The URL can be used to link to this page

07/01/1991 - 5104� , � �'` . ' . . . �- . , t� 0 �: �` : :, ,;;, ;;� �: . . .. . � .. � . 4: � . . . � � . - h: �:": � . . � � . . >��.... . . . .. •� � 9fy � . . . .. � � ~�� _ ��' � . � � . . . � . . . ' . �, ��= o:: . . . s y J1.: �. . ., . . . - . . . � � � .. { ' ^� i �.; ° „� y z ' «. . . . . __ 3 t, '� , P,a; � _ . ; �y . ; ,s.� 4 ;� � . . � � . - " •,�� '"�` ' � '` z : a G `,�§ . . � . . �"'. . F #'a< k j K� 4'"iz `� ��> .-� . � .. . - . . r a" � � ` SM�4: � 1 � 'LL � � � 4 1^• , x� OFFI�?l�L CIT'!C COIINC�L At�1 ;, �k ��" - C4�JNCIIr i[�$TI'�G �� :.�,: �. _ ,�...� JIILY i, 1991 �. �' � � � - ,� �¢ �n � �-� _ � :��-� h �� . . . . , ,. . '�'W i�� ' �1 . . . . _ - .'� ; �� , . � �?' � r�� .: � � � � , �*�y � � t : �x "� ' ��; �'� � . . . . . ., - � '+ r-�.fi� � .1� ' E � • � � � � � - . . �� i� � �a � - .z�' - . . . : '. �,1 'p� . � . - ' � ' �` t :'. P - . .:.. ' .: £� - . .. _ . . . �sy "'�t . .. : . .' � � . 4 � ,. . .. , i , .Y� ,� . � ��L� .1 ,�:.,t _- . . . _..� y; r'ep - . . . . . x .. -c' y � �� fi . . . � , . Y.� � � . . . . .. � . . : t ��.y �. *.^. � � � � . � r � 4. li. �. , b} .. A 1 �Y ��5�$[ � � � . � . . � :".J 'x.. R . . . � . . � yia` d } � - . . � .. . . �l ; % �, . . . . . . . . . .2Y � r� �'� � . k�� :th` " `'� . . . . . .•� `.�:' y k� ;,rg � � �`� r - � � _ � � N � � r �r � ,} P' � ,�;,.f � � . . . � . , " s�;�^'.r . . . . . '�` �' � � ,.,�'y<° . .. . . � � ;y:aS ��, '. . . . . . , . . !� � . L - , "r i8 � 3� a � ' �"rz ' '� � ,�+� � ,� ' g � , � �" .� � �� '_ ..t: - � - . . � �. . . � . � ii ,' ��2 K�� f .R it't: r „- . �,' '�§�• ,r�p �r�'+� - . � � � , - � aT' � it �E ",�. 3 r'i' � ' � � yrt . - . . . .j i ��,� � ;��.x� � a �+rt`*3�F�.� a,; � � " ?�,,,� � � '� �r � �`�. � .,j y� �^�� ro ' � � � . . � � } �':x��+ � �''��"�'�s„ ;:t ,�.r . � � tl �' � �b�{ �� . � . . . �,{' . 9' `o� " "� �.. j � y'��`^ g ��.r -. . . � � � � . d lR . � �;, � kv��,a, K ^ . . � .;. � � •� Y.� # JT�v' �p A Z. Y v� . . . . � . � y �. - . . . � . � . r � �� i .Ai` �.� ��' . . � . ' � ` �� '� k��. F *�� S:: . . . �> , rb��.. #..�'�� s , � i_. ,�, ..,.- ,Po x ��,. .. . . ,�- :._ x..: .�._ �- �r �� unrar fRlDltY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ATTENDENCE SHEET Monday, July 1, 1991 7:30 P.M. PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PRINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS ITEM NUMBER �� G" L -1 r : L �%o - ' ` . a S 'S .� �' .L � �. ,�- � � �� 5�- .� , r_ �� '�`; � L u� G: . S�� t�- l 3 5— � � I,t%a S� S M , �J�� e,r.r.� 6� ��v +�e �P�.e �l�e. '(�� n�! � �` �� % � br��of� � �e�s��v �s .� . ve �1/� � - _ G� �erson `� '�1 � ��`' �--�- � �cz.a-� �) S ?n S�• Nl zs. Sry3 a - 1 S �� l� s � a , jj� �o,� ;,�P,v!`��.,��. /� ��/,�fi tfO,v �sr/a /s �� 8 d U L �^ � (. �CSo � T ►' � C� �X; • �o C.0 ■, �_ � FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL F�� JIILY 1, 1991 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: APPROVAL OF MINi1TES : City Council Meeting of June 17, 1991 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: OPEN FORIIM, VISITORS: (Consideration of items not on agenda - 15 minutes) PIIBI,IC HEARING: Consider Modification to the City of Fridley's Redevelopment Plan and Creation of Tax Increment. District No. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1S OI,D BIISINESS : Second Reading of an Ordinance Under Section 12.07 of the City Charter to Vacate Streets and Alleys and to Amend Appendix C of the City Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2B Variance Request, VAR #91-12, by Robert Amborn to Reduce the ._ _ Required Front Yard Setback from 35 Feet to 14 Feet and to Increase the Maximum Square Footage of An Accessory Building from 1,000 Square Feet to 1,270 Square Feet, on Lot 2, Block 4, City View Addition, Generally Located at 405 - 57th Place N.E. (Tabled 6/17/91) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3S FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIILY 1, 1991 paqe 2 OLD BOSINE88 (CONTINUED): Special Use Permit, SP #89-12, by Ashland Oil Company (Rapid Oil) to Allow a Motor Vehicle Fuel and Oil Dispensing Service . on Lots 1 through 3, Block 6, City View Addition, Generally Located at 5701 University AvenueN . E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 4N Reconsider the Reissuance of a Special Use Permit, SP #89-08, by Samir Awaijane to Al1ow a Repair Garage at 7570 Highway 65 N.E. (Tabled 6/17/91) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 5J NEW BUSINESS: First Reading of an Interim Ordinance Placing a Moratorium on the Issuance of Special Use Permits for Auto Body Repair Businesses and Prohibiting Their Location Within the City While the Moratorium is in Effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 - 5.5A Resolution Modifying the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and Modifying the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 Through No. 10 to Reflect Increased Project Costs and Increased Geographic Area Within Redevelopment Project No. l; and Establishing Proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 and Approving and Adopting�� the Proposed Tax Increment � Financing Plan Relating Thereto and, Resolution Recommending Certain Changes in Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 Under Certain Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 6F FRIDLEY CITY CO�IdCIL ISE$TING OF JIILY 1, 1991 Paqe 3 �TEW BIISINE88 (CONTIN[18D� : Resolution in Support of a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Application for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License to Totino-Grace Aiqh School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 7B First Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by Making a Change in Zoning Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 8D Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 1991 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 - 9.61 A. Establish Public Hearing for July 22, 1991, for a Vacation Request, SAV �91-01, by Eugene and Jean Hagberg, to Vacate the 12 Foot Al2ey in Block 23, Hyde Park, for a Distance of Approximately 243 Feet South of the South Line of 59th Avenue, Generally Located North of 58th Avenue, South of 59th Avenue, East of 2nd Street, and West of 2 1/2 Street ........ 9 - 9.4 ........ 9.14 - 9.36 B. Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, by Bizal, Inc., to Increase the Maximum Lot Coverage from 40 Percent to 42.5 Percent on Lot 1, Block 3, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, Generally Located at 7880 Ranchers Road N.E . .............. 9.4 - 9.7 .............. 9.37 - 9.51 FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL �$TINa OF JIILY 1, 1991 Paqe 4 NEW BIISINESS (CONTINtTED): Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 1991 (Continued): C. Consideration of Anoka County Regional Rail Authority's Environmental Impact Statement for Light Rail Transit .......... 9.8 - 9.10 .......... 9.52 - 9.61 Receive an Item from the Appeals Commission Meeting of May 28, 1991: . . . . . . . . . . 10 - lOL A. Variance Request, VAR #91-14, by Bizal, Inc., to Reduce the Rear Yard Setback from 25 Feet to 8 Feet, to Al1ow the Construction of an Addition on Lot 1, Block 3, East Ranch Estates 2nd Addition, the Same Being 7880 Ranchers Road N.E. Receive an Item from the Appeals Commission Meeting of June 11, 1991: . . . . . . . . . 11 - liL A. Variance Request, VAR #91-15, by Steinwall, Inc., to Reduce the Hard Surface Setback from the Public Riqht-of-Way from 20 Feet to 14 Feet and 10 Feet, to Allow Additional Parking on Lot 8, Block 2, East Ranch Estates, the Same Being 7895 Ranchers Road N.E. Extension of Rock Crushing�Permit, SP #82-12, for Park Construction Company at 7900 Beech Street N.E. . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 12C FRIDLBY CITY COIINCZL 1LB$TING OF JIILY 1, 1991 Paqe 5 NEW BIISINE88 (CONTINtJBD): Receive Bids and Award Contract for Point of Sale and Inventory Hardware, Software and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 13A Receive Bids and Award Contract for Clover Pond Diversion/52nd Avenue Floodway Project No. 222 . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - 14C Resolution Ordering Improvement, Approval of Plans and Ordering Advertisement for Bids; Skywood Lake Water Extension Project No. 220 (Menards/I-694) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 15E Informal Status Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 18A Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 190 ADJOIIRN: � � � � ,: - . {�:: : _ � z� �; �, ' �, �� . k� �, � . � � � � �' ,s ` * # �,�.;,. ' � �r �r . . . . . E, �X� b ~ � #� � . . �. .. .. `. .� .: .y. .. . ��-.�. 3 . , . � € a. � . � � . .. . � �.r4. ' � ��i� �� C.=� r��..�t , •' `, - �:' � ' ` � ns „� �' l _ � � . . � 'd � : F . . . � '>..`i{}t A } : � „�� . .� s?ti1l18 17 � 1991 � - � �� "�' � w � :�. , `; { -� s � � ° F; �• + � " . , �� t: � r � x > r , ,s �.. ;� ,,; � � �� ,"� �'° �� "'.o-' v 4 t r�s . � � � - �� i -� z . . - _ ';' r . � �: r � . . � � �,�;; ; x g ; .G. . . �, d`. h ��u . .. . . � . .. � .. � ��5 � � . . � � .-vi 2 Y . . . . . . . � . . .°''w' . . . . . .. � . � `�,' � . . � . *p � �at '.{ s . . . � ,� ''"-r 4 �t ;r & . � .. . . :: � . L � . . . . . . . ��' Z. d . _ . . _xL � '�A: .. . . . . . ''� � L ^t { - - &� . . . . . . - �{ � % .'� T. 'i�,. k � � � . . . . - �» ,� �-� . . . . � �~ �3 } . .. � � �A ,.� :, . . . . . . � � :_ Z�', � '. � . . ,. � � . � . } �� k G� . � . J�� . . . .. . . � . •�$: � .� � . .� � �. � . . .. �r,: � . - . � � �s� �; - �¢ = 3 . 0 3 t . . . � � .. � . zru{� " y . . . � � . , .. �� 2.4 . � � . � . � - s��: . . . . . .. � � ¢ 7 � � � � . .� � 4�. . . - � . . o ,�' � . '" ��, a . . . . ��, .� S . � . . � .. . . � . . � : s � `'. �' � �;, � � � y � . . .. - � . . � �. E" !; �, s� ; � ��: � . . - � � � . 2 � ��. F a. r � .. : . � .. ,�,� � i �.I.� , . . . . . � . . . . .� . � � . � � � � � � r �, t��g, � �. ;s- 4 ; <:1 a ,� r � . � �. . . . � � . ''� # �; ��5�� t � s�'�* � �� ,. � � �,. �`�" �, � : ,. . . . . .. � F.� .a , � . . .. ._.._ sn_.. . . . ..�..., THE MINtJTEB OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL OF JiTNE 17 , 19 91 The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Mayor Nee. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Nee led the Councilmembers and audience in the PZedge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL• MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Nee, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Billings, Councilman Schneider and Councilman Fitzpatrick MEMBERS ABSENT: None PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATIONS: GORDON SANGSTER DAY - JUNE 18. 1991: Mayor Nee read and issued a proclamation proclaiming June 18, 199Z as Gordon Sangster Day in the City. He urged residents to join together in expressing their appreciation for Mr. Sangster�s significant and diverse contributions to the Fridley School District and community. Mayor Nee stated that this proclamation will be presented to Mr. Sangster at a recognition dinner on June 18, 1991. NATIONAL NIGHT OUT - AUGUST 6, 1991: Mayor Nee read and issued a proclamation proclaiming August 6, 1991 as National Night Out and called upon all citizens to join the Fridley Police Department and participate in the 8th Annual National Night Out by having neighborhood block parties. Mayor Nee presented this proclamation to Connie Bauman, Crime Prevention Specialist, and to Marilou and Byron Johnson, Block Captains. Ms. Bauman thanked the Mayor and Councilmembers for the proclamation. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: COUNCIL MEETING, JUNE 3, 1991: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. FRIDLEY CITY COtTNCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17, 1991 PAG$ 2 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: Mayor Nee requested the following items be added to the agenda: (14) Reconsider Special Use Permit, SP #89-08 at 7570 Highway 65 N.E. and (15) Set Public Hearing on the Establishment of a Tax Increment Financing District. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt the agenda with the above two additions. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. OPEN FORUM. VISITORS: GRACE EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH RE: 73RD AVENUE PROJECT: Mr. Michael Happ, Trustee of Grace Evangelical Free Church, addressed the Council regarding their concerns about the 73rd Avenue improvement project. He stated that while this improvement is under construction, he would like to propose that an entrance be cut through the parkway on the west side of the church to allow access into their parking lot and away from neighboring residences. Mr. Happ felt that this was a safety concern due to the number of vehicles going in and out of the church property. He stated that the church is not only used on Sunday but during the week for day care and other activities. He stated the concern is that there will be cars backed up waiting to exit. Mr. Happ submitted a letter voicing the church's concerns for shortening the frontage road entrance and asked that consideration be given to making an entrance off the parkway in line with the church's west entrance. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to receive this letter dated June 17, 1991. 5econded by Councilman Schneider. Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that this issue was discussed with the representatives of the church a year ago and again this past week. He stated that he would like to review the request to determine what consideration can be given. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that one of her concerns was about employees from the businesses on 73rd Avenue taking shortcuts through the residential neighborhoods. She stated that this was one of the reasons for narrowing the median, to prohibit these vehicles from cutting through residential areas. Mr. Happ stated that he would agree, but their concern is that there will be traffic backed up on 73rd Avenue because of the constraint of that intersection. FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17, 1991 PAGE 3 Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that a median cut across the parkway at Station 27 on the plans will be reviewed to allow access into the west entrance of the church's lot. Mayor Nee stated that Council does not usually act on requests submitted under the open forum segment in order to allow an opportunity for review and report by the City staff. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS• 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON REZONING. ZOA #89-04. BY ASHLAND OIL COMPANY. TO REZONE LOT 4, BLOCK 6. CITY VIEW ADDITION. FROM �2-2 TO C-2. GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5701 UNIVERSITY AVENiTE N.E.: MOTION by Councilman Billings to reopen this public hearing which began on November 13, 1989. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, aIl voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing reopened at 7:55 p.m. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this request is to rezone a vacant strip of land approximately 40 by 140 feet adjacent to an existing vacant home from R-2 to C-2. She stated that this rezoning was postponed from the November Z3, 1989 City Council meeting in order to receive more information about soil tests taken on the property. Ms. Dacy stated that the property is a double frontage lot with 57th Place along the north and 57th Avenue along the south. Ashland oil Company, who owns Rapid Oil, is proposing a new facility. She stated that at the time of the rezoning request the HRA was considering this parcel for potential redevelopment, the LRT corridor was being discussed, and both issues were pertinent at that time. She stated that this particular site is not being considered for a park and ride for the LRT system. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval of this rezoning with three stipu2ations, which she outlined. She stated that approval of the rezoning is conditioned upon compliance with the stipulation of Rapid Oil's special use permit, which states that the site must be cleaned according to MPCA standards prior to issuance of a building permit. She stated that a special use permit is necessary in a C-2 zoning district to construct an oil changing facility. Ms. Dacy stated that soil tests have been completed for the petitioner by Delta Engineering. FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JUN� 17. 1991 PAGE 4 Councilman Billings stated that one of the reasons this item was tabled was to determine the extent of the contamination and what actions were necessary to remove the contaminants. Ms. Dacy stated that the stipulations on cleaning the site are contained in the special use permit request. She stated that there was ground water and soil contamination, that a pump system would be used to remove the contaminated ground water, and that contaminated soils would be treated on the site. She stated that Ashland Oil is following through with the appropriate permits from the MPCA, MWCC and the DNR. Mr. Jerry Brill stated that he is an attorney representing Ashland Oil, as Mr. Lemley could not attend the meeting this evening due to a prior commitment in California. He stated that Ashland Oil has a plan designed by Delta Consultants to remove contaminants from the site and that this was approved by the MPCA on September 6, 1990. He stated that Ashland Oil recognizes its responsibility to remove these contaminants and that this would begin when the new facility is constructed. Mr. Brill stated that the new facility would be a considerable upgrade to the site and that the rezoning and special use permit is needed in order to proceed. He stated that as far as he knows there is no plan to take this site for the LRT system. Mayor Nee questioned what would be done with the adjacent vacant single family home. Ms. Dacy stated that, at this time, the plan is only to redevelop the Rapid Oil facility. Mr. Brill stated that he did not know if Ashland Oil had any plans for the single family home but may attempt to lease or sell it. Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that the plan is to aerate the soil, to pump and treat the water, and to dispose of it in the sanitary sewer system. No other persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed rezoning. MOTION by Councilman Billings to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:15 p.m. FRIDLEY CITY COONCIL MEETING OF JIIN$ 17. 1991 _ PAGB 5 2. PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION RE4UEST, SAV #91-02, BY JAMES AND LINDA PETERSON AND TIMOTHY AND DONNETT MILLER TO VACATE THE EAST 110 X 40 FEET OF DOVER STREET AS MEASURED FROM THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BROAD AVENUE SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT FOR UTILITY PURPOSES OVER THE SOUTHERLY 20 FEET OF THE PORTION OF DOVER STREET TO BE VACATED AND A WALKWAY EASEMENT OVER THE NORTHERLY 10 FEET OF THE SOUTHERLY 20 FEET OF THE PORTION OF DOVER STREET TO BE VACATED GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF 591 DOVER STREET AND NORTH OF 7995 BROAD AVENUE: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:15 p.m. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that the petitioners are proposing to vacate the east 110 feet of Dover Street, as measured from the east right-of-way line of Broad Avenue and which lies between the two petitioners' properties. She stated that the portion of Dover Street east of Broad Avenue is currently a paper right-of-way and the street is unimproved. Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Peterson lives in the home to the south of the right-of-way and that the purpose of the vacation is to add property to the Peterson and Miller property, as Mr. Peterson wishes to construct a garage. She stated that the petitioner has reserved a 20 foot utility easement and a 10 foot walkway easement. She stated that there is a resident who lives on Dover Street who wants a walkway easement retained. Ms. Dacy stated that since the Planning Commission meeting, staff has discussed this walkway easement with the City Attorney, and it is preferable that the walkway easement not be a stipulation of approval of this vacation. She stated that this walkway easement would call attention to a specific strip of land that would appear to be owned and maintained by the City and would encourage pedestrian traffic. She stated that because of the vegetation and slope of the hill, it is staff's position that pedestrian traffic should not be encouraged in this area. She stated staff is recommending that the stipulations for utility and walkway easements be deleted. She stated that the stipulation for a hard surface driveway by August 1, 1992 should remain. Mr. Peterson, 7995 Broad Avenue, stated that he is one of the co- petitioners of this vacation request. He stated that this strip of land proposed to be vacated is partial gravel and used as a parking lot. He stated that his home has a single car garage, he needs space to keep his vehicles, and that the only direction he can expand is to the north. He stated that if the vacation is approved, he would regrade the area, sod it, and try to stabilize FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17. 1991 PAGE 6 his portion of the hillside. He stated that this vacation would also eliminate the off-street parking. Mr. Peterson stated that the utility easement is for the benefit of the City, and the walkway easement came about as a result of the Planning Commission meeting. He stated that none of the residents were disappointed by the idea of not having a through street; however, several residents expressed an interest in having a means of travel to the river. He stated that there are several ways to access the river; however, this is probably the worst due to the terrain. Mr. Scott Painter, 541 Dover Street, stated that he and his wife were the objecting parties. He stated that they were concerned about losing the legal right-of-way as they use this access to go to the river. He stated that it is easier to go in this direction than on East River Road. He stated that he understands the City Attorney may have some legal concerns, but the path is well used, and he felt it would continue to be used. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated that this is not a major concern, but felt it should be pointed out to Council. He stated that Mr. Painter just stated that the path has been used for a period of time and, while it is not designated as a walkway, it is designated as a roadway, and it is conceivable if someone were to get hurt that they may file a claim. He felt that the liability would be covered by the City's insurance, but the risk is something Council might wish to weigh. Councilman Billings questioned the legal description for the Minnegasco easement. Ms. Dacy stated that this easement is defined in the vacation ordinance which is Item 5 on the Council's agenda. No other persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed vacation. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:43 p.m. OLD BUSINESS• 3. ORDINANCE NO. 971 RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZONING " BY DELETIN SECTION 205.09.05.D.(7) AND SECTION 205.09.07.F AND RENUMBERING THE REMAINING SECTIONS CONSECUTIVELY: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and adopt Ordinance No. 971 on the second reading and order publication. FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17. 1991 PAGE 7 Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 4. ORDINANCE NO 972 RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE. CHAPTER 205 ENTITLED "ZONING" BY AMENDING SECTION 205.04, BY ADDING NEW SECTION 205 04 09 "ABOVE GROUND FUEL STORAGE (AGFS) TANKS" • MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to waive the reading and adopt Ordinance No. 972 on the second reading and order publication. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: 5. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE: MOTION by Councilman Billings to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading, with the stipulation that the petitioners, Timothy and Donnett Miller, shall provide a hard surface driveway by August 1, 1992. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Mayor Nee stated that he would like to see a walkway easement provided. MOTION by Councilman Billings to add the following paragraph to this ordinance, between paragraphs one and two, to read as follows: "Subject to an easement for walkway purposes over the northerly 10 feet of the southerly 20 feet of the portion of Dover Street to be vacated." Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE MAIN MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 6. RECEIVE ITEMS FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 28, 1991• A. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #91-10 BY MICHAEL KLISMITH, TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD FROM 4 FEET TO 7 FEET �A 4 FOOT FENCE ON TOP OF A 3 FOOT BERM), ON LOTS 7. 8. 9 AND 10 BLOCK 3 SPRING BROOK PARK THE SAME BEING 7905 EAST RIVER ROAD• MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the recommendation of the Appeals Commission and grant Variance Request, VAR #91-10. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17. 1991 PAGB 8 B. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #91-12 BY ROBERT AMBORN TO REDUCE RE4UIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 35 FEET TO 14 FEET AND TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM SOUARE FOOTAGE OF AN ACCESSORY BUILDING FROM 1 000 TO 1 270 SOUARE FEET ON LOT 2 BLOCK 4 CITY VIFW ADDITION THE SAME BEING 405 - 57TH PLACE N E• Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this variance was requested in order to allow the petitioner to construct additional garage space to park his recreational vehicle on a hard surface to meet City Code requirements. She stated that the petitioner currently is storing his large recreational vehicle outside, that he was required to store this vehicle on a hard surface driveway, and that he has chosen to enclose it by constructing additional garage space. Ms. Dacy stated that two variances are necessary as double frontage lots have to meet a 35 foot setback from both the rear and front right-of-way and that a variance is also needed to increase the size of an accessory building. She stated that the Appeals Commission recommended denial of the variances as they felt the garage was too large and that the issue of the size of an accessory building should be reviewed. Ms. Dacy stated that another alternative is to vacate the right- of-way to the west of the property; however, the petitioner is concerned with the location of the gas main and whether he would have adequate area to expand. She stated that if Council approves the variances, staff is recommending a hard surface driveway to the proposed addition by September 1, 1992, for the petitioner to sign and record an agreement against the property which would allow him access to the property in perpetuity, and which releases the City from liability or incurring any costs should the improvements be disturbed due to maintenance of utilities within the right-of-way. Ms. Dacy stated that one other alternative is a curb cut from 57-1/2 Avenue, but this is not ideal since there is a steep hill there. Mr. Amborn, the petitioner, stated that the purpose of constructing the garage was to meet the City Code requirements and to also correct the water problems in the back of his garage. He stated that by e�cpanding into the right-of-way it would interfere with the gas main or be very close to it. He stated that the garage would be on the side and not in view from either street which enhances the looks from both north and south. Mr. Amborn stated that the garage is a little high to accommodate the recreational vehicle, however, it would be into the hillside by 3-1f2 feet and provide a standard view from the north side. Councilwoman Jorgenson asked Mr. Amborn if he considered having a double garage in front of the single garage and using the current driveway access. FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17, 1991 PAGE 9 Mr. Amborn stated that he has a patio at this location and has a drainage problem. Ms. Dacy stated that there is a limit ori the height of the garage which she believed was fourteen feet. Councilman Billings stated that the petitioner's proposal of expanding on the south side takes advantage of the four foot change in elevation of the property so from the north property line, the actual visible structure that would be seen is about ten feet high. On the south side, it is further back on the property. Mr. Amborn stated that the adjacent properties are a lot higher than fourteen feet. He stated that some split level homes are at least twenty feet in height. Councilman Billings stated that, all things considered, he felt this was the most logical place on the lot to construct the garage. He stated that a smaller structure could be constructed, but this would not allow him to store the recreational vehicle inside. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated she is concerned that if the street easement is vacated would Mr. Amborn have the necessary turning radius. Councilman Billings stated that he would prefer to table this item to July l, 1991 and have staff review the height issue. MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item to July l, 1991. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. C. VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #91-13 BY LEONARD VANASSE. TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A SIGN FROM 80 SQUARE FEET TO 101 S4UARE FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FREE-STANDING pyT,nN ST(:N �N T,(�T 3_ RTACK 1. MAR-LEN ADDITION. THE SAME BEING 57 - 81ST AVENUE N.E.: MOTION by Councilman Billings to concur with the recommendation of the Appeals Commission and grant Variance Request, VAR #91-13, with the stipulation that the subdivision process to split a portion of the parcel for Crouse Cartage Company shall be completed within two years; and if not, the signage shall be reduced to 80 square feet. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Mayor Nee felt that it would not be in the City's best interests to split this property and that the parcel should probably be kept in tact. Councilman Billings stated that if the parcel was not split in two years, ANR would be required to reduce the size of their sign. He FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JUNB 17. 1991 PAG$ 10 stated that he would be comfortable with authorizing the variance for a two-year period. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this is an unusual situation because what once was a one-owner building is now becoming a multi-tenant building. She stated that because ANR is reducing their facility they may lease more docks to other businesses. MOTION by Councilman Billings to amend the above motion by deleting the stipulation and substituting the followinq stipulation: "This variance shall apply until July 1, 1993 and, at such time, the variance shall be reviewed by the City Council and if not renewed, shall expire." Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE MAIN MOTION, Councilman Billings, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Fitzpatrick and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman Schneider voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried by a 4 to 1 vote. 7. APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO 1 FOR PHASE II - 3 MG CONCRETE RESERVOIR REPAIR PROJECT NO. 200: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to authorize Change Order No. 1 with Western Waterproofing, Inc. for Phase II of the 3 MG Concrete Reservoir Repair Project No. 200 for a deduction of $225.40. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 8. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD COATTRACT FOR COMPUTER HARDW SOFTWARE AND SERVICES: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive the following bids for Computer Hardware/Software: Company Computoservice, Inc. Infocel Modern Computer Systems Business Records Corporation Therefore Systems, Inc. Wang Laboratories, Inc. Systems Consultants, Inc. Total Bid $224,623 $248,124 $252,313 $264,580 $278,602 $314,609 $354,660 FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JiJNE 27. 1991 _ PAGS 11 Company Pentamation HTE, Inc. Total Bid $435,434 $484,125 Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that HTE, Inc. was the lowest, responsible bidder based on City staff's in-depth review. He requested that Council allow staff to negotiate a contract with HTE not to exceed an acquisition cost of $271,640. Councilman Schneider stated that from the bids received, a short list of four bidders was developed. He stated that in the electronics industry things change very rapidly. He stated that from the time the bidding process began, many bidders stated that they could change the configuration and reduce the cost. He questioned if there was a problem with having those companies on the short list modify their bids without looking at all the bidders modifying their bids. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated that in reviewing this situation it was quite complicated. He stated that what is included in this package is hardware, software, and maintenance. He stated that what the City is really looking for is a functioning system and not any one of those elements. He stated that Council has a degree of latitude or flexibility in determining which of the bidders is the lowest, responsible bidder taking into consideration all of those elements. Mr. Herrick stated that in discussing this with Mr. Pribyl, it is his understanding that five companies did not make the short list because they did not meet something in the specifications. He stated that a very elementary rule of bidding is that if you do not meet the specifications the bid cannot be accepted. Mr. Herrick stated the four companies that made the short list appeared to meet the specifications in terms of what was submitted at the time of the bidding. He stated that it is his understanding that the City had these four companies provide a demonstration and, based on the demonstration information, it was determined that two of those companies were deficient for one reason or another, leaving two companies to be considered. He stated during that period of time, things changed in the electronics industry and the two companies that met the specifications indicated that they would be able to supply the same hardware for substantially less than they had bid. He stated that he had questioned if all four finalists were given the same opportunity to adjust their price and understands this was the case. FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17. 1991 PAGE 12 Mr. Herrick stated that Mr. Pribyl discussed this situation with the State Auditor's Office and, based on the circumstances and information contained in his memo, it is his opinion that if Council makes the finding that HTE is the lowest, responsible bidder for the hardware, software, and services it would supply, he would be comfortable with the process. He stated that his opinion is based on the fact that all four companies on the short list had the same opportunity as HTE. He stated that he believed HTE and the second position vendor submitted modified prices. Mr. Pribyl stated that Mr. Herrick's comment was correct. He stated that in the final process the selection was narrowed down to three companies, and two of the three used the same type of hardware. Mr. Pribyl stated that he would like the authorization to negotiate a contract with HTE and have the contract reviewed by the City Attorney. He stated that if they cannot negotiate a contract, staff would come back to Council for further direction. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to find HTE, Inc. the lowest, responsible bidder and allow staff to enter into a contract with HTE subject to appropriate contract terms and review by the City Attorney at a cost not to exceed $271,640. Further, if staff cannot successfully negotiate a contract with HTE, that this item will come back to Council. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Councilman Billings stated he is concerned that another bidder is considering the possibility of litigation and wondered if the Council should reject all the bids and direct staff to negotiate a contract on a professional service basis. He stated that if this goes into litigation there would be costs involved whether or not the City would be successful or unsuccessful. Mr. Pribyl stated that he discussed this issue with the City Attorney and State Auditor's Office and felt that the rationale used ta eliminate a number of vendors can be supported. He stated that if the bids are rejected, the City could enter the market on a professional service basis, but he felt comfortable that specifications were not met in the bids that were not considered. Mr. Herrick stated that there are some pluses and minuses with either rejecting all the bids or negotiating a contract on a professional service basis. He stated that if a contract was negotiated on a professional service basis, it could also be open to litigation. He stated that if Council proceeds as suggested by staff, and if there is litigation, he may come back to Council and suggest a professional service contract. He stated that they are not anticipating any litigation. Mayor Nee stated that the suggestion to negotiate a contract is far removed from the bid. He stated that he does not have a problem ■ FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17, 1991 PAGE 13 with that other than it appears they are negotiating with the highest bidder. Mr. Pribyl stated that he was uncomfortable with the entire bidding process. He stated that in the analysis and demonstration they can specifically state reasons why the vendors did not qualify and adhere to the specifications. Mr. Herrick stated that this certainly is not the average bidding situation in the sense it is different than what is normally done. He stated that the difference in price between the original bid and what is offered is in excess of $200, 000, and he does not think anyone would object to saving over $200,000. Mayor Nee stated that it depends on how the savings was reached. He stated that it is a matter of ethics that one company's bid is not used to influence another company. Mr. Herrick stated he has been assured that this has not happened. He stated that Council, however, could proceed along the lines of Councilman Billings' suggestion to award a professional service contract. Mr. Pribyl stated that in looking at longevity on the system part of the responsibility is to make sure the City is not put into the situation as it exists today. He stated that the process of evaluating the vendors is difficult but felt it was defensible. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 50-1991 RE4UESTING THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS TO CONDUCT A STUDY FOR THE FEASIBILITY OF A FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT ON THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt Resolution No. 50-1991. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 10. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that there were no informal status reports. 11. CLAIMS• MOTION by Councilman Schneider to authorize payment of Claims No. 37901 through 38130. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. FRIDLEY CITY COtJNCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17. 1991 PAGB 14 12. LICENSES• MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to approve the licenses as submitted and as on file in the License Clerk's Office. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 13. ESTIMATES• MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the estimates as submitted: A & K Construction, Inc. 9038 ilOth Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Well No. 12 & Booster Station Improvement Project No. 216 FINAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12, 826. 00 Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered 301 Fridley Plaza Office Building 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney for the Month of May, 1991. ....$ 9,105.75 Chemlawn Services Corp. 1156 East Highway 36 Maplewood, MN 55109 Corridor Maintenance Project No. 217 Estimate No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3, 686.98 HNTB 6700 France Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55435 Inspection of the 1.5 MG Elevated Water Reservoir Project No. 202 Partial Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,842.85 W. B. Miller, Inc. 16765 Nutria Street Ramsey, MN 55303 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2 Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6, 899. 50 FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 17, 1991 PAGB 15 Pitt-Des Moines, Inc. 1015 Tuttle Street Des Moines, IA 50309 Construction of Water Reservoir Partial Estimate the 1.5 MG Elevated Project No. 201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . $77, 235. 43 Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 14. RECONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #89-08, 7570 HIGHWAY 65 N.E. (APPROVED AT JUNE 3, 1991 COUNCIL MEETING)• Councilman Schneider stated new information has come to the Council's attention which could have a significant influence on the special use permit. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to reconsider approval of Special Use Permit, SP #89-08. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee decZared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to table discussion on Special Use Permit, SP #89-OS to the July 1, 1991 Council meeting. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 15. SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to set the public hearing for the establishment of a tax increment financing district for July 1, 1991. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT• MOTION by Councilman BiZlings to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Regular Meetinq of the Fridley City Council of June 17, 1991 adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Garole Haddad Secretary to the City Council Approved: William J. Nee Mayor � � -- � Community Development Department G DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: June,�28, 1991 ,� �. TO: William Burns, City Manager �� . FROM: SUBJECT: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Public Hearing Considering Modification to the City's Redevelopment Plan and Creation of Tax Increment District #11 The City Council at the June 17, 1991 meeting established a public hearing to consider the addition of the former Cub Foods site and the Bob's Produce properties into the redevelopment area, and to create a tax increment district over both parcels. State statute also requires the City Council to pass a resolution if the City Council is to authorize these modifications. Approval of the resolution is scheduled later in the agenda. The district will be a 25 year redevelopment district. The attached memorandum from Jim Casserly and Mary Molzahn describes the cash flow analysis for the district, and another memo describes the advantages of having both properties in one district. Former Cub Foods Site Proposal The Charles Smith estate owns the former Cub Foods property and has retained Mike Hurley as its attorney and Bob Grootwassinck as its broker to coordinate the remodeling of the existing building into three retail tenant spaces. The owners have a signed lease from Pet Food Warehouse for an August 1, 1991 occupancy. They have also indicated that they may have another lease with Stone Fabric for a second tenant space. The petitioners have identified hard costs in the amount of $480,000 to improve the interior of the building and to make outdoor improvements. Interior improvements include the roof repair, removal of asbestos-backed floor tiles, finishing the tenant spaces, improving the HVAC system, lighting, and other necessary work. Exterior improvements will include seal coating the parking lot, re-striping, installation of landscaping, and removal and replacement of the outdoor lights. Bob's Produce Proposal We have obtained preliminary information from Bob Schroer to redevelop his property. Schroer has indicated that he wants to construct a 23,000 square foot building to sell his produce as the 1 Redevelopment Plan/TIF �11 June 28, 1991 Page 2 first phase. For the second phase, a 12,000 square foot building would be constructed where the Malmborg's Garden Center is now located. "But-For" Test Redevelopment of the two subject properties will increase the taxable value of the properties and will bring existing sub- standard and blighted buildings into conformance with the building codes. Both properties are declining in value already. Redevelopment will also improve the appearance of the area. Finally, redevelopment of the properties will provide for additional employment opportunities. Pet Food Warehouse has indicated that they will provide 30 full and part time employment positions. Bob Schroer has indicated that his employment positions could increase from 20 full time and 50 part time to 40 full time and 100 part time persons. HRA Action On June 27, 1991, the HRA approved a resolution to modify the redevelopment plan and create Tax Increment District #11. The HRA also approved two potential forms of assistance for redevelopment of the former Cub Foods site. The first option was the petitioner's original proposal of a$15,000 grant and a$50,000 second mortgage. The second option is a"pay as you go" ogtion where the $65,000 request for assistance is included in the Northeast State Bank first mortgage; however, the HRA would either pay up to a cap of $65,000 as we receive the increments, or we stop giving back the increment after seven tax payable years. The HRA stated that they preferred the "pay as you go" option; however, if the loan committee for Northeast State Bank could not approve this proposal, the HRA agreed with the original option of a grant and mortgage combination. The HRA did require that the mortgage needed to be personally guaranteed. The HRA authorized staff and Jim Casserly to prepare a development contract for approval. Recommendation The City Council should conduct the public hearing as established. Mike Hurley, representing the property owner of the former Cub Foods site, will also be present to address the City Council's questions. Staff recommends the City Council approve the resolution scheduled later in the agenda. It should be noted that the City Council could decertify either of the parcels from the district once we recover the amount of assistance, or if no activity has occurred within five years. M-91-476 1A Ca.sserly Molzahn & Associates, Inc. 215 South 11 th Street, Suite 200 • Minneapolis • Minnesota 55403 Office (612) 342-2277 • Fax (612) 332-4765 , M E M O R A N D U M TO: City of Fridley W' liam Burns arbara Dacy FROM : Mary E. Mol z ahn ►�� James R. Casserly n,� y DATE: June 3, 1991 RE: TIF District No. 11 Enclosed please find a cash flow analysis for proposed redevelopment TIF District #11. This analysis, which includes the Cub Foods and Bob's Produce sites, will be inserted into the TIF Plan for TIF District No. 11. It was prepared by combining the individual analyses, prepared previously, for each site. The assumptions, which are detailed on Page 3, include: 1, inflation of 0.000$; 2, current tax capacity rate of 101.508; 3, administrative expenses of 5.000$; 4, taxable present value rate of 10.000� applied to the total available revenue; 5. tax exempt present value rate of 8.000$ applied to the local government aid deduction; and 6. pay 1991 tax capacities per Anoka County. Additional assumptions include: 1. Cub Foods Site The estimated tax capacity of $9,200 is based on an additional estimated captured market value of $200,000. : Construction is assumed in 1991 with the first tax increment received in 1993. It is proposed that the Developer will repay the City $35,000 of the $50,000 assistance at 9.000� over a term of 10 years. Annual payments approximate $5,454. 2. Bob's Produce Site The estimated tax capacity of $65,688 is based on two phases. The Phase I estimated tax capacity of $42,688 assumes estimated construction costs of $1,160,000 and an estimated market value of $928,000. Construction is assumed in 1991 with the first tax increment received in 1993. The Phase II estimated tax capacity of $23,000 assumes estimated construction costs of $625,000 and an estimated market value of $500,000. Construction is assumed in 1994 with the first tax increment received in 1996. Based on the above assumptions, $1,356,373 is generated in available tax increments, after administrative expenses are deducted, plus $54,537 in developer repayments for total estimated revenue of $1,410,910. This revenue stream translates into $465,414 in 1991 dollars based on a taxable present value rate. The total local government aid deduction for both projects is approximately $258,000. This amount translates into $63,128 in 1991 dollars based on a tax exempt present value rate. Also enclosed is a separate cash flow analysis of the Cub Food Site. The differences between this analysis and previous one is a higher interest rate on the City's loan and a reduced class rate to reflect recent Statutory changes. The $50,000 HR.A investment will be recovered in approximately six years between loan repayments and tax increment receipts. If you have any questions, please give a call. MEM,JRC/db encls 1C � a a Q N w z z f } w J 0 K LL O F- U N �--i W Yi- �-�+ W o � � 5 � C � Q J Q m Q Q � Q ZZ � Z N N Q v a W m N v a � � W J � � W � J � ~ Z' � a Z 5 g v � W � � W � J W ^ !— J 2 U 2 Z 2a v (n > Q J 41 Q E Q a vWi m J W J mQ � "� F J W v � Q W Q � • a z M � O � v a > a o w � J Z mQ x £ v ►-� f- K Q � I N w i �n. z w ►~-� i C�'3 N � N N 1 v J� 6W. W 1 X � I W I � I a 1 W X W N i � � Q w 00 I v F- ~ U $ i N z i w .. � � w i H i H � � � g i � aQ� nQ t� � V C) m i � i � o � � O F Q U � i `� = ~ aQ N i w U �. i G 1 i !- i U Z ¢ U F- 1 v C7 F Q z i .. a � i o c.� o i 0 i m Q � 1 0 1 W 1 � I 1 � {i C � I v � W a i s� >- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o M N v ao v r�n +n M��n �o a n � � IA �O � N 1� m �!f 1A O uY eh N �O t�t n d � � O N at m N P N O� M O CO t0 � N M� 1A �D P 01 O N M� n� N N O O O O O O O O O O O O e{ O+ O� N� t0 �'�f tD N � �!1 h M N d a M W iD O CA cf t0 O� v1 V� t� h O at 1� M Ih 1� 10 O� O� N e! If1 d�O �O n 1� CD 1� � � � � � � � � � � � � O O O O O O O O O O O O et d N N�a�e� v1 �A 1� n tCpp S � a N N t0 lD N N CO CD Q V O O�D ��[7 01 01 1[1 1A .- � e- � N N M fh Ih P7 V <� d �!1 N O O 1� f� t0 Q� �''') O O N M M CO p V+ 1� 1"1 N� �ef �� t0 C� f� �D O� N CO O� ��lf � f7 �A � � P �D C+ O� O 10 1h 1� CO ��O �D C� O� t0 1� tC O� /� O V �f1 N �A a� p O� N O O t0 1� � t�1 CO tD O� � 1� CO O� �� N M M ln � t0 f� f7 � f� O� �� t0 CA V� N a� r- N N N N N N N� f'�) 1h f�I �[�I fh M th O O 1� O O M O� O u1 I� Q N O� O u'1 �� O�� O� Vl O� 1� O� N� � 1� O M CO N� u� Q� N f7 tD O+ O�D n 1� 10 O� f� O N N� t0 �A N M n7 CQ 1�'1 Q1 O c0 P') O� a � Qi N 1� O t0 O t0 Q� V1 f� eh IA N d N O Q1 O+ � CO � f� 1� t0 N � N r N � N � r � � � r- � � � �.- 0 0� o c� ao c� m c� m v v a a a a f� 1� f� f� N t� N 1� N 1� N n N I"� N N N N N N N N N v a o v o v o � n n n n n n n n r n n n r� �!I p u'1 �Il p V1 CO c� � a CO fD m a � m CO W� W� W CA t7 N� N M N� N M N t� N� N� N�"i N N N N N N N N N �v a �v a a a �v a a a �Il tA N �(1 �A �A �A �A 1A N O O O O CO m �� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 � n r� n � n n n n n n n � n n n r. r n n in �n uf u� u'f �n c0 �D a0 aD a0 aD fD t0 CO c0 CO aD aD aD a0 cD CO CD GD c0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O 1� f� i� 1� I� I� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N �n M rn e+1 cn �+I �n in in �n u� in �n in in in u� u� u�-y u� uf �n in u� in in O O O O fN7 ch M c7 fh f�1 M fN7 f�l C�N') c'N7 ('�7 f� r�n PN'I f�N') � f'�N') M fN M PN'! � M M M M f7 M M fh M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N i0 i0 iD t0 tO i0 O� O O O� O O O e"� � e�I � t'� � M� t� M c+f r�'f N N N N N N M Nl f7 c7 f� f�1 t7 0 0 0 0 �o �o �o �o w �o � �o �o �o �o �o �n �o �o �o �o �o �v �o � � � � u�i `�i vi �i `�i v�i `�i u� v�i `�i v�i u�i `�i `�i `�i u�i u�i N `�i u�i in �n u� in in in u°ii u�'i uQ'i u°'i u°ii u�'i vai u°'i v�'i u°'i v�i u°'i � u�'i v�'i u�i � u�i v°'i u�'i u� ui �n M c�'y cn �� 'I M N N N N N N O O O O O O q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 01 O� G� O� O� O� �D �O b t0 �C �D �O t0 �O � t0 �O �O �O �D t0 10 tD t0 �O 10 �G O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N .- � .- � .- � '- � r- .- '- � r- �- '- .- .- � .- .- .- .- r- � .- � � � us �n u'� uf uf cn �n �n rn u� cn cn ui u� �n u'� �n �n �n �n �n �n �n u� v� �n in �n v� �n fh M C7 cn M e'7 f'7 f'7 fh fh M e'7 f7 M 1'7 t7 NI t7 ni e+l M 1'�f t7 f7 M/�f fh fh fh fn O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � n n n n n n n n n n r n n n n n n n r r� � � n n n n n r � . � W CO C+ O+ O O tV N rf eh a d Vf uf C� O� CN+ O�i O�i O�i �� a O�i � O�+ a Oni O� T d� O� O O O o O o O O O O O O O� V� O+ O+ O� O� O+ O� O+ O� O+ O+ O+ O� O+ O+ O+ O+ O O O O O O O O O O O O r- e- r- � r ��-- � e- � f- ��- � e- � e- '- N N<V N N N N N N N N N \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t0 N t0 N t0 N 1p N�G N �O N �D N lD N t0 N�D N�D N t0 N t0 N t0 N 1D N r � �- � r- r- '- � � r � � �- � � O �A O �t1 O M O �A O � O N O 1A d M O M O� O 1A O� O� O �A O O. '- r N N f'y f7 a� ��O �O 1� f� CO W Q� O+ O O N N/'7 M� a r � � �'- � r � r e- o� � � � M 0 h F Q .,. � etl i � Y J � W V LL H N W a a Ho w 2 f Y w J O K LL O � v i � i N > 1 Y !- � W i � Q � J J I G � Q t � C m 1 J �-+ 1 Q Q � � J I 1�- F- � � I y N N Z i a � m � h � a �v (� J � M W N N �-�+ W ��ZSg � � � w a � J W > ms{ Q i. � �-J. Z � � vWi > � g w a � � a <n �. Q °° � v p Q �j Q � /� {A Q x v � ; � o � W F- m � � g�� d � Q .Z-� �l.� � 1�1 � � fn 1 v W 1 � ' 1 4 � N 1 � � I v � i \ 1 W I F- I , H 1 N � � I � 8 I W I � � 1 � 1 � I 1 1 1 1 1 � H � O F- I M 1 C I 1 la. 1 �+ 1 ~ 1 V i � w i �� 1 O i O 1 [D w i .. � i � C 1 Rp , 1 1 a � v (�% Mg (�i W a W J Q d X W W 2 � � � �N Z W �-+ G � �( ..� 1- Q Q V F CJ � W h � � � h �W J Y Q �r z � ~ aa O CJ W a 0 N O `Q �I! Y I 1 1 I t i 1 �f1 �'f N� O Oai � 1� �D t�A V� N O CO � i(1 N O n a N N N N M tN�1 M t'7 th f'�7 cf aT a� et �A N� Vl �� t0 t0 � N N 1NA a t�0 st 1� � M Oi �A O� N I�A � N 1A n O N b CD m O+ CD O+ CD O+ tD O+ � O+ � CO fA CO '- �� r .- .- 1� � rn r n �p o o a a m ao r> � r n �n in ��1A 1n f� f� W O O N N d e� tA IA f� 1� �� 1� f� f`') 1h O� �D b N N fD m ei a O O�D 1D N N �O �D �O �D f� f� f� 1� � CO O� O� O� O� O O r�� N N N f7 �O N th �o in n O�1 11 11 r 11 � II N 11 Ii 11 u d N O O 1� � f"1 tD f`� t� f� N N �D fn O� d M d� CD et 1 � � a f� f� V t0 �D V N �- N'1 O+ W M 1h O� N N 1 N�n �n cn n rn rn �n � v�n a ��n rn � c� .- ao �n o a i v ��°v °v a v a v v v a�� v a a v a v i v �D t7 O O�7 N O+ 1� R N C� P� f'7 Q�i O� n t�0 �A e'7 � a d N N��D O 1n N O� CQ a� tO �O t0 N 1A 1A O ct c v a fh P') f7 M fh f7 N N N N N 1 �(1 � �o i v � � i � i N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1� � n r� n r n r n n n n n r n n n n n n n n n i o, ta ao co co tA aD tA m oo ao to co ao tn co aD co m W co co co i o N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1 1 � 1 1 � 1 I 1 n I M 1 � 1 1 � N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n n r � n n r r� 1� 1� r� n r n n n n n r n n n m�m��m��m��m�m�� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � r r- � � r r r � r r r'- .- r r r � � � r e- � N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ch e'7 th M t+l 1'7 t'7 r7 M M f7 t7 f+l f7 fh M t7 fh fh fh f7 fh N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N p p 0 0 0 0 0�gi cgi c9i � r°n °m �° c4i eQi °M c°n c°+� �i c°� f'7 � M f7 f7 f7 f`') M ttpD t�Dp ��Dp t0 {tQQ t�0p ��Dp t0 i�0p t0 i�0p t�0p i�Dp t0 ��Gp t�Dp ��pD �D i�0p tD �O �D IA IA 1A t�A 1!1 u'l IA � In U�i {A ln Ifl l�A lA IA N l�A Il) I�A I�A 1�A . � . . . . . . � . . . . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' N � N N � N N � � N N � � N � � � � � N � � e� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O tD �D �O t0 �O t0 �D �G t� t0 �D � t0 tD �O �O tD tD �G �D �O �G O� O� O� O� O� O1 O� O� C� O+ O� Oi O� O� T O� O� 01 O� 01 01 O� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N � � � �.- .- � � r- � r �.- � �.- .- r- .-- � � � lA I!1 IA V1 If1 In IA IA IA 1A I!'/ IA lA 1A Ifl IA If/ lA If1 1A V1 1[1 M 1'7 f7 t7 R! f7 f�'/ t7 f7 f7 Nl f7 f7 M t7 f7 fh f�1 P/) t7 fh 1'7 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O G O 0 0 0 0 0^ n^ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t0 tD 1� 1� �� O� pf O O r � N N f�7 c'7 � a UY IA tD �O O O O O p O r-� e� �.� .- .- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N� N N ` � � � � � � � ` � � � � � ` � � � � � � � �D N t0 N lp N�D N�O N t0 N lD N�O N�D N tD N t0 N 1 O �A O U1 O �[1 O �Lf O �(1 O tt1 O 1n O�A O tn O �A i � 1!f t0 �O f� t� m� O�� O � � N N M M V d t�1 tA 1 e- r r � r � �.- N N N N N N N N N N N 1 n n � u �� M u n n u n � 11 �� . 11 11 n 11 �D n � N � O� C � � i 0 ti w Q � 4 � J � N � LL. F�- � W a a a t- � w z Z } W O � � O � U � o° °o o° o° � o° o° o° o° � �D O N O O�D N O O O � N� b� a N �� N � � r o-.i � w� rn rn rn a rn m rn rn rn rn � � a > ¢ a � � � � f- � � X w y �� 4 � J F O H � F � w � � w � � w � n aQ w i c � � � ►- � m � �5 � � � � m w C� c� � m w"� F- a U w f- �Z > H a U w`� � y ►+ � a > aa � w aa � > aa � w n � w °w �i w a � � � r � w � � .. � � c� W � � �� s a' � a �� N Y Q N W W �� Y Q y W W gWW�� m��$a� ��a� � � U � N �m N � a M M M � O M M O� � � � a � G O� f�I J E � �+ � N � O > �o O O O G C� m ?� F . � O �b n c'7 N 1-a- � N O� t00 O O � � b � � .�. .� Y Y ZJ JZ O O � � � m v v � � � � �/1 N N N m m m m m a�� v v v v v N N � � N O O O O O O O O O O N N N N Ih N N N N f7 v v v v v N N N N N O O O O O c� M M ch c�'f I I I � I r �-- r r p OO � O O O O O O � O m � W W W H H �� h � } � W 7 'Z > � J O Q X a a W a w W N ~ � Z m Q J ? � � � J � 1F O O � O N � ch N � 8 � m � 2 W Q W G.' Z FW- Q d O J c Q F- w a w � O � w � > a � C a � c � � M 0 N W N a .. � etl 2 � � J � NW NQ U � Casserly Molzahn & Associates, Inc. 215 South 11 th Street, Suite 200 • Minneapolis • Minnesota 55403 Office (612) 342-2277 • Fax (612) 332-4765 M E M O R A N D U M TO: WILLIAM BURNS BARBARA DACY FROM: MARY MOLZAHN JAMES CASSERLY RE: CREATION OF NEW TIF DISTRICT DATE: APRIL 25, 1991 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Consideration is again being given to whether (1) a TIF District should be created to include the Cub Food site, (2) a TIF District should be created to include the Cub Food site and the Bob's Produce site or (3) two separate TIF Districts should be created. After an initial analysis of the two sites in question, the following conclusions have been made: 1, The Cub Food site qualifies independently as a 25 year Redevelopment TIF District. 2. The Bob's Produce site qualifies independently as a 15 year Renewal and Renovation TIF District; it is unclear whether it qualifies individually as Redevelopment. 3. Together the Cub Food site and Bob's Produce site qualify as a 25 year Redevelopment TIF District. The attached summarizes the advantages and disadvantages for creating a single TIF District encompassing the Cub Food and Bob's Produce sites versus creating two individual TIF Districts. 1G SINGLE TIF DISTRICT - ADVANTAGES 1. It is simpler in terms of time, energy and expense to create a single TIF District: one modification to the Redevelopment Plan, one Tax Increment Financing Plan and one public hearing is required. 2. The City avoids future Legislative restrictions imposed on the creation of TIF.Districts or the use of tax increments. 3. The pooling restrictions require 75� of the revenue derived from tax increments to be spent within the TIF District in which they were generated. In a single TIF District, the pooling problem is eliminated. 4. Both sites would have a 25 year term in which to maximize tax increment receipts. 5. The Local Government Aids deduction would be reduced. A Redevelopment TIF District phases in the LGA deductions at a reduced rate. The Renewal and Renovation District has a 100� phase in of LGA deductions by year 13 versus year 20 for the Redevelopment District. SINGLE TIF DISTRICT - DISADVANTAGES 1. If redevelopment of the Bob's Produce site does not occur within the next several years, the tax increment revenue may be limited. It may make sense to create a separate TIF District when the redevelopment is imminent. 2. The Five Year Limitation requires that all revenues generated within a TTF District be paid to a third party, pledged to bonds, pledged to binding third party contracts, or used for reimbursement of costs paid within five years of the TIF District's certification. If the redevelopment activity occurs after five years, the tax increment generated after the fifth year must be returned to the taxing jurisdictions. SEPARATE TIF DISTRICTS - ADVANTAGES 1. Tax increment revenues can be maximized if TIF Districts are created as projects are proposed. 2. The Five Year Limitation is easier to comply with because the redevelopment activities of each TIF District are treated individually. 1H MULTIPLE TIF DISTRICTS - DISADVAN'PAGES 1. A modification of the Development Program, the preparation of a tax increment financing plan and the holding of a public hearing is required for each TIF District created. 2. The City is at risk in terms of Legislative amendments to the Tax Increment Financing Act. 3. Under the pooling restrictions only 25� of the tax increment generated is available for use in other TIF Districts. If pooling is necessary, the amount of tax increment which may be spent in a different TIF District is greatly limited. 4. The Bob's Produce site will probably be limited to a 15 year district with the resulting increase in LGA deductions and a substantial decrease in available increment. RECOMMENDATION Based on the advantages listed above for a single TIF District, it is our recommendation that the City consider the creation of a 25 year Redevelopment TIF District including both the Cub Food and Bob's Produce sites. If redevelopment activity does not proceed on the Bob's Produce site within the next few years, the three parcels included in this site may be decertified from the TIF District. By decertifying these parcels in the fourth year following the TIF District's certification, the restrictions and penalties imposed under the Five Year Limitation can be avoided. These parcels may then be included in a separate TIF District when development activity becomes imminent. There are no district and redevelopment MEM,JRC/db negative legal consequences in creating a single it will allow the HRA to better manage the of the Bob's produce site if it so chooses. 1� Public Trails/Recreational Improvements/Open Space Parking Street Lighting Demolition Relocation Architectural/Engineering Fees Administration Fees Total Maximum Estimated Total Bonded Indebtedness* 325,000 450,000 200,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 400.000 $11,078,000 $14,401,400 *This amount includes capitalized interest in an amount sufficient to pay interest on the bonds from the date of issue until the date of collection of sufficient tax increment revenues to meet scheduled interest payments when due. AS MODIFIED FEBRUARY 26, 1990 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 10 (NORTHCO PHASE III) Soils Correction Administration Fees Intersection Improvements Frontage Road and 73rd Total to University Avenue Avenue Maximum Total Estimated Bonded Indebtedness* $ 70,000 4,967 20.000 $ 94,967 $ 94,967 *This amount includes capitalized interest in an amount sufFici�nt to pay interest on the bonds from the date of issue until the date of collection of sufficient tax increment revenues to meet scheduled interest payments when due. AS MODIFIED JULY 1, 1991 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 11 (UNIVERSITY/OSBORNE SITE) Acquisition Demo�ition Site Cleanup/Preparation and Utility Relocation Street Modification Ingress/Egress 1 - 16 1J $ 200,000 40,000 200,000 60,000 Professional Fees Administrative Fees Total Maximum Estimated Total Bonded Indebtedness* 15,000 72,000 $ 587,000 $ 737, 000 *This amount includes capitalized interest in an amount � sufficient to pay interest on the bonds from the date of issue until the date of collection of sufficient tax increment revenues to meet scheduled interest payments when due. Subsection 1.10. Public Imorovements and Facilities Within Redevelopment Proiect No 1 Publicly financed improvements within Redevelopmen� Project No. 1 include but are not limited to: a. The acquisition and sale and/or lease of the parcels identified in Subsection 1.7, hereof; b. Soil corrections, including excavation and backfill; c. Installation and/or upgrading of utilities and other public improvements; d. Development of proper traffic circulation patterns and improved ingress and egress on public and private roadways; e. f. Funding of the Reserve Program; and Other authorized uses as provided by State law. (The following amendment of Subsection 1.10 to the Modified Redevelopment Plan was approved November 18, 1985.) Additional public improvement costs to be incurred within Redevelopment Project No. 1 and to be financed by tax increments derived from all tax increment financing districts within Redevelopment Project No. 1 are estimated to be: Land Acquisition Streets, Intersections, Walkways and Lighting Parking Facilities Soil Correction, Drainage and Landscaping 1 - 17 1K $3,500,000 4,100,000 1,500,000 2,300,000 SECTION XII TAX iNCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 11 , (UNIVERSITY/OSBORNE) Subsection 12.1. Statement of Obiectives. See Section I, Subsection 1.5. Statement of Objectives. Subsection 12.2. Modified Redevelopment Plan. See Section I, Subsections 1.2, through i.15. Subsection 12.3. Parcels to be Included. The boundaries of Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 are described on the attached Exhibit XII-A and illustrated on Exhibit XZI-B. Subsection 12.4. Parcels in AcQUisition. The Authority may publicly acquire and reconvey any or all of the parcels in Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 identified on the attached Exhibit XII-A. The following are conditions under which properties not designated to be acquired may be acquired at a future date: (1) The City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of the Tax Increment Financing Plan; and (2) Such acquisition will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 12.5. Development Activitv for which Contracts have been Signed. As of the date of adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan, the City intends to enter into a Development Agreement with an investment group incuding the following: Steven Hardy, Leanne Hardy, Kent Gardner, Jerrill Lynn Gardner, Kent Smith and Spring Smith, for the rehabilitation and expansion of an existing facility to provide 34,200 square feet of commercial space with a total construction cost estimated at $400,000, and anticipated construction completion in 1991. Subsection 12.6. Specific Development ExAected to Occur. At this time it is anticipated that a facility providing 34,200 square feet of commercial space will be rehabilitated and constructed. Additional commercial development is also anticipated and is expected to include an additional 35,000 square feet with construction costs in excess of $1,700,000. 12 - 1 1L Subsection 12.7. Prior Planned Improvements. The Authority shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of district enlargement with a listing of all properties within Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen {�g) months immediately preceding approval of the Tax Increment Financing Plan by the Authority. The county Auditor shall increase the original tax capacity of Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 by the tax capacity of each improvement for which the building permit was issued. If said listing does not accompany the aforementioned request or notice, the absence of such listing shall indicate to the County Auditor that no building permits were issued in the eighteen (18) months prior to the Authority's approval of the Tax Increment Financing Plan. Subsection 12.8. Fiscal Disparities. The Authority hereby elects the method of tax increment computation set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 3, clause (a) if and when commercial/industrial development occurs with Tax Increment Financing District No. 11. Subsection 12.9. Estimated Public ImArovement Costs. The estimated costs associated with Redevelopment Project No. 1 are listEd in Section I, Subsections 1.9 and 1.10. Subsection 12.10. Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness. It is anticipated that $500,000 of bonded indebtedness could be incurred with respect to this portion of Redevelopment Project No. 1. The City also wishes to reserve the right to pay for all or part of the activities listed in Section I, Subsections 1.9. and 1.10. as modified July 1, 1991 relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 as tax increments are generated and become available. Subsection 12.11. Sources of Revenue. The costs outlined in Section I, Subsection 1.9. will be financed through the annual collection of tax increments. Subsection 12.12. Estimated OriQinal and Captured Tax Capacities. The tax capacity of all taxable property in Tax Zncrement Financing District No. 11, as most recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue of the State of Minnesota on January 2, 1991, is estimated to be $70,035. 12 - 2 1M The estimated captured tax capacity of Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 upon completion of the proposed improvements on January 2, 1995 is estimated to be $129,601. Subsection 12.13. Tax Capacitv Rate. The current total tax capacity rate is 101.508. Subsection 12.14. Tax Increment. Tax increment has been calculated at approximately $60,464 upon completion of the improvements assuming a static tax capacity rate and a valuation increase of zero percent (0.0$) compounded annually. Subsection 12.15. Tvpe of Tax Increment FinancinQ District. Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 is, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 12, a Redevelopment District. Subsection 12.�6. Duration of Tax Increment FinancinQ District. The duration of Tax Zncrement Financing District No. 11 is expected to be twenty-five (25) years from receipt of the first tax increment. The date of receipt of the first tax increment is estimated to be July, 1993. Thus, it is estimated that Tax Increment Financing District No. 11, including any modifications for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate in the year 2018. Subsection 12.17, Estimated ImAact on Other Taxina Jurisdictions. The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes construction would have occurred without the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 11. If the construction is a result of tax increment financing, the impact is $0 to other entities. Notwithstanding the fact that the fiscal impact on the other taxing jurisdictions is $0 due to the fact that the financing would not have occurred without the assistance of the City, the attached Exhibit XII-E reflects the estimated impact of Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 if the "but for" test was not met. Subsection 12.18. Modification of Tax Increment Financinq District and or Tax Increment Financinq Plan. As of July 1, 1991, no modifications to Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 or the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefore has been made, said date being the date of initial approval and adoption thereof by the City Council. 12 - 3 1N EXHiBIT XII-A BOUNDARIES OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 11 UNIVERSITY/OSBORNE AS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED JULY 1, 1991 P.I.N. 11-30-24-22-0024 11-30-24-22-0020 11-30-24-22-0018 02-30-24-33-0026 XII-A-1 10 W � Q a h w rr M Y W H U ��gz `� w � � a � J W Q J J > CaO Q ^ Z J � U v W Q � � d N i I I � 1 � I 7 H Q 1 v U tA � i I y+ ' H �-1 z � H � z ' x � i i � � H w i `� r+ 3 0 ; 00 O � � ,'K," � O I � W r�i � 1 v � � i U � U i i 1 1 i v w i F- 1 1 (I) 1 � � v Z 1 �1 i � I z' , , �,� h I v K I W I > � �. t � i I 1 I 1 N I �v � i � i C 1 1 �-+ I 1- I v z � w i �� o; J 1 W 1 mv a i i O I N I � 1 O I Q lY I v a i w 4 � 2 � Q W a � • a z � o � a > ¢ w a o � J Z 5�W ►r H d' a � N Z W � � w J Q X w c � H y( W � Q W � H �U N Z W r-1 � 1 � Y 1 � �; � � U � dQ' F�-� GQQ. I C.) U I � � � � ¢ U i � ~ a i N Q 1 W U i 1 I 1 � F U i .-� aQ � O U i , � I W 1 � f i 1 1 1 N 1 O Q 1 � } j O O f� f� �D O� m fh O O CV � f�7 f� CD � d O O Of I� � f�'1 d N� m �T � � M tD O� f� �O O� N CO O� � tD �A 1+1 M�A � O� 1� �D 01 �b O� Of O t0 t7 1� � CO t0 �D O� � Qi t0 r tn f� t0 O� 1� '- O et In N �A �A �l � f7 � n O�i � N�� W Q�i � N Q N eh t0 tD tD tD uf M � O� t0 (�'f � f� CO � O N M a �A � ip n r.- r- � � r N N N N N N N� C�1 � tn f'� (h (n tn � O O l� O O(h 01 O N n� N lT O �!1 t0 O l0 O� @ tn f� fh tp � et f� O M CO N N O� N('7 �O u1 lh O t� O in O 1� O� (V f� C� O t0 f� f� �O e- O� 1� O N N m�O �A N f'7 M CO � Qf � O�O t7 C� V N O1 N f� N t0 N t0 O� In l� fh ^ N�? � N O O� O1 �� CO f� f� tC 0 0� o cv w c� ao cv co v v a v a � v � f� 1� r r N n N f� N 1� N 1� N f� N N N N N N N N N �Y � O st O � O r f� r h � f� .- (� � f� '- f� f� 1� f� I� n 1� f� f� � �''') N� N f�l N� N� N� N f�"1 N� N f� N N N N N N N N N � � � � a a Q a a � vi ui ui vi us ui ui vi us vi O O O O W CO CD c0 (p m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N fV N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 o r� � r� r� n r n r� n � r. � � n n r� n n r� n �n v� �A �n u� �n CD c0 N aD tD aD aD c0 CD tD aD CD aD aD CO CD cD CO CD c0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O f� 1� 1� f� I� f� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N f7 fh M fh f7 M �!1 !A 1A lA IA �A lA �A 11'1 IA 1(1 IA �A !A 1A In IA IA �A 1A .- �.- .- � �.- � �'- � �.- � � �'- �- �.- .- � r- .- � � O O O O�A 1A N 1A IA lA N N N N N N N N N N N�� M�� tV ��N fn f7 M c7 fh M fh M (+) M c'7 lh M f+l fn fh (�7 C7 � M�'I M M� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N f'n M M C�1 C��') M l� f'7 M f'7 f� (h M M f7 f'7 M C7 P�'1 f'�n O O O O �O �O �O �C �D �O b� tD �D t0 t0 t0 tD �O t0 �D �O t0 �D �� ;�;�;�� A 1A C7 f7 1'7 frl M fh ' M<+1 N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O� O� Oi O� Oi O� �O �O �D �O iD tG �O �D �D � t0 t0 ��O � t0 �O �O �D ��G O O • • • • T O� O� O+ O� O� O� O� O+ O� O+ O+ Qf O+ O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� f� 1� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N � r- r- �'- � ��- .- �.- '- r- �.- � r- r- r- .- � �.- � �'- � � lA IA L!i lA IA 1A l� In lA lA IA 1A lA 1n IA IA ln l!) 1A tA �:i IA 1!1 1A lfi 1A lA l!') 1A IA f+I f'n c'7 (h ch f+1 c� f7 c'n C7 Cn [h M (') c'7 t�l M f+) ('7 f/) Nl C7 K) M fn t7 P'1 l�'i M f'7 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O d O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � n n r� n n n n � n n r n n n r� r� n r� n n � r r� n r� n n r� r 1P N N M 1h V�' i!1 N�O t0 P f� CU CA O+ O� O O N N M M �y �f1 �A O� Of �+ O1 O+ O� O� O� Of 01 Of Of Q� Of Of tT O� O O O O O O O O O� O O O� C� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O O O O O O O O O O O O .- � r'- r'- e- r � � r- r r r r � � r N N N N N N N N N N N N \ \ \ \ \ \ � \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t0 N t0 N t0 N t0 N �O N�O N �O N t0 N t0 N i0 N tp N�O N 1D N tG N �O N r r- � � r � �- � .-- �- r r '- r- r 0 1l1 0 1!1 O 1A o 1A o tA o� o�A o �!I o�1 O N q M o lA o 1n O�A o tA O O r�-- N N M M�� IA �p �p f� 1� (p Cp p� pi O O N N Cn cn a � •- r r � r- � � e- ��- o, C � � W Q � � w � Z U �I H � X J OC W � � M � N W t7 d 1 �NN-+ j 1 � N�{ O O 1� � Q��O ^ N� N M OMi �W �� Oai N N� 1 Y W FQ- 1 pN �ifp1 �f �� O� O� tD r� �A Q ��O O� r N ��O �!1 O� 1 J 4 2_! � 1 tD CD ONi O�i O� M� N N fn M ��'f N�� N V�1 if t00 � tN0 i.� z�. W�� i cn ch ch r� v a a v v v v v a�� a v a v v v i � � i 1 j fQa Q 1 ��N N O �O O t�A N O� CO ��p N O N N Oa1 � CO 1'� t0 N M I 1-- J=Z W I �(�7 O f� �7 N Oi 1� Q N O� 1� M fh � i Y w Q a � �D ��D �n �ff �ri � p Q V a fh fh ch ch ch c�l N N N N N 1 v W Q f Q 1 i a N 00 i i 1 � � � v I WZ j Z � I f I I N � J 1 v 0 � � i � 1 I O 1 � } � v r 1 '. � U i I 1 1 I � 1 (7 1 v W H W Z �N O � C W > Z � 1 C� � N H C � H H Z � J W W C W K 0 W � � a V' a vi �o v tt C N t0 Q � J W 1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N j� J m � 1 f� h/� f� f� h f� f� h f� f� n I� f� f� f� 1� 1� h(� f� I� 1 01 �5W � �m�o�o�o��mm�o�m��o�o�o��o�m� � o O Q W i N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I Q � 1 1 a � � � W H 1 I f� j O W � � �n a > a i i � G w i 1 � � i i � W ►- 1 J 2 I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1 n J� W 1 1� t� f� 1� I"� t� n 1� h f� 1� h 1� f� f� 1� t� f� f� f� f� h 1 M W 1 Gp � CO CO 00 C� fD LD CD CD CO m CD CO CO W�[L Qi CO Ca W 1 t0 �--� 1-- UC 1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I �A > 2 1 1 f7 Q rr I 1 . 1 1 � 1 I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1� N 1 �- r � (/� M N � � � � � N N N � � � � � � N � � M � � � � N i W� W I'- ��- e- r r '- r r�- � r�- �'- �- .- � r � r � j � J Q d � 1 f� X W O F tat Z l+. � Q W v � �.- U� W rr � W W ~ Q Q .. aQ f- aQ U U � v U � m v a v 0 S a U �"� F- Q h Q W V N N fV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M�� M M N1 c'� M M M c'� M K1 M ch M ch ch M M N N N (V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M� M M c� ��'1 M M� M M M M M M c7 M«� � �D �D t0 tG tp �O \O �O tD �D 4C �O �O t0 �D �O t0 ��D �O tD t0 I In N N 1A N tA IA �A �A tA �A N N t!1 � �A �A 1A �A M!A tA � O� O1 Q1 O� O� 01 O� 01 01 01 01 01 01 O� O� Oi T O� 01 a1 01 O� 1 � � � � � N � � N N � N � � � � � � N N N N 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O tD t0 tD �O �O �D �D �G �o �D �D �O �D �D tD �O �C t0 �O to �O �O O� C1 01 O� 01 O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� O� Qi O� Of N fV (V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r � r r.- � r�-- r r- r � r.-- r r e- ��- ��- �... } 1 1(1 ln �A M 1n �!f �(1 1n �A �A IA tA �A �A �A N IA �!f �A �A �!f tA J4 !-- 1 Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z �( � 1 ►-� Q V I O O O O O O O Gi O� O O O O O O O O O O O O O .�-. ~ a i"�^ n n n n n n r r n r� n n n n t�. n � n � o � ; 1Q � , n n p� p O O.- � N N M t�7 O� �A M�p �p W I O O O S O � O O O O O O O O O O O O O.O O O H 1(V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N G 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ � \ \ \ \ \ 1 1p N�G N �D N 4� N�O N�O N�D N�p N �D N �O N t0 N I � �- f- r- .- � � �- � r '- � 1 � Q � o�n o�n o�n o u� o�n O in o u� o�n o �n o in o�n i W 1 �A tA �D 10 1� f� CO CO 01 01 O O � r N N M R1 a Q 1[1 tn 1 ik Y 1 � r- �- � � � r r � r N N N N N N N N N N N N I �D n n N r 11 u n u n r O� C � 7 r N Q � � dl � 2 ` �' 1--� J H � X J OC W � '- � H � W Q a Q pH N w z S } W J 0 K � O � U rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0p 0 0p �O O N O O� N O O O tA � N� 1�D � V N � O N � r!f F � > N M U N f'7 t► Vf tp M?} O�i O�i T � 0�1 O�i O�i p�f O�f O�f 1- a¢ > a x U W U ~ � � � £ 2 F O FN- H W w � O Np tn � > > w Z U � � `-`r- a a w � o �5 � � � �S m ° � � � � � m N q Z J J rr J W �-+ F Q a+ J W�-r Q W UO�a c,��y�?QI��W,r�Q ��QI��,s�Q v� `�Q �Q � f"£/�' a ° ., � %'„ c� � � iif rn «, � �'i c� � � "vS �n �O i i H N fn � yl N � Q N W W W (n � Q N W W WW�a� ��a� �� o+ a rn a Fa rNi °� cN+� � O M� O � r O O z � °v c°n 0 0; oi � f � � 0 N > O O � O Z � co � O � � � t+1 N J� > Q O � O �V � O � � � � y } JZ J O O Q � J m v v � � � tn N N tn m om oaD m om � m m � m .. .. .., .. ... N N W � N Qu o °o °o °o N N N N M � V� � � v � N N N N M M M M � � � � � r r r r O 1R O W O O O O OO � O O O O O O � O lD � W W W a a� � d' N y } W ] F Z > 9 J O Q X a a w t+ a W W N S V H m a Q � � � � J � O O O O� O .-- � � M N � 8 W � M- 2 T a W � W H J J � Q ►- W U�-+ W � O Z W F- J �-+ � a .. C � a 1 C � � � � W 1�- Q «. r � � � � C � H � � J OC NQ U � � � _ EXHIBIT XII-D "BUT FOR" ANALYSIS The four parcels in the proposed Tax Increment Financing District are located in an area targeted by the City for redevelopment. Existing buildings do not meet city codes and there are several environmental concerns, including the removal of asbestos materials. One building on the site has been vacant for a number of years. In addition to providing job opportunities and increased retail traffic, the rehabilitation of this building will provide an additional $200,000 in market value to the City's tax base. Other buildings in the Tax Increment Financing District will be replaced with larger structures providing additional employment and market valuation. Due to the high costs of public improvements including demolition, site acquisition, clean up and preparation, the project would not proceed in the foreseeable future without public assistance. XI-D-1 1S r C] Community Development Department Q Pr�rn�NG DrviSION City of Fridley DATE: June 27, 1991 TO: William Burns, City Managerl�� . FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Second Reading of an Ordinance Approving a Vacation Request, SAV #91-02, by Peterson and Miller in Riverview Heights Attached please find the above-referenced ordinance. The City Council held the first reading of the ordinance at their June 17, 1991 meeting. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the second reading of the attached ordinance. MM/dn M-91-461 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AM�ND APPENDIIC C OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Fridl.ey does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. To vacate a11 that part of Van Buren Street, now known as Dover Street in the plat of Riverview Heights according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Anoka County, Minnesota, lying Easterly of a line drawn from the Northwesterly corner of Lot 19, Block L to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 21, Block K and lying Westerly of a line drawn from the Northeast corner of Lot 22, Block L to the Southeast corner of Lot 18, Block K, all in the plat of Riverview Heights. Subj ect to an easement for walkway purposes over the northerly ten (10) feet of the southerly twenty (20) feet of the portion of Dover Street to be vacated. Subject to an easement for utility purposes over the Southerly twenty (20j feet of the portion of Dover Street to be vacated. Also reserving an easement to Minnegasco over the Westerly sixty (60) feet of all that part of Dover Street lying Easterly of the Easterly line of Broad Avenue. All lying in the South Half of Section 3, T-30, R- 24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Be and is hereby vacated subject to the stipulation adopted at the City Council meeting of June 17, 1991. SECTION 2. The said vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code shall be so amended. PA5SED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1991. Cs"1 � Ordinance No. Page 2 ATTEST: SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR Public Hearing: June 17, 1991 First Reading: June 17, 1991 Second Reading: Publication: : � _ � i DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Community Development Department P G DTVISION City of Fridley June 27, 1991 William Burns, City Manager / i �. Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Variance, VAR #91-12, by Robert Amborn of 405 - 57th Place N.E. The City Council tabled the request at its June 17, 1991 meeting. Although we have been unable to reach the petitioner, we have concluded that the proposed structure will meet the 14 foot height maximum (see attached staff report). Should the City Council approve the variance, the following two stipulations are recommended: 1. The petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway to the proposed addition by September 1, 1992. 2. The petitioner shall sign and record against the property an agreement with the City which will allow him access to the property in perpetuity and which releases the City from liability or incurring any costs should the improvements be disturbed due to maintenance of utilities within the right- of-way. MM/dn M-91-462 � � STAFF REPORT APPEALS DATE �y 2 g. 1991 C�TY OF PLANIVING COMMISSION DATE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL DATEJu� 17, 1991; July 1, 1991 AuTHOR-�ls REQUEST PERMIT NUMBER APPLIC ANT PROPOSED REQUEST LOCATION 405 - 57th Plaoe SITE DA�'A I SiZE DENStTY PRESENT ZONING ADJACENT LANO USES � 8� �ONING UTp.JTIES PARK DEDICATION � ANALY�1� FtNANC1AL IMP�ICATIONS CONFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSNE PLAN COMPATiBiL1TY WITH ADJACENT USES 8� ZONWG ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION VAR #91-12 •...- � .. Zb reduce the required fmnt yard setback frcm 35 ft. to 14 ft. & increase the maximnn square footage of an acoessory bui.lding fran 1,000 sq, ft. to 1,2?0 sq, tt. 11,240 sq. ft. Lnt ooverages 16.3� R-3, Gene"ral Multiple Dwelling : �3, Ger�eral Multiple Dwelling tA the N, S, W, & E Denial D�nial � �J �_ `poY jo�� -r - $ cc'�--- �- =-+--- :' � {' 9 2"'s t 2! I ,3 2B 3 l � � �(nNpg1 4 !J 27 f -rofi2� _.3..._ 26 �__S'_ � ' f � -r1 2 5 L, - -: PSd -T-' 24 a� � Z : 2r 9�'t �: ::• 22 a� '`i''9 �� Z�P�.. JF_ _ ` 2/ U� 8� ��P'I/ ...: Z� �,,;_..i � ",rl' _ � /9 t` � � . /9 /3Li: /B / � � '. M I4�� + /7 1 + Q . �4 /t �6 � �l �� 's VAR �� 9 1-12 Robert Amborn N 1/2 SEC. 23, T. 30, R. 24 ��B C/TY OF FR/OL EY �7! 21 12 � � N//� O� EF C. y. �" _ _ = 3 �. : e o �. '!� // I Y' � : R� � 6 ;el / . _ � . Z� 1 � 11 2 ' 2! Z > , ^ ; ,{�a/O Z�yl w� /S �12 SI 3 , / 3/ PI 3 'f • j �. +� 27 f � 2l B S -�''9 a 3'S� ,'�is l+`i.'1 I z. z� z. '�, z r`Q � Lf�A 'G x�' ��, �.;3 M�s I. �rs ci � * � - ls � 23 B Z) . 2 ��.7 5�-� .r./2 K'� S �' zz f . It 1 2L � 'Sa i .iN '. a'R�/I C�G � r� q tJ ;e 2/ .�s� f �! �, ��'--'�"� �� "Y�TH AVENUE � I �N.E. � 30.�1 Ml � ' �. � ��l'l L 3e � l� 11/f 4� / ��,22 L�/ L z�. --� _ : rv z t -af r r�l t l :s j � 2e � .y �• %' . zo 3.f' • 2 ia� 'J l l ��i te 4 e7 z�l'iF Z� _�__ ��.j�/1 ��2 t 2/ �2 S7 -.1 fA Z��f} P 1 ps S ze �• e K. zs s k�, : 2 J�/f l�'�.i �� zs 6 zs a W •• es c�dP � �p p1 . � iJ 7 Ea'a '£? �> • r��? ��c�. 1.�'/3 r!f�9 M¢ r� e :�, -- -- ; � . . � :, �! ��e °3 W � 1L . /o y) , L� ,�r� ' � "'"' -� � r o : Z lAi7 �10 = �'��12 't' S 2 $ ��B `5 . 2/ . Z � zo ..�r � } IN // M / Y.n"" /; � 2 ':// Y� 6 Y�77 f l°l z �� is �+, ;y, . . �� 1 s� �. ,`..:�� @l s .1 /3 /BVa - - i: �� ' �� l �� W :I)�O `S�7 f �:*�'6� Ml� • is /F/m)' f- /f 7 - Jj . l, y :.�s' f � y il i vi �s A��! � is Li* l� � �'s � B *is �+� � �e N.e. o:•' , : f�,x� ' � o: ,�„ , _,,,. �„ ,, , � 2 � / � ��Y3 Q'Q � .. � 6'd :,1 / J� � . w /t 9 ai �B' B6A� . 3 . O Zg- ` ec. �"'_' `� � f„ M/�y �f H S%� b'2 �,,, /3 '�� -/O � M�/1 � f�4 •�•S"2� � f a � i t - _S-- �- In . ZL - � 5 6`1 1 //�A /Ajo Z '.F�l� .�13'1. `.' /2�'f // �� '/6 ��6 zs - 59 TH VEo N.E. �, �i � �, • rf � .,.. / i° / S • r� z zf z ' S! �. PI �l! t7 s i� y u � �� f =s 'f ss � yj S4 ; 7 W ' _ .-2 �' . Z 1! 9 +.z[ f ts �". 'i7 . AD zi :' do� U z�� .r i1 /L »Y ~ /d -� ii �: � is - m •'- t �7 N �: � / /J �s /: ;'•��,e��- �. g �, j � :t�; �6� �� i �6 r� , � � „�e � (.� t+'is S�" � s t� � y 4,. •r __ { .,\r�is ' t�T� 3 , Esvo :y��zi TO�y : _".Sf' Z�� : / M�2 � r3,M �-Z4n �� 9h 7 �� 3 �'.�' .�3 6� �// :r�2a i � � I � N> M/z 7i,A:. /zY� , JlI�: � 4)/Z /9 1 � � /I 3�� /f ��J ♦ /f. 3 M h ` B 3 � �L5 /3 ' 'u'l � � tfr 7 i�) 4 Ls) ll��/ B lI� //. g�Ir' : � /3 .lAig 3 ��.,�+. ❑ 4�)/4 : i I a � 2 s i*�s� s 1�,� o �� l ; i7" n � i x i(+�i s z y� i� r � 9 t. ia j i I �c ,* ; : �� c' N� jz »�s izp� s F'� 6' s i UE --N:E.9 ia ' � _ "",o ' +' � Y i = " ^ / � � • /"'iS' //l�' K�6 // (f� E C�' � io � I !> " � �" ' �� f e � 2;0� 9P) 2 '��A z� ,� . :tMt,y � 2. i �2 j q(1� al7' /a(tr 76e� y �(�,/z 3:r'� ./2.. 3 t� ::✓' .i�,f , �0 •W: yr 3 V � . 8 j°' . ' ni r s //r. ._4_.. �� `t!• . IrW.•� -- �y¢-� 6 U' ifN� �i�9•�w 19(�� 6 �m)y "�.�•�' odro a t/Oe,, 5:1 � �y� 1 f•. :.� :��7f '.aY3 : sc'� __.f" ., c. f c 'w� Si., � i -'� _ ' ' . �i W r� 1 'I ��'a�I� AYE. .� N.E.... � 9 s 1- __ c ,�: - - - - - - ,ae •.;�. � ,��a � � � •� z � � t�) i^� ;�'r u i, ` ;i. . oa � ' r<i wJ i.� �� is .� : y , % i 4» /t �r / 2 3 i t f 7 .o H a 3 + 3 s{ c� .v ir i<s iI iy ! ' .'S: 2!.� ' r ,u � � M�i °�� z� � REW ERED �� 9 y� B, tn ' d: i :r' 2 ' ±,� PLACE � r✓ � ' ' .i:- '-r�-- 5�� ji _ ry,� � � y; ,w� M , C ) I � ,:� �� 'o a. I!n L) � �Jh �J ,N� « .` iL.�D y.SURVEY .: � 6 v y . ` 1 �/ z 3 r� s s�� ep F� 2 ,,,; �� 3 i� : � s n a a u N.es i i� s'i'�O. w.' ' .7 %s . Q '�. _ _ - / i e N � 9 i' 9'r %1 . .� ° :bI ' � t.- '�-ri#'-lkVE1{liF--PFE��- ----- �—�t�� .� � �—� r—� �-1(-1 N 1 � � SiG. r! .. 13 24 2 3 3B LOCATtON MAP lSSC �f� R`3!� i.-.i!' •) ii+QJ� �'. 'S �� 111S1 i: �! G.�A %��1 ��'i�� .i7G1 iL � � �'S �T7f I!C! 1r6tl1 r.i.7.�'VlO ��r�l sf�it�f� sC� t��,�lfi �� 'i� CI�P.3ir E�ifl �,•th Sir7S1 ':'�d ►�'►i��1Sf0 Yt7'�� 1?��1V�;i f�� '►f� ft�'t Ktti ri�l �:.�. v�9d 'r.re cs�w Irtr r_:.� f.��'��rf�y � �i'r"_ �`i�11 �'_S\7 {i� �YIA1 ��,�l� /—,�, 1� •]\�li►�[t�►�tl��_ Staff Report VAR #91-12, 405 - 57th Place N.E. Page 2 A. STATED HARDSHIP: City is requiring the petitioner to store his camper on a hard surface driveway (see attached letters dated Decexnber 7, 1990, and February 15, 1991) . He is choosing to enclose it in a structure. B. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: Request The petitioner is requesting two variances: (1) to reduce the required front yard setback from 35 feet to 14 feet; and (2) to increase the maximum square footage of an accessory building from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,270 sq. ft. The petitioner is proposing to construct additional garage space in order to meet the City Code requirements to park his recreational vehicle on a hard surface. The petitioner is choosing to store his recreational vehicle in a structure. In addition, the petitioner has indicated that his existing garage suffers water inundation in the spring from runoff from the slope of the rear yard and from the garage roof. The request is for Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, City View Addition, the same being 405 - 57th Place. Site Located on the property is a single family dwelling unit. General Multiple Family, and Multiple Family, on alI sides. Analysis detached two-car garage and a The property is zoned R-3, is surrounded by R-3, General section 205.07.03.D.(1) requires a front yard depth of not less than 35 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to a11ow for off- street parking without eneroaching 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. The Code requires that all vehicles be parked on a hard surface. The petitioner is choosing to construct additional garage space to the rear of his existing garage. To meet the Code requirement, all that is required is to pave an additional parking area to the west of his existing 3D Staff Report VAR #91-12, 405 - 57th Place N.E. Page 3 driveway. The property located to the west of the subject property is a 33 foot right-of-way dedicated to the City when the property was platted in 1887. A gas main is located within the right-of-way. The petitioner is proposing to request an access easement from the City in order to access the garage addition. The petitioner has three options which would allow him to meet the Code requirement: 1. Provide a paved parking area for the recreational vehicle adjacent to his existing driveway. 2. Expand his existing qarage to within 5 feet of the west lot line and to expand the garage toward 57th Place. 3. Vacate the public right-of-way which would provide an additional 16 1/2 feet of property for the petitioner; however, the petitioner is concerned with the location of the gas main and whether he would have adequate area to expand to the west. While the petitioner has several alternatives which would allow him to meet the Code without requiring a variance, the petitioner's lot is unique in that it is double fronted and that there are no houses which front 5? 1/2 Avenue to the north. However, the petitioner would not meet the minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet for a standard interior lot with the proposed addition. Section 205.07.o1.B.(4}.(a) requires a garage to not exceed 100$ of the first floor area of the dwelling unit or a maximum of 1,000 square feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain residential quality of a neighborhood by limiting the size of accessory structures. The proposed addition will not adversely impact the lot coverage, increasing it from 16.3� to 22.6%. However, the petitioner could reduce the size of the addition by 270 sq. ft., which would reduce the size of the addition to 13 ft. by 33 ft., more than adequate to park a recreational vehicle. 3E Staff Report VAR #91-12, 405 - 57th Place N.E. Page 4 Recommendation Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission deny the variance request to reduce the front yard setback frvm 35 feet to 14 feet and to increase the maximum square footage of an accessory building from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,270 sq. ft. as the petitioner has other alternatives which would allow him to meet the Code. However, if the Commission chooses to approve the variance request, staff recommends the following stipulations: l. The petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway to the proposed addition by September 1, 1992. 2. The petitioner shall sign and record against the property an agreement with the City which will allow him access to the property in perpetuity and which releases the City from liability or incurring any costs should the improvements be disturbed due to maintenance of utilities within the right-of-way. Appeals Commission Action The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend to City Council denial of the request. City Council Recommendation Staff recommends the City Council concur with the Appeals Commission recommendation. Staff Update Staff was unable to contact the petitioner to determine the proposed height of the accessory structure. By using the hypothesis that a ten foot high door would accommodate the RV, staff was able to calculate the height of the structure. Adding 1.5 feet for the header, and 2.5 feet as the average height of a 5/12 hip roof, the height of the structure is 14 feet. It should be noted, however, that the height of the structure from the ridge of the roof to the garage floor will be 16.5 feet (see Section 205.03.11 of the zoning code for the definition of building height). 3F VAR ��91-12 3G S1TE PLAN �Y, , , �� G I't � � S �4�..�. , , v o, s-.�— VAR 4�91-12 Robert Amborn % �, � _. �'t --:��:�_. - - �o a �- � ; 3H ELEVATIOlV � _ U�tYOF FRiDLEY FRIDLEY MUNtCIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 December 7, 1990 Robert and Kathleen Amborn 405 - 57th Place N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 RE: Property at 405 - 57th Place N.E. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Amborn: On July l, 1990, the City of Fridley began a new program call.ed Systematic Code Enforcement. This program is designed to provide fair and equitable code enforcement, improve the City�s appearance, and maintain property values by creating a more attractive suburban environment. Under this proqram, all properties in the City will be inspected appraximately once each year to ensure that they are iri compliance with the Fridley City Code. A recent inspection of your property �evealed that not all Code requirements are presently being met. Listed below is an item which does not comply with the Code: 1. Fridley City Code requires that aZl vehicles must be currently l�.censed/street operable and kept on a hard sureface parking area, or stored in an enc].osed structure. Observed two vehicles (RV38002 and RV25727) parked off hard surface driveway along west side of garage, Your prompt attention in correcting this problem would help us in our effort to improve the City. A`reinspection will be conducted on or about December 27, 1990, a�t which time compliance is anticipated, Please call me at 572-3595 if you have questions or wish to discuss this fu�ther. Thanks for your cooperation! Sincerely, Steven Barg Code Enforcement Officer SB:ls C-90-1088 � 31 � `� �� :� _ �X CITYOF FRI DLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 February 15, 1991 Robert and Kathleen Amborn 405 - 57th Place N.E. Fridley, NIId 55432 RE: Extension of Time to Comply with Fridley City Code Dear Mr. and Mrs. Amborn: Recently, Z sent you a letter concerning the parking of one or more vehicles on your property in a manner not in compliance with the Fridley City Code. Upon speaking with you, I learned that you wished to comply, but you required additional time to make the necessary arrangements. Based on this information, I granted you an extension of one year to fully comply with the City's parking requirement. This letter is to confina that you have until December 31, 1991, to take the steps needed to comply with the Fridley City Code. This may be accomplished by creating additional paved parking and/or making other arrangements, such that all vehicles on your property are kept in your existing driveway, on an adjacent paved area, or in an enclosed structure. (Please be advised that the time extension only applies to vehicles which are currently licensed and street operable.) Feel free to call me at 572-3595 if you have questions or wish to discuss this matter further. Thanks for your cooperation! Sincerely, Steven Barg Code Enforcement Officer SB:ls CE-91-29 3J January 1, 1983 shall have a basement except if located in a flood plain area. . � .� A. B. . �. : �• �; ��a.��.� Gel�eral Pravisions. (1) A minimun of two (2) off-street g3rking stalls shall be provic3ed for each dwelling unit. (2) The required parking stalls shall not be located in any portion of the required front yard except -on a driveway or hardsurfaoed parking spaoe approved by the City. (3) All driveways and parking stalls shall be set back three (3) feet f rom any property line except as agreed to in writing tyy adjacent property ownezs and filed with the City. Garage Require�aents. (1) All lots having a minim�an lot area of 9,000 square feet or resulting from a lot split shall have a c3ouble garage. (2) All lots havirig a lot area less than 9,.000 square feet ana greater than 7,500 squase feet shall�have a single garage. (3) The above requirements shall satisfy the off-street parking stall requirenent. . . : Z� :�u : ►.M_ Z+V; .i� s ��.N A. Parking Requirements. (1) Existing Facilities: (a) At least one (1) off-street parking stall shall be pravided for each dwelling unit. (b) The reguired parking stall shall not be located in. any portion of the required front yard, except on a drivewaY or harclsurfaoed parking spa�ve appraved by the City, and set back a minimum of three (3) feet fran the sicie property line, except as agreed to by adjacent property awners. (c} A garage shall satisfy the off-street parking stall requirenent. (2) All driveways and parking stalls shall be surfaced with blacktop, ooncrete or other hard surface material approved by the City. B. Exterior Storage. (1) Nothing shall be stored in the required front yard. (2) All materials shall be kept in a building or shall be fully screened, so as not to be visible from any public right of way except for stacked f irewood, boats, and trailers plaoed in the side yard. (3) The City shall require a Special Use Permit for any 3K � 205.07,06. ... � : �� • � � � • �• • •. • � I� • ' �. 205.R1-6 1 �i CI�'Y OF FR�I�:SC 6431 IAIIVERSITY AVIIV�JE N.E. FRIDLEY, I�T 55432 (612) 571-3450 �-i �� ii ui � � ' - •�� n.� � �� _ m.' P1�lR� APPISC�TIO�T F� Pl�rJPIIt�i'Y II��t'N�,TI�T - site plan Y+equired for submittals; see attad�ed ��: _ y � ,S -- ,. ? � h D �... p� �� : Int � Block _� Tract/Additia�n � (/ G! l.J Qirrent zoning: Square f e/aareage f� a o d - Reason for varianoe arid i�ardship: _ ::�� . ,�. . , .., ,. .� c�� :�:��: � c✓�O �S�e�t'�on of City Oode: �t- F�3 �l w� -� d�;Y� o,� -�- Fee Owners na�st sign this form prior to prooessir�g) �� 7/--/39� �� n� � � n�� SIC��URE I]ATE Fee: $100.00 $ 60.00 k for resideriti.al praperties P�ermit VAR # ` t 1- ! "� R�oeipt # �/a / � 3 Application Yeoeived by: ' � �✓i( '�'.�� _,�._.,-- � SCheduled Ap�eal.s �ni.ssiarl date: �is�.. 'L'� � `i'�`t � Scheduled City Oa�u�cil date: ` �: . .,..,.....r.,......�...........,....r.,.�.......,. _��....,��.... 3.L PIIBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE APPEALB COMMIS3ION _________________________________________________________________ Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing at the Fridley Municipal Center at 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, May 28, 1991, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of variance request, VAR #91-12, by Robert Amborn: 1. Per Section 205.07.01.B.(4).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum size of a garage from 1,000 square feet to 1,270 square feet; 2. Per Section 205. 07. 03. D. (1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front yard �etback from 35 feet to 14 feet; To allow the construction of an addition to an existing garage, on Lot 2, Block 4, City View Addition, the same being 405 - 57th Place N. E. , Fridley, Minnesota, 55432. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given the opportunity at the above stated time and place. DIANE SAVAGE CHAIRPERSON APPEALS COMMISSION Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department, 571-3450. 3lVI APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28, 1991 PAGE 4 willing to recommend app oval of the variance request with the stipulation recommended by staff, because he is concerned about site lines. Ms. Savage stated it seem the property it would affect the most is the gas station ac ss from the property. The public purpose of the section o the Code is to maintain the attractability of residenti 1 areas. She did not see how the fence and berm could be detr mental to the property; in fact, they would be an attractive addition to the property. She would also recommend approval of the variance. Ms. Beaulieu agreed. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded�b to City Council approval of var � Michael Klismith, per Section 20 City Code, to increase the heigh 7 feet in the front yard (4 foo berm), on Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, Bloc same being 7905 East River stipulation: � Ms. Beaulieu, to recommend nce request, VAR #91-10, by .04.06.A.(7) of the Fridley . of a fence from 4 feet to � fence on top of a 3 foot . 3, Spring Brook Park, the t ad, with the following 1. The fence and vegetation the public right-of-way. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE � THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIHLIC Ms. McPherson stated this item will go 17, 1991. 1 not be located within :SON BAVAGE DECLARED CLOSED AT 7:50 P.M. City Council on June 2. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE RE4UEST VAR '#91-12, BY ROBERT, � AMBORN: (1) Per Section 205.07.O1.B.(4).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum size of a garage from 1,000 square feet to 1,270 square feet; (2) Per Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 14 feet; To allow the construction of an addition to an existing garage, on Lot 2, Block 4, City View Addition, the same being 405 - 57th Place N.E. MOTION by Ms. Beanlieu, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to open the public hearing. • IIPON A VOICE VOTE � ALL VOTING AYE � CHAIRPERBON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:53 P.M. 3T1 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28. 1991 PAGE 5 Ms. McPherson stated the property is zoned R-2. The petitioner has two variance requests. One is to reduce the required front yard setback from 35 feet to 14 feet, and the second is to increase the maximum square footage of an accessory building from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,270 sq. ft. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner's request is in response to a letter from the City's Code Enforcement Officer regarding the City Code requirement to park all vehicles on some type of hard surface. In this instance, the vehicle in violation is a recreational vehicle (RV). The petitioner is choosing to add on to his existing garage in order to provide storage space for the RV and also to try to correct a water problem with his existing garage because of the slope of his property. Ms. McPherson stated that currently located on the property is a detached double car garage and a single family dwelling unit. Because the City has notified the petitioner that his RV should be parked on a hard surface driveway, he is proposing an addition to the rear of his existing garage. Located to the west of the property is a 33 foot public right- of-way dedicated to the City in 1887 when the area was platted. A gas main is located somewhere within this right- of-way. The petitioner has seen the gas company excavate this main and is relatively sure that it is close to his property line. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has three other alternatives to meet the Code requirement without needing variances: 1. To provide a paved parking area for the RV adjacent to the existing driveway. 2. To expand his existing garage to within 5 feet of the wets lot line and to expand the garage toward 57th Place. 3. To vacate the public right-of-way which would provide an additional 16 1/2 feet of property for the petitioner; however, the petitioner is concerned with the location of the gas main and whether he would have adequate area to expand to the west. The location of the gas main would determine exactly how much additional room the petitioner would have to expand the garage if the vacation was approved. Ms. McPherson stated that while the petitioner does have these alternatives, the petitioner's lot is unique in the fact that it is double-fronted and that none of the houses on 57th Place actually front 57 1/2 Avenue to the north. There are several existing outbuildings on the adjacent properties that fall 30 APPEALS COMMIBSION MEETING, MAY 28, 1991 PAGE 6 within that 35 feet setback; however, in reviewing the adjacent building files, she did not find any prior variances granted. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner's request would not meet the rear yard setback of 25 feet for a standard interior lot with the proposed addition. He would have to shorten the addition by approximately 11 feet to meet the interior lot requirement. Ms. McPherson stated the second variance request is to increase the maximum square footage from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,270 sq. ft. The proposed addition would not adversely impact the lot coverage. The lot coverage would be increased by approximately 6.3�; however, he would be well within the 25� lot coverage allowed by Code. The petitioner could reduce the size of the proposed addition by 270 sq. ft., which would reduce the size of the addition to 13 ft. x 33 ft. Ms. McPherson stated that staff reconunends the Appeals Commission recommend denial of both variance requests as the petitioner has other alternatives that would allow him to meet the Code. However, if the Appeals Commission chooses to recommend approval, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall provide a hard surface driveway to the proposed addition by September 1, 1992. 2. The petitioner shall sign and record against the property an agreement with the City which will allow him access to the property in perpetuity and which releases the City from liability or incurring any costs should the improvements be disturbed due to maintenance of utilities within the right-of-way. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner would request an access easement from the City to access the west side of the proposed addition to allow him to park the RV and any other vehicles in the addition. Mr. Amborn stated this request is to meet the City's code requirement for parking vehicles on a hard surface driveway. He stated that as long as he would be putting in a concrete slab to provide this parking, he decided to try to solve his water problem at the same time. The original house and garage were destroyed in the 1965 tornado, and he purchased the property after that. The original garage slab was enlarged and the existing garage was built; consequently, there is a slope in the back of the lot that was never changed. During heavy rains and spring run-off, he does have water problems. So, the water problem and adding on to the garage for RV and � APPEALS COMMISBION MEETING, MAY 28. 1991 PAGE 7 boat storage are the reasons for the size of this garage addition. Mr. Amborn stated the addition to the back of the garage would be more aesthetic because it would not be very noticeable from the front of the property on 57th Place. There is an 8 foot grade difference between 57th Place and 57 1/2 Avenue. He will need a 20 foot door to accommodate the RV, but the door will be on the side facing the garage to the west, 417 - 57th Place. (He stated the garage to the west of his property is at least 20 feet high at the peak.) Putting the garage door on the front would make a roof line that would be very difficult to match in with the existing garage. He stated that there is a gas main about 12-14 feet from the existing garage, and he is requesting an easement from the City in order to access the garage addition. If he had to add on to the west side of the garage, it would be too close to the gas main, which has to been dug up in the past. Mr. Amborn stated the variance from the back is called the front yard setback, but in reality it is the rear of all the houses that are facing 57th Place. As far as aesthetics, the view or site line won't encroach into any of the neighbors' site lines on either side of him. Ms. McPherson stated that Section 205.07.03.D.(4). Double Frontage, (b), states: �'The setback for garages and accessory buildings in the rear yard shall be the same as for a front yard." This should help clarify the front yard versus rear yard issue. Mr. Amborn stated the reason for his variance request is to meet the code to provide storage for his RV and boat and to solve his water problem. He thought this proposal would give the best look to the property. As far as the hard surface driveway going over onto a gas main on a City easement, he did not think he should be required to provide a hard surface driveway over a gas main that has been dug up in the past. He has an existing semi-hard limestone drive for the storage area for his RV. This driveway is used only several times a year. Mr. Amborn stated the existing garage is 576 square feet, so it is an increase from the maximum allowed of 1,000 square feet to 1,270 square feet. Ms. Savage asked how long the hard surface vehicle parking requirement has been �n effect. Ms. McPherson stated she believed it has been a requirement for a very long time. 3Q APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28. 1941 PAGE 8 Mr. Amborn stated he thought that at one time, RV's were exempt from the hard surface parking requirement. Ms. Savage asked why Mr. Amborn wanted to keep his RV in the garage rather than just on a hard surface parking area. Mr. Amborn stated that RV's are very expensive, and when they are parked outside in the weather, they are subject to leaking and overall deterioration. The same is true for the boat. OTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYTs, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY. Mr. Kuechle stated there are some unique things about this lot that are different from other lots and the fact that it is a double frontage lot. He is generally against building garages this large, because almost every homeowner in Fridley can use a larger garage. The Code should either be changed to allow larger garages, or the Code should be enforced unless there are special exceptions. He realized the Council has granted variances for larger.garages in the past, but he would recommend to the Council denial of this variance. Ms. Beaulieu stated that if this vehicle has been stored outside all this time, she did not see a special hardship for enclosing it now. The petitioner should just put down the hard surface to meet code. She also would recommend denial of the variance. Ms. Savage stated she has difficulty seeing a hardship in conforming to the Code. She agreed that the property is somewhat unique, and it does not appear that the proposed garage addition would have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. However, she did not think they should set a precedent when there are so many people in Fridley who would like to have larger garages in which to store extra vehicles and recreational vehicles. She agreed with Mr. Kuechle and Ms. Beaulieu and would recommend denial of this variance. MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to recommend to City Council denial of variance request, VAR #91-12, by Robert Amborn: 1. Per Section 205.07.O1.B.(4).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum size of a garage from 1,000 square feet to 1,270 square feet; �R APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28, 1991 PAGE 9 2. Per Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 14 feet; To allow the construction of an addition to an existing garage, on Lot 2, Block 4, City View Addition, the same being 405 - 57th Place N.E. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on June 17, 1991. 3. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE RE4UEST, VAR #91-13, BY LEONARD VANASSE• Per Section 214.12.02.B of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum square footage of a sign from 80 square feet to 101 square feet, to allow the construction of a free- standing pylon sign, on Lot 3, Block 1, Mar-Len Addition, the same being 57 - 81st Avenue N.E. OM TION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CBAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:23 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated the property is located at the intersection of 81st Avenue and Main Street. It is currently the ANR Trucking Terminal. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the surrounding properties. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is subleasing a portion of the ANR Trucking Terminal to Crouse Cartage Company. The petitioner is proposing to install a 21 square foot sign to allow the public to find the Crouse Cartage Company. However, the sign increases the maximum square footage of the sign on the property from 80 square feet to 101 square feet. ANR Trucking currently has an 80 square foot sign. Ms. McPherson stated that Section 214.21.02.A-D of the Sign Code outlines four conditions that must be met prior to the Appeals Commission recommending approval of a sign 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. 3S r � � Community Development Department P G DrvtSION City of Fridley DATE: June 27, 1991 (� � y�, TO: William Burns, City Manager�, FROM: SUBJECT: Background Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Special Use Permit, SP #89-12, by Ashland Oil Company at 5701 University Avenue N.E. The special use permit was considered by the Planning Commission on September 13, 1989; however, the special use permit and the rezoning application were postponed for City Council action in order to obtain additional information regarding the underground contamination at the site. Ashland Oil has received approval from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to proceed with a remediation plan. When the Planning Commission originally considered the special use permit request, they recommended approval of the permit subject to the following stipulations: 1. 2. 3. 4. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted and approved by the Engineering staff prior to issuance of a building permit. The petitioner shall combine Lots l, 2, and 3 with Lot 4 into one tax parcel. Approval of the special use permit shall be contingent upon approval of the rezoning application of Lot 4(ZOA #89-04). No building permit shall be issued until the contamination clean-up has been completed and has satisfied MPCA standards. Analysis Since the 1989 Planning Commission consideration, a number of issues need to be addressed. First, the City has passed a new landscaping ordinance. An,additional stipulation should be placed on the motion requiring submission of a landscaping plan in conformance with the City's ordinance (the petitioner had originally completed a landscaping plan; however, it should be updated and revised to comply with our new ordinance). According Ashland Oil SUP June 27, 1991 Page 2 to the proposed remediation plan, both soil venting and ground water pumping will be performed on the property. According to the MPCA, both activities can occur in conjunction with operation of the new Rapid Oil facility. However, at this point, we do not have a site plan showing where the remediation equipment would be placed on the property. Prior to a building permit, such a plan would need to be submitted for staff review and approval. Finally, the Mayor at the last City Council meeting raised the question that if the area to the north and east of the property were to be redeveloped, could the Rapid Oil facility use just one entrance/exit from 57th Avenue. Jack Lemley from Ashland Oil was contacted regarding this idea, and will be investigating that option, On a preliminary basis, he indicated that they could operate with just one entrance from 57th Avenue. On June 27, 1991, the HRA will be discussing redevelopment of this area and whether or not it would acquire this particular site. At the writing of this report, we did not have the HRA information; however, we will provide the City Council with a verbal update at the meeting. Recommendation Pending the outcome of the HRA meeting, staff recommends that the City Council approve the special use permit, SP #89-12, by Ashland Oil, to allow a motor vehicle fuel and oil dispensing service on Lots 1 through 4, Block 6, City View Addition, with the following stipulations: l. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted and approved by the Engineering staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The petitioner shall combine Lots 1, 2, and 3 with Lot 4 into one tax parcel. 3. Approval of the special use permit shall be contingent upon approval of the rezoning application of Lot 4(ZOA #89-04). 4. The petitioner shall submit a site plan indicating the location of the remediation equipment prior to the issuance of the building permit. 5. A landscaping plan in conformance with the landscaping ordinance shall be submitted and approved by the Planning staff prior to issuance of the building permit. BD/dn M-91-471 . �1 �� ♦ � June 25, 1991 Minnesota Poliution Controi Agency 520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155-3898 Telephone (612) 296-6300 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED VAVOLINE INSTANCE OIL CHANGE Robert �i. Harbison, President P.O. Box 14000 Lexington, RY 40512 Dear tir. Iiarbison: RE: General NPDES/SDS Yerwit #2QV G790016 Vavoline Instance Oil Change �i(�� .lUN 25 1991 Enclosed is a copy of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)/State Disposal System (SDS) General Permit covering your facilities at the above referenced location, and an initial supply of Discharge lionitoring Report Forms. This Permit has been drafted pursuant to the Clean Vater Act, as amended, and Hinnesota Ru�es pt. 7001.0210. Compliance wfth the terms and conditions of this permit is required as of the date�of receipt of this letter. Iionitorfng for PAHs as specified in the Permit is required at this site. lionitoring for lead as specified in the Permit is required at this site. A new permit number has been assigned to this facility: tIId G790016. This new nwaber will be used to track permit compliance, and should be included on all correspondence related to this permit. Correspondence should be directed to the attention of the Industrial Section at the address below. oater Quality Division �iinnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Kinnesota 55155 If you have any questions regarding this Permit, please contact Peter Sandberg at (612) 296-7307. � Si erely, � , ^ ", � D s A� Ba , Sup visor Permits Unit, Industrial Section Qater Quality flivision DAH/jmg Enclosure Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainerd • Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester Equal Opportunity Emp� • Printed on Recycied Paper w r'' � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING CO1�MI88ION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 -------------------------------------------------------------�--- CALL TO ORDER• Chairperson Betzold called the September 13, 9, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Donald Betzold, Dave Ko rick, Dean Saba, Sue Sherek, Alex Bar , Paul Dahlberg Members Absent: None Others Present: Barbara Dacy, lanning Coordinator Michele McP erson, Planning Assistant Jerry Br' , Ashland Oil Jack ey, Ashland Oil Darr Olson, City Sports Ma Langer, City Sports vid Larson, 7890 Hickory Street N.E. 0 MOTION b r. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve the August 30, 19 , Planning Commission minutes as written. ' A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERBON BETZOLD DECLARED MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP #89-12, BY ASHLAND OIL CO. (RAPID OIL): Per Section 205.14.O1.C.5 of the Fridley City Code to allow a motor vehicle fuel and oil dispensing service on Lots 1 through 3, Block 6, City View Addition, the same being 5701 University Avenue N.E. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTZON CARRIED IINAI�TMOIISLY AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:36 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated Ashland Oil, who owns the parcel in question, is proposing to demolish the existing Rapid Oil facility located at 5701 University Avenue N.E. The parcel is zoned C-2, General 4C PLANNING COI�MISSION l�IEETING. BBPTEMBER 13. 1989 - PAGE 2 Business. The existing building sits on the eastern portion of the lot with the asphalt area toward the University Pivenue frontage. The petitioner currently owns Lots 1- 7 of this particular area. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner recently applied for two variances, one for lot •area and one for building setback to University Avenue. After reading staff's recommendation for the variance request, the petitioner withdrew that request and is in the process of rezoning Lot 4, which is currently vacant and is zoned R-2, Two Family Dwellinq, to C-2, General Business. The rezoning will allow Ashland Oil to combine Lot 4 with Lots 1, 2, and 3 and create a buildinq site which will conform with the current Zoning Code. For the rezoninq, the petitioner has submitted a revised site plan which shows the alignment of the building which conforms to all the required setbacks, as do all hard surface areas. Ms. McPherson stated staff realizes that the initial application was for Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Block 6, and staff is recommending the Planning Commission recommend approval of Special Use Permit, SP #89-12, by Rapid Oil, contingent upon the approval of the rezoning of Lot 4. She stated staff is recommending the following stipulations: 1. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted to be approved by the Enqineering staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Ashland Oil shall record the easement and restrictive covenant required from the previous special use permit process for the site at 75rd Avenue and Highway 65. 3. The petitioner shall combine Lots 1, 2, and 3 with Lot 4 into one tax parcel. 4. Approval of the special use permit shall be contingent upon the approval of the rezoning application of Lot 4. 5. No building permit shall be issued until the contamination clean-up has been completed and has satisfied MPCA standards. Mr. Betzold stated the Commission members had received a copy of a memo dealing with soil contamination on this site. Ms. McPherson stated soil testing and water testinq is being done, both on this site, and on the Hardees Restaurant site. Staff is recommending five stipulations with the recommendation of approval. Of the five, one stipulation is that Ashland Oil will not be issued . � r pLANNING COMMI88ION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 - PAGE 3 a building permit for their new building until the contamination clean-up work has been completed and satisfies MPCA standards. Mr. Betzold stated another issue is that this particular area of University Avenue is being looked at as a possibie corridor for light rail transit. Has staff had any input from the County as far as a"park and ride" facility at this location? Ms. Dacy stated the Anoka County Regional Railroad Authority is still in their design process. The Committee has identified the intersection of 57th as being a potential target for a park and ride site. The Authority has also considered some of the Planning Commission's recommendations about possible park and ride facilities at the vacant property on Osborne Road and the Immanuel Christian Center's parking lot. However, there has not been any formal review by the Anoka County Regional Railroad Authority regarding Rapid Oil's site plan. They are still investigating various locations. Mr. Dahlberg asked if staff has discussed with the petitioner some of the issues the Planning Commission discussed regarding light rail transit for this particular site. Ms. Dacy stated that in a conversation with Bob Mikulak at the time of Ashland Oil's application about 1/2 month ago, she made them aware that Anoka County is considering University Avenue as a light rail corridor, but she did not discuss specifics. Mr. Jerry Brill, attorney representing Ashland Oil, stated they have never been aware of a consideration of light rail transit for this area. This was the first they had heard about it. Mr. Dahlberg stated that in initial discussions with the Anoka County Regional Rail Authority, they had illustrated that there would be several options available relative to where parking areas could be located near this intersection. They had suggested there could be some on the west side of University Avenue and pedestrian traffic across University Avenue to get to the LRT stop. The Planning Commission's discussion suggested they would rather see the park and ride facilities on the same side of University Avenue as the stop (east side of University Avenue). The Commission suggested that the site at 57th and University might be an appropriate location for a park and ride facility. Mr. Brill stated that regarding the property, he had raised the question to Ms. Dacy about the need for a special use permit. They initially started with a request for a variance, and it turned into a request for a special use permit. There had been a direct service station on this property for quite a number of years before it turned into a Rapid Oil Change facility. Staff cannot find any records that there has ever been a special use permit issued for 4E �LANNING COMMI88ION 1�iEETING, BEPTEMHER 13. 1989 - PAGE 4 either the direct service station or the Rapid Oil Change. If that is the case, it becomes a nonconforming use. Staff has suggested that the special use permit procedure was added to the ordinance after the use was already there. He questioned whether they really needed a special use. If it is expand without a an expansion. use•permit or if they can just continue the same � nonconforming use, they might not be able to special use permit, and this might be considered Mr. Betzold stated the City Attorney could look at �this issue before this item goes to City Council. However, the City Attorney's position might be that even though it is the same service, by the fact that the facility is going to be torn down and rebuilt, the City wants the property to be legal nonconforming. Ms. Dacy stated she did discuss this issue with the City Attorney, and that is another p�art of the analysis. She wanted to clarify that there has always been a request for a special use permit. It did not originate as a variance and turn into a special use permit. There has always been a variance and special use permit, and the variance has turned into a rezoning. Mr. Brill stated they want to improve the use of the property.. They are losing customers because the facility is old and out of style. Mr. Kondrick asked if the petitioner has any problems with the five stipulations recommended by staff. Mr. Brill stated they are in agreement with the stipulations. Mr. Betzold stated the fact that Ashland Oil wants to improve the site is very much appreciated. He stated by Ashland Oil bringing in this request, it is going to force other qovernmental entities to make some decisions regarding the long�range plans for this site. Mr. Jack Lemley, Ashland Oil, stated Ashland Oil is losing money with this old Rapid oil facility. The facility does not look qood, and people are qoing elsewhere. They have seen an increase in business at their new 73rd Avenue/Highway 65 Rapid Oil facility. They want to get rid of the eyesore and get a new facility in there that they and the City can be proud of and appreciate. Mr. Kondrick stated he was just real concerned that the petitioner understand that light rail transit might be going in. �OTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Barna, to close the public hearing. �� , PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BEPTEMBER 13, 1989 - PAGE 5 IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIN(3 AYE, CHAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:50 P.M. - Mr. BetzoZd asked if this special use permit request should be called to the attention of the Anoka County Reqional Rail Authority. Mr. Dahlberg stated he would suggest that before Ashland Oil would elect to proceed with any potential development on the remaining property they own east of the subject site, they contact the County to discuss their options at that time. Mr. Dahlberg stated that regarding stipulation #2, that Ashland Oil record the easement and restrictive covenant required from the previous use permit for the site at 73rd and Highway 65, he did not think that issue should be tied to this request, even though it should definitely be done by Ashland Oil. Ms. Dacy stated she respected that opinion. Staff wanted to alert Ashland Oil that this item has not been done. Mr. Lemley stated he was not aware this had not been done, and stated he will make sure the easement and restrictive covenant for the 73rd and Highway 65 site are recorded at the County. The Commission members agreed to delete stipulation �2 from the recommended stipulations with the assurance from Mr. Lemley that this will be taken care of by Ashland 0i1. MOTION by Mr. Dahlberg, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to recommend to City Council approval of Special Use Permit, SP #89-12, by Ashland Oil Company (Rapid Oil), per Section 205.14.O1.C.5 of the Fridley City Code to allow a motor vehicle fuel and oil dispensing service on Lots 1 through 3, Block 6, City View Addition, the same being 5701 University Avenue N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted to be approved by the Engineering staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. 3. 4. The petitioner shall combine Lots 1, 2, and 3 with Lot 4 into one tax parcel. Approval'of the special use penait shall be contingent upon the approval of the rezoning application of Lot 4. No building permit shall be issued until the contamination clean-up has been completed and has satisfied MPCA standards. 4G pLAS1NZNG COMMISBION 1tEETZNG. 88PTgMHER 13. 1989 - P!►GE 6 IIPON 7� VOZCE VOT$, l�I+L VOTI�TG ]1YS, CS�iIRP$RBON B$TZOLD DBCI.�RED THE l[OTION C�RRIED IIN�iNIMODBLY. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission will hear the rezoning request by Ashland Oil on September 27. At the petitioner's request, the special use permit will be held until both the special use permit and rezoning can be heard at the City Council at the same time. / 2. �89-13. BY WAYNE DAHL: Per Section 205.07.O1.C.1 of the Fridley a second accessory building to exceed 240 20, Block 1, Sandhurst, the same beinq 177 City Code o allow square f et on Lot Eiartman ircle N.E. Mr. Betzold stated the petitioner, Wayne Dahl, has the special use permit and vacation applicatio : accessory building be tabled. He stated that si ce be republished and the neighbors renotified, ere open the public hearing. 3. �equested that for a second this item wi�l was no need to if`J' �14 ISi ""LL A lYLJ ivL L/ �r+ uv r+a..�va. s va. .. Per Section 205.14.O1.C.3 to llow enterprises having merchandise in the open and not thin an enclosed structure; per Section 205.14.O1.C.8, t allow exterior storage of materials and equipment, loca ed at 7191 Highway 65 N.E. �IOT�I _N by Ms. Sherek, seconde by Mr. Kondrick, to waive the reading of the public hearing otice and open the public hearing. IIPON A�OICE VOTE, l�I�L VOTIN �YE, CSAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISL , 11ND TSE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN !�T 8:03 P.ls. Ms. Dacy stated the P nning Commission considered a rezoning on the subject property t their June 21, 1989, meeting. On July 24, 1989, the property w s rezoned from R-3, General Multiple Dwelling, to C-2, General siness. Originally, as a stipulation of the rezoning, the anning Commission recommended a stipulation regarding r.o ou door storage or outdoor sales. After the Planning Commiss�on me ing, the petitioner requested an opinion from the City Attorn as to whether or not that stipulation could be imposed. I cluded Yn the agenda packet was a memo from Mr. Aerrick dated Jun 29, 1989, in which Mr. Herrick stated that the Code for the C-2 istrict does authorize the outside storage of recreational vehicl , boats, etc., upon obtaining a special use permit. Mr. Herr' stated: "It is my opinion that because the Code provides for utside storage, either with a special use permit or if the st red materials are screened, a prohibition against all exterior orage would subject the City to a claim that this property was � � � STAFF REPORT APPEALS DATE C�� OF PLANVNG COMuqSSlON DATE : S e p t emb e r 13 , 19 8 9 F'RiDLEY CITY COI�IqL DATE : October 2, 1989 �Hpq MM/dn REQUEST PERMIT NUMBER APPLICANT PROPOSED REQUEST LOGATION S1TE DAiA SIZE DENSITY PRESENT ZON�IG ADJACENT LAND USES � Z��a �E$ � PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS F�VVANCIAL IMPLICATIONS CONFORMANCE TO COMPREF�NE PLAN COMPATIBILITY WRH ADJACENT USES 8� Z+ONNG ENVIR�IMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATION QLANNING COMMtSSiON RECOMMENDATION SP ��89-12 Ashland Oil Company A special use permit to allow a motor oil and fuel dispensing establishment within a C-2, General Business. 5701 University Avenue N.E. N/A N/A C-2, General Business C-2 to the north and south; R-2 to the east; University Avenue to the west. On site N/A Within a proposed HRA redevelopment area Yes Yes Potential soil and ground water contamination Approval with stipulations. Approval with stipulations. Staff Report SP #89-12, Rapid Oil Page 2 REQUEST Ashland Oil is proposing to reconstruct their motor oil changing station located at 5701 University Avenue N.E. The original application encompasses Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 6, City View Addition. The petitioner also applied for two variance requests (side corner building setback and lot area). Because the petitioner owns the adjacent lots, staff advised the petitioner to utilize Lot 4 in order to remove the need for the variances. Ashland Oil has therefore applied for a rezoning of Lot 4, which is currently vacant and zoned R-2, Two Family Dwelling to C-2, General Business. The rezoning will allow Ashland Oil to combine Lot 4 with Lots 1, 2 and 3 and create a building site which will conform to the current zoning code. SITE The site is currently occupied by an existing Rapid Oil Change station. Ashland Oil will demolish this station and rebuild a new oil changing station which will be similar to the one built at the corner of 73rd Avenue and Highway 65 in Fridley. This site is within a proposed HRA redevelopment area. This site is zoned C-2, General Business, with additional C-2 to the north and south of the site. R-2, Two Family Dwelling, is loaated to the east, and University Avenue borders the site to the west. ANALYSIS Because this request is to demolish the existing building and reconstruct a new building and because no special use permit has been issued for the property, a special use permit is required (Section 205.14.O1.C.(5)). The special use permit will bring the site into conformance with the current zoning code. The site is currently being tested for soil and water contamination. Testing is also being done on adjacent parcels across University Avenue, specifically on the Hardees Restaurant site. Two of the four existing curb cuts are proposed to be closed. This will improve access and help control traffic exiting from the site onto 57th Avenue. This will also reduce traffic conflicts for cars accessing University Avenue to go either north or south. The petitioner is preparing a site plan to include the extra 40 feet provided by Lot 4. With the additional 40 feet from Lot 4, the petitioner can shift the building to the east to comply with the building setback requirements. This will then allow the petitioner to also meet the hardsurface setback requirement; allowing room for the curb cut for access onto 57th Place to be shifted to the east. 4J 0 Staff Report SP #89-12, Rapid Oil Page 3 Through the special use permit and rezoning processes, Ashland Oil will be bringing the site into conformance with current zoning codes. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the special use permit, SP #89-12, with the following stipulations: 1. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted to be approved by the Engineering staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Ashland OiZ shall record the easement and restrictive covenant required from the previous special use permit process for the site at 73rd Avenue and Highway 65. 3. The petitioner shall combine Lots 1, 2 and 3 with Lot 4 into one tax parcel. 4. Approval of the special use permit shall be contingent upon the approval of the rezoning application of Lot 4. 5. No building permit shall be issued until the contamination clean-up has been completed and satisfied MPCA standards. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission voted to delete stipulation #2 requiring Ashland Oil to record the easement and restrictive covenant for the 73rd Avenue and Highway 65 site. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the special use permit request, SP #89-12, to the City Council with the stipulations as amended. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the request, SP #89- 12, by Ashland Oil, with the following stipulations: 1. A grading and drainage pZan shall be submitted to be approved by the Engineering staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The petitioner shall combine Lots 1, 2 and 3 with Lot 4 into one tax parcel. 3. Approval of the special use permit sha11 be contingent upon the approval of the rezoning application oP Lot 4. 4. No building permit shall be issued until the contamination clean-up has been completed and satisfied MPCA standards. �►� � --- � SP ��89-12 Ashland Oil � —i-� . . � � � .. � . _� • ' , ; �'�' �Q � ' �«�' � : � , � � . � / � � •• � � , �� Q , t , Y � �.. , M , �� ` . ., � . � � : . ` � __. � ,% � � .s . .�_ . - . .� ` `� �r / ';�� d � �' '`'� T � � � � ' " " ' �' � � � � ,, � •• ,� I �. .. ' � ; � '- � � � � �i ; ,� � , .. . � -d-� � . ,,: � ( ,. � i . . . � ' - � ` �O �► � � � I � � �� , � , �. .1- � ' � , ! s ' . . � • I' � �'` � � � � �' L.. _ _ � � '� , - - - ..� , ; �• . � = ,. �� — — — _ _ � � . �� t.� o ��,� � �� + -• -- . aM : , . .. ♦ � -�. C �m►-,,nd h,��n�nn 4N r � � J DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Community Development Department G DIVISION City of Fridley June 27, 1991 William Burns, � City Manager � �� Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Reconsideration of Special Use Permit, SP #$9- 08, by Samir Awaijane of 7570 Highway 65 N.E. At the June 17, 1991 City Council meeting, the City Council passed a motion to reconsider the special use permit to Samir Awaijane at 7570 Highway 65 N.E. Attached for the City Council's reference is the minutes from the June 3, 1991 meeting and the staff report. BD/dn M-91-474 �� ' �'k�`f �� ,i ,��'� � � r �"� y �Yi .{(�;•)',�ie . �� • . FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE Samir Awaijane �v7o ii'i:at�heS [�Velliie iv . r.. Fridley, MN 55421 Dear Mr. Awaijane: June 6, 1991 On June 3, 1991, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request to re-issue special use permit, SP #89-08, to permit an auto body repair shop at 7570 Highway 65 N.E. The City Council approved the special use permit subject to the following six stipulations: 1. The special use permit shall be limited to Samir Awaijane, and is not transferrable to another tenant without City Council approval. 2. The special use permit shall be reviewed on an annual basis by staff with a report to the City Council. Should a hearing by the City Council be necessary due to lack of compliance by the petitioner, the item shall be scheduled for City Council consideration as soon as possible. 3. The building code improvements outlined in Darrel Clark's letter of August 30, 1989 shall be completed for the building r�,.� ��8 i�^.3i �.^.f }:i�� j^.r=:^.L.ri�^.-.i�1' w�.j7 ��I?.l'. �? Fr 1 aC�9 ��anK7 �FCr tha remaining building by September l, 1991. 4. The storage area for the auto body outdoor storage must be screened in compliance with the petitioner's submitted site plan which includes an eight foot wood fence enclosing the storage area. The surface of the storage area for the wrecked vehicles shall be constructed, as recommended by staff, either bituminous surface or gravel surface with or without impervious liner. The storage area screening shall be completed by August 1, 1991. 5A 0 Samir Awaijane June 6, 1991 Page 2 5. The parking lot sha11 be hardsurfaced, striped, lined with concrete curb, and landscaping installed as per the staff recommended plan by September 1, 1991, unless the City Council, via a variance request, approves an alternate plan. 6. The staff's review and report to the City Council shall be scheduled on the first regularly scheduled Council meeting of October, 1991 for compliance with the above stipulations. I have already forwarded to you an Appeals Commission variance application and the schedule for the Appeals Commission and City Council action. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the Planning Department at 571-3450. S' cer , � / �� arbara Dac � Community Developme t irector BD/dn Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by June 19, 1991. : . _ ,, � Concur with a i aken FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 3, 1991 PAGE 7 9. REISSUE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #89-08 FOR A NEW TENANT AT 7570 HIGHWAY 65 N.E.: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that when the Council approved this special use permit for Keith's Auto Body, one of the stipulations stated that the special use permit was limited to Keith's Auto Body and was not transferrable to another tenant without the Council's approval. She stated that there are two buildings on this site, and the special use permit for Keith's Auto Body was to occupy the rear building. Ms. Dacy stated that the petitioner for the reissuance of this special use permit is Samir Awaijane. She stated that he is proposing continuing using this site as an auto body shop. She stated that about a month ago, Mike Thompson, one of the.Awners in the partnership, advised staff that Keith's Auto Body would be terminating the lease. Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Thompson advised us that he would be unable to meet the stipulations of the special use permit due to the lack of income from Keith's Auto Body. She stated that the petitioner, Mr. Awaijane, is now part owner of the property, and that he will help bring the property into compliance. Ms. Dacy stated that the stipulation for connection to the City's sewer system has been accomplished. She stated that the stipulation for compliance to the building and electrical codes has not been completed. She stated that Mr. Awaijane stated that they will meet these requirements for the rear building by June 15 and for the other building by September 1. Ms. Dacy stated that the trailers have been removed from the site. She stated that the petitioner is proposing a new plan for the storage area for wrecked vehicles. She stated that the proposal is to install an eight foot high fence along the south property line and a twenty foot gate at the front of the storage area. She stated that Mr. Awaijane also indicated that he would like a portion of this area to be gravel and not bituminous, as originally stipulated, as he felt moving vehicles in and out of the area will cause damage to a bituminous surface. Ms. Dacy stated that the Engineering Department has reviewed this request and is recommending a small gravel area be maintained at the site to help with storm water management. Ms. Dacy stated that the parking lot improvements, restriping, and installation of concrete curb is to be completed by January 1, 1992, and the petitioner stated that this time period can be met. She stated that the petitioner has advised us that he will request a variance along the frontage road from twenty to ten feet to obtain additional parking and a waiver of the curbing along the south and west. She stated that these two issues will be addressed in a separate application to be presented to the Appeals Commission and Council. 5C FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF JIINE 3, 1991 PAGE 8 Ms. Dacy stated that staff is recommending the special use permit be reissued to Mr. Awaijane with the five stipulations outlined on Page 9B of the agenda. Councilman Schneider asked if it is the policy to drain all fluids from the vehicles before they are stored. Mr. Awaijane stated that if a car is smashed all fluids are usually drained before it is stored. Councilman Schneider asked if it is better to have the gravel and a liner to prevent contamination. Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that if you have qravel, it can be cleaned and hauled out. He stated that if there is some leakage there is the potential for ground contamination;�however, it appears the petitioner intends to have most of the vehicles drained in the storage area. Councilman Schneider stated that there could be an annual review and an inspection of the area for contamination. Councilwoman Jorqenson stated that she is concerned also with items such as brake fluid and oil, which are petroleum based. Mr. Flora stated that the Council could request the petitioner to install a non-porous fabric underneath the layer of qravel. Councilman Billings stated that, traditionally, the Council has required a hard surface but did, in one case, approve a gravel surface, and required a liner to avoid seepage into the qround. Mr. Flora stated that there is a similar situation at Christensen's Auto Body, and they have installed a liner on their site. Councilman Schneider asked if there was a tracking mechanism so that this could be brought back for review by the Council. Ms. Dacy stated that the tracking is done by hand until the City switches over to the new computer software. Councilman Billings ,questioned if the hard surface and concrete curb could be completed by January, 1992 since this type of work probably will not be done after the middle of November. Mr. Awaijane stated that he hoped to have these improvements completed in the next two months. He stated that if the Council would rather have asphalt, he would comply with this request. Ms. Dacy stated that if the Council wished to have all the area paved, staff could work with the petitioner on an alternate drainage plan. 5D � FRIDLEY CITY COQNCIL MEETING OF JIINE 3, 1991 PAGE 9 MOTION by Councilman Schneider to reissue Special Use Permit, SP #89-08, with the following stipulations: (1) the special use permit shall be limited to Samir Awaijane, and is not transferrable to another tenant without City Council approval; (2) the special use permit shall be reviewed on an annual basis by staff with a report to the City Council. Should a hearing by the City Council be necessary due to lack of compliance by the petitioner, the item shall be scheduled for City Council consideration as soon as possible; (3) the building code improvements outlined in Darrel Clark's letter of August 30, 1989 shall be completed for the building at the rear of the property by July 15, 1991 and for the remaining building by September 1, 1991; (4) the storage area for the auto body outdoor storage must be screened in compliance with the petitioner's submitted site plan which includes an eight foot wood fence enclosing the storage area. The surface of the storage area for the wrecked vehicles shall be constructed, as recommended by staff, with either bituminous surface or gravel surface with or without impervious liner. The storage area screening shall be completed by August 1, 1991; (5) the parking lot shall be hard surfaced, striped, lined with concrete curb, and landscaping installed as per the staff recommended plan by September 1, 1991, unless the City Council, via a variance request, approves an alternate plan; and (6) the staff's review and report to the City Council shall be scheduled on the first regularly scheduled Council meeting of October, 1991 for compliance with the above stipulations. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 10. FIREjDRAFT STOPS' MOTION by Councilman Schneider to authorize this lette�to be sent to the five remaining Innsbruck townhome owners egarding the number of fire/draft stops within their chimney ases. Seconded by Councilwaman Jorgenson. Councilwoman Jorgenson felt that the lett should probably be sent by certified mail so the City will kno hat it has been received. Councilman Billings stated that is may necessitate the owners going to the post office for t letter if they are not at home when it is delivered. Mr. Herrick, City Attorne , stated that the reason he would like the letter sent is to dvise the homeowners that the condition exists and to recomm d that they correct it. He stated that in reviewing material om the State and in talking with Darrel Clark, it appears that t City does not have the authority to demand the homeowners to i stall these draft stops unless it can be found it is life thre ening. He stated that neither the State Inspection 5E � _ � Community Development Department P G DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: May 31, 1991 „ TO: William Burns, City Manager �`��1�� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Request to Re-Issue Special Use Permit for a New Tenant, SP #$9-08, at 7570 Highway 65 N.E. Request Samir Awaij ane is requesting that the City Council re-issue special use permit, SP #89 -08, to allow a repair garage at 7570 Highway 65 N.E. (see attached letter). Background On February 26, 1990, the Fridley City Council approved special use permit, SP #89-08, for Keith's Auto Body, to allow a repair garage subject to seven stipulations. Stipulation #1 stated that the special use permit is limited to Keith's Auto Body, and is not transferrable to another tenant without City Council approval. The petitioner, as of May 29, 1991, has become one of the owners of the partnership which own the site. Keith's Auto Body will not be occupying the tenant space as of June 1, 1991. (Because of the involvement of the new partner, unpaid taxes in the amount of $26,414.85 have now been paid). Stipulations for A�proval The City Council may recall that the property h requirements, both indoor and outdoor, to be met i the property into compliance with current code. important items was to connect the buildings to (stipulation #3). Both buildings were connected sewer on October 15, 1990, and the SAC charges of to the City. �d several code i order to bring One of the most sanitary sewer to the sanitary $1,200 was paid Another stipulation required an annual review by staff with a report to the City Council (stipulation #2). Mike Thompson, one of the owners in the partnership, advised me that Keith's Auto Body would no longer be occupying the tenant space and the resulting lack of income was hampering Thompson's ability to meet the other Re-Issue SP #89-08 May 31, 1991 Page 2 stipulations. Awaijane's tenancy and participation in the partnership, however, will help bring the property into compliance. Stipulation #4 required building code improvements as outlined in Darrel Clark's letter of August 30, 1989 to be completed by January l, 1991. This stipulation has not been met. The new petitioner has stated that the requirements for his building can be met immediately and the remaining building will also be brought into compliance. Stipulation #5 required that the dropped trailers that were stored in front of the building be removed, or a special use permit for exterior storage issued to the property owners. The property owners have removed these dropped trailers from the property. Stipulation #6 required a screened storage area for the vehicles awaiting to be repaired. It was to be completed within one month of the connection to the sanitary sewer. This stipulation has also not been met but again the new tenant has a specific proposal to complete this stipulation. The petitioner has indicated that he would like the ability to have a gravel surface for the wrecked vehicles. The petitioner is concerned that moving the vehicles in and out of this area will cause damage to a bituminous surface. He would also like to use this area for a small detention area. The Engineering Department has advised that the gravel area be six inches to one foot below the bituminous surface in order to promote proper drainage. Given the small size of the storage area and its location on the property, a gravel surface in this area is acceptable: The storage area is also proposed to be screened by an eight foot wood fence. Stipulation #7 required that the parking lot be hardsurfaced, striped, lined with concrete curb, and landscaping installed as per the staff recommended plan by January 1, 1992. The new petitioner indicate that he will comply with this requirement this summer; however, he will be applying for a variance request to reduce the front ya�d setback from 20 feet to 10 feet in order to allow for more parking area and also to waive the concrete curbing requirement at the rear of the lot to facilitate drainage from the rear portion of the property. The petitioner does not want to install the concrete curbing along the north side of the property to the rear of the easterly building and along the proposed gravel area. We advised the petitioner that the Appeals Commission would have to make a recommendation on these variances before final action by the City Council. These issues are separate from the special use permit issue. 5G Re-Issue SP #89-08 May 31, 1991 Page 3 Analysis The new petitioner understands the requirements of completing the parking lot improvements, constructing the storage fence, and meeting the building code improvements. The petitioner operates an existing auto body repair business at 2555 California Street N.E. Mr. Awaijane also lives in Fridley at 5096 Hughes Avenue N.E. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council re-issue special use permit, SP #89-08, to Samir Awaijane with the following stipulations: 1. The special use permit shall be limited to Samir Awaijane, and is not transferrable to another tenant without City Council approval. 2. The special use permit shall be reviewed on an annual basis by staff with a report to the City Council. Should a hearing by the City Cauncil be necessary due to lack of compliance by the petitioner, the item shall be scheduled for City Council consideration as soon as possible. 3. The building code improvements outlined in Darrel Clark's letter of August 30, 1989 shall be completed far the building at the rear of the property by July 15, 1991 and for the remaining building by September 1, 1991. 4. The storage area for the auto body outdoor storage must be screened in compliance with the petitioner's submitted site plan which includes an eight foot wood fence enclosing the storage area. The storage area for the wrecked vehicles may contain a gravel surface. The storage area screening shall be completed by August 1, 1991. 5. The parking lot shall be hardsurfaced, striped, lined with concrete curb, and landscaping installed as per the staff recommended plan by January 1, 1992, unless the City Council, via a variance request, approves an alternate plan. BD/dn M-91-383 5H_ May 31, 1991 Mayor and Councilmembers City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: I want to take a moment of your time to introduce myself and my family to you. My name is Samir Awaijane. I, along with my wife, Mindy, and our son, Alexander, have lived at 5096 Hughes for the past seven years. We are expecting our second child in early July. We enjoy living in Fridley and plan to do so for a very long time. I am a body shop owner and am currently selling my business located at 2555 California Street NE, Minneapolis. I have become a partner in the 7570 Corporation which owns the property located at that address on Highway 65 in our City. I am in the process of remodeling the back building there and hope to occupy the body shop on July 1, 1991. I am aware of past promises that have not been kept for various reasons with reference to our property at 7570 Highway 65 and want you, the City Council, to know that my partners and I will be bringing this property up to code in a very short time. Yours Truly, �� , � c--'l.�^' "^''�-J ��2._�' Samir Awaijane 5! . ��'qI 5.� �%�� I . i � �; J, .� 3 � . �; � 0 � � � �� 0. � � h � � R 0 R /1� ---�,1 s�� ORDIUANCE NO. CITY OF FRIDLEY ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN INTERIM ORDINANCE PLACING A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL USE PERMITS FOR AUTO BODY REPAIR BUSINESSES AND PROHIBITING THEIR LOCATION WITHIN THE CITY WHILE THE MORATORIUM IS IN EFFECT. The Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: SECTION 1 PURPOSE AND INTENT The City Council finds that an interim ordinance placing a moratorium on the location and establishment of auto body repair businesses is necessary to protect the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the citizens of the community; and The City Council finds that an interim ordinance piacing a moratorium on the location of auto body repair businesses is necessary in order to permit the planning process to take place and to allow the City Staff, Planning Commission, and Council to proceed in an orderly fashion to adopt a permanent ordinance requiring the owners and operators of auto repair businesses to obt�in a license to operate within the City. SECTION 2 AUTHORITY This ordinance is adopted pursuant to that authority granted the City in Minnesota Statutes Annotated §462.355, Subd. 4, entitled "Interim Ordinance". SECTION 3 DEFINITIONS The City Council hereby directs the City Staff to study and prepare an ordinance requiring owners and operators of auto repair businesses to obtain a business license, and to schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this interim ordinance. The City Staff is further directed to report the results of their studies and recommendations along with the-recommendations of the Planning Commission as soon as the Planning Commission has completed their hearings and recommendations_ SECTION 4 VIOLATION The City may enforce any provision of this ordinance by mandamus injunction or other appropriate civil remedy in any court of competent jurisdiction. 5.5 SECTION 5 SEVERABILITY Every section, provision or part of this ordinance is declared severable from every other section, provision or part thereof to the extent that if any section, provision or part of � this ordinance shall be held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not invalidate any other section, provision or part thereof. This ordinance shall become effective fifteen (15) days after publication and shall be in effect for a period of vne hundred and eighty (180) days from the date hereof. PASSED by the City Council of the City.of Fridley, Minnesata, the day of , 1991. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor -2- 5.5A 0 � Councilmember following resolution, the reading of which unanimous consent, and moved its adoption: CITY OF FRIDLEY COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RE50LUTION NO. introduced the was dispensed with by A RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND MODIFYING THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS N0. 1 THROUGH NO. 10 TO REFLECT INCREASED PROJECT COSTS AND INCREASED GEOGRAPHIC AREA WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1; AND ESTABLISHING PROPOSED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 11 AND APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE PROPOSED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN RELATING THERETO. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. It has been proposed and approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") that the Council modify, approve and adopt the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 to reflect increased project costs and increased geographic area, pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended and supplemented from time to time. 1.02. It has been further proposed and approved by the Authority that the Council modify, approve and adopt the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment FinanCing Districts No. 1 through No. 10 to reflect increased project costs and increased geographic area within Redevelopment Project No. 1, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 through 469.179, inclusive, as amended and supplemented from time to time. 1.03. It has been further proposed and approved by the Authority that the Council approve the establishment of proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 and approve and adopt the proposed Tax increment Financing Plan relating thereto pursuant � to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.i74 to 469.179, inclusive, as amended and supplemented from time to time. 1.04. The Authority has caused to be prepared, and this Council has investigated the facts with respect thereto, a Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 reflecting increased project costs and increased geographic area; Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 through No. 10 reflecting increased project costs and geographic area within Redevelopment Project No. 1; and a proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan for proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11, defining more precisely the property to be included, the public costs to be incurred and other matters relating thereto. 1.05. The Authority and the Council have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the modification, approval and adoption of the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 through No. 10, and prior to the establishment of proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 and the approval and adoption of �he proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto. 1.06. The Council hereby determines that it is necessary and in the best interests of the City and the Authority at this time to modify, approve and adopt the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 to reflec� increased project costs and increased geographic area; to modify, approve and adopt the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 through No. 10 to reflect increased project costs and increased geographic area within Redevelopment Project No. 1; and to establish proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 and to approve and adopt the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto. Section 2. Findinas. 2.01. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the assistance to be provided through the adoption and implementation of the Modified Redevelopment Plan, Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans and proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan are necessary to assure the development and redevelopment of Redevelopment Project No. 1, 2.02, The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the Modified Redevelopment Plan, Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans and proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan conform to the general plan for the development and redevelopment oi the City as a whole in that they are consistent with the City's comprehensive plan. E • �1 2.03. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the Modified Redevelopment Plan, Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans and proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole for the development and redevelopment of Redevelopment Project No. 1 by private enterprise and it is contemplated that the development and redevelopment thereof will be carried out pursuant to a redevelopment contract with a private developer. 2.04. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the modification, approval and adoption of the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1; the modification, approval and adoption of the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 through No. 10; and the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 and the approval and adoption of the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto by the City is intended and, in the judgement of this Council, its effect will be to promote the purposes and objectives specified in this Section 2 and otherwise promote certain public purposes and accomplish certain objectives as specified in the Modified Redevelopment Plan, Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans and proposed Tax increment Financing Plan. 2.05. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 constitutes a"tax increment financing district" as defined in Minnesota 5tatutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 9, and further constitutes a type of "redevelopment district" as defined in Minnesota 5tatutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. 2.06. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the proposed development or redevelopment in proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11, in the opinion of the Council, would not occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary. 2.07. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the City made the above findings stated in this Section 2 and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in the Modified Redevelopment Plan, the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans, the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan and Exhibit A of this Resolution. Section 3. Modification, Approval and Adoption of the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 3.01. The modification of the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 reflecting increased project costs and increased geographic area and the approval and adoption 3 .: of the Modified Redevelopment Plan relating thereto are hereby approved and adopted by the Council of the City of Fridley. ' Section 4. Modification. Anproval and Adoption of the Modified Tax Increment Financina Plans for Tax Increment Financinq Districts No. 1 throuah No. 10. 4.01. The modification of the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 through No. 10 reflecting increased project costs and increased geographic area within Redevelopment District No. 1 and the approval and adoption of the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans relating thereto are hereby approved and adopted by the Council of the City of Fridley. Section 5. Approval of the Establishment of Proposed Tax Increment Financina District No. 11 and the Approval and Ado tion of the Proposed Tax Increment FinancinQ Plan Relatinq Thereto. 5.01. The establishment of proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 within Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the approval and adoption of the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto are hereby approved and adopted by the Council of the City of Fridley. Section 6. FilinQ of Plans. 6.01. Upon approval and adoption of the Modified Redevelopment Plan, the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans and the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan (collectively the Plans ), the City shall cause said Plans to be filed with the Commissioner of Revenue. Adopted by the Council of the City this 1st day of July, 1991 . The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: 4 s C Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor CERTIFICATION I, Shirley A. Haapala, the duly qualified Clerk of the C of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota, hereby certify t the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the City Council on the 1st day 1991 . ity hat of July, Shirley A. Haapala, City Clerk 5 . � �— EXHIBTT A TO RESOLUTION NO. The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan for proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3, are as follows: 1. Finding that proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 is an "redevelopment district" as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. Proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 consists of four parcels of land which qualify as a redevelopment district under Minnesota Statutes, 5ection 469.174, Subdivision 10. 2. Finding that the proposed development or redevelopment, in the opinion of the Council, would not occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary. City staff has reviewed the available costs for the development including the costs of the public improvements and the rehabilitation of existing structures. Due to these high costs, the project would not be financially feasible without the City's assistance. 3. Finding that the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission of the City of Fridley has reviewed the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan for proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 and has determined that the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan for proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 conforms to the comprehensive plan of the City. 4. Finding that the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan for proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole for the development or redevelopment of Redevelopment Project No. 1 by private en�erprise. The project to be developed (two commercial facilities) wil.l be located within proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 and will consist of the rehabilitation of one or more existing buildings and the construction of a new building. The rehabilitation and construction will eliminate a blighting influence, increase the tax base and provide additional job opportunities. 'C.� �� RSSOLIITION ii0. - 1991 RESOLIITION RECOMMENDING CERTAIN CHANGES ZN TA% INCR.EMENT FZNANCING DZSTRICT NO. 11 II�iDER C23RTAIN CONDITIONS WHEREAS, the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the Fridley City Council have established Tax Increment Financing District No. 11; and WHEREAS, Tax Increment Financing District No. 11 incTudes three parcels north of Osborne Road; and WHEREAS, there is as yet no definite developerjproperty owner commitment to redevelop property located on those three parcels. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley that if no development agreement is in place for these properties by July 1, 1996, the City Council encourages the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority to remove the three parcels from Tax Increment Financing District No. 11. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THTS DAY OF JULY, 1991. ATTEST: SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA. - CITY CLERK WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR 6F CITY OF FRIDLEY M E M O R A N D O M � E � �� TO: AILLIAM W. BIIRNS, CITY MANAGER �"� ��'� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SIIBJECT: MINNESOTA LAWFIIL GAMBLING APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM LANFIIL GAMBLING FOR TOTINO-GRACE HIGH SCHOOL DATE: JUNE 21, 1991 The attached resolution approves the application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Application for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License for Totino-Grace High School. The Totino-Grace High School will be holding a raffle on January 2, 1992. Minnesota State Statutes requires a resolution approving or denying any type of qambling of permit. The application has been approved by the James P. Hill, Public 5afety Director. 7 RESOLUTION NO. - 1991 RE30LIITION IN SUPPORT OF A MINNESOTA LAAFIIL GAMBLING APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM LAAFIIL GAMBLING LICEN3E TO TOTINO-GRACE HIGH SCHOOL WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has been served with a copy of a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Application for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License for Totino-Grace High School; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has not found any reason to restrict the location for the charitable gambling operation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley approves the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Application for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License for Totino-Grace High School for a raffle to be held January 2, 1992. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1991. WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR ATTEST: SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK 7A �<�� FOR 80ARD USE ONLY FEE CHK LG220 Minnesota Lau�fui Garnbling INIT OATE `p�"�""490' Application for Egemption from Lawful Gambling License Fill in Uie unshaded portions of this applica6on for exempdon and send it in ai least 45 days be%re your gamWing adivity for processing. Toti no-�race tii gh Scliool � X--98018-91-001 �treet city state ip e 1350 Gardena Avenue Fridlev� MN 55432 :hief executive officer Phone Treasurer Brother Milton Barker,FSC�612 �571�9116 Thomas Zellmer :urrenVprevious ezempt B-01847 003 �612 � 566-3 Attach prool o/ nonprofit status which shows Check the box below which indicates your type of organizafion that your organization is nonpro�t ❑ Fraternai ❑ Religious O Veterans C73 Other non-profit C�1 IRS designation O Certification of good standing from the Mi�nesota Secretary of State's otfice ❑ Affiliate of parent no�profit organization (charter) Stteet Date(s) of acuviry ti no--Grace lii gh School CitY-------- -------= State Zp aode I Counry MN I declare all information submitted to fhe Gambling Control Division is true, accurate, I have received a copy of this applicadon. This application will be reviewed by the Gambling Control Division and will become effective 30 days from the date of receipt by the city or counry, unless the local govemment passes a resolution to specifically prohibit the activiry. A copy of that resolu6on must be received by the Gambling Control Division within 30 days of the date filled in below. Cities of the first dass have 60 days in which to disallow the activiry. City or County Township City of county name. , Township name � �: � �� --� ,_ -�.: < � c. l_� t Signature .pers n receiving appli ti n Signature of person reoeiving application , , / _ � ��__��.% l; �/ C�/. l� «/ '�c. �:; i: -- � ; r' 1. 1 L_.* t i. ,. wnu - eoua Pi�k - -pgan@sEm Vdlow ••Boerd reWrns lo Organizadon b oompwe cnaeee xe.a c.oie -•-• c�y « cwny . I �'. ) � _ ; � Mail with $25 permit fee and copy of proof of nonprofit status to: Department of Gaming - Gambling Control Division Rosewood PI uth, 3rd Floor 1711 W. aG�i�y Road B Roseville. MN 55113 Date � _ � . DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Community Development Department NG DIVISION City of Fridley June 27, 1991 � Qi- p William Burns, City Manager A� e�� Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director First Reading of an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning, ZOA #$9-04, by Ashland Oil at 5701 University Avenue N.E. Attached is the ordinance rezoning Lot 4, Block 6, City View Addition, from R-2 to C-2, in order to allow Ashland Oil to combine this lot with the existing Rapid Oil property in order to construct a new building. The original public hearing on this item occurred on November 13, 1989 and was continued and concluded on June 17, 1991. The Planning Commission originally recommended approval subject to three stipulations. One of the stipulations based approval on the submitted site plan. Since the plan will need to be modified to show location of the remediation equipment, and since this has been addressed by one of the stipulations in the special use permit, we are recommending that particular stipulation be deleted. Pending the outcome of the HRA discussion on redevelopment in this particular location and the outcome of the City Council's decision on the special use permit request, it is recommended that the City Council approve the first reading of the ordinance, subject to three stipulations: 1. 2. BD/dn Compliance with the stipulations of the special use permit request, SP #89-12. Approval of the special use permit request, SP #89-12. M-91-472 � ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS The Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Appendix D of the City Code of Fridley is amended as hereinafter indicated. Be and is hereby rezoned subject to stipulations adopted at the City Council meeting of July 1, 1991. SECTION 2. The tract or area within the County of Anoka and the City of Fridley and described as: Lot 4, Block 6, City View Addition, generally located east of 5701 University Avenue N.E. Is hereby designated to be in the Zoned District C- 2, General Business. SECTION 3. That the Zoning Administrator is directed to change the official zoning map to show said tract or area to be rezoned from Zoned District R-2, Two Family Dwelling to C-2, General Business. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1991. ATTEST: SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK Public Hearing: November 13, 1989 June 17, 1991 First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: : � WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BEPTEMBER 27, 1989 - PAGE 2 MoTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Saba, to inue on the table special use permit, SP #89-11, by Orthodox Church of the Resurrection of Christ. IIPON A VOICE VOT VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION IINANIMOUSLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING ZOA #89-04. BY ASHLAND OIL COMPANY (RAPID OIL): To rezone Lot 4, Block 6, City View Addition, from R-2, Two Family Dwelling, to C-2, General Business, the same being 5701 University Avenue N.E. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public Aearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:34 P.M. Ms. Dacy stated the property is located on the northeast corner of 57th Avenue and University Avenue, immediately east of and adjacent to the existing Rapid Oil facility. The property is vacant and measures approximately 40 ft. in width and 140 ft. in depth. At the September 13, 1989, meeting, the Planning Commission considered a special use permit by Ashland Oil to reconstruct a new facility on the property. The site plan included in the agenda packet is a revised site plan which meets all the setback requirements and lot area requirements in the C-2 district. Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner is proposing to relocate the access drives into the site so that the parking setbacks can be met. Two existing driveway cuts into the property will be removed. Ms. Dacy stated that in evaluating a rezoning request, the City should look at whether or not the proposed district is compatible with existing zoning and uses and whether or not the uses contained in that district would be compatible with adjacent properties. The existing zoning pattern in the area is C-2, General Business, along the east side of University Avenue, abutted by R-2, Multiple Family, or R-1, Single Family, to the east. Because this proposed request would merely extend that commercial zoning 40 ft. to the east, the rezoning should not have an adverse impact to the adjacent uses or zoning districts. Ms. Dacy stated that in the Staff Report on page 2, 3rd paragraph, the first sentence under "Analysis" should be changed to read: "The uses proposed in the C-2 district will � be compatible with the surrounded uses and zoning." Ms. Dacy stated staff had advised the petitioner that the City has limited the use of automabile-related uses along major entrances into the City, mainly University Avenue. The City has implemented this policy primarily through the use of its development contracts . . � � .F �- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BEPTEMBER 27, 1989 - PAGE 3 with the HRA, specifically on the Vantage property development at 81st Avenue where The Wholesale Club is located. The HRA is currently studying the 57th Place site as a potential redevelopment site; however, the HRA wants to wait to evaluate the soil tests currently being conducted on the site to determine whether or not a redevelopment project should be pursued at this location. Ms. Dacy stated that regarding the issue of light rail transit, staff sent Ashland Oil's site plan to BRW, the consultant for Anoka County, and received BRW�s comments back on Tuesday, September 26. Anoka County is looking for a station location to the south of the site where SuperAmerica and the used car lot are located. That is the first priority. Whether or not the station is located there depends on future decisions as to whether or not the LRT will go over I-694 or will go underneath the bridge at I-694. The second alternative would be to locate a station on the subject property. BRW's comments, however, were that it was very early in their planning process to make any commitments at this time, but they were encouraged to see that the Rapid Oil building was moved farther to the east. That would give them additional room if additional area is needed beyond the University Avenue right-of- way at this location. Ms. Dacy stated that at this time, the proposed site plan does not conflict with the intent of the plans for the LRT; however, the petitioner should be aware that the site is a second alternative as a station location. Ms. Dacy stated staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval subject to three stipulations: 1. 2. 3. Compliance with the site plan submitted with the application. Compliance with all the stipulations of the special use permit request, SP #89-12. Approval of the special use permit request, SP #89-12, by the City Council. Mr. Jack Lemley, Ashland Oil, stated he is representing Rapid Oil. He stated he did talk to BRW that day, and it was his understanding after talking to them, that it is going to be quite awhile before the LRT is built. Their guess was about 10 years. He stated, as pointed out by staff, they are setting the building back where it should not cause any problems for a future LRT. Staff has done a very good job in helping them lay out these plans. Mr. Lemley stated he has no problem with any of the stipulations proposed by staff. : PLANNING COMMIBSION I+IEETING. BEPTEMHER 27. 1989 - PAGE 4 MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Barna, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, 11LL VOTING l►7C$, CHaIRPER80N BETSOLD DECL�RED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBI,Y. OM TION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Barna, to recommend to City Council approval of rezoning request, ZOA �89-04, by Ashland Oil Company (Rapid oil) to rezone Lot 4, Block 6, City View Addition, from R-2, Two Family Dwelling, to C-2, General Business, the same being 5701 University Avenue N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the site plan submitted with the application. 2. Compliance with all the stipulations of the special use permit request, SP �89-12. 3. Approval of the special use penait request, SP �89-12, by the City Council. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, 11LL VOTING !►YE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. Ms. Dacy stated the City Council will establish a public hearing date on the rezoning at their October 23, 1989, meeting, so both the special use permit request and rezoning request will go to the City Council on November 13, 1989. 3. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY SIGN CODE: Ms. Dacy stated staff welcomed any proposed changes, c ents, or suggestions to the amendments as proposed by staff. Mr. Betzold referred to #36, "Special Event", er Section 214.02, DEFINITIONS, which states: "An event ch occurs within a designated time period on an annual ba '" He suggested it be changed to read: "An event which occ s within a designated time period for 'nstance on an annua as's ." Mr. Barna referred to Section 4.07.O1.B (Changeable Signs) which states: "The message shall t change more than once every fifteen (15) minutes except for a gn displaying time,�temperature, and/or date." He stated it sh ld be changed to read: "The message shall not change more than ce every fifteen (15) minutes except for the dis la of time m erature and o date." The present wording sounds like a s' n displaying time, temperature, and/or date can change more n every fifteen minutes. Mr. Sab referred to Section 214.06.03 (Political Signs). He stat he would like to see a reduction in the maximum allowed size f political signs (32 sq. ft.). : � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 19, 1991 ----------------------------------------------------------------- CALL TO ORDER• Chairperson Betzold called the June 19, 1991, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Don Betzold, Sue Sherek, Connie Modig, Brad Sielaff Members Absent: Larry Kuechle, Dean Saba, Dave Kondrick Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Ronald Swenson, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E. Paul & Eileen R�ider, 5875 2nd Street N.E. Pete Meisner, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E. Peggy Walker, 6339 5th Street N.E. Karen Moormann, 5850 - 2-1/2 Street N.E. APPROVAL OF MAY 22, 1991 PLANNING COMMTSSION MINUTES• MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to approve the May 22, 1991, Planning Commission minutes as written. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYg, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MAY 22� 1991, PLANNING COMMISSION MINIITES APPROVED AS WRITTEN. 1. CONSIDERATION OF A VACATION SAV #91-01 BY EUGENE AND JEAN HAGBERG: To vacate the 12 foot alley in Block 23, Hyde Park, for a distance of approximately 243 feet south of the south line of 59th Avenue, generally located north of 58th Avenue, south of 59th Avenue, east of 2nd Street, and west of 2-1/2 Street. Mr. Betzold stated that this item was tabled at the last meeting in order to obtain additional information and a legal opinion from the City Attorney. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to remove this item from the table. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. McPherson stated this is a request to vacate the north 243 feet of an alley that is located in the 5800 block of 2nd and 2-1/2 Streets. She stated at the last Planning Commission meeting, there � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 2 were several questions raised regarding the effect of this vacation on Mr. Meisner's property, 5834 - 2 1/2 Street N.E. Ms. McPherson stated a memo has been received from the City Attorney, and it is his opinion that preventing access to Mr. Meisner's property would constitute a taking. She stated the City Attorney suggested that one of the alternatives discussed by the Planning Commission be implemented, if the alley is vacated. She stated the alternatives are that an access easement be obtained or that Mr. Meisner be allowed a paved parking area in the front of his home. Ms. McPherson stated the apartment owners at 5851 2nd Street and 5846 2-1/2 Street were contacted to determine if they would provide Mr. Meisner with an access easement or a place to park his vehicle on a permanent basis. She stated both property owners indicated they would be reluctant to provide Mr. Meisner with any type of access easement. Ms. McPherson stated the City Assessor, Mr. Madsen, was consulted and it was his opinion that there would be a devaluation in the property, if the vacation is approved. She stated Mr. Madsen felt the property was not landlocked, but there would be no area to provide access to a garage, should one be constructed. Ms. McPherson stated it is staff's recommendation that Mr. Meisner have some type of access, prior to approval of the vacation, either by an access easement or paving the parking area in his front yard. Mr. Ron Swenson, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E., stated there is an alley a block away on 60th and 2-1/2 Streets that is maintained by the City and asked why this alley cannot be improved and maintained. Mr. Betzold stated his position is that if this vacation is not . approved, the City should improve the alley and pave it. Mr. Swenson stated it seems neither the neighbors nor the City are willing to pay for the improvement. He stated you cannot drive a vehicle in the alley without it getting scratched. Mr. Pete Meisner, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E., stated he does need some type of access to his property as he wants to construct a garage at some future date. He stated if the alley is open, he can construct a garage in the rear and, if the alley is vacated, he would need a tuck-under garage. Mr. Meisner stated he understands the City is not willing to consider a tuck-under garage. Ms. McPherson stated she did not know where Mr. Meisner obtained this information as there are several tuck-under garages on other properties in the City. She stated unless there is a structural problem, she could not see any reason for the City not allowing Mr. Meisner to construct a tuck-under garage. 9.1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 3 Mr. Meisner stated his only concern is that he has some type of access. Mr. Paul Reider, 5875 2nd Street, stated he felt the off-street parking in front of Mr. Meisner's home would give him the optimum access. He stated he favors vacation of the north end of the alley as it is a drive-through and not maintained. He questioned who is liable if someone is injured as there are children riding dirt bikes in the alley. He stated he is concerned with the safety, and the four landowners to the north are looking for some relief to the activities that occur in the alley. Mr. Betzold stated if the north end of the alley is vacated, there has been testimony that it would be a lot more difficult for Mr. Meisner to access through the south end. He stated also that if the north end of the alley is vacated, there may be a request to vacate the south end. He stated he would not iike to be placed in the position that by approving one vacation, the other one would have to be granted. Mr. Betzold stated it seems there are problems with any approach that is taken. He stated he reviews this from a policy standpoint, however, the Council would also get involved in the budgeting issue, if the alley were to be improved. Mr. Sielaff asked what constitutes adequate access and if there was access only from the south, if this was adequate. Ms. Dacy stated there is access from the south, but history has shown that this has not always been available. She stated what the City Attorney has stated is that Mr. Meisner may have no means to get to his property and that may constitute a taking af property. She stated her concern is that Mr. Meisner's property is not typical and does not have an access from the street and his sole access is from the alley. Ms. Peggy Walker, 6339 5th Street N.E., stated she felt the alley should not be vacated. She stated she has not observed vehicles in and out of the alley, except the vehicles from the apartment building and Mr. Reider's neighbors. She stated she felt the apartment owners wanted the alley vacated so they can dump their snow in this area. Ms. Elaine Reider, 5875 2nd Street, stated she has cleaned the alley and removed debris. She stated she has talked with property owners regarding the alley and no one is even concerned or cares about it. She stated she wanted the partying that goes on the alley to stop, but wanted Mr. Meisner to have access. Ms. Dacy stated in regard to the question of liability which was raised by Mr. Reider, the City would be liable. She stated there are a number of paper streets and alleys in the City that are on the books and not improved. She stated if something happened on 9.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 4 City owned property, anyone would have the right to file a claim. Mr. Betzold stated if someone was injured and wanted to file a claim, there is nothing that prohibits them from doing so. Ms. Modig questioned how giving access to Mr. Meisner would affect the parking at one of the apartment buildings. Ms. Dacy stated that in the case of the property owner to the north, if Mr. Meisner was provided access, he would have to access through the apartment's parking spaces. She stated the apartment owner did not want to give up any parking spaces in order to provide this access. Ms. McPherson stated as far as the apartment owner to the west, the area where Mr. Meisner would access is where the dumpster and fencing is located. Mr. Meisner stated he would be willing to clean the alley to a certain extent, but was told by City staff this was not a good idea as he would be on someone else's property. He stated he was advised that the City would not clean the alley. Ms. Dacy stated she knows the cleaning issue is frustrating for the property owners. She stated the current policy is that the City is not maintaining the alley, but as Ms. Reider testified, she has done some cleaning in the alley. She stated she believed the apartment owner must plow the alley for his tenants to get in and out. No other persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed vacation request. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to close the informal public hearing. OPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY, AND THE HEARING CLOSED AT 8:05 P.M. Ms. Dacy stated if the Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of this vacation request, the staff recommends that the petitioner pay for the cost of preparing and installing the dead- end alley signs and provide a ten foot drainage and utility easement over the vacated alley. She stated a provision should also be made for Mr. Meisner's property for an access easement or a paved area in the front yard so he has 100 percent access at all times. Mr. Betzold stated it seems the provision for an access easement is not feasible since the apartment owners are not willing to provide the access. He stated it seems any approach that is taken is liable to cost the City. He stated he did not know how to 9.3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 5 advise the Council as they make the spending decisions. Mr. Betzold stated from a policy standpoint, there is a problem that this is a nuisance and does not doubt it is an eyesore and, for this reason, probably should be vacated. Mr. Betzold stated, however, he cannot ignore the issue that by approving the vacation, it would be taking property from Mr. Meisner and he would probably have to be compensated. He stated Mr. Meisner has already been told he cannot park on the street, but he cannot be ordered to install a parking space in his front yard. He stated if the north end of the alley is vacated, Mr. Meisner may not be able to access on the south which may constitute a depreciation in his property. Mr. Sielaff stated he is inclined to deny the vacation request due to all the uncertainty. Mr. Betzold stated he is not opposed to the vacation, however, there are consequences if it is not vacated. He stated he felt the best recommendation he could make is not to vacate the alley. He felt if the alley is not vacated, the area probably should be considered for upgrading and improvement. He stated this would have to be the Council's decision as there would be considerable cost involved to improve it and they may wish to leave it as it now exists. Ms. Sherek stated if the vacation is going to cause a hardship to a person who is not a party to the vacation request, she would not be in favor of it. MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend to City Council denial of Vacation Request, SAV #91-01, by Eugene and Jean Hagberg, to vacate the 12 foot alley in Block 23, Hyde Park, for a distance of approximately 243 feet south of the south line of 59th Avenue, generally located north of 58th Avenue, south of 59th Avenue, east of 2nd Street, and west of 2-1/2 Street. OPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY. Ms. Dacy stated the City Council will hold the public hearing on this vacation request on July 22, 1991, but action on the request will not take place until the Council's first meeting in August. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP #91-07, BY BIZAL. INC • Per Section 205.18.03.C(4) of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum lot coverage from 40� to 42.5� on Lot l, Block 3, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, generally located at 7880 Ranchers Road N.E. 9.4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE i9 1991 PAGE 6 MOTSON by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY, AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 8:23 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated this special use permit is for property located at the intersection of Ranchers Road and 79th Avenue. She stated the request is to increase the maximum allowable lot coverage from 40 to 42.5 percent to allow an expansion to an existing building. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has also applied for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet. She stated the Appeals Commission recommended approval of the variance with the stipulation that a lot split be completed within two years to bring the property into compliance. Ms. McPherson stated the property is zoned M-2 and the building is used for manufacturing and warehousing.. She stated the lot to the south is currently vacant and owned by the petitioner's father. She stated as the two properties are owned by two separate entities (the subject parcel is owned by the Bizal Corporation), a combination of the properties is not possible without a transfer of ownership. Ms. McPherson stated under Section 205.18.03.C.(4) of the City Code, two standards must be met prior to the City granting a special use permit to increase the maximum lot coverage by up to ten percent. She stated the first standard requires an evaluation to determine if a reduction in the total building and parking coverage can be achieved. Ms. McPherson stated, in this case, the expansion would increase the building coverage, but not impact the parking coverage. Ms. McPherson stated the other standard is whether all ordinance requirements can be met, including but not limited to parking, storm water management, and landscaping. She stated the current use of the building is divided between manufacturing space at 15,580 square feet and warehouse space at 5,870 square feet. She stated the code requires the number of parking spaces needed for the existing uses to be 42 and the site currently has 27 spaces. Ms, McPherson stated the proposed addition of 5,480 square feet would require an additional three parking spaces on the site. She stated while the site provides adequate parking for its 25 employees, it clearly does not meet the code requirements based on the types of uses within the building. Ms. McPherson stated the proposed warehouse expansion would eliminate area for the "proof of parking" which is provided for in 9.5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 7 the code. She stated the "proof of parking" means a property owner does not need to physically provide the required number of spaces, but needs to maintain an area where the required spaces could be provided if needed. Ms. McPherson stated a grading and drainage plan should be submitted to insure that the storm water detention requirements are met. Ms . McPherson stated one of the issues that has been brought up during discussions with the petitioner, Mr. Bizal, and his architect, Mr. Samuelson, is the vacant lot to the south. She stated one of the alternatives proposed by staff was a lot split to split the vacant property in order to provide adequate area to meet the code requirements. She stated the lot split process would prevent expedient construction and the petitioner is in dire need of warehouse space for storage of raw materials. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is willing to complete a lot split within two years. Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending denial of the special use permit as the proposed expansion does not meet the standards set forth in the Zoning Code. She stated if the Commission chooses to recommend approval, staff would recommend that when the lot split is completed, 55 feet should be split from the adjacent vacant lot to provide "proof of parking", the petitioner shall submit a grading and drainage plan showing where storm water detention and retention shall occur; and variance request, VAR #91- 14, shall be approved. Mr. Betzold asked what would guarantee that the lot split would proceed, if this special use permit is approved. Ms. McPherson stated if the petitioner fails to apply for the lot split, the City could process a revocation of the special user permit which would then render the property non-conforming. She stated in talking with mortgage companies, one of their concerns for financing is if a property is in conformance with the codes of the City. She stated if the special use permit is revoked, this could make acquiring a loan more difficult for the property owner. Mr. Betzold asked if the petitioner's father, who owns the vacant lot, could deed the property over to this parcel. Ms. McPherson stated this was discussed at length with the petitioner, Mr. Bizal. She stated Mr. Bizal's father purchased this vacant lot for investment purposes and is not interested, at this time, in a transfer of property. Mr. Mike Bizal, Vice-President of Bizal, Inc., stated his father bought this vacant lot on a contract with the idea that this would be used for expansion space or investment. He stated Bizal, Inc. 9.6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 8 paid taxes on this vacant lot and the lot was held in escrow for future expansion. He stated Bizal, Inc. owns the building and understands if it was ever sold, the City would want adequate parking on the site. He stated, however, he wanted to begin this addition as soon as possible. Mr. Betzold asked Mr. Bizal if his father could deed the property to Bizal, Inc. and then combine the two parcels into one. He stated by having two lots in different ownership, the City is taking the chance that the lot split would not proceed. Ms. Dacy stated the lot split will still have to be processed unless the property was deeded and the City held the deed. Mr. Bizal stated his father has agreed to the lot split, but did not want to deed the entire parcel, if it was not necessary. Ms. Dacy stated if Mr. Bizal's father deeds over the entire parcel so the property is under one ownership, the special use permit and variance will not be needed. Ms. Sherek stated a variance and special use permit are granted when special circumstances are involved. She felt in this case, because Mr. Bizal's father was the owner of the vacant lot, this criteria does not exist as other alternatives are available. Mr. Bizal asked if the vacant lot was transferred to create one parcel, how soon he could begin construction. Ms. Sherek stated construction could begin as soon as this transaction is recorded since the variance and special use permit will not be needed. Ms. Dacy stated the documents should be submitted to the City to prove that this has been recorded. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE � ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ONANIMOIISLY AND PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:48 P.M. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to recommend to City Council denial of Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, per Section 205.18.03.C.(4) of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum lot coverage from 40% to 42.5� on Lot 1, Block 3, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, generally located at 7880 Ranchers Road N.E.. Further, a transfer of ownership is suggested in order to eliminate the need for a variance and special use permit. UPON A VOICE VOTE � ALL VOTING AYE � CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY. 9.7 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 9 3. CONSIDERATION OF ANOKA COUNTY REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT: Ms. Dacy stated she wanted to have two speakers here this evening, Mr. Steve Wilson from the Metropolitan Council and Mr. Scott Thompson from the Metropolitan Transit Commission, however, they were not able to attend the meeting. Ms. Dacy stated she wanted to point out that a number of the Commission members had concerns about the metropolitan area traffic shifting to interurban versus downtown orientation and that is true. She stated there is still enough employment activity downtown that there is still a significant amount of ridership activity. Ms. Dacy stated she took a tour of the 394 Corridor, with representatives of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, which will have three or four major park and ride sites. She stated of the two that are open, one is completely full every day and the other is not experiencing as much parking and ridership because routes of the bus system do not coordinate well with the 394 traffic. She stated this is very similar as to what would be happening in our area. Ms. Dacy stated the Commission has a letter from Mr. Wilson of the Metropolitan Council regarding transit ridership in Fridley. She stated the Metropolitan Council is indicating they have a very conservative estimate for the ridership in the Northeast Corridor. Ms. Dacy stated the Metropolitan Transit Commission conducted a route by route count on ridership which she briefly reviewed. She stated from the public's view, in general, they feel there is "no one on the bus" and, to a certain extent, that is not true. She stated there are high ridership counts. Ms. Dacy stated when the preliminary design plans for the light rail transit system are received this fall, recommendations will have to be made regarding the location of stations. Mr. Betzold stated it has to be assumed that light rail will be a reality at some future date and to figure out the problems, as it relates to Fridley, such as where stations should be located. Ms. Sherek stated in looking at the proposal for the various stations, it seemed the kiss and ride was not a good proposal for the intersection and University and Mississippi. She asked if there were studies on the impact of fewer, but larger station sites as opposed to one every few blocks. She stated there is a lot of land that needs to be developed at 57th Avenue and possibly it may be better to have a larger site than several small parking sites all along University Avenue. . • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 19, 1991 PAGE 10 Ms. Dacy stated these are the type of recommendations the Planning Commission will have to make within the next several months. Ms. Dacy stated regional agencies and the Metropolitan Transit commission have adopted policy statements stating light rail transit is a viable form of transit. She stated they adopted a 20 year plan to have this Northeast Corridor and four or five other corridors in the metropolitan area. She stated if the City is not in favor of a light rail transit system, she felt there should be some alternative. Mr. Sielaff asked if the cost would have any bearing on whether light rail transit would become a reality. Ms. Dacy stated it would be the responsibility of the State to determine how light rail transit would be funded. She stated if there is no financing, there is the possibility it would not proceed. Ms. Sherek asked, as this point, what funding is being used for the Transit Authority to proceed. Ms. Dacy stated funding is coming from Anoka County's general budget. Mr. Sielaff asked if there would be a cost-effective analysis. Ms. Dacy stated the Regional Transit Board stated LRT is a cost- effective system versus an all bus system. However, she stated that staff is recommending the City adopt a recommendation to request a comparative study between LRT and an al1 bus system, specifically for the northeast corridor. Ms. Sherek stated she has not seen a comparison of the two systems and an analysis of the costs. She stated she knows some things are hard to project, but there is a tremendous cost and risk in creating this system. She stated to a certain extent, where transportation is located will also determine where development occurs. She stated development of a light rail transit system may well bring some new types of industry into the City. Mr. Betzold stated the State Legislature will, ultimately, look at those costs. Ms. Sherek felt these figures should be projected now and that they were "putting the cart before the horse." Mr. Betzold felt it was necessary to go through this analysis, even though it is controversial and expensive, because if the decision is to proceed with the light rail transit, the plan has to be ready to be implemented. 9.9 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 11 Mr. Sielaff stated the Environmental Quality and Energy Commission only addressed the environmental issues. He felt completion of construction plans before a full cost analysis was also pre-mature. Mr. Sielaff stated based on the Citizens' Survey that people would use their automobiles to access a park and ride, possibly more widely spaced, larger parking areas should be explored as opposed to numerous neighborhood sites. Ms. Sherek stated the City's point of view has been not to take any homes and one of the biggest issues that came out in the public hearings is that residential homes would have to be taken for some park and ride sites. Mr. Betzold stated if he had to make a decision today on station locations, he would not favor a station at Mississippi and University. He felt possibly they could be a larger park and ride at either 53rd and University or 57th and University. Ms. Dacy stated Mississippi and University is the City's downtown and she felt a station was necessary at this location. Ms. Sherek stated if adequate parking cannot be provided at this intersection for a park and ride, it would be difficult to recommend a station at this intersection. Ms. Modig felt if there were a lot of park and ride stations every few blocks along University, it would detract from the City. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to recommend to City Council adoption of staff's six page comments and the Environmental Quality & Energy Commission's comments on the Environmental Impact Statement Draft for the Light Rail Transit. UPON A VOICE POTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED T8E MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY. 4. REVIEW PROPOSED EXPANSION TO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND CREATION OF NEW TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Ms. Dacy stated the Housing and Redevelopment Authority is considering modifying the redevelopment project area to include the former Cub Foods site and Bob Schroer's property at the southwest and northwest corners of the Osborne Road and University Avenue intersection. She stated the HRA has directed staff to proceed with a public hearing to create another tax increment financing district and include these sites in the project area, with the understanding that if Mr. Schroer's project was not finalized, it could be deleted from the district before any penalties are incurred. 9.10 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 12 Ms. Dacy stated that State law requires the Planning Commission to adopt a resolution stating that they have determined this redevelopment plan and creation of a tax increment financing district is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Sielaff asked who determines how many tax increment financing districts should be created. Ms. Dacy stated the City Council makes this determination. Mr. Sielaff asked if the City has any protection against bankruptcies. Ms. Dacy stated when the HRA assists a developer, they try to get some type of security on their investment. She stated if they assist through a second mortgage, that is a loan that is paid back, but there is not 100 percent assurance that all the funds would be repaid, except through the generation of taxes the district creates. She stated the HRA does take a certain amount of risk, but they try to minimize or secure the risk. Mr. Sielaff asked if the HRA is responsible to the bond holders. Ms. Dacy stated if assistance is through a bond they would be responsible, but that is not always the case for providing assistance. Mr. Betzold asked the criteria for including Mr. Schroer's property in this tax increment financing district and if it is something that could be done privately. Ms. Dacy stated the building is sub-standard and tenants are moving. She stated the consultant, Mr. Casserly, felt this meets the test for City involvement. She stated if the Cub Foods site did not exist, she felt Mr. Schroer's property would have qualified for a 15 year district, but with the Cub Foods site included, this constituted a 25 year district. She stated to include both sites maximizes the City's options. Mr. Sielaff asked if tax increment financing can be used only in certain zoning districts to which Ms. Dacy answered in the negative. Ms. Sherek stated the Commission has reviewed several plans for the old Cub Foods site and in order to make it economically feasible, a developer has to over-build on the site. Mr. Betzold stated he has not had as much information on Mr. Schroer's property as he would have liked. 9.11 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 13 MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to adopt the following resolution: RESOLIITION OF THE FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING T$E MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 TO BE CONBISTENT WITB THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF T$E CITY UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 6, 1991: MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive the May 6, 1991, Parks and Recreation Commission minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 16. 1991: MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to receive the May 16, 1991, Special Human Resources Commission minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE � ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY. 7. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY AND ENERGY C�MMISSION MEETING OF MAY 21. 1991: MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive the May 21, 1991, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission minutes. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CIiAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 28, 1991• MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to receive the May 28, 1991, Appeals Commission minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRiED IINANIMOIISLY. 9. OTHER BUSINESS: SEARS OUTLET PROPERTY: Ms. Sherek questioned the uses on the Sears Outlet property in reference to the number of tent sales and trailers parked on the 9.�2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 19, 1991 __ PAGE 14 site. She stated there are seven trailers on the site and only three are allowed. Ms. Dacy stated she has spoken with Mr. Bushey and advised him he had to comply with the special use permit and that continued use of tent sales is against the ordinance. She stated it has been the City Council's policy to limit outdoor sales to one per year. She stated she advised Mr. Bushey to submit a letter on specific requests so that these may be submitted to the City Council as this is an on-going problem. ADJOURNMENT• MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to adjourn the meeting. Upon a voice vote, Chairperson Betzold declared the motion carried unanimously and the June 19, 1991, Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, �A�°"�,c��-�� Carole Haddad � '� � Recording Secretary 9.13 r �, � J DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Community Development Department G DIVISION City of Fridley June 27, 1991 � William Burns, City Managern �� r Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Establish Public Hearing on a Vacation Request, SAV #91-01, by Eugene and Jean Hagberg in Block 23, Hyde Park Attached please find the above-referenced staff report. The City Charter requires that the City Council hold a public hearing for ordinances approving vacation requests. Staff recommends that the City Council establish July 22, 1991 as the date of the public hearing for this vacation request. MM/dn M-91-463 e ,� �► STAFF REPORT APPEALS DATE CITYOF PLANNING COMMISSION DATE � May 22 , 1991 � June 19 , 1991 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL DATE : July l, 1991 AUTtiOR � dn REQUEST PERMlT NUMBER APPLICANT PROPOSED REQUEST LOCATION SITE DATA StZE DENSITY PRESENT ZONING ADJACENT LAND USES & ZONING ltTIlJ11E� PARK DEDICATION ANAL�(�!S FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS C4NFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSNE PLAN COMPATIBlLITY WITH ADJACENT USES 8� ZONING ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION SAV �� 91-01 Eugene and Jean Hagberg To vacate the north 243 feet of a 12 foot alley in Block 23, Hyde Park, as measured from the south ROW line of 59th Avenue. S-I, Hyde Park 5-1, Hyde Park to the north, south, east, and west Yes Yes Approval Denial ._ __ 0- W OR EH s�c. �l ) I t _ `—�_, = �J---� _ ` �� ; `a °' � / '. J°(nJ / "- F�)i' . ..3 �s ; H(�M 2" 29 2' Y .9 `4 i - 9 l. � 36�1, ZB 3 8 ,3 2B ' 21 �J } 27 • 2�(M) 4 C) 27 _ Ss l4�• 26�.YJ �J�) _Zf._ "_.3....' 26� , lJ(W f '•2s-- 6(p `23y� ! .�� 25 z� (aJ 1sn� 7 z4- --T'- 24 '�' : is B ZlAtJ 8 Jy �' t. B d' ' � :: � ,, . aP s zr --�' .. zz � � � . � ai /0 LI /0 2/ Jp _ P/ M� �, � : ¢ /i�) ao U 2a'� // P� �`'� ' ��s izaa• n�n a a —�z__: ifa Y /d /3 6)• /B /3 /S /3 /B nti� i+ i��c+� is n^ ra -. , i� � : i C..� iss� , k ir ; i �t �� 0 o �� '� o : d 3'E� 4 � af i 29 1 sf z � P7 : ss �� 3� r/ 3 W' a8 3� 2e l z� f --z7_-- I : z�� 4 z� i z� ,�, s,�a zs s � • as s s� Zf 6 --td--. f • P31(1 f ' t5 sr s� tfp 7 zf 7 � zI 9 � � sa 8 "L B � l7 B '� � zz � � zz --�-- �y zZ � �: -. zne.� io W zi Ml royn� . zi„H io � zi,�l ; Z Za r J! Z. 2 // • 2. to ta d `i . if �, l iz is ire^i. . �9 /P � � if 1,� � "YB" l3 . , /B M� _G3-a � : i8 /3 ' /B�+ w: �, � r.� F--�--- +' t- na it/..r � n.• /s i! N /f / y /f /" N / AVENUE N.E. /� ` ,{ N,y 4� . 1P t� �s vi lf �f' D� 2 i Zy 2 Pf . SB ♦i' - P . IB l.,.3 � � a. . z�,}` � z e� I¢�p : K i��z� z� �s r z`tti ---f�' M � =t � ss [� 6 � 25 _�_: � � 14� 7 p;• Z ... : P e �`M� = e t�� ' u B � i � 9 41 !. i. yi , ei d+ ,� ai Qi �e �o, z� 4Y� Q�ba M�2/ Zo Zo � �� ro yl �in/i , �nzm �I /9 t'� �2 /f '11 . /2 �;l /7 � 4H/P /f 78 13 ' /BM� /3 /6 el /3 • , l�iB � . n �F if : � i� � if Wi : i� �v>/4 : � �� • K i i i is i tfr� ,58TH AVENUE ii:E.= � �f = /n � z : i. t = Y /� } �f 2.� :t d' _p" f 2;n), ; 9 M 3 B 31F� •(x�� 3 . w'�,p) :b�J , aN: �1�'�1 . . i . ,IM14i�-.� •-_� � I'��@ � c� c gi zias fEC. Y�,7S}C�F� �m�`i� w� r io��+�tN • i��9��' �� ' �� .. SAV 4�91-01 Eu�ene/Jean Hagberg n✓ �i2 sEC. � � C/TY OF '' �1 21 N/H COR. � � � �� i----- . - ' _.... �. ._ . —ikYEf�ttE- o a,� ��.,o,��r:� ; .,�ir i� � zp��6 �.�� ' j Sf t � 2 -_3i _" _2"_ ' ,pwpe� '' �`3 .MI� 3 � '� ��/O 2 � ^�13 �L I . p�fi27 ♦ : :�2f t ' t " s l: } c S z�9 3� l+'/t ��3 _ . 2. �� - _ �� xy� ,�W �Sia M�s I _,BSa_ B L : ti \ Z,l� lt 1 �S � ali� ��/z � i :4�:i �o ,� � �9 ��B �� !� � // 014�// C�� ie // y ir � W � N +il 'R'�7 �,f � t}�i/ �. 1 Ral/O �7 a K H � L,� s\� �w:3 Kl �ll,f . �,� �B � .,: ... . � � TH AVENUE � � �� ' . t' : se �' uf� =i��s � r t��z l��/ 2 I1 2 i -b¢ Z 4� F Si 3'f� ' L ISwfl j :�1��/T s�P =�a2/ �2 y =� - �`' - ze'.t� N � � , t� 3 ��. ,��t�is 1.P�3 � i W � ps s� � lpi! y2 i � � rs y� � . y�'�/3 � :��/f pt '�'� s � � W �iB �� YJ ��/2 i'� ,5 Z i t4��B N�5 ia : Z �+�i7 �i� Z ' � ge //N r`%/ y�6 i��7 6� ' �ti '`Ol t �1��/f @�S �F '�� r_i� w� f �� O i.s�� y g�*�C �� ' � e�� ' u �� y �� ,�� . l"'� 't'6 �`�is �'"} /f - • "'ria 3 � 1 �� + � L'i3 �Q l •`ibl� �l/ � � /i 9 � , e a�' t�' _ �.n� -' l� . F . �n/F �� s� �1 � � iJ �� io � j.'__ � 2 n . ��■> Mia �a ,��%Ni �2� 3 � � /2� // iA ± 5 '"'"'�� 59 TH VE. N.E. i .r� •l•�/ /s�pl (V)/ s //6 p/+ ��0/e / (�l = � L�is z w : 21�� a /f� It� 2 :/f(� � 41 f� i ' --•� - . �s p M> � � /f 3U� �j/ I��J /f� j � ,�� \r � ' ' f W, �'� M� f /3iI� i iA'� + 7 ?� 4 �) + � n s `�� S C• 5 a� : C�'iz :r's i.r� s F`� m ; �a / +l //'`*� 'q�6 4 ♦ //iP 6 C�� io 7 I �> � � _ �b _, ' �� B . 2lF /a l91 �i 7' /O ( 7 IF� 8 �o � -~ � � f9� .i'°�7 -I'." � �� Q � . . 6 v 'e .ifp ,1 9': m 8 'n f•ei s i �`• �c' "_.'F_" ' � � '" � � . � AV E. � N. E. �.,. , .: . . _ ( s� :. - r� t� .� F.., "' � . � y� ,�; � :n� r �,. . � � � � _ .e ii n is if is E � 9 � �i� z 3sss � ��': i• - � * �, ,,,,,,, PLACE A. CQ�'��: ��7 f� r'F,`�8} . l z 3 i s c � ..v✓ .. _�a ' L� '_` �a� G9 TlI ��— ._ __. _—��{�� "'�_ _ 3 � �� r_1 ' r--1 (_--1 �1 � S!C f , 23 24 2 9.16 LOCATION MA1' Staff Report SAV #91-01, Eugene Page 2 RE.�UEST The petitioners alley in Block properties 5851 2 1/2 Street. SITE and Jean Hagberg are requesting that the north 243 feet of a 12 foot 23, Hyde Park, be vacated. The request abuts the through 5881 - 2nd Street and 5846 through 5852 - The alley is located between 58th and 59th Avenues and 2nd and 2 1/2 Streets. The alley is not improved, and the properties adjacent to it are zoned S-1, Hyde Park. ANALYSIS Public Pur�ose Alleys serve the public in three ways. They provide: l. 2. 3. Vehicular access; Location for utilities; Access for emergency vehicles. Al1 the properties except 5834 - 2 1/2 Street where Mr. Meisner resides have access from the public streets. Advantages of the Vacation There are several advantages to vacating the alley. It will remove from public responsibility part of an alley that the City cannot maintain, transferring the maintenance responsibilities to the adjacent homeowners. The vacation would potentially remove the nuisances of partying and the illegal dumping of materials. Mr. Meisner, who uses the alley on a regular basis for access, would still have access opportunities from 58th Avenue or could obtain access across the south portion of the parking lot of the apartment building at 5851 - 2nd Street (to the rear of his home). The alley currently is not used by snowplow or garbage hauling companies. Disadvantaaes of the Vacation There are also several disadvantages to vacating the alley. The City Council. has preferred 100 o agreement for vacation of an alley, being reluctant to approve partial alley or street vacations in the past. In 1963, there was a problem with an alley vacation where there was not 100% agreement by the adjacent homeowners (see attached minutes), but the alley was eventually vacated. in 1980, 9.1�,8 Staff Report SAV #91-01, Eugene and Jean Hagberg Page 3 the City Council vacated the alley in Block 7, Hyde Park, on 100� agreement by the property owners. In the Hyde Park neighborhood, there are two partially vacated alleys and four entirely vacated alleys. Vacating a portion of the alley would eliminate through- traffic and would create a dead-end alley with no turn-around option; people would be required to back down the alley. �acating a part of the alley eliminates options for Mr. Meisner to access his property. With only one entrance to the alley, access would be prohibited should an obstruction block the alley at 58th Avenue. Mr. Meisner uses the alley in order to park his vehicle in the rear yard. One option for him is to pave a parking area in the front yard; however, in 1978, the City told the previous property owner that he would not be able to use the curb cut that existed along the street for a driveway (see attachment "A"). However, Section 205.07.06.A.(1).(b) allows parking in the required front yard if such parking occurs on a hardsurface. In reviewing the proposed vacation request in terms of the three public purposes discussed earlier, the alley is required by Mr. Meisner to provide vehicular access to his property. There are no City utilities located in the alley; however, NSP does have an electric line running the length of the alley and would require a ten foot drainage and utility easement over the vacated alley. The City does not require the alley for emergency access by fire or police vehicles. If Mr. Meisner can be guaranteed access to his property, either through an easement agreement with the property owner at 5851 - 2nd Street or can pave a parking area in his front yard, the first public purpose would not be needed and part of the alley could be vacated. PLANNING COMMISSION RECONIlKENDATION The vacation request should not be granted until Mr. Meisner has guaranteed access to his property by an easement agreement with the property owner of 5851 - 2nd Street or by allowing him to pave a parking area in the front yard. If either option occurs, staff recommends that a part of the alley be vacated with the following stipulations: 1. 2. The petitioner shall pay for the cost of preparing and installing the dead-end alley signs. The petitioner shall provide a ten foot drainage and utility easement over the vacated alley. The Planning Commission may also want of vacating part or all of the alleys recommendation for the City Council to 9.19 to discuss the policy issue in general, and then make a consider. Staff Report SAV #91-01, Eugene and Jean Hagberg Page 4 STAFF UPDATE Staff consulted the City Attorney to determine if preventing access to Mr. Meisner's property would constitute a taking. In his memo of June 11, 1991, the attorney confirms that this may be a taking (see attached memo). He suggests that either an easement or paving a parking area be implemented prior to completion of the vacation. Staff also contacted Mr. Rasmussen and Mr. Baune, owners of 5846 - 2 1/2 Street and 5851 - 2nd Street respectively. Mr. Rasmussen stated he was unable to provide parking space to Mr. Meisner as he does not have enough parking for his tenants with the ten spaces he has. Mr. Baune also stated he was not interested in providing an access easement to Mr. Meisner. The City Assessor reviewed the property and stated that the property would receive a reduced value due to lack of a legal parking place. In terms of cost, the cost is the inconvenience of the property owner needinq to create a parking area in the front of the property. The parcel will not become landlocked if the City approves the vacation request. The City Attorney's opinion confirms staff's original recommendation that the vacation not be approved until Mr. Meisner has some type of guaranteed access to his property. Planning Commission Action: June 19, 1991 The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the request to the City Council. Citv Council Recommendation Staff maintains its original recommendation that the vacation not be approved until Mr. Meisner has some type of guaranteed access to his property. 9.20 �—� .� _ ___ _ _ _ __ - . r�,��'�"%� �Y�,.n'7 �l� G�� ; ^,a �,� -�-� � � �- �' /� �`�� r� `�' �� -" �'l�� `�� -�"� � '�s � ��'-� 9.21 A� C�IR'Y � FRIDLEY ' � 6431 �IIVERSITX AVENQE N.E. FRIDIE�C, 1�T 55432 (612) 571-3450 • . � :� •� Address: _.. .,� •� n ni �� a - •� n a � a�_ �� a VAC�TIC�T APPLIC�TIOId 1�O�Ni � i��'� ` � . • .. .. a� . •.� « • •; • - c:n - • • - . r a• � � •; • '• - �• ��- .M c��- - •� • . r. •� � ► � � % I � r ♦ i � � l I � � � i �� / p 1 A,.r.+Ll1 '� �� I A w A�:1 �• � . � / � � � � � /�� v �. i��i�. .r. u •�.. / /. � ' r^ �a,[� .'J I � (�O�1�SdG't Rit�C�]a-S�2r52 F� OWl'�225 IILLSt `S1.C�I1 �115 fOY7A Qr10Y' tA PI'�OOESSl?lt�� r�,r� � u.q �i►, P v� �r-� P-a, n �. :,`�f�-�•, bc..r�► - �s �8 8 l--� n d �.�1� - Sz� � � �� r� � �c. u.r�._e � i�� i`:T�.�? r. ►� - � �� '� � , �., i '..,., .� �, r- -;�� !--a � clv-: �--`y1 �v 4 �V✓ v ■ � 1 � � nA�rn� � - 33/ : �7'7 � :., � s' , � �-�,�=�q/ +.1—TT�- � �i� _n�,�� = 331-/�� 7 r*iii� - -- „ - e a,x�airr �.,.......--.:,._.»--- Fee: $150.00 (/ . �t sAV # 9I—v1 ��t # 3��7 Application reoeived by: � ; .: . : .: , ; ,. s�lea P�ar�i�g ooami.ssi�' aate: �.lD ,�� l 9,q I _J _ SC�dIL�ACZ Cltj7 C�O172'1C11 C73�: `` "''~, .. . , . ._ _ .<, - , � . . , . � a �� S. H'� ..J q 3 yMF r ' � . . � 5 �' � ¢ t # ...f � ... . � a ,�� j �' . . �.. $ ?" `�r t. . . . . � � � ��`yl^S>� x�.� sµ � , - . r G,^ y tf;. IE-�IE;I$1� 1(cC�� .�`�v'�,�51yr��'�� ,��'Y .�--------- � A'I`1'UI2N�YS AT :L,AV�' Virgil C. Herrick James D�. Hoeft M E M O R A N D U M Gregg V. Herrick Of C��unsel David P. Newman t ; � i TO: Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant „!�� li FROM: Virgil Herrick, City Attorney 6U DATE: June 11, 1991 RE: Vacation Request by Eugene and Jean Hagberg This memorandum is in response to your memo of May 31, 1991. In your memorandum you discuss the possibility of vacating a portion of an alley in Block 23, Hyde Park. As I interpret the material that you furnished me, a majority of the �eople adjacent to the alley are in favor of the vacation. However, one, Mr. Meisner, is presently using the alley for access to the rear of his lot for parking purposes. The Planning Commission asked two questions: 1. Will City action on the vacation request constitute a taking if it prevents access to Mr. Meisner's property? 2. Has there been precedent for the City to pay legal fees incurred by the property owner to record an access agreement? The general rule regarding a vacation of a right-of-way is that if a property owner is damaged by the vacation, he is entitled to compensation. The vacation of an alley constitutes a taking of part of the property owner's property rights. It is similar to a condemnation action and the measure of damages is the same; that is, the difference in value of the property before the vacation and the difference in value of the property after the vacation. Based on the information contained in the discussion before the Planning Commission, it would be my opinion that there is a very good possibility that the vacation would constitute a taking as far as Mr. Meisner is concerned. It would be my suggestion that one of the alternatives discussed by the Planning Commission be implemented before the alley is vacated. If this is not done, the City could be liable for damages to Mr. Meisner. If an alternative solution to his access problem is obtained, I would then suggest that Mr. Meisner be asked to sign an agreement that he is in favor of the vacation. Suite 205, 6�01 University Avenue N.9.��Q11e��, �tinric-�;ota 5��3?, r�t2-571-3h5c3 Memo to Michele McPherson June 11, 1991 Page 2 i am not aware of any precedent for the City to pay legal fees incurred by a property owner to record an access agreement. However, the amount of fees involved in this would be minimum. If there were to be an access easement partially on Meisner's property and partially on the adjoining property, this would involve preparing two Quit Claim Deeds with cross-easements. The one easement would have to be signed by Mr. Meisner and his wife, if he has one; the other would have to be signed by the adjacent praperty owner. If either property has a mortgage, the mortgage company would have to assent to the granting of the easement. I would estimate that the entire cost of preparing the easement agreements and recording them with the county would not exceed $200.00. I trust that the above answers your questions. If not, please contact me. VCH:ldb 9.24 CITY OF FRI�[,EY VACATION R$�[T�ST NOTICE Dflte: April 26, 1991 Dear Utility �npany: The Gity of Fridley currently has a Vacation request, SAV � 9�-n � , to See attached Plea�e indicate whether or not you have a problen with this vacation request. ► •.n.. /• �!'�='=��, � -_ _ _ •i - • - — has no problan with this request. / / _ �-�� . �--- —" � —,=:�.�' -'=iii • •� �: a- �_ The utility oompany does have a problgn with this request for the follaaing reasons: A� �� • ��i�� . �� (.�/c� � . �� , �o.'.�?a��--.,��c��u� .��i u� .. . o-rr�r,i . . , Sic�ed � , � , � , .'• �� , �� : - CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 22, 1991 �. �..r.,..................,. �..r....r.r CALL TO ORDER• Chairperson Betzold called the May 22, 1991, Planning ommission meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Don Betzold, Dave Kondri , Brad Sielaff, Larry Kuechle (for Dia Savage) Members Absent: Dean Saba, Sue She k, Connie Modig Others Present: Barbara Dacy, ommunity Development Director Michele McP rson, Planning Assistant Steven Ba , Planning Assistant Jean Ha erg, 5881 - 2nd Street N.E. James eterson, 7995 Broad Avenue See ttached list MOTION by . Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to approve the May 8, 1, Planning Commission minutes as written. �A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED MAY 8, 1991, PLANNING COMMISSION MINIITES APPROVED AS WRITTEN. l. CONSIDERATION OF A VACATION REOUEST. SAV #91-01. BY EUGENE AND JEAN HAGBERG• To vacate the 12 foot alley in Block 23, Hyde Park, for a distance of approximately 243 feet south of the south line of 59th Avenue, generally located north of 58th Avenue, south of 59th Avenue, east of 2nd Street, and west of 2 1/2 Street. Ms. McPherson stated this is the 243 feet directly south of 59th Avenue. The alley is not improved, and all the properties in this general area are zoned S-1, Ayde Park. Alleys serve the public in three ways: They provide: (i) vehicular access; (2) location for utilities; and (3) access for emergency vehicles. In this particular instance, all the properties except one, 5834 - 2 1/2 Street, just south of where the vacation request ends, have access from either 2nd Street or 2 1/2 Street. Ms. McPherson stated the City has several advantages for vacating the alley. It will remove from the public responsibility part of, 9.26 �LANNING COMMI88ION ISEETZNG. I�IAY 22. 1991 PAGE 2 an alley that the City cannot maintain, transferring the maintenance responsibilities to the adjacent homeowners directly abutting the alley. It would also potentially remove nuisances of partying and iZlegal dwnping of materials. Ms. McPherson stated the property owner, Pete Meisner, who depends on the alley for access co�ld potentially still have access from 58th Avenue, which is the' south entrance ta the alley, or if he could come to some type of agreement with the apartment building directly to the west of him at 5851 - 2nd Street, he would still have access to his property. Ms. McPherson stated there are several disadvantages to vacating the alley. In the past, the Council has preferred 100$ agreement for vacating an alley or street. Included in the agenda packet are minutes alluding to a 1963 alley vacation in which the petition was to vacate a portion of an alley; and in the process of review, the entire alley, without 200� agreement, was vacated. However, the original petition for the portion of the alley was 100� agreed upon by those persons directly abutting the alley, the same as this current request. Ms. McPherson stated that in 1980, a similar request to vacate a21 of the alley in Block 7, Hyde Park, was approved by the City. In that instance, a petition with 100� of the adjacent property owners was submitted. In the Hyde Park neighborhood, there are two partial�y vacated alleys and four entirely vacated alleys. Ms. McPherson stated vacating a portion of the alley creates an alley that has a deadend which would require that someone driving into the alley would have to back out the same way he/she entered the alley. With only one entrance to the alley, access would be prohibited should someone park in the south area of the alley, and this would prohibit the access of Mr. Meisner's property. Ms. McPherson stated a third opportunity for access to Mr. Meisner's property would be for the City to allow a parking area to be paved in his front yard. However, in reviewing the building file in 1978, apparently City staff told the previous property owners that they could not use a curb cut in their front yard, even though the Code allows parking in the required front yard if the parking does occur on a hard surface. Ms. McPherson stated that in evaluating the request based on the three public purposes (vehicular access, emergency vehicle access, and location for utilities), the only requirement that is not met is the fact that ti�e access to Mr. Meisner's property could potentially he blocked. There are NSP overhead wires in the alley; however, a 10 foot drainage/utility easement submitted by the petitioners wouid still allow access by the utility company to repair and maintain their lines. The Fire Department does not 9.27 PLANNING COMMZSSION MEETING, MAY 22, 1991 PAGE 3 require the alley for emergency access, so the remaining issue is to ensure that Mr. Meisner has guaranteed access to his property. Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending to the Planning Commission that this vacation request not be granted until Mr. Meisner has guaranteed access to his property, either by an easement agreement with the property owner of 5851 - 2nd Street, the apartment building directly to the west of his property, or by the City allowing him to pave a parking area in the front yard. If either option does occur, staff would recommend the portion of the alley be vacated as requested, the north 243 feet, with two stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall pay for the cost of preparing and installing the deadend alley signs. 2. The petitioner shall provide a 10 foot drainage and utility easement over the vacated alley. Ms. McPherson stated staff is also recommending that perhaps the Planning Commission might want to discuss the policy issue of vacating part or all of alleys in general and make a recommendation to City Council. Mr. Betzold asked how access to Mr. Meisner's property is being denied. Ms. McPherson stated that Mr. Meisner's house has no garage and no driveway from 2 1/2 Street. In order for Mr. Meisner to remove his vehicle from the street, he uses the alley to park in his rear yard on the grass. On occasion he has had to call the City to say that someone has piled brush in the alley or someone has parked in the alley which prevents him from accessing his property. Mr. Kuechle asked if there is any record for the number of parties or disturbances that would indicate a good reason to vacate the alley. Ms. Dacy stated the Police Department has records, but staff does not have that information for the meeting. Ms. Jean Hagberg, 5881 - 2nd Street, stated that they have lived at this address since 1964. Until last year, the alley has not been drivable, because of high ruts. In the last year, they have had NSP cut down trees, and the neighbors cleaned up the alley. They also hauled in dirt to fill in the ruts, because they had plans for vacating the alley on their end. Ms. Hagberg stated their reasons for wanting to vacate the alley is because of the kids that go back there and party, because of broken glass, cans, beer bottles, and other debris, and cars driving through the alley at 2:00-3:00 a.m. . . •� PLANNING COMMIBBION MEETING, MAY 22, 1991 PAGE 4 Mr. Paul Reider, 5875 - 2nd Street, stated that he owns the property adjoining the Hagbergs. He stated snowplowing is a concern of his since this alley has never been plowed. This alley has no gravel on it, and it is very muddy when it rains. At this point in time, he did not expect the City to come in and spend any of his tax dollars to imprpve it. Six months out of the year, the alley is filled with snow. If the alley was plowed, what would happen to the s�ow? T� his knowledge, the alley has not been used for garbag� re�aoval or fire accsss. He believed it would be a win- win situation for the City ta not spend any money improving this property, and he would condone giving Mr. Meisner off-street parking in his front yard. Mr. Meisner's lot is very small, but he could have access to his rear yard from the south end of the alley and from the front. He did not want to cause a hardship for anyone. Mr. Meisner stated there are no lights in any of the alleys that the City is not maintaining. So, it is very dark back there. He stated he walked down to the 5900 block where 1/2 of the alley is vacated. He did not see one sign saying "deadend". He did not see any signs saying "end of street" or any barricades. He asked some people if there were any problems with the vacation of the alley, and there did not appear to be any problems. Regarding snow removal, they said they are at the discretion of the apartment building to plow them out. He did not understand that, because he is under the impressian triat he is not allowed to plow an alleyway with his personal vehicle. The people in the 5900 block told him of similar problems with the alley because of the darkness, a place for kids to party, and trying to keep the alley clean. Mr. Reider stated that if one-half of the alley is vacated, they will stop people from using it for a shortcut and for parties and it will stop the garbage that is ongoing. The broken glass is a big problem, and who is liable if someone gets cut while playing in the alley? If the alley is to be kept open, then he thought lights are essential for security reasons. Mr. Betzold asked if vacating the northern one-half of the alley would preclude the vacation of the southern one-half in the future. Ms. Dacy stated that if the neighbors submitted a petition to vacate and had 100$ agreement from the adjacent property owners, then she did not see haw the vacation of the northern half could preclude the vacation of the southern half. Ms. Dacy stated staff's recam�nendation is based on the objective to get the access issue resolved for Mr. Meisner or any future owner of his property. The record is not clear as to why the City denied the former property owner the ability to have a curb cut off that street in 1978 when the Code does allow it. They do not know if the property owner of the apartment building wouid be willing 9.29 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 22, 1991 PAGE 5 to record an access easement in perpetuity across their property to allow Mr. Meisner access. Mr. Pete Meisner stated that he has to have some type of access to his property. He is willing to work with the apartment building owner to get an easement as long as it is in writing. Mr. Kondrick asked how Mr. Meisner felt about a parking area in his front yard. Mr. Meisner stated a parking area in his front yard would take up almost his entire front yard. He would prefer to have access to the rear of his property. Mr. Betzold stated a third option for access to Mr. Meisner's rear yard is to come through the alley from the south. Mr. Meisner stated the only problem with that is that he would have to drive in forward and then back out. He would still have to drive on a part of the northern part of the alley. Mr. Betzold asked about snow removal in the wintertime. Ms. Cheryl Williamette, 6004 - 2 1/2 Street, stated she is the previous owner of Mr. Meisner's property. She stated they had a big truck and they plowed the alley themselves. They always parked two vehicles in the back yard. She stated that in 1978 when the City came in and tore up the old streets and put in new streets and curbs, they decided they would like to put a parking area in the front yard. She stated the property is on a hill, and there is no way you can guarantee that a vehicle parked on the hill in the wintertime is not going to slide down the hill. So, it is not an option unless they dig into the hill, and there is water and sewer on part of the property. At one time, she and her husband tried to see if they could put a drive-around to get to the rear of the house, but there is not enough room on either side of the house. Ms. Dacy asked Ms. Williamette if she remembered why the City did not allow a curb cut in 1978. Ms. Williamette stated the City said it was because they could not park in front of the house, that they needed some access around the house. Ms. Judy Konselo, 5828 - 2 1/2 Street, stated she owns the property next to Mr. Meisner. She stated she uses the alley to the south, and in the wintertime, the snow from the apartment building parking lots is stacked at the end of the alley, so access to the south for Mr. Meisner is not possible in the wintertime. Ms. Dacy stated that given these particular circumstances, staff thought the option for a driveway in Mr. Meisner's front yard 9.30 pLANNING COA�MI88ION MEETING. I�AY 22, 1991 PAGE 6 should be reconsidered. The lot is only 40 feet wide, and there is no way to get to the rear from the front of the property, and it seems like a reasonable option. Mr. Betzold stated that if the City does vacate the northern half of this alley, they are essentially taking property from Mr. Meisner. By denying hi�n the access to the rear of his property and then requiring him at the sa�e time to have some place to park his car, having to use his front yard far a driveway would diminish the value of his property. If the only access to the rear of the property is with an easement, that will cost someone some money, and somehow this is going to have to be worked out. He stated using the southern half of the alley is the worst scenario, because it is probably just a matter of time before the neighbors to the south are going to want to vacate their half of the alley. It is too bad the City turned down the curb cut and driveway 12 years ago, because they wouldn't have this problem now. Mr. Betzold stated he believed there is an issue here, because the City is essentially taking property, and the City Attorney should review this n�atter before it goes to Council. He would also like staff to contact the apartment building owner and get more information on that option. Ms. Dacy stated staff will try to contact and meet with the apartment building owner at 5851 - 2nd Street to see if it is possible to get an access agreement, and they will also discuss this with the City Attorney. OT ON by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to table SAV #91- Ol, by Eugene and Jean Hagberg until the June 12, 1991, Planning Commission meeting in order to obtain more information and to get a legal opinion from the City Attorney. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CSAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. Ms. Dacy stated that if not enough information is available for the June 12, 1991, meeting, the City will notify the neighbors about a week prior to the meeting. Ms . Sherek stated another question to be asked of the City Attorney is that if there are legal fees incurred by the property owner to record an access agreement, is there any precedent for the City undertaking the payment of those fees? 2. ONSID RATION OF A VACAT ON UEST S 91-02 Y JAMES AND INDA PETERSON AND IIy[QTHY AND DO MILLER: To vacate the east 110 x 40 fee of Dover Street as measured from the east right-of-way ' e of Broad Avenue, subject to an easement for utility p oses over the southerly 20 feet of the portion of Dove Street to be vacated and a walkway 9.31 CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 19, 1991 CALL TO ORDER• Chairperson Betzold called the June 19, 1991, Plan ' g Commission meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Don Betzold, Sue Shere , Connie Modig, Brad Sielaff Members Absent: Larry Kuechle, q�an Saba, Dave Kondrick Others Present: Barbara Dac , Community Development Director Michele M herson, Planning Assistant Ronald enson, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E. Paul Eileen R�ider, 5875 2nd Street N.E. Pe Meisner, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E. ggy Walker,.6339 5th Street N.E. aren Moormann, 5850 - 2-1/2 Street N.E. MOTION b Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to approve the May 22, 19 , Planning Commission minutes as written. ( A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARi:D MAY 22, 1991, PLANNING COMMISSION MiNOTES APPROVED AS WRITTEN. 1. CONSIDERATION OF A VACATION, SAV #91-01, BY EUGENE AND JEAN HAGBERG: � To vacate the 12 foot alley in Block 23, Hyde Park, for a distance of approximately 243 feet south of the south line of 59th Avenue, generally located north of 58th Avenue, south of 59th Avenue, east of 2nd Street, and west of 2-1/2 Street. Mr. Betzold stated that this item was tabled at the last meeting in order to obtain additional information and a legal opinion from the City Attorney. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to remove this item from the table. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLP,RED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. McPherson stated this is a request to vacate the north 243 feet of an alley that is located in the 5800 block of 2nd and 2-1/2 Streets. She stated at the last Planning Commission meeting, there 9.32 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 2 were several questions raised regarding the effect of this vacation on Mr. Meisner's property, 5834 - 2 1/2 Street N.E. Ms. McPherson stated a memo has been received from the City Attorney, and it is his opinfon that preventing access to Mr. Meisner's property would constitute a taking. She stated the City Attorney suggested that one of the alternatives discussed by the Planning Commission be implemented, if the alley is vacated. She stated the alternatives are that an access easement be obtained or that Mr. Meisner be allowed a paved parking area in the front of his home. Ms. McPherson stated the apartment owners at 5851 2nd Street and 5846 2-1/2 Street were contacted to determine if they would provide Mr. Meisner with an access easement or a place to park his vehicle on a permanent basis. She stated both property owners indicated they would be reluctant to provide Mr. Meisner with any type of access easement. Ms. McPherson stated the City Assessor, Mr. Madsen, was consulted and it was his opinion that there would be a devaluation in the property, if the vacation is approved. She stated Mr. Madsen felt the property was not landlocked, but there would be no area to provide access to a garage, should one be constructed. Ms. McPherson stated it is staff's recommendation that Mr. Meisner have some type of access, prior to approval of the vacation, either by an access easement or paving the parking area in his front yard. Mr. Ron Swenson, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E., stated there is an alley a block away on 60th and 2-1/2 Streets that is maintained by the City and asked why this alley cannot be improved and maintained. Mr. Betzold stated his position is that if this vacation is not . approved, the City should improve the alley and pave it. Mr. Swenson stated it seems neither the neighbors nor the City are willing to pay for the improvement. He stated yau cannot drive a vehicle in the alley without it getting scratched. Mr. Pete Meisner, 5834 2-1/2 Street N.E., stated he does need some type of access to his property as he wants to construct a garage at some future date. He stated if the alley is open, he can construct a garage in the rear and, if the alley is vacated, he would need a tuck-under garage. Mr. Meisner stated he understands the City is not willing to consider a tuck-under garage. Ms. McPherson stated she did not know where Mr. Meisner obtained this information as there are several tuck-under garaqes on other properties in the City. She stated unless there is a structural problem, she could not see any reason for the City not allowing Mr. Meisner to construct a tuck-under garage. 9.33 � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 19, 1.991 PAGE 3 Mr. Meisner stated his only concern is that he has some type of access. Mr. Paul Reider, 5875 2nd Street, stated he felt the off-street parking in front of Mr. Meisner's home would give him the optimum access. He stated he favors vacation of the north end of the alley as it is�a drive-through and not maintained. He questioned who is liable if someone is injured as there are children riding dirt bikes in the alley. Iie stated he is concerned with the safety, and the four landowners to the north are looking for some relief to the activities that occur in the alley. Mr. Betzold stated if the north end of the alley is vacated, there has been testimony that it would be a lot more difficult for Mr. Meisner to access through the south end. He stated also that if the north end of the alley is vacated, there may be a request to vacate the south end. He stated he would not like to be placed in the position that by approving one vacation, the other one would have to be granted. Mr. Betzold stated it seems there are problems with any approach that is taken. He stated he reviews this from a policy standpoint, however, the Council would also get involved in the budgeting issue, if the alley were to be improved. Mr. Sielaff asked what constitutes adequate access and if there was access only from the south, if this was adequate. Ms. Dacy stated there is access from the south, but history has shown that this has not always been available. She stated what the City Attorney has stated is that Mr. Meisner may have no means to get to his property and that may constitute a taking of property. She stated her concern is that Mr. Meisner's property is not typical and does not have an access from the street and his sole access is from the alley. Ms. Peggy Walker, 6339 5th Street N.E., stated she felt the alley should not be vacated. She stated she has not observed vehicles in and out of the alley, except the vehicles from the apartment building and Mr. Reider's neighbors. She stated she felt the apartment owners wanted the alley vacated so they can dump their snow in this area. Ms. Elaine Reider, 5875 2nd Street, stated she has cleaned the alley and removed debris. She stated she has talked with property owners regarding the alley and no one is even concerned or cares about it. She stated she wanted the partying that goes on the alley to stop, but wanted Mr. Meisner to have access. Ms. Dacy stated in regard to the question of liability which was raised by Mr. Reider, the City would be liable. She stated there are a number of paper streets and alleys in the City that are on the books and not improved. She stated i.f something happened on 9.34 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 19, 1991 PAGE 4 City owned property, anyone would have the right to file a claim. Mr. Betzold stated if someone was injured and wanted to file a claim, there is nothing that prohibits them from doing so. Ms. Modig questioned how giving access to Mr. Meisner would affect the parking at one of the.apartment buildings. Ms. Dacy stated that in the case of the property owner to the north, if Mr. Meisner was provided access, he would have to access through the apartment�s parking spaces. She stated the apartment owner did not want to give up any parking spaces in order to provide this access. Ms . McPherson stated as far as the apartment owner to the west, the area where Mr. Meisner would access is where the dumpster and fencing is located. Mr. Meisner stated he would be willing to clean the aZley to a certain extent, but was told by City staff this was not a good idea as he would be on someone else's property. He stated he was advised that the City would not clean the alley. Ms. Dacy stated she knows the cleaning issue is frustrating for the property owners. She stated the current policy is that the City is not maintaining the alley, but as Ms. Reider testified, she has done some cleaning in the alley. She stated she believed the apartment owner must plow the alley for his tenants to get in and out. No other persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed vacation request. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to close the informal public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY, AND THE HEARiNG CLOSED AT 8:05 P.M. Ms. Dacy stated if the Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of this vacation request, the staff recommends that the petitioner pay for the cost of preparing and installing the dead- end alley signs and provide a ten foot drainage and utility easement over the vacated alley. She stated a provision should also be made for Mr. Meisner's property for an access easement or a paved area in the front yard so he has 100 percent access at all times. Mr. Betzold stated it seems the provision for an access easement is not feasible since the apartment owners are not willing to provide the access. He stated it seems any approach that is taken is liable to cost the City. He stated he did not know how to 9.35. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 5 advise the Council as they make the spending decisions. Mr. Betzold stated from a policy standpoint, there is a problem that this is a nuisance and does not doubt it is an eyesore and, for this reason, probably should be vacated. Mr. Betzold stated, however, he cannot ignore the issue that by approving the vacation, it would be taking property from Mr. Meisner and he would probably have to be compensated. He stated Mr. Meisner has already been told he cannot park on the street, but he cannot be ordered to install a parking space in his front yard. He stated if the north end of the alley is vacated, Mr. Meisner may not be able to access on the south which may constitute a depreciation in his property. Mr. Sielaff stated he is inclined to deny the vacation request due to all the uncertainty. Mr. Betzold stated he is not opposed to the vacation, however, there are consequences if it is not vacated. He stated he felt the best recommendation he could make is not to vacate the alley. He felt if the alley is not vacated, the area probably should be considered for upgrading and improvement. He stated this would have to be the Council's decision as there would be considerable cost involved to improve it and they may wish to leave it as it now exists. Ms. Sherek stated if the vacation is going to cause a hardship to a person who is not a party to the vacation request, she would not be in favor of it. MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend to City Council denial of Vacation Request, SAV #91-01, by Eugene and Jean Hagberg, to vacate the 12 foot alley in Block 23, Hyde Park, for a distance of approximately 243 feet south of the south line of 59th Avenue, generally located north of 58th Avenue, south of 59th Avenue, east of 2nd Street, and west of 2-1/2 Street. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. Ms. Dacy stated the City Council will hold the public hearing on this vacation request on July 22, 1991, but action on the request will not take place until the Council's first meeting in August. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPEC.Y�L USE PERMIT, SP #91-07, BY BIZAL, INC.: Per Section 205.18.03.C(4) of t Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum lot cover from 40� to 42.5� on Lot l, Block 3, East Ranch Estates ond Addition, generally located at ?880 Ranchers Road N. . 9.36 � _ � J Community Development Department NG DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: June 27, 1991 �� TO: William Burns Cit Mana er � . Y 5 � FROM: SOBJECT: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, by Michael Bizal, at 7880 Ranchers Road Attached please find the above referenced staff report. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council denial of the request. Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning Commission action. MM:ls M-91-464 .� L��'�i—� (—lyyl 1�J �=�1, t-i�Ul'1 1�UHtK I Y kU('1�L� �U � i_�� T�1 j'� f"`�'[]'j'�'�j��\/ 2SL� h9innesota �Norld Trade Center 3?SO 1DS Tvwer 1�.,l�L.1i�.L' lt 1. i 30 Tast Srvcnth Strc�et 80 Sc�uth Eibhth Street tr . RLTMI�L� -�'Pi.»t PauZ, Milu1e30YA SS�OJ,-�}999 Muu�capulis, Miitr►c�sota 5540�••2252 � �.r yy�.r�� TeleFhane (6]2) 24I-9333 %tephone (612) 340-5555 U FAX (612) 291-9313 FAX (h12) 34()-5534 1'R�7iF,$$1()NAI, AS$Q�1.A7tp�J Attonaeys at I,aw w�tex's dixect di�f number, Bzzal Mfg.,_I��. 78g0'N� �anchers Road Fri,dl�y, �Viinnesata 55432 Gentlemex�: 291-94Qi 55?114E7 P.02 June 27, 1991 Re; Additiion to Flant Ma�nzdcr BuiJding 1625 M Strect, N.W. Washingtvn, D.C. 20036-320� Tcicpho,nc (,2Q2) Z93•0555 FiN((2U2)659-Q4GG Rep3y tv S.'ant Paul officc �i,uth M. Bizai �is the owner vf �,,ot 2, �1ock 3, East RanGh Estateg 2nd Addxti�o�a. Anoka Cpunty, Mi.,nz�e�ota, which is adjacex�t to Lot 1 where t�:e exis�ing build�ing xs located and which i�s owned by ihe corporatxoz�. You have been to�d by tk�e City of Fxidley that the ownexship of i,ot 2 must be �n tk�e corpoxation. . Ti�tke �o Lot 2 has been put in Ruti�a �Vi. Bizal for estate plaxuling purposes and it would be detriznenta� to such purposes to put ti.tle to Lot 2 i.zx tk�e carpvx'a�ion. �t is my judgxnent that a lon�-te�rm lease of 40 to 50 y�ars from R�uth 1VS. Bizal to the corporation of Lot 2 would provide the needed protection tp the City oi Fxidley in respect to setbael�s, etc. x'he lease eould be recarded and the eff�ct would be t�at �o pax•i af Lat 2.could be eol.d in cantravention of the City's objectives. CAS/pd Vexy truly yours, DOHEI�T�,'', R,U!lVV�J3L� & BtTTL,ER �y � Carl A. S ensor� 9.38 � � STAFF REPORT APPEALS DATE CITY OF PLANNINC COMMISSION DATE : June 19 , 1991 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL DATE : July �, 1991 AuTHOR MM�dn REQUEST PERMIT NUMBER APPLICANT PROPOSED REQUEST LOCATION ��TF DATA SI�E DENSITY PRESENT ZONING ADJACENT LAND USES & zoN�rvG UT�.RIE� PARK DEDICATION ANAL�f�I� FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS CONFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSNE PLAN COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT USES 8� ZONING ENVIRONMENTAL CONStDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMlSS14N RECOMMENDATION SP 4�91-07 Michael Bizal To increase the required maximum lot coverage from 40Z to 42.57 7880 Ranchers Road 63,283.47 square feet M-2, Heavy Industrial M-2, Heavy Industrial to the North, South, East, and West; M-1, Light Industrial to the Northeast Yes Yes Denial Denial •.��• SP ��9 ]-07 Michael Bizal S �/2 SEC. ��TY o, C/TY OF SPR. w at c R � 31 SEC.2 _ �� ;� . – . � -. ,..I.. l -- ,' ^ e'° —�� .;o»'i.- `_�° ; ie' ^��•,••• y(�"i 4n I ; � � icr� i�r> :ci'?s NL i , � - • -d �� '' r � I � 1in) �' . �r �� iofr). �� W + ��-� 1 iP% � (A%,« ��)Z � � � I �C�9 : �, W i � y " j; �.�� ,j i� �e z v�� s�n' � � N I � \ � 5 I ( :*� ', z l�) ru' ' ` " r:.`F._. � � � WYLpWpp� J IANE ` �} F: •�t)i3 M4 � I I ` i `� �� ' � �:, � �.,� , �> Gs� . f �nn�• - 7t - 'sF� : c�?� N�s � .. .- . Z 3 4 � i !' �.. � > ' ' c � a� c -�a N>L i� ' �'' �"� ' J \ , � � ' ° � -- -- ' !� ,,.,,.. ; � • ��,� ��,� ' � � ' ' Q � -�'�,,,-=� -. � h�) i F � W , ("3n l�r 1 . — =�—=3 =� - ` t � � ,. ` ..- --- -��-�_.;.t 9 CN � : �(� s(w� � (�� )g � � — «—a — «�_.-� . � - � p � � ; . , � � � � ... � ,J, �u � y � � W � J '4 �ii � � ;.,� u� z 80 TH AVE. N.E .,, J Q � \ � 3 ,¢ �i _ ; � � �� , O � � � � � +�- "` '�` is �a} �f � /�i�) /I�''� l�� i ) �l i � . _ • � � _ ,w� y � � � � �~� c�`� ' n(„> : `3! � �1� ��z� 1 , 6 <� ` Ip � ~ I /' ; � K`�,� � y N ` �' l�U :�I ' 3' I =�!� Z ,�y � �t's t' .". _; r �' t L 3ii'�: � � !�i ;- � S . , ; W . i C i � ROSEDA(„Ery i� ¢ I U R ) k� f i "' "'�' i . ro�. x p ! !`_ r ,� 'a �. > ; �. (l, CxJ .(.pa� a ii(��) f�t :• u * +: � � /1/ -.1 i .. � ' W ^9 n t � �f �� j � : iaCr) £C� � ti.�/o �l'.s � ' ' ; 1 � rn - ,n m 6 / I � � .u' `<,.;� _•.. .r - • �''� � ± i ' 2id .cC►!� ('�J h,1 6i � : 9(p�e �(!� a��9 K�c �/ J ' - -'� �� e,,i �,9 '. :.�o': � I 3 �r) y)• :l►'�8 l,�l�'- _ � s.i,..u.w�. — .,`,:'�T ', .. .� �`s ,e..e� a s r s ''-'-! - r,:,, 79` ill a.e' ~•� ,+i.� ,+°.e� `i- _ I , C l , `�',�, wwl"/ .��..�.-�H -. ,� � ' � � ., y. �. i ,..i.. «�.�..... -. a.. i s i�) � � iw' . � /wiM A. ' ��i C � ( J , .�..�.�,_�- T ES _ _ — .�.e. ,� � . A ~:� �, ^ �;, �Y .:z"ro. I2 ' '"�.,..,.. F 3 CN i2r ,� a I �� 1(+0 I C J A 7 i (q r+. � � � � �'— � . , � (�) � (�io � �j •O /wri L� � ` .. --- I EA � App ,,, � o ,__ SE � ,�., "�` . , � � �i--- - ---- I �, ' '�'.�. ��> > f = � � � � ' ; j ."..,..Yn., w_... '� � �r., I� �, ,> ; -� � I�'� '� . . � �:� . ; 1� �. y ; 9q� I �� . � ��;, (�, I` i�� ^;`� � W -.._ . . _.. .� � �: � r(wl f � ac r �'� - `� � h - .:� ,t n�� i.: _ �� , .... � 'a. .�' �;^ (;I ^`m�i! � . � � — ._ ... '�� Wp ER i..::.:._-._- ��.• S.rt CGNNEN •o••••• �� -` . . � SEC 2 � __ "_'._ I � �: �` - . - � Q(�U ' '.-.= ._ � ''�, ., 33 , � ; -�; f�s-ose�"E� 34 9.4o LOCATION MAP SP ��91-07 Michael Bizal F� 9.4� ZONING MAP Staff Report SP #91-07, Michael Bizal Page 2 Request The petitioner is requesting a special use permit to increase the maximum allowable lot coverage from 40� to 42.5�. The request is for Lot l, Block 3, East Ranch Estates 2nd Addition, the same being 7880 Ranchers Road N.E. The petitioner has also applied for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet. The Appeals Commission recommended approval of the variance request to the City Council with the stipulation that a lot split be completed within two years to bring the property into compliance. Site Located on the property is a single story industrial building used for manufacturing and warehousing. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, with additional M-2 zoning to the north, south, east, and west. Located to the northeast is M-1, Light Industrial zoning. The lot to the south is currently vacant and owned by the petitioner's father. As the two properties are owned by two separate entities (the subject parcel is owned by the Bizal Corporation), a combination of the properties is not possible without a transfer of ownership. Analysis Section 205.18.03.C.(4) of the Fridley City Code outlines two standards which must be met prior to the City granting a special use permit to increase the maximum lot coverage by up to ten percent. In evaluating this proposed request, standard A requires an evaluation to determine if a reduction in the total building and parking coverage can be achieved; however, the proposed addition would require an increase in total building coverage as well as additional hardsurface area to provide loading dock access to the warehouse addition from Ranchers Road. The second standard to be evaluated is whether all ordinance requirements can be met, including but not limited to parking, storm water management, and landscaping. The current use of the building is divided between manufacturing space at 15,580 square feet and warehouse space at 5,870 square feet. By code, the required number of parking spaces needed for the existing uses of the building is 42. The site currently provides 27 spaces. The proposed addition of 5,480 square feet would require an additional three spaces be provided on site. The number of employees that work at Bizal total 25. While the site provides adequate parking 9.42 Staff Report SP #91-07, Michael Bizal Page 3 for the number of employees currently employed by Bizal, the site clearly does not meet the code requirements based on the types of uses within the building. In addition, the proposed warehouse expansion would eliminate area for the "proof of parking" which is provided for in the code. A property owner does not need to physically provide the required number of spaces, but needs to maintain an area where the required spaces could be provided if needed. A grading and drainage plan should be submitted to ensure that the storm water detention requirements are met. �tecommendation and Stipulations As the proposed expansion does not meet the standards set Forth within the zoning code to allow a special use permit to increase the maximum lot coverage, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to the City Council. If the Commission chooses to recommend approval of the request, the following stipulations are recommended: 1. When the lot split is completed, 55 feet should be split from the adjacent vacant lot to provide "proof of parking". 2. The petitioner shall provide a grading and drainage plan showing where storm water detention and retention shall occur. 3. Variance request, VAR #91-14, shall be approved. Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the request to the City Council. Gity Council Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning Commission action. 9.43 � 1 I � h I � I � � 1 I ' i \ 1 Lega1 Lor 1 � B11tY 3 EASa' 4da1l.�F 6s�ri.s SMOJO dDD �T1o,.! 79th AVE -- - �aw= — � � � � f � � .� 1 i i � � � PQO POB QO D AOO�T�ON p ti7 __�¢J.o' _ __ SITE PLAN S�d..t +" — dv� :'i � Q O � �� i � � o � � 4 = y M (.� ; � z ji � I � � t'�y� . ��tvorl! u � Su�vey LoT SJitvCxs Cv�..Rwv LNm JNii L �477 9.44 SP ��91-07 Michael Bizal = S� v, v: �•�..,-. � z., ts w�r ar. ^�-w S�Lbt ;s: i�.:��4 KEG 2V �i� t a•_ F LX 2aTO 42. Zoaina �_'r SITE PLAN CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVEI2.SITY AVENUE N.E. F'RIDLEY� 1�IId 55432 (612) 571-3450 •� n ni i A �.=-1 �;� n.- � �.c� . rni -� SP�CII�L U�E PIItNIIT APP�IC'�l't'IO�T F1DRM , �� .......r......_��..�......�� PROPERTY II�iTi�T - site plan required for submittals; `see attached ....,.....,.~ �. ?880 RANCHERS ROAD. Legal description: � 1 �� 3 EAST � RAN.Cli ESTATES 2ND ADD- Tract/Ar�ditio� � Current zoning: M 2 = Squarn' footage�a�age 6 3, 2 8 3• 4 7 R,�a..son for speci.al use m,�,�,;t; NEW ADDITION WOULDb �EXCEED BilILDING TO LAND Section of City Code: 20 5• 18 •� 3 . . �� .._: � .r......,._._..,� .r.r....r... � FFF� aWNE�R INFiOR1�TI0�i ... (Contract Purr.hasers: Fee Owne.rs must sign this fonn prior t�o prnoe.ssiricli s�� NAME s AD�S T]AY'i'7MF' pHC1�E SIQ�i'IUf2E �� ................�....�.. �....,.»�� _.........�........... P�,'I'I'I'TO1�R IN��OI�ITI�T � NAME ADDff2ESS i SI(�'IURE � Fee: P�eYmit 5P # BIZAL� INC• 788� RANCHERS ROAD � ,. _ / $200.00 X $100.00 91-oi Application received by: I)AYTIME PfiONE � 71 4� 3�` �/. � LaATE MAY 1�, 1991 for residential seoond aaoes.sory buildings Reaeii�t # _�/,/d � �-� �� p�� : c�1 � z 1 � � , �� : _ � 9.45 RATICI - : 3�� 3 �d'1 „` s,� � 3--*�'3- �* � ' d/ �'i - 7880 Ranchers Road • Fridley, Minn. 55432 (612) 571-4030 June 18, 1991 City Planning Commission City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Reference: Bizal Manufacturing, Inc. SP ��91-07 7880 Ranchers Road Gentlemen: During the course of our presentation for a Special Use Permit to the Appeals Commission, Staff Planning, and other City Departments, it was s�uggested that certain additional land inay be necessary in order to fulfill all provisions of the city ordinances. At its hearing, Che Appeals Commission suggested that the side yard setback be increased from eight (.8) feet to a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet. This require7nent tiaould b�e enforceable in two years tiy terms of the Special Use Pexmit. A further and deeper study of the report now suggests that a "parking reserve" be created, and that eighteen (:18) feet of the lot to the south, that being the north fifty-five (55) feet of lot 2, become available to satisfy that future need. It does change our corporate thinking and planning fox long term expansion. This land or lot 2, block 3, belongs to tl�e same family, but is not in corporate ownership. The rema�nder of lot 2 after the split reduces its investment quality, since lot 2 was initially and "still is" held in family escrow for futwre expansion to satisfy the land and expansion needs of Bizal Manufacturing, Inc. We will provide the followi.ng within a time frame that the city may select. The officers of Bizal Manufacturing, Inc., have the will and the intent to provide the following options: 1.) Establish a parking reserve only on the north fifty-five (55) feet of lot 2, bl.ock 3, Eas.t Ranch Estates, 2nd addition. This also could be accomplished under long term lease provisions until transfer. 9.46 a � ..'�.'z',�.* !?<.+ � +'��HY '-� -^'• � �.� y �::; t .�nt1'"�s� �� ,.ak�3�;'?+.�.�,�?, i �^� '�. � . y .��N+7 � xb"'"¢ .-.p k `�a `F`+�" ,4.� d -� v. ��5', d;,; �,. i` 7880 Ranchers Road • Fridley, Minn. 55432 (612) 571-4030 2.) Title transfer to the corporation shall be completed, if required, within the two years, as established by motion at the Appeals Co�is s ion . 3.) Create a new landscape plan for submission. 4.) Create suxface water on-site storage in order to acconIInodate engineering storm sewer time delay and for water run off. We do appreciate all your consideration. i � � G'C�[c- ii�r� � Michael F. Bizal President Bizal Manufacturing, Inc. 9.47 PLANNING CONIlKISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 5 advise the Council as they make the spending decisions. Mr. Betzold stated from a policy standpoint, there is a problem that this is a nuisance and does not doubt it is an eyesore and, for this reason, probably should be vacated. � Mr. Betzold stated, however, he cannot ignore the iss that by approving the vacation, it would be taking prope from Mr. Meisner and he would probably have to be compensate . He stated Mr. Meisner has already been told he cannot park on e street, but he cannot be ordered to install a parking space i his front yard. He stated if the north end of the alley is vacate , Mr. Meisner may not be able to access on the south which may constitute a depreciation in his property. Mr. Sielaff stated he is inclined to deny �ie vacation request due to all the uncertainty. / Mr. Betzold stated he is not oppose to the vacation., however, there are consequences if it is not v cated. He stated he felt the best recommendation he could make 's not to vacate the alley. He felt if the a1Zey is not vacat , the area probably should be considered for upgrading and i rovement. He stated this would have to be the Council's deci ion as there would be considerable cost involved to improve it d they may wish to leave it as it now exists. Ms. Sherek stated if th vacation is going to cause a hardship to a person who is not a p rty to the vacation request, she would not be in favor of it. MOTION by Mr. Sie ff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend to City Council denial o Vacation Request, SAV #91-01, by Eugene and Jean Hagberg, to vac te the 12 foot alley in Block 23, Hyde Park, for a distance of approximately 243 feet south of the south line of 59th Avenue, generally located north of 58th Avenue, south of 59th Avenue, ea of 2nd Street, and west of 2-1/2 Street. UPON A j�UICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTIO�?'CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. Dacy stated the City Council will hold the public hearing on is vacation request on July 22, 1991, but action on the request ill not take place until the Council's first meeting in August. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP �91-07, BY BIZAL, INC.: Per Section 205.18.03.C(4) of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum lot coverage from 40� to 42.5� on Lot 1, Block 3, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, generally located at 7880 Ranchers Road N.E. • � : PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 6 MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, AI,L VOTING AYE, CHAIRPBRSON 88TZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY� AND THE pIIBI,IC gEp�RING OPENED AT 8:23 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated this special use permit is for property located at the intersection of Ranchers Road and 79th Avenue. She stated the request is ta increase the maximum allowable lot coverage from 40 to 42.5 percent to allow an expansion to an existing building. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has also applied for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet. She stated the Appeals Commission recommended approval of the variance with the stipulation that a lot split be completed within two years to bring the property into compliance. Ms. McPherson stated the property is zoned M-2 and the building is used for manufacturing and warehousing. She stated the lot to the south is currently vacant and owned by the petitioner's father. She stated as the two properties are owned by two separate entities (the subject parcel is owned by the Bizal Corporation), a combination of the properties is not possible without a transfer of ownership. Ms. McPherson stated under Section 205.18.03.C.(4) of the City Code, two standards must be met prior to the City granting a special use permit to increase the maximum lot coverage by up to ten percent. She stated the first standard requires an evaluation to detenaine if a reduction in the total building and parking coverage can be achieved. Ms. McPherson stated, in this case, the expansion would increase the building coverage, but not impact the parking coverage. Ms. McPherson stated the other standard is whether all ordinance requirements can be met, including but not limited to parking, storm water management, and landscaping. She stated the current use of the building is divided between manufacturing space at 15,580 square feet and warehouse space at 5,870 square feet. She stated the code requires the number of parking spaces needed for the existing uses to be 42 and the site currently has 27 spaces. Ms. McPherson stated the proposed addition of 5,480 square feet would require an additional three parking spaces on the site. She stated while the site provides adequate parking for its 25 employees, it clearly does riot meet the code requirements based on the types of uses within the building. Ms. McPherson stated the proposed warehouse expansion would eliminate area for the "proof of parking" which is provided for in 9.49 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 7 the code. She stated the "proof of parking" means a property owner does not need to physically provide the required number of spaces, but needs to maintain an area where the required spaces could be provided if needed. Ms. McPherson stated a grading and drainage plan should be submitted to insure that the storm water detention requirements are met. Ms. McPherson stated one of the issues that has been brought up during discussions with the petitioner, Mr. Bizal, and his architect, Mr. Samuelson, is the vacant lot to the south. She stated one of the alternatives proposed by staff was a lot split to split the vacant property in order to provide adequate area to meet the code requirexaents. She stated the lot split process would prevent e�cpedient construction and the petitioner is in dire need of warehouse space for storage of raw materials. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is willing to complete a lot split within two years. Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending denial of the special use permit as the proposed expansion does not meet the standards set fvrth in the Zoning Code. She stated if the Commission chooses to recommend approval, staff would recommend that when the lot split is completed, 55 feet should be split from the adjacent vacant lot to provide "proof of parking", the petitioner shall submit a grading and drainage plan showing where storm water detention and retention shall oacur; and variance request, VAR #91- 14, shall be approved. Mr. Betzold asked what would guarantee that the lot split would proceed, if this special use permit is approved. Ms. McPherson stated if the petitioner fails to apply for the lot split, the City could process a revocation of the special user permit which would then render the property non-conforming. She stated in talking with mortgage companies, one of their concerns for financing is if a property is in conformance with the codes of the City. She stated if the special use permit is revoked, this could make acquiring a loan more difficult for the property owner. Mr. Betzold asked if the petitioner's father, who owns the vacant lot, could deed the property over to this parcel. Ms. McPherson stated this was discussed at length with the petitioner, Mr. Bizal. She stated Mr. Bizal's father purchased this vacant lot for investment purposes and is not interested, at this time, in a transfer of property. Mr. Mike Bizal, Vice-President of Bizal, Inc., stated his father bought this vacant lot on a contract with the idea that this would be used for expansion space or investment. He stated Bizal, Inc. 9.50 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19 1991 PAGE 8 paid taxes on this vacant lot and the lot was held in escrow for future expansion. He stated Bi2a1, Inc. owns the building and understands if it was ever sold, the City would want adequate parking on the site. He stated, however, he wanted to begin this addition as soon as possible. Mr. Betzold asked Mr. Bizal if his iather could deed the property to Bizal, Inc. and then'combine the two parcels into one. He stated by having two lots in different ownership, the City is taking the chance that the lot split would not proceed. Ms. Dacy stated the lot split will still have to be processed un�ess the property was deeded and the City heZd the deed. Mr. Bizal stated his father has agreed to the lot split, but did not want to deed the entire parcel, if it was not necessary. Ms. Dacy stated if Mr. Bizal�s father deeds over the entire parcel so the property is under one ownership, the special use permit and variance will not be needed. Ms. Sherek stated a variance and specia2 use permit are granted when special circumstances are involved. She felt in this case, because Mr. Bizal's father was the owner of the vacant lot, this criteria does not exist as other alternatives are available. Mr. Bizal asked if the vacant lot was transferred to create one parcel, how soon he could begin construction. Ms. Sherek stated construction could begin as soon as this transaction is recorded since the variance and special use penait will not be needed. Ms. Dacy stated the documents should be submitted to the City to prove that this has been recorded. MOTION �y Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOOSLY AND pQBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:48 P.M. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to recommend to City Council denial of Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, per Section 205.18.03.C.(4) of the Fridley City Code, fo increase the maximum lot coverage from 40� to 42.5� on Lot 1, BZock 3, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, generally located at 7880 Ranchers Road N.E.. Further, a transfer of ownership is suggested in order to eliminate the need for a variance and special use permit. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CBAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 9.51 � _ � DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Review Process Community Development Department NG DIVISION City of Fridley June 27, 1991 William Burns, City Manager � �,� Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Consideration of Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Light Rail Transit (LRT) in the Northeast Corridor The Environmental Quality and Energy Commission (EQEC) and the Planning Commission have reviewed the draft EIS. Two public hearings were conducted in the northeast corridor, one on June 5, 1991 and the other on June 13, 1991. The purpose of the comment period for the draft EIS is to determine whether or not the EIS is accurate in describing the extent of the impacts and whether or not the EIS is adequate in identifying proper mitigation measures. The advisory commissions have recommended to the City Council that the specific list of comments should be�sent to the Anoka County Regional Rail Authority (ACRRA) and also have adopted five major issues which also should be relayed to the ACRRA. Commission Recommendations Both the EQEC and the Planning Commission adopted the following staff synopsis of major issues which should be sent to the ACRRA: l. The City of Fridley recommends that the responsible regional transportation planning agencies (the Regional Transit Board, the Metropolitan Council, and the Metropolitan Transit Commission) should conduct a specific study in the northeast corridor to analyze and compare the proposed LRT system versus an all bus alternative. The study should address the cost effectiveness of each alternative, system reliability, ridership comparisons, and other issues as deemed appropriate (see comment #5N of the specific list of comments). The draft EIS stated that the no-build alternative referred to an RTB report called "The Year 2010 Transit System Principles and Philosophies). That document was completed on March 15, 1989 and is about ten pages long. It was an attempt 9.52 Draft EIS June 27, 1991 Page 2 to look at service is too general and the transit system 2010. improvements metro-area wide; however, it is not a thorough representation of what would be like in the northeast corridor in Implementing an "all bus system" would depend on two key points: A. The provision of a reliable main/trunk line bus service from the suburbs to downtown Minneapolis would still have to be maintained. As traffic and congestion increases on University Avenue in the next 20 years, buses will be bogged down in the traffic. Therefore, when considering an all bus alternative, it will be necessary to provide a dedicated right-of-way for a main/trunk line bus. B. Re-routing the buses east/west will have to be done in order to accomplish a time transfer system. The time transfer system is also proposed in the LRT alternative; however, both are equally complex systems to re-route the existing north/south orientation to east/west. 2. The Fire and Police Departments are opposed to the closure onto University Avenue for emergency employees and vehicles. The Rail Authority staff has indicated to us that at this point in the planning process, detailed questions and responses cannot be completed; however, they are willing to pursue alternatives that would be acceptable to the City. The purpose of this comment is to put the Rail Authority on notice that the City's preference is to have the emergency access remain open. 3. Construction of the park-and-ride sites in Fridley will translate into acquisition of about $1,320,400 in property value. This represents about $6,400 in City taxes. The City of Fridley wants to minimize the loss of value as much as possible, at the same time realizing that park-and-ride sites will be necessary to serve the anticipated ridership. We believe that the EIS should include an analysis of the properties to be acquired for park-and-ride sites in the corridor and identify the amount of tax base loss to each community. 4. It is not clear from the EIS whether the Rail Authority will build the park-and-ride sites at 53rd and 57th Avenues immediately, or if they will phase one or the other in. The EIS has indicated that there is an overall demand of 2,300 parking spaces system wide. If a park-and-ride site is eliminated, the Rail Authority staff has indicated that the 9.53 Draft EIS June 27, 1991 Page 3 parking spaces would have to be accommodated elsewhere on the system. The City has a list of specific questions and comments in the attached detailed list regarding the park-and- ride sites at 53rd and 57th Avenues. 5. The Rail Authority, as part of the draft EIS, should respond to each of the comments listed in the attached detailed list. The Next Step in the Process After receiving comments on the draft EIS, the Rail Authority has indicated that they will respond in writing to each person who has made a comment or asked a question. After that point, the Rail Authority will revise the EIS and prepare the final EIS as they deem necessary. While there will be another review period for the City to comment, there will not be any official public hearings. Then, the Rail Authority has indicated that they will submit the preliminary design plans to the City for review. As the City Council recalls, state statute requires the City to complete review of the design plans and conduct a public hearing within 45 days of reception of the plans. The preliminary design plan represents about l00 of the total constructiori project. It is anticipated that the City would receive these plans in August or September, 1991. During the preliminary design review, the City has the opportunity to make more specific and development-related comments regarding construction of the system. The EIS review is slightly different, in that it is only looking at environmental impacts, and not, for example, the type of light standards to be constructed at the park- and-ride facility. On a future agenda, the City Council should discuss the process to occur for the public hearing on the preliminary design plans as to how many hearings should be conducted, where they should be conducted, and when the City Council would finalize these comments on the preliminary design plans. Staff will have a recommendation for a future agenda. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to write a letter to Tim Yantos of the Anoka County Rail Authority outlining the five points identified in this memorandum, and also attaching the specific list of issues that have been reviewed and recommended for approval by the EQEC and the Planning Commission. M-91-479 9.54 COMMENTS ON LRT EIS JULY l, 1991 l. Summary Chapter. This chapter merely introduces the issues which are further described in the remainder of the draft EIS. A. Page 1.7, Community and Neighborhood Character, impact on Fire Station and access onto Mississippi to go east/west with Opticom system. The statement should read that there is an adverse impact on the Fire Station. B. Page 1.13, Storm Water Runoff, disregards storm water runoff from station area. C. Page 1.14, Utilities, disregards the impact of all utility lines placed under the LRT tracks; what happens when water lines and gas lines break. D. Page 1.16, Safety, slights police support necessary for various activities in the park and ride facilities. E. Page 1.17, At Grade Street Crossings, does not incorporate sidewalks or bikeways at at-grade crossings. F. Page 1.18, Storm Water Runoff, does not call for detention ponding or filtering water in park and ride and station facilities. 2. Project Description Chapter. A. What are graffiti resistent vendomats? B. What are the merits of the proof of payment fair collection versus the Washington D.C. subway example (Nancy Jorgenson's questions)? 3. Alternatives Chapter. A. Figures 3.3, 3.4, and 3.6 indicate only a 2 ft. space shown between tracks and frontage roads and no barriers. Need to put a barrier between the tracks and frontage roads. What types of protection/separation can be made within 2 feet? Vegetation? Fencing? Also, in area north of Mississippi, Russian Olive trees and fence will be removed. Existing trees should be replaced with some kind of landscape barrier. Will also help with noise issue. 9.55 Comments on LRT EIS, July 1, 1991 Page 2 Existing vegetation and greenery along the corridor should be acknowledged, and replacement landscaping should be identified as soon as possible and not until the final design stage. The landscaping criteria and details should address areas where the line immediately impacts residential areas. The Rail Authority should commit to a budget for landscaping early in the process, and not be reduced at time of construction. Significant sized plant materials should be used. Recycled products such as envirosoil, or compost mulch, should be utilized as a showcase for recycling efforts. B. Why isn't there an indication of the MnDOT right-of-way on Figure 3.6 (top half); and what is the distance in this area to the Fire Station? We would like a specific cross section of the Fire Station area to better understand how area would function under both alternatives. C. Page 3.10, talks about identifying feeder bus bays at various stations. In looking at Chapter 5, the bus that services 57th Avenue makes circular loop to include the west side of the Mississippi River coming through Northtown and back to 57th Avenue. What is demand for service or existing ridership west of River? Does it justify new feeder route? D. Figure 3.13, consider second exit for park and ride facility at 49th Avenue. E. Figures 3.14 and 3.15, should eliminate one of the exits onto 4th Street. F. Figures 3.16 and 3.17, suggest a second exit be put onto 4th Street. G. Figure 3.18, here are comments on the Mississippi Street station design: (1) Provide sidewalk on Mississippi Street (2) There is no bike path north of Mississippi Street. How will connection be provided? Plans don't appear to be showing improved Mississippi Street. (3) Do plans show improvements to Mississippi Street which will be completed by Anoka County this year? 9.56 Comments on LRT EIS, July 1, 1991 Page 3 (4) The new feeder route #125 stops at University Avenue and Mississippi Street. We would like this to continue to East River Road and south of the Georgetown Apartment area and then loop back. As it is right now, how are route #125 buses going to turn around? (5) The City requested analysis of the necessity of pedestrian overpasses at Mississippi, 57th Avenue, and Osborne Road during the scoping period. The advisory commissions also want an analysis of an overpass between Locke Park and Community Park. H. Is the Cambridge systematic report available for review and comment? I. The chart on page 3.30 indicates a higher park-and-ride activity than can be accoxamodated at the Mississippi Street station. Will Hide 'n Ride parkers generate need for pedestrian overpasses? Further, these numbers do not seem to correspond to the discussion in Chapter 5 regarding traffic from the park-and-ride sites. J. Will construction of park and ride sites at 57th and 53rd be phased? Are both needed? K. The section devoted to energy use should identify what kind of energy losses will occur "on line". How efficient is the system when it is "on line"? 4. Affected Environment Chapter. A. Page 4.5, City of Fridley, add 73rd Avenue as major east/west route. B. Page 4.10, the City of Hilltop is also served by the City of Fridley Fire Department. C. Figure 4.2b, map errors include wrong location of Anoka County Library, the post office is located too far south, and the Middle School should be added. D. Figure 4.4b, the zoning maps needs to be amended to reflect the Springbrook Apartment site as residential, the southeast and northeast quadrants of Mississippi Street and University Avenue should be shown as commercial, and the Lake Pointe site should be shown as planned development. 9.57 Comments on LRT EIS, July 1, 1991 Page 4 E. F. G. Figure 4.6, the transit map is too busy to be understood. The northeast corridor area should be enlarged and focused on. Page 4.10, another Fire Station is located on Central and 63rd Avenue. Page 4.32, Table 4.9, why are there two rows for carbon monoxide? Why is there less carbon monoxide in the build alternative versus the no-build alternative at the Northtown station. Although it was stated that air quality mitigation would not be necessary because carbon monoxide levels have not been exceeded, what would mitigation entail? What types of procedures will be provided to monitor air quality along the system? H. There is no description given of what the electric poles look like. How often- are they placed along the corridor? Station light standards, structures, and colors should be coordinated with concepts of the University Avenue Corridor Plan completed by Barton Aschman. Need to know height of electric poles for Fire Department information. I. Page 4.48, Vibration issues, will vibration cause problems for business computers and utilities underground? Would the vibration of the LRT system affect the water wells in the area? The EQEC wanted to reinforce the need for the vibration study and have it address impact on area wells. J. Page 4.47, how do traffic noise levels on University Avenue compare with LRT? How much additional noise will be created? Especially concerned about properties along east side, north of Mississippi. Will noise from LRT increase with the age of the system? K. Page 4.67, the section on Parklands should include discussion of impacts of trail/bikeway/walkway systems/sidewalks. Specifically, existing sidewalks from 57th Avenue north to 61st Avenue should be replaced if removed by the frontage road. See other comments for the bikeway/walkway facilities at Mississippi Street. L. What procedures will be taken if contaminated soils are found during the construction? 9.58 Comments on LRT EIS, July 1, 1991 Page 5 M. Impacts on residential development north of Mississippi Street need to be better identified and addressed earlier in the review process. 5. Environmental Consequences Chapter. A. Page 5.9, the City will object to closure of access onto University Avenue for Fire Station. Access is needed onto service road and good access is needed onto University Avenue and Mississippi Street. The EIS should include a specific cross section of the alternatives. B. Page 5.15, can more data be included to compare impact on land values from LRT versus Station Area redevelopment? Tax values of displaced properties should be indicated and incorporated into discussion through page 5.19. C. Page 5.17, the comment regarding the commercial redevelopment for the 53rd Avenue site is not entirely accurate. D. Page 5.18, southwest quadrant should be identified as being a major redevelopment area of Mississippi station area. E. Page 5.20, "full system projections" by the Met Council. What are these and when will they be produced? F. Page 5.26, what factors at 57th Avenue make it operate under capacity versus what factors at 53rd Avenue make it fail? Again, the figures in this part of the traffic analysis do not seem to correlate to Table 3.30. G. Page 5.26, forgot Mississippi station in Table 5.9. H. Page 5.27, what is the breakdown of people exiting the park-and-ride site at the Osborne Road station going right versus going left? Are left turners of those headed east-bound going to need a stop light? Will the warrants be there? Exit needs to be wide enough to accommodate turning movements. I. Page 5.29, why is traffic increasing on 66th Avenue? Frontage road is merely being relocated. No motor vehicle access to 66th Avenue will be permitted. J. Page 5.30, any change to the City in maintenance responsibilities for any items along University Avenue? 9.59 Comments on LRT EIS, July l, 1991 Page 6 K. Page 5.35, Frontage Road/Acaess Issues, there is no discussion of frontage roads at Mississippi Street and/or Fire Station. L. Figure 5.1, all development in this area drains toward Springbrook Nature Center; water quality and volumes should meet standards of the agreement between the City of Fridley and Coon Rapids. M. Page 5.39, No Build Alternative, shouldn't discussion contain information regarding what intersections fail or what happens if no improvements? Refer to Anoka County transportation plan? N. Page 5.41, is information available to indicate number of proposed buses/routes? Also, Year 2010 study by RTB for improved bus system is too general and not specific enough for a valuable comparison to LRT. Compounding the issue is increasing public demand to use money on a revamped bus system. Request ACRRA/HCRRA initiate a study of an improved bus system (2010) for Northeast Corridor and compare to LRT in terms of; (1) gas/fuel prices (2) reliability of service (3) traffic increase (4) capital investment (5) labor cost (6) dedicated right-of-ways (7) customer direction (8) cost effectiveness Further, when will detailed review of feeder bus routes in conjunction with LRT occur and when can City comment? O. Page 5.65, Feeder Bus Noise Impacts, what receiver points meet the three tests for no significant change in noise levels? Mississippi Street? 57th Avenue? P. Page 5.73, Storm Water Runoff, in rural section, need to make sure ditch is big enough. No reference to possible siltation downstream in Locke Lake from Rice Creek culvert expansion. When will erosion control plans for this area be completed, and what is anticipated to be proposed? Q. Page 5.81, what happens during main breaks or flooding? The City has a strong concern about all utilities under LRT tracks. Utilities should be relocated outside LRT line. 9.60 Comments on LRT ETS, July 1, 1991 Page 7 R. Page 5.84, parkland analysis should refer to pedestrian and bikeway/walkway systems along the corridor. 6. Proposed Mitigation Measures Chapter A. Page 6.4, 53rd Avenue Station, it is not clear who would be responsible for the mitigation. B. Page 6.7, Frontage Road Mitigation, we need to beqin analysis of what alternative would be appropriate in Fridley. C. Page 6.13, (if required), delete "if". Stormwater detention is required in the City of Fridley. 7. General Questions A. What happens to ridership projections if employment trends are underestimated, i.e., downtown employment decreases? Have 1990 census numbers affected ridership projections? Where does the employment forecast of a 47% increase come from? B. What will $211.7 million translate into 1996 or 1997 dollars? Or at anticipated time of construction? C. What is air quality impact at park and ride sites if during winter, parked cars are warming engines for extended periods? What will mitigation be? D. Will pre-empting signals cause more accidents? If lights suddenly change, won't motorists have to react too quickly, thus causing accidents? �� r � � --- I Community Development Department G DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: June 27, 1991 TO: William Burns, City Manager �,�• �' FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SIIBJECT: Variance Request, VAR #91-14, by Michael Bizal, at 7880 Ranchers Road Attached please find the above referenced staff report. The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend to City Council approval of this request, with the following stipulations: l. 2. 3. A lot split shall occur within two years to bring the property into compliance. Concrete curbing shall be installed along the south side of the new pavement extension. Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, shall be approved. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the reguest to reduce the rear yard setback as the petitioner has other options which would allow him to meet Code. MM:ls M-91-465 0 � � STAFF REPQRT APPEAIS DATE r�ay 28, 1991 ��[T� OF PLANNING COMMISSiON DATE FRIDLEY CtTY COUNCIL DATE July 1, 1991 nuz�t �ls REQUE�T PERMIT NUMBER APPLICANT PROPOSED REQUEST LOCATION �1TE DATA SIZE DENSITY PRESENi' ZONING ADJACENT LAND USES . & ZONlNG Ui�t"f1ES PARK DEDICATION A�IALYSIS FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS CONFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSNE PLAN C4MPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT USES & ZONaVG ENVIRONMENTRI. CONSIDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATtON PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION vAR �91-14 Mi:ch�l Bizal To redt�oe the rear yard setbac]c fran 25 ft. to 8 ft. 7880 Ranchers Road 63,283.47 sq. ft. M-2, HPavy Industrial M-2, Heavy Industrial, Ir�ddustrial, tr� the NE Denial teD the N, S, E, & W; i�-1, Light A�roval with stipulatipns 1 ► w v� ccv sec z � -- . I N e�rg 3 " . .°f p^ �-� , r IK' ^'��Y : i � F iI � �l> i ��,\ �� . I o ..� i , I � �= - i j �� z �� z � � �� ''� = � � ,j \. ' Q� � I , , j � �,� ; J �I " J ,' \ v `, 0 , � I � -- -- i � � � ' � _ ----_—" _ `� � V ` ; -' _" I �" ----.r —�_�1�� ¢ � ' 7! � � ,o � �l„ 5 �!� .j��, j. .Q '�;; _,� I � ..... 4 � � � , �� i�: �• - ;�r; �� " � . �� \� 6 �. I��. I n �lf/ �!� Y�. I � k�'�; � � i3Y I 1 +� � I ()�l � � s � Y� � ' � .,..�... f �. W . �' � i ' I a... J � t a rb�. x p� e%1� r� I •a �� i f � �...� .... .+' - e C+) � � 6y� �iJ• 2Cd .' I ..... � -- - + . - , I +-- ,' ��. . .� .:! � ��i.,. o •.e. ,s _ ,i ;� � ;,�,�% 4 °t. �, ., : : �- (.�) � � , � (� � � �� , rra ,�� , i �'� _ — c ��.--.,�,�� 1 E - i ` A �_` � . � z i �< <_ 3 ! �N ti2� a � L 7�+�) ��KI � t 7 i I(�) 0�... r . ��) �O �I f, ' E A � p <" � . ¢ ..� - -_- . Q � , . , , , ; . SE �..� � . � ------ � '; i LCJ Z i �: � �y7 � . I ! ) I�' () }� I '{ I .. � .. . � - � Y „ •. �,•r i � (�'� ,`T � ' � � � � �n� I : ;i� C') h r(+'J t s I�i �� - ' h�,- � R�) � � u ('� , � , °�, ,:,'� ar I; __. f; � , I ,' . S.w CLWNEN , �o.,..r r .._,�_.. '� '�:) SEC.1 a' Li_ i 33 VAR ��91-14 Michael Bizal S �/2 SEC. cirr o, C/TY OF SPR. � 31 ,.J,, � „9�� . ^� °. icN> i�r> :tn?c N1, .� �' I � m(r>; ' !c•) [ai= ��-i'� Z(M) � : (s�� ) � C"�l � s� (uJ, W ' � ac�� ;.+.� ' t Z ,*C� 3('o Z � Ir> � z WYLOWppp, LANE �� : =�`��> �4 :: ` t %»,, ,' �� , . s �� - � �,-� fF�� : c�:_ r�s i � i_3 � a fsq u�� c�� :��r N>G s s ' <)....: :' �� oCw) �N> � , @'3v 1�1� -�,� _' � ---:.-�tr--�.: = 9 �q , W : �CM� 6i�� K .��9 (A.i '= i.,�f�' y;:� ` v~i 3 80 TH �/WE. N.E '. F �1� m �"7 ie (ig �� /(�) /4�''�` 1�� _ ��'� C•, . .., d� ,, , ,� �> ��r„> � � � �z, /6�� /� / • N t �2(�: 3 i/'�. : ��2 - 3 - W � ROSEUALE R AR s ir(4+) 4�'�: rrii �4 ,+ v � ` .� kv M[ 9�) �) �l�) (n) �j P) W` i d S f % � i ia� s(� �:��io �d:t N ^ ,vr � � i� ��x� �'� �� C� 9 ip�z L(t%2 t��9 �� L ;��'- I ? q�P) 7�A)` :l�B lll7. J ` - �x.:.»j� 79�TII �` Y' �., ,�r.e � �, � -%%. :: °'s',. /.sv,. " ,a.��. �� 1- ° ";;� ti.. /�� .. . . `i> p I �- ; � 7.vG. sa+ ��.✓ a..rL.re.,r G �.., :G%Ml . -..... .. ��%�; � ��'�'' _ . ^' r— �.�... , S �AU� � , � "��. �N� 34 f) �oB LOCATION MAP VAR ��91-]4 Michael Bizal �. � o� Z4NING MAP ! Y 1 / (� Staff Report VAR #91-14, 7880 Ranchers Road Page 2 A. STATED HARDSHIP: "New addition encroaches into 20 foot side yard setback." B. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: Request The petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet on Lot 1, Block 3, East Ranch Estates 2nd Addition, the same being 7880 Rancher Road. The petitioner has also applied for a special use permit to increase the lot coverage from 40% to 42.5°s. Site Located on the property is a single story 21,450 sq. ft. industrial building used for manufacturing and warehouse. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the properties to the north, south, east, and west. Zoning to the northeast is M-1, Light Industrial. Analysis section 205.18.03.D.(3) requires a rear yard depth of not less than 25 feet. Public purpose served by this request is to provide adequate open space areas around industrial structures for aesthetic and fire fighting purposes. The petitioner is proposing to construct a 5,480 sq. ft. addition to the south portion of the existing building. The addition will be 40 ft. by 137 ft. In reviewing the variance request, staff discussed several other alternatives with the petitioner. The lot to the south of the subject property is owned by the petitioner's father and is currently vacant. Staff discussed the possibility of combining the two lots into one lot which would eliminate the need for the variance and the special use permit. The subject property, however, is owned by Bizal, Inc., which is separate from the petitioner's father. The petitioner's father would need to transfer ownership of the vacant lot to the corporation prior to the combination. 1 � �� Staff Report VAR #91-14, 7880 Ranchers Road Page 3 Staff also discussed the option of processing a lot split to split 18 or 20 feet from the vacant lot and add it to the subject parcel. However, due to the timing constraints involved in processing a lot split, the petitioner did not view this as a viable alternative. The third option would be 23 feet This would allow requirement. Recommendation is to construct a smaller addition, one that in width, instead of the proposed 40 feet. the petitioner to meet the 25 foot setback As the petitioner has three alternatives which would allow him to meet the Code requirement, staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of the request to the City Council to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet. However, if the Commission chooses to recommend approval of the request, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. 2. Concrete curbing shall be installed along the south side of the new pavement extension. Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, shall be approved. Appeals Cominission Action The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request with the following stipulations: 1. 2. 3. A lot split shall occur within two years to bring the property into compliance. Concrete curbing shall be installed along the south side of the new pavement extension. Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, shall be approved. City Council Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council deny the request to reduce the rear yard setback as the petitioner has other options which allow him to meet the Code requirement. ioE VAR ��Qt-14 SITE PLAN � 10F CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (612) 571-3450 •� i ni � t- - ••• �.at � c� . w� .- VARIANC� APPLIC�iTT�T FORM 1�PIItTY II�Il�'FI�i - site plan required for submittals; see attached �: 7880 RANCHERS ROAD L�gal description: �t 1 �� 3 ��i�� EAST RANCH ESTATES 2ND ADD• C�zrrent zoning: M 2 Square footage/acreage 6 3, 2 8 3- 4 7 R�ea�son for varian�e aryd hardship • � E W A D D I T I 0 N E N C R 0 A C H E S I N T 0 2 0 F T SIDE YARD SETBACK 2�5•18•03 Section of City Code: � . ��• .�.•�►• .; (Contract Pum,hasexs: Fee Owr�rs must sign this form prior to proaessir�g) N11ME ` �\�}��=i�.`T. �• i—i� •�`I $IQ`�� r_ .��.-�� BIZA�, INC- 7881] RANCi�ERS ROAD \ , i� • � i • • i I �� Fee: $100.00 X $ 60.00 for residential properties FPxmit vAR #�'1 I- 1`7 Receipt # 6f 0�3�J Application reoeived by: Scheduled Appeals Canunission date: yi1,(�- ��, /cI q� Scheduled City Counci.i date: 571 4�3� MAY 1�, 1991 w___��__�.._�__��___�_�__��_�_�_�_�__ 10 G_......_�._...�.. __�...._.�_�.�__��_.._��_.._�_� PDBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE APPEALS COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing at the Fridley Municipal Center at 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, May 28, 1991, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of variance reguest, VAR #91-14, by Michael Bizal, Bizal, Inc.: Per Section 205 .18 . 03 . D. ( 3) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet, to allow the construction of an addition on Lot l, Block 3, East Ranch Estates 2nd Addition, the same being 7880 Ranchers Road, Fridley, Minnesota, 55432. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given the opportunity at the above stated time and place. DIANE SAVAGE CHAIRPER50N APPEALS COMMISSION Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department, 571-3450. 10H APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28, 1991 _____PAGE_12 Council approval of thi variance with a stipulation that the subdivision must occur ithin two years. Ms. Savage stated she no the size of signs. She h because the existing sign buildings are set so far think a larger sign � in tY polluting in this type of Company does need some ty recommend approval of the � the subdivision must occur w sign will have to come down. ally is very opposed to increasing l a hard time finding the property, s not a very intrusive sign and the back from the road. She did not �.s type of area would be visually -ea, and it seems Crouse Cartage of signage. She is willing to iance with the understanding that �thin two years; and, if not, the O ION by Mr. Kuechle, second by Ms. Beaulieu, to recommend to City Council approval of v iance request, VAR #91-13, by Leonard Vanasse, per Section 2 4.Z2.02.B of the Fridley City Code, to increase the maximum quare footage of a sign from 80 square feet to 101 square fe t, to allow the construction of a free-standing pylon sign on Lot 3, Block 1, Mar-Len Addition, the same being 57 - 81st Avenue N.E., with the following stipulation: 1. The variance to be gr years, at which time occurred. UPON A VOICE VOTE � ALL VOTINC3 AYE � THE MOTION CARRIED tJNANIMOIIBLY. Ms. McPhersan stated this item will 17, 1991. 3 for a period of two subdivision shall have BAVAGE DECLARED to City Council on June 4. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST. VAR #91-14, BY MICHAEL � BIZAL. BIZAL. INC.: Per Section 205.18.03.D.(3) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet, to allow the construction of an addition on Lot 1, Block 3, East Ranch Estates 2nd Addition, the same being 7880 Ranchers Road N.E. MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE oOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:49 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated this property is located at the intersection of 79th and Ranchers Road. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are the properties surrounding it. There is M-1, Light Zndustrial, zoning to the northeast of the subject parcel. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing to construct a 40 ft. by 137 ft. addition to the south of the existing 101 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28. 1991 PAGE 13 building. The setback from 2 also increases petitioner has increase. addition will reduce the required rear yard 5 feet to 8 feet. In addition, the addition the lot coverage from 40� to 42.5�, and the applied for a special use permit to allow this Ms. McPherson stated staff reviewed several alternatives for the petitioner: • 1. The vacant lot to the south of the subject property is owned by the petitioner's father. There was the possibility of combining the two lots into one and eliminating the need for a variance and special use permit; however, the subject parcel is owned by the corporation, and the vacant parcel is owned by a family member, which are two separate entities and would not allow a combination to occur, so that is not an option at this time. 2. The processing of a lot split between the two property owners, splitting approximately 18-20 feet from the vacant lot and adding it to the subject parcel. That is a relatively simple alternative to the variance; however, the petitioner would like to build the warehouse addition as soon as possible, and the lot split timing is not conducive to his timeframe. 3. The constructing of a smaller addition, 23 feet in width instead of the proposed 40 feet. This would allow the petitioner to meet the 25 foot setback. Ms. McPherson stated staff believes the petitioner has at least two to three alternatives which would allow him to meet the code requirement; therefore, staff is recommending the Appeals Commission recommend denial of the variance request to the City Council. Ms. McPherson stated that if the Commission chooses to recommend approval, staff is recommending the following two stipulations: 1. � Concrete curbing shall be installed along the south side of the new pavement extension. Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, shall be approved. Mr. Mike Bizal stated he is the Vice-President of Bizal, Inc. He stated his father is the owner in question of the vacant lot to the south. He is also the President of Bizal, Inc. His father purchased that lot as an investment, and he does not want to sell it to the corporation at this time, but he does want to retain control of it for expansion at a future time or construct another building. 10J APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 28, 1991 PAGE 14 Mr. Bizal stated they considered the option of splitting the lot; however, it does not fit the timeframe they are looking at. They want to construct the addition as soon as possible. Mr. Bizal stated they are in need of expansion space. They are going to a time delivery which requires them to warehouse their finished goods or raw materials so they can finish the product and ship to their customers on a more frequent basis. The option to shrink the addition would not be worth their effort. Tt would make the building too narrow for maneuverability of forklifts. Ms. Savage stated th�re might not be is ever sold and problem. that if the rear yard setback is granted, a problem now; but if the lot to the south another building built, it could be a Mr. Bizal stated that if they decide to sell that lot, they would definitely do a lot split so there would be the required setback. They might even split off more for additional space. Since they have control of the lot to the south, he did not think it is unreasonable to request a rear yard setback to 8 feet. Ms. Beaulieu stated that if the variance is granted now, then there is no control over what happens in the future. She asked if they could do something similar to the previous request and recommend approval of the variance with a stipulation that a lot split be done within a certain time period. Mr. Bizal stated they have no problem with a lot split if they can get a variance in order to start construction within their timeframe. Ms. McPherson stated that if the petitioner does not have a problem with that, then the Appeals Commission might want to make that stipulation. Because the petitioner has also applied for a special use permit, if the Commission chooses to add a stipulation requiring a lot split, perhaps the Commission should recommend a longer time frame, so that the lot split process is separate from the variance and special use permit process. It would prevent some confusion. Mr. Kuechle asked Mr. Bizal if he intended to do a lot split. Mr. Bizal stated, yes, he did. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle,�seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE � ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED T8E MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CL08ED AT 9:08 P.M. �� APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 28, 1991 PAGE 15 Mr. Kuechle stated that he would be in favor of recommending approval of the variance as long as there is a lot split within two years to bring the property into compliance. Ms. Beaulieu asked how they can be assured that the lot split will take place. Ms. McPherson stated�they cross reference the stipulations of the different permit processes, and they could process a revocation of the special use permit if the lot split is not processed within two years. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to recommend to City Council approval of variance request, VAR #91-14, by Michael Bizal, Bizal, Inc., per Section 205.18.03.D.(3) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 8 feet, to allow the construction of an addition on Lot 1, Block 3, East Ranch Estates 2nd Addition, the same being 7880 Ranchers Road N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. A lot split shall occur within two years to bring the property into compliance. 2. Concrete curbing shall be installed along the sauth line of the new pavement extension. 3. Special Use Permit, SP #91-07, shall be approved. DPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 5. UPDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS• Ms. McPherson gave a verbal update on Planning Commission and City Council actions. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to adjourn the meeting. Upon a voice vote, Chairperson Savage declared the motion carried and the May 28, 1991, Appeals Commission meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectively submitted, , �� .i �P -��t'-- Lynn'e Sab Reaording Secretary 10L r � � I Community Development Department PL�NG D�SION City of Fridley DATE: June 27, 1991 �, TO: William Burns, City Manager ��` FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SDBJECT: Variance Request, VAR.#91-15, by Carl Steinwall, at 7895 Ranchers Road Attached please find the above referenced staff report. The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend to City Council approval of the request with the following stipulation: 1. The petitioner shall work with City staff on a landscape plan for the boulevard areas. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the request as the petitioner is alleviating the parking problem through other measures and has outgrown the existing facility. MM:ls M-91-466 � � �► STAFF REPORT APPEALS DATE June 11, 1991 CITY OF PLANIWNG COMMISSION DATE FIZIDL�Y CITY COUNCIL DATE July 1, 199I AuTt�oq 1`�/ls REQUEST PERM(T NUMBER APPLi NT PRCI�POSED REQUEST LOCATION S�Tf flAi'A SIZE DENSiTY PRESENT �ONING ADJACENT LAND USES 8� �ONING UTILf f IES PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS FINANCIAL IMPLICATlONS CONFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSNE PLAN COMPATIBILITY WtTH A�JACENT USES 8� ZONWG ENVIRONMENTAL COtVSIDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION VAR #9 I-15 Carl Steinwall Zb redtioe the requi�d hard surfaoe setback f�m the pu}�lic right-of-way f�cn 20 ft. to 14 ft. and 10 ft. 7895 Ranchers RQad 35,738 sq, ft.; 34$ 1ot ooverage N�-2, Heavy Industrial Nf-2, Heavy Industrial, to W& S; Nf-1, Lic�t Industrial tro N; C-3, General Shopping to E Denial Approval with stipulatian VAR ��91-15 Carl Steinwall S �/2 SEC. C/T Y G C/TY OF SPfi O 31 w us c ,v � sEC.z „ � � �� ,.� � -- � — ' ' ' � 2' � ' �.'"'"��a' r .. �i ( � e� � 'r _ ♦a''� r.- I�� y`�' 91F'� 4'� S � , iaN� i�r)• ;(�?c N�i � 2' � CJ ` ' . . � � � � ..�,NJ..3 L..1 (s.) C�.r W T ,�Cu� 2(N) ,(A)/t N�2 � I r \ , �) � � . � ' > : /.: `�`j : C� � �� 3' 1 �e Z � 3 (� 2 ��l ' �.> � I .i \ �` = < � — : :, ^ ' , � �.' ' (u� s �. .I , � i Wi'L�Q�Q • .�r. .. �} � ,�� x��/3 m¢ if '�I c�ti z C•) z '�" c�fi • , ,�» . LANE w � I � '3 �\ QJ ii ' t��,) �i (,� � s fn'j• ' �ty� t^' °("�k ��s i ` '� ..� "\... •y � �� -� Z , _3 s i � N(fi� ,; �v zC�'�ii L�)� � � j � �°� ' � Q ` � s � ` ° I --r--- � —a�5*�r,•._ ;~ -� (�l r F , m(«;; ,`•`�) W ; (�a �1�� . I I — — ---- - \ ` Q;` � � �, ' :�;--- —�i'z-- �. , 3 ;H „ � a i(w� 3�a� � ,(,�)y � �x�� i' -- r� —... ,, '� o¢t � .� w� I�� i.. �.v F�� 9:� ai Y 80 TH • yAVE. N.E � 1 � �;a s y � : � ) C°J: ,�i � r Q : aq -1_L ie (u) , : /f'e•�� ' f�, t /4�`A: 1�� 1 � . . 4 �. � Q � � �i �t �' ,., w"y . k . /s�lry C�J �j ir(„� r : �a� M at+� N�z� ,.. _ ,. � � i � ` 6 k �' '� �n ;,,, ,"'. �;; . � ' ,'.`a>�I � � ; • " � ��,�t; � i�>: : �"�Z - j i , s.: ,� , {� , , , ' ;. :� i'; •�� ;� S ' C + � v'z ROSEDAI.Es R Oa t u(�r> � 4't` : :�rir r4 i I y� .-..e W . �"� ' �f ' w�. , IY:�r ialt i � ` O�, � r •� �ll �` 9�%, �� ) , Nt. ; ► _ . • , `�' � � � W ' n '�c B �f �f � �,_„ t ioCN)� �CA%• � Zlaio ±��s i � (7i < j � �" ...-i: . ��i i � h ^ � ` 1C1 fD i � 6 ; � ' � � �� ,,, ;� _ • lt•J � ' .� ` �� °� ''_ 2� ��`` _°� `^') 6� � s 9(�'�ti t(})t s'ly l�"c 1 � I : � %� � y ,,�'.; � � a : B�r ; r�Y :t�e l�A� � � ' a ,� � ' �, • .. - :��.,.». • — � , , . ° �� " t' - -="- N ' — f�,: fi9.7FF-r+, .' - : , : . -.' � . ,d � � ` ` - . �3�� t !K� . �J II �r.•�ee='-.Y - �i9 W! • 3 / � J 1 �' .s-�.....:e.;:. E - / T . B - . / �) �, '- ' ~ H:s.✓ .... � �, �c�� . A � SE 6 (n) � i (n) r (�J � '�- ��'' S.IK CORNEA SEC.Y 2 - �::.�-£ AT ES N � �� !2t , � %, /i� eo'��0 a A .v ..., � � _(, � i I � i Oj Y �1 ps) � i ;i. f � . I: . �.1 � ; 33 �� . i ! �,. � :�� ; � i - w:;::; �..., s eCW �O � .,) , � I , � .! • � , � i �� J i -.. (�� 11B /YJiv/ ... , r v�....-.., � ... ,� ;T"" , ,�. Krrr.ryp.� N.M4r.r�rr G � � ,,.... y^ .,�_ �._: .�,� I �-'�`�� `�"'�. ��NAE��% ' --� y � -�O 34 L sJ _:�.�_ -_ 1 OCATION MAP VAR ��91-15 Carl Steinwall �_ 11C zoN�N� nnAP Staff Report VAR #91-15, 7895 Ranchers Road Page 2 A. STATED HARDSHIP: "Additional parking" B. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: Request The petitioner is requesting that a variance be granted to reduce the required hard surface setback from the public right-of-way from 20 feet to 14 feet and 10 feet. The request is for the north half of Lot 8, Block 2, East Ranch Estates, the same being 7895 Ranchers Road. Site Located on the property is a single tenant industrial building which shares a common wall and a common lot line with the property to the south. The property i.s zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. The properties to the south and west are also zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. The property to the east is zoned C-3, General Shopping. The property to the north is zoned M-1, Light Industrial. Analysis section 205.18.OS.D.(5).(a) requires that all parking and hard surface areas shall be no closer than 20 feet from any street right-of-way. Public purpose served by this requirement is to limit visual encroachment into neighboring site lines and to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas adjacent to the public right-of-ways. The petitioner is requesting the variance in order to expand the existing parking area from 23 spaces to 32 spaces. The petitioner has been experiencing a parking problem due to the lack of adequate spaces. The parking problem began approximately three years ago, and the employees have been using the parking lot of the adjacent multi-tenant strip center where T.R. McCoys is located for additional parking. The building was built in 1977 as a speculative warehouse and office building. As the building is on a lot less than 1 1/2 acres, the Code outlines a ratio of 1 space for every 700 square feet of building area, which would require 1? spaces. The property currently has 23 spaces which exceed the Code requirement for the speculative building parking ratio. 11D Staff Report VAR #91-15, 7895 Ranchers Road Page 3 In 1978, Steinwall, Inc., occupied the building. Today's use of the building is broken into manufacturing, warehouse, and office space, with warehouse encompassing 600 square feet, manufacturing 10,325 square feet, and office 1,400 square feet. Based on the parking ratios outlined in the Zoning Code, the various uses require 31.7 parking spaces. With the proposed parking lot expansion, the building would then meet Cade. The petitioner has indicated that they are currently using a second building located in the area of 79th Avenue and Main Street for warehousing purposes. The petitioner has also spoken with staff regarding the possibility of relocating within the City to either an existing building or a new building. This indicates that the petitioner is essentially outgrowing the building. While the petitioner does have a need for additional parking spaces because the number of employees continues to grow, the petitioner is using other alternatives at the moment to alleviate the parking problem. The company uses three shifts, with 28 employees on the first shift and 10 employees each on the second and third shifts. In addition, they are using the parking lot of the strip center where T.R. McCoys is located for parking for the employees. The Code itself is not imposing a hardship. The company is expanding to the poznt where they no longer "fit" the building. Granting the variance may encourage a more intensive use of the building in the future. Recommendation As the Code is not imposing the hardship on the property, and the petitioner has discovered and is using temporary measures to alleviate the parking problem, staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend to the City Council denial of the request. AApeals Commission Action The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request to the City Council with the following stipulation: 1. The petitioner shall work with City staff on a landscape plan for the boulevard areas. Cit Council Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council deny the request as the petitioner is alleviating the parking problem through other measures. 11F � � � 0 z � � ~ � 1 N � Z � � � M AI � �� Ln � Q W � � f�'� N Gz7 O � ►�--� F- CJ7 �U, W � � � F--�1 O LL O O 3 O F- 4 W Z F- �--a G'7 Z F-- ►-y J w Z Q � � a � � � � � � O� � �n w O N Q M O � � 1.f7 t.!') rz-r � � O J � � 0�0 Q Q 7- • �-• 3 � W [� � U'7 O � W O� ►-� N C~ � l_�1.. CO C!7 � � Z Q � VAR ��91-15 Carl Steinwall � N � � N O 1 O 1.f7 CJ� � � i �D I i � � � 'd" I � N 11 F SITE PLAN CITY OF F�tIDLEY 6431 IJNIVII2SITY AVENUE N.E. F'RIDLEY� MN 55432 (612) 571-3450 •. � �� - . . � - � �. . .� ,- �i�ARIANC� APPLIC�IZ�I�i FC� ....�..�..�......» ..............._......� PROPEitTY I��T - site plan required far sutxnittals; see attached ~�...^.~� Aaa�: _ 78 9�' �i9iv�c--�..� �o�� -�.�i� ,c,� /19r� �-�3�. Lagal description: � Bloak � Tract/Additi� �'%� `�i'�NCfi� C�1��rT�"t' Current zoning: Square foo�tage/aareage Rea..son for variaxice arid hardship: - /�!�/�/ T/Q/V� �A-.��//ti�.�-- Section of City Oode: �, o�-L� � o�wr� n�o�oN �' ,� 14' � �; ______----�-.�.�.M_.. (�tract Purchasers: Fee (�mers naa..st sign this fonn prior to prooessing) � e �;- o-. I// '� � , � � . � • � i � �, ; � / .. �'�►. k 1: � �' �� i � PE'1''I'PIONIIt Il�OIi�'1'IO�T w.��w..~�w.. �►� ia __ � �d �3 �`�-- ��-- �v�- 5��.vG L�. �� i�/.��3� .� � i • . ; - �_ f/%%�� ' / � r. r• ` ��ii __ I � � • � .� ` Fee; ��___ $100. 00__N�, ___....��.....,.,,......��.,.....,.��_... ...................._............_,..,...�_�......��.._��.. $ 60.00 for residential properties �t � # — ' �i� # �0 3 7 9 AppZication reaeived by; n�--�,,,r Scheduled Appeals Ca�nission date: u-�.e� ( � Scheduled City oo�uncil date: ��_��_��.._��...._��....,_��..�.._��.....,.._�......,._........��..,�.....,.�......�......��_��..�_�_.....� 11G PIIBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE APPEALS COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing at the Fridley Municipal Center at 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, June 11, 1991, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of variance request, VAR #91-15, by Carl Steinwall, Steinwall, Inc.: Per Section 205.18.05.D.(5).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the hard surface setback from 20 feet to 14 feet and 10 feet, to allow the expansion of a parking lot, on that part of Lot 8, Block 2, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying north of a line drawn between a point on the east line of said Lot 8 distant 159.84 feet northerly of the southeast corner of said Lot 8, and a point on the west line of said Lot 8 distant 161.75 feet northerly on the southwest corner of said Lot 8, said line being between the walls of two buildings, the same being 7895 Ranchers Road N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432 Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given the opportunity at the above stated time and place. DIANE SAVAGE CHAIRPERSON APPEALS COMMISSION Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department, 571-3450. 11H CITY OF FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 11, 1991 �� CALL TO ORDER' Chairperson Savage called the June 11, 1991, meeting to order at 7:3o p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Diane Savage, Larry Kuechle, Ken Vos, Cathy Smith Carol Beaulieu Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Carl Steinwall, Steinwall, Inc. APPROVAL OF MAY 28, 1991 APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES• MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve the May 28, 1991, Appeals Commission minutes as written. IIPON A VOICE VOTB, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. GONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE RF'OUEST VAR #91 15 BY CARL STEI ALL STEINWALL. INC.• Per Section 205.18. 05. D. (5) .(a) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the hard surface setback from 20 feet to 14 feet and 10 feet, to allow the expansion of a parking lot, on that part of Lot 8, Block 2, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying north of a line drawn between a point on the east line of said Lot 8 distant 159.84 feet northerly af the southeast corner of said Lot 8, and a point on the west line of said Lot 8 distant 161.75 feet northerly on the southwest corner of said Lot 8, said line being between the walls of two buildings, the same being 7895 Ranchers Road N.E. Ms. McPherson stated the property is located at the intersection of Ranchers Road and 79th Avenue. The building shares a common lot line and a common wall with.the building adjacent to it t the south. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. There is M- 2 zoning to the west, south, and north; with C-3, General Shopping Center, zoning to the east. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing to expand his existing parking lot from 23 spaces to 32 spaces. In order to do 111 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. JIINE 11, 1991 PAGE 2 that, he needs a variance to reduce the hard surface setback from 20 feet to 14 feet and 10 feet. The petitioner has been experiencing a parking problem due to the lack of the adequate spaces. The parking problem began approximately three years ago; and, in the meantime, the employees have been using the T. R. McCoys' parking lot located to the east of the petitioner's property. Ms. McPherson stated the building was constructed in 19?7 as a speculative warehouse and office building. The building ratio at that time was based on a ratio of 1 space for every 700 sq. ft. of building area, because the building is on a lot of less than 1 1/2 acres. The existing 23 spaces exceeds the required parking spaces for the speculative building parking ratio. Ms. McPherson stated Steinwall, Inc., occupied the building in 1978, and today's use of the building is manufacturing, warehouse, and office space, with warehouse using approximately 600 sq. ft.; manufacturing using �0,000 sq. ft.; and office using 1,400 sq. ft. Based on the various parking ratios for those three types of uses, the building would require 31.7 parking spaces. With the proposed parkinq expansion, the property would meet the required parking requirement. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has also indicated that they currently use a second building at 79th Avenue/Main Street for their warehousing facility. The petitioner has also discussed with staff the possibility of reloaating their business within the City to either an existing building or a new building. This indicates to staff that with the two buildings needed to house their operation and the search for a new location, the petitioner is essentially outgrowing this site. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has displayed a need for additional parking, because the number of employees continue to grow, but the petitioner has found other alternatives to solve the parking problem. Those alternatives are the employee parking at T. R. McCoys' parking lot and the use of three shifts. Ms. McPherson stated the Code is not imposing a hardship. The petitioner is essentially outgrowing the building in this location. Granting the variance may encourage a continued intensive use of the building in the future. For these reasons, staff is recommending that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of this variance request. Ms. Savage asked Mr. Steinwall to address the issue raised by staff about his business outgrowing his facility. Mr. Steinwall stated they are about at the maximum usage of the building. If any further growth takes place, it will not take place in this building. The business is a very complex operation 11J APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 11 1991 PAGE 3 and is very expensive to move, and they would like to stay in this building. They are just trying to accommodate their parking needs right now. They are not planning any further expansion, and they are not planning to hire any additional employees. They have a 9,000 sq, ft. warehouse rented on 79th Avenue and Main Street. Mr. Steinwall stated their parking problem comes during the shift changes. The first shift is pretty full with 28 office and tool room employees. The second and third shifts have 10 employees each. The employees have been parking in the parking lot near T. R. McCoys, and he did not think they were infringing on anyone; however, if the buildings are ever rented, there is the possibility that they would no longer be able to use that parking. The other alternative would be parking on the street. Dr. Vos asked if it is the petitioner's intention to have employee parking on his own property rather than somewhere else. Mr. Steinwall stated, yes, their employees have asked if it would be possible for them to park on site. The variance is to expand their parking lot so they can accommodate their employees on their own site without having to worry about what will happen if they should ever lose the other parking area. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICB VOTE, ALL oOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOQSLY. � Mr. Kuechle stated he would be in favor of recommending approval of the variance, with a stipulation that the petitioner work with the City on a landscape plan. This business has been in Fridley for 13 years, and the petitioner is coming to the City asking to provide on-site parking for their employees. He is a little concerned about taking away more green space; therefore, they need to maintain what green space they have. Even if this business moved out of this building, he thought there is a high probability that this 22,000 sq. ft. would see another similar type of activity without enough parking spaces to accommodate the use. Ms. Smith stated she agreed with Mr. Kuechle. She did not think a setback to 14 feet and 10 feet is going to create any traffic or line of sight problems. The property is well kept, and she would agree with the recommended stipulation regarding the landscaping. Dr. Vos stated that even though staff has talked about the fact that the petitioner does have other parking off site, there is no written parking agreement or leasing arrangement for the other parking. It is just a good will type of agreement. He is not in favor of employees parking ofi site and on the street. He thought 11K APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JIINE 11: 1991 PAGE 4 this is a reasonable variance request, and he would recommend approval. Ms. Savage stated this area is one of the most aesthetically pleasing, if not the most aesthetically pleasing, industrial area in Fridley. There is a lot of open space and good landscaping. She did not think the expanded parking lot is going to adversely affect the spirit of the Code, and she is also in favor of recommending approval of the variance. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend to City Council approval of variance request, VAR #91-15, by Carl Steinwall, Steinwall, Inc., per Section 205.18.05.D.(5).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the hard surface setback from 20 feet to 14 feet and 10 feet, to allow the expansion of a parking lot, on that part of Lot 8, Block 2, East Ranch Estates Second Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying north of a line drawn between a point on the east line of said Lot 8 distant 159.84 feet northerly of the southeast corner of said Lot 8, and a point on the west line of said Lot 8 distant 161.75 feet northerly on the southwest corner of said Lot 8, said line being between the walls of two buildings, the same being 7895 Ranchers Road N.E., with the following stipulation: 1. The petitioner will work with City staff on a landscape plan for the boulevard areas. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AY$, CSAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. - Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on July 1, 1991. UPDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY C�UNCIL ACTIONS: Ms. McPherson reviewed the past Planning Council actions. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Dr. Upon a voice and the June p.m. Commission and City Vos, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to adjourn the meeting. vote, Chairperson Savage declared the motion carried L1, 1991, Appeals Commission meeting adjourned at 8:15 Respectfully su itted, L e Saba Recording Secretary 11L � _ � DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Community Development Department PI.ANNING DIVISION City of Fridley June 27, 1991 William Burns, City Manager � . Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Extension of Rock Crushing Permit, SP #82-12, for Park Construction Company at 7900 Beech Street N.E. At the May 20, 1991 City Council meeting, staff informed the City Council that an administrative extension of the crushing permit would occur until June l, 1993. Per Steve Billings' question as to whether or not this would be appropriate based on the original motion made in 1989, staff consulted with the City Attorney regarding this issue. The City Attorney has written an opinion which states that the motion does not clearly reveal whether the administration can reevaluate and extend the special use permit (please see attached opinion). Recommendation No rock crushing activity has occurred Given the lack of clarity noted in suggesting the following recommendation. City Council extend the crushing permit, 1993, at which point the permit shall be two years if no crushing activity occurs. has occurred, staff shall report it to tY: renewal prior to June l, 1993. MM/ dn M-91-467 in the last two years. Herrick's memo, we are Staff recommends that the SP #82-12, until June 1, automatically renewed for If rock crushing action �e City Council for permit • • • 0000� � CONSTRUCTION C0. ESTABLISHED 1916 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA ■ MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA April �0. 1991 �itV of Fridlev 6431 UniversitY Ave. NE Fridlev. MN 55432 Attn: Jahn Flora RE: �rushinq Permit SP #82-12 Dear Mr. Flora: bd�. �-, `Ep 6ENfq,�� m! `oA v i Sa •�f AME1�e.�. DENVER,COLORADO Per the attached photo copy of your June 7, 1389 letter. please extend our current Crushino Permit from June 1, 1991 to June 1, 1993. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Si erelv. ;.' RICHARD ENG� ETSEN , Gispatcher RE/rk Enc. 7900 BEECH STREET N.E. ■ MINNEAPOLIS, MINNE��5432 ■ PHONE (612) 786-9800 ■ FAX (612) 786-2952 - AN EQUAL O ITY EMPLOYER - 6. JEROME FARRELL• MOTION by Co man Billings to waive the reading and approve the ordinanc pon first readinq. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon voice vote, all votinq aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion ried unanimously. 7. CONSIDERATION OF EXTENSION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW pARK CANSTRi?(`TTAN Tn RF.Si1MF ROCR CRUSfiING ACTIVITIES 2 MOTION by Councilman Billings to approve the extension of Special Use Permit, SP #82-12, to allow a rock crushing operation at 7900 Beech Street with the following stipulations: 1. Special Use Permit, SP �82-12 is extended for a period of two years. Re-evaluation of the permit is to be scheduled for the first regular meeting of the City Council in May, 1991, providing there has been one crushinq operation at that time. 2. The City be allowed to dump their waste concrete material at this site in City trucks at no cost. 3. Park Construction will take the necessary steps to ensure the City and State noise, dust, and environmental limits are not exceeded. 4. The rock crusher generators and stockpiles shall be located as far north and east on the property as possible. 5. The same standards regarding runoff shall be applied to this site as applied in the Rice Creek Watershed area. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 8. ORDINANCE NO 924 APPROVING A VACATION, SAV #89-01, TO VACATE MOTION by Councilman Billings to ive the reading and adopt Ordinance No. 924 on secon eadinq and order publication. Seconded by Councilman Fi atrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declar he motion carried unanimously. 9. .� 12B Virgil C. Henick James D�. Hoeft Gregg V. Herrick Of Counsel David P. Newman TO: FROM: DATE: RE: I�III�IE�1f��1� � ��y��.��ll� �. arroRNrYS A�r �,�«� M E M O R A N D U M � � Michele McPherson, Planning •�,ssistant „+ �/ Virgil Herrick, City Attorney �'U June 11, 1991 Administrative Extension of Crushing Permit, SP #82-12, for Park Construction Company This memorandum is in response to your memo of May 31, 1991 regarding the above subject. You ask the question whether the motion passed by the council on June 5, 1989 authorizes the administration to extend the crushing permit. In reviewing the motion made by Councilman Billings at the 1989 meeting, I note that there are five conditions attached to the approval of the special use permit, SP #82-12. The only one of those conditions that is relevant to the question is the first one which reads as follows: "Special use permit, SP #82-12, is extended for a period of two years. Re-evaluation of the permit is to be scheduled for the first regular meeting of the City Council in May 1991, providing there has been one crushing operation at that time." I do not think you can answer the question by looking at the wording of the motion. The quoted portion of the motion talks about re-evaluation of the permit. It does not indicate who is to do the re-evaluation; i.e, the council or the administration. There is also a question whether the use of the term "re-evaluation" is synonymous with an "extension" of the permit. Because �"he language of the motion does not clearly address the question, I am of the opinion that it does not give the administration authority to extend the permit. This opinion is re-enforced by the fact that Councilman Billings, who made the motion, feels that it does not grant the staff authority to extend the permit. In view of the above, it would be my suggestion that the matter be placed on the council agenda for council action on extending the existing permit or issuing a new permit. VCH:ldb Suite 205, fr�01 [Jniversit}• Avc;nuc- N.F�.�11ey, �llinne�ot� 55�32, !�l'-�7J-,i2i>(i FINANCE DEPARTMENT t � � MEMORANDUM TO: WILLiAM W. BIIRNB, CITY MANAGER A,�,� �J1 FROMs SIIBJECT: DATE: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR REQIIEBT FOR COIINCIL ACTION ON POINT OF SALE AND INVENTORY HARDWARE, SOFTWARE, AND BERVICES JIINE 26, 1991 The Finance Staff has completed the review process, and are ready to recommend to Council a vendor to provide the Liquor Stores with a Point of Sale cash register system, which includes inventory control and all support services. As you may recall, we reviewed the entire liquor operation with Council and suggested a number of operational and capital improvements to enhance our total operation. This is the first main capital improvement we are requesting, but would like Council to know that we are currently working on initiating numerous others shortly, they include: possible new signs at the stores, new parking lot at the warehouse, and surveillance systems. We have been working with an advertising agency and feel that we are making an impact on the bottom line with some of the strategies. We are reviewing and implementing other operational initiatives that seem to be making impaat. As of our most recent interim income statement, our estimated operating income is above last year's at this time, so it seems that some of our strategies are proving effective. COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED l. Motion to Receive Bids - Attached you will bid proposals that were received on May 6, Council's first action would be to make a the bids. find a list of all 1991 at 3:00 p.m. motion to receive 2. Motion requesting the City Staff to enter into negotiations with Retail Data Systems/Tomax to negotiate a contract not to exceed an acquisition cost of $59,035 . Staff has conducted an extensive review process and we have eliminated one vendor based on apparent software weaknesses communicated through the vendors proposals and then attended 3 demos. We are recommending to Council that we be allowed to negotiate a contract with Retail Data Systems\Tomax. After reviewing all proposals, we feel that Retail Data Systems is the lowest responsible bidder and meets the requirements of the liquor operation. I am requesting that Council allow the City Staff to negotiate a contract for hardware, software, and a 5 year maintenance agreement. It should guarantee an efficient transition to the new software and provide for expedient support. This contract should not exceed a system acquisition cost of $59,035. RDP/me 13 BID PROPOSALS FOR LIQIIOR POS $ARDWARE�SOFTWARE MONDAY, MAY 6, 1991 3:00 P.M. BID TOTAL COMPANY BOND BID COMMENTS Total Register Systems Cashier Ck $38,667 Did not meet Park Nal Bk specifications $1,933.35 Retail Data Systems /Iris Cashier Ck $64,839 lst Bank NCR $3,249.50 Business Ware/DPM Norwest $74,927 (Joint) $2,606.75 First Star $1,139.40 Retail Data Systems / , Included $59,035 Tomax with NCR Casio b id 13A Engineering Sewer Water Parks Streets Maintenance MEMORANDUM TO: FROM DATE: Willi.am W. Burns, City Manager �� Jahn G. Flora, Public Works Dir�c.�tor Jur1e 26, 1991 �.F�r�� SUBJECT: Coltunbia iieights Joint P�aaexs P.�gre�nent/ Clwer P�orrc�/52r�d Avenue Storm Watex Iu�rove�nts Based upon the Joint Pbwers A�nt that was executed betw�een the cities of Fridley arid Colwnbia Heights x+egazding the 6 Cities Wat.exshed Management Organization C�apital Improvements for Clavex Pbryd aryd the 52nd Avenue pr�perties, I have requested pYnposals frcan seven erigineering finns for identifjririg atxi designing a solution to the storm water proble�ns. We reoeived three r�sponses: Barr �gineering, Maier St�wart ar�d As_sociates (Nl'SA) and OSNI. Zhe Public Works Dir��tor frcan Coltnnbia Heights arr.i myself have reviewed the prc�OSals ar�d feel that the agree�ment suk�nitted from NLA best satisfies the RFP and provides us the prooess whereby analysis of the hydrology and hydraulics can be made, a pro�osed solution will be presented and then a position made whether or not the project wrn.ild be carried fozwa�l or not. Zhe MSA proposal for the Pt�ase I irivestigation and r�eoce[¢nerydatio�n is for $l, 800. 00, to be shared equally betw�een the two cities. The M5A proposal also includes a fee for the seoorid phase for design at 6.85 peroent of the c5ons�ruction cost and a construction enginePxxing fee of 8 pervertt of the construction c�st. Airrently, they estimate a minim0.nn oonstnzction oost could be $50, 000. 00 ar�d a maxiirnun oost ooRild be $200, 000. 00. Their fees w�ou.ld range betwee�i. -� ;$7, 000. 00 to $32, 000. 00 respectively. Zhis is an equ�ally shared joint venture project arXi cuYrently the City of Fridley has $45,000.00 set aside for these imprwemexits. I have reo�ived notioe frceu FYed Salsbury, Direct.or of Public Works, City of Coltnnbia Heic�ts, that the G�oltm�bia Heights City Council has appraved the retention of MSA for the P�ase I initial irrvestigation ar�d analysis of the pro�lem. Zhe decision to pr�oc.�eed to Phase II will not be made until the analysis is co�tnpleted and oosts have been subanitted to both councils for appraval. In acx�rdanoe with the Joint Powaexs A�re�nt, I rec�rnnend the City C7oiuicil receive the bids arxl awa�l the oontract for phase I of a tw�-pd�ase proj ect for the analysis and reo�xidation for solution of the Claver Foryd ar�d 52rid Avenue Floodway Project No. 222. JGF/ts is_.« -� 1� i • ;� � JI I�'a �� '`a1 1�: _,'� �� dwa�d M. Esr�sam Car�rmC�mbers St�t 9: �n S�Q �vocYi Gxry L �s�m Ftoi�t �t+. Itrtttcimann �'� � . � CITY QF COLLT1VI�rA HEI�HTS ' 59Q 40th A�renue N. E. Colurnb�a IYe�ighis, iWI1V 55421-3878: f 6�2) 782-2800 June 25, � �9� Mr . �ohn E.� o ra Ci�y of Fridle�r 6931 University Ave. N. E. �'ridley, MN:55A32 � F' . � Dear John: � The City Councxl af..Columba.a Heights authorized entering inta an agre�ment with MSA to perfarm a study on the sta�rn wa,ter . probl.em in the north end �of Columb�.a Heights and fihe south.: end of Fridley . The �understanding of �he Czty Council is that the. �study would be c�mpl.eted,.� an a�ternative:selected and then both cities wou�.d enter into an �gxeement w�th MSA to perform design work and construc�ion wor.k for whate�rer alterna.tive is sele�ted... The Columbia Heights City'�Cpuncil was informed by stai�' �. that poten�ial exppsure, based upon: MSA's proposal, is 53�, 500. The pxapasal�.is a not-�o-exceed and may be� less �� than tha� amount depending upon the al.ternative seleCted � by bath City Counciis. The cost w'ould bE shared equslly betwe�n the City of Gol.umbia Heights.and the City o�� 'ridley . " ' . Sincere7.y, �r�k�� , �'redrick V. Salsbury Director of:Public Warks E`vS : jb . 9�.-416 cc: �ro�ect Fil.e �9112 Studrt W: Andarson; Acting Ci�y Manager "SERVECE IS OUR BUSIN�S3"� EQUAL OPPOATUNITY �MPLOYER � � � ; ; � i � BID PROPOSALS FOR CLOVER POND DIVERSION/52ND AVENUE FLOODWAY PROJECT NO. 222 COMPANY Barr Engineer Maier Stewart & Assoc. OSM HNTB TKDA SEH � BID BOND NO BID NO BID NO BID !_L_�� TOTAL BID $ 16,000.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 8,000.00 COMMENTS <�Y :< . ': .. w. M':SC�� ::..:�.�Fw�: ��ti{µ � :;�-.w-.�;. 694 ui > Q >- _ �. � � w > z � MISSISSIPPI ST. Subwatershed Divide hlinor Watershed Divide -- Flow Direction ' ' DR. } _ �P�� .............. _....;°.:,_°, a 2000 � Scale in Feet w� • O;`: / . ui � z ,� � � _ � '� 57TH AVE. N.E. 0 � �� BOROER LJ SULLlV POND/NG� LAKE � A A � 51 S T � q N.E. � A R TER T/A•f ,^�1� POND n �� G� d � P��CLOVER � ` POND % Z � 49TN AVE N.E. � ` � PROPOSED O i . DIVERSION � � .- --•- ---= .., .,..� 46TH AVE. N.E� 45TH q JACKSON POND �` 44 i H VE. N.E. 3 z � Q � � � � ~� � � � � � 42ND �/E. N.E. � V_ Z — � w • � / .O �/ � / �,p� � / O�Q, `'.�'. J � LABELLE POND ,$�i� QC� 9T} 37TFI AVE. N.E. Figure 6 SUBWATER�� CFH SOUTH �1 �. dN ��i • ;' Q: � S� _��}"' SIL V LAt HA R T I LAKE Engineering Sewer Water Parks Streets Maintenance MEMORANDUM TO: William W. �s, City Manager �� ' FROM: Jahn G. F1ora;Public Worl� Director DATE: June 27, 1991 SU BJ ECT: Skyw�ood Iarye Feeder r•; *� PW91-202 In the 1989 Water � Study, it was identified that an additional feeder line wauld be beneficial to feed the 1.5 N1G reservoir on 53rd Averrue ar�d a oo�mectiari be made to the dead-erri syste9m oaZ 52rxi behirri the Sliyc�n�od Mote.l. In an atte�t to satisfy those neec3s, t�e sc�eduled a project in the 1990 Capital Improvement for $150,000.00. We w��e not able to aaoca�lish it at that tin� due to a delay in reveivirx� agreemerits frcan MnDOrr to install the feeder in the I-694 right-of- way ar�d the neoessary eas�nents to place the line behirid the Mer�ds store ar�d Skywood Shcq�ping Center. We have naw been inforn�ed that MnDOrr will allaw the feeder line to be installed in the I-694 right-of-way. We are c�rently waiting the permit to be signed. 'Ihe easements for the dead-exxi oonnectian have been executed. We have wnrked with Mex�ards ar�d the adJ ��u'15 P�Y awriei�s on cx�nstruction of a smmd wall at�cxuxl the Mer�ds propexty in relatioai to the installati� of the watPx sezvice line. Five draft agreements have been prepared which autline the project, the saur�d,/retainirig wall ar�d the expectations of all parties. Tt�e property awne.rs agree with the latest draft but N1�ex�an�.s does nat lik�e the special use stateaanent restrictitzg changes to their opexations. Zhe 1990 im�rovement has be�n rescheduled for 1991 ar�d the preliminary plans aryd specifications have been prepared. Re� the City Cb�uicil pass the attached resolution approving the plans and authorizing staff to advertise for the Skyw�ood Iane Water Extex�sion (Menards/I- 694) Project No. 220. It is haped that an agreemerit on fihe sau�d/retaining wall can be ac�ieved. If not and the bids reoeived are aooeptable, I would � that the City Coiuicil authorize the construction of the water line project as prc�osed with or with�zt the so0.u�d/retaining wall. JGF/ts 15 � C1iYOF tRIDLEY RESOLIITION NO. - 1991 RESOLIITION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT, APPROVAL OF PLAN3 AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS; SRYWOOD LANE WATER EXTENSZON PRO.TECT NO. 220 (MENARD3/I-694) WHEREAB, the construction of certain improvements is deemed to be in the interest of the City of Fridley and the property owners affected thereby. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, as follows: l. That the following improvements proposed by Council Resolutions are hereby ordered to be effected and completed as required: SRYWOOD LANE WATER E%TEN3ION PROJECT NO. 220 2. The plans and specifications prepared by the Public Works Director for such improvements are hereby approved and shall be filed with the City Clerk. The Public Works Director shall accordingly prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper advertisements for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. the advertisement shall be published for three (3) weeks (at least 21 days) , and shall specify the work to be done and will state that the bids will be opened and considered at 11:00 A.M. on the 7TH DAY OF AIIGUST, 1991, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Public Works Director. That the advertisement for bids for SRYWOOD LANE WATER EBTENSION PROJECT NO. 220 (MENARD3/I-694) shall be substantially in the standard form. PA3SED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 13T DAY OF JIILY, 1991. ATTEST: WiLLIAM J.NEE - MAYOR SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK 15A NOTICE TO BIDDERS SRYWOOD LANE WATER EBTENSION PROJECT NO. 220 Sealed bids will be received and publicly opened by the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, at the office of the Finance Director, 6431 University Ave., N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432 (tel. 571-3450) on Wednesday, the 7th day of Auqust, 1991, at 11:00 a.m., for the furnishing of work and materials for SKYWOOD LANE WATER EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 220. All in accordance with the plans and specifiaations prepared by John G. Flora, P.E., Public Works Director, City of Fridley, 6431 University Ave., N.E., Fridley, MN, 55432 (Tel. 572-3550). Plans and specifications may be examined at the office of the Public Works Director and copies may be obtained for the Contractor's individual use by applying to the Public Works Director. Bids must be made on the basis of cash payment for work, and accompanied by a cash deposit, certified check (on a responsible bank in the State of Minnesota) or a bidder's bond made payable without condition to the City of Fridley, Minnesota, in an amount of not less than five percent (5�) of the total amount of the bid. The City Council reserves the right to reject any and all bids and to waive any informalities in any bids received without e�cplanation. No bid may be withdrawn for a period of forty-five (45) days. By order of the City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota. Dated this lst day of July, 1991. Published: Fridley Focus July 17, 1991 July 24, 1991 July 31, 1991 15B John G. Flora, P.E. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Construction Bulletin July 19, 1991 July 26, 1991 August 2, 1991 . i � ��tve-TM`'i1.:-rT'� ��4 -zl .-':- � � i • t � YAf1M1rQ 1i�7 �'-�'�`- ! � i ' -� � _ ks c , 'o .� / � o aa yq�A� � _ _ oy ,? � f.-�' � - . ,. , � 9 �� . �„ � � ` ; + _ l� / > Z � ,.-�, . � -Y J � �� '� ��r- . J � W - � • ✓ ' !- '1! Y�iNMt O �1H� ►Ilb7Y0 1Lr3 �~ W j � q Wy � � ``' �. �-"�"__l.. { �-� u j Z + f � ow � • _ � 'J it i � Z � '�.. -- ; ,�,� a �� ; ;� ~�M �� ,� �i Y � a ` • ' �a "' ` � ��M •` * � �� ,S� �, �r ' , / � � �l � V SO � Y . Jt�'� � ' � ' � Q �� - � � _ V �� . ' �� a'� � � r' � �� O'� v \ ' r°�� ,c� � �n . "ev �° �� ! ` ;O � • �` .6'0 ? i � �o �, � L y � . 1 . \ � i ., . . i� , . � '�� _ � t = `�•9 , �`-� � e � G cp ��q�' ' / • i i � M ��0' _ / � /� � � u '" i � I . � 0 � i / 1t� � i . �o � � i = / • , � � � � o( t�, ° j' W 9 � � c s re � s '. 0 1 7i � - ' ( � I�tl s�nwvo , 3�r � �` 'ay ;, tss� � r . .+ � ` d \ ( I � � ' w aI�1 J J "' �: I ��W .� Y. . � `,� : W A � * J, � W a � L�� '�� 0 ' _ � " Y�� v s�wa Nyo�u�� M° _ � ° 3M15 °wo4w�ior /� s� I a�� 11�I � _ • �,wo��i�,s-ii3isooa i�yl itD7M � � �. WOAMif�11 8 N t� %// , �. � m F W w 1 + ir N W : M,O�w`.--. , `o s tD . � � • � � W a 173r1 � . ° � ' � � N 1� 3 / , � ' �� - -- --g N � W ~ 'tfl'. nb �ntao si�3ti : — <T �- _ � �� ' J I � � � ..�i... : �i 3 � io Nr k• M �ne�.-'- s �. , w9 --- - � ( � � W � � � �. � ' - .. � = v . � � � ; � o �l � + o I . i • 2 � (p�/ � � p >Y1S 77Yild - ! �! �� - � , . � i _ _ _ > �D 1 � ,' �i� j � , � � .9 s � i0 � <' � . co � ,.� � _. 1� 7tlOM�li! � . � . �ls 3n � ± — J t, _ Q = � «� � � ;: .. s �� / u . , � s M �r� j�i } a \l .� /' g ; �' � : _ �.. � .... .a.�� .1+ �lWt _ " � ��" . ,, _ . _ � . 9 ' � � ': 'LS tD) i ` ' - i , ,mT _ � ,ti ; — 9 , ; 1 � ` , `W+ , - !%�}' � r '_ � � i ♦ � -�, ��•��.�r��w��r 15C . � � REDRAFT LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING MENARDS WATERLINE AMENDED 6-24-91 As a result of a water distribution study that was made on the Fridley Water System, it was determined that a connection between the main service line south of I-694 needed to be extended to the dead end line on 52nd Avenue. As the City looked at the various alternatives to install this feeder line, it became apparent that the most economical and feasible solution would be a line running along the eastern edge of the Menards and Skywood Mall/Motel properties. The construction of the water line would parallel the existing sewer line, therefore, it became necessary for the excavation to extend into the hill on the east portion of the Menards property. As a result of this excavation, it was determined that a concrete retaining wall would be necessary to maintain the hill slope. Based upon the noise problems we have had in this area in the past, it was determined that a sound/retaining wall could be constructed 19 feet west of the east Menards property line. This sound/retaining wall constructed 28 feet high for the southly 240 feet of the alignment would substantially eliminate the line of sight and sound transmitted from the Menards yard operation to the residential properties to the east. The remaining portion of the easterly wall could be constructed to a lessor height. It is understood that the sound/retaining wall would then extend along the north Menards property line and step down from 18 feet to 8 feet at the guard gate. The wall over the Standard Oil service line would step down from 28 feet to 8 feet to connect to the southerly Menards fence. The north wall would be designed to provide a textured surface to the exterior of the Menards property. It is understood that the water line excavated material could be placed and extended into the 30 foot buffer zone in the lower section of the valley abutting the Menards property. This fill would be placed in an attempt to raise the valley area and would serve to fill between the sound/retaining wall and the natural ground level. In this fill operation, every effort would be made to protect the large trees in this area. It is understood that some of the smaller growth would be removed. This disturbed area will be reestablished with seed and ground cover. Construction of the sound wall will not extend beyond the property line. Every effort will be made to protect the large trees in the buffer zone. After construction, the area will be seeded and the ground cover restored. It is also understood that with this construction, the lights within the Menards wall would be modified to shine down and diminish light distribution beyond the sound 15D sound/retaining wall yard adjacent to the would be shaded to wall. Letter of Understanding Menards Waterline Page Two 6-24-91 This agreement assumes that the current yard operation and the hours of operation remain the same as they presently exist. If Menard's completes the construction as described above, the single family property owners to the east agree that no further complaints will be made. Should the yard hours of operation be expanded or intensify, Fridley will require Menard's to obtain a Special Use Permit. It is understood that the sound/retaining wall construction in the Menards yard does not include a special use permit. Menard's is permitted to use all of the area inside the sound/retaining wall for the authorized activities of the Home Improvement Center. We the undersigned acknowledge that our signatures agree to the understandings noted above. DATE• MAR.Y MATTHEWS, 1259 Skywood Lane DR. HEGGELSTAD, 1258 Skywood Lane MARVIN PROCHASKA, Real Estate (Menards) JOHN G. FLORA, DPW (City of Fridley) 15E 17 FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL CHIMNEY SWEEP Pixley, Jack Sweeps, Inc. 4179 - 149th Avenue NW Andover, MN 55304 ELECTRICAL Parsons Electric Co 917 5th Ave S Minneapolis MN 55404 EXCAVATING Groth Sewer & Water 775 Tower Drive Hamel, MN 55340 Jack Pixley Donald Dolan Larry Groth GENERAL CONTRACTOR The Cities Home Improvement 5310 Cedar Lake Rd St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Robert Galinson Kent Adolphson Construction 16 - 66 1/2 Way NE Fridley, MN 55432 Home Enhancers 8609 Lyndale Ave S Bloomington, MN 55420 Kent Adolphson Jim Wiebusch HEATING Efficient Air Control, Heating & Air 1818 - 117th Ave NW Coon Rapids, MN 55433 William Sandager Climate Designers 19187 Main Street NW Cedar, MN 55011 Barry Gusk MOBILE HOME INSTALLERS Mobile Movers 525 -105th Lane NW Coon Rapids, MN 55448 PLUMBING Groth Sewer & Water 775 Tower Drive Hamel, MN 55340 Dan Feltenstein Larry Groth Lane, Randy & Sons Plbg & Htg 1501 West Broadway Minneapolis, MN 55411 Randall Lane : � LICENSEB DARREL CLARK Chief Bldg Ofcl STATE OF MINN DARREL CLARK Chief Bldg Ofcl DARREL CLARK Chief Bldg Ofcl Same Same CLYDE WILEY Chief Bldg Ofcl Same STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINN Same , ' G1YOF' fRIDLE.Y FOR CONCIIRRENCE BY THE CITY COONCIL Insituform Central, Inc. 17988 Edison Avenue Chesterfield, MO 63005 JIILY 1, 1991 ESTiMATES Sanitary Sewer Repair Project No. 221 (Hackmann Avenue) FINAL ESTIMATE: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 25,101.00 Western Waterproofing 2838 Stevens Avenue South Minneapolis, NIId 55408 Phase II - 3 MG Concrete Reservoir Repair Project No. 200 FINAL ESTIMATB: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5, 916.14 Herrick & Newman 205 Fridley Plaza Office Building 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Services Rendered as City Attorney for the Month of June, 1991 . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,894.25 HNTB 6700 France Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55435 Well No. 12 & Booster Station Improvement Project No. 216 Partial Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,043.61 19 • �1 I FROM: City of Fridiey Engineeri�g Division CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 RE: Estimate No. 1 (FINAL) Period Ending: July 1, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FOR: INSITUFORM CENTRAL, INC. City of Fridley 17988 EDISON AVENUE 6431 University Avenue N.E. CHESTERFIELD, MO 63005 Fridley, Minnesota 55432 DATE: November 5, 1990 SANITARY SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 221 (HACKMANN AVENU� 602-60-000-45530-6004 STATEMENT OF WORK .::,:..:w;;:-;::.;;;:.;;:.:_;;:.;;;;:.:.;:.;:.;;:.:;.:;.;>;;;:.:.;:.;;;::;:.;:::;.;;:.;;:.;;::::::>:.:::.::»» :: .......:...:. .: .:.; . -.;:.. :.::::,;;:;:.:;;:.::...: ��:..:::.;:::.;::.;.:. :.: :::;;;:::::<.::.:;.;;;:.;:;:-:;;:.;:<.;;: :....: : ..: :... . .... : �::.....:..�;:;::;:.: .:�: .:�.�.: � :.:.:::.;:. '�'° MA`�'�::;: :: � �1'C�:<:;.;:;>:; ::t� `�':::::::<:;<;:::;::<::::: ::: > ! : ::: � �:�'1; :> .:.�:, :.::..:.:............................:.......................:.:...:............. . .::::::::::::. ............:..................... ...,.:.:., ..:.:::::::::::.:::.::::::::::.�:::::::.:::;:::::.:�::..;::.:::::.:::.:::...=......1.................. ............,�U..... .........:. :::�:..::::.;�.:�:::::::::::::::::::..: i�.UA.. ..'�:�?"`�..�.:. :'>>A��.:....::..�..... ........ ,. ........ . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ...... . . . . ... .. . . ... . ....... ...::.: �.: .,:.:�:. ::>:: f::::>;;:.;>;::::>:-<;::>:::<:>;::: ::: ::> .:::::::::::::: :.::..: :..�: :.:. .::.;::<.::.;:.;:;:.::;:;:;.::.;:.>:.::.;;:.:.;:.;:.;;;:.;;»;:.;:.;;;:.;:;;:.::.:;.:.;:_:.;;:.;;;:.:>::;>�:.:::. :::::.::� ::::::::::::::.�::::. >: ...................................: .: ..:.:.<.: ..::: .::: ,., :. :.......: ....... :...:. :<::. :: :.::::::.;: .;�:.;.:::::. �::::. :. <:.:.:::: ::.:: : ......::.::.:::::.:.:.:...., .. :�::;.:<:.:>::.;:;;:.;;:;: .: .... .. .:...... . :::...:.� ::::::::::...::.:::...:�..::::.: :: .................... . . , .. . ..: . ::::::: . .:::::::::::: .: . .: . .. . . :: .. .::. : .. . . ::.. :.:::..:;:: ..;: : .... �:::.:::::;:.. :<:;:: :. � : : � : . : : ..; <:r<>::>::>:v:::...: -:�� ;:��: >:::»:<::<:<;:::: <:::<:<;;:«<<:<:;� �° ��-;�-::>-::>::::>:::::<: :>:;,::<:;:: ........;��.:�:: �:� ::�:-:<;:; ::::>:::<::::::��;��::��<�:~��:::�:��::,,:;>,:;:<; ::. ::..: :.:::..::.�:...... . : .. . . .. : .. .. :.:;::;:;:.:::>:.;:::>::;;.>: .: : . . : .: .:::._.�:::... .. . : .::.:::::::.:.� ;.;::.:::::::. .. . : ::.:::::::::: .::::::: . . : : < :. .:.�::.�: .::::::�,:. . .: :. : :. . . ::.>:::::: .� ::.::::: ::.::::::::��1't�A?GT:t'C�M:.:::::.�:::::::::: :.:. .. . .�1'C'�'1�. .::::::::::.�P�t. �.::: :.:::::r: .:::::::::::. .t�1'�'::::::::::: .::::::: : . �11�'�'' .::::.�: .:::::::._. : :.t'�t . . .. �::::::::: ...................................................................................... ��:.�:::.:::::::::.�:::: :..�.:::::_.�:.::::.:��::::.::::::.�::: .::::::.::::U::::::.:_:.::�:::::: .::::._:��`:�:::::::.:::�:::..�:: .:.:�:::,"�.::::�4;�;�.:::::::: Insituform Lining 327 63.00 Lin. Ft. 327 $20,601.00 Mobilization and Demobilization 1 1,000.00 L.S. 1 1,000.00 Reinstatement of lateral connections 1 3,500.00 L.S. 1 3,500.00 TOTAL . - $25,101.00 Estimate No. 1 (FINAL) Insituform Central, inc_ Page Two July 1, 1991 SUMMARY: Original Contract Amount Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Amount Retained {0%) Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUE THIS ESTIMATE CERTIFICATE OF THE CONTRACTOR $25,101.00 $0.00 $25,101.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25.101.00 I hereby certify that the work performed a�d the materials supplied to date under the terms of the contract for this project, and all authorized changes thereto, have an actual value under the contract of the amounts shown on this estimate (and the final quantities on the final estimate are correct), and that this estimate is just and correct and no part of the "Amount Due This Estimate" has been received. �gY Co t act r's Authorized Representative (Title) CERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER Date 6�a�('�/% I hereby certify that 1 have prepared or examined this estimate, and that the contractor is entitled to payment of this estimate under the contract for reference project. l !-�l� Date v � (� ( � Respec Ily Submitted, n G. Flora, P.E. Public Works Director CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 6431 IIniversity Ave., N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 JULY 1, 1991 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Fridley C/O William W. Burns, City Manager 6431 University Ave., N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Council Members: CERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER We hereby submit the Final Estimate for SANITARY SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 221 (HACKMANN AVENUE), for Insituform Central, Inc., 17988 Edison Avenue, Chesterfield, MO, 63005. We have viewed the work under contract for the construction of SANITARY SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 221 (HACI�IANN AVENUE) 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 JULY l, 1991. Respectfully submitted, ohn G. Flora Director of Public Works A 19D Prepared Checked b JULY 1, 1991 City of Fridley SANITARY SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 221 (HACKMANN AVENUE) PREVAILING AAGE VERIFICATION This is to certify that Insituform Central, Inc., has abided by the Prevailing Wage Provisions as specified by the Minne�ota Department of Labor and Industry for Anoka County. I declare under the penalties of perjury that this statement is just and correct. INSITUFORM CENTRAL, INC. � �� J PH F. OLSON, V.P. FINANCE & ADMIN. 19E July 1, 1991 City of Fridley SANITARY SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 221 (HACKMANN AVENUE) 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 $25,101.00 and the final payment of $25,101.00 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. INSITUFORM CENTRAL, INC. � C�� (� � � , . J ep F. Olson, V.P. Finance & Admin. 19F � July l, 1991 To: Public Works Director City of Fridley REPORT ON FINAL INSPECTION FOR CITY OF FRIDLEY SANITARY SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 221 (HACRMANN AVENUE) We, the undersigned, have inspected the above-mentioned project and find that the work required by the contract is substantially complete in conformity with the plans and specifications of the project. 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 agreed 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, starting from the day of the final inspection that being JULY 1, 1991. � 1 Volkman, Public Works Superintendent �Y ctor Representative, (Title) l l�l� � 1 N S 1 T U F O R M C E N T R A L, I N C. 17988 EOISON AVENUE CHESTERFIELD, MISSOURI 63005 314-532-6137 T0: City of Fridtey 6431 University Averwe, N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 PROJECT: Sanitary Seuer Repair Project No. 221 (Hackmann Averwe) insituform Reconstruction D UPL 1 CATE ES�IMATE � 1NVOICE # JOB # LKJRK COMPLETED THRU: INYOICE OATEO: 1 & final 153 CMN104 06/07/91 06118/91 ITEM CQNTRACT COMPLETEO-TO-DATE NO. DESCR1PT10N GUANTITY UNIT PRICE GUANTITT X AMOUNT ---�---------------------------------------------------------------------------------�------�---------------------�------- �Sewer Lining � 327 L.F.� 63.00 /L.P.� 327 L.P.( 100X� 20,601.00 �Mobilization and Demobilization � 1 L.S.� 1,000.00 /L.S.J 1 L.S.� 100X� 1,000.00 jReinstatement of Laterat Connections � 1 l.s.� 3,500.00 /L.S.� 1 L.S.� 100X� 3,500.00 { i i i i � i i i i i i i i i i i i i i� i i i i � i �� ti i i � I I i I 1 I I I �� I I I I i I �� I I I I I 1 { 1 f 1 I I l I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I i I i 1 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL COMTRACT: S 25,101.00 EARNED TO DATE: f 25,101.00 ------------------------•--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ------- Cust. #21965 CONTRACT SUMMARY Month Gross S 25,101.00 ---------------- Less: Retainage 8 OX 0.00 Month Retention 0.00 Month Open 25,101.00 BN/vjn cc: Boyd Hirtz Dan Carroll Charles Nance Mike K�osnosky Total Contract Earned Less Retainage Add: Less: Net Amount Due: Paid to Oate: TOTAL DUE: AMWNT PAST DUE: 19H S 25,101.00 0.00 25,101.00 S 25,101.00 Previous Estimates Other Total Deductions f�om Ear�ed to Oate AMOUNT OUE 7HIS ESTIMATE: O.UO S 25,101.00 __�__________ PLEASE REMIT T0: o.00 p p. 60X 1026 CHESTERFIELD MO 630Q5 17-Jun-91 UPDATED FROM: City of Fridley Engineering Division TO: Honorable Mayo� and City Council City of Fridley 6431 University Ave., N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 DATE: MAY 14, 1991 CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE., N.E. �RIDIEY, MN 55432 �`� r ��1 �I� � �u;� 1 � �s�� .tE� - Eit�. & DcS ,;'a�'4 '�'• �j. Hf �t.:i RE: FINAL ESTIMATE Period Ending: APRIL 26, 1991 FOR: Western Waterproofing 2838 Stevens Ave., S. Minneapolis, MN 55408 PHASE It - 3 MG CONCRETE RESERVOfR REPAIR PROJECT NO. 200 PROJECT CODE # 601-60-000-45530-6015 STATEMENT O� WORK ` ' ��i ` �: : :: :::`'»:>:<`:::> <::::>::>:::�:>;':<:<:::>::::>`:<�:>:`;:;::::>::>::::: >::>s>::::::::>::>::»»::»::>:;::::::::;;::>::>::>::>::t:>::>::>::>?::>:�»::?>::»::><:»::::>?::::>>>s::::::>'::>::::>:<::::>::>::»::»::»>�:::>;::>::><;:<:>::::::::::>><:::;:>;:>::>»>::::»<::::>::>::»::>:z:;<:>::»::>s:::>::>::::::::;:::>::»::»::::>:::<:::::::::>:;:>::::<:<:>::>: ;�:: >::>::>::::>;:<:::>::;::>::»»>::»::;,:;;;:<:<::;::»::>::>::::«<:<:«<:>:<:::»::>::>:>:>::::::>:::;>::»:<:»::>:: »»>:;:>:«:.:»:::»>:<::<:>::>::>::>::::::;::: _>::::«: ::>:<:::>::>::>::>::>;:::>:><:::>::>::.:::>::>::»:: >::::::<;<:::;:<:>::>:::<:»::>::>::.;;::>::;>; �?t '�'1. >::>::::>:;::::>::<»::>;:::<:>::::::»::>::><::»::::<:»:<>::>::>::»::>::>:::;;::>:>;::>:<::<:::»:::r::>:::«:»:: »:::.::.;:.>:.>;:.;:.;:.;:.:.:;:.;::.;:.:.::.;:.;:.;;:_:.;;:.;:.;<.;;:..; ::::::::.: : ::::.. :.::::: :::::::::::::: :.:: ::.:::.... ... . 't'1� . :.::.......................................:::::::::..:..�::...........................:..:.:�:i:i::::.....:::..................... Qt! i� :::;:�::�:'C`..�'E`I: `�'::,:: _>::.:::::::::>:`::�>:: �:>::�:;<:::,;:�;>:' ,;;><»:»;>;;:::<«>�<:: :;�::>;:;<:?:<:::::::�.:;:.>::>'�>:::::;:::_;::�>?:> .:<��::y::;;:»:?>;>?'>�:,:>�:��:�r':;>�:>:>_� >:a��>: �:?.: �:;:<:.�>:;:::>�.:::;:i ;;,. i.-_:;;'�:�; �/*�}�+ �±. �rf {�[v � > i �.. � �.>::;:.: � �: x::... .>��>:.:::::m:>;::o::..:: �:.>: �.:»;r.>;::>�.: : ».�'..;;';_::i;i::::::;:`:: :::::t::::::; '.:`:$"i:::i::::[::::::i[::i:;::[1:::[:[:>i:[::;fi:::ii;iiP:::i:ifi:::i::::$i:[ii:i2::i::i;i:::.#°;::[:i:::: 11t111 .C..... . . . . .. ... �' > .....� ..............#. . . :. ... ........�lYk�....::.:_.:....:..:._......................, . �.� :.::::::::::'r,.::ii::;2:::::::::::::::5:::::::::i:::i::ii::i:::;:2`:":::;:::::::::i;;::::<;:;:::::�>::>:..>::.:._:::. . ............. . ..:................................: ...... . . . .....:... .......:.::::::::.�::::.......:::.::.:.:::..::n�::::::.�:::._::::::::::....... :::.::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::»:•>: : .: iJ:»:<.>r:.:>:?>r:.:::::�:r:� � .� L;�::.�::: ............:::.:...::...:..::::.: :...::::.::.........:.....:::::::.:::::::::._.�.�.� . ::...:................:.�::::::::::: :.::::..:::.......:................:::::::: :::::::: :.::::::................. :....:::::.�::::::::::.....:..... .............�...�....:::::::: �.� :.:::::::::::::::::� w� (ry�/�� ±` . �. . : "''?�'. "� i!L-: i%L7f1. `.�;�� ;C � t _:;<;�i::::::: i::::`:>::?' ;:2:?:`':i''.:'' ?'��'':: y�'�.: �': :: :: ::: �� :;::::"':` :i:'+:::::i:i' ... �:.,::.:::::. � �'�. "it:'?+2; _ ;i �`::`::i:`.�.. _;;:::�::'.i::[[s?:f:;i; :>; ;:.::;: �;_:::5:[5::.::<.. �. ��..;[:i[:tii': ;:;t: i:5i.'':Y:iy:;.':: i2:2 "'[ �': ".'i:;:=f:'t %::t::i[Ev[[[t:i":t:ti:tt::'�:V� ..............�......� .tYt .................. ..... �(1K��::::.....:........ .. . . : : . . . : . . .. . _ . :. : ..�,.... . .... ............ ................................::.::.:::..:::::::�2�1.:::::::::.:::.::.::::::;;..:.::.::.::.:;;p�1�E:.;:.:;.;:;:::;::.;:::.:>:<�JtulT;>:.:.;:.::>:.:�.�'�IMATE.:::.::;.:.;:.;:.:.;AltltCi. <:;:.;;:: . ......... ....................... .............:::::::.::::::::::.: .::. :: :.:::::::::: �,I�`�".:::::. 1.2.1 Repair top two feet of $136.00 sq. ft. $40,800.00 300 33 % $13,600.00 the interior shell 1.2.2 Repair top two ft of the drop panels $57.43 sq. ft. $57,430.00 1,000 100 % $57,430.00 1.2.3 Replace joint $3.37 lin. ft. $9,773.00 2,900 100 % $9,773.00 1,2.4 Install roof to shell $3.37 lin. ft. $1,523.24 452 100 % $1,523.24 ��iz: sea�ar�t 1.31 Interior steel n/a $2,580.00 Lump Sum 100 9�0 $2,580.00 sandblast 1.3.2 Interio� steel coating n/a $1,059.00 Lump Sum 100 % $1,059.00 1.3.3 tnterior concrete n/a $15,272.40 Lump Sum 100 % $15,272.40 waterblast 1.3.4 Repair interior $6.54 sq. ft $3,270.00 500 100 % $3,270.00 concrete 1.2.5 Comptete interior n/a $141,154.00 Lump Sum 100 %$141,154.00 1.3.5 coating 1.4 191 17-Jun-91 UPDATED WESTERN WATERPROOFING, INC. PAGE TWO FINAL ESTIMATE JUNE 17, 1991 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: Reduced Compieted Units Item 1.2.1 Delete landscaping: Change Order No. 1 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT: SUMMARY: Originai Contract amount Reduced material units $272,861.64 $136.00 sq. ft. ($27,200.00) (200) n/a ($225.40) (1) $272,861.64 ($27,200.00) Contract Deletion - Change Order No.1 Revised Contract amount Value Completed to date Less amount retained (2.5 percent) Less amount paid previously AMOUNT DUE THIS ESTIMATE CERTIFICATE OF THE CONTRACTOR ($225.4Qj $245,436.24 $245,436.24 $0.00 $239,520.10 $5�916.14 $245,661.64 ($27,200.00) ($225.40) $245,436.24 I hereby certify that the work pertormed and the materials suppiied to date under the terms of the contract for this project, and all authorized changes thereto, have an actual value under the contract of the amounts shown on this estimate (and the final quantities on the final estimate are correct), and that this estimate is just and correct and no part of the "Amount Due This Estimate" has been received. � gy C- _ _.�� _ /�.�3 : Date C,�zfl�� , C r o�'s Authorized Representative (Ti e) CERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER I hereby certify that I have prepared or examined this estimate, and that the contractor is entitled to payment of this estimate under the contract fo� reference project. 19J 17-Jun-91 UPDATED WESTERN WATERPROOFING, INC. PAGE THREE FINAL ESTIMATE JUNE 17, 1991 � - � •- i/ , , . � :, �i . � - . : �'\��'� � . . ►��:. .: - - Date ` / Respectfully Submitted, John G. Flora, P.E. Public Works Director 19K July l, 1991 City of Fridley PHASE II - 3 MG CONCRETE RESERVOIR REPAIR PROJECT NO. 200 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 $245,436.24 and the final payment of $5,916.14 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. WESTERN WATERPROOFING, INC. � �- C��'�l"� � e Carlson, Department Manager 19L July 1, 1991 City of Fridley PHASE II - 3 MG CONCRETE RESERVOIR REPAIR PROJECT NO. 200 PREVAILING WAGE VERIFICATION This is to certify that WESTERN WATERPROOFING, INC., has abided by the Prevailing Wage Provisions as specified by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry for Anoka County. I declare under the penalties of perjury that this statement is just and correct. WESTERN AATERPROOFING, INC. - � / �� J JE ARLSON, DEPARTMENT MANAGER 19M CITY OF FRIDLEY PIIBLIC AORRS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 6431 IIniversity Ave., N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 JULY 1, 1991 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Fridley C/O William W. Burns, City Manager 6431 University Ave., N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Council Members: CERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER We hereby submit the Final Estimate for PHASE II - 3 MG CONCRETE RESERVOIR REPAIR PROJECT NO. 200 for WESTERN WATERPROOFING, INC., 2838 Stevens Ave., So., Minneapolis, MN, 55408. We have viewed the work under contract for the construction of PHASE TI - 3 MG CONCRETE RESERVOIR REPAIR PROJECT NO. 200 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 two-year contractual maintenance bond comrnence on July l, 1991. Respectfully submitted, .r // �i� '' �/�ohn G. Flora Director of Public Works 19N Prepared Checked b July 1, 1991 To: Public Works Director City of Fridley REPORT ON FINAL INSPECTION FOR CITY OF FRIDLEY PHASE II - 3 MG CONCRETE RESERVOIR REPAIR PROJECT NO. 200 We, the undersigned, have inspected the above-mentioned project and find that the work required by the contract is substantially complete in conformity with the plans and specifications of the project. All deficiencies have been corrected by the contractor. Also, the work for which the City feeZs the contractor shouZd receive a reduced price has been agreed upon by the contractor. So, therefore, we recommend to you that the City approve the attached FINAL ESTIMATE for the contractor and the two-year maintenance bond, starting from the day of the final inspection that being JIILY 1, 1991. � � olkman, Public Wo.rks Superintendent � �-�'/�L,�'y��1r ii� r Represen�ative; (Titlej 190