Loading...
PL 02/07/1996 - 7065�� �"'`�� �� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1996 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC COPY (Please return to Community Development Dept.) � CITY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA PLANNINC, COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1996 7:30 P.M. LOCATION: Fridley Municipai Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: January 3, 1996 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 110, ENTITLED °PUBLIC NUISANCES". IN ORDER TO CLASSIFY CRAVEL AND/OR DIRT DRIVEWAYS AS A NUISANCE AND PROHIBIT THEIR USE. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PAFtKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 4. 1995 ^ RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - MEETING OF JANUARY 11, 1996 OTHER BUSINESS: ADJOURNMENT �� �"� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEETINd� JANQARY 3� 1996 CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Kondrick called the January 3, 1996, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absenta Dave Rondrick, Diane Savage, LeRoy Oquist, Dean Saba, Brad Sielaff, Connie Modig Dave Newman Others Present: Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Dan Ryan, North Country Collectibles Scott Lund, Rite-Way Mobile Home Repair, Inc. David Theede, D.V.L. Transport, Inc. I,arry Theede, D.V.L. Transport, Inc. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 20 1995, PLANNING CONIl�ISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to approve the December 20, 1995, Planning Commission minutes as written. IIPON A VOICL VOTL, ALL VOTIN(� AYB, VICE-CBAIRPERSON RONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #95-11 BY NORTH COUNTRY COLLECTIBLES: Per Section 205.17.O1.C.(3) of the Fridley City Code, to allow retail uses within industrial buildings on Lot 2, Block 1, Central View Manor 3rd Addition, generally located at 1175 -73 1/2 Avenue N.E. AND PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #95-12 BY D.V.L. TRANSPORT, INC.: Per Section 205.17.O1.C.(9) of the Fridley City Code, to allow repair garages within industrial buildings on Lot 2, Block 1, Central View Manor 3rd Addition, generally located at 1175 -73 1/2 Avenue N.E. MOTION by Mr. Oguist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to conduct the public hearings simultaneously, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. � IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THL MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PIIBLIC HEARIN(�4 OPEN AT 7=34 P.M. , PLANNIN(� COMMI88ION MEETING JANUARY 3 1996 PAGS 2 � Mr. Hickok stated Special IIse Permit request #95-11 is by North Country Collectibles, a retail merchandise operation located within an M-1, Light Industrial, district. Special IIse Permit request #95-12 is by D.V.L. Transport, Inc., to allow truck repair in the M-1 district. The property is located on the north side of 73 1/2 Avenue between Highway 65 and Central Avenue. Mr. Hickok stated, in April 1994, the City Council held a public hear�ng for construction of a new office/warehouse complex of 13,000 square feet on this site. There were separate land use actions�requested to rezone a portion of the property, to vacate an easement on the property, and to allow the use as proposed. The City Council approved those actions and a plat in July 1994. The construction of the building is now nearly complete. The landscaping is installed. Parking installation has occurred. Mr. Hickok stated North Country Collectibles is a request to allow a 1600 square foot retail space within this office/warehouse complex. The code allows a certain mix of retail in an industrial building provided the retail area does not exceed 5,000 square feet or 30� of the building. In this case, North Country Collectibles represents 12� of the space within the buildinq and falls within the code requirements for ,� this location. Mr. Hickok stated the parking supply, according to code, is to be sufficient for that retail space. The staff report included in the agenda provided information on how much parking would be required for each of the uses within the complex. Initially, it was indicated this would be an office/warehouse mix, and a speculative formula of one parking space per 700 square feet was used to determine parking needs. The uses have gone toward small industrial spaces with their own parking demands. Therefore, one of the stipulations relates to future parking needs and allowing additional parkinq on the north side of the building. The code requires that the existing level of service on the roadways not be affected by the retail use. Staff did an analysis and determined the numbers are negligible in terms of the impact to 73 1/2 Avenue. Mr. Hickok stated the proposal should be compatible with surrounding uses. Staff has previously indicated that the retail use under 30� of the building space is appropriate in the M-1 district. Mr. Hickok stated the code indicates the building owner or agent should be responsible for informing prospective and future tenants that the property is zoned for industrial use and that there are some limitations on the retail and other types of uses � in the building. Staff recommends approval of the request by � �� PLANNINC� COMMI88ION MEETING. JANUARY 3, 1996 PAGL 3 North Country Collectibles with the �ollowing stipulations: 1. Owner shall provide adequate parking on-site for uses within the buildinq. If parking�demand exceeds parking accommodations, a madification of the rear park3ng/storage area may be required. 2. Any new lightinq associated with this use shall be downcast security/safety liqhting and shall not exceed a footcandle measurement deemed appropriate, by City staff, for the specific location. 3. The completed/approved (Rite-Way) site plan including all code required elements such as: concrete or asphalt parking surfaces, B6-18 curbing around the perimeter of all parking surfaces, screening walls or fences, specific landscape plant materials, plant locations, and irrigation for the front and side yards shall be adhered to with any modification requiring review and approval by City staff. 4. No outdoor portion of this M-1 property shall be utilized for display or sales. n 5. Drive aisles shall be provided and kept free of vehicles to allow circulation and access for police and emergency vehicles. 6. Deliveries to the retail operation shall be done in a manner that does not disrupt parking or entrance to other businesses within this complex. 7.. All signs shall be consistent with the comprehensive buildinq sign plan approved by the City Council. 8. All existing non-compliant signs shall be removed from the site and shall be replaced by proper signage within 45 days of final City Council approval of this special use permit. 9. Owner shall provide information about 30� maximum retail to present and future retailers in complex so that they are aware of the limited expansion potential for retail within the building. Mr. Hickok stated the petitioner has respanded to these stipulations and has stated he has no objections. Mr. Hickok stated Special Use Permit #g5-12 is for D.V.L. � Transport to allow truck repair in an M-1, Light Industrial, district. The code does allow a special use permit for truck repair in an M-1 district. In December 1994, Mr. Lund had PLANNING COMMISSION MEgTINQ JANQAgY 3 1996 AaE 4 �"�` requested special use consideration to allow a repair garage in the complex. The request was withdrawn. D.V.L. Transport is similar b�t, rather than repair passenger vehicles, repairs large scale tractor/trailers. Mr. Hickok stated staff has reviewed the request. Staff recommends approval of the request with the following stipulations: 1. Motor vehicles stored outside shall not exceed 15 feet in heiqht. 2. Screening materials are provided as in Section 205.17.06.G(1) (a) . 3. Motor vehicle storage is conduct�d as provided in Section 205.17.07.D(5). 4. Liqhting associated with storaqe shall be downcast security/ safety lighting and shall not exceed a footcandle measurement deemed appropriate, by City staff, for the specific location. � �. The completed/approved (Rite-Way) site plan including all code required elements such as: concrete or asphalt parkinq surfaces, B6-18 curbing around the perimeter of all parking surfaces, screening walls or fences, specific landscape plant materials, plant locations, and irrigation for the front and side yards shall be adhered to with any modification requiring review and approval by City staff. 6. No outdoor portion of this M-1 property shall be utilized for display or sales. 7. Drive aisles shall be provided and kept free of vehicles to allow circulation and access for police and emergency vehicles. 8. No junk or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on site. 9. All screening fence installations shall meet the minimum building setback requirements from any street property linee 10. All signs shall be consistent with the comprehensive building sign pian approved by the City Councii. 11. All existing non-compliant siqns shall be removed from the site and shall be replaced by proper signage within 45 days of final City Council approval of this special use permit. � �. pLANNING COMMIBSION MEETING JANVARY 3 1996 PAGB 5 12. No outdoor repair of �otorized or non-motorized vehicles shall be permitted. 13. All existing outdoor storage shall be moved to hard-surfaced parking area, stored indoors, or removed from site completely. 14. The rear area screening qate shall be kept closed to provide adequate screening between storage area and the public riqht-of-way. Mr. Rondrick asked if there were any questions of staff pertaining to North Country Collectibles. Mr. Sielaff asked what the circumstances are for North Country Collectibles already being in the complex. Mr. Hickok stated staff were not aware until a recent site visit that this operation was already in the building. When this was recognized, staff talked with Mr. Lund who then came in with the special use application. ^ Mr. Sielaff stated the business could potentially have high traffic volume. How will staff determine if demand exceeds parking accommodations? Mr. Hickok stated staff will have to monitor. It is possible that on weekends this business could have a high demand parking situation. Staff will let the police depa=tment know this is a stipulation so they can do random inspections. During regular business hours, the code enforcement officer will be asked to make random checks to see that parking does not exceed the designated parking. If these observations reveal parking on the street or in the driveway beside the building, staff will ask the owner to designate additional parking behind the building. Mr. Sielaff asked if this would be true of any situation where there was parking on the street. Mr. Oquist stated he thought this would be true only if the parking lot was full. Staff cannot control those who choose to park on the street and not in the lot. Mr. Hickok stated this was correct. This wouid have to be a "bursting at the seams" type of situation where the lot was constantly full and patrons have to park elsewhere. �.-..� Mr. Kondrick stated he did not think the square footage of the business would generate a great amount of traffic. There may be a problem, however, in conjunction with the other businesses. 6 PLANNIN(� COMMISSION MEETINt3 JANQARY 3 1996 PAGL 6 �"'� Mr- Lund, owner of the property, stated regarding parking, North Country Collectibles does not draw a significant amount of traffic. They average one or two vehicles per day visitinq that facility. They do not anticipate.any parkinq concerns. Mr. Ryan, owner of North Country Collectibles, stated the business carries baseball cards, comics, stamps for collectors, etc. Because of the location, it is hard to find. Psr. Lund stated 95� of the business is outside the facility at collectible shows, althouqh Mr. Ryan does display collectibles at this location. Mr. Sielaff asked if Mr. Ryan did any promotions. Mr. Ryan stated he qoes to three to four shows a month outside this facility. Mr. Sielaff asked if Mr. Lund was aware that he needed a special use permit. Mr. Lund stated, at the time of construction, they were going to have mechanics in this facility. The former business operation �"`� was not conducive to their operation in that they could not bring vehicles into that small of a building. They then built a bigger building in order to bring vehicles inside. He understood that the�special use permit was needed because they were doing mechanical work on vehicles for others. What he has learned is that, before he leases, rents, or does anything further with the building or any tenants, he will just call the City to see if it f its . Mr. Kondrick asked if there were any comments regarding the stipulations. Mr. Lund stated he had no problem with the stipulations. Mr. Kondrick asked if the Counnission members had any questions or comments regarding D.V.L. Transport, Inc. The Commission members had no questions of staff. Mr. Rondrick asked the petitioner if they had any comments. Mr. Lund introduced Mr. David Theede and Mr. Larry Theede, owners and operators of D.V.L. Transport, Inc. Mr. Lund stated they had anticipated mechanics coming into this facility. They were doing some outside work. Therefore, this would require a special use permit. � Mr. Rondrick asked if there were any comments regarding the � � �"'� PLANNINa COMMI88ION MEETINa JANQARY 3 1996 PAGS 7 stipulations. Mr. L. Theede stated he understood the stipulations. They were not in business to put junk out there. They keep things clean in the area. Mr. Lund stated, in reviewing the stipulations, #13 refers to moving existing outdoor storage. He asked if this alludes to the cement blocks that are in that area. Mr. Hickok stated cement blocks were used as an example. Along the western lot line by the landscaped area, there are some items stored. Mr. Lund stated in his business of being a mobile home transport and set up company he buys a number of cement blocks. They put these blocks in what is the storage area which is the along the fenced portion of the building. Alonq the fence line, they did put in landscape rock rather than sod which is less work to maintain. Behind the fence, which is screened, they keep the blocks on pallets and stored off the curb along the fence on the area of landscape rock. This is behind the gate and cannot be seen unless the gate is open. They are not kept in the parking area because the blocks would be in the way. The pallets are very heavy and need to be stored off to the side in order to be accessible for the trucks and off the drive lane. He would prefer not to keep them on the asphalt. It was their intent to keep the blocks along the fence line. One stipulation when constructing the building required a 5-foot offset curb along the west of the building also. They also put landscape rock in that narrow strip. They were going to put a lumber rack next to the building which would extent about four feet. He felt this was reasonable and would fit the city's requirements to screen outdoor storage. Ms. Modig stated the original stipulation indicates storage was to be on a hard surface, and now the petitioner is not complying with the stipulation. Mr. Lund stated he had not taken everything into consideration because the stipulation does not specifically list everything that has to be on the hard surface. When talking about storage on hard surface, they were originally talking about trailers, cars, and things like that which would be placed on a hard surface. He did not see any detriment if the blocks were on the asphalt or off the asphalt. Mr. Kondrick stated he did not see a problem as lang as it is screened. PLANNING COMMI88ION MEETINa JANQARY 3 1996 PAGE 8 �. Ms. Modig stated she sees a potential problem. If the petitioner did not follow the previous stipulations, she did not know if they will follow the stipulations this time. Mr. Lund stated, when building this facility, there were stipulations and that storaqe was to be on a hard surface. He did not think of every small item. Mr. Oquist stated the stipulation was somewhat general. He does agree that this does not take into consideration that the blocks are needed in the business and to put cement blocks on a surface that will impede traffic is also a hazard. Sufficient space must be available for emerqency vehicles. Mr. Lund stated there is a five-foot span between the curb and fence. Mr. Hickok stated the issue is where the cement blocks would be placed - on the hard surface with a landscape separation. As he recalled, that stipulation was to control storage. The idea was to have a separation between what is stored and the fence. It is a controlling feature with having everything on a hard surface. In this case the blocks would be away on the side, and he can �� understand that. But he thought that blocks on a pallet could be put in the back corner. It may take up a parking stall for a trailer but would still allow room for emergency vehicles. Mr. Lund stated they do have landscaping on the north 20 feet and to the east for 15 feet. Ms. Modig stated another company in the area asked for a variance to display snow plow equipment and the City did not allow it because this was not in keeping with the code. Now they just keep the gate open. This area has the appearance of having storage gates open and outside storage. The stipulations for this request are similar to those originally required. She is concerned that the stipulations will be ignored. Mr. Oquist stated, while he aqreed with the comments, the discussion is academic. The conaern about the storage of the cement blocks should be taken care of on the special use permit granted a year ago. D.V.L. Transport does not have any storage outside. The discussion concerns Rite-Way Mobile Home Repair. D.V.L. Transport knows the stipulations for their storage and they must live up to that stipulation. Staff has to deal separately with Rite-Way and the issue of outdoor storage. Mr. D. Theede stated all of their storage is inside. They have been checked by the EPA. The only thing they would have outside � is trucks. a . �� PLANNING COI�MISSION MEETINa JANQARY 3 1996 pAa$ 9 Mr. Oquist stated the first stipulation states the motor vehicles stored outside shall not exceed 15 feet in height. Mr. L. Theede stated the legal height is 13 feet 6 inches so this is not a problem. Mr. Lund stated he would work with staff concerning the cement blocks. MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICL VOTB� ALL VOTINa AYE� VICE-C8llIRPERSON HONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLZC HEARING CLOSED AT 8a05 P.M. Commission members has no further comments. Mr. Kondrick asked for a motion regarding Special Use Permit #95-11 by North Country Collectibles. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to reconmanend approval of Special Use Permit, SP #95-11, by North Country Collecti.bles, n to allow repair garages within industrial buildings on Lot 2, Block l, Central View Manor 3rd Addition, generally located at 1175 -73 1/2 Avenue N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. Owner shall provide adequate parking on-site for uses within the building. If parking demand exceeds parking accommodations, a modification of the rear parking/storage area may be required. 2. Any new lighting associated with this use shall be downcast security/safety lighting and shall not exceed a�ootcandle measurement deemed appropriate, by City staff, for the specific location. 3. The completed/approved (Rite-Way) site plan including all code required elements such as: concrete or asphalt parking surfaces, B6-18 curbing around the perimeter of all parking surfaces, screening walls or fences, specific landscape plant materials, plant locations, and irrigation for the front and side yards shall be adhered to with any modification requiring review and approval by City staff. 4. No outdoor portion of this M-1 property shall be utiiized for display or sales. 5. Drive aisles shall be provided and kept free of vehicles to �` allow circulation and access for police and emergency vehicles. PLANNING COMMIBSION MEETING JANQARy 3 1996 PAGE 10 6. Deliveries to the retail operation shall be done in a manner that does not disrupt parking or entrance to other businesses within this complex. 7. All signs shall be consistent with the comprehensive building sign plan approved by the City Council. 8. All existing non-compliant signs shall be removed from the site and shall be replaced by proper signage within 45 days of final City Council approval of this special use permit. 9• Owner shall provide information about 30� maximum retail to present and future retailers in complex so that they are aware of the limited expansion potential for retail within the building. IIPON A VOICS VOTF, ALL pp'1+INa AyE� pICE-CBAIRPER80N HONDRICR DECLARED T8E MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. Mr. Hickok stated the City Council would consider this request on January 22. Commission members has no further comments. Mr. Rondrick asked for a motion regarding Special Use Permit #95-12 by D.V.L. Transport. MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend approval of Special Use Permit, SP #95-12, by D.V.L. Transport to allow repair garages within industrial buildings on Lot 2, Block 1, Central View Manor 3rd Addition, generally located at 1175 -73 1/2 Avenue N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. 2. Motor vehicles stored outside shall not exceed 15 feet in height. Screening materials are provided as in Section 205.17.06.G(1){a). 3. Motor�vehicle storage is conducted as provided in Section 205.17.07.D(5). 4. Lighting associated with storage shall be downcast security/ safety lighting and shall not exceed a footcandle measurement deemed appropriate, by City staff, for the specific location. 5. The completed/approved (Rite-Way) site plan including all code required elements such as: concrete or asphalt parking surfaces, B6-18 curbing around the perimeter af all parking surfaces, screening walls or fences, specific landscape � �"� � � _ _ . i^'� PLANNING COMMIBSION MEBTINt�. JANQARY 3, 1996 �AGS 11 plant materials, plant locations, and irrigation for the front and side yards shall be adhered to with any modification requiring review and approval by City staff. 6. No outdoor portion of this M-1 property shall be utilized for display or sales. 7. Drive aisles shall be provided and kept free of vehicles to allow circulation and access for police and emerqency vehicles. 8. No junk or inoperable vehicles shail be stored on site. 9. All screening fence installations shall meet the m3.nimum building setback requirements from any street property line. 10. Al1 signs shall be consistent with the comprehensive building sign plan approved by the City Council. 11. All existing non-compliant signs shall be removed from the site and shall be replaced by proper signage within 45 days � of final City Council approval of this special use permit. 12. No outdoor repair of motorized or non-motorized vehicles shall be permitted. 13. Al1 existing outdoor storage shall be moved to hard-surfaced parking area, stored indoors, or removed from site completely. 14. The rear area sereening gate shall be kept closed to provide adequate screening between storage area and the public right-of-way. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICL-CSAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIBD IINANIMOIISLY. Mr. Hickok stated the City Council would consider this request on January 22. 2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 7, 1995: MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the minutes of the Human Resources Commission meeting of December 7, 1995. �., IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIN(� AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED DNANIMOIISLY. � ' ' - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANQARY 3 1996 PAGB 12 � 3• RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 19. 1995: MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to receive the minutes of the Appeals Commission meeting of December 19, 1995. IIPON l�l VOICE VOTL, ALL VOTINd AYE, VIC$-CBAIRPER80N RONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. 4. OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Hickok stated, regarding the special use requests, Ms. Modig made a good comment reqarding the surrounding uses in the area. This site evaluation provided an opportunity for staff to look at some of the surrounding uses. As a result, staff has a list of numerous items which will be followed up by the code enforcement officer. These items are now on a schedule with a deadline for correction. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Mr, Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to adjourn the meeting. IIPON A VOICL VOTB, ALL pOTIN(� AYE, VICE-CHAIItpER80N RONDRICR DECLARED T8E MOTIOld CARRIED AND THg JANQARy 3, 1996, PLANNING COZ�II►II88ION MEETINQ ADJOIIRNED AT 8:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ? � �� � � ' � Lavonn Cooper L�> Recording Secretary � r-'� r _ � . DATE: TO: Community Deveiopment Department February 1, 1996 PI,��]VIVING DIVISION City of Fridley Planning Commission Members FROM: Ba.rbara Dacy, Community Development Dire,ctor Scott H'ickok, Planning Coordinator Kurt Jensen-Schneider, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Properly Improvement Ordinance Amendments / Public Hearings BACKGROUND The City Council considered three modifications to the City Code at its November 20, 1995 conference meeting, see attached November 16, 1995 memo(Eahibit A). Their discussion resulted in a follow-up memo which inciuded suggested revisions (Ezhibit B). At this time, staff has been directed to proceed with ordinaace madifications involvu�►g gravel driveways, junk velucles, and nuisance abatement. To proceed, a Planning Commission public hearing for each of the proposed ordinance changes is required and has been scheduled for February 7, 1996. The draft ordinances and the public hearing notice aze attached for your review (Ezhibit C). UNPAVED DRIVEWAYS The unpaved driveway amendment concept was previously studied and approved by the Planning Commission at its September 22, 1993 meeting. The current version of the driveway amendment allows for special assessment of the costs and incorporates a11 existing gravel, dirt, or unpaved driveways into the Public Nuisance section of the City Code. The list of nine rationale for classifying gravel, dirt, or unpaved driveways as a public nuisance is attached (Ezhibit D). In summary, the Planning Commissions 1993 input to the City Council included: 1. That approved hardsurface materials consist of concrete, bituminous, brick, and concrete pavers. 2. That all driveways be paved five years from the adoption of the ordinance; when the property is sold; or when a�emut- is required by the City.. 3. That a separate compliance deadline should not be estabGshed for property owners with driveways in exc�s of 50 fcet. 4. That a hardsurface requirement not be imposed for secondary/accessory structures being used for storage facilities. Property Improvement Ordinance Amendments / Public Hearings February 1, 1996 Page 2 S• That an assessment process be made available to hom�wners. A more thorough review of past planning Com�nission action can be obtained by reviewing the October 21, 1993 memo from Barbara. Dacy to William Bums (Ex6ibit E). Specific input from the Planning Commission is summarized and stagcomments are included. It should be noted that staff recommended not to require drivewa.ys to be paved when the properiy is sold. To proceed with this alternative, a"tiuth in sale" approach would have to be develop� and a truth -in-sale ordinance would be r�uired Included in the packet is a letter from Mary Mathews of 1259 Skywood Lane. Ms. Ma.thews is unable to attend the public hearing but did have specific input regarding her driveway situation (Eghibit Fj. NNK VEHICLES ,� The City Council has also direct� staff to proceed with improvements to the junk vehicle sections of the City Code. To increase the effectiveness and effiaiency of resolving junk vehicle code issues staff has proposed the an ordinance re�rision The cwrent proposal combines Code seerion 123 Jurrk Yehicles with Code section 114 Ab�rdoned Motor Yehicles. A draft version of ,''� this ordinance modification/combination is included. The proposed changes are also discussed in the November 16, 1995 and January 4, 1996 property improvement memos to the City 1Vlanager (Ezhibits A and B). In summary, the proposed ordinance modificafion/combination includes the following: 1. A more detailed description of the criteria necessary to define junk vehicles 2. An additional definition of unsafe motor vehicles to include reference to State Statutes 169.468 to 169.75. 3. A definition of motor vehicle which includes any machine propelled by power which is designed to ttavel along the ground and transport persons or property or pulls machinery. 4. A detailed five day notification and abatement process along with specific impound, reclaim, and public sale requirements. 5. An aggrieved owner hearing proceSS using the City Hearing Examiner. 6. A one year "sunset date" to allow for a re-examination of the ordinance one year from it's adoption. An ordinance change of this nature will cla.rify and broaden the junk vehicle enforcement options. Along with improved driveway definitions and surface requirements, the City will be better equipped to resolve vehicle related issues. Removal of junk and unsafe vehicles will become more efficient, the detrimental effects of junk, inoperable, or unsafe vehicles will be diminished. � � Property Improvement Ordinance Amendments / Public Hearings ,� February 1, 1996 Page 3 NUI5ANCE ABATBMENT City Council has directed staff to proceed with a minor modification to the Nuisance Abatement ordinance. The suggested modification will allow staff to more efficiently abate "same or similar" violatioas from the same location at which an initial abatement has already occutred. In summary, the proposed ordinance modification includes: 1. A"Release of Property Agreement" to be signed before reclaiming any abated material. 2. A provision which allows the City to abate same or similar violations from a location in which an abatement has already occurred. An abbreviated but reasonable notice period will still be required. These modifications will allow the City to treat recurring violations as a continuation of the first violation Separate abatement proceedings and 20 da.y notification periods will be avoided. A more efficient response to recurring citizen complaints will be achieved. �1 SLIMMARY �, The potential for neighborhood improvement will be a positive change for the City. Driveway and vehicle complaints are often intenelated. Approaching both issues at the same time demonstrates the Cities concern about the impact they ha.ve on residential neighborhoods. In addition, responsiveness will be increased with the nuisance abatement revision.. Each of the three modifications will result in increased enforcement effe�tiveness. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinances as submitted. KS:ks M-96-50 �% Community Developme�t Departmemt � PLANNING DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: November 16,1995 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott H'ickok, Planning Coordinator �/ Kurt Jensen-Schneider, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Property Improvement Ordinance Options Staff has prepared inforniation on several property improvement ordinance issues for council consideration. This informa.tion will include a review of unpaved driveways, junk vehicles, and nuisance abatement provisions. Current difficulties in enforcing code requirements related to these areas will be lughlighted for your consideration. UNPAVED DRIVEWAYS Problem: Current code requirements mandate the construction of an approved hardsurface driveway. Many homes in Fridley were constructed prior to this requirement, or simply without regard to the requiremerrt. Cucrently there aze approximately 328 unimproved gravel, crushed rock, or dirt driveways in the City. Residences without paved driveways are pernutted to park vehicles on whatever "driveway" the owner of the property maintains. The detrimental effects of unimproved driveways are clearly displayed in the attached list of eight rationale for requiring hardsurface driveways (see ezhibit A). History: The attached memo dated October 21, 1993 outlines past actions taken concerning hardsurface driveways (see ezhibit B). This memo reviews the following: 1. Council's request to investigate an amortization ordinance tha.t would require all property owners to pave their driveway by an established date. 2- Past Planning Commission approval and input for the Council to consider when developing the ordinance amendment. 3. Staff comments regarding implementation requirements and Planning Commission input. 4. Legal opinion regarding the City's ability to contract and assess driveway improvement costs (see ezhibit C). � ,� , �"� Property Improvement Ordinance Options November 16, 1995 Page 2 Solution: Staff recommends that the City Council pursue an ordinance wtuch would require all non hardsurface driveways to be paved. In making this recommendatian staff concurs with the following Plarming Commission input from the October 21, 1993 memo: 1. That approved hardsurface materials consist of concrete, bituminous, brick, and concrete pavers. in addition staffrecommends all mateaials 1ia.ve sufficient P. S.I. ratings to support motor vehicles. 2. That a11 driveways be paved five years from the adopdon of the ordinance 3. That a separate compliance deadline should not be established for property owners with driveways in excess of 54 feet. 4. That the hardsurface requirement not be imposed for secondary/accessory structures being used as storage facilities. 5. That an assessment process be made available to homeowners. �, _ ._ In addition to these recommendations, staff believes specific language involving the lot coverage aspects of a hardsurface driveways in the frorn yard should be included. Lot coverage or size requirements would eliminate concems abaut paving entire &otrt yards. Paving the driveway will also help to limit the number of vehicles stored on the property since it forces a decision as to how big the paved surface is on the property. Summary: The implementation of an ordinance modification requiring all non-hardsurface driveways to be paved would: 1. Require notification of 328 property owners. 2. Require a Planning Commission public hearing to amend the zoning ordinance. 3. Require a City Council public hearing. 4. Provide an option for special assessment of properties. 5. Require a large scale communication, coordination and inspection effort to ensure all properties reach compliance within the require� timeframe. n, Property Improvement Ordinance Options November 16, 1995 Page 3 The implemeutation of a definite hards�uface requiremern a,ould aid in the enforcement of residential P�8 r�l�'ements• Exce.ssive storage of vehicles would be limited to a well defined, hazdsurface, drivewaY are�a. In additioq lot coverage requirements would establish a maximum parking area, for each parcel. Direct control rn,er the number of allowable vehicles would be achieved. The implementation of this requiremeut vvill require additional language be added to the Zon�ng Code. Staffis cuirently working to develop specific language for these modifications. ,1UNK VEHICLES � Problem: The cunent junk vehicle ordinance states that all vehicles must be aurently licensed and str�t operable if stored outside. The ordinance does not define what qualifies as an inoperable vehicle; this determination is made admin,istratively on a case by case basis. To qualify as an operable vehicle a current license must be displayed and. all critical operational paRs (tires etc.) must be functional. Without first-hand knowledge of operability or neighbors who can testify as to the operability of a velucle can not be considered "junk" under the cutrent ordinance requirements. A vehicde which maintains a current license and is not visibly �� missing °critical parts" can easily remain on the property for an extended period and give the appearance of being operational when in fact it is not. Ensuring tha.t a vehicle is safe to operate on the public street is not a requirement of the current junk vehicle ordinance. A vehicle may visibly pass the operational test while lacking critical interior or exterior safety items. Solution: To strengthen the junk vehicle ordinance staffrecommends the Council consider an ordinance modification with administrative implications and changes. Ordinance Modification- The implementation of an ordinance modification could include the following: Incorporate a definition of "unsa.fe for operation" to ittclude reference to any state, local, or fedeial regulations including, but not linuted to Nfinnesota State Statutes 169.468 to 169.75. 2. To include any vehicle which is not regularly used on City streets as an abandoned, junk or unsafe vehicle. �"'� !~� Property Improvement Ordinance Options November 16, 1995 Page 4 3. To increase the expediency of junk or unsafe vehicle processing and abatements to 72 hours in accordance with State Statutes (the City of Mpls enforces this). 4. To detail the notice, reclaim, and public sale requirements concerning abated vehicl�. 5. To implement a hearing process for aggrieve� vehicle owners. To incorporate these changes effectively, the City's legal staff has combined Code section 123 Jra7k Yehicles with Code Section 114 Aba�ndoned Motor Yehicles A draft version of this ordinance modification/combination is attache� as ezhibit D. Administrative Chan�e: To accompany the ordinance m�ification staff would proceed with an administrative change in junk vehicle enforcement. This change would introduce iacrea.sed activity and effectiveness to the process. To implement this change staff would develop: ^ 1. A checklist of vehicle safefiy and operational requirements to be used as official notice of vehicles in violation 2. A notice form to be securely attached to and d.isplayed on any junk vehicle for a period of no less than 72 hours before abatement. This checklist would be generated using Sta.te Statute requirements referenced in the definition of "Unsafe for Operation". If an excessive number of unsafe conditions aze revealed, the vehicle would be considered inoperable. If any critical parts are missing or impaired the vehicle would be considered inoperable. A preliminary sample of a vehicle checklist is attached as ezhibit E. How It Works Egample: 1. Complainct about vehicles on Ely strest is received; an inspection takes place. 2. Staff has reason to believe that four of the eight vehicles observed raise significant safety or inoperability questions. A notification checklist for each questionable vehicle is left at the site. 3. The vehicle owner receives a copy of the vehicle checklists and is required to ,� provide verifica.tion that tt�e listed vehicles are safe for the public roadway (specific inspection procedure required). Property Improvement Ordinance Options November 16, 1995 Page 5 4. Should the vehicle not provide verification within Sve da.ys (minimum 72 hours) the city concludes that the vehicles aze inoperable. 5• The city removes and impounds each inoperablelunsafe vehicle. 6• The city ma,ils notice to the vehicle owner(s) stating the location and procedures for reclaiming the abated vehicl�s). 7• Within fifteen da.ys a.fter notification of the completed vehicle abatement the vehicle owner shall reclaim such vehicles upon payment of all towing and storage costs. 8. Airy property owner who feeLs aggrieved by an impoundment of a vehicle may request a hearing before a heazing examiner. 9• Atry person aggrieved by the decision of the hear�ng eacaminer may appeal that decision to the City Council. � Summary: ^ The nnplementation of an ordinance modification of tius nature would r�uire: - I. Research potential service garages to act as safety inspectors. Z. Public notifica.tion. 3. A City Council public hearing would not be required, but a hearing is recommended to explain the new program. 4. First Reading 5. Second Reading An ordinance and administrative change of this nature would clarify and broaden the junlc vehicle enforcement options. Along with improved driveway definitions and surface requirementsy the City could better respond to citizen complaints. Additional control to limit. the number of vehicl� on a parcel would be achieved. The detrimental effects of inoperable vehicles would be dimuushed. r'� �'� Property Improvement Ordinance Options November 16, 1995 Page 6 NUISANCE ABAT'E:N�NT Problem: The nuisance abat�ent ordinance has been used effectively on several occasions. Proble�ns have arisen with the recun'ence of violations after the abatement occutred. Speafically, inoperable vehicles have retumed to the site in the same inoperable condition just da.ys after the abatement. The nuisance abatement ordinance does not address a repeat offense violator. Returning the same or similar material. to the abatement location causes the City to uritiate an entirely new notification and abatement proceeding. Solution: To counter the problem of the repeat offender staff recommends that the Council coasider: Requiring a"Release of Property Agreemeirt" to Ue signed bp anYone wishing to claim any abated materiats. This agreement would establish that the questionable material would not be retumexl to the abatement site unless code requirements were all satisfactorily met (see ezhibit �. � 2. Adding specific language to the abatement ordinance allowing the City to abate "same or similar" violations within a specific time fraine following an abatement. This would allow the city to treat recurring violations as a continuation of the first violation Separate notification steps and abatement proceedings could be avoided. NUMBER OF VEHICLES PER LOT In April of 1993 the Council reviewed parking ordinance issues and discussed the possibility of limiting the number of vehicles on residential property. In an Apri121, 1993 memo the option of limiting the number of vehicles was outlined (see ezhibit G). Upon review by the council in 1993, this option was not adopted due to concern about the legal ramifications. Current Apple Valley, Coon Rapids and White Bear I.ake ordinances continue to restrict the number of vehicles per parcel. With the exception of the A.pple Valley example (4 vehicles allowed outside the garage) the maximum allowable vehicles is based on occupancy and/or number of licensed drivers residing at that location. Enforcement of any ordinance provision based on occupancy of a residential home is difficult. Staff recommends the Council consider limiting the number of vehicles per lot as second phase approach in property improvement ordinance modifications. The impact of a manda.tory hardsurface requirement and improved junk vehicle requirements may resolve the number issue. � Property Improvement Ordinance Options November 16, 1995 Page 7 CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATTON Staff recommends that the following actions be approved by the council: Co�rtinue with the implementation of a mandatory hardsurface requirement for all remaining unimproved driveways. 2• Continue with the outlined modifications to the junk vehicle requirements. Combining code sections 123 and 114, and implementing the necessary adminisnative changes. 3. Develop specific language providing for a"Release of Properiy" to Chapter 128, Nuisance Abatement. �, Staff does not recommend a vehicle number limitation at this time. Staffrecommends that a limitation as to the number of vehicles allowed on a parcel be approached as a phase II modification to the property improvement ordinances. With adoption of a mandatory paved driveway requirement, improved junk vehicle requirements, and nuisance abatement modifications, a significant impact will be made in Fridley neighborhoods. Staff will have the ability to be more responsive to citizen complaints. Neighborhood residential character will be improved. � M-95- KJS:K7S CC: Dave Sa�lman, Police Cluef ,� � � Community Developme�t Department � PLA►��T1�TING DTVISION City of Fridley DATE: January 4, 1996 TO: William W. Bums, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott H'ickok, Planning �oordinator � i Kurt 7ensen-Schneider, Plaaning Assistant SUBJECT: Council Information - Property Improvement Ordinance Changes ' Staffhas prepared additional information on the property improvement ordinance issues for C�uncil consideration. This will include additional information on unpaved driveways and fwther modifica.tions to the proposed junk vehicle and nuisance abatement provisions. UNPAVED DRIVEWAYS At the November 20, 1995 conference meeting staff recommended that the City Couricil pursue an ordinance which would require all non-hardsurface driveways to be paved. In considering this recommendation several concsrns were raised. Cost: More specific information about a homeowner's cost of improving their driveway is provided in attachment A. The cost savings for the resident could be significant if they use the citie's asphalticoncrete contra�tor. The Citie's contractor cost may vary from year to year. The 1996 pricing information is being prepared by the engineering department at this time. A typical asphalt driveway would cost at least $1,250. Property Valuation: The tax implications of paving a driveway are minimal. A concrete surface will cause a$300 increase in the assessed value of the home. An asphalt surface will cause a$200 increase in the assessed value of the home. The most important benefit of a driveway improvement is that it increases the appeal of the home and neighborhood. Financial Assistance: Nfinnesota State Statute limits any special assessment of this nature to no more than a 30 year Council Information - Property Improvement Ordinance Changes January 4, 1996 Page 2 term. The Council could set the interest rate as it sees fit. Staff recommends that the assessment option be included as the only financial assistance tool made available to the residents. Paving a driveway is an eligi'ble cost in the City's loan program (CDBG does not include this e�ense). Coapling the assessment option with the reduced cost of using the City's contractor will significandy aid the property owner. Including an administrative chazge with the special assessment may help to cover the cost of administering the assessment. For senior, or low income residents a deferred assessment option could be made available. Providing these residents with a deferred assessment activated by the sale of the property would delay the cost burden and place it upon the next property owner. Staff recommends that all driveway assessments ta.ke the form of a 5 year term at 7 percent. Staff also recommends that a 5 percent administrative charge be added to the assessment total and that a$1,250 minimum be required if a resident wishes to use this option. Acceptable Materials: Staffrecommends that approved hardsurface materials ha.ve sufficient P.S.I. ratings to support motor vehicles and consist of concrete, bituminous, and brick. In addition, an acceptable driveway may be constructed using a porous pavement system (pavers). This system would � consist of interlocicing, prefabricated, perforated blocks laid on a soil base and providing a stable pervious surface for low volume vehiculaz use. A por.ous pavement system would be acceptable for all areas of the driveway except the area which parking regularly occurs. To prevent the seepage of velucle fluids, an uninterrupted hardsurface would be required on the parking/storage portion of the driveway. Rental Property: Several of the known gravel driveways exist on rental properties. Of the 514 registered rental properties approximately 30 of them have gravel or dirt drives. The unpact of requiring rental property owners to pave their driveways will be significant if they own numerous properties. The positive impacts to neighborhoods in which these rental properties are clustered will also be significant. Staff recommends that rental property owners be pernutted to use the City contractor as well as the special assessment option. Lot Coverage: Staff believes specific language involving the lot coverage aspects of a hardsurface driveways in the front yard should be included. Lot coverage requirements would eliminate concerns about paving entire front yards. Paving a limited area may also help to limit the number of vehicles stored on the property. The Cities of Brooklyn Park and St. Louis Park, haae a maximum front yard hardsurface coverage of 30 percent. Staff recommends arnending the � ordinance to stipulate a ma�cimum hardsurface coverage of 30 percent in the front yard. ��"`, Council Information - Property Improvement Ordinance Changes January 4, 1996 Page 3 Summary: To proceed with the implementation of an ordinance modification requiring all non- hardsurface driveways to be paved staffwould: 1. Notify all aff� propeci.y owne�s (aPProx. 328) and invite them to an informational meeting the latter part of January. 2. Schedule a Planning Commission public hearing to amend the zoning ordinance (February 7, 1996) 3. A City Council established public hearing for March 4, 1996 7UNK VEHICLES At the November 20, 1995 conference meeting staff recommended that the City Council pursue an ordinance which would clarify and broaden the junk vehicle enforcement options. In considering this ^ recommendation several concerns were raised. Inspection Garages: The original proposal included a clause in which vehicle owners would be required to certify their car as operable and safe using a coirtract inspection gazage. Upon further consideration by staff and concems expressed by the Council this clause has been removed. The concerns about disparity among garages and the legal issues around requiring inspections are sigiuficant enough to withdra.w it from the draft ordinance. Staff believes the lack of garage inspection requirement will not detract from the enforceability of the ordinance. Unsafe vs. Inoperable: The administrative decision of detennining when a vehicle is considered unsafe or inoperable was a concem. To clarify the conditions in which a vehicle may be impounded a detailed junk/unsafe vehicle notifica.tion form is attached as eghibit B. If at any time during the 5 day notification period a vehicle owner expresses a significant hardship regarding the repair of their vehicle, staff will administratively extend the correction deadline for a reasonable time period. Vehicles will be removed only if they maintain one {1) or more junk/inoperable conditions, or two (2) or more unsafe conditions. ;�"`�, Council Information - Property Improvement Ordinance Changes January 4, 1996 Page 4 Sunset Date: To provide for a test period with any junk vehicle ordinance changes it was suggested that a one (1) year "s�u�set" be included. After one (1) year, staffwill provide a report to Council about the program and make a recommendation to continue or repeal the ordinance. Staff recommends it is appropriate to provide a one year"Sunset Date" with the proposed changes. Public feedback during this trial period may be very helpful, Ordinance Modifi�ation Highlig6ts: 1. Incorporate a definition of "unsafe for operation" to include reference to any state, local, or federal regulations including, but not limited to 1Vfinnesota State Statutes 169.468 to 169.75. 2. To include any vehicle which is not regularly used on City streets as an abandoned, junk or unsafe vehicle. n 3. To increase the expediency of junk or unsafe vehicle processing and abatements by using a 5 day notifrcation period. This notice period would still exceed the minimum �"� 72 hour notice required by Sta.te Statute. 4. To detail the notice, reclaim, and public sale requirements concerning abated vehicles. 5. To implement a hearing process for aggrieved vehicle owners. 6. To include a one year "sunset date" from the effective date of the ordinance. To incorporate these changes effectively, the City's legal staff has combined Code section 123 Junk Yehicles with Code Section 114 Abandoned Motor I�ehicles A draft version of this ordinance modification/combination is atta.ched as ezhibit C. Summary: If directed to proceed with the adoption of the cunent draft version of this ordinance the following actions would need to take place: 1. Public notification. 2. A City Council public hearing would not be required, but a hearing is recommended to explain the new program during the same hearing for requiring hardsurface driveways (March 4, 1996) � , . � Council Information - Property Improvement Ordinance Changes 7anuary 4, 1996 Page 5 3, �irst Reading (March 18, 1996) 4. Second Reading (Apri18, 1996) NUISANCE ABATEMENT At the November 20, 1995 conference meeting staff recommended that the City Council pursue an ordinance modification which would add additional language to the nuisance abatemeirt ordinance. This additian would allow the C'riy to abate "same or sinu'lar" violations from the same lacation within a specific time frame following an abatement. The only concems expressed about this modificaxion were with regards to the "Release of Property Agreement". Council felt it could be revised to include more specific provisions for reentering the persons progerty. Atta.ched as ea6ibit D is a revised version of the release of property agreement. Staff believes this agreement and ordinance modification would allow the city to treat recurring violations as a continuation of the first violation. Separate notification steps and abatement proceedings could be avoided. � Summary: If directed to proceed with the modificaxion of the nuisance abatement ordinance the following actions would need to take place: Public notifica.tion. 2. A City Council public hearing would not be required, but a hearing is recommended to explain the new program (March 4, 1996). 3. First Reading (March 18, 1996) 4. Second Reading (Apri18, 1996) CON�LUSION/RECOMIVIENDATION Unless othervvise directed staff will proceed with the drafting of these ordinance modifications. The potential for neighborhood improvement and increased enforcement effectiveness will be a positive change for the City. If there is any concern or further information is desired please inform staff at your earliest convenience. � M-96-7 KJS:kjs HARDSURFACE COST IlVIPACT CITY CONTRACT (Estimate) Cost for 45' * 25' d/w Cost for 70' * 25' d/w CONCRETE CONTRACTOR Cost for 45' * 25' d/w Cost for 70' * 25' d/w ASPHALT CONTRACTOR Cost for 45' * 25' d/w Cost for 70' * 25' d/w CONCRETE $25.00/sq. yd $3125.00 $4860.00 $29.25tsq, yd. $3656.00 $5674.00 ASPHALT $10.00/sq. yd $1250.00 $1940AU $10.00/sq. yd. $1250.00 $1940.00 *The City contract costs will vary from year to year depending on the bid amount. Contract costs for 1994 were $18.00%sq. yd for concrete and $7.00 sq. yd.. for asphalt. EXHIBIT A � �, �� r-� ,� ;,"�. JiTNK/UNSAFE VEHICL� NOTIFICATION It is unlawful for azry person to drive or for any vehicle or property owner to cause or knowingly pernut any velucle wlrich is in such unsafe or junk condition to be parked or stored in a location that is viewable from the public right-of-way. While conducting and inspection, the City of Fridley Code Enforcement Officer has observed a vehicle which does not meet one or more of the following junk/'inoperable conditions or two or more of the following unsafe conditions as required by City Code and Minnesota State Statute. VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: VEHICLE LICENSE: Unsafe conditions Two headlamps Two tafl lamps IUumJnated llcense plate Two rear reflectors Front and rear hazard ltghts Signal and stop lamps Horn Seat beltslnches Mu, j�ler in good condition. Rear view mirror Cracked windshield Windshield wiper device Tires with tread deslgn less than I/16 of an inch. Front and rear bumpers. (passanger cars) Front bumpers and either rear bumpers or reJlectors.(trucks &vansJ Every trucl� trailer, semitrailer, pole trailer, and rear end dump truck shall be provided with wheel f laps. All p[ates shall be securelyJastened All plates shall be unobstructed and plainly visibl Junk/Ino�erable Conditions Numbered plates for the current year: AU body panels, doors and parts shall be securely jastened to the vehlcle Brakes of adequate natursz to control and stop the vehicle. Intact front and rear wiridshields. Suspension system or body more than six {6) from the origtnad manufactured height By not meeting these vehicle condition requirements the vehicle described above is considered unsafe and/or junk. Fridley City Code requires such unsaf�unk vehicles to be repaired or removed from view upon notificatioa If such vehicle is not revaired or removed from view of the public right-of-wa,y within FIVE (51 DAYS of this notification it will be imuounded bv the Citv. If you ha.ve any questions or concerns about this notification or about City of Fridley vehicle parking and storage requirements please contact Code Administration at 572-3595. Ifyou would like to seek and extension of the five (5) day impoundment notice and can provide verification of a reasonable hardship as to why the vehicle can not be repaired or stored correctly contact the City of Fridley Code Administration immediately. EXHiBIT B 114 . ASANpONED �`:��; ,� <'��i;Y:;�'j'���.:� MOTOR VEHICLES .. . . _ .��.:..:..:. .... e � ,'� g ...>.... 14 . 0 3 , ...:.....:..... ���..��. �>:;•.z:,:�:>�::�:�.:� �� ��a-. ':�€';= ��� �� 1 �-'` ������:�� :����y��': �;�.�-. �. ��:.n.x,.s•x�•s: .s.:.�.<;:..;�•;: Abandon�d � <.,:.::....,....,,.�....t,..�.y,:..,.:.� �� �. �• z.�-����''i���� motor vehicies consti�u�a a hazard to �he health ' anc�� we"�fare o�' the re�iden�s of the community in that suah �vehicies can harbor noxiaus diseases, furnish shelter and bre�ding places for vermin, and present physica�. dangers �o the safetv and we7 1 hA� r.,. .,f .,r. a ,.a,.,.,. .._� _�t --- - . . . Y�,n„�,Y., �•-� ��=•G� a�.�aY m��ais also conat�tute" a°°ti"Iight on the l�indscape o£ the City $nd �hera€or� ar� detrimental to the ei'tvironment. Th� �tb�indonment and re'�irement of motor vehia�.e:s and otrier sorap metai constitutes a waste of a valuabla saurce r,f use�'ul metal. =t is therefore in the ub}.ic interest that the present aocumu].ation df 2�b2�ndoned �"�'` '"y".�",�:�is7`�� motor veh,icl�s�s � ,.. and c��her scrap metals be elimina�e�;�""'��is �" �i�ur� ab2��donment of mo�or vahiclea and other rar�tp m�t�ls be prevented, that the exp�,nsivn oP existing scrap �ecyaling facilities be deveiop�d, and that other a�Geptable and e�anvmically use�ul methods �or the dispoeal of abando��d ��.;�Y'��"'%�'�'''��°"`�:��::� motor vehicleB and other ... . . ..• • .e� . :. :?�2i`_•_x:l[7?�ti�C:,'c?'u2�?i:•'rTNN�?��,..e.�::_ r��..._. _ -•---- - - _ 114.02 DEFINITI�N3 1. Abandoned Mvtar Vehiale. A motar vehicle whiah has remained for a period of more �han 48 hours on public property iil�gally •--�-- --= � �-or has remain+�d Par a p�riod o� more than 48 haurs on private property without cansen�. at �he persvn in contrdl. of such prope�ty �r in an inoperable condition such that it has no substantial patential far �urther use consiatent with it� usual functions, un].ess it is kept in ar► encic�sed garage or storage building. It shall alsa mean a motor vehicle voluntarily surrendered by i�s Qwner to the Ci�y ar a duly au�horized agent ot the City. A c].assic car ox ��,oneer car, as dePi.ned �.n Minnesota statutes, S�ction 16g.10 shall not be cansider�d nn abandoned motor ve�hicle with the meaning of this 3ection. ��►��:���;�;���'i�"��";����� � �:�:�iji��.��,;.���� �x�?'..��An.• �. Ww.<: • :L.4•�'s:K":.•i't xaqv.:k�q;a;.�5�:.'s::,.•,s";;`:w:°:'x� `.Y.'a•.': / EXHIBIT C �\ ��. ����'�������� ��`,•;•hs�`..�:.�.:� � .i :�,: =ww.K::.a:7r .m.. r.fi:2>. 4. 'i`�l�;�wt����aia�� ..�.««.�.,. � .w«a.�oo-mcwr��9r.o�a �� •'a '� �+o ���� ����o°� •;. ••s.`�6w-.:.FS��a+��� � �.. •���� ^3 3 � `�,x,',,,+°�°Cw„' x.ve•woceoa.aoxecext�vxoxx :e y �'�(rn• ..w r. !°Tf^^°' �....«.«.. ;....... ;. ;.. �`..; ;..... ...... . � :.. J.L :�'���'�Y;��� T�k��, ., •� ��'�i!'�i�:.��'�,.��ft.ii�.`�3�;'i��'���'����..�4��� x��' .���'°�`�� �f�. �.���td:��a'�.L»S.,xior.e.xa�'��."Ft;war.,s•.:..ovcLa'av`�:�x�.°�:::°.�m$aw: •a•w""`iwrr:.00,`a,'�...tv..vn...v.°...y,..:i.•.�w`...».•..4 .�sK'-a'x:��,h.��5o`.•':M�`�.Kk•uaa�e ��.����� rJ�(h^ . ,�(� y, �+ � � - '.4yk.y�••...l�.•E' S�' :X• �.ti��a �� ��i-.K.:f�s4.}';�St'� n. r�7�-��S���µµ�A.��������na�����za >`.ut.�.•::..Y�:,r.,oc�,c,�aAaa 'x ..an.,i..�wa�mosrx,�e�ettuaa xw+w: '�ita�, component Parts. Those parts of � motor vehicle that are essential to the mechanical functioning af the vek�icle�, including, but no� limited r'�, to, the motor, drive trr�in and wheeis. 114 . 0 3 �4�F3#�- ,'� 3� .�i���' k�.L. aZ.�e�aa4,!�'`'• seuc� The �it�y, or its duly autharized agen�, may tiake in�o custody and impound any abandoned ;��F���°��'� `• `'�.�'� mo�or veh ic ie . ,�� .�.�.�.,.,z..:a � � _�Y m ,�.h �� ' �iV%''. "•i: ,.:�..;: ;.�..y,. •� .�Vi�'>':;`..�. ��>. . .�:. . �'t�i�l` .����'-:`<� �::�<:: M��;E.>.,r�.,.. ����:�°":��:' .'�:�", _u.ri-. ����:........ . _..>.. :��1.. ..��Y�< ����o���:ii:r���i��,. .................>..,.......�.... .....>......._.,........<:�.::�:..-:-�-:�.... _,. .. .... 114.Q4. VEHICLES IMMEDIATELY SUBJECT TO PUBLYC SALE r . o- When an abandoned mo�or vehivle is mare than seven {7) modal years o� age, iz�cks vitai componen� parts and does not display � license plate currently valid ir1 Minnssot�► or itt Any other atate or foreiqn aauntry, it shall immediately be eligible Por sale at pubiic auction and sh�ll no� be �uk�j�at to the notificatian ar reclamation procedures estr�blished by this Chdpter. 114.05 N4TICE 1• When an abandoned mo�or vehicie does not fall withi� the pravisiona of Section 114.04, The c.ity shaii give noti�e oE �he taking within ten �(10) days. Th� nvtice �hall set forth the date �tnd place vf the takin�� the �rear, tci�k�, model drtd serial numb�r � <!•�o.�.. � ..._i C..�.: �:3,'�%.'Uf!{u.. r•v o tha abandoned :.� .;,��t., t,,�.� ,.� ��,� motor vehicle and the lace where the vehi�le i� b� 'ng �e��;� s a�'], inform� the owner and any lienhaidera oP their right to reclaim the vehicie under seation 114.06 and sha].l state that failura oP �he.vwner or lienhalders �o exerci�e �heir righ�. t� recl2tim tihe vehicle rhal�. be deemed a waiver by them of a11 rights, title and inte�resti in �h� vehicl� and a conaent to the sale of the vehicle at a public auction purguant to SeGtian 114.07. 2• The notice shall be s�nt bx ma.�i to the registered owner, f.g any, og the abandoned '� ��" '� � �� t .... .....� . ... : � :.�,�. ,.,:.�.x. : ....... :... . `�.� :.; �=� ���.<'�.�,��� motor vehicle and o ail readil� . .�.�..�...�, �.�. ... ......... ... iden�ifiable I�`N'e'�''iaY`c�ers ............,..°�.'�°w...N.�..:. ���u.,� .,.�.�.M.....�.......v.�.._.�__. af record. ��-:��"�°��`����r:�>�.�s� ----�- - - - • �3:e,:3t;�:L�evr�':���z �i'�;;$'�y<�a-�<s:o•rx'�M.a,..�,,,�".�w`,c'.:�p��.'��.,��sw�..aSi,'..u%>t�i•tcRt�'ti•c:':s�x«i%ki�"`"'�i' :7;.Al:a"�"'f2.�c .°�.�.�r`.�'r'„i" 1I .LL i$ � e• •��y�+M• . qvww .a. • . . C' �.C��vryY.Y.30004Y.6%'�E!>C-046f..XnVn':�'IWiK. •K.RF� ON GCOIN[ K4 mposs�.� Ye to determzn'e wi�H'�'r"easonable"cer�ain�y �'iie identity and addre�s oP the reg�stered owner and ail lienhalders, the notice sha11 b� published ance in a newspaper of genera]. ciraulatian in the area where the mr�tior ve�iicle was abandan�d c����� �f ���_����������. pubii�hed natices ma be rou ed t ether tor e'�iic�'°``and ecanomy. Y g A � 114 , 4 f RECI,AIM 1. The owner or any lienhoifler of Ynt►tr�r v�hicle ahall have � right �o City upan paym�n� oP all �owing and -3- an abanfloned �1.,- ���}����'� ��"Sy•}.y•HIYsX�'^��SC•yT :�i•II� a'''�M�.�If �`r���vfT�.7,INRy.�ki'SR r�claim such ve�i�c�e �"rom 'the stoxage charges resulting � �"� from takinq the vehicle in�o oustody with fifteen (15) days after ,—� �he da�e af the notive required by 6ection �14.05. �. Nathing in this Chapter shall be canstruea to impair �ny lien a� a garagekeeper under the laws of this state, or th� right oP a li�nholder to tor�close. Fax the pur�ases of this Sectian, "garag�keeper" is an op�rator of a pmrking place or establiehm�n�, an opera�or or a mo�vr vehicle storage �acility, ar an operatar of an establishmen� ror tlie servicing, repair or maintenance of m��cr vehicies. �: .:�k:.L`:2:°�e5 2. Hamring. Any property owr�er who Psels aggri�v�d b an eL°����-�Y�= ,� impoundment af a vehicle under thi.s ohap�er may request a hearing be�ore the Heari�ng Examiner. such reques� shall be Piled in writing with the o�riae oP the Conanunity Development Dire��or wi�hirs twen�y (20) days afte� the date af service of the natiic� by the Code �nfdreement� afficer or other duly autharized �gen�. The Cammunity Development.Director �h��.l nc�tify the Hearirig Ex��miner who sha].1 notify the propsrty owner af the da�e, �ima and place oP the hearing. The hearing sh�li be a�nduct�d ne more �han �wenty (�0} d�iys a�ter the H�aring Examiner rec�ives na�ice oP the reques�, un].ess a�.atex date is mutually agreed to by the Hearing Examiner, the property owh�r �nd the City. Soth the p�operty owner and the City may appear at the hearing with counsel and may call such witnesses and present such �vid�nc� as is det�erm�.ned Uy th� Hea�'�11g Examiner to be relevant. WitYtin tert (10) days a�ter such � he�r3.ng, the Heari.ng Examiner sha�l af�ixm, repeal or modify the order of the Cade Enforcement Ogficer or vther duly__authorized - - - . . ... .. . �,. __ - ti �..:SY"Y$:;�y� : . �r ..�iaT:�T.:'::L s�':�"�'<�`s" c^:x::�°"''' 2:� ..••:.y&w''L:d:ai2 x:w36Cica.; ic;;6ah::� - �S:a:ycu. " ».Ya....,-,.� '�� '$�..,�,A.�� �m�`{���� �;`��:,������.�k�t`��;'��=��l,,��;����!:�" e Hearing xamirier's Rt�.. �z?t� �%�:'� 'T 4f s2? �:w:.�:..�:.�,µ...c...,..,,�.... .,. .ya,..� orc�er siza��.�"�e accompanie""�c' `by �writ�en '�iridings of fact, and may include a�inding. of Pavt as to the -a�e�-e%�� �re e L. ! 4 L 4wa.! _ .a _ a i -t a..... t.s �,. a...,....... a- � -- � I � L�i�V1�.Yro 1r ��--�tt��a�a���. ��:��t��w�s�F�;��a���:�?a�,�iv���t�. Any person aggr.ieved by the decision "o��"�he``�ear`ing �x�miner�"may appeal ��a� decisian �o �he City Council by £iling notice of such appeal with the -4 - Gommunity ��velapment Director within twent 20 da s o� a�n►�...i sxi -- .. � .� .,. �,,� ,: Y ( ) Y � ,....4rv��r-cii2�f?!��j:�.��i�}��i; �::.��-` HB ,:�� .,..:�<�iii� aring Examiner's � decision. At its naxt avaz�.a��le`"�reguTar'h'meating fol.lowing the Pilinc� af a na�tice oP appeal, the council sha].l reviaw the de�isian a�nd findings oP Pact of �.h� Hearing Examine.r and sha�7.l r�ffSrm, repeal or modiPy tha� decision. IP the council affirms ths� Hearin Examiner s deaisi.on declaring at „ . .... . � . �,. ~,v.0..;..;;I ti� �°��� " ''���� �,'�'� :": exis�rx hthe Cit ahall a�e . , .. . . . . � . w . ...%�::.«.. �»..... '����°'�.�. . " �' M �,"" aiter twenty (20) days fa].lowing t e�� ounci� s�°`�inai"�'��Q��;�t�r��i, unless the property awner obtiains � court arder ta the contrary within e�id twenty (2oj days. 114.0� 1�IJ$LtC SAY,� 1. A� abarldoned �;��: ��� �;���,�.�.,� motor vehicle taken into cus�ody and not reclaimed un e`r`�`'�ec�ion'R114.OG sb�►�.7. be sold to the highest b�.dder at public auction or s�le, follawing nat�ic� publieh�d a reasonable time in advanae. �he purahaser shaii be give�.a re�etpt in a iortn prescribed by the City which shaii be su�Picient title to dispose r�f the vehicle. The receipt shecll also entitl.e the purchaser to register the vehicle t�nd receive �► certificate og ti�le, free and ciear of ail liens and �laims af owno�chip. }�[}rd. rr .t:ttK:"c.�.�'i�'i. i,.�+{1.. ^�}.^�'a•�r.�v](���.Y: :,:. I.w. r � t "!, •�.��Qry'i�YifH`ti�"•"�11����N'IYk�li'.If��l�� :L. . AvR����'�.�'L'. .r�.i�',F'i'�.t2<'.i•.2�:i''v.'•%Y.•!�?<va:a.c:a;w:;�c;;;u:wsu<;;a:x:;3�>�.*t� S¢�� C:�T6t�11G\f�fdleyiYehjGl�.Ord � -5- � I�, FP,UM BRP.NG GU�S' � STEFFEN 1. 4.1596 10=1� F. 3 RELEABE OF gROHERTY I am the awner oP property locatecl a� (the +�property'' ) � Fridley, Minnesota. T al.ao own th� items ot per�onal proporty mor� complete7.y described in Exhibit A(the "items"). pri , 19 , the Ci.ty of Fridley served natice up�n me that the storage of �he i�ems de�ail.ed in Exhik�i� A vio�a�tes City ordinances and constitutes a public nuisance. I did not request a heaxing challenging the Cit�y's detesm�.na�.ic,n vf the cod� vic�la�ion and the Cii:y remav�c� th� 3tems. .Pursuant to the code, I am collecting the itema removed from my property. I unders�and that as a oonditicn of abtaining tha items Y will have to pay tor all costs assoaiated with the removal and storage, as well as an additional 25$ charga to Cover the vost af th� Gity'r adin�.nistration of the ardinance. I under�t�nd and agree that the ,items a6 they wer� taken from my property, violate the City's ordinance. I h�reby state . that the items wi].3. nat be returned to the praperty in violatfc�n of City ordinances. Z ur►derst�►nd that if additional removal is deemed necessary by the City, notice will be p�ovided to me �f'�.er the removal takes place. All other provisions of City ordinance � 128, including the right to a hear.�ng, w�ll still apply. The notio� servQd an mc� on , 19 , a6 well �s th�g release, �onstitutr� my notic� th�tt �he storAg� of the items lis�ed in Exhibit A mus� be in conformity with City ordinanae�. � 0�\mur+fc\frldl�y\rsleane.p�o EXHIBIT D PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE TI-� PLANNING C011�IlVIISSION Nofice is hereby givett that there will be a public heazing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, February 7, 1996 at 7:30 p.m for the pwpose of: /'� Consideration of an ordinance amendmeirt recodifying the Fridley City Code, chapter 110, entitled "pUBLIC NUISANCE", by omitting section 110.06, "PENALTIES", and adding sections 110.10, "DRIVEWAY NUISANCE", 110.11, "COMPLIANCE", 110.12, "ASSESSMENT", 110.13, "PENALTIES"; and chapter 114, entitled pABANDONED MOTOR VEHICLES", by adding sections 114.07, "HEARING", and 114.09 'DISPOSAL AUTHORTTY" and amending sections 114.01, "POLICY", 114.02, "DEFINITIONS", 114.03, . "IIVIPOUND", 114.05, "NOTICE", 114.06, "RECLAIM", 114.07, "PUBLIC SALE"; and chapter 128 entitled "ABATEMENT OF EXTERIOR PUBLIC NUISANCES", by adding section 128.07, ernitled "R�T FASF OF PROPERI Y" and renumbering the rema,ining sections consecutively. �^\ PUBLIC NUISANCE - DRIVEWAY The purpose of the public nuisance ordinance amendments is to classify gravel and/or dirt driveways as a nuisance and prohibit their use. These provisions will require all gravel driveways to be paved five years from the adoption of the ordinance. A draft of the proposed changes are listed below. ABANDONED MOTOR VEffiCLE _ ,T[JNK/ITNSAFE VEgICI,E The purpose of the revisions to the abandoned motor vehicle code section is to define the process for the abatemern of junk or unsafe velucles. These impoundmentlabatement provisions will increase the efficiency in which junk, unsafe, or inoperable vehicles can be removed from private property. A draft of the proposed changes aze listed below. ABATEMENT OF EXTERIOR PUBLIC NUISANCES - RELEASE OF PROPERTY The purpose of the revision to the Abatemerrt of E�cterior Public Nuisances code section is to explain in detail the release of abated property back to the owner. Affected property owners will be required to sign a release form when they cla.im the property. The release form will prohibit the return of property to its original locaxion if it continues to be in violation of City ordinances. A draft of the proposed changes are listed below. �,--� �"� � � _ � N. YI__y �J 110. PUBLIC NUISANCE 110.10 DRIVEWAY NUISANCE Gia.vel. dirt. or un�paved driveways endan�er the safe�t ► healtb, comfort or renose of a considerable number of inembers of the public D�sits from these driveways obstxuct Citv storm sewers and detemion ponds. and detract from the aesthetic character of the property Furtheimore. �raveL dirt or unpaved drivewa.ys do not ad�uately define orderly_parkin� az'eas, theY allow unsi�htiv ruts and ditches and can cause exc�ive sprayin� of graveL dirt and dust on nei h�g.properties Fuiallv. gra.vel. dirt. or unpaved drive�va.ys do not protect the environment from the seena�e of vehicle fluids which c�n cause signific�rt environmental heaith risks to the community Therefore. �ra.vel. dirt and unpaved drivewaxs are hereb� declar� a public nuisance. 110.11 COMPLIANCE Owners of residential properties containin� �ravel. dirt. or unpaved drivewavs shall construct hardsurface drivewa.ys by April 1, 2001 All driveways shall be surfaced with blackton, concrete or �''� other hardsurface material a�nrov� by the Citv. . _ :_, 110.12 ASSESSMENT All assessments levied for the r�avment of a hardsurface driveway installation shall be reimbursed in accordance with terms and conditions outlined � the Ci.ty Council Such assessment shall be levied under authorit�granted by 1Vfinnesota Sta.tutes 429.061. 110.13 PENALTIES Any violation of this cha.pter is a misdemeanor and subject to all penalties provided for such violations under the provisions of cha.pter 901 of this Code. �"��. 114. ABANDpNED JUNK OR UNSAFE MOTOR VEHICLES i� 114.01 PURPOSE Abandoned iunk and unsafe motor vehicle.c constitute a hazard to the health and welfare of the residents of the community in that such vehicles can harbor noxious diseases, furnish shelter and breeding places for vennin, and present physical dangers to the safety and well being of children and oth�' citizens. Motor ve�ricles contain fluids which if released "urto the environment c�n and o cause ��'ficam health risks to the community The condition of vehicles that are junked and abandoned or unsafe si�uficantiv mcrease the lilcel�hood that these dangerous 8uids might be so released Abandoned �unk or unsafe motor velucles aad other scrap metals also constitute a blight on the landscape of the City and therefore are detrimental to the environment. The abandonment and retiremern of motor vehicdes and other scrap metal constitute3 a�e of a valuable source of useful metal. It is therefore in the public i�er�t that the present accumulation of abandone�cl junk or unsafe motor vehicles and other � metals be eliminated, that fi�ture abandonment of motor velucles and other scrap metals be preve,nte�, that the expansion of existing scrap recycling facilities be develoPerl, attd that other ac�ceptable and economica,lly useful methods for the disposal of abandoneci junk or unsafe motor vehicles and other forms of scrap metal he develop�. Because of these significant concems. the Citv is amending this s�tion These amendments shall be effective for any violation wluch occurs throu�h March 30 1997 at which int the amendments to this se.ction will have no further force and effext uniess a further amendment is enacted. � 114.02 DEFINITIONS 1. Abandoned Motor Vehicle. A motor vehicle which has remained outdoors on �raperty v�iithin ths Ci,ty for a period of more than 48 hours on public property illegally , r has remained for a period of more than 48 hours on private pruperiy without consent of the person in control of such properiy or in an inoperable condition such that it has no substantial potential for further. use consistent with its usuai fundions, unless it is kept in an enclosed garage or storage building. It shall also mean a motor vehicle voluntarily sutrender� by its owner to the City or a duly authorized agent .of the City. A c�assic car or pioneer car, as defined in Mumesota Statutes, Section 168.10 shall not be considered an abandoned motor vehicle with the meaning of this Section ?. Unsafe Motor Vehicle Anv vehicle located outdoors on nronerty within the City in which any svstems including, brakin� s_teerm� susoension. electncai hehtYn� motor, drive train systems are not functionin� or a vehicle which cannot leeallv be dnven or is in violation of any state fe,�ieral or local vehicle uipment or safetv reeulatton mcludui� but not lumted to 1Vrnnesota Statutes 169 468 to 169 75 �, � �, 3. Junk Motor Vehicle. A motor vehicle which is loc�ted outdoars on prouertv in the City wluch meets anv of the followin� criteria shall be defined as a jw�ic vehicle: ,� Any motor vehicle which is not in operable condition. � Any motor vehicle which is�artially dismantled. c. A�motor vehicle which is a source of repair or replacement parts for other vehicles. d. Any mator vehicle wlrich lacks component narts• e. Any motor vehicle which is not ament re�istered and properly licensed for oueration with and by the Sta.te of Nfinnesota. 4. Vital Component Parts. Those parts of a motor velricle that are essential to the mechanical functioning of the vehicle, including, but not limited to, the motor, drive train and wheels. � 5. Motor Vehicle Definition. A machine propelled bypower other than human power designed to tra.vel alon� the �ound bv use of wheels, treads runners or slides and transports persons or prope or pulls machinery and sha11 include without limitation, automobiles trucks trailers motorcycles, tractors, 3-wheelers. M wheelers and snowmobiles. 114.03 �B-ABATEMENT The City, or its duly authorized agent, ma.y take into custody and impound any abandoned 'u� nk or unsafe motor vehicle. A vehicle ma� be impounded after notice of such propos� impoundment (in a form similar to that set forth herein) has been securely attached to and conspicuously displayed on the vehicle for a ueriod of five days prior to such imuoundment excludin� Saturda ►�s, Sundays and city holida.vs for the following reasons: a. When such vehicle is parked and/or used in violation of any law. ordinance or re�ulation or b. When such vehicle is abandoned junk or unsafe. /�� 114.04 VEHICLES IlVIIVV�DIATELy SUgJECT TO PUBLIC SALE � When an abandoned motor vehicle is more thatt seven ('n model ye�s of age, lacks vital component parts and does not display a lic�se plate cun.e�y �d ���� or in any other state or foreigtt country, it shall immediately be eligi'ble for sale at public auction and shall not be subject to the notification or reclamation procedures established by this Chapter. 114.05 NOTICE 1• When an abandoned motor vehicle dces not fall within the provisions of Section 114.04, The city shall give notice of the taking within ten (10) da.ys. The notice shall set forth the da.te and place of the taking, the year, malce, model and serial �. of the abandoned junk or unsafe motor velucle and the P1ace where the vehicle is beang held, shall inform the owner and any lienholder of their right to reclaim the vehicle under Section 114.06 and shall state that failure of the owner or lienholder to exercise their right to reclaim the velucle shall be deemed a waiver by them of a11 rights, title and interest in the vehicle and a consent to the sale of the velricle at a public auction pursuant to Section 114.07. 2. The notice shall be sent by mail to the registered owner, if any, of the abandoned junk or unsafe motor vehicle and to all readily identifiable lienholder of record. The norice sha11 be mailed to the re�istered owner at the address provided by the motor vehicle division of the 1Vfinnesota. arlmetrt of Pubhc Safety or the correspondin�agency of azry other state or province A copy of such nobce mav be sent to the nropertv owner where the velucle is found if the person mailing; the �, not�ce has reason to beheve that the re�istered owner of the vehicle or one who claims to be the re�stered owner of the vehicle, is residing or in custody at some different address a cony of the n°tice s1�a11 also be mailed or nersonally deliver� to such owner or claimant in a manner designed as nearlv as mav be practicable, to �ive actual notice to him or her If it is impossible to determine vv�th reasonable G�rtainty the idernity and addre,cs of the registered owner and a11 lienholder, the notice shall be publisheri once in a newspaper of genera.l circulation in the area where the motor vehicle was abandoned junk or unsafe. Published notices maq l� grouped together for convenience and economy. 114.06 RECLAIM 1. The owner or any lienholder of an abandoned junk or unsafe motor vehicle shall have a right to reclaim such vehicle &om the City upon payment of all towing and storage charges resulting from taldng the vehicle nrto aistody with fifteen (15) days after the date of the notice required by Section 114.05. 2. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to impair airy lien of a garagekeeper under the laws of this Sta.te, or the right of a lienholder to foreclose. For the purposes of this Section, "garagekeeper" is an operator of a parking place or establishment, an aperator of a motor vehicle storage facility, or an operator of an establishment for the servicing, repair or maintenance of motor vehicles. 3. To reclaim a motor vehicle impounded nursuant to this ordinance the owner or lien holder � � must pav atry costs and administrative fees inaured by the C•riy and must aQree to relocate the vehicle in accordance with locate state and federal reg,ulations The owner or hen holder reclaimm� such vehicle shall sign a"Release of Propertv" and shall agree to immediate imvoundment wnthout nottce if such vehicle again violaies this ssction In addition. the Citv may require a bond to be aosted if said vehicle has been subiect to a nrior im�undment 114.07 HEARING. �Y Properiy owner who fe�ls aggtieved by an e�a r..�. n a r. c + nsx ,... ,.+t, � impoundment of a vehicle under this chapter may request a heazing before the Hearing Examiner. Such request shall be filed in writing with the office of the Community Development Director within twenty (20) days after the date of service of the notice by the Code Enforcement Officer or other duly authorized agent. The Community Developmart Director shall notify the Hearing Examiner who shall notify the properiy owner of the date, time and place of the hearing. The heazing shall be conductetl no more than twenty (20) days after the Hearing Examiner receives notice of the request, unless a later date is mutually agreed to by the Hearing Examiner, the properiy owner and the City. Both the properiy owner and the City may appear at the hearing with counsel and may call such witnesses and present such evidence as is determined by the Hearing Examiner to be relevarn. Within ten (10) da.ys after such hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall affirm, repeal or modify the order of the Code Enforcement Offcer or other duly authorized ageirt. Notice of the decision shall be mailed to the owner at the address �iven in the hearing request. The Hearing Examiner's order sha11 be accompanied by written findings of fact, and !",, may include a finding of fact as to the �� ° ' �``' � ''� � ` ` ' ''°°� ., , violation of this cha�. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Hearing Examiner m,ay ap�al that decision to the City Council by filing notice of such ap�al with the Community Development Director within twenty (20) days of �e�e�e-e€-�e the mailing of the Hearing Examiner's decision. At its next available regular meeting following the filing of a notice of appeal, the Council sha11 review the decision and findings of fact of the Heaxing Examiner and shall affirm, repeal or modify thax decision. If the Council affirms the Hearing Examiner's decision declaring that a violation of this chapter exists, the City shall proceed to sell the vehicles after twenty (20) days following the Cauncil's fmal determinatioq unless the property owner obtains a court order to the contrary within sa'td twenty (20) days. 114.0�8 PUBLIC SALE 1. An abandoned junk or unsafe motor vehicle taken into custody and not reclaimed under Section 114.06 shall be sold to the highest bidder at public auction or sale, following notice published a reasonable time in advance. The purchaser shall be given a receipt in a form prescribed by the City which shall be sufficient title to dispose of the vehicle. The receipt shall also entitle the purchaser to register the vehicle and receive a certificate of title, free and clear of all liens and claims of ownership. 2. Dis�osin� of unsold vehicles Abandoned vehicles not sold pursuant to subdivision 1 shall be disposed of in accordance with 1Vfinnesota. Statute 168B.08 and 168B.09. �, 3. Disposi6on of sale proceeds From the proceeds of a sale under this section of abandon� ,� motor vetucle the Crtv snall reimburse itself for the cost of towing,�preserving and storing the velucle and all admimstrahve notace and ubhcahon costs incwred in handlin the vehicle ursuant t sections 114.01 to 114.09 Anv remainder from the proce�s of a sale shall be held for the owner of the vehicle or e�tled henholder for 90 da. and then shall be d sited in the tr f the writ of govemment 114.09 DISPOSAL AUTHORITY 1. Units of government The Citv may contract yvith others or may utilize its own equipment and nersonnel for the mventorv of abandoned motor vetricles and abandoned scrap metal, and if no bids are received mav utilize rts own eqt�ipment and personnel for the collection, storag;e and transnortahon of abandoned motor vehicles and abandoned scrav metal nrovided. however, that a umt of govemmerrt mav ut�lize its ov�►n equipm�t and pe�.sonnel for the collection and stora.ge of not more than five abandoned motor vehicles without advertising for or receiving bids in any 120 da.X enod• � r--� 128. ABATEMENT OF EXTERIOR PUBLIC NUISANCES 128.07 RELEASE OF PROPERTY To reclaim those materials that have been remov� in accordance with 128 � the owner or lien holder must pav any costs and administrative fees incwred by the Ciri The owner or lien holder reclaiming the materials shall sign a"Release of Property" and shall agree not to return the items to their original loca.tion in violatian of City ordinances If adtiitional removal of the same or similar items is deemed ne�essazy by the CitX, an abbreviated but reasonable notice period will be provided before removal takes place All other provisions of Citv ordinance 128 includin� the ri�ht to a hearing, will still apnlv. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need and 'uiterpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should comact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than January 31, 1996. Any and all persons desiring to be heard sha11 be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. If you desire a copy of the proposed amendments or have auy questions related to this item, please contact the Fridley Community Deveiopment Department at 572-3593. � DAVE NEWMAN CHAIR PLANNING CONIlVIISSION Publish: January 25. 1996 February 1, 1996 ��, a RATIONALE FOR HARDSURFACE � Dl��rVEWAYS l. Promotes visual appeal and neat appearance of single family properties. 2. Restricts vehicles to one area of the lot instead of allowing them to be scattered across the yard. 3. Eliminates the nuisance of gravel being sprayed on neighboring yards and avoids unsightly ruts and ditches. 4. Eliminates problems created by blowing dust. 5. Protects soil from contamination due to oil and other vehicles fluids. � 6. Serves to maintain property values by promoting a more attractive appearance. 7. Reduces maintenance costs incurred when ruts are "evened out" or gravel is replaced. 8. Promotes parking requirements consistent with that of other zoning districts. 9. Prevents soil and gravel from eroding onto the street and being deposited into the City's storm sewers and detention ponds. � � �� i _ � DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Backqround Community Development Department PLANIVING DIVISION City of Fridley October 21, 1993 William Burns, City Manager V Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Ordinance Amendment to Require Gravel Driveways to be Paved The City Council. recen.tly adopted an ordinance amendment which tied the "behavior" of parking cars to parking on hardsurface'driveways. During that discussion, the �City Council directed staff to investigate an amortization ordinance whereby owners of properties having a gravel or non-hardsurface driveway would be required to pave the driveway by an established date. Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission discussed this•issue at its September 8, 1993 meeting and also the September 22, 1993 meetinq. The Planning Commission on a 3-2 vote recommended that the City Council pursue an ordinance which would require that all non-hardsurface driveways become hardsurface driveways. The Commission members who voted in favor of the ordinance amendment agreed that it is important to require paved driveways. They agreed with the eight purposes of a hard surface driveway as proposed by staff (see attached). They also noted that other first-ring suburbs have addressed this issue. Roseville has recently required a five year amortization period for all owners to pav� drivewa�s. The Commissioners voting against the prop�sal were concerned about the financial impact on the property owners. �nThile only 15 of the 337 property owners who have gravel driveways are considered "low income" (we checked the water billing records), the average cost of a driveway improvement can range from $875 - $1,250. Some households may not be able to afford the extra expense (see attached cost chart). The Commissianers thought that the money would be better spent on improvements to the home itself. The Commissioners thought it would be better enforced through the sale of a home or when a building permit is issued. Gravel Driveways October 21, 1993 Page 2 The Planning Commission also provided the following specific input for the City Council to consider when�developing�the ordinance amendment: A. What materials should be considered acceptable in meeting the hardsurface requirement? The Planning Commission recommended concrete, bituminous, brick, and concrete pavers (see article from newspaper regarding concrete paversj as acceptable materials. B. How long should properties have to pave driveways? The Planning Commission recommended that the driveway be paved when one of the following instances occurs first: * Five years from the adoption of the ordinanae * When the property is sold . * When a permit is required from the City e a ` �� C. Should additional time be granted for property owners with � driveways in excess of 50 feet? The Planning Commission recommended that it was not necessary to establish a different time frame. D. Should a hardsurface driveway to accessory structures in the rear yard be required? The Planning Commission recommended that the hardsurface requirement not be imposed if the secondary/accessory structures are used for storage facilities. E. Should there be some type of assessment process? The Con�nission encourages the City Council to make the special assessment process available to homeowners, and to make every effort to include this improvement with other improvements in City programs for rehabilitation or repair. Staff Comments on Planning Commission Action Part of the Planning Commission recommendation includes a provision to require the driveway to be paved when the property is sold. � Staff is concerned about this option because there are approximately 400 - 500 sales during a calendar year. An ordinance �� similar to the ��truth-in-sale�� apprc�ach would have to be developed Gravel Driveways � October 21, 1993 Page 3 to require the driveway to be paved. Staff recommends that this provision be included in a truth-in-sale ordinance if the City Council and HRA choose to adopt one. This type of ordinance was scheduled for consideration in 1994. Creating an ordinance solely for paving the gravel driveway would be costly at this point if the City were to pursue a broader approach pertaining to the house �tself in the near future. Paving a driveway is an acceptable expense under all of the City's current grant and loan programs. An additional allocation of funds toward this particular project would have to be considered by�the HRA. Staff would recommend the ffitA not allacate additional funds for paving driveways. We believe there are other projects such as multiple family rehabilitation programs which are higher in pr.iority. • Also, should the City Council decide to pursue the ordinance amendment, we would like to schedule ordinance consideration adoption for the first or second quarter of- 1994 to enable us to finish other ordinance processes (nuisance abatement and wetland overlay). � CitY Attorney's Opinion Also attached is an opinion from the City Attorney reqarding rahether or not the cost for paving driveways can be assessed. The Attorney states that the City does have the authority to contract with homeowners for the installation of the hardsurface driveway if it were to be determined in the ordinance that an unpaved driveway constitutes a public health or safety hazard, is a nuisance, or constitutes a hazardous condition. Summarv As evidenced by the close vote in ��e Planning Commission motion, there are mixed feelings about proceeding with this ordinance amendment. Staff is ready to carry out and implement an ordinance if it is decided that it is necessary; however, the implementation of the ordinance will require a significant amount of effort, including notification of the 337 property owners, conducting at least two public hearings (one before the Planning Commission and one before the City Councilj, arranging for special assessment of properties who choose to be�assessed, and inspection of the properties five years from the adoption of the ordinance to insure compliance. Should the City Council choose not to proceed with an ordinance �`amendment, staff will continue to enforce a policy which would Gravel Driveways October 21, 1993 Page 4 continue to allow the gravel driveway, however, cars must be parked on the driveway area and.not scattered.across the lot. Further, �we will encourage homeowners to take advantage of the City�s asphalt contract. We will also continue to require that driveways be hardsurfaced as part of special use permit, variance, or other requests. BD/dn M-93-618 � � � �� _ � n 0 To: The Planning Commission From; Mary Matthews Re: Driveways At your suggestion, as I am not able to attend the January 31,1996 hearing, i am writing this letter to ask consideration not to include my entire driveway in the newly proposed code. The house was architecturally designed so the natural terrain woutd be disturbed as littie as possible thus preventing erosion and keeping the natural terrain. Brief History We picked the lot because of i#s uniqueness. (It's a natural upheaval caused by the glacial flow through the area.) We had a friend (architect) check it out to see if it was buildable. He designed a house that �ould disturb the hill very little, but it did require measures to prevent erosion ie, catch basins at the corners of the house and garage to catch water run off and pipes under the ground to disperse the water. V1/e also worked with Bachmans and a landscape architect with landscaping that would have root systems to control erosion. We pla�ted many trees native to Minnesota that were pollution resistant and would provide food for the birds. {green�ash, Seberian Pea, mapfe, Norvuay, etc.) The top of the hill is our only flat area and served as our yard and driveway. IVlaterials were suggested that would both retain and provide drainage thus preventing run off and erosion of the hilt. Eight by eight wood frames the mixture of gray trap rock, a c�ment mixture that was tight but settled ihe rock on the clay base. The trouble spot was where the drive and street meet. Sewer flushing washed dirt and rocks into the street (a concern) so this for about 5 feet was repiaced with stone. It seems to have corrected the problem. Other than #he irouble spot we have had no serious erosion problem. The rock drive lends itself to the naturaf aesthetic wre worked to preserve. It has not been a problem to my neighbors as it does not throw dust and actuatly it can't be seen by them. I hope you wiH discuss further w+th me the problem. Enclosed please find articles, a photo of the hill before our years of planting, and landscape plans. Should you need more in#ar please call (work) 293-8680 or a#ter 5:30 p.m. 571-1208. MMlmm enc