The URL can be used to link to this page

02/22/1994 - 4910� �,� � �... ■� :: OFFICIAL CITY COIINCIL AGENDA COIINCIL MEETING FEBRIIARY 22, 1994 �: / '7 �ei'I : , �r�,.,' �r. ,� � � �x� _ :,. RID�� :�� ,�.� .,��`' FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING ATTENDENCE SHEET Tuesday, February 22, 1994 7:30 P.1�I. PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PRINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS ��,v �� t� Ge�ve �f Zo i S l �ian� L.,v . ;� ��I e �t�,v' �i �z t� �l � V��' _� f �� r�%' - � / � � � �- c.'��.J L v � �� /% /� L � - �,- � ! �i'iLc,. /�o ,2� 5 3! z� � E�4�/ �0�.'� 7� .-�--'-� '-�. c S— .�// �-�_�, w�� 6� �7 i',ew , r �,. .. .: . .. .. . : ; �: � , � ITEM NUMBER FRIDLEY CtTY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 1994 Page 2 �� ADOPTION OF AGENDA: OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: (Consideration of items Not on Agenda - 15 Minutes) PUBLIC HEARING: On-Sale Beer License for Jang-Won Restaurant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1 G Ordinance Recodifying the Fridley City Code, Chapter 205, Entitled "Zoning," by Adding 205.27 (0-4 Wetland District) and Renumbering Official Title and Summary 205.28, and Amending Chapter 11, "General Provisions and Fees" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2UU OLD BUSiNESS: Second Reading of an Ordinance Under Section 12.07 of the City Charter to Vacate Streets and Alleys and to Amend Appendix C of the City Code (Vacation Request, SAV #93-03, by the City of Fridley) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3C n� � � r� � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 1994 Page 3 OLD BUSINESS (CONTINUED�: Award Contract for Locke Lake Dam Restoration Project No. 211 (Tabied February 7, 1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 4D NEW BUSiNESS: First Reading of an Ordinance Amending . Chapter 2 and Section 4.04 of the Fridley City Charter (City Council Organization, and Nominations and Special Elections) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 51 First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 4 of the Fridley City Charter (Nominations and Elections) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 6D First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code, Entitled "Zoning," and Chapter 211, Entitled "Subdivision," to Amend the Public Hearing Notification Radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 7C FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 1994 Page 4 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED� Establish a Public Hearing for Consideration of Amendments to Chapter 220 of the Fridley City Code....................................... 7AA Resolution Authorizing Payment of Certain Claims Without Prior Approval ............... 8-8B �. Receive Bids and Award Contract for Corridor Maintenance Project No. 266 ............... 9-9C Informal Status Report: Hugo Street and Ruth Street Stop Sign Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Claims...................................... 11 Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � 2 - 12B Estimates .................................... 13 ADJOURN: �z . � � 1 :��: �:,, � ,,� J t .�,`k # � ';. � '�( �1 5 � THE MINQTES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF FEBRIIARY 7, 1994 THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order at 7:36 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 Council- woman Bolkcom MEMBERS ABSENT: None PROCLAMATION• CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY AWARENESS WEEK FEBRUARY 13-19 1994• Mr. Hunt, Assistant to the City Manager, read this proclamation which proclaimed the week of February 13-19, 1994 as Child Passenger Safety Awareness Week. Mayor Nee issued the proclamation and urged Fridley citizens to buckle up themselves and their children while driving during this week and the entire year. „ APPROVAL OF MINUTES: COUNCIL MEETING, JANUARY 18, 1994: 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. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: MR. FARON TURNER 7708 TYLER STREET RE• MINI-DONUT STAND: Mr. Turner, 7708 Tyler Street, Spring Lake Park, appeared before the Council regarding operation of his mini-doughnut stand inside the Wal-Mart store. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7. 1994 PAGE 2 Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that Mr. Turner was asked to cease operation of his mini-doughnut stand due to violations of the building code. 5he stated that a ventilation system needs to be connected in order to operate the machine for making the doughnuts. She stated that Mr. Turner indicated he would operate this stand outside the store; however, the special use permit process does not allow for this type of operation. Ms. Dacy stated that she met with Mr. Turner and advised him to apply for an amendment to the zoning ordinance. Mr. Turner stated that he did not object to applying for an amendment to the zoning ordinance if it would be approved. He also said that he could not afford to pay for this process if it was not approved and he could not operate his business. He questioned if his business could be licensed under the licensing of a peddler or caterer. He stated that there has been a good response to his operation from the management at Wal-Mart, as well as the general public. Mr. Turner stated that Wal-Mart did not want to install the ventilation system, but he could operate his business outdoors inside of a trailer. Mr. Turner stated that the cities of Brooklyn Park and Coon Rapids issue either a peddler's or caterer's license for his type of operation. Councilman Schneider asked if the code permits a supplemental use of commercial property for selling food. Ms. Dacy stated that in cases where there may be a grand opening of a business, this type of sale is permitted and approval is required from Anoka County. She stated that this would be for a short term use, and Mr. Turner's operation would be for long term. Councilman Schneider asked if Mr. Turner would be permitted to operate his business if he applied for a restaurant license. Ms. Dacy felt that the ordinance needed to be clarified before Mr. Turner could operate his business. She stated that Mr. Turner is concerned about the application fee to apply for an amendment to the ordinance. Mr. Turner stated that he has no problem with the cost if it would guarantee that he could operate his business. He stated that he has no problem with paying this fee if a license fee could be established. Councilman Billings stated that as he understands, Mr. Turner would like the Council to make a determination if he can operate his business before going through the public hearing process. He stated that the purpose of the public hearing is to gather informatior, and facts to determine if an amendment to the ordinance FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRIIARY 7, 1994 PAGE 3 is in the best interests of the City. He felt that he could not give any guarantees that if Mr. Turner applies for the amendment it would be approved. He stated that he has some concern, as this may open the door for a lot of persons to operate out of trucks or trailers to sell their items which the City discourages. He stated that if the City accommodates Mr. Turner, he questioned how it would impact those persons who want to come into the City and sell their merchandise from a truck. He felt that all these issues would have to be considered. Mr. Turner questioned if it was possible for him to operate under a license that has already been established in the City. Councilman Billings felt that it may be in Mr. Turner's best interest to work with City staff to review some of his options for the operation of his business. Mr. Turner stated that he would be in contact with Ms. Dacy's office to discuss the matter. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE ENTITLED "ZONING " AND CHAPTER 211 ENTITLED "SUBDIVISION," TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION RADIUS: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Council- woman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:06 p.m. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that the purpose of this amendment is to expand the public hearing notification radius on all development applications to 350 feet. She stated that the purpose of the amendment is to be consistent with state statutes and to advise a larger portion of the neighborhood about development applications. She stated that these development applications apply to special use permits, variances, plats, and lot splits. No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed amendment. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:08 p.m. 2. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AME�DING CHAPTER 2 AND SECTION 4.04 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER (CITY COUNCIL ORGANIZATION, AND NOMINATIONS AND SPECIAL ELECTIONS): MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRIIARY 7, 1994 PAGE 4 Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:10 p.m. Mr. Hunt, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that several years ago the Charter Commission began working on these proposed amendments. He stated that Mr. Backlund, Chairman of the Charter Commission, was present to answer any questions. Mr. Backlund, Chairman of the Charter Commission, stated that two members of the Charter Commission, Ed Hamernik and Kurt Creager, would present these items to the Council. He stated that Mr. Hamernik would present the proposed amendment to Chapter 2 and Section 4.04, and Mr. Creager would present the proposed amendment to Chapter 4. Mr. Hamernik stated that the amendments proposed for Chapter 2 involve a considerable reorganization. He summarized the main changes being proposed, as follows: Section 2.01.01 clarifies the source of the "Council-Manager" plan of government pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Section 2.01.04 expands the ability of the council to.require production of non-documentary evidence such as electronic data. Section 2.02.02-2.02.04 deletes language which was required for the transition to elections in even numbered years, and links the election of Mayor and Councilmember-at-large to presidential election years and Ward Councilmembers to gubernatorial election years. � Section 2.02.05 changes slightly and clarifies when terms of office begin and end. Section 2.03 stated that the previous Section 2.06 was a long paragraph, and this has been split into subsections for greater clarity. � Section 2.03.01 corrects the title of Mayor Pro Tem and specifies that the appointment is only for the temporary absence or disability of the Mayor. Section 2.03.05 clarifies that the Mayor's duty is not an on-going annual duty but rather something done when necessary at the direction of the Council. He stated that this avoids a potential conflict with Section 2.01.02 which prohibits the City Council from attempting to perform administrative duties other than through the City Manager. Section 2.03.06 is revised to allow the Mayor to take control in time of emergency without first having to seek Council approval. FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING OF FEBRIIARY 7. 1994 PAGE 5 Section 2.04.01 deletes obsolete references to the original City Charter. Section 2.04.02 is clarified and does not affect the substance of the section being amended. Section 2.04.04 is changed to accommodate the complicated and changing state legislation and case law regarding redistricting of wards and precincts. He stated that it eliminates the penalty against the Council for failure to redistrict in a timely fashion after the decennial census. Section 2.05 clarifies the disqualifications of Councilmembers from being employed by the city in other capacities. Section 2.06.01 makes failure to attend eight consecutive regular meetings of the Council a reason for declaration of a vacancy similar to moving out of the ward or the City. He states that there is a time frame of thirty days from the event in question for the declaration of a vacancy. Section 2.06.02 provides for a special election to fill a vacancy declared to occur in approximately the first three and a half years of a four year term of office, that is before filings for the next election of the office in question are closed. He stated that the window is changed from 45 days to 60 days to 30 days to 65 days. Section 2.06.03 allows for a primary election prior to a special election to fill a vacancy if more than two candidates file. Section 2.06.04 requires the Council to appoint a non-candidate if the vacancy occurs after filings are closed but before October 1 of the fourth year of the term. Section 2.06.05 provides for the winner of the general election to assume office immediately if the vacancy occurs on or after October 1 of the fourth year of the term. Section 2.06.06 provides for the Councilmember-at-Large to serve as Mayor during a vacancy in that office. Section 2.06.07 & 2.06.08 provides for restoration of the Council in case the membership of the Council is reduced to two or less. Section 2.07 deletes obsolete language from the original charter. Section 4.04 clarifies the fact that special elections to fill a vacancy on the Council are governed by Section 2.06. Councilman Schneider stated that recently a special election was held for the Ward 3 Council seat. There was an incorrect statement in Focus News which stated that anyone in Fridley could vote in this election. He felt that there probably should be clarification FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 6 in the Charter that only residents residing in the geographic boundaries of ward were eligible to vote for this Council seat. Mr. Backlund stated that all residents can vote for the Mayor and Councilmember-at-Large, but a resident must live within their ward boundary in order to vote for that particular ward Councilmember. This would be checked by the election judges. Councilman Billings stated that there is nothing in the state statute, City ordinances, or City Charter which states that when a resident goes to the polling place he is only eligible to vote for the Council representative for his particular ward and cannot vote for the representative of the other wards. He felt that perhaps this issue should be addressed at some future date. Councilman Schneider questioned how a regular meeting is defined under Section 2.06.01. Mr. Hamernik stated that a regular meeting is established by resolution when the Council when they adopt their calendar of meetings at the beginning of each year. He stated that conference meetings or budget work sessions are not regular meetings. Councilman Billings stated that he has a problem with the term "eight consecutive regular meetings." He stated that he assumes the Charter Commission was trying to establish something that was approximately four months in.length, and the current City Council establishes two regular meetings per month. He stated that a future Council may wish to meet every week, and now missing "eight consecutive regular meetings" would reduce this time period from four months to two months. He stated that he was not sure of the intent and why the term "eight consecutive regular meetings" was used. Mr. Backlund stated that part of the reason was to insure participation of all Councilmembers. He stated that if some future Council decided to meet daily or weekly, and a member chose to ignore this schedule, the City would not be fully represented. Councilman Billings stated that a Councilmember could be absent from the City for three months before a vacancy is declared, yet he could not miss eight consecutive meetings. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that budget sessions are as important as regular Council meetings. She felt that the reference should not be just to regularly scheduled meetings, as budget sessions and conference meetings are just as important. Mayor Nee stated that in June of 1965, the Council probably had twenty meetings where action was taken, and it seems practical to make the length four months. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 7 No other persons in the audience spoke regarding these proposed Charter amendments. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:45 p.m. 3. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER (NOMINATIONS AND ELECTIONS): MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Council- woman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:45 p.m. Mr. Creager reviewed the proposed amendments to Chapter 4 of the City Charter. He outlined these changes as follows: Section 4.02 eliminates obsolete language. Section 4.03 eliminates obsolete language and deletes confusing reference to "regular" municipal elections in a section on primary elections. Section 4.06 clarifies language and raises the filing fee from $5.00 to $10.00. He stated that it also answers the question of who is eligible to nominate and elect persons. Section 4.07 clarifies language in the nomination petition. Section 4.08 eliminates redundant language and breaks up lengthy sentences. No other persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed Charter amendment. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:50 p.m. NEW BUSINESS• 4. APPOINTMENT: CITY EMPLOYEE: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that he was pleased to recommend Liz Chevalier for appointment as Crime Prevention Specialist II. He stated that Ms. Chevalier graduated from the University of Minnesota with a B.S. in Criminal Justice and holds a social work certificate. He stated that she was employed as a Crime Prevention FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 8 Specialist in the Fridley Police Department from 1980 to 1985 and worked for School District No. 14 from 1985 to 1989 with the Early Childhood Family Outreach Program. He stated that Liz has been a foster parent to over fifty children in the past five years and was co-author of the safety coloring book sold by the Fridley Police Department. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to concur with the following appointment by the City Manager: Name Elizabeth Chevalier Position Crime Prev. Spec. II Exempt Starting Salarv $26,041.60 per year S2,Z�o.13 per month Starting Date Replaces Feb. 8, Rose 1994 Griep Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 5. RESOLUTION NO. 12-1994 APPROVING AND AUTHORSZING SIGNING AN AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORKING CONDITIONS, WAGES AND HOURS OF POLICE OFFICERS OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR THE YEAR 1994• Mr. Hunt, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that there are about nineteen changes to this contract from the previous year. Most are editorial or changes of dates. He outlined some of the changes as follows: Article 7.4 provides for voluntary mediation of grievances prior to arbitration. Article 17.1 increases the employer's contribution toward insurance from $295 per month to $315 per month for employees choosing family coverage in 1994. Article 17.4 was added on group term life insurance with base coverage of $25,000. Article 22 provides for a three percent increase in wages. Article 26.2 clarifies patrol officers would be paid overtime rate for work done on an actual holiday rather than on the day the holiday is observed. Article 32 language is added to clarify that Investigators who are not paid overtime under the contract are eligible for overtime pay under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Mr. Hunt stated he recommends that the Council approve this agreement with the Law Enforcement Labor Services for 1994. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 9 MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt Resolution No. 12-1994. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 6. RESOLUTION NO. 13-1994 IN SUPPORT OF A RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT TO KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, FRIDLEY: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 13-1994. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 14-1994 IN SUPPORT OF A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING APPLICATION FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE TO THE CHURCH OF ST. WILLIAM: MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt Resolution No. 14-1994. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 8. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 22, 1994, FOR JANG-WON RESTAURANT FOR AN ON-SALE BEER LI4UOR LICENSE: MOTION by Councilman Billings to set a public hearing date of February 22, 1994 for consideration of an on-sale beer liquor license for Jang-Won Restaurant. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 9. WAVE TEMPORARY SIGN PERMIT FEE AND DEPOSIT FOR THE MINNESOTA MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this is a request from the Multiple Sclerosis Society to waive the temporary sign permit fee and deposit to allow them to display a banner promoting the Super Cities Walk to raise funds to fight multiple sclerosis. She stated that the banner is four feet by eight feet and is to be displayed at the SuperAmerica at 7299 Highway 65 N.E. Ms. Dacy stated that staff recommends this request be granted to waive the temporary sign permit fee and deposit, as the sign code permits the Council to waive the fee requirements for non-profit organizations. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to waive the temporary sign permit and the deposit to display this banner, as requested by the Multiple Sclerosis Society. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Councilman Billings stated the deposit would be returned when the banner is taken down so there really is no expense to this organization, if they paid the deposit. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7. 1994 PAGE 10 UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 15-1994 APPROVING PLAT, P.S. #93-02, SHOREWOOD PLAZA REVISED (GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 65 AND EAST MOORE LAKE DRIVE): Mayor Nee felt that the next item on the agenda to vacate these easements should be considered before the plat. 11. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS.AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE (VACATION REQUEST, SAV #93-03 BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY): MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 15-1994 APPROVING PLAT, P.S. #93-02 SHOREWOOD PLAZA REVISED (GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 65 AND EAST MOORE LAKE DRIVE): Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this plat is to correct right-of-way errors along East Moore Lake Drive and dedicate new easements. She stated that all property owners involved in this request contributed to the final plat process. MOTION by Councilma.n Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 15-1994. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Councilman Billings asked if the original plat was reviewed to make sure any stipulations on that plat were included in this revised plat. Ms. Dacy stated that she has reviewed the original plat, and there were no stipulations which would apply to this plat. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 12. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 12, 1994: A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #93-18, BY JULIE BRUNNER TO ALLOW ACCESSORY BUILDINGS OTHER THAN THE FIRST ACCESSORY BUILDING, OVER 240 SQUARE FEET, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7235 EAST RIVER ROAD N.E.: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that the original home on this property was destroyed by fire in 1990, and the property owners are completing the new home. She stated that in FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRIIARY 7. 1994 PAGE 11 order to keep the original garage on the property a special use permit is needed. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of this special use permit with the stipulation that the structure be re-sided and shingled to match the new dwelling. She stated that there were no adverse comments from the surrounding neighbors. Staff also recommends approval of this request. Ms. Dacy stated that the structure is not to be used for any type of vehicles; therefore, there was no stipulation for a hard surface driveway. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to grant Special Use Permit Request, SP #93-18. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Councilman Billings stated that the stipulation that the garage be re-sided and shingled has been completed; however, he asked if the code provides that there has to be a driveway. Ms. Dacy stated that the code does not necessarily state that a driveway has to be provided if there is a gara.ge. She stated that the Planning Commission determined that because this was to be used for storage, a driveway was not necessary. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. B. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 22 1994 FOR AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 205 ENTITLED "ZONING," BY ADDING 205.27 (O-4 WETLAND DISTRICT) AND RENUMBERING OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY 205.28: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to set the public hearing on this item for February 22, 1994. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a vaice vote, al� voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to receive the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 12, 1994. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 13. RECEIVE ITEMS FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 11, 1994: A. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #93-35, BY SAMIR AWAIJANE, SAM'S AUTO BODY, TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO 10.5 FEET; TO REDUCE THE SETBACK FROM A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FROM 50 FEET TO 35 FEET ALL TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE SHED AT 7570 HIGHWAY 65 N.E.: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this is a request for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 10.5 feet and to reduce the setback from a residential district FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 12 from 50 feet to 35 feet. She stated that this item came to the City's attention in response to a call received regarding work being done without a building permit. She stated that the petitioner constructed a 15 foot by 40 foot addition to the existing block building to deter vandals from damaging cars. Ms. Dacy stated that the Appeals Commission recommended approval of the variance. She stated that the petitioner has advised her that he felt the actual setback from the south lot line was 41 feet, so he would only need a nine foot variance. She stated that in order to be safe, staff recommends the variance be approved to the 35 foot setback, as it is difficult to determine why there is a six foot discrepancy between the measurements without a certificate of survey. Mayor Nee asked about the addition and how it was attached to the existing building. Ms. Dacy stated that the footings along the south wall are essentially a series of two by fours. She stated that the Building Department had not reviewed the plans prior to construction. However, the inspectors have now been out to inspect the building, and there are no frost faotings underneath the addition. She stated that the prelimina�y interpretation is that this is not permitted. Alternate means will have to be reviewed, which may necessitate the petitioner to provide the frost footings. Mr. Awaijane, the petitioner, stated that he started to build this structure by just adding a roof and then he installed the walls. He stated that he called for a permit, but the inspectors never knew anything about the shed. He stated that he has a four by four treated plate bolted two feet into the asphalt to provide a footing for this structure. He stated that the entire building is built on top of the asphalt parking lot. Councilman Schneider stated that his concern is how the City would enforce what has to be done to meet the codes if the variance is granted. Ms. Dacy stated that this would be enforced through the building permit process. Councilman Billings suggested that perhaps there should be a stipulation that if either of the other two buildings lose their non-conforming status this variance would automatically expire. He stated that he would not want to approve a variance that some future property owner may misunderstand that it was satisfactory to build that close to the property line. Councilman Schneider stated that he understands the hardship caused by the vandalism, but asked if this is related to the property. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7 1994 PAGE 13 Mr. Gregg Herrick, Assistant City Attorney, stated that he supposed this condition relating to the vandalism may apply to the variance rationale. Councilman Schneider asked if this additional storage is for Mr. Awaijane's business or his personal use. Mr. Awaijane stated that he uses the building to store customer vehicles and also his own vehicles. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to concur with the recommendation of the Appeals Commission and grant Variance Request, VAR #93-35, to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 10.5 feet and to reduce the setback from a residential district from 50 feet to 35 feet, with the following stipulations: (1) the petitioner shall submit three sets of building plans including structural and foundation details, as required by the Building Inspection Division; (2) the petitioner shall apply for and receive a building permit for the structure including payment of all permit fees and penalties and conform to all applicable building codes; (3j this variance shall be tied to the non-conforming status of the existing buildings and shall cease to exist if either of the two buildings lose their non-conforming status; and (4) the additional structure shall be used for storage only and no business whatsoever shall take place in this accessory structure. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. B. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #93-36, BY UNITED STORES, TO REDUCE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 35 FEET TO 0 FEET; TO REDUCE THE HARDSURFACE SETBACK FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM 20 FEET TO 10 FEET, ALL TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION AT 785 53RD AVENUE N.E.: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that United Stores is proposing to add a 3, 000 square foot addition to the west of their existing building, as well as additional parking. She stated that two variances are requested, one to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 0 feet and the other to reduce the hardsurface setback from a public right-of-way from 20 feet to 10 feet. MOTION by Councilman Billings to grant Variance Request, VAR #93-36, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 0 feet and to reduce the hardsurface setback from the public right-of-way from 20 feet to 10 feet, with the following stipulations: (1) the petitioner shall submit a landscaping plan with the building permit application showing existing landscaping and additional parking lot screening along the westerly lot line. Parking lot screening may be achieved through a three foot berm, a hedge, or a combination of the two. The landscaping plan shall also indicate that three new trees will be planted along the westerly lot line; (2) the FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRIIARY 7. 1994 PAGE 14 petitioner shall provide a grading and drainage plan and hydrologic calculations for review and approval by the Engineering Department with the building permit application; (3) the petitioner shall submit an erosion control plan with the building permit application; and (4) the addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing building. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 14. APPROVE AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN FOR RICE CREEK BUSINESS CENTER GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7120 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that Brookstone Commercial Services has received a request from University Billiards to allow back-lit channel lettering for its wall signs. She stated that this amendment to the sign criteria would permit channel lock letters as an option to the 12 inch white injection molded acrylic dimensional letters. She stated that the channel lock letters allow for neon tubing to be installed behind the letters which reflect off the facia of the building. She sta.ted that no changes in appearance would be noted except at night when the letters would be lit. Ms. Dacy stated that staff recommends approval of this compre- hensive sign amendment with the stipulation that the channel lock letters shall be the same dimension (height, width, style) as the remaining letters on the building. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to approve this amendment to the Comprehensive Sign Plan for Rice Creek Business Center with the following stipulation: (1) the channel lock letters shall be the same dimension (height, width, style) as the remaining letters on the building. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 15. REALLOCATE THE 1989 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT HUMAN SERVICE FUNDS' Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that in 1989 Alexandra House received $3,500 in CDBG funds as part of the human service allocation. She stated that Anoka County recently advised the City that $3,034 of this grant was not used and is available for reallocation. She stated that during the public hearing on the 1994 CDBG application on January 18, 1994, the Council expressed an interest in reallocating these unused funds for the Senior Outreach Worker program. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to approve the reallocation of $3,034 from the 1989 Community Development Block Grant Funds to ACCAP to assist in funding the Senior Outreach Worker program. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 15 16. APPROVE THE 1994 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that the Council conducted a public hearing on January 18, 1994 for the allocation of the 1994 CDBG funds. She stated that the City will be receiving an additional $21,212, and it is recommended these be allocated to the Housing Rehabilitation program based on the Council's priorities. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission and Human Resources Commission reviewed the proposed allocation of these funds, and it is recommended the Council approve the allocations as follows: Anoka County Administration Housing Rehabilitation Human Service Grants Senior Home Companion Program Senior Outreach Program TOTAL $ 1,000 $124,612 $ 25,000 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $155,612 MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the 1994 allocations of the Community Development Block Grant funds as presented. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, aZl voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 17. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR THE LOCK LAKE DAM RESTORATION PROJECT NO. 211: Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that ten bids were received for this project. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to receive the following bids for Project No. 211: Bidder Lunda Construction 620 Gebhardt Road Black River Falls, Company WI 54615 Park Construction Co. 7900 Beech St. NE Minneapolis, MN 55432 C.S. McCrossan Construction P.O. Box 1240 Maple Grove, MN 55369 Progressive Contractors, Inc. 8736 Zachary Lane Osseo, MN 55369 Total Bid $537,375.75 $556,558.58 $558,441.57 $593,794.00 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRIIARY 7, 1994 PAGE 16 Blattner Constructors Miners 16733 County Road 9 Avon, MN 56310 Carl Bolander & Sons 251 Starkey St. St. Paul, MN 55107 Rice Lake Contracting Corp. County Road 12 Deerwood, MN 56444 Lametti & Sons, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd. N. Hugo, MN 55038 Division 7 Corp. 7670 Highway 65 N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Glenwood Bridge, Inc. 2260 N. Lakeshore Drive Glenwood, MN 56334 $640,520.00 $689,212.75 $697,760.00 $706,785.00 $751,991.25 $763,958.75 Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Flora stated that Lunda Construction was the low bidder at $537,375.75, and it is recommended that the contract be awarded to them for this project. MOTTON by Councilwoman Jorgenson to award the contract for Project No. 211, Locke Lake Dam Restoration, to the low bidder, Lunda Construction Company, in the amount of $537,375.75. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Councilman Schneider questioned what portion of this cost was the City's share. Mr. Flora stated that there is a grant from the Department of Natural Resources for $150,000 and a commitment from Anoka County for $100,000. He stated that there is a total assessment for this project of $192,500. Based on these figures, the cost to the City is $165,500 not including interest to be paid on the $135,000 loan from the state. Councilman Billings asked if the City had a firm commitment from the Department of Natural Resources and the County for funding of this project. Mr. Flora stated that there is a commitment from the state. He thought the County Board had voted to provide the funding. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 17 Councilman Billings stated that he wanted to make sure the funding is in place before he awards the contract. Councilman Schneider stated that he felt the City should proceed, but he would like to know if those funds are available from the County. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she believed this was an item budgeted by the County, and there should have been a formal vote on it. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to table this item on awarding the contract for this project to the next regular Council meeting on February 22, 1994 and request staff to verify, in writing, the Anoka County funding and how costs would be distributed in the City's Capital Improvement Fund. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 18. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 FOR THE 63RD AVENUE BOOSTER STATION PROJECT NO. 250• Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that this change order covers the installation of gas service to the booster station. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve Change Order No. 2 for the 63rd Avenue Booster Station, Project No. 250 in the amount of $740.00. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 19. RESOLUTION NO 16-1994 ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS; REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF MISCELLANEOUS CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK - 1994 PROJECT NO. 262: Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that this resolution would advertise for bids for the City's annual contract for the removal and replacement of miscellaneous concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks. MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt Resolution No. 16-1994. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 20. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that there were no informal status reports. 21. CLAIMS: . MOTION by Councilman Schneider to authorize payment of Claim Nos. 53739 through 54056. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1994 PAGE 18 voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 22. LICEN5ES• MOTION by Councilman Billings 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. 23. ESTIMATES• MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to approve the estimates as submitted: Barna, Guzy & Steffen, Ltd. 400 Northtown Financial Plaza 200 Coon Rapids Boulevard Coon Rapids, MN 55433 Statement for Services Rendered as City Attorney for the Month of December, 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered 301 Fridley Plaza Office Building 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 243.98 Statement for Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney for the Month of December, 1993. . . . . . . . . $13,429.75 NewMech Companies, Inc. 1633 Eustis Street St. Paul, MN 55108 Locke Park Filter Plant Modification Project No. 240 Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $90, 252 . 00 Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT' MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council of February 7, 1994 adjourned at 10:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Carole Haddad William J. Nee Secretary to the City Council Mayor CITY OF FRIDLEY MEMORANDOM TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ,� �� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, CITY CLERK SUBJECT: pUBLIC HEARING FOR JANG-WON RESTAURANT FOR AN ON-SALE BEER LICENSE DATE: FEBRUARY 16, 1994 Jang-Won Restaurant has appiied for an On-Sale Beer License. Pursuant to Chapter 602 Section .05 of the Fridley City Code, we are required to hold a public hearing before issuing this license. Council has designated February 22, 1994 as the public hearing date. l� CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Fridley will hold a public hearing at the City Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue Northeast on February 22, 1994 at 7:30 p.m. on the question of issuing an On-Sale Beer License to Jang-Won Restaurant for the property located at 6440 University Avenue Northeast. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than February 16, 1994. Anyone having an interest in this matter should make their interest known at this public hearing. William A. Champa City Clerk Publish: February 15, 1994 iA C(TY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSfTY AVENUE NORTHEAST FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (61 �57134.50 Rec2ipt # ,' - � License # =�-- Public Hearing Date I= � R 22 , l�`!�( APPLtCATION FOR AN ON AND OFF-SALE BEER/ NONINTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: The undersigned hereby makes applkation for an on and off-sale beeNnonk�toodcatinp malt Iiquor license In eccordance wNh G�pter 602 of the City Code of Fridlsy. �Definition: Anv malt liquor with an alcoholic content of mo�e than one-half of one percent (.5%1 bv volume and not more than 3.2 percent (3.296) by weiqht. . Fee: $ 60.00 Off-Sale Beer j,- o�: �'�"�� —��' . t=',\� - f:Y��Ci, � :, t'�_a��. �zL _$325.00 n- a e u es - ale ($ 90.00 lnvesti ation Fee, Individual ��, �«� M� $180.00 Investigation Fee, Corporation, Partnership, etc. Expires: April 30, 19� TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: The undersigned tiereby makes application for an on and off-sale noninbo�dceting matt 1'puor (beer) Ikense in raccordance with Chapter 603 of the City Code of Fridley. Name of applicant S� PART i - GENERAL INFORMATON � (I�me of individual, partnership, corporatior(or association.) � /i �— Business name: c��L-L�'1�f ' LL�C �' ( /�'<,cj/" '/// �' .� / Business address: ��f `�t� l!'�/l`'. �` � • '/� � �� !c/.��E�-�. �%;�� S—.�� r�—� Business phone number. / C - � � , _S—� � —�.5-}.�_ Type of Appiicant �7 c%��Y-%~� � C:l.°_t�� -� /��'�ra� Person (Individuai) Corporation Partnership Association or other Type of license applicant seeks: V On�ale (Incfudes OffSale) 9/91 � Off-Sale Temporery OnScJe If applicant is a natural ��erson (individual), state full name residence and business addresses and telephone numbers ,. Full name: � ��E%�:� ;=�:i �L.7;�!/ _ � ��l/ �— ��/��. �! �`. � -��-� =;i}��,`�� Residence address: _ i �--- i Phone number: �C_J "` �� , � -� Susiness address: �L� �� >>/// �v�-. /l�' � � �'j cl�� y �%11� -r �� i -�- , P `-�� _~%v� `��r�1� Business hone number: /� '� (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY INDIVIDUAL.) s The full name, residence address and telephone number of the agent in charge of individual owne�'s premises at such time as the owner is absent. Full name: / ;j • ��i �_ ,n /: �' il / <— .��i-- �� ,�/ %l/�. �� Residence address: �� —�. � 3�"` - Phone number: _ �� %�� `�j�� L-� � ` ` (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AGENT.) PART III - PARTNERSHIP If the applicant is a partnership, state full names, residences and business addresses and telephone numbers. Full name: Residence address: Phone number: Ful! name: Residence address: Phone number: Full name: Residence address: Phone number: Full name: Residence address: Phone number: (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY EACH PARTNER.) The manager will be: Name: Address: Phone number: (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY MANAGER:) 1� �/-� If the applicant is a corporation or association, q�ve the name of corporation or association, Fridley address and phone number, and home office address and phone number. Name of corporation: Fridley address: Phone number. Home office address: � Phone number: The full names, residence addresses and telephone numbers of all officers of said corporation or association. P�esident Resident address: Phone number: vice President: Resident address: Phone number: Secretary: Resident address: Phone number: Treasurer: Resident address: Phone number. (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY EACH OFFICER.) The manager will be: Name: Address Phone number: (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY MANAGER.) PART V - CLUB If the applicant is a club, state name of club: Date that club was first incorporated: Address of club: Phone number: The full names, positions, residence address and phone �umbe�s of all officers, executive committee members and members of board of directors: Fufl name: Residence address: 1 [3 Position: Ful� �ame: fiesidence address: Position: Full name: Residence address: Position: Fuil name: Residence address: Position: Full name: Residence address: Pasition: Fuii name: Residence address: Posi6on: Full name: Residence address: Phone number: Phone number: Phone number: Pho�e number: Phone �umber: Phone number: Posdion: Phone �umber• (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY EACH OFFICER.) The full names, residence addresses and telephone number of the manager, or any other individual with management responsibilities for the club's premises to be licensed. Full name: Residence address: Position: Phone number: (PART VI -- PERSONAL INFORMATION FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY MANAGER.) ANY FALSIFICATION OF ANSWERS TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS MAY RESULT IN DENIAL OF THE APPLI.CATION. Subscribed and sworn to before me a Notary Public on this �� day . 19 ,J � Notary P ' ) . . ; . Commission expires n `C,,;;�. _ ; ; d.: :: _ '� . � - - " 1� PLEASE NOTE Section 11.11: The penalty for late payment of a11 ikenses and permlt fees as shown fn Section 11.10 of th� Cily Code shall be 25°,6 of the amount of the fee H received fran 1 to 7 days late. if the paymeM is received more riien 7 days afier k{s due, the panalty shall be 5096 of the fee. If paymeM is not received 30 days after the due date the buslness MUST discontinue operation. FOR CITY USE ONLY: �, � PUBUC SAFEIY DIRECTOR • �' � • L - � " � �Y' Denied' APProved. Or�te. � C(TYCOUNCIL• Approved: Denied: Date: 9/1 1 t� PART VI - PERSONAL INFORMATION {PART VI - PERSONAL INFORMATION -- MUST BE COMPLETED BY EACH PARTNER, OFFICER ETC ) i // Name of appiicant —?�{�-�� /��! � �'L' �� . � � Residence address: /�� `, �:� ��`�= ` /r�. �-� .� .�-!..�-- ��"�-//G�� `� �f-�% i�:>4.. �// 1 t, Phone number: /�J % `� ��.7 � U.S. Citizen: Yes ' No " If naturalized, date and place: ��''��3--�/ j�r'��'-`�"'� Y'S� Driver's license number: _�j~�y��S' SGL�� Date of Birth: �—�� / ,/� � Last place of employment: ��'--l'!� E' jcz-;�-?�� a>e° Sf /�� 1� :� ?• �/�� y I -�T Tf-'Go�%i C Ust your residence address for the past 5 years. %?%ct_ �Q ✓/ �� _ %D L�•� �-v Street Address City � State Zip Code �� .� � /�� Z f% 22lL � ., Street Address City State Zip Code Street Address SVeet Address City City State State r.�C�.. -�� List two residents of the State of Mirt�esota that have know� you for two years, and that will vouch for your sobriety, honesty, and general good character. ��.-,v=� s �, � ��? y- r��/ �-�_ , ��' , � �;, `zL..: ��_�. �fr� � Address �`G� / = / T�G.�,L%� Name Address ?T ��lZlc. � �l�z ��/�-� ANY FALS{FlCATION OF ANSWERS TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS MAY RESULT 1N DENIAL OF THF APPI I�;ATI(�N Subscribed and sworn to before me a Notary Public on this./,� day o , 1 / . ( tary Publi Commission expires o ��T--�� 1� r � � J Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: February 17, 1994 py � �- TO: William Burns, City Manager� FROM: SUBJECT: Background Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Public Hearing Regarding the O-4, Wetland Overlay District Ordinance The proposed O-4, Wetland Overlay District ordinance is a result of the Minnesota State Legislature passing the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. The Act was a compromise between House and Senate versions of wetland protection bills. The purpose of the Act is to achieve no net-loss of wetland functions and values. The law requires developers to examine sequencing in order to avoid wetland impacts. If wetland °impact cannot be avoided, the law requi�es replacement of the lost wetland functions and values. 1993 Wetland Studv; Westwood/Peterson In order to determine the overall impact of the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act and the subsequent O-4, Wetland Overlay District ordinance on the City of Fridley, the City contracted with Westwood Engineering and Peterson Environmental Consulting to determine the number of wetland basins located in the City. The results of the study are as follows: l. 2. 3. 4. 5. There are 59 wetland basins located in the City. 36 basins are located in the Rice Creek Watershed District. 23 basins are located in the Six Cities Watershed District. Three basins would be exempt from the sequencing requirements of the ordinance. 21 basins are less than half an acre in area. Public Hearing on O-4 District February 17, 1994 Page 2 City Responsibilities Under the proposed O-4, Wetland Overlay District ordinance, the City wauld be responsible for the following items: 1. Issuing certificates of exemption. There are 25 activities which are exempt from the replacement requirement. The City must issue certificates which certify that the landowner's activity is exempt of it falls within those 25 categories. Staff recommends that a certificate be issued whether the landowner requests one or not. 2. Determine instances of no loss. There will be instances where a developer's actions will only temporarily impact a wetland, with the impact being repaired, resulting in no loss of wetland functions and values. In these instances, the City will be required to document that no loss will occur. 3. Review and approve or deny replacement plans. Where wetland impacts to wetland function and values cannot be avoided or rectified, the ordinance requires that those losses be replaced. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review the documentation and replacement plans submitted by developers. The City will need to verify that the replacement plan meets the standards set forth in the ordinance, and either approve or deny the replacement plan. 4. The City will be required to review monitoring reports submitted by the property owner. 5. The City is required to maintain documentation for the above activities for a minimum of ten years. The proposed O-4, Wetland Overlay District ordinance merely mirrors the State Statute. There are communities that have proposed more restrictive ordinances, specifically in terms of the exemption pertaining to wetland fills up to 400 square feet. The Statute permits filling up to 400 square feet per year per land owner without replacement, up to 5% of the total wetland area. They are eliminating this exemption because it may be difficult to track this activity if several landowners abut a wetland area. 2A Public Hearing on O-4 District February 17, 1994 Paqe 3 Summary of Process to Date Staff conducted meetings with property owners in December. A total of 11 owners attended the meetings. The Environmental Quality and Energy Commission and Planning Commission reviewed the ordinance in December and January. A copy of the ordinance was sent to each property owner abutting a wetland basin in the City. Recommendation The Planning Commission and EQEC recommended the City Council approve the ordinance as proposed. The ordinance as written permits all of the activities as identified in the State Statute. Staff is not recommending a more restrictive ordinance. Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing regarding the O-4, Wetland Overlay District ordinance. Ron Peterson of Peterson Environmental Consulting will attend the public hearing if the City Council has any questions regarding the State Statute. MM/dn M-94-76 : 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 Tuesday, February 22, 1994 at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: AN ORDINANCB RECODIFYING THL FRIDLEY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED ��ZONING��, BY ADDING 205.27 (0-4 WETLAND DISTRICT) AND RENIIMBERING OFFICIAL TITLE AND SIIMMARY 205.28� AND AMENDING CHAPTLR 11, ��GENERAL PROVISIONS AND FEES�� The City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota hereby ordains: 205.27 0-4 WETLAND DISTRICT 1. PURPOSE AND INTENT It is the purpose and intent of this section to establish special controls to protect the unique and valuable wetland resources within the City of Fridley. 2. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES The boundaries of the O-4 district shall be located on the official overlay map of the City of Fridley and shall encompass all areas delineated within the Wetland Delineation and Evaluation Study, Westwood Engineering 1993. The boundaries of the O-4 district are subject to change due to site-specific delineations accepted by the City. 3. POLICY. A. The preservation and use of significant wetlands is critical to the environment. The City will coordinate with federal, state and local agencies in order to achieve no net loss of wetlands. B. Significant wetlands will be maintained in their natural condition or improved to provide more benefits for water quality management, with consideration for other amenities. C. The City encourages sound, contemporary land use development that incorporates grassed, open, and wetland spaces to allow infiltration of precipitation in all land use categories. 2C D. The City proposes to preserve and enhance wetlands within the community through implementation of development regulations that will ensure the design and construction of adequate on-site storm water sedimentation and retention and detention basins, flow control devices, and implementation of effective erosion control techniques. E. The City will comply with and implement the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act and the accompanying rules of the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. 4. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE This ordinance incorporates the following documents by reference: 5. �� C. The 1991 Wetland Conservation Act (the Act) and Minnesota Rules, 8420. The Federal Manual for ldentifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands dated January 1989, with appropriate amendments. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service Classification of Wetlands and Designation Habitats, Table 4. D. Wetlands and Deep water Habitats of the United States. E. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103. WETLAND OVERLAY DISTRICT REGOLATIONS A. No development shall be allowed within a wetland overlay district without first: (1) Having the City or the Local Government Unit certify that the activity is exempt as defined in Section 205.27.04, or (2) Having the City or the Local Government Unit certify an acceptable wetland replacement plan submitted by the applicant for compliance with the Act. B. Prior to the issuance of a City permit, the petitioner must show proof of, compliance or exemption from the DNR and Corps of Engineers regulations concerning drainage, grading, or filling of wetlands. In addition, the application must show consideration of the affected wetland values for stormwater runoff storage and detention, sedimentation and nutrient trapping and retention, fish and wildlife habitat, and the recreation 2 2D � and open space needs of the community. C. Sequencing (1) The following principles of wetland mitigation are listed in descending priority. A wetland replacement plan shall not be approved unless the applicant has demonstrated that the activity impacting a wetland has complied with the highest priority possible: (a) Avoids direct or indirect impacts to the wetland that may destroy or diminish the wetland; (b) Minimizes the impact to the wetland by limiting the degree or magnitude of the wetland activity and its implementation; (c) Rectifies the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected wetland; (d) Reduces or eliminates the impact to the wetland over time by preservation and maintenance operations; and (e) Replaces unavoidable impacts to the wetland by restoring or creating substitute wetland areas having equal or greater public value. (2) The applicant may either submit the information required for sequencing analysis as part of the application for replacement plan approval or apply for a preliminary sequencing determination from the City. For projects impacting wetland areas less that 4,356 square feet, the City may provide on-site sequencing determinations without written documentation from the applicant. D. Sequencing Determinations (1) The City shall determine whether any feasible and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid impacts to wetlands. An alternative shall be considered feasible and prudent if: (a) It is in accordance with accepted engineering standards and practices; (b) It is consistent with reasonable requirements 3 2� i2) of the public health, safety and general welfare; (c) It is an environmentally preferable alternative based on a review of social, economic, and environmental impacts; and (d) It would create no truly unusual problems. The City shall consider the following in evaluating alternatives: (a) The basic project purpose can be reasonably accomplished using one or more other sites in the same general area that would avoid wetland impacts. An alternate site may not be excluded from consideration only because it includes or requires an area not owned by the applicant that could be easily obtained, used, expanded, or managed to fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed project; (b) The general suitability of alternate sites considered by the applicant; (c) Whether reasonable modification of the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project would avoid impacts to wetlands; (d) Efforts by the applicant to accommodate or remove constraints on alternatives imposed by zoning standards or infrastructure, including requests for special use permits, variances, or planned unit developments; and (e) The physical, economic, and demographic requirements of the project. Economic considerations alone do not make an alternative not feasible and prudent. (3j If the City determines that a feasible and prudent alternative exists that would avoid impacts to wetlands, it shall deny the replacement plan. (4) If no feasible and prudent alternative is available that would avoid impacts to wetlands, the City shall evaluate the replacement plan to determine that it will minimize impacts to wetlands. The City shall use the following criteria to determine the sufficiency of the applicant's efforts to minimize impacts to wetlands: 4 ZF (a) The spatial requirements of the project; (b) The location of existing structural or natural features that may dictate the placement or configuration of the project; (c) The purpose, of the project and how the purpose relates to the placement, configuration, or density; (d) The sensitivity of the site design to the natural features of the site, including topography, hydrology, and existing vegetation; (e) The value, function, and spatial distribution of wetlands on the site; (f) Individual and cumulative impacts, and (g) An applicant's efforts to: ( (1) ) Modify the configuration proj ect; ((2)) Remove or constraints infrastructure, features; and size, scope, or density of the accommodate site including zoning, access, or other ((3)) Minimize other impacts. (5) If the City finds that an applicant has not complied with the requirements to minimize wetland impacts, the City shall list, in writing, its objections to the project. If, within 30 days, the applicant does not withdraw the project proposal or indicate intent to submit an amended project proposal satisfying the City's objections, the statement of objections shall constitute a denial. (6) Temporary impacts to a wetland shall be rectified by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected wetland. The City may determine that an applicant's activity may qualify for a no-loss determination if the following criteria are met: (a) The physical characteristics of the affected wetland, including ground elevations, contours, inlet dimensions, outlet dimensions, 5 2G substrate, hydrologic regime, are restored to pre-project conditions sufficient to ensure that all pre-project functions and values are restored; (b) The activity is completed and the physical characteristics of the wetland are restored within six months of the start of the activity; (c) The party responsible for the activity provides a performance bond to the City for an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost to restore the wetland to pre-project conditions. The City shall return the performance bond to the responsible party upon a determination by the City that the conditions in Section 205.27.5.D.(6).(c) and Section 205.27.5.D.(4). (d) An applicant shall be granted a no-loss determination under the criteria a through c above once in a ten-year period for a particular site within a wetland, except that repairs to the original project shall be allowed under the no-loss determination, if the City determines the request to be necessary and reasonable. (7) After an activity is completed, further wetland impacts from the draining or filling must be reduced or eliminated by maintaining, operating, and managing the project in a manner that preserves and maintains remaining wetland functions and values. The City will require applicants to implement best management practices to protect wetland functions and values. i$) 6. EXEMPTIONS Unavoidable wetland impacts that remain after efforts to minimize, rectify, reduce, or eliminate them must be replaced. A. The following activities are exempt from the O-4, Wetland Overlay District regulations: (1) Activities in a wetland created solely as a result of: (a) Beaver dam construction; � 2H (b) Blockage of culverts through roadways maintained by a public or private entity; (c) Actions by public entities that were taken for a purpose other than creating the wetland; (d) Any combination of (a) to (c). (2) Impoundments or excavations constructed in non- wetlands solely for the purpose of effluent treatment, storm water retention, soil and water conservation practices, and water quality improvements, and not as part of a compensatory wetland mitigation process, that may, over time, take on wetland characteristics, are also exempted. (3) Placement, maintenance, repair, enhancement, or� replacement of utility or utility-type service, including the transmission, distribution, or furnishing, at wholesale or retail, of natural or manufactured gas, electricity, telephone, or radio service or communications; (4) Activities associated with routine maintenance of utility and pipeline rights-of-way, provided the activities do not result in additional intrusion into the wetland; (5) Activities associated with routine maintenance or repair of existing public highways, roads, streets, and bridges, provided the activities so not result in additional intrusion into the wetland outside of the existing right of way; (6) Emergency repair and normal maintenance of existing public works, provided the activity does not result in additional intrusion of the public works into the wetland and do not result in the draining or filling, wholly or partially, of a wetland; (7) Normal maintenance and repair of structures causing no additional intrusion of an existing structure into the wetland, and maintenance and repair of private crossings that do not result in the draining or filling, wholly or partially, of a wetland. This exemption applies to private structures, such as buildings or road crossings; (8) Activities that result in the draining or filling of less than 400 square feet of wetlands. This exemption applies if the total wetland loss by draining and filling will be less than 400 square 7 20 feet per year per landowner, and the cumulative impact by all persons on a wetland over time after January 1, 1992, does not exceed five percent of the wetland's area. 7. REPLACEMENT PLAN DETERMINATIONS A. A landowner intending to drain or fill a wetland who does not qualify for an exemption in Section 14 or a no-loss determination in Section 205.27.5.D.(6).(a-d) shall obtain approval of a replacement plan from the City or local government unit before beginning draininq or filling. B. The City shall, within ten days of receipt of the application, mail a copy of the application and an invitation to submit comments to the Board of Water and Soil Resources (the board), which will publish it in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor; members of the public who have requested a copy; the soil and water conservation district; the watershed district or watershed management organization; the county board; mayors of cities within the watershed; and the. commissioners of agriculture and natural resources. At the same time, the City shall publish notice of the application with an invitation for comment in the City's official newspaper. C. The City shall not make its decision before 30 days and not more than 60 days have elapsed from the mailing of notice, publication in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor, when required, or publication in the newspaper, whichever is later. The City's decision shall not be effective until 30 days after a copy of the decision has been mailed to the Environmental Quality Board Monitor for publication, when required, and mailed to the same list specified above for notice of the application, and to the applicant. The mailing to the applicant shall be by registered mail and shall advise that the decision is not effective for 30 days and is stayed if it is appealed. D. The City's decision sha21 be based on the replacement standards in Section 205.27.8 and on the determination of the Technical Evaluation Panel concerning the public values, location, size, and type of wetland being altered. The City shall consider the recommendation of the Technical Evaluation Panel to approve, modify, or reject the proposed replacement plan. 8. REPLACEMENT PLAN COMPONENTS 8 2J A. On a Combined Joint Notification form provided by the City, and with needed attachments supplied by the applicant, the following documentation shall be provided: (1) Organizational information, including the following: (a) The post office address of the applicant; (b) For corporations, the principal officers of the corporation, any parent companies, owners, partners, and joint ventures, and a designated contact person; (c) Managing agents, subsidiaries, or consultants that are or may be involved with the wetland draining or filling project; (2) An affidavit confirming that the wetland values will be replaced before or concurrent with the. actual draining or filling of a wetland. The City may require an irrevocable bank letter of credit or other security acceptable to the City to guarantee the successful completion of the project; (3) For the impacted wetland: (a) A recent aerial photograph or accurate map of the impacted wetland area; (b) The location of the wetland, including the county, watershed name or number, and public land survey with the coordinate of the approximate wetland center; (c) (d) The size of the wetland, in acres or square feet; The type of wetland using U5FWS Circular 39, and NWI mapping conventions; {e) A list of the dominant vegetation in the impacted wetland area, including common names of the vegetation exceeding 20 percent coverage and an estimate of coverage; (f) (g) A soils map of the site showing soil type and substrate, where available; The size of the watershed that drains surface water into the wetland as determined from a � 2K United States Government Survey topographical map or other suitable topographical survey; (h) The locations of any surface inlets or outlets, natural or otherwise, draining into or out of the wetland, and if the wetland is within the floodplain of a stream, river, or other watercourse, the distance and direction to the watercourse; (i) A map, photograph, or written description of the land use of the immediate watershed within one mile of the impacted wetland. The surrounding land use information shall also indicate the presence and location, if any, of wetland preservation regions and areas, wetland development avoidance regions and areas, and wetland deficient regions and areas as identified in the comprehensive water plan; (j) The nature of the proposed project, its areal extent, and the impact on the wetland must be shown in sufficient detail to allow the C�ty to determine the amount and types of wetland to be impacted and to demonstrate compliance with the replacement sequencing criteria in Section 5D; (k) Evidence of ownership or rights to the affected areas, including a legal description. When two or more landowners are involved, including both the impact site and the proposed replacement site, a contract or other evidence of agreement signed by all landowners and notarized must be included with the replacement plan. The contract or agreement must contain an acknowledgement of the covenant provisions in Section 205.27.7.4.9, by landowners on which a replacement wetland is proposed and the location and acreage of replacement wetlands. The contract becomes binding upon final approval of the replacement plan; (1) A list of all �ther local, state, and federal permits and approvals required for the activity; and (m) Other information considered necessary by the City for evaluation of the activity. (4) For the replacement wetland: 10 2L (a) A recent aerial photograph or accurate map of the replacement wetland area; (b) The location of the wetland, including the county, watershed name or number, and public land survey coordinate of the approximate wetland center; (c) The size of the wetland, in acres or square feet; (d) The type of wetland using USFWS Circular 39, and NWI mapping conventions; (e) A list of the dominant vegetation in the impacted wetland area, including common names of the vegetation exceeding 20 percent coverage and an estimate of coverage; (f) A soils map of the site showing soil type and substrate, where available; (g) The size of the watershed that drains surface water into the wetland as determined from a United States Government Survey topographical map or other suitable topographical survey; (h) The locations of any surface inlets or outlets, natural or otherwise, draining into or out of the wetland, and if the wetland is within the floodplain of a stream, river, or other watercourse, the distance and direction to the watercourse; (i) A map, photograph, or written description of the land use of the immediate watershed within one mile of the impacted wetland. The surrounding land use information shall also indicate the presence and location, if any, of wetland preservation regions and areas, wetland development avoidance regions and areas, and wetland deficient regions and areas as identified in the comprehensive water plan; (j) Evidence of ownership or rights to the affected areas, including a legal description. When two or more landowners are involved, including both the impact site and the proposed replacement site, a contract or other evidence of agreement signed by all landowners and notarized must be included with the replacement plan. The contract or agreement 11 2M must contain an acknowledgement of the covenant provisions in paragraph 9, by landowners on which a replacement wetland is proposed and the location and acreage of replacement wetlands. The contract becomes binding upon final approval of the replacement plan; (k) A list of all other local, state, and federal permits and approvals required for the activity; (1) An explanation of the size and type of wetland that will result from successful compZetion of the replacement plan; (m) Scale drawings showing plan and profile views of the replacement wetland and fixed photo-reference points for monitoring purposes. Photo-reference points should include views of any control structures and enough additional points to accurately depict the entire project; (n) How the replacement wetland shall be constructed, including the best management practices that will be implemented to prevent erosion or site degradation; (o) For created wetlands only, additional soils information sufficient to determine the capability of the site to produce and maintain wetland characteristics; (p) A timetable that clearly states how and when implementation of the replacement plan shall proceed, and when construction of the replacement wetland shall be finalized; (q) A notice in a form provided by the BWSR attached to and recorded with the deed for lands containing a replacement wetland, specifying the following: ((1)) The location of the replacement wetland; ((2)) That the wetland is subject to the act; ((3)) That the fee title owner is responsible for the costs of repairs 12 2N � or reconstruction, if necessary, or for replacement costs; ((4)) That reasonable access to the replacement wetland shall be granted to the proper authorities for inspection, monitoring, and enforcement purposes; ((5)) That costs of title review and document recording is the responsibility of the fee title owner; and {{6)) That the City or board can require necessary repairs or reconstruction work to return the wetland to the specifications of the approved replacement plan and require reimbursement or reasonable costs from the wetland owner, or can require replacement of the wetland according to the Act; (r) A statement that the replacement wetland was not previously restored or created under a prior approved replacement plan; (s) A statement that the replacement wetland was not drained or filled under an exemption during the previous ten years; (t) A statement that the replacement wetland was not restored with financial assistance from public conservation programs; (u) A statement that the replacement wetland was not restored using private funds other than those of the landowner unless the funds are paid back with interest to the individual or organization that funded the restoration and the individual or organization notifies the City in writing that the restored wetland may be considered for replacement; (v) A plan for monitoring the success of the replacement plan in meeting the project goal in paragraph 1 and as specified in Section 205.27.12; and (w) Other information considered for evaluation of the project by the City. 13 2� (5) The applicant must provide information considering the special considerations criteria in Section 205.27.8.G. 9. REPLACEMENT PLAN TsPALIIATION CRITERIA A. Before consideration or approval of the replacement plan, the City shall ensure that the applicant has exhausted all possibilities to avoid and minimize adverse impacts according to sequencing in Section 5D. B. The order of preference for the method of replacement, from the most preferred to least preferred: (1) Project-specific restoration; (2) Project-specific creation; (3) Wetland banking. Modification or conversion of non-degraded wetland from one wetland type to another does not constitute adequate replacement. Wetlands drained or filled under an exemption may not be restored for replacement credit for ten years after draining or filling. C. Replacement of wetland values shall be completed before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a wetland, unless an irrevocable bank letter of credit or other security acceptable to the City is submitted to the City to guarantee successful completion of the replacement. All wetlands to be restored or created as part of an approved replacement plan shall be clearly designated prior to approval of the replacement plan by the City. D. Replacement wetiands shall be located in the same watershed as the impacted wetlands, or the ratio in Section 205.27.10 shall apply. E. Replacement wetlands must be of a size sufficient to ensure that they provide equal or greater public value than the wetland that was drained or filled. The minimum size of the replacement wetland must be in the ratio of two acres of replaced wetland for each acre of drained or filled wetland. The actual replacement ratios required for a replacement wetland may be more than the minimum, subject to the evaluation of wetland functions in Section 9. Future owners may make no use of the wetland after it is altered for a period of ten years unless future replacement to achieve a 2:1 ratio occurs. The landowner shall record a notice of this restriction in the office 14 ZP of the county recorder in which the project is located. F. Restoration and replacement of wetlands must be accomplished according to the ecology of the landscape area affected. A replacement plan that would result in wetlands or wetland characteristics that do not naturally occur in the landscape area in which the replacement will occur will not be approved. G. The following factors when, applicable to an impact or replacement site, shall be considered by the City: (1) The site contains endangered species listed in Minnesota Rules, parts 6134.0200 to 6134.0400 and the proposed activities would take those species, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (2) The site contains a rare natural community, and the proposed activity would adversely affect the community, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (3) The site contains a significant fish and wildlife resource; including but not limited to fish passage and spawning areas, colonial waterbird nesting colonies, migratory waterfowl concentration areas, deer wintering areas, or wildlife travel corridors, and the proposed activity would adversely impact those resources, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (4) The site contains archaeological or historic areas, and the activity would adversely affect those areas, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (5) The proposed activity would have significant adverse impact on the groundwater quality, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (6) The proposed activity would have significant adverse impact on the water quality of outstanding resource value waters as listed in Minnesota Rules, 7050.0180 or on trout waters, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (7) Wetlands used for educational or research purposes shall be maintained or adequately replaced. (8) The proposed activity involves known or potential hazardous wastes. Such activities shall be conducted in accordance with applicable federal or state standards. 15 ZQ (9) The proposed activity shall be consistent with other plans, including, but not limited to zoning, comprehensive, watershed management, and land use plans. 10. EVALUATION OF WLTLAND FIINCTIONS AND VALIIEB A. Replacement wetlands shall replace the functions and values that are lost from a wetland that is drained or filled. A replacement wetland should replace the same combination or functions and values provided by the impacted wetland. The wetland type index system in Minnesota Rules 8420.0540, subpt 10, item B, uses relative values of wetland functions compared across wetland types to evaluate the adequacy of wetland replacement. The City may allow the evaluation of wetlands by measuring and comparing public values specified in Minnesota Statutes, section 103b.3355, with the current version of the Minnesota wetland evaluation methodology or another scientifically acceptable methodology. B. Table 4, Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0550, provides technical specifications for constructing wetland types. In evaluating a wetland replacement plan, the City shall determine whether the wetland type stated as the replacement plan goal will result from the replacement plan specifications. If a wetland type other than the replacement plan goal is likely to result, the City shall evaluate the plan based on this determination. C. The City may consider allowing constructed stormwater detention basins for replacement credit if the basin conforms to the following specifications: (1) The basin design uses a two-cell system in which the upstream cell has a 24-hour retention time for a two-year storm event; (2) The downstream cell is designed for a maximum 12-inch rise in water level far a ten-year storm event; (3) The standards in Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0550 are followed; (4) The design goal is a palustrine emerc that meets all statutory definitions o: for example, soils, hydrology, and Only the downstream cell can be counted credit, and the replacement plan mus plan and schedule for maintenance o: 16 � ent wetland a wetland, vegetation. for wetland : include a the storm water basin system. Storm water basins which allowed for replace�ent are not eligible for an exemption; and (5) Storm water management basins constructed for the primary purpose of controlling or treating stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces or developed areas, not conforming to the units in 1-4 above, are not considered wetlands. These are therefore exempt from replacement plan requirements when constructed in non-wetlands, and also cannot be considered for credit as part of a replacement plan, regardless of their location. D. When wetland functions lost as a result of drainage or filling are replaced by restoring a wetland of the same type and in the same watershed with the same inlet and outlet characteristics as described in Section 205.27.9.E, and related definitions, the replacement shall be considered to be in-kind and the minimal replacement ratio shall be used to determine the necessary size of the replacement wetland. The minimum replacement ratio is 2:1, requiring two times the impacted area be replaced. E. If the wetland functions lost as a result of drainage or filling are to be replaced by creating a wetland or restoring a wetland of a different type than the impacted wetland, or if the replacement wetland is in a watershed other than the impacted wetland or had different inlet and outlet characteristics than the impacted wetland, the replacement shall be considered out of kind, and the City shall use the replacement ratios in Minnesota Rules, 8420.0540, subpt b, item D, Table 2, to determine the amount of replacement wetland needed to replace the lost wetland values. (1) Differences in wetland functions and values among wetland types are to be 'evaluated and replaced using the wetland type ratio table located and, to be applied as specified in Administrative Rules, 8420.0540, subpt 10, Table 2. The wetland type ratio table incorporates an evaluation of public values as specified in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.3355, for the purposes of comparison among wetland types. (2) If a wetland to be drained or filled exhibits more than one wetland type as determined by the Technical Evaluation Panel, and more than one wetland type is proposed to be drained or filled, the City shall use the following procedure to 17 2� determine needed replacement. The acreage•of each wetland type to be converted to non-wetland shall be determined. The wetland type ratio table shall then be used to determine the amount of replacement wetland for each wetland type. The sum of the replacement for each wetland type shall be the resultant acreage requirement for the wetland type ratio. � (3) When a replacement wetland is located in a different hydrologic unit than the impacted wetland, as indicated by the USGS Hydrologic Unit Map for Minnesota, the ratios in MInnesota Rules 8420.0540 must be followed. (4) If the inlet and outlet characteristics of a replacement wetland differ from those of the impacted wetland, the ratios in Minnesota Rules 8420.0540 Table 3 shall be applied. (5) The City may, by local ordinance, establish additional local public value to address wetland conservation or preservation issues of local concern. These ratios shall have a minimum value of zero and shall be based on wetland management objectives of a local water management plan adopted under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103B or 103D. (6) The required replacement ratio for out-of kind replacement shall be the sum of the wetland type ratio plus the hydrologic unit ratio plus the inlet and outlet characteristic ratio plus the local public value ratio. If this ratio is less than the minimum in-kind ratio, the minimum in-kind ratio shall be the required replacement ratio. (7) In cases of partial drainage, the amount of wetland to be replaced shall be calculated using the formulas in Minnesota Rules 8420.0540, Item E. (8) In cases where partially drained wetlands are restored to their former state, credit may be received as calculated in Administrative Rules 8420.0540, Item F. (9) For projects of unusual complexity, or replacement plans that have been denied and are being appealed, and for which the City believes an alternative evaluation process may produce a substantially different replacement requirement, the City may evaluate the replacement plan using the current version of the Minnesota wetland evaluation is 2T methodology or another scientifically accepted methodolagy approved by the board, in consultation with the Commissioner, that evaluates all wetland functions and values for both the impacted and replacement wetlands. When using the Minnesota wetland evaluation methodology or another board, in consultation with the Commissioner, approved methodology to evaluate replacement plans, the ratio of impact wetland to replacement wetland shall not be less than the minimum required. Further, the hydrologic unit ratio, the inlet and outlet characteristics ratio, and the local public value ratio, shall also be considered when using the Minnesota wetland evaluation methodology or another board, in consultation with the Commissioner, approved methodology. (10) A replacement plan that fails to meet the requirements in items 1-8 shall be considered inadequate in replacing lost functions and values and shall not be approved by the City. A replacement plan that has been considered by the City and not approved may be revised and resubmitted for consideration by the City. The decision of the City to. approve, approve with conditions, or not approve a replacement plan becomes final if not appealed to the board within 30 days after the date on which the decision is mailed to those required to receive notice of the decision. Before construction of the wetland, a notice as required in Section 205.27.7.4.9 must be recorded and proof of recording provided to the City. 11. WETLAND REPLACEMENT STANDARDS. A. The standards and guidelines in this part shall be used in wetland creation and restoration efforts to ensure adequate replacement of wetland functions and values. Minnesota Rules 8420.0540, Table 4 provides general guidelines for the physical characteristics that each type of replacement wetland should have. B. The standards in items 1 to 8 shall be followed in all wetland replacements unless the technical evaluation panel determines that a standard is clearly not appropriate. (1) Water control structures must be constructed using specification provided in the Minnesota Wetland 19 ZU Restoration Guide or their equivalent. Control structures may be subject to the department dam safety regulations. (2) Best management practices must be established and maintained to the entire perimeter of all replacement wetlands. (3) For replacement wetlands where the dominant vegetation of the wetland type identified as the replacement goal in Section 205.27.7.A.4.1, is not likely to recover naturally in a five-year period, wooded and shrub wetlands especially, the replacement wetland must be seeded or planted with appropriate species, as determined by the soil and water conservation district, the seed or planting stock should be of local wetland origin to preserve local genotypes. During the monitoring period, the applicant must take reasonable steps to prevent invasion by any species, for example, purple loosestrife and Eurasian water milfoil, that would defeat the re-vegetation goal of the replacement plan. (4) Erosion control measures as determined by the soil and water eonservation district must be employed during construction and until permanent ground cover is established to prevent siltation of the replacement wetland or nearby water bodies. (5) For all restored wetlands where the original organic substrate has been striped away and for all created wetlands, provisions must be made for providing an organic substrate. When feasible, the organic soil used for backfill should be taken from the drained or filled wetland. (6) The bottom contours of created types 3, 4, and 5 wetlands should be undulating, rather than flat, to provide a variety of water depth. (7) Sideslopes of created wetlands and buffer strip must not be steeper than 5:1, five feet horizontal for every one foot vertical as averaged around the wetland. SidesZopes of 10:1 and 15:1 are pzeferred. (8) Created wetlands should have an irregular edge to create points and bays to be consistent with Section 205.27.8.F. 12. MONITORING ANNIIAL REPORT � 2V A. The purpose of wetland value replacement monitoring is to ensure that the replacement wetland achieves the goal of replacing lost functions and values. B. The applicant shall submit the annual report to the City on a date determined by the City until the applicant has fulfilled all of the requirements of the City. C. The purpose of the annual report is to describe actual wetland restoration or creation activities completed during the past year, activities planned for the upcoming year, and the infortnation in Section B. D. The annual report shall include the following information and other site-specific information identified by the City: (1) A description of the project location, size, current wetland type (Cowardin classification), and desired wetland type (goal); (2) A comparison of the as-built specifications versus the design specifications (first annual plan only) and a rationale for significant changes; (3) Hydrology measurements: seasonal water level elevations during the period April through October (msl or referenced to a known benchmark); (4) A list of the dominant vegetation in the wetland, including common names of the vegetation exceeding 20 percent coverage and an estimate of coverage. (5) Color photographs of the project area taken anytime during the period June through August, referenced to the fixed photo-reference points identified on the wetland replacement plan and labeled accordingly. 13. MONITORING DETERMINATION3 BY THE CITY The City: A. Shall inspect the project when construction is complete and certify compliance with construction specifications, and may inspect the project at any time during the construction and monitoring period, and any time after that to assess the long-term viability of the replaced wetland. When the City certifies that the construction specifications have been met, the City shall so advise the applicant and return any bond or other security that the applicant had provided; 21 2W B. May order corrective action at any time during the required monitoring period if it determines that the goal of the approved replacement plan will not be met, and may require the applicant to prepare an amended wetland value replacement plan for review and approval by the City, which describes in detail the corrective measures to be taken to achieve the goal of replacing the lost wetland functions and values; C. Shall make a finding based on a site visit at the end of the monitoring period as to whether the, goal of the replacement plan has been met. If the goal of the replacement plan has not been met, the City shall order corrective action and extend the monitoring period; and D. ShaZl require one or more of the following actions if, during the monitoring period, the City finds that the goal of the replacement plan will not be met: (1) �2) (3) Order the applicant to prepare and implement a new replacement plan; Issue a cease and desist order on the draining and filling activity if it has not been completed; Order restoration of the impacted wetland• (4) Obtain forfeiture of a bond or other security and use the proceeds to replace the lost wetland values; (5) (6) Ask the district court to order the applicant to fulfill the replacement plan; or Other actions that the City determines necessary to achieve the goal of the replacement plan. E. A landowner intending to drain or fill a wetland without replacement, claiming exemption under Section 205.27.14, shall contact the City before beginning draining or filling activities for determination whether or not the activity is exempt. The City shall keep in file all documentation and findings of fact concerning exemption determinations for a period of ten years. F. The City shall issue a certificate of exemption to the landowner. G. The landowner requesting the exemption is responsible for submitting the proof necessary to show qualifications for the particular exemption claimed. The landowner shall 22 ZX ensure that proper erosion control measures are taken to prevent sedimentation in the water, the drain or fill does not block fish passage, and the drain or fill is conducted in compliance with all other federal, state, and local requirements, including best manage�ent practices and water resource protection requirements established under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103H. 19. NO LOSS DETERMINATIONS A landowner unsure if the proposed work will result in a loss of wetland shall apply to the City for a determination. The City shall keep on file all doaumentation and findings of fact concerning no-loss determinations for a period of ten years. The landowner applying for a no-loss determination is responsible for submitting the proof necessary to show qualification for the claim. The City shall issue a no-loss certificate if: A. The work will not drain or fill a wetland; B. Water level management activities will not result in the conversion of a wetland to another use; C. The activities are in a surface impoundment for containment of fossil fuel combustion waste or water retention, and are not part of a compensatory wetland mitigation program; or D. The activity is being conducted as part of an approved replacement plan or is conducted or authorized by public agencies for the purpose of wetland restoration and the activity is restricted to placing fill in a previously excavated drainage system to restore a wetland to its original condition. E. The activity meets the conditions in Section 205.27.5.D.6. 15. TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL PROCEDURES For the City, there is a Technical Evaluation Panel of three persons: a technical professional employee of the board, a technical professional employee of the soil and water conservation district of Anoka county, and a technical professional with expertise in water resources management appointed by the City. One member selected by the City shall act as the contact person and coordinatar for the panel. Two members of the panel must be knowledgeable and trained in applying methodologies of the Federal Manual for ldentifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands, and 23 2Y evaluation of public values. The Technical Evaluation Panel may invite additional wetland experts in its work. The panel shall make technical determinations on questions of public values, location, size, and type for replacement plans if requested to do so by the City. the landowner, or a member of the Technical Evaluation Panel. The panel may review replacement plans and recommend to the City either approval, approval with changes or conditions, or rejection. The panel shall make no determinations or recommendations without at least one member having made an on- site inspection. Panel determinations and recommendations must be endorsed by at least two of the three members. The panel, or one of its members when so authorized by all of the members, may assist the City in making wetland size and type determinations when asked to do so by the City as part of making an exemption or no-loss determination. If requested by the City, the landowner, or a member of the Technical Evaluation Panel, the panel shall answer technical questions or participate in the monitoring of replacement wetlands according to Section 205.27.13. 16. APPEAL OF CITY DECISIONS A. The decision of the City to approve, approve with conditions, or reject a replacement plan, or determination of exemption or no-loss, becomes final if not appealed to the board within 30 days after the date on which the decision is mailed to those required to receive notice of the decision. B. Appeal may be made by the Iandowner, by any of those required to receive notice of the decision, or by 100 residents of the county in which a majority of the wetland is located. C. Appeal is effective upon mailing of the notice of appeal to the board with an affidavit that a copy of the notice of appeal has been mailed to the City. The City shall then mail a copy of the notice of the appeal to all those to whom it was required by Section 205.27.6.B to mail a copy of the notice of decision. D. An exemption or no-loss determination may be appealed to the board by the landowner after first exhausting all local administrative appeal options. E. Those required to receive notice of replacement plan decisions as provided for in Section 205.27.6.B may petition the board to hear an appeal from an exemption or no-loss determination. The board shall grant the 24 2Z petition unless it finds that the appeal is merit-less, trivial, or brought solely for the purposes of delay. In determining whether to grant the appeal, the board shall give consideration to the size of the wetland, other factors in controversy, any patterns of similar aats by the City or landowner of petition, and the consequences of the delay. 17. APPEAL FROM BOARD DECISION An appeal of a board decision appeals and must be considered decision for purposes of judicial section 14.63 to 14.69. 18. COMPENSATION is taken to the state court of an appeal from a contested case review under Minnesota Statutes, A. Replacement plan applicants who have completed the City's process and the board appeal process, and the plan has not been approved as submitted, may apply to the board for compensation. under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.237. B. The application must identify the applicant, locate the wetland, and refer the board to its appeal file in the matter. C. The application must include an agreement that in exchange for compensation the applicant will convey to the state a perpetual conservation easement in the form required by Minnesota Statutes, section 103F.516. The applicant must provide an abstract of title demonstrating the ability to convey the easement free of any prior title, lien, or encumbrance. Failure to provide marketable title negates the state's obligation to compensate. D. The applicant must submit official documentation from the US Army Corps of engineers, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the watershed district or water management organization if any, the county, and the City, as applicable, that the proposed drain or fill activity and the proposed subsequent use of the wetland are lawful under their respective legal requirements. E. The landowner must demonstrate that the proposed drain or fill is a feasible and prudent project and that the replacement plan as proposed is a reasonable good faith effort to fulfill the replacement requirements of Sections 205.27.7 to 205.27.10 and the Act. F. If the plan was approved, but with conditions or 25 2AA modifications, the applicant must show that the conditions or modifications make the replacement unworkable or not feasible. A plan is unworkable or not feasible if the replacement must be on land that the applicant does not own, the applicant has make good faith efforts to acquire a replacement site and not succeeded, and there is not a qualifying replacement available in a wetland bank. A plan is also unworkable or not feasible if it is not possible to carry out for engineering reasons. The applicant must show that not going ahead with the project will cause the applicant damages and that disallowing the proposed use will enhance the public values of the wetland. G. The applicant must submit the requirements of this Section in writing, by certified mail, to the board. If the applicant wants to make oral argument to the board, it must be indicated art of the application. The board may require that the applicant appear before the board. H. If the board finds that the applicant has submitted a complete application and proved the requirements in this Section, the board shall compensate the applicant as required by law within 90 days after the board received a completed application, provided that within the same time period the applicant must convey to the board a conservation easement in the form required by Minnesota Statutes, section 103F.516. If the board does not provide the required compensation in exchange for the conservation easement, the applicant may drain or fill the wetland in the manner proposed, without replaaement. 19. WETLAND BANRING The applicant may use wetland banking credits if the project complies with Minnesota Rules 8420.0740 subparagraph 2 if no alternative site is available. 20. PENALTIES Any violation of this Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject to all penalties provided for such violations under the provisions of Chapter 901 of this Code. 11.10. FEES CODE SUBJECT FEE 205 Wetlands Certifying Exemptions $75.00 Replacement Plan Application $75.00 No Loss Determination $75.00 26 - - . . Appeal of Decision $75.00 Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than February 15, 1994. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department at 571-3450. Publish: February 8, 1994 February 15, 1994 27 2C�r WILLIAM J. NEE MAYOR CITY OF FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 30, 1993 CALL TO ORDER- Chairperson Sielaff called the November 30, 1993, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Brad Sielaff, Bruce Bondow, Susan Price, Dean Saba, Steve Stark, Rich Svanda, Jack Velin Members Absent: None Others Present: Lisa Campbell, Planning Associate Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 21, 1993 ENVIRONMENTAL 4UALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Price, to approve the September 21, 1993, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTTNG AYE, CHAIRPERSON SIELAFF DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion of Draft Wetland Ordinance Ms. McPherson stated it is her responsibility to follow the legislative actions regarding the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA). In 1991, the legislature adopted the Act. The basic purpose of the Act was to protect all wetlands not regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers or the Department of Natural Resources. This was designed to achieve what is known as "no net loss of wetlands". In 1991, regulation of wetlands began under an interim program under State statute. The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) was given responsibility to write the rules and administer the Act. Ms. McPherson stated that under the original statute, a permanent program for the Wetland Conservation Act was 2DD ENVIRONMENTAL QIIALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 30, 1993 PAGE 2 to begin on July 1, 1993. However, in 1993, the Legislature modified the Act and the permanent program was delayed until January 1, 1994. Changes included allowing fills of up to 400 sq, ft. of wetland area without replacement and also modified the role of the technical evaluation panel. Ms. McPherson stated that in order to assist staff in determining how this would impact Fridley, the City contracted with Westwood Engineering and Peterson Environmental Consulting to identify and delineate the wetlands located in the City. A copy of the study, summary charts and aerial maps are available for review. Ms. McPherson reviewed the study findings. Ms. McPherson stated property owners are responsible for hiring an independent consultant to actually delineate wetland boundaries in the field. The City has notified these property owners, and staff will be meeting with them on December 6 and 7 to discuss the Act and how it will impact development. Ms. McPherson reviewed the Wetland Development Process. When someone proposes to develop a site, three questions must be answered: Is there a wetland on the site? If no, development can proceed. If yes, the next question is: Is draining, filling or burning of the wetland required? If no, the property owner can develop according to the zoning requirements. If yes, the next question is: Is the activity exempt under the Act? There are 25 exemptions under the Act. Tf yes, the local unit of government is responsible to file an exemption certificate on the property. If no, the next guestion is: Is the area being drained, filled or burned less than 400 square feet? If yes, there is no replacement required and the area can be filled. If no, the size of the area must be determined. Is the area between 400 and 4,356 sq. ft.? If yes, the replacement is still required; however the sequencing guidelines are waived. If the area is larger than 1/10 of an acre, the WCA requirements are enforced. Ms. McPherson stated that the first thing that is required of a developer is the sequencing which is to avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce or replace. Repiacement is the last option any developer or property owner can pursue. They must prove in their documentation that they have attempted to do the other four prior to seeking a replacement site. Once replacement is the only option, there is a series of requirements for inventorying land 2EE ENVIRONMENTAL QIIALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 30, 1993 PAGE 3 uses, identifying the existing type of wetland, vegetation, type of replacement wetland, etc. which the property owner or developer must produce and propose to the local government unit, who is responsible, along with the assistance of the Technical Evaluation Panel, to determine if the proposed plan will replace what is to be lost. Ms. McPherson stated the technical evaluation panel is made up of a member of the BWSR, a member of the Soil and Water Conservation District, and a technical person appointed by the City. Ms. McPherson stated adoption of the proposed ordinance would comply with the requirements of the WCA, designate on the zoning map the location of regulated wetlands, attempt to clearly define the responsibiZity of both the petitioner and the City regarding administration of the act, and to attempt to define the process for development within and around wetlands. Ms. McPherson stated that as a result of adopting the ordinance, the City would be responsible for admini- stering those wetlands located in the Six Cities Watershed District. Because the City does not have an approved water management plan, the City is not allowed to regulate those wetlands located in the Rice Creek Watershed District. Ms. McPherson stated that for the Six Cities Watershed District properties, the City would be responsible to certify exemptions, certify replacement plans, verify the sequencing requirements, determine that there is no net ioss, submit a copy of the application for review, secure letters of credit and legal documents to insure replacement is completed, record deed restriction, verify replacement ratios, retain exemptions and/or no loss documentation for 10 years, monitor the replacement plans, insure replacement of wetland function, review an annual report as submitted by the applicant, and inspect the project and certify completion. Ms. McPherson stated that under the appeals process, the City wouid be responsible to set up an administrative appeals process to review appeals of replacement plans or determinations. Ms. McPherson s�ated the City needs to adopt an ordinance by January 1, 1994, but the City will likely adopt the ordinance in March. The City at a minimum needs to adopt 2FF ENVIRONMENTAL QIIALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 30, 1993 PAGE 4 a resolution stating it will be responsible for the terms of the Act and that the City delegates certain parts of their authority to another body. Ms. McPherson reviewed the proposed adoption schedulea Mr. Stark asked if the Six Cities Watershed District and the Rice Creek Watershed District encompass all of the City. Ms. McPherson stated they encompass the entire City. Mr. Stark stated Rice Creek is responsible for the wetlands there and Six Cities is not, and asked why the difference. Ms. McPherson stated the jurisdiction for the districts does not overlap. Six Cities is a water management organization and the City Engineer is responsible for doing the permitting within that district. Anyone developing in the Rice Creek Watershed District needs to go to the district to get their permits first. Mr. Stark asked if this is a state or federal act? Is this mandated? Is there funding to help cover costs? Ms. McPherson stated this is a state act which is mandated. This is not optional. There is no funding. $1.6 million is budgeted in this biennium for matching grants to help cover costs. The City has submitted a grant application. Mr. Stark asked if there would be a permit fee. Ms. McPherson stated the City can charge no more than $75.00 for a permit fee. Mr. Sielaff asked how many surveyed wetlands are in the Rice Creek Watershed District and how many in the Six Cities Watershed District. Ms. McPherson stated Rice Creek has 36 wetlands and Six Cities has 23. Unfortunately, most Qf the developable commercial and industrial vacant land is located in the Six Cities Watershed District. There are several properties that are impacted by wetlands. Mr. Sielaff asked how many of these properties are not developed. 2GG ENVIRONMENTAL QIIALITY & ENERGY COMMIS3ION MEETING, NOVEMBER 30, 1993 PAGL S Ms. McPherson stated she knew of four which are located in the northwest corner of the City. All are fairly large properties zoned industrial. The proposed ordinance will become part of the Zoning Code. Mr. Stark asked if there is anything in the ordinance that is debatable or is it mandatory? Ms. McPherson stated that as far as the ordinance draft, she had taken those parts of the statute that pertain to the City. What is in the ordinance is taken verbatim from the statute. She did not include all 25 exemptions, only those that she felt would be encountered in the City. She did not include the section on banking because this is something the City is not responsible for administering. The proposed ordinance is not any more restrictive than the state statute. The state statute is incorporated into the ordinance by reference on page 2. The statute is 89 pages in length and not very "user friendly". She has attempted to include the necessary information in a format that is easier to follow. Mr. Sielaff asked if the City could be more restrictive. Ms. McPherson.stated that is an option, but the City must, at a minimum, comply with the statute. Mr. Saba asked if the landscape ordinance provided for screening of wetlands. Ms. McPherson stated, no. Mr. Stark asked that if a developer needs to flood a wetland, is that protected? Ms. McPherson stated nothing prohibits that. It is still a wetland but it changes the type. The statute calls out draining, filling, and/or burning, but not flooding or excavating. Ms. McPherson distributed copies of "Out-of-Kind Replacement" and reviewed the process of determining the replacement ratios. Mr. Sielaff stated this looks like it is making it difficult to develop property. Mr. Saba stated that, on the other hand, this is a proactive approach to save and protect wetlands. 2HH ENVIRONMENTAL QUALiTY & ENERGY COMMIS3ION MEETING, NOVEMBER 30 1993 PAGE 6 Mr. Sielaff asked if the ordinance could be simplified. Perhaps the City could set a policy rather than go through all those numbers. Ms. McPherson stated this could be done. There are a lot of people concerned about the taking issue. If someone has property they have purchased which is 75 % wetland and the City says, for example, they cannot develop within 100 feet of the wetland, the City has then eliminated development options for that property owner. Ms. Svanda stated that is the problem of the property owner and he does not think that is a valid argument. Mr. Stark stated he could see it being valid if the investment was made after the ordinance was approved. What happens if you have owned property for 10 years and the wetland is not on your property but near one, is that property also affected? Mr. Svanda stated this is not a new issue. There have been programs in place for some time. Mr. Saba stated that with the ordinances that have been adopted, people who have wetlands would get rid of them or be very careful of what purpose they are pursuing. The City needs to be proactive in adopting the ordinance and add value to the wetlands. Mr. Sielaff stated that in looking at the ordinance and the need for replacement plans, involvement of a technical committee, staff and administrative time, he asked if there may be a simpler way to do this. If so, they could eliminate some of the costs. Ms. McPherson stated the Commission could make a recommendation to take that route. She does not know of the legal ramifications. The minimum is to pass an ordinance that complies with the statute. The ordinance can be more stringent. The minimum is what is being proposed. Mr. Saba stated the ordinance autlines a process. A more stringent ordinance without a process would be challenged in court. Ms. McPherson stated the statute and ordinance have room for compensation. If a property owner's replacement plan is denied and an appeal is denied which renders their property non-buildable or non-developable, they can 2io ENVIRONMENTAL QIIALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 30 1993 PAGE 7 appeal for compensation. If the City passed an ordinance which said there is to be development of wetlands with no process or no hope of compensation, she thought the City would be putting themselves in the position of being taken to court. Mr. Saba stated this is basically the same thing, but there is more involved and there is a process. Ms. Campbell asked where the compensation comes from. Mr. McPherson stated compensation comes from the State. The process is very expensive. Unfortunately, the costs to inventory are going to be cost prohibitive for most people. Mr. Sielaff stated the Rice Creek Watershed District would do the work and would be taking care of the program for their District. The City would not be involved at all. Ms. McPherson stated Rice Creek would be responsible for the wetlands in that district. They would be responsible for staffing. The City would be responsible for the 23 wetlands in the Six Cities district. Of these, probably only 5 pieces are vacant and developable. The others are in residential areas that would not have an opportunity for development. Mr. Saba asked how the ordinance would affect redevelop- ment. Ms. McPherson stated redevelopment would be held to the same standards. The law does not differentiate between development and redevelopment. Ms. Campbell asked if the Commission would like Ms. McPherson to take a closer look at those five properties and see if there should be more stringent restrictions. Ms. McPherson could go ahead with her process; and the Commission look at these areas and, if there is something you wanted to protect, the Commission could amend the ordinance to be more restrictive at a later time. Ms. McPherson stated this would be a fair assessment. By the end of this week she will have some composite maps of the City and she can put in the dividing lines for the watershed districts, identify vacant pieces, and identify wetland types, 2JJ ENVIRONMENTAL QIIALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 30, 1993 PAGE 8 Mr. Sielaff stated it would be nice to find out what happens at the public hearings also. Ms. McPherson stated there will be a public hearing at the Planning Commission level on December 8. They will be asked to table it and not make a decision until December 22. Another public hearing will be held in February, so there is January to adjust the language. Mr. Svanda stated he would prefer to incorporate language now if possible so it is cleaner. Ms. McPherson recommended the Commission make a recommendation to the Planning Commission that in concept you agree with the basic ordinance but have directed staff to provide more information so you can further evaluate and decide if the rules for some areas should be more stringent. She will provide the Commission with a summary memo of the public hearings. Mr. Sielaff stated there was a comment at the Planning Commission about the issue of banking. He thought banking is a proactive approach for the future. Banking is mentioned in one part but he thinks it warrants a separate section in the ordinance. Ms. McPherson stated she would make a reference to banking so people know it is available. Mr. Saba stated the maintenance is what makes this difficult. Mr. Sielaff stated there are some interesting issues for wetlands and who maintains it, etc, Ms. McPherson stated the owner maintains and must do an annual report until replacement is complete. Mr. Stark asked if there was anything that can be put in the ordinance requiring certified professionals to do the inventories. Ms. McPherson stated this is possible. She did not know if there is a certification pxocess. Typically most wetlands delineators have a background in biology, soils, hydrology, etc. One of the consul�ants will be present at the public hearings. Mr. Sielaff asked that this be included on the agenda for the next meeting. 2KK ENVIRONMENTAL QOALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, NOYEMBER 30, 1993 PAGE 9 Ms. Campbell stated the next meeting would also include a groundwater update and a review of the Workplan for 1994. Mr. Stark stated he had a question about compensation. If we decide that we do not want wetlands filled, do land owners have the right to get compensation from the City or from the State. Ms. McPherson stated this is something she would need to discuss with the city attorney. One cannot take a property owner�s land without just compensation. This is a worst case scenario. It may just mean doing a smaller development. For those people where this would affect 95% of the property, the City may get involved in a lawsuit. The laws are not real clear as to who pays the money for compensation. In her opinion, by ].00king at the statute, it appears that the compensation comes from the county. Mr. Stark stated he thought it important to know just how this would work by the next meeting. b. Yard Waste Transfer Site Update Ms. Campbell stated through November 7 the site showed a$2,560 deficit. She has not yet done the final report. She stated the deficit is the same as last year. There were 1,000 fewer trips this year, but the 1,000 trips last year were during the summer months. It is possible there was a larger volume of City trucks this year coming to the site. They do not pay but the yard waste is still transferred out. There is a full-time staff person who was not full-time last year who accrued some annual leave time. Ms. Campbell stated the two immediate recommendations are to not have a full-time staff person in that position but rather part-time staff who do not accrue annual leave and a possible adjustment in the fee. The City Council in their budget sessions made a commitment to keep the site open, but that was assuming the site was breaking even. Originally, they had expected to have drop-off days prior to the Council deciding �o keep the site open. With this in mind, she would recommend delaying opening the site in the fall even longer than this year. 2LL � CITY OF FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1993 CALL TO ORDER� Chairperson Sielaff called the December 21, 1993, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL• Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Brad Sielaff, Bruce Bondow, Dean Saba, Rich Svanda, Jack Velin Susan Price, Steve 5tark Lisa Campbell, Planning Associate Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 30, 1993 ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Svanda, seconded by Mr. Bondow, to approve the November 30, 1993, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SIELAFF DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. � NEW BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS a. Continued: Discussion of Draft Wetland Ordinance Ms. McPherson stated that included in the agenda was a memo dated December 16, 1993, regarding an "Update Regarding 0-4 Wetland Overlay District Ordinance" which summarizes the work completed to date. Owners' meetings were held December 6 and 7. The first meeting on December 6 was with owners from the Six Cities Watershed District with three people attending. After the meeting, staff had a discussion with Mr. and Mrs. Sporre regarding the issue of taking, and staff encouraged them to process a permit application and a wetland replacement plan prior to a�tempting litigation. 2MM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. DECEMBER 21, 1993 PAGE 2 Ms. McPherson stated the meeting on December 7 was with owners in the Rice Creek Watershed District with eight attending. The attendees had several questions. Ms. McPherson stated the meetings went well. Staff will continue to keep owners informed throughout the process. Ms. McPherson stated there has been a change in administrative responsibility. She attended a seminar conducted by the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) in administering the statute. At that seminar, they were informed that the City can retain regulatory authority within the Rice Creek Watershed District. Rice Creek will still have its permit requirements in terms of Chapters 103 and 509, but the City can retain authority as far as the wetlands. The City Council did pass a resolution to this effect on December 13, 1993. Staff will be meeting with the Council in January to work out the administrative policies. Mr. Svanda asked if the law set out policies on how agencies are to interact. Ms. McPherson stated the watershed district is required, once they set forth policies, to make rules to implement the policy. In the case of Rice Creek Watershed District, they have not done that. They have policies in regard to wetlands which they implement as if they were rules. � Mr. Sielaff stated that BWSR had approved the Rice Creek plan. Ms. McPherson staied this was true, but the legislature changed the rules as to what is required in the 509 plans. Basically, the watershed districts must rework and resubmit their 509 plans based on the new legislation. Ms. McPherson stated compensation had also been discussed. Compensation is to occur at the rate of 50% of the average agricultural value of the land. The City does not have any agricultural land. She asked the City Assessor to call the County to see what the County's value was. For tillable agricultural land {there are different classes of agricultural land), the number is $1,729 per acre. She was not sure what figure would be used in an urban area. Ms. McPherson included in the agenda a copy of a memo dated December 21, 1993, from the Gregg Herrick, Assistant City Attorney. She had asked what the City's �N�J ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. DECEMBER 21, 1993 PAGE 3 financial liability would be if the City passed an ordinance which was more restrictive than the State statute. His response was that the City would be liable for any type of condemnation which would occur as a result of leaving an owner's property totally unbuildable. Under the statute, the money comes from a separate state fund. The Legislature did not budget any money for compensation. However, Mr. Ron Peterson, the consultant, believes that few replacement plans will be denied. Mr. Svanda asked if an owner would then get to fill wetland if a compromise is reached. Ms. McPherson stated this was possible or the process may be delayed to the point where the Legislature would appropriate funds or pull funds from another source. The Legislature did appropriate grants to help cities cover part of the administrative costs. The money could come out of that budget; but, at this point, it is too early to tell. It makes denying a replacement plan very difficult knowing there is no other recourse for the property owner. Mr. Svanda asked if the fund is set up so that part of the reimbursement for the property owners would be from the fund and part from the city. Mr. McPherson stated that if there was a fund, it would be similar to the Reinvest in Minnesota program which encourages setting aside marginal lands. Reimbursement would come from that fund as opposed to coming from the City. If the City denies a replacement plan, the owner can appeal to BWSR. Then, the decision is no longer in the City's hands and the City is not liable for BWSR's denial of the replacement plan. The City could deny a plan and BWSR could approve the plan. If BWSR also denied the plan, an owner can then go to district circuit court. The question is: If the City passed an ordinance that was more restrictive than the statute, who would be liable for compensation? The answer is that the City would be liable. As it is now, the State is liable for compensation. As part of a replacement plan, the City must review all the steps to make sure other options have been considered. Mr. Sielaff asked how a request gets to BWSR. Ms. McPherson stated a request goes to SWSR if the City denies it. BWSR's only role is to assist in implementation and administration and for final appeals. However, there is the technical evaluation panel, which 2�� ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION M13ETING. DECEMBER 21, 1993 PAGE 4 has a BWSR member on it, which the City can use to approve, deny, or approve with conditions, a replacement plan. Ideally, staff would like to avoid using the technical evaluation panel if possible because that is another step in the process. Staff is proposing to the City Council to reserve the right to contract with a consultant as needed to review plans. The property owners will also have to use a consultant. If the consultants do not agree, they can go to the technical evaluation panel for a decision. Mr. Sielaff stated he believed the consultant has too much power in the process. The consultant should be advisory. It sounds as if the consultant is making the determination. Ms. McPherson stated the City almost has to have a consultant because there is no one an staff who has the skills or expertise to make these decisions. Some of the owners are already having to hire a soil scientist, a botanist, and a hydrologist because they have already had conflicts with the technical evaluation panel. Up to nine people could be on site doing an evaluation. Again, there is no one on s"taff who is well versed in all of these areas. The problem is in detailing just where the lines are to be drawn out in the field. Mr. Sielaff stated his concerns with consultants is that they must be used properly. At the Rice Creek Watershed District, the consultant was the engineer and basically made recommendations to the board and was in a position �o create work for himself. A consultant is hired by a client to make recommendations, and the client must take responsibility to control the work of the consultant. Ms. McPherson stated the intent in hiring a consultant is not to put the uitimate responsibility in the consultant's hands. That is staff's responsibility. The intent is that the control stays with the City, but the City does need someone with the technical expertise to review decisions and make sure the City is on track. Mr. Saba asked if the determination should not rest on the testing done by the soil scientist. Ms. McPherson stated that is how the line is determined, and that documentation is required as part of the whole submission. Mr. Sielaff stated there is other expertise available through the Soil and Water Conservation District and BWSR. � il ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. DECBMBER 21, 1993 PAGE 5 Ms. McPherson stated BWSR has appointed one staff person to be on the technical evaluation panel. The Soil and Water Conservation District also has technical staff. Mr. Svanda stated there is a concern. Staff does not have the expertise, but they just want to make sure that staff uses the consultant by seeking the consultant's opinion rather than making the final decision. Mr. Saba stated he wants the consultant to make a recommendation and that staff make the final decision. Mr. Svanda asked if the Commission would be acting on these requests. Ms. McPherson stated that in terms of the review process, the Planning Commission would review replacement plans. Mr. Saba stated the Planning Commission could also recommend that the EQE review a request and come back to them with a recommendation. Ms. McPherson stated there is a short window of opportunity. The City has a maximum of 70 days to review requests. In this time, the City must review, meet the publication requirements, and have the Planning Commission and the City Council review requests as well. Based on the fact that the EQE meets once a month, it is difficult to say how their meetings fall into the process. Staff is recommending at this time that the Commission receive the notice and have an opportunity to speak at the public hearing at the Planning Commission. Mr. Sielaff asked how much time there is between the notification and the public hearing. Ms. McPherson stated the City has 10 days from the date the application arrives to notify all people on the list and mail notification to the paper for publication. From the tenth day, the City has 60 days to make a decision and notify the property owner. In that 60 days, a public hearing must be held at the Planning Commission level plus have the City Council make its decision and pass a resolution to approve the request with conditions or deny. Mr. Sielaff stated that if there are 30 days, there may be an EQE meeting during that time in which to review. 2QQ ENVIRONMENTAL QIIALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETiNG. DECEMBER 21, 1993 PAGE 6 Ms. McPherson stated that if a request goes to Planning then to EQE and then to Planning, there could be a problem. Ms. CampbeZl stated that Commission members could contact staff if there are any comments or problems. Mr. Svanda suggested going through the process with one request and see how it goes. Ms. McPherson referred to the City map showing delineated wetlands and stated there are two property owners who are concerned about future development on their property. One owner is arguing over the location of the line, and staff has referred the owner to the consultant to discuss how the determination was made. The owner is preparing the property for marketing but, because of the State law, this may be more difficult to do. Ms. McPherson stated the other owner has property of a different nature. The wetland boundaries have been delineated on a survey. One parcel of property is almost all wetland. One parcel has been filled over the years so part of the lot appears to be buildable. However, staff is suspect of the quality and type vf fill placed there. It is staff's opinion that they will see a replacement plan for the lot that is considered a wetland. The Commission may be reviewing some requests in the near future. Mr. Sielaff asked if any wetlands are delineated that cross city boundaries. Ms. McPherson stated Harris Pond does extend into New Brighton and is protected by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Another wetland is in the southeast corner that goes into Columbia Heights. This one would fall under the statutes. It appears to be completely surrounded by developed lots. If anything happens in another community, the City would receive notification through the mayor. Ms. McPherson stated a memo was sent to the City Council about the administrative review process. Staff tried to specify those parts of the statute for which the City would be responsible. At this time, staff has proposed that the EQE receive notification only. Planning Commission would hold the public hearing. City Council would make the decision on the replacement plan. The City will establish some fees. The maximum which can be charged is $75.00. Public hearings will be held before the City Council in February. This was tabled by the 2RR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. DECEMBER 21, 1993 PAGE 7 Planning Coramission until January 12. All affected property owners will be notified with a copy of the ordinance and a copy of the meeting dates. Mr. Sielaff stated the Commission has discussed previously the option of being more restrictive. Mr. Saba stated this could be more expensive for the City. Mr. Svanda stated being more restrictive would take the City out of any funds that may be available. Ms. McPherson stated they had also discussed value. One wetland may be more valuable than others and do they preserve those that are worth mare? The purpose of the statute is trying to replace the wetland functions and values with the same type. If this is not done, the property owner will be penalized. There are enough safeguards in the statute to penalize someone. It will be cost prohibitive for someone to try to make something different than what is lost. Mr. Sielaff stated there cauld be a lot of time spent to agree on a replacement plan. Based on the discussion from the owners' meetings, the owners have already spent a lot of time. Mr . S iela f f asked i f Ms . McPherson was going to amend the ordinance to include the banking issue. Ms. McPherson stated she will amend the ordinance to state the City will accept a banked wetland. b. Bikeway/Walkway Plan Implementation Update Ms. McPherson stated the City has three segments that are in process. The first is along University Avenue. The City has received a grant to finish the segment from 73rd Avenue to 85th Avenue. The surveying has been done and staff is now doing the required paperwork and design. The second is along Central Avenue. The County will be upgrading Central Avenue from Osborne to 73rd, and the City has requested they construct an off-street bikeway along that segment. Ms. McPherson stated staff submitted a grant application to the DNR for funding for the segment from 73rd to Mississippi along Central Avenue. Staff has not heard at this time whether the grant was approved. The third segment is along Main Street. Anoka County is working to upgrade Main Street in i994. The City has requested 255 PLANNING COMMI$SION MEETING, JANIIARY 12, 1994 PAGE 13 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on February 7, 1994. � 3. {TABLED) CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 205 ENTITLED "ZONING" BY ADDING 205.27 (0-4 WETLAND DISTRICT): MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to remove the item from the table and continue the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED TIiE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY. Ms. McPherson stated that since the December 8, 1994, Planning Commission meeting, staff has made several revisions to the proposed ordinance. Staff inet with the Environmental Quality & Energy Commission members who had questions regarding compensation and wetland values. Ms. McPherson stated staff also has developed administrative and public review processes for the sequencing requirements. Under the ordinance and state law, the petitioner has to go through a series of sets to prove he/she has attempted to avoid, minimize, rectify, and/or reduce or eliminate impacts to wetlands before applying for replacement plan. For those four sequencing guidelines, staff will be making administrative determinations to the petitioners. Ms. McPherson stated staff will administratively approve exemption certificates based on the exemption stated in the Act and in the ordinance. Staff would utilize the skills of a consultant to review questions regarding staff's decision prior to notifying the applicant. Ms. McPherson stated that for replacement plans, staff has proposed a public review process similar to the special use permit process. The replacement plan review process has a tighi timeline established by state law. A decision must be made and the applicant notified approximateiy 70 days from the receipt of an application. Staff proposed and the City Council concurred that the Planning Commission would conduct a public hearing which will allow an opportunity for public comment and testimony. The Planning Commission would make a recommendation to the City Council, and the City Council would pass a resolution either approving or denying the replacement plan. The City can also approve replacement plans with conditions similar to a special use. Ms. McPherson stated the Environmental Quality & Energy Commission requested an update on the owners' meetings held in early December, and that update was included in the Planning Commission agenda. These informational meetings went well. 2TT PLANNING COMMI3SION MEETING, JANIIARY 12, 1994 PAGE 14 Ms. McPherson stated staff also learned of a change in administrative responsibility. Earlier, staff had talked about the fact that the City would be giving up administrative responsibility to the Rice Creek Watershed District. That is no longer the case, and the City will be retaining administrative responsibility for the entire City. Ms. McPherson stated the Environmental Quality & Energy Commission has inquired about compensation. In speaking with the City's consultant, current compensation rates under the Act amount to 50% of the average agricultural land value of the City. The City does not have any agricultural land, so staff called the County. The County's average agricultural land value is $1,729 per acre. She spoke with Gregg Herrick, Assistant City Attorney, about the issue of compensation should the City pass a no-touch ordinance. Mr. Herrick said that because the ordinance would be more restrictive than the state ordinance and would not allow a property owner any type of process circumvent that, if it would result in a total taking of the property, the City would be responsible for any compensation. The Environmental Quality & Energy Commission agreed that the process staff is recommending the City adopt, which is to adopt the state statute, is a good thing and agreed to pass it onto the Planning Commission. Ms. McPherson stated at the request of the Environmental Quality & Energy Comrnission, staff will mention in the ordinance that banking is an opportunity for replacement. Mr. Sielaff stated the only issue he had brought up at the Environmental Quality & Energy Commission was to use the City's technical consultant on the Technical Review Board. His concern was that a consultant who the City hires is making a decision as part of the Technical Evaluation Panel. The consultant should be there for advice and not to have a vote. Ms. McPherson stated she did not think they had actually resolved the issue of whether the consultant would actually sit on the Technical Evaluation Panel in lieu of the city engineer. It is staff's intent to use the consultant to assist them with information, answer questions, and give advice. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to recommend to City Council approval of an ordinance recodifying the Fridley City Code, Chapter 205, Entitled "Zoning", by adding 205.27 (0-4 Wetland District), with the addition of a section on banking. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER50N KONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2uu r � � J Community Development Department PLAN1vING DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: February I7, 1994 tj,,- TO: William Burns, City Manager ��,v FROM: SUBJECT: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Second Reading of an Ordinance Approving a Vacation Request, SAV #93-03, by the City of Fridley; Shorewood Plaza Plat The purpose of the vacation is to vacate all utility easements dedicated on the plat of Shorewood Plaza. New easements were dedicated as part of the recording of Shorewood Plaza Revised. The City Council conducted the first reading of the ordinance at its February 7, 1994 meeting. Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the second reading of the attached ordinance. MM/dn M-93-719 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE IINDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDI% C OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. To vacate all easements as donated and dedicated to the public for drainage and utility purposes and as shown on the recorded plat of Shorewood Plaza, as corrected by Surveyor's Certificate files as Document No. 176792. All in Anoka County, Minnesota. This property is generally located at the intersection of Highway 65 and East Moore Lake Drive, between Highway 65 and Central Avenue. All lying in the South Half of Section 13, T-30, R- 24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Be and is hereby vacated. SECTION 2. The said vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code shall be so amended. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1994. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, CITY CLERK Public Hearing: First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR September 27, 1993 February 7, 1994 3A SAV �d93-03 City of Fridley P.RELlMINARY PLAT � SHOREWOOD ' PLAtA REVISED . • .. � � � uwt ou�lrt� bA nwart� �� ' �C i. �l 1 4 - � u� �I.a M warn0 M1u�. �W� m�t1. ��n�.eu. N�wIKM erse4��1� ��+r...Y� ur au..�( M�� iw ' I �•` w� •� w �. « �.w �iw pwwm: iu .mii�ai. �wir �:a ...�..�.i w � � ��. u....,� +�� .. �..a w�a. i... w�.. wa..y w u... m.+ uo..r a. a�. +`� +� , ..m.:a........�...........o s..�1rr 9.199i °-�, 4..�. �� . �.,M �N � R �� c.�. rw ,. .� ,. � �. ..� ,. ,.; �, �,�, .�..; � ,�. ,. �... .. .... � � �,� „ ,r,. w...;._ ..4 .�..�. ,w.. w,.... � .�a.,.:�, ;�° i" �a ;"• . .LL �,��r �•1.' LMI i.::.u, ea��+�..... u n.�...,.. uw.. .,. ..i «u �►..�'ti w. w�, s.,o i� r�t ...�a . mmo... w ew�er .. u. r�.� .t �omao �uu ... �. r ...r.e . ' . u. �a� �r ...�n r a�c.w.s eu 'u. �� 4�� r W� �t.i�a a . KV:G C:H�t�K "1'ti:lfaPC.G: ......�.. �.... ,�......�..... r....e...v... u..� .w�. ,4,.a� . i o� ��..,a ...�.. w..w �n�.. w�mm u a r.er a w+... / �:�T r. . bLJi � � ucurv�r.wq.1wwuw. .b�.pr\•.�. `:.y �.oY- H ..._. . .,,.�.,.,.,.�...�.�..,. /�.:�,.�.. �K.�:.�t,,,�.� �----� s..-s �r • �e �� .w �e. ..�.aw �u.w. ..u..r. .a �.n.=a n.w. / / . .. . /� � lr�a Y. U lat N P mea .w �Rr s� �wr wP+�. �� P:1 :'wC.7' y � w�ne `o• - �e �mt .�s ta �I�t1w ��+�+l. ��r.r. .ti 1.n.rs. P9a+. _ _ •_�Mw� , o.�.s •r . u �m. .w. �x t�a�.. �u..q - .�Irv r.vs+. - 4NQ:at:w:Jb,v . �:..'J _ :.l��• --""'� .e�. �•-' ,� ........ �.,..�.._,.,..,�..�. ��.....,.,,...�.-_ \ OUTLOT B > .r' ,-_ � M .r, J .i w�u.�. ... u �.�.0 ..-.nu t�+.�.. � � yR '� / � , �,,,-M ' . .., I. 1 �in ;•:. •r.2: .I , �.:.::::I � ,1�, D � r f .�. � .., , , _ ,,,��.,; � k.�. � :�' j � •,: ` ._1 �� .� / N � � � �� 4 i '��,�': �� ;�� OUTLOT A � � � � � T ' .,` `�>�L�. � �� / r° _ (• • � �.; � 1 � � '�opRE lqkE . �[�T��T C` �a.,� `,�"�+" '!. a° J �' ��r r Esr RETqi ,�/ r�/• j:' LOT 3. J O, _ � �` ..,..,�yT ,. � $�OCK 4 �EN7ER � f / ,�" BLOCK 2 h Z -�: ?°� mv �f• � Y ( r� 4, , } '� ' �' % .. d Q + � p � • v� � � J � 4 �l A:2 ♦ � � i'� �� _ . � /�4/ MOOAE LAKE EAST j 5 /o • 2�� '� ��. � � •' �// Y. • � ST �-' � f MOORE "t,pK� uJ � .� __ .�.... _ _ � _ �F; � , "i ' -- ----' - �,. • �7 II+ w ' �-� � � . �,.:�:.�.;.•.��:,.: � -- �; � � w„�:� �:.:; , ;� � ��, � LOT 1 . BCOCK � � - - ' < < > � —' K' , '.�, � � �� :• 3� MOORE LAKE RACQUET Q � I 1 # _ : ; �, � . !- S�ARS : . �WIH 1 HEALTH GLUO � � I SuRPLLLO a I Y' O O ; � �! � y i, RETAIL ` f �� ' s J I ,, � cenTeR �' � �3Z, O� , � LOT 2',` � '� � j' ` ..v' � �.�� ;a (�;,� BLOCK 2 r � � �f� '� 1 t Oi � � J t U � n . , Z � tJ � j� �J -a � �� .; :� ;;' � z�� n � � I 1'ial-4/ � � � —._. I _ '� —� N��_"—I�_. ��.�=.V� "�� '........ ::J.'.1'f O'w � I . �,.v� . ,..iiF:J I ' y `Y ` � t.. . � J , �� •,.cn;�l;�.:^�: y 1 F • �a1��c� f / J. r.�. sa I _�.. � J ' ��urr��:ti� —� � � _ �w.� � �• uuw� w.u. �_ 'S�sab��{�q�l � .•.• 1.'- [ I I O .i:UN.yl:i4'-+�S / S l � I� ' .. . : ,_ . :�.,. _� _ - .:. _ ' _ . _ / . ._. _ .. - ._ � .�.�...,..�.. _ - — = `�— _ -_ _ _ �--� - — �: =- -- �` � � . MOORE LAKE � • � Y Y T 'T NV.MK �1f.ti�. W FLtT 1CAlt � 11MCM • �O r�tT —.— � W\ T�.11V wl/a � —��-. � OwN MMUI\NwIGT�Gy � � —.—. MATtn v�h�M -- ��u. l�/w Y��4�iY u. HCw� uwt --� � ��K�AI Vla u�lMwl ura j � �r � YXti�o� AOJ�.[�/a+ �o �tr�c� WI�e 3B� . .,�. �.o.�.r , NeW Water/Sewer/Drainage Easements - - - SAV ��93-03 City of Fridley F'�'G L/M /�l/-l2Y ��1-�T 5�-ID�C WODI] �L,� ZA � - � �� - 1 � i / � � : :�..-�. � , I 5 ��ukr. � l� — / • °! �� .0 u — I — . . � � A f ' -- _ � _ . i =p. � � ' . ` / � F .�� {, � 1 rrw . � � F.l � v � .i d � �.. ••+' �� 0 + � j� t r' - •�.. _ �� ' ' \ i p,�}\e �, ee . � � --- -- -- -- - — }� �-- . f:/= \ , i�.�t, i S� sn � a. � �, :-i"y�J; � •� •� � ,� ' i \� i -:,.,,��✓ � ... �' .� ,� �. � .� i�� ` , a . ``' . � _^ �//,/> • . � � I� \ � f' � � � � � � S/ �� L O t � � � � 4 c o- :`` r o Z16 �o^ a I � x.� . �\ /i.l /'; ' \ � � I .4 / •`�• �± , f +; I,•• •' , �, � � � • .i ti / � i ' i � � t't, </ / �� - �� V �` I � % � 7N� � ( t � � % � �`� ' I� � � s n•se �. _ � , .s `.�' 4 `..'* „'\ o�. ' � � � - - a.. _ - � �. � � , _ = t: .L . ..�. ; I l? - _" -.._ ' \ ' �„�^F�; ,,t` ( .1 ;'�� ' I y �. � � - - -:_--��-- --�_.i—. ` _ ' i .` . =� : � f •` � - .:.: - - -.. . _ -' - I ' i : ' � . `jl, ...i... .� _ „� - f �' I. � . � ; �,; � _"," _ �' - _ ,'_ --_- _ � _� � - I ;� � .�� B� ± , l� y � � ;n }� _ �;, �� ; ;- - �;._ ;� . . , � � ; . , �. ; ,; . _ ;;, ; � ; �; - i k • � i � . ;' � --�-�` � : �� o' _ ,� _ .,`` - • o�w ! � � � . t , ; - '� - . .. `��: 9_ • . • � , iio i . <. ,� ` _ _ ._. r I _ .. .. .5.... .. . . � .. '. ' - -- _ "`< �;�c: ( _ ,a: e i •. - - �' `:' • . � � " % ;� l _ � o � S ' �''. -�' .:'- . _ , > ; . � ,. ; ' , •._�, ......._. ... _ I ' —.- — � - - - � . 1 - -� • �J N . '_ % : . `._�- - ` = _�- 1 ; J o� � !, � � � .Y_� � -_ ` ,' i � � l�� .. � �� ` 1..� �..�.�- f , • lY� __ _ _�5• � Y.' . • 5��.e+ ��- � � �._.�..:._. �..� ` _.'._ .;..�..;... ..._ `J_ `,�� 7171 — i._..• I ��' . �� 1 � . � MOORE ' w /' � LAKE � I, �_��-�...�i� �� . � 3 C � Original Easements to be Vacated / _ UIYOF FRIDLEY MEMORANDUM Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue N.e. Office of the City Manager Fridley, MN 55432 � William W. Burns ; (612) 571-3450 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Wiiliam W. Burns, City Manager �t� � DATE: February 18, 1994 SUBJECT: Locke Lake Dam Restoration Project No. 211 During the course of the week, I have been researching and working on the Locke Lake Dam project. As you may recall, Anoka County indicated a difference of opinion with our Public Works Director John Flora over the County's commitment to the project. It was our prior understanding that the County was going to contribute $100,000 toward the reconstruction of Locke Lake Dam and in addition, purchase the Sajady property. We also understood that they were going to construct park improvements and build on the Sajady property. A�oka County representatives have emphatically told me that their contribution is limited to the acquisition of the Sajady property, which is now up to approximately $135,000 plus relocation costs. Anoka County has indicated, however, that they are willing to construct the fishing pier, and provide a parking lot and a canoe portage area over a longer period of time as part of their parks capital improvement planning process. Additionally, the County indicated a willingness to reimburse the City for the costs of demolishing the Sajady house and for grading and reseeding the Sajady property. This will amount to approximately $10,000 and will be reimbursed by the County within a two-year period. The attached information from our Finance Director Rick Priby� allows us to compare what had been the City's expected contribution with what we now expect to pay for the Locke Lake project. Assuming that we are successful in getting the DNR loan converted to a grant, our net costs for the project have risen from $57,500 to $74,876, or have increased by $i 7,376. 0 Locke Lake Restoration Project No. 211 February 18, 1994 Page Two Details of the above agreement with Anoka County were worked out at a meeting on Friday, February 18,1994, attended by Commissioners Paut McCarron and Jim Kordiak and myself. We have not yet had time to rewrite the joint powers agreement. The City/County joint powers agreement should be presented to Council for approval at the March 7, 1994, City Council meeting. My recommendation is that Council agree to the expenditure of the additiona{ money and that the bid award for Locke Lake Dam Restoration Project No. 211 be approved at the February 22, 1994, City Council meeting. Thank you for your consideration of my recommendations. WWB:rsc .� Construction Bid Engineering Costs Grant Assessment City County City Costs In storm water budget LOCKE LAKE FUNDING SYNOPSIS $537,376.Q0 70.000.00 $607, 376.00 May 92 Scenario $150,000 192, 500 * 192,500 100.000 $635,000 192,500 -135.000 $ 57,500 Additional Cost Current Position $150,000 192,500 * 264,876 0 $607,376 264,876 -135.000 $129,876 ** - 55.000 74,876 - 57.500 $ 17,37fi * Includes $135,000 DNR loan. This may be requested to be assumed in the future. ** County Park improvements on site .- City o1 Fridley State ot Minnesota Beqinning Balance Revenues Funds Available Pro�ects S YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BUDGET 1993 Storm Water Capital Improvements 1993 Interest Income Depreciation Total Hevenues Stonybrook Creek Project Contingency Reline 75th Storm Sewer New Project Highland Lake Diversion / 52�d Ave Swale �"��'�'J�n1 ' Totai Projects Ending Batance ��" � . 5�'►�PA`� iN'b'jeGt Sii� �&'�`�� ';; . �fk'i1F�fiq1�Plid � ��'9��}, � >s - .;i�i.'il $ 6f [19iA►:i11tK�B lS t1�9F�Ht�. � Beginning Balance Revenues Funds Availabie Prolects E:�ding Balance 1994 interest Income Depreciation Total Revenues Oak Glenn Creek Erosion Project Norton Creek Repair Contingency Total Projecis 215 4C 5456,164 36,493 t 17,478 153,971 610,135 75.000 75.000 180.000 200. 560.218 549,917 549.917 3, 993 123,T78 �2�,n� 177.688 50,000 25,000 75,000 1 SO,d00 527,688 1 � ; I 1 \ . ` � � �� J � � t � ��h: r _�� . �\ e � � } � 7 N � x w S }-- U `J �� -� I . + u V � - � ;: t 5 - �+ . � •, . ` ' � i -, � � ._ _ . - .^, S �ti � �S 4 � _ . , r. b :� z, �. � � � � G 3 .'�, "' ;j �' a f m n� rv � . a. _ r. � � n K � Z �85�85�f:8Q85�8Q85�$88Q885�8Q8Q888858�E8Q88�8�858��888QQ�q888Qe � '�2575€�25252525 ��:2S2S�Sg �S�`.�'^Q25�X�N�a�a2S��'�,$X�i,2S�X$ � ! ' ^ � Z N � H O K H O H H O 1� 1!( O 1Y� H H O S O vCf H Oe7 O O Nn�p N� R� O i� O H Op� O O� O �� O O O. O�' O O�^^!1 O N o O t� O♦ O N�I el �e � N(+ P�.'• Cl � x� S N f` � �� U ma�s '�R � �n�i '�i �oo^ H �ui i 888�38888'888888888888888888888888888888 o ��:�8a��1�g�Y��psss��^�?��N��:Ng� � � O N. ' O�0 t'1 � Y n�G f�V O H O 10 ' V r O N N N N N/ f! N tl 10 � N � � t'1 M FC Y, ^ �U p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p o p C9 O O O 1`�j Oo Qp Oppp O�y H S� yD� 1�/1. Op Op O Op O N N N O O N O O O l� � O O O Hp O Oyf R a�l Op U 2 V N 0 O� 'v ^ O q N N�� O� 8 q�S O 8 O� o� N Cl ^ N S��• � R N�� N N P � N `�~ N ep 1f1 ^ b O � N O O �, `N ^ Y1 ^ � � � ~ N � m G z $ 8 g i'3, 8$ 8 8 8 g 8 8 g g 8 8 g g 8 8 g g 8 g g o$ 8 g g$ 8 g g g g 8 g � a��:��$8g��ga<g��8�8�3��$��8�r�g �1 4 J� �O �V A O 4 A�'1 t� N N � m r n' O ID O N/J ^[� t7 N tp �7 �- vl � N^ p f`� N N(V r♦� C! N 0 fV �- a N u 9 JC O U y �� U 1_- • � Z P � J O U � � �4O � Vy � 2 � V/ � v � O U Y 3 a 4 � � � A � � � L' 8Q$Q8Q�8Q8Q8Q�8888�$8$8Q8Q888888$8888888888��8 2S 2S ZS r 2S 2S 2m5 � p YV R�. o � i$ ili, 7S i v � �� ca �=� � R^��i � N N�� N�O f, R(Y P� O P t� H e� '1 /V 8H�p�yS�«�88��88a8�f��p�y�888�8p�r3Q8�8y8�$$�N8p88p8p8 Y O �D ��1 ^ At�� Q C�! O O N O f� A 01 iV �� N�V �� O� O �f1 N N C( N� O v�f�! O 10 N tr'l n•- 1` N fNY {V f�l � N� N O CI O a0 ' O Yf ^ N N N O N PI � O P! Y1 0 1� N N ^ � 8 N bp I� O N N 1` N N M P r��y f�y'�� O� m�O N Q! O! 1� {� IN'1. N tl N N � O n O f�`/ f�t.� h O 1` N H Y O �D N� Q O ^ N N p O N O w Y u� tnV N YNI � N� O N OI < � y� O N N�� N N fP'1 � ^ N N Y1 {`7 D�D ^ � � w $88888$88$888888888888N$$8�88888888888 N��g��g��O��QRS^8gs��Q�ag:��$NBSM$P�� w O C�' O O f O q � N Cl O N m V^ O m P m N N- P/ Y1 P7 O 1'i � 1!� - t� n f'� ^ N N Q N N Cl N N n lV f� � �" n sggpsspapgssg�g�apgssp8ossg�sagp��a.sagpgssa�a � O V� V v fl ^� N fV ^ O e Q��O N l�'! tl N N� N O � Ql 10 O� g O O N N^ N�O `•4 n � � N N � f{V ^ n N a0 O^ n �' Yf � .� 8888$a.888p8p8p8p88p888p8p8py8�888m�$ , 8 .�888. 8'p8 O pq � N.`Q pq O O N O O 8 O oQ 8 O O O� e0 � P 8 ^� H • N N�' Cl � h O O C( .f,�lV 0� f� n N O 1'1 v O N N{� O f'f O.� N� � t N 1� Y1 O� O V �!�. a v N� N! N 1�l1 N n� f` � O N O t� ^� N CI �� , . �- ri �� _' � 888gS8p8��888�8p8888°°°8��8p�8��8P$88{8(��8 8 O O N P iV P' ^ N Ci N O V O N N{7 l'1 C1 (V'1 O� N OO •^• ,G N�N'I ^ p�� N O_ ' N N O D n� D f. ct f� �D ' y N v µ N LV N n �-N- l3 [o N t�.J N N[� LL l� Y} Y 6 6 N V7 Q Y J- T} J u r/: LL i>' �� N N 6 Q N>>� = J J J J J N N U U U� W !:1 J J W U U U U J J 1 N!A J J W 1L t/1 n � �f p } �- .- �. p � .� � Q O a � � � � •- ^ - �l1 N O � N � ^ � f� O ��tf � .. � t'! D �n p Q O ° a � _ �, o � G N z + � d u u N W � � aQa� ;0 X N C � W U- J U o a r � � � � O U -i : ; 3 �� . ��' ° � ��? �� < � � • g • � ; � � gguN�3 � ^ L3�.� � S �5 � � � d Q. m � C � � � � fL = .- 1`I •• N �l 1i 3�. y • y ` -0 C lt �� s��s:_�5�ga�$�,§� �: a y $ � O F- �4 N N Q y�� g `� �o $ y� a a ti � i i � � u: s � �� °�3 E i U v J 1 O`� � N N�� u v> u' 7 c5 in A t. k i c' V� 4 � - �. r . �n �o n w c� � - v� �o .. .� a o - �: `r' � ,�yi �a � _. � � .- .. h ti . � ,1 d� � ��= � : ¢�� p� � 8 � y; E �$�...� 0 � �su° �]� n n e', n n n° N N � 8 � N g a yT M N r f N 0 N e � h n r � � 0 � _ C�N�F FRIDLEY MEMURANDUM Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley, Minnesota 55432 (612) 572-3507 FAX: {612) 571-1287 � MEMO TO: AILLIAM W. BIIRNB, CITY MANAGER � William C. Hunt Assistant to the City Manager FROM: WILLIAM C. HIINT, A88I3TANT TO THE CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: DATE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2 SECTION 4.04 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER FEBRUARY 9, 1994 ANDG�� Following the public hearing on Chapter 2 and Section s�.04 of the Fridley City Charter on February 7, 1994, it is in order to schedule the first reading of the amending ordinance for the Council meeting of February 22, 1994. According to Minnesota Statutes 410.12, Subd. 7 the ordinance "shall be adopted by the council by an affirmative vote ot all its members after a public hearing upon two weeks' published notice containing the text of the proposed amendment and shall be approved by the mayor and published as in the case of other ordinances." There is no provision in the statute which would allow the Council to alter the amendment proposed by the Charter Commission. It is a straight up or down vote. Since amendments to this chapter have been submitted to the Council on several different occasions with additional changes each time and since the proposed amendments involve a considerable reorganizat.ion of Chapter 2, I wish to summarize the main changes being proposed. Some of these comments are also contained in bold type face interspersed in the body of the text. I will list items by sections zn the proposed amended version. 2.01.01 2.01.04 Clarifies the source of the "Council-Manager" plan of government. Expands the ability of the Council to require production of non-documentary evidence such as electronic data. 2.02.02- Deletes language which was required for the transition 2.02.04 to elections in even numbered years and links the election of Mayor and Councilmember-at-large to presidential election years and of Ward Councilmembers to gubernatorial election years. � Memorandum to William W. Burns Public Hearing on Amendments to Fridley City Charter Chapter 2 and Section 4.04 February 9, 1994 Page Two 2.Q2.05 Changes slightly and clarifies when terms of office begin and end. 2.03 The previous section 2.06 was one long paragraph. This has been broken up into subsections for greater clarity. 2.03.01� Corrects the title of the Mayor pro tem and specifies that the appointment is only for the temporary absence or disability of the Mayor. 2.03.05 Clarifies that the Mayor's duty is not an on-going, annual duty, but rather something done when necessary at the direction of the Council. This avoids a potential conflict with section 2.01.02 which prohibits the City � Council from attempting to perform administrative duties other than through the City Manager. 2.03.06 Revised to allow the Maybr to take control in time of emergency without first having to seek Council approval. 2.04.01 Deletes obsolete references to the original City Charter. 2.04.02 Changes for clarity which do not affect the substance of the section being amended. 2.04.04 Changes made to accommodate the very complicated and frequently changing state legislation and case law regarding redistricting of wards and precincts. Eliminates the penalty against the Council for failure to redistrict in a timely fashion after the decennial census. 2.05 Clarifies the disqualifications of Councilmembers from being employed by the City in other capacities. 2.06.01 Makes failure to attend eight consecutive regular meetings of the Council a reason�for declaration of a vacancy similar to moving out of the ward or the City. Also states a time frame of thirty days from the event in question for the declaration of a vacancy. 2.06.02 Provides for a special election to fill a vacancy declared to occur in approximately the first three and a half years of a four year term of office, that is before filings for the next election of the office in question are closed. Changes the window from 45 to 60 days to 30 to 65 days. The current state requirement of having absentee ballots available one month before the 5A a Memorandum to William W. Burns Public Hearing on Amendments to Fridley City Charter Chapter 2 and Section 4.04 February 9, 1994 Page Three election, the requirements of notice, and the amendment requiring at least eight consecutive working days for filing for office might make �.t difficult or impossible to hold a Tuesday election within 60 days. 2.06.03 A11ows for a primary election prior to a special election to fill a vacancy if more than two candidates file. 2.06.04 Requires the Council to appoint a non-candidate if the vacancy occurs after filings are closed but before October 1 of the fourth year of the term. 2.06.05 Provides for the winner of the general election to assume � office immediately if the vacancy occurs on or after October 1 of the fourth year of the term. 2.06.06 Provides for the Councilmember-at-Large to serve as Mayor during a vacancy in that office. 2.06.07 & Provides for restoration of the Council in case the 2.06.08 membership of the Council is reduced to two or less, for example in the case of a catastrophe or multiple resignations. 2.07 Deletes obsolete language from the original charter. 4.04 Clarifies the fact that special elections to fill a vacancy on the Council are governed by section 2.06. Attachments c: Charter Commissioners : ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2 AND SECTION 4.04 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: That the following sections of the Fridley City Charter be amended as follows: CHAPTER 2 . . .. . CITY COUNCIL ORGANIZATION Section 2.01 COUNCIL-MANAGER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 1. The form of government established by this Charter shall be known as the "Council-Manager Plan.-" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. COMMENT: CLARIFIE3 THE 30URCE OF THE ��COIINCIL-MANAGER PLAN.�� 2. All discretionary powers of the City, both legislative and executive, shall vest in and be exercised by the City Council. It shall have complete control over the City administration, but shall exercise this control exclusively through the City Manager and shall not itself attempt to perform any administrative �l� duties. .. ��.,.� .:�.� �.�:��zr 3. The Council shall �s��,�e-; -a��-si �'= perform the duties and exercise the powers of all 3eea� Citv boards and commissions except as n�n otherwise provided bv statute or bv this charter. It may,-��e� by ordinance create commissions with advisory powers to investigate any subject of interest to the municipality. 4. The Council shall have power to make investigations into the City's affairs, to subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, and compel the production of books, papers and other evidence. The Council may at any time provide for an examination or audit of the accounts of any office or department of the City government, or it may cause to be made any survey or research study of any problem affecting the City or its inhabitants. Each such investigation shall be authorized by resolution of the Council. COMMENT: MOVED FROM PRESENT SECTION 2.08.01. EXPANDS THE ABILITY OF THE COUNCIL TO REQUIRE PRODUCTION OF NONDOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. 5C 5. Any member of the Council may request in writing any specific information relating to any department via the City Manager. The City Manager shall respond in writing within a reasonable period of time. (Ref. Ord. 592) COMMENT: MOVED FROM PRE$ENT SECTION 2.08.02. 6. Except for the purpose of inquiry, the Council and its members shall deal with and control the administrative services solely through the City Manager, and neither the Council nor any member thereof shall give orders to any of the subordinates of the City Manager, either publicly or privately. COMMENT: MODED FROM PRESENT SECTION 2.09 Section 2.�02. ELECTIVE OFFTCERS l. The Council shall be composed of a Mayor and four (4) Councilmembers who shall be eligible voters. 2. The Mayor shall be elected at large €e� in each United States presidential election year to a , ES3�EsPr } } h o £a �-9��63�-��c-zi-�ccBazn-zTTi �., � � �,. c--rv�-c� f nt t x�t h j a�r t�a.cx••.. o �,.,..c�=�-g�raoT�v-i-G E��E�--'�6-�ic-vzir�z--�� R-. .+.-. +.. M.. l 1 L. L� � F �---�-sn�-��-e-��C�«Te�a term of four ( 4) years . �-3. One (1) Councilmember shall be elected at large in each United States residential election ear to ' £�e'tr')'� �=--''�'�c-z s�S �9 H-�i-$ei3ii�aie�ift� E•.• _ .•'' _ r a i ��„...,,,. a i., i i u. a.. -. 9 �"-vr�Crm--&�Lc�9rca�raa--�vri�r�cz E�-�6 9 E-i¢b"2 j 4 L Y 1 �. 4 L LZ 1 p GL�CjZ'CL�C�G[TCP �' � "TT'� l J- L1� �'��c�9�—�rr�—��GsE�6�F6uirf�i�-Ttteiit�t� -rr�-�c3-�e� C—�iuiz—�'n e e�-ee�eel-€e� a term of four ( 4) years . 3:4. Three (3) Councilmembers shall be elected T��ns a`�-r� in each Minnesota gubernatorial election year from three (3) separate Wards of The City, p�e� , e ��e�-}�.�� : �... � ,. � t-�t��t�e�rt�e�l�e�'—€e-�–,d��--P�e--z �P-cr�-6-� ��ii-�F2-��e--S-E�oF�-crrraa�zicr'i-'r—z�".��-�e-��i �[� �' at�e��re�e�-€e ��_-�-�-€e�z-e-�e---��}-�ea�-��a--e��=-�� rr��—"'rn�� 6�T�itE�it�9 cT9Tr�e3it-�h�c"ii��S-�`�6-�' -znz�-P�v-�-9r�ti'n @ . , i ��ne�e�-�e�a�-� �'�-�'�- ;�--�-�e�ee�-�€e�--a-�e�t to terms of four (4 ) years each, ��cr� �i c=per='.svzrci-cc��a cv cn�vr�r�C 8��i-��amhar f��i•�iai,a-�-91"�.ir--�t�-�}-@E�@t�--�6 �' 9-�r 5D COMMENTB: SECTIONS 2.03.04 AND 2.03.05 MOVED TO NEW SECTION 2.04. 6-5. The term of Mayor and of each Councilmember shall begin on the first e€��ia-�-H�s��ss day -�- '-'�� ---�� of January following their election to office and shall end on December 31 of the last year of the term. The incumbent may remain in office unti 1�er� a successor has been duly ��e�=��s qual i f ied and accepts the office. The first order of business at the first official Council meeting in each January that follows an election year shall be the swearing in of the newly elected members of the Council. COMMENT: CHANGE3 THE TIMES WHEN TERM3 BEGIN AND END. 6. The Council shall be the judge of the election of its members. COMMENT: SECTIONS 2.03.07 AND 2.03.08 MOVED TO NEW SECTION 2.04. SECTION 2.04 MOVED TO NEW SECTION 2.05. SECTION 2.05 MOVED TO NEW SECTION 2.06. Section 2.8G03 THE MAYOR 1. The Mayor shall be the presiding officer of the Council, except that a}�.=�z mayor .pro tem shall be chosen from the remaining Councilmembers to ��'-' �`F�� serve at the pleasure of the Council, who shall act as Mayor in case of the Mayor's temQorary disability or absence from the City. COMMENT: CORRECTS THE TITLE OF THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND SPECIFIES THAT THE APPOINTMENT IS ONLY FOR THE TEMPORARY ABSENCE OR DISABILITY OF TAE MAYOR. 2. The Mayor shall vote as a member of the Council. 3. The Mayor shall exercise all powers and perform all duties conferred and imposed by this Charter, the ordinances of the City and the laws of the State. 4. The Mayor shall be recognized as the official head of the City for all ceremonial purposes, by the courts for the purpose of serving civil process, and by the Governor for the purposes of martial law. COMMENT: THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE IN 2.06 MOVED TO NEW 2.01.07. 5. At the direction of the Council �the Mayor shall study the operations of the City government and shall report to the Council any neglect, dereliction of duty, or waste on the part of any officer or department of the City. 6. In time of public danger or emergency the Mayor may, -•� `�'� '�'�� i�-� �e�se�r� take command of the police, maintain order and enforce the law. Council consent shall be obtained when practicable. 5E COMMENT: REVISED TO ALLOW MAYOR TO TARE CONTROL IN TIME OF EMERGENCY WITHOUT FIRST IiAVING TO SEER COIINCIL APPROVAL. Section 2.04 WARD COUNCILMEMBERS 1• The City is divided into three (3j separate election Wards desicinated as F�'�T Ward 1, Ward 2, and Ward 3. .� ( �i 1 Lri,��6 :-�i--9iu'ri=s�e—�k�-3-�ea—�`A�t�3i�s�?�—c'��-@a .. , .� �. � � .. a�9zrrE`�—P�6� '��6�3 91i�—�9 @--�3@-�-��-E6�93�TE,' "�sr.�er�rc�'zt9z�c �9z.�--'"r'r��'�6�—� . COMMENT: REVI3ED FROM PRESENT SECTION 2.03.04 2. �re A Ward Councilmember e�e��r�en,--�—�� must be a resident of such ward. „i..�u..'r'.� G3i�E�--3-ii-�ri"rc—e�tCs^c-vr�6uia�:rl�t�n�... F�..�.... •••.. � �P-��i�e�-0��E--E3i...rraii—Tre�--�t3 �ii-i't�iit•••••�,...... c...,..... �?e?^�*in� ^�3± #::� ��i::. If the Ward Councilmember ceases to be a resident of the ward then that office shall be declared vacant. However, a change in ward boundaries during the term of office shall not disqualify the Councilmember from completing the term. COMMENT: REVISED FROM PRESENT SECTION 2.03.05. 3. The boundaries of the three (3) wards shall be redetermined from time to time by ordinances duly adopted by the Council, and based on the findings of the Council that the wards so redetermined are such that the population of any ward shall not deviate by more than three percent (3%) from the average of the three (3) wards. COMM�NT: MOVED FROM PRESENT SECTION 2.03.07 4. After each decennial census of the United States, the Council shall redetermine ward boundaries. This redetermination of ward boundaries shall be accomplished within the deadlines established bv Minnesota law. If no deadlines are established by law, then redistrictinq must be completed no less than one hundred (100) days prior to the legally determined date of the municipal primary of the year ending in the digit two (2)�� . If further redistricting is necessarv, as determined by the Council, the adoption of the 5F new boundaries shall be prohibited durina the time period from ninety (90) days before a primary election up to and including the day of the general election in the same year. Any prohibitions stated in the Minnesota state statutes pertaininq to the adoption of the new boundaries shall also aQ�ly. COMMENT: MOVED FROM PRESENT SECTION 2.03.08 Section 2.9,4- 05. DISQUALIFICATION FOR APPOINTIVE OFFICE No incumbent member of the Council shall be appointed acting or permanent City Manager, nor shall any member hold any other paid municipal office or employment under the City; and no former member shall be appointed to any paid office or employment under the City until one (1) year after leavin� office. COMMENT: THIS CLARIFIES THE DISQUALIFICATIONS OF CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM BEING EMPLOYED BY TiiE CITY. Section 2.8�06 VACANCIES IN THE COUNCIL l. A vacancy in the Council shall be deemed to exist in case of the failure of any person elected thereto to qualify on or before the date of the second regular meeting of the new Council, or by reason of the death, resignation, removal from office, removal from the City, removal of a ward councilmember from that ward, continuous absence from the City for more than three (3) months, or conviction of a felony of any such person whether before or after their qualification, or by reason of the failure of any councilmember to attend eiaht t8) consecutive reaular meetings of the Council. In each such case, within thirtv (30) days the Council shall by resolution declare s�trel� a vacancy t0 AX1St_ u�--9rti'raz-��1'}�rrci"d-rcrti'r.- (Ref . Ord. � 2. If a vacancy is declared to occur before filings for the next election of the office in question are closed, the Council shall call a special election to be held not less than €e�-�-- -f�e—;-�r; thirty (30) days nor more than sixty-five (6-965} days from the time such vacancy is declared. The Council shall designate a period of eight !8L to twelve (12) consecutive working da.ys for the purpose of filing nomination petitions in accordance with Section 4.06. (Ref. Ord. ) 3. In the case of a special election to fill the vacancy, �e-�e �-a�� e�--�� e�-e-�o=e�e� s'- ��p ��--��e�-�re--��—th e procedure provided in Section 4.03, Primarv Elections, and Section 4.04, Special Elections, shall be followed except for the scheduling of election dates, which must be within the time frame s�ecified here. The winner of said election shall be qualified and take office immediately upon certification 5G by the board of canvass and shall fill the unexpired term. (Ref. Ord. 857, Ord. ) z�-. 3 � .• �" �.. i-ii!@-�%-iir�rrp�-v-i-��i�E9�t2i '�c-r'�i�-TE��? �:: i � i = T F LL. �CG'1Ii1'S�CC� �.r.RTi}L�r�t'e'�—RZTt'Eti�' / � _ " _ _ _ _ _ " _ � ' � ' - 4. If the vacancy is declared to occur in the fourth vear of the term of office after filings for the office in ctuestion are closed, but before October l, the Council shall appoint �[within thirty (30) days of the vacancy declarationl bv ma'o� rity vote a qualified citizen who has not filed for anv municipal office in the general election in question. The a�pointee shall assume the office immediately and complete the unexpired term. (Ref. Ord. ) 5. If the vacancy is declared to occur on or after Octobe_r__1_of the fourth year of the term, the winner of the aeneral election shall be qualified and take office immediately. If the winner of the qeneral election cannot take office due to reasons indicated in Section 2.06.01 above, the Council shall declare a vacancy and order a special election as provided for in Sections 2.06.02 and 2.06.03 above. The person so elected shall serve out anY of the remainder of the unexpired term as well as the full four year term. (Ref. Ord. ) 6. If the Mayor's position is declared vacant the Councilmember- at-Large shall serve as Mayor until the vacancy is__filled. (Ref. Ord. ) 7. If at any time the membership of the Council is reduced to less than three (3) members the Citv Manager shall order a special election after the manner provided in Sections 2 06.02 and 2.06.03 above to brinq the membership of the council up to five (5). (Ref. Special Election 3/25/75, Ord. 776, Ord. 857, Ord. ) 8. If the position of City Manaqer is vacant the Citv Clerk shall order such an election. If the position of City Clerk is also vacant the Chief Judge of District Court of the State of Minnesota within whose �urisdiction the corporate offices of the City of Fridley lie shall order such an election. (Ref. Ord. ) 5H Section 2.07 SALARIES AND EXPENSES The Mayor and each Councilmember shall receive reasonable remuneration or salary, the annual amount and payment of which shall be prescribed by ordinance duly adopted on or before November 1st of the year preceding payment of the same. T��—t-�i��; . . � �...,, � � ; , 9�. ..� '��e�e---s�rre�r—s�a�e�—a-�r�—�e��-ar�sr�s—�a?�? When authorized by the Council, its members shall be remunerated for their reasonable expenses incurred in connection with the City's business. The City Manager and all subordinate officers and employees of the CIty shall receive such reasonable compensation as may be fixed by the Council. COMMENT: SECTION 2.08 MOVED TO NEW SECTIONS 2.01.04 AND 2.01.05. COMMENT: SECTION 2.09 MOVED TO NEW SECTION 2.01.06 CHAPTER 4 NOMINATIONS AND ELECTIONS Section 4.04 SPECIAL ELECTIONS. The Council may by resolution order a special election, fix the time of holding the same, and provide all means for holding such special election, provided that three (3) weeks' published notice shall be given of said special election. The procedure at such elections shall conform as nearly as possible to that herein provided for other municipal elections. Special elections for vacancies in the City Council shall be held in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.06. (Ref. Ord. ) PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1994. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR First Reading: February 22, 1994 Second Reading: 51 � _ C�� F FRIDLEY MEMORANDUM Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley, Minnesota 55432 (612) 572-3507 FAX: (612) 571-1287 William C. Hunt Assistant to the City Manager 1� MEMO TO: WILLIAM W. BURN3, CITY MANAGER �:r FROM: WILLIAM C. iiIINT, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER �L � SUBJECT: FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1994 Following the public hearing on Chapter 4 of the Fridley City Charter on February 7, 1994, it is in order to schedule the first reading of the amending ordinance for the Council meeting of February 22, 1994. According to Minnesota Statutes 410.12, Subd. 7 the ordinance "shall be adopted by the council by an affirmative vote of all its members after a public hearing upon two weeks' published notice containing the text of the proposed amendment and shall be approved by the mayor and published as in the case of other ordinances." There is no provision in the statute which would allow the Council to alter the amendment proposed by the Charter Commission. It is a straight up or down vote. � The proposed changes are listed below by section. 4.02 4.02 4.06 4.07 4.08 Eliminates obsolete language. Eliminates obsolete language, and deletes confusing reference to "regular" municipal elections in a section on primary elections. Clarifies some language and raises filing fee from $5.00 to $10.00. Clarifies some language in the nomination petition. Eliminates redundant language and breaks up lengthy sentence. Attachments c: Charter Commissioners ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: That the following sections of the Fridley City Charter be amended as follows: CHAPTER 4 NOMINATIONS AND ELECTIONS Section 4.01. GENERAL ELECTION LAWS TO APPLY. Except as hereinafter provided, the general laws of the State of Minnesota pertaining to registration of eligible voters and the conduct of primary and general elections shall apply for all municipal elections of such officers as are specified in this Charter. The Council shall, through ordinances duly adopted in compliance with such state laws and this Charter, adopt suitable and necessary regulations for the conduct of such elections. (Ref. Ord. 857) Section 4.02. REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. Regular municipal elections shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, at such place or places as the City Council may designate by resolution. ��e�rg _� '�'�_ j-=�= z�-Z; =Regular municipal elections shall be held every even numbered year. The Council may divide the City into as many voting precincts as it may from time to time deem necessary. Each ward shall constitute at least one (1) voting precinct and no precinct shall be in more than one (1) ward. At least fifteen (15) days' notice shall be given by the City Clerk of the time and places of holding such election, and of the officers to be elected, by posting a notice thereof in at least one (1) public place in each voting precinct and by publishing a notice thereof at least once in the official newspaper of the City, but failure to give such notice shall not invalidate such election. (Ref. Ord. 919, Ord. ) Section 4.03. PRIMARY ELECTIONS. On the first Tuesday after the seeond Monday in September there shall be a primary election for the selection of two (2) nominees for each elective office at the regular municipal election, unless only two (2) nominees file for each elective office. , Primary municipal elections shall be held every even numbered year, if necessarv. (Ref. Special Election 4/12/60, Ord. 592, Ord. 919, Ord. ) . � Section 4.04. SPECIAL ELECTIONS. The Council may by resolution order a special election, fix the time of holding the same, and provide all means for holding such special election, provided that three (3) weeks' published notice shall be given of said special election. The procedure at such elections shall conform as nearly as possible to that herein provided for other municipal elections. Section 4.05. JUDGES OF ELECTION. The Council shall at least twenty-five (25j days before each municipal election appoint two (2) registered voters of each voting precinct to be judges of elections therein and one (1) registered voter o� the same precinct to be head judge of election, or as many more or less as may be determined by the Council. No person signing or circulating a petition of nomination of candidate for election to office or any member of a committee petitioning for a referendum or recall shall be eligible to serve as a judge of such election. (Ref. Ord. 592, Ord. 873) Section 4.06. NOMINATIONS BY PETITION. The mode of nomination of all elective officers provided for by this Charter shall be by petition. The name of any eligible voter of the City shall be printed upon the ballot whenever a petition as hereinafter prescribed shall have been filed in that person's behalf with the City Clerk. Such petition shall be signed by at least ten (10) registered voters qualified to vote for the office in question. No electar shall sign �H�� F• „ a � �ur�cr=c-ircli��r-e-� o€-�r�es-�e-p�-�rxre�-s�-t-�it more than onQ petition for any office for which there is an election. Should such a case occur, the signature shall be void as to the petition or petitions last filed. All nomination petitions shall be filed with the City Clerk in accordance with Minnesota State Statutes. Each petition, when presented, must be accompanied by a€�e ten dollar ($��.—^��10.00) filing fee. (Ref. Special Election 4/12/60, General Election 11/3/64, Ord. 825, Ord. 857, Ord. 921, Ord. ) Section 4.07. NOMINATION PETITIONS. The signatures to the nomination petition need not all be appended to one (1) paper, but to each separate paper there shall be attached an affidavit of the circulator thereof stating the number of signers of such paper and that each signature appended tl-,ereto was made in the circulator's presence and is the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be. With each signature shall be stated the place of residence of the signer, giving the street and number or other description sufficient to identify the same. The nominee shall indicate by an endorsement upon the petition acceptance of the office if elected thereto. The form of the nomination petition shall be substantially as follows: • : NOMINATION PETITION We, the undersigned, registered voters of the City of Fridley, hereby nominate . . . , whose residence is . . . . , for the office of ...., to be voted for at the election to be held on the . . . . day of . . . . . , 19 . . ; and we individually certify that we are registered voters and that we have not signed �-eother nomination petitions of candidates for this office-�� }ar�-rP _ra�Pr�flna a-,., i,.,. ...� ..,-.�..a ��.........�-.�.. r------- -- --- -------' -------- Name Street and Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . being duly sworn, 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 swo�n to before me this ..... day of ..... , 19 . . This petition, if found insufficient by the City Clerk, shall be returned to . . . . . . , at Number . . . . . . . Street. I hereby indicate my willingness to accept the office of .... if duly elected thereto. (Ref. Ord. 857, Ord. ) Section 4.08. CANVASS OF 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, � shall make full declaration of the results� and file a statement thereof with the City Clerk,-_ �--�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, Ord. ) Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley City Manager's Office at 571-3450. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other person with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than February l, 1994. s� PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1994. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR First Reading: February 22, 1994 Second Reading: •� r � � I Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: February 17, 1994 /�, �1� TO: William Burns,�City Manager� FROM: SUBJECT: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director First Reading of an Ordinance to Expand Public Hearing Notification Radius The Planning Commission recommends approval of the attached ordinance to expand the public hearing notification radius on all development applications to 350 feet. The purpose of the amendment is to be consistent with state statute requirements on public hearing notices and to also advise a larger portion oi the neighborhood about development applications. Listed below are the proposed changes for each type of application: 1. 2. 3. 4. Special use permit - 200 feet to 350 feet Variance - 200 feet to 350 feet Plat - 300 feet to 350 feet Lot split - 200 feet to 350 feet Using one notificati.on radius will also simplify staff procedures in processing development applications. The zoning ordinance already stipulates a 350 foot radius for rezoning applications, therefore, no change is needed for this type of application. The street and alley vacation applications are not affscted by this ordinance, since the vacation procedures are outlined in Section 12.07 of the City Charter. We will simply increase the notification radius to 350 feet for vacations in order to be consistent with the remainder of the applications. Because no specific dimensions are identified in Section 12.07 of the City Charter, no changes to the Charter are necessary. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve first reading of the ordinance. BD/dn M-94-48 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, ENTITLED ��ZONING��, AND CHAPTER 211, ENTITLED ��SUBDIVISION", TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION RADIUS The Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: 205.05. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 4. SPECIAL USE PERMIT E. Action by the Planning Commission. (1) Notices shall be mailed to all owners of property within �-98 350 feet of the parcel included in the request not less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days prior to the hearing. Failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not invalidate any such proceedings as set forth within this Chapter. 5. VARIANCES C. Recommendations by Appeals Commission. Within thirty (30) days after filing an appeal from an administrative order or determination, or request for variance from City Code provisions, the Appeals Commission shall hold a public hearing thereon and shall hear such persons as want to be heard. Notice of such hearing shall be mailed not less than ten (10) days before the date of hearing to the person or persons who file the appeals, and to all adjacent property owners within a�-98 350 foot distance of the requested variance location. Within a reasonable time, after the hearing, the Appeals Commission shall make its recommendations or approvals subject to conditions of the Fridley City Code and forward a copy of such recommendation or approval to the City Council through the Planning Commission. 211.04. SUBDIVISIONS 1. Lot Split. B. Review (1) The proposed lot split shall be informally heard by the Planning Commission. Notices shall be mailed to all owners of property within 350 feet of the parcel included in the request, not less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) da.ys prior to 7A Page 2 - Ordinance No. the hearing. Failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not invalidate any such proceedings as set forth within this chapter. �-��e ,,. ; ,a ,. r..i, +- t-„ ^ u; �:.�.�„ � � �,. ..'�. ..., ^. , �-�f�-r�-�i�cccl�ii� � i,"6�t-�ii� � i r • � S�zrcc,=�c�-ccliSz-vrrS�xica—A�t�%�crr�E=z.• a,. ,.a p cr�rsr � c—r r.,�.,,..,. ; ., ti. .. i i .� a ei�--��i 13iz�srli�i� �vmm-r3S�'•" �6 �i@--�� j' �r�;�„ = = � 2-r� � �a��is��--S �i�-�-a��-s�rs-, e x' El _,. ..�_ ��:-- 4<-�-l_ , �, After considerincr such thinqs as adjacent land use, traffic patterns zoning requlations, future development, plans for parks, bikewayfwalkwavs, street extensions, and other criteria deemed pertinent the Planning Commission shall recommend to the City Council either approval, with or without stipulations, or disapproval. �-2� (3) After review and recommendation by the Planning Commission the application for lot split shall be informally heard by the Citv Council. The Citv Council shall approve or disapprove the request for the lot split within sixty (60) days. 2. Plat and Registered Land Survey Process. C. Steps (3) Action on Preliminary Plat by Planning Commission (b) Not less than a meeting of consideration shall do the ten (10) days before the date of the Planning Commission, for of a preliminary plat, the City following: ((1)) Notify by United States mail the subdivider and the property owners of the property within }h�-�� h„~�r��' -�-3$9-} three hundred fifty �350) feet adj oining the land within the plat of the time and place of such hearing. : Page 3 - Ordinance No. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1994. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: 7C WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR � _ � I DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION City of Fridley February 17, 1994 William Burns, City Manager Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator Establish PubZic Hearing for Rental Licensing Ordinance In order to begin the process of revising Chapter 220 of the Fridley City Code (Residential Rental Property Maintenance and Licensing), the City Council must first call for a public hearing. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council establish a public hearing for March 7, 1994 to consider proposed changes to Chapter 220 of the Fridley City Code. GF/dn M-94-79 -- CL�LI TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR HOWARD D. ROOLICR, ASSISTAN'P FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS WITHOUT PRIOR COUNCIL APPROVAL DATE: February 17, 1994 Attached is a resolution for Council consideration which updates a similar 1978 resolution. The resolution needs to be updated for changes made in our operations during the past 15 years. Items (a) through (p) were included in the 1978 Resolution. By adding the new items to the resolution, the City will be able to handle each type of payment more efficiently and/or by the required due dates. Payroll taxes and other payroll related obligations need to be included in the resolution to allow the City to meet federally mandated deposit rules for taxes and other deadlines for items such as PERA, ICMA and health and life insurance premiums. Payments to contract inspectors and sports officials were added to allow quicker payment thereby making the City competitive with other cities since the normal practice is to pay these types of people shortly after their work is complete. Deposit refunds were added so tha� the City can more efficiently refund deposits collected by the recreation department. A fair number of deposits that are held for several months before being refunded are collected by the Recreation Department. Past practice was to hold these checks so they could be refunded immediately. Once the resolution is adopted, the checks received by the recreation department will be deposited in the City's bank account. RESOLUTION NO. -1994 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS WITHOUT PRIOR COUNCIL APPROVAL. WHEREAS, Section 7.11 of the City Charter provides that the Council may by resolution or motion provide for the regular payment without specific individual authorization by the Council of salaries and wages of regular employees or laborers, and fixed charges which have been previously duly and regularly incurred; and WHEREAS, the Council has adopted a written policy regarding the payment of claims; and WHEREAS, the Council deems it necessary to update this policy. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Treasurer is hereby authorized to issue checks for the following types of claims without prior Council approval: (a) Salaries of regular employees (b) Overtime of regular employees if approved by the affected Department Head (c) Salaries of temporary employees, providing the time sheet has been approved by the Department Head (d) Utility bills and discount invoices (e) Payment to the City (one fund to another fund) (f) Petty cash items up to $15 (g) Petty cash items up to $25 if approved by the affected Department Head and the City Treasurer (h) Flat rate monthly auto allowance (i) Postage, postage due or C.O.D. items (j) Advances to employees for up to 750 of the cost of attending out of town conferences not to exceed $500. (k) Registration and other expenses for local conferences, limited to $75 (1) Reimbursement to employees for costs incurred while attending local conferences or meetings, such payment limited to $15. (m) Reimbursement to an employee for clothing allowance : � (n) Claims approved by Council as a separate agenda item (i.e. estimates) (o) Fixed charges which have been previously incurred, such as rent payments, payments on bonds and contracts for deeds (p) Investments (q) Payroll taxes other liabilities withheld from employees' wages and the corresponding City paid benefits (r) Contracted Building Inspectors who have signed a contract with the City. (s) Softball, basketball and other sporting officials contracted by the Recreation department (t) Refunds of deposits being held by the City PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1994. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK . . WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR Eng�neer;nn Sewer Water Parks 'Streets fv!a�ntenarcc ME MORANDUM TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �` PW94-O51 � FROM: Scott Erickson, Asst Public Works Directo�� DATE: February 22, 1994 SUBJEGT: Receive Bids and Award of Contract: Corridor Maintenance Project No. 266 Bids were opened Thursday, February 17, 1994, at 10:00 am for the Corridor Maintenance Project No. 266. This project covers the mowing, spring cleanup, weed control and trash pickup of approximately 60 acres of right-of-way along University Avenue and East River Road from April 15, 1994 to August 1, 1994. Fifteen potential bidders reviewed the plans and specifications and two bids were received. The low bidder was Innovative Irrigation, with a total bid of $13,444. They were the 1993 Corridor Maintenance contractor and did a satisfactory job. MN/DOT personnel will take over maintenance of the corridor after August 1 and will continue until the end of the growing season. See the attached map for the areas in question. Recommend City Council receive the bids and award the contract for the Corridor Maintenance Project No. 266 to Innovative Irrigation in the amount of $13,444. JGF:cz Attachments 0 � . •, . � / BID FOR PROPOSALS CORRIDOR MAINTENANCE, PROJECT NO. 266 THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1994, 10:00 A.M. ; . , :::.:::::::.::: . : .. . ..... >:::.>.>:.: :;:>::;::;::.;:.;:.: .::.;�:: «:>:<:>::>:>:::><:::>:>. >.: ::.; »>::::>�«««:: .. <;`:>::.::>;::::>::`::�:::;:::>:::>:::<:::::::> . ::.;:::::. ' . ' ' .PLAtVHO1..t�Ei�. . � :::::::::::::»;:: : <:::>:::::: ::::::<::>::::>::::>::>: :;::::>:::<::: ,:.:. �ID 6C)NQ:::>::;°:;::;::::::<;::::>::>::::>:::. :..:TC)T}�I»:.�I.D .:::..:::::.:......:.::: :.: .: :: .... aMMEI�I�'5....:.�:: , .:::::::::::::::,::::::::::::::: :.:::::::::.:.;:::;::::::::;:::: : :< ::.;::;;:;;:.;;::::::::::::::::: :.. ::::::::. ::::.::: :::. :.::...........: :.:::.......... ....................................................... .........::::: �..........:........:.:...::::...... Innovative (rrigation 5°�6 United Casualty $13,444 10006 University Ave NW Coon Rapids, MN 55448 Jon Isaacson Lawn Care 5°k Amwest Surety $15,421 105515 County Rd 116 (19910 Dassel Lane) Rogers, MN 55374 Anoka Lawn & Garden No Bid Box 632 Anoka MN 55303 Arteka-Natural G�een No Bid 15195 Martin Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Contract Maintenance Service No Bid 13000 Harper St Blaine MN 55449 Fair's Garden Center No Bid 201 E Broadway Monticello MN 55362 Mirage No Bid 7955 Riverdale Dr Ramsey MN 55330 Nadeau Utilities No Bid 6615 Highway #12 Independence MN 55359 Prescription Landscape No Bid 1311 Sylvan St St Paul MN 55117 Talberg Lawn & L.andscape No Bid 100 Wilshire Dr Minnetonka, MN 55343 True-Green Chemlawn No Bid PO Box 9280 Maplewood MN 55109 • � F- 'r CORRIDOR MAINTENANCE, PROJECT NO. 266 PAGE 2 •� � i +v . � �, - .l- . 1`r �` - .�:.' ��` ��.-i . �' ` r - -1 .':'_ { �\ � 1.. . , .. . . . _ NORTN OF OSBORNE� , ,� MEDIAN b WEST SIDE ONLY � 't- r� ' � 1 t'e�� . \\ T'��.r Y " j ` � A 1' � •�� \ �*,.l.�� _ _.�.. _ _ , . �—T , ' : �- \�� y ,?�� \� � ` :- � � . :� � r; �, ';>� '•� _ ��;..,: ' ; �� :i :. _ � - � '1. �; �=; �; _ � . \ . ; �" � - _ t"'r� • �'. _ `6, \•. . ="�� Vt CENTER MED1AN .� � '-. � -�= � � INCLUDED �'� , , =��L :�� N � ��- � � i � � W i 'V :..�.+i..—�.� �++c� . y� ,..,�� - - ��, E � : '' I'� � �, I� r' — — � '�. �=-'.�-x i � i� � � � r'�� — ��` , .... � o ' .,.=:,: . S ; � : ;:._�, •-.. _, �:�r?c;:==y�-•- ,_= � � J "''�''� ' �': _��' ` `� "'''i �:.. a � =�� --.•` '� `�,�C �'�' : y - ^; ,�::� � �. � N �� , / �y. � . y � �i' ^ � -� i' `.' - �^•' - � �. ��.'��1 � �F �� \��i/ !�� -- �— — -- i -� �`• . \; ^ '-L=+'S� , 1 � .�J:z:� �) . : � � j: ��\ _ r CENTER MEDIAN ;� � a =� ��'� �\� = INCLUDED � __ SLIP OFF;� ! :�;: � � : INCLUDED ��= l o, _ - 11' �'i �_�; -- � . , i3-. I - L 4 _ _ _ / �� ( CENTER MEDIAN ONLY — '+� `�� . � � �� '�.�� --, r .q�'�"� ___ / . i � i � ��, � � �I -�� , __ ` ` � � --- � -�.. -- ��' =s.�\ - --- _ _ t �� -- _. r-. —_ - � �,;,��.. `\ kJC_Zl �i : � _ � — • �-�= Cc'TntitS —_ i (1STlk'1S ____ _ — �_ _ ' _ �� " --- -- � _�.._---• = - ` _ ' .... � � ..._ ' 'r - t I — .-� . _ �=_ �� I ' _ •.r �~� � I f ' .fr"=r'-`�— �' � ? `^ . ...�. ' .� - � `'^^�_ � �� i ! UNIVERSITY AVE. MEDIAN INCLUDED �M��;,��. T:�i`i,..�� _..1.-t%�_i" l �• :�5••T ." ��._..-: � �..-.�.--�, . -�l -_ ' •- ��_' '-'t � �� ----• _ �_^S �. =' 1 '!":; /: _; =', = ., i,_ —� ,.:i-.�"� �y' ;, ti , ., - - -=1 �-- .--� - �� - ,_ - � .�� - ��- - � � � : i � _ -- -r � __ . �. __.._�� ` � � • .=d,�: ...:_ -..i =�:-- � . ''�� - =' � � � �— ��;.�:= , _ • . � �• � 1 1 �,. � � .�="_�'r�— --�.L--• �� -^! � �:.I i_ —1 ( . l; _ � _ l ;-" _• �' -- `�= i': _ _ . _ ` �-_ _ _ _ �� _ � � ' .:^:' • -' .-� ..._ .. . --._'1 �'t= ;t � NOTE: HiGHWAY �ENCE ENDS AT 69TH AVE. • .i: . . .,i _ �;...� / . - _^ �^ .. —. -1 � ,��C • {: � • ` —' `•L�-�,.-c� � C• 1�'` f � �- : � ; •,`.:✓ = i%'• . 5 t _'�• ==J_ �-' . CUTTING REQUIRED ON - '�-'"`•� � � . ,: t ''� •_��;,'„ _ .. `, V(-/; �. ':::-�....,C� 1 '. ,�._! •BOTH SIDES OF FENCE . �_ t' ~� `�,�i�--'--�'� i/✓� `��, i:_i_ �: �'�-�._J�1 Isl�i. �r�-c�.,-�.� -� h �1 ��7 �-• �� t� 1 �� .� I I — ` .� ':I, I�ti I�If I� `!1 .1i�( — �=. o�-��I, �+ :��!�! „ : -: :;'.:�r3 f . �Y.e t := ::: -: _ .-�_�::,.:::�:;� =:.f.••�--- -. c; � �=%== -'-:�;: _:�_::_T�=�� 'g,,� J� I . _ �v� � , , T.� , _ , � a _ �''� � 1� - -- `��'?'� + G .�` • =' ��- � °', .. . .; r�. ::�:::.. ..��ii� � - - - - �- CUTTING RE�UIRED ON I BOTH SIDES OF FENCE -` � - � C I� � �� -- - � - � . � _ ,t � _ I - �j-M:� j = ;: � I N� � � -� » � ' � J� I �. �� pROJECi ao�''243 1I CUT TO EAST CURB LINE EAST SERVICE ROAD 10 17 12 � � FOR CONCURRENCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL ' GAS SERVICES Citywide AC & Heating 2529 1 /2 7 Street North St Paul 1V[N 55109 Steven Franck McQuillan Bros Plbg & Htg Co 452 Selby Ave St Paul MN 55102-1727 John McQuillan , Sweeney Jim Service 23117 Durant St East Bethel MN 55005-9726 Jim Sweeney �ENERAL ONTRACTOR-COMMERCIAL Liberty Construction e PO Box 155 St Micheal MN 55376-0155 Howard Johnson Norman Construcdon 1400 W Lake St �#300 Minneapolis MN 55408-2656 Alan Ackerberg Rayco Construction 3801 5 St NE Columbia Heights MN 55421-3703 Monika Ellis Ryan Company Inc 108 West Broadway Osseo MN 55369-1562 Michael Ryan HEATING _ Citywide AC & Heating 2529 1/2 7 Street North St Paul MN 55109 Steven Franck 1VIcQuillan Bros Plbg & Htg Co 452 Selby Ave St Paul MN 55102-1727 John McQuilian Sweeney Jim Service 23117 Durant St East Bethel MN 55005-9726 Jim Sweeney 12A LICENSES GARY FORD Acting Bldg Ofcl Same Same GARY FORD Acting Bldg Ofcl Same Same Same GARY FORD Acting Bldg Ofcl Same Same Unifab Inc 3850 Edgewooci Ave St Louis Park MN 55426-4404 PLUMBING McQuillan Bros Plbg & Htg Co 452 Selby Ave St Pau1 MN 55102-1727 Thielbar Plumbing Co 26499 Xingu St NE Stacy MN 55079 Paul Meyer John McQuillan Scott Thielbar 12B Same STATE OF MINN Same 13