions that are existing.
Ms. Savage stated she shared some of these same feelings. They
certainly want to encourage businesses in Fridley, particularly
small businesses, but she is very concerned about storm water
retention and access for fire-fighting equipment. She also would
recommend denial of the side and rear yard variances. •
Dr. Vos stated variances 1, 2, 4, and 6 are already existing
conditions. So, essentially, by denying variances 3 and 5(side
yard and rear yard variances), they are denying the variances for
the proposed addition. Reqarding the storm water retention, the
property to the south appears to have no retention pond. This is
such a small lot compared to the lot to the south with a larger
building so he did not know how they could measure the impact of
water retention on other properties. If the variances are denied,
and the petitioner builds the smaller addition, he did not believe
there would be much impact. One possibility for water retention,
although not ideal, would be to contain water on the roof. The
only place he would see a problem with fire access would be on the
�•
APPEALB COMMI88ION MEETING, D$C$MHER 4, 2990 PAGE 6
west side if that property developed, because there is parking lot
abutting the property to the south. He stated he is going to
recommend approval of all the variances, as he did not see any
major problems.
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Dr. Vos, to recommend to City
Council approva2 of the following variances:
1. Per Section 205.18.03.A of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the required lot area from 1 1/2 acres (65,340
square feetj to 1/3 acre (14,320 square feet);
2. Per Section 205.18.03.B of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the required lot width from 150 feet to 89 feet;
3. Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2).(b) of the Fridley City Code,
to reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35
feet to 8 feet;
4. Per Section 205.18. 03. D. (5) .(aj of the Fridley City Code,
to reduce the par�Cing setback from 20 feet to 8 feet,
To allow the construction of an addition on Lots 1-5, Block 6,
Onaway Addition, the same being 7786 Beech Street N.E.
IIPON A VOiCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CIiAIRP8R80N SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
MOT ON by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Savage, to recommend to City
Council denial of the following variances:
1. Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
2. Per Section 205.18.03.D.(3) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet,
To allow the construction of an addition on Lots 1-5, Block 6,
Onaway Addition, the same being 7786 Beech Street N.E.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� SAVAGE AND RIIECHLE oOTING AYE� VOS VOTING NAY�
CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIBD BY A VOTE OF 2-1.
Ms. McPherson stated both the variance request and special use
permit request will go to the City Council on January 7, 1991.
CONSIDERATION OF 1991 MEETING ATES:
O ION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to approve the 1991
meeting dates as follows:
� �
CITY OF FRIDLEY
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 26, 1991
MMM�V NNM�YMM�►NMMNM�Y�YMMMMNMMMNNN�VMMMMMMAMMtiMNtiMM�YMMMMMMNIY�Y�YNMM�VNN�YMN
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Savage called the March 26, 1991, Appeals Commission
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL'
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Diane Savage, Larry Kuechle, Ken Vos,
Cathy Smith
Carol Beaulieu
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Humberto Martinez, 7786 Beech Street N.E.
APPROVAL OF MARCH 12, 1991, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve the
March 12, 1991, Appeals Commission minutes as written.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE RE4UEST. VAR #90-31, BY HUMBERTO
MARTINEZ•
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Per Section 205.18.03.A of the Fridley City Code, to reduce
the required lot area from 1 1/2 acres (65,340 square feet)
to 1/3 acre (14,080 square feet);
Per Section 205.18.03.B of the Fridley City Code, to reduce
the required lot width from 150 feet to 88 feet;
Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 2 feet and 0
feet;
Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2).(b) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35 feet to
8 feet;
Per Section 205.18.05.D.(5).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
6R
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 26, 1991 PAG� 2
To allow the construction of an addition on Lots 1-5, Block 6,
Onaway Addition, the same being 7786 Beech Street N.E., Fridley,
Minnesota (Food Process & Control).
MOTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to open the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� AI,L VOTING AYE� CBAIRPER80N SAVAGE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PQBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the property is located at the southwest
corner of the intersection of 78th Avenue and Beech Street. The
property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the other
properties to the north, south, east, and west.
Ms. McPherson stated that on December 4, 1990, the Appeals
Commission reviewed a variance request for an addition which
would create an addition to the south and west of the existing
building. At that time, staff recommended the Appeals Commission
recommend approval four of the six variances as they are existing
conditions on the site:
l. To reduce the minimum lot area from 1 1/2 acre to 1/3
acre;
2. To reduce the required lot width from 150 feet to 88
feet;
3. To reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35
feet to 8 feet;
4. To reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet.
Ms. McPherson stated staff recommended the Appeals Commission
recommend denial of the following variances which are related to
the addition itself:
1. To reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
2. To reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet.
Ms. McPherson stated that on December 4, 1990, the Appeals
Commission voted 2-1 to recommend, per staff's recommendation,
denial of the request to the City Council.
Ms. McPherson stated that since that time, the petitioner has
revised his request to only enlarge the building toward the south
property line, leaving the rear of the property open for any
future expansion of parking area, for the creation of a retention
pond, and any other code requirements the City may require.
6S
APPEALS COMMISSION MBETING, MARCH 26, 1991 PAGE 3
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed request will reduce the side
yard setback from 20 feet to 0 feet. The expansion will allow
the creation of six additional parking spaces at the rear of the
property, should the use of the building change from warehouse to
manufacturinq or from warehouse to office and manufacturing.
Ms. McPherson stated that while the petitioner's revised request
has less impact on the site, staff still feels the site is still
being overbuilt. There is still the concern about whether there
would be enough area for additional parking area to meet code
requirements if the use of the building changed. If the area in
the rear is converted mainly to parking, there will be less area
for the petitioner to meet drainage and retention requirements.
Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending that the Appeals
Commission recommend to the City Council denial of the variance
request to reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 0 feet.
However, if the Commission decides to recommend approval, staff
recommends that the petitioner should have the adjacent property
owner write a letter acknowledging the existence of the zero lot
line.
Ms. Smith asked how close the building to the south is to the lot
line. .
Ms. McPherson stated the adjacent property owner's parking area
and setback area are adjacent to the petitioner's proposed
addition, so there would be some distance between the buildings.
If the parking lot was built to code, there should be 5 feet of
grassy area between the parking area and the proposed expansion.
Dr. Vos asked if there are any fire code requirements for the
building for zero lot line.
Ms. McPherson stated the code allows zero lot lines for buildings
that share common walls. She believed the construction of this
addition would be such that the fire rating of the walls would be
in accardance with the building code and that would help prevent
the spread of any fires. With the previous proposal, the
openings in the south wall required a 3/4 hour fire rating, and
she would anticipate that since the new propasal is to the zero
lot line, no openings would be allowed in the building wall
itself. As far as access to the proposed expansion, there would
be fire access from the rear of the property.
Mr. Humberto Martinez stated that when he went before the
Planning Commission with his special use permit request, the
Planning Commission asked him if he would be willing to come up
with a compromise. He stated he has done that, and that is why
he is back with this new proposal.
6T
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 26, 1991 PAGE 4
Mr. Martinez stated there is a fire hydrant at the corner of his
building so there is good fire access. He stated there is about
4-5 feet of grassy area between his lot line and the parking area
of the neighbor to the south.
Mr. Martinez stated his neighbor is well aware of what he is
proposing and has expressed no objection. His neighbor cannot
expand anymore because he is already overbuilt in accordance with
City Code.
Mr. Martinez stated this is an old area of Fridley, not a modern
commercial or industrial district, and there are a lot of
nonconforming situations in this area. The owner who built the
original building could build right up to the lot line at that
time but decided, for some reason, to build up to 2 feet from the
lot line. Other buildings in the area are built right up to the
lot line. This is an unusual situation, and he hopes the
Contmission will look favorably upon his request for a variance to
allow him to e�and his business.
Ms. Savage stated that she had driven by the petitioner's
property that morning, and she noticed that there were quite a
few cars parked on the street.
Mr. Martinez stated that those cars do not belong to his
employees. Those are cars from neighboring businesses. All the
cars associated with his business are parked in his parking lot.
He does not receive customers at his business.
Ms. Savage stated that even though these are not cars associated
with the petitioner's business, parking zn this area is still a
concern if the use of the business should change.
Mr. Martinez stated that is why he is leaving room at the rear of
his building for additional parking.
Ms. Savage stated that if the area to the rear is used for
parking, there is still the concern expressed in the staff report
that there would not be roo� for water retention or drainage
purposes.
Mr. Martinez stated that if the area is not covered with
concrete, but is left grassy or with gravel, there wouldn't be a
problem and the drainage would be the sa�e as it is now.
Dr. Vos asked about the difference in lot coverage from the
original proposal to the present proposal.
Ms. McPherson stated the original proposal increased the lot
coverage to almost 51�, while the new proposal increases the lot
coverage to 440.
��
APP$ALS COMMISSION MESTING. MARCH 26, 1991 __PAGE_5
Dr. Vos asked why Mr. Martinez had left a gap between the
proposed addition and the original building.
Mr. Martinez stated that area would be a picnic area for his
employees.
Ms. Savage asked Mr. Martinez if the variance is denied, what
will he do?
Mr. Martinez stated that if the variance is denied, he will be
forced to start looking elsewhere to buy a building where he wi11
be allowed to expand his business.
Ms. Savage asked Mr. Martinez if he could design the addition in
such a way as to not need a variance.
Mr. Martinez stated he tried to do that before he came in for his
first request, but he did not see any way to add on what he needs
without a variance.
Mr. Kuechle asked Mr. Martinez if he would consider reducing the
building down to 2 feet from the lot line to bring it in line
with the existing building.
Mr. Martinez stated he did not think 2 feet would be much of a
problem.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOiCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:00 P.M.
Mr. Kuechle stated he would be willing to approve the variance at
2 feet instead of 0 feet. This would give a little space along
the building and the lot line. Anything less than that is really
denying the petitioner the ability to add on anything.
Dr. Vos stated he had voted in favor of the variances at the
December,4, 1990, meeting. He stated he agreed with Mr. Kueahle.
With the petitioner's liability, it would be to his advantage to
be off the lot line by 2 feet.
Ms. Smith stated she also agreed. There is no other alternative
for the petitioner to add on to his buildinq.
Ms. Savage stated she has struggled with this request. It
bothers her that nonconformity is being allowed to continue. She
stated the property is overbuilt, and she is concerned about
future owners of this property and the use of this building. She
stated Mr. Martinez has made an effort to reduce the expansion.
She did not like the zero lot line, but she is willing to go
6V
APPEALS COMMI88ION MLETiNG. MARCH 26, 1991 PAGE 6
along with the other commissioners in recommending approval of
the variance to 2 feet, even though she is not very comfortable
with this decision.
MOTiON by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend to
City Council approval of variance request, VAR #90-31, by
Humberto Martinez:
1. Per Section 205.18.03.A of the Fridley City Code, to reduce
the required lot area from 1 1/2 acres (65,340 square ieet)
to 1/3 acre (14,080 square feet);
2.
3.
4.
5.
Per Section 205.18.03.B of the Fridley City Code, to reduce
the required lot width from 150 feet to 88 feet;
Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 2 feet;
Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2).(b) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot from 35 feet to
8 feet;
Per Section 205.18.05.D.(5j.(aj of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the parking setback from 20 feet to 8 feet;
To allow the construction of an addition on Lots 1-5, Block 6,
Onaway Addition, the same being 7786 Beech Street N.E., to allow
the construction of an addition on Lots 1-5, Block 6, Onaway
Addition, the same being 7786 Beech Street N.E., with the
following stipulation:
1. Special Use Permit, SP �90-18, shall be approved.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYS, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
OTHER BUSINESS•
Ms. McPherson gave a verbal update summarizing the recent
Planning Commission and City Council actions.
ADJOURNMENT•
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Ruechle, to adjourn the
meeting. Upon a voice vote, Chairperson Savage declared the
March 26, 1991, Appeals Commission meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
c.- :t�_ ,l_i ��', �`—�--
Ly, e Saba
Recording Secretary
6W
� _
�
J
Community Development Department
PL,ANIVING DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: April 12, 1991 �•
TO: William Burns, City Manager�;'�
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Resolution Approving a Registered Land Survey,
P.S. #91-02
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the registered land
survey, P.S. #91-02, by Midwest Super Stop, with the following
stipulations:
1. Complete curbing along the south side of the parking lot.
2. Construct a masonry dumpster enclosure with a chain link fence
gate with vinyl slats.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Dedicate Tract D to Anoka County as right-of-way for East
River Road.
Combine Tracts A and B for tax purposes.
Deed Tract C to the property owner to the west.
Record a 17 foot street, utility, and bikeway/walkway
easement, previously dedicated to the City.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached
resolution.
MM/dn
M-91-273
0
��
RESOLUTION NO. - 1991
A RESOLUTION APPROVING REGISTERED LAND SURVEY,
P.S. #91-02
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
Registered Land Survey, P.S. #91-02, on March 27, 1991, and
recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also conducted a public hearing on the
proposed Registered Land Survey at their April 22, 1991 City
Council meeting and approved the Registered Land Survey at their
meeting; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City
of Fridley hereby approves the Registered Land Survey, P.S. #91-
02, with the stipulations attached as E�rhibit A, and authorizes the
Mayor and City Manager to sign the Registered Land Survey as
prepared by E. G. Rud and Sons, Inc.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the petitioner is requested to record
this Registered Land Survey at Anoka County within six (6) months
or said approval with become nulZ and void.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
[Li�
Exhibit A
Resolution No. - 1991
Page 2
1. Complete curbing along the south side of the parking lot.
2. Construct a masonry dumpster enclosure with a chain link fence
gate with vinyl slats.
3. Dedicate Tract D to Anoka County as right-of-way for East
River Road.
4. Combine Tract A and B for tax purposes.
5. Deed Tract C to the property owner to the west.
6. Record a 17 foot street, utility, and bikeway/walkway easement
previously dedicated to the City.
�
� _
�
Community Development Department
PI.ANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: April 16, 1991 �,� -
TO. William Burns, City Manager�,
FROM:
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider Closing Springbrook Trail Project #732
and Reallocating CDBG Funds to Riverview
Heights Acquisition Project
Anoka County has notified us that the 1987 Springbrook Trail
Project #732 must be closed out and remaining funds reallocated to
another project. Anoka County has requested a response from the
City by May 15, 1991. The original project totalled $20,000. Its
purpose was to hire unemployed persons from the Anoka County Job
Training program to clean up and remove debris from the �Springbrook
Nature Center caused by the 1986 tornado. These persons also
replanted trees and other vegetation in the Center.
The Finance Department reports that there
in this fund. We recommend that the City
money to the Riverview Heights Acquisition
Recommendation
is $1,060.39 remaining
Council reallocate this
fund.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve closing the
Springbrook Trail Project #732 and reallocating the remaining funds
to the Riverview Heights Acquisit.ion project fund.
BD/ dn
M-91-275
�•
?��p CoUNr�.
v `���.
����zV
M�NNESOl
P
COUNTY OF ANOKA
Urban Anoka County Community Development Block Grant
COURTHOUSE ANOKA, M/NNESOTA 55303 612-427-4750
April 3, 1991
Ms. Barbara Dacy, Pianning Coordinator
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Re: Closing Springbrook Project #732
Dear Barbara:
I am currently reviewing 1987 projects and asking cities with completed projects carrying a
remaining balance to take action to close them. Springbrook Trail Project #732 has a remaining
balance of $2,734.50. So that we may ciose out all our 1987 projects, would you piease ask the
City Councii to make a request to the Anoka County Board of Commissioners regarding the
reallocation of this balance. The City's response by May 15 will allow us to close our 1987
Program Year for this year's Grantee Performance Report.
Please call with any questions.
JOW:sw
Sincerely,
oAnn O. Wright
Community Development Manager
Atfirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
<�$�
MEMORANDUM
- Municipal Cente�
'� 6431 University Avenue Northeast Williarri C. Hunt
Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Assistant to the City Manager
�7YOF (612) 572-3507
�a-� FAX: (612) 571-1287
,,� . •
MBMO TO: WILLIAM W. BIIRNS� CITY MANAGER �.^
FROM: WILLIAM C. HUNT, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGERj �
�
DATE: APRIL 15, 1991
SOBJECT: 1991-92 CONTRACT WITH THE TWIN CITY AREA IIRBAN CORPS
Each year the City of Fridley enters into a contract with the City
of Minneapolis to participate in the Urban Corps Program. As a
participant the City can employ students who have Federal Work
Study Grants to work as interns. The City pays between fifty and
seventy percent of the salary, and Federal Work Study money makes
up the difference. For example, an undergraduate student from the
University of Minnesota will receive $5.75 per hour for intern work
and the City will pay $2.97 to the Urban Corps. The Urban Corps
takes care of payroll taxes for the interns. We are responsible
for worker's compensation insurance.
In order to participate in the Urban Corps program, it is necessary
for the City of Fridley to contract with the City of Minneapolis.
The required contract is attached.
I request that you present this matter to the Fridley City Council
at their meeting on April 22, 1991 for a motion authorizing the
Mayor and City Manager to sign the attached contract with the City
of Minneapolis.
WCH/jb
�
1991 - 1992
AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN URBAN CORPS PROGRAM
BETWEEN CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND
THIS AGREEMENT is entered fnto this day of 19
by and between the City of Minneapolis (herein called "Urban Corps") and
(herein called "Agency"). �
WHEREAS, the above named Agency, a public organization or private non-profit
tax-exempt organization, desires to participate in the Twin City Area Urban Corps
and in consideration for the assignment of Urban Corps student interns to the
Agency, we do hereby agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. The Urban Corps shall have the right to approve or reject requests for
interns submitted by this Agency upon forms provided for that purpose by
the Urban Corps.
2. The Agency will accept a student as an intern by completing and signing
the Assignment section of the student's IIrban Corps�application form.
3. The Agency shall. utilize such students as may be assigned to it fn ac-
cordance wfth the specifications set forth in its wrftten request to
the Urban Corps, and shall immediately notffy the Urban Corps of any change
in nature of assignment, duties, supervisor or work'location.
4. The Agency shall provide such students as may be assigned to it with a safe
place to work and with responsible supervision. �
5. The Urban Corps shall have the right to inspect the work being performed
by such students as may be assigned to the Agency, and shall have the right
to interview such students and their supervisors.
6. The Urban Corps shall have the right to require such students as may be
assigned to the Agency to attend such general or special meetings, or to
appear at the Urban Corps office, individually or as a group, as shall
be necessary for the proper functions of the program.
7. In accordance with the requirements of Federal and State law, work
performed by such students as may be assigned to the Agency shall:
a. $e in the public interest;
b. Not result in the displacement of employed workers or impair existing
contracts for services;
c. Not involve the construction, operation or maintenance of so much
of any facility as is used, or is to be used, for sectari�an
instruction or as a place of religious worship;
d. Not.involve any partisan or nonpartisan political activity or be
for the Office of Education.
0 1
8. The Agency shall require such students as may be assigned to it to submit
time repor�s and follow such other procedures as may be established by the
Urban Corps. �
9. The Urban Corps shall have the right to remove any student assigned to the
Agency from said assignment and from the Agency at any time for any reason
without prior notice, and the Urban Corps shall not be obligated to replace
said student.
10. The Agency shall have the right to remove any student assigned to said
Agency at any time with prior notice given to the student and the IIrban
Corps.
11. The Agency warrants that it is in compliance with the provisions of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 252), and Minnesota Statutes
Section 181.59 and Minneapolis Code of Ordinance. Chapter 139 and 141, where
applicable. �
12. The Agency shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless the Urban Corps from
all claims, causes or actions which may result from the assignments of
students to the Agency or because of the acts or omissfons of the students.
13. The Agency will be responsible for compensating to a work-study
student any monies earned before or after the student's specified
� work-study award dates and/or monies earned over and above the
dollar amount specified in the student's work-study award.
14. The Agency shall obtain at its own expense Worker's Compensation insurance
(or shall be self-insured under State Law) for such students as may be
assigned to it under this Agreement. For the purposes of the Agreement�the
Agency shall be deemed the student's employer and that no employment
relationship exists between the student and Urban Corps, and, further. that
no employment relationship exists between the Agency and Urban Corps.
15. The Agency shall pay to the Urban Corps 51.5� or other percentage figure
as agreed upon by identifying the percentage figure on the student`s Urban
Corps application form of the gross compensation earned by such students
assigned and accepted by the Agency under a Federal or State program. The
Urban Corps will bill the Agency, in accordance with bi-weekly payroll
periods, for its proper share of the compensation of such students as may
have been assigned to the Agency and performed wark during said period.
Student hourly rates are set forth in Section 15(a) and 15(b) of this
Agree�aent .
a. Hourly compensation for students will be set at minimum rates of
$5.75 per hour for entering freshmen through receipt of a Bachelor's
degree, and $6.75 per hour for graduate students; other agreed upon
hourly compensation rates not to be below the specified rates in
14(a); or other rates Por Urban Corps student interns as established
by the City of Minneapolis, through a salary ordinance replacing
current minimwn rates.
b. A graduate student is defined for purposes of this Agreement as one
who has received a B.A., B.S., or equivalent degree or is enrolled
in the fifth year of � five year program.
• �
16. At the election of the Agency, the Urban Corps shall place students to
intern under a Stipend program. This option will be specified in the
Assignment Form which the intern's Agency supervisor must sign before
commencement of the internship. The Stipend rate which the Agency shall pay
the Urban Corps is $30.00 per week for each week the student works.
17. At the election of the Agency� the Urban Corps shall place interns for whom
the Agency will pay the intern's total compensation plus an additional
twenty-one and one half percent (21.5�) for administrative costs. This
option will be specified in the Assignment Form which the intern's Agency
supervisor must sign before co�mencement of the internshfp. Agency rates
for said option.are set forth in Section 17(a) and 17(b) of this Agreement.
a. Agency rates for students will be set at mini�um rates of $6.99 per
hour for entering freshmen through receipt of a Bachelo�'s Degree,
and $8.21 per hour for graduate students; other agreed upon hourly
compensation rates not to be below specified rates in 17(a); or other
rates for Ur�an Corps student interns as established by the City of
Minneapolis through a salary ordinance replacing. current minimum
rates.
b. A graduate student is defined for purposes of this Agreement as one
who has received a B.A.. B.S., or equivalent degree or is enrolled
in the fifth year of a five year program.
18. Performance under this contract shall co�mence on July 1, 1991 and
terminate on June 30, 1992 unless amended in writing as mutually agreed
upon by both the Agency and the Urban Corps; however, either party may
terminate upon slxty (60) days written notice.
Based upon the statements and afffrmations made by the Agency through the
above document, the Urban Corps hereby agrees to the assignment of students to said
Agency, in accordance with said document and the applicable laws and regulations.
CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS
By
Mayor .
ATTEST:
City Clerk
COqNTERSIGNED:
City Finance Officer
Approved as to Legality:
AGENCY
Agency Name
Address
City
By
Title
ay
Titie
Minneapolis Assistant City Attorney ATTEST:
Cr1�J
State Zip Code
0
a
: Fv • � ck�r�i�� � � �� •�• � • : �
STATE OF )
)SS
COtJNTY OF )
�n this c�iay of , 19 , before me appeared
�nd to me
personally l�own, who being by me duly sworn did say that they are respectively
the and of
, the corporation described in and who
exeeuted the foregoing instnament; that the seal affixed to the foregoing
instrument is the oorporate seal of said corporation; that said instnament was
executed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors;
and said and acl�zawledge
said instnament to be the free act and deed of said corporation.
9D
Notary Public
�
STIPEND
TWIN CITY AREA URBAN CORPS
111 CITY HALL, 350 5TH ST S, MINNEAPOLIS MN 55415-1314
(612)673-3027
AGENCY PAYMENT SCHEDULE
AGENCY PAYS:
$30.OU
STUDENT RECEIVES:
$20.00
Interns not eligible for work-study usually receive the stipend. The number of hours a
student works is determined by the agency ar department supervisor and the intern. Lrban
Corps recommends at least 10 hours per week.
WORK-STUDY
'fhe percentage of the intera's gross c�mpensatien that is billed to the agency depends
on which school the intern attends.
U of M, Macalester College, College of St. Thomas & most other schools - 51 5�
AGENCY PAYS: STUDENT RECEIVES:
for undergraduates $2.97/hr $5.75/hr
for graduate students $3.�48/hr �6.75!hr
Hamline University, College of St. Catherine - 61.5�
for undergraduates
for graduate students
AGENCY PAYS:
$3.54/hr
$4.16/hr
STUDEtiT RECEIVGS:
$5.75/hr
�6.751hr
Concordia Coilege-St. Paul, St. Olaf College Mankato State L'niversitv - 71 5'�
AGENCY PAYS: STUDENT�RECEIVES:
for undergraduates $4.12/hr ��,�5/h�
for graduate students $4.83/hr $6.75/hr
Augsburg College - 64.b`k
for undergraduates
for graduate students
FULL HOURLY SALARY
for undergraduates
for graduate students
EFFECTIVE 7/1; 91
AGENCY PAYS:
$3.71/hr
$4.36%hr
AGENCY PAYS:
$6.99/hr
$8.21/hr
•
STUDENT RECEIVES:
�5.7�/hr
$6.75/hr
STUDENT RECEIVES:
$5.75/hr
$6.75/hr
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
, �, .
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �� PW91-95
FROM:
DA7E
SUBJECT:
John G. Flora,(Public Works Director
April 4, 1991
0.5 MG Water Tank Repair
The Commons Park 0.5 MG elevated water tank was constructed in
1962. Since that time, no major repairs or repainting of the
structure has occurred. In 1989, we inspected the tank, found some
structural problems that need to be corrected and identified a
project to repair and repaint the entire structure. The original
estimate for the repair and painting of the tank was $160,000.00.
In preparing the plans for the 1.5 MG elevated tank, it was
determined to delay the construction of the altitude valve pit
which was necessary to control the elevation of the two storage
tanks so that it could be incorporated into the 0.5 MG tank repair
and the filter plant piping system. An estimated cost of
$80,000.00 was identified for pit and valve construction and added
to the 0.5 MG tank project.
Because of the environmental concerns with lead-based paint, we had
the paint material on the tank inspected and found it to be a lead
paint. Therefore, the plans and specifications for the painting
of the tank require the exterior paint of the tank to be completely
removed and appropriate precautions taken because of its close
proximity to the schools and the athletic/recreational facilities.
On Wednesday, March 27, 1991, bids were opened for the project.
Four (4) bids were received. The low bidder was Rainbow, Inc. at
$376,667.00. This included $180,667.00 for the repair and
repainting of the tank, $73,000.00 for the shrouding of the tank
to contain the sandblasted waste material, and $123,000.00 for the
construction of the altitude valve and pit. This bid is
$136,667.00 over our original estimate.
In addition, should the sandblast material be found to be
contaminated, there is an additional $30,000.00 to deal with the
disposal of that material. (It is hoped that by proper sampling
techniques, the waste material will not be defined as hazardous.)
10
�
�
CftYOF
Fl�DLEY
Page Two - PW91-95
A new tank of the same capacity is estimated at $400,000.00.
Accordingly, the repair costs are appropriate based upon the
extended life that can be expected for the tank.
Since the original 1.5 MG tank was estimated at $1.5 million and
the current costs are running around $1.3 million, the altitude
valve costs could be appropriately assigned to that project which
would then be well within our estimates.
Since we have a basic structure that needs to be repaired to retain
its continued use for the next 70+ years, I would recommend the
City Council receive the bids, award the contract, and authorize
by motion the allocation of the additional $136,670.00 for the
repair work and the $30,000.00 to dispose of contaminated material,
if necessary from the Water Fund.
MOTION: Motion to amend the 1991 Capital Improvement
Program to Increase the .5 MG WaterTank Painting/Altitude
Valve and Vault Installation Project No. 212 by
166,670.00.
JGF/ts
10A
Gty of Fridley
State ot Minnesota
BUDGET 1991
Une Item Detail
a�.qc'Y�P�art N i R
"� PU111�OUSA4,� ..far��81f:.....
� 2.:,z.:5�MG Elevated Tank Aepair
3'�`Tped lopme�t of Well Nos 1, 4�and 9
4 Construction of Weli No. 14
5 W. University Service Dr. Water Line
g Mississippi St. Water Line Relocation ��
7 57th Place Waier Line Re{ocation
g TCE Test �Nells
TOTAL
� �
���
�
a�s.000 a,,os�
240,000 4.800
gp.ppp 12,000
300�000 6�000
A 2��
HRA
HRA
30,00�
5646.000 525,867
�
0
H
�
Q
Z
�
Z
�
Y
Q
.}-
W
Q
�
�
�
�
T
N
�
Z
U
w
�
a.
�
g
Q
�
Z
J
Q
�
�
Z
W
J
�
L
Q
°o
T
T
T
�
T
�
2
�
�
Q
tn
Z
�
W
�
ii:i`;:<:::€:<:>::::>:::`;
� :: � •: ; � : ;:: � : �: ; : <:
�.:::��`:::`:>::::> n o 0 0
��`=r:;�•`•.«; 00 m m m
�::�<::<::::,; C� O O O
�;;>:::;�£::�;':.
:}::::..:<:>:::�:;::::�� Z z Z Z
`.'�::s:: �;,y;;:
::Q;:;!,'?:':::.?'�: ,.?� .
:: i:`.::'c:%:�`:�`t:;
;;y;:;:i#'.•::i:;ii;'t'•`.:'> O O � �
;(/i:i;':;;;;:;�:;r:;; O O O O
��`�?'�fz�;':�? O O O O
Q`:L�;.:�: °o rn °o_ °o
>�j:;; I:�.::: .:. �:
.�:_�(J1.::U: O M M N
�:.�.;, c'� N 00 th
:y t•tfi: �? 69 69 69
.?. ;;;?�<�'—'•
•>:...�.::;�'s
::Z:'::;:: :'%: :;:;::;
a o_ o 0
O O O O
��::g:"'.'•i:':;;:;::;:;:::;:;?
:�::�::i�:;;;;;:•.,•_:':: (�D O O O
?:;iA:�<'r•;;;i::i tL3 1n O � � � � 0 �
;<M1ila:::«:�:i; ^ O T N m m m m CC)
'��'<��`%'����' � � � � �
;•••'`.::'Q:;zi�:%: � � � � Z Z Z Z Z
f:::=�:::}s>s:r:
::z:>;.: . . .•.•.: � s::
'�: �'<:fi�:�:;�-r �:';:
:�:fi:1:'�: {;i� i{'r,':i+:; .
:::•::•::.. .W•;:..
%�::�iJf.�S:?.':':i::�: �
>:i:::.� fi.1: ;::;.; ;.r.; � .
���'�`<%'�;�i
.�':�:� L�'i:ti-::::
:a::<>�:<�<>::` v� cn cn cn
`��:::iu «�:>::::: w w w w
;W:"t�::;::;:::<;::: �- >- �- �-
0>':' j �; �::: «:<'::::>
fl;::>�:`:::::::.<:'
:a;::::>::>:::`::::;>":::
::;�:.;:'<,_:>
::::z>>:::.<:::;:;
<:'<:�>o<�:><:;::::: o 0 o a
::;:<_:>�>�::::>::>; �n �n �n �
::: ; :: ;' i� : � ? : : :: ;'' :; ;
; <:. : ; i j p ; : � :.. , ; : . ; :
O
U
U �j Z V Z
w z ? �
:,:::.:;��.;;:,><:;:: > � uS w z �
:<:::::;<�:::::::>::>: t= z
���»<>::r�:':�{:::;::: � Z � a c� � z c�n
:<::>::::::ti:;::::>::::>:: � � z v Z o z � a �s
:�><����:':`�����:::»:?'
�' m t= ~' a
:s::::>:::1�:::::::><:::: ? a�C uj � p O z w o w
::?<::;::::�:}:::::>:::'' a c9 �-- V >
a � W z
:::;:::::>f3>s:::>::::: � 0 z 0 � � a ¢ F- � C7
:;:<`:;;t�:���::::::::.> z �-- w °� 0 3 z a
Z � a v >- w w = � �
Q 0� � W = J °� U Q
o� o � �- a a = � -,
10C
� HNTB
Apri15, 1991
Mr. John G. Flora
HOWARO NEEDLES TAMMEN S. BERGENDOFF
ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNEFIS
Public Works Director
City of Fridley
Civic Center
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Re: Bid Evaluation; Commons Park Water Tower Refurbishing
Dear Mr. Flora:
<�(X, Fran�e
Ar�eizue South
Suite 2G0
Minneapti[is, Minnesota
554.i5
(612) 920�GGt
As you know, the low bid of Rainbow, Inc. was $376,667. Their breakdown of the bid is as
follows:
Painting/repair 188,667
Containment 73,000
Altitude valve � 12
$376,667
The cost estimate for this project was $240,000 based on $160,000 for painting/repair and
$80,000 for the altitude valve. The $160,000 figure comes from AEC's inspection report. At
the time AEC estimated the paintinglrepair costs, they were unaware tha.t the paint on the
exterior of the tank was lead-based. Because the paint is lead-based, the spent sand/paint residue
must be contained to comply with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements. Rainbow,
Inc. estimated the containment costs at $73,000 as noted above. However, there aze additional
costs related to removal of the lead-based paint that will be discussed below.
Ordinarily, a commercial blast (SSPC-SP6) is specified for the exterior of a water tower before
it is re-painted. A near-white blast (SSPC-SP10) was specified for the exterior in lieu of a
commercial blast. This was done because of the desirability of removing all of the exisdng lead-
based paint (i.e. get all the old paint off to avoid having to face this issue again in the future).
Rainbow, Inc. estimates that a near-white metal blast for the exterior of the water tower
increased the project costs by an additional $20,000.
The containment procedure specified requires that ground covers be laid. It is anficipated that
the ground covers will kill the sod beneath them. Replacement of the sod killed by the ground
covers is estimated at $3,000.
P�r'tna�� Cf�arl9s T. Hann�gan PE. Oani i J. S(�i9i� PE. John L Cocton PE. Francis %. Hail PE. IaoberL 5. Coma PE. Oonaitl A_ puP�us PE, W���ian� lova F41A,
Flobert O� M�lie�' PE, Jari�as L. TuLC�e. J��. VE. Nugh E. Sc1-+,all PE, Cary L',. Goodman 41A, Gc�raon H. Slanay, J�'- PE, Harvey K- HamniOnd, J�'. PE. SLephen G. Gc�ddard PE.
Jt�hn W. Wi91�c. Jr�. PE, Fa�ich�rd O. Beckn��n PE. Ricl���rU l F-nr n,in AIA. Oouqlas E. Prescocc, G'E
A��oci�ce� Kantl�i� T. L�ncolr� [:PA, Rr�t�.3rvs W Sm�t,ham PE-, hiar y O. Bar t.t�ssa PE. R.aln�� E. Gob�son PE. ScanlaV I. Mast, PE. W.ilcar Sn.irkt� F�E, R[�ss L. Janser� AIA,
F/`.�riY T. LJ�nn� PE. H. Jure�n�e HiitlPr P[, [31a�se M. C:.3r r it�� e PF_, Micli..�el P. Inpa��d�a PE. �ern�rd L. Prince PE. SLaphen E3. C7�i�nn PE. Saui A J;�c��l�t: PE. Cw nq H. Miller� F41A,
O�uyi:3s C. Myhra PE. C;�rl J. Ma311N:� PE. O.iriiai F. F3ackp�� PE. p�riald P Ka��lfi PE, R��iald L- Hart,�p PF_, Tlio�n.'�s L. W�Ilian�s 414. Oerin�s E C'O��kl�n PE. John C- Ki�Oka PE.
Rotlnr�y P G'e�lo PE, Stuvari M. R��ss 414, Rr�UnrL A. Laick F�F, (��c+nr� C]. Sadulsky PG. Ben�amin A. WliiS�ar PE. IaOyar S. Dus�:in PE. Jol�n p. [ji'uL��a�'S PG.
Charias L. C./'Ae�iiy..l��. PE. Faot�urr, M. Sic�.an PE, poufl�a5 A. Ci�vV A�4, Rnymu�U J. McGabe PE. Thom.3s A. Skinnar PE. Puul 4. Y�ross� PE. F. C;r.r�sc�utie�� ��rnoritl ASL4 G�CP.
R[�land W. Fre�•k�ng AIA, Jari�es T. Kienla 4�A. Terry K. Mille3r 41A, Rpc3er l:. War'O PE, MHU�iCe D. M�Ilgr PE. Robart L. Watson AIA
Offiea� Gianandri�. VA, AclanLa, GA, patun q�upe, LA, F3oswn. MA, Ct�arleo��go, {L, C1evaland, OM, ConcorO, Cq, Ual\as. TX. OanvBr, CO. Fairfieltl. NJ,
Harcfprd, LT. Ho�sGOn, T%. Indi�nan��lis IN. Irv�ne. C4, Kar��.as C��Y. MO. i ngtOn, MA, Los AnGelas. C11. Miai+��. Fl. M�iwaukae. W�. Minneaoo�is, MN.
Nnw vr�r k. NV, nki. ����rt�a t;�ty, (JK, (]r-i:�.�����, FL, [)vrar-lantl P,���k. KS. Pl�ii:,��yEal�f.�.. P Rala�c)h. NC. S�aatLle. WA, Tn�i���.a. F-I_. Tu�s�. C)K. Wil�n�nc��ii•�, pE
Mr. 7ohn G. Flora
April 5, 1991
Page 2
Based on the discussions presented above, the lead-based paint added $96,000 to the project
costs as follows:
Containment: $ 73,000
Additional Sandblasting: 20,000
Additional Sod 3•000
$ 96,000
Rainbow, Inc. estimated the altitude valve installation at $123,000. The additional sod killed
by the ground covers was included in the $123,000. Consequently, the cost of the altitude valve
installation should be reduced to $120,000. Several months ago, the altitude valve installation
was estimated at $80,000. However, during the design process, it was discovered that the water
tower has much shallower footings than originally anticipated. To prevent undermining of the
footings, the location of the altitude valve had to be shifted upstrearn of the high service pump
connection to the tower feed line. This change in location, in turn, resulted in the following
items of construction that otherwise would not have been necessary:
• 12" watermain to reconnect the high service pump connection;
• Removal and re-installation of the water tower electrical service;
• Removal and re-installation of the dehumidifier.
The cost of these additional work items is estimated at $20,000. This leaves a remaining sum
of $20,000 [$120,000 -($80,000+$20,000)] for the altitude valve installation that T have no
explanation for. Perhaps, the original estimate for the altitude valve installation was too low.
In a conversation with Rainbow, Inc., I learned that delivery time for the aititude vaive chamber
is 12 to 16 weeks following receipt of approved shop drawings. It would be desirable if the City
Council awarded this project on April 22nd to keep things on schedule.
10E
Mr. John G. Flora
April 5, 1991
Page 3
If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF
��:�� `�-
Thomas A. Roushar
TAR/vw
,s�o3ae�.ow►.,us
10F
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
��Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
�'
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �`�� PW91-112
FROM: John G. Flora,i� lic Works Director
Mark A. Winson;�''Asst. Public Works Director
�yj�✓✓Jon Thompson, Construction Inspector
DATE:
SIIBJECT:
April 18, 1991
City Council Award of Street Improvement
Project No. ST. 1991 - 10 (Sealcoat)
On April 10, 1991, we opened bids on Street Improvement Project No.
ST. 1991 - 10 (Sealcoat). Four (4) potential bidders received the
plans and specifications and three (3) bids were received.
The low bidder was Allied Blacktop with a total bid of $95,732.62,
including Alternate A. Alternate A specified a latex additive
which bonds the chips to the emulsion oil faster and more firmly.
Recommend that the City
Project No. ST. 1991 -
$95,732.62. �
JGF/MAW/JT/ts
Attachment
Council award the Street Improvement
10 (Sealcoat) to Allied Blacktop for
11
/
'
C�71f OF
EWDL.EY
BID PROPOSALS FOR
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1991 - 10 (SEALCOAT)
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 1991, 11:00 A.M.
BID TOTAL
COMPANY BOND BID ALTERNATE A
Allied Blacktop
10503 - 89th Ave., N.
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Astech Corp.
P.O. Box 1025
St. Cloud, MN 55407
Bituminous Roadways
2825 Cedar Ave., S.
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Bituminous Paving, Inc.
P.O. Box 6
Ortonville, MN 562�8
5$
5�
5�
NO BID
11A
$ 84,413.38 �$ 11,319.24
$ 86,686.21 �$ 94,892.96
$ 88,291.64 �$ 20,299.17
City o( Fridiey
State ot Minnesota
...,,r,,.��..,s_�.�....._„ r .
1, a Pr �`��
3~ East River Road - Phase N
(Hartman Circle,to Gten Creek Roa�
�4�ppt.�tcom�,`�2alatio�4
�5��.�_.Osbome Widening �
g East River Road Med(an Upgrade
7, 73rd_Avenue 1Mdening . _ �. .
`8- �q �Highway 65/53rd Avenue VNidening
�- ' pnstaiiing of brick medians, etc.)
Total
BUDGET 1991
1 �#$
�
5115,000
110.000
100.00�
46�000
40�000
50,000
100.000
80,000
a6�41,000
Engineering
Sewer
Water
'Parks
IStreets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager !�►�� PW91-104
�
FROM: John G. Flora,�Public Works Director
DATE: April 5, 1991
SUBJECT: MSAS Street Designations
In 1986 the City sent a letter to MnDOT requesting that the MSA
designation for Ranchers Road between 81st and 83rd should be
rescinded since the Wholesale House was developed there and the
road would never be constructed. We also suggested that the
designation of the University West Service Road between 81st and
83rd be established as that road would in fact complete the MSAS
system to 85th.
We have just received telephone confirmation that MnDOT State Aid
would support those changes and suggested the City make formal
application.
The attached Resolutions formally rescind the designation of
Ranchers Road between 81st and 83rd as a MSAS street and request
the designation of the University West Service Road between 81st
and 83rd as an MSAS street.
Recommend the City Council approve the two (2) Resolutions.
JGF/kn
Attachments
12
�
�
CliYOF
fRIDI.EY
RESOLIITION NO. - 1991
RESOLIITION REVORING MIINICIPAL STATE AID STREET
(MSAS NO. 344j
WHEREAS, recent area development does not require a street at the
location of Ranchers Road between 81st and 83rd Avenues in Fridley;
and
AHEREAS, it is evident to the City Council of the City of Fridley
that the street herein referenced should be revoked as a Municipal
State Aid Street under provisions of Minnesota Laws.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Fridley, County of Anoka, that the street described as follows, to
wit:
Municipal State Aid Street No. 344: Ranchers Road from
81st Avenue to 83rd
Avenue
be and hereby is revoked as a Municipal State Aid Street of said
City subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Minnesota
Department of Transportation. �
BE IT FIIRTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized
and direeted to forward two (2) certified copies of this Resolution
to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation
for his approval of the revocation of said Municipal State Aid
Street No. 344.
PA38ED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THl3 CITY OF FRiDLEY THIS
22ND DAY OF APRIL, 1991.
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA, CITY CLERK
12A
RESOLIITION NO. - 1991
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A MIINICiPAL STATE AID STREET
NiiEREAB, it appears to the City Council of the City of Fridley that
the street hereinafter described should be designated as Municipal
State Aid Street under the provisions of the Minnesota Laws of
1967, Chapter 162.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Fridley, County of Anoka, that the street described as follows,
to-wit:
Municipal State Aid Street No.
University Avenue West Service Road - 81st Avenue to 83rd
Avenue
be and hereby is established, located and designated a Municipal
State Aid Street of said City, subject to the approval of the
Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
BE IT FIIRTIiER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized
and directed to forward two (2) certified copies of this resolution
to the Commissioner of Highways for his consideration, and that
upon his approval of the designation of said street or portion
thereof, that the same be constructed, improved, and main�ained as
the Municipal State Aid Street of the City of Fridley, to be
numbered and known as Municipal State Aid Street as noted above.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
22ND DAY OF APRIL, 1991.
WILLIAM J. NEE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA, CITY CLERR
13
8� th
� ... • .. .- . .
.
�,=� gLAI NE
AV E N E. � �
. .. . . . . . .�
;''i l �'
,
/ ■ ';
T 3 t W / �. -+,
. . 36
� 3�2
���.�• T 30 N R 24w
��� �
��=:
arr■•■■■r■■r■■■■■•■■■a■■
kr \k�,,
�� T\��
l� '+
� �� �
�\ � W ,
_ < �'
�'� �1
Q
M
�
'.n ;
,� ; ��EVocA-ri
��.z
�
o}r .
����8�st 4vE. V.�
��
■
Mj r
.
�f��At■
.
.
.,
.
��
r
� �r;3�0�
a.
• �i
■
, �
iN �-�:
�a
a�. �
339 ����:
� �- t----, . — - ;----�
ST. .- , ,
, ,.
-1 i �'�
8ER �.' Y_��� � . � �' ' i
---- � -=• ° `�� :�: , �; �.
(i�_E��L�OW ,,1 � w :. z� vi °:�
� �� Z t-'' ; � .
C• ` s 7 . ,r �I " .
►*1 !4 A v } \ � .. ' � � ; :,3 n 9�� ,
a4i��+� �� s,E �-■-�e-�-�r�: ,r�-r,� �r,rv
309 �- --- - -� - �, � -, ,— - , .---; --- ►-- r---
� \ Jt � � �Y � �i �
�'A � z i ►- : : "'' �--i � (� ' � `�.
�- F ,� `� ' 8t�� I Z! ' �K : �� ' ��:
.�,y'.. '� p �' h� � �„! '.:vE,,� V Ei _. _ � �
� �. � � � :
, ,,� , �
�'"i � �Q�'� K � Py �`�` 2 � � ? ' j � v' �
� � W
'�. ,� t�` W�; j: Q �2 >':
� R O t ��' mI �? :GVE '�N.E_� ,,'Q v�i� �
��� �
r, '�" _'�"�'_"� � _ -J OC i .
, O � 3 4.. � 3 S 3 ��,�,
P . -� • � � , w �
��� .,� t, ,.. \ �. Z� �. ; u/
' v� ,�waY,," � �'� _
�� �
\ \-----�� � � , rC� �.
_ �,R�� KARD t �� j{.�
r- ------ _� . � �`� � i
�1.. _ - --�
�
, �p. ��,� ,
' �`r �" E�
� �WA•� N
7`�� t'�'�'�"- '
� � � � �--- �
� , , , ----_
, . ��� :
" ��' 3i �
1�� 1 -J � .
� 1� � � �A ,
r`
/ �---- -
� -- --
. � �i
�' • f
,_
�
��
# ^ ---
I�
,�
�;
,.
;,
;�
`I
,�
�_
�---
i
�
M.S.A.S.
i;
�--� DESIGNATION
��--
i:.
I�
�.
i
�_
�i '
OSBQRNE;
. � • • • -�-----r----
-" � a� c N �. o, �
. ,r�h,L� �,��-
�
' , ` _� r..� a
►- ti-- � � _ _ A -
� I� � -
' cn. , .n _ _--
i ' r -'
! ' � I - �_,
r ' j= ( I -," -� � _ - -
�J �_ �'� � _ _� � ���q' --- �� --- _
; �5 �n-AVe-N E:, , ��>�-'� ' .--
� .Z4. f . �_ _ AY�E.,� � � , �� F ,, � ' � +
,� -- -- �; -- , - , -��;=,�=' yA
.
RESOLUTION NO. - 1991
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PARTICIPATING IN
PLANNING FOR ALTERNATIVES FOR TRANSIT SERVICES
IN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473 required the Metropolitan Council
to prepare and adapt a comprehensive policy plan to recognize and
encompass physical, social, or economic needs of the metropolitan
area, including such matters as highways and transit facilities;
and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Legislature in 1989 restructured the
Regional Transit Board and required several plans regarding transit
service issues; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council in its 1989 Transportation
Development Guide/Policy Plan identified and documented the
significant increases in travel demand in the metro area, the
increasing costs associated with maintaining an aging highway
system, and identified various transit alternatives to reduce the
need for additional highway capacity; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council identified light rail transit as
one of the alternative transit services to be used in certain areas
within the metropolitan area; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Transit Board, in compliance with
requirements from the Minnesota State Legislature, has adopted
comprehensive planning documents to develop and build a light rail
transit system; and
WHEREAS, the Anoka County Regional Rail Authority approved its
Comprehensive Light Rail Transit System Plan on February 28, 1989;
and
WiiEREAS, the increasing population growth in northern Anoka County
dictates adequate transportation facilities through the City of
Fridley; and �
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley encourages
the evaluation and study on the part of responsible metropolitan
agencies of all modes of transportation and transit and their
applicability to first ring suburbs, such as the City of Fridley;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley will participate
in the preliminary design and environmental impact statement
process identified by the Anoka County Regional Rail Authority for
light rail transit; and
�
Resolution No. - 1991
Page 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley recognizes that
light rail transit with an appropriate feeder bus system can
provide basic mobility for transit dependent people and is an
attractive alternative to the automobile in highly congested
corridors; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley has not eliminated
light rail transit from the City's own transportation planning
process now under way in the revision of its Comprehensive Plan for
the 1990's.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
MAYOR - WILLIAM J. NEE
SHIRLE A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
14A
CITY OF FRIDLEY
M 8 M O R A N D II M
�.
�•
TO: AILLIAM W. BIIRNS, CITY MANAGER �•
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SIIBJECT: MINNESOTA LAWFIIL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT APPLICATIONS
FOR THE RNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS
DATE: APRIL 11, 1991
Attached is a resolution approving the application for a Minnesota
Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the Knights of Columbus. The
gambling premise permit is for 6831 Highway No. 65. The Public
Safety Director, James P. Hill, has approved the gambling permit.
The Minnesota State Statutes requires the adoption of a resolution
approving or denying any�type of gambling of permit. �
15
RESOLIITION NO. - 1992
RESOLIITION IN SIIPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA
LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT TO T8E RNIGHTS OF
COLUMBIIS
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has been served with a copy of an
Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the
Knights of Columbus; and
WHEREAS, the location of the Premise Permit is 6831 Highway No. 65
Northeast; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has not found any reason to restrict
the location for the charitable gambling operation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City
of Fridley approves the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit
to the Knights of Columbus.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
15a
LG214
t� v�a9oy
FR-�DL�cy L.uf'it
�
Minnesota Lczw,fitl Gambling
Premise Permi� Application - Part 1
FOR 80ARD USE ONLY
FEE
CHECK
INITIALS
DATE
KniQhts of Columbus #4381
Business Add�ess of O�ganization - Street or P. O Box (Do not use address of gambfing manager)
6831 Hwv.65 no. Fra.dleY Mn.55432
C��Y State Zip Code Counry Business phone �umber
Fri d1_��Mn 55432 � �i1JOKl� ( ) 571-1492
Name of chiei executive officer (cannot be gambling manager) Title Business phone number
/ZA yMOn/D �JE�✓Ix/ �l�.L,utJ D G-RAN D 1� i`1 IC-��-1 "T" c l
Address of ch�ef executive officer - Street or P. O. Box
.31 za l.c>i�so�cl �T., ti/.L . SSy►$ �C�uE'P�►.►
L�►Y tate p ode ounty �
-M��ft�t�Po�ls MN 5541'a HEwnlEp��
<:;�#.., ;�•n�.2'�St:;�>t:^"ri�i,:`}-:}Y:^y,�{?.x;h{LV,yr,•:_.i:i\Nri 4'M`:i . •.:%Y.•:^.C`".M.'elr,a.v , ip.m;�xxvwv.v� v,i�v'hlr'L� �. f+ix "
:::�.::<•`::;:L.... :z:.�;... . .�yi•.t�'-�. -sxri:s::.xX. ....,-,fm.:�yi�::��:`:+. :-..`;x':>'�st?'::�5^o-'K';": ,?'`-'?3�`.';;?x"Q�"-.j : : .�o-?., .,�s,.
,;.?�.;,"fs;::?`.yC;:xs'�.::•;c-:.>:..! ,,,y..:�.. ,v�'k:;,><:a� .::,•,,:�:-::.<:=:.:...•:;.x•:._:#;.�.>x:.;.::�c.x::::,�:....o ���s.<.;;��,t�,:..tv..,.�.�..yx,
p +`..M12. rrt;•::.:a..•r.{G�:•;,.,.%�. � .v.�n +?2:!:.�:K:.fi:::�!.�.5•::.S�i,�x{u,�;;n{.r;{. r ':iYi\,.;;...v...}.Y.:2. ♦
:..�:v}..........i....t}.�. ...A:.}:::.x::Niiii•.{-Y.•.. n}.::..r..:.....r\.:v::-`.-:G:i:v�\.v....u:n++
..�...�.Q� .v��:.:v:Q�QR:'� .,f.. ::�'.; .t,n ..:............3..............
;:..
.,: }.
4!.. ..>�.x,.}.f:: •.a,;..•x.....?�: ::Y;:::::t;' :_F,•
. . . •:: :•:�
5
,. ., . .:. .
.:-.P
:, ::
P:: ;::� ::.>:::::.:. :::,:.:::�.<>:_:r:.,;<::..;.:�..:.::.. :;r.:::
.
. . .::::. ., ..
::;: .:.:. - .. .�...:.
. , :...:..::.:..:::.::.:.:..:,..,:�.::...:..,.:.....F-.,;:.><.::::;:::�..:..,. ;>�
.. .�.::;
.. . . ,....... . ....._. ..:.. . :.:.:...�
.::.:.::::..::.._..:................:::;::.::-:::...::::.:......:.: ,::�<::.:.:.�..... >:: . ....:._::.:;;�-
,.. � : . . . : : : : : : . . . . . . : <: ; .>::: : :> : :: � .:;::::;..
.....:.....:.................. . ..:: .:'.s.; .y;.>... `�..: :.: �:: ;�:_:-:::. •::::.•..__ ._..:...v.::.•::::.:::�::.:...::s •::i•::�:::•::•:::`•:: l'• : '. :. �.}::,:•..;{,{..:: .
X �.i • • :.
< "� �'�� Y i >' :v:
Class of Premise Permit Fee
� Ctass A — Bingo, Raffles. Paddiewheels. Tipboa�ds. Pull-tabs $200 `":' '' ": °':`-":::.:.""�"�""''�"..: :`-.:::::..:'.':':':.::..: ::'.:
❑ C{ass B— Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Puli-tabs $�25 The class ot premise permit k
❑ Class C— Bingo only �� oo must be reffected by cJass of
Q Class D— Raf{{es only • g75
the organlzation license.
Bingo Occasions
If class A or C. flll in days and beginning and ending hours of bingo occasions:
No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by an organization per week.
Day . BeginningJEnding Hours
_S11I1� 6"30 w10:30 P.M.
to
Day
Mon.
BeglnningjEnding Hours
6- 30 to10' 3fl PM.
to
Day Beguuiing /Endtng Hours
Tues. 6: 30 to10: 30 pm
to
Status of Premise Permit - check ane:
❑ New premise — Fill in ase o�ganization prem+se permit number
�c Renewal of existing premise pe�mit — Fill i� com lete premise permit number A-00278-001
❑ Previously expired premise permit — Fill i� comolete premise permit number
15B
LG214
Miruiesota Lawful Gambling
Premise Permit Application - Part 2
.�:<:.:::{;a:..a�:ry::�:�:�,.�. .�.� �.�,. :.>f :� .
. .. �.;�nv... .�s �:..:�:«.�;>:;;��:.�;,... -: ry�;
}:.: :!:•.. Y� Ji::;(}:.. t. I.?•i:;;: ;:::•.;.V .�: e. .:.. , .; ii . , . �"'C��. ti �.
;�%i'�t#�1:�3���.;. ' . �.... . .
;• .....: • ..:
,:: �, . . ..•. ' � •'�`k
..:. .,.... . .. • . . ..
..
..P�-en��ses::.I� :.urrr�:a�Cior�:�.<>:.�;.>:�:v�:.t>.�:...���;,. . . � . -
:.. .... ............... .,... . � � �� ..� � �
. . .
. .:. : :.. :: � ... :�.. .,� .,...,;.: : , .: •...•.,..,.:x.?:<;.,. .;.: ..� . . t. . . ,
::.�>}
Name of establishment where gambGng wiN be c�nducted Street Address (do not use a post offtw box number) .
Kniqhts of Columbus #4381 6831 Hwy. 65 No.
Is the premises lacated withi� ciry limits? $�Cyes ❑ no
Ciry and Cour�ry where gambling premises is located OR Township and County where gambfing premises is located if outside of ciry qmits
Fridl
�c/vK/I
Name and Address of Legal Owner of Premises City
State
North Air Home Association 6831 Hwy. 65 Fridley Mn. 55432
Does the organizarion own the build'i�g where the gambGng will be co�ducted? � YES ❑ NO
Zip Code
NOTE: Organizatians may not pay themselves re�t if they own the buiiding or have a holding oompany. A lette� must be sub-
mitted showi�g rent payments as zero irom gambting funds it the organization's hotding company owns the premises. The
letter must be signed by the chief executive officer.)
Rent:
if NO, attach fhe foliowing:
� a capy of the lease with tertns for one year.
* a copy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions, showing what portion is being leased.
A lease and sketch are not required fo� Ciass D appiicantions.
For gambling with bingo $
For gambling withoui bingo $
Address of sto�age space of gambling equipment
Address City
-- E? F% :3% f'�/ccJ,9 �/ 6 S' N. L� � r/llDL�
G %% � f3.'1tJ
a
f % C�cc.::h18. /� //
C�7
C
Tota! square tootage leased
Total square tootage teased _
State Zp code
r�� �Sy32
Bank Axaunt Number
�
SZ 5c C chlT�i�l�-L. AtiE, N�(� , ��vM�3�i11���f� IS /11 iti/ SSyZ/
Name, add�ess, and 6ile o/ persons authorized to sign checks artd make deposiis and wid�drawals,
Name Address iUe
..� O f-{ i� �- i3 A C.t-tArJ� S �� S^ 2 N Q s l Jt1, L' ./�JPLS� N� . G��')�t� 1 nl � M G%�
�ZA y M o r� D N� , E�c.L�, � fl 3i �-o u,�f����,c.1 si �.� ���sf>,� �-f�-� �.o ��,�� �- H T��� o.
15C
�
LG214
Minnesota Lawfui GambIing
Premise Permit Application - Part 3
, ., :,...,:...>:.,- ..� ..._. .
�+`. :3..:./�,.,c,^',,,SG„' lr:t•'.«G!/G.3:%:,:,�x:�'!n. �` . j',YVH... 4.. . . � f � iiRj.. n.. . f '�,�,.. ., .. .� f#`,e'
�i..�s *��i�,p f11prty,�6�` Y .:,�'2f�`-#. '<.•. � .,�°i;t a `��+�,'�.�.,z':kj: ly, Q,�' v� +
�.'�iI.FLL0l4iK:iG.� ' �lI�1�:s�4G:.•:+.... f .}�� . . . .s'r.+�::i}:,�`;•,�r >;:i•> .f•.' `i�xai:;...
'<: •�?%'•..• :'i�
.c:�:�i:i:%F:•>:a;:::;.::..r:•::�:.i:' :�:�:. •::.sx: �i'`f :.X^•.3:�:.:�i,,'„ `?'Y:.$'• �'.v'.}:�fi�¢g;;•�•. { . .'c:'.:."�s`�,�.a�C. /-9. •'3sv:..'
..., .. ..:......:.... 'Y.?�f r � � . .. .: ; l :
:.,.. ..: �•:::.,.::.�:: :.:... . . .....:.r.?J..:.:...: . ..::... .... .
..>i9',%.,:` �'+.'cy. _.�'�..,-::.+.•..t.. ... : ,�c::•k. • � +.'.v�'v.K.�.�cd. ....
- � • .. .. ..;.. ..'<-.-::::::..�k=::::9�.:.:.. . n ..:. � a�.+ •'•-'� ��i1`i...f a+' �;c .. �+.`x....::
Gambllng Site Authorization
1 hearby conseni that local law enforcement officers, the board or agents of the board. or the commissioner of revenue or
public safety, or agents of the commissioners, may enter the premises to e�force the law.
Bank Records Information
The board is authorized to inspeci the bank records of the gambling aa:ount whenever necessary to fulfill
requirements of cu�rent gambling rules and law.
i dedare that:
I have read this application and all info�mation submitted to the board;
Atl information is true, accurate and complete;
All other required information has been fully disdosed;
1 am the chief executive office� of the orga�ization;
1 assume full respo�sibility fo� the fair and IawfuY gambling and �ules af the board and ag�ee, if I'�censed,
to abide by those laws and rules, induding amendments to them;
A membe�ship list of the organization wiil be available within seven days after it is requested by the board;
Any changes i� application informatio� witl be submitted to the board and local government within 10
d�ys of the change; and
A termination plan will be submitted to the board within 15 days of the te�mination of aU premise permits.
Failu�e to provide required information or providing falsa informatio� may result in the denial or �evocation of the
lice�se.
1. The city •must sign if the gambling premises is located within city limits.
2. The county ••AND township•' must sign if the gambling premises is bcated within a township.
3. The local government (city or county) must pass a resolution spec'rficalty aQp�aving a� de�ying the application. .
4. A copy of the resolution app�oving the applicatio� must be attached to the application.
5. Applications which a�e denied by the local goveming body shoutd not be submitted to the Gambling Cos►trot Division.
Township: By signatu�e below. the townshiQ acknowledges that the organization is applying fo� a premises permit within
township limits.
City• or County'• Township'•
City or Counry Name
of person
Township Name
Signature of person receiving applicabon
Oate Received � I Tide
�-11- �!J
Received
Is townsfiip: ❑ Organized ❑ U�organized ❑ Uninwrporated
Refer to the lnst�ucilons fo� the required attachments Mail to:
15D
Department of Gaming
Gambling Control Oivision �
Rosewood Plaza South, 3rd Floor
1711 W. County Road 8
Roseville, MN 55113
LG200A
Aev. (1Q/12/90)
��Zt��.Ey c� �' y
EOR BOARD USE ON�Y
�� Minnesota Lau�ful Gambiing
Organization License Application - Part 1
Legai Name of Organization �
1�. l��G t\�� S dtiC �0�--��1'ti13V ��"� '13� �
8usiness Address of Organizadon - Street or P. O Box (Do rwt use address of g
E ��'S � �\IG.1��; h'� � � N � -
Ciry State Zip Code
F4�'.\�J1.._t.-i/ . �13 � �F.,i�b3Z
Name of chief execu6ve +d ice�
Last First Middle Maide�
L`1 l. U rJ D ���i Mt� Nl� MELV J 6%�'W
Add�ss of chief exewdve officer - Street or P. O. Box
3i z-v u���sv� �T, .v. �r
Other names used
� �,�::- �-�K� �31u G�
ma�ager) � Business ID Number(Sab
�
r-cs�R�
/(rf� � , / �i oZ� M %
&Tax Pem�it)
�hone number
�l I -1�I�iZ
�ho�e �umbe�
>7S-s3 �S
Ciry State T�p Code Cou�ty
�a �'�.s ��N s y� � if �
ame o treasurer or person respons�ble or organtzatwn'a other revenues ttle ate o �rth usmess pfione �um �
last Name Fi�st Name Middie Name Maiden
� cr�o .I-o r�. x,,�. s� L... No v� Iqi �iz �s�i �s��y
Type of tdonprofit Organization: �Fratemai ❑ Veterans O Religious Q Other �o�profit
Number of years organizabon has been in existence as s nonprofii organization _ � T ) L'�r%i�
Attach a copy of a certiflcate of good standng as a nonprofit organiza6o� from the Minnesota Secretary of State's otfice and/or a letter from
ihe IRS dedaring income tax exemption. (Do not send a sales tax�pertnit or Federai empbyer identificatio� infoRnatio�)
Number of Active Members 9DU "f' (musi be age 18 and older)
When dces tfie organiza6on hold regular meeBngs? Oay (s) �,:� � L-�.i'S �'��,lIZSU�Y Nours ��• �S� � �`�,
Has the Compensation Schedule for ihe ciment yea� been submitted on the fortn provided by the` boardl O yes �` If no, attach a copy
i -
Have Intemal Controls tor the curre�t year been submitted on the fortn provided by the board? ❑ yes '�If no, atiach a oopy.
Class of Organization License
�Class A— Bingo, Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipbaards, Pu(t-tabs
❑ Class B— Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Pul!-tabs
❑ Ctass C — Bingo only
❑ C(ass 0 — Raffles onty
Cheek the bvz that most
accurately summarizes the
gambling at all of your premises.
The organization llcense must
reflect all forms of gamhllng
conducted by your organization.
:;:�� «=�; `>� � ;r<`:�::�<:>sr;:::; ��:: <`';: � :
�:� t:'-::::::#:`�>:>:<`:;:>::>:::; �`:;;:r:>:::<'z:::>:.r <:`::>A`'::<:;:;;ti <�:>::�:'»<:<�'s<::;: �:>>r :;:;;;,,,.>:«<; <;:;:;`;ti.ti <.;:`!,,,`,;:.,,.,:';<`":;::;::
:.. .. . . ........... ... . . ."'. .
._:. . ,:�:::t.::;�::::-•�::::5:>i:�:�i:�:-:-s:�.`:5:�::;:::•'::::3.
. tQ ::;::> .:..:::::::..:::::::::: ;::::.:.: •:..
. ...... ..:.:.::. ....:.. :.: �:.:
S �I�..O .. .>,... .f.:.: :.:.. .�:.;>.:.x•: •:::::.....:. ,.
;:�1C ['>::-;�
eTIS C . `�:
;: •: �:.::.:.:<::�.<:�:•:::•,,..,..., ...............::::.::...;:.�::.:. . ......... ..: ,........: ..
.. hec�`c..: one. . ................ .... .. ..:::
., ...... ............. ............:.....................::.�:.:::::..::.
...
...:.:...
........... .. .. .:::.::.::.: :,: :.::::.�.::.::�:.:..:: ::.: ::::,,..:�:.�:..:�:.,............ ................... :..:: :..;:::;;..:.,:: :..:.:}::�.
. . ... . ,.:. . .. .:.:::::::
- . . .
E
,
❑ Organizatio� has never been licensed. •
� Renewal of existing license — Fip in s�m l�te license number _��— �74 �,� ;—L�(J �
❑ Change in class of existing I'�cense — Fill in m e license numbe�
❑ Previously expired license — Fill i� comolete lice�se number
15E
0
, Virgil C. Herrick
James D�. Hoeft
Gregg V. Herrick
Of G�unsel
David P. Newman
T0:
FROM:
LL �l��LL�1111 `U. P V�� Y J. !�};1�A� V
��
A'TTORNEYS AT I,AW
M E M O R A N D U M
�/ ��
''Bill Burns, City Manager �:�
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Darrel Clark, Chief Building OfFicial
Gregg Herrick, Assistant City Attorney
DATE: April 16, 1991
RE: D�.aft Stops in Chimneys in Westi Brenner Pass Townhomes
Concern has been raised with regard to the City's interpretation
of the State building code as it pertains to the West Brenner
Townhomes. The first concern involves approximately five
townhomes which have not had any repairs to their original
chimneys. It appears likely that these townhomes were
constructed with no fire stops, clearly in violation of th� code.
These townhomes were constructed and inspected in the late '70's
and early '80's.
The second problem with regard to these townhomes involves the
City's interpretation of the fire code. When a number of these
townhomes repaired and rebuilt their chimneys, it appears they
relied upon a code interpretation by the Fire Department. This
interpretation led to the repair and installation of a single
fire stop in each of the unit's chimneys. The most recent
building permit disclosed that the Fire Department was
interpreting the code differently.than the Inspection Department.
Because of the difference in interpretation of the code, Darrel
Clark contacted the State as to their interpretation oP this code
requirement. While the State has indicated they ravor the
interpretation that would require three fire stops, one for each
floor the chimney passes, Darrel Clark has indicated that other
city insQectors have stated the code could be interpreted to
require only one fire stop.
The general rule in Minnesota is that a city cannot be held
liable for negligent examination or inspection unless special
circumstances exist to create a special duty to individual
members of the public. The court has held that the examination
and inspection of buildings for fire or other hazards is a public
duty and, therefore, the city would not ue subject to liability
to specific individuals. The courts have indicated, hocaever,
that on a case-by-case basis, a special duty can be owed if the
following are found:
Suite 205, 6401 Universiry Avenue N.1'�.gridley, Minnesota 55432, G12-571-385U
Memo
April
Page
to Burns/Dacy/Clark
16, 1991
2
1. The city has actual knowledge of the dangerous condition.
2. The plaintiff has a reasonable reliance on specific
recommendations of the municipality.
3. A statutory duty for municipal protection of a particular
class exists.
4. Municipal action which increases the risk of harm.
Even thouqh the City currently has actual knowledge of the
situation and made specific recommendations as to the number or
fire stops required, this is an issue which deals with an
administrative interpretation of the code and which would most
likely be interpreted as a public duty to which no liability
would attach. In discussing this matter with the City'� insurer,
the League of Minnesota Cities, it was determined that because of
the City's actual knowledge of the situation, the City should
notify these individuals that its current interpretation of the
code would require three fire stops to be installed in each
chimney and that the City would recommend that they update the
construction of their chimneys.
Because�this is an interpretation question regarding the code,
it is our opinion that the City would not have an obligation to
the homeowners to reconstruct the chimneys. As long as the City
acted in good faith in making its interpretation, .liability far
reconstruction should not exist. The City shouZd condition the
issuance of future permits for repair or improvements on the
installation of additional fire stops.
With regard to
responsible for
installation of
interpretation
interpretation
would not have
GVH:ldb
Mr. Rochelle's complaints that the City should be
the added costs to his remodeling for the
two additional fire stops, the City's current
of. the code is in conformity with the State's
of that code section and, therefore, the City
any liability for enforcement of that code.
16A
17
�
� FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL LICENSES
F�p�.� Apri l 22, 1991
Type of License: BY: Approved By:
Fees:
CARNIVAL
MCM Inc. (Magel's Carnival L. Magel Sr. James P. Hill $825.00
7825 Cambridge St. Public Safety Dir. (Dep) $200.00
St.Louis Pk.,MN55426
CIGARETTE
FMC Cor�.. Service Am. "
4800 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
Fridley Country Boy Country house Inc. "
6501 Central Ave. N.E.
Fridley,MN 55432
George's Restaurant Anthony Nicklow "
3710 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
Hanna ��agic Car Wash Va�ctory Enterprises Inc.
7300 University Ave.N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Service Am. Corp. Same °
7490 Central Ave.N.E.
Fri dl ey, P•1N 55432
5uper Am.#4199 Birch Bru, Inc. "
7299 Hwy. 65 N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
SuperAm. #4175 " " " "
5667 University Ave.N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
SuperAm.#4207 " " "
7449 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
Swings Spurette John Swingdorf "
6485 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
E. River Rd. Texaco Donald M. Kisch "
8100 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
€NTERTAINP4ENT
� ��
� ��
�� ��
�� ��
�� ��
��
�� ��
��
��
,� ��
$48.00
$12.00
$24.00
$12.00
$12.00
" $12.00
$12.00
" $12.Od
" $12.00
$12.00
George's Restauarnt Anthony Pjicklow James P. Hill $85.00
3710 E. River Rd. Qublic Safety Director
�
19
�
_ FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL
fR�IDL�EIf Apri 1 22, 1991 Page 2
GAMBLING PERMIT
LICENSEB
George's Restaurant Anthony Nicklow James P. Nill
3720 E. River Rd. Public Safety Director
Fridley, MN 55421
Maple Lanes Bowling Center D. Savelkol "
6310 Hwy. 65 N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 '
ON SALE AND SUNDAY LIQUOR LICENSE
George's Restaurant Anthony Nickiow "
3720 E. River Rd.
Fridley,.MN 55421
TEMPORARY ON SALE BEER
Fridley Jaycees P�lark ��1cCown ��
P.O.Box 32004
Fridiey, M�J 55432
OFF SALE.BE�R
E. River Rd. Texaco �onald ��1. iCisch "
8100 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
SuperAm.#4207 Birch Bru, Inc. "
7449 E. River Rd.
Fridiey, MN55432
SuperAm.#4175 " " "
5667 University Ave.N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
SuperAm. #4199 ° " "
7299 Hwy. 65 N.E.
Fridiey, MN 55432
Swings Spurette John Swin�dorf -
6485 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
PRIVATE GAS PUMP
Determan Welding & 7ank Serv. James R. Determan
1241 - 72nd Ave. N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
19A
R,
��
��
��
�� ��
��
��
��
n
$300.00
$300. 00
" $9,000:00 �
Sunday $200.00
" Exempt
" $fi0.00
$60.00
Richard Larson
Fire Inspector
" $60.00
" $�0.00
" $60.00
$30.00
�
�
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL
il 22, 1991
REFUSE HAULER
Becker's Sanitation
,19447 Saugh St. N.W.
Elk River, MN 55330
Waste Management Blaine
10050 Naples St. N.E.
Blaine, MN 55432
RETAIL GASOLINE
E. River Road Texaco
8100 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
Fridley,Country Boy
6501 Central Ave. N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Hanna`Magic Car Wash
7300 University Ave.N.E.
Fridley,; MN 55432
Swi.ngs Spurette
6485 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
SOLICITOR(CHARITABLE)
Mn. COACT
324 Henn. Ave. N.E.
R1p 1 s. MN 55401
Greenpeace Action
2637 Nicollet Ave. So.
P1p 1 s. h1N 55408
RETAIL GASOLINE
SuperAmerica #4175
5667 University Ave
Fridley MN 55432
SuperAmerica #4199
7299 Highway 65
Fridley MN 55432
SuperAmerica #4207
7449 East River Rd
Fridley MN 55432
Ronald Beckers
Kent L. Harrell
Donald M. Kisch
Country House Inc.
LICENSES
Pa4e 3
Richard Larson
Fire Inspector
�� ��
Victory Enterprises " " "
�� � i I
John Swingdorf " ° "
Rosal ie Loeffl er Jarr�es P. Hi 11
Public Safety Director,
Wm. Busse
James P. Hill
Public.Safety Director
SuperAmerica Group Inc Richard Larson
Fire Inspector
SuperAmerica Group Inc Richard Larson
Fire Inspector
SuperAmerica Group Inc Richard Larson
Fire Inspector
19B
$75.00
$195.00
$60.00
$60.00
$60.00
$60.00
Exempt
Exempt
$60.00
$60.00
$60.00
�
� FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL LICENSES
BLACKTOPPING
Minnesota Roadways Co
147 N Jonathan Blvd
Chaska, rIIJ 55318. Jack Mueller
ELECTRICAL
Advanced Electric Co Inc
4407 Loretta Ln �
Minnetonka rIlJ 55345 Ronald Leidall '
Aid Electric Service
7101 Highway 65
Fridley I�T 55432 Gerald Koskiniemi
American Eagle Electric Inc
9420 Ermine Blvd NW
Anoka MN 55303 Judith Billmark
Arctic Electric Inc
2632 8th Ave N
Anoka MN 55303 Reynold Lindberg
B & L Electric Inc
3933 West 143rd St
Savage 1�T 55378 Robert Ward
Bacons Electric Co
6525 Central Ave NE
Fridley NIl�T 55432 Richard Paddock
Blaine Heating A/C & Elec Inc
13562 Central Ave NE
Anoka MN 55304 Kenneth Chouinard
Braastad Electric Inc
17620 Hwy 65 NE
Soderville MN 55304 Harold Braastad
CSI Electric Inc �
5241 West Broadway
Minneapolis MN 55429 Donovan Slough
Clinton Electric Co
4009 E Lake Street
Minneapolis MN 55406 Michael Ackerman
Comm-Tech Electrical Contr Inc
14216 - 23rd Ave N
Plymouth MN 55447 Michael Schmitt
Commonwealth Electric of MN Tnc
554 Broadway
St Paul MN 55101 Tracy Donovan
19C
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
STATE OF MINN
Same
Same
� Same
Same
Same
Same
Same �
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Donnelly Electric Inc
1126 Rice Street
St Paul MN 55117 Edward Sobanski
Dymanyk Electric Inc
1915 NE Broadway
Minneapolis MN 55413 Joan Bachynsky
Egan-McKay Electrical Contr Inc
7100 Medicine Lake Rd
Minneapolis MN 55427 James Rivard
Eichmiller, Steve Electric
8424 Dupont Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55444 Steve Eichmiller
Electric Repair & Construction Co Inc
4024 Washington Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55412 Donald Cole
Electric Service Company
1609 Chicago Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55404 James Peterson
John Ess & Sons Inc
11401 Co Rd #3
Hopkins MN 55343
Edward Gully Electric
19951 Uplander St NW
Cedar MN 55011
Gunnar Electric Co Inc
7960 Eden Prairie Rd
Eden Prairie MN 55347
Heights Electric Inc
?04 - 40th Ave NE
Minneapolis MN 55421
Highland Electric Inc
2030 St Clair Ave
St Paul MN 55105
Hunt Electric Corp
2300 Territorial Rd
St Paul MN 55114
Industrial Electric Company
600 South 9th Street
Minneapolis MN 55404
Killmer Electric Co Inc
9702 - 85th Ave N
Maple Grove MN 55369
Vernon Steppe
Edward Gully
Forrest Woody Walters
Steven Nelson
William LaLonde
Robert Tipler
Sherman Wollan
Duane Palmer
19D
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Lakeview Electric Co
8116 Pillsbury Ave S
Bloomington NIIJ 55420 Les Froysa
Lehn Electric Inc.
214 E Main St
Anoka MN 55303 Tim Lehn
Lindell Electric Inc
710 - 87th Ln NE
Blaine MN 55434 Ronda Schiebout
Mayer Electric Corporation
5128 Hanson Court
Minneapolis NIlJ 55429 Cherie Holm
Mellas Electric Inc
17065 Xylite St NE
Ham Lake MN 55304 Robert Mellas
Mik-Lyn Electric Co Inc
1305 Jefferson Hwy
Champlin MN 55316 Michael Belko
Muska Electric Company
1985 Oakcrest Ave
Roseville MN 55113 Walter Moore
Nordberg Electric
126 South Adams
Cambridge MN 55008 Paul Nordberg
North Side Electric Co
1405 - 44th Ave No
Minneapolis MN 55412 James Stumpfa
Pete's Repair Inc
8835 Xylon Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55445 Pete Perusse
Phasor Electric Co ��
13809 Industrial Park Blvd
Plymouth MN 55441 Kirk Herman
Prairie Electric Co Inc
6595 Edenvale Blvd #120
Eden Prairie MN 55346 Ronald Oswald
Premier Electrical Corp
3400 - 48th Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55429 Lonnie Bellin
R& O Elevator Co Inc
8324 Pillsbury Ave S
Bloomington MN 55420 Lee Arnold
19E
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Residential Electric Inc
2356 Charles Ave
St Paul MN 55114
Ries Electric Company
777 North Concord
So St Paul MN 55075
Royal Electric Co Inc
7401 Central Ave NE
Fridley MN 55432
SECO Inc
2817 Lyndale Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55408
Sherwood Electric inc.
1211 Old Highway 8
New Brighton, NIl�i 55112
Snyder Electric Co
6112 Excelsior Blvd
St Louis Park MN 55416
Southside Electric
4219 Bloomington Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55407
Starbird Electric Co Inc
1938 West Broadway
Minneapolis MN 55411
Suburban Lighting Inc
6077 Lake Elmo Ave N
Stillwater MN 55082
Three Phase Electric Inc
2705 Fox Ridge
Blaine MN 55434
Total �lectric Inc
1537 92nd Ln �NE
Blaine MN
Wiring by Weir Inc
410 Ensign Ave N
Golden Valley MN 55427
Young Electric Inc
5D26 North Highway 169
Minneapolis MN 55428
ERCAVATING
American Excavating
20516 Viking Blvd
Wyoming MN 55092
John Heinen
John Ries
Michael Gannucci
Stuart Gilbert
Jerry Snyder
David Wintheiser
Michael Heffron
Phil Larson
Gary Hennings
Richard LeVoir
John Weir
Bruce Young
James Lang
19F
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Carl Bolander & Sons Co
251 Starkey Street
St Paul MN 55107 Dominique Najjar
Renollett Trucking Inc
2324 - 153rd Ln NW
Andover MN 55304 Daniel Renollett
United Water & Sewer Co
11666 Wayzata Blvd
Minnetonka MN 55343 Wallace Owczarzak
GAS SERVICES
Air Comfort Inc
3944 Louisiana Circle
St Louis Park MN 55426 Donal Ruden
All Season Comfort Inc
1417 -18th St NW
New Brighton Mn 55112 Richard Larson
American Burner Service
601 N Prior Ave
St Paul MN 55104 Lyle Rotvold
Anderson Heating & Air Cond
4347 Central Ave NE
Columbia Heights MN 55421 Ricky Anderson
B& D Plumbing & Heating Inc
4091 MacIver Ave NE
St Michael MN 55376 William Daleiden
B& H Heating Cooling & Refrig
RT 2 Box 220C
Buffalo MN 55313 Brian Ihmken
Blaine Htg A/C & Elec Inc
13562 Central Ave NE
Anoka NIlJ 55304 Kenneth Chouinard
Branch Air • �
Route 2 Box 179
Isanti MN 55040 Ray Cveykus
Centraire Inc
7402 Washington Ave S
Eden Prairie MN 55344 LeRoy Seurer
Custom Mechanical Inc
5973 3rd St NE
Fridley MN 55432 Donald Dickison
DelMar Furnace Exchange Inc
4080 - 83rd Ave N
Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Del Wischmann
19G
Same
Same
Same
CLYDE WILEY
B1dgJMech Insp
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Dependable Indoor Air Quality Inc
9500 Vincent Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55444 James Holt
Egan & Sons Co
7100 Medicine Lake Rd
Minneapolis MN 55427 Gerald Egan
Gas Supply Inc
2238 Edgewood Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55426 S R Navickas
Golden Valley Heating & A/C
5182 West Broadway
Crystal MN 55429 S Follese
Horwitz Inc
5000 N Highway 169
Minneapolis MN 55428 Larry Swanson
J& J Heating & Sheet Metal Inc
211 South Adams
Cambridge MN 55008 James Lindell
J K Heating Co
1286 Hudson Rd
St Paul MN 55106 Johnny Ness
Metropolitan Mech Contrs Inc �
7340 Washington Ave S
Eden Prairie MN 55344 Thomas Nelson
Midwestern Mechanical
9103 Davenport St NE
Blaine MN 55434 Gene Beijer
Milts Gas Heating Service Inc
2500 Longview Dr
New Brighton MN 55112 Milton Witzmann
Minnegasco Div of Arkla Inc
201 S 7th Street
Minneapolis MN 55402 Michael Fogarty
Noel's Heating & A/C Inc
4920 Zachary Ln
Plymouth MN 55442 Noel Olson
P& H Services Co Inc
208 - 73rd Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55430 Gerald Steffens
Pierce Refrigeration
1920 - 2nd Ave S
Anoka MN 55303 John Becker
19H
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Rapid Heating & A/C Inc
5514 - 34th Ave N
Crystal MN 55422
Ron's Mechanical Inc
1812 E Shakopee Ave
Shakopee MN 55379
Royalton Heating & Cooling
4120 - 85th Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55443
Sedgwick Heating & Air Cond Co
8910 Wentworth Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55420
Duane Biddle
Ron Coster
Tom Stewart
Thomas Sedgwick
Sharp Heating & Air Cond Inc
4854 Central Ave NE
Columbia Heights MN 55421 Kevin Hanson
Dale Sorensen Co
150 West 88th St
Bloomington MN 55420
Standard Heating & Air Cond
410 West Lake Street
Minneapolis MN 55408
Suburban Air Cond
8419 Center Drive
Minneapolis MN 55432
Superior Contractors Inc
6121 - 42nd Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55422
Thompson Air Inc
5115 Hanson Court
Minneapolis MN 55429
Welter Ray N Heating Co
4637 Chicago Ave
Minneapolis MN 55407
GENERAL CONTRACTOR
Alcar Building
5131 Overlook Drive
Bloomington MN 55437
American Remodeling Inc
4949 West Royal Ln
Irving TX 75063
Dale Sorensen
Ted Ferrara
Steve Chinander
Donald Hoglund
Floyd Thompson
Ray Welter Jr
Al Carr
Leslie Connell
191
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Arndt M J Construction Co
2808 Sherwood Rd
Mounds View MN 55112 Marlan Arndt Same
Wayne Barkley Construction
67 - 13th Ave SW
New Brighton MN 55112
Rodney Billman Inc
151 Silver Lake Rd
New Brighton MN 55112
Brickner Builders Inc
6240 Hwy 65, Suite 208
Fridley, MN 55432
Cad/Con Inc
6401 University Ave NE
Fridley MN 55432
Carlson-LaVine Inc
2831 Aldrich Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55408
Crandall Construction Inc
3933 Douglas Drive
Crystal MN 55422
D& D Home Improvement Inc
7401 Central Ave NE
Fridley MN 55432
DuAl1 Services Inc
636 - 39th Ave NE
Columbia Heights MN 55421
Durabilt Associates Inc
7343 Ann Court
Eden Prairie MN 55346
E-2 Construction Inc
12805 Hwy 55
Plymouth MN 55441
Elder-Jones, Inc.
1120 E 8oth St #211
Bloomington MN 55420
Erickson Brothers
4567 West 80th Street
Minneapolis MN 55437
Everest Construction Co
2685 Long Lake Rd
Roseville MN 55113
Wayne Barkley
Tay Kersey
Richard Brickner
Dick Giddings
Shelly Norby
James Crandall
Donavan Olson
Gary Dooner
Thomas Kasprzak
Craig Ekberg
Robert Kanne
C James Carlson
Maynard Johnson
19J
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Franzen Construction Co
4250 - 5th Street NE
Columbia Heights MN 55421
Dick Harris Co
6200 Riverview Terr
Fridley MN 55432
D W Harstad Co Inc
15850 Lincoln St NE
Ham Lake MN 55304
Richard Hastings Co
6331 Riverview Terr
Fridley MN 55432
Hoyt Construction
321 W 83rd St
Bloomington MN 55420
George B Johnson Contr
5410 Grand Ave N
Brooklyn Center MN 55430
Milton Johnson Co
525 Lowry Ave NE
Minneapolis MN 55418
Kraus Anderson Const Co
525 S Eighth Street
Minneapolis MN 55404
Lindstrom Cleaning & Const Inc
9621 Tenth Ave N
Plymouth MN 55441
Lloyd's Home Improvement Inc
1012 - 42 1/2 Ave NE .
Columbia Heights�NIN 55421
Mr Siding Incorporated
1080o Xavis St NW
Coon Rapids MN 55433
Maertens-Brenny Const Co
8251 Main Street NE
Fridley MN 55432
K G Marcy Construction Co
2813 Bryant Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55408
Robert Franzen
Richard Harris
Alton Johnson
Richard Hastings
Bill Hughes
George Johnson
Bruce Erickson
Janice Goebel
Robert Hennen
Lloyd Graczyk
Larry Shelton
Joseph Maertens
Kenneth Marcy
19MC
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Midwest Fence & Mfg Inc
525 E Villaume Ave
So St Paul MN 55075 Tim Nelson
Morin Construction Inc
12104 Jefferson St
Blaine MN 55432 Kevin Morin
New Concept Builders
499 West Lynnhurst Ave
St Paul MN 55104 Bruce Mitchell
Opus Corporation
PO Box 150
Minneapolis MN 55440 W Lyle Meyer
Panelcraft of MN Inc
3118 Snelling Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55406 Dennis Johnson
Pete's Repair Inc
8835 Xylon Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55445 Pete Perusse
Potvin Construction Co
9911 Ives Ln
Maple Grove MN 55369 Tom Potvin
Skyway Quality Homes Inc
8025 Garfield St NE
Spring Lake Park MN 55432 Robert Shimanski
D V Selfe Construction Co Inc
17 55 E County Rd H2
White Bear Lake MN 55110 Donald Selfe
Steadfast Home Repair
4820 Excelsior Blvd #106
St Louis Park MN 55416 Wendy Johnson
Steiner Development Inc
3610 S Highway 101
Wayzata MN 55391 David Distad
Thurs Construction
5717 - 113th Ave N
Champlin MN 55316 Kevin Thurs
Timco Construction Co
9421 West River Rd
Brooklyn Park MN 55444 Timothy McKee
Twin City Exteriors Co Inc
6000 Bass Lake Rd
Crystal MN 55429 Steven Patnode
19L
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Twin City Storm Sash Co Inc
10825 Greenbrier Rd
Minnetonka NIlJ 55345
Unipro Construction Mgmt
3500 W 80th St Suite 100
Bloomington MN 55431
Vic & Sons Construction
10020 olive St
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
Watson-Scott Const
14191 70th St S
Hastings MN 55033
Ron Williams Construction
600 Janesville Street
Fridley MN 55432
HEATING
Air Comfort Inc
3944 Louisiana Circle
St Louis Park MN 55426
Air Conditioning Assoc
689 Pierce Butler Route
St Paul MN 55104
Air & Furnace Care Inc
8733 Humboldt N
Brooklyn Park MN 55444
All Season Comfort Inc
1417 - 18th St NW
New Brighton MN 55112
Allan Mechanical Inc
6020 Culligan Way � �
Minnetonka Mn 55345 �
American Burner Service Inc
601 North Prior Ave
St Paul MN 55104
Fred Bergacker
Bruce Palmer
Scott McCulloch
Greg Watson
Ronald Williams
Donal Ruden
John Matthews
Richard Bidler
Richard Larson
Elmer Wedel
Lyle Rotvold
Anderson Heating & Air Cond
4347 Central Ave NE
Columbia Heights NIN 55421 Ricky Anderson
B& D Plumbing & Heating Inc
4091 MacIver Ave NE
St Michael MN 55376 William Daleiden
19M
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
CLYDE WILEY
Bldg/Mech Insp
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
B& H Heating Cool & Refrig
RT 2 Box 220C
Buffalo NIId 55313 Brian Ihmken
Blaine Heating A/C & Elec Inc
13562 Central Ave NE
Anoka MN 55304 Kenneth Chouinard
Bostrom Sheet Metal Works Inc
785 Curfew Street
St Paul MN 55114 Robert Vranicar
Branch Air
Route 2 Box 179
Isanti MN 55040 Ray Cvevkus
Centraire Inc
7402 Washington Ave S
Eden Prairie MN 55344 LeRoy Seurer
Custom Mechanical Inc
5973 3rd St NE
Fridley MN 55432 Donald Dickison
De1Mar Furnace Exchange Inc.
4080 - 83rd Ave N
Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Del Wischmann
Dependable Indoor Air Quality Inc
9500 Vincent Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55444 James Holt
Egan & Sons Co
7100 Medicine Lake Rd
Minneapolis MN 55427 Gerald Egan
Faircon Service Company
2668 Patton Rd
Roseville MN 55113 Mary Vliem .
Flare Heating & Air Cond Inc� �
9303 Plymouth Ave N
Golden Valley MN 55427 Randy Imker
General Sheet Metal Corp
2330 Louisiana Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55427 James McCarthy
Gilbert Mech Contr Inc.
3012 Clinton Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55408 P Dan Gilbert
Golden Valley Heating & A/C
5182 West Broadway
Crystal MN 55429 S Follese
19N
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Home Energy Center
14505 21st Ave N
Plymouth MN 55447 Carl Norman
Horwitz Inc
5000 N Hwy 169
Minneapolis MN 55428 Larry Swanson
J& J Heating & Sheet Metal Inc
211 South Adams
Cambridge MN 55008 James Lindell
J K Heating Co
1286 Hudson Rd
St Paul MN 55106 Johnny Ness
Larson Mechanical
1509 Coon Rapids Blvd
Coon Rapids MN 55433 Bob Larson
Master Mechanical Inc
9864 James Circle
Bloomington MN 55431 Gordon Peters
Metropolitan Mech Contr Inc
7340 Washington Ave S
Eden Prairie MN 55344 Thomas Nelson
Modern Heating & A/C Inc
2318 lst St NE
Minneapolis MN 55418 Terry Hutchinson
Noel's Heating & A/C Inc
4920 Zachary Ln
Plymouth MN 55442 Noel Olson
Owens Services Corp
930 E 80th St . •
Bloomington MN 55420 R H Oraens
P& H Services Co Inc
208 - 73rd Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55430 Gerald Steffens
Pete's Repair Inc
8835 Xylon Ave N
Brooklyn Park NIN 55445 Pete Perusse
Pierce Refrigeration
1920 -2nd Ave S
Anoka MN 55303 John Becker
190
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Ron's Mechanical Inc
1812 E Shakopee Ave
Shakopee MN 55379
Rapid Heating & A/C Inc
5514 - 34th Ave N
Crystal MN 55422
Royalton Heating & Cooling
4120 - 85th Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55443
Sedgwick Heating & Air Cond
8910 Wentworth Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55420
Sharp Heating & Air Cond Inc
4854 Central Ave NE
Colwnbia Heights MN 55421
Standard Heating & Air Cond
410 West Lake Street
Minneapolis MN 55408
Suburban Air Cond
8419 Center Drive
Minneapolis MN 55432
Superior Contractors Inc
6121 - 42nd Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55422
Thompson Air Inc
5115 Hanson Court
Minneapolis MN 55429
Fred Vogt & Co
3260 Gorham Ave
St Louis Park MN 55426
Welter Ray N Heating Co
4637 Chicago Ave
Minneapolis MN 55407
Yale Incorporated
9649 Girard Ave S
Bloomington MN 55431
Ron Coster
Duane Biddle
Tom Stewart
Co
Thomas Sedgwick
Kevin Hanson
Co
Ted Ferrara
Steve Chinander
Donald Hoglund
Floyd Thompson
Donald Bell
Ray Welter Jr
John Deblon
MA$ONRY
Country Concrete & Const Inc
16214 Xenia St NW
Andover MN 55304 Wayne Knudson
19P
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Jasco Inc
7175 Cahill Rd
Edina MN 55439
MikeDonald Cement
1140 Pierce Terr NE
Minneapolis MN 55421
Pearson, Ronald Masonry Inc
741 Kennaston Dr
Fridley MN 55432
David Olson
Donald Siegel
Sharon Pearson
MOVING
Ernst Machinery & Housemovers Corp
9400 - 85th Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55445 Kenneth Ernst
OIL SERVICES
American Burner Service Inc
601 N Prior Ave
St Paul MN 55104 Lyle Rotvold
Egan & Sons Co
7100 Medicine Lake Rd
Minneapolis NIId 55427
PLASTBRING
Joe Nelson Stucco Co Inc
1150 98th Ln NW
Coon Rapids MN 55433
PLIIMBING
A-Aaron's Div. of Waste Inc.
2511 Hwy 7
Excelsior, MN 55331
All-American Mechanical
496 No Prior Ave
St Paul MN 55104
Aqua City Plumbing
5428 Nicollet Ave South
Minneapolis MN 55419
Gerald Egan
Evelyn Nelson
Duane Farr
Charles Rosenberger
Dave Vogelgesang
B& D Plumbing & Heating Inc
4091 MacIver Ave NE
St Michael MN 55376 William Daleiden
Barnes Plumbing Co Inc
134 E 18th Street
Minneapolis MN 55403
Bob's Circle Plumbing
52 E Rd
Circle Pines MN 55014
William Barnes
Bob Schneider
19Q
Same
Same
Same
STATE OF MINN
CLYDE WILEY
B1dg/Mech Insp
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
STATE OF MINN
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Boedeker Plumbing & Heating
2905 Garfield Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55408
Bohn Plumbing & Heating Inc
8280 Lake Jane Tr
Lake Elmo MN 55042
Loren Brown Plumbing
12R # 1 Box 3 8
Delano MN 55328
Bruce Plumbing Co.
3601 - 85th Ave N
Brooklyn Park, MN 55443
Budget Plumbing Corp
6420 Flying Cloud Dr
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Kent Carpenter Plumbing
8009 Lake Drive
Lino Lakes MN 55014
Dalby Plumbing
1212 East 94th Street
Bloomington NIlJ 55425
Egan & Sons Co
7100 Medicine Lake Rd
Minneapolis MN 55427
Fignar Plumbing Co
2844 Johnson St NE
Minneapolis NIlJ 55418
Fritze Plumbing
9381 Trenton Ln . �
Maple Grove MN 5�5369
Gilbert Mech Contr Inc.
3012 Clinton Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55408
Harris Mechanical Contr Co
2300 Territorial Rd
St Paul NIN 55114
Hayford Plumbing & Htg
2610 Coon Rapids Blvd
Coon Rapids MN 55433
Chester Boedeker
William Bohn
Loren Brown
Joe Bruce
Fred Muralt
Kent Carpenter
Charles Dalby
Gerald Egan
Stephen Fignar
Larry Fritze
P Dan Gilbert
Gerald Mullenbach
Robert Hayford
19R
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
S M Hedler Plumbing Inc
2519 4th Street NE
Minneapolis MN 55418 Sylvester Hedler Same
R C Hoffman Plumbing Inc
804 W Sextant
Roseville MN 55113 Richard Hoffman Same
Horwitz Inc
5000 N Hwy 169
Minneapolis MN 55428 Larry Swanson Same
Hutton and Rowe Inc.
2126 - 2nd Ave
Anoka, MN 55303 David Rowe Same
J& J Heating & Sheet Metal Inc
211 South Adams
Cambridge MN 55008 James Lindell Same
Jerry's Plumbing
1838 Northdale Blvd
Coon Rapids MN 55433 Gerald Thrall Same
Joyce Plumbing Inc
4342 Oakdale So
Edina MN 55424 Robert Joyce Same
Klamm Mechanical Contrs Inc
12409 County Road #11
Burnsville MN 55337 Edward Klamm Same
Kolar Plumbing
1397 Selby Ave
St Paul MN 55104 James Kolar Same
Kramer Mechanical Plbg & Htg
7860 Fawn Lake Dr NE
Stacy MN 55079 Edward Kramer Same
Larson Plumbing Inc
3095 - 162nd Ln NW
Andover MN 55304 James Larson Same
Leos Plumbing
8600 Xylon Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55445 Brian Johnson Same
LeVahn Brothers Inc
3200 Penn Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55412 Loren LeVahn Same
Lindman Plumbing Co
6224 Noble N
Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Gary Lindman Same
19S
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Metropolitan Mech Contrs Inc
7340 Washington Ave S
Eden Prairie MN 55344
Midwestern Mechanical
9103 Davenport St NE
Blaine MN 55434
R J Miller Plbg & Htg Inc
6293 Jackson Street NE
Minneapolis MN 55432
Minnesota Mechanical Inc
509 Front Ave
St Paul MN 55117
Minnesota Water Treatment Inc
1461 - 94th Ln NE
Blaine NIIJ 55434
Mooney-Ridler Plbg & Htg Inc
2925 Garfield Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55408
Northern Plbg & Htg Inc
15685 Medina Rd
Plymouth MN 55447
Northridge Plumbing Co
6960 Madison Ave W #10
Golden Valley MN 55427
Nygaard Plumbing
7435 Hwy #65
Minneapolis MN 55432
Olson Plumbing
731 - 44th Ave NE
Minneapolis MN 55421
P& H Services Co Inc
208 - 73rd Ave N
Brooklyn Park MN 55430
People's Plbg & Htg Co
1148 Arcade Street
St Paul MN 55106
Quality Plumbing & Remodeling
11033 Terrace Rd NE
Blaine MN 55434
Thomas Nelson
Gene Beijer
Robert Miller
George Fredericks
Jennifer Nelson
David Ridler
Harlan Perron
Darwin Baack
Nils Nygards
Doug Olson
Gerald Steffens
Ron Gritzmaker
Dean Ciccone
19T
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Richfield Plumbing Co
805 - West 77 1/2 Street
Richfield MN 55423 Wilfred Schulz Same
Roto Rooter Services Co
14530 27th Ave N
Plymouth, MN 55447
Schulties Plumbing Inc
1521 - 94th Ln NE
Blaine MN 55434
Seitz Bros Inc
16752 - 68th Ave N
Maple Grove MN 55369
Solar Mechanical Inc
1628 Hwy 10
Minneapolis I�Ild 55422
Dale Sorensen Company
150 W 88th Street #6
Bloomington MN 55420
Standard Plbg & Appliance Co
8015 Minnetonka Blvd
St Louis Park MN 55426
David Lohmann
John Schulties
Jack Seitz
Mike Nally
Dale Sorensen
Inc
Julius Klein
Thompson PZumbing Corp
15001 Minnetonka Industrial Rd
Minnetonka MN 55345 Kenneth Gause
Tim's Quality Plumbing Inc
PO Box 22409
Minneapolis MN 55422
Welter & Blaylock Inc
819 W 106th St
Bloomington MN 55420
ROOFING
Berwald Roofing Co Inc
2440 North Charles St
N St Paul MN 55109
Tim Lindholm
Bill Yetzer
Eugene Berwald
L & M Roofing
593 Berwood Ave
Vadnais Heights MN 55127 Lyle Nelson
Manions Master Roofing
3841 Hayes Street
Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Tom Manion
19U
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
Same
Same
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Netko Brothers Roofing Inc
7118 Riverdale Rd
Minneapolis MN 55430
Rainville-Carlson Inc.
2929 Lyndale Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55408
Stock Roofing Inc
289 Liberty St NE
Fridley MN 55432
SIGN ERECTOR
Alphacom Sign
13809 Vincent Ave S
Burnsville MN 55337
Lawrence Signs Inc
945 Pierce Butler Route
St Paul MN 55104
Leroy Signs Inc
6325 Welcome Ave N
Minneapolis MN 55429
Naegele outdoor Adv Inc
1700 W 78th St
Minneapolis MN 55423
Nordquist Sign Co
312 W Lake Street
Minneapolis MN 55408
Suburban Lighting Inc
6077 Lake Elmo Ave N
Stillwater MN 55082
WRECRING
Carl Bolander & Sons Co
251 Starkey Street
St Paul MN 55107
SWIMMING POOLS
Innsbruck North Townhouse Assn
5506 Meister Road NE
Fridley MN 55421
Maurice Filister
5750 East River Rd NE
Fridley MN 55432
Five Sands Development
6950 Way2ata Blvd #421
Minneapolis MN 55426
Jean Netko
Robert Johnson
Warren Stock
Jerry Burgeson
Larry Norton
LeRoy Reiter
Tom Klees
Jim Tordoff
Ray Roemmich
Dominique Najjar
At: 5506 Meister Rd
Same
Same
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bl•dg Ofcl
At: 5750 East River Rd
At: 78 55 East River Rd
19V
Contractors, Public Pools, & Trailer License Renewals
Harold D Morrow
Rt 5 Box P196
River Falls WI 54022
Skywood Inn
5201 Central Ave NE
Fridley MN 55421
KCS Property Mgmt
8100 12th Ave S Suite 200
Bloomington MN 55425
At: 5430 - 7th Street
At: 5201 Central Ave NE
At: 6540 East River Rd
Northwest Racquet/Swim/Health Club
5525 Cedar Lake Rd
St Louis Pk MN 55416 At•: 1200 East Moore Lk Dr
Ellen/Milton Hughes
4410 Douglas Ave S
Golden Valley MN 55416 At: 6670-90 Lucia Ln NE
Independent School Dist #14
6000 West Moore Lk Dr NE
Fridley MN 55432 At: 6100 West Moore Lk Dr
Marck Investment Co
PO Box 26113
Minneapolis MN 55426
University Ave Assoc
111 83rd Ave NE
Fridley MN 55432
Kmit Luciow Associates
3158 Arthur St NE
Minneapolis MN 55418
Edric Associates
5024 Normandale Ct
Edina MN 55436
At: 1120 - 52nd Ave NE
At: 111 - 83rd Ave NE
At: 5460 - 7th St NE
At: 1200- 72nd Ave NE
Black Forest Condo Owner's Assoc
1601 North Innsbruck Dr NE
FridZey MN 55432 At: 1601 North Innsbruck Dr
TRAILERS
Onan Corporation
1400 - 73rd Ave NE
Fridley MN 55432
Park Construction
7900 Beech Street NE
Fridley MN 55432
At: 1400 - 73rd Ave NE
At: 7900 Beech Street NE
19W
20