10/21/1991 - 5112�
anror
wo��
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING
ATTENDENCE SHEET
Monday, October 21, 1991
7:30 P.M.
LEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
ITEM
RINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS NUMBER
'
GNOF
FRIDLEY
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
APPROVAL OF MINIITES:
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL
OCTOBER 21, 1991
City Council Meeting of October 7, 1991
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
OPEN FORUM, VISITORS:
(Consideration of items not on agenda - 15 minutes)
STATE LEGISLATIVE IIPDATE:
Senator pon Frank
PUBLIC HEARING:
r�mendment to the Zoning Ordinance -�
t� Change the Definition of a _.
Kennel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1L
A
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 21, 1991 Page 2
PIIBLIC BEARING (CONTINOED):
Public Hearing for a Rezoning
Request, ZOA #91-02, by Thomas
Brickner to Rezone from C-1,
Local Business, and C-2,
General Business, to R-3, General
Multiple Dwelling, on Lot 2 and
the Southerly 399 Feet of Lot 3,
Auditor's Subdivision No. 88, to
Allow the Construction of an
Apartment Building, Generally
Located at 6450 Central Avenue N.E. . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2RR
Assessment for Street Improvement
Project No. STREET 1990 - 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3B
Assessment for Water, Sanitary
Sewer & Storm Sewer Project
No. 210 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 4B
Assessment for Treatment and
Removal of Trees 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 5B
�
i
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 21, 1991 Page 3
OLD BUSINE88:
Receive an Item from the Appeals
Commission Meeting of September 17,
1991 (Tabled 10/07/91) : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 6M
A. Variance Request, VAR #91-29,
by Kenneth Speltz and Rich
Kleinow, Skyline Veterinary
Hospital, to Reduce the
Required Front Yard Setback
from 80 Feet to 48 Feet to
Al1ow the Construction of an
Addition on Lot 2, Block 1,
Herwal Second Addition, the
Same Being 6220 Highway 65 N.E.
Resolution Renaming Viron Road
to Highway 65 East Service Drive
(Tabled 10/07/91) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 7F
NEW BIISINESS:
Resolution in Support of an
Application for a Minnesota
Lawful Gambling Premise Permit
to the Lion's Club of Fridley
(Maple Lanes, 6310 Highway 65) . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 8C
Resolution in Support of an
Application for a Minnesota
Lawful Gambling Premise Permit
to the Lion's Club of Fridley �
(Ropers Lounge and Restaurant,
3720 East River Road) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 - 9C
�
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 21, 1991 Page 4
NEW BIISIN1�88 (CONTINOED) :
Receive the Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of October 2, 1991: ........ 10 - lOS
A. Consideration of an Ordinance
to Require a License for Motor
Vehicle Repair Garages
(Proposed Chapter 18) ......... 10 - lOP
......... lOR - lOS
Extension of a Special Use Permit,
SP #90-15, by Mike Schrader, to
Allow Repair Garages; to Allow
Automobile Service Stations and
Motor Vehicle Fuel and Oil
Dispensing Services; to Allow
Motor Vehicle Wash Establishments;
to Allow Exterior Storage of
Materials and Equipment, all on
Lots 1 through 9, Block 1,
Central View Manor, and Lot 3,
Block 1, Central View Manor,
2nd Addition, Generally Located
at 7355 Highway 65 N.E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 11E
Authorization to Award Contract
for the Tnstallation of the
Spur Station Storm Sewer Line,
Project No. 223 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 12D
Authorization to Advertise for
Bids for Emergency Repair of
Well No. 5, Project No. 224 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 13F
�
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 21, 1991 Page 5
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINIIED):
Authorization for Emergency
Repair of Sanitary Sewer Line
on 61st Avenue between Fifth
and Sixth Streets, Project
No. 225 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - 14D
Approval of Change Order No. 3
to Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2, Deleting
Fire Training Facility Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 15C
Approval of Change Order No. 4
to Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2, Adding
Resurfacing of 61st Avenue
Between 5th and 6th Streets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 16B
Establish Special City Council
Meeting for November 12, 1991, �
to Receive the Statement af
Canvass from the November 5,
1991, Election . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - 17A
Resolution Confirming Assessment
for Street Improvement Project
No. STREET 1990 - 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 18B
Resolution Confirming Assessment
for Water, Sanitary Sewer & Storm
Sewer Proj ect No . 210 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 19 B
Ci�iLLL�1 ..�a,, �.vva��,iL rac��-riavur vr vi:ava�a� a.r.� 1yy1 Y�q@ 6
NEW BOSINESS (CONTINIJED):
Resolution Confirming Assessment
for the Treatment and Removal of
Trees Z991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - 20B
Resolution Designating Time and
Number of Council Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Z - 2ZB
Informal Status Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Claims. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 - 24C
Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
ADJOURN:
�
T8B ][INQT88 O!' TSg FRIDLEY CITY COVNCIL 1L�ETI7�3 4�''
OCTOBLR 7, 1991
•�,
�; ,.
1
THE MINIITES OF THE REGIILAR M$ETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL OF
OCTOBER 7, 1991
The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order
at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Nee.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Nee led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
ROLL CALL•
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Nee, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman
Billings, Councilman Schneider, and Councilman
Fitzpatrick
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION:
FIRE PREVENTION WEEK - OCTOBER 6-12. 1991:
Mayor Nee read and issued a
October 6 through 12, 1991 a:
citizens to visit the City's
1:00 to 5:00 p.m. He stated
the University Avenue Fire
demonstrations, how to plan <
escape drill for children,
presented this proclamation
proclamation proclaiming the week of
Fire Prevention Week. He invited all
three fire stations on October 12 from
that special programs will be held at
Station including fire extinguishing
� safe escape from your house, a smokey
videos and much more. Mayor Nee
to Fire Chief, Chuck McKusick.
Mr. McKusick stated that he hoped the public would come to their
open house on Saturday, as it will be a great opportunity for
citizens to review this public safety program. He stated that Dick
Larson, Deputy Fire Chief, had 1,535 children go through the fire
escape house. He stated that Mr. Larson and the Fire Department
volunteers have done a fantastic job of promoting the program, and
the house is provided by the Fire Marshals Division of the North
Suburban Regional Mutual Aid Association.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
COUNCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 30,_ 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 COONCIL MESTING OF OCTOBER 7. 1991 PAGE 2
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt the agenda as submitted.
Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
OPEN FORUM. VISITORS:
MR. PETER EISENZIMMER, 6535 OAKLEY DRIVE:
Mr. Eisenzimmer voiced his concern about assessments for the
improvements on 67th Avenue and Oakley. He stated that these
improvements were identified in a notice in the Fridley Sun-Focus.
He stated that it was his understanding the residents on Oakley
Drive and 67th Avenue would not be assessed, but the costs of the
improvement were to be paid by the developer.
Councilman Billings stated that the assessments for the improvement
of 67th Avenue will be paid for by the properties on 67th. He
stated that the City still has to go through the process of the
public hearing regardless of who pays for the improvement. He
advised Mr. Eisenzimmer that he did not receive a copy of the
assessment notice, as it is not proposed that his property be
assessed for any of this improvement. He stated that all the
assessments would be to those properties which Mr. Brickner
purchased, as well as to the church property.
Mr. Eisenzimmer stated that there is a lot of tra�fic in the area
with cars racing on Oakley Drive. He stated that people cannot
sleep and felt this should be checked.
Mr. Burns, City Manager, asked when this problem is occurring.
Mr. Eisenzimmer stated that it occurs on week nights, but more so
on the weekends. He stated that it begins around 10:00 p.m. and
goes on until 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning. He suggested that a
gate be placed in front of the church so vehicles cannot get into
that property.
Mayor Nee stated that he understands the church has had some
vandalism, and they probably do not like what is going on either.
Councilman Billings stated that he felt a more permanent barricade
at the end of Oakley Drive would give assurances to the
neighborhood that the City is not trying to build a roadway there.
He asked about the plans for planting and erosion control along the
area where the street sweepings had been placed.
Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated it is hoped that some
additional dirt would be obtained, and he said the ch�rch is
working on landscaping their portion of the property. He stated
that the City will plant some trees next year.
FRIDLEY CITY COONCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 1991 PAGE 3
Mr. Eisenzimmer stated that he was told by a member of the church
that the road would be through next year.
Councilman Billings stated that this must have been a
misunderstanding on the church's part. He stated that there are
no plans for the City to complete the connection between Oakley
Drive and 6?th Avenue.
Mayor Nee stated that if there is a misunderstanding, it should be
straightened out.
Councilman Billings stated that he would take the responsibility
of sending a letter to the church informing them of the City's
position.
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that it may be beneficial to include
in this letter the concerns about the cars and stepping up patrols
of this area.
NEW BUSINESS•
1. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 18. 1991:
A. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 21. 1991. FOR AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF
A KENNEL•
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to set the public hearing on this
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance for October 21, 1991. Seconded
by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
B. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 21. 1991� FOR A
REZONING RE4UEST. ZOA #91-02. BY THOMAS BRICKNER. TO REZONE
FROM C-1. LOCAL BUSINESS, AND C-2, GENERAL BUSINESS. TO R-3.
GENERAL MULTIPLE DWELLING, ON LOT 2 AND THE SOUTHERLY 399 FEET
OF LOT 3. AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 88, TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN APARTMENT BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATEI�___AT
6450 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E.:
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to set the public hearing on this
rezoning request, ZOA #91-02, for October 21, 1991. Seconded by
Councilman Billings.
Councilman Schneider stated that at the Planning Commission meeting
there was discussion after the meeting, and some of the residents
thought the petitioner was withdrawing this request. He asked that
staff re-notify the neighborhood and any of those persons who
attended the Planning Commission meeting that this item �3i11 be
discussed by Council on October 21.
FRIDL�Y CITY COQNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBSR 7. 1991 PAGE 4
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to receive the minutes of the
Planning Commission meeting of September 18, 1991. Seconded by
Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee
declared the motion carried unanimously.
2. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 3, 1991:
A. VARIANCE RE4UEST. VAR #91-28, BY RICHARD PETERSON TO INCREASE
THE HEIGHT OF A FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD FROM 4 FEET TO 6 FEET
ON LOTS 4 5 AND 6 BLOCK 3 SPRING BROOK PA.RK THE SAME BEING
7939 EAST RIVER ROAD:
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this is a
request for a variance to the height of a fence in the front yard.
She stated that the petitioner is proposing a six foot high fence
rather than the four foot allowed by the code. She stated that the
Appeals Commission recommended approval by a 3 to 1 vote.
Ms. Dacy stated that the Appeals Commission felt the height of the
fence was necessary in order to provide the maximum amount of
protection, as the elevation of East River Road is higher than this
property. She stated that the Commission also noted that there are
a number of fences on properties in this particular area, and that
the property to the south of this parcel was granted a similar
variance.
Ms. Dacy stated that staff is recommending denial of this variance
request.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the recommendation
of the Appeals Commission and grant Variance Request, VAR #91-28.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated that there is heavy traffic on East
River Road which does have an affect on the property owner's
privacy.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 7 1991 PAGE 5
3. RECEIVE ITEMS FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER
17, 1991:
A. VARIANCE RE UEST VAR #91-29 BY KENNETH SPELTZ AND RICH
KLEINOW, SKYLINE VETERINARY HOSPITAL, TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED
FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 80 FEET TO 48 FEET TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ON LOT 2 BLOCK l. HERWAL SECOND
ADDITION THE SAME BEING 6220 HIGHWAY 65 N.E.:
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this is a
request for a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 80 to
48 feet. She stated that this property was previously granted a
front yard variance from 80 to 55 feet. She stated that this
property is zoned C-3, as are all adjacent properties. She stated
that Miller Funeral Home to the south and the Moore Lake Office
complex to the north were also granted variances to 55 feet for the
front yard setback.
Ms. Dacy stated that the owner is proposing an addition to the
front and rear of the existing building. She stated that the
purpose of the addition is to expand the waiting room, lounge, and
office area in the front and expand the boarding area for the
animals in the rear.
Ms. Dacy stated that staff is recommending denial of this variance
request based on the analysis that the property owner has
reasonable use of the property, and that the addition could be made
to the rear of the building.
Ms. Dacy stated that the Appeals Commission recommended approval
based on their finding that the additional footage in the front
yard would not decrease 'any sight lines, that there were no
objections from property owners in the area, and no adverse
aesthetic impact. She stated that the Commission also felt the
addition of the office area, lounge, and waiting room could not be
accomplished by adding to the rear of the building.
Councilman Billings questioned if some of the interior plans for
the building could be changed, such as moving the examining rooms,
so that the expansion occurs to the rear. He questioned if the
property owners had looked at keeping the addition within the
confines of the existing front yard setback.
Mr. Rich Kleinow, Skyline Veterinary Hospital, stated that to move
the examining rooms towards the rear would involve a lot of
remodeling because of the terrazzo, plumbing, and counter work.
He stated that they are requesting this seven foot variance
primarily to modernize the clinic.
Mr. Kenneth Speltz, Skyline Veterinary Hospital, stated that they
have revised their plan several times and solicited reconumendations
from the Appeals Commission. He stated that the addition could be
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 7. 1991 PAG$ 6
done to the rear of the building at a huge expense and,
essentially, shutting down the business for a period of time. He
stated that this would increase their construction costs between
$20,000 and $30,000.
Councilman Schneider asked the percentage increase in order to make
this change.
Mr. Speltz stated that it would cost between one-fourth and
one-third more. He stated that the estimated cost for the entire
addition is $60,000.
Mr. Speltz stated that there is a bowling alley to the north that
is two feet from the curb. He stated that the gas station has
about a 40 foot setback, and the Brickner building has about a 50
foot setback.
Ms. Dacy stated that all the properties in this area are not built
to the 80 foot setback requirement. She stated that when this area
was vacant it was anticipated some type of shopping center would
be constructed. She stated that several other businesses in the
area have obtained variances to reduce the front yard setback. She
stated that if the property was zoned C-2 a 35 foot setback would
be allowed, and this variance would not be required.
Ms. Dacy stated that staff is recommending denial of this variance;
however, there could be a legitimate argument that the zoning may
not be appropriate in this general area and that the 80 foot
setback is too restrictive.
Councilman Schneider stated that he would like to see the aerial
photos of this area and the alignment of this property with
existing businesses.
Councilman Billings stated that it may be appropriate to check with
adjacent property owners to determine if they would favor a
rezoning to C-2 which would allow a 35 foot setback. He stated
that he would like the opportunity to review other options.
Mr. Kleinow asked if it would be a complicated procedure in getting
the other property owners involved if there is a rezoning.
Councilman Billings stated that it could be, however, staff would
need to contact the other property owners to determine if they are
interested in a rezoning.
MOTION by Counc•ilman Schneider to table this item for further
information from City staff. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion
carried unanimously. .
FRIDL�Y CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 7. 1991 PAGE 7
Councilman Billings stated that he would like to compliment the
owners of Skyline Veterinary Hospital on the excellent job they
have done in providing the City's animal control services.
B. VARIANCE RE4UEST, VAR #91-30. BY BRUCE AND SUZANNE HANLEY,TO
REDUCE THE REOUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO
18.7 FEET. TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE-SEASON PORCH.
ON THE WEST 130 FEET OF LOT 31. AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 77.
THE SAME BEING 132 ALDEN CIRCLE N.E.:
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this property
is located in the northeast corner of Alden Circle and 71-1/2 Way.
She stated that the variance is to reduce the rear yard setback
frem 25 to 18.7 feet to allow the enclosure of an existing deck.
She stated that staff had recommended denial of the v�riance
because the property owner had other alternatives.
Ms. Dacy stated that the Appeals Commission recommended approval
of the variance on a 3 to 1 vote as they felt the variance would
not have an adverse impact since there is adequate distance between
the rear and the nearby adjacent structure.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the recommendation
of the Appeals Commission and grant Variance Request, VAR #91-30.
Seconded by Councilman Billings.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated that if this home faced 71-1/2 Way,
a variance would not be needed.
Councilwoman Jorgenson asked if the petitioner had a seven foot
high fence.
Mr. Hanley stated that at the Appeals Commission meeting someone
stated the fence was seven feet high, but the fence is actually six
feet high.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
4. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION OF .A GARAGE WITHIN A
UTILITY EASEMENT OVER THE VACATED ALLEY EAST OF LOTS 25
AND 26, BLOCK 5, HYDE PARK:
Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this
resolution is to allow the encroachment of a detached garage into
a utility easement. She stated that when the petitioner, Mr.
Johnson, went through the vacation, variance, and memorialization
processes, one of the requirements of the vacation request was that
Council pass a resolution authorizing a specified distance of
encroachment in the retained easement and the City's conveyance of
the east half of the alley to owners west of the alley.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 1991 PAGE 8.,_
Councilman Billings stated that at the last Council meeting, the
time period was extended for the variance, and it was staff's
belief that the petitioner may move the location of the garage.
He questioned how much green area would be left in the back yard
if there is a deviation from the original plan.
Ms. Dacy stated that she asked Mr. Johnson which plan he wished to
pursue, and understands he is considering a change from his
original plan; however, he still needs a letter from the property
owner to the south. She stated that Councilman Billings' comment
is well-taken because there would be more green area with the
original plan.
Councilman Billings stated that although the numbers in the
variance are the same, the location of the garage is a substantial
change, and he would like some time to review the plan and discuss
options. He stated the worst case scenario is that this request
may have to be processed again through the Commission, so there is
a mailing to the neighborhood regarding Mr. Johnson's plans.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item to the November 4,
1991 Council meeting. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
5. RESOLUTION RENAMING VIRON ROAD TO HIGHWAY 65 EAST SERVICE
DRIVE•
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to table this item. Seconded by
Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
6. RESOLUTION NO. 78-1991 DESIGNATING POLLING PLACES AND
APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE NOVEMBER 5 1991 GENERAL
ELECTION:
MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt Resolution No. 78-1991.
Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
7. APPROVAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT WITH RECYCLE MINNESOTA RESOURCES
INC.•
Ms. Lisa Campbell, Planning Assistant, stated that this agreement
sets forth the terms and conditions under which Recycle Minnesota
Resources may lease the property and run a redemption center at
350 - 71st Avenue N.E. She stated that this agreement is for a
two-year period and expands the materials accepted to include
magazines. She stated that it is requested the $1.00 fee to lease
the site be waived, Recycle Minnesota Resources' staff would•assist
in enforcing yard waste hours, and the City agrees to correct the
drainage problem at the site at a cost of about $150.00.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MBETING OF OCTOBBR 7. 1991 PAGE 9
Ms. Campbell stated that the City has not received any complaints
in the last two years regarding this site, and the employee of
Recycle Minnesota Resources who is at the site has been
outstanding. She stated that this person is always willing to work
with residents to insure their materials are acceptable, and he was
recently honored with a service award from Recycle Minnesota
Resources.
Ms. Campbell stated that tonnage at the site has increased
45 percent since 1986. She stated that the General Manager of
Recycle Minnesota Resources, Mr. Locey, was here this evening to
answer any questions.
Councilwoman Jorgenson asked what was involved to correct the
drainage problem.
Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that some fill would be
installed in front of the building.
Councilwoman Jorgenson asked if consideration has been given to a
hard surface. She stated that the area is a mud hole in the spring
and late fall. She stated she would like to ask that Council
consider installing a hard surface driveway and possibly including
this item in the capital improvements program for next year.
MOTTON by Councilwoman Jorgenson to authorize entering into this
lease agreement with Recycle Minnesota Resources. Seconded by
Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to direct staff to check further
into the poss.ibility of installing gutters on the building at the
recycling center and also the installation of a hard surface
driveway. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Locy, General Manager of Recycle Minnesota Resources, stated
that they appreciated working with the City of Fridley and felt
that their employee had done a good job at the recycling center.
He stated that he also appreciated the relationship and cooperation
they have had with Lisa Campbell of the City's staff.
8. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH ON-LAND ENVIRONMENTAL
OPPORTUNITIES, INC. (OLEO):
AND
APPROVAL OF ADDENDUM TO AGREEMENT WITH NASH DISPOSAL INC.:
Ms. Campbell, Planning Assistant, stated that this agreement with
OLEO would allow for the transfer of the City's yard waste to OLEO
farms. She stated that OLEO is a group of Anoka County farmers who
are pursuing the development of land spreading yard waste as an
alternative to large-scale composting. She stated that in 1988,
FRIDLBY CITY COtJNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 1991 PAGE 10
OLEO was established as a non-profit organization in order to
receive financial and technical assistance. She stated that in
that same year, they completed their first study on the effect of
land spreading on corn crop productivity. She stated that the
study is being monitored by the University of Minnesota. She
stated that the 1988 study was inconclusive, but later studies have
indicated some increased crop productivity.
Ms. Campbell stated that it is not likely that County-based
large-scale composting sites will have the capacity to manage yard
waste indefinitely and alternate approaches are needed. She stated
that this year, OLEO is evaluating the transportation costs of land
spreading, along with crop productivity, and have approached the
City requesting that the City's yard waste be transported to their
farms. She stated it is proposed that the City transfer yard waste
to the OLEO farms under the condition that any additional per load
costs will be paid by OLEO, and OLEO has accepted these terms.
She stated that OLEO has also met all the State and County
licensing requirements.
Ms. Campbell stated that the two agreements for the Council's
consideration involve an addendum to the existing contract with
Nash Disposal, Inc. to allow the contractor to bring yard waste
material to the farms, and the other agreement is with OLEO where
they agree to reimburse the City for the transfer of the yard
waste.
Councilwoman Jorgenson asked if the City of Lexington was a pilot
for the OLEO program.
Ms. Campbell stated that she believed they were involved; however,
the study is closely monitored by the University of Minnesota.
Ms. Campbell stated that OLEO is funded through agriculture funds
from Anoka County. She stated that she believed they have received
about $5,300 through this funding source. She stated she is not
concerned that the City would not receive their money from OLEO.
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to authorize entering into this
agreement with On-Land Environmental Opportunities, Inc. (OLEO)
for receiving the City's yard waste. Seconded by Councilman
Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared
the motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to authorize entering into the
addendum to the agreement for yard waste transfer services with
Nash Disposal, Inc. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETINQ OF OCTOBER 7. 1991 PAGE 11
9. APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 2. SKYWOOD LANE WATER EXTENSION
PROJECT NO. 220•
MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item. Seconded by
Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all votinq 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 Fitzpatrick to authorize payment of Claim Nos.
39739 through 39829. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
12. LICENSES•
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to approve the licenses as
submitted and as on file in the License Clerk's Office. Seconded
by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
13. ESTIMATES•
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to approve the estimates as
submitted:
Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff
6700 France Avenue South
Suite 260
Minneapolis, MN 55435
Review of Shop Drawings and
Resident Engineering Services
for Water Reservoir Project
No. 202
Partial Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,337.86
W.B. Miller, Inc.
16765 Nutria Street
Ramsey, MN 55303
Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2
Estimate No. 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $15, 567 . 89
Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 1991 PAGE 12
ADJOURNMENT'
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adjourn the meeting. Seconded
by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye,
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Regular
Meeting of the Fridley City Council of October 7, 1991 adjourned
at 8:48 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Carole Haddad William J. Nee
Secretary to the City Council Mayor
Approved:
i _
�
.
Community Development Department
PLANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: October 17, 1991
TO: William Burns, City Manager ,h���
�`
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Public Hearing for an Amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance, to Change the Definition of a Kennel
Plannina Commission Action
The Pl'anning Commission at its September 18, 1991 meeting
unanimously recommended to approve the proposed amendment to change
the definition of a kennel as proposed in the attached public
hearing advertisement. As you recall, the definition of a kennel
is proposed to be amended in Chapter 101 of the City Code. In
order to be consistent, the Zoning Ordinance definition should also
be changed. .
Recommendation
Attached is the staff report that was transmitted to the Planning
Commission for its review. The first reading of the ordinance
amending the definition of a kennel is proposed in°tandem with the
first reading of the amendment to Chapter 101 of the City Code.
Staff recommends that the City Council proceed to conduct the
public hearing. Besides advertising in the Fridley Foeus, we also
notified two individuals who specifically requested to be invited
to the pub�lic hearing.
BD/dn
M-91-759
1
�
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
CITY COUNCIL
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the
Fridley City Council at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431
University Avenue N.E. on Monday, October 21, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. for
the purpose of: ,
Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code, entitled
"Definitions" to change the definition of a Kennel as
follows:
205.03 DEFINITIONS.
39. Kennel.
Any lot or premises on which four ( 4) or more dogs or
cats, or any combination of four (4) or more dogs or
cats, at least six (6} months of age, are kept.
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an
opportunity at the above stated time and place.
WILLIAM J. NEE
MAYOR
Publish: October 9, 1991
October 16, 1991
Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley
Community Development Department, 571-3450.
�
1A
� _
�
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
Community Development Department
PL�rrG DrviSION
City of Fridley
September 13, 1991
Planning Commission Members
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJE�T: Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to Change the
Definition of a Kennel �
Background
For several years, a variety of issues pertaining to various
sections of the Animal Control ordinance (Section 101 of the City
Code) have been discussed or debated. Most recently, questions
were raised regarding the number of animals permitted to be kept
in a single family home. This generated the proposed ordinance
amendments to Section 101.
Planning Commission Action
In order to ensure that Section 101 of the City Code is consistent
with the zoning ordinance, the definition of a kennel is proposed
to be amended. We have attached the entire ordinance; however, the
only item of consideration for the Planning Commission is the
amendment to the kennel definition. This is not to suggest that
the Planning Commission cannot comment on other provisions of the
ordinance, for example, the Parks & Recreation Commission has been
concerned about the impact of animals within community recreational
facilities.
Proposed Definition
The definition of a kennel is proposed to change to permit four (4)
or more dogs or cats or any combination of four (4) or more dogs
or cats at least six (6) months of age. This means that a
homeowner can only have three dogs or cats. The current definition
of a kennel is three (3) or more dogs or cats; a homeowner can only
have two dogs or cats. A kennel is not permitted in the
residential zoning districts of the community and is only permitted
in the commercial zoning districts. In the last several years, the
City has encountered several situations where single family
homeowners own three or more dogs or cats and the City has had to
advise them that one of the dogs or cats be removed from the
premises. -
�--•
1 Ci
Definition of a Kennel
September 13, 1991
Page 2
The City Council directed staff to prepare the ordinance amendment
in order to conduct the public hearing process and to discuss the
proposed ordinance change. The Chief ot Police will be present at
the meeting to present background information to the Planning
Commission regarding this issue.
Other Communities
We surveyed other jurisdictions (see attached) and found that five
out of the eight permitted up to three animals. Two had no
restrictions on cats. Some also required a special use permit for
more than three animals in a residential district.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the amendment to the definition of a kennel, Section 205.03.39,
as represented in the attached ordinance. This is also recommended
by the Police Department.
BD/dn
C-91-674
0
1C
CITY
Fridley
Columbia Heights
New Brighton
Spring Lake Park
Blaine
Coon Rapids
Brooklyn Center
Brooklyn Park
Anoka
ANIMAL RESTRICTION BIIRVEY
�OGSICATS COMBO
2 a�imals
2 animals
3 dogs
Cats not restricted
3 dogs
Cats not restricted
3 dogs plus 3 cats
2 animals
2 dogs plus 3 cats
3 animals
2 animals
1D
. , .
z� � � • • _ �_��4�_ _ ��',�v�
No
No '
Special use permit
Special use permit
$50
Up to 7 cats
Special use permit
$50
Kennel.license $30
Kennel license
No
F. ' -" . ,
(��°��O�y
� �u� 3 0 ����
July 30, 1991
Mr. Nee:
My name is Pam Davis. I reside at 7321 E. River Rd, Fridley. We moved in June
l, 1991 from Cambridge.
I called ahead (May) to question the requirements of our animals for th� City
of Fridley. We have two Chihauhuas, (one 3 years old and one 4 years old), 1
miniature dachshund who is 9 years old, one 4-month old Chihauhua and one
9-year old Siamese cat, neutered and declawed. The 4 month old puppy has
already left and the cat I can dispose of or find a home for.
On, Thursday evening June 26th, an officer came to our house and said a
cancerned neighbor had called because of the barking of our dogs. She told us
to check into a kennel license. Earlier this month, we had put up a chain link
fence in the backyard to keep our dogs in our yard.
I weat to the county offices on Monday morning, June 29th and spoke.with a
person in the zoning office. She told me at this time they were not enforcing
that law of only two animals and that we could not get a kennel Zicense unless
we had a pet shop or were a veterinarian. I wanted to be sure so I went
downstairs and talked with the CO officer-in charge, Mark. I explained the
situation to him as we understood the complaint was for barking dogs: He also
told � they were not enforcing the ordinance of no more than two dogs, and not
to destroy my dogs. He stated that unless the dogs bit someone, I did not have
to destroy them. Later that evening the•first officer called my home as she
had checked further into it and realized we could not get a kennel license, but
that we still had to dispose of the other two animals. I explained we were
told otherwise. She also told my husband at that time the complaint was for �
the amount of animals we had, not for the barking. She said Dave So]mon would
call me in the morning. He called me this morning and said he was sorry for
the wrong information that was given to me and that I had to get down to only
_._ having two animals.
Everyone has been very nice and no one has been disrespectful or rude. I
realize they are only doing their job, but can something be done? I don't want
to dispose of my animals. How do you chose which one is to go? The obvious
woul� be the oldest because she is 9 years old but can't they wait until she
expires? She won't live much longer. Why can't we be issued a kennel license
as other cities do?
.-..�:,I did call ahead and nothing was said about being able to only have two
= + �_-- �--
animals. We do have a chain link fence around the yard so they can't get out.
Can you please help me? I do not want to dispose of my pets. Thank you.
� rely,
� �,w��^` ���" �
Pam Davis
Home #: 574-1794
Work �: 755-�500 Ext. 110
1E
�
r"
INClOENT REPORT
�,� 91-109614
FRIOIEY POUCE OEPARTMENT M�ypp�pp
FENSE 0/1 INC10fNT
����r a►r� 5 M T W � F S
TE wEPORTED TIME RECEIVEO TIME 01SPATCHEO TIME AfiNIVEp T1ME COMPLETED
7-25-91 1511 1533 1609 pRO: R- raeto I+�e CFS
� occuaRtc rwt axu�R[o
%-25-91 � S3IiU2 R P- Phone � IqC
���pE�E Q�� A - alar� ARR
7335 East River R,oad 5 I- tn person duv
� OF COMPLAINANTNIGTIM 008
John Capretz L v- �ts�ai oFv
r+E�►ooaess vaoHE N- a�tl pROP
7335 East River Road 571-4754 T- ocne�
SINESS nO0AE5S PMONE
M�11TE0 6V
��.Ei1.li3Ilt • ,
�
OtJAO •
�51
O1 9835 S
ISN UOC OISP
AEPIACENEMT VALUE:
vvR APPpOVwI ��LUE OF O�AGE:
DA v�ue �covEnEU:
ESTED/$USPECT(S) OR OESCRIPTIOM
Gerald Davis, 7321 East Riv�er Road, 03-04-44, 574-1794
i -
flME Of ANREST
,AN.S OF iNCIOENT. -- AOOIT�ONAL RE/ONT3:
Dispatched i� 7335 East River Road to meet with caller who is concerned about his neighbor at
7321 East River Road, t�o be having tx�o many animals.
Updn arrival, I met with the caller, Mr. Capretz who infonned me of his neighbor, Mr. Davis
who has five an�mals at his residence. Mr. CaFretz was ccncerned about an ordinance violation.
I then proceecled aver to 7321 East River Road t�o speak with Mr. Davis. Mr. Davis advised me
he just m�ed here fran Cambridge and was unaware of our animal ordinances. I then explained
thesn to him and instructed him � obtain city licenses for his animals. Clear.
-�,�
1F
�
FRIDLEY
POLICE
(_
�
�
SUPPLEi�AEiVTARY INVESTiGAT10N REPORT �,�E No. 91-109614
� ao��rrr
OFfENSE
John Capretz
COMPUINANT
�ooR�ss
7335 East River Road
AOO�TIONAI. OETAILS Of OfFENSE ►ROGRESS Of INVfSiIGAi�ONS. EiG.
I contacted Ms. Davis on Jtily 29, 1991. Ms. Davis had infori�ed CSO Dodge that she
had rnceived conflicting infoxmation as to whether or n�ot the City enforces the ordinance
regarding the rnanber of animals at a residence. I info�ned Ms. Davis that there may be sane
misunderstanding in that we c'b not proactively enforce (go cbor to cir�or searching houses)
the ordinanoe but that we had received a oomplaint and we have no ch�ice but to enforce
the ordinance as it i.s written. I apologized for any conflicting information that Ms. Davis
may have received but that she was limitsci to twn animals in her residence accozdi.ng to
City ordinance 101.04 (S) 8. I suc�gested that Ms. Davis discuss this issue with family
m�nbers ,and infornn me when they felt was a�asonable time for theqn to �ly with the
ordinance. ' '
On�Ju1y 30th, 1991 Ms. Davis �ontacted me and stated that she had contacted Mayor Nee and
that the Mayor had told her that he wnuld raise the issue with the eouncil t�o see if
there wexe some other solutions bo the issue of the n�ber of animals in a household.
Direct�or Hill contacted Mayor Nee and e�lai.ned the issue to him. A resolution to this
canplai.nt is pending a decision by the City Council.
I contacted the ocs�iplai.nant (he had previously requested that we contact him with the
final resolution) and explained to him the current status of his vo�nplaint.
Copy � DirectAr Hill.
_.-
�::t-�
m
TNiS OfFENSE IS OECURED:
�"�°"�did � SIGNED �putY Directar Sallman DHS sjd oAT� 8-1-91
ca..r.a br An.a p �nwstia.ti�q ontur
, 6�netie��llt Gund
, �MCliw tNo► G��nd)
�
SIGNED OA?F
Q Chief or Comm�� ' tlicer
This fonn I� UNd b�r Olfic�� Atsia��d fo • C�w to R�poA ►reqr�a Aller Th�e� •�d Sevsn O�ys �ed vV�eklv �e���lttr, Alsa fo Reqwrt S:a�ilic�nf OwelooTMN.
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1991
�.
... ............................................................................................................... «.............,...................................,. ....,.......... ::.... ......
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Betzold called the September 18, 1�91, Planning
Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. '
%
ROLL CALL-
Members Present: Don Betzold, Dean Sab , Sue Sherek,
Diane Savage, Conni odig, Brad Sielaff
Members Absent: Dave Kondrick
others Present: Barbara Dac , Community Development Director
Michele M erson, Planning Assistant
Jim Hil , Public Safety Director
Dennis chneider, Councilmember
Timo y and Deborah Hutchison, 8021 Riveryiew
errace
om and Marge Brickner, 1671 Kristin Court
See attached list-`
0
MOTION }�fy Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to approve the August
22, 1�1, Planning Commission minutes as written.
A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
MOTION CARRIED iTNANIMOIISLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code
entitled "Definitions" to change the definition of a Kennel
as follows: -
205.03 DEFINITIONS
39. KENNEL
Any lot or premises on which four (4) or more dogs or cats,
or any combination of four (4) or more dogs or cats, at least
six (6) months of age, are kept.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
�H
�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 2
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CIiAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Dacy stated that the City has two sets of regulations
pertaining to animal control. One set is Section 110 which is the
Animal Control Ordinance, and the other set is various regulations
in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Over the past several years, a
variety of issues have come up regarding animal control, and one
of the issues has been the number of dogs and cats individuals can
keep in their single family homes. As a result, the City Council
directed staff to draft an ordinance amendment regarding that
particular issue and other related issues.
Ms. Dacy stated this item is before the Planning Commission because
of the proposed change in the definition of a kennel. A kennel is
only permitted in commercial zoning districts of the City. The
definition of a kennel as defined in the Zoning Ordinance is: "Any
place where three (3) or more dogs or three (3) or more cats or any
combination of three (3) or more dogs and cats are kept on the same
premises..'!-� This means that right now the single family homeowner
can only have up to two dogs and cats. It is being proposed that
the definition of a kennel be changed to four dogs/cats so that a
homeowner can have up to four dogs and cats in the same home.
Ms. Dacy stated that staff surveyed other communities to find out
what they do with this issue. Out of the surrounding eight:
communities, five do permit three dogs or ca�s in the single family
home. Different communities have different restrictions regarding
kennels. Som.e permit them as a special use in the R-1 district.
That is not being proposed in this parti:cular ordinance amendment..
Ms. Dacy stated the Director of Public Safety, Jim Hill, was
invited to the meeting �as a�resource for any questions the
Commission members might have. The Planning Commission will only
be acting on the definition of a kennel, because that is within
the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Ms. Dacy stated staff is recommending approval of amending the
definition of a kennel from three to four total dogs and cats or
any combination thereof.
Mr. Betzold stated the ordinance addresses vicious animals and
animal nuisances. A few years ago, there was a woman in New
Brighton who fed ducks on her property that caused some problems.
Would this type of thing be included in this particular ordinance?
Mr. Hill stated that they did discuss the issue of feeding wild
animals and concluded that they did not want to recommend that for
a variety of reasons. The issue basically came up because of the
raccoons. Some members of the public requested that the` City
prohibit the feeding of those types of animals. He stated the
enforceability of that kind of thing is very difficult, and then
11
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 3
there are the people who like to feed the birds, etc. , so it . is
difficult to determine where to begin and end with this type of
issue.
Mr. Hill stated this process has been going on for several years,
and they wanted to get an animal cantrol ordinance that is clear
and understandable to the residents of Fridley.
Ms. Pam Davis, 7231 East River Road, stated she is concerned about
this ordinance because she presently has three animals. Before they
moved to Fridley in June, she called the Anoka County Courthouse
to find out if there were any special regulations for the City of
Fridley. She was not told about the limitation of two animals.
Because she is not in the zoning that allows kennels, she cannot
get a kennel license. Her oldest animal is 9 years old and the two
Chihuahuas are 3 and 4 years old. She would like to see this
ordinance changed, because she does not want to have to dispose of
one of her animals.
Mr. Betzold stated that a letter dated July 30, 199i, from Pam
Davis was included in the agenda packet.
Mr. Hill stated the number of animals per residence has not been
vigorously enforced. It is enforced upon complaint; and in this
situation, t�iere has been a complaint. But, the ordinance is under
consideration for change. They have advised Ms. Davis that they
will be staying the enforcement of any action until some decision
is made by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Mr. Sielaif asked the rationale for three animals versus two.
Ms. Dacy stated that it seems the majority of other communities
seem to approve of three animals. Some communities don't have any
restrictions on cats.
Mr. Saba asked if there have been a lot of complaints about the
number of animals. How can they intelligently draw a line on the
number of dogs and cats and the combination of dogs/cats?
Mr. Hill stated he did not know if there is an answer to the
question of what is the legitimate number of dogs/cats? The real
issue is not so much the number of animals, but it is the animal
owner and how he/she maintains the animals. He stated that from
his experience and knowledge, there are many families in the City
of Fridley who are violating the ordinance at this time, but they
are not violating it by way of disturbing the neighbors. Many of
them love animals and take in stray animals and care for the
animals until a home is found for them. He stated that after many
months of consideration, they feel four animals is not an
unreasonable number. There will always be someone who want�s 4-5
animals, but once they start getting into those numbers, they._ start
getting into health issues. As far as the combination of
1J
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. SLPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 4
dogs/cats, there are other sections of the ordinance that will
relate to nuisances.
Mr. Saba asked if any consideration had been given to the size of
an animal.
Mr. Hill stated it was discussed, but to his knowledge the size of
an animal has never been addressed legislatively in any other
ordinance. Sometimes three small dogs can make more noise than
three large dogs.
Mr. Betzald stated the proposed change does not address the special
use permit issue. He asked Mr. Hill to give some rationale as to
why that was not considered.
Mr. Hill stated they looked at that for a long time. He stated
the special use permit process is a whole other administrative
process with other issues relating to it, and they decided not to
get into it at all.
Mr. Betzold stated that if the ordinance is amended, if a family
with more than three animals moves to Fridley, they have to get
rid of the extra animals.
Mr. Hill stated, yes. The people would be given a notification,
but they are quite liberal in giving them plenty of time to find
another home for the animal(s). He stated that destroying an
animal is not the only option. The City's current animal shelter
at Skyline Veterinary Hospital has done an admirable job in
adopting out stray animals, even though legally they do not have
to do that.
MQTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Modig, to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:50 P.M.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Savage, to recommend to City
Council approval of amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code
entitled "Definitions" to change the definition of a Kennel as
follows:
205.03 DEFINITIONS
39. KENNEL
Any lot or premises on which four (4) or more dogs or cats,
or any combination of four (4) or more dogs or cats, at least
six (6) months of age, are kept. -4
�K
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 5
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CIiAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
2. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP
#91-10, BY TIMOTHY HUTCHISON:
Per Section 205.24.04.(d) of the Fridley City Code,, to allow
construction in the CRP-2 District (flood fringe),on Lots 21,
22, 23, and 24, Block V, Riverview Heights, ge � ally located
at 8021 Riverview Terrace N.E.
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to aive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the publ' hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPE�SON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC BEARING O��EN AT 7:52 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the special use pe 't request is to construct
an addition to an existing dwelling nit located in the flood
fringe district. The property is 1 cated in Riverview Heights
between Ely and Dover Streets. The roperty is zoned R-1, Single
Family Dwelling, as are all surroun ng parcels. Currently located
on the property is a single famil two-story dwelling unit and an
existing detached garage. The xisting dwelling unit which was
constructed in 1966 prior to �he adoption of the flood fringe
ordinance regulations does cor�.tain a basement. -
Ms. McPherson stated the h.iroposed addition would connect the
existing dwelling unit to t'�e existing garage. Also, an addition
would be constructed to ��e garage. Section 205.24.U5.A of the
Fridley Zoning Ordinar�ce requires that new structures for
habitation be construct�d so that the basement or first floor, if
there is no basement;�is above the regulatory flood protection
elevation. The current dwelling unit is nonconforming with this
section of the orc�-�nance as it does contain a basement. The
petitioner is proposing to expand the dwelling unit with a
basement. The elevation of the basement would not be able to meet
the requirementi�to be above the regulatory flood elevation;
however, the fi,rst floor of the addition would be able to meet the
elevation rectuirements.
Ms . Mcl
special
have be
has reQ
prop
not
in
elev
t
�rs�bn stated that in the past, the City has approved
s� permits for crawl spaces and accessory structures which
/located below the regulatory flood elevation. The City
red that hold harmless agreements be recorded against the
to ensure that these crawl spaces and accessory uses are
rted to livable area. Because the ordinance is specific
the basement floor must meet the regulatory flood
dtion, to approve the special use permit, even with a hold
less agreement, would be a clear violation of the ordinance.
stated the previous agreements and special use permits� have
been allowed'by the ordinance under Section 205.24.05.B of the
Fridley Zoning Ordinance.
1L
r �
�
- J
Community Development Department
PI.ANIVING DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: October 17, 1991 �
TO: William Burns, City ,Manager �.��
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Public Hearing for Rezoning Request, ZOA #91-
02, by Thomas Brickner; 6400 Block of Central
Avenue N.E.
Attached please find the above-reference staff report. The City
Council established October 21, 1991 as the date of the required
public hearing. Staff recommends that the City Council hold the
public hearing.
MM/dn
M-91-749
�
�
�► STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE
C[�QF PLANNING COMMISSION DATE september 18, 1991
FtZtDLEY cmr co�xva� oA-rE : October 7, 1991 q�Hpq �
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSEO REQUEST
LOCATION
SiTE DATA
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONfNG
ADJACENT LAND USES
& ZONING
UTIIJT�S
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FlNANClAL lMPLlCATlONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPATIBILITY WITH
ADJACENT USES & ZONING
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONStDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMEN�ATION
ZQA #91-02
Thanas Briclmer
�Ib rezone property frcm C�-1, Local Business, and C-2,
General Business, to i�-3, Ger�eral Multiple Dwelling
64� Central Av�nwe
110,192 sq. ft.; 2.52 arxes
C-2, Local Business,and C-2, General Business
C-1, Local Business, and C-2, General Business, to the N;
N�1, Light Industrial, to the S; R-2, Ztvo Fami.ly Dwelling
to the W
Approval
Denial
_�
9
ZOA 4�91-02
Thomas Brickner
_ S l/2 S�C. /3. T. 30, /�' 24
C/TY OF FR/OL EY
�1
�
,
16
m
r.•..
.�.�
�� �
:zji_. ,
�
34
14
24
�
I� , �
43
�'
�
.. �'
�'
,'
�
.
4�'':�
�
�;
,
�
.
�
t
(�
ZB LOCATION MAP
Staff Report
ZOA #91-02, Thomas Brickner
Page 2
REODEST
The petitioner is proposing to rezone property located south of
Sandee's Restaurant and west of Central Avenue from C-1, Local
Business and C-2, General Business to R-3, General Multiple Family
Dwelling in order to construct a 48 unit, three story apartment
building. The rezoning request is one of two land use requests
which will need to be considered by the City Council. If the
rezoning request is approved by the City Council, the petitioner
will need to submit a plat ( in order to subdivide the property from
the Sandee's Restaurant property), drainage calculations, and a
landscaping plan.
The petitioner is proposing a three story, 48 unit apartment
building. Each floor will contain 16 units; four one bedroom units
and 12 two bedroom units. The apartment will have both above- and
below-ground parking spaces. The petitioner intends to live in the
building and manage it. The petitioner has met with the
neighborhood on several occasions and has agreed to file deed
restrictions against the property to limit the following:
1.
2.
3.
No outdoor sheds;
No swimming pool; and
Restricting the number of people per unit, to no more than
three persons in a two bedroom unit, and no more than two
persons in a one bedroom unit.
The intent of the deed restrictions is to promote the building as
an "adult" building.
SITE
The property is currently vacant and is characterized as having a
low elevation and containing wet/poor soils. The lot is heavily
wooded with a variety of trees including Maple, Aspen, Cottonwood,
and shrub materials indicative of wet soil conditions. The
property is zoned C-1, General Business and C-2, Local Business,
as is the property to the north. The Advance Company property
located to the south is zoned M-1, Light Industrial and property
to the west is zoned R-2, Two Family Dwelling.
ANALYSIS
In analyzing a rezoning request, there are three tests which must
be evaluated: -�
2D
Staff Report
ZOA #91-02, Thomas Brickner
Page 3
1. That the proposed use
intent;
2.
3.
is consistent with the district's
That the proposed use is consistent with the lot and structure
requirements of the zoning district; and
That the proposed use is consistent, with adjacent uses and
zoning.
DISTRICT INTENT
The intent of the R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling district
is to provide zoning for single, two family, and multiple f�mily
dwelling units. As the proposed use is for a three story, 48 unit
multi-family apartment, the proposed use meets the intent of the
zoning district.
LOT/STRUCTURE REOUIREMENTS
The proposed site plan meets the minimum requirements for lot area,
setbacks, and provision of garage/parking spaces. However, there
are several issues which need to be addressed. These include
height, landscaping, drainage, traffic, and platting.
Height
The apartment building is proposed to be a height of 42 feet which
is below the 45 feet allowed by the zoning district; however, as
was stated earlier, there are poor soil conditions which will need
to be corrected prior to construction of the building. The
petitioner has completed a soils report; analyzing the soils in the
vicinity of the proposed building. The petitioner's consultant has
determined that with appropriate soil correction, the maximum
height of the building will be 42 feet; however, as the soil
analysis was limited, actual field conditions may result in the
construction of the building at a higher elevation than what is
proposed. The proposed building, once completed, will be the
tallest structure in the area.
Landscat�inq
As was stated earlier, the petitioner will need �o submit a
landscape plan consistent with the ordinance. As a condition of
approval, the petitioner should be required to save as many of the
existing trees as possible to provide screening and buffering for
the single story, two family dwellings to the west of the parcel.
These trees will aid in mitigating the difference in scale between
the proposed building and the surrounding structures. __
2E
Staff Report
ZOA #91-02, Thomas Brickner
Page 4
Drainaae
The petitioner will not submit a drainage plan until the proposed
plat has been prepared. Concern regarding the overall drainage in
the neighborhood has been expressed by the homeowners in the area
during past land use requests and also during the neighborhood
meetings conducted by the petitioner.
Storm water in the area flows from Harris Pond located east of
Central Avenue through a series of pipes to an open ditch located
north of the Graystar office building. Once the ditch reaches
Central Avenue, it is joined by a second ditch parallel to Central
Avenue. Storm water flows from the joining of these two ditches
under Central Avenue and along the north side of East Moore Lake
Drive through a series of pipes. These pipes enter a series of
detention ponds located in the Moore Lake Commons development area,
eventually entering Moore Lake.
Storm water from the proposed development should be directed toward
a third ditch located along the west lot line of the subject
parcel. The design of the project will need to include a pond
located at the northwest corner of the property, discharging into
the third ditch. Any flooding problems the neighborhood is
currently experiencing due to the capacity of the downstream system
will not be increased due to the proposed project. By ordinance,
water is not allowed to flow off the subject parcel at a rate
greater than what flows off the site in its undeveloped state.
Further, Anoka County has indicated its preference to have the site
drain toward the west, and not toward Central Avenue.
Traf f ic
Traffic issues pertain to two areas: 1) on-site and combined
traffic with Sandee's Restaurant, and 2) the intersection of Old
Central Avenue and Mississippi Street.
Staff has analyzed the requirements for installing a traffic signal
at the intersection of Old Central Avenue and Mississippi Street.
In reviewing requests for traffic signals, Anoka County has
established ten warrants which must be evaluated prior to
installation of a signal. Of the ten warrants, only the first
warrant, minimum vehicular volume, applies to the intersection.
It requires that the volumes in eight hours out of 24 hours need
to be exceeded. In analyzing the traffic counts for the
intersection and combining it with the proposed traffic of the
apartment building, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is not
met. Using the ITE (Institute of Traffic Engineers) suggested
number of trips per day for apartment complexes as five to six
2F
Staff Report
ZOA #91-02, Thomas Brickner
Page 5
trips per unit, approximately 300 additional trips will be
generated by the proposed use. Using a 50� distribution where 50�
of the people leaving the facility will travel north on Central
Avenue and 50� of the people leaving the facility will travel south
on Central Avenue, the required vehicle trips per hour on Central
Avenue is not great enough to warrant the installation of a traffic
signal. However, our analysis is not a sophisticated traffic
analysis, and if in error by as little as 100, it is possible that
the minimum vehicular volume warrant could be met.
Anoka County will not consider the installation of a signal at this
intersection until the actual vehicle volume exists. Anoka County
is willing to complete the traffic counts after the project is
completed and consider adding a traffic signal to its capital'
improvement project.
The proposed vehicular entrance into the apartment complex is
located less than 30 feet from one of the Sandee's Restaurant's
parking exits. Staff recommends that the parking area for the
apartment be tied with the parking area for Sandee's Restaurant to
reduce the number of driveways. This will limit the traffic
conflicts on Central Avenue. Anoka County has suggested that one
of the two driveways to the project be eliminated. Staff
recommends that the southerly driveway be eliminated. Further, a
driveway connection to the Sandee's lot should be made. Staff will
recommend this on the plat request as well.
Plattinct
Currently, the subject parcel is combined with the Sandee's
Restaurant parcel. In order to develop the apartment complex, the
two parcels need to be legally separated. As the parcels were
originally part of an auditor's subdivision, a plat will need to
be created in order to process the legal separation of the
properties. The platting process should be completed if and when
the rezoning request is approved. The second reading of the
rezoning would not occur until the plat was completed and
construction had begun.
COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT USES AND ZONING
While the rezoning request has met the first two tests, there are
several advantages and disadvantages to approving the request.
Disadvantages
The proposed rezoning request would continue the mixed lar-td use
pattern which currently exists along the west side of C�ntral
Avenue. Currently, there are three developed properties: Sanciee's
2G
Staff Report
ZOA #91-02, Thomas Brickner
Page 6
Restaurant, the Advance Companies (M-1), and the Ziebart facility
(M-1). The remaining undeveloped properties are zoned commercial
and CR-1, General Office District. North of Mississippi Street,
the land use on the west side is residential and then industrial
north of Rice Creek.
In addition, the proposed rezoning would locate a higher density
population near the M-1 zoning district. While the use of the
property by the Advance Company has relatively low impact, it is
possible that a higher intensity industrial use could locate in
that location. Other homeowners in the area have complained about
noise from Sandee's Restaurant and Moore Lake Commons.
There is also the issue of
proposed apartment building
building will be much taller
area and may emphasize the
Central Avenue.
Advantages
scale and the visual impact that the
may have on the neighborhood. The
than any building which exists in the
mixed use nature of the west side of
The proposed rezoning request does meet all requirements of the
zoning district and may have a minimal impact on the neighborhood.
While the proposed building will be the tallest structure in the
area, the R-3 regulation setbacks are written to provide adequate
setbacks between adjacent structures. There will be approximately
120 feet between the proposed apartment and the adjacent
structures. The intent of the district regulations is to mitigate
the impact of scale between various structures.
The proposed use would generate less traffic than a commercial use,
such as a restaurant, and there are no extended hours of operation.
The vehicular activities of the building would be buffered by the
building itself due to its "L" shape, which forces the vehicular
activities toward Sandee's Restaurant and Central Avenue. In
addition, the apartment building is a collector street (as opposed
to a residential street), near shopping facilities, and on a
transit line.
Staff also questions whether additional commercial development will
be generated as "spin-offs" from the Moore Lake Commons
development, and whether retaining the existing commercial zoning
on both sides of the street will be compatible with the residential
areas (compatibility issues were raised during the Moose Lodge
request). There is adequate commercial space in Moore Lake Commons
for neighborhood commercial uses to locate, and to serve the area.
2H
Staff Report
ZOA #91-02, Thomas Brickner
Page 7
RECOMMENDATION/STIPULATIONS,
As the rezoning request meets the intent of the district, the lot
and structure requirements of the district and the advantages
outweigh the disadvantages regarding compatibility of the proposed
rezoning with the adjacent uses and zoning, staff recommends that
the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request to the
City Council, with the following stipulations:
1. A plat shall be submitted and approved by the City Council.
2. A drainage plan and preliminary calculations shall be
submitted in conjunction with the plat application indicating
a pond in the northwest corner and the drainage directed to
the west property line.
3. A permit shall be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed
District prior to issuance of a building permit.
4. A landscape plan in conformance with the ordinance shall be.
submitted in conjunction with the plat application.
5. Existing trees shall be maintained along the west property
line to provide buffering and screening, and shall be
protected during construction.
6. Deed restrictions prohibiting outdoor sheds, a swimming pool,
and limiting the number of persons per dwelling unit, shall
be recorded against the property prior to issuance of a
building permit.
7. An overall parking and access plan with Sandee's Restaurant
shall be submitted with the plat application.
8. The southerly driveway access shall be eliminated on the site
plan.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission voted 4-2 to recommend denial of the
rezoning request to the City Council.
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends tha the City Council approve the rezoning request
as it meets the three tests used to evaluate rezoning requests.
2�
�
��
� ��
��
�
� �
�
i
i
ZOA ��91-02
Thomas Brickner
I� `� �
0
cti �, :�i�
=i•iI� �'7M �_�
-r---- -------i---------� � — i
I P � �
I x � �
., � � � �
�< �
S �+
� � �� z,�n � �� I
iI � J �a �' �
� " i • _._� �
. ,
� �.
I ,�
I w
� ii'iy �... . � . . . . . � ' P
T�3 - -+. �. _.� '
���t ' � ... -
1 .t- � __��... J f
� . �� .. . . . . . . �x. ( . . . . . . . � �
I I i, .
�
� � .
1
_ .
j .
� ' Q � � 1` � � '
� � � � . - � ��c•' . .� \ ._ •,�`-.;� '.�-1, I
� ( 2� I . � . ' . '.` . �•.. I .
� I ��a � . �� � �
I � ��� � � . �
i 3d � I
� � ' :;;�� �.I;-��-���,.:..=.
i :r - ... . ;-
4;
�
�
b-
--�-- s-�y'--• .. .. ._ --•-•--a,-iri...:.._... :.�,.�._ �
•�n�'1� -NmnN:+v� 4N�LS•It'j
,,
�
�
�
1 �
.. ►�
.I - \;J
� �
� :- 1
� °4
z �'�� a
►�� :: I
ra
2J SITE PLAN
%I�f (,¢ADE
,, �(v_o -� o l -o t'
_.__�,___�i y.,_.
� ,.- �.
�
c
,
�
2L
rt;.�
ZOA 4�91-02
Thomas Brickner
� ._�
c��,t., .r:, �
�9�-0'��
q�l-r� �
t f -o• ✓
�---�=°—�. . ..
i�s_�.
n f/ G,,�. ,c 1'lrr_
Gu F
�a1� � � °o%�-o w�� 7�gc-E
�
�•, P 7. �27XoM ,C� Sy1-o 7 � � � . .
- ELEVATION'
� . . . _ . . .__ . __ � _ � _..�._ . . . i _ . - : . � .
. �, . � .
� WIM)MO� MUftill: � •• • • �
. .• � �
rJ � W
. � 17�N1 w r 1 1! TW �Y� + � �
a � •tL. u+ru� � N
_" • � � � � `
_ ♦ �, y � ^
: 1 � u �/�
� � � 11�Y i � 1111��MM �//
♦ilO�Y � � ; i5 � ' —
� � _ e •' ' L
� y , .•� ;
- ' ai
�. . : . .
: „ � : � .,, > � : �r
ZI »�is : •■or� � u _ ,�o Y ' j �
� I�IYO � j ' � r �
, a
= .�__. - -�" - � �� ` �
117�LS r/1M1�• �7)YIS Y�IMiM
L
N
n •
.
i �
s -
J
� ` �\�rl
.. r=.tixree: �
n.w Za�... �
.)1Yl
. � llMlt I:r:4
_ � C
, sfni ` �un�
�z � cz ' rz •,
. Y� ��y •• •..y
.il�If
IYL �)lYIO .
I
t
� � m' a/1Yli
� \\ ` �
.
� `\
�
4 • , � '
0M! � . Jl ' ' ♦
t
aawa� ra
�\ •
�
�
� ;
�. . _
uu■ .�
- w.. , r
�J
41 ♦ i�
� � u '�� i
�� ♦
•
"r
;,,� rV r"� a
• �
. r �- .
ls
� + � �
Y £
t Q �
� . ,y,' .—" , \
i �'� ��i ,1��
� w
, ��� ti:
� ���
��R , �
�a:, �J� t:. II .
i
�111���•
• �a�ra�
I
'
s
s
J
J
� `
Nbt ~ �
W
Y
d
_.i
� �
• • - ,
w
. `� �
. ° Q
= • • O
_ • f,
o �)l�it j M1Yn• h��
F , � •
♦)�Ylf YOi���f ' Y�J
ll��lt 1�rIn0
at)Y�i )p��Ow
�
i
._ � �
f��R■
II ��
!G'J
•
i
1
�
1!
.-
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager PW91-258
FROM: Mark A. Winson, Asst. Public Works Director ��
DATE: August 23, 1991
SUBJECT: Drainage & Traffic for Proposed Apartment
Complex by Brickner Southwest of Mississippi and Central
After reviewing the preliminary plan for this apartment building,
there are not any particular concerns with drainage. The developer
will need to provide onsite detention in accordance with City and
Rice Creek Watershed District requirements. There appears to be
sufficient open areas on the site to accomplish this. There is an
adjacent drainage ditch which could be used as the discharge
permit.
We have reviewed the existing traffic volumes, projected volumes
after the completion of the apartment complex, and the accident
history of the intersection of Mississippi Street and Central
Avenue. Since January, 1986, there have been nine (9) property
damage, one (1) personal injury, and no fatality accidents at this
intersection. Under current conditions, this intersection does not
meet any of the ten (10) warrants for signalization. The addition
of the apartment complex could push the traffic volumes up far
enough to meet the minimum traffic warrant.
I have contacted the Anoka County Highway Dept. regarding doing an
analysis of this intersection for signalization and it does not
currently meet warrants for signalization. If the apartment
building is constructed, they will take another look at the traffic
counts to see if warrants are met.
MAW/ts
, . Barb Dacy
2N
�:
0 -"`
/
�
F��
, �O�p Cp`H.:e.
r
P �
t ��� ���.
:��
` M��'NESOtP
September 6, 1991
COU NTY OF ANOKA
Depanment of Highways
Paul K. Ruud, Highway Engineer
1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD NW, ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 612-754-3520
Michele McPherson
City of Fridley
6431 Universrty Avenue NE
Fridley, MN. 55432
Re: Proposed Development
48-Unit Apartment Building
Dear Ms. McPherson:
I have reviewed the proposed site plan for a 48-Unit Apartment Building to be
located west of CSAH 35 (Central Avenue NE) and south of CSAH 6/CR 106
(Mississippi Street NE) in the City of Fridley, and offer the following comments:
The existing right-of-way at this location is 50 feet from the centerline
of CSAH 35, which should be adequate for future needs. Calculations must
be provided which show that any drainage onto CSAH 35 does not exceed
the pre-existing conditions. If drainage to CSAH 35 will exceed the current
conditions, an alternate drainage plan must be sought.
A single entrance onto CSAH 35 should be adequate for a 48-Unit
Apartment Complex. It is my recommendation that the northern most
entrance be mtained, and the southern most entrance eliminated.
A permit for any work which may occur within the County Right-of-way is
required and must be obtained prior to the commencement of any
construction. Contact Roy Humbert, Contracts Administrator for the Anoka
County Highway l�epartment %r future information regaruing ihe permit
process.
'Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Feel free to contact me if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
�".��� �%'�` '
ne Pemble
Traffic Engineer
dmh/ 1FRIDLEY
Affirmative Action / �iM Jpportunity Employer
�:
C. WARRANTS
4G1 Advance Engioeerin= Data Reqaired
A comprehensive investigation of traffic conditions and physicai
chazacteristics of the location is required to determine the ncoessity for a
signal installation and to furnish necasary data for the proper design and
operation of a signal that is found to be warrantai. Such data desirably
should include:
1. The numba of
each approac�
hours selecced shoul
traffic.
hours of a representative day. The 16
Sreatest percentage of the 24-hour
2• Vehicular volumes for each traffic movement from rach approach,
classified by vehicle tvne (heavy trucks, passengu cars and light trucks,
and public-transic vehicles), during each 1S-minute period of the two
hours in the morning and of the two hours in the afternoon duruig whic
total traffic entering the intersection is greatest.
3. Pedastrian volume counts on each crosswalk during the same periods
as the vehicular counts in paragraph (2) above and also during hours of
highest pedestrian volume. Where young or elderly persons nad special
considoration, the pedestrians may be classified by general observation
and rxorded by age groups as follows:
(a) under 13 years
(b) 13 to 60 years
(c) over 60 years,
4• The 8S-percentile speed of all vehicles on the uncontroUed
approaches to the locauon.
5. A conditions diagram showing details of the physical layout,
includuig such features as intersectional geometrics, channelization.
grades, sight�isiance restrictions, bus stops and routings, paricing
conditions, � pavement mazkings, street lighting� driveways, location of
neazby railroad crossings, distance to neazrst signals, utility poles and
futures, and adjacent land use. .
6. A collision diagram showing accident eaperirnce by type, location,
direction of movement, severity, time of day, date, and day of wak for at
least one year.
The following data are also desirable for a more precix understandin�
of the operatioa of the intersection aad may be obiained durin� the
Periods specified in (2) above:
1. Vehiclo-soconds delay determinod separatdy for each approuh.
QJ
�
2. The number and distribution of gaps in vehicular traffic on the
major strat when minor-street traf�c finds it possible to use the
intersection safely.
3. 1fie 85-percentile speed of vehicles on convolled approaches at a
point near to the intersection but unafferted by the contrd.
4. Pedesirian delay time for at least two 30-minute peak pedatrian
delay periods of an average wcekday or like periods of a Saturday or a
Sunday.
Adequate roadway capacity at a signalized interscction is desirable.
Widening of both the main highway and the intersecting roadway may be
warranted to reduce the delays caused by assignment of right-of-way at
intasectioas controtled by traffic signals. Widening of the intersecting
roadway is often beneficial to operatioa on the main highway because it
reduces the signal time that must be assigned to side-strat traffic. In
urban areas, the effect of widening can be achieved by elimination of
pazking at interscctional approaches. It is always desirable to have at teast
two lanes for moving traffic on each approach to a signalized intersectioa.
Additional width may be nxessary on the leaving side of the intersation,
as well as the approach side, in order to clear traffic through the
intersection effectively. Before an intersection is widened, the additional
green time needed by pedestrians to cross the widened streets should be
checked to ensure that it will not exceed the green time saved through
improved vehicular flow.
4C-2 Wurants for TnfBc Si�na! [astallatioe
Traffic control signals should not be installed unless one or more of the
signal warraats in this Manuai are met. Information should be obtained by
means of engineering studia and compared with the requirements set
forth in the wanants. tf thesr requirements are not met, a traffic signal
should neither be put into operaiion nor continuec! in oparation (if alrrady
installed).
For the purpose of warranting signalization, a wide-median intersection
should be considered as one intersection.
Whea a traffic control signal is indicated as being warranted, it is
presumed that the signal and all related traffic control devices and
mazkings are installed according to the standards set forth in this Manual.
It is further presumcd that signal indications arc properly phasod, that �
roadways are propaiy desigaed, that adjacent traffic signals are properly _
coordinated, that there is adequate supervision of the optration and
maintenance of the signal and aU of its related deviaa, and that the traffic
signat conuopa will be selected on the basis of engineering study and
judgment.
2 Vl
�
�'4 VNan'aat 2, Interruptian of Contiauous Traftk
The lnterruption of Continuous 'Traffic warrant appties to operating
cmditions where the traffic volume on a major streei is so heavy thai
trfC� on a minor intersecting streec suffers excessive delay or hazard in
��ng or crossing the major streec. The warrant is satisfied whrn. for
� of any 8 hours of an average day, the traffic volumes given in the
tabt' below exisi on the major street and on the highec-volume minor-
5�' ;pproach to the interseccion, and the signai installatioa will not
se� -±isrupi progressive traffic flow.
MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOL[7MES FOR WARRANT 2
:�umt�er of lanes for moving traffk Vehicles per hour on
on each approach Vehicles per hour on higher-volume mi_
itajor Street Minor Street �� $�� «� of nor-street approoch
both approaches) (one directSon only)
i................ 1................
2 n- more _ . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . .
........
'2. or more. . . .. ... 2 or more.. .... ..
l ................ 2 or more........
7b0 73
� 75
� 100
7� 100
These major-street and minor-streec volumes aze for the same 8 hours.
During those 8 hours, the direction of higher volume on the minor street
�aay be on one approach during some hours and on the opposite approach
during other hours.
When the 85-perceacile speed of major-streec traffic exceeds 40 mph in
ather an urban or a rural area, or when the interseccion lies within the
built-up area of aA isolated community having a population of less than
l0,000, ihe Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant is 70 percent of
the requiremencs above.
4�5 Warrant 3, MinLnam Pedestrian Volame
The Minimum Pedestrian Volume warrant is satisfied when, for each of
any 8 hours of an average day. the following traffic volumes exist:
1. On the major street, 600 or more vehicles per hour enter the
intersection (total of both approaches); or where there is a raised median
island 4 feet or more in width� 1,000 or more vehicles per hour (total of
hoth approaches) enter the interseccion on the major streec; and
2. During the same 8 hours as in pardgraph (1) there are 150 or more
Pedestrians pec hour on the highest volume crosswalk crossing the major
S[IC'ti,
When the 8S-percentile spoed of major-street traffic exceeds 40 mph in
either an urban or a rural azea, or when the intersection lies within die
built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than
r� `�
�
An investigation of the need for traf�c signal control should include
v►iiere appticable, at least an analysis of the factors contained in the
foLlowing warrants:
Warraat 1—Minimum vehicular volume.
K'arrant 2—[nterruption of continuous traffic.
" .irrant 3—Minimum pedestrian volume.
rrant 4—School crossings.
at 5—Progressive movement.
.:�t 6—Accident experience.
ant 7—Systems.
Warrant 8—Combination of warrants.
Warrant 9—Four Hour Volumes.
�'arrant 10—Peak Hour Delay.
� azrant 12—Peak Hour Volume.
Iv-a3 (e)
Iv-20 (c)
Aw. 4
tC-3 Warraat 1, Mi�aat Ve6kalu Volume
The Minimum Vehicular Volume warrant is intended for application
where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason for
consideration of signal installation. The warrant is satisfied when. for
each of any 8 hours of an average day. the trafFc volumes given in the
table below eaist on the major sueet and on the higher-volume minor-
street approach to the interseccion. An "average" day is defined as a
weekday representing traffc volumes normally and repeatedly found at
the tocation.
MINIMUM VEH(CULAR VOLUMES FOR WARRANT 1
Vehiclea per hour on
Number of lanes for moving tnffic Vehicles per hour on higher-volume mi-
on each apptwch �jar sireet (tota! of nor-street appe�oach
M�jor Street 1M[inor Street both approaches) (one �tirection only)
1 ................ 1............._..
2 or more.. . ... .. l .. . ... .. . .. . ... .
2 or more. . . . . . . . 2 or more_ . . _ . . . .
1 .. . .. . . . . . . . .. .. 2 or more... ... . .
� I:�
G00 150
fi00� �flp ,_ -.
500 2(Ip
These major-suxt and minor-street volumes are for the same 8 hours.
During those 8 hours, the dircctioa of higher volume on the minor sueet
may be on one approach during some hours and oa the opposite approach
during other hours.
When the 8S-percrntile spad of major-strat craffic exceeds 40 mph in
either an urbaa or a rural area, or whea the intersection lies within the
built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than
10,000. the Minimum Vehicular Volume warrant is 70 percent of the
requirements above.
2S
�
PLANNING COMMISBZON MEETING, APRIL 5. 1989 __PAGE 8
Ms. Sherek stated she agreed, especially with the increased cost
of new construction. Maybe they should be looking for developers
to redevelop and upgrade existing property. They are now talking
about the Central Avenue Corridor, and there are apartment-type
units along there.
Ms. Saba stated they really need t e improving the properties
they have now instead of lookin building new senior housing.
Ms. Dacy summarized the ents as follows: The Commission is
recommending the City e a pro-active approach and inventory not
only vacant sit , but also potential conversion sites for
redevelopment try to take advantage of existing amenities--to
be more p ctive instead of reactive.
The ommissioners agreed.
2. REVIEW PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF CENTRAL AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY:
Mr. Robertson.stated the Central Avenue corridor goes back in
history about 100 years and has some historical significance. It
certainly reflects the mixture since the County and the City
started zoning in the early 1940's and early 1950's. The purpose
of the study is to look at the corridor from Mississippi Street to
Osborne Road, and this first part looks at Central Avenue from Rice
Creek Road to Mississippi Street. They have tried to identify what
the City's options are.
Mr. Robertson stated that in the recent past, they have had many
applications or proposals for development in this area, such as
Moore Lake Commons. He stated that Moore Lake Commons is really
establishing a whole new identity and an anchor in the south end
of this corridor. The Moore Lake Tax Increment District extends
up from Moore Lake and the area around Hillwind north to the
intersection of Mississippi Street. They have private development
going on, even without HRA incentive, such as the old Midwest Van
& Storage site.
Mr. Robertson stated there have been other proposals. The Public
Works Department suggested a median on Central Avenue between
Mississippi and the intersection of Highway 65, and the residents
did not want it. So, there has been an ongoing sequence of
'p'�3pb3^t► i s z�4i �b�€� ��-n �� . � �:.�� � Y, �-� �s -s�e
confusion. He stated staff has called it "the identity crisis".
What is possible for Central Avenue's future? That is really the
purpose for this study.
Mr. Robertson stated Central Avenue was one of the first�paved
roads in the State of Minnesota. It was called the "Sportsmans'
Highway" because it led to the hunting and fishing areas to the
2T
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 5, 1989 PAGE 9
north around Mille Lacs Lake. Supposedly, the original concrete
pavement is buried under the asphalt.
Mr. Robertson stated they divided the corridor study area into
segments--the portion north of Mississippi and the portion south
of Mississippi, and look for problems and opportunities. What
needs could they use for unifying, trying to establish an identity?
One of the things that is a problem right now, but might be a
potential opportunity, is the fact that this right-of-way is
extremel� wide. It is 40 ft. wider than a normaZ 60 foot right-
of-way, and this creates problems. They have made the assumption
that no matter what alternative (predominantly residential,
predominately commercial, or a rational mix) the Commission picks
for an identity, there needs to be some kind of unifying element
so that it gives some kind of identity and rationale and
establishes some kind of visual continuity from Moore Lake to
Osborne Road.
Mr. Robertson stated they decided there were several things they
could do. They could turn the problem of the wide right-of-way
into an opportunity. If they use that wide right-of-way for a
central median, they might get the same kind of objections as they
got from the people across from Moore Lake. But, there are huge
unused areas on the side, so maybe they should create some kind of
additional landscaping by having wider boulevards on either side
of the two-lane street. That is a way of providinq some kind of
visual continuity.
Mr. Robertson stated that because the right-of-way is so wide, they
could add a bikeway/walkway very easily.
Mr. Ro�sertson stated there are some isolated unsightly properties
along the street and maybe they can identify those properties and
key in on specific redevelopment or r-ehabilitation projects for
these properties.
Mr. Robertson stated Ms. McPherson and Ms. Dacy would give a more
detailed description of the three alternatives they have
identified: (1) predominately residential; (2) predominately
commercial; and (3) a rational mix of residential and commercial.
Ms. McPherson stated it had been her responsibility to do the
�i :_„�� �� : ��� �h �w . ��� : ��_ � �Z�a � �r�c .af �.kae
existing land use along the study. Predominately, they have two
land uses: commercial and residential, including single family,
duplexes, and multiple dwelling. According to the zoning, there
are quite a few non-conforming uses in both residential and
commercial. South of Mississippi there are quite a number of
vacant lots, so they have the opportunity for new projects as well
as some potential ideas for redevelopment projects. -
ZV
PLANNING COMMIBSION MEETING, APRIL 5. 1989 PAGE 10
Ms. McPherson stated Ms. Dacy, Mr. Robertson, and she discussed
what could happen if they had a predominately residential,
predaminately commercial, or a predominately mixed use development
scheme.
Ms. McPherson stated she would first talk about the predominately
residential scheme or scenario. She stated the area north of
Mississippi is strongly residential already. There are many single
family homes, multi-units, the new Creek Park Addition, to the east
of Central Avenue. These are some problems that could be taken
care of in some spot redevelopment. One would be to potentially
redevelop the Findell site into large single family home lots.
Bacon Electric and �the automotive site are not necessarily in unity
with the residential scheme. Bacon Electric would be relocated to
a higher visible site as part of the commercial node on Moore Lake
Drive. The area would then be developed with residential uses.
Ms. McPherson stated the automotive site is not a unifying element
in the residential scheme; therefore,.it should be relocated to an
industrial park or with other automotive developments in the City.
That would allow this corner to be redeveloped in a residential
theme, allowing this to become an entry point for the residential
development located in the Creek Park Addition.
Ms. McPherson stated on the south part of Mississippi, they have
the identity crisis with all the non-conforming uses. In a
residential scenario, these currently non-conforming uses would
become conforming and integrated into a residential scheme. The
satellite fire station was designed to reflect and enhance the
residential feel so th_is a good neighbor to the residential
alternative.
Ms. McPherson stated that even though the Advance Companies is a
commercial use, again it is more of a soft commercial use with a
lot of landscaping. The wide landscaped boulevard promotes the
soft commercial feel.
Ms. McPherson stated in the residential scenario they then have the
opportunity to potentially split some of the long deep lots and
create a proposed right-of-way for some streets going north/south
which would allow development on the back half of these lots which
would increase the residential density in the area. On the corner
V1 T\7.� �Z°'�'!1 ��vRV�a �4i'Yy Vi'iiviisi i �� `i�L� .-C'-TS� .�..� -��:.��- �aL^'�
commercial node that would tie in with the residential and Moore
Lake Commons .
Ms. McPherson stated Ms. Dacy was going to address the commercial
and mixed use alternatives.
Ms. Dacy stated that north of Mississippi under the commercial
alternative, they would still propose the relocation of Bacon
ZV
PLANNING COMMZSSION MEETING, APRIL 5. 1989 PAGE 11
Electric and the removal of the automotive use because of the
obsolete nature of the buildings and encourage redevelopment to a
more appropriate commercial neighborhood use.
Ms. Dacy stated south of Mississippi they have existing commercial
zoning and industrial zoning by Ziebart and the vacant property to
the west. So, under the commercial alternative, the existing land
uses and the existing zoning almost promotes it. However, they
would still recommend that on the east side of the street the rear
of these properties could still be subdivided to access onto a new
north/south street and maybe create a buffer.between the existing
single family neighborhood to the east.
Ms. Dacy stated the disadvantage to the neighborhood commercial
alternative is what type of commercial uses are going to be located
here. Are they going to be retail strip cent�r, or support
commercial businesses for Moore Lake Commons, or would they be more
of the office/showroom/semi-warehouse uses? She stated if the City
is trying to promote a soft image for Central Avenue, those types
of uses wauld not be consistent, and maybe the alternative is to
encourage the "ma and pa" oriented commercial uses and the
specialty retail. The impact of the Moore Lake Commons project may
also be a deciding factor. For several years, these vacant
properties have been zoned commercial, and they have remained
vacant so that might be another disadvantage to the commercial
alternative.
Mr. Robertson stated that the unknown variable is the impact of
Moore Lake Commons. With the increased traffic at Moore Lake
Commons and more people coming into the bottom end of this
corridor, is that going to create more traffic and potential for
this lower part of Central, so that things like office/showroom
would be feasible.
Mr. Betzold stated there is also the "barrier" kind of thing, where
people will go so far but will not turn the corner into an area
they are unfamiliar with. People who drive to Moore Lake Commons
are not necessarily going to turn the corner to these other
businesses. He would never put a retail shop on the lower end of
Central.
Ms. Sherek stated she had a real problem "ma and pa" specialty
�i�5� . i� �� � ��Ti'i� �i ����c ��C �� � � L'�i;.''.� i �#°;3�° .
they do not want people converting the front of their houses to
specialty shops.
Ms. Dacy stated that with the mixed use alternative, on t3�e
southern portion, they are looking at in filling the vacant
properties on the east side with townhouses or twin homes, anything
that might approach sing2e family ownership situation. They-would
2W
PLANNING COMMIS8ZON MEETING, APRZL 5. 1989 PAGE 12
still subdivide the rear of the properties to create a residential
mix and then have the nodes of commercial at the intersections.
Ms. Dacy stated that on the west side, Mr. Brickner will be making
an application for a multi-family project.
Ms. Dacy stated the disadvantage to the mixed use alternative is
it.might be perpetuating a mixture of uses and the whole identity
crisis.
Ms. Dacy stated the advantage of the mixed use alternative is if
there is no real market for the commercial, why not have multiple
family housing in this location. It is located near neighborhood
shopping, and would be a good buffer between Central Avenue and the
neighborhoods to the west.
Ms. Dacy stated Mr. Dahlberg stated he would prefer the residential
alternative, because of his concerns about increasing traffic on
Central Avenue. He did not have a real problem with the mixed use
alternative if the traffic issue can be controlled. He likes the
boulevard/parkway concept but does not want a median, because it
channelizes the traffic and may increase the speed. He does not
see the necessity of commercial at every node, primarily at Rice
Creek Road. He feels the residential alternative is more in
character with the entire area and better from a traffic
standpoint.
Mr. Barna stated on the east side between Rice Creek Road and
Mississippi, he would like to see it all residential development-
-take out the little welding shop on the eorner of Mississippi and
Central and the commercial complex or► Rice Creek Road and Central.
He would like to see light multiple, such as a townhouse
development, on the vacant property.
Mr. Robertson stated that Mr. Dahlberg had said he liked the
boulevard/parkway approach but not the median. One of the reasons
they would do the boulevardjparkway would be because historically
it would be more correct. It was originally a narrow concrete
road, and they would emphasize that original character by not
constructing a median.
Mr. Kondrick stated he really did not have a problem with medians.
If thev are not interesting� they can be a waste of time, but a
creative median with trees and landscaping can be very interesting.
Another thing is lighting. Lighting creates a whole different
atmosphere, both during the daytime and evening. Lighting can draw
people into an area and make them want to build here.
Mr. Robertson stated that is one of the reasons why staff thought
the best way to use that wide right-of-way is to put that _ extra
ZX
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 5, 1989 PAGE 13
greenery and landscaping elements along the edge for uniting this
mixture and confusion along the edge, rather than down the middle.
Ms. Sherek stated medians are also very difficult in the winter for
snowplows.
Mr. Betzold stated he agreed that north of Mississippi Street
should all be residential and that both Bacon Electric and the
automotive business should be relocated. He would like to suggest
another option for south of Mississippi Street that has not been
discussed. Why not have one side commercial and the other side
residential? An example is along Main Street south of I-694. On
one side it is clearly all commercial activity, and on the other
side it is all residential. It is just like two different worlds.
why not do the same thing in this area?
Ms. McPherson stated that this issue was discussed. Mr. Robertson
stated there is a basic sort of principle that they should try to
follow in where they break land use. They should try to break it
and make the change at the rear lot line, rather than at the center
].ine of the street, and that having one use on one side of the
street and another on the other side of the street contributes to
the identity crisis. Also, there is the question of property
values and property assessments with residential and commercial.
Ms. Sherek agreed with Mr. Betzold. There is no question that one
side of Main Street is residential and one side is commercial.
South of Rice Creek Road is going to be commercial with the health
club and the shopping center. If the opportunity is there for
commercial development, they should promote it. There is such a
scarcity of land in Fridley. With the upgrading of the Midwest Van
& Storage property and the development in Moore Lake Commons, there
is going to be some fall-out from that development and
redevelopment. She would hate to see another piecemeal development
in there in the meantime. To her, there is no reason why they
cannot have one zoning on one side of the street and another zoning
on the other side of the street.
Ms. Sherek stated she did not agree with Mr. Brickner's proposal
to put an apartment building in this area. Townhouses or something
like that might be "o.k.", but to stick an apartment building in
there when there is no other real multiples in the area is just
c;��� � ����.--'�� �:�fz:� �� ���z.� -�'��r a�� �� � .� t� ,c�i�„� .a.r�v
kind of identity with that type of development, nor are they going
to gain any kind of identity by turning it into residential with
those two solid commercial properties on either side.
Ms. Sherek stated it is great to discuss further development, but
her whole point of continuing the corridor study all the way-`up to
Osborne is she felt the whole corridor should be viewed--as a
continuum. She felt they were lacking something discussing this
� 2Y
PLANNING COMMZBSION MEETING. APRIL 5, 1989 PAGE 14
in depth before the whole study is done. From about Onondaga to
Osborne, again they have residential on one side and industrial on
the other side, but she did not think that area had as serious an
identity crisis as Mississippi south with the mixture of houses
and commercial uses on one side of the street.
Ms. Dacy stated they just needed a place to start, and the north
half of Mississippi Street to Osborne could be presented at a May
meeting.
Mr. Kondrick stated after hearing Ms. Sherek's comments, he does
agree that the west side of Central Avenue south of Mississippi
Street should remain commercial.
Ms. Dacy stated Mr. Dahlberg had also suggested they look at a
treatment along the right-of-way by Moore Lake Commons as far as
installing a walking path down to Moore Lake Beach.
Mr. Barna stated this idea had been presented before, and neither
the neighbors or the property owners�want a walking path along
there.
Mr. Saba stated he thought it very important to do the boulevard
treatment and landscaping along Central Avenue right away and tie
it in with the Moore Lake Commons.
Ms. Dacy stated another thing Mr. Dahlberg had stated was that
there should be a traffic signal at 73rd Avenue/Central.
Ms. Dacy stated staff will be including the Central Avenue study
in the April 17th City Council meeting packets. The City Council
will have the Planning Commission's minutes with their comments.
Ms. Dacy stated Mr. Brickner might be applying for a rezoning
within two weeks. After hearing the Planning Commission members'
comments about commercial on the west side, she would contact Mr.
Brickner and inform him of these comments. She stated Mr. Brickner
is intending to have a neighborhood meeting at the end of April.
Maybe at this neighborhood meeting, staff can present the three
alternatives and get the neighborhood's reaction to those
alternatives, depending on the City Council's reaction.
Mr. Betzold stated he and the Planning Commission members
appreciated staff's work and all the thought and time that went
into the presentation of this part of the Central Avenue study.
5. RECEIVE MARCH 6 1989 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
MoTION by Mr. Kondrick, s ded by Mr. Saba, to receive the-March
6, 1989, Parks & Rec ion Commission minutes.
ZZ
Mr. Betzold stated he would also like to see notices �t the public
meeting stage. He would just as soon not have a b.riefing before
the meeting.
Mr. Kondrick stated that 20-25 years from now,when in theory the
LRT has expanded out to Anoka, perhaps Ramsey; East Bethel, etc.,
and more park and ride stations are necessaryr He would then think
the significance of the parking lots in the�City of Fridley would
be greatly diminished. He would like to �ve the flexibility so
those parking lots could then be changed pack to something else.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that in the
Kondrick, when an area is no lonqer
an option where the City or HRA can
to the County and the Rail Autho;
purchasing the property? �
si
ty,
sation described by Mr.
3ed for parking, is there
the property and lease it
rather than the County
Ms. Sherek stated this raised question raised by the Planning
Commission in the early discu ions, and that was: Do they have
to build all these stations a initial construction? BRW is saying
they need 2,Oa0 parking spa s, but what is wrong with starting out
with Northtown, Mississip i/University, 51st or Target, and then
when there is the dema five years later, they build another
station.
Ms. Dacy stated th would have to have the land reserved under
that option.
Mr. Saba stated they have to be somewhat careful, because just the
potential "ne d" for a parking lot in a certain area can stop or
slow develop ent.
Mr. Barn stated his main concern about LRT is they are talking
about p lic bodies developing the parking spaces. In looking at
other cities, the vast majority of parking ramps are privately
owne . Why isn't the City of Fridley looking at some type of two-
lev 1 parking ramp/retail development on the southwest corner with
a sistance from the HRA, so that when or if the LRT does go in,
hey can use the extra space for retail or whatever?
2. CONSIDERATION OF CENTRAL AVENUE CORRIDOR TMPLEMENTATION PLAN:
Ms. Dacy stated the Planning Commission spent quite a bit of time
discussing this last spring and summer, and it went to the Council
Conference meeting in July. She thought the Counci.i members
appreciated the exercise of going through the land use planning and
intent. Their concern was there are other priorities in_ the
community as far as development and tax increment dollars.
Ms. Dacy stated that she used a diamond model to analyze the plan
for improvements along Central Avenue, whether those are land use
2AA
pLANNING COMISI88ION KEBTINa. NOVBMB$R 8, 1989 PAGE 8
or physical improvements. The four components of the diamond are
Mission, Power, Structure, and Resources.
Ms. Dacy stated they are looking at three phases over the next ten
years. The components of Phase I respond to the Council's mission
of land use compatibility and appearance. The components of Phase
II depend on market forces to determine the timing of the various
components. The components of Phase III emphasize eeonomic
development and redevelopment.
Ms. Dacy stated staff is asking for the Planning Commission's
concurrence of this phased approach with any recommended changes.
Staff's intent is to present any recommended changes and this
analysis to the City Council for review and concurrence.
Mr. Kondrick commended staff on a tremendous outline.
Ms. Sherek stated the area from Onan north on Central Avenue is in
danger of becoming a slum, and it is getting worse every year. Do
they want to let that happen? There are already pockets like this
in the City, and do they want to add to it? By coming up with a
comprehensive plan and continuing toward systematic code
enforcement, and having other plans for these properties if they
should go up for sale. They need to put the plan together and have
some kind of "vision" of what Central Avenue should look like.
With Moore Lake Commons, there is going to be spin-off development.
The Commissioners agreed.
Mr. Kondrick stated they have to be very specific about what they
want to see along the Central Avenue Corridor.
Mr. Barna stated that whether Onan develops or not, they want to
see that northwest corner changed,�from 73rd Avenue to Fireside.
Mr. Dahlberg stated he did not think it was appropriate for the
Commission, as a planning body, to dictate the types of development
unless it is within a specified district like this is. Within a
tax increment district, they can do that, but outside the district,
they cannot. If Onan does not develop, then the district is
reduced dramatically. They can change the boundary, but not
significantly, because 70� of the land area has to be considered
blighted. So, it becomes a very small area that they have any
inf luence or control over . He thought a plan is good, and this
outline is an excellent beginning.
MOTION by Mr. Rondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to accept the
Central Avenue Corridor Implementation Plan as submitted by staff.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE� l�LL VOTING aYE, CBAIRPSRSON BET80LD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
-
list of all of the major issues the Commission discussed�and then
came up with an Evaluation Matrix for the Commission to rate the
Commission's performance for each of those issues and�to rate
staff's performance for each of those issues.
Ms. Dacy stated she would also like the Commis, ion to go through
the four issues for 1990. The Commission mi�ht have some issues
to add to this list. i
Mr. Betzold stated he would like to tabYe discussion until Ms.
Sherek and Mr. Saba can be in attenda��e.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded Mr. Barna, to table
discussion of the 1989 Accomplis ents and 1990 Workplan until
all Planning Commission member are present.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTI G AYE, CHAIRPERSON BET20LD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIM SLY.
Ms. Dacy stated she h also included in the agenda a memo to Mr.
Burns dated January , 1990, regarding the Community Development
Department's Prior' ies and Accomplisiunents for Z990/1989. She
stated this is so ething Mr. Burns has requested, and it will be
done on a quart ly basis.
3.
Ms. Dacy tated this memo is for the Commission's information.
It list the types of things they will see in the Housing Chapter
of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. McPherson and she went to this
work op. It was a very helpful workshop. The Metropo2itan
Cou il is very aggressive on this issue, and housing has become
a riority. Jack Kemp, Secretary of HUD, will be speaking at
t e State of Region address on March 7, 1990.
4. CENTRAL AVENUE CORRIDOR UPDATE:
Ms. Dacy stated this update summarizes the results of the City
Council's discussion at their January 8, 1990, meeting. Mr.
Betzold attended that meeting.
Mr. Betzold stated he thought one of the Council's main concern
was that they thought the Planning Commission was advocating
rezoning everything up and down Central Avenue. They articulated
a number of criteria as to what kind of development they would
like to see, their long range goals along Central Avenue, etc.
Although there have been other discussions, this is the first
time the Council has ever outlined everything they want to see
along Old Central, and the information was very helpful. After a
long discussion, he thought the Council agreed that they do want
to do something to improve the Central Avenue Corridor, but �`hey
ZC`i
pLANNING COMMISSION MESTINQ. JAN. 31, 1990 PAGE 6
would like to talk to people along Central Avenue and encourage
people to voluntarily rezone.
Mr. Barna stated he had assumed that from previous planning
documents and discussions, these were things the Planning
Commission would like to see happen, not what they demand, and in
reality, some of these things may never happen.
Mr. Dahlberg stated he thought the Planning Commission members
all feel comfortable enough with what they have done to this
point to say that they don't see it as something etched in stone.
Mr. Dahlberg asked if it was the position of the City Council
that the Planning Commission should re-evaluate what they have
done to this point and bring back new recommendations, or reject
it in its entirety and leave the Corridor as it is?
Ms. Dacy stated there is sentence in Phase I and Phase II that
says: "After completion of the Comprehensive Plan, consider
rezoning properties and marketing them as they become available."
The Council recommended to delete that sentence and state that
they would encourage property owners to rezane on a voluntary
basis, instead of the City starting the rezoning process.
5. SENIOR HOUSING STUDY UPDATE:
Ms. Dacy stated Mr. Burns' memo dated January 4, 1990, regarding
"TIF Guidelines for Senior Housing" summari2es the Cou '1's
informal consensus regarding senior housing financi policies.
Basically, the �ouncil said that the current poli es are
acceptable for senior housing projects and lis three ways the
HRA currently uses to assist the projects. em #4 identifies
the basic criteria for the guidelines.
6. CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE:
Ms. Dacy stated this schedule
Planning Contmission's informat
% .
MINUTES•
0
ncluded in the agenda for the
MOTION-�by Mr. Kondri , seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to receive the
November 6, 1989, rks and Recreation Commission minutes.
IIPON A VOICE V E, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION C IED IINANIMOQSLY.
8.
2DD
�
.5 �+' >.::.-'
��, � ), �:. ` : x'.
.: .,.� Vr ��li�.L.LJi�ti . N��,.
' `� 6431 1tA1tVF,RSITY AVI
., FRIDLEY, ~l�T ';- 55432'
`(612) ,571-3450
�
i s� �c
�' t .. t' c .� 3 - 3,�g '� 4a
. �qi t �°3 f �" r �'I ,y ,�
� � � = b l0 � i Y+ a{ L,( - �' .
t � "�^� ue
�6 i3 T * .i'� �S •i� 5. a. �n � i
1 ) . �. 64 �:-,� �d . kH
� t� '� �. 1. iK .. : f
�,- �� ,� �� Doaimulit9-`Development Dep�e�it,- `�
t: >:
+. � �k ; :: �;
, R
� .� Y ;� , .. _
_ � �- . �
_ : R�OI+lII+1G APPZ,'It3�lTI0[+T �
;:_ ,. . '-
PIi�JFE[t7.'Y II1�RMATIC�J�= sits_ plan required;, for suUmitta3.s; :see attac��ed
i
Address: (� �S �'��, C..�. C/�/ �"�� G�' � 1� C
�- �. ;
;
i�. a���.�: ;,Ua �s ��;� 7i` �3 .� ��c / i�C�ir/�L� �r c:E G,� C c,� �'c��.�G.�
� � _ � �. ' �. ..�- �
�' � �, �: �
� ��� T�w � 3 ` � .!'
IAt BJ.00� j?�, w y'I'�"dC�AC�IC�ltl.�l � '" �j
Qirnent zoa�ir�g: �'-�� � ��� � � � � '� � � f � a s - �, �,%.C� °;� 6�l � T `
� �� OO�CjPi� C�2 'r ', ��
�� 3 h . � � �F , : _
�: � � ; ,.. � �, �+ x s" ,�_ ,
R�qtx�g Z - %��' � � � .,9 � �, �, t� `.� >
� ° � .�: � � � :�; z ;� �
Reasam for rezariixx�• '�N�����";j �� P%� y� L'/J G, � ��� �,:. _.
„�,� _ ;� �; � - . , $ � ,, �,L
�
FEE aWt�ER � II�OR'L�TIO�T�_ � �
(Corttract PuYrha.sers: . Fee �rs moust siqn this fornn .pria� to p�ooessing) '
� �/l �r1?.�4�5 �� / G/l �Il �IZ' `
An�s � �-- 1 ��GV 1 � �' /t / � 7
�vmrur� PFI�E S �
� �,,�7 .
� ;
Sz� � - �
��ar� n��,�ta� - _ 4� ;. __
, ,. ,
� `�'.%�o .�1%I .d � =' �d'� / G ,� h/G ,��
� � z �v /�J �:, : � �-��iv� :�..,_ .
--� -
����.��,� �
SI(�ZURE � l , pATE
Fee: _.....,..,.�_......$300. 00 f - �C� C'i . On _�� .................. .....,_.. ...�......,_..����
Permit ZoA # ��. �� : Receipt # 'at" � �.i� � ;.
Application reoeived by: : - .
Sc�eduled Planning Cce►anission date:: � / ' �
Scheduled City Cauncil date:
: � � � � ;a:� :s� � � � � � �
.r.,,.....,�.r..............��� _
;
� �� � � � � � � 2EE� � � �� ,� �
, ,,
a . ..
.
. ..
, � , .. ,� . : ,
�� • . .� , ,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBBR 18. 1991 PAGE 8
Ms. Dacy stated that is correct. There is an issue as to whether
or not the elevation that the City currently has to enforce is
appropriate. However, until that officially changes, the City has
to enforce the ordinances as they are. The Engineering Department
has submitted a petition to initiate the process, but this process
could take a very long time.
Ms. Dacy stated staff is more than willing to meet with the
petitioner and contractor to discuss -the alternatives regarding
the utility pipes, crawl spaces, etc:" -
Mr. A1 Stahlberg, 8055 Riverview�Terrace, stated the house at 688
Fairmont Street which was built�in the early 1980's has a basement.
i"
Mr. Dennis Prince, 8031 Ri�erview Terrace, stated there is another
house in this area with a�'basement that is definitely in the flood
plain. �
MOTION by Ms. Sher , seconded by Ms. Savage, to table Special Use
Permit, SP #91- , by Timothy Hutchison.
UPON A VOIC VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CAAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION ARRIED IINANIMOIISLY.
Mr. Be.,�zold stated this item will be tabled until the petitioner
requ.�sts that it be put back on the Planning Commission agenda.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING ZOA #91-02 BY
THOMAS BRICKNER•
To rezone from C-1, Local Business, and C-2, General Business,
to R-3, General Multiple Dwelling, on Lot 2 and the Southerly
399 feet of Lot.3, Auditor's Subdivision No. 88, to allow the
construction of an apartment building, generally located at
6450 Central Avenue N.E.
MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Mr. Saba, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND TIiE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:25 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the property is located on the west side of
Central Avenue, just south of Sandee's Restaurant. The property
is zoned C-1, Local Business, and C-2, General Business. There is
similar zoning to the north; M-1, Light Industrial, to the south,
and R-2, Two Family Dwelling, to the west. This rezoning request
is one land use request that will need to be considered by the
Council. The petitioner is asking that the land use question be
answered first. Should the rezoning request be approved isy the
Council, the petitioner will need to submit a plat in order to
subdivide the parcel from the Sandee's Restaurant property, a
ZFF
�
PLANNING COMMIS3ION MEETING. SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 9
drainage plan with appropriate drainage calculations, and a
landscaping plan.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing a three story, 48
unit apartment building. Each floor will contain 16 units; four
one-bedroom units and 12 two-bedroom units. Both above and below
ground parking spaces are being proposed. The petitioner intends
to live in the building and manage it. The petitioner has met with
the neighborhood on several occasions and has agreed to file deed
restrictions against the property to limit the following:
1.
2.
�
No outdoor sheds
No swimming pool
Restricting the number of people per unit, to no more
than three persons in a two bedroom unit, and no more
than two persons in a one bedroom unit
Ms. McPherson stated the intent of the deed restrictions is to
promote the building as an "adult" building.
Ms. McPherson stated that in analyzing a rezoning request, there
are three tests which must be evaluated:
1.
2.
3.
That the proposed use is consistent with the district's
intent;
That the proposed use is consistent with the lot and
structure requirements of the zoning district; and
That the proposed use is consistent with adjacent uses
and zoning.
Ms. McPherson stated the proposed three-story apartment building
is a permitted use in the R-3, General Multiple Dwelling, district.
Therefore, the proposed use does meet the intent of the zoning
district.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has submitted a site plan which
meets the minimum requirements for lot area, setbacks, and
provision of garage/parking spaces. However, there are still other
issues that need to be addressed. These include height,
landscaping, drainage, traffic, and platting.
Ms. McPherson stated the apartment building is proposed to be
constructed at a height of 42 feet which is below the 45 feet
allowed by the .zoning district. There are poor soil conditions
which will need to be corrected prior to construction of the
building. The petitioner has completed a soils report; anaiyzing
the soils in the vicinity of the proposed building. The
petitioner's consultant has determined that with appropriate soil
2GG
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPT$MBER 18, 1991 PAGE 10
correction, the maximum height of the building will be 42 feet.
The property is actually slightly lower than Central Avenue. The
lowest floor elevation would be 882 feet, which would be the floor
elevation of the garage space. If a person was standing on Central
Avenue looking towards the proposed building, they would be able
to look into the first floor of the apartment building.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner will need to submit a landscape
plan consistent with the R-3 zoning district regulations . As a
condition of approval, the petitioner should be requi"red to save
as many of the existing trees as possible to provide screening and
buffering for the single story, two family dwellings to the west
of the parcel. These trees will aid in mitigating the difference
in scale between the proposed building and the surrounding
structures.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner will not
until the proposed plat has been prepared.
overall drainage in the neighborhood has
surrounding homeowners.
submit a drainage plan
Concern regarding the
been expressed by the
Ms. McPherson stated that currently storm water in the area flows
from Harris Pond located east of Central Avenue through a series
of pipes to an open ditch located north of the Graystar office
building at the corner of Central and Rice Creek Road. Once the
ditch reaches Central Avenue, it is joined by a second ditch
parallel to Central Avenue. Storm water flows from the joining of
these two ditches under Central Avenue and along the north side of
East Moore Lake Drive through a series of pipes. These pipes enter
a series of detention ponds located in the Moore Lake Commons
development area, eventually entering Moore Lake.
Ms. McPherson stated storm water from the proposed development
should be directed toward a third ditch located along the west lot
line of the subject parcel. The design of the project will require
the construction of a detention pond at the northwest corner of the
property, discharging into the third ditch. Any flooding problems
the neighborhood is currently experiencing due to the capacity of
the downstream system will not be increased due to the proposed
project. By ordinance, water is not allowed to flow off the
subject parcel at a rate greater than what flows off the site in
its undeveloped state. Further, Anoka County has indicated its
preference to have the site drain toward the �est, and not toward
Central Avenue.
Ms. McPherson stated traffic issues pertain to two areas: (1) on-
site and combined traffic with Sandee's Restaurant; and (2) the
traffic impacted at the intersection of Central Avenue and
Mississippi Street.
�
Ms. McPherson staff has analyzed the requirements for installing
a traffic signal at the intersection of Old Central Avenue and
2HH
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 11
Mississippi Street. Between the writing�of the staff report and
this meeting, staff again consulted with Anoka County to determine
exactly what the hourly counts are for Central Avenue and
Mississippi Street. The last hourly counts adjusted by the State
of Minnesota were conducted in 1988. While the peak hour traffic
in the morning and evening hours has been increasing over the
years, there would still be 2-4 hours of the minimum 8 which is
required where the warrants to install a traffic signal would be
broken. �
Ms. McPherson stated Anoka County �will not consider the
installation of a signal at this intersection until the actual
vehicle volume exists. Anoka County is willing to complete the
traffic counts after the project is completed and consider at that
time adding a traffic signal to its capital improvement project.
Ms. McPherson stated the access points with the restaurant and the
proposed project need to be considered. Currently, the petitioner
is proposing two driveways into the proposed project. The proposed
vehicular entrance into the apartment complex is located less than
30 feet from one of the Sandee's Restaurant's parking exits. Staff
recommends that the parking area for the apartment be tied with the
parking area for Sandee's Restaurant to reduce the number of
driveways. This will limit the traffic conflicts on Central
Avenue. Anoka County has also suggested that one of the two
driveways to the project be eliminated. Staff recommends that the
southerly driveway be eliminated. Further, a driveway connection
to the Sandee's lot should be made. Staff will recommend this on
the plat request as well.
Ms. McPherson stated that, currently, the subject parcel is legally
combined with the Sandee's Restaurant parcel. In order to separate
these parcels, a plat will need to be created and approved by the
City Council. The platting process should be completed if and when
the rezoning request is approved. The second reading of the
rezoning would not occur. until the plat was completed and
construction had begun.
Ms. McPherson stated the last test of the rezoning is to evaluate
the compatibility of the proposed use with adjacent uses and
zoning. While the rezoning request has met the first two tests,
there are several advantages and disadvantages to approving the
request: •
Disadvantages
The proposed rezoning request would continue the mixed land
use pattern which currently exists along the west side of
Central Avenue. Currently, there are three developed
properties: Sandee's Restaurant, the Advance Companies (M-
1), and the Ziebart facility (M-1). The remaining undeveloped
properties are zoned commercial and CR-1, General Office
2��
PLANNING COMMISSION 1rIEETING. 88PTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 12
District. North of Mississippi Street, the land use on the
west side is predominately residential and then industrial
north of Rice Creek.
The proposed rezoninq would locate a higher density population
near the M-1 zoning district. While the use of the property
by the Advance Company has relatively low impact industrial
use, it is possible that a higher intensity industrial use
could locate in that location. Other homeowners in the area
have complained about noise from Sandee's Restaurant and Moore
Lake Commons development. �
There is also the issue of scale and the visual impact that
the proposed apartment building may have on the neighborhood.
The building will be the largest and tallest structure which
exists in the area and may emphasize the mixed use nature o�f
the west side of Central Avenue.
Advantaqes
The proposed rezoning request does meet all requirements of
the zoning district and may have a minimal impact on the
neighborhood. While the proposed building will be the tallest
structure in the area, the R-3 regulations.provide adequate
setbacks between adjacent structures. There will be
approximately 120 feet between the proposed apartment building
and the adjacent structures. The intent of the district
regulations is to mitigate the impaet of scale between various
structures.
The proposed use would generate less traffic than a commercial
use such as a restaurant, and there are no extended hours of
operation. The vehicular activities of the building would be
buffered by the building itself due to its "L" shape design,
which forces the vehicular activities toward Sandee's
Restaurant and Central Avenue. In addition, the apartment
building is a collector street (as opposed to an interior
residential street), near shopping facilities, and on a
transit line.
Staff also questions whether additional commercial development
will be generated as "spin-offs" from the Moore Lake Commons
development, and whether retaining the existing commercial
zoning on both sides of the street will be compatible with the
residential areas (compatibility issues were raised during the
Moose Lodge request). There is adequate commercial space in
Moore Lake Commons for neighborhood commercial uses to locate,
and to serve the area.
Ms. McPherson stated that as the rezoning request meets the intent
of the district, the lot and structure requirements of the district
and the advantages outweigh the disadvantages regarding
2JJ
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 13
compatibility of the proposed rezoning with the adjacent uses and
zoning, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the request to the City Council with the foilowing
stipulations:
l. A plat shall be submitted and approved by the City
Council.
2. A drainage plan and preliminary calculations shall be
submitted in conjunction with the plat application
indicating a pond in the northwest corner and the
drainage directed to the west property line.
3.
4.
A permit shall be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed
District prior to issuance of a building permit.
A landscape plan in conformance with the ordinance shall
be submitted in conjunction with the plat application.
5. Existing trees shall be maintained along the west
property line to provide buffering and screening, and
shall be protected during construction.
6. Deed restrictions prohibiting outdoor sheds, a swimming
pool, and limiting the number of persons per dwelling
unit, shall be recorded against the property prior to
issuance of a building permit.
7.
�
An overall parking and access plan with Sandee's
Restaurant shall be submitted with the plat application.
The southerly driveway access shall be eliminated on the
site plan.
Mr. Tom Brickner stated staff has put together a very complete
report together. He stated there is a real need for this type of
apartment building for the empty nester people without children.
He stated the stipulations are aeceptable to him, and he is willing
to answer any questions the Commission might have.
Ms. Modig stated she is very concerned about the drainage problems
that already exist in this area. She has a real problem with the
apartment building and underground garage and the drainage
situation.
Mr. Brickner stated the parking will be higher on the front side
and the lot will be pitched to the back so the water runs to the
holding pond in the northwest corner and then south so the water
is not running onto Central Avenue.
Ms. Dacy stated that via this application, Anoka County has also
stated that they do not want any more water coming toward Central
2KK
�LANNING COMMI88ION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18. 1991 P�GE 14
Avenue. So, no matter who develops on this site, a developer is
going to have to tip the site back to the pond and submit
calculations that prove that the rate of water runoff equals or
does not exceed the rate of runoff from the site in its undeveloped
condition.
Ms. Modig stated that it seems like an act of futility, because
the water in this area just does not drain. There is already so
much water going into Moore Lake, and this water will go into Moore
Lake eventually.
Ms. Sherek stated that realizing this property is adjacent to
Sandee's Restaurant and is undivided now, is any of the property
being proposed for division currently part of Sandee's parking
area?
Mr. Brickner stated that City staff has been working with the owner
of Sandee's to eventually put a green area long Central Avenue, and
that would take away 6-8 parking spaces. However, if they turned
Sandee's parking the other way and ran it parallel in line with
the proposed apartment building and the apartment building's
parking, Sandee's would not lose any parking. There could also be
some cross easements for overflow parking.
Mr. Brickner stated he is proposing 48 parking stalls inside and
42 parking stalls outside, and he did not believe the outside
stalls would ever all be full.
Ms. McPherson stated the parking requirements are based on 1 1/2
stalls per one-bedroom unit plus an additional 1/2 space for each
additional bedroom per dwelling unit.
Ms. Savage stated that in terms of the amount of parking that Mr.
Brickner is required to have, she could foresee a parking problem.
Mr. Brickner stated they will not do anything to attract families
with children. He and his wife will be living there and managing
the building.
Mr. Saba stated that every apartment building owner starts out with
good intentions; but what happens 10 years from now? What will the
conditions be like then?
Ms. Sherek asked if deed restrictions with respect to occupancy in
rental property legal and enforceable? �
Ms. Dacy stated this was discussed with the neighborhood and the
intent was to restrict the number of people, and she believed the
federal issues are with the age of the people. The petitioner
would be limiting the number of occupants as opposed to the age of
the occupants; however, the City Attorney has not checked the
legality of this limitation.
2LL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 15
Ms. Sherek stated if it is legal, then who is going to enforce it?
Ms. Dacy stated it would have to be recorded against the property,
and the owner of the property and management will have to enforce
it. The City has a licencing procedure that every rental building
has to meet which must be renewed annually. However, those
procedures traditionally have pertained to fire and building codes.
Ms. Sue Rau, 1341 - 64th Avenue N.E., asked if the City of Fridley
really needs another apartment building. She gave to the
Commission members an article which appeared in the Fridley Sun
Focus dated August 14, 1991, stating that Fridley has one of the
highest vacancy rates of 20 large metro area cities from April
through June of 1991. Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, Maplewood,
and Fridley had the highest vacancy rates.
Ms. Jackie Calderom, 6401 Central Avenue N.E., asked if the City
is going to rezone the property first and then work on the other
problems that could occur. She did not quite understand why they
are not taking some of these other problems, such as drainage,
before the rezoning.
Ms. Dacy stated that the petitioner has asked that the City
consider and decide whether or not it thinks an R-3, Multiple
Family Dwelling district, is appropriate in this particular
application. No matter who develops the site, the grading has to
be meet the ordinance, and the access points have.to be reviewed
by Anoka County. If the City Council approves the rezoning, when
the City rezones a property, it takes an ordinance which is
approved via two readings. Typical policy has been that the
Council will approve a rezoning on first reading but hold up the
final approval until, in this case, another plat application comes
through with more detailed plans. So, the City Council would have
the plat process plus the second and final reading of the rezoning
to determine whether or not the site plan meets all the ordinance
requirements. The intent of this initial process is for the
Planning Commission and City Council to consider whether or not
going to R-3 is a good idea in terms of general land use.
Ms. LaVonne Kowski, 6391 Central Avenue N.E., stated that Mr.
Brickner has told the neighborhood that it is either the apartment
building or an addition onto Sandee's Restaurant for a rental hall.
Is this true?
Mr. Brickner stated he has been looking at alternatives for the
use of this property and adding onto Sandee's Restaurant is his
second choice.
Ms. Barb Edwards, 1403 - 64th Avenue N.E., stated tha� the
petitioner is proposing an underground garage. What type of-soil
testing has been done to determine the water level under this
2MI1�1
PLANNING COMMI88ION MEBTING, 8$PTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 16
property and whether an underground garage can even be built
without being under water?
Ms. Dacy stated Mr. Brickner submitted a soils report conducted by
Suburban Engineering. Suburban Engineering took soil boring test
holes around in the area where the building is going to be
constructed to determine depth to the ground water. They then made
a recommendation based on the various depths. Soil carrection will
be needed, but they will be able to construct an underground garage
that is above the water table. Again, additional soil borings and
structural requirements will need to be submitted.
Mr. Brickner stated the property will have to be raised to get good
and proper drainage.
Ms. LaVonne Kowski, 6391 Central Avenue, stated that if this
rezoning progresses, is there any way for the neighbors to meet
with the City Engineer to see what has been proposed as far as a
drainage plan? She is very concerned because she has water in her
basement which is a crawl space. There are a lot of problems with
drainage in this area, and this development is going to affect
them.
Ms. Dacy stated that the plat process is also a public hearing
process and the public is invited to attend.
Ms. Jean Schwartz, 1372 - 64th Avenue N.E., stated that if the
rezoning is approved, and the project is later denied because of
the drainage issues, or whatever, is the property then zoned R-3?
Ms. Dacy stated that if something falls apart during the plat
process, under the Council's typical policy, the property would
revert to the current zoning because the second and final reading
of the ordinance has not occurred or been approved.
Mr. Mark Mattison, 6421 Central Avenue N.E., asked if Mr. Brickner
was going to put up any kind of barrier to provide some privacy for
the homeowners across Central Avenue. He stated the current
commercial activity is during the daytime and it is gone when he
comes home at night. If the property is rezoned to residential,
then people will be coming and going at all hours of the day and
night and car lights will be shining into his windows.
Mr. Brickner stated
there will probably
neighborhood. There
at night.
he believed that with the residential usage,
be less lights shining into the residential
shouldn't be a lot of activity or traffic late
Mr. Mark Schwartz, 1372 - 64th Avenue, stated that the last traffic
count was in 1988 before the Moore Lake Commons development._ Not
counting the rush hour traffic, but all the other traffic, it seems
that the traffic has about doubled since the construction of the
2NN
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 18 1991 PAGE 17
Moore Lake Commons deveiopment. Even though Mr. Brickner's
intentions are good, it is going to be hard to get older people to
rent; and in order to make the payments, he is going to have to
rent to anyone because of discrimination. He believed it is going
to end up being 2-3 single people per apartment with 2-3 vehicles.
Ms. LaVonne Kowski, 6391 Central Avenue, stated it is a near
impossibility to go either north or south from 64th Avenue onto
Central Avenue from 7:00-9:00 a.m., and there is a definite rush
hour traffic pattern from 3:30-5:30 p.m.. It will be difficult for
the apartment building renters to get out onto Central Avenue also.
She did not believe barriers forcing traffic north or south has not
been looked upon kindly. There are a lot of vans coming and going
from the Advance Company at 6400 Central Avenue, yet that type of
traffic is not noticeable. If a commercial use such as that went
on this property, it would not have as significant an impact as the
proposed apartment building.
Ms. Kowski stated that regarding the rezoning, the three homes on
the east side of Central Avenue are going to be heavily impacted
with a huge apartment building. Even with only three homes across
the street, it is not fair to have that piece of property rezoned
for multiple dwelling. When they purchased their homes, that piece
of property was not zoned multiple dwelling, and they would not
have purchased their homes if it had been. She stated she is not
against progress, but she has a fear of apartment buildings and
what can happen with them.
Ms. Doris,Bergman, 6435 Pierce Street, stated she lives directly
behind Mr. Brickner's property. She stated the neighbors on Pierce
Street are not objecting to the rezoning and the construction of
an apartment building.
Mr. Stanley Dubanoski, 6423 Pierce Street, stated he also lives
directly behind the proposed development. He hopes Mr. Brickner
builds the building. There are trees on that lot that are 150 feet
high. If there is ever a tornado, those trees could destroy their
homes.
Ms. Jackie Calderom, 6401 Central Avenue N.E., stated this is a
good neighborhood, and they do not need or want this apartment
building.
Ms. Sue Rau, 1341 - 64th Avenue, stated they want housing for
anyone that needs it, but not in this area where there are drainage
problems already.
Mr. Mark Mattison, 6421 Central Avenue, stated that in looking at
the compatibility of zoning, he did not see any reason to put
residential zoning in the middle of commercial zoning. �e is
concerned about what the apartment building will look like in 10-
15 years as compared to a commercial building. He is concerned
2��
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. SEPTEMBER 18. 1991 PAGE 18
about how this rezoning will affect his property vaiue. The
drainage is always going to be an issue. An apartment building is
going to cause more problems with traffic and lights. He would
like the Planning Commission to consider recommending that this
property remain zoned commercial.
Mr. Mattison stated that�if the grade of the property is raised 4
feet, there is a strong possibility that the remaining trees won't
survive.
Mr. Doug Johnson, 6388 Pierce Street, stated he is also concerned
about an apartment building on this property. If the deed
restrictions are leqal and enforceable, that would take care of
some of the concerns; however, he doubted that is the case, even
with a bond requirement or something to aid in the enforcement.
Mr. Johnson stated that Mr. Brickner has said he intends to own
and live in the building. That is great, but many owners/
developers start out by owning/occupying their buildings, but as
another project comes along, they move out into a newer building.
Mr. Brickner stated this is his retirement home.
Mr. Doug Johnson asked Mr. Brickner if he had looked at the
possibility of building candominiums where the units are
individually owned.
Mr. Brickner stated he did not believe a condominium project would
be saleable in this area. There are too many choices for condos
in areas with other amenities. This property has the amenities for
rental property. He stated he has a very good track record in
Fridley, he has lived up to the stipulations put on other projects
in the City, and he will build a building that Fridley can be proud
of.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to close the public
hearing.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:55 P.M.
�
Ms. Modig stated there are so many zones in this area, and she can
see no reason to put in another one. There are too many problems
with the parking, drainage, traffic, and the way the apartment
would look in among the commercial. She realized that there is R-
3 zoning only a couple of blocks away, but they would just be
creating another mix in this area that is not needed. She stated
she cannot support the rezoning request.
Mr. Sielaff stated he believes this is an acceptable use. � The
stipulations appear reasonable and the petitioner is agreeable to
2PP
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 19
the stipulations. He stated he would vote in favor of the
rezoning.
Mr. Saba stated he looked at this as spot zoning. As a Commission
they have to consider that whole.area in terms of what they want
to see there, rather than to allow different developments until
they end up creating a mishmash of zones. He is also concerned
about the density the apartment building would add to the area.
He stated he thinks very highly of Mr. Brickner as a developer and
has the highest regard for any development he does; however, he is
concerned about the future when the building would be sold. Every
apartment building after a period of time ends up affecting the
crime rate and affecting adjacent property owners. He stated he
cannot support the rezoning.
Ms. Sherek stated she has very serious reservations about the
drainage and whether deed restrictions with respect to occupancy
are legal or enforceable.
Ms. Sherek stated the Commission has given serious thought and
discussion to this piece of property in the past, including a
comprehensive study in 1989 on the Central Avenue Corridor from.
Moore Lake to Osborne Road. It was the Commission's discussion at
that time to maintain this property as commercial property,
especially in view of a number of public hearings that have been
held with neighbors over other previously proposed uses for the�
area. Multiple dwellings were on the list of types of
developments that the residents do not want in this area. Based
on that and the unanswered questions with respect to drainage and
what will happen to the property in the future, she would vote
against the rezoning.
Ms. Savage stated this is a difficult decision, but she agreed with
Mr. Sielaff. She believed there are enough safeguards built into
the proposal. She stated the Rice Creek Watershed District will
also look at this proposed project closely and, ultimately, the
drainage problems may be improved. As long as the stipulations are
closely monitored and other concerns are taken into consideration,
she would vote in favor of the rezoning.
Ms. Sher.ek stated that if the Commission recommends approval of
the rezoning, it might be appropriate to stipulate that the
petitioner post a long term bond to make sure the drainage is
effective.
Ms. Dacy stated this is also required as part of the building
permit.
Mr. Betzold stated that no matter what goes onto this property,
the drainage issue will have to be addressed, but there a`re no
guarantees. He would hate to see them criticize this plan on the
issue of drainage alone.
2QQ
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. SEPTEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 20
Mr. Betzold stated he also has a lot of respect for Mr. Brickner,
who is trying to do what he thinks best and what is in his best
interest. He stated he has problems with the rezoning request.
It is too bad they cannot go back and undo the mistakes that have
been done along this stretch of land and the different zoning
districts. Zt is possible they might never be able to develop all
this commercial as it is zoned, but he did not think it was
appropriate to have part commercial/part residential �oning. He
would vote against the rezoning. _
MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to recommend to City
Council denial of rezoning request, ZOA �91-92, by Thomas Brickner,
to rezone from C-1, Local Business, and C-2, General Business, to
R-3, General Multiple Dwelling, on Lot 2 and the Southerly 399 feet
of Lot 3, Auditor's Subdivision No. 88, to allow the construction
of an apartment building, generally located at 6450 Central Avenue
N.E.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, BETZOLD, SABA, SHERER, MODIG VOTING AYE, SIELAFF
AND SAVAGE VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4-2.
Ms. Dacy stated that on September 30, 1991, the City Council will
establish the public hearing for October 21, 1991.
4. RECEIVE AUGUST 9, 1991. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
%
MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recei�✓'e the August
9, 1991, Parks & Recreation Commission minutes./
QPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE, CHAIRP� N BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOQSLY.
5.
MINUTES:
MOT ON by Mr. Saba, seconded by . Sherek, to receive the August
8, 1991, Housing & Redevelopme Authority minutes.
IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VO NG AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANI USLY.
6. RECEIVE AUGUST 0 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL UALITY AND ENERGY
COMMISSION MI TES:
MOTION by Mr. S' laff, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the August
20, 1991, Env' onmental Quality and Energy Commission minutes.
IIPON A VO E VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTI CARRIED IINANIMOUSLY.
2RR
CITY OF FRIDLEY
ANORA COIINTY� MINNE80TA
NOTICL OF HEARING ON A88ESSMENT FOR BTREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. BTREET 1990 - 3
Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Fridley will
meet at the Fridley Municipal Center in said City on the 21st day
of October, 1991, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., to hear and pass upon all
objections, if any, to the proposed assessments in respect to the
following improvements, to-wit: �
STR$8T IMPROVEMENT PROJBCT NO. STRBET 1990 - 3
The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvements in the
total amount of 599,928.01 is now on file and open to public
inspection by all persons interested, in the office of the Clerk
of said City.
The general nature of the improvements and each of them is the
construction of street improvements including installation of
concrete curb and gutter, aggregate base course, bituminous paving,
parking lot, and related appurtenances located as follows:
67TH AVENIIB, OARLSY STREI3T & SPRINGBROOR NATIIRE CENTER
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of
them is all that land benefited by said improvements or each of
them and lying within the general area above. Said improvements
will be assessed against the properties within the above noted
areas in whole or in part proportionately to each of the lands
therein contained according to the benefits received.
At said hearing the Council will consider written or oral
objections to the proposed assessments for each of said
improvements. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any
individual assessment unless a written objection signed by the
affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the
assessment hearing or presented to the residing officer at the
public hearing.
A property owner may appeal an assessment to the district court by
serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk within
thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment and filing such
notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service
upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
The City of Fridley adopted Resolution No. 47 - 1981 on April 6,
1981, relating to the deferral of special assessments for certain
senior citizens where the payment of said special assessments
constitutes a hardship. The following factors will govern the
granting of the deferments: the property must be homestead
property, and the owner must be at least sixty-five (65) years of
3
Page 2- Notice of Hearinq on Assessment for Street Improvement
Project No. Street 1990 - 3
age or older, and in the case of husband and wife, one member must
meet this age requirement.
The application for said deferral must be made within the first
thirty (30) days after the adoption of the f inal assessment roll
by the City Council. The owner will make application for deferred
payments on forms prescribed by the Anoka County Auditor, and will
make application to the City of Fridley on forms provided by the
City.
The City Council will consider each application on an individual
basis; however, the general policy is to grant senior citizen
hardship special assessment deferrals when the annual payment for
the special assessment exceeds two (2) per cent of the adjusted
gross income of the owners as determined by the most recent Federal
Income Tax Return.
The deferral will be terminated and all amounts accumulated plus
applicable interest shall become due when any of the following
happen: the death of the owner, provided that the surviving spouse
is not otherwise eligible for the deferral; the sale, transfer, or
subdivision of the property or any part that further deferral is
not in the public interest.
The assessment roll as presently calculated shows an assessment of
SlAmountZ for 1Legal Description) under Street,Improvement Pro,j ect
No. Street 1990 - 3 to be assessed over ten (10) years at seven and
one-half (7 1/2 %�, percent interest.
The property owner may pay the total special assessment to the City
of Fridley within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment
with no addition of any interest. If the entire special assessment
is not paid within the thirty (30) day period, but is paid before
November 30th in the year in which the roll is adopted, interest
is charged from the date of the adoption of the assessment to the
date on which the assessment is paid.
Partial payment of an assessment which is not less than ane-haif
thereof, provided that such partial payment shall in any event be
in a sum of at least One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), may be made
within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment. If a
partial payment is made, the original assessment will be reduced
by this amount, and the remaining balance shall be certified for
collection as a part of the original assessment roll.
If the assessment is not paid by November 30th in the year adopted,
the first payment of principal and interest will be included.on the
following year's tax statement. To the first payment shall be
added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the
adoption of the new assessment through December 31 of the following
3A
Paqe 3- Notice of Hearinq on Assessment for Street Improvement
Project No. Street 1990 - 3
year. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on the balance of unpaid principal. The
entire remaining balance of an assessment subsequent to the current
year's payment may be paid at any time after the first year, but
the payment on the yearly tax statement does include interest to
December 31, of that year.
DATED THIB DAY OF , 1991 BY ORDER OF THE CITY
COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF �RIDLEY.
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERR
3B
AILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
CITY OF FRIDLEY
ANORA COQNTY� MINNSSOTA
NOTICE OF HEARING ON ASBE88MENT FOR WATER, SANITARY SEWER
& BTORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 210
Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Fridley will
meet at the Fridley Municipal Center in said City on the 21st day
of October, 1991, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., to hear and pass upon all
objections, if any, to the proposed assessments in respect to the
following improvements, to-wit:
WATER, SANITARY SEWER & STORM SEWBR PROJECT NO. 210
The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvements in the
total amount of 535,395.50 is now on file and open to public
inspection by all persons interested, in the office of the Clerk
of said City. ,
The general nature of the improvements and each of them is the
construction of water mains, sanitary sewer and storm sewer and
related appurtenances located as follows:
67TH AVENUE L%TENSION AND OARLEY; STREET
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of
them is all that land benef ited by said improvements or each of
them and lying within the general area above. Said improvements
will be assessed against the properties within the above noted
areas in whole or in part proportionately to each of the lands
therein contained according to the benefits received.
At said hearing the Council will consider written or oral
objections to the proposed assessments for each of said
improvements. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any
individual assessment unless a written objection signed by the
affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the
assessment hearing or presented to the residing officer at the
public hearing. _
A property owner may appeal an assessment to the district court by
serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk within
thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment and filing such
notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service
upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
The City of Fridley adopted Resolution No. 47 - 1981 on April 6,
1981, relating to the deferral of special assessmerits for certain
senior citizens where the payment of said special assessments
constitutes a hardship. The following factors will govern the
granting of the deferments: the property must be homestead
property, and the owner must be at least sixty-five (65) years of
age or older, and in the case of husband and wife, one member must
meet this age requirement.
�
Page 2- Notice of Hearinq on Assessment for Water, Sanitary Sewer
& Storm Sewer Project No. 210
The application for said deferral must be made within the first
thirty (30) days after the adoption of the final assessment roll
by the City Council. The owner will make application for deferred
payments on forms prescribed by the Anoka County Auditor, and will
make application to the City of Fridley on forms provided by the
City.
The City Council will consider each application on an individual
basis; however, the general policy is to grant senior citizen
hardship special assessment deferrals when the annual payment for
th� special assessment exceeds two (2) per cent of the adjusted
gross income of the owners as determined by the most recent Federal
Income Tax Return.
The deferra2 will be terminated and all amounts accumulated plus
applicable interest shall become due when any of the following
happen: the death of the owner, provided that the surviving spouse
is not otherwise eligible for the deferral; the sale, transfer, or
subdivision of the property or any part that further deferral is
not in the public interest.
The assessment roll as presently calculated shows an assessment of
S�Amount) for (Leaal Description� under Water, Sanitary sewer &
Storm Sewer Project No. 210 to be assessed over twenty (20) years
at seven and one-half (7 1J2 %� percent interest.
The property owner may pay the total special assessment to the City
of Fridley within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment
with no addition of any interest. If the entire special assessment
is not paid within the thirty (30) day period, but is paid before
November 30th in the year in which the roll is adopted, interest
is charged from the date of the adoption of the assessment to the
date on which the assessment is paid.
Partial payment of an assessment which is not less than one-half
thereof, provided that such partial payment shall in any event be
in a sum of at least One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), may be made
within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment. If a
partial payment is made, the original assessment will be reduced
by this amount, and the remaining balance shall be certified for
collection as a part of the original assessment roll.
If the assessment is not paid by November 30th in the year adopted,
the first payment of principal and interest will be included on the
following year's tax statement. To the first payment shall be
added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the
adoption of the new assessment through December 31 of the following
year. To each subsequent installment when due shall be�added
interest for one year on the balance of unpaid principal: The
. �
Paqe 3- Notice of Hearinq on Assessment for Water, Sanitary Sewer
& Storm Sewer Project No. 210
entire remaining balance of an assessment subsequent to the current
year's payment may be paid at any time after the first year, but
the payment on the yearly tax statement does include interest to
December 31, of that year.
DATED THIS DAY OF � 1991 BY ORDER OF T$E CITY
COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLEAR
�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF HEARING ON ASSE5SMENT FOR
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREEB 1991
Notice is hearby given that the Council of the City of Fridley will
meet at the Fridley Municipal Center in said City on the 21st day
of Oc�ober, 1991, at 7:30 o'clock P.M. to hear and pass upon all
objections, if any, to the propose3 assessments in respect to the
following improvement, to-wit:
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREE3 1991
The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvements in the
total amount of 225.00 is now on file and open to public
inspection by all persons interested, in the office of the Clerk
of said City.
The general nature of the improvements and each of them is the
treatment or removal of trees located in the City of Fridley as
follows:
Pin No. 03-30-24-42-0073 Lots 29 & 30, Block 6
Sprinq Brook Park
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of
them is all that land benef ited by said improvements or each�of
them and lying within the general area above. Said improvements
will be assessed against the properties within the above noted
areas in whole or in part proportionately to each of the lands
therein contained according to the benefits received.
At said hearing the council will consider written or oral
objections to the proposed� assessments for each of said
improvements. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any
individual assessment unless a written objection signed by the
affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the
assessmer►t hearing or presented to•the residing officer at the
public hearing.
A property owner may appeal an assessment to the district court by
serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk within
thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment and filing such
notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service
upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
The City of Fridley adopted Resolution No. 47 - 1981 on April 6,
1981, relating to the deferral of special assessments for certain
senior citizens where the payment of said special assessments
constitutes a hardship. The following factors will govern the
granting of the deferments: the property must be homestead
property, and the owner must be at least sixty-five (65) years of
��
Paqe 2- Notice of Hearinq on Assessment for Treatment and Removal
of Trees 1991 �
age or older, and in the case of husband and wife, one member must
meet this age requirement.
The application for said deferral must be made within the first
thirty (30) days after the adoption of the final assessment roll
by the City Council. The owner will make application for deferred
payments on forms prescribed by the Anoka County Auditor, and will
make application to the City of Fridley on forms provided by the
City.
The City Council will consider each application on an individual
basis; however, the general policy is to grant senior citizen
hardship special assessment deferrals when the annual payment for
the special assessment exceeds two (2) per cent of the adjusted
gross income of the owners as determined by the most recent Federal
Income Tax Return.
The deferral will be terminated and all amounts accumulated plus
applicable interest shall become due when any of the following
happen: the death of the owner, provided that the surviving spouse
is not otherwise eligible for the deferral; the sale, transfer, or
subdivision of the property or any part thereof; loss of homestead
status for any reason; the City Council determines that further
deferral is not in the public interest.
The assessment roll as presently calculated shows an assessment of
S(Amount�, for (Leaal Description) under Treatment and Removal of
Trees 1991 to be assessed over five (5) years at seven and one-half
(7 1!2 �Z percent interest,
The property owner may pay the total special assessment to the City
of Fridley within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment
with no addition of any interest. If the entire special assessment
is not paid within the thirty (30) day period, but is paid before
November 3oth in the year in which the roll is adopted, interest
is charged from the date of the adoption of the assessment to the
date on which the assessment is paid.
Partial payment of an assessment which is not less than one-half
thereof, provided that such partial payment shall in any event be
in a sum of at least One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), may be made
within thirty (30) days of adoption of the assessment. If a
partial payment is made, the original assessment will be reduced
by this amount, and the remaining balance sha1T be certified for
collection as a part of the original assessment roll.
If the assessment is not paid by November 30th in the year adopted,
the first payment of principal and interest will be included on the
following year's tax statement. To the first payment shall be
added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the
adoption of the new assessment through December 31 of the following
5A
Paqe 3- Notice of Hearinq of Assessment on Treatment and Removal
of Trees 1991
year. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on the balance of unpaid principal. The
entire remaining balance of an assessment subsequent to the current
year's payment may be paid at any time after the first year, but
the payment on the yearly tax statement does include interest to
December 31, of that year.
DATED THiB DAY OF , 1991 BY ORDER
OF THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY.
ATTEST: � WILLiAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SBIRLEY A. FiAAPALA - CiTY CLERR
5B
9
r _
�
- J
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Community Development Department
P G DrviSION
City of Fridley
October 17, 1991
William Burns, City �tanager
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Variance Request, VAR #91-29, Skyline
Veterinary Hospital; 6220 Highway 65 N.E.
Attached please find the above-referenced staff report. Several
variances have been granted:
*
*
*
*
Miller Funeral Home - 80 feet to 55 feet; July 1967
Brickner's Office Condominiums - 80 feet to 55 feet; February
1985
Sinclair Station - 80 feet to 45 feet; no variance record
Skyline Veterinary Clinic - 80 feet to 55 feet; November 1968
The Chanticlear Pizza building (now Video Revue) meets the 80 foot
se�back, and the setback for Maple Lanes is unknown. A question
was raised at the October 7, 1991 City Council meeting as to•the
exact setback of the Brickner Office Condominiums. Darrel Clark,
Chief Building Official, measured the setback at 57.5 feet from the
back of the curb. There is one foot between the curb and the
property line.
The parcels have been zoned General Shopping Center since 1958 (see
attached zoning maps). The original letter designation for the C-
3 district was C2S.
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of
the request to the City Council.
MM/dn
M-91-750
�
�
�
C�� �F
FR(DLEY
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLiCANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION
STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE sePt�ember 17, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE
CITY COIAVCIL DATE october 7, 1991
SITE DATA
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONING
ADJACENT LANO USES
& zorvwG
urnmEs
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL IMPUCATIONS
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
COMPATIBILITY WITH
ADJACENT USES & ZONING
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
VAR #91-29
AUTHOR �1S
Ken Speltz; Rich Kleinaa
'Po reduoe the front yard setback fr�n 80 feet to 48 feet
62�0 Highway 65
20,121 sq. ft.; 15� existing 1ot ooverage, 21� proposed
C-3, General Shopping Center
C-3, General Shopping Center
Denial
Approval
�
tN£R �
L_!1 �
I
� ,,..
' �N
i
�
I � WFST
�
1-_
__"__ �
33
�
VAR ��91-29
Skyline Vet.
S �/2 ��C. /3,
�
ClTY OF FR/Ol
14
/O '
s•�>
/7
ny. J itY
)lI
� rr.� ,'
�H� �'
�
"'"•..' �
D.sisN.'i ,
AN ���
AUO ■
� ya
A
so � :
WO�
c� .f �
24
sB LOCATION MAP
�.°�
•]►`II►�tt�►��/!\=
Staff Report
VAR #91-29, 6220 Highway 65 N.E.
Page 2
A. STATED HARDSHIP:
"Remodeling would be too cost prohibitive without the
variance."
B: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Request
The petitioners request that a variance be granted to reduce
the required front yard setback from 80 feet to 48 feet. The
request is for Lot 2, Block 1, Herwal Second Addition, the
same being 6220 Highway 65 N.E.
Site
Located on the property is a single story brick commercial
building currently used as a veterinary haspital and boarding
kennel. The property is zoned C-3, General Shopping, as are
all adjacent properties.
Analysis
Section 205.15.03.C.1 states that all permitted buildings and
uses, except automobile parking and loading spaces, driveways,
essential services, walks, and planting spaces shall not be
closer to any public right-of-way than 80 feet.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide
desired front yard space to be used for green areas and to add
to the attractability of a commercial zone.
The required front setback in the C-3, General Shopping,
district is 80 feet. However, variances to 55 feet have been
granted for the subject parcel, the Miller Funeral Home to the
south, and the Moore Lake Office complex to the north. The
petitioners are requesting a greater variance to 48 feet which
will allow the subj ect building to encroach a greater distance
toward Highway 65. The purpose of the front addition is to
provide a larger waiting reception area and additional office
space.
The petitioners, in addition to the proposed front addition,
are also proposing an addition to the rear of the building.
The petitioners have the option of adding the needed space to
the rear of the building without requiring a variance-� In
addition, the petitioners have reasonable use of the property
without granting the variance. No additional parking spaces
will be required; the site provides adequate parking for the
facility including the addition.
. �
Staff Report
VAR #91-29, 6220 Highway 65 N.E.
Page 3
Recommendation
As the petitioners have reasonable use of the property and
have an alternative which allows them to meet Code, staff
recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of the
request to the City Council.
Appeals Commission Action
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval
of the request to the City Council.
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the request as the
petitioners have reasonable use of the property and can meet
the Code.
�
6E
M
.-�
��'ir �
!/ �y ,�I,,�/ �.
f/'Ff+ll��ry���f
/�l���f �'
r �.���.
0
0
eV
�
.eo'S
■.
1 •� '��'��'.�
�•� •� �� •.•e
�'4.•ti •4 •'��
� •a-' �•4'y,
,00'OOI
- .-,.:
����
.:; .:,.:;.:; :-;
� � �;�;�,;;;
;��� ;;-':'; � ;; .
M I. 4. �. M.� �.
f i?��'t'��
h.� �:��:• ;.
���� �;�F��, �'
�:�j:i �;�
' ,�' :'/` :�/'.'!�:
r r f
�
�
3
d
�
A
.�
f f�}r�? r��
����i�,,.
� ;� ;��+ ,� � 1+>
�`f�/ ��� I `l
!,��i!,�;`� �
f�J���,
.t .k .t .� .` .� .* .� .� �, ,
.ti .` .` .` .`'.ti .` .t'.41 : ��
-,'•.'•: •: •,'•; •: •t �t1 {: ^'
.`•.t•.4 .i .t .� .` .,. `' � T —
.t•.`'.4 .4 .; .` .t .' .`� .�- . -;
� � �,0o'0£�E j;; �
i �-
�
.� :; �__ �
- - -1 �: � .�
"' I � �--� — — —
_ - - -'� L
a � n ;'I
N I � — — — — l
—� — � � � �
1
� �--- '---
_`_J �,---�--------
aaaaias� a�eba�
100.00'- s � -
N
�
O�
�
u
.p
o':
E-� U
� �' N
p',+.'Z^ 11
� ,b .,.�� .
i� � � ~
w
�+ �
,�'O� �
Q' °�' p ,u
O �+ �
a �i
VAR 4�91-29
Skyline Vet.
A -9/
6
S'
STING FLOOR PLAN
VAR ��91-29
Skyline Vet.
.,
�
�
No
¢
}O
FL
x
>
�
e
P�'.�POSED FLOOR PLAN
r--
CITY OF FRIDLEY
6431 UIVIVII2SITY AVENf7E N.E. .
FRIDIEY, I�IId 55432 � doa�mmity Developmarit Dep�trtane2lt
(612) 571-3450
�..�_�........__.,._....�.�.��_...... V�►RZANC� AP�I�tQ�TIO�T F�O�S �.....,....r.,.
PRDPER7.'Y II�o�TIO�i - site
.,, _
I,egal descri.ptlOri:
required for subaaittals; see attac�ed
��� �7 � ���.� :
C ���
�3�-� � I
1.l.Jl. D1l�R / 11Gl�il./L'16�+1.11..1�1 �� /J22� ����J
�0
GZirrent zoning: t-�� �,li��- Square foatage/aGreage ,�(�_�.pc^
�ason for variaix�e arid han7s�nip: _--� fr,Q��., G�.-�,�Q� � c.��
��� �-/-c.�=-�.�`� (��-�-�.-� o��-= sectian of City C�ode: %S� �S�• D=j �. �
.r�..r�.....r�.�.....r.r.r�.�.�..r.r�..r vl��. �^"-`` lo ��JcQi��1,�j -��/p � 5�0�.�',.�,�Y�il �' .
�' • ia�• � i • •+ ►� •
• '�%
(Contract Puz+c,t�asers: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to prooessing)
�rr i
� � .
�
AD�RESS ���r� /�c�e.i i � � y� �'
-< r .�c. ,� �S�'Z� 3 �-- oAVm7� PHONE �� ��� p' �,
SIC�'IURE pA� � �-- n
,• ��
�
��s �-,�,
_ =�-� �—,�
szc�� � /
_�___�_����_��__�__
Fee: $loo.00
S 60.00
7ti
J� /C�.-,�-<�
n��t�rn� � �/�� �� �' Z,=
_.__ - �
� �� �.
for residential prop�rties
Permit VAR # � � ` Z � Rereipt # 't`� � ��- � �
Application received by:
Scheduled Appeals Cammission date: 9
Sched.uied City Council date:
e
s�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 17, 1991
...... ... ............ _........,.... _ ...... ..........,....................., ......... ..........,. _ .......,....,........... _ .,..,..............,..,.... ................,. _..,................
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Savage called the September 17, 1991, Appeals
Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL•
Members Present: Diane Savage, Ken Vos, Cathy Smith,
Carol Beaulieu
Members Absent: Larry Kuechle
Others Present: Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
Bruce & Suzanne Hanley, 132 Alden Circle
Richard Kleinow, Skyline Veterinary Clinic
Ken Speltz, Skyline Veterinary Clinic
APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 3 1991 APPEAL5 COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Dr. Vos, to approve the September
3, 1991, Appeals Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY.
l. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REOUEST, VAR #91-29, BY KENNETH
SPELTZ AND RICH KLEINOW SKYLINE VETERINARY HOSPITAL:
Per Section 205.15.03.C.1 of the Fridley City Code, to reduce
the required front yard setback from 80 feet to 48 feet to
allow the construction of an addition, on Lot 2, Block l,
Herwal Second Addition, the same being 6220 Highway 65 N.E.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to open the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND TIiE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:31 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this property is located north of West Moore
Lake, west of Highway 65, and directly north of the Miller Funeral
Home. The Moore Lake Office condos are located directly to the
north. The property is zoned C-3, General Shopping, as are all
adjacent properties. .
6J
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 2
Ms. McPherson stated the variance request is to reduce the front
yard setback from 80 sq, ft. to 40 sq. ft. to allow an addition to
the front of the veterinary hospital. The property currently has
a variance from 80 feet to 55 feet as do the Miller Funeral Home
to the south and the Moore Lake Of f ice condos to the north . The
petitioners are proposing a new waiting area, storage space, and
larger reception, office, and lounge areas. They are also
proposing an addition to the rear of the building. One of staff's
alternatives is that the petitioners bui2d all the additional space
to the rear of the structure which they can do without a variance.
Ms. McPherson stated.the petitioners currently have reasonable use
of the property without the variance so denying the variance would
not constitute a taking. However, the site would provide enough
parking for the facility if the additions are constructed.
Ms. McPherson stated that as the petitioners have reasonable use
of the property and have an alternative which allows them to meet
the Code requirements, staff recommends that the Appeals Commission
recommend denial of the variance.
Mr. Ken Speltz, Skyline Veterinary Clinic, stated they are
requesting to make some internal changes in the front part of the
building that can't be made anywhere else in the building, because
they can't move their reception area or waiting area to the rear
of the building. The majority of what they need has to be in the
front part of the building. To move the internal changes to the
middle or the rear of the building is literally impossible. The
addition to the rear of the building is for more boarding area.
Since they already have a 55 foot variance, they are only asking
for an additional 7 feet. In looking at some of the other setbacks �
in this area, the setbacks vary, except for the three properties
which are the same at 55 feet.
Mr. Richard Kleinow, Skyline Veterinary Clinic, stated they do not
have reasonable use of the property, because they cannot put the
office space in back of the building without reversing the whole
plan. The denial of this variance request would add a huge
financial hardship on them.
Ms. Savage asked if there is any way to expand to the side of the
building on the south.
Mr. Speltz stated that would be a possibility, but expanding to
the south would interfere with the turning radius for the parking
area along the north side of the property line. This driveway is
also the only entrance they have to the parking area.
Mr. Kleinow stated that with the proposed plan, they will only lose
one parking space. If they expanded to the south, �hey would`lose
about six parking spaces. With the proposed plan, they will lose
�
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 3
a little green area in front, but they will be putting on a new
modern front which should add to the aesthetics of the area.
Mr. Speltz stated they have been in this location for 22 years and
have not done a major facelift to the building in that time, and
now is a good time. He believed what they are proposing will look
good.
Ms. McPherson stated she had done some research of other front yard
setbacks in this area. Maple Lanes is very close to the street,
but it was built in 1958 and there is no record of a variance.
Video Update (former Chanticleer Pizza) meets or exceeds the 80
foot setback, and Sinclair Station is about 45 feet from the
street.
Mr. Kleinow stated that, currently, they have a large sign out
front. If they take down the sign and put nice lettering on the
entrance to the building, would that help aesthetically? Maybe
that is something the City can consider.
Mr. Speltz stated the owners of the Miller Funeral Home have�no
problem with the variance request. Tom Brickner did have an
objection initially, but after the plan was explained to him, he
no longer objected to it.
Mr. Speltz stated that as far as losing green area, part of the
front yard landscaping is rock, so with the addition, they are
looking at only losing about 1 foot of green area.
Ms. Savage stated that if the variance is approved, will this
satisfy the petitioners' need for more space or will they have to
look for another site in the near future?
Mr. Speltz stated they are outgrowing their space, but this
addition would be fine for at least another 10-15 years. They like
this area, they have built up a good reputation in this area, and
people know where they are.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:55 P.M.
Ms. Smith stated she would be inclined to vote in favor of the
variance request. The property is very well kept. The additional
7 feet would not make much difference in the appearance of the
property, other than to upgrade it. She did not see that a 7 foot
variance would create any problems and did not think the building
will look much different after the expansion. �
Ms. Beaulieu stated she agreed with Ms. Smith.
6L
APPEAL3 COMMISSION MEETING. SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 4
Dr. Vos stated he did have some difficulty with the hardship,
because it is essentially a hardship of economics and growth.
There isn't anything unique about this property that makes it
possible only to go out to the front, except how the building was
designed originally, which is that the waiting or reception area
cannot be in the rear or on the side of the building. He stated
he will vote in favor of the variance for the following reasons:
(1) Skyline Veterinary Hospital has been a good neighbor in the
City of Fridley; (2) There are no objections from the property
owners of the buildings to the south and north; and (3) This is not
a large expansion, and they are really only going from 55 feet to
48 feet.
Ms. Savage stated she agreed. It is a very attractive building and
the area in front of the building is well kept. She agreed that.
this amount of expansion is not going to have a big impact on the
appearance or aesthetics of the space.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend to City
Cauncil approval of variance request, VAR #91-29, by Skyline
Veterinary Hospital, per Section 205.15.03.C.1 of the Fridley City
Code, to reduce the required front yard setback from 80 feet to 48
feet to allow the construction of an addition, on Lot 2, Block 1,
Herwal Second Addition, the same being 6220 Highway 65 N.E.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on October
7, 1991. �
2.
SUZANNE HANLEY•
Per Section 205.07.03.D.(3 .(a) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the required rear rd setback from 25 feet to 18.7
feet, to allow the construc ion of a three-season porch, on
the west 130 feet of Lot 31, uditor's Subdivision No. 77, the
same being 132 Alden Circle E.
MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by\Ms. Smith, to open the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHA RPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING PEN AT 8:00 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated this property is 1 cated at the intersection
of Alden Circle and 71 1/2 Way, nort of the Riverwood Park
Subdivision. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling,
as are all surrounding parcels.
6M
� �
�
.
Community Development Department
I_'�_ _z_�� � 1 �
City of Fridley
DATE: October 17, 1991
1� � .
TO: William Burns, City Manager �'
,
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving a Change in Street Names,
from Viron Road to Highway 65 East Service
Drive
Historv
Viron Road between Fireside Drive and Osborne Road on the east side
of Highway 65 was constructed in 1966. It was named Viron Road
after a name of a company that was building structures/ homes to
be placed on the moon. Strite Anderson also located in this
general vicinity and adopted the 7585 Viron Road address. Viking
Chevrolet, the chiropractic clinic, and Bass End Trail Shop used
Highway 65 street names. Our records indicate that a Highway 65
street name was also assigned to Rocky Rococo's; however, they are
using a Viron Road address.
This issue was brought to the
approximately 10 years ago, and
that time objected to the street
Current Request
attention of the City Council
the owner of Strite Anderson at
name change.
Attached are letters to Supreme Tool Inc., Rocky Rococo Pizza, and
Kurt Manufacturing Company, who bought the Strite Anderson building�
three years ago. Supreme Tool leases space from Kurt
Manufacturing. Mr. Mozman from Supreme Tool contacted us on
September 18, 1991 and stated that he had no objection to the
street name change. We have not heard from Kurt Manufacturing or
Rocky Rococo. We will try and obtain verbal confirmation of an
opinion one way or another prior to Council action.
Recommendation
Given that there is a street name confusion along this particular
road and given that other service drives along Highway 65 and
University Avenue are named similarly, staff recommends that the
City Council approve the proposed resolution changing the name of
Viron Road to Highway 65 East Service Drive. `
BD/dn
M-91-760
r�
�.
A
. !Jl . �/ • ^ �� :
i; �1
e f���'1_ 1 :
•'S�
�.3604)
I', �s�lPc�%Lvinbii <o�„Psny
J
fa)
I �ood �
%Q�//1!�/C
c
�:
��
Q
��
--�_ �
��
�
ry
� �
�
�1)
21 t,
� ��
;
: I7 `� • • . �" �I'A !,� � •"' � ....y �I �_ 7 . '
2o i[
!1� . . . .:.-.:-,w� ��i � �.-!o°— _ _ _200_ _
i �: � S�eZmen�G �; .* i:~ /� � f� � � '�` CITY ��
�so o � <iri/L Hic�ran � � � � /� y � `' • I . ��� � � 0
. � �) ;, Z (, � �•�i`,+ , y� � ` �/2�� �b�j
�� 'b ; �� ,�`� ,� � :; 3 2 FR1
,e � �+J ,' /1 �
: o .�o � � M ; ��..,.s o� .� �: �� � A DE
/. .. ,• �J . 00 200
{ .� �� 470.20
1 ����` . . . . ~ / 1 �
i �
�I
�
z
r
a
S'
� �
_
Z
�
��
F-
� W
Q
�
1
4
�
j ri�ls-s��
L; � �
u s/
�h�s��fJ �►'
.,
Q
:
,:_��,.,
�
Za0 31{ i
�" k
�
•✓Jl Jr SJ �'
. �X
�: � �
���
3 �j�!' � (i�•
�� �
� �i ' ..
ff J! � ��� °!
1 �
r
�
4 ��
9
(� so/
/rr �►-�. (c j
� f�.
� ��
r;
(z4o)
5��� 1
'� DEVELOPM
,y
, o
'4 L. . . . 670. 7 A
��)
(L �io/
Yir�a� Rrd!
'%�r0/ �
�`� � /,�ye/
-�' ,
_ �_
suo��o f
A Ce�i/d E
� ,cb���sn �
N.�soJ
N �p�'lL,
0
,o
h �,q _ FIRESt
. -°�f
�
� �
I (4J % � (
JJ7./o ^
(� % A I
�
� �
_ �-
�
�
�r� o� �e. A .�iooif
; sSlo% �
IL1� *I
�
I
/
(4Zo
�tli//v� � Ovim<l{i
�Q� I3 �d
.
_
_
CtTY OF
FRtDLEY
FR[DLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FR[DLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287
October 8, 1991
Mr. John W. Kvidera
Kurt Manufacturing Co.
7585 Viron Road NE
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Proposed Street Name Change From Viron Road To Highway 65 East
Service Drive
Dear Mr. Kvidera:
I have enclosed a copy of a proposed resolution that the City
Council will be considering at a public hearing meeting on October
21, 1991 in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center. This proposed
resolution will change the name of Viron Road to Highway 65 East
Service Drive.
The City would like to hear from you regarding this proposed
change, as you are one of the businesses that use Viron Road as
their mailing address. The remaining businesses along Viron Road
already use Highway 65 as their mailinq address.
If the proposed resolution is� adopted, the change wouI.d be
effective on or before January l, 1992.
We would like to have your opinion on this proposed change, before
the public hearing on October 21, 1991.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free
to contact me at 571-3450.
Sin rely,
�
�
/ t,, J
DARREL G.CLARK
Chief Building Official
DGC/mh
Enc: 1
[i ��
r
�`
_
�
CITY OF
FR! DLEY
,
r, �
l ,�' � �
1 4�,;;
���i
�
,-
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (6l2) 571-1287
September 17, 1991
Supreme Tool Inc
7585 Viron Road NE
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Proposed Street Name Change From Viron Road To Highway 65 East
Service Drive
Dear Sirs:
I have enclosed a copy of a proposed resolution that the City
Council will be considering at a publ�.c hearing meeting on October
7, 1991 in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center. This proposed
resolution will change the name of Viron Road to Highway 65 East
Service Drive.
The City would like to hear from you regarding this proposed
change, as you are one of the two businesses that use Viron Road
as their mailing address. The remaining businesses along Viron
Road already use Highway 65 as their mafling address.
If the proposed resolution is adopted, the change would be
effective on or before January l, 1992.
We would like to have your opinion on this proposed chanqe, before
the public hearing on October 7, 1991.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please f�el free
to contact me at 571-3450.
Sincerely,
� ����``�
C��L'1.,� '! �` ;: 1
DARREL G.CLARK
Chief Building Official
DGC/mh
Enc: 1
7C
�
r°
_
_
CITY OF
FRI DLEY
FRIDLEY MUN[CIPAL CENTER • 643I UNIVERS[TY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287
September 17, 1991
Rocky Rococo Pizza
7601 Viron Road NE
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Proposed Street Name Change From Viron Road To Highway 65 East
Service Drive
Dear Sirs:
I have enclosed a copy of a proposed resolution that the City
Council will be considering at a public hearing meeting on October
7, 1991 in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center. This proposed
resolution will change the name of Viron Road to Highway 65 East
Service Drive.
The City would like to hear from you reqarding this proposed
change, as you are one of the two businesses that use Viron Road
as their mailing address. The remaining businesses along Viron
Road already use Highway 65 as their ma.iling address.
If the proposed resolution is adopted, the change would be
effective on or before January 1, 1992.
We would like to have your opinion on this proposed change, before
the public hearing on October 7, 1991.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free
to contact me at 571-3450.
Sincerely,
��.
.. ,� �� , , .�
�� , /�-� l
DARREL G.CLARK
Chief Building Official
DGC/mh
Enc: 1
7D
�
BUILDING INSPBCTZON DIVISION MEMO
�IO TO: John Flora, Public Works Director
a Da m nity Development Director
1�M0 FROM: re C arc, h ef Building Official
MEMO DATE: August 28, 1991
REGARDING: Change in Street Names
Please find attached a proposed resolution which when adopted by
the City Council will change Viron Road to Highway 65 East Service
Drive NE.
This proposed change has been discussed with the Fire &. Police
Departments and it is agreed that since the majority of the
businesses use Highway 65 in their advertising, as their address,
that we should change the street name to avoid any confusion.
This resolution would affect Friendly Chevrolet -7501 Hwy 65 NE;
Supreme Tool Inc - 7585 Viron Rd NE; Bass Pro Shop-Trails End -7597
Hwy 65 NE; Rocky Rococo Pizza -7601 Viron Rd NE; and Fridley
Chiropractic Clinic - 7699 Hwy f5 NE.
I would recommend that this resolution be adopted as soon as
possible so that we can notify the businesses and get the City
records to agree on business addresses.
DGC/mh
ATTACH: 1
7E
RESOLDTION NO. 1991
RESOLDTION RSNAMING VIRUN ROAD TO HIGHWAY 65
EAST SERViCE DRIVE
WHEREAS, Viron Road runs generally in a north-south direction on
the east side of Highway 65; and
WHEREAS, address numbers are being used that would be consistent
with addresses on the East side of Highway 65; and
WHEREAS, a majority of businesses on Viron Road already use Highway.
65 as their business address; and
WHEREAS, the Police and Fire Departments of the City of Fridley
concur with the proposed name change for the general safety and
welfare of the area residents;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Fridley:
1. That all of Viron Road be renamed Highway 65 East Service
Drive; and �
2. The City Finance Director is hereby directed to register
said street name change with the appropriate authorities of
Anoka County and the United States Postal Service as well as
other affected parties; and
3. That this change will take effect immediately.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY
THIS DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - Mayor
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - City Clerk
m
7F
CITY OF FRIDLEY
M E M O R A N D O M
TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ��
�
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: MINNESOTA LAWFIIL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT APPLICATIONS
FOR THE LION�S CLUB OF FRIDLEY IN MAPLE LANES
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1991
Attached is a resolution approving the application for a Minnesota
Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the Lion's Club of Fridley in
Maple Lanes, at 6310 Highway 65 Northeast. The Public Safety
Director, James P. Hill, has approved the gambling permit. The
Minnesota State Statutes requires the adoption of a resolution
approving or denying any type of gambling of permit.
0
8
RESOLUTION NO. - 1991
RESOLIITION IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA
LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT TO THE LION�S CLUB OF
FRIDLEY
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has been served with a copy of an
Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the
Lion�s Club of Fridley; and
WHEREAS, the location of the Premise Permit for the Lion�s Club of
Fridley is the Maple Lanes at 6310 Highway 65; and
WHEREAS, the City oi 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 Pr.emise Permit
to the Lion�s Club of Fridley.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
: �
FOR BOARD USE ONLY
LG214 BA3E # _
r
nr�ro'� PP � - - �
� ,, .
_, ,
,. FEE
. Minnesota Lawful Gambiing � CHECK I
: Premises Permit Application �-. Part l� of 2,:: � �"�
- DATE=`
,1 s, ' � . . .
�
.
:� iaGl�.::Q.R �
.;
'� s� .x 1 �:�855 Of Pf9f11�SA5 P8R11�t -.� '� � d�?�-�% � �rv' .:� s � a
� i8fl8W8� ' � � ; v ,.. ,-. � ' : (C�IOC�C Ofl@� . � '� � ; ,
. . � ..
,. . _ . . .
Organizadon base I'�cense number i3 OU ,3U� [] ? A'($�400) P�1-tatis; 6pboards. paddlewheels. raffles, bingo �
Premises permit numbe� U d� � B($250) Pull-ta�. tipboards. paddlewheels, raffles
❑ Nev�► ❑ C (3200) 8ingo only
- • Q D ($150) Raffles only
§�°"� . .
� .�' � -
Name of Organiza6on - � ` : , : � ., �
�
. � �.,
1--1 U N�.1 G L �!S :; �j F,:�R 1 n C.£ `( -
Bus ness Address of Organization. -$treet or P. O Box (Do not use the address of your gambGn9 �9�I -
p /( ��I �L '.� .'1 :fr / i�
� �E`I MN 3's�u3�- N�k c�l.� �7f C'
Name of chief executive officer (cannot be you� gambGng manage� Title DayGme phone number
�3F �NiE �.(.S.S n_ NE T�`TE � R�SIDEMi� (G��) S7/-a �3�
Bingo Occasions :
If applying for a class A or C permit. flll in days and beginning & ending hours of bingo oocasions:
No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your o� anizatton per week. " -
Day Beginning/Ending Houis � Day Beg[nntng/Endiag Hours Day Heginntng /Ending Hours -
t,o to tn
� � � _
to If bingo will not be coaducted. check here (�)
'"T^
Is the premises located within ay Gmits? [�j Yes O No If no, is township � organized 0 unorganized p uninoorpora�d
City and Counry where gambling premises is located OR Township and Cou�ty where gambling premises is bcated if outside of ary Gmits
� ('�i Dt-E'� �4 i'vc�KA. ( �R (O��Y M AJ �J43 �
Name and address of legal owne� of premises City State T.ip Code
f R�fJL�Y (ZEc��A-'tt��►.-cs� R�lc,�. cv - F R� O�.i�Y M w ,r.�`�,/3a
Does.your organization own the buil�ng where the gambling nfiil be oonducted? p YES � NO
If no, attach the folbwing:
• a copy of the lease (form LG202) with terms for at least one year. �
' a copy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions, showi�g what portion is being leased.
- A lease and sketch are not required for Class D applications.
Raaress c:�ry atate cip coae �
�v� c� `% A 1u�KA � 1' �(� I�Lf�Y MN� 3��Y3 1
: :3
Minnesota Lawful Gambiing
Premise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2
eank Name Bank Acaount Number
��2io��� s�-r�T� ��wr� :�ya�y�1
n ress iy tate p
.M�-
�tLt.�A►�. �NIL�IAr+�S G7dd P4a - A «�v� �v:�. FRiD�.��l ,nn�;3`,��13� �4ssls�r- G��n.M�f
i4-R l F� F-(A � P�Z � G t-� y� n�a Ka- s r. �v �, � Q �Di�Y n�: � s,�-`I �a. �ssr s7. �A�. �n,a��;
cxamdnng site eutnonzauon •1 am the chief executive officer of the organization;
1 hereby oonsent that local law enforcemeM officers. the :.� �ume full responsibil'ity for the fair and lawful ope�a-
board or agents of the board. or the commissioner,of: ;: , �� of alt aativities to be conduded;
revenus or public safery� o� agents of the oommissioners, ,,� �� familiarize+myseff with the laws of Minnesota�
may enter the premises to enfo�ce ttie law. � _
� Bank Records Information � goveming lawful gambling and rules of the board and
agree. if licensed, to abide by those laws and n�les,
The board is authorized to insped the bank records of the including amendments to.them;
gambting accous►t whenevec necessary to fu�{I ,. .�y ��es in �application informatwn will be submitted
:. �.
requirements of current gambling rules and law �: ` �
': to the board and local unit of govemment within 10 days
� Oath _ of the change; and
I dedare that: , � •I understand that failure to provide required info�mation
•I have read this application and all information submitted o� praviding false or misleading information may result in
to the board is true, accurate and complete; the denial or revocation of the license.
•all other required information has been fully disdosed; . _
Signature f chief executive officer Date
� o.,/ —9/
�d: y�'<;��.xw.•<:�:;��,��, •� � �. :t• `
{ 't � <. ....• <. fi.. t•..•.: f . !A
- l��."�.:�7!"e�2t1T. . . - �C' .• ', .
, ..
.�. . l�
.,
. � A��rf�»x '�l/.ox.» ,,,s✓ �>r,:+•.
. .a.. w.o-.c ./.o:. .r.�::�r' svws. .. .. .
.. .. �axanC��»wd6aotx�aaw . .
. . . . , . . . - .
. . . . . . . . . . . . ,.
.. . .: , .. �" .
.� �. .. . . . .
. , ��,:� .. .. _... ...< � .. .., . . .,. �
•.
' ..'_ :.. ' .... if�° :;� -^ y i: ". i ':ZLc'� D' 1� i .., ✓�''�t ,r"s`Kt �. . _ ... 1 7.... :.. ..
1: The c' `must si n tfns �' '� 4 A cocw of the bcal unrf'of qovemmeriYs re�lutbn ao=
ity g appiicatwn rf the gamblmg prem.. S� provinq this`a��i�cat%n must be�aftacFied to th�s'a�piication
ises, is located within aty I�mits.. .X .- � � f 3� #�����{� , ,
..
,<��;..��-5 if th�s appficaUo�. �s denied by the local untt of government, �
;
2. The county "AND township" must sgn th�s applicat�on d�� �� �.- -
� ,,; d should`not be submitted to the Gambling Controi Board.
the gambling premises is located wdhin a township. �' �- �
3. The bcal unit government (city or county) must pass a Township• By sgnature bebw, the township acknowledges
resolution specifically approving or denying this application. that the organization is applying for a premises permit within
township limits.
Cit * or Count *" �,� . � � Townshl� ** �xt f �, _ � ; " r� -
� ; :
i � ty Oi CiOU►Ity 8(Il@ s� " e � �ct.rr � `r ��x 's ��k� �w 1z 'v _. ,p�A Af �'�.E! �s'`'h� �" � S � 7: g� �;i� �' `:
� �� ��r � �������a�v �Toumsh+��p Name �-�� ,. �. € ,. �. �.. ,� �
� Yk f �y..- � i '�, ; r '�,,.�a�:4 f �� r '+b�'�..'�.�wi,T�. ' x'wr��"�?s ��,i-.i�1�# � Ys:- c+Y� r�� "�*.",1, ���:y s`:
'. �•.. � �; .; . ,
. ` �` �. .. 4 .y, "� . i,sy[' 'it�,t`+,T4k y"'ty,n,.., ,�' yS'�'��'3.i�'y�... �.L 3$7 �„�f ..:�• ��.,s,� 'n r _
�' ,. � rv .. , '.ti, ' V �. . ... ...� ... r. ''.;,r"kfi'1.{a-<�., zC� F E;.i�-�d^-.2�.?t. ��. ^=.r u�.:,�Y«ea�) �'�n:�•< ^;`N3'��d:. }x�..���.,�-?s�;.'.r} ����+`� � +t.",�'�,'i.!.
-�, ..<,-t.'pd�'ix �� .� �s .q��tyQ.tr,.. � . a.rt � x aA�:t§t� 3�' t:.Kx z$.� �.-e4�s-t y�y��. . i � ,
. �
.
� Sign �k on reoe' _ g a caUon :w � sY r�'�€'�5�.�',.�.��. �S�gnature of person reoe�nn9 ePP��raUon`" F`, �.`�.
�- a r " ` > -� . { ' , � = ti � . �,� } � � r��� � ;
. t_ � � �,:r ,r � ' �5 �. � X S . � ,1. ^3.}r ! '4 3 �F iL .. Y �nC,`.., �is F� k�� ,+r �s'j r
% .
�! . :.:.. _ � / � ,aa4.�,..:::.r € G� �„� 5 7� .��:'' �� .Ft',�i�;��"� � x.d��',�{,.zn' �i �:;.
'> r � . - '" � '# r � � t: R.s i
��: T� * ,°.r,�-< - . . .
. Date Recewed �� , Title�� � Date Received
," , � ,
�� I � '6�`�� ` ' 'I '
` i�
Refer t�, the instructwns for required attachments �� {
, %, ,
. . _ • . . . . f� Y I .
. 4} . _ . . . ... . . � .
. .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .
. .. _'� . �r. .. 1 ? , n . , . _...
. . . _�.'Cr . .. . .
u. . . . . . _ . . . , i . . . . .
Ma�l to. •:. Gambl(ng Conuol Board. .. , . � ;� .� � r � "= x� f
,
Rosewood Plaza SoutFi� 3rd Floor �` �� , � y,'': `� ' s. ���' _ ' x * ;
` 1711 W. County Road B '��� ` ` ` `'
Roseville� MN 55113 r.8� . LG214(Part 2) .
,
.
. (Rev7r29+�1j
.
.
.
_
.
CITY OF FRIDLEY
M E M O R A N D U M
/� .
� �d
TO: WILLIAM A. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �• i
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
3UBJECT: MINNESOTA LAWFQL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT APPLICATIONS
FOR THE LION�S CLOB OF FRIDLEY IN ROPERS LOIINGE &
RESTAURANT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1991
Attached is a resolution approving the application for a Minnesota
Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the Lion's Club of Fridley in
Ropers Lounge and Restaurant, Inc., at 3720 East River Road. The
Public Safety Director, James P. Hill, has approved the gambling
permit. The Minnesota State Statutes requires the adoption of a
resolution approving or denying any type of gambling of permit.
9
,
�
RESOLUTION NO. - 1991
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA
LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT TO THE LION�S CLIIB OF
FRIDLEY
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has been served with a copy of an
Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the
Lion�s Club of Fridley; and
WHEREAS, the location of the Premise Permit for the Lion�s Club of
Fridley is Ropers Lounge and Restaurant at 3720 East River Road;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has not found any reason to restrict
the location for the charitable gambling operation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City
of Fridley approves the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit
to the Lion�s Club of Fridley.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK
�
9A
LG214
n��►
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
Premises Permit Application - Part 1 of 2
� fienewal
Organization base I'�cense number R �0 � DCn
Premises peRnR number O ��
�
FOR BOARD USE ONLY
BASE #
PP #
FEE
CHECK
INITIALS
oa�
Class of premises permit
(check one)
❑ A($400) Pull-tabs. tipboards. paddlewheels. raifles, bingo
� B($250) Pull-tabs. tipboards. Paddlewheels, ratfles
❑ C ($Z00) &ngo only
❑ � ($150) Raffles oniy
,
�y°". :s'�:: • .
�'� -. .:��.I�`�.: :OQ.�'�'C�� > .
� ; �.: ..,.�-:.:::;;:
Name of Ocganization .
�1drv's c�ur� dF F�IncEy
Business Address of Organization - Street or P. O Box (Do not use d�e address of your gambling manage►)
�`( n� N .s--.�- y 3�
xecudve officer (cannot be your gambGng manager) Ti
Daytime phone number
�� �! t� .� � ' eZ t� :3 �
If applying for a class A or C peimit. flll in days and beginning & endiug hours of bingo occasions:
No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your or�anization per week.
Day Begtnning/Ending Houra Day Begtnntng/Ending Hours Day Begi�uiing /Ending Hours
to
to to
tn to to
_- to � If biago �vill not be coriducted. checi here �:_
_ t- - -
� ' %."':nf?}:•::4:ti{�._ .r!.vV:.:i:�'"4iiti:'•i'v:^"f.•:4rr'rXeY}:tititi•"•%'.:•::ti-0'v:v"t5.-U�' A4.' V--- r 4:4�'� . Yf --- :lNti_ " - R- Yrff . - . •� a .. -
ame o esta ishment w re gam ing nnl treet ss (do not use a post o �ce box num
R� �F�s ���� N�E � R�. �� : 3,�d �l�ST �'lU� I� Rn
ts the premises located within ary limits? L�J Yes O iVo If no, is township � organized 0 uncxganized p uninaorporated
Ciry and County where gambling premises is located OR Township and County where gambNng premises is bcated if outside of ary Gmits
��Z I� ��`� 1� n�u K A � F'R ! ID � E`i M M ��'rY 3,�
Name and address of legal owner of premises Ciry . State Zip Code
`�dRIC �� IUI�� t,ow a���14.�A�r•n,e�x,u� a.v,e�c�,� - M P� � r�N �s t�y��9�� �.
`; Does your ofganization"own the buldng where the gai
�: if no. attach the following:_'
. �
_ S Copy Of 1hB IB85e {fVrm ��.xvc� w�u�: wrms wr
"' • a oopy of a'skefch'of the floo� plan with dunens
:>_ . . .
-; .; A lease and sketch are not'required for Class D�a
p' YES �;.[$I..NO'�'
.:;. �.,,�;� L r . .,
t leasi one``year : ` ..r. x
�is; showu�g�what pohion is being tease
P6cations'�';:. " ' ,
,�.r..-�,:..-.,,..:�,�__�,,.;...,.;.,..:...:-:m:.:. �,,..:...�...:s:,..:....:
..... ..... .r . .:..... ...:.... ..... • ...... .:......,.... ....:.. . . . . , . . .. ..... .
A ress Ctry tate p ,-
Co 7��r P(.A ZA Cu ��rF �.r �� �R9DL�`i. M N'�.: 3'�4 3� . .
9B
.
,.
- � � ` `` Minriesota Lawful Gambiing
Premise, �Permit Application .- Part 2 of 2 `
... � - � �' xi� r'r
^ :S�i.t.'� �,";���a '��f$?�.r �
.,.... . .. . . . _
•., .' . ��: �. ..., .. i� �, ., . • .
y: t �y� ; +r.�.•.�. ..
- � .MK S . .{A� : .i47�R ' :� ; !� . •:,�:. r��
Bank Neme - ` �`" ,6ank AocouM Nuniber ;: y t �
F.l� l D 1.�E Y �'S TA- ^l'E Y x�(3A�i K,. 3� f.l 9' p G ;��. �-�. �� ,, �.�
ress . . _ � � �,:: �ry tate . p .�t � c r
, � . . " \ , 3 .: �y .P .' �'- S� J Y
- --� r3 is V:�► �v',��RS �i � Y '«�,4=�� ' '�iv�F�� ° .�jK�l�� Ot,3 `�`- =M K `�ts�3'`�! "�.�� �' i�
: `S ' ox � . mia �'� .".u•f, .v."{}.'�wc rrss.so� :Kc'<v vN. ..ty _ �
. C�- . . . . . . . .a�w ,�� F����• . ' ' a,.,_ _ .
•.�.'' , ` ... .. r � 4 } � .' +' . �„ '4x. �� r � -it� � �,�'I..�Y'!
. 4 �+ � 7 =` '�� _ - ::�. . � r > t `� � r't.: '� i:�7' i ri %�4 +
„ � �Y •{ a {� J�` ( 'f5��l� �:�;: '-�F �_�:' C4 " : �__. � �: :� 1 T � .:>' i'�Hn,y4 ...
'W ��I:I�AMk :�,V�'(LL'IAMS, .4,G7o"d PLA214 Cf�` Vfi NE.�F�eID�'�Y MN SJ'4 1.. `ASStiT��"iNI
,
,., . ,
�L-�l�! l-�AUPE2T <aL����{• �.IVUk� ST: IVE. F�21DLE`( :MN :S3Y32� /�1sTGA� �F
. � A' . . .' .: Y ' � ' ... ., .. .
..' '.
. AY.�::�'��,�.,�'����,.�rf.��` . .,_ ...
Gam , g-S te Au � o �, on �.��.� ��s t 1.� -:
I hereby�conseM that-loca� faw�enforcemeM offioers. the `�r -
': board or agems;of the tioard. or the commiss�oner of K k=
_.' revenue or public sa`fety,`or agents of the oommisswn`s"rs. =:
� �4 r.-: x t
may ente� the premises to enforce the.faw �°; ����``° �
��, -� ;
Bank Records Info=iaatioa . � ' �' '
The board is authorized to i�sped the bank��ecords of the
gambting accouM wheneve� necessary to fu�ill
requirements of cunent gambiing rules and law.
Oath
1 dedare that:
•I have read this appiication and all information submitted
to the board is true, aocurate and oomplete;
•all other required information has besn fully disdosed;
Signature of chief ex ive officer °
�_ �����---��
1. The city •must sign this application 'rf the gambling prem-
ises is bcated wfthin aty limits.
2. The county ••AND township•• must sign this application if
the gambling premises is bcated within a township. ..
3 The locai unft overn nt '
, yv�nrnm� www� yamoung anv ru�es oi [ne ooara ana �.� x
;; : .. . -,. ;
agiee, if lioensed� to abide by those laws and riiles. ='
including amendments to them;
•any changes in application information will be submitted
to the board and bcal unit of government within 10 days -
of the change; and :
•I understand that failure to provide required information
or providing faise or misleading information may resuft in
the deniai or revocatwn of the t�cense.
Date �
�o - � y— 9/�
4. � coRy of the local unR of governmeM's re�lution au-'
orovinq this a��tication must be attached to this a�plicati�n
5. If this application is denied by the bcal unft of government,
it should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Board.
g me (c�ty or county) must pass a Township: By signature below, the township acknowledges
resolution specificaliy approving or denying this application. that the organization is applying for a premises permit within `
township limits.
City*_ or County** Townshid'*
. j , �
i
. _ _ `.
������
r '
a li tion - �
G--�DLi
Date Fieoeived
/ l� :/ � `- %
Reter td the instrucxions for required attachments.
Mail to: Gambiin� Control Boa�d
Rosewood Plaza South, 3rd Floor
1T11 W. County Road B
Rosevllle� MN 55113
Township Name
Signature of person reoeivin9 application
Tide Date Received
1
9C
LG214(Part 2)
lR��nast)
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING,�OCTOBER 2, 1991
�����������������������_�����������������������������������������
CALL TO ORDER•
Chairperson Betzold called the October 2, 1991, Planning Commission
meeting to order�at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL-
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Don Betzold,
Larry Kuechle
Brad Sielaff
Sue Sherek
Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba,
(for Diane Savage), Connie Modig,
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Jim Hill, Public Safety Director
Steve Billings, Councilmember
William Burns, City Manager
Randy Thompson, 1115 - 2nd Avenue South, Mpls.
See attached list
APPROVAL OF AUGUST 21, 1991, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES•
MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the August
21, 1991, Planning Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
l. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE A
LICENSE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE REPAIR GARAGES (PROPOSED CHAPTER
18 :
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to open the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:31 P.M.
Ms. Dacy stated that in July 1991, the City Council approved an
ordinance establishing a moratorium on the issuance of special use
permits for repair garages. The purpose of the moratorium was to
provide staff with the ability to research and develop an ordinance
to evaluate whether or not a business license for repair garages
should be passed by the Council. The ordinance creating the
moratorium stipulated that a public hearing be conducted by the
10
PLANNING COMMISSTON MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 2
Planning Commission within 60 days of the effective date of that
ordinance. The effective date was August 15, 1991. As an
ordinance, the City Council by charter and state statute, is also
required to conduct at least two readings of the proposed
ordinance. The moratorium ordinance requires that the moratorium
is lifted within 180 days, so the City Council has until February
15, 1992, to finish this process.
Ms. Dacy stated the Council was aware that the impact of this
ordinance would be discussed by the existing repair garage owners;
therefore, this item was placed on the Planning Commission agenda
in order to give a public hearing forum and opportunity for all
those businesses affected to give testimony and comments on this
particular proposal.
Ms. Dacy stated the intent of the ordinance is summarized in four
points:
1. To establish uniform regulati.ons for auto body repair garages.
2. To enable the City (as it does with the liquor license,
massage parlor license, and sexually--oriented business
license) to perform personal and criminal background
investigations on the operator.
3.
�
To provide a basis for the City to deny a license based on
illegal activities.
To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of
Fridley.
Ms. Dacy stated that
example, a business
Paul, the business c
controls are merely
and building codes.
the City Council became
was denied a license in
ould locate in Fridley.
those of zoning and land
aware that if, for
Minneapolis or St.
The City's existing
use controls, fire,
Ms. Dacy stated other automotive related uses that require some
type of license are junkyards and/or salvage yards, motor vehicle
rental agencies, retail gas sales, and used motor vehicle sales.
Chapter 108 of the Fridley Fire Code has extensive regulations for
storage of flammable liquids and spray booths.
Ms. Dacy stated staff identified 47 businesses in Fridley that are
related in some way to the automobile business. Quite a few of
those businesses have contacted City staff. Mr. Phil Leffel of
MAACO Auto Body organized a group of repair garage owners who have
hired an attorney to draft some ordinance language for the City to
consider. Mr. Leffel has identified at least 15 concerns and
questions which are included in the agenda packet. °
1 ',
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 3
Ms. Dacy stated each business on the mailing list received a copy
of the proposed ordinance. Jim Hill, Public Safety Director, is
also at the meeting to act as a resource and answer questions.
Ms. Dacy stated that, in summary, there are two overall issues that
face the City on this particular issue:
1. Should the City even have an ordinance? Some have commented
that this is an extra layer of regulation.
2. If the City does have an ordinance, how can they reasonably
accomplish the purposes referred to earlier?
Ms. Dacy stated the Commission has a first draft of the ordinance.
It was based on the existing Minneapolis ordinance. Staff realizes
there are areas that need to be changed and that additional changes
will be suggested. Therefore, staff is not recommending that the
Commission approve this particular ordinance., Staff is
recommending that the Commission consider the testimony from people
in the audience, the Commission of�fer its suggestions and comments,
and staff will take all this input, meet with the attorney for the
repair garage owners, and propose an alternative ordinance for
consideration by the Council.
Mr. Betzold asked how close the proposed ordinance is to the
Minneapolis ordinance. Is it more restrictive or less restrictive?
Mr. Hill, Public Safety Director, stated that the Minneapolis'
ordinance as it relates specifically to this issue of repair
garages is probably less in length. The authority that lies within
it for both cities is probably about the same. There are certain
sections of the Minneapolis that they chose not to use that are
more restrictive or more inclusive. The proposed ordinance is
probably more fine-tuned, only because it is the most recent
ordinance of this type.
Mr. Hill stated staff was directed by the City Council to draft
this ordinance. Many hours of staff time was spent on it. The
original draft included parts of several other City ordinances such
as Chapter 31, Pawn Shops; Chapter 127, Sexually-Oriented
Businesses; Chapter 19, Used Motor Vehicles; Chapter 205, Zoning;
Chapter 123, Junk Vehicles; Chapter 125, Saunas and Massage
Parlors; Minneapolis Chapter 317, Motor Vehicle Repair Garages; and
Minneapolis Chapter 362, Intoxicating Liquor.
Mr. Hill stated that upon review of the draft ordinance, the
Community Development Department had addi�ional comments about what
should be incorporated into this ordinance. The City Attorney's
office reviewed the draft ordinance and had additional suggestions.
They used the recently adopted Chapter 31, Pawn Shop ordinanc�e, as
a draft as it related to the mechanics of the application, the
definitions as applicable, and all the requirements of the
1 :
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2. 1991 PAGE 4
application. Investigation and recommendation of the Public Safety
Director is different from the pawn shop ordinance in that he or
his designee would make a recommendation to approve a license
unless one of the former conditions were found or believed to be
true. It is Council's decision, not his, whether or not a license
is issued and whether or not a license should be revoked or
suspended. No City staff can close a business down as it relates
to this ordinance.
Mr. Hill stated there is concern on the part of one or more members
of Council that more regulations are probably needed on some
businesses, not out of desire, but out of necessity. Police calls
are increasing by 10-15 calls per day. Council became keenly aware
recently that they were without autho�ity and power under the
City's existing ordinances to prohibit any business that operates
motor vehicle repair garages from entering the community, even
though hypothetically, they could be convicted felons. Or, someone
who applied for a license in the City of Minneapolis and under the
Minneapolis' ordinance, has been denied that license, can come
across the border into Fridley and open the business without any
regulation prohibiting it. The City Council felt some
responsibility to•do something to protect the citizens of Fridley
and also to maintain the reputability and honesty of the existing
business people.
Mr. Betzold stated that Mr. Leffel has submitted five comments and
questions regarding the proposed motor vehicle repair garage
licensing ordinance. He would like to identify the provisions and
questions and ask Mr. Hill or Ms. Dacy to respond to each one.
1. Section 18.08.04. GRANTING LICENSES.
No chanqe in ownership, control, or location of a license
shall be permitted except by amendment to the license which
amendment must be approved by the City Council.
Why does the City need to know about the change in ownership or
control of a business and why must an amendment to the license be
approved by the City Council?
Ms. Dacy stated this is a transferability clause. This language
also appears in other ordinances mentioned by Mr. Hill. The
purpose is to be able to know who is going to be operating the
business, and the City wants to be aware of that person,
partnership, or corporation, and through the application process,
the personal and criminal background checks are conducted.
Ms. Dacy stated that regarding why an amendment to the license must
be approved by the Council, again, if the ownership changes, it is
not atypical to see this language in other ordinances. The pu�pose
is to evaluate the proposed corporation, partnership, or person
that will be operating the business.
10C
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991. PAGE 5
Mr. H�11 stated that from the enforcement standpoint, it is
maintaining a paper trail. This requirement is in the Pawn Shop
ordinance, and he believed it is in the Sexually-Oriented Business
ordinance.
2. Section 18.11.01. INVESTIGATiON AND RECOMMENDATION OF PQBLiC
SAFETY DIRECTOR.
The Public Safety Director shall recommend approval of the
issuance or a license by the City to an applicaut within 45
days after receipt of an application unless the Director finds
one or more of the fallowinq to be true:
(C) An applicant has failed to provide information reasonably
necessary for issuance of the license or has falsely
answered a question or request ior information on the
application form.
What happens if an unintentional mistake is made on the
application?
Ms. Dacy stated the City Attorney has advised her that if the error
was intentional and inconsequential, then probably nothing would
occur. However, if the Public Safety Director feels it was
intentional and material, it may be grounds to take an extra look
at the license. Again, the Council has to ultimately approve any
action.
3. Section 18.11:O1.C. INVESTIGATION AND RECOMMENDATION OF
PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR.
The Public Safety Director shall recommend approval of the
issuance or a license by the City to an applicant within 45
days after receipt of an application unless the Director finds
one or more of the following to be true:
(I) In the judqment of the Public Safety Director, the
applicant is not the real party in interest or beneficial
owner of the business operated, or to be operated, under
the license.
The ��judqment of the Public Safety Director�� is too broad to
determine whether or not the applicant is not the real party in
interest or beneficial owner of the business to be operated.
Ms. Dacy stated if there appears to be a question, the Council will
make an opportunity at the public hearing for the owner to state
facts for or against whatever is the issue. The Council decides
whether or not to issue a license. -�
10D
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 2. 1991 PAGE 6
Mr. Hill emphasized that the Public Safety Director shall recommend
approval unless a condition exists. If for some reason, the
investigators feels that a condition exists, then he is prohibited
from recommending approval; he simply reports the fact to Council
based upon the evidence, and the Council has to make the final
decision.
4. Section 18.12.03. ISSUANCE OF LICENSE CONDITIONS.
Licenses issued to corporations shall be valid only as long
as there is no change in the officers or ownership interest
of the corporation unless such change is approved by the
Council, in which event said license shall continue in force
until the end of the then current license year. Failure to
report any chanqe in stockholders, officers, or manaqers shall
be qrounds for the revocation of all licenses held by the
corporation. Every corporation licensed under the provisions
of this section shall adopt and maintain in its bylaws a
provision that no transfer of stock is valid or effective
unless approved by the City Council and shall require that all
of its aertificates of stock shall have printed on the face
thereof: ��The transfer of this stock certificate is invalid
unless approved by the City Council of Fridley,�+ and failure
to comply with this provision shall be qrounds for the
revocation of all licenses held by the corporation. The
provisions of this section shall not apply to the issuance of
any license to a corporation whose stock is traded on a public
stock exchange.
Why does the City need to require that businesses adopt and
maintain in its by-laws a provision that no transfer stock is valid
or effective unless approved by the City Council. Is this required
for any other license in the City, for example, a liquor license?
Why does the City have to approve the transfer of a stock
certificate? Why is it grounds for revocation of a license?
Ms. Dacy stated the City Attorney advised her that, again, the
intent is to determine who is operating the business and to
determine the backgrouncl of the operator of the business. To her
understanding, it is not in the liquor ordinance; however, it is
in the recently adopted pawn shop ordinance regarding license.
The City Attorney indicated that the Commission and the Council
might want to entertairi an amendment that would require more than
50% of the stock change. It gets back to the original intent of
trying to determine who is operating the business.
Mr. Hill stated that specific provision was explicitly requested
by at least one member of Council to be placed in the pawn shop
ordinance. That language is directly out of the City of
Minneapolis' long standing intoxicating liquor ordinance. �
10E
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 2 1991 PAGE 7
5. Section 18.13.01. INSPECTION.
An applicant or licensee shall permit representatives of the
Police Department, Health Department, Fire Department, and
the Community Development Department includinq the Buildinq
Inspection Division, to inspect the premises of a Mator
vehicle Repair Garaqe for the purpose of ensurinq compliance
with the law, at any time it is occupied or open for business.
What rules would be used for the inspection permitted under
18.13.01? City staff will need to address this.
Ms. Dacy stated this will have to be verified with the City
Council, but internally in discussing how to administer this
ordinance, staff is intending to propose that a number of these
shops have already received a special use permit and a file is
maintained on that. If the business is�in compliance, someone from
the Community Development Department may not have to go out and
make an inspection.
Ms. Dacy stated there are very strict codes regarding the paint
booths. Again, if the City knows the business is up to code, then
there may not be a need for an inspection.
Ms. Dacy stated that as far as the Building Code is concerned, all
the existing repair garage owners were issued a certificate of
occupancy. If the City staff is not aware of any ongoing
violations, they may not need to do an inspection. There may be
a question on the application form: Have you been cited recently
for any kind of violation? Again, the burden would be on the owner
to provide the correct information. If it is a new business, then
staff would need to do an inspection.
Ms. Modig asked if there is a provision in the other ordinances
regarding an inspection by the Health Department. �
Ms. Dacy stated the Health Department needs to be deleted. There
is no need for that inspection.
6. Section 18.13.02. IN3PECTION.
A person who operates a Motor Vehicle Repair Garaqe or the
person�s agent or employee commits an offense if a person
refuses to permit a lawful inspection of the premises by a
representative of the Police Department any time it is
occupied or open for business.
What is a lawful inspection of the premises? Does that mean that
a police officer"can stop at any time and shut down the business
for some type of offense? Does this conflict with the need-�or a
search warrant, �and does this constitute an unreasonable search?
��F
PLP,NNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 8
Ms. Dacy stated that, according to the City Attorney, the answer
is, no. In order for the Council to revoke the license, according
to the ordinance, there has to be a public hearing and the owner
has to be notified why the Council is considering revoking the
license and to give the owner ample opportunity to present his/her
case. The intent of this section is merely to provide the ability
for City officials to have access to the property. It does not
give City officials the authority to revoke the license.
Mr. Betzold stated that if someone refuses to let the police
officer on the premises, what happens?
Mr. Hill stated that in theory the police officer could cite the
owner for violation of the ordinance, because the violation of any
code of the City Code is a misdemeanor. That would be an option,
but a more realistic approach would be for the police officer to
report that incident to him and he would report to Council and
recommend they consider a suspension or revocation hearings.
7. Section 18.14.01. REFOSAL, SIISPEN3ION OR REVOCATION.
It is unlawful for any applicant to make a false statement or
omission upon any application form. Any false statement in
such application, or any omission to state any information
called for on such application form, shall, upon discovery of
such falsehood, be grounds for denial of a license, or, if
such license is already issued, shall be grounds for
revoaation. Issuance of a license shall not protect the
applicant from prosecution of violation for this section.
Aqain, what happens if an unintentional mistake is made on an
application. Will this be qrounds for revocation? How does the
Public Safety Director administer this?
Ms. Dacy stated that, according to the City Attorney, it depends
on the mistake. If they believe the petitioner is concealing
information, they will make the City Council aware of it. Again,
the City Council approves the license and they need to conduct the
hearing and give the petitioner or applicant an opportunity to
present the facts.
8. Section 18.14.02. REFUSAL, SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION.
The City Council mav suspend or revoke a license issued under
this Chapter for operation on any premises on which real
estate taxes, assessments, or other financial claims of the
City or of the state are delinquent or unpaid.
What happens in a multi-tenant building situation where one of the
tenants is not ultimately responsible for payment of taxes and
assessments? What happens if the property owner, and in some
10G
PLANNiNG COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2. 1991 PAGE 9
cases, an out-of-town property owner is delinquent? Can the tenant
be exempted from this requirement?
Ms. Dacy stated that according to the City Attorney, if the tenant
is not the owner of the property, the tenant is not responsible for
the taxes and assessments. This section will have to be adjusted.
9. Section 18.15. INSURANCE REQIIIRED.
Every license applicant shall provide and maintain in full
force and effect public liability insurance to indemnify any
person against loss or injury in the sum of one hundred
thousand ($100,000) for injury or death to one person and
three hundred thousand ($300,000) for each acci8ent or
occurrence, and ten thousand dollars ($10,000) property
damaqe, and shall contain a provision that no cancellation
thereof shall become effective without thirty (30) days prior
notice thereof in writing to the Ci.ty Clerk. In addition,
each applicant for a Motor Repair Garaqe License shall file
with the City Clerk a public liability policy or certificate
of insurance for each vehicle used in the business of its
Motor Vehicle Repair Garage. �
Why is there insurance required? Why does the City Clerk need to
be notified about the 30 day notice for chanqe of insurance?
Policyholders only receive a 3o day notice, so it may be possible
for the repair qarage owner to notify the City within 30 days.
Why is a public liability policy or certificate of insurance
required for each vehicle used in the business of the repair
garage?
Ms. Dacy stated it is not atypical for the City to require public
liability insurance. They do it in other ordinances. The intent
is if the City is authorizing a license for an entity to do
business within the City, there are some expectations on the part
of the consumers about issuing that license. Authority does exist
for the City to require some type of insurance to protect the
consumers.
Ms. Dacy stated that as far as the mechanics, staff acknowledges
that the 30 day time period may be constraining. They will have
to work with the repair garage owners on that. As far as whether
or not insurance is required for each vehicle used in the business,
staff believes that language came from the Minneapolis ordinance.
After working with the repair garage owners, it may be prudent to
delete that requirement. Maybe it is not atypical for communities
to also require workmen's compensation insurance. That miqht be
another issue that needs to be discussed.
Mr. Hill stated the language for this section came from Minnea�olis
Chapter 317.70 which has been effective since 1984. He is not sure
why they would need to require insurance for each vehicle used in
10H
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 10
the business. The 30 day clause is consistent with either
insurance or bond requirements in various ordinances. The intent
is for consumer protection.
10. Section 18.16. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS REQUIRED.
Every Motar Vehicle Repair Garage Licensee shall maintain, on
the premise, original records which shall include all work
orders, estimates, invoices, and names of all customers for
whom motor vehicle repairs have been performed. As used in
this section, the term ��invoice�� shall contain that
information required in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 3253F.56
to 325F.65. Such records shall be immediately available for
inspection and copying by enforcement officials and shall be
retained for at least two (2) years. A customer has a right
to a copy of documents maintained by the Motor Vehicle Repair
Garage reflecting any transaction to which he was a party.
1.
2.
3.
The operator of the Motor Vehicle Repair Garaqe is
required to identify the source of the parts used on
repaired vehicles.
The operator is required to keep a record of parts that
are purchased and all purchased parts are to be paid by
checks rather than cash.
The operator is required to keep invoices and cancelled
checks to establish the source of parts used on repaired
vehicles.
Why do the records have to be available? Can�t that be done
through request of a search warrant? What do Minnesota Statues
Chapter 325F.56-65 require?
Ms. Dacy stated the intent was to mirror some of the existing
regulations that are in State Statutes. The proposed section
states two years rather than at least one year in the State
Statute.
Ms. Dacy stated that regarding whether that can be done through
request of a search warrant, both the statute and the ordinance
state that they have to contact the owner prior to that and give
him/her a reasonable amount of notice.
11. Section 18.16.02. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS REQUIRED.
The operator is required to keep a record of parts that are
purchased and all purchased parts are to be paid by checks
rather than cash.
101
PLANNING COMMI83ION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 11
There are some occasions where some parts are paid with cash. Why
does it have to be checks? Why can�t the buildinq owner have the
ability to pay with cash for some parts if so desired?
Ms. Dacy stated staff has received a lot of telephone calls about
checks versus cash. Some business owners feel that is going too
far, because, in some cases, they may need to use cash to purchase
small parts. Again, the intent is to provide a paper trail on auto
parts to be able to determine the origin of each particular part
and to determine whether or not the part is stolen.
Mr. Hill stated the Minneapolis ordinance is basically the same
except for the check issue. The issue of a check over cash is a
recommendation made by the City Attorney.
Mr. Saba asked if a minimum level of cash purchase could be
allowed, such as $5 or $10.
Mr. Hill stated that since the issue had been brought up, it is a
logical issue to discuss.
12. Section 18.7. UNAUTHORIZED WORR; CII3TOMER�S RIGHT TO RETIIRN
PROPERTY
No Motor Vehicle Repair Garaqe shall fail to return to any
customer, upon demand, the customer�s vehicle in violation of
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 325F.61.
What does Minnesota Statutes Chapter 325F.61 require? What happens
if an auto repair garage performed work in the amount of $2,500,
returned the vehicle to the customer, the customer with no basis
demanded the vehicle without paying? Would this void the process
of a meahanic�s lien?
Ms. Dacy read Chapter 325F.67.
Ms. Dacy stated that regarding whether or not it voids the
mechanic's lien, the City Attorney wants to do more research on
that issue. Maybe the repair garage owners and their attorney can
give some direction on this particular issue.
Mr. Hill stated that as he read this section of the statutes, it
is not implying any additional requirements upon the business
owners than what currently exist today under State Statute. The
mechanic's lien is a State Statute issue, not a City issue.
13. Section 18.18. REFUSE
All refuse must be stored in a completely enclosed trash/
dumpsters and must be fully enclosed as required by the zoning
ordinance.
10J
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 12
If refuse is defined as motor vehicles which are abandoned, some
of the vehicles may not be able to be deposited in dwapsters.
Ms. Dacy stated they obtained the definition of refuse from the
Minneapolis ordinance. It does need to be reworked. The intent
is that if there are sizable car parts that are in a state of
disrepair, they need to be screened from the public right-of-way
or adjacent residential districts. To a certain extent, this will
be addressed through the special use permit process for those areas
that require a special use permit for repair garages. Repair
garages are a permitted use in the M-2, Heavy Industrial distriet.
The intent is to make sure that everyone is conforming to the same
rules.
Mr. Hill stated that they significantly reduced the language from
the Minneapolis ordinance in an effort to simplify it.
14. Section 18.20. SEVERELY DAMAGED VEHICLE3
All severely damaqed vehicles must be completely drained of
all fluids prior to transfer to Motor Vehicle Repair Garage.
Who is responsible for determining what a sev�rely damaged vehicle
is? Where are the fluids to be drained? How is severely damaqed
defined?
Ms. Dacy stated this.section was inserted in the ordinance because
City Council discussed this particular issue at great length with
at least one special use permit application. The issue was when
the vehicles get to the repair garage and if they ar,e stored in an
area that is not paved, is there surface contamination and possible
underground contamination from fluids from the vehicles? This
section needs to be reworked if it is to remain in the ordinance.
The questions are well posed. Staff needs to come up with language
that is reasonable, enforceable, and that the repair garage owners
are willing to live by.
15. The City should require motor vehicle qaraqe owners to obtain
a hazardous waste generator� s license and submit an EPA number
to the City.
Ms. Dacy stated staff agrees with that and that should probably be
included in the ordinance.
Mr. Randy Thompson stated he is an attorney representing the
following businesses: Maaco; Christensen Auto Body; Tires, Inc;
Fridley Tire & Brake; Triangle Coach Works; Rensfeldt's Auto, Inc.;
Fridley Fast Lube, Amaco; Fridley Auto Body, Kennedy Transmission;
Lisell Auto Service; Gary's Automotive; Northeast Towing Service;
and Phillip's 66. These businesses represent a numbc-�r of
businesses from service stations to body shops, towing businesses
to tire shops to repair shops. In listening to the presentation,
10K
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 13
this ordinance seems to be drawn and has taken restrictive
covenants from liquor, massage, adult use, and pawn shop types of
ordinances, yet they are really talking about mainstream legitimate
businesses who have done business in this community for a long
time.
Mr. Thompson stated they strongly oppose the ordinance in its
present form. It is overly restrictive to the number of
constitutional infirmities, and it is basically impractical and
unworkable. To say something has been taken from a liquor
ordinance fails to recognize that the liquor industry, because of
the advent of prohibition and subsequent appeal, has always
occupied a special place in terms of the ability of the governing
body to regulate liquor as opposed to other types of businesses.
Just because the City can regulate something in the liquor industry
does not mean they can do it in another type of business.
Mr. Thompson stated the Minneapolis ordinance is approximately 2
1/2 pages. The City of Fridley's proposed ordinance is 9 pages.
That points out their initial concern. What is the purpose of this
ordinance? Is it to regulate "chop shops"? Is it environmental
protection? Is it consumer protection in connection with
automotive repairs? It is just not clear. It seems to touch on
a little bit of everything, but doesn't do a good job on anything.
Until there is a focus, it is difficult to tailor something that
is going to be narrowly drawn and generally focused and reduce the
restrictions of legitimate business operations.
Mr. Thompson stated there is no indication that there is any
particular reason to believe that the businesses represented are
any more ripe for criminal activity or any more suspect to criminal
activity than any other business.
Mr. Thompson stated their second main concern is: What is a fair,
economic, and practical method to obtain a purpose for this
ordinance? They want something that is not burdensome to
legitimate businesses. They do not want to drive businesses out
of Fridley to neighboring cities. They want to keep paperwork to
a minimum. They need to stay within constitutional standards.
They need to make it cost-effective, because any costs imposed on
businesses are eventually passed on to the consumers.
Mr. Thompson stated that using the example of the draining of
fluids of vehicles that are severely damaged, they have to talk
about what is practical and what is understandable in the business
operations. What fluids have to be drained from a severely damaged
vehicle?
Mr. Thompson stated by putting it in the licensing provision, are
they putting the businesses of the City of Fridley -�at a
disadvantage and are they creating a situation where, for example,
a consumer would call a tow truck operator from the City of Blaine
10L
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 14
because there won't be as many problems. If they are going to
restrict it, it should be a separate ordinance and it should be
something that deals with vehicles in the City of Fridley so that
anyone towing vehicles in the City of Fridley are subject to the
same restrictions.
Mr. Greg Accomando, Fleetwood Motor Company, stated it seems the
City is approaching the situation of how to identify chop shops in
a backward manner. Instead of identifying chop shops, the City
wants to identify all the auto body shops and is telling the auto
body shops they must maintain records indicating where all the
parts come from, so the City of Fridley can backtrack these records
to identify the original chop shop or where these parts came from.
It is extremely difficult to backtrack parts, because they get
parts from various sources such as junk yards and several out of
state operations, where they may get a receipt from Texas for a
part. For the City of Fridley to backtrack to Texas to find out
if that part was stolen in Texas would be very difficult. Asking
body shop operations and repair companies to keep track of their
records to identify chop shops that are operating in Fridley seems
very backwards to him. It would seem more logical to start from
the beginning. If a chop shop operation is doing business in the
City of Fridley, that should be easily identified.
Mr. Accomando stated that if he were to operate a chop shop and
handle a 1ot of cars, he would first want to have a dealer's
license. The guidelines involved by the State of Minnesota in
having a dealer's license are very restrictive. The State has
investigations and checks every car to make sure it is property
bought. So, this is already being done by the State of Minnesota.
Mr. Accomando stated he agreed that overall the City of Fridley
should have a general business license and some type of guidelines
so the City knows what kinds of businesses are coming into the City
of Fridley. It seems more realistic to identify chop shops
operations by the use of a general business license by finding out
what these businesses are doing. That seems fair. If he was to
start a business in any other community, he would expect to go
through those types of investigations. But, to take an existing
business and backtrack parts to try to identify chop shops is very
backwards.
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to close the
public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:35 P.M.
Mr. Kondrick stated he believed there should be an application
process. The business owners and their attorney have brought up
some new points of view that should be considered. They have
agreed to meet with City staff and rework this ordinance. He is
10M
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 15
not willing to make any recommendation, other than to have City
staff work with the business owners and attorney to come up with
a workable ordinance.
Mr. Betzold stated he could not go along with the ordinance as
written. Tt is too restrictive. A general business Iicense might
have some merit, but he could not recommend that at this time. To
try to keep the honest legitimate repair garages in business and
to try to keep the dishonest illegal ones out of business requires
some oversight on the part of the City which means there has to be
some kind of application process or some standards and criteria to
determine whether or not an application should be denied or
approved.
Mr. Saba stated the attorney brought up the possibility of some
kind of grandfather clause or section that would basically license
the existing businesses. That is a good suggestion. What they are
really concerned about are the new businesses or the change in
ownership. He believed there might need to be a different level
of applicability in terms of the ordinance. He believed there is
a need for an ordinance for the reasons discussed. The worst thing
that can happen to a small city like Fridley is to have chop shops
or illegal activity occurring in any of the City's businesses,
because it gives the whole city a bad name. This ordinance goes
a long way toward protecting the business owners as well as the
citizens of Fridley.
Mr. Kuechle stated that from his personal view from being in
business himself, he fu11y agrees that 120 days to approve a
license is too long. That time has to be shortened. Thirty days
would be right, with 60 days absolute maximum.
Mr. Kuechle stated the comment about a short form renewal is a good
idea. He would not be in favor of grandfathering in existing
businesses, because you end up with two classes of facilities, some
licensed and some unlicensed.
Mr. Kuechle stated that as far as the insurance requirement, it
seems every legitimate business already has some kind of liability
insurance. As far as the maintenance of records, the Gity is
asking for two years. In reality, businesses must keep records for
three years for the IRS. Many times the current year's records are
kept on the premises, and the other years are stored off the
premises. The ordinance has to be changed to a reasonable time to
produce the records.
Mr. Kuechle stated he is somewhat surprised about
checks versus cash. In his business, he doesn't
all simply because there is no way of tracing
potential of inappropriate activity with cash is
He would be surprised if a lot of businesses
10N
the concern over
deal with cash at
purchases. The
simply too -�igh.
didn't deal with
PLANNING COMMI3SION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE lb
checks, because without checks, there is no record if audited by
the IRS.
Ms. Modig stated she cannot support a lot of the ordinance because
it is very restrictive. She has a lot of concerns about the
privacy factors. She knows it is necessary to know about illegal
activities pertaining to this type of business. If someone has
been convicted of a felony for chopping up cars before, then that
might be a valid problem; but she did have a problem making it
prohibitive for someone who has been convicted of another type of
felony, has been rehabilitated, and is trying to start over in a
new business.
Ms. Modig stated that regarding the licensing on the ownership,
they talked about the ownership being changed to more than 50%.
That would be a good idea. She would like to see a lot of changes
made in the records required. Recordkeeping in a day-to-day
business is not always readily accessible.
Ms. Modig stated she did not think they need to have language in
the ordinance which is already in the State Statutes. There is no .
point in being redundant.
Ms. Modig stated she would like this ordinance to do what it is
intended to do, to protect the community from an influx of
potential criminal activity by chop shops. But, she also does not
want to lose any of the existing businesses in Fridley.
Ms. Modig stated staff has done a lot of hard work on this
ordinance; but she did agree with a statement made earlier and that
is that just because it is a Minneapolis ordinance, that doesn't
make it great.
Mr. Betzold stated having the State Statute references in the
ordinance does clarify that these are some of the criteria that
will be considered for a revocation. of a license. It helps
establish a baseline.
Mr. Betzold stated he agreed that records did not necessarily have
to be produced immediately, but he did think the record-producing
requirement is a good idea.
MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to forward to the City
Council without a recommendation the proposed ordinance (proposed
Chapter 18) to require a license for Motor Vehicle Repair Garages
along with the comments from the October 2, 1991, meeting. The
Pl.anning Commission cannot concur with the ordinance in its present
written form and requests that the City staff, motor vehicle repair
garage owners, and their attorney work together to produce a
workable ordinance. �
100
PLANNiNG COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 2, 1991 PAGE 17
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOOSLY.
2. RECEIVE SEPTEMBER 5 1991 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the
September 5, 1991, Human Resources Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. RECEIVE SEPTEMBER 17 1991 APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES.
MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive the
September 17, 1991, Appeals Commission minutes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to adjourn the
meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Betzold.
declared the motion carried and the October 2, 1991, Planning
Commission meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
R s ectfully ubmitted,
Ly Saba
Rec rding Secretary
10P
�
S I G N— IN S H E E T
PLANNING COMMI83ION MEETING, ���r 2, 1991
�f�''K� U C�S�cin� ���� �.�
,5��.� �, �����r ,�,_:�r�<r -, �� � � � �� �� ��
r �i — ,�i�Ce ��ia o.;��;,� ��� ..
�/�r�l /� � �.���r`� -
� �/
bS
z r����
SJ
i�
� _
�
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Community Development Department
PLANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
October 17, 1991
William Burns, City Managerr^ ,� �" �
,"
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Receive Minutes of the Planning Commission
Meeting of October 2, 1991; Ordinance to
Require License for Motor Vehicle Repair
Garages
Plannina Commission Action
The Planning Commission at its October 2, 2991 meeting considered
the first draft to the proposed ordinance requiring a license for
motor vehicle repair garages. The Planning Commission unanimously
moved to forward the ordinance to the City Council without a
recommendation for the proposed ordinance along with the
Commission's comments from the October 2, 1991 meeting. The
Planning Commission stated that it cannot concur with the ordinance
in its present written form, and requests that the City staff,
repair garage owners, and their attorney, work together to produce
a workable ordinance. Also during discussion of the ordinance, the
Commission requested that staff ask the City Council whether or not
they wish the Planning Commission to consider a revised or new
ordinance.
The Planning Commission considered the first draft of the ordinance
for two reasons. First, it provided a good forum and ample
opportunity for repair garage owners to state their concerns and
suggest changes. Secondly, the ordinance establishing the
moratorium on issuance of special use permits stipulated that the
licensing ordinance be considered by the Planning Commission within
60 days of the effective date of the moratorium. Given that the
City has now complied with that requirement, plus the fact that the
attorney for the repair garage owners will be submitting an
alternative draft for consideration by the City Council, staff
recommends that the item not be referred back to the Planning
Commission and be,discussed by the City Council. Typically, the
Planning Commission would not review a license and the issues to
be discussed on th� proposed ordinance are policy issues which need
to be discussed by the City Council. �
Motor Vehicle Repair Garage Ordinance
October 17, 1991
Page 2
We are expecting an alternative draft from the attorney of the
repair garage owners the first week in November. Possible first
reading of the ordinance could then occur at one of the December
meetings.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the minutes of
October 2, 1991, and direct staff to advise the Planning Commission
that the Commission does not need to review additional drafts of
the motor vehicle licensing ordinance.
BD/dn
M-91-762 -
�
10S
� _
�
�
Community Development Department
FLANNING DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: October 17, 1991
. � (�.
TO: William Burns, City Manager� �V
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Background
Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Extension of Special Use Permit, SP #90-15, by
Mike Schrader
On November 5, 1990, the City Council approved a special use permit
to allow repair garages, automobile service stations and motor
vehicle fuel and oil dispensing services, motor vehicle wash
establishments, and exterior storage of materials and equipment,
for construction of an auto mall at the vacant property located
east of adjacent to Highway 65 and north of 73 1/2 Avenue.
Attached is a letter from the property owner's representative, Mike
Schrader, requesting an extension of the special use permit for a
one year period. The City Attorney's office has been requested to
render an opinion if the extension of the special use permit would
be in violation of the moratorium on issuing special use permits
for repair garages. The City Attorney will be prepared by Monday's
meeting to render an opinion.
Recommendation
Pending the approval of the City Attorney, staff recommends the
City Council extend the special use permit request, SP #90-15,
until November 1, 1992.
BD/dn
M-91-763
October 8, 1991
Michele McPherson, BLA
Planning Assistant
Fridley Municipal Center
6431 University Ave.
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: 7355 Highway 65 N.E.
Dear Ms. McPherson,
I am writing regarding special use permit #90-15 and the rezoning
of the above referenced property. As you know, the development
market has been somewhat repressed over the past 18 months due to
market influences such as insufficient lending sources, the gulf
war, recession and the S&L crisis. The proposed development at the
above property was not spared from these influences. During key
planning stages, a number of major te�ants for the project
cancelled their letters of intent or had corporate approvals
removed. The corresponding fall out of tenants caused the
developer to put the project on hold until the development climate
and economy become more stable. Despite the developers current
resolve not to develop the property, he most definately plans to
complete the project at some future date. Accordingly, it is
hereby requested that the special permits and rezoning efforts not
be withdrawn and placed on hold for one year.
If you have questions or comments, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely, .
i� !/i` � . ' �
�,
,'/' �/
,/�i�i... � l- �,
' � � �� • � `���� �_..
Michael S. Schrader
Developers Representative
893-6894
11A
�; � w• �1, �_ _ , c • :,� '�-.,�' ' ' � ��=��
UPON �i VOICE VOTE T111�N ON THE lrtl�►IN MOTION, all voted�e, and
Mayor Nee declar�d the aotion carri�d unanisously.
•' `� � 1Y �� �
There was no
business.
. .� : ���`.��X�
1.
response
N
from the audience
N
thia item of
Kr. Hill, Public Safety Director, � ted that thie ordinance would
specify qamblinq prohibitione in er eStablishments which has
previously been City policy or a iniBtrative interpretation.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpat ck to �raive the aecond readinq of
Ordinance No. 958 and adop ft on the second readinq and order
publication. Seconded by Councilwoman� Jorqenson. Upon a voice
vote, all votinq aye, yor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
2.
N
«
Kr. Hill, Publ Safety D'irector, �tated that thie i6 basically a
housekeepinq tem to keep the Cfty'a ordinance current so that it
is not i� onflict with the State statute reqardinq qamblinq
prohibitio s. He stated that it also establishes the rent which
increase from a maximum of $100 per week to $600 per month.
�N/by Councilman Fitzpatrick to waive the second readinq of
�ance No. 959 and adopt it on the second readinq and order
ication. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorqenson. Upon a voice
, all votinq aye, Kayor Nee declared the motion carried
imously.
� : Y�� � . � ����:
• � • j� • •: � � • �•
� � � � � • • • • '
! s ( � � � • • ' • �� •
r i � � � Y_. fr � � L� � � �
4� � r i � � � �� � Y_� • •
i , � � • �s ! � � � �
; : � � • �
Ms. Dacy, Planninq Coordinator, stated that this special use permit
covere a variety of automotive related uses which would be located
in an auto nall development. She stated that two buildinqs
totalinq 26,000 square feet would house these uses. She stated
11B
�*QTn�Y CITY COQNCIL 1[EETIN4 Ol� l�OVBKBER S, 1940 4l1aS 3
� that in conjunction with this special use permit, there is also a
request to rezone a portion of the property iroa M-1 to C-3.
Ms. Dacy stated that this ite�n was tabled to allow staff to
research what stipulations could be placed on this special use
permit reqardinq the qeneration of odors lro� the automotive
buildinq tenants. She.4tated that there wa� alao a concern
reqardinq noise. �
Ks. Dacy stated that in addition to the sixteen stipulations
recammended by the Planninq Comn►ission, staff ic propoeinq three
additional stipulatione. She stated Stipulation No. 17 requfres
that the HV�C and odor ventinq systems 4ha11 be desiqned with all
possible desiqn features and equipment that is economically
available to elfminate to the qreatest extent any possible odor
emissions from the auto aall or its individual tenants. She stated
that odor ventinq systems for automotive paintinq, detailinq, or
finishinq tenants shall meet NFPA, EPA, and UFC construction and
installation requirements.
Ks. Dacy stated that under Stipulation No. 18, if a problem were
to occur in the auto mall, I�iinnesota Pollution Control Aqency rules
and requlatfons would be imposed. She stated that these rules
contain the odor emission etandards, and this procedure is similar
to the one used for the Central Roofinq Company complaint in 1987.
She stated that failure to seet the MPCA odor standards shall be
a basis for revocation of_the Bpecial use permit.
Ms. Dacy stated that Stipulation No. 19 states that doors on the
north side of the buildinq ehall be closed when vehicles are beinq
serviced or when noise is qenerated. She stated that the Planning
Commission also recommended that tenants that contribute to odor
emissions shall be located alonq the east �ide of the eastern most
building on the site.
Ms. Dacy stated that the Council discussed some amended lanquage
to Stipulation No. 16 reqardinq the ar►r�ual review process, and
staff has worked with the petitioner who aqrees trith an occupancy
of ninety percent.
Ms. Dacy stated that a letter was sent to residents of the trailer
park to the north alerting them that this item was tabled at the
last meeting and would be considered this evening. She stated that
staff recommends approval of the epecial use permit with the
sixteen stipulations r�commended by the Planninq Commission in
addition to staff's three stipulations.
Mr. Kike Schrade�, representinq the petitioner, stated that all of
the stipulations were acceptable.
Mr. Kitch Del�iara stated that he wanted to let the Council know�that
he is stronqly oppoBed to any extension of the service road. He
11C
i
�
?RIDL,�Y CITY COIINCZI� ]�ETIIiO O! �►OVEl�LHER �. 1990 P]1�iE �
stated that he understood it would be extended in 1992. He st,nted
that he opposes the exteasion as it would hurt soae of their
tenants in the trailer park.
Kayor Nee stated that the Council has not taken a poeition
reqardinq the extension of the service road.
Mr. DeMars stated that he felt if the auto sall surviveg, the
extension of the service road would be diacussed in the iuture.
Iss. Dacy 4tated that there aay have been a aisunderstandinq, ae she
stated at the Planninq Commission seetinq, that in 1992 the upqrade
of the siqnalization at 73rd ]►venue would be completed. She stated
that at no time did she state the City had plans to extend the
service road in 1992.
Kr. DeMars stated that he underetood it wa6 stated at the Planninq
Commiseion �aeetinq that the service road was to be constructed in
1992. -
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorqenson to qrant Special Use Permit, SP
�90-15, with the followinq ctipulations: (1) the rezoninq request,
ZOA #90-05, shall be approved; (2) the petitioner shall submit
qradinq and drainaqe plans of calculations approved by the Rice
Creek Watershed District prior to issuance of the buildinq permit;
(3) the petitioner shall eubmit a revised landscape plan prior to
the iesuance of the building permit, indicating the followinq
changes: (I�►) reduce the berm at the intersection of 73 1/2 �venue
and Viron Road; (B) add eix additional Linden trees somewhere on
site; and (C) the wood Bcreeninq fence alonq the north property
line is currently unnecessary. However, the petitioner�shall
install a screeninq fence alonq the north property line if the
existing fence should for some reason be removed or damaqed; (4)
the petitioner shall eubmit an irriqation plan prior to issuance
of the buildinq permit; (5j the petitioner Bhall dedicate to the
City a ten foot easement parallel to the east riqht-of-way line of
Viron Road; (6) the petitioner shall combine the lots for tax
purposes; (7) there shall be no exterior storaqe of junk vehicles,
tires, or trailers. Vehicles waftinq to be serviced sha21 be
allowed to be etored overniqht, provided they are currently
licensed and street operable; (8) any auto body repair and paintinq
facility and/or detailinq facility shall be required to obtain its
own epecial use permit. Auto body repair and paintinq tenants
shall comply with EPA regulations to control odor emissions and
hazardous materials; (9_j there shall be no repair of automobiles
before the hour of 7:00 a.m. and after the hour of 9:00 p.m.; (10)
rooftop equipment shall be screened; (il) the petitioner ehall
submit a comprehensive siqn plan for City Council approval; (12)
tenants who contribute to odor emissions shall be located alonq
the east eide of the eastern most building on the site; (13) the
petitioner shall apply for a epecial use permit for any auto rental
tenants; (14) a park fee of $.023 per.equare foot shall be paid at
11D
� y� �1; � : . ; � • _l� �� : , � : _ � .� j�} ��-�
the tiae oi buildinq perait; (15) the petitfoner �hall work with
the Minnesota Departaent ot Transportation to stripe a right turn
lane to 73 1/2 l�venue on Highway 65; (16) co�plianca vith the
special use perait shall be r�viewed after tt�e project rsaches 90
percent occupancy. The pernit shall be reviewed annually
thereafter up to five yeare; (17j the HVAC and odor ventinq systems
shall be desiqned with a11 possible desiqn featurea and 4quipment
that is economically available to eliainate to the qreatest axtent
any poesible odor emissions lrom the auto sall or its individual
tenants. Odor ventinq systems for automotive painting, detailinq,
or finishinq tenants shall meet NFPA, EPA, and UFC construction and
installation requiremente; (18) in the case of automotive paintinq,
detailinq, or finishinq tenants, odor emiseions will be evaluated
in accordance with the standards 4stabliehed by the Minnesota
Pollution Control l�qency, specifically Section 7005.0900 t3irouqh
Section 7005.0960. Failure to aeet the l�IPCA odor standards shall
be a basis for revxation of the special use permit; and (19� doors
on the north afde of the buildinq ehall be closed when vehicles are
beinq serviced or when noiee ie qenerated. Seconded by Councilman
Fitzpatrick.
MOTION by Councilman Billfnqs to amend the above motion as follows:
Under Stipulation No. 17, add a comma at the end of the first
sentence and add the words "includinq the restaurant." Further,
to add the followinq sentence at the end of Stipulation No. 17:
"Venting shall be located in the area of the buildinq that fs the
furthest distance from any residential neiqhborhood." Seconded by
Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, l�ayor
Nee declared the motion carried urianimously.
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE MAIN MOTION, all voted aye, and
Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
4. FTRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF'�THE
� 4� � � � - �
�IOTION by Councilwoman Jorqenson to waiv e readinq and approve
the ordinance on first readin Seconded by Councilman
Fitzpatrick.
Councilman Billinqs a if the lots to be rezoned were 7, 8 and
9 which included e auto mall project, except the restaurant
portian. Ks. cy answered in the affirmative.
UPON��ICE VOTE TAi�N ON THE �BOVE 1rIOTION, all voted aye, and
I�tavor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
�
11E
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager�;'t�� PW91-308
John G. Flora,��Public Works Director
FROM:
October 15, 1991
DATE:
Spur Station Storm Sewer Line, Project No. 223
SU BJ ECT:
At the September 30, 1991 Council meeting, we received Petition No.
5-1991 from Murphy Oil requesting a storm water line be provided
to their facility at the intersection of Mississippi Street and
East River Road. The petition waives the right to a public hearing
and requests the cost of the improvement be assessed to the
property. We have been working with the Ar►oka County Highway
Department to install a storm sewer pipe from the Spur Station
property to the storm system south of the site on East River Road.
It will not be necessary to modify the budget, but Council should
be aware that this is a change from the original Capital
Improvements Program that identified the projects under the Storm
Water Fund. As the Enterprise Funds were not included as part of
the original Budget Resolution, it does not require any amendment
to the budget, but Council might want to be aware this is a project
that was petitioned by the property owner and was not known at the
time the �apital Improvement Plan was developed; as such, it is
not included in that plan.
We have obtained quotes from two contractors to install the storm
sewer system pipe and catch basin. Based on these quotes, it is
recommended a contract be awarded to Volk Sewer and Water, Inc. for
$13,045.00 to install the storm sewer system.
JGF:ch
12
�
�
��
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PETITION COVER SHEET
Date Received 9/2p/g1
Petition No. 5-1991
Object C0�3STRUCT CERTAIN STORM SEWER IiiPROVEMENTS TO EXTEND THE
EXISTING STORM SEWER SYSTEI"I IN EAST RIVER ROAD APPROX
200 FEET NORTH.
Petition Checked By Date
Percent Signing
Referred to City Council
Disposition
12A
�
�
MURPHY
OIL USA, INC.
September 18, 1991
Mr. John G. Flora
Director of Public Works
City of Fridley
6431 Uni�-ersity Ave., N.E.
Fridley, M\. 55432
Dear Mr. Flora:
SUITE 304
4800 W.77TH STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435
`% � /
�-- J - ' � �---`'-C, _ .
Murphy Oil, being the owner of the property at 6485 East River Road,
Fridley, ( PIN's 15-30-24-42-0001, 15-30-24-42-0026 ), request that the City
of Fridle3 construct certain storm sewer improvements to extend the
existing storm sewer system in East River Road approximately 200 feet
north. riurphy OiI further agrees to waive their right to a public
hearing and agrees to pay the assessments for the project.
Sincerely,
MURPHY OII.y� tj,SA, �NC.
Gary /K. Andelin
Construction Supervisor
GIiAf mts
12
SPUR -
: _ _ a
:� � _ _ n.. . _ ' . ; l
� ry I , _ 4; 2 ,v i
;- F- f � � c .�. p �� � J
I�./� o � I 1 ." '.. a�. f- t
J -o ^ S �Z I •.� o' C� :e . �o' Q �
: Z 1 . ' . � � cn
i V
--- N a
a rn
Z ' � z
N '
F- .� `'''. �. �
�:. �<�:. _ � ��
O :��. ;; :
J w � � �` � _.) •
Z Q! Y J M �
-- � 31 � � a rn �,
0. N. - a ? m3
Y p �-
'a W , CO Q -� C
d � �' d � � � N' -
- - � Z • ..��-- r
.�� �
N m N •�� : N � oc O �n
F-- - -- a
� � O O , W � , . � Z . N
aJ '� � � � v� t0
m N , � � .n �:J � l.L m
cn � N Z
' �:.: :_. . ✓ . �
, ' m
1�31�b • °
, _, ,
:.�
_1—` i` — - � � ` . � � z
__--- ' � :� Q � O .
�:
� a :>`: ' � �' w � � � ' r�-
►n = i � ' �:r::,. � �-g -- O
� i U �. � « r � tA
1 MM � t
� �c �, — �,
� �j �' ' � � �
1 ao � �:`� �m _ w
� ° �c� . o: ' � ,; ���`s:� '� � � �' �ri a
�� N�, Z I � Zr. - a
. -� �=- - -- �
�/ -L � ' � ' ' � w ` � � '
;j q (� ��.- cn ,;, � � �
J ' � �� Q �
N •" ' U U �..!..• ���. bl, � N
W � -
. ' ,l
1- Q � � a�0
� ..
p Q ;n � ':a • +
� � � � �
� , , 51�8s� w c�
U Z
►-- W � � w
N . �3� r �:` (n
1.1 ' ".r:</ � cn /y
. . W r�J .. •'OI .: :�N Y..
d' � - 'Q � � � � ` �`���'�� � � w
O � t►� ' 'I : (t�� •,• : ;.; ..: 0 �• 3
N J ' W �":':
+ a. � � �-' � J
.�--- k ' ; O Q
� � N a. . I� L I •���i�i W ', -� a W
. �
� ` �
d _ � �y�, Q� p �
C7 �r . on J W
� X i -N Y5J `� � W � .
b' �
J
� � � �Q
' Z �
m
r-- -> � � 3 � z
w
O � ; _ M 1_
� i ' ' . 1 �T , � — �
N
1 Z ( • � � M .� '^ �
QUOTES
MURPHY MART STORM SEWER
VOLK SEWER & WATER, INC.
10/16/91
ITEM QTY PRICE TOTAL
12" RCP STORM SEWER 203 LF @ $20.00 $4,060.00
B6-18 CONC. CURB & GUTTER 210 LF @ $10.00 $2,100.00
CATCH BASIN 1 EA C$1,000.00 $1,000.00
CONN. TO EXIST. CATCH BASIN 1 EA C $500.00 $500.00
BITUMINOUS PATCH 140 SY @ $32.75 $4,585.00
TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS @ $800.00 $800.00
NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
lTEM
12" RCP STORM SEWER
B6-18 CONC. CURB & GUTTER
CATCH BASIN .
CONN. TO EXIST. CATCH BASIN
BITUMINOUS PATCH
TRAFFIC CONTROL
SAW CUT
QTY
203 LF @
210 LF @
1 EA C
1 EA C
140 SY @
1 LS @
250 LF @
PRICE
$33.60
$15.00
$850.00
$500.00
$32.00
$500.00
$3.50
12D
$13,045.00
TOTAL
$6,820.80
$3,150.00
$850.00
$500.00
$4, 480.00
$500.00
$875.00
$17,175.80
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM .
William W. Burns, City Manager�,� , PW91-313
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SU BJf CT:
John G. Flora,�Public Works Director
October 16, 1991
Emergency Repair of Well No. 5, Project No. 224
It appears that Well No. 5 was struck by lightning during a storm
in the first part af September. We have been investigating and an
electrical overload to the pump appears to be the problem.
Well No. 5 consists of a submersible pump which is 530 feet below
the suriace. In order td inspect the pump, the entire pump shaft
and column pipes will have to be removed.
We have prepared plans and specifications to remove the pump and
either repair or replace it as necessary. In the meantime, even
though the well was last maintained in 1990, we may have to replace
some column pipe or pump shaft. We estimate a maximum cost of
$25,000.
I recommend approval to advertise for the emergency repair of Well
No. 5. This is a deeper well and is one of our primary producers
now that we are minimizing the use of the shallow wells in Commons
Park.
It will not be necessary to modify the budget, but Council shauld
be aware that this is a change from the original Capital
Improvements Program that identified the projects under the Water
Fund. As the Enterprise Funds were not included as part of the
original Budget Resolution, it does not require any amendment to
the budget, but Council might want to be aware this is a project
that was not known at the time the Capital Improvement Plan was
developed and, as such, it is not included in that plan.
JGF:ch
13
�
�
FW�
�ATE
=ROM
>UBJECT
FUBLIC �VOR�.S
N[AINTENANCE
1991
Condition of biell #5
IO�iEMORANDUM
TO
x
�uri,ng the w�eek,end of Sept�bex' 7-8, 1991, a rainstonn aooa�ai'iied bY lic�tning
caLLSed the main breaker t;o fail in Well.hause #4. Zhis brealt�er vontrols We11s
2, 4, 5, 6 arri 7. After repairs to the mau► breaker aa� Sept�nber 9th, it was
then disowered that lightnir�q may have stYUCk Well #5 and cau..� an electrical
short. As a result, We11 �5 can r►o longer be used•
I request that w�e be allvw�3 tfl advertise for bids for the repair of Well #5.
Attached are specificatio�s for this repa.ir. Please advise.
13A
�
n
INKO
,
0
P�JBI�C WC�2KS N�1IlII�NC� DIVISIa[d
C'�'I'Y OF FRIDIEY
4UOTATION.S F�DR REPA�t WOiRK � WII�, NO. 5
I�ocated at 770 - 63rd Ave. N.E., �7idley, l�t 55432
SDGTION I•
A. General Information•
Zt�ese snecificatioazs are int�s�ded to oaver the inspectical arid repair w�z�k to Well
No. 5, which has a su�oezsible p�mq�. It shall be riot.ed that the p�mg� is ari $
stage, 12MC Jacuzzi, arxi the a�rsible mobor is a Pflweger. �he i� is 175,
the RPM is 1750, the wlts are 460 - Pii3 ani cycle 60. Serial No. 88257, type
UN12-175.
l. Size of well c�sing
2. Deptlz of well
3. Static level
4. Zbtal ptm�ing head
16 ]�ves
845 feet
287 feet
535 feet
5. Capacity of p� 1000 per mirn�te
6. Ool� pipe - 8" pipe of 21' 384 feet
ratxian lengt2ls
Zl�e tatal p�m�pis�g head does not it�clude los.ses in the p�m� � whic3i must be allv�aed
by the bidder. Zl�e efficiency of the p�m�ir�g unit shall be as hic,� as correct
d�esign ar�d engineeriux� will �n++; t.
B. G�eneral S�ecifications•
Bidder shall furnish all neo�.ssazY ecNiPnent, labor arri materials tA perform a
va�lete repa�ir ar�d new part installatiaaz servic�e as follaas:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Set uP equiPm�t� dis°°�u�ect PiP�4 � P�1 fmm w�ell.
R�ll anci dismaritle 8-stage, 12MC Jacuzzi ptmg�; 175 i�, sutxnersible m�tor;
coltmm pipe shafts aixi transport to ywr facility.
After c�a�letion of repairs ar�d aoquisition of new pazts needed. deliver
all materials ar�d it;�ns tfl jab site.
Rei.nstall sui�mexsible mat.or air3 p�mp in well.
5. �v�ec.�t all PiPin4, etc. ani plaoe p� back in servive.
All of the previwsly desczibed work will be oou�leted for the s�m► of $
6, Wirir�g and motor to be inspected at time of removal by �wr�er's electrician.
13B
QuatatiaLS for Repair Work to Well No. 5
Page 2
C. �e�a� u S�ecif ications •
After vwr�x's inspection. anY �paius or Parts that he shall det�esmine to be
neaessazy will be at rat�es (all rat�es ani part prioes shall i�clude stx� labor
ar�d ir�stallatioa�► oost, where applicable) .
Qtys Unit PY'ive Zbtal Dost
8" #5002 Class D Z�ec3�no
c�ec.k valve
8"� 1' rarxian l��gth aoltmm
pipe with oa�lirgs
InQe,ller w�ear rin�s
Bowl beariux�s
�• 5--�
&xal shaft
�— $ $
���
�_
�_
8
_�
$ $
$ $
S $
$ $
S $
S S
Zbta1 Paxts: S
Zto�ta,l s�cticc, I: S
SEC,TIOId Ii:
Bowl Assembly:
If after cwnex's inspecti� the bowl asseqnbly re�quires replaoe�aent, the bidder
shall furnish the bowl assc�nbly. ir�cludinc! adal�ters to suixaersible nKytor arid
�1� pipe. Zhe bowl as��nbly shall be a].2MC Jacuzzi, 8-stage or approved
equal. Perfoza�anoe cutve shall be furnisheci. Under wr�rkit�g conditia�s, 1�nnP
shall provide 1000 GPM at 535 feet T.D.H. arxi shall not werload the 175 HP
mat�r.
&ywl assembly $
Alldwar�oe for old bdwl assembly $
Zbtal Se�ction II : $ - - ---
SEGTION IZI• .
A. 1. �lete re�air of a�bmersible mator $ `
2. Replaarrent 3 ooatid�x.fior, 600 wlt pow�er cable $
13C
0
Quotations for Re�air Work to We11 No. 5
Page 3
B. New Slibmersible MatAr•
Oo�tractflr to s�ly new a�rersible 175 I� mot'ror, 480 volts, 3�ha_Se, no N/O -
3 oocr�uct.or, 600 v�olt power cable.
Zbtal tdew rfabor:
� . . - . . . - . �► • ,r�_•
7bta1 Sectioc'► III:
SDCI'ION 1V •
A. Bailirw
S
$
$
If th�e w�e11 is reported t� be filled with arYy sar�drx.k, the contractor is to
furnish th� neoe �sazy labor and equi�nt to bail the well . Disposal of the
sar�droc�Jc is to be by the oontractor.
For fu�nishirq ar�d installistig the neoessa�y equiP'oent in the well ar�d bailing
sar�drocJc for a period of 20 hwrs:
� �� $
For more or less time than 20 hairs of ba.ilirg sar�dra',3c.
Qost per hour $
B. O�ltmm Pipe:
�lwmi pipe to be sarx�la��tecl, painted inside arxi artside with Yv.st-resistant
pairit, Zbtal quaritity is approacimatQly 19 (rar� lerr�ti�s) •
Prive per unit $
C. Disinfectirig:
Zbtal: $
ZYie oo�tractor shall, after the installatioaz of the p�mq�, d.isinfect the we11 with
no�t less than 10 paurls of hypociilorite dis.solved in water arxl po�ur'ed into the
well. �e solutio� should �nain i.ri ti�e we11 at least tw�enty-faur hwrs before
P��J. Solutio� will be p�mg�ed to waste during t�st Pw�ir�c!-
Iimp S�n: $
D. �est Ra�ir�cJs
After the disinfectir�g ar�d installatio�► has be�n caoc►pleted, the ooa�tract;or shall
test p� ar�d dispos� of test water t� the aitside of buil� as iclentified by
the Public Works Dir+ec.�tor. Fbur (4) i�aurs of tes-t pw�ir�g to the autside will
13D
Quot,atiorLS for Repair Work to Well No • 5
Page 4
be zequired to reach the 5ppm sat�d oocYtQnt or less before the test p�m�irig into
the syst�n can take plaoe.
� �� $
E. SySt�n 7Destira:
After the test p�mpi�g i.s va�le�tred, the oontract�r shall t�est the P'�1»!
cap�acity of the installatia� in the pnes�e of a rep�+e.sP�tative of the � City to
ensure 1, 000 gpm is obtain�.
� �= $
To�tal secti� Iv: $
C�ZAND 'tCyl'AL (SF�CTI�LS I, II, III, & li� :$
Variations ar�d F�X�otions'
Variatioa�s fran the abwe s�ecificatioc�s will be oonsides+ed pravidit�g the bidder
calls particular attenti� tfl sudi e�tiarLS ar�d explains in detail the rea.,sons
ar�d advantages for the e.�ooeptioa�.
Zlve purchaser reserves the ric,�t to reject atYy or all bids.
... �
All werk► equig�rent arid materials u_sed shall aoriform strictly with the
of the followirg oodes:
M�inne.sota State Board of iiealth
American Water Works As..soci.atiari
� American Society of Z�estir�g Materials
or ariy o�ti�er ood� whic3� may apply.
�� -
After r+�pairs ar�d installation of pia�s arr3 all w�11 taerk has been aa�leted, ��
the ooaitractor is to supply a written p�m� Y�eoord describir�g suc3i data as an
installatiaa� plan, all statisti.cal data for p�a�s ar�d well, turvine p�u� cuYVe,
list of parts ar�d materials u.sed, mat�exials re�nvved, �tc. -:
�artiryg Date and oaie�letion Date:
�
13E
J
Quo�tatials far �air Work t�o Well No. 5
Page 5
Notificatioaz to be given cc► any p�'d�lens arisir�g arxi a z�ea.s� �y, or an
explanatioai of the problea► given to ti�e Public Works Director.
a
10-10-91
C:�WP'�WFJ�iS\SPFX'S. �5
BY
�. ��... ��
�� -
[.'• • i'
���
�K
�3F
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
William W. Burns, City Manager ;�� PW91-309
TO: ; �
John G. F1ora,�Public Works Director
FROM:
October 15, 1991
DATE:
Emergency Repair of the 61st Avenue Sanitary
SUBJECT: Sewer Line, Project No. 225
On Monday, October 7, 1991, we found a large settTement hole on
61st Avenue between 5th and 6th Streets. On Tuesday, October 8,
when we excavated the street, we found damage to the 36 year old
15 inch corrugated metal pipe sanitary sewer line. This line is
approximately 19 feet deep and, apparently, over the years the top
section of the pipe has been corroding and is deteriorating. We
replaced approximately 8 feet of the pipe and filled the hole.
On Wednesday, October 9, we found evidence of settlement indicating
further damage to the pipe. We attempted to TV the line on
Thursday, but were only able to view about 60 feet of the line.
We noticed some damage to the roof as well as separation of the
pipe. On Friday, we again excavated the pipe and found more damage
and, as a means of maintaining the sanitary flow through this main
collector, inserted a 10 inch PVC pipe sleeve for 150 feet into the
pipe.
Since this sleeve obstructs the flow and allows sand to percolate
into the line, and while the street is still not repaired, we wouZd
propose to replace the corrugated metal pipe between 5th and 6th
Streets with 15 inch PVC pipe. Because of the requirement to
excavate the pipe using construction boxes, securing the parallel
water and gas service lines, and still complete the repair work
prior to the asphalt plant's closing next month, we have received
quotes from two contractors. ,
Northdale Construction Company has submitted the lowest bid of
$24,700.50 to replace the pipe and maintain the sanitary flow
during the construction period. We would recommend the Council
award a contract to replace the 15 inch sanitary sewer line on 61st
Avenue between 5th and 6th Streets to Northdale Construction
Company for $24,700.50. Funds for the work are available ir� the
Sanitary Sewer Fund.
�� �
•
14
William W. Burns
October 15, 1991
Page 2
It will not be necessary to modify the budget, but Council should.
be aware that this is a change from the original Capital
Improvements Progra� that identified the projects under the Sewer
Fund. As the Enterprise Funds were not included as part of the
original Budget Resolution, it does not require any amendment to
the budget, but Council might want to be aware this is a project
that was not known at the time the Capital Improvement Plan was
developed and, as such, it is not included in that plan.
We would also propose a Change Order to the current Street
Improvement Project ST. 1991 - 1& 2 to replace the asphalt street
surface once the sanitary sewer line repair work has been
completed.
When this emergency is completed, we will complete a TV inspection
of the 12,000 foot corrugated metal pipe line in an attempt to
determine its overall condition so that we can schedule an
appropriate repair project, if required, over the next few years,
without having to completely rebuild the sanitary system and the
supporting roadways.
JGF:ch
14A
BID PROPOSALS FOR
EMERGENCY REPAIR OF SANITARY SEWER LINE ON 618T AVENIIE
COMPANY
Northdale Const. Co.
14450 Northdale Blvd.
Rogers, MN 55374
EJM Pipe Services, Inc.
7807 Lake Drive
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Volk Sewer & Water
8909 Bass Creek Court
Brklyn. Pk., MN 55428
BID TOTAL
BOND BID
$24,700.50
$27,400.00
No Bid
� �
.
COMMENTS
r , ��r`. �,
�,'p`a: �
�
F i ;�
_� Y+• • � . �E '�� '.� �
.a - �. �.v._
, r ._ � _
,�.� ,[�' I M� .y . .
� • t t , � '�L '�. ,
- f,�•^�► r ' / . .� .
- �r � . .
_ ,.
. • - . �, , . �, - �,
. � `t � f �.
'� � ' � ��; °�°"ti
� -
. . 4.. ". �` �jF"�...-,�..
,� ." K � � j�� � . .
- ' �r" � �-, �i • .
` C i�a '
F � E
. . x �, �. �
. - k ;�y
� i !. � a
.h. , .... ,�,._., -- _ :.«:�:,., ..< <
. ..�...�..:. �� � �, �.;..
_ t �., t .A, it ` . r _� / �� t ,
``�'"�. .. ,> s �
.
� �i'� � t ��,,_. . �''���'.'�,�r '� :�rj •
s
",.�--�' �, � tt� ! _ l? S t �K
-3 s
� � i � �+� {i« � �� ��y „�
� ' t�'�'•�� -. �� '4 - St
_ \- �t. - S� j+�'J • `,'' �.•
. . . ,A 4 i���� i� .
' r +n�
...�.��
,� i , 1 �
.x � t ^Y' �. �
, �i, e
. .s'�'.� � , � .
. ,.,``�'- , ����
� .� ��� �.�' i,:�� ,� � '
� $ J �;��;•��� 1 �,,� .
� ,a���� �� � ,
„R � ���!r'L���? `tv1.. t �,'�� �` :.,. _ �. _
" �� .
i- ....,,,,�"��.�f}.
".���'i'4``� . `\
--w-•,l��... �� � .
� ":r.,,,. zi� ``��.`� �' .
^�� ������
a��'� '�. �. �,x'� �
*,
����(' � . . ' � .
� ' lfa P
P�;�t } t � �.' � ' ' .
� ��`� ' ' ���: ' ;�
.�. , �,'- ;, `� �
r. �
.
+�,_.
•�' �w
� l� ' ��� �,'/
. ( .} `
j•� f �.L�� •. t,� 'YA, '•,
,�� � �) �� � `' F � *
� �� �. '`.L.% w , �t ! �
��`��h,��"� ; � ��� �
�
� ���
i1.
� �
� ,
�f. r.l ^►,� I a. ,� i� , y., � �.
�M,�
iro�y ^'�r�' e � �~0 .. . .
la�,,��"� * ,�, �,', .
� ��� t� �
t �n t ..� � � �� . � "� .
� * A �� ;y��♦.,�,P� %,� b, .
�� �' �r, � i, .
_ . � i �� a., '.
f `' �'�� I �� }. . _.
i. �
. � � �d �. � y . .
r
- �^
w��� ,a . ���
'� a .
. m � �
� -Q �sa •�rrr.._ ���r I
. ,� r�r , � • •
wN
� , � �� L%�� 'l'.�aM � . �ri � ,� • �
�� . I -
� „�.0 ».,w A r � •` �
� -o � - �lj = .°�!�
� �air� �} � :. .
� . . • � .t - �- •. -
- , .
• . � : _ t � ` �
' � , ' , .;� . . ; i � .
•Y. - '� . . .' ,
.�._�r..�--� -
, A • •
�� ilaraa . • - ,. . _
' • J .
• � � �� _� • ..
, � . � .
1 � • �
{)� �
�I • I � � _ ' , iAy�� � • ��A . . .
� � � . � ' t' • • • ' .
. ' ; , _
� s � �
' � ' � 1
� �iNi� �f�M �N
.Q S .. .
a s s �N �Ow ' �
. � � � � -
• . � - ^ �
tstlsi �� . � •
� �
_ _ _. ., a W
as�� s�M� • G Z
�' • � V
� _ � � " . � m W
. _ . . , ;, � . . _ . . � � �,
. - .
. � ..
_ . .. .. - � � n.
��• � . . � _� ' -• . .. r Q �
. , _ . �, � : , �
- ,� . . . ` a
� ,� ,,.,.....�, � -. - . , ►� � J
- . .. ..= - , J
.• • . _. �' . - :.. . �
•. U
, � l
• • z ..• � - {T ..
- ;�: - . , . •
� � , : � ; � ,,� �.-.« . " �._ _ _
,' ' � - ' -�.'' } � :.
uas . _ " - - . .
�
.
i • _.
_ - �i
i -
� '_ r. t:-tt �.—._�._. ,. -=4 .� ti - ':, .r.
� ��
� �
1s - - • • . � •
� . . _ - - �� '
� . <•
i _ . " . - •
- .. - _'. .�-� _
. �- • , , .
t � . . �'- � • .
� � - . " . . , .
;� � �� t� - • ' � 14 ' . '
�, . - . � �
Engineering
iSewer
Water
IParks
Streets
IMaintenance
MEMORANDUM
William W. Burns, City Manager PW91-312
TO: �
FROM:
John G. Flora; Public Works Director
DATE: October 16, 1991
SUBJECT: Change Orders to ST. 1991 - 1& 2 Street Improvement
Proj ect
It has been decided that the Fire Training Facility proposed for
the west end of the Municipal Garage area will not be constructed
this year. In the 1991 Street Improvement Project, we had
incorporated the costs of the asphaZt road and parking lot for the
Fire Training Facility. Since this is not to be completed, we need
to delete that portion of the work from the contract.
Recommend the Council approve Change Order No. 3 to reduce the
contract for Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2 in the �
amount of $23,062.50.
It is also necessary to repave the section of 61st Avenue between
5th and 6th Streets as the result of the sanitary sewer
replacement. We would suggest that this asphalt work be completed
by the street contractor for Street Improvement Project No. ST.
1991 - 1 & 2 .
Recommend the Council approve Change Order No. 4 to increase the
contract for Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2 in the
amount of $20,225.00 for the resurfacing of 61st Avenue.
These items will require a supplemental reappropriation at some
point in the future, since these items affect the Capital
Improvement Fund.
JGF:�n
15
•
�� �
.
C�'I'Y OF FRIDI£Y
E[JGIlIF.E��TG D�EPA�7II�1'r
6431 LAJIV�iSITY AVE., N.E.
FRIDI.EY, MN 55432
Octvber 21, 1991
W.B. Miller, Inc.
16765 Nutria Stre�t �
Ramsey, NIId 55303
SUH7F7CT: Change O�ier No. 3: Street I�roven�ei�t Project
No. ST.1991 - 1 & 2
Gentle�netz:
You are hereby o�lered, authorized, and instruct�ed to mod.i.fy your cantract far Street
I�roveznent Project No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2 by adding the follawir�g work:
DEI�TIOd�IS•
MM4�ul
S(��DUIE H• FIRE TRAIl�ING CENI�2
1. �n �ccavation
2 . Agr�regate Ba.,se � Class
5, (100� Crushed)
3. Bitx%x Oa115e Mixture
( includitxJ oil )
4. Wear douY'se Mi.xture
(includiryg oil}
5. Bittnnino��.s material
for tar3c coat
APPROX.
S��
700 C.Y.
775 Zbn
225 Zbn
225 Tor�
300 Gal
�AL DEI�TIONS
TOiI'AL Ci�NGE ORD�tS •
Original Contract Ama�uit
C�ontract Addition -��ge Order No. 1
Contract Addition - Ct�ange Order No. 2
Oontract Deletion -�x�e Order No. 3
REVISID Cl�JIitACr 1�iA�Tr �
15A
F'RICE
$ 3.00
$7.50
$33.00
$33.00
$1.00
ANIOtJNT
$2,100.00
$5,812.50
$7,425.00
$7,425.00
$300.00
$23,062.50
$366,230.00
6,904.00
77,906.50
- 23,062.50
$427,978.00
0
,
W•B• Miller� Ir�c•
Page �
c1�ar,ge ord+er No. 3
Octaber 21, 1991
,�, :
S�bmitted arid
October, 1991.
p� bY
��� �
.e�-f7�e(,
�
by John G. Flora, Public Wbrks Direct.or, on the 21th day of
J . F1ora, P.E.
r of Public Works
Approved ar�d aooepted this � b day of Q ��, 1991, by
W.B. Miller, Inc.
� / � �/
Approved arid aooepted this 21st day of October, 1991, by
M • ' • ��
WilZiam J. Nee, Mayor
William W. Burns, City Manager
15B
�
STRF:�.T piaO�TDC,`T PU. ST. 1991 - 1& 2
REV. 4/26/91
StsiIDIILE OF P�2IC�5
STI2F.'Er PROJF7CT ST. 1991 - 1& 2
� PAi2T H
' (FII2E R�A�V� C�fI'�Ri
b�,�ec or Approx It:e m with Unit Prioe Unit Prive Amaint
�tem No 4uantitv Bid Written in Woras D�llars Oents Dc�llars Oents
r
E105.501 700 �Onmion btcavation
ai. Yd. at Dollazs ar�d 3• �' ' Zl aa• �
i
^^- aents per Qi. Yd. ��
2211.503 775 Agg. Class 5, 100� ��i
, .. �_..
Zbns at Dollars ar�d �► ` S D SS 1 Z� 5-D
� �� c�ents per 2bn .
2341.510 225 Binder Course Mixi�ure (iricludicx� oi1)
�,,,�-,,,._....�_....
Zbns at llars arxl � ev 7A Z S au
�3 , 7- .
-�-� cer,ts per 7bn
�341.5q8 225 Wearirig • Mixt�lre (incltlding oil) �r
� Zbns at Dollars ar�d ��. °'� `7� z 5� b•
/
�-- �nts per Zbn
?357.502 300 Bit�nni.naus Material for Tack Goat
o t �''� .r
Gal . at �• Dollar•s and � D � � p Q.
.
�- cents pex Gal.
Z�OTAL — PART H (FIRE TR�TII�G (�frER) -
$ ' ---�7.-�-.�-`d-�.2:.5-�- �� � �„� �:."�.....
1
x � s��.
61
15C
CI'I'Y OF FRIDIEY
FNGIl�iF•F�Il1G DEPAR'II�1T
6431 UNIVIItSITY AVE., N.E.
FRIDIEY, IrIId 55432
OCtobex 21, 2991
W.B. Miller, Inc.
16765 Nutria Street
R3msey, MN 55303
SUB7�C.T: Cl�ange Order No. 4: Street Imprave�ner�t Project
No. ST.1991 - 1 & 2
Gentle�nen:
Yau are hereby ordered, authorized, and instructed to modify your �tract for Street
I�rove�nerit Project No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2 by adriirig the follaair�g w�ork:
ADDITI�S: �
APPROX.
1'I�'I OLTANIZTY
SC�DLJLE M: 61st AVF,tJUE PAVING - 5th ST. to 6th ST.
1. Aggregate Base, Class
5, (100� CZvshed) 800 C.Y.
2. Bindex �aut�se Mixture
#2331, (includes oil) 215 Zbn
3. Wear G�ourse Mixture
#2341, (includitlg oil)
4. Bit�nnir�aLS material
for tack ooat
215 Zbn
250 Gal
����c`�: �,� YM�� ��
'Il7I'AL Q�1NGE ORDEE2S'
Original Cbntract Amount
�tract Addition - C�ige OYder No. 1
Contract Addition - Q�ange O�ier No. 2
Qoaitract Deletion - C�ange Ozder No. 3
Oo�tract Ar�dition - Change Order No. 4
•,- • :�:�. ..: • n
16
PRIC�
$7.50
$32.00
$33.00
$i.00
• -�--
$6,000.00
$6,880.00
$7,095.00
$250.00
$20,225.00
$366,230.00
6,904.00
77,906.50
- 23,062.50
20,225.00
$448,203.00
�
W.B. Miller, Ir�c.
Page �
Qlanqe Order No. 4
Octciber 21, 1991
Sv�ngtted and apprwed by Jahn G. Flora, Public Works Director, on the 21st day of .
October, 1991. � �
����a � �
a..-.�L. G�,c�..:�.-
�
� G. Flora, P.E.
r of Public Works
p,pproved and aooepted this day of � , 1991, by
W.B. Miller, Inc.
u � � �
Appraved and aocepted this 21st day of october, 1991, by
CITY OF F1tIDI�X
William J. Nee, Mayor
William W. Burns, City Manager
Approved arr3 acoepted thi,s day of , 1991 by
u i �. • • � �� • -�� i� •
.. .�.� •
Elliot Ruhlar�d, P.E.
District State Aid F��gineer
16A
ir � �
E
F
G
`
�IIOORLTN ���R y
MQpR�tM aMT(�
� � �� ;, 'i ��-
- �� ;��. ' , i ...
, . � _. .. .
,, :.f � � i .
� � � /'- :� -• - �-- -- -- -- -- --
' �' _
� � i� . J. - = .J.O� µ� w A ^ • IOCR[r r' ►�11v i ��. + �1'•
' .� �I� J.i-7.; .i� %J..�� O r p � �a� C � fi � • .
j� i IJ.K...�r:�^� � � 0' • � ' e e � • � ■.'�:..
1� � LwtJ7 7 A �� D i Y O + L O 7 C, �� �
.� �r • . � I ^ , � .
� � .aJ7"�^ �'�e�� r,� o C .• ♦ '•
'�' ��u�► ��-•o a o A a a ' s• °• ' � C 6 e
�1'��'.�:�!'�.17 �' �o � p 4 • p � .
► � �� • j j� � o �1L....i' + � � + • C � �G . ` � � A
� �
V � - .. ` '' � ) � ° e ti' . o s i, C J t� � C
. � � 1� � • \'�
' �1 G � �
1 �w �
a �i �i4 . ,
a - �" ' �
,,�
z . ,, .,...
s (n �' C
W � ,.. �, ��
Z �„� �a� . ,�
� � -o o �� � � • (
3i '^ ""'� � . �
_ c,�� � ji � 0
e a �� � �' re /� u r
�(/_����� �� � ... � S "Y f:
� \ � w� �� � II� -- :�::� , V^ �..
..i �� • .ww : -'
_. ' ,,� \ �_ �� � nn.,,s � � `�„�Jh _. �
`�' QKR� �
� ,' , _, . .' y - �
:' J� _ 11 , - �
11 `
11 � i � �f
�
_ �� u r �w � . ,
� „ :
��`iw�� �..+ N , � � � t �
r w�[�
� . �� � � ;k 1 �
4� 1 S � ..« 8 _
c '' � _. �';L :: ' .
..._. c .:�,: �
., � , - ;: _••. a`�, -i++i��i:•�-�-
Gu � '� ; �o C (+/� Q �r�ii i1- t �:
vUV� ... �. � �w � A '�r'a � I��f�=.�rj.f' .�r
f �S+'IV`� � � r t 4S �.... C +ti�1-:�-�T �
� �'�ui.�� ° r'-j a� t f �~Q c �`� sfr.._*:..•,t�� e
' -= , ' �� �J � F � V � : i �±�. . F � .�"�',' i ,
v �� ��v V �...� .� �� p
(.�V GL` J.. C � _' �" ��' ''�'�� �_ ^ 1 � � /��:
� 3'C,�t'� F v � O :..�i,�;�j4*� %i � " =� --`.' Vs f
� (:�„� .� f• : .: i ' .riCi%i.�",t:� _ _ _ � u�e
�.���". �4�C —_.— i; :� �r'-�-';'.�r M;��. 'i �OF
a ^� �7 ... . i� � • � ? ��� i:�_ ~ :: h10
� ��, � :.Q � 0 � � � t _ .::., ��:: : : �
> ; �� , - . _.... �'<� -" �.�..:�..
� G ,�CQ �_ ` J'' '' '. � ! 'V�.
�^ ., �� 4�;` ; , ; I
J ., � �
C�C � ;� ``y��+.. � � , � � d� �� `.
I � /� .� � 4(y
�(j r`.�. 1 j 1 1� aa7
Y �' C�i..'.'"�'.. �1 1�. I �
y i L�j_..---�• ..� � ' � � �� r � i • � - -
:;� --�,• ' 1 1 , � �1M � � � f j
� � ww� � �� ��
� �;� � ; :; 1: - : , �
l �� �� .�. .. i
.�;,, , .
,,
;;:; � �� �
_ _ ��-�..�- ,
.� � .,
____ _.__ �
y- ? ; � •.ee
/ ��
r ' "`.'
�
� � ` ",
� i i �' �
J �i i� �
� � r � �' .
� `L e� � _ �,; »�...... 1 � .
.� , , �, � ��� l� I r�
� .�� ��� -- -
,�
� � , ,;; .. _
� ..... �i�' _
v � t �---- � � � � - r�mmni�,.. a
;� �� . .� , ; -- - �
�� 4 ' ' ' L
.�. � � nn. � � .�..+.. � .
�� ' � . �(i r
� � � � � � �,A
I � ' � .._ _
� � .»....�� � ' --- I � .
� ', � .
� � :��or.=
� �
. , u �� � .
; � IETTERED STREETS
� y�
p � ' � � 1 _�- Wlf�wl� /1. R li7 MYUY! �I+L � ►I. Mt
I^ . . �� +� , d�lt A. r !4 4ww M. i 1�1
' ,� �� .'�, ' . _ � .� 1'i � oi�.MdW s -. �'� � �
_ 1 O�N Y�w li I-i �i ►• � ►4 t�4 F�
CITY OF FRIDLEY
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �,
� �'
�
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL� FINANCE DIRECTOR
SHIRLEY A. iiAAPALA, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: RECEIVING STATEMENT OF CANVASS
DATE: OCTOBER 17� 1991
The Statement of Canvass for the November 5, 1991 Election for the
Councilmember in Ward II should be received by the Council within
seven calendar days after the election. We have attached a copy
of a section from the City Charter, "Section 4.08. CANVASS OF
ELECTIONS AND TAKING OF OFFICE."
Since the next scheduled Council Meeting is November 18, 1991 and
is beyond the seven day City Charter requirement, we would like
to suggest that the Council set a date for a special meeting to
receive the Statement of Canvass sometime between November 6 and
8, 1991 so they are in compliance with the City Charter.
17
�
4.08
certify that we are registered voters and that we have not signed
more nomination petitions of candidates for this office than there
are persons to be elected thereto.
Name Street and Number
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
� -� , , , , , , , . . . . . , being duly worn, deposes and
says, "I am the circulator of the foregoing petition paper
containing signatures and that the signatures appended thereto were
made in my presence and are the genuine signatures of the persons
whose names they purport to be."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ..... day of .....
, 19 . .
This petition, if found insufficient by the City Clerk, shall be
returned to . . . . . . , at Nwaber . . . . . . . Street .
I hereby indicate my willingness to accept the office of ....
if duly elected thereto. (Ref. Ord. 857)
Section 4.08. CANVASS QF ELECTIONS AND TAKING OF OFFICE.
The Council shall meet and canvass the election returns within
seven (7) calendar days after any regular or special elections, and
shall make full declaration of the results as soon as possible and
file a statement thereof with the City Clerk, and said statement
shall be made a part of the minutes. This statement shall include:
(a) the total number of good ballots cast; (b) the total number of
spoiled or defective ballots; (c) the vote for each candidate, with
a declaration of those who are elected; (d) a true copy of the
ballots used; (e) the names of the judges of election; and (f) such
other information as may seem pertinent. The City Clerk shall
forthwith notify all persons elected of the fact of their election,
and the persons elected shall take office at the time provided for
by Section 3.01, upon taking, subscribing and filing with the City
Clerk the required oath of office. (Ref./Ord./592)
17A
10/05/89
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
■►
�
r��r
MEMORANDUM
TO: WILLIAM W. BIIRNB, CITY MANAGER �l l
�
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DAVID DIIBORD, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR
MARY BMITH� ASSL$SMENT CLBRR �
SUBJECT: RESOLIITION CONFIRMINt� ASSE88MENT FOR STREET
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. STREET 1990 - 3
DATE: OCTOBER 2, 1991
Attached you will find the resolution confirming assessment for
Street Improvement Project No. Street 1990 - 3. The petition for
this project was received by Council June 18, 1990.
This project involved the extension of 67th Avenue off of Oakley
Street, extending Oakley Street 50 feet and extending and paving the
parking lot at Springbrook Nature Center. The total cost oF the
project is $99,928.01. The amount of $56,786.47 for Oakley Street
and Springbrook Nature Center will be paid by the Capital Improvement
Fund. The amount of $43,141.54 will be assessed equally on�the seven
lots involved. They will be assessed over a ten year period at seven
and one-half percent interest.
RDP/ms
Attachment
:
RESOLUTION NO. - 1991
RESOLIITION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR BTREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. STREET 1990 - 3
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers
heretofore selected by this Council for such purpose,
calculated the proper . amounts to be specially assessed for the
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. STREET 1990 - 3
in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel
of land in accordance with the provisions of law, and has
prepared and filed with th� City Clerk tabulated statements
in dup].icate showing the proper description of each and every
lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and the
amount calculated against the same.
2. Notice has been duly published as required by law that this
Council would meet in regular session at this time and place
to pass on the proposed assessment.
3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing
been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested,
and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons
to present their objections, if any, to such proposed
assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have
been filed, except
4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed
and altered as follows:
5. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels
of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified was and is specially benefited by the
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 3TREET 1990 - 3
in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified by the corrective roll in the amount set opposite the
description of each lot, piece, or parcel of land, and that
said amount so set out is hereby levied against each of the
respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described.
: �
Paqe 2- Resolution No. - 1991
6. Such proposed assessment as altered, modified, and corrected
is affirmed, adopted and confirmed, and the sums fixed and
named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and
corrected, with the changes and alterations herein above made,
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special
assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land
respectiv�ly.
7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed, shall be
certified to by the City Clerk and filed in his office and
shall thereupon be and constitute the special assessment for
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. BTREET 1990 - 3
8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel of
land shall bear interest from the date hereto until the same
have been paid at the rate of seven and one-half (7 1/2 �) per
cent per annum.
9. Such assessment shall be payable in ten (10) annual
installments payable on the first day of January in each year,
beginning in the year 1992, and continuing until a11 of said
installments shall have been paid, each installment to be
collected with taxes collectible during said year by the
County Auditor.
10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the
office of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified
statement of the amount oi all such unpaid assessments and the
amount which will be due thereon on the first day of January
in each year.
PA83ED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERR
.
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
''��
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
�
�
��r
MEMORANDUM
�- :
TO: WILLIAM W. BIIRNS, CITY MANAGER
v�� ��� �
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DAVID DUBORD, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR
MARY BMITH, ASSESSMENT CLERR
SIIBJECT: RESOLIITION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR NATER,
SANITARY SEWER & STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 210
DA,TE: OCTOBER 2, 1991
Attached you will find the resolution confirming assessment for
Water, Sanitary Sewer & Storm Sewer Project No. 210. The petition
for this project was received by Council June 18, 1990.
This project involved the extension of 67th Avenue off of Oakley
Street. The total cost of the project is $35,395.50. The amount of
$6,838.70 will be paid by the Water Fund and $28,556.80 will be
assessed equally on the seven lots involved. They will be assessed
over a twenty year period at seven and one-half percent interest.
RDP/ms
Attachment
19
RESOLIITION NO. - 1991
RESOLIITION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR WATER� SANITARY SEWER
& STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 210
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of� the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers
heretofore selected by this Council for such purpose,
calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed for the
WATER, SANITARY BEWER & STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 210
in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel
of land in accordance with the provisions of law, and has
prepared and filed with the City Clerk tabulated statements
in duplicate showing the proper description of eaeh and every
lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and the
amount calculated against the same.
Z, Notice has been duly published as required by law that this
Council would meet in regular session at this time and place
to pass on the proposed assessment.
3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing
been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested,
and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons
to present their objections, if any, to such proposed
assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have
been filed, except
4. The amounts speaified in the proposed assessment are changed
and altered as follows:
5. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels
of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified was and is specially benefited by the
WATER, SANITARY SEWER & STORM SEWER PAOJECT NO. 210
in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and
modif ied by the corrective roll in the amount set opposite the
description of each lot, piece, or parcel of land, and that
said amount so set out is hereby levied against each of the
respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described.
19A
Paqe 2- Resolution No. - 1991
6. Such proposed assessment as altered, modified, and corrected
is affirmed, adopted and confirmed, and the sums fixed and
named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and
corrected, with the changes and alterations herein above made,
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special
assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land
respectively.
7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed, shall be
certified to by the City Clerk and filed in his office and
shall thereupon be and constitute the special assessment for
WATER� SANITARY SEWER & STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 210
8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel of
land shall bear interest from the date hereto until the same
have been paid at the rate of seven and one-half (7 1/2 �j per
cent per annum.
9. Such assessment shall be payable in twenty (20) annual
installments payable on the f irst day of January in each year,
beginning in the year 1992, and continuing until all of said
installments shall have been paid, each installment to be
collected with taxes collectible during said year by the
county Auditor.
l0. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the
office of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified
statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the
amount which will be due thereon on the first day of January
in each year.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 1991
ATTEST:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
SHIRLEY A. iiAAPALA - CITY CLERR
�
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
�
�
�r �
MEMORANDUM
TO:
WILLIAM W. BIIRNB� CITY MANAGER ��
,�1,. ,
�t�
FROM: RICiiARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DAVID DIIBORD, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR
MARY SMITH, ASSESSMENT CLERR
SIIBJECT: RESOLIITION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR TREATMENT
AND REMOVAL OF TREES 1991
DATE: OCTOBER 2� 1991
Attached you will find the resolution confirming assessment for
Treatment and Removal of Trees 1991. There is one property to be
assessed for this and an assessment agreement was signed by the
owner. The total cost for this is $225.00 and will be spread over
a five year period at seven and one-half percent interest.
RDP/ms
Attachment
20
RESOLIITION NO. - 1991
RESOLIITION CONFIRMING A3SE38MENT FOR THE
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREES 1991
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, as follows:
1� The City Clerk has with the assistance of the tree inspector
heretofore selected by this Council for such purpose,
calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed
for the
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREES 1991
in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel
of land in accordance with the provisions of law, and has
prepared and filed with the City Clerk tabulated statements
in duplicate showing the proper description of each and every
lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and
the amount calculated aqainst the same.
2. Notice has been duly published as required by law that this
Council would meet in regu3.ar session at this time and piace
to pass on the proposed assessment.
3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing
been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested,
and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons
to present their objections, if any, to such proposed
assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have
been filed, except
4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed
and altered, as follows:
5. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels
of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified was and is specialiy benefited by the
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREE3 1991
in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and
modified by the corrective ro11 in the amount set opposite
the description of each such lot, piece, or parcel of land,
and that said amount so set out is hereby levied against each
of the respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein
described.
� '�
PAGE 2- RESOLIITION NO. - 1991
6. Such proposed assessments as altered, modified, and corrected
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed, and the sums fixed and
named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and
corrected with the changes and alterations herein above made,
are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special
assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land
respectively.
7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed shall be
certified to by the City Clerk and filed in his office and
shall thereupon be and constitute the special assessment for
TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF TREES 1991
8. The amounts assessed against every lot, piece, or parcel of
land shall bear interest from the date hereof until the same
have been paid at the rate of seven and one-half�(7 1J2 �)
percent per annum.
9. Such assessment shall be payable in five (5) annual
installments payable on the f irst day ot January in each year,
beginninq in the year 1992, and continuing until all of said.
installments shall have been paid, each installment to be
collected with taxes collectible during said year by the
County Auditor. �
10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the
office of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified
statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the
amount which will be due thereon on the first day of January
in each year.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COQNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIB
DAY OF , 1991.
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERR
1:
WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR
MEMORANDUM
21
RESOI,UTION NO. - 1991
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING TIME AND
NOMBER OF COIINCIL MLETINGS
WHEREAS, Section 3.01 of the Charter of the City of Fridley
requires that the City Council meet at a fixed time not less than
once each month; and
WHEREAS, Section 3.01 of the Charter of the City of Fridley
requires that the Council shall meet at such times as may be
prescribed by resolution; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council to comply with the open
meeting provisions contained in Minnesota Statutes 471.705 as
interpreted by the courts;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Fridley that:
1. The Council will hold regular meetings in the Council
Chambers of the Fridley Municipal Center, commencing at
7:30 p.m. on the following Mondays in 1992:
January 6, January 27, February 3, February 24, March 2,
March 16, April 6, April 20, May 4, May 18, June 1,
June 29, July 6, July 20, August 3, August 17,
September 21, September 28, October 5, October 19,
November 9, November 23, December 7, and December 21.
2. The Council will hold conference meetings at the Fridley
Municipal Center, at which time matters are discussed but
no formal action is taken, commencing at 7:30 p.m. on the
following Mondays in 1992:
January 13, February 10, March 30, April 27, May 11,
July 27, August 31, October 26, and November 16.
3. On the dates of regular Council meetings, conference
meetings will be held in the Fridley Municipal Center at
7:00 p.m. and following adjournment of each regular
meeting.
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
21A
: ■
�r
�
ca-nroF
F(tiDLEY
a
1992 CALENDAR
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND HOLIDAY SCHEDULE
January i992
S M T W T F S
� 2 3 4
S 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 14 15 16 17 t8
19 21 22 23 24 25
262 28293031
May
S M T W
3 5 6
10 12 13
17 18 19 20
24 26 27
31
1992
T F S
1 2
7 8 9
14 15 16
2 i 22 23
28 29 30
Septembe� 1992
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5
9 11 12
13 4 1 18 19
20 22 23 24 25 26
27 29 30
February 1992
S M T W T F S
1
2 4 5 6 7$
9 11 12 13 14 15
16 18 19 20 21 22
23 2 25 26 27 28 29
June 1992
S t� T W T F S
(1) 2 3 4
7 8 9)0 11 12 13
15 16 i7 18
1 23 24 25 26 27
28 30
Octobe� 1992
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 Q 6 7 8 9 10
t1 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 2728293031
Conference Schedule
March 7-10
NLC Congressional City Conference
Washington, D.C.
June 12 - 15
League of Minnesota Cities Conference
Bloomington, Minnesota
September 13 - 17
ICMA Conference
Reno, Nevada
November 28 - December 2
NLC Congress of Cities
New Orleans, Louisiana
�
X = Holidays
O = Council Meetings
❑ = Conference Meetings
Budget Work Session Dates:
June 3, 17, 22 & 24 (if
necessary).
Ma�ch
S M T W
� 4
8 9 1 11
15 16 17 18
22 24 25
29 31
July
S M T W
5 � 7 8
12 14 15
19 0 21 22
26 28 29
S
t2
19
26
2
16
23
30
1992 Ap�il 1992
F S S M T W T F S
6� t .2 3 4
13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
20 21 12 14 15 16 17 18
27 28 19 21 22 23 24 25
26 28 29 30
1992 August 1992
F S S M T W T F S
� 4 1
10 11 2 4 5 6 7 8
17 18 9 11 72 13 14 15
24 25 16 1 18 19 20 21 22
31 23 4 25 26� 27 28 29
30�1
Novembe� 1992
S M T W T F S
1 3 4 5 6 7
8 10 � 12 13 14
15 17 18 19 20 2i
22 2 24 25 � ��$
Le,gal Holidays.
Jan. 1
Jan. 20
Feb. 17
May 25
July 3
Sept 7
Nov. 11
Nov. 26
Dec. 25
9
�ecember 1992
S M T W T F S
1 3 4 5
6(� 91011 12
13� 15 16 17 18 19
20 (^c 1 22 23',�4� 26
27 2$ 29 30 31
New Year's Day
Martin Luther King Jr. Day
Washington-Lincoln Day
Memorial Day
Friday before Independence Day
Labor Day
Veterans Day
Thanksgiving Day
Christmas Day
Holidays
Additional Holidavs:
Nov. 27 Friday after Thanksgiving
Dec. 24 Christmas Eve
11 Total Holidays
Council meetings will be held the �rst and fourth
Mondays of January and February; the 5rst and
third Mondays of March, April, May, July, August,
October, and December, the first and fifth Mondays
of June; the third and fourth Mondays of
September; and the second and fourth Mondays
of November.
Confereace meetings will be held on the second
Monday of January, February, and May; the fifth
Monday of March, and August; the fourth Monday
21 B of Apnl, July, and October, and the third Monday
of November.
22
23
�
� FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL
�p � October 21, 1991
Type of License: By_ Approved By:
CHRISTMAS TREE LOTS
Harthans Lawn Care Tim Harthan Richard Larson
5625 Boone Ave. No. #221 Fire Inspector
New Hope, MN 55428
CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS
LICSNSES
Fees:
$200.00
Deposi:t $100.00
Fridley Police Explorer Cp1.Lynne Tellers James P. Hill
Post # 886 Public Safety Director
6431 University Ave.N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
INTERSTATE COMMERCE SOLICTOR
Marketing Assoc.Group Inc. D. Reni�c James P. Hill
Box 18050 Public Safety Director
306 Irvine, CA 92714
USED MOTOR VEHICLES
Skip's Central Auto Parts Michael Allen Geithman
1201 -732 Ave.N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
�
24
James P.Hill
Pub7ic Safety Dir.
Exempt
Exempt
$150.00
.. _
�
�
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL
GAS SERVICES
Heating & Cooling Two Inc
9290 Zachary Lane N
Maple Grove MN 55369
Northem Air Corporadon
75 S Owasso Blvd
Little Canada, MN 55117
GENERAL CONTRACTOR
Brandvold Builders
5345 Colfax Ave N
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Builders 8r. Remodelers
3517 Hennepin Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 5540$
McGough Construction Co Inc.
2737 N Fairview Ave
Rosevilie MN 55113
Mikkelson-WulfF Construction
126 Blake Rd N
Hopkins MN 55343
Minnesota Landmark
1342 Grand Ave
St Paul MN 55105
Murphy Bros Bldg & Remodeiing Co
1337 Gardena Ave
Fridley, MN 55432
Northern Circte Systems
1155 Old Hwy 8
New Brighton MN 55112
HEATING
B & C Heating Inc
4071 Sunset Dr
Spring Park MN .55384
Steve Sinkie
Terry Gaetke �
Dave Brandvold
Nick Terech
John Shea
Bruce Wulff
Martin Taluja
7ohn Murphy
Steve Dahlke
Robert Ritchie
24A
LICENSES
CLYDE WILEY
Bldg/Mech Insp.
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
Same _
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
CLYDE WILEY
B1dglMech Insp
Heating & Cooling Two Inc
9290 Zachary Lane N
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Northern Air Corporation
75 S Owasso Blvd
Little Canada, MN 55117
MASONRY
Dodge Concrete Co
10508 Eagle St NW
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
PLUMBING
Eide Plumbing Co
2868 - 135th Ave N
Andover, MN 55304
J. Scott Plumbing
2112 Highwood Ave
St Paul, MN 55119
Spiess Plumbing
1073 E �range
St Paui, MN 55106
ROOFING
Walker Roofmg
2701 - 36th Ave 5
Minneapolis, MN 55406
Steve Sinkie
Terry Gaetke
Kenneth Dodge
Bob Eide
S+cott Jochim
Scott Spiess
Jackie Anderson
24B
Same
Same
DARREL CLARK
C�ief Bldg Ofcl
STATE OF MINN
STATE OF MINN
Same
DARREL CLARK
Chief Bldg Ofcl
�PPROVED BY R.H. LARSON, FIRE P�04T� TION BUREAU/HOUSING INSPECTOR
G
'
CIlYOF
FRIDLEY
FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COIINCIL
OCTOBER 21, 1991
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 September, 1991
W. B. Miller, Inc.
16765 Nutria Street
Ramsey, MN 55303
ESTIMATES
. . . $ 8,699.50
Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 1991 - 1& 2
Estimate No. 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 37, 625. 32
Northdale Construction Co., Inc.
14450 Northdale Blvd.
Rogers, MN 55374
Skywood Lane Water Extension
Project No. 220
Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 65, 238. 87
Maier Stewart & Associates
1959 Sloan Place
St. Paul, MN 55117
Clover Pond Diversion/52nd Avenue
Floodway Project No. 222
Partial Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 789.40
25