09/10/1990 - 5130� 1rRIDLSY CITY COIINCIL ME$TINQ
�� ATTENDENCE SHEET
MONDAY , September 10, 199D
7:30 P.M.
�LEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
�RINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS INUMBER
p � oM �� � �t �/� �,�) i f��' C..�I L �` 1/� = i.✓ � �-- �'—
-=� i � S �-• � 2 � �� �a�o � ��
�.J GE� I� Q rI� PPI/� �D ��� Y'ilCl pu �(%l'� _�r ��/�. /,-� 1'1� � G
`�' �,d.� � • I` r !
yoo �ti+� � .
� e �.0 �%0 h %e,�� oK� l �/s. , � ssy�� � = S'A �
� kSc� f'�►' LC �o G�t
.���R.�- - � 2., c �� �
�
�
I
�
�
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 - 7:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION:
Kerry Van Fleet Day
Thursday, September 13, 1990
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of August 27, 1990
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
OPEN FORUM. VISITOR3:
(Consideration of items not on agenda - 15 minutes)
�
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 Paqe 2
PIIBLIC BEARING:
Public Hearing on Assessment
for Street Improvement Project
No. Street 1989 - 1& 2&
(Addendum No. 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1B
Public Hearing on Assessment
for Treatment and Removal of
Trees 1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2B
Public Hearing on Assessment
for Street Improvement Project
No. Street 1988 - 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3B
OLD BOSINE88:
Second Reading of an Ordinance
Recodifying the Fridley City Code
Chapter 113 Entitled "Solid Waste
Disposal and Recycling Collection"
by Adding Section 113.05, "Yard
Waste Transfer Site," and Renumbering •
the Present Section 113.05 to 113.06
and the Remaining Sections Consecutively;
and Further Amending Chapter 11 of the
Fridley City Code Entitled, General
Provisions and Fees, Section 11.10 . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 4A
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 10� 1990
NER BIISINE88:
Paqe 3
Receive the Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of August 22, 1990: ........ 5- 5AA
A. Resolution Approving a
Subdivision, Lot Split,
L.S. #90-03, to Split
Lots 4, 5, and 6, Block 2,
Northco Business Park into
Two Parcels, Generally
Located East of Northco
Drive and South of 73rd
Avenue ........................... 5 - 5B
........................... 5P - 5AA
Receive Items from the Minutes of
the Appeals Commission Meeting of
August 21, 1990: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 6AAA
A. Variance, VAR #90-18, by
Winfield Developments, Inc.,
to Increase the Maximum
Square Footage of a Free-
Standing Sign from 80 Square
Feet to 104 Square Feet; to
Allow a Second Free-Standing
Sign Along the Same Street
Frontage; to Allow an Existing
24 Square Foot Free-Standing
Sign to Remain on Lots 4,
Except the Nor�herly 35 Feet,
Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, Paco
Industrial Park, the Same -
Being 7110-7190 University
Avenue N.E. .....................
B. Variance, VAR �90-17, by Joel
and Marilyn Gerdeen, to Reduce
the Lot Area from 9,000 Square
Feet to 8,835 Square Feet;
to Increase the Lot Coverage
from 25 Percent to 26.5 Percent;
to Reduce the Front Yard Setback
from 35 Feet to 21 Feet on Lot 2,
Block 2, A1 Rose Addition, the
Same Being 6240 Alden Way N.E......
6 - 6M
6N - 6GG
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 Paqe 4
NEA BIISINE88 (CONTINIIED):
Receive Items from the Minutes of
the Appeals Commission Meeting of
August 21, 1990 (Continued):
C. Variance, VAR #90-21, by Shirley
Severson, to Reduce the Side
Yard Setback from 10 Feet to
8 Feet; to Reduce the Setback
from the Normal High Water Line
of the Mississippi River from
100 Feet to 44 Feet; to Reduce
the Setback from the Mississippi
Bluff Line from 40 Feet to 0 Feet
on Lot 3, Block 1, Walt Harrier
lst Addition, the Same Being 6490
Riverview Terrace N.E. .......... 6HH - 6AAA
Approval of Ten-Week Expansion of the
Hours at the City of Fridley's Yard
Waste Transfer Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 7C
Approval of Agreement with School
District No. 14 to Lease the "A"
Frame Building Located at North
Inns�ruck Park, Arthur Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 8F
Approval of Joint Powers Agreement
for the Installation of Temporary
Traffic Control Signals at the
Intersection of: C.S.A.H. #1 (East
River Road) and 77th Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 - 9G
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 Paqe 5
NEW BII8INE88 (CONTINIIED):
Resolution Authorizing Changes in
Appropriations for the Capital
Improvement Fund and Authorizing
the Transfer of Funds from the
Capital Improvement Fund, Street
Division, to the 1988 Street Fund . . . . . . . . . . .10 - l0A
Approval of Motion to Add to the
1990 Sanitary Sewer Capital
Improvement Fund from Fund Balance
an Additional $14,000 for the City's
Cost of the Sanitary Sewer Line
Servicing the Property at 7570
Highway 65 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 11A
Resolution Authorizing Changes in
Appropriations for the Capital
Improvement Fund, Street Division . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Resolution Reappropriating Municipal
State Aid Funds to County State Aid
Highway (CSAH) - 51st Way and East
River Road Signal Revision Project
(SAP 127-020-08) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 13A
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBSR 10, 1990 Paqe 6
NEW BIISINESS (CONTINIIED):
Resolution to the Rice Creek Watershed
District to Implement the Streambed
and Bank Stabilization Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - 14B
Resolution Confirming Assessment
for Street Improvement Project
No. Street 1989 - 1& 2&(Addendum
No. 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 15C
Resolution Confirming Assessment
for the Treatment and Removal of
Trees 1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 16B
Resolution Confirming Assessment
for Street Improvement P'roject
No. Street 1988 - 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - 17B
Resolution Certifying Changes to
the County Auditor to be Levied �
Against Certain Properties for
Collection with the Taxes Payable
in 1991 (Nuisance) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 18A
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING� SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 p�qg �
NEW BII8INE8B (CONTINIIED):
Resolution Certifying Charges to
the County Auditor to be Levied
Against Certain Properties for
Collection with the Taxes Payable
in 1991 (Weeds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 19A
Claims. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - 21K
Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 - 22E
ADJOIIRN:
♦
Kerry Van Fteet Day
September 13, 1990
Wiltiam J. Nee
Mayor
F�idley, MN
WHEREAS, Kerry Van Fleet lir�ed, worked, dnd owned a business in
Fridley for 20 years before stacrting with the Fridley Chamber of Commerce;
and
WHEREAS, Kerry Yacn Fleet has been the Executive Director of the Fridley
Chamber of Commerce since 1982; cxnd
WHEREAS, during those eight years Kerry worked diligently to increase
Chamber membership by 43 percent to 200 members; and
WHEREAS, Kerry helped create a working relationship between the City of
Fridley and the Chamber of Commerce which has generated a business
climate that encouracges compcznies to locate and grow here; and
WHEREAS, Kerry lias decided to move to Floridac and pursue other
ventures and adventures; dnd
WHEREAS, many local and ciuic leaders Itave praised her work and
accomplishments:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that I, William J. Nee, Mayor of
the City of Fridley hereby prociczim September 13, 1990 as
Kerry Van Fleefi Day
BE IT FURTHER RESO�VED that City Council, City employees, and
citizens extend our best wish,es to her for a healt�iy and happy future.
INWITIITESS WHEREOF, I haue set rny
hacnd and caused the seal of the City of
Fridley to be affixed this 1(1th day of
September, 1990.
WILLIAM J. NEE, MAYOR
THE MINIITES OF THE REGIII�AR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL OF
AIIGUST 27, 1990
The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order
at 7:39 p.m. by Mayor Nee.
�LEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Nee led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
ROLL CALL•
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Nee, Councilman Billings, Councilman
Fitzpatrick, Councilman Schneider and
Councilwoman Jorgenson
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION - PAUL WESTBY. HUMAN
RESOURCES COMMISSION:
Mayor Nee stated that the City is blessed with a number of public
spirited citizens who volunteer their services and who have made
contributions to the development of the community. He stated that
Paul Westby has served on the Human Resources Commission from
August, 1986 to July, 1990, and the Council wished to recognize his
service to the City by issuing a Certificate of Appreciation.
Mayor Nee presented this certificate to Mr. Westby, and he and
members of the Council extended their appreciation to him for
serving on the Human Resources Commission.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
COUNCIL MEETING. AUGUST 13. 1990:
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to approve the minutes as
presented. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
�DOPTION OF AGENDA:
The following item was added to the agenda: (3.5) Setting a Public
Hearing for a Replat in the Northco Addition.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt the agenda with the above
addition. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
�RIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 2?. 1990 PAGE 2
OPEN FORUMf VISTTORS:
FANTASY HOUSE:
Mr. Steve Boswell, 6800 Washington Street, presented information
involving several cases in Renton, Dallas, and Houston which he
felt may be helpful to the Council. He stated that there is an
organization, American Family Association, that works specifically
to remove pornography from cities, and they have a wealth of
information available free-of-charge. He stated that this
organization has been involved in several of these cases, and they
have been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Mr. Boswell pointed out that the cases involved rezoning and
stipulating that this type of business could not be located within
certain areas such as close proximity to a church, elementary
schaol, public park, residential area, etc. He felt that if
Fridley had such an ordinance, the Fantasy House could not exist
because of its close proximity to a church and a residential
district.
Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated that he was familiar with the
Renton case. iie stated that he felt, in addition to considering
an obscenity ordinance, the Council should consider a zoning
ordinance that would limit the location of adult businesses. He
stated that you can rely on the study in the Renton case. However,
while a City can enact zoning ordinances and state limitations on
where these businesses can or cannot be located, the City also has
to provide a sufficient area where they can locate.
Mr. Herrick stated that he has prepared a preliminary draft of an
ordinance to be reviewed by the State Attorney General and Federal
Attorney�s Offices for their conunents. He stated that he is
thinking of recommending to the Council a zoning ordinance that
would limit the location of this type of adult business. He stated
that the Council would have to make determinations as to what
zoning areas this type of business would be permitted in and if a
special use permit would be required. He stated that the ordinance
also needs to be reviewed to make sure it is not too restrictive
and that it would be upheld in court.
Mr. Herrick stated that he will make suggestions to the Council
regarding changes in the State obscenity statute and ask them to
pass this information to the State representatives. He stated that
it is difficult to be successful in these type of prosecutions, and
he did not want to have an ordinance that is flawed.
Councilman Schneider asked if a zoning ordinance would have any
effect on the Fantasy House.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 27, 1990 PAGE 3
Mr. Herrick stated probably not immediately because it would be a
non-conforming use. He stated that he would probably.suggest some
type of amortization schedule.
Ms. Judy Blanchard, 6220 Baker Street, stated that the Concerned
Citizens' only concern is about the torture and perverted items
which Fantasy House sells. She stated that the people who buy
these types of things are a threat to women and children. She
stated that she purchased the T-15 trainer and submitted a copy of
the instructions taken off the package. She explained how this is
operated and stated there is a picture of a lady bound hand and
foot. She stated it is hoped that the people who have not been to
Fantasy House will stop and see what items they carry and join them
in the picketing.
Ms. Charlotte Halpin, 6390 Monroe Street, stated that she had asked
about covering the front of the store and wondered if this has been
done. She felt that the door at Fantasy iiouse should state "Adults
Only."
Mr. Hill, Public Safety Director, stated that the Police Department
has requested other locations in the City to keep the windows clear
so that the police can observe the inside of a business in the
event of robberies. He stated that if Fantasy House was asked to
cover their windows it would not be equal treatment of all.
Ms. Dacy, Planning Coordinator, stated that the ordinance states
that the maximum amount of windows that can be covered is forty
percent. She stated that staff has been reviewing the question of
Fantasy House covering their windows, and it was the feeling of the
City Attorney that they could not be forced to cover their windows
one hundred percent because of the statement in the ordinance.
Mr. Herrick stated that his office has been reviewing the State
obscenity statute to determine if it is strong enough to require
coverage of the windows. He stated that it is probably somewhat
of a fact question as to how accessible it is as far as minors are
concerned. He suggested that perhaps the Police Department should
report as to the visibility of the merchandise through the windows.
Ms. Darlene Rusch, 561 - 63rd Avenue, stated that the Council seems
calm about the information Judy Blanchard has submitted, but she
is appalled and offended.
Councilman Schneider asked what she proposes the Council do right
now.
Ms. Rusch stated that she would like to hear some outrage.
Councilman Billings stated that he was outraged that the purchase
was made, and someone bought this item.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 27. 1990 PAGE 4
Councilman Schneider stated that when he first received calls
regarding the Fantasy House, he did visit the store and was
outraged by it. He stated, however, the City cannot go in there
and have the business closed. He stated that the City Attorney is
working to attempt to come up with a solution to rid the community
of the problem.
Ms. Rusch stated that it is necessary to prove that this item was
sold in that store, and this is the only way they could go to court
with some of these things.
Councilman Billings stated that the Council has been trying during
the last eight weeks to come up with a law that has not been
overturned in the courts.
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that the ordinance has to be very
specific about references to certain items such as chains, leather,
etc., as these items can also be purchased in hardware and other
stores. She stated that she visited the store so that she would
have a good viewpoint to speak on what materials are in the store.
Councilman Billings stated that several weeks ago when a zoning
ordinance was mentioned as a means to control where this type of
business was located, the response was that the Concerned Citizens
of Fridley did not want these businesses anywhere in the City. He
stated that it now seems the qroup is talking about a zoning
ordinance to control where they may be located in the City. He
stated that the City of Ramsey has spent $30,000 so far to rid
their community of a similar establishment and may spend much more.
He stated that he wants to come up with a solution that will be
successful so that the City is not spending funds on something that
is fruitless.
Mr. Boswell stated that their graup is submitting options and
information that Fantasy House could probably be prosecuted on
obscenity charges. He stated that they wish to provide any
information to the Council which may be helpful.
Councilman Schneider stated the only reaction he has right now is
that the Council is trying to work with them. He felt that for the
Concerned Citizens of Fridley to keep coming to every Council
meeting and asking what is being done will not solve any problems.
He felt that they should all work together. However, the Council
feels insulted when they are being questioned all the time
regarding what they are doing.
Mr. Boswell stated that the Concerned Citizens want to be involved,
and it is not because they think the Council is not doing anything.
He stated that they are here to find out how they may assist the
Council, and they do not want to see the issue die. He stated that
if there is a way they can exchange information besides attending
the Council meetings, they are open to these avenues.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 27. 1990 PAQE 5
Councilwoman Jorgenson felt that this issue can be dealt with at
staff level.
Mr. Boswell felt that 35 to 40 minutes a week has to be spent to
review what has transpired, but it certainly does not have to be
done at the Council meetings.
NEW BUSINESS•
1. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY
CODE CHAPTER 113 ENTITLED "SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING
COLLECTION" BY ADDING SECTION 113.05, "YARD WASTE TRANSFER
SITE:" AND RENUMBERING THE PRESENT SECTION 113.05 TO 113.06;
AND THE REMAINING SECTIONS CONSECUTIVELY: AND FURTHER AMENDING
CHAPTER 11 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE ENTITLED, GENERAL
PROVISIONS AND FEES. SECTION 11.10:
Ms. Dacy, Planning Coordinator, stated that the yard waste site has
been open since the end of March, and in August, the City reached
the limit for the yard waste season. She stated that there are
several months remaining in the yard waste season, and the City is
near their projected budget amounts for transferring yard waste,
as well as for monitoring the site.
Ms. Dacy stated that in order to implement a gate fee at the yard
waste site, this ordinance amendment is necessary. She stated that
this proposed ordinance would establish a gate fee of $3.00 per
trip, and the per trip volume would be ten bags of bagqed yard
waste, or in the case of a loose load, one trailer or pick-up truck
bed. She stated that this proposed ordinance was reviewed by the
Environmental Quality and Energy Commission and recommended for
approval.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and approve the
ordinance upon first reading. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion
carried unanimously.
2. RECEIVING THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
AUGUST 8, 1990:
A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #90-13, BY GARLAND LAGESSE. TO ALLOW
THE RECONSTRUCTION AND EXPANSION OF AN ATTACHED PORCH IN A
CRP-2 (FLOOD FRINGE) DISTRICT, ON LOTS 9-12, 16-24. BLOCK M,
RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS. GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7951 BROAD AVENUE
�J. E. •
Ms. Dacy, Planning Coordinator, stated that this special use permit
is to allow the reconstruction of a porch addition which lies in
the Flood Fringe District. She stated that the Planning Commission
recommended approval of this special use permit; however, they
wanted the Departanent of Natural Resources to determine if it would
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 27, 1990 PAGB 6
be acceptable if the porch was located at the elevation of the
existing living space which is six inches above the park elevation
of 821.94.
Ms. Dacy stated that a site inspection with Mr. Hovey of the
Department of Natural Resources was conducted, and the conclusion
was if the petitioner constructed an il by 18 foot porch, he could
raise it six inches to the existing level of the home and would not
have to raise it an additional 1-1/2 feet. She stated, however, if
the petitioner constructs a larger porch, he would have to go to
the 823.5 elevation. She stated that the petitioner has advised
he would construct an 11 by 18 foot porch.
Ms. Dacy stated that if the special use permit is approved� it is
recommended the stipulation for a hold harmless agreement be
included in the approval.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grant special use permit, SP
#90-13 to reconstruct a porch with the same dimensions of 11 by 18
feet and at the level of the floor of the existing home, with the
following stipulation: (1) the property owner shall execute a hold
harmless agreement to be recorded with the title of the property.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
The Council received the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting
of August 8, 1990.
3. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION
�'IEETING OF AUGUST 7, 1990:
A. VARIANCE REOUE5T. VAR #90-19. BY DARELD DEAN NELSON, TO REDUCE
THE 5ETBACK ON THE 5TREET SIDE OF A CORNER LOT FROM 17.5 FEET
TO 10 FEET. TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING GARAGE� ON
THE WEST 67 FEET OF LOT 20. AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION #129. THE
SAME BEING 1365 - 73RD AVENUE N.E.:
Ms. Dacy, Planning Coordinator, stated that this is a variance
request to reduce the setback on the street side of a corner lot
from 17.5 to 10 feet to allow the expansion of an existing garage.
She stated that staff's recommendation was for denial of the
variance as an alternative was identified for a separate detached
garage to the rear of the property. She stated that obviously this
would be more costly for the petitioner.
Ms. Dacy stated that the Appeals Commission recommended approval
of this variance as they felt the primary purpose of the 17.5 foot
setback was to preserve sight lines, for traffia safety and,
because none of the surrounding homes would be affected, they felt
the variance would not be contrary to the ordinance.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 27. 1990 PAGE 7
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to concur with the Appeals
Commission and grant variance request, VAR #90-19 to reduce the
setback on the street side of a corner lot from 17.5 feet to 10
feet. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson.
Councilman Billings asked about the hardship on this piece of
property.
Councilman Schneider felt that, from a practical standpoint, the
variance was appropriate as there would not be a problem with the
sight lines, and a car is now being parked at this location.
Mayor Nee stated that, as reflected in the minutes, if another
garage was constructed, the use of the existing qarage may be a
problem.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
3.5. SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A REPLAT IN THE NORTHCO ADDITION
Ms. Dacy, Planning Coordinator, stated that several months ago the
Council approved the Northco Second Addition plat, and the owners
are now taking four originally platted lots and creating two lots
by adjusting the lot lines. She stated that a public hearing
should be set for September 17, 1990 regarding this replat.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to set the public hearing for the
replat in Northco Addition for September Z7, 1990. Seconded by
Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
4. APPROVAL OF EAST RIVER ROAD/OSBORNE ROAD COST INCREASE:
Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that in November, 1985,
the Council passed a resolution approving the preliminary plans for
the County's improvement project at the intersection of East River
Road and Osborne Road. He stated that this project was identified
within the City as ST 1988-4.
Mr. Flora stated that in the resolution for the preliminary plans,
the City requested the County include a bikeway/walkway on Osborne
Road, the use of interlocking paving stones within the median, and
rubberized railroad crossing panels at the Burlington Northern
Railroad tracks. He stated the County indicated that they did not
desire to make any changes to the preliminary plans as this was a
federally funded project, and any changes would require a
resubmittal, loss of funds, and delay of the project. Mr. Flora
stated that it was agreed the County would proceed with the
original project, and incorporate the desired additional items as
change orders to the contract.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AUGIIST 27. 1990 PAGE 8
Mr. Flora stated that on March 15, 1988, the City entered into a
Joint Powers Agreement with the Anoka County Highway Department
for the improvement of the intersection and, at that time, it was
estimated the City's portion of the project would amount to
approximately $94,456.13, based on the original preliminary plans.
He stated that the City has received the final bill which
identified a cost of $130,314.46. He stated that this is an
increase of $35,858.33 from the original estimate and includes the
additions of the bikeway/walkway on Osborne Road, red brick in the
medians, railroad crossing panels and construction of the Talmadge
Way and 75th Way cul-de-sacs. He stated that in preparinq the
assessment rolls, $90,305.60 has been identified as the assessable
amount, leaving a balance of $40,008.86 to be funded through MSAS
funds.
Mr. Flora stated that he would recommend that Council approve these
additional costs associated with the improvements.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to authorize an increase to the
Joint Powers Agreement with the Anoka County Highway Department
for an additional $35,858.33 for a total amount of $130,314.46 for
the improvements under the County's project SP 02-608-07 or the
City's project No. ST 1988-4. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion
carried unanimously.
5. PRESENTATION OF THE 1991 PRELIMINARY DRAFT BUDGETS•
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that in conformance with the
City Charter, the 1991 preliminary draft budget is submitted to the
Council. He stated that this preliminary budget reflects a 3.5
percent increase over the 1990 budget.
Mr. Pribyl stated that it is recommended the Council set the public
hearing for the 1991 budget for November 19 and November 26 as the
reconvening date, if one is needed.
Mr. Pribyl stated that resolutions have also been prepared for
adoption of the proposed budget, the proposed tax levy, and they
are included as separate items on this agenda.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive the City Manager's 1991
preliminary draft budget. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion
carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to set the public hearing on the
1991 budget for November 19, 1990 and the reconvening date, if
necessary, for November 26, 1990. Seconded by Councilman Billings.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion
carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGQST 27. 1990 PAGE 9
6. RESOLUTION NO. 60-1990 ADOPTING A"PROPOSED" BUDGET FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR 1991:
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that after adoption of this
"proposed" budget, the tax levy could not be increased; however,
internal modifications could be made.
i�IOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to adopt Resolution No. 60-1990.
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote,
Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Fitzpatrick, Councilman
Schneider and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman
Billings voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion
carried by a 4 to 1 vote.
Councilman Schneider requested a synopsis for the first Council
meeting in November on how the budget would be affected if the City
chose to get out of the liquor business.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 61-1990 AUTHORIZING CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS
FOR THE GENERAL FUND. STATE AID FUND, CABLE TELEVISION FUND,
HRA REIMBURSEMENT FUND. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND. CIVIC CENTER
REMODELING FUND AND THE FIRE BUILDINGS FUND FOR THE YEAR 1989:
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 61-1990.
Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
8. RESOLUTION NO. 62-1990 AUTHORIZING CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS
FOR THE GENERAL FUND AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR THE
YEAR 1990:
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that these adjustments have
arisen as a result of donations, intergovernmental aids, unforeseen
expenditures and items budgeted in incorrect categories.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 62-Z990.
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
9. RESOLUTION NO. 63-1990 CERTIFYING "PROPOSED" TAX LEVY
REQUIREMENTS FOR 1991 TO THE COUNTY OF ANOKA FOR COLLECTION:
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that the 1991 "proposed" tax
levy of $4,751,46:5 represents a 5.3 percent increase over the 1990
levy of $4,5i2,647. He stated that this increase can be attributed
to several reasons, one being the loss of $96,954 in Local
Government Aid and the other being Special Levy for the Unfunded
Accrued Liability of the Police Pension Fund that increased fram
$96,364 in 1990 to $111,169 in 1991.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AUGIIBT 27, 1990 PAG$ 10
Councilman Schneider asked if the average property owner would
receive a 5.3 percent increase in the City's portion of property
taxes.
Mr. Pribyl stated that this does not apply; however, there is
really no way of knowing because the City does not know the
distribution of the levy at this time.
Councilman Schneider asked if this would be known at the time the
. Council adopts the budget.
Mr. Pribyl stated that the City should have some pretty good
figures by that time.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick ta adopt Resolution No. 63-1990.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, Councilman
Fitzpatrick, Councilman Schneider, Councilwoman Jorgenson and Mayor
Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman Billings voted
against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried by a 4
to 1 vote.
10. �ESOLUTION NO. 64-1990 CERTIFYING CHARGES TO THE COUNTY
AUDITOR TO BE LEVSED AGAINST CERTAIN PROPERTIES FOR COLLECTI�N
WITH THE TAXES PAYABLE IN 1991 (NUISANCEI:
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this resolution is
necessary to assess the expenses associated with the clean-up of
the Erickson property.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt Resolution No. 64-1990.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 65-1990 DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT
ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST 1988-4:
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt Resolution No. 65-1990.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
12. RESOLUTION NO 66-1990 DIRECTING PUBLICATION OF HEARING ON
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.
ST 1988-4•
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt Resolution No. 66-1990.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MSETING OF AIIGIIST 27, 1990 PAGE 11
13. RESOLUTION NO. 67-1990 AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM
THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND:
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that in December, 1989, the
City received a dividend check of $61,109 from the League of
Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. He stated that the dividends
received in previous years were deposited in the Self Insurance
Fund. However, Council had informally directed that the dividend
be used to compensate the General Fund for the underbudgeted 1990
Worker's Compensation premium. He stated that it is requested,
therefore, this resolution be adopted to authorize the transfer of
these funds.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt Resolution No. 67-1990.
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
14.� RESOLUTION NO. 68-1990 DESIGNATING OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES AND
SAFE DEPOSIT ACCESS FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY:
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 68-1990.
Seconded by Councilman Bi2lings. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
15. RESOLUTION NO. 69-1990 IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A
LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE TO THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FOR BINGO:
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that due to a recent change
in State Law, it is now required that any application for bingo or
other form of charitable gambling must be approved by formal
resolution of the Council, He stated that this resolution is to
approve bingo for the Knights oF Columbus.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 69-1990.
Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
16. CLAIMS•
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to authorize payment of Claim Nos.
33519 through 33722. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
17. LICENSES:
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to approve the licenses as
submitted (for concurrence by the Council on August 13 and August
27, 1990) and as on file in the License Clerk's Office. Seconded
by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, aZl voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 27, 1990 PAGE 12
18. E5TIMATES:
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to approve the estimates as
submitted:
Minnesota valley Landscape, Inc.
9700 Bush Lake Road
Minneapolis, NII�T 55438
Landscape, Irrigation &
Lighting Project No. 168
FINAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,220.45
Twin City Testing
P. O. Box C/M 9395
St. Paul, NIN 55170
Construction of the 1.5 MG
Elevated Water Reservoir
Project No. 201
FINAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3, 050. 00
Astech Corporation
P. O. Box 1025
St. Cloud, MN 56302
Street Improvement Project
No. ST 1990 - 10 (Sealcoat)
Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $94,186.00
Bituminous Consulting & Contracting
2456 Main Street
Minneapolis, MN 55434
Street Improvement Project
N�D. ST 1990 - 3
Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $23, 441. 25
HNTB
6700 France Avenue South
Suite 260
Minneapolis, NIl3 55435
1. Design and Improvements to
Well No. 12 and 63rd Avenue
Booster Station Upgrade
Project No. 204
Partial Estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,763.40
FRZDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIBT 27. 1990 PAGE 13
2. Inspection of the 1.5 MG
Elevated Water Reservoir
Project No. 202
Partial Estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,443.64
Bruce A. Liesch Associates, Inc.
13400 - 15th Avenue North
Minneapolis, NIIJ 55441
1. Monitoring Wells at Commons
Park Project No. 208
Partial Estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,502.50
2. Locate and Design Well No. 14
Project No. 205
Partial Estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,126.50
Lindahl & Carlson
1821 University Avenue
Suite N318
St. Paul, MN 55104
1990 Miscellaneous Concrete
Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Project
Estimate No. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,167.71
Twin City Testing
P. O. Box C/M 9395
St. Paul, MN 55170
Locke Lake Dam Repair
Project No. 211
Partial Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2, 300. 00
Volk Sewer & Water
8909 Bass Creek Court
Brooklyn Park, 1rIN 55429
Water, Sanitary Sewer and
Storm Sewer Project No. 210
Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20, 292 . 95
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee de�lared the motion carried unanimously.
�
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF AIIGIIST 27. 1990 PAGS 14
ADJOURNMENT•
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adjourn the meeting. Seconded
by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Regular
Meeting of the Fridley City Council of August 27, 1990 adjourned
at 8:52 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Carole Haddad William J. Nee
Secretary to the City Council Mayor
Approved:
IJ
CITY OF FRIDLEY
ANOlCA COIINTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE O� HEARINa ON ASSESSMENT FOR BTREBT IMPROVEMENT
PROJBCT NO. STREET 1989 - 1& 2&(ADDENDUM NO. 1)
Notice is hereby qiven that the Council of the City of Fridley will
meet at the Fridley Municipal Center in said City on the 10 day
of September, 1990, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., to hear and pass upon all
objections, if any, to the proposed assessments in respect to the
following improvements, to-wit:
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. STREET 1989 - 1& 2&
(ADDENDUM NO. 1)
The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvements in the
total amount of 5865,4t7.i8 is now on file and open to public
inspection by all persons interested, in the office of the Clerk
of said City.
The general nature of the improvements and each of them is the
construction of concrete curb and gutter, aggregate base course,
bituminous paving, �new signal system, landscaping, storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, and related appurtenances located as follows:
STREET 1989 - 1
BTREET 1989 - 2
ADDENDIIM NO. 1
Northco Drive, 51st Way and East River Road,
7570 Hiqhway 65
University Avenue West Service Drive -
83rd Avenue North 465'
Commerce Lane - 73rd Avenue to Osborne Road
Lot 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 77
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of
them is all that land benefited by said improvements or each of
them and lying within the general area above. Said improvements
will be assessed against the properties within the above noted
areas in whole or in part proportionately to each of the Iands
therein contained according to the benefits received.
At said hearing the Council will consider written or oral
objections to the proposed assessments for each of said
improvements. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any
individual assessment unless a written objection signed by the
affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the
assessment hearing or presented to the residing officer at the
public hearing.
A property owner may appeal an assessment to the district court by
servinq notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk within
thirty (30) days after adoption cf the assessment and filing such
notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service
upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
�aqe 2- Notice oi Hearinq on Assessmeat tor Strest Improvement
Project No. 8treet 1989 - 1& 2 i(Addendum No. i)
'he City of Fridley adopted Resolution No. 47 - 1981 on April 6,
.981, relating to the deferral of special assessments for certain
;enior citizens where the payment of said special assessments
:onstitutes a hardship. The following factors wi12 govern the
�ranting of the deferments: the property must be homestead
iroperty, and the owner must be at least sixty-five (65) years of
age or older, and in the case of husband and wife, one member must
meet this age requirement.
1A
The application for said deferral must be made within the first
thirty (30) days after the adoption of the final assessment roll
by the City Council. The owner will make application for deferred
payments on forms prescribed by the Anoka County Auditor, and will
make application to the City of Fridley on forms provided by the
City. �
The City Council will consider each application on an individual
basis; however, the general policy is to grant senior citizen
hardship special assessment deferrals when the annual payment for
the special assessment exceeds two (2) per cent of the adjusted
gross income of the owners as determined by the most recent Federal
Income Tax Return.
The deferral will be terminated and all amounts accumulated plus
applicable interest shall become due when any of the followinq
happen: the death of the owner, provided that the surviving spouse
is not otherwise eligible for the deferral; the sale, transfer, or
subdivision of the property or any part that further deferral is
not in the public interest.
The assessment roll as presently calculated shows an assessment of
$ LAmount) for SLecral Descri�tion) under Street Imnrovement Proiect
No Street 1989 - 1& 2&(Addendum No. 1l to be assessed over
ten (10) years at eiQht and one half (8 1/2 �) per cent interest.
The property owner may pay the total special assessment to the City
of Fridley within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment
with no addition of any interest. If the entire special assessment
is not paid within the thirty (30) day period, but is paid before
October 15th in the year in which the roll is adopted, interest is
charged from the date of the adoption of the assessment to the date
on which the assessment is paid.
Partial payment of an assessment which is not less than one-half
thereof, provided that such partial payment shall in any event be
in a sum of at least One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), may be made
within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment. If a
partial payment is made, the original assessment will be reduced
by this amount, and the remaining balance shall be certified for
collection as a part of the original assessment roll.
Paqe 3- Notice ot Hearinq oa Assessment tor Street Improvement
Project No. Street 1989 - 1& 2 i(Addenduat No. 1)
If the assessment is not paid by October 15th in the year adopted,
the first payment of principal and interest will be included on the
followinq year's tax statement. To the first payment shall be
added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the
adoption of the new assessment through December 31 of the following
year. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on the balance of unpaid principal. The
entire remaining balance of an assessment subsequent to the current
year's payment may be paid at any time after the first year, but
the payment on the yearly tax statement does include interest to
December 31, of that year.
DATED T8I8 DAY OF , 1990 HY ORDER OF THS CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY.
AILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPAI.A - CITY CLERR
l� �]
�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
ANORA COIINTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREES 1989
Notice is hearby given that the Council of the City of Fridley will
meet at the Fridley Municipal Center in said City on the lOt day
of Segtember, 1990, at 7:30 o'clock P.M. to hear and pass upon all
objections, if any, to the proposed assessments in respect to the
following improvement, to-wit:
TREATMENT AND REM04AL OF TREES 1989
The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvements in the
total amount of 51,200.00 is now on file and open to public
inspection by all persons interested, in the office of the Clerk
of said City.
The general nature of the improvements and each of them is the
treatment or removal of trees located in the City of Fridley as
follows:
Pin No. 24-30-24-24-0078 Pt of Lot 3& 4, Blk 4,
Parkview Manor Addition
Pin No. 23-30-24-41-0020
Pin No. 23-30-24-l1-0011
Lot 18, Blk 6, Doanay� s Lakeview
Manor Addition
Lot 11, Hlk 5, Donnny� s Lakeview
Manor Addition
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of
them is all that land benefited by said improvements or each of
them and lying within the general area above. Said improvements
will be assessed against the properties within the above noted
areas in whole or in part proportionately to each of the lands
therein contained according to the benefits received.
At said hearing the council will consider written or oral
objections to the proposed assessments for each of said
improvements. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any
individual assessment unless a written objection signed by the
affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the
assessment hearing or presented to the residinq officer at the
public hearing.
A property owner may appeal an assessment to the district court by
servinq notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk within
thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment and filing such
notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service
upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
�
2A
Paqe 2- Notice oi Hearinq on Assessment !or Treatment and Removal
of Trees 1989
The City of Fridley adopted Resolution No. 47 - 1981 on April 6,
1981, relating to the deferral of special assessments for certain
senior citizens where the payn�ent of said special assessments
constitutes a hardship. The following factors will govern the
grantinq of the deferments: the property must be homestead
property, and the owner must be at least sixty-five (65) years of
age or older, and in the case of husband and wife, one member must
meet this age requirement.
The application for said deferral must ]
thirty (30) days after the adoption of t
by the City Council. The owner will make
payments on forms prescribed by the Anoka
make application to the City of Fridley
City.
e made within the first
ie final assessment roll
application for deferred
County Auditor, and will
�n forms provided by the
The City Council will consider each application on an individual
basis; however, the general policy is to grant senior citizen
hardship special assessment deferrals when the annual payment for
the special assessment exceeds two (2) per cent of the adjusted
gross income of the owners as determined by the most recent Federal
Income Tax Return.
The deferral will be terminated and all amounts accumulated plus
applicable interest shall become due when any of the following
happen: the death of the owner, provided that the surviving spouse
is not otherwise eligible for the deferral; the sale, transfer, or
subdivision of the property or any part thereof; loss of homestead
status for any reason; the City Council determines that further
deferral is not in the public interest.
The assessment roll as presently calculated shows an assessment of
S(Amountj for SLegal Description) under Treatment and Removal of
Trees 1989 to be assessed over five (5) years at Eight and one half
(8 1/2 %) per cent interest.
The property owner may pay the total special assessment to the City
of Fridley within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment
with no addition of any interest. If the entire special assessment
is not paid within the thirty (30) day period, but is paid before
October i5th in the year in which the roZZ is adopted, interest is
charged from the date of the adoption of the assessment to the date
on which the assessment is paid.
Partial payment of an assessment which is not less than one-half
thereof, provided that such partial payment shall in any event be
in a sum of at least One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), may be made
within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment. If a
partial payment is made, the original assessment will be reduced
�
Paqe 3- Notice oi Hearinq oi Assessment on Treatment and Removal
oi Trees 1989
by this amount, and the remaining balance shall be certified for
collection as a part of the original assessment roll.
If the assessment is not paid by October 15th in the year adopted,
the first payment of principal and interest will be included on the
followinq year's tax statement. To the firs� payment shall be
added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the
adoption of the new assessment through December 31 of the following
year. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on the balance of unpaid principal. The
entire remaining balance of an assessment subsequent to the current
year's payment may be paid at any time after the first year, but
the payment on the yearly tax statement does include interest to
December 31, of that year.
DATED THI3 DAY OF , 1990 BY ORDER
OF THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERR
3
CITY OF FRIDLEY
J1NOK�i COIII�TY� MINNESOTl�
NOTICB OF HEARZNG O�T liB8B881�ENT FOR BTREST IIKPROVEMENT
pItOJECT NO. BTREET 1988 - 4
Notice is hereby qiven that the Council of the City ot Fridley will
meet at the Fridley Municipal Center in said City on the Ot day
of Sevtember, 1990, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., to hear and pass upon all
objections, if any, to the proposed assessments in respect to the
followinq improvements, to-wit:
BTREET IMPROVEKENT PROJECT NO. 8TRE8T 1988 - 4
The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvements in the
total amount of S9o.305.6o is now on file and open to public
inspection by aIl persons interested, in the office of the Clerk
of said City.
The general nature ot the improvements and each of them is the
construction of street improvements includinq gradinq, concrete
curb and gutter, stabilized base, hot-mix bituminous mat, sanitary
and storm sewer, traffic siqnal, street lighting, landscaping,
bike/walk path and related appurtenances located as follows:
OSBORNE ROAD EAST OF EAST RIVER ROAD TO MAIN STREET
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of
them is all that land benefited by said improvements or each of
them and lyinq within the general area above. Said improvements
will be assessed against the properties within the above noted
areas in whole or in part proportionately to each of the lands
therein contained accordinq to the benefits received.
At said hearinq the Council will consider written or oral
objections to the proposed assessments for each of said
improvements. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any
individual assessment unless a written objection signed by the
affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the
assessment hearinq or presented to the residing officer at the
public hearing.
A property owner may appeal an assessment to the district court by
serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk within
thirty (30) days after adoptian of the assessment and filinq such
notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service
upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
The City of Fridley adopted Resolution No. 47 - 1981 on April 6,
1981, relatinq to the deferral of special assessments for certain
senior citizens where the payment of said special assessments
constitutes a hardship. The following factors will govern the
granting of the deferments: the property must be homestead
property, and the owner must be at least sixty-five (65) years of
3A
paqa 2- Notics o� Hearinq oa Assessment ior 8treet Zmprovament
project No. Street 1988 - 4
age or older, and in the case of husband and wife, one member must
meet this aqe requirement.
The application for said deferral must be made within the first
thirty (30) days after the adoption of the final assessment roll
by the City Council. The owner will make application for deferred
payments on forms prescribed by the Anoka County Auditor, and will
make application to the City of Fridley on forms provided by the
City.
The City Council will consider each application on an.individual
basis; however, the general policy is to grant senior citizen
hardship special assessment deferrals when the annual payment for
the special assessment exceeds two (2) per cent of the adjusted
gross income of the owners as determined by the most recent Federal
Income Tax Return.
The deferral will be terminated and all amounts accumulated plus
applicable interest shall become due when any of the followinq
happen: the death of the owner, provided that the survivinq spouse
is not otherwise eligible for the deferral; the sale, transfer, or
subdivision of the property or any part that further deferral is
not in the public interest.
The assessment roll as presently calculated shows an assessment of
S(Amountl for rr.Aeat Descriationl under Street Improvement Proiec�
No Street 1988 - 4 to be assessed over te� Years at eiaht and
one half (8 1/2 �L per cent interest.
The property owner may pay the total special assessment to the City
of Fridley within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment
with no addition of any interest. If the entire special assessment
is not paid within the thirty (30) day period, but is paid before
october 15th in tha year in which the roll is adopted, interest is
charqed from the date of the adoption of the assessment to the date
on which the assessment is paid.
Partial payment of an assessment which is not less than one-half
thereof, provided that such partial payment sha21 in any event be
in a sum of at least One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) , may be made
within thirty (30j days of adoption of the assessment. If a
partial payment is made, the original assessment will be reduced
by this amount, and the remaininq balance shall be certified for
collection as a part of the original assessment roll.
If the assessment is not paid by October 15th in the year adopted,
the f irst payment of principal and interest will be included on the
followinq year's tax statement. To the first payment shall be
added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the
mber 31 �f the followinq
adoption of the new assessment through Dece
Paqe 3- �otic• o! Hearinq on Assessment for Btreet Zmprov�ment
Projact No. Street 1988 - 4
year. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on the balance of unpaid principal. The
entire remaining balance of an assessment subsequent to the current
year's payment may be paid at any time after the first year, but
the payment on the yearly tax statement does include interest to
December 31, of that year.
• DATED THIS DAY 08 , 1990 BY ORDER OF THB CITY
COONCIL OF T8E CITY OF FRIDLEY.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
BHIRLEY A. AAAPALA - CITY CLERIC
��.
3B
s
��
unroF
Fr�aer
DATE:
TO:
COl1ILMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT'
MEMORANDUM
September 5, 1990
William Burns, City Manager�'
�
.�►
FROM: Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, lanning Coordinator
Lisa Campbe ��lanning Associate
8IIB.7ECT: Second and Final Reading of Proposed Yard Waste
Gate Fee Ordinance
To implement a gate fee at the yard waste site, an ordinance
amending Chapter il and 113 of the City Code is required. Without
an ordinance, the City may not ieqally receive the revenue
generated from the proposed fee. This requirement necessarily
postpones the effective date of the gate fee to October 4, 1990.
The ordinance amends Chapter 11: General Provisions and Fees,
Section 11.10: Fees for Services Rendered, to include a gate fee
at the yard waste site. The ordinance amends Chapter 113: Solid
Waste Disposal and Recycling Collection, Section 113.05, to become
Yard Waste Transfer Site and renumberinq the remaining sections
consecutively.
Section 113.05, as proposed, forma2ly establishes the yard waste
transfer site and includes specific limits on what materials may
be disposed at the site and in what amount. Leaves and grass only
may be deposited at the site. No more than 10 bags of bagged yard
waste, or one trailer load, or one pick-up truck bed load of loose
yard waste may be deposited at the site per trip.
Please note this section establishes that only residentially
generated leaves and grass transported by the generating resident
may be disposed of at the site. The language does not limit the
use of the site to Fridley residents, but does prohibit
commercially-generated and/or commercially-transported yard waste
from being deposited at the site.
Staff Recommendation
In order to begin charging a gate fee at the yard waste site on
October 4, 1990, staff recommends Council adopting the ordinarice.
The ordinance must be adopted before a fee may be imposed. First
reading of the ordinance was approved on August 27, 1990. Approval
of the second and final reading is recommended.
LC:ls
M-90-631
4
NO.
AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY
CODE CHAPTER 113 ENTITLED "SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
AND RECYCLING COLLECTION" BY ADDING SECTION 113.05,
"YARD WASTE TRANSFER SITE", AND RENUMBERING THE
PRESENT SECTION 113.05 TO 113.06 AND THE REMAINING
SECTIONS CONSECUTIVELY; AND FURTHER AMENDING
CHAPTER 11 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE ENTITLED,
GENERAL PROVISIONS AND FEES, SECTION 11.10.
The City Council of the City of Fridley hereby ordains as follows:
Section 113.05. Yard Waste Transfer Site
The City of Fridley operates a yard waste transfer site at 350 -
71st Avenue N.E., east of Columbia Arena. Residentially generated
leaves and grass that are transported by the generating resident
may be deposited at the site. Residents are limited to a per trip
volume of ten bags of bagged yard waste, or in the case of a loose
load, one trailer or pick-up truck bed. Residents must debag and
take their bags with them upon leaving the site. Commercially-
generated and commercially-carried leaves and grass may not be
deposited at the site. Only leaves and grass may be deposited at
the yard waste transfer site.
CHAPTER 11. General Provisions and Fees
Section 11.10 is amended as follows:
11.10 Fees for Services Rendered
CODE SUBJECT
113.05 Yard Waste Transfer Site Gate Fee
FEE
$3.00 per trip
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1990.
WILLIAM J. NEE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA, CITY CLERK
First Reading: August 27, 1990
Second Reading:
Publication:
I �
5
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETZNG, AIIGIIST 22,1990
w+r w.rr�.�r, w..►�r�r.�r�r.r�.�..�.�.aww.w.��rn►.u.r.�.rw.�w.w1►ww�rww►w.�.w�rw..�.+wn+�..�..r�..�.+n�r.r.
SALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Betzold called the August 22, 1990, Planning
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m.
�tOLL CALL •
Members Present: Don Betzold, Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba,
Paul Dahlberg, Connie Modig
Members Absent: Sue Sherek, Diane Savage
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
William Burns, City Manager
Warren Stock, 289 Liberty Street N.E.
Dale Ekstrum, Northco Corporation
Kristin Larson, Stewart Corporation
See attached list
APPROVAL OF AUGUST 8 1990 PLANNING COMMISSZON MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the August
8, 1990, Planning Commission minutes as written.
QPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
l. CONSIDERATION OF A LOT SPLIT L S. #90-03, BY FRIDLEY
BUSINESS CENTER PARTNERSHIP:
To split Lots 4, 5, and 6, Block 2, Northco Business Park
into the following two parcels.
Parcel 1: Lots 5 ad 6 and the north 87.98 feet of the east
268.02 feet of Lot 4, Block 2, Northco Business
Park, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Anoka County, Minnesota.
Parcel 2: Lot. 4, Block 2, Northco Business Park, according
to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota, except the north 87.98 feet of the east
268.02 feet of said Lot 4.
All generally located east of Northco Drive and south of
73rd Avenue.
�',
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AIIGIIST 22, 1990 PAGE 2
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing to split an 88
ft. rectangle from the original Lot 4, Block 2, of the Northco
Plat; and, at the same time, transfer a triangular easement to
the parcel to the north, Lots 5 and 6. The purpose of the lot
split is to provide adequate lot area for one of the Fridley
Business Center Partnership's buyers of the property. Included
in the staff report is a site plan for Angeion Corporation, which
has applied for a building permit and wishes to build in
September. By processing and approvinq the lot split, Angeion
will be able to proceed with construction in September. The plat
application (agenda item #2) will reconfigure the lot line of
the triangular easement area which has too complicated of a legal
description and needs to be replatted.
Ms. McPherson stated entire parcel is located near the
intersection of Northco Drive and what was the old Carter Day
plant. The parcel is currently vacant and is zoned M-2, Heavy
Industrial, as are the parcels adjacent to it.
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed lot split does not adversely
impact the existing lots as to minimum lot area or minimum lot
width as outlined in the M-2, Heavy Zndustrial District, zoning
regulations. The area to be split is rather small compared to
the overall size of the lots. Staff is recommending the Planning
Commission approve the lot split with three stipulations:
1.
2.
3.
The plat, P.S. #90-03, shall be completed by the
petitioner.
Compliance with stipulations of P.S. #90-03.
Park dedication fees shall be paid at time of building
permit issuance. �
Mr. Dale Ekstrum, Northco Corporation, stated that when the
property was originally plated, they did not have any potential
tenants or buyers, and basically platted it into smaller lots.
Angeion Corporation, through Stewart Corporation, the developer,
needs Lots 5 and 6 plus 88 feet. It is relatively common today
to do this kind of lot split in a platted business park.
Mr. Kondrick asked what kind of business would be conducted in
this building. .
Ms. Kristin Larson, Steward Corporation, stated Angeion
Corporation is a medical manufacturing and research company. At
the beginning, there will be about 75 people on site. With the
expansion that is planned, there would be 98 people on the one
shift. The second shift would have about 25 people. They have
provided more than the required number of parking spaces for the
company now and after the expansion.
�
�LANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 22, 1990 PAGE 3
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend to
City Council approval of L.S. #90-03, by Fridley Business Center
Partnership, to split Lots 4, 5, and 6, Block 2, Northco Business
Park into the following two parcels.
Parcel 1: Lots 5 ad 6 and the north 87.98 feet of the east
268.02 feet of Lot 4, Block 2, Northco Business
Park, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Anoka County, Minnesota.
Parcel 2: Lot 4, Block 2, Northco Business Park, according
to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota, except the north 87.98 feet of the east
268.02 feet of said Lot 4.
Al1 generally located east of Northco Drive and south of
73rd Avenue, with the following stipulations:
1. The plat, P.S. #90-03, shall be completed by the
petitioner.
2. Compliance with stipulations of P.S. #90-03.
3. Park dedication fees shall be paid at time of
building permit issuance.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRZED IINANIMOUSLY.
2. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT. P.S.
�90-03. BY FRIDLEY BUSINESS CENTER PARTNERSHIP:
To replat Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6, Block 2, Northco Business
Park, into two lots, Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Northco Business
Park Third Addition, on property generally located east of
Northco Drive and south of 73rd Avenue.
MO ION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to open the
public hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
T8E MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:45 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the purpose of the plat is to formalize the
previous lot split into correct, simp2e legal descriptions
instead of a complicated metes and bounds description for that
particular triangular easement discussed with the lot split
request. The plat will create two parcels: Lot 1 and Lot 2 of
the proposed Northco Third Addition. Lot 1 is 4.65 acres and Lot
2 is 6.1 acres. Both lots meet the minimum lot area requirement
and the minimum lot width requirement set forth in the M-2, Heavy
Industrial District regulations.
�
PLANNING COMMIS3ION MEETING. AIIGIIST 22. 1990 __ PAGE 4
Ms. McPherson stated environmental considerations such as tree
preservation and drainage issues were first addressed in the
original plat and those conditions outlined in the oriqinaZ
development agreement will still apply to these new lots.
Ms. McPherson stated cross parking easements were originally
recorded with the original plat for Lots 4 and 5 and the adjacent
Carter Day facility. These cross parking easements will need to
be amended and re-recorded based on the new legal descriptions.
Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommendinq the Planninq
Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat with two
stipulations:
1. Cross parking easements shall be recorded against Lot
2, Block l, Northco Third Addition, and the Carter Day
property to the east (Lot 7, Block 2, Northco Business
Park) .
2. A park dedication fee of $.023 per square foot shall be
paid at the time-of building permit.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to close the public
hearinq.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
T8E MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARIN(3 CLOSED AT 7:50 P.M.
MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend to
City Council approval of preliminary plat, P.S. #90-03, by
Fridley Business Center Partnership, to replat Lots 3, 4, 5, and
6, Block 2, Northco Business Park, into two lots, Lots 1 and 2,
Block 1, Northco Business Park Third Addition, on property
generally located east of Northco Drive and south of 73rd Avenue,
with the following stipulations:
1. Cross parking easements shall be recorded against Lot
2, Block 1, Northco Third Addition, and the Carter Day
property to the east (Lot 7, Block 2, Northco Business
Park) .
2. A park dedication iee of $.023 per square foot shall be
paid at the time of building permit.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNQ AYE, CBAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
T8E MOTZON CARRZED IINANIMODBLY.
Ms. McPherson stated the Iot split and preliminary plat will go
to City Council on September 10, 1990.
5C
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 22. 1990 PAGE 5
3. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP
�90-14. BY STOCK ROOFING:
Per Section 205.18.O1.C.(12) of the Fridley City Code to
allow exterior storage of materials and equipment on Lots 10
and 11, Block 7, Onaway, generally located at 7738 Elm
Street N.E.
OT ON by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to waive the
reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYEi CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLA1tED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARIN(3 OPEN AT 7s52 P.M.
Ms. Dacy stated the property is located west of and adjacent to
Elm Street and is approximately 14,700 sq. ft. in size. The
property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as is all the property
surrounding it. However, to the north of the parcel is an
existing singZe family home and to the south of the 16 ft.
platted alley are two other single family homes. The single
family homes are considered nonconforminq by ordinance.
Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner is requesting a special use permit
for outdoor storage. The petitioner is proposing to construct a
3,500 sq. ft. building, part of which will be a garage area for
the petitioner's vehicles. The remaininq area will be used as
office area. The petitioner is proposing to have the alley
improved such that access can be made from Elm Street and to
provide access into the proposed building and outdoor storage
area. Three parking spaces are proposed directly in front of the
building. The outdoor storage area is proposed to be contained
by 6 foot tall chain link fence with slats. The fence is
proposed to be located along the property line.
Ms. Dacy stated that on August 7, 1990, the Appeals Commission
consider three variance requests: lot area from 1/2 acre to 1%3
acre, lot width from 150 feet to 104 feet, and building setback
to reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 5 feet. The
Appeals Commission tabled action until after the Planning
Commission action on the outdoor storage issue. One of the
concerns of the Appeals Commission was that one of the reasons
for proposing the building 5 feet from the lot line was that the
long dimension of the building could provide screening of the
outdoor storage area. The Appeals Commission wanted more
information on that issue. The other issue the Appeals
Commission wanted discussed was the relationship of the
industrial properties in this area to the single family homes or
nonconforming properties. Staff has developed more information
on that which she will discuss later in the meetinq.
Ms. Dacy stated the proposed business is a roofinq business. Mr.
Stock has indicated that he needs this amount of storage area for
materials related to the roofing business. This includes the
5D
5E
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AIIGIIST 2�. 1990 PAGE 6
solid asphalt, insulation pallets, equipment such as ladders, and
other materials related to the business.
Ms. Dacy stated that in analyzing the site design of this
particular property because of a lot area that is so small in
relation to what the Code requires, it is difficult to meet all
the required setbacks. The outdoor storage area is large enough
such that if the building was to be reoccupied by a manufacturinq
use, the outdoor storage area could be converted into a parking
lot and required parking spaces could be provided on site. The
petitioner is requesting that the outdoor storage area not be
paved but have a gravel/rock surface. Staff surveyed other
special use permits granted in the past, and three properties
have been permitted to not have a paved surface: Central Roofing
Company, Park Construction, and Kohanek located to the west of
this property. There are a large number of oak trees along the
south lot line and the rear of the property that could be
maintained if the outdoor storage area is not paved.�
Ms. Dacy stated the primary issue with the outdoor storage is
that as part of the roofing business, the petitioner has two
asphalt kettles. These kettles are transported to job sites and
heated on site to melt the hard asphalt to liquid asphalt. The
question arises as to how much of a nuisance does the asphalt
odors produce when the kettles are returned to the site. The two
asphalt kettles are about 5 feet long and 3 feet wide. The
overall capacity is 175 gallons. The Fire Code prohibits storage
of these kettles in the building. In an attempt to gauge how
much these kettles smell, staff had the petitioner place one
asphalt kettle on the property on Monday afternoon. The kettle
was returned to the rear of the site at approximately 100-150
degrees F. In order to heat the asphalt, it has to reach 450
degrees F. Typically, the asphalt is heated at the job site. It
is her understanding that roofing companies cannot transport
liquid asphalt until it is somewhat hardened in order that the
asphalt liquid will not spill in route.
Ms. Dacy stated three staff inembers walked around the site to
determine if they could smell the odor at the property lines.
Mary Novack, 21 - 77th Avenue, was also at the site. They did
not detect any distinct odor at that particular time, so, based
on that experiment, staff believes two asphalt kettles could be
stored on the property and not cause an adverse impact as long
as:
1. The asphalt is not heated on the site.
2. The kettle is not returned to the site until the
asphalt is below 200 degrees F.
3. The kettles are stored in the farthest corner of the
site to minimize the view.
5F
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINa, AIIGIIST 22. 1990 __ PAGE 7
4. The lid be kept on the kettle.
Ms. Dacy stated if there is some type of spillage onto the
ground, as the asphalt cools, it hardens, so there is no threat
to groundwater contamination. She spoke to a represe�tative from
the MPCA who said that asphalt is not found to be carcinogenic,
so it has none of those impacts at all. �
Ms. Dacy stated that as far as the proposed access to the
property, the Commission should understand that because this is a
public alley, the petitioner would be required to submit a
petition to the Council to request that the City pave the alley
and assess the cost only to this particular owner. The
petitioner has indicated that the vehicles that would be
accessing the site will back into the property and into the
building so that the materials from the trailers can be unloaded
into the outdoor storage area. Also, that way the trucks can
drive out of the site.
Ms. Dacy stated she would address the nonconforming use issue
which was raised and discussed at the Appeals Commission meeting
on August 7, 1990, regarding what the policies are for the future
for these nonconforminq uses. Typically, municipalities use tax
increment financing as a typical redevelopment tool. Outside of
that, the only other way that municipalities can acquire property
is through condemnation or eminent domain. For both those
options, the City has to have some type of public purpose. In
the case of tax increment financinq, staff has identified four
concerns regarding the use of that tool. Unfortunately, the
state has amended the laws such that they are hampering
municipalities in trying to redevelop properties.
Ms. Dacy stated that creating a tax increment financinq
redevelopment district in this area poses the following concerns:
1. One of the major changes in the new state law for
redevelopment tax increment districts includes a reduction
in Local Government Aids (LGA) if a project has not occurred
or increment is beinq generated within a particular time
period.
2. A typical size industrial parcel that is usable for
industrial development is approximately 3 acres. The amount
of vacant properties total less than one acre in size.
Typically industrial uses are looking for a site that is at
least 2-3 acres in size. So the mere size of these
properties poses an issue that the City would have to
address in order to get a developer to look at acquiring the
properties, acquire the homes, and propose a project.
PLANNZNG COMMISSION MEETING. AIIGIIST 22, 1990 PAGE 8
3. In doing a brief economic analysis, it appears that because
of the size of the property, they may not be able to
generate enough tax increment to equalize the City's
expenses and putting this into a tax increment district.
4. The policy issue the City would have to address is whether
or not the City would be wiling to borrow money from other
- districts (which is also under scrutiny by the state) or to
take the loss and acquire the properties.
Ms. Dacy stated that it is her understanding that it is not the
City Council's policy to condemn single family homes; and, at
this point, that would be an issue the City Counci2 would have to
reconsider if they want to do something in this area. They would
have to make a specific budget allocation to acquire those homes.
Given the recent changes in the state law regarding Local
Government Aids and budget cutbacks the City is dealing with now,
the�Council would have to take a serious look at what type of
budget impacts it would mean to acquire some of these properties.
Ms. Dacy stated that as far as staff's preliminary analysis on
nonconforming structu=es, the structures would remain in this
area as long as they were occupied by the owners or as long as
they were able to be sold as single family properties.
Ms. Dacy stated that based on the odor experiment and staff's
analysis, staff is recommending the Planning Commission recommend
approval, subject to ten stipulations:
1.
2.
Submission of a landscaping and irrigation plan prior
to issuance of a building permit.
The parking area to the west of the proposed building
shall be lined with concrete curb.
3. The outdoor storage area shall be enclosed by a 6 foot
chain link fence with slats. The fence shall also
extend along the south right-of-way line of the alley
providing access to the outdoor storage area. Storage
of materials shall not extend above the height of the
fence.
4.
5.
6.
7.
All liquids shall be stored inside the building.
Submission of a grading and drainage plan prior to
building permit issuance.
Payment of park dedication fees at time of building
permit.
Approval of variance request, VAR #90-20 and compliance
with stipulations.
5G
5H
PLANNZNG COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGOST 22. 1990 PAGE 9
If it is determined that the asphalt kettles will not have
an adverse impact, the following stipulations are also
recommended:
8. There shall be no heating of the asphalt kettles on the
property or on the adjacent right-of-way.
9. Temperature of the asphalt kettles must be no higher
than 200 degrees Fahrenheit when they are returned to
the site.
10. The asphalt kettles shall be parked in the northwest
corner of the site.
The petitioner, Warren Stock, stated his roofing business only
operates during the summer months. They are shut down during the
winter. The outside storage would not be used in the winter
time. The trucks and equipment would all be stored inside during
the winter. During the summer, some trucks, equipment
(wheelbarrows, hoists, ladders, carts, etc.), pallets of
shingles, pallets of insulation, solid asphalt, and some lumber
would be stored outside. There would be no storage of chemicals.
Mr. Betzold asked how many vehicles Mr. Stock had and the hours
of operation.
Mr. Stock stated the business hours are 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
He stated he has one single axle truck, one dump truck, and five
pick-up trucks. The trucks leave the site in the morning and
return at night. As far as deliveries, there would be about one
delivery a week.
Mr. Stock stated the reason he chose this site is because it is
close to his home and it is an ideal location for startinq a
business. It is an affordable property. The proposed office is
about five years into the future. Right now his office is in his
home.
Ms. Modig stated that as far as the odor experiment, she was at
the site at the time of the experiment. Part of the problem with
the experiment was that the street was being sealcoated, so there
was more odor in the street than there was at the site. She
could not detect any stronq odor from the kettle until she got
close to the kettle, and she did not think that is going to be a
problem. The lot area is really too small for any kind of
industrial use. Her one concern is the single family homes, even
though they are noncvnforming.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that Mr. Stock has indicated that two kettles
is adequate for his business. How much would his business have
to grow before he would have to add a third kettle or more?
51
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 22. 1990 PAGE 10
Mr. Stock stated there are different types of roofing.
Residential raofing is about 50� of his business and will
continue to be 50$. The other 40$ is commercial. Most of their
commercial business has gone to single ply systems which do not
require asphalt. Basically the kettles are used for the other
10� which still believes in the four ply roof. But, percentage-
wise, it is not a business they solicit. That part of the
business is very small, and he did not foresee any need for more
kettles.
Mr. Betzold asked about future expansion.
Mr. Stock stated there is room for expansion. There are
nonconforming homes that might be acquired for possible future
expansion. If not, a 3,500 sq. ft. building with overhead doors
would have a lot of uses for other contractors or trades in the
business.
Mr. Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, stated it was at his
urging that the Mayor, City Manager, and Community Development
Director looked into the possibility of acquiring the single
family homes to make one parcel. He thought it would be a plus
for the City and the area to do something right and have one
parcel inst'ead of several small parcels. He wanted to thank the
staff for their efforts and for actinq so promptly.
Mr. Harris stated he has tried to put together a project for the
four properties. With the four parcels, he is guessing they
could get a 10,000-11,000 sq. ft. building doing a zero lot line
on the north boundary line. At the present taxing rate of around
$1.10-1.15, it seemed this would generate about $11,500 a year.
Ms. Dacy stated staff is�estimating between $150,000-200,000 to
acquire the four parcels, demolition, and relocation costs.
Mr. Harris stated they were looking at just the four lots, not
the houses across the alley. The houses across the alley could
conceivably be put together in another parcel.
Ms. Dacy stated the bottom line is really a policy issue for the
HRA and Council. If there is a differential in the amount of
increment that is generated and the amount of original HRA
investment to clear the site, it will be up to the•HRA and
Council to decide whether or not they will accept a differential.
Up to this point, it has been the City's policy that the
increment that is qenerated must be used in a"pay-as-you-go"
approach.
Mr. Harris stated he thought the City has to narrow its scope.
Perhaps staff could re-examine the acquiring costs of just the
four lots. It is his thinking that instead of two small
5J
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 22. 1990 PAGE 11
buildings, it makes sense from a platting perspective and for the
benefit of this area to have the four lots done as one parcel.
Mr. Francis Anderson, 7748 E2m street N.E., stated he lives
directly to the north of this property. He has lived here for 45
years, and he is opposed to the special use permit for outside
storage and the variances as requested by Mr. Stock.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to accept into the
record Petition No. 14-1990, a petition in opposition to the
variance request by Warren Stock.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CBAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
TiiE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Mr. Betzold stated this petition would be submitted to the
Appeals Commission.
Mr. John Krall, 19 - 77th Avenue N.E., stated that once Mr. Stock
gets his permit for outside storage, what is going to stop him
from doing whatever he wants? He stated he is opposed to the
variance request and gener�lly opposed to the whole proposal. It
is unreasonable to put this business on such a small area. It
would be better to combine the parcels into one.
Mr. Carl Peterson, Tru Machine, 7791 Elm Street N.E., stated his
business is odor control and he felt the study done by staff was
not sufficient to determine a potential odor problem. He stated
his company has looked at asphaZt pZants which are different than
asphalt roofing, but the potential odor�problem is still there.
On a particular day when the climatological conditions are right,
there might be an odor; and he does not want any odor across the
street.
Ms. Dacy stated it is staff's understanding that the kettle would
leave the site cold, that the kettl� cannot be heated up on the
site. When the kettle is returned, it should return at no hotter
than 100-150 degrees F. That is a stipulation the petitioner
must adhere to if the Planning Commission and City Council
approves the special use permit with the recommended
stipulations.
Mr. Peterson stated another concern is what happens when Mr.
Stock sells to a bigger company. He stated there is a dumpster
on Elm Street that shouldn't be there. If the City cannot
enforce something like a dumpster, how are they goinq to enforce
this special use permit?
Ms. Dacy stated that as far as the dumpster, the City recently
instituted a Systematic Code Enforcement Program which they hope
will address these kinds of things. The City has been divided
into several districts, and staff will be policing the City on a
i
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AIIGII3T 22. 199 PAGE 12
lot by lot basis. Regarding the enforcement of the special use
permit conditions, staff reviews special use permits on an annual
basis for compliance. An option the Planning Commission has is
to place another stipulation on the special use permit that
limits the special use permit to Stock Roofing only. Any future
business would have to go through the special use permit process
again. Another option is to request that the special use permit
be reviewed semi-annually or annually to make sure things are
being done properly. Also, adjacent property owners can call the
City when they see a violation of the special use permit.
Mr. Krall stated he would be concerned about the spillage of hot
asphalt on the property as outlined by staff in the staff report.
And what is to stop Mr. Sto�k from heating the kettle at the
site?
Mr. Dahlberg stated that at 150-200 degrees F.,
that there would be little likelihood that there
or liquid asphalt at the site at any poin`t.
Mr. Stock stated that is correct.
it would appear
would be molten
Ms. Lois Anderson, 7748 Elm Street N.E., asked how Mr. Stock is
going to get all his equipment on such a small lot without
infringing on the single family homes.
Mr. Stock stated it is a good sized lot at 14,000 sq. ft. He did
not see any problem in storing his equipment on the site.
Ms. Anderson stated only three parking spaces are designated on
the site. With 5 employees plus himself, where are those
' vehicles going to park?
Mr. Stack stated that his employees will park in the rear. The
only reason would come to the site would be to pick up a truck.
Most employees drive directly to the work site. There will never
be any overnight parking. The trucks will be parked inside at
night. He did not foresee any parking problem.
Mr. Stock stated he could understand the neighbors' concerns. He
would have concerns also if someone wanted to put a business in
his residential neighborhood. However, the property is zoned M-
2, Heavy Industrial, and he would like to use the property for
that purpose.
Mr. Stock stated that regarding the concern about the kettles,
the kettles will only be used about six days durinq the summer.
He has only used one kettle four days this entire roofing season.
He would be happy to show his job sheets to confirm this.
Ms. Mary Novack, 21 - 77th Avenue N.E., stated she was at the
site when the odor experiment was conducted. She could not give
5K
PLANNING COMMIS$ION MEETING, AIIGIIST 22, 1990 PAG$ 13
it a true evaluation, because the street had just been sealcoated
and there were diesel trucks in the area.
Mr. Dahlberg stated he is familiar with Mr. Stock's business. He
agreed with Mr. Stock that the amount of roofing that is done
these days with tar or pitch and grave2 type of construction is
very small as compared to other types of roofing technoloqies
�hat are used. He believed Mr. Stock when he says he will not
expand that part of his business even if his business triples
because so few roofs today are built in that fashion. It is
probably accurate that the kettles would be not be used more than
4-6 days out of an entire roofinq season.
Mr. James Rhode, Rhode Lock & Glass, 39 - 77th Avenue N.E.,
stated they own a small business on the west side of 7738 Elm
Street. He had a lot of the same concerns as those expressed by
the homeowners. He was not as concerned about the kettles. He
stated they had looked at expanding and going through the same
process as Mr. Stock, but they decided it was not worth the time
to qo through the process. His concern would be that if this
roofing business doesn't turn out, and they decide to make one
big building, then they still have the same problem with 77th
Avenue. They have an unvacated alley behind them which is used
for parking and access. He stated if a special use permit and
variances are granted to Mr. Stock, then the City would have to
do the same for his business.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTZON CARRIED AND THE PIIHLIC HEARZNG CLOSED AT 9:15 P.M.
Mr. Saba stated that, as suqgested by staff, the City has ways to
Iimit and address some of the concerns expressed, even if they
recommend approvaZ. He wouldn't recommend approval without
putting all these stipulations on the special use permit. One of
the major concerns is the size of the property; and if the
variances are approved, it would be extremely difficult to claim
any kind of hardship to expand the property. If the Commission
does recommend approval, he would recommend they review the
special use permit annually and that the special use permit be
for Stock Roofing only.
Mr. Saba stated he understands the concerns regarding the odor,
but he did not think there would be much more of an odor than
that of sealcoating a driveway.
Mr. Kondrick stated he agreed. He understood the roofinq
business, and the asphalt is a very small part of his business.
The use of hot asphalt is too expensive and too time-consuming,
and the future is other roofing techniques. He aqreed that to
5L
5M
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINa, AIIGIIST 22. 1990 PAG$ 14
protect the City, the neighbors, and the petitioner, that the
special use permit be for this business only and that it be
reviewed annually.
Ms. Modig stated due to the fact that the kettles are only going
to be used a limited amount of time during the roofing season,
and that there is literally no activity during the winter, she
�ould be in favor of recommending approval of the special use
permit, with a'review in one year. She stated that sometimes the
City has to do things to encourage small businesses.
Mr. Dahlberg stated he also concurred. The Planninq Commission
is not addressing the issue of variances and other issues related
are yet to be resolved by the Appeals Commission. If Mr. Stock
can build on the site and conform to the setbacks, he can do that
without going through the process for variances. So the request
is basically for a use that is allowed within the M-2 zoning and
a use that inherently needs or requires some type of outdoor
storage. If the storage area is handled correctZy and it
provides the appropriate screeninq to the adjacent properties,
and since the odor may potentially be apparent only a few
occasions during a given year, he did not see that the roofing
company is not appropriate within this zoning and on this piece
of property in particular. He wau2d be in favor of recommendinq
approval.
Mr. Betzold stated that when they are looking at particular
requests such as special use permit requests, the City has to
came up with good reasons why it would not be allowed. He has
not heard anything at this meeting that would tell him that Mr.
Stock should not be allowed to operate this type of business on
this property. His concern about the odor was satisfied when he
was told that the kettle would only be used a few days out of the
year.
Mr. Betzold stated what is troubling him is the Commissiori's role
when they have to take long term views of these kinds of things.
They are recommending approval for a business to go on a little
lot here without regard to what has happened in the surrounding
area. Is this really how they foresee the long term development
of this area? The City recognizes the houses in this area are
nonconforming and will come down some day, but they also
recognize that it is not the City�s policy right now to do
anything about it. They recognize that some of the tools they
have through tax increment financing have been�taken away, so he
did not see any initiative starting to show it is economically
feasible to develop this area.
Mr. Betzold stated he wanted to recommend approval of the special
use permit. At the same time, he wanted to recommend to the
Appeals Commission that they deny the variances so something can
be done with this corner.
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 22. 1990 _ PAGE 15
Mr. Dahlberg stated he would like the petitioner to consider not
asking for some variances, particularly the setback variance.
Earlier staff explained that the vehicles would back off the
street onto the site, and he did not think that should be
allowed.
OM TION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend to
City Council approval of SP #90-14 by Stock Roofing, per Section
, 205.18.O1.C.(12) of the Fridley City Code to allow exterior
storage of materials and equipment on Lots 10 and 11, B1ock 7,
Onaway, generally located at 7738 Elm Street N.E., with the
following stipulations:
1. Submission of a landscaping and irrigation plan prior
to issuance of a building permit.
2. The parking area to the west of the proposed building
� shall be lined with concrete curb.
3. The outdoor storage area shall be enclosed by a 6 foot
chain link fence with slats. The fence shall also
extend along the south right-of-way line of the alley
providing access to the outdoor storage area. Storage
of materials shall not extend above the height of the
fence.
4. All liquids shall be stored inside the building.
5. Submission of a grading and drainaqe plan prior to
building permit issuance.
6. Payment of park dedication fees at time of building
permit. ' -
7. Approval of variance request, VAR #90-20 and compliance
- with stipulations.
8. There shall be no heating of the asphalt kettles on the
property or on the adjacent right-of-way.
9. Temperature of the asphalt kettles must be no higher
than 200 degrees Fahrenheit when they are returned to
the site. •
10. The asphalt kettles shall be parked in the northwest
corner of the site.
ii. The special use permit be for Stock Roofing only.
12. The special use permit be reviewed in one year.
5N
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 22, 1990 PAGL 16
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE, CBAIRPERSON BET20LD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED QNANIMOIISLY.
Ms. Dacy stated the Appeals Commission will have a public hearing
on the variances on September 11 or 25. The property owners will
be renotified of that meeting.
Mr. Betzold stated that the Planning Commission's recommendation
for approval of the special use permit should in no way affect
the Appeals Commission's recommendation regarding the variances.
He hoped the Appeals Commission could make their recommendation
independent of the Planning Commission's action.
4. RECEIVE AUGUST 7 1990. APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to receive the
August 7, 1990, Appeals Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED tJNANIMOIIBLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to adjourn the
meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Betzold
declared the motion carried and the August 22, 1990, Planning
Commission meeting adjourned at 9:3o p.m.
Res ectfully su itted,
L n Saba
Recording Secretary
�
�
unraF
f RIDLEY
C0�IIWIUNI"fY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
M EMO RAN D UM
DATE: September 6, 1990
TO: William Burns, City Manager ��'
�
FROM: Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT:
Lot Split Request, L.S. #90-03, by The Fridley
Business Center Partnership
Attached is the staff report for the above-referenced request. The
Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the
request to the City Council with the following stipulations:
1.
2.
3.
The plat, P.S. #90-03, shall be completed by the petitioner.
Compliance with stipulations of P.S. #90-03
Park dedication fees shall be paid at time of building permit
issuance.
Attached also is the resolution approving the lot split request,
L.S. #90-03. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the
attached resolution.
MM/dn
M-90-606
5P
� 5Q
� STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE
���OF PLAMrNG COMNSSION DATE: August 22, 1990
FRlDLEY �N ��C:L �A�: September 10, 1990 AUTHOR M��dn
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPUCANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION
SITE DATA
SIZE
oENSr�v
PRESENT ZONtNG
ADJACENT LAND USES
8� ZONNVG
U1ifTES
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL IMPl.1CATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPAT�ILITY W�TH
ADJACENT USES 8� ZONNG
ENVIRONMENTAL ,
CONSIDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENOATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
L.S. ��90-03
Fridley Business Center Partnership
Split off a portion of Lot 4, Block 2, Northco
73rd and University Avenues
206,911 square feet
M-2, Heavy Industrial
M-2, Heavy Industrial
Yes
Yes
Approval with stipulations
Approval
5R
Staff Report
L.S. #90-03, Fridley
Business Center Partnership
Page 2
Request
The petitioner, Fridley Business Center Partnership, is proposing
to split off a portion of Lot 4, Block 2, Northco, and combine it
with Lots 5 and 6, Northco, in order to create a larger lot for
its purchaser, Angeion Corporation. In addition to the area being
split, a triangular easement along the north lot line of Lot 4 will
also be created for access for the Angeion Corporation. The
petitioner is also processing a plat request, P.S. #90-03.
The subdivision of these properties are proposed in two phases for
the following reasons:
Phase 1: The purpose of the lot split application is to convey the
88 foot rectangle for Angeion Corporation. Angeion has
submitted its building permit application and would like
to start construction in September. Approval of the lot
sp2it will enable them to do so. The proposed
description of the rectangle is simple enough to be
accepted by the County Recorder's office without
replatting.
Phase 2: The purpose of the plat application is to reconfignre the
common lot line between Angeion's lot and Lot 4 to
include the triangular easement area into Angeion's lot.
The legal description of the triangle is too complicated
by metes and bounds, and therefore, needs to be
replatted.
Site
The property is located at the intersection of Northco Drive and
the Carter Day private drive near 73rd and University Avenues. The
property is currently vacant, and is treed with native oak and
cherry trees. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are
the parcels to the north, south, east, and west.
Analysis
The petitioner is proposing the lot split in order to create a
larger lot for the Angeion Corporation. The split does not
adversely impact Lot 4, Block 2, Northco, as that lot is over the
1.5 acre minimum lot size set forth in the zoning code. In
addition, the lot still maintains the required 150 feet of lot
width.
5S
Staff Report
L.S. #90-03, Fridley
Business Center Partnership
Page 3
The petitioner, in processing the plat request, will create two new
lots in what will be the Northco 3rd Addition, which will make the
legal descriptions of the lot split and easement much simpler.
Recommendation
As the lot split does not adversely impact the existing lots as to
minimum lot area and lot width, staff recommends that the Planning
Commission recommend approval of the request with the following
stipulation:
1. The plat, P.S. #90-03, shall be completed by the petitioner.
2. Compliance with stipulations of P.S. #g0-03
3. Park dedication fees shall be paid at time of building permit
issuance.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of
the lot spZit request with the stipulations as presented by staff.
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning
Commission action and approve the lot split request.
5T
RESOLUTION NO. - 1990
RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION, LOT SPLIT,
L.S. #90-03, TO SPLIT LOTS 4, 5, AND 6, BLOCK
2, NORTHCO BUSINESS PARK INTO TWO PARCELS,
GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF NORTHCO DRIVE AND
SOUTIi OF 73RD AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City Council approved a lot split at the
, 1990 meeting; and the Planning Commission
stipulations attached as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, such approval was to split Lots 4, 5, and 6, Block 2,
Northco Business Park into the following two parcels:
Parcel 1: Lots 5 and 6 and the north 87.98 feet of the east 268,02
feet of Lot 4, Block 2, Northco Business Park, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Parcel 2: Lot 4, Block 2, Northco Business Park, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota, except the north
87.98 feet of the east 268.02 feet of said Lot 4.
All generally located east of Northco Drive and south of 73rd
Avenue.
WHEREAS, the City has received the required Certificate of Survey
from the owner; and -
WHEREAS, such approval will create two separate parcels from Lots
4, 5, and 6, Block 2, Northco Business Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council directs the
petitioner to record th2s lot split at Anoka County within six
months of this approval or else such approval shall be null and
void.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1990.
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
5U
EXHIBIT A
Resolution No. - 1990
1. The plat, P.S. #90-03, shall be completed by the petitioner.
2. Compliance with stipulations of P.S. #90-03
3. Park dedication fees shall be paid at time of building permit
issuance.
_
� ���
■ � 1 ■
�,N' ...... i I�
. ,:
� ,,
�` �
�
�
-------•---- • •-----
-•-- -- -- --•�------•• I
--- �
�� _ ��
�
�
j w �r �
��b
�s
s '
.�
oyb� py .
�.
.
� °�.
. � ��ls��`�d,—
L_ �
._IL7Mt�- M.KKoe+--- ,s
""o^ �
�
C �e
r W
� �' O
�
�
�
W
�
V
O ,
�
� �
. �
� �
3 �
: �
? J
�
�
�
Q
�
�
V
�
L.S. ��90-03
Fridley Business
Center Partnership 5 V
��
�
��
i�
��
� �
T--
a
�
�
�
t'
�`V �
s N �
�
r�
��� > \
`► � �•W Z > ~ � `�A <
� 1 (Il J ? p �
� ,� ''t W � = Q � F
�� , 11 �7�D Q' j� ` � 1 �
'�1 '�► �L (�13 � 1�
*•� �
! � '��� �� ,1� �J � r
t v♦ /t Q i
; � � . ` �' � V / y' • Z
` i ��
t' �� '�+► 1, 1 �' � C
L__ — -----� •
-- ----
:...wr •�i s "'rnr ,r �t
�t r L<IS�ib+� � 1' V��'��.rsi+ ' U ...... •
/ ^ r t 1 .
,.s -- �', ! �'r» v� . A.__._.. �...__I�'_
"'H�M--M.FM�._' � __ _ — - - - �_
-- R W __..� __„_.__ - ''T'. �i d+ xv�w+!�w �x+nal . ;�
��
r---- ���y� .�:.., d i•r �..f-„s-�_-� — �'"�T :s
� 3�N 3A� All�7/r.� � tv �N a , �'-+�r+ �
�_ -- � ' � �,`l � ` ,w✓.i 1 w�.r ��ri W v
. 1 � � . i. ✓n.• �
j - ! _ ,� � � �Y , — • _ _ _ _ � J • � . tP y J ���i � � � - � � �
` _= � • �+. !'i.. � l � / • ' � •���•
�� �� f . t4�: �� � r� t
-- - "_. 1"
��`.- r �� . ��., :
�w . �� � • M � • r � � ��� � .'�� � � �`��J�_�r
. r. ' ,
•" ' • i; ! ��• =' --1 �': � �. ~` .
.I ' '�1�N1� a 7Y311q0� �. � Ia _ � � r
_', ` i�- _... ` s f� d 1r� i t, f: 'ki' J s� : i �
�� � 3 � '�', � � ri ._.
� * L: . W ' y
' � � '�
� � � `�� � � � � �.� '�� � . �° .! �
; � . - W I i �t,�} � '� _ .
L
OCATION MAP
1 'J
. ,
n
v
O
Z
}
a
_
�
_
Y
2
�
�
H
C�� • .
. S . 4 '� `
,
. 4 r ze
! u �
.� l, � � -
i' '• 4 _
l! , ll J �
s ! F
� ,! I 1 +
T TM AVE. N.E.
,
U�!I'fY
HOSPITAL
� �� �
� �
1, �
// ' ` �f y' i �J
� i, , �
^ ,�
�. i I �
. ' i�
• v� rT . 1
• i � � . • ` 4��,�, •,.,. . -.� , r }� { �l�
I "'
-, ; *_, •J � , . �
�{. . . . -- C�• �:�:f ,� �
�
�
�
T `�
•����� � • :Y•. •J � .�
3 '�. ;•� • r\ s .
. ` �' ,' �
r
h �� � � � a. • +, '' i
t� . d �l J � �
!a l j � ' ` �.
w � �
,. . .
- � �> « ., .,�
� t• •� . ��
�� , . � ,
�` � ' � �
—� � , �• • , .
. .s , � .
� � •, � _
� + . : .i •� ,
rs .
_ A . � 2 �� + �t _� �._ _�_,
P s`'j T R A�� j/�
�f� //// / /
� ,
REG�sTERE� � E��sTERE°'
�% ////�� / R ///�
I.AN� A
����� � L �
� SUR / s
/� � �
� � o.
N
/� /
L . S . 4� 90-03�
Fridley Business
�. .+'-�� z ' jT.'� a
�_ 4�� � •
� ; ; ,: u - a
1 1� 1 • � • • � R .
i�ii • • ,
�� ' ao°�ri �:�:� ; •
� •• - ,
� � � ?
. ' f
, t - - s3
.j . J s, r� �• ip � �t n
� `' I � � � '
� . I .. .
`� ' � i + = j' `1 .1 d ,
. • .: i u
W /
w
, ,;..i .�;sla,r i
/ • � y = � _
a , � � 1
r t. �\ �' : i � I
� s 2
13 .c. `" � • C
I+ ,'� � ' �t
R � ~� �' _�,�. ,
� f
� MADSFN ,: E,,o�,:,,�,, , •, r
� ^ '�� � CAuId! '
r4R h. �
�.' .
�� ! `4 '.� � � Z� 1 �
T) RO AVEN:JE N E
r,.�.�.�n�.��rf�/
; �.� �s,,,, ���
' I - ,.� .
H � � �r� �'� �?� - �.r ✓ � � .. •��
v�..i QOUJ�B«,5�.-�'�� R�CY'L`L.�C�� ,,� L�QCICQ . �� ,��� �"� ��".t c�
(� •:� �, � � � ,.� �� � � '`l� �, �, ��� � :� :.� �', ,
A� � �- '�. � � � �,., '� �;.�
.� . � � ` � �� � ' "a � � � � � ��'� � � � .�.=�`�r�
t:�' � � o �:C�` GAi�AGfl � � � . ,� .� �� �.• �;
� �'3 �'j . � :� �' i � ��-� ,.� o :;-
�` ���� ���� � �� � � � � � �
`:� ' P� P� t�i �a��t�es.—� � � � "'► �.�,� � ::� ,..�
- �� -
5W
ZONING IIIIAP
z .
�
I.,_, a� �� �-i:i si �r:t
_� ' �..!!i� �� �� �
� ; f' �i��=�,'�s����; i
� o � �� �°��_== .�� 1
��� �_ !����;�1"i.��< < p
t` 4' �Ij �j� l��:�jj�'`�S�f� � �!
� O `�� � � �'�;;i;��;-�: ! �!
� c� �:� �!; °��l�•, 3��:�1= � ��
ti j � r•�t
o O 1'� ! �jlSi�i.. j. �� � :3
.S� �'� :��� .:���I� � ��
U �.{ a �s �_i�Sls,�����
_ � �1e 9 i�� i���1;=;9i���is 9 �,
F—
O
Z
..�.
'•%�,t
��.'
� , (.)
: l\:
L.S. 4�90-03
Fridley Business
�;
j� !'i j
r =
�` ! �� ���;f��- : �
�' �;; � r�F����� � � �_t
''� ���� � ����;:� ! N �=•i
� . i=1
� 1,, c�i� � =�'�lsili i •�, a •'i !�
� 9 � � , f�yi ��1' E � � �;.:,
��t ,��i � r�:i: ��; , r; l:�tt
E ge
i t s�' � I .�
; ' j�� ': {����l��r � I : � :F�
.�! i �� -;
ji� ,i�� �;
�'
�� , �,��.
��9�I��it�3i
� lilililiii��
�j�•�aE�co
�
j �
v �
� �
� �
v
e
.
t
i`
�
.
x
N
�
/ 1� I �
� 1 l'l �
:.:�,�:: •:
i .;.
� ,,
t';�
��:.
y
Z ��'�-��� �
. �
SITE PLAN
X
>a*
�i
ea
��
��
O�
a? w-
uv
`� '
y as•at� � �sv�w �raa �
L.S. ��90-03
Fridley Business
�
:$
Z � i ;
± o�
$� �
, �M M M
� I = O
s s
�__ ' � ` �1J
_.`` -� W �i � `,J e — � 'v
�-_;, I � � �;, � Q
,� -- ' ,,.. �..... - � �
�' _- � � •=- « �
' r o L
�a �� �C. � M
< <;1 ' i� m o
=; `,_J i �� -- �' % ; r
• j_` i� �,-- �;' �� ~ m/� �O}
;? f_] l N�' ' L_ _• ii `
� � w
Y _: °' 3 '° -- _ - r
0
l%: `��' t p Q � ' � � � � C u
Q �= I ; y \ � • � I � — i
�. m <w w rr .... ��/ �.��\
� ���,��� � � -
a � �., t, � .f��t .. ti+�a,y . >R M�w��71�0 ��J��
~� ' '°" f�f�i ..» ....a. 3 m
�
W
Z
�
m
O
�
�
Z
�� � . � � '�
� , ; �� .��� :,s
`� ;N = :_ ; � r
I ` , -- � :: �
���� co
�s�� ���~+ � � ���i
,- = ;.,.:. ` 5 : �; _ � � • �
��I= � ' �� { : + t
- � I `I � � 3= � '�� ,+�y; �
t' �, y�`y � ' a..
� 1 • b
�� � .� .0 ~1'• `�� �
1 � t�
`� � Y — — — � ir
« �: � � �;��5'.:.,.
�✓ I � � ., tt
��!�� � M I� __ � .i 'Q� O +•
� � j; �'_ a � M
' =�
I ' y '
» ' � C ,
� ;.; � � '— � �'
:i•.;✓ �.� '•ro � �O'Y�'r p�. V V 1 '_
—� "y.'', P� r—�\ F. j' ,
�~ M
_ I = �•3''� \f `ip� O
�� ' ( =� � • ! .� .
\-' °• , • `I' \
_� ( a O ' " i �� �
_
�� � � � . `
_ � s � `w i
—� ' � y - �\+' �'� ���'�. .
� l, _ �_ .oN
� -�.1� •�.� �.'7 Ar
1 _�1 /V .��'iV��/��/
/ l� Y� a, � I-� � Q /�, /. �
�_� ..iv .'.✓ir,r,.,�r�
�
i,�
�«
I c
� I O
:; � �
�� I -�'�
� ,� `�
�
�4=
���
.
�3�.
=oo�
�:R�
�Y:a
��
3 ~
�
� y
N
� '_
HW
� y
a .,
s =34
s,
. �
„
��
'` � t
s. . �e.
3� Q��i
J a5�4
•
� :�
� t
� r=
�.
� ,.
� ':
tr , �t
;:
I O
..e...a �
M i�
I�
.�. ..»�... ...
.... ` (� • 3
0 ¢
� w�
_ ,,�:
� i��...w y�i.y
sIs ?'�~sii
. a � a �1 � ,,,»
�
�
� y
.i
� �
- �.�.� • .........�.. � . _
� / ���./-� � /A//1 1
/! 1. � �l/J �]/ I/yI /
� I '1 / /1 1 / ( �J I (..i I /•
ii/v,;J1. :iJ_✓1_..
5Y
_ �
_ —_° �—_
—� w .w���
-se�*c�sit'ma � .�
�
f �
! =�i
: d
,4
� ��
�
E '
� ;
!� 9
� i �
n
�
v Q
i
0
C
7 � • `
�..
i ;
t
�
� F
0
7�
�L
��
iL
=i
ta � �a
�i �.
t aa
a =4
1 l�
�
'�,�-�;
1
v j
S • 9
� � i
a
Y '
4
�� t
.� i
�
�aj � �
!• � �
� � 0
� { �
.,�� ■.
j� � =1
t'
�: i ��
i �
s
r
��..�-�— .— �- �• �
�
�
t
_
►
L.S. ��90-03 �
Fridley Business
' �u'o'�od�o� �°^ls ��a„�artners � � 5Z
•Y mOli�a
•��'�� ci-o�re� �
.a�. ° U
NOIl`v'tVOd�lO� N013JN�ci' �' •a � �
ti,.aew. o�o.. ,�V..�e�M .� ....e.
:
s
s � �
;,9g �
�: $ 2� � � � !
�4 � �� � � �� �
ie`.�. i $ ��a1
....p'(
! �
�, i
- e_ E
. j i y�
�� .
c
E
s
#
, 's
� � s�.
� � 6t �`
� € ��e
�
�
��
— -�.r
-- ==�nw=
�arri�acnl � �
t'
�
,
t
:
q 5
i!
i'
_�
? e
�
��i
F-� $_
Q � a�
Z::
.I a��= 3
� Az. l3��� ( � i #
� �F� g"a�i � � 1
t e•. °_ �
�� ��s 3;��" r. � i
�-$� :
T a i96f: _
. � � � s,
i=I =y? •i�=� 4 s � �
6 .. y !
�sd ��s:i ¢ !
95: ,.. `
i�i 6�I i:..� ;{ g �
�x5 L."QYE =��y4 a� � `
l�b ��€� �*r:� _� � s �
.:: _- a„° �'t t�, �
BsS pp;� ■`4�� �t 7 � �
ij ��] Ty��t 8 d� �f � i
�i� ���: Ds�i� i: �a i a
z
s
�
�
� \
\�
�
A�� �
. • . � i i
■ � �
!?e ��s
y:.
�i s[ : � ti :
L.S. 4�90-03 '
Fridley Business �
. N°ue� ldv�� �-�rtnersh LL �A
..�s.r '.r�.. c � v � v�s1v ( �
a�e a� �w v �.v •w�.�e ��� \./
!'�JOIl'd�iOdrJO� hl013JN°�' �' -�•� �� �Y
.o� wwiu� uoo+� rgwuW� �� «..�v. -
�j
i
�.y2,
�
1
� '�
. � ;�
;
.
, �.
�
�
cinr oF
F�a�
C011�UV1UNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
MEMQRANDUM
DATE: September 5, 1990 �
TO: William Burns, City Manager �;+�' '
FROM:
BIIBJECT:
Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Variance Request, VAR #90-18, by Winfield Realty
Attached is the staff report for Winfield Realty's request for a
sign variance to allow two free-standing s�gns and to allow a total
sign area of 104 square feet at the Rice Creek Business Center,
7110-7190 University Avenue N.E.
The Appeals Commission unanimously recommended denial of the
request. Staff recommends the City Council concur with the Appeals
Commission's recommendation.
BD:ls
M-90-721
�
� 6A
t STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE A�t 7, 1990 ; August 2�, 1990
CITY OF �Ar� con�ru�ssiav DA�
FRIDLEY cmr cou�,a� oA� September zo, �90 ,� BDi_ �s ___
' REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION 7110-7190 vniversi
SITE DATA
SI2E
DENSITY
PRESENT ZON�IG
ADJACENT LAND USES
� & ZONNVG
UTy._ftES
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
F�IANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREt�NE PLAN
COMPATBILtTY WITH
ADJACENT USES 8� ZONNG
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSiDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMlSSION
RECOMMENDATION
�
VAR #90-18
Winfield Realty
Zb allow two sic�s per develapment; tA increase the
r.�axi.m�mt sq. ft. of a free-standing sign fran 80 sq. ft. to
104 sq. ft.
Denial
nenial
. :
Staff Report
VAR #90-18, 7110-7190 University Avenue N.E.
Page 2
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 214.11.02.A requires one free-standing sign per street
frontage.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to limit the
number of signs along the right-of-way abutting the property.
Section 214.11.02.8 requires a maximum size of 80 square feet
in area per development for a free-standing sign.
Public purpose served by requirement is to control visual
pollution and excessive use of signs in commercial areas.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
"Tenant-signage issues"
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Historv
Winfield Development Company received a setback variance
approval in 1987 to locate the existing monument sign 6 feet
from the property line. The permit for the sign was issued
on September 30, 1987. The sign is approximately 4 feet tall
and the entire monument sign is approximately 16 feet long.
The area of the sign copy is approximately 24 sq. ft.
Analysis
Tn the fall of 1989, the property manager for Winfield Realty,
Cynthia Cronin, and Dave Burbul, from DeMars Sign, contacted
the Planning office regarding requirements for installing a
80 sq. ft. pylon sign. On September 11, 1990, the Planning
Coordinator advised Ms. Cronin in a telephone conversation
that the existing sign that was approved in 1987 would have
to be removed since the maximum allowable square feet would
be exceeded and that two signs would exist per street
frontage. On September 18, 1989, the Planning Assistant
advised the sign contractor that the existing sign would have
to be removed. Unfortunately, the stipulation to remove the
sign was not written on the sign permit for the 80 sq. ft.
sign.
Since the permit issuance, staff has contacted Winfield Realty
on several occasions to either remove the existing monument
sign or to remove the verbiage from the monument sign in order
sc
Staff Report
VAR #90-18, 7110-7190 University Avenue N.E.
Page 3
to comply with the sign ordinance. Winfield Realty decided
to app2y for a variance to receive permission to retain both
signs.
Because the property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial, only one
sign per street frontage is permitted and a maximum size of
80 sq. ft. in sign area is permitted per development. The
proposed request would permit two signs along University
Avenue with a total square footage of approximately 104 sq.
ft.
Section 214.21.02 of the Sign Code requires the applicant to
prove the following four criteria for a variance:
A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applicable to the property or to the
intended use that do not apply generally to other
property in the same vicinity and district.
There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
applicable to this property which is different than the
property surrounding this area. There are no topographical
circumstances or visibility circumstances which make this
property unique from others in this vicinity.
B. That the variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and
district; but which is denied to the property in
question.
Denying the variance would not deny a substantial property
right of the petitioner. Each tenant of the building has
adequate wall signage; and if one of the free-standing signs
is retained, the property owner has full use of all
alternatives available under the Sign Code.
C. That the strict application of the Chapter would
constitute an unnecessary hardship.
Denying the variance would not cause an unnecessary hardship.
The ordinance is not imposing a hardship. The property owner
has the right of wall signage and a free-standing sign.
D. That the granting of the variance would not be
materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
or general welfare or detrimental to the property
in the vicinity or district in which the property
is located.
. �
Staff Report
VAR #90-18, 7110-7190 University Avenue N.E.
Page 4
Granting the variance may not be detrimental to the public
health or general welfare of the public; however, authorizing
them to have an additional sign would be contrary to the
spirit and intent of the Sign Code.
Recommendation
Because the petitioner was fully aware of the sign
requirements before and after the sign permit was issued and
because the application does not meet the four tests of the
criteria for variances from the Sign Code, staff recommends
that the Appeals Commission deny the variance request for a
second free-standing sign a2ong University Avenue and an
increase of signage permitted on the property to 104 sq. ft.
Apbeals Commission Action
The Appeals Commission unanimously recommended denial of the
request.
Citv Council Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council concur with the Appeals
Commission's recommendation.
.
CITY OF FRZDLEY
71ppEALB COI+lMIBSION KEETINa� 11IIGDBT 21� 1990
_� • • ' �
Chairperson Savage called the August 21, 1990, Appeals Commission
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL•
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Diane Savage, Larry Ruechle, Kenneth Vos,
Cathy Smith
Cliff Johnson
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Cindy Cronin, Winfield Development
Cindy Willis, Winfield Development
Joel Gerdeen, 6240 Alden Way N.E.
John Smith, Smith Architects
Shirley Severson, 6490 Riverview Terrace
Dolores Balafas, 6482 Riverview Terrace
Ethel Arnold, 3205 Hilldale Avenue N.E.
APPROVAL OF AUGUST 7 1990 APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
OT ON by Ms.
1990, Appeals
page 15, 5th
"approval".
Smith, seconded by Dr. Vos, to approve the August 7,
Commission minutes with the following correction on
paragraph from bottom of page: Change "denial" to
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, liLL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE MZNIITES APPROVED AS AMENDED.
1. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REOUEST VAR #90-18 BY WINFIELD
DEVELOPMENTS. INC.:
A. Pursuant to Section 214.11.02.B of the Fridley City Code
to increase the maximum square footage of a free-standing
sign from 80 square feet to 104 square feet;
B. Pursuant to Section 214.11.o2.A of the Fridley City Code
to allow a second free-standing sign along the same
street frontage;
6E
l•1�
�►PPEALS COMMI88ION MEETZNG. 110GIIST 21. 1990 PAGE 2
To allow an existing 24 square foot free-standing sign to
remain on Lots 4, except the northerly 35 feet, Lots 5 and 6,
Block 1, Paco Industrial Park, the same being 7110-7190
University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432.
�+IOTION by Mr. Kuechle, eeconded by Ms. Smith, to open the public�
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, 11LL �OTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE
PIIBLSC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M.
Ms. Dacy stated the parcel is located between University Avenue on
the east and Commerce Circle East on the west side of the property.
On site is the Rice Creek Business Center. The property is zoned
M-1, Light Industrial, and is surrounded by M-1 zoning uses to the
west ar►d M-2, Heavy Industrial, zoning uses to the east. On the
north is C-2, General Business zoninq, and to the south is the
Community Park.
Ms. Dacy stated the request is for two variances to the Sign Code.
In 1987 after the building was ccnstructed, the City approved a
sign permit and setback variance to locate the existing monument
sign (approx. 24 sq. ft.) on the property in front of building
along University Avenue. In 1989, the petitioner installed another
free-standing sign in the amount of 80 sq. ft. listing the various
tenants on the signs located within the building.
Ms. Dacy stated that in the file is a list of correspondences and
discussions staff had with the petitioner regarding the
installation of this sign. When the sign permit for the free-
standing 80 sq. ft. sign was issued, staff verbally advised the
petitioner that the sign either had to be reduced in size or the
existing monument sign had to be removed. Staff probably should
not have issued the sign permit for the 80 sq. ft. sign until the
monwnent sign was removed, or at least should have listed a
stipulation on the sign permit for an 80 sq. ft. sign.
Ms. Dacy stated that since that time, staff has been corresponding
with the petitioner stating that the original sign constructed in
1987 should be removed. The petitioner is now requesting a
variance in order to keep both siqns on the property. Because the
property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial, only one sign per street
frontage is permitted, and a maximum size of 80 sq. ft. �in sign
azea is permitted per development. With the 80 sq. ft. sign plus
the 24 sq. ft. monument sign installed in 1987, that totals 104 sq.
ft.
Ms. Dacy stated Section 214.21.02 of the Siqn Code requires that
four criteria must be met in order to grant a variance. In the
staff report, staff outlined each of the four criteria and found
that none of the criteria was met:
�•l� '
�PPEALB COI+IIriI88ION MEETING. AIIGUST 21, 1990 PAGE�'
A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
applicable to the property or to the intended use that
do not apply generally to other property in the same
vicinity and district.
There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
applicable to this property which is different than the
property surrounding this area. There are no topographical
circumstances or visibility circumstances which make this
property unique from others in this vicinity.
B. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by
other property in the same vicinity and district; but
which is denied to the property in question.
Denying the variance would not deny a substantial property
right of the petitioner. Each tenant of the building has
adequate wall signage; and if one of the free-standing signs
is retained, the property owner has full use of all
alternatives available under the Sign Code.
C. That the strict application of the Chapter would
constitute an unnecessary hardship.
Denying the variance would not cause an urinecessary hardship.
The ordinance is not imposing a hardship. The property owner
has the right of wall signage and a free-standing sign.
D. That the granting of the variance would not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or general
welfare or detrimental to the property in the vicinity
or district in which the property is located.
Granting the variance may not be detrimental to the public
health or general welfare of the public; however, authorizing
them to have an additional siqn would be contrary to the
spirit and intent of the Sign Code.
Ms. Dacy stated that because the petitioner was fully aware of the
sign requirements before and after the sign permit was issued and
because the application does not meet the four tests of the
criteria for variances from the Sign Code, staff recommends that
the Appeals Commission deny the variance request for a second free-
standing sign along University Avenue and an increase of siqnage
permitted on the property to 104 sq. ft.
Ms. Cindy Cronin, Winfield Development, stated that, historically,
this center was not going to be a retail center and was not built
to be a retail center. However, the tenant mix has ended up to be
mostly retail. They have received a lot of pressure over the last
few years from the tenants for additional signage because of
6H
APPEALS COMMZ88ION MEETING, �IIGQST 21. 1990 PAGE 4
competition in the area. She stated they did know that the
monument sign was supposed to be removed when the free-standing
sign was put up. However, the monument siqn was used more as a
landmark to identify the retail location.
Ms. Cronin stated that regarding the hardship, they are dealing
with tenants that are trying to maintain a business in a retail
environment. The pylon siqn is lighted in the evening, and the
monument sign is just wooden letters on a brick front. She stated
that if they have to make a choice, the tenants have requested to
keep the pylon sign. She stated that they would also like to keep
the monument sign which is more like a landmark. It is her
understanding that they can keep the monument sign if the letters
are removed, but the sign would not look nearly as good and would
be more of an eyesore to the community. She would like to at least
keep the "W" for property identification.
Dr. Vos asked if the monument sign was still a"sign" if the nWn
is left on it.
Ms. Dacy stated that accordinq to the definition in the Sign Code,
it would be a"sign" with the "W".
Ms. Savage asked if there were any similar developments along
University Avenue that have sign variances.
Ms. Dacy stated there are none. No multi-tenant building has more
than one sign.
Ms. Cronin stated that, again, this building is comparable more to
a retail center. The signage on the building would be more of an
office/warehouse concept. The individual tenant sign on the
building is very understated, and it doesn't have the retail
Ncatch-your-eye" appeal.
Ms. Savage stated that one of the things she sees as a problem
along University Avenue is too many signs. The building looks nice
now and she appreciated the fact that the signage is understated.
It adds to the sesthetic quality of the center.
Mr. Ruechle stated that right now on the sign there are four
tenants with top billing and other tenants with secondary billing.
Will this ever change?
Ms. Cronin stated the sign will only allow for four tenants for
top billing. The building is not large enough for that to change.
If any of the tenants move, tenants of comparable eize will move
in, so she did not see a change in the amount of tenants an the
sign or size of the sign.
OT ON by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Ruechle, to close the public
hearing.
si
�IPPEALB COI�IBSZON MEETING, l�VGIIST 21. 1990 PAGE b
IIPON A VOICE VOTS� ALL VOTINC� AYE� CSAIRPERBON BAVAGS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AIdD THE PIIBLIC HBARING CLOBED AT 7:55 P.M.
Ms. Savage stated she has rather strong feelings about the Sign
Code and that it should be followed. One of the things that can
really spoil a community is too many signs. She did not think
University Avenue needs any more signs or any larger signs. In
fact, she wauld even like to see some of the larger signs,reduced.
She did not see any of the four criteria being met. It is a nice
property and is very adequately advertised with the existing
signage. It is consistent with similar properties on University
Avenue. If they qranted a variance, it would not be fair to other
similar businesses. She did not think denying the variance will
create any unnecessary hardship.
Ms. Smith agreed. She stated this is a nice looking building. A
monwnent sign looks nice, but Winfield Realty was aware that the
first sign was supposed to be removed when they were given a permit
for the second sign. If they allow this monument sign, they would
be setting a precedent; and other similar strip centers will want
monument signs identifying their specific center.
Dr. Vos stated he did not see any hardship that this mix of tenants
is any different than other centers on either side of University
Avenue. The only hardship is what is going to be done with the
monument. He could live with the "W", but everything has to go to
meet the spirit and letter of the Sign Code.
Mr. Kuechle stated he would agree to recommend denial. He did not
see any special hardship or special conditions occurring here that
are not occurring in almost any other business.
OM TION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend to City
Council denial of variance request, VAR #90-18, by Winfield Realty:
A. Pursuant to Section 214.11.02.B of the Fridley City Code
to increase the maximum square footage of a free-standing
sign from 80 square feet to 104 square feet;
B. Pursuant to Section 214.11.02.A of the Fridley City Code
to allow a second free-standing sign along the same
street frontage; �
To allow an existing 24 square foot free-standing sign to
remain on Lots 4, except the northerly 35 feet, Lots 5 and 6,
Block 1, Paco Zndustrial Park, the same being 7130-7190
University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAQE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
VAIt ��90-18
ZONiNG MAP
0
► �-:� =�
J; _ -.�
" •
•
. ,
� I
!
�
6
_ .i.,
, t.
� �
. . �_ f
� �
�y�es �"n' _ _ _
i
'� . `
�
3
�
+
- - -- � -- ---_= =�
� ---_--_-- _ -�--�______�---. � - - _
_ -� _
-,;,-�� ^ - - � '� {� r � �
. � t� ��j�/�� �,
�; �,;V , _ i � � , �,
' %�a /� ' � i�; �+ 1 I��: '// ��'
�f !a 1�l� '� ,4. I��� �%/� �� IlI �
�,� 1� ��►►:'�.�w
'��i � �/�� /
�
�
� ,' � �
�
;
;.
- ' ;r". �j
,;
i �,
,
,i:
-- _ _.%
�= �:.�.,.
�.
J
.i,�.�
�/l,� I:,�
�!
%r II i �
I n �
��tl `' A ► � • �
�
� _ _
� � - _ - -
• �- � 0
� �
�
� ��ir��
Y
V
�
��'z�
9 r
� � t
,.r � �
�' 1
� �
�
���
a ;
� �
� �
��
�J �
� �-
� .� 1
�� I
v�
po �
� I
�
�
. �
i
�
�
�
i
�
�
�
�
i
t
1
I
G 24 :
�
z
� 4�90-18 Q
j�bi}ifi,eld Realty �
� t� ' V
�1= � . o �'" LL!
�'_ ° .V�
� _ - _ a s
� 'i � �w
` a V
o � ,
� � ( 6 �_ V �
• ��� �� � �
��,1
;-�---� �
� � �! �7
� � �Q
� ��I 4�
I -� �•j1
R j �L �
� ; ��
� �-
' ' �; � � �,
6M
�
'� N � .
, �
� ��
�
w �
� 1
V '
I � 1,�
W
.Z
i �
Q
�•�
V
�_
0
�
��
:� .
' o�
' NI
� + �
� �
� .
I
�
i i
� j
� �
� ;
' � Q
' J
� � O.
� (
� I Z
� �
! ----�
� Q-� (�
� _;
1—.�
1 � �
'�IGN
�
�
�
�
lf i �
I ��
��
� i:�
��
�1z
° �" �
: �
���
_
r�
.
� `�
,��
a
�, � �
C�. �
.
.
�
�
c�nr o�
F�a�
CUINWIUNITY DEVELOPMENT'
DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDC.IM
DATE: September 3, 2990
TO: William Burns, City Manager �
.� �'
FROM: Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
BIIBJECT: Variance Request, VAR �90-17, by Joel Gerdeen
Attached is the staff report for the above referenced request. The
Appeals Commission voted 3-1 to recommend approval of the following
variances to the City Council:
1.
2.
3.
To reduce the lot area from 9,000 sq. ft. to 8,835 sq.
ft.
To reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 24 feet.
To increase the lot coverage from 25� to 25.4$.
Staff recommends the City Council concur with the Appeals
Comiaission's action.
I�II�I :1 s
M-90-602
6N
� � so
�s► STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE Auqust 7, 1990 ; AuguSt 2 i, 1990
CITY OF �.� co�sslon, DA�
fRIDLEY CITY COl�IC1L DATE Septercber io, �90 ��� �?� —
REQUEST
PERMiT NUMBER
APPLlCANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION 6240 Al.den way N.E.
SiTE DATA
SIZE
DENS(TY
PRESENT ZONaVG
ADJACENT LAND USES
8► ZONNG
UTLJTES
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FINANCtAL �APLlCATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPATBII.(TY WiTH
ADJACENT USES 8� ZONNG
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATiONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATiON
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
VAR #90-17
Jael Gerdeen
Zb reduae the miniirnml lot area fnzn 9, 000 sq. ft. tA .8, 835
sq. ft.; to reduoe the frcnt yard setback fran 35 ft. to
21 ft.; and to increase the 1ot coverage f�an 25g to 26.5$
8,835 sq. ft.
1�1, Single Family Dwelling
i�l, Single Family Dwelling, tA the N, S, E, & W
Yes
Yes
See staff re1-�.ort for re�ndation
Approval
�
Staff Report
VAR #90-17, 6240 Alden Way N.E.
Page 2
A.
B.
C.
PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.07.03.A requires a minimum lot area of 9,000
square feet in the R-Z Single Family Dwelling District.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to avoid the
condition of overcrowding of a residential neighborhood and
to avoid an excess burden on the existing water and sewer
services and to avoid reduction of surrounding property
values.
Section 205.07.03.0 requires that not more than 25� of the
area of a lot shall be covered by the main buildings and all
accessory buildings.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to avoid the
condition of overcrowding of a residential neighborhood.
Secticn 205.07.03.D.(1) requires a front yard setback of not
less than 35 feet.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to allow for off-
street parking without encroaching on the public right-of-way
and also for aesthetic consideration to reduce the building
"line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard.
STATED HARDSHIP:
See attached hardship.
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Reciuest
The petitioner, Joel Gerdeen, is requesting three variances
to reduce the minimum lot area from 9, 000 sq. ft. to 8, 835 sq.
ft. ; to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 21 feet;
and to increase the lot coverage from 25� to 26.5�; to allow
the construction of an 18 ft. x 32 ft. addition to the front
of his house on Lot 2, Block 2, A1 Rose Addition, the same
being 6240 Alden Way N.E.
Site
A single family dwelling unit with an attached two car garage
is located on the parcel. The parcel is zoned R-1, Single
Family Dwelling, as are the parcels to the north, east, west,
and south.
. '
.!
Staff Report
VAR #90-17, 6240 Alden Way N.E.
Page 3
Analysis
Lot Area
The lat area is 8,835 sq. ft. and was platted as such in 1971
with a lot width of 93 feet and lot depth of 95 feet. There
is no mention in the minutes of the plat process that the lot
does not meet the minimum lot area requirement. However, at
the public hearing at the March 14, 1968, Planning Commission
meeting, discussion occurred concerning the fact that the lot
depth was shorter than "average". The lot depth requirement
was waived by the Planning Commission as the lots on either
side of the area being platted had been platted (please see
attached March 14, 1968, Planning Commission minutes). Since
the City approved the plat with the lots not meeting the lot
area requirement, staff recommends that the lot area variance
be approved.
I,ot Coveraqe
As the minimum lot area is reduced, the 25� lot coverage, in
effect, is increased. An average lot of 9,000 sq. ft. would
have a 25� lot coverage of 2,250 sq. ft., and a lot of 10,000
sq. ft. would have a 25� lot coverage of 2,500 sq. ft. The
subject parcel has a 25� lot coverage of 2,208 sq. ft. The
proposed addition will increase the total square footage of
structures on the site to 2,348 sq. ft. (26.5� lot coverage).
The proposed square footage would be 25� of a lot 9,392 sq.
ft. in area. However, because the lot is substandard in size,
a variance should not be granted to allow the petitioner to
increase the lot coverage significantly. Staff recommends an
increase in the lot coverage to the 9, 000 sq. ft. lot coverage
of 2,250 sq. ft. which is proportional to the reduced lot area
and which would require the petitioner to reduce the proposed
addition by 98 sq. ft. This would require a 3 foot reduction
in the depth of the proposed addition. The addition would
then be 15 feet by 32 feet. This would still provide adequate
room size with some minor modifications to the foyer area of
the proposed addition.
Front Yard Betback
The reduction of the addition by 3 feet would then change the
variance to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 24
feet. This would allow the petitioner's addition to be more
in line with adjacent parcels on either side of the subject
parcel. The parcel to the east is a corner lot situation, so
the setback from Alden Way appears to be 17.5 feet, while the
parcel is to the west appears to be set back the required 35
feet.
. '
Staff Report
VAR #90-17, 6240 Alden Way N.E.
Page 4
The petitioner has indicated several reasons why the front
yard is the only reasonable alternative including building
code requirements, the impracticality of building to the rear
of the garage, and blocking adjacent property owners' views
(see attached hardship). In addition, the shortened rear yard
is a result of the shorter lot depth. The petitioner would
then be trading a front yard variance for the rear yard
variance.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission approve the lot
area variance to reduce the lot area from 9,000 sq. ft. to
8,835 sq. ft. Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission
deny the front yard variance and the increased lot coverage
variance as presented, but approve a reduction in the front
yard setback from 35 feet to 24 feet, and to increase the lot
coverage from 25� to 25.4�.
A�peals Commission Action
The Appeals Commission voted 3-1 to recommend approval of
staff's recommendation to the City Council. The petitioner
indicated that, while staff's recommendation makes the
proposed raoms smaller, it is a workable solution.
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the variances
as follows:
1. To reduce the lot area from 9,000 sq. ft. to 8,835 sq.
ft.
2. To reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 24 feet.
3. To increase the lot coverage from 25� to 25.4�.
l•I`�
item will go to Ci
Y__: �. �
on September
A. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.A of the Fridley City Code
to reduce the lot area from 9,000 square feet to 8,835
square feet;
B. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.0 of the Fridley City Code
to increase the lot coverage from 25� to 26.5$;
C. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 21
feet;
To allow the construction of additional living space on Lot
2, Block 2, A1 Rose Addition, the same being 6240 A1den Way
N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432.
OT ON by Ms. Smith, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to open the public
hearing. �
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CSAIRPERBON BAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLZC HEARING OPEN AT 8:00 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this property is located adjacent to Alden
Way on the south side of the street. Currently on site is a single
family dwelling unit with an attached two car garage. The parcel
is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, as are the parcels to the
west, north, east and south.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is requesting three variances:
minimum lot area from 9,000 sq. ft. to 8,835 sq. ft.; front yard
setback from 35 ft. to 21 ft.; and maximum lot coverage from 25�
to 26.5�.
Lot Area
Ms. McPherson stated the lot area is 8,835 sq. ft. which is below
the minimum of 9,000 sq. ft. as outlined in the Zoninq Code. The
lot was platted in 1971 with a lot width of 93 feet and lot depth
of 95 feet. In the March 14, 1968, Planning Commission minutes,
there is mention that the lot depth was shorter than naverage° .
The lot depth requirement was waived by the Planning Commission as
the lots on either side of the area had been already been platted.
Since the City approved the plat with the lot not meeting the lot
area requirement, staff recommends that the lot area variance from
9,000 sq. ft. to 8,835 sq. ft. be approved.
6T
�PPEALS COI+IIdI88ION MEETING. �UGIIST 21. 1990 PAGE 7
�,ot Coveraae
Ms. McPherson stated that as the minimum lot area has been reduced,
when proposing the addition, the actual Iot coveraqe is increased.
If the lot met the minimum lot area requirement, the average lot
size of 9,000 sq. ft. would have a 25� lot coverage of 2,250 sq.
ft. The petitioner is proposing an increase of square footage on
the site to 2,348 sq. ft. Because the Iot area is reduced, the
actual lot coverage is then 26.5$, which is over the maximum of 25�
allowed by code. This would actually be 25� of a lot 9,392 sq. ft.
in area. However, because the lot is substandard in size, the
variance should not be granted to significantly increase the lot
coverage. Staff has recommended a compromise of this variance to
increase the lot coverage to 2,250 sq. ft. which is 25� of the
9,000 sq. ft. This would require the petitioner to reduce the
addition by 98 sq. ft. Staff determined that a 3 ft. reduction in
the depth of the proposed addition would meet that requirement.
The proposed addition would then be 15 ft. x 32 ft. instead of the
proposed 18 ft. x 32 ft.
�ront Yard Setback
Ms. McPherson stated that by reducing the addition to 15 feet in
depth, this variance request is then changed from 35 ft. to 24 ft.
This would allow the addition to be somewhat more in line with the
adjacent properties. The property to the east is a corner lot so
the setback from Alden Way is 17 1/2 feet. The property to the
west appears to be setback the required 35 feet from Alden Way.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner submitted a very thorough
application and outlined several reasons why it would not be
possible to place the proposed addition in the rear or side yards.
Because of the shortened lot depth, the petitioner only has a rear
yard of 28 feet which only allows the petitioner to expand an
additional 3 feet before he encroaches into the rear yard setback
of 25 feet. The Appeals Commission would then be trading the front
yard var�ance for a rear yard variance.
Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending that the Appeals
Commission approve the lot area variance from 9,000 sq. ft. to
8,835 sq. ft.; to deny the front yard setback variance and the
increased lot coverage variance as requested, but to approve a
reduction in the front yard setback from 35 feet to 24 feet and to
increase the lot coverage from 25� to 25.4$
Mr. Gerdeen stated he has redesigned the addition based or� the 15
feet. He basically changed some of the closet space and the
entryway. He actually liked the redesign on the basis of the
entryway, except that it cramps the old master bedroom.
OT ON by Dr. vos, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to close the public
hearing.
su
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AIIGIIST 21. 1990 PAGE 8
IIPON A VOICB VOTE, ALI+ VOTING l�YE, CBAIItPER80N BAVl�G$ DECL�iRED THE
MOTION CARRIED 11ND THS PflBLIC HEAltING CLOSED AT 8s25 P.M.
Mr. Ruechle stated he t�ould like to see the variances approved;
however, he had some real concerns about trying to put too much
into this neighborhood. The lots in this area are quite small,
and sometimes a person has to move to get �a larger house. He
stated that in looking at the site line, the addition would stick
out about 11 feet in front of the existing house, and that is a
lot in a neighborhood where the lots are small and the houses
large. He stated he could vote in favor of the lot area and lot
coverage variances, but had some difficulty with the front yard
variance.
Ms. Dacy stated that when they analyzed this request, they thought
this was different in the fact that it had the 93 foot 1ot depth
which is atypical. It is typical for this particular subdivision,
but it appears that Al Rose Addition is sandwiched between the plat
to the north and to the south. From a legal point of view, denying
the lot coverage and front yard setback variances would obviously
not deny the petitioner use of the property. They would still have
the house and garage. The other alternative would be add to the
rear which would require a rear yard variance.
Ms. Smith stated it did not seem to make sense to put the addition
onto the rear of the house. It makes more sense to do it the way
staff has recommended. Unfortunately, if these variances are
granted, she could foresee a precedent to other neighbors in this
area who might want to add onto the front of their homes.
Ms. Savage stated she agreed there are some problems as far as
crowding, and the homes to the west all seem to be on the same line
of sight. She would tend to agree with staff's recommendation.
- Ms. Smith stated she would also recommend approval based on staff's
recommendation.
Dr. Vos also agreed.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend to City
Council approval of VA1� �90-17 by Joel and Marilyn Gerdeen:
A. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.A of the Fridley City Code
to reduce the lot area from 9,000 square feet to 8,835
square feet;
B. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.0 of the Fridley City Code
to increase the lot coverage from 25� to 25.4�;
�PPEALS COMMIBSION MEETING. AIIGIIST 21. 1990 PAGE 9
C. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 2�
taet;
To allow the construction of additional living space on Lot
2, Block 2, A1 Rose Addition, the same being 6240 Alden Way
N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, 1CtJECHLE VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED QNANIMOIISLY.
Ms . Dacy stated that this item will go to City Couricil on September
10, 1990.
3.
SEVERSO t��.
A. Pursuant to Sect
City Code, to rei
to 8 feet;
B.
C.
205.07.03.D.(2).(a) of the Fridley
the side yard setback from 10 feet
Pursuant to Section 05.25.08.C.(2) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the tback from the normal high water
line of the Mississip i River from 100 feet to 44 feet;
Pursuant to Section 20 .25.08.C.(1) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the se ack from the Mississippi bluff
line from 40 feet to 0 eet.
To allow the construction of �
3, Block 1, Walt Harrier lst
Riverview Terrace N.E., Fridl
�IOTION by Mr. Ruechle, seconded by
hearing.
3itional living space, on Lot
ddition, the same being 6490
, Minnesota, 55432.
. Smith, to open the public
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHA�PERBON BAVAGE DECLARED T8E
MOTZON CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARZNG PEN AT 8:40 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitione Shirley Severson, is
requesting three variances--to reduce e side yard setback and
the setbacks set forth in the O-2, Overla District, of the Zoning
Code concerning the Mississippi River res urces of the bluff line
and the high water line.
Ms. McPherson stated the parcel is approxim te
area and is accessed by a private drive ff
The site is zoned R-3, General Multiple Fa i
adjacent parcels to the north, south, east
district allows for multiple family units, s�
family units. An existing single family dwel
on the site. The Zoning Code for R-3 zoning st
�y 11, 000 sq. ft. in
Riverview Terrace.
Ly Dwelling, as are
and west. The R-3
gle family, and two
ing unit is located
�tes that for single
6V
SEC
'Y
♦
�
�
. l5, T. 30. R. 24
OF FR/OLEY
cavcpvrav� ,Ha e
18 '; 0 -�; - . . - .._.. ..,.
� ;., � �;.��� _� _ . . __.. � .
A�
I
i
�
�
�+L '
.
�
�
2 O 43
VAR 4�90-.17
Joel Gerdeen 6 �
O ..f Fsi,-siin� ....�,. ..". " " _�
�ro fniae a•y �+'n en
R e �w' P �1
- �.
� ME r � o
Qif �: t
1 1N:5 )k<
� REfF�E�
tr �S NC
�tcu►
41
f E W CMIM
..y � ��'
s+--r_�j_` .t�
�
M'�z,`'�,,. SYLy
� �'' �� HILi
�" �r, � Pt A
• SLTELLITE L
� � : .. :; � �4.
O �
m i; i
v 1� ..' ' '. �
. STLVAN •I
. ..
'', . , , ,
��
, ,. , "
b y r
i
?'RtItiT7 OR.
W
�
�
C
LOCATI�N MAP
�
;
. �
�
�
RiV
E �
l
VAR 4�90-17
3oe1 Gerdeen sv
J\
,!,�.�-D .��� T7�� I
L„ J .,� r,
ZQNING MAP
�
�
�
�
W
A
�
'Q
O�
'�
N
�O
W
U
�
W
A
�
�
W
�
�
W
W
A
�
W
V
�
m
N
.�
��>
�
��
�
=�
�o
�a
� �
vAx ��9o—i�
Joel Gerdeen
a�t
�i
m' c
O J
�1
� a�
� �
� �
� m �
N � �
m � � � � � �
� � � � � �
c� � +— � - -- - — ---------_-�--__
��
3�
SiTE PLAN
•I•
4
. p
<: .
>;".>
�� ��
: �
b �
�
.
.
� :
���
VAR �� 9 0-17
Joel Gerdeen s AA
M
=���>��>}��,., L '�>�".��:>� : -
� ^>;• �} >}^> � � �; .
� M - -
�
�
, � �
.
..
_ ''''^` i-..-`' `
� � �
.�:,�; �M,.�.��,' I
�'�
�
r �r�'r'' i: f 'r,,!- 1
Q r: f,�j.. f, j� f'L �C .%.�.,
. �� f;� �ti � y f1�'
s`..r. � �fti/� :
� ! �';
� .,
�
� Fl�t x. �` � ��?+,!�.,�• , �f I
Cf�r� . :... . , i:
� , J•` V �,• , ,� �
� �',.;"4�';('';� k % ' ;; ;: ♦ <_
:.."\�. '�``� 1 I
: %Y% `':r,' "?� �
i{%< %�.%C `•�
� I
, j f, f .
ti�ti �'11,��.
. � t� .!� J1. .
k �t
i
1�^L. ����.
f��-.�. ..: r.
� ��f: �
� -'+� �
REVISED FLOO
i
�
R PLAN
VAR 4� 9 0- I 7
Joel Gerdeen c ��
v
EL�VATION
scc
Petition for Front Yard Variance July 20, 1990
Joel and Marilyn Gerdeen
6240 Alden Way, Fridley, MN
Lot 2 Block 2 A1 Rose Addition
Description of request.
p �.r
We request permission to add a 32 ft. by 18 ft. addition to front ofAhouse.
� The addition would include a bedroom (12'3" x 17'8") and a living room
(18' 10" x 13'3 ") plus enlarged entry way and closets. The present living
room would become a family room. The new addition would add 576 sq.
ft. of living space to existing 1196 sq. ft. on the ground floor for a total of
1772 sq. ft. The enlarged house would be 14 ft. closer to the street than
previous structure but still 30 ft. from the curb. .
Reason for request to build.
Our basic reason for building is that we have outgrown our present
residence and need more space. We have lived in the present 3 bedroom
house for 8 years. When we purchased the house we had one daughter.
When our son was born last year, the third bedroom became used full-
time. We need another bedroom for guests.
Marilyn's mother, who lives in Decorah, IA., comes to visit frequently and
we resort to moving a twin bed into the living room for her use. Her
mother is 76 years old and has had hip and knee surgery. She cannot
climb stairs easily and our basement would be unsafe in case of a fire.
Marilyn is the closest daughter; her other children live on the East and
West coasts. We welcome her visits and exgect that as she ages further
that she may become a full-time resident.
a
We prefer not to move to�different lazger house. Investing the cost of
buying and selling our house ($10,000 estimate) in our present property is
financially smarter and would cover a good portion of the cost of the
addition.
We have established ourselves in the neighborhood over the past eight
years. Our daughter walks to the Stevenson school where all of her friends
attend. Many of her friends are also right in the neighborhood within
walking distance. Our baby sitter lives directly across.the street. We are
active in our church (Redeemer Lutheran} which is within 1/2 mile.
Moving would disrupt our whole family's social life.
Gerdeen Variance Petition page 2 6DD
Alternatives to building in the front
We have considered building in different ways. Our back yard is very
small with only 28 ft. from the house to the back fence. A reasonably
sized addition of 16 ft. would leave only 12 ft. to the back line. An
addition in the back would essentially sacrifice the little back yard space
that we have. �t would also restrict any view that we or our two adjoining
neighbors have.
There would be extensive damage to trees and landscape just to gain
access to the back yard. Our back yard is fenced in so that our son can
play without danger of wandering into the street. Excavation and
construction back there would disrupt his whole play area and add
unnecessary dangers.
Building on the back behind the present bediooms, would require
extensive disruption to two of the present bedrooms. One of the bedrooms
would become inadequate in size (6 ft. wide} due to the required hallway
space and would have no window. Essentially, one room would be
sacrificed to add two.
Building behind the garage seems impractical because access to the main
portion of the house would have to be through the garage or the kitchen
would have to be modified. In addition, we would lose the biggest tree in
the back yard and restrict the view of our neighbor to the east from their
3-season porch.
Building directly behind the present dining area in the middle of the
backyard would divide the backyard into two small areas and is
undesirab:e. Our present electric, telephone and cable utilities also come
into this central area and would have to be revamped.
' We also considered building a second story over a portion of the house but
feel that would be more disruptive to the present structure. The roof of
the house is built with 2x4 trusses and great care would have to be taken
while removing such and building the second floor. Work would be more
difficult and would have to proceed more rapidly since the present
structure would be exposed to the elements. A sudden rain storm could
cause extensive damage to the ceilings of the first floor during exposure.
In addition, a second bathroom on the second floor would be required at
extra expense.
Gerdeen Variance Petition Page 3 sEE
Advantages of building in front
Building in ihe front is the logical choice. There is more space since the
present house is 48 ft. from the curb. An addition in the front provides a
more balanced use of the lot: it would be 30 ft. to the curb compared to 28
ft. to the back fence. The view down the street for our neighbors would
not be restricted much more than it is already. There are presently many
trees down the street that would tend to hide our addition. Our closest
neighbor to the west has a large evergreen that already restricts their
view in our direction. Even then their bedrooms are on the end of their
house closest to ours.
Excavation will also be easier in the front and the landscaping in the yard
will be disrupted less. The closest tree will be 9 ft. away from the new
addition.
Building in front would require reducing the size of the present master
bedroom to a still adequate 9' 11 " x 11'6" while providing access to the new
larger master bedroom. We could continue to use the present master
bathroom and no additional plumbing is necessary.
Adding a living room in front also allows for a larger and more protected
front entry way. The new entry would open to the east instead of the
north and would be protected better from the cold winter's northwest
winds.
Access to the new living room would be direct from the new entry way. It
would also allow for entertainment of guests separate from the day-to-day
living area.
A full basement under the addition is planned and would provide
additional storage and recreational areas below. We presently have
difficulty in moving objects down into the basement since there is only 28"
between the last step and the basement wall. We plan to open the
basement wall at that point to allow direct access to the new basement
area.
Plannin� C�:nmission Meetin� - March 14, 1968 Pa�e 2
sFF
RECEIVE COMriITTEE ON ORDITANCE R�:VIEta MIPiUTES : MARCH 9, 1968:
MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Erickson, Chat
on Ordinance Review meeting of March 9, 1968 be
all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
ORDER OF AGENDA:
� 1.
the minutes of the Committee
accepted. Upon a voice vate,
It was decided to hear the public hearings at the particular time they
were advertised.
Item 1(L.S. �G8-05, Walter Maciaszek) was to be put on the April llth
Agenda because the petitioner was n�t ready this evening. The rest of the
items wauld be considered in the order in cahich they appear on the Agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING• PROPOSED PRFLIMIr!A1tY PLAT, P.S. �68-01, AI. ROS__E_ ADDsTION,
ALBERT M. JOHI�SON: Lot 36, Revised Auditor's Subdivision �23.
The Public Hearing T'otice was read by Chairman Hughes. He e.Yplained
the custom of the Planning Cu�nission is for the petitioner to speak first,
then the Commission members discuss the petition and f�llowing that, the
meeting is open for discussion to members of the public. ,
Mr. Jensen explained that the Plats L� Subdivisions-Streets & Utilities
Subcommittee examined the aerial photos of the area and it appeared there
was a difference in the North/South dimensi�ns. By scaling the aerial photo,
it appeared to be 220 feet while the preluninary plat showed 2r�0 feet. With
a lot depth of 95 feet, this would be below Che requirements of the ordinance
by five feet. �
Mr. Harry Crowder, 146 63rd Way: You are going to put in 12 lots, in-
cluding No. 8�ahich has a house on no:a? Tlie zoning is for single family.
The new plat was circulated among Che audience.
Richard Dittes,�6291 Rivexview Terrace: MosC of the people are here
because they were concerned whether the zoning might be changed fram R-1
and since this is of concern no longex, then the people are in favor of the
plat. Is there something in this layout that has serious implications?
He was informed the question was the possibility that some of the lots
would be too small in dimensions to meet all ordinance requirements. It
now appears that Mr. Johnson has corrected this.
Mr. Dittes continued that if the Commissioa had no objections, he would
like to see the request approved. .
1�TION by Erickson, seconded by Myhra, that the Planning Comanission close
the puhlic hearing of the pxeliminary plat, P.S. �58-01, A1 Rose Addition
by Albert M. Johnson of Lot 36, Revised Auditor's Subdivision �23. Upon a
voi:ce vote, all voting aye, the motion carxied unanimously.
Plannin� Commission Meetin� -
�
2.
MOTION by Erickson, seconded by Myhra, that the Planning Couu�ission
approve the preliminary plat, P.S. �68-01, A1 Rose Addition, by Albert M.
Johnson of Lot 36, Revised Auditor's Subdivision �23. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, the motion caxried unanimouslq.
Mr. Jensen said mention should be made of the lot depth being waived
due to the area on both sides having been platted.
It was noted that the buildings located an Block 2 will be taken down.
The audience was told that consideration of this item would be by the
Council on M�nday, March 18th, and a public hearing date for the final plat
may be set for the second Monday in April which is the 8th.
PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST, ZOA �68-02, ROBERT WILSON: Lot 4, Block 1,
Wilson Addition. Rezone from R-1 to R-3A.
The Public Hearing Notice was read by Chairman Hughes. A communication
from Mrs. Mable F. Gadbois was received which referred to this Item.
Mr. and Mxs. Wilson were present. Mr. Wilson said being it is all
industrial property to the rear of this area, the lot to the north has a tri-
plex on it, he thought it would really dress up the neighborho�d to have
this type structure in there. He said Mrs. Gadbois' property is an old farm
and there is some 40 lots that are vacant.
Mr. Erickson said according to the zoning map, the area north, Gailsview
Addition, had not been recorded as of January 1, 1968. TIr. Wilson was asked
if he were the owner of Lot 1 when the rezoning originally took place, but
he said the former owner rezoned the lot in 1960.
The Chairman asked the Engineering Assistant if he had discussed this
request with the City of Columbia Heights. Darrel Clark replied that he
had talked to Mr. Brown, City Engineer, and he informed him that the zoning
across the street was R-2. He would inform the City Manager of Columbia
Heights of the hearing and if he felt they would co�ent, that they would
send a lettex. They were also told this would go before the Council before
anything would be final. �
Mr. Myhra wondered if the size of the land was insufficient for a four-
plex and was informed that was true. A triplex was the largest apartment
Mr. Wilson could build. ��
Mr. Erickson then addressed Mr. Wilson and asked him that knowing the
fact he could aot build a four unit apartment on this building site, if it
was his wish to continue this request? Mr. Wilson said they built two apart-
ments in Columbia Heights, the same type of building, on 80 foot lots. Mr.
Erickson said that there was a change made for multiple units in our ordinance,
but presently under our ordinance, you cannot build more than three units.
Mr. Wilson said that the building burned was a two family dwelling and
was that way when he bought it. He thought the house was 75 years old, maybe
older.
�
�
crnr oF
F���
C01N1MUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT'
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 3, 1990
TO. William Burns, City Manager r� �,
' �
FROM: Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
BIIBJECT: Variance Request, VAR #90-21, by Shirley Severson
Attached is the staff report for the variance request by Shirley
Severson. The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the request to the City Council. The Commission stated
that they would continue to grant variances to these nonconforming
properties within the O-2 Overlay District until the City developed
a plan to remove these structures to meet the goals of the Overlay
District regulations.
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the variance request,
as the petitioner has reasonable use of the property, and the City
Code does not permit the expansion of nonconforming uses. Staff
recommends that the City Council approve the variance to the side
yard setback to bring the property into compliance with the R-1
Single Family Dwelling District regulations.
MM:ls
M-90-604
•l 111 tl
� sii
s STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE : august 2�, 1990
CI�TY OF PLAMrNG CONMSSION DATE = -
FRIDLEY CRY COIaVqL DATE september 10, 1990 �uT� �_
'� REQUEST
I PERMIT NUMBER
'' APPLICANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION 6490 Riverview Ter
SITE DATA
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONING
ADJACENT LAND USES
8� ZON�1G
UTLRfS
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FlNANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREhIEJ�ISNE PLAN
COMPA'TBILRY WITH
ADJACENT USES 8� ZONNG
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS
� -----------------
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
VAR 4190-21
Shirley Severson
To reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 8 feet;
to reduce the setback from the bluffline from 40 feet
to 0 feet; to reduce the setback from the normal high
water line from 100 feet to 44 feet.
11,000 square feet
R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling
R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling to the N, S, & E;
Mississippi River to the W.
Yes
Yes
Denial
APPmval
s��
Staff Report
VAR #90-21, 6490 Riverview Terrace N.E.
Page 2
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
8ection 205.07.03.D.(2).(a) requires a side yard setback of
10 feet between any living area and side property line.
Public purpose.served by this requirement is to maintain a
minimum of 20 feet between living areas in adjacent structures
and 15 feet between garages and living areas in adjacent
structures to reduce the exposure to the possibility of fire.
Zt is also to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas
around residential structures.
Section 205.25.08.C.(2) requires that all new structures and
uses shall be placed not less than 100 feet from the
Mississippi River normal high water line as defined by the
Federal Insurance Study.
Section 205.25.08.C.(i) requires all new structures and uses
to be placed not less than 40 feet from the top of the bluff
line overlooking the Mississippi River.
Public purposes served by these requirements are:
a. To protect and preserve a unique and valuable state and
regional resource for the benefit of the health, safety,
and welfare of the citizens for the state, region, and
nation;
b. To prevent and mitigate irreversible damage to this
state, regional, and national resource;
c. To preserve and enhance its natural, aesthetic, cultural,
and historic value for the public use;
d. To protect and preserve the river as an essential element
in the national, state, and regional transportation,
sewer and water and recreational systems; and
e. To protect and preserve the biological and ecological
functions of the corridor.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
"Bedroom addition - existing bedrooms too small"
6KK
Staff Report
VAR #90-21, 6490 Riverview Terrace N.E.
Page 3
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Request
The petitioner is requesting the following three variances:
1. To reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 8 feet;
2. To reduce the setback from the Mississippi River bluff line
from 40 feet to 0 feet;
3. To reduce the setback from the normal high water line of the
Mississippi River from 100 feet to 44 feet.
Site
The property is 11, 000 square feet in area and is accessed by a
private drive. A single family dwelling unit is located at the
edge of the Mississippi River bluff line and has an attached
garage. The property is zoned R-3, General Multiple Dwelling, as
are adjacent parcels to the north, south, east, and west.
Historv
In 1987, the petitioner applied for a variance to reduce the side
yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet for living space. The
petitioner was proposing to construct additional living space over
the attached garage which is less than 10 feet from the property
line. The Appeals Commission voted to deny the variance request,
and the City Council concurred.
Analysis
The single family dwelling unit was built prior to 1959 when the
City began keeping building permit records. The Walt Harrier First
Addition, where the parcel is located, was platted in 1978, and the
City adopted the 0-2, Overlay District regulations in 1983. If all
the setback requirements are mapped out on the parcel, there is not
adequate buildable area left over (please see Exhibit A).
While the imposition of the O-2, Overlay District, setback
requirements leaves the parcel with a non-buildable area, the
property owner currently has reasonable use of the property as the
single family dwelling unit was built prior to the adoption of the
code requirements. The adoption of the O-2, Overlay District
requirements, rendered the property nonconforming. Section
205.04.03.I of the Fridley Zoning Code states that "alterations may
be made to a building containing lawful nonconforming residential
units when they will improve the livability thereof, provided they
6LL
Staff Report
VAR �90-21, 6490 Riverview Terrace N.E.
Page 4
will not increase the number of dwelling units or size of the
building". By constructing the proposed addition, the petitioner
will be increasing the size of the nonconforming use, which is in
contrary to the City Code. Denying the variances would not be
denying the use, of the property as the land owner has reasonable
use of the property.
Staff must point out, however, that if the existing structure were
to be totally destroyed by some form of calamity, tornado, fire,
flood, etc., the petitioner would need only to apply for and
receive the setback variances in order to construct a new
dwelling. The City could then grant minimal variances which would
require the new structure to be located closer to the front of the
lot. Denial of the variances for the vacant lot would constitute
a taking of the property. This would apply, however, only if the
property were vacant or the existing dwelling unit were totally
destroyed by natural calamity.
In order to meet the R-1, Single Family Dwelling setback
requirements, the structure would need to be relocated or
reconstructed. The property owner was not responsible for the
design of the plat which located the side lot line 8 feet instead
of 10 feet from the dwelling unit. Staff recommends approval of
the side yard variance.
Recommendation and Sti�ulations
As the property owner current has reasonable use of the property
and the City Code does not allow the expansion of nonconforming
uses, staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial
of the variances to the 0-2, Overlay District; to reduce the
setback from the bluff line from 40 feet to 0 feet, and to reduce
the setback from the normal high water line from 100 feet to 44
feet. However, it is staff's recommendation that the side yard
setback variance be approved by the Appeals Commission to bring the
property into conformance with the R-1, Single Family Dwelling
setback requirements.
Ap�aeals Commission Action
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of
the variance request as presented.
Citv Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the variance request
as presented as the Code does not allow the expansion of noncon-
forming uses, and the property owner has reasonable use of the
property. Staff recommends approval of the side yard variance to
bring the property into conformance with the R-1, Single Family
Dwelling District regulations.
6MM
APPEALS CO�ISSION MEETING. AUGIIST 21. 1990 PAGE 9
C. Pursuant to Sectio 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the ont yard setback from 35 feet to 2�
teet;
To allow the construction f additional living space on Lot
2, Block 2, A1 Rose Additi , the same beinq 6240 Alden Way
N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 5 32.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, 1CUECHLE VOTING
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Ms . Dacy stated that this item will
10, 1990.
,Yi CSAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED
to City Council on September
3. �ONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REOUEST VAR #9Q-21. BY SHIRLEY
SEVERSON:
A. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(a) of the Fridley
City Code, to reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet
to 8 feet;
B. Pursuant to Section 205.25.08.C.(2) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce tYie setback from the normal high water
line of the Mississippi River from 100 feet to 44 feet;
C. Pursuant to Section 205.25.08.C.(1) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the setback from the Mississippi bluff
line from 40 feet to 0 feet.
To allow the construction of additional living space, on Lot
3, Block 1, Walt Harrier ist Addition, the same being 6490
Riverview Terrace N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432.
OTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Smith, to open the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED T8E
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEl�iRING OPEN AT 85�0 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner, Shirley Severson, is
requesting three variances--to reduce the side yard setback and
the setbacks set forth in the O-2, Overlay District, of the Zoning
Code concerning the Mississippi River resources of the bluff line
and the high water line.
Ms. McPherson stated the parcel is approximately 11,000 sq. ft. in
area and is accessed by a private drive off Riverview Terrace.
The site is zoned R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling, as are
adjacent parcels to the north, south, east, and west. The R-3
district allows for multiple family units, single family, and two
family units. An existing single family dwelling unit is located
on the site. The Zoning Code for R-3 zoning states that for single
sNN
APPEALS CO�II+IISSION MEETING. �IIGIIST 21. 1990 PAGE 10
family dwelling units, those setbacks outlined in the R-1 section
of the Zoning Code will apply.
Ms. McPherson stated the existing single family dwellinq unit was
built prior to 1959, which is when the City first beqan keepinq
building permit records. The first record on file is for a permit
to remodel the existing dwelling unit dated 1959. The Walt Harrier
First Addition was platted in 1978, and the �City adopted the O-2
District regulations in 1983.
Ms. McPherson stated the property owner has reasonable use of the
property as there is a single family dwelling with attached garage
on the site. The adoption of the Overlay District requirements has
rendered the property nonconforming. Section 205.04.03.I of the
Fridley Zoning Code states that: "Alterations may be made to a
building containing lawful nonconforming residential units when
they will improve the livability thereof, provided they will not
increase the number of dwelling units or the size of the building."
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing to increase the
size of the house by an additional 282 sq. ft. of living area to
the second floor to create a larger master bedroom. Granting the
variances to increase the size of the nonconforming use, is in
direct conflict with this particular section of the Zoning Code
regarding nonconforming structures. Again, denying the variances
would not be denying use of the property as the property owner has
reasonable use of the property.
Ms. McPherson stated if this was a vacant lot and the City denied
the variances, this would constitute a taking. In order to create
a buildable area and build a structure on the lot for a single
family or two-family dwelling unit, the City could grant minimal
variances. The City could require that a new structure built
closer to the front property line away from the bluff and away from
the high water line of the Mississippi River. However, this would
only occur if the existing structure was damaged to more than 50�
of its value by a natural calamity or if this was a vacant
property.
Ms. McPherson stated that in order to meet the R-1, Single Family
Dwelling, setback requirements reqarding the side yard setback from
10 feet to 8 feet, the structure would either have to relocated or
reconstructed. The current property owner was not responsible for
the design of the plat which�placed the lot line within 8 feet of
the structure and not 10 feet as required. Staff would recommend
approval of the side yard variance from 10 feet to 8 feet to bring
the property into conformance with the setbacks requirements of the
R-1, Single Family Dwelling district.
Ms. McPherson stated that as the property owner currently has
reasonable use of the property and the City Code does not allow
the expansion of nonconforming uses, staff recommends the Appeals
. • ��
�PPEALB COMMISSION MEETING. �IIGIIST 21. 199d PAGE 11
Commission recommend denial of the variances to the O-2, Over�ay
District setback requirements--to reduce the setback from the bluff
line from 40 feet to 0 feet and to reduce the setback from the
normal high water line from 100 feet to 44 feet.
Ms. Dacy stated the issue staff had to struggle with is an
ordinance issue. Staff made its recommendation because the
ordinance is so explicit about nonconforming structures. However,
it raises a larger policy issue alluded to in the staff report
about the intent and the purpose of the setbacks along the river.
Does the City eventually want to phase out nonconforming
structures? Should the City not allow homeowners to expand when
the intent of the regulations is to place the structures farther
away from the river?
Mr. John Smith, Smith Architects, stated he is representing the
petitioner. He stated Ms. Severson has occupied the existing home
for about eight years. Three years ago she applied for a variance
for a design to add bedrooms which went beyond the existing
footprint of the house. That variance was denied. After looking
at the plans provided by Ms. Severson, his architectural firm
decided their direction should be one of coming up with a solution
that is going to have as little impact as possible on the property.
The house has a very comfortable, low profile, kind of look to it.
There is the issue of the existing family room that exists in the
back of the house toward the river, above which they are going to
be building. The roof on top of that structure is not in keeping
with the character of the rest of the house so it seemed natural
to expand upward. There are also issues of privacy and views of
the river.
Mr. Smith stated the real problem that exists is the 6ize of the
existing two bedrooms on the second floor. Although the bedrocros
are adequate in size by code, they feel they do not meet current
market standards. The windows are not adequate regarding the 1988
Uniform Building Code in that they do not allow the required
egress. The ceiling height in the entire upper level meets only
the bare minimum requirement at 7.6 ft., 7.5 ft. with carpeting
and padding.
Mr. Smith stated they feel they have the following hardships:
1. The overlying zoning district was established long after the
existence of the house itself and subsequent subdivision and
final platting.
2. Bedrooms are undersixed for the size of the house. They do
not meet the current market needs and do not meet current
U.B.C. requirements.
. •
APPEALS COMMISSION KEETING. �IIGIIST 21. 1990 PAQE 12
3. The living conditions are adverse in that Ms. Severson has
not slept in the upstairs bedrooms for two years, because it
is claustrophobic.
Mr. Smith stated they have talked to the neighbors and have
received letters from the neighbors who are not opposed to the
request for variance.
O ON by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to receive into the
record letters from Constance Bundy, 6470 Riverview Terrace; Denise
Smith, 6492 Riverview Terrace; Janet Palmer, 6498 Riverview
Terrace; Corinne Jespersen, 6496 Riverview Terrace; and Rochelle
Bydlon, 6454 Riverview Terrace, stating they have no objection to
Ms. Severson's addition or request for variance.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL 90TING AYE, CHAIRPERBON BAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED ONANIMOt16LY.
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Or. Vos, to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECI+ARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY.
Mr. Kuechle stated he would be in favor of granting the variance,
unless the City has a plan for eliminating nonconforming
properties. As long as the same footprint is being used, it is
not violating the spirit of the Code and not encroaching any
further on the bluff line or high water setback.
Ms. Savage agreed. There is no harm to the environment, and this
seems like a reasonable solution to improving the house.
Ms. Smith stated she is also in favor of qranting the variance.
The addition will not be any higher than the existing roofline.
Dr. Vos stated he thought the variance request is reasonable. They
have to approve the side yard setback to bring the property into
conformance, and the other setbacks are existing now with the
existing footprint of the house. He would be in favor of the
variance request.
OT ON by Ms. Smith, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to recommend.to City
Council approval of variance request, VAR #90-21, by Shirley
severson:
A. Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(a) of the Fridley
City Code, to reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet
to 8 feet;
. ! !
�PPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. AIIGIIST 21. 1990 PAGE 13
8.
C.
Pursuant to Section 205.25.08.C.(2j of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the setback from the normal hiqh water
line of the Mississippi River from 100 feet to 44 feet;
Pursuant to Section 205.25.08.C.(1) of the Fridley City
Code to reduce the setback from the Missiesippi bluff
line from 40 feet to 0 feet.
To allow the construction of additional living space, on Lot
3, Block 1, Walt Harrier ist Addition, the same being 6490
Riverview Terrace N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CBAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED IINANZMOUSLY.
3. OTHER BUSINESS:
Informal consideration of a variance request by Phil Hansen,
pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City Code,
to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 31 feet at
6850 Brookview Drive N.E.
Ms. Dacy stated this request has been withdrawn by the petitioner.
gA7oURNMENT•
oM TION by Dr. Vos,
Upon a voice vote,
motion carried and
adjourned at 9:00
seconded by Mr. Ruechle, to adjourn the meeting.
all vating aye, Chairperson Savage declared the
the August 21, 1990, Appeals Commission meeting
p.m.
Res ctfully s itted,
Lyn Saba
Rec rdinq Secretary
vaR ��90-2 � � 6RR
Shirley Severson
--
C!T Y OF FR/OL EY '
!
CONDOA//NN� NQ 8 '
� I
. � ��
. i . .F.
' S -. ,_.
� r� \
� �� �Qa� ~c1 •D� `�' '
. ` f i I ��� M � � ;�w, ';� �R�lSrl ., ; . 4
1-. �" ' s•
� � ,F��i � "A�r%�,, � � ,� �''�� o �r, , �
i_ � c � 1 �`� :` ,,,--- �.,.+rY" s;
0 . . , . , .
i� r � ��'7' _y 1po� �;' ,��,�
i' ! : �: . >_� '4;: .;' •.� y, •�y�l 4 � �4) ; ,�;•`,
t � I *. ' � '- s0 . r • 7 �'�,. ��` -.
( '� '" .' : . � • '� � �°. ,,��Ml ',•
, ,,�: ,,�p� � � ,��;' S N ,.`A�E ��.y
,ti��' � ZA � � ��. � J� �\551PF`�, P .`'�?�
, ; ,^ ��,, � . � , M�55 .. /� '��;�
.TLOt ,_ `� ���� / :. `� •li � . .
�
I
.1
/� 1 �
�
T . i
.1
,
�,
`,�
�
�
�
�
,
:
�
;
i
�
1
� �
I
;
i
I
� f
�
�
i
�,
1
� i �
• �: .
., '�
1 \
av`
��
/ ' t .. . � � � ^ Z - ..
r•ll�� �1� 4 GV�O .
,y���r�r' `IfA�p) : �f� ` '
4�J /' l w� "' �''"
�.
�,,� �,- ��a� �� .� �- ..
�, `��� _ ` 0' �-:�
,..t� r, ,N , �
64 �l wA x. ,.4. ;:-,� • 09
,'��`' ' �S? � �,,,s` ;= �•6
`� • a M� :,'�.'% ? •
� �� ' /
r ii � ~ , �/a"� �. i
� �` / .
i Y. � � .
�� i�' � ✓
5 � E,� 2g�
��s'.,� � 1
if :' rq \ �� -s .E i
tU". J'� ��'i' . 'w i�7��
�` `�• ' 3i�i-�..'fij7 iJJ� �
' 1
�i'. �: r,� tll. . , N /.L1 '`
3 � !�� • '= "A ii �
� � . �
•?� � y 5/ - , s
9 ' ��? �� -
A_:�-- - WaY:
-G�- ti �"�, ��-j �`i �t
,� °.. ' �+t) � � � � 5 w � �
.%> �, B� �± � „ `, � .•
g` , T �
� ; �p� e ,
i�' � �
� v �
� h- 63
L
OCATIVN nn�►r
J
��
�
I
/
�
.�
;;
�i
;
,
4 �
1 I
�
i
,
�
, .
��
� •
.��
RIEt�a �r
1�AY` �
VAR #90-21
Shirlev Se
L�
.�
�
zoNiNG MAP
�
�.J
>
�
�
�
�[WT�M� �Yr M�1�M �YL� tK �r{M�It fi: M I�LW��.
YINMESOTA REiIOTRAT1pM NO.
VAR 4�90-21
Shirley Severson sTT
..-...-m. a►n
•CAL[ 1�� " '�
O�IIIOM YOMYYLNT �
, ,
�.,,�jT 3� $�,.aCK Z� �P1A`-[ KlRR1�R`,�
1 �J�T �cb� 1'[ ION� �V-�OKh COW�aT �/� � (�j .
SiTE PLAN
�
�� � ►� �I
VAR 4190-21
Shirley Severson s uu
�
��aS�,TS
_--�� 5.�,
.._='�'-ti� Cl.b.- HT. �
_� _ _. � . '.
----___- -- �- - , t
�
—'�1 � � � i- -o cj .
a
;■
�
(
i
�
FLOOR PLAN
C�. f;e!► �.. . 'x .;�; : M
� .t � ;: v�`
.a" � -i t� � .
L y.
..� �,,' � • l�,
� :L.:. �,-�� .� 1 ti�
' �. : J
•r
��.:����{ � .� .��•ir�.� � . '-�NIY�, �"+a�;�`� '•
\."` �"' ' �•. � .
� {� �. • i
' �`' ,�•� � �, ; • � ` '4 �.� tIl `ff•,- t. a�: �.
� -x •• ��i _• . �%� .
. , � , � � � W _ rr�� . .,".
='--�' .. • - ,
.�'�. _ , . .
1; � � ' � �* J _ '� j r ,s •
;�' • CL7 � � �
: �,� . � .
� , : ,�� I
� � �� �
�.�-r
. =
-- � _ _ _ -- - � -y ~ . ;,_
� �, - ... . .." ,� . _
_ ,�w� . -�-�..s, �! - ' r '
� .�..�_+r`.r '�...Z., � ' �--�4 ,
.. � �►. . `"�1k . ,. _ . . .t..l . �'�� .
"�F7uR9M �~�F �' :
�� . . � • . � - ••� ..
___ - �Y• i ' . . ..
i' � ,-�� .�i ���—��'
� '�"==-- ;,�.
�� � _ ' - - �III ,��
'���11�1 �II��
�� �.
�
Smith
.,�,,,���;�,.
��-ii c�•�Nrtnu.t sikci i
R,in�r�rnt.i5�ii�� -,•,.,��,
„�� •�:; r•,
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Exhibit A
FOR KURTM SURVEYING INC. L` 1
�KNN �MiVI tIMT �w� MM11l1.KM.M K/Mi W Ni�Yi� 1002 .1Ef/[11fOM i711L[T M.L 0
�rrc w wa[� rrw�co wra�v�ar arrw� � w� wwr • COLUWU MLtiNT� WMMqOTA WIi1
PLNfT[MO �Y� t11A1RTM YY[� TMt �r{ M tM[ �W! M YYIII[�11. W'1N•�/M �TE
iG�IE 1�� .. ••'
M1NNEiOTA pEiltT(iAT1pN NO. Q'Niow rowurEwT
�
►�
�
/ /✓
� � /_
n w
�� '
VAR 4E90-21
Shirley Severson
,
'/ ..
'�'• �' 40' Setback from the Bluffline ��
� �--
�r � •
'11(�i "1 Z
PR.oPo4Ea h�61.� . '
DEAQGbI'1 dOG1'rlo�
To r.t e�.T �eo�. raay'f. -
�r�►�'T-1_�.BZ S.F� --��— 100' Setback from the normal
_ . I - high water ti
I r�
• y,�-..s�'a \ �0�'h = %
�% / � � ��.r.. `� _ /
�
��
..
�
n
� � . . i �'� ` .
� 11 - _ I I
_ � I
� S ,�,q� ± _ ,
� _ ""- // �
� •.
•� � J � . .
��
i�/
T7LJF� L�NE
p' /
� ���
� i/
buildable area left after tt
� setbacks are applied
• r
►,,.aT 3, �$L.oct� Z� \nlq�-� F-l�R�cRS
1 �jT ,�ibL71i 101�1� �-10k4/�• C-OVNt `y� �. f�l .
- �OQ,�,� 1 _ _.. -� � �
�"}'� J_�-10 o-- 40 4�+ j.a
N
�/T / ��
� ��___ ��.- _t-� _�"ar� _ �?� ccy � ..
� = �lur� `s r��.�p'�
1 u�i��f ,&� sr.,� �` i
� � ���� �
s�-i��
sXX
-------_ _._ �
lrl�dytcC.
�f�•-rf�.�
� �'��
--- - � . �. f--
,,:.- ,
D�.,IS.� a::ll
6';°2 �iverviev, Terrac e
Fridley � I�i;� 55432
57�-6�78
August z0, 1990
�ity of Fri�ley
Appeals Cor.wiission
b4j2 LTniversity Ave. ��.E.
r ridley , .�i2� 55�32
R �: VA� r50-21 � by Shirley Severson
To �'.;'ha.:� It i�iay Concern: �
On Tuesday, l�.upust 27 , t 990, I.srill not be able to attend
the hearing on a variance request for tis. Severson at E490
�inercieti: Terrace ���hich ��ill alloi°; her to constrnct additional
living space. �
iherefore ��.y this serve as t�<<ritten agreement for my �pproval
�
on t 's �atter.
.
�C•Lf.t��
�eriise S�ith
�. � /
...�.�: i �
� /-
6YY
�af ya
szz
/ �
����
/j��cE,_ /�7p pb �CC�"d-'� � �
, � �
�r� � � S �h-��G � e� � (�- c�
C�
� ��
�'� �� �'LC��-.
� , � / (�
� 7 /(J ) l f'�i�' ? 4 CS'�.�
. � 1
�.�.��� _
� ��� � T
�r 6AAA
� �
��. �� ►�wx �, ,
U
� � /
�
�- �� ��e. c �.,� �, Irw- � � %a �c� u �� .�
,�
�` � i'
� �`� � � `�- �2�,,� �'(.� F �, �-� c �
�C��� c� �
J
;- �j �{�
`�I� C� � 4 � � � � .. E�,t�- �(,� (�`� � "1 �� � C �
� ��,�t �t v� w h ,
rJ �
� b ' �� � � �w � ��
\ 4 � � � t; lL�
�e-�r����� �����
/,,q \' �� ���
� �� � G�.0 �.- G"� l!� � (. C� � � U'� �C � �� .
�lV i ,
�
, �( c�/ 1
� � ���( � �,� �. tC� 1 �D'C �� � ! d vL r2 � 4 /�a � .� ��� �—
� !
V
! ��' �- G� {S� - ` � � V �. � �,� c� t � `� ��� �
� �
Cx �.t� � � �-1c� � � v�-t� D � , � � �� �--- �� �C �
�
� ,.�. � t� ,�� � � � � . ,
� � ���
� ,
�
CONTEMPORARI' RESORT HOTEL Wa1t Disney Wor{d Co., P.O. Sox 40, Lake Buena Vista, Florida 32830
�
�
cinroF
F�a�
CO1NtMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
MEMC�R.AN DL1M
DATE: ' September 6, 1990 �� '
TO: William Burns, City Manager�•
FROM: Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator
Lisa Campbell.,.f��nning Associate
✓
BUBJECT: Yard Waste Transfer Site Hours Expansion
�7
�
.
.o
�
Due to a misunderstanding between staff and Recycle Minnesota
Resources' staff, it was mistakenly reported to the Council that
RMR would be�expanding the drop-off center hours along with the
City's expansion of the yard waste site. According to Peggy
Tanney-Wander of RMR, it is not operationally or economically
feasible for RMR to expand their hours. Ms. Tanny-Wander cites
safety, staffing, lack of promotion, and a seasonal drop-off in use
of the site as the factors making even a brief expansion difficult.
RMR has agreed to activate its security system, and the City will
be posting a sign indicating that the redemption center is closed.
Also, the yard waste transfer site monitor will be responsible for
informing the residents that they may not leave materials at the
redemption center; however, staff has made it clear that the City
cannot guarantee that materials will not be left at the site.
At the Council meeting on August 27, 1990, the Council approved a
mo3erate expansion of hours at the yard waste transfer site. This
expansion was Wednesday to 7:00 p.m. and Sunday from 1:00 - 6:00
p.m. Staff has attached the staff analysis given to the Council
on August 27, 1990. Please note that as the season progresses, it
may be dark before ?:00 p.m. on Wednesday and 6:00 p.m. on Sundays,
and it may be necessary to close the site or purchase a flood
light.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends Council act to approve a ten week expansion of
hours at the City's yard waste transfer site. These hours would
be Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday - 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.;
Wednesday - 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; and Sunday - 1:00 p.m. to 6:00
p.m. This expansion will be in effect from September 25 to
December 1, 1990, unless weather conditions indicate an early daily
ar seasonal closing of the site.
LC:ls
M-90-640
WORKSHEETS FOR THE RMRjYARD WASTE
EXPANSION OF HOURS
Option �1: No Espansion/40 hours
9am - 5pm Tuesday - Saturday, 1 monitor
(4x8) ($5.30) (1.15�)
Plus one additional monitor on Saturdays
(8 x $5.30) (1.15)
Total Weekly Labor Cost Equals:
Total Labor Cost Over Ten Weeks Equals:
Option �2: Espand to 47 hours a week
9am - 5pm Tues, Thurs, Friday,
& Saturday
9am - 7pm Wednesday
lpm - 6pm Sunday
T, Th, & Fri, 1 monitor,
(24 x $5.30)(1.15)
Wednesday, 9am - lpm, 1 monitor
lpm - 3pm, 1 monitor
3pm - 7pm, 2 monitors
(6 x $5.30) (1.15)
(4 x $5.30) (1.15)(2)
Saturday, 9am - 5pm, 2 monitors
(8 x $5.30) (1.15) (2)
Sunday, ipm - 6pm, 2 monitors
(5 x $5.30) (1.15) (2)
Total Weekly Labor Costs Equals:
Total Cost Over Ten Weeks Equals:
ATTACHMENT A
$ 195.04
$ 48.76
$ 292.56
$2�925.60
$ 146.28
$ 60.95
$ 97.52
$ 60.95
$ 377.89
$3,778.90
7A
Worksheet/ RMR/Transfer Site
Hours Expansion
August 22, 1990
Page 2, 1990
Option #3: Espand to 65 hour a Week
9am - 9pm .'T, Th, and Fri., 1 monitor
9am - 5pm Saturday, 2 monitors
ipm - 6pm Sunday, 2 monitors
(12 x $5.30) (1.15) (3 days)
(8 x $5.30) (1.15) (2 monitors)
(5 x $5.30) (1.15) (2 monitors)
Total Weekly Labor Cost Equals:
ATTAC��r A
$ 292.56
$ 97.52
$ 60.95
$ 451.03
Total Cost Over Ten Weeks Equals: '$4,510.30
r� -,
� ur Mn
SEP-05— 90 4ED 13:56 ID:RECYCLE � hN
minnesofia
resourc�s
S�ptamber 6, 1990
Lisa Campbell
City of l�ridley
6341 University Ave.
Fridley, NiN 55432
- _ ...,, , _..
;�
TEL ND:612635075? tt5?3 P02 �a�. �;"`.
ATrAQiI�'�:VT 8 '� , �
..7 � `
Dear I.isa, .
In response to your rec�uest for RNiR to �x�Xdl =� �e viabil tyS oRdo
site during Sept. 2Sth - Dec• lst, we have c p
so and have determined it is not ftasible for us to �xund our hows
of operation for the followmg reasons:
�Safery - there is not proper lighting during the evening for
properly servicing RMit customers.
•Labor - additional manning
would be necessary. Our business
is seasonal, and at this time of tbe season volume drops oif and
we are cutting back on our labvr hours.
�Promotion - additional promotions would be needed to norify '
our customers of the new hours.
•Past Experience - we have promoted evening hours during the
months of June, July and August, we have only. serviced a few
customers. .
Our building site witl be securo durin$ your extended hours. We
appreciate being able to respond to your rcquestust not feas ble for us
respot�se isn't what you had hoped for, but it s� ��er questions
to cxtend our hours at this time• If there are any
piease ca�, �
1
7�� west county road b• sulte 300 north • rosev+lle, minnesota 55143 � 642-635-0809
fox 612-635-0757
e�rlMwc! on rACV'C�ed DOD9�
�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
M E M O R A N D II M
�
TO: WILLIAM W. BIIRNS, CITY MANAGER ��
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SIIBJECT: "A" FRAME LEASE - BCHOOL DISTRICT N0.14
DATE: AIIGIIBT 30, 1990
School District No. 14 would like to renew the lease for the "A"
Frame building located at North Innsbruck Park, Arthur Street. The
lease would include the same terms and as the agreement dated July
11, 1989. The lease will run from September 1, 1990 through May
31, 1991. �
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please let me
know.
(• �,
�H: �i�vt�l��l • • �
This Agreenent, mac3e this day of , , 1990 , by
and between the City of Fridley (hereinafter designated as "Lessor") and
Independent School District No. 14, (hereinafter c7esi�ated as �LeSS2E°)•
WIZi�TESSE�i :
That the Lessor, for and in consideration of the terms, covenants,
rents and conditions, herein mentior�ed, to be p�id anc3 performec3 by Lessee,
cbes hereby desnise and let on to said Lessee, and the said Lessee does
hereby hire and take f rom the Lessor the following described pr enises
situated in the City of Fridley, County of Anoka, State of Minnesota,
t�wit:
Rl�e "A" fraane building locatec3 at North Innsbruck
Park, Arthur Street, Fridleyr Minnesota
To have and to hold the same just as it is, without liability on the
part of the Lessor to make alterations, and imlxovene�ts or repairs af any
kind in and about the demised prenises, except as and if otherwise set
forth herein, beginning September 1, 1990 through May 31, 1991.
1. Lessee agrees to and with Lessor to pay Lessor as and for the �ent
for the abave-mentioned pr enises momhly installments of $555 each month,
in ac3vance, oai the f irst day of eadz and everY mor�th dur ing the f ul l term
of this Lease at the offioe of the Lessor or at such other plaoes as Lessor
may in writing designate. In addition to the rent specif ied in the
preveding paragraph, Lessee agrees to provide for the cleaning of the
building's interior, the maintenanoe of the side walks and the upkeep of
the lawn. Further, the Lessee shall pramptly pay the costs of all
C L
.
utilities, incluaing but not limited to, electricity, natur al gas,
telephone, �ewer, water and refuse renoval.
�e Lessor agrees to provide all snow renoval for the parking lot
whidz is imrediat�ly adjaoent to and which servioes the c3e�nised property.
2. Lessee shall �procure irisurance on the contents of the builc]ing
' during the term of the lease.
3. Lessee oovenants and agrees that it will make no structural chan9e
or major alteration without the Lessor's oonsent, which consent sh all not
be unreasonably withheld. The Lessee further covenants that it will
prcmptly pay for ariy such alterations, repairs or maintenance made to the
demised properties so that no mechanics liens will be f iled against the
property.
4. Lessee agrees to pay for all special requirements for utilities
such as gas, ste�n, water and electricity. Charges for such utilities
shall be paid by Lessee and in the event such charges are not paid when
due, the same shall constitute a default hereunder on the part of the
Lessee.
5. Lessee agrees that it will not s�let the cle�nisea prenises or any
part thereof, and will not assi� this Lease or ariy other interest therein.
6. Z�e parties hereto mutually agree that if the demisecl prenises are
partially or totally destrayecl bY fire, or other hazards. then Lessor may,
but is not obligated to, repair an3 restore the demised pranises as soon as
is reasonably practical, to subtantially the same condition in which the
cieqnised prenises were before such da�naqe.
:
7. Any trade fixtures, equiPnent and other ptoperty installed in or
attached to the demised prenises ty or at the experise of the Lessee shall
renain the property o� the Lessee and the Lessor agrees that the Lessee
shall have the right at any time and from time to time to temove any ana
all of its trac3e f ixtures. equiPment and other property which it may have
stared upon or affixed to the cl�nised prenises; pravided, hawever, that in
. the event of such removal, Lessee shall restore the premises to
substantially the same o�r�dition in which the prenises were at the time
Lessee took possession.
8. Lessee agrees to gay to the Lessor on demand, the cost of any
� xepairs to the prenises if such repairs are�made necessary by Lessee's
misuse or negligence, or the misuse or negligence of Lessee's guests.
Lessee agrees to make the aforenentioned payment no later than the f irst
day of the month follawing notification from the Lessor of the Lessee's
responsibility for this payment.
9. ZYie Lessee agrees to pranptly notify the Lessor of any dangerous
oonditions in the prenises pravided by the Lessor.
10. The Lessee agrees to vacate the premises on or before the
teunination c7ate of this Lease or any renewal or extension as provided by
this Lease. If the Lessee fails to vacate on or before the required date,
he shall be liable to the Lessor for any and all losses incurred by the
Lessor as a result of such failure. Upon vacating, the Lessee agrees to
leave the prenises in the oondition at the commencement of the tenancy,
orclinary wear and tear ex+cepted.
11. Lessor shall at all times have the right to enter upon said
C 1 ��
prenises to inspect their oondition and at his election to make reasonable
and neoessary repairs thereon for the protection and preservation thereof,
but nothing herein shall be construed to require the Lessor to make such
rep�irs, and the Lessor shall not be liable to the Lessee for failure or
delay in making such repairs, or for damage or injury to persons or
property caused .in or by the making of such repairs, or the doing of such
work.
12. If the Lessee shall make default in ariy aovenant or agreeqnent to
be performed by it and if after written notice from Lessor to Lessee, such
c3efault shall oontinue for a period of five (5) days or if the leasehold
interest of the Lessee shall be taken on execution or other prooess of law,
or if the Lessee shall petition to be or be declared bankrupt or insolvent
according to law, then, and in any of said cases, the Lessor may
inanediately or at any time thereafter, without further notice or demand,
enter into and upon said prenises or any part thereof and take absolute
possession of the same fully and absolutely without such re-entry working a
forfeiture of the r�rs to t� �ia �a tt�e oovenants to be Perf°rme� b'1' �he
Lessee for the full term of this Lease and at Lessor's election, Lessor may
either lease or sublet such prenises or ariy part therof on such terms and
conditions and for such rents and f or such time as the Lessor may
reasonable elect and after crediting the rent actually collected by the
Lessor from such re-letting, the Lessee, its respective heirs, legal
representatives, sucoessors and assigns, and intere�ts shall be liable to
the Lessor for arry balance renaining due on the r�t or reserved under this
Lease; or the Lessor may at his option, declare this Lease forfeited and
may take full and absolute possession of said prenises free fram any
subsequent rights of the Lessee.
C•]'�
�at in the event of default by the Lessee, Lessee shall compensate
the Lessor for all reasonable attorneys fees, expenses and costs incurred
by the Lessor in either reacquiring possession of the property or for
bringing an action for reoovery of unpaid rent.
In the event that the Lessee vacates the prenises and defaults in any
of the tern►s of this Lease without giving formal notice of termination of
the Lease, the Lessor has a right to reenter and take possession of the
prenises.
13. Wherein in this Lease it shall be required or permitted that
notioe or c7Pmand be given or served by either party to this Lease to or on
the other, such notioe or demand shall be given or served ancl shall not be
deened to have been given or servec3 unless in writing and forwarded by mail
addressed as follaws:
To the Lessor :
Fridley City Mana9er
Fridley City Hall
6431 University Avenue
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Zb the Lessee:
Independent School District No. 14
6000 West Moore Lake Drive
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Such addresses may be chan9ed from time to time by either party by
servioe of notioe as above pravided.
14. �e Lessor and the Lessee agree that all af the provisions hereof
are to be construed as oovenants and agreenents.
15. Where appropriate, singular teuns incluc3e the plural� and Pronouns
of one gendex include both genders.
C•1 r
16. In the event that norrpublic fimds are tem►inatea or sic�ificantly
reduoed which causes orie prograan to prenaturely close, the lessee shall
notify the lessor and shall be allowed to tenainate the lease within thirty
(30) days due to the lack of f�mds.
II�I WI�SS WI3EREOF, the Lessor and Lessee have caused their respective
names to be subscribed to this Lease on the day of
Lessors: City of Fridley
Bl''
• William J. Nee
I� Mavor
Lessee: Inc3ependent School District No. 14
BY=
Dennis E. Rens
I{� Superintendent
Eoyineenny
Sewe�
Wa1er
Parks
s�.eau �
M�iNensoce
MEMORANDUM
��
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �• PW90-316
FROM: John G. Flora,fPublic Works Director
DATE: September 4, 1990
BIIBJECT: Temporary Traffic Control Signals -
CSAH #1 and 77th Way
We have received notice from the Anoka County Highway Department
that they propose to install temporary traffic control signals at
the intersection of CSAH #1 (East River Road) and 77th Way. These
will be a temporary installation this year. It is anticipated that
the County will install permanent signals in the next two or 3
years.
The temporary signals will only require the City to participate in
the costs for the electrical installation and any ccnstruction on
our legs of the street plus the installation of the Emergency
Vehicle Preemption System. When the signals are permanently
installed, we would have to pay our share for the permanent
installation which would be based upon the typical signal
percentage breakdown.
As our Fire Station #3 is located at this site, it behooves the
City to have the signals installed as well as the Emergency Vehicle
Preemption System. This is an item that we were not previously
aware of. Therefore, the necessary funds to support the EVP are
not in the Budget. I would recommend that these be funded from the
Street Capital Improvement Area.
Recommend the City Council epprove the attached Joint Powers
Agreement for the installation of temporary traffic control signals
at the intezsection of CSAH �1 and 77th Way and authorize the
approval to purchase the Emergency Vehicle Preemption System for
this location.
1GF/ts
cc: Rick Pribyl
Bob Aldrich
�
�'J
/
�
fRl�l�.Y
�OINT POWGRS AGREEMENT 9A
FOR T1iE
INSTALIATION OF TEMPORARY TRAFF'IC CONTROL SIGNALS
AT 7'IiE INTERSECI'ION OF:
C.S.A.H. �i (EAST RIVER ROAD) A1�1D 7TTIi WAY
This Agreement made and entered into this day of , 1990,
by and between the County of Anoka, State of Minnesota, a politica] subdivision of the State of
Minnesota, 325 East Main Street, Anoka, Minnesota, 55303, hereinafter referred to as "County," and
The City of Fridley, hereinafter referred to as "City".
WITNESSEI'Ii:
WHEREAS, the panies to this Agreement desire to joinQy cause the construction of
temporary tr�c actuated control signals at the intecacction of C.S.A.H. #1 (East River Road) and
771h Way; and
WHEREAS, thc parties agrce that it is in their best interest that the cost of said project be
shared; and,
WHEREAS, said work will be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Stat
§ 471.59.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTIJALLY STIPULATED AND AGREED:
1. PURPOSE
The County and City have joined together for the purpose of installing a temporary
traf(ic control signal system at the interscction of GS.A.H. #1 (East River Road) and 77th Way, as
described in the plans and speciGcations numbered 90-03-01 on file in the otfice of ihe Anoka County
Highway Dcpartment and incorporated herein by reference.
2 METHOD
The County shall provide all engineering services and shall cause lhe oonstruction of
Anoka County Project No. 90-03-01 in conformance with said plans and speciGcations. The letting
of bids and the acceptance of atl bid proposals shall be donc by the County.
-2-
3. COSTS
A. The contract costs of the work, or if the work is not contracted, the cast of
all labor, materials, normal engineering oosts and equipment rental required to complete the work,
ahall constitute the actual "construction costs" and ahall be so referred to herein. "Fstimated casts"
are good fai�h projections of the costs which will be incurred for this projecG The estimated costs
are attached as Exhbits A, and incorporated herein by reference.
B. Bccause this is a temporary signal there will be no oost to the City for
construction, except those costs associated with installation and providing power to the signal.
4. TERM
This Agreement shall continue until (1) terminated as provided hereinafter, or (2)
until the construction provided for herein is completed and payment provided for herein is made,
whichever of (1) or (2) shall first occur.
5. DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS
All funds disbursed by the County or City pursuant to this Agreement shall be
disbursed by each entity pursuant to the method provided by law.
6. CONTRACT'S AND PURCHASES
. �
All contracts let and purchases made pursuant to this Agreement shall be made by the
County in conformance to the State Laws.
7. STRICT ACCOUNTABILITY
A strict accounting shall be madc oE all funds and report of all receipts and
disbursemcnts shall be made upon request by either party.
8. SIGNALIZATI�N POWER
The City shall, at its sole expense, install or cause the instaliation of an adequate
electrical power source to the service pad or pole, for the intersection of C.S.AH. #1 and 77th Way,
including any necessary extcnsions of power lines. Upon completion of said traffic control signal
-3-
9C
installation the ongoing cost of electrical power to the signal shall be at the sole cost and expense
of the City.
9. MAINTENANCE
Maintenance of the �mpleted signal and signal equipraent will be the sole obligation
of the County. All other maintenance, including the ongoing cost of electrical power to the signal,
will be the responsibility of the City.
10. EMERGENCY VEHICLE PREEMPTTON
The City shall furnish all Emergency Vehicle Preemption (E.V.P.) System Equipment,
detectors and wiring supplies necessary to complete the EV.P. System. All wires must be continuous
without splices from the E.V.P. detector to the terminal facility in the TratTic Signal Contral Cabinet
The Equipment furnished by the City (to be instailed as part of the signal project) shall be
delivered to the Anoka County Highway Department (Signal Division) at 1440 Bunker Lake
Boulevard. The E.V.P. System priority device module shall be compat'ble with the cunent Mn/DOT
Spec. Full Actuated TrafCc Control Terminal Facility and will utilize the NEMA Signal Controller
Internal Preemption Programming.
The County will periodically inspect and maintain the E.V.P. System Equipment and w�l
cooperate with the City in testin� and evaluating the EV.P. System Operation.
The City shall reimburse the County on an annual basis for the costs of maintaining the
E.V.P. System.
11. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by either party at any time, with or without cause,
upon not less than thirty (30) days written nolice delivered by mail or in person to the other party.
If notice is delivered by mail, it shall be deemed to be received two days after mailing. Such
termination shall not be effective wiih respect to any solicitation of bids or any purchases of services
or goods which occuned prior to such nolice of termination.
-4-
12. AFFTRMATNE ACITON
.�
In accordance with Anoka County's �rmative Action Policy and the County
Commissioners' policies against discrimination, no person shall illegally be e�ocluded from full-time
employment rights in, be denied the bene6ts o� or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the
program which is the subject of this Agreement on the basis of race, creed, color, aex, marital status,
public assistance status, age, disability, or national origin.
13. NOTT
For purposes of delivery of any natices hereunder, the notice shall be effective if
delivered to the County Administrator of Anoka County, 325 East Main Street, Anoka, Minnesota,
55303, on behalf of the County, and the City Manager oE the City of Fridley, 6431 University Avenue
N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432, on behalf of the City.
14. INDEMNIriCATION
The City and the County mutually agree to indemnify and hold harniless each other
from any claims, losses, casts, expenses or damages resulting from the acts or omissions of the
respective officers, agcnts, or employees relating to activities conducted by either party under this
Agreement.
15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT REQUTREMENT OF A WRITTNG
It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is cflntained
herein and that thi� Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and ali negotiations between the
parties relating to the subject matter thereof, as well as any previous agreement presently in effect
between the parties relaling to the subject matter thereof. Any alterations, variations, or
modifications of the provisions of lhis Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced
to writing and duly signed by the parties herein.
��
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties of this Agreement have hereunto set their hands on
the dates written belaw:
COUNTY UF ANOKA
sy:
Dan Erhart, Chairman
Anoka County Board of
Commissioners
Dated:
ATI�ST:
By:
John "Jay" McLinden
Anoka County Administrator
Recomme dcd for Approval:'!
g � c e-C� l�./��-�-�-'�-�
Y�
Paul K. Ruud, County Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Assistant Anoka County Attorney
(DV:Contract\CSAH # 1 JPA)
CI1Y OF FRIDLEY
sy:
Name: William Nee
Title: Mayor
Dated:
By:
Name: William Burns
Title: City Manager
�
By: ---
e: John Fiora
itle: Director of Public Works
e
By.
City Attorney, City of Fridley
9E
-6-
EXHIBTT A
Joint Powers Agreement
For The
Installation and Maintenance of Temporary Traffic Control Signals
at the Following Intersection:
GS.A.H. #1 (East River Road) at ?7th Way
Estimated Costs for the Project are as Follows:
Project 90-03-01
Temporary Traffic Control System
Control Cabinet
Engineering
City of Fridley Share 0% *
County Share 100%
� ��� ��
� ��� ��
� ��
Total 543,200.00
0.00
S43,200.00
�-�
* The City will share in the construction of the permanent signal system when it is installed. This
construction wilt occur when East River Road is upgraded in the mid to late 1990's.
�
�
-7-
. : :
Cost Sharing Agreement for Projects Constructed
in Anoka County Using County State Aid Funds or Local Tax L,evy DoUars
ITEMS
Concrete Curb & Gutter
Concrete Sidewalk
Concrete Sidewalk Replacement
Concrete Curb & Gutter for
Median Construction
Concrete Median
Grading, Base & Bituminous
Storm Sewer
Traffic Signals
(Communities larger
than 5,000)
Traffic Signal
(Communities less than 5,000)
Engineering Serviccs for
construction
Right of Way
, � �.r r �:�`,� �1
SO%
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Based on State
Aid Letter
1R af the cost of
its legs af the
intersection
I � � 'd
90+%
100%
yC r��:7:� ci�]
SO%
100%
0
0
0*
Based on State
Aid Letter
the cost of its legs
of the intersectian plus
1R the cost of the County
legs of the intersection
0 *"
8% of its actual construction
cost
0 "'
9G
The County pays for 100% of a standard Median Design such as plain concrete. If a
community requests decorative median such as red brick, atamped concrete, or exposed
a�regate concrete the City will pay the additional cost above the cost of standard median.
•* In communities less than 5,000 people the County pays for 100% of the cost of the traffic
signal efCective in March of 1986. The County collects on bchalf of the cities (less than
5,000) "Municipal State Aid Dollars" because those cities do not qualify for state aid funds.
These funds are used to pay the City Share.
**• In the event that the City requests purchase of right-of-way in excess of those right-of-ways
required by county construction the cities participate to the extent an agreement can be
reached in these properties. For instance a city may request a sidewalk be constructed
alongside of one o£ our roadways which woufd require additional right of way, in this case the
City may pay for that portion of the right of way. Acquisition of right-of-way for new
alignments shall be the responsibility of the City requesting the alignmen�
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager,�Ti6 PW90-341
FROM:
John G. F1ora,��Public Works Director
DATE: August 29, 1990
SIIBJECT: Resolution to Amend Capital Improvement
Budget and Transfer of Funds
At the City Council meeting of August 27, 1990, the Council
authorized the additional appropriations of func]s for the joint
Anoka County/City East River Road and Osborne Road Improvement
Project.
Attached is the resolution that authorizes the transfer of funds
and amends the 1990 Capital Improvement Budget.
Recommend the City Council approve the resolution to final this
project with Anoka County.
JGF/ts
Attachment
10
/
�
FY��
I�pI,V!'ICrT 2�. - 1990
vr.• � •: � � �: �i• A� �:r• e+r.: � • •.• • • �• • . ��i• �c�-
r• • V• � 1' '.� • 3� 1� " �I i� � �� � � Y:'� ' � �:1' Y' • ti`1 J1'
N' ' �1 I�2 '�• �:1' 4� • Y• � 1"•� � 7 171 ' �I i� : Y'i:�f'
� • •: • �:I" : Y'�� ` 11 1�
�i8, �12 Cl� Of FildlEy BU�Z�ZBd 21�1 �IICL�r3�.+e �i1 SOOjJE t+0 AT101� ODI�'1�
for SP 02-608-07, Ea.,.�t Rives Ro3c�/Osbon'�e Rpad I�rvvezt�ent Pr�ject, arid
1�g� the c3�arige *-�,;r� additicnal finxling for fhe Fast River Road arri
OsUorne Raad in�rwement - red brick meciian.
NDW, �, BE 1*P It�'�OLVID by the City Oau�cil of the City of Fridley t2�at
the 1990 Yxx9get be amerr%d as follows:
C�PIi�,L F[1AID
Project Area: Street
Reve�nue Adjus�t
F1.�d ffilatyoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 40. 008. 86
iJ• • • � • ' • III.J ,
Capital Outlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � 40 . 008 . 86
BZ IT F0� RE90LVID, that the City OQU�ci1 of the City of FYidley authorizes
the transfer of fiu�ds fr�n the C�pital Iag�rovement F'1u�d, Stx�t Division, to the
1988 Street FLn'ri in the aa�xm�t of $40, 008. 86.
`1]I� • 1� • �• • ]I� �:1' M ��'�1 M� •1- �:1' M • ` ' �� Y:� ; � Y: � • • '
_171• 7� 1'1�1• • �
WILI�AM J. NEE - I�YOR
ATI'F�I':
`I � �' ►• ••• M N 71 •J
� �1
i
TOs
FROM:
DATE:
E nqmeennq
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets `
Maimenance
MEMORANDUM
William W. Burns, City Manager
John G. F1ora,IPublic Works Director
September 6, 1990
BIIBJECT: Fund Clarification
PW90-350
In order to identify the projects within the Budget and the Capital
Improvement Program plus those additional projects that have
developed during the year, it is necessary to allocate the monies
to the various funds for project accountability.
In 1989, upon Council action, we initiated an amendment to ST. 1989
- 1& 2 to construct a sanitary sewer line to service the
commercial development at 7570 Hiqhway 65. While the project was
approved, the funds were never identified in the 1990 Sewer Capital
Improvement Fund. Since this is an Enterprise Fund, the Council
should make a motion to add this item.
With the requirement to incorporate the Opticon Emergency Vehicle
Preemption System into the Anoka County signals at East River Road
and 77th Way. The Council, by resolution, needs to add this item
to the 1990 Capital Improvement List and Budqet.
Recommend the City Council approve the attached motion and
resoiu�tion to identify the approval of these projects.
JGF/ts
Attachments
11
/
�
f��
Enq+neer�nq
Serer
Water
Parks
Slreets .
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TOt William W. Burns, City Manager �.�f� PW90-353
FROM: John G. Flora, Public Works Director
DATEs September 6, 1990
SIIBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Fund
In order to identify the Council approval and the authorization to
pay the assessments for the sanitary sewer line constructed to
service the facility at 7570 Hiqhway 65, the Council should make
the following motion:
"Motion to add to the 1990 Sanitary Sewer Capital
Improvement Fund from Fund Balance an additional
$14, 000. 00 for the City's cost of the Sanitary Sewer line
servicing the property at 7570 Highway 65."
JGF/ts
l i i�]
�
�
fRIM�.Y
RE80LIITION NO. - i990 1 2
REBOL�TION ]1IITHORZSII�Ta CHANa88 IN
APPROPRIATZONS FOR THE CAPZTAL IMPROVEMENT
FIIND, BTREET DIVISION
�REAB, the Anoka County Hiqhway Department has informed the City
that they are installinq temporary siqnals on CSAH #1 and 77th Way,
and
1PHEREAB, it is to the City's best interest to install the Emergency
Vehicle Preemption System on these signals, and
1PHEREAB, funds of $8,000.00 need to be allocated to the Street
Capital Improvement Fund to defray these costs, and
WBEREAB, a supplemental appropriation to adjust the sanitary sewer
and street funds is required.
NOW, TSEREFORE, BE ZT REBOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Fridley that the Budgets of the following funds be amended as
follows:
�APITAL IMPROVEMENT FIIND
Revenue Adjustments
Fund Balance . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8, 000. 00
�pDlOpriation Adjustments
Capital Outlay . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8,000.00
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY T8E CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
lOTH DAY OF BEPTEMBER, 1990.
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERIC
Engmesn�g
Sewer
Waler
Parks
Slrcets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
�
TO: William W. Burns, City Managerar' � PW90-351
• FROM: John G. Flora,�Public Works Director
�f��'Clyde V. Moravetz, Enqineering Aide/Administrative
DATE: September 5, 1990
SIIBJECT: Request for Additional Off-system
Monies for MSAS Project 127-020-08
The City of Fridley had previously requested $54,000.00 from our
State Aid Funds (Resolution No. 41-1989) based on estimates
available at that time. MnDOT has since approved and authorized
reimbursement of up to 66 2/3 percent of the improvement costs for
the above-mentioned project.
The 66 2/3 percent represents $60,000. We are requesting
preliminary and construction engineering costs which brings the
total reimbursable amount to over $69,000.00.
Request City Council approve the attached resolution
reappropriating $70,000 for the above project.
JGF/CVM/ts
Attachment
13
/
�
��
13A
RESOLIITZON NO. - 1990
RE80LIITION REAPPROPRIATING MIINICIPAL BTATE AID
FIINDS TO COIINTY BTATE AID HIGHWAY (CSAH) -
S18T 1PAY AND EAST RIVER ROAD SIGNAL REVIBION
pROJECT (SAP 127-020-08�
1PHEREAB, it has been deemed advisable and necessary for the City
of Fridley to participate in the cost of signal improvement project
located on CSAH No. 1(East River Road) within the limits of said
municipality; �
WHEREAB, said construction project has been approved by the
Commissioner of Transportation and identified in his records as
(SAP} No. 127-020-08.
WHEREA3, the City has previously appropriated $54,000 to apply
toward the construction of above-reference project (Resolution No.
41-1989).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Fridley that The City of Fridley hereby reappropriates from our
Municipal State-Aid Street Funds the sum of $70,000.00 to apply
toward the construction of said project and request the
Commissioner of Transportation to approve this authorization.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CZTY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
lOTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1990.
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
BHIRLEY A. HAAPALA, CITY CLERR
�11d����� �1`L S \Y.ld��vi\' 1lL 1U V
�
ATTORNEYS AT LAV��
Virgil C. Herrick
James D. Hoeft
Gregg V. Herrick
Of Counsel
David P. Newman
TO: City Council �
�r
City Manager �t'
FROM: Virgil C. Herrick,
DATE: September 6, 1990
MEMORANDUM
City Attorney `U
RE: Rice Creek Watershed District - Streambed and Bank
Stabilization Program
I have received several calls from Frank Murray indicating that
the board of managers wish to implement their watershed
management plan. The plan provides that the managers will levy
an ad valorem tax on the watershed district. The amount of the
levy for the forthcoming year is limited to $30,000.00. In order
to implement this program the statute and the water management
plan requires a petition from a municipality.
I have prepared a resolution and a petition requesting the
watershed district to implement the streambed and bank
stabilization program. According to Mr. Murray the district
intends to levy the ad valorem tax and turn over the proceeds to
the City of Fridley to be used on the banks and bed of Rice Creek
within the city. If in fact this turns out to be the procedure
the city will need to adopt some type of program, probably a cost
sharing program, with the land owners.
There remains some questions about the administration of the
program and who will be responsible for the engineering and
inspection. Despite these questions I feel that it is worthwhile
for the city to petition the district to implement the program.
VCH/lal
Suite 205, 6401 Universiry Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55�32, 612-571-3850
14
CITY OF FRIDLEY
RESOLUTION
TO THE
RICE CREER WATERSHED DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley is a municipal corporation
located in Anoka County, Minnesota; and,
WHEREAS, a substantial portion of Fridley lies within the
Rice Creek Water'shed District; and,
WHEREAS, Rice Creek flows through Fridley and outlets into
the Mississippi River within the City; and,
WHEREAS, all of the drainage area of the Watershed District
flows through Fridley; and,
WHEREAS, there has been and continues to be substantial
amounts of streambank erosion and sediment deposits within the
streambank of Rice Creek as it flows through Fridley; and,
WHEREAS, the erosion of the banks and beds of Rice Creek has
caused considerable damage to private and public properties; and,
WHEREAS, the Rice Creek Watershed District has adopted a
Watershed Management Plan that includes a stream, bed and bank
stabilization program; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 103D.721, Subdivision 4, authorizes
the managers to determine the amount to be paid and generally
assessed by the Watershed District for the basic water management
plan; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 103D.905, Subdivision 3, authorizes
the managers to levy an annual tax to pay the cost attributable
to the basic water management features of projects initiated by
petition of a municipality of the Watershed District,
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Fridley hereby
approves the attached petition to the Rice Creek Watershed
District requesting that the Board of Managers implement that
portion of their Watershed Management Plan that relates to stream,
bed and bank stabilization and hereby authorizes the Mayor to
sign said petition.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY
THIS DAY OF , 1990.
William J. Nee - Mayor
Shirley A. Haapala - City Clerk
14A
�
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANORA
City of Fridley
to the
Rice Creek Watershed District
-----------------------------
. '
PETITION
The City of Fridley, a municipal corporation, a portion of
which is within the Rice Creek Watershed District, hereby
petitions the managers of the Watershed District as follows:
1. The City hereby requests that the Board of Managers
_ implement the Streambed and Bank Stabilization Program as
described within the district's Watershed Management Plan.
2. The Streambed and Bank Stabilization Program be financed
under the provisions of Minnesota Statute 103D.905, Subdivision
3. �
3. The Watershed District adopt any rules and regulations
that may be necessary to implement the Streambed and Bank
Stabilizatian Program.
Adopted by the City of Fridley this lOth day of September,
1990.
City of Fridley
By William J. Nee, Mayor
15
CITY OF FRIDI.$Y Q,3 "
1 �
MBMORANDIII� A, �
���i
MEMO TO: � WILLIAM W. BIIRNB, CITY MANAGER, AND CZTY COIINCIL
FROM: RZCBARD D. PRIBYL� FINANCE DIRgCTOR
SIIBJECT: FZNAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJ$CT
NO. STREBT 1989 - 1 i� 2 i� (ADDENDIIM NO. 1)
DATE: AIIGIIST 29, 1990
On the attached pages you will find the Final Assessment Roll for
the Street Improvement Project No. Street 1989 - 1& 2&(Addendum
No. 1). The total cost of this project is $865,417.18.
Listed below is the breakdown of the project, what it involved, and
a summary of the assessable costs.
NORTHCO DRZVE
This assessment involved the construction of concrete curb and
gutter, aggregate base course, bituminous paving, and sodding of
approximately 1,725 feet of Northco Drive from 73rd Avenue to East
University Avenue Service Road. The cost for this is divided in
accordance with the Development Agreement between Northco Business
Park and the City of Fridley. Total cost on this portion is
$93,243.66, being assessed for ten (10) years with equal annual
installments at eight and one half (8 1/2$) per cent interest.
IINIVERSITY AVENIIE WEST SERVICE DRIVE
This assessment involved street improvements including concrete
curb and gutter, aggregate base course and bituminous paving. The
cost for this will be assessed per petitions with two property
owners. Total cost is $85,380.90, being assessed over a ten (10)
year period at an interest rate of eight and one half (8 1/2�) per
cent each year on the unpaid balance.
COMMERCE LANE - 73RD AVENIIE TO OSBORNE ROAD
This assessment involved reconstruction of Commerce Lane including
concrete curb and gutter, aggregate base, bituminous pavement,
Iandscaping, and storm sewer improvements. The total cost of this
project is $302,684.06 with the City paying for $91,905.60 from the
Capital Improvement Fund and the remaining amount of $210,778.46
to be assessed by front footage between the fourteen property
owners on Commerce Lane. The cost to the property owners will be
assessed for ten (10) years at eight and one half (8 1/2�) per cent
interest.
1�A
Also added under this portion of the project is a storm sewer
assessment on Osborne Road. The total cost is $52,105.47 to be
split between two properties according to area. This assessment
will be deferred until the property is developed. At the time a
building permit is issued the principal amount plus accumulated
interest will become payable.
S18T WAY AND EAST RIPER ROAD
This assessment involved the installation of concrete curb and
gutter, aggregate base course, bituminous paving, new signal
system, and landscaping. The total cost of $310,540.32 will be
assessed according to front footage as follows: $128,021.01 being
assessed between two property owners for ten (10) years at eight
and one half (8 1/2�) per cent interest. The amount of $66,868.54
will be paid for from the Capital Improvement Fund, $86,916.36 will
be paid by Anoka County, and the remaining amount of $28,734.41
will be placed on two properties as deferred assessments until
developed. At the time a buildinq permit is issued the principal
amount plus accumulated interest will become payable.
SANITARY SEWER LINE
This improvement consists of providing sanitary sewer service to
7570 Highway 65. This assessment was charged based on lineal feet.
The total cost of this assessment is $21,462.77 with $8,444.25
being currently assessed. The remainder amount of $13,018.52 will
be paid by the Capital Improvement Fund and will also be placed on
the property as a deferred assessment. At the time of
redevelopment, when a building permit is issued, the amount of
$13,018.52 plus accumulated interest would become payable.
[�
RESOLIITIOZI NO. - 1990
RESOLIITION CONFIRMING A88ES8MEI�T FOR BTREET IMPROV$MENT
PROJECT NO. STREET 1989 - 1 ie 2 ie (ADDENDUlS NO. 1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers
heretoiore selected by this Council for such purpose,
calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed for the
BTREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. STREET 1989 - 1 h 2&
(ADDENDOM NO. 1)
in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel
of land in accordance with the provisions of law, and has
prepared and filed with the City Clerk tabulated statements
in duplicate showing the proper description of each and every
lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and the
amount calculated against the same.
2. Notice has been duly published as required by law that this
Council would meet in regular session at this time and place
to pass on the proposed assessment.
3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing
been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested,
and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons
to present their objections, if any, to such proposed
assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have
been filed, except
4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed
and altered as follows:
5. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels
of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified was and is specially benefited by the
STREET IMPROQEMENT PROJSCT NO. BTREET 1989 - 1 i 2 6
(ADDENDDM NO. 1)
in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified by the corrective roll in the amount set opposite the
description of each lot, piece, or parcel of land, and that
said amount so set out is hereby levied against each of the
respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described.
Paqe 2- Resolution No. - 1990
6. Such proposed assessment as altered, modified, and corrected
is affirmed, adopted and confirmed, and the sums fixed and
named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and
corrected, with the changes and alterations herein above made,
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special
assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land
respectively.
• 7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed, shall be
certified to by the City Clerk and filed in his office and
shall thereupon be and constitute the special assessment for
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. STREET 1989 - 1 6 2 i�
(ADDENDQM NO. 1)
8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel of
land shall bear interest from the date hereto until the same
have been paid at the rate of eight and one half (8 1/2 �) per
cent per annum.
9. Such assessment shall be payable in ten (10) annual
installments payable on the first day of January in each year,
beginning in the year 1991, and continuing until all of said
installments shall have been paid, each installment to be
collected with taxes collectible during said year by the
County Auditor.
10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and fil.e in the
office of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified
statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the
amount which will be due thereon on the first day of January
in each year.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THB CITY COIINCIL OF TH8 CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF � 1990
WILLIAIrI J . NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERR
15C
l l•�
CITY OF FRZDLEY
1�i8MORANDII1rI
��_
MEMO TO: WILLIAM W. BIIRNB� CITY MANAGER� AND CITY COIINCIL �
FROM: RICSARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DAVZD DUBORD, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR
MARY SMITH� ASSESSMENT CLERR
SIIBJECT: FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF
TREES 1989
DATE: AUGOBT 30, 1990
This assessment roll consists of the removal of diseased trees
within the City of Fridley. The charges are made under the
authority provided in State Statutes Section 18.023 and Chapter 104
of the City Code.
There is an administrative charge of $25.00 added to each parcel
of land assessed in addition to the contractor's charge for cutting
down a diseased tree. The total cost will be assessed for a period
of five (5j years.
16A
RE80LIITION NO. - 1990
RESOLIITION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR THS
TREATMENT AND REI"IOVAI+ OF TREES 1989
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the tree inspector
heretofore selected by this Council for such purpose,
calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed
f or the
TREATI�SENT AND REMOPAL OF TRE$8 1989
in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel
of land in accordance with the provisions of law, and has
prepared and filed with the City Clerk tabulated statements
in duplicate showing the proper description of each and every
lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and
the amount calculated against the same.
2. Notice has been duly published as required by law that this
Council would meet in regular session at this time and place
to pass on the proposed assessment.
3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing
been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested,
and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons
to present their objections, if any, to such proposed
assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have
been filed, except
4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed
and altered, as follows:
5. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels
of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified was and is specially benefited by the
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREES 1989
in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified by the corrective roll in the amount set opposite
the description of each such lot, piece, or parcel of land,
and that said amount so set out is hereby levied against each
of the respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein
described.
� • :
PAGS 2- RESOLIITION NO. - 1990
6. Such proposed assessments as altered, modified, and corrected
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed, and the sums fixed and
named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and
corrected with the changes and alterations herein above made,
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special
assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land
respectively.
7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed shall be
certified to by the City Clerk and filed in his office and
shall thereupon be and constitute the special assessment for
TREATMENT AND 1tEMOVAI+ OF TREES 1989
8. The amounts assessed against every lot, piece, or parcel of
land shall bear interest from the date hereof until the same
have been paid at the rate of eight and one half (8 1/2 �) per
cent per annum.
9. Such assessment shall be payable in five (5) annual
installments payable on the first day of January in each year,
beginning in the year 1991, and continuing until all of said
installments shall have been paid, each installment to be
collected with taxes collectible during said year by the
County Auditor.
10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the
office of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified
statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the
amount which will be due thereon on the first day of January
in each year.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THB CITY COIINCIL OF THS CITY OF FRIDLEY THIB
DAY OF , 1990.
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. BAAPALA - CITY CLERR
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
17
CITY OF FRIDLEY
KBlIORl�NDIIK
r �r.�
��'
MEMO TO: 1PZLLII►M W. SIIRNS� CITY KANAGER, liND CITY COIINCIL
FROM: RICHARD D. PRZBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
BIIBJECT: FINAL ASBE88MENT ROLL FOR BTREET IMPROPEMENT PRO.TECT 1d0.
BTREET 1988 - 4(OSBORNE ROAD EAST OF EABT RIVER ROAD TO
MAIN BTREET)
DATE: AIIGIIST 30� 1990
On the attached pages you will find the Final Assessment Roll for
the Street Improvement Project No. Street 1988 - 4. This project
was part of a Joint Powers Agreement between Anoka County and the
City of Fridley. The t�otal cost to the City of Fridley is
$130,314.46 of which $90,305.60 will be assessed according to front
footage between six properties.
This assessment involved street improvements fncluding grading,
concrete curb and gutter, stabilized base, hot-mix bituminous mat,
sanitary and storm sewer, traffic signal, street lighting,
landscaping, and bike/walk path.
This project will be assessed for ten (10) years at eight and one
half (8 1/2 $) per cent interest.
17A
REBOLOTIO�i NO. — 1990
ItEBOLIITIO�T CONFIRMING li88888MENT FOR STRSET I![PROVF.I�iENT
PROJECT IdO. BTREET 1988 — �
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The.City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers
heretofore selected by this Council for such purpose,
calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed for the
STREET ZMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. BTREET 1988 - 4
in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel
of land in accordance with the provisions of law, and has
prepared and filed with the City Clerk tabulated statements
in duplicate showinq the proper description of each and every
lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and the
amount calculated against the same.
2. Notice has been duly�published as required by law that this
Council would meet in regular session at this time and place
to pass on the proposed assessment.
3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing
been open to inspection and copyinq by all persons interested,
and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons
to present their objections, if any, to such proposed
assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have
been filed, except
4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed
and altered as follows:
5. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels
of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified was and is specially benefited by the
STREET IIdPItOVEMENT PItO.7ECT NO. STREBT 1988 -�
in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified by the corrective roll in the amount set opposite the
description of each lot, piece, or parcel of land, and that
said amount so set out is hereby levied against each of the
respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described.
:
17B
Psqa 2- Resolutioa No. - 1990
6. Such proposed assessment as altered, modified, and corrected
is affirmed, adopted and confirmed, and the sums fixed and
named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and
corrected, with the changes and alterations herein above made,
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special
assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land
respectively.
� 7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed, shall be
certified to by the City Clerk and filed in his office and
shall thereupon be and constitute the special assessment for
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. BTREET 1988 - 4
8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel of
land shall bear interest from the date hereto until the same
have been paid at tiie rate of eight and one half (8 1/2 $) per
cent per annum.
9. Such assessment shall be payable in ten (10) annual
installments payable on the f irst day of January in each year,
beginning in the year 1991, and continuing until all of said
installments shall have been paid, each installment to be
collected with taxes collectible durinq said year by the
County Auditor.
10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the
office of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified
statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the
amount which will be due thereon on the first day of January
in each year.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIB
DAY OF , 1990
ATTEST:
SH2RLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERIC
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR •
�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
M E M O R A N D II M
S� �
MEMO TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ��
MEMO FROM RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
MEMO DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 1990
REGARDING: CERTIFICATION OF NUISANCE CHARGE TO THE
COUNTY FOR COLLECTION
The attached resolution is for the purpose of certifying charges
to the County for collection with the taxes due in the year 1991
(one installment).
Due to a fire of more than 50 percent damage this residence was
removed and the site cleaned as per signed agreement.
RDP/eh
�;.
RESOLIITION NO. - 1990
RESOLIITION CERTIFYING CHARGEB TO THE COIINTY AIIDITOR TO
BS LEVIED AGAINST CERTAIN PROPERTIES FOR COLLECTION WITH
THE TA%ES PAYABLE IN 1991 (NIIISANCE)
WHEREAS, a nuisance condition has been found to exist on Lots 29
and 30, Block E, Riverview Heights,
WHEREAS, the owners of such property was given notice to abate such
nuisance; and
WHEREAS, the owners of such property did not abate such nuisance
and the City of Fridley, under authority of Section 463.151
Minnesota State Statutes of 1988, did therefore abate the nuisance
at a total of $3,500.00.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby
authorized and directed to certify to the County Auditor for
collection with the taxes payable in 1991, the charges as listed
below:
Lots 29 & 30, Blk E, Riverview Heights
03 30 24 23 0008
Wreck house, shed and cleaned site $3,500.00
TOTAL $3,500.00
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1990
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
19
CITY OF FRIDLEY
M E M O R A N D II M �
TO: WILLlAM N. BIIRNB, CITY MANAGER ��,
FROM: RICIiARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SIIBJECT: CERTIFICATION OF DELINQIIENT WEED CHARGES TO THE
COUNTY FOR COLLECTION
DATE: SEPTEMBER 5, 1990
The attached resolution is for the purpose of certifying unpaid
weed cutting charges to the County for collection with the taxes
due in the year 1991 (one installment).
Each property owner was billed and a reminder was sent. The last
notice sent to each property owner stated that if the bill remained
unpaid, it would be certified to the County and a 15� penalty would
be added. Administrative charges in the amount of 25� or a maximum
of $10.00 were added to each bill.
The charges in this resolution are for work done in 1990.
RDP/eh
RESOLIITION NO. - 1990
RESOLIITION CERTIFYING CHARGES TO THE COIINTY AIIDITOR TO BE
LEVIED AGAIN3T CERTAIN PROPERTIES FOR COLLECTION WITH THE
TA%ES PAYABLE IN 1991 (WEEDS)
WHEREAS, a nuisance condition has been found to exist on the lots
listed below; and
WHEREAS, the owner of such property was given notice to abate such
nuisance; and
WHEREAS, the owner of such property did not abate such nuisance and
the City of Fridley, under authority of section 18.271 Minnesota
State Statutes of 1988, did therefore abate the nuisance at a total
of $1,405.18.
Pin Number Plat Parcel
03 30 24 24 0063 55321
03 30 24 32 0120 57593
11 30 24 24 0010 56808 400
13 30 24 12 0120 56879
13 30 24 42 0051-52 59152
14 30 24 14 0096 56790
15 30 24 41 0021 55995
15 30 24 44 0038&40 55915
23 30 24 24 0074-75 55401
24 30 24 11 0127 00479
24 30 24 24 0039 57274 1100
24 30 24 41 0251-4 56364
26 30 24 32 0020 57352
�
4/1 Chouinard Terr 97.74
32&33/W Riverview Hts 97.74
il/1 Melody Manor 97.74
1/2 Moore Lk Hgh 3rd 97.74
17&18/2 Spring Valley 122.76
9/2 Meadowlands 2nd 97.74
13-16/13 Fridley Park 97.74
4-10,14-20/20 Fridley Pk 147.48
4-5/3 City View 97.74
16/1 Heather Oaks 120.16
8/2 Parkview Hts 135.12
1-5/6 Innsbruck Vill 2nd 97.74
15/2 Plymouth 97•�4
$1,405.18
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1990
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
• / 1
20
��
{
I
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL
EBCAVATING
Frattalone, F.M. Excavating
3066 Spruce Street
Little Canada, MN 5511? Frank Frattalone
GAS SERVICES
Bergman Heating & Air Cond.
9072 Taylor Street N.E.
Blaine, MN 55434
Rouse Mechanical Inc.
11348 K-Tel Drive
Minnetonka, MN 55343
Co.
Bryan Bergman
Gary Danzeisen
GENERAL CONTRACTOR
Barkley, Wayne Construction
67 - 13th Avenue S.W.
New Brighton, MN 55112 Wayne Barkley
Beers Construction
4208 - 6th Street N.E. �
Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Randy Beers
Etter Builders Inc.
3542 Auger Avenue
White Bear Lake, MN 55110
Gaughan Land Incorporated
299 Coon Rapids Blvd
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
Gym, The - Fridley Inc.
15130 - 18th Ave N, #110
Plymouth, MN 55447
M.A. Family Trust
5750 Jefferson Street N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
West, M.A. Builders
15415 Drexel Way
Apple Valley, MN 55124
iiEATING
A-Aarons/Div of Waste Inc.
2511 Highway 7
Excelsior, MN 55331
Thomas Etter
Darnell Weaver
Tim Tenute
Roger Leffler
Matt West
Mark Silvernail
LICB118E8 21 A
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
CLYDE WILEY
Bldg/Mech Insp
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
CLYDE WILEY
Bldg/Mech Insp
Bergman Heating & Air Cond.Co.
9072 Taylor Street
Blaine, MN 55434 Bryan Bergman
Rouse Mechanical Inc.
11348 K-Tel Drive
Minnetonka, rIIJ 55343
MOVING
Dale Movers Inc.
7816 Central Avenue N.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55432
PLIIMBING
B J& M Plum.binq & Heatinq
943 Payne Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55101
Bodin Plumbing Co.
9401 Riverview Avenue South
Bloomington, MN 55425
Mickelson Plumbing Inc.
21680 Meadowvale Road
Elk River, 1rIId 55330.
Sowada & Barna Plumbing
1264 - 226th Avenue
East Bethel, NII3 55005
Gary Danzeisen
Dale Peterson
Bill Moore
Cecil Bodin
David Mickelson
John Sowada
Thompson Plumbing Corp
15001 Minnetonka Industrial Rd
Minnetonka, MN 55345 Ken Gause
Same
Same
STATE OF MINN
STATE OF MINN
Same
Same
Same
Same
21B
�
�
OWNER
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL
� September 10, 1990
�LOCATION OF BUILDING
Riverwood Apartment Mgmt.
2505 Silver Ln. NE
Mpls, MN 55421
Premium Investments
339 13th Ave.
Mpls, MN 55413
(same as above)
Moore Lake Apts.
11300 Minnetonka Mills Rd.
Mpls, MN 55414
K & K Littler
41 Rice Creek Way
Fridley, MN 55432
Moore Lake Apts.
(same as above)
Duane Tollefson
548 105th Lane NW
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
Gerald Engdahl
6875 Madison St.
Fridley, MN 55432
Allan & Bev Mattson
Box 248
Anoka, MN 55303
Mike Semsch
Real Estate Equities
325 Cedar St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
(same as above)
David Heryla
1100 Polk Place NE
Col. Hts., NIld 55421
John Weatherly
5401 4th St. NE #1
Fridley, MN 55421
5960-80 Anna St.
6551 Channel Rd.
6571 Channel Rd.
5701 Hwy. 65
6379 Hwy. 65
995 Lynde Dr.
4030 Main St.
6035 Main St.
Z�C
LICENS$8
Page 1
UNITS FEE
33 91.00
11 49.00
il 49.00
32 89.00
8 49.00
32 89.00
3 36.00
4 36.00
120 Mississippi Place 4 36.00 �_
5650 Polk St.
5660 Polk St.
5761 2nd St.
5830 2nd St.
16 57.00
16 57.00 �
3 36.00
4 36.00
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR
(
;_
OWNER
21D
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL LZCENSEB
� 5eptember 10, 1990 Page 2
ILOCATION OF BUILDING UNITS FEE
David Baune 5851 2nd St.
3111 Dartmouth Dr.
Excelsior, NIlJ 55331
David or Shirley Burg 5866 2nd St.
2291 Lois Dr.
New Brighton, NIId 55112
Douglas Properties 5980 2nd St.
c/o Douglas Jones
2505 Silver Lane NE
Mpls, 1�1 55421
Robert Johnson 5810 2-1/2 St.
7 Dartmouth Cir. '
Longmont, CO 80501
Jerry & Barbara McNurlin 5820 2-1/2 St.
250 Sylvan Lane
Fridley, MN 55432
Willard Guimont 5980 3rd St.
5980 3r'd St. NE #1
Fridley, MN 55432
Richard & Nanci Anderson 6061-63-65 3rd St.
2008 Jerrold Ave.
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Richard Perkovich ' S320 4th St.
1718 E. 7th St.
St. Paul, MN 55106
John Haight 5800 4th St.
9016 44th Circle N.
New Hope, NIId 55428
Dennis Kmit & Johanna Luciow 5460 7th St.
3158 Arthur St. NE
Mpls, NIId 55418
John Blahoski 105 58th Ave.
895 Orange Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55106
Curtis Bostrom 190 59 1/2 Way
5652 Regis Trail
Fridley, MN 55432
11 49.00
4 36.00
4 36.00
4 36.00
4 36.00
4 36.00
3 36.00
4 36.00
4 36.00
34 93.00
7 36.00
12 49.00
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION HUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR
OWNER
21E
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL LICENSEB
September 10, 1990 Page 3
�LOCATION OF BUILDING UNITS FEE
David Baune, Partner 191 59 1/2 Way
c/o Midwest Investment Co.
3111 Dartmouth Ave.
Excelsior, MN 55331
Stellar Inc. 1250 72nd Ave.
5236 Lochloy Dr.
Edina, MN 55436
R& B Properties Partnership 351 74th Ave.
c/o Clarence Rezac
6301 Central Ave.
Fridley, MN 55432
Rudy Bayer 371 74th Ave.
2921 Brookshire Ln.
New Brighton, MN 55112
Dan Stover 389 74th Ave.
P.O. Box 32628
Fridley, MN 55432
Auren Kerntop 321 79th Way
201 Mercury Dr. NE
Fridley, I�T 55432
12 49.00
29 83.00
11 49.00
4 36.00
11 49.00
8 49.00
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR
21F
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL LZCENSES
OWNER
Mattson Properties
BoX 248
Anoka, I�T 55303
Todd Fuechtmann
9824 Yalta St. NE
Circle Pines, MN 55014
Marvey Mayer
7431 Able St.
Fridley, 1�II�T 55432
Ed-Ray Builders
9920 Zilla St. NW
Coon Rapids, NIl1 55433
(same as above)
(same as above)
(same as above}
(same as above)
(same as above)
(same as above)
(same as above)
(same as above)
(same as above)
Gary Wellner
8457 Riverview Ln.
Brooklyn Ctr., NIIJ 55444
Floyd Bradley
9648 Quincy St. NE
Blaine, MN 55434
Prithipal or Bash Singh
19 S. Deep Lake Rd.
St. Paul, MN 55127
Steven Mindlin
4526 Pleasant Dr.
St. Paul, MN 55112
September 10, 1990
�LOCATION OF BUILDING
7325-27 Able St.
7417-19 Able St.
7431-33 Able St.
7479-81 Able St.
7495-97 Able St.
7501-03 Able St.
7513-15 Able St.
7527-29 Able St.
?539-41 Able St.
7553-55 Able St.
7565-67 Able St.
7579-81 Able St.
7595-97 Able St.
8081 Broad Ave.
6830 Brookview
7325-27 Central Ave.
7335-7 Central Ave.
Page 1
UNITS FEE
2 24.00
2 24.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Fa
E1.
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
12.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR
OWNER
21G
FOR CONCURRENCE HY THE CITY COUNCIL LIC$NSEB
� September 10, 1990 Page 2
�LOCATION OF BUILDING UNITS FEE
John Hammang
805 Windemere Dr.
Plymouth, MN 55441
Floyd Bradley
9648 Quincy St. NE
Blaine, 1�I 55434
Karen & Douglas Hornsten
10916 Mississippi Dr.
Champlin, 1rIId 55316
Sean Murphy
6276 E. River Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
Rodger & La Vearle Carey
10270 Mississippi Blvd. NW
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
John Zielinski
7930 59th Ave. N.
Mpls, MN 55428
Allan & Pamela Fehn
1251 Hillwind Rd.
Fridley, MN 55432
Norma Willson
401 Ironton St. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Auren Kerntop
201 Mercury Dr. NE
Fridley, NIId 55432
Terrance Dreyer
1232 Norton AVe. NE
Mpls, MN �55432
Donovan or Sharry Elias
7390 Concerto Curve NE
Fridley, NIIJ 55432
(same as above)
140-42 Charles St.
620 Dover St.
6190-92 E. River Rd.
6276 E. River Rd.
7857-61 Firwood Way
7889-91 Firwood Way
1251-53 Hillwind Rd.
401 Ironton St.
5835 Main St.
1230-32 Norton Ave.
1240-42 Norton Ave.
1250-52 Norton Ave.
2 24.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR -
� 21H
� FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL LICBN8E8
F�p�,��y September 10, 1990 Page 3
OWNER -LOCATION OF BUILDING UNITS FEE
Delores Ponessa 1260-62 Norton Ave. 2 24.00
1327 Hillcrest Dr. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Gurmeet or Daleet Gandhok 1280-82 Norton JAve. 2 24.00
19 S. Deep Lake Rd.
St. Paul, NIIJ 55127
Thomas Shier 1295-97 Norton Ave. 2 24.00
1715 Heritage Lane NE
New Brighton, I�i 55112
Don Klostreich 41 Osborne Way 1 12.00
1609 Roosevelt St.
Anoka, MN 55303
Marita Larson 6315-17 Pierce St. 2 24.00
1216 Banfill Circle
Brooklyn Park, MN 55444
(same as above) 6325-27 Pierce St. 2 24.00
Mark Clasen 6345 Pierce St. 1 12.00
6345 Pierce St. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Don Johanns 6373-77 Pierce St. 2 24.00
1620 Rice Creek Rd. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Vernon Lindberg 6140-44 Star Ln. 2 24.00
1897 Stinson Blvd.
Fridley, MN 55432
G& G Building Inc. 6421-23 Starlite Cir. 2 24.00
845? Riverview Ln. N.
Brooklyn Pk, 1�IIJ 55444
Mark Akbari 7396-98 Symphony St. 2 24.00
8809 Tyler St. NE
Blaine, MN 55434
Ed & Doris Chies 7337-39 Univ. Ave. 2 24.00
9920 Zilla St. NW
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
Steven Chies 7349-51 Univ. Ave. 2 24.00
8624 Miss. Blvd. NW
Coon Rapids, NIlJ 55433
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR
OWNER
211
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL I.ICENSEB
� September 10, 1990 Paqe 4
.
�LOCATION OF BUILDING UNITS FEE
Daniel Fay
729 Kimball St. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Ed & Doris Chies
9920 Zilla St.
Coon Rapids, I�i 55433
Jerry & Barbara McNurlin
250 Sylvan Ln.
Fridley, MN 55432
NHC Properties
7635 Alden Way
Fridley, NIIJ 55432
Joseph Sinigaglio
4715 3rd St. NE
Fridley, MN 55421
Beverly Mattson
BoX 248
Anoka, MN 55303
Kenneth Ohnstad
5908 4th St. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Gerald Foss
874 94th Ave. NE
Blaine, NIId 55434
Charles Westling
125 76th Way
Fridley, MN 55432
Wallace Roeker
7419 McKinley St. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
W. Thomas & Gloria Shier
1715 Heritage Ln.
New Brighton, 1�1 55112
Ed & Doris Chies
9920 Zilla St. NW
Coon Rapids, I�IN 55433
7361-63 Univ. Ave.
7373-75 Univ. Ave.
5936-38 2nd St.
5141-43 3rd St.
5191-93 3rd St.
5820-22 4th St.
5908-10 4th St.
5940 4th St.
5536-38 7th St.
50-60 63-1/2 Way
1580-84 73-1/2 Ave.
360-362 74th Ave.
2 24.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
1 12.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
2 24.00
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAUjHOUSING INSPECTOR
OWNER
21J
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL LICENSEB
September 10, 1990 Page 1
�LOCATION OF BUILDING UNITS FEE
Old Central Condo Home- 66550-56 Central Ave. 4 20.00
owners Assoc.
c/o Maureen Halos
6556 Central Ave.
Fridley, NIIJ 55432
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Black Forest Condo. Assoc.
4930 W. 77th #190
Edina, 1�1 55435
Roland & Belle Rae Krueger
9251 Lansing Ave.
Stillwater, MN 55082
James & Arla Lawrence
1550 6th Ave. N.
Long Lake, MN 55356
Lyle Christie
5627 W. Bavarian Pass
Fridley, I�1 55432
David Childs
2314 Roosevelt St. NE
Mpls, Mn 55418
Olav & Kristin Maehle
1372 Carling Dr. #306
St. Paul, MN 55108 •
Ronald Erickson & Phyllis
Reha
1247 Long Lake Rd.
New Brighton, MN 55112
Daniel Cremisino & Deanna
Pesek
4830 262nd St.
Wyoming, l�i 55092
Kristin Chambers
2906 Hwy. 10 NE
Mounds View, NIlJ 55112
Bennett Lindberg
DBA Lindberg Investments
20525 NW Rum River Blvd.
Oak Grove, MN 55303
1601 N. Innsbruck 1 12.00
#127
1601 N. Innsbruck 2 24.00
#153, 356
1601 N. Innsbruck 6 36.00
#164,215,278,332,339,344
1601 N. Innsbruck
#208
1601 N. Innsbruck
#248
1601 N. Innsbruck
1601 N. Innsbruck
#254
1601 N. Innsbruck
#280
1601 N. Innsbruck
1601 N. Innsbruck
#308,353,363
1 12.00
1 12.00 "
2 24.00
1 12.00
1 12.00
1 12.00
3 36.00
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR
APPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE PROTECTION BUREAUjHOUSING INSPECTOR
� 2
� FOR CONCIIRRENCE BY THE CITY COIINCIL EBTIMATEB
FWDI.�Y BEPTEMBER 10, 1990
Astech Corporation
P.O. Box 1025
St. Cloud, MN 56302
Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1990 - 10 (Sealcoat)
FINAL ESTIMATE: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12, 691. 73
Herrick & Newman
205 Fridley Plaza Office Bldg.
6401 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Services Rendered as City Attorney
for the Month of August, 1990 . . . . . . . . . $ 5,121.00
Bituminous Consulting & Contracting
2456 Main Street
Minneapolis, MN 55434
Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1990 - 3
Estimate No, 2 ' , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , $ 25, 567. 59
Volk Sewer & Water
8909 Bass Creek Court
Brooklyn Park, MN 55429
Water, Sanitary Sewer &
Storm Sewer Project No. 210
Estimate No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7, 306. 79
Walbon Lawn Maintenance
3225 Skycroft Drive
St. Anthony, MN 55418
Corridor Maintenance Project
No. 199
Estimate No. 5 . . . $ 4,342.86
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
�RGM: Ci!y of Fridiey E:�qineering Divisic�
TC: Hortora�le M�yor aed City Co,�ncil
Ci!y of Fridley
b�31 University Ave.^.ue M.E.
Fridle/, Minr.eso:� ��431
D�,iE: SEPT:MPE9 I0, 14%8
CIPf �F FRI4lE�! PUBLIC MQRKS UEPRRiMENi
N31 11MIVERS[tr AVENUE N.E.
FR!DLEY, M1NNE5GTA �5432
PRC3�CT !99@-18 B=At:�nTi�18
Si�Tr!�cN- L•F tiC�K
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22A
RE: Estitate No. 2 iFIHalI
Period Endir:q: 9-87-48
CODE 1 549-@a-aaa-91¢3
5�9-88-88@-410�
FOR: AS�e:h Corparat:�n
P.D. 6ox la�S
5t. Ctc��d M.^.. 5e38i
�S?IMA?ED I1�iI; QL�ArTItY TNI� TOi�!
C:'t:;=:4.T ITEM AL'A!ITITY FR:C= �hIT , �ST:t'R?E ICTAL F�'i�'�
5ea1[o2� wit� 'r�-J n�yr?gete 235�8:? a.4��;i 5q. `.'d. 8 :�'��3G1 47�14J.16
Sw¢�� after aeai��a: �rpli:at:on ?35,82? 6,833 Sq. Yd. ?:i4,,i8? 234,381 7,734.57
TQTA� V-----------------------�w�____-----------------------------------------------r��___--------------f1a5,E77.73M
sunn�tv:
�Jriginz: Contract A�eunt
ke�ised Cor.tract A�cunt
Value CosplPted To Da*.e
AEC�nt �e!air::d iaX!
les5 Aea�nt Paid �f°Vioesly
Atl;;NT Ji;E !;IS ES?IMh':
CERIIF?�A'c CF ?HE LI�iTMFCT�4
ie�,i�e.e4
se. ea
t186,813.73
f8.4�
54�,186.85
51���Qi.�J
: herehvi ce.*!if�� t"3t ihe »ork perforeed and th? eateria'.s s;ipp2ied to date ur,C?r tt;e teras of the :ontract fot this
p!O�eit� ir.3 all 2�thL!i:e'� :har.ges k�ereto, h'aVE d.". ac'ual value under :hE :o�tract of th.e �oun!s ShJMR �n thie
estiaate (and the final Guzntities ar. th� final es:i�ate are correttl, and tha! this eztitate is lest and c��rec: and no
part of th? '��c�:n: U�e This Est�eate' hae been re:eiveu.
EY _4�b•�- - --- ----- --------
C:•ntra:to►'s tt:or:. erreseatat .e tTi!le;
CE�TIFiCA?E CF THE EN�I�IEER
C3tE _ �_ � �_ � 0
I herehy certify ti�at I have prepared or exe�ined tDis estiaate, and thet the �ontracto.• is entitled to pay�ent o� this
esti�ate ueder the centract for reference project. ,
CITY Df F4IOLEY� INSPECTOR
Chetted By �_ _ ��`""'
,
Date_!1 �~�O
Respectfully Sub�itted,
n 6. F1or��P.E.
Publit Morks Director
22B
CITY OF FRIDLSY
pIIBLZC WORRS DEPARTMENT
ENGINEERIN<3 DIVISION
6431 IIniversity Ave.� N.8•
Fridley, 1�1 55432
September 10, 1990
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Fridley
C/o William W. Burns, City Manager
6431 University Ave., N.E.
Fridley, 1�IN 55432
Council Members:
CERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER
We hereby submit the Final Estimate for Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1990 - 10 (Sealcoat), for Astech Corporation, Inc., P.O•
Box 1025, St. Cloud, I�T, 56302.
We have viewed the work under contract for the construction of
STREET ZMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1990 - 10 (Sealcoat) and find
the same is substantially complete in accordance with the contract
documents. I recommend that final payment be made upon acceptance
of the work by your Honorable Body and that the one-year
contractual maintenance bond commence on September 7, 1990.
Respectfully submitted,
i
ohn G. Flora
Director of Public Works
Prepared
Checked
22G
September 10, 1990
To: Public Works Director
22D
City of Fridley �
REPORT ON FINAL INSPECTION FOR �
CITY OF FRIDLEY
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1990-10 (SEALCOATL
We, the undersigned, have inspected the above-mentioned project and
find that the wark required by the contract is substantially
complete in conformity with the plans and specifications of the
proj ect .
All deficiencies have been corrected by the contractor. Also, the
work for which the City feels the contractor should receive a
reduced price has been aqreed upon by the contractor.
So, therefore, we recommend to you that the City approve the
attached FINAL ESTIMATE for the contractor and the one-year
maintenance bond, startinq from the day of the final inspection
that being September 7. 1990. j�
on pson, Construc ion Inspector
, (Title
22E
September 10, 1990
City of Fridley
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. ST. 1990 - 10 (Sealcoat)
CERTIFICATE OF CONTRACTOR -
This is to certify that items of the work shown in the statement
of work certified herein have been actually furnished and done for
the above-mentioned projects in accordance with the plans and
specifications heretofore approved. The final contract cost is
$106,877.73 and the final payment of $12,691.T3 for the improvement
project would cover in full, the contractor's claims against the
City for all labor, materials and other work down by the contractor
under this project.
I declare under the penalties of perjury that this statement is
just and correct.
ASTECH CORPORATION� INC.
� �' ����l���..�
" ' --�"'ral.. - - . -
- - •
], � � /